248 WHERE IS EVANGELICAL FEMINISM TAKING US?
no longer observed in today’s world, because of Paul’s teachings about
our newfound freedom in Christ” (91). Moreover, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
“refers specifically to sexual relationships between men and boys, which
would be a coercive and perverted relationship” (91), and 1 Timothy
1:10 shows “that it is the power differential of these sexual acts that
make them despicable” and “taking a power advantage over another is
the perversion that is rightly condemned here” (92). And concerning
Romans 1:26-27, “For some theologians, unnatural refers to perverse
and hedonistic sexual practices, not the mutually loving interaction that
occurs between same-sex consenting adults. Therefore it is argued that
the persons with a homosexual orientation are not going against natu-
ral tendencies” (92, italics in original).
They go on to mention “the high view of scriptural authority held by
many of the founders of the gay church” (94) and they give an extended
and sympathetic summary of the decision of Mel White, former Fuller pro-
fessor, to leave his family and pursue a homosexual lifestyle. They quote
his former wife as saying, “Mel had no choice about being a homosex-
ual” (95). They say, “No one is to blame, Mel asserts; he believes homo-
sexual orientation is part of God’s plan” (95). The Balswicks do not give
one word of disagreement with any of this positive assessment.
While at the end of the chapter they say that they personally find
the Genesis account of God’s creation of male and female “persuades us
to uphold the male and female union as God’s intended design for
authentic sexual union” (101), they follow that by saying that because
of the fall “none of us achieves sexual wholeness in accordance with
God’s highest ideals” and that some people “have natural attraction for
a same-sex partner” (101). They conclude,
We acknowledge that some gay Christians may choose to commit
themselves to a lifelong, monogamous homosexual union, believing
this is God’s best for them. They believe that this reflects an authen-
tic sexuality that is congruent for them and their view of Scripture.
Even though we hold to the model of a heterosexual, lifelong, monog-
amous union, our compassion brings us to support all persons as they
move in the direction of God’s ideal for their lives.^33(^33) Ibid., 102.