32: APPROVAL OF HOMOSEXUALITY 249While not personally endorsing lifelong homosexual relationships
as morally legitimate, the Balswicks also carefully avoid saying that com-
mitted homosexual relationships are wrong. While they say they hold
to a heterosexual “model,” this is simply stated as their personal pref-
erence, and the chapter as a whole gives much greater argument and sup-
port for the view that committed homosexual relationships can be
legitimately defended from Scripture and may be God’s will for people
who naturally have a homosexual “orientation.” In response to that
same quotation from the Balswicks’ book, World magazine founder Joel
Belz wrote, “If that isn’t an explicit example of relativism at work, I’m
not sure I’d ever know one.”^34
A Fuller student who took a gender/sexuality class from the
Balswicks in the spring of 2006 reported that on the day that the class
was scheduled to discuss the morality of homosexuality the Balswicks
brought in a pro-homosexual guest lecturer for the entire class period.
This student wrote to me,
If there was any doubt about the agenda of the class it was made clear
today. I sat through the most liberal, leftist, sad, theologically
bankrupt lecture on homosexuality this morning.... According to
the schedule this was the last class time devoted to the issue.... pray
that God will change the hearts and minds of those in authority at
Fuller Theological Seminary.”^35This does not indicate that everyone at Fuller Seminary is now advo-
cating the moral legitimacy of homosexuality in committed lifelong rela-
tionships. But this class clearly promoted that view. And it does indicate
that the seminary is allowing steps to be taken in that direction, and it
suggests further movement in that direction yet to come.
The approval of homosexuality is the final step along the path to
liberalism.
(^34) Joel Belz, “Relativism at Fuller,” World, July 1, 2006, 8.
(^35) Private e-mail from Kim Livesay to the author April 18, 2006, quoted by permission.