A few days ago I posted a few thoughts about why I don’t find parallels between slavery debates and homosexuality debates to be persuasive. In short, when it comes to the issue of homosexual practice, I am not persuaded that the issue within the church is an issue of realizing the justice and liberty that are ours in Christ.
But as I have mulled this over, I have feared that I may have done wrong in merely stating that much and no more.
Here’s the more: the same Christian story that compels me to deny the church’s blessing on same-sex unions also compels me to fully support the civil rights of homosexuals.
In short, the state should have a mechanism for sanctioning homosexual couples as united in one household, and the laws of the state pertaining to spouses should extend equally to all such partners, and exclusion from public office, commerce, housing, and the like should be met with the same recriminations that the state metes out on racial and religious prejudice. And let’s not forget tax deductions, for crying out loud!
What sort of reading of the Christian story would lead me to the conclusion that this is a quintessentially Christian position? Quite simply, it’s the command to love neighbor (together with Jesus’ closing of the “who’s my neighbor?” loophole) as interpreted through the Golden Rule.
What does it mean to love my neighbor? What does it mean to do what I would want done to me?
If someone did not approve of my choice of a spouse, would I still want that person to protect my right to cover my wife on my employer’s health insurance plan? If my wife’s state-funded employer poked around and found out that I work at an institution that discriminates based on religious conviction, would I still want them to allow me to be covered under her insurance and receive spouse survivor benefits should she die–even though my work and life is antithetical to the state’s commitment to non-establishment of religion?
If I were sick in the hospital, would I want the hospital to be legally required to allow the partner I love to come visit me?
There is no way of reading the church’s posture toward the world as “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and still argue based on our set of convictions that we are acting obediently when we fail to not only approve of but even advocate for full inclusion of homosexuals in civil society.
If all of this seems too far from home, perhaps we should remind ourselves of some of the other things that the NT teaches about sex and marriage, and ponder whether we want those, too, to be the bases of difference in civil society.
Should the state refuse to acknowledge a marriage in which one of the partners has been previously divorced?
Should an insurance company be able to cancel the insurance policy of a spouse who commits adultery?
When the shrewd lawyer attempted to back Jesus into a corner by pinning him down on the extent of this “love your neighbor as yourself” business, Jesus replied with a most unlikely story. A religious outsider, an idolatrous Samaritan, sees a beaten, wounded man on the side of the road and lends assistance where the religious professionals, in order to obey nothing less than the law of God itself, passed by.
Who was the neighbor who loved? It was the person who showed mercy.
Who was not a neighbor? It was the religious people who upheld the Law.
O.k., but Luke was a bleeding heart liberal, chapter 4 and all that. What about the good ol’ Sermon the Mount Jesus?
He is the one who commanded: “Let your light so shine before people that they will see your good deeds and glorify your Father who is in heaven.”
Did you catch that? We are to be acting in such a way that people outside the community see that we are workers for good in way that compels them to glorify the God who is, himself, the source of the light that we shine.
And once again, as an evangelical Christian the question is turned on me: have I shone the kind of light for my homosexual neighbor that would cause him or her to see my good work and glorify my Father in heaven?
Both as an individual and as a member of a community I know that I have failed, that we have failed, to show this kind of love.
Please forgive me.
First, it seems that she is couching some things provocatively (and it’s working, people are provoked). Given how she has couched things on her Facebook page, it is clear that she is not giving up on her faith in Christ. It’s clear that she’s not suddenly disbelieving the resurrection of Jesus or the value of his death. This is not a renunciation of her Christian faith. She is wrestling with how to follow Jesus when the world of Jesus’ followers seems so often incongruous with the kind of community that should be bearing Jesus’ name.
