What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • Bristol University Christian Union – more

    Well, after my earlier post on Bristol University Christian Union, here’s some more.

    They’ve published a new statement which says this:

    BUCU statement on women speakers
    Bristol University Christian Union (BUCU) deplores the recent exaggerations and misrepresentations in some parts of the media of its position on women’s ministry in the church.

    It is well known that Christian churches differ on this question. BUCU is not a church, but a student society, so it has never had a formal policy on women’s ministry.

    In recent months, the Executive Committee have been exploring ways in which BUCU can best accommodate members with divergent and strongly held convictions, while expressing our unity as Christian believers. In line with our basic position throughout that process, which has not been widely publicised, the Executive Committee now wish to make clear that we will extend speaker invitations to both women and men, to all BUCU events, without exception.

    BUCU is utterly committed to reflecting the core biblical truth of the fundamental equality of women and men.

    BUCU Executive Committee
    5 December 2012

    So, first off, kudos to them for considering this quickly and issuing this statement. It goes part way to repairing the damage done to the reputation of the faith caused by further reports. Odd that they say they’ve not had a policy on women speakers whilst also moaning that such a policy has been misrepresented. However, it must at least be partially welcomed.

    Question now falls to UCCF (the Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship) which doesn’t really come out of today that well. Do they really condone groups who exclude women speakers or don’t they? They seemed to suggest earlier that it was a secondary issue which didn’t really matter. Are they prepared to say that such exclusion is against the gospel they believe in or not?

    Does UCCF believe in “the core biblical truth of the fundamental equality of women and men?” 

    Are they planning on including it in their doctrinal basis?

    Would be good to know.

    , , ,

4 responses to “Book Review”

  1. Peter O Avatar
    Peter O

    I think you miss the point of the book Kelvin. It’s meant to be a guide to listening to *all* sides of the debate, not just those you agree with. That’s what makes the last section so good, because it forces us to deal realistically not just with the genuine evidence on the causality of homosexuality, but also the fact that some people *do* see remarkable change in their sexual orientation (and that others don’t).

    I wrote my own review here.

    Reply
  2. Avatar
    Anonymous

    We were not called by the last Lambeth Conference to listen to all sides in the debate.

    Reply
  3. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    Ruth Gledhill has posted a PDF of the whole thing, for those interested:
    http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/files/Final.pdf

    Reply
  4. Rosemary Avatar
    Rosemary

    I’ve now read the ‘scientific’ section – thanks for the link ryan – and I thought it was mixed. I thought Glynn Harrison made a serious attempt at dispassion. I think it is a fair point that any person must decide their own priorities, and the final argument must be between theologies, not sciences. I was not so impressed by David de Pomerai – though one could hardly quarrel with his conclusion that we simply do not know exactly what makes one person homosexual and the next heterosexual. However his whole argument was bedevilled by assumptions that, e.g. homosexual men will be more effeminate than straight ones. Anecdotal evidence instantly produces examples where it is the straight male siblings who are drama queens and run from spiders, while gay ones take it all in their stride.

    It must be accepted that both gay and straight people live with voluntary or enforced celibacy with no ill effects – and that some people can change their sexual orientation and live happily with the change. What I found truly heart rending were the desperate attempts and the high cost to those who actually did succeed in changing orientation – however much Harrison denies the skin colour analogy, it reminded me painfully of those endless jars of skin lightener which encrust Sri Lankan chemists, where beauty is measured in skin tone. Because whether or not genetic, orientation is not a simple free choice. But I suppose the answer would be: ‘And what is?’

    The final point, though, is always the same. Is Christianity a religion of an authoritative book, or an authoritative Person?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Jet Lag

    Only just coming to terms with the time change from being away o­n holiday. It does not usually affect me so, especially as it is not that great between here and Greece. However I've been waking at 0530 the last couple of mornings.Got unexpectedly distracted yesterday by a monk. o­ne of my old college friends…

  • I'm Back

    Just to note that I am back from 2 weeks holiday in Crete. The blog posts below were posted in advance. Normal service is now resumed. Crete was hot and good. Monasteries and moussaka.

  • Job for August

    I’m planning on something new in August – a politics blog. I’ve spoken about it before, but now is the time. This one has really become one for the congregation and is all about my position in ministry. My local campaigning is a separate issue altogether and deserves its own distinctive website.

  • Talking of books…

    … I need to make my mind up who to go and see at the Book Festival in Edinburgh which starts soon.