back back to Letters previous previous story  |  next story next

Requirements of foster-parents, and of bishops

From the Revd Sharon Ferguson
Sir, — It was with personal interest and a great deal of disbelief that I read your report on the rejection of Owen and Eunice Johns as foster-carers (News, 29 February), and realised that this couple really believe that it would be OK to foster children and impose such beliefs and attitudes upon them.

Of course, they have the right to hold their beliefs, but if they are taking the Bible so literally in this instance, are we to assume that they will do so regarding everything in the Bible? Is this the sort of person we want to be responsible for the moral development of children?

Although many of the Christian denominations are still struggling to accept the sexual expression of same-gender relationships, they generally accept that the homosexual orientation is morally neutral, and that no person should be discriminated against because of his or her sexual orientation.

Children and young people being looked after have already experienced enough trauma and rejection in their lives. If they are brave enough to disclose to a carer that they believe they are gay or lesbian, regardless of their age and regardless whether it turns out to be a phase of growing up or their natural orientation, they need to be received with total acceptance and support. Anything less than this is completely unacceptable.

If Mr and Mrs Johns are going to use the law to appeal against the decision of Derby Social Services, then I wish to remind them that there is one law that is superior to all others, and that is God’s law of love, which was made clear in the commandment of Jesus (John 13.34-35). You cannot love what you cannot accept.

In my opinion, this law overrides any of the other instructions that can be found in the Bible.

I pray that the Johnses will rethink their views on homosexuality, and at least realise that really to follow Christ means finding all people acceptable, especially those marginalised by society.
SHARON FERGUSON
Assistant Chief Executive
Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement
Oxford House, Derbyshire Street
London E2 6HG

From the Revd Peter Graham
Sir, — The Revd Stephen Griffiths (Letters, 29 February) upholds the theory that our bishops should be giving us a clear defence of scripture (and tradition). I imagine most bishops, like the rest of us, would agree with this; yet the fact remains that theological differences among experts mean that there is in fact no agreement to be found on the basis of literal interpretation.

I am sure there are psychological causes for homophobia, but I cannot see any logical reason for the powerful and widespread moral certainty about Paul’s condemnation of gay sex as compared with our Lord’s own words about divorce and about unconditional love.

Jesus is recorded as saying that anyone who looks lustfully at a woman has already committed adultery with her in his heart; but there are no such words about looking lustfully at one’s fellow males.

I simply cannot understand how one can take a couple of verses from the Pentateuch and an extremely illogical passage from the great apostle Paul and exalt acceptance of these as the criterion of biblical Christianity. The fact, of course, is that the whole concept of sexual orientation was unknown to those writers, who believed that all men were heterosexual and that homosexual acts were therefore clearly abhorrent to God.
PETER GRAHAM
Carrier’s Cottage
Buckland Newton
Dorchester, Dorset DT2 7DW


back back to Letters up back to top previous previous story  |  next story next


© Church Times 2006 - All rights reserved

Website by Baigent