T A

Epiphany and epiphanies

I’m speaking tonight, the Feast of the Epiphany, not in church but to a gathering of scientists and theologians interested in the interface between those two subjects. It’s really important, and outfits such as the Faraday Institute here in Cambridge do great work keeping the dialogue going and developing public understanding in an often polarised discussion.

Some of the themes that come up are the perennial big ones of origins and ends. In between are other issues of identity and — particularly at the moment — sexuality. The idea of Epiphany gives us a particularly helpful way in to what is a difficult topic. Epiphanies are showings. In the theological and literary tradition they are where two stories intersect, where the things of this world are shot through with the things of the beyond, and they are often the turning point of the story. James Joyce’s Dubliners was for instance explicitly conceived as a sequence of fifteen such events.

In them we are taken into the territory of wonder and mystery, and new meaning emerges. Accompanying people to their threshold is a key part of the work of the church — and whether it is through worship, or the sacraments, or the scriptures, or silence, or the awe of the universe, we see time again that as they encounter the Other their lives are transformed for good. Research too, in my experience, may be 99% perspiration but usually hinges on the 1% of inspiration, the sudden insight, often out of the blue, that sets its direction.

Closed doors are the enemy of epiphanies, the blockers of transformative insight. So my second suggestion, as we address the vexed issues of sexuality and identity, is that we can make common cause across the science-religion divide to keep the doors open, to oppose fundamentalist positions which close down the questions, and then close down the answers. And more positively (since just opposing fundamentalism breeds a sort of fundamentalist liberalism of its own) to sponsor new spaces in which such open discussion can take place.

It’s not an easy path to tread. One of my first experiences as a bishop was the so-called Indaba process at the Lambeth Conference, which deliberately tried to create such dialogue — and was roundly attacked from all sides for not coming down on any of them. Discussion is something an Institute such as the Faraday does rather well, but issues to do with homosexuality may prove challenging even for its members whose churchmanship is varied: so how might we go about it?

Both theologians and scientists have something to bring to the table here to create a dialogue that could just possibly draw in others too. On the theology side Reasoning, in which people of various faiths expound their scriptures together, might prove a useful model for explorative exposition. When the Lambeth Bishops picketed Parliament I was given a copy of the Poverty and Justice Bible, with all the relevant verses highlighted. Far more than any to do with sexuality. So, for instance, how do biblical teachings on justice and sexuality speak to each other?

Then from the science side, we have been quite fleet-footed in relating the Biblical accounts of Creation to our scientific theories about the origins of the universe. Could we read across some of that sophistication to build up an equal expertise in dealing with a verse such as “male and female he created them”? And just what is the current science anyway about male and female? I for one, even though I am relatively conservative on this issue and happy to live within the Church’s guidelines, see it as essential that genuine scientific insights are factored into and not out of our theology.

So — are there ways in which all of us could use our experience and positions to underpin a more creative debate in the church than the one I fear we may end up having? I pray for epiphanies!

David Thomson
Bishop of Huntingdon

12
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
9 Comment authors
revdaveLaurence RobertsErika BakerWilliamMaida Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Daniel Berry, NYC
Guest
Daniel Berry, NYC

Dear Bishop…Nice posting. But I have to go to this simple point: we long ago gave up using the bible for a history, geology, archeology, cosmology or biology text. Why would we persist in using it as a behavioral sciences text? The scientists in that area will tell you–as they do in all others–that we “don’t know” so much more than we “do know.” Why do we continue to misuse the bible by continuing to distort what it actually *is*?

Laurence C.
Guest
Laurence C.

“I am … happy to live within the Church’s guidelines” Bishop of Huntingdon

I’m sure he is, given that those guidelines don’t affect him personally at all – unless he’s one of the 13 gay bishops we hear so much about from Changing Attitude.

Father Ron Smith
Guest

I must confess, I rather liked the Bishop’s talk to the assembled scientists/religious people at the Cambridge meeting. I think that, though he confessed to a ‘conservative’ viewpoint of gender and sexuality issues, he did at least admit to the need for a proper opportunity for convergence between religious and scientific views to be investigated. This is so much better than the blanket ‘No-No’ approach of the LGBT-challenged oppositionists.

I am inclined towards the biblical approach of: He who is not against us, is with us. Half-full, rather than half-empty.

Charlotte
Guest
Charlotte

I actually have a fairly conservative view of sexuality issues, myself. I mean that I believe stable, permanent, public bonds between couples to be necessary for the health of society and the well-being of future generations. That is (to my mind) a reason for supporting the exchange of full, public vows in church between same-sex couples. They can then draw on religious and community support when the hard times come (as they come to all couples). Social stability will be enhanced along with their own personal well-being. However, I have to confess that the concept of “marriage” still carries a… Read more »

Maida
Guest
Maida

I love this line: “I […] see it as essential that genuine scientific insights are factored into and not out of our theology.” I see this as one of the true strengths of our Anglican tradition.

William
Guest
William

Surely Daniel, the bible is God’s message of love to the world – charting the gathering together of a people and then preparing them to receive the fullness of his truth in Christ. I don’t see any opposition to science here. Scripture does not attempt to explain scientific facts. It presents us with the path to salvation.

revdave
Guest
revdave

William, I agree with you. The Bible was written by real people in history – inspired real people, but real people – so it’s hardly surprising that what they say is couched in the concepts and understandings if their time. In fact that more we learn about their cultures’ concepts and understandings the more we understand what the inspired writers were saying (and what they were not saying). However, I don’t think that any *scientific* discovery has *ever* changed our understanding of the Scriptures regarding God’s moral and ethical standards, so I doubt that there is any chance that they… Read more »

Erika Baker
Guest
Erika Baker

Revdave,
you’re absolutely right.
And allowing same sex couples to marry and to affirm their committment to a live long exclusive and faithful relationship with their partner will precisely honour God’s moral and ethical standards.

revdave
Guest
revdave

Erika, unfortunately that is no more the case than a life-long exclusive and faithful sexual relationship between adult siblings (of either gender).

Erika Baker
Guest
Erika Baker

Revdave,

love the “unfortunately”!
You are, of course, entitled to your view.
But it is time that everyone recognises that there is a huge body of very good pro-gay theology around and simply denials are no longer good enough.
Sound theology engaging with the arguments made is what’s needed – and what appears to be sadly lacking. Maybe because there isn’t any.

Laurence Roberts
Guest
Laurence Roberts

What Erica said. How I admire your patience, fortitude, clarity and kindness.

I am greatly *lacking in them when encountering the opinions of revdave et al. You give me hope !

Thanks.

*I seem to be becoming an old curmugeon ! *

revdave
Guest
revdave

Erica There is a growing body of pro-gay theology, but it’s not very good Christian theology. At least not if your starting point is the canonical authority of teachings of Christ and His Apostles. Theologians down the centuries have justified all sorts of things that later turned out to be incorrect. But the question for a disciple of Jesus is simply “what did Jesus and the Apostles teach, and why?” Jesus taught the (almost) permanence of male-female marriage, the sinfulness of divorce, the sinfulness of sex outside marriage, and that even lust is to be rejected. The Apostles were equally… Read more »