In my professional career (outside of the Christian schools I've been associated with) I've had numerous coworkers who were practicing homosexuals. In general these experiences have been positive and I have never had any "problems" with my homosexual friends/coworkers, and I hope that they would say the same about me even though they knew I was a Christian.
And though these interactions started when I was in high school, for a number of years my view on homosexuality was nothing more than dismissive disgust. I moved one notch more nuanced in my later college years as I embraced the "hate the sin - love the sinner" ethos (yet another manifestation of my over-simplification of human sexuality). A few years after that, I moved to adopt the idea that homosexuality itself was not necessarily sinful, though homosexual acts certainly were, and therefore the idea of a homosexual Christian was no more problematic than the idea of a single heterosexual Christian. In both cases, the individuals simply needed to control their actions to stay within God's will. Then, in the last few years as gay marriage became the battle du jour, my libertarian side gave me an easy out. I simply blamed the government's involvement in marriage and I took the stance that only churches should administer the rites of marriage. This would leave churches free to marry whoever they wanted (or did not want). This last stance generally provided a way out of facing the larger and messier questions, while placating the extremists on either side.
I recently listened to a podcast of a local pastor's sermon on homosexuality. He certainly seemed sincere and genuine as he actually cried over the way that homosexuals have been mistreated by Christians, and he asked for forgiveness from them. I'm sure that in certain circles, such a show of deference toward homosexuals would be scandalous in of itself, but that was at the beginning of the sermon. By the end he was stating that the Bible clearly teaches homosexual acts are wrong and he had no choice but to agree. He seemed to actually apologize for having to believe what the Bible was teaching him. It was sadly intriguing to listen to this man vainly trying to reconcile the dissonance between what he knew to be right in his heart and his traditional interpretation of Scripture.
For me, two points have come to stand tall and immovable and they have helped settle the issue for me.
The first issue is whether or not one's sexual orientation is a choice or is it (like one's race) something one is simply born into. Christians have fiercely defended the idea that homosexuality is a a choice (like sin is a choice). But it is clear to me that sexual orientation is not a choice for the majority of individuals. Very few people would freely choose to pursue a sexual identity which alienates themselves from their families, churches, friends, and coworkers. Few (some, but very few) people would choose such a socially destructive path simply because they wanted to. To claim otherwise shows an incredible lack of understanding for the difficulties facing any "out" homosexual. Christians like to bemoan how easy it is to be a homosexual today, but that claim only has merit in very select subcultures within the U.S. today. Try being a homosexual in the Bible belt. Try it in most high schools today. Try it in Africa or any Muslim country where it is a capital offense.
Sexual orientation is therefore something that we are either born into or something that is brought upon us through a combination of nature and nurture. Though currently there is no known "gay gene", undoubtedly there will be a series of genetic markers associated with homosexual orientation identified in the coming years. Sexual orientation (generally) is not merely a choice. If I look back upon my life, there was never a time or phase when I decided to like girls. I did not choose to be heterosexual, I just am. If someone told me that today God wanted me to choose to be attracted to men instead of women, I'm afraid there isn't much I could do. I'm pretty sure that I would forever "disappoint" God by my attraction to women.
The second issue is whether or not homosexual behavior is damaging. It is almost impossible to answer this question because it is exceedingly difficult to separate any damage that may be caused directly by homosexuality from the damage that society inflicts upon homosexuals as punishment for their nonconforming behavior. So a question remains unanswered. If society did not condemn homosexuality, but rather accepted it as normative would homosexuals be as happy, healthy, and as well adjusted as heterosexuals? As I said it is difficult to tell, but the studies I am familiar with lead me to believe that responsible/loving homosexual behavior is not in of itself any more destructive than responsible/loving heterosexual behavior. I suspect that this conclusion will be reinforced as homosexuality becomes increasingly accepted in society.
Evangelical Christians have vehemently denied the mounting evidence and the cultural momentum on both of these issues for many years, but the connected nature of today's youth makes it difficult to maintain the veil of ignorance. This is leaving evangelicals with just one remaining fig leaf. It is this trump card to which the tearful pastor appealed. The Bible is against it. The problem is that the more we hold onto this claim, the more we are damaging people's (especially our youth's) opinion of the Bible.
Evangelicals are now left in the position of claiming that there are desires that are inherently evil even though individuals themselves have no control over whether they have the desires or not, and even though the associated actions have no negative consequences. To my knowledge there are no other impulses/actions which Christians claim are evil that are neither the choice of the individual nor results in any harm. In this regard, homosexuality seems to stand alone in the church's view of right and wrong and it seems to stand alone in the way in which we read and apply the Bible today.
When we read the gospels we rejoice with the idea that God's love is available to all. It makes no sense to us that God would condemn an individual simply because of an accident of birth (this is why racism is so abhorrent to us). We affirm the goodness of the Scriptural truth of Galatians 3 that says, " 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."
And even if some Christians insist that there is something "broken" about homosexuality, we are left with the idea that most homosexuals are born into this state by no action or fault of their own. We have no choice how we are born - tall, short, blonde, brunette, (or if you think something is biologically awry with homosexual behavior) down's syndrome, defective heart, brittle bone disease, etc. Are evangelicals claiming that these conditions are curses from God? Are we claiming that God looks upon these conditions as sin? I will not nor can I accept that God is a less merciful and loving being than I am. I am firmly convinced that to sin one must choose something. Sin is something you do, not something that is done to you.
As we read the Bible's prohibitions and admonitions today we habitually read them through the lens of what results in good and what results in evil. When we read Paul's prohibition against women speaking in church in 1 Corinthians 14: "34 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says." we all read these words with a moral sense that asks us "what is the good and harm of the issue?" Women in churches today speak all the time. I have never been in a church (except for an Jewish Orthodox service) where no women spoke at all. And if there is a discussion about the issue, the discussion always surrounds what is the good and harm of the action. If there is no harm in the action, we allow it. Women speak in church. They also wear braided hair. We eat lobster and bacon. We don't greet each other with holy kisses. Are we claiming that God wants us to blindly follow the Bible's strictures without thought of good and harm - without a thought of love? I will not nor can I accept that God is a more arbitrary, petty or vindictive being than I am. I am firmly convinced that a sin must involve harm.
We are doing a grave injustice to the name of God by tying our own tastes and distastes to God's will. We are also embittering a generation against the church and the Bible. A person's sexual orientation is not a sin, and homosexual acts are no more inherently sinful than heterosexual ones. Our progress on this moral issue towards God's Kingdom is simply another step along the lines of our changing attitudes on slavery, racism, sexism, nationalism, violence, and the value and dignity of human life. Unfortunately on this issue, the church will be dragged toward truth and love by culture, and not the other way around. In the end we will be thankful that God continued to work in the world to increase His love, mercy, and justice even when His own church opposed it.
No comments:
Post a Comment