The Wilkinsons and 'Christian' opposition to anti-discrimination laws
How have the Wilkinsons achieved virtual martyrdom status in UK conservative evangelical circles in the space of about 12 hours since Archbishop Cranmer reheated the story? Either they are as naive as they are projecting, or alternatively they knew the law, knowingly broke the law, and have little to complain about if they are then subject to the consequences of the law.
If the Wilkinsons are truly naive and thought their B&B was just a private home, I wonder were they paying tax on the proceeds of their business, as well as complying with the fire and safety regulations that apply to B&Bs? If they were, they know fine well that the nature of their business meant that their home was, in law, treated rather differently than any other private home.
Even if I try to put myself in the shoes of the Wilkinsons, I fail to see how letting a double room to two men compromises their position. They are clearly not themselves being forced to take part in any activity that would breach their interpretation of Christian morals. New Testament scripture is fairly clear that one should, where it does not intself constitute a flagrant moral breach, obey lawful authority. St. Matthew 22:15-22 (and parallel passages in the other synopic gospels) and Romans 13:1-7 might offer the Wilkinsons and their church and interesting point of departure for a bible study on this subject. And the law is pretty clear that one is not aloud to refuse to provide a service to a customer on the basis of their sexuality - any more than one can so do on the basis of their religious beliefs or the colour of their skin. And rightly so.
None of this is to delegitimise the Christian tradition of peaceful resistance to illegitimate authority and unjust laws. But I'm not the one citing my rigid adherence to scripture, literally read, as grounds for being able to escape the law. And if the Willamsons think they are engaging in Christian civil disobedience, they really need to do a little bit less whingeing about how the law shouldn't apply to them.
As a communicant Anglican, faithful to the best of my capacity, I also resent the casual and unthinking way that the Wilkinsons, the Bulls and their supporters claim with such lack of qualification that their view is as a result of their Christian principles. I don't doubt that they possess Christian principles, and may be in most ways fine people, but many Christians would be repelled by the idea of turning a gay couple away from lodgings because of their sexuality. Many would even hold that behaving in such a way was itself immoral. So, whatever principles motivate the Williamsons, they cannot be reduced to 'Mere Christianity'.
If the Wilkinsons are truly naive and thought their B&B was just a private home, I wonder were they paying tax on the proceeds of their business, as well as complying with the fire and safety regulations that apply to B&Bs? If they were, they know fine well that the nature of their business meant that their home was, in law, treated rather differently than any other private home.
Even if I try to put myself in the shoes of the Wilkinsons, I fail to see how letting a double room to two men compromises their position. They are clearly not themselves being forced to take part in any activity that would breach their interpretation of Christian morals. New Testament scripture is fairly clear that one should, where it does not intself constitute a flagrant moral breach, obey lawful authority. St. Matthew 22:15-22 (and parallel passages in the other synopic gospels) and Romans 13:1-7 might offer the Wilkinsons and their church and interesting point of departure for a bible study on this subject. And the law is pretty clear that one is not aloud to refuse to provide a service to a customer on the basis of their sexuality - any more than one can so do on the basis of their religious beliefs or the colour of their skin. And rightly so.
None of this is to delegitimise the Christian tradition of peaceful resistance to illegitimate authority and unjust laws. But I'm not the one citing my rigid adherence to scripture, literally read, as grounds for being able to escape the law. And if the Willamsons think they are engaging in Christian civil disobedience, they really need to do a little bit less whingeing about how the law shouldn't apply to them.
As a communicant Anglican, faithful to the best of my capacity, I also resent the casual and unthinking way that the Wilkinsons, the Bulls and their supporters claim with such lack of qualification that their view is as a result of their Christian principles. I don't doubt that they possess Christian principles, and may be in most ways fine people, but many Christians would be repelled by the idea of turning a gay couple away from lodgings because of their sexuality. Many would even hold that behaving in such a way was itself immoral. So, whatever principles motivate the Williamsons, they cannot be reduced to 'Mere Christianity'.