‘The idea of a trajectory or a redemptive-movement approach to understanding and applying Scripture is hardly a new concept’ is the opening sentence in William J. Webb’s ‘A Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic: Encouraging Dialogue Among Four Evangelical Views,’ JETS 48 (2005): 331-49. Steven Croft notes,
Many evangelicals with a high view of the Scriptures find themselves persuaded by this trajectory argument on the question of the equality and inclusion of women in leadership and ministry, despite the prohibitions to the contrary contained in some parts of the New Testament. However, they are unable to discover a parallel trajectory on questions of human sexuality and the recognition of same-sex relationship.
He adds
I believe that trajectory is manifestly present. The direction of travel in the New Testament trajectory is undeniably towards the worth of each individual, the equal value of all humanity, and the freedom that is entrusted to us in Christ.
But it is not clear how he identifies a trajectory within the New Testament. A trajectory implies movement along a path. Where is the beginning of the path and where its end? Does he mean to imply that while Jesus in the Gospels is a bit hazy about the worth of each individual (perhaps thinking of the incident with the Syro-Phoenician woman?), Paul has a better grasp of it (in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek), and the book of Revelation gives us the clearest picture of the equal value of all humanity (a great multitude from every nation, tribe , people and language)? Against this, Croft sees the Biblical understanding of human worth as flowing ‘most of all, from the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ and the life that Jesus lives’. Given that the incarnation and the life of Jesus arguably stand at the beginning, not the end of the path traced in the NT, it is hard to see what kind of trajectory there might be, or is it that Jesus himself, prior to his cross and resurrection, did not yet fully realise what would flow from his life?
Croft observes that ‘this understanding of human worth and dignity…is unfolded from Genesis to Revelation.’ Clearly, man and woman made in the image of God is a key marker of human worth and dignity. Does Croft believe that the implications of this are seen more clearly in Revelation 21-22 than in Genesis 1-3? Does the OT focus on Abraham and his seed (‘in whom all the families of the earth shall be blessed’ [Genesis 12:3]) suggest to Croft uncertainty about ‘the equal value of all humanity’? Even if that were the case, the Bishop of Oxford must surely know that many Christians past and present would strongly contest the view that the OT is equivocal about the worth of each individual, the equal value of all humanity.
The problem here is arguably that Croft accepts the widespread cultural belief that denying sexual intimacy within same-sex relationships denies the value and worth of some individuals. In other words, the key element of the alleged ‘trajectory’ is not taken from Scripture which makes it hard to claim that the trajectory is to be found in Scripture itself. This is essentially different from ‘the question of the equality and inclusion of women in leadership and ministry’ which needs to be addressed in the light of diverse passages which directly concern the matter but at least on first reading seem to point in different directions. The same is true for the argument about slavery and about divorce. In all these cases, the church had to bring into conversation passages which directly address the matter at hand and it has historically done so, knowing that ‘it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another’ (Article 20 of The Thirty-Nine Articles). By contrast, in seeking to redraw the boundaries of sexual morality, Croft suspends the teaching of passages which directly address the matter in the light of his belief about what ‘the worth of each individual, the equal value of all humanity, and the freedom that is entrusted to us in Christ’ imply. This reflects a different hermeneutical approach and a different view of the authority of Scripture from what the Church of England has historically taught.
What about freedom in Christ? This, too, is not best described in the language of trajectory. There is no ever growing movement of freedom in Christ through the Bible or even the NT. The freedom for which Christ has set us free came at a definite moment in history and relates to the end of the old covenant which was brought about by the establishment of a new covenant. This new covenant comes with the same call to be holy and blameless before God (cf. Ephesians 1:4) but no longer is a nation sanctified, set apart for God’s special purpose, and the worship of God in Spirit and in truth no longer needs the regulations that concerned the shadow of the substance that is fulfilled and accomplished in Christ.
