The appointment of Dr George Pell as the new Roman Catholic Archbishop of Sydney has brought into the open an issue that has been fermenting for some time within various sections of the Christian church in Australia. His first public Service in Sydney saw an ugly demonstration by some who considered that Dr Pell was strongly opposed to homosexuals.

From published statements of Dr Pell it would seem that the judgement against him has been somewhat harsh. He is reported as saying that he loves those who are homosexual with Christian charity but he strongly condemns their lifestyle and behaviour. It is also reported that his response to a suggestion that there might be homosexuals among the clergy was: "God forbid!"

At the same time our Anglican Primate the Archbishop of Perth, Dr Peter Carnley, went into print expressing a very different attitude. He considers that homosexuals should be accepted by the church, and believes that it will not be long before the Church blesses homosexual unions and ordains homosexual clergy. This is certain1y happening now in Anglican Churches in Canada and Episcopal Churches in America.

Some years ago it was prophesied that the question of the acceptance of homosexuality would become an issue to split the church. Already the Uniting Church has come to the brink on this issue, and is maintaining an uneasy truce. It is now becoming a key issue, a crisis in the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches.

There are three major pivotal points in this debate about homosexuals and the church. Firstly is the question of the authority of the Bible, and the weight that is given to its teaching. The second is the who1e question of how we "do ethics", the process by which we make ethical judgements. And the third is our understanding of the nature of homosexuality; whether it is "normal" for a certain segment of society, something they are born with; or whether it is a lifestyle of choice which can be changed. The fact that people differ widely in their views on these questions is the reason why they approach the question of homosexuality from such differing perspectives.

For those of us who take the Bible seriously, its teachings on homosexuality is quite clear. Homosexual practice is both "unnatural" and sinful. Those who continue to practice homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God. However, it should be kept in perspective that this is also true for adulterers, thieves, drunkards, slanderers and swindlers. (1 Cor. 6: 10). Homosexual practice is not the worst sin, but it is clear1y a sin nevertheless!

It should be noted that the Bible addresses the issue of homosexual practice, but not that of homosexual orientation. .The love of one man for another is not wrong, as in the case of David and Johnathan. But it is wrong when that relationship is expressed in sexual activity.

From the Bible's perspective, there is no clear answer on the question of whether homosexual orientation is inherited. It is very clear that homosexual practice is not "normal". God's norm is the sexual union, within the marriage relationship, of a man and a woman. While some may see this as too restrictive, it is in fact the great basis of hope. Where homosexuality is accepted there is no incentive to change. But, when it is recognised as an aberration from God's norm, and when homosexual activity is repented of, there is real hope for godly transformation. There are many wonderful testimonies of former homosexuals who have been transformed by God.

The great tragedy in the Church today is that many of our leaders no longer consider the Bible to be the authorative Word of God. They are then left to their own imaginations, and the prevailing currents of thought of the day. We need to be sure of our own foundations.