Abstract
In the ongoing debate surrounding same-sex relationships in general, and same-sex marriage in particular, James Brownson's recent work is a welcome addition, providing a calm and well-reasoned examination of Christian Scripture that can be appreciated by all sides of the debate. Regardless of whether or not a person ultimately agrees with Brownson's conclusions, readers on all sides should find food for thought at numerous points throughout the book. Furthermore, thanks to the lack of technical jargon, any reader—clergy, scholar, and casual reader alike—can follow the argument in this book.
Before reading Brownson's work, two points are necessary to understand. First, to arrive at Brownson's conclusions, one must be open to Scripture being a culturally and historically contextual document rather than a predominantly propositional decree. Second, Brownson repeatedly asserts, “if [hetero- or homosexual] unions are to fulfill the biblical [ideal], they should be exclusive, lifelong, intimate, loving, and fruitful in the broad sense of [fruitfulness]” (p. 124), a standard to which not even all heterosexual unions rise.
The major impetus for this book came when Brownson's teenage son told his parents “he believed he was gay.” (p. 11). Prior to this, Brownson characterized himself as a “moderate, traditionalist,” who distinguished between homosexual orientation and homosexual behavior. However, his relationship with his son drove him to reconsider Scripture, and out of this reexamination he developed an approach to Scripture in which the moral logic underlying all passages touching on homosexuality guides one's ultimate interpretation of those same passages. Brownson's focus on moral logic is intriguing, shifting the discussion of homosexuality from an ontological basis to an ethical one.
Brownson opens with a comparison of traditionalist and revisionist positions. Traditionalists, according to Brownson, ground their response to homosexuality on gender complementarity, the focus of which is biological differences between male and female. These differences, say the traditionalists, are central to God's purposeful design for creation (and procreation) as described in Genesis. Brownson takes issue with this particular definition of complementarity, on which his critique of the traditionalist position through the remainder of the book is based.
While traditionalists maintain a more literal understanding of prohibitions against same-sex erotic behavior, revisionists contend there is too great a separation between the cultural context of Scripture and that of contemporary life, with the result that Scripture has little to say directly to same-sex relationships as they exist today. In order to account for same-sex relationships as they are currently experienced, revisionists seek to base their scriptural conclusions on justice and love. Brownson argues such a position broadens the boundaries too far, advocating instead for a middle position in which “the movement of scriptural revelation” through the whole of the canon of Scripture is considered alongside both the progression of culture and current scientific knowledge (pp. 50–51).
With this middle position in mind, Brownson moves into an intriguing critique of the traditional core of Christian sexual ethics: patriarchy, one flesh, procreation, and celibacy. Traditionally understood, intercourse involves an active and a passive partner. Within patriarchy, the active partner is male, and the passive partner is female, leading to the patriarchal prohibition against men behaving like women. In a return to gender complementarity, the discussion of “one flesh” parses the biblical meaning of the phrase, concluding “one flesh” has more to do with kinship relationships than biology. With respect to procreation, Brownson challenges the traditional view that sex is for the purpose of creating children, arguing that Scripture views procreation as secondary to unity, meaning marriage can exist without procreation but not without unity. Finally, in examining celibacy, Brownson reintroduces the distinction between sexual orientation and behavior. The traditionalist middle ground allows for homosexual orientation as long as the corresponding sexual behavior is quarantined within celibacy. According to Brownson, traditionalists misunderstand the biblical view of celibacy as a lifelong call in general and as a requirement for certain types of people in particular.
Brownson then turns his attention to an exegesis of the “boundary language” of Romans 1:24–27. He examines lust and desire, purity and impurity, honor and shame, and natural versus unnatural. First, he links lust with idolatry and passion, which are understood to lead to a debased and obsessive pursuit of gratification. Scripture differentiates such behavior from desire, characterizing the former as evil. Second, the discussions of purity/impurity and honor/shame delve into the theological and cultural progression from the Old Testament through the New Testament, such that Paul's usage of these terms ought to be understood in light of this progression. For example, the Levitical purity laws are superseded in Christ. Third, Brownson, in what may be the most captivating chapter, contends that Paul uses “natural” as an apologetic device in connection with Greek thought. He also argues that current understandings of what is “natural” are far different on many levels from those of Paul's original audience.
Brownson's concern for the reader is evident from the outset in the structure of his argument. Each chapter summarizes the content to follow and ends with a “Summing Up” section in which he briefly restates the main points of each chapter in a bullet-pointed list. Throughout the body of each chapter, Brownson walks the reader through his argument, repeating main concepts. In response to the deep emotion attached to the issue of and differing stances on same-sex relationships, his methodological approach is pastoral, allowing the reader to come alongside the argument rather than being subjected to it, which all can appreciate.