By Ashley Obrey
Staff Writer
Diversity, strength in opinion, critical reflection, and interaction were common themes of this week’s controversial Moral Compass Series.
A fusion of Scripture, personal experience, strong opinions and heated debates addressed the topic of homosexuality, this semester’s contemporary moral issue of interest, on Oct. 14 and 15 and a third program last night.
The purpose of exploring such a topic: “To raise levels of sensitivity to the issue and strengthen moral convictions based on Scriptural insight,” said Dr. David Baird, dean of Seaver College.
In a consistently packed Elkins auditorium, students and faculty alike listened and watched as various speakers gave their perspectives on the topic of homosexuality.
On Oct. 14, Dr. Rick Marrs, associate dean of Seaver College, presented “Homosexuality: A Biblical Perspective.” His lecture gave relevance to various passages in the Bible with regards to sexual conduct, specifically homosexual behavior.
“The biblical aspects of this topic have changed rather dramatically in the last 15 to 20 years,” Marrs said. To show that change, he focused on the “traditional” and “non-traditional” as the two major interpretations of the biblical materials.
“Today I believe the issue is less focused on what the biblical texts say (exegesis) and more on how contemporary Christians apply those texts (hermeneutics),” Marrs said.
As for his personal opinion, Marrs said that he is “fairly comfortable with the Pepperdine position,” which clearly parallels the traditional understanding of the biblical texts. His views, however, did not bias his presentation.
“My final goal for that evening was to be as informative as possible, as fair to all sides as possible, and to provide a setting where dialogue could occur that was rooted in a familiarity with the materials that Christians consider central to this discussion,” Marrs said.
Marrs’ unbiased presentation left little room for dispute among audience members.
The series took a different turn Oct. 15 with the panel discussion of “Christian Responses to Homosexuality.” Each speaker, moderated by Dr. Randy Lowry, director of the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, brought his own experience to the table, creating debatable conflict through convictions.
Panelists, which included the Rev. Edwin Bacon, rector of All Saints Episcopal in Pasadena, the Rev. Alan Chambers, executive director of Exodus International, and Dr. Stanton Jones, provost of Wheaton College, each respectively came from what was collectively deemed a lens, or perspective, of personal experience, inclusion in the church, and science.
Chambers, who realized at age 11 that he was “attracted to boys,” was troubled by and struggled with homosexuality, but he believes God created everyone with the liberty to choose their lifestyles.
“Homosexuality isn’t what God created for us,” he said, “but we have the freedom to choose.”
Chambers, once distraught by his inability to reconcile his faith and sexuality, sought to live a life compatible with Christianity and thus “overcame” homosexuality.
“I stand here today a very different person than I once was,” Chambers said.
Bacon’s views were somewhat different.
“Homosexuality is not something to overcome, but is something that should be celebrated,” Bacon said.
It is for this reason that he honors gay marriages, saying that we shouldn’t deprive someone from being with “the love of his life.”
“Jesus said the most important thing is the love of God with your whole being and loving your neighbor as yourself,” Bacon said. Bacon said he believe that God created everyone just as they are and accepts everyone as he made them.
Jones approached the discussion from a less experiential and more analytical point of view. After studying psychology, Jones ended up learning a great deal about human sexuality in graduate school and came to the conclusion that “the proven findings of science, when applied, suggests that 3,000 years worth of Church history is wrong about homosexuality.”
He hoped to emphasize what science really says about homosexuality as well as the scientific applicability to the moral issue.
The main disagreements among panelists included science, deciding upon the appropriate lens through which Christians should view such moral issues and the clash of absolutes.
Jones discussed during the question and answer period that the brain is constantly reforming and that homosexual brains probably form differently based on childhood activities and other methods of socialization. Chambers said that we can overcome genetics. Bacon, however, shared his view that homosexuality is not just genetic. It is instead multi-causal and is an issue that extends beyond choice.
Aware of the intensity of different viewpoints, the discussion at one point focused in on what a Christian, in his or her process of commitment to the church, should use as a lens. While Chambers stood firm on his idea that, although experience is a part of it, the true lens is Scripture, Bacon argued that no one uses Scripture as his only lens.
“People were not made for the Bible, the Bible was made for people,” Bacon said.
Jones referred to St. Augustine when he commented that love should be the lens.
“We will bump up against these absolutes,” Jones said, extending his views on love and applying them to Lowry’s question of how people should react when our beliefs clash with regards to what we perceive as absolutes.
“We must be loving and respectful with each other, forcing us to make fundamental decisions on what we believe,” he added.
It was at this point that the panelists, in disagreement on what defines the absolutes, recognized that people inevitably will disagree and hold even firmer to their own beliefs.
“In a clash of absolutes there will invariably be people who splinter off,” Bacon said.
Chambers gave a suggestion on how to resolve such conflict.
“We have made homosexuality the issue,” he said. “We’re divided over it, angry over, fighting over it. As far as absolutes go, the compromise/connection has to be first and foremost Christian,” he said.
Other disparities on the issue did not find their basis on the arguments among speakers or the topics themselves. Instead, people shook their heads at various general stances taken by particular speakers.
Junior Jeremy Stolee’s opinion somewhat resembles that of Chambers and Bacon.
“I personally don’t feel that homosexuality is right,” he said, “but I feel that people have the right to do anything they want to, and God will love you no matter what that choice is.”
Junior Catie Royal presents a much less conservative view and expressed whole-hearted support.
“I think that a person can be spiritually satisfied and be homosexual,” she said.
“I don’t think [homosexuality] is a sin, but I don’t know enough about the Bible to say that from a biblical Christian standpoint. That’s just me personally. I’m liberal, but I’m a Christian.”
Others, like junior Matt Pond, weren’t so lenient on the less traditional views presented.
“I think that [Christianity and homosexuality] are totally contradictory,” he said. Christians should respect homosexuals as humans, but I think being gay is too much of a lifestyle to mix with being Christian.”
Despite the fact that many students opposed Bacon’s blessing of gay marriages, some students did, however, agree with him when he said his “only regret is that we didn’t have a fourth chair (panel member).”
“I think the two-on-one thing wasn’t fair,” junior Brad Johnson said. “They should have included another person in the mix.”
It was such variations in opinion and moral conflict that gave purpose to the selecting of the series’ topic last year.
Two years ago, a controversial Convocation about how a church dealt with the issue of homosexuality ignited a stirring debate on homosexuality within the Graphic. The response: a campus-wide reaction of astonishment and indignation, which contributed to the topic being set as the subject of the series in 2002, until Sept. 11 put it on the back burner to the ethics of war.
In previous years, the Moral Compass Series, sponsored by Student Affairs, featured a broad range of program topics, such as euthanasia, abortion and the death penalty. This spring it will address the issue of poverty.
“The Moral Compass Series is a campus-wide forum that encourages open dialogue, critical reflection, and deep consideration of the Christian faith and its interaction with contemporary moral issues,” Associate Dean of Students Affairs Tabatha Jones said in her introductory statement of the series.
Although there was some divergence between his own convictions and what was said in the lecture, sophomore Matthew Davis, like others, looked positively at the Moral Compass Series as an available tool for the Pepperdine community.
His conclusion: “I think (the Moral Compass Series) is valuable to the university as a whole, because it opens the door necessary to the understanding of other points of view.”
October 23, 2003