Last week I ventured into a topic that could be considered
one of the “where angels fear to tread” areas―same-sex marriage. I reflected on the meeting at our church
regarding the on-going process to consider changes in the Marriage Canon on the
Anglican Church of Canada which would allow marriage between two people of the
same sex.
This week I want to continue to consider the issue which has
so dominated the energy of the Anglican Church in recent years. It seems that we have been considering,
discussing and, yes arguing and disagreeing, about this issue
interminably. However, it has only been
in the recent past in terms of the existence of the Anglican Church. It is only the recent version of many issues
which seem to have consumed the church in the modern and not so modern era. The
most recent before this was the ordination of women which seems to have been
the dominant issue which consumed the church in similar ways prior to same-sex
marriage. OF course, there have been
numerous other issues such as changes to the prayer book as well. Many of you are aware that same-sex marriage has
been front and centre in many mainstream denominations in North America and
beyond in these turbulent times as well.
Wherever it is discussed it is one which people take strong stands on
both or all sides of the issue. It
brings our the best and the worst in people.
I do not enter this arena without some trepidation.
As I noted last week, this issue is not a straightforward
one by any means. People hold positions
on both (all?) sides of the issue for many complicated and complex reasons;
both heart felt and well thought out.
The reasons for and against can be supported in scripture, history, justice,
and the movement of the Holy Spirit. I
want to briefly touch on some of the issues knowing full well that I cannot do
justice to any serious consideration of an issue which is so complex.
The first, and probably most serious, consideration is based
on scripture. What does scripture say
and how do we understand what scripture is saying to us today? For people who use scripture to support their
opposition to same-sex relationships and marriage, scripture passages in both
the Old Testament (Hebrew Scriptures) and New Testament are cited. Beginning appropriately at Genesis, the
off-putting cliché is often used that “God created Adam and Eve and not Adam
and Steve” to justify their position.
Although the first parents were not married in any ceremony in the story
they were created and placed in the earthly paradise by God to be
together. It is unclear whether they had
any kind of sex-life in their relationship until they disobeyed God and ate of
the fruit of the tree of the wisdom of good and evil and their eyes were opened
and realized they were naked and were ashamed.
They did not have any progeny until after they were expelled form the
Garden―first
Cain followed by Able. And we
know how successful the relationship between the first brothers was.
Many forms of marriage and sexual congress are presented in
the bible from the beginning with polygamy being common including to an extreme
extent such as King Solomon having 700 official wives and 300 concubines. There were also cases of the Abraham and the
other patriarchs using servants to bear children to ensue the successive
generations which was an absolute good in those days. This was apparently with the approval of God
as there was no opposition from on high expressed. The modern nuclear family is a latter
development of the form marriage has taken through biblical history and
beyond.
Another account which is prominently raised in the same-sex
issue is the story of the destruction of the city of Sodom. The story of Sodom is used as an example of
the sin of homosexuality. In the account
two angels visit Lot in Sodom. While
they are there the men of the city come to Lot’s house and demand he bring out
the visitors so that “we may know them” ―clearly, in the somewhat archaic language,
they wanted to commit homosexual rape against the visitors. God destroys the city as an apparent punishment
for this attempted evil act. It is
interesting that it is not the fact that it was a case of attempted rape rather
than the same-sex nature of the attempt.
It is also interesting that that Lot, who is presented as a godly man,
offers his two virgin daughters to the mob so they will not inflict this act on
his visitors, not exactly family values we should hold up as virtuous:
Look, I have two
daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to
them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the
shelter of my roof.’
The alternative understanding of
this passage is that the sin for which Sodom was destroyed was the lack of
hospitality they showed to the two visitors (who happened to be
angels―messengers from God).
There are many more cases in
scripture where a prohibition against homosexual relations are evident. In some cases, they cannot be put down to
misinterpretation as in the case of Sodom.
They can however, be considered in other ways. Before going there, I want to address the
question regarding Jesus’ attitude towards same-sex relationship and
marriage. Much, to the disappointment of
those opposed and to the relief of those supporting the issue, nowhere in the
Gospels does Jesus address this issue. I
can be argued that there are other issues which the church is facing that is
not addressed by Jesus. However, for one
that is so important a one facing the church it can be surprizing that Jesus
did not deem it necessary to address it.
One way of considering scripture
passages on the issue is to consider the world view in Jesus’ time―taking an
historical critical approach to scripture as it is called by biblical
scholars. In Jesus’ time there was no
concept of homosexuality so the it was not considered as a reality for
people. Although homosexuality is no
longer considered an illness or a disordered condition by modern medicine, some
people, especially those of some religious perspectives, do believe that it is
a sinful disordered state which can be healed through prayer and even exorcism;
something which is not part of God’s plan for humankind.
Central to the issue is how we
understand scripture. Is it the inerrant
word of God which gives us a template or direct understanding of God’s will and
a program for how to live today? Or is
it the record of the biblical people’s attempt to document their understanding
of God working in their lives based on their understanding of the world. Or somewhere along that axis of belief?
I have more to say on this issue
but realize I have exceeded my unwritten rule on the length of these
missives. I will continue next week―God
willing. I want to close with the hope
expressed by Archbishop Fred Hiltz, our primate; that we approach this issue in
loving disagreement.
Blessings on your journey,
Greg
