Comparing gay activists to Nazis will harm, not help Christian witness

It would be unkind toward Alan Craig to claim that he suffered from a temporary fault with his frontal lobe when he compared homosexual activists to the Nazis in an opinion piece in the Church of England Newspaper last week.

It is however accurate to say that in this instance—as a Christian—he has divorced his duty to love his neighbour from his political worldview. That is not to say there are no valid concerns conservative Christians should have when it comes to the freedom of the Church to self-define in this country. But to use crass and hurtful comparisons will backfire. It is also sinful.

Let’s be clear. Having a conservative biblical view of homosexual practice should be a freedom that is given to churches and their congregations in a liberal democracy. Gay and lesbian people don’t have to be part of a church which teaches they should not sleep together. They are free to participate in Quaker worship or go to more liberal churches. Having a conservative view does not amount to homophobia. Churches should be free to define marriage to be between a man and a woman, particularly since the rights of gays and lesbians in civil partnerships—in all but name—give them the right to marry.

But the churches also have a responsibility. In response to the freedom we have been granted here in the UK, we must emphasise the love of God for all people as seen in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. This is true in our personal lives, but it must also be true in the public square. How can we proclaim personal salvation and a message of grace when we cannot show it in our political philosophy? How will the gay community hear us?

When we do not speak in such a way that a possible antagonist understands us, we should be silent. It is therefore sinful to compare homosexual activists to the Nazis. It is sinful because it is a gross caricature of history, because it is unnecessarily inflammatory and because it is hurtful to our neighbour, whom we are to love. But above all, it sullies the Church's witness to God's saving grace. Moreover it betrays a form of identity politics that has nothing to do with the identity of Jesus.

The instances where the Bible mentions homosexual acts are few. Building a theology that can respond to the narrative of the modern gay identity is not easy. Then try translating into a sermon and you will struggle even more. Articulate it in the public sphere and you will be misunderstood. But it can be done. Those that have ears, hear.

Alan Craig has been a councillor in the London Borough of Newham and ran in the London mayoral election last time round. He has campaigned on issues to do with poverty, and was a part of the campaign against the east London Mosque. His experience in a multicultural area of London is immense and from what I can tell, most of the time he speaks with Christian compassion and often with a lot of sense.

In his own defence of the article to the Guardian journalist Riazat Butt, he said that he was very careful not to label gay people Nazis. Craig maintains that he was speaking narrowly of the activists behind the gay lobby. He should have known that even if he was careful and did not call gays Nazis, the distinction cannot be clear in the same way that speaking about paedophiles in the Roman Catholic Church smears all Christians with the same tar.

Identity politics is dangerous at the best of times. It is only through regaining the trust of those that Craig perceives to be persecuting the Church, that we will be able to stand firm to proclaim the truth of Jesus' act of salvation for all.