Mike Ovey on The Pilling Report
Posted on December 23, 2013
Filed under Anglican Communion, Church of England, Theology
Principal of Oak Hill College, Dr Mike Ovey, has now posted eight responses to the Pilling Report (“the Report of the House of Bishops Working Group on Human Sexuality’).
1. God’s work versus God’s will?
“ultimately in practice, it prefers our judgment of what we think good to God’s judgment expressed in the scriptures of what is good.”
2. Does sincerity grant a veto?
“This creates the bizarre situation of an explicit submission to the authority of scripture, while not in fact applying what scripture says, either against same-sex marriages, or in favour.”
3. Groundhog Day: ‘scripture’s lack of clarity’
“As we have seen, judgments about the obscurity of scripture have been made before, notably in Roman Catholic responses to the Reformation.”
4. How common is the common ground?
“Like an iceberg, the most significant parts of the Pilling Report lie beneath the surface.”
“They have talked at length, listened at length and have had both clerical and expert help in all their deliberations. They have listened both to each other and to a wide range of witnesses. But this process has not enabled them to reach a collective conclusion as to whether or not same-sex sexual relations in the context of a faithful long-term commitment are right or wrong.”
6. Common grace and stolen fruit
“After noting that the tradition of the church for 2,000 years and indeed worldwide at the moment is against recognition of same-sex marriages and relationships, the report nevertheless goes on to speak in laudatory terms about the same-sex couples who have testified before it.”
“If we want a biblical precedent for a hermeneutics of suspicion where the hermeneutics of suspicion is wrongly placed, then we need look no further than Genesis 3:1ff.”
“Churches can get things wrong. One of the more disturbing moments in the Thirty-Nine Articles comes in Article 19 which deals with the doctrine of the church.”