How Ken Wilson Sees a “Third Way”

Posted on March 22, 2015 by PaulVK

Post on CRC A1B Website

A third way for evangelicals on same-sex marriage

I studied the scriptures on divorce and remarriage extensively as a younger pastor. I studied the early church fathers and the Protestant Reformers. Their grounds for allowing remarriage were extremely strict, based on a plain reading of scripture. This older consensus held sway in the church — Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox — until it was flooded with remarried couples after World War II.

Some have objected that this “third way” is just “open and affirming” in disguise. But I maintain that this “third way” — I call it “welcome and wanted” — is not equivalent to “open and affirming” for two important reasons.

Second, the “third way” questions why people who accept the gospel of Jesus Christ think they have any business assuming that our acceptance of one another “in Christ” is contingent on granting each other our moral approval. The “affirming” in “open and affirming” implies that the congregation so tagged offers its moral approval to gay couples. But what does that have to do with the gospel? Isn’t the whole point of the gospel that God accepts us thanks to the faithfulness of Jesus and not because he approves of all our moral choices? And that we are to do likewise with each other? Where does this insistence that our unity depends on granting each other moral approval come from?

In any event, the biblical “ideal,” if there is such a thing, is not marriage, but celibacy, according to the teachings of Jesus and Paul. Marriage, according to both, is a concession to human weakness. “If you can’t remain celibate, it’s better to marry than to burn,” said Paul. Hardly a ringing endorsement of marriage. This business of granting marriage some privileged moral status is far from the New Testament ideal.

Call me naïve, but I think there’s a third way for evangelicals in the gay marriage debate, and it’s a way that honors the Bible and the power of the gospel better than “love the sinner, hate the sin” or “open and affirming.” Whether or not it works is another matter. But I think it’s time to give it a try, especially if it could bear witness to a risen Lord better than the current rehashed moralism that we’re calling the gospel.

Unknown's avatar

About PaulVK

Husband, Father of 5, Pastor
This entry was posted in Daily Links and Notes. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to How Ken Wilson Sees a “Third Way”

  1. Dustin DeVriend's avatar Dustin DeVriend says:
    March 24, 2015 at 7:56 am

    Paul,

    I spent some time diving into who Ken Wilson is in light of CCSF attempting this ‘third-way,’ yet the reality is his attempt at this new way is really ‘open and affirming’ (I could be ignorant in this, which I am waiting for his book to show up, so I can understand this ‘third-way’ better) like he tries to denounce in his words above. Here is his modified sermon to his congregation before he was no longer at Vineyard Ann Arbor where he clearly supports same-sex wedding officiation, clergy, membership, and rejecting his denominations stance on homosexuality (Isn’t this full-blown open and affirming? Or is the term subjective dependent on the tribe one is looking at?): http://annarborvineyard.org/resources/online-sermons-a-music/865

    Here is a link to the staff, board, and denominational letters showing that those who didn’t agree with the Sr. Pastors shift didn’t feel like they could voice their opinion: http://annarborvineyard.org/congregation-documents

    As a seminary student in Newbigin House of Studies, this has made the learning grounds even more stretching as various responses come out, transitions take place, and I ponder at the same time how does a pastor who takes this ‘third-way’ adjust their doctrine around sin and sanctification (plus so much more)? Also, do you implement a church conscience clause for the pastors (multi-staff) who hold a ‘traditional’ view, and leave any pastoral care of homosexuals to those who are open & affirming? Yet, I think what your blog posts have been getting at is central, the church needs to talk about it! Thanks for compiling all your data points into one place, it helps others too!

    Reply
    • PaulVK's avatar PaulVK says:
      March 24, 2015 at 6:42 pm

      Thanks for these Justin. I’ll write more in subsequent posts about a possible “third way”. I agree that Wilson’s position is like “affirming” in practice without “affirming” in profession. I think that is a substantive distinction, one that will tend to not satisfy either culture war camp. Thanks for your comment.

      Reply
  2. Don Bromley's avatar Don Bromley says:
    May 19, 2015 at 2:33 pm

    I served with Ken Wilson from 1997-2011 as his executive pastor. Yes, Ken’s “Third Way” is indistinguishable from “Open and Affirming.” In other words, a “Third Way” church would do all the things an “Open and Affirming” church would do: ordain non-celibate gay pastors and officiate gay weddings in the church sanctuary. Calling it “third way” is creating a distinction without a difference, and is purposefully misleading.

    Reply

Leave a comment