Homosexual Marriage?

Blue Horizontal Line

 

There is a social drive in America to have the term
‘‘marriage,” include unions of homosexuals and lesbians.
I comment only for your consideration, not pretending to
dictate to your conscience. What your conscience decides
is your affair.

I share my thoughts because I have been asked by some to share
them. I think of myself as God’s imperfect servant, so I warn
you ahead that I may give imperfect advice about this. So when
I have given as I reasoned in Christ, you are free
likewise so to do and to arrive at different conclusion. It
is not unanimity of intellectual agreement that holds the
Christians together, it is unanimity in love.

It would not be wise but divisive to use the term ‘‘marriage”
to any but men and women. Marriage has overtones of forming
a family to have children to procreate the human race. To me
marriage denotes male and female joining together doing uniquely
only what two opposite sexes coming together can do: form a
spiritual and sexual union to procreate children and to rear
them in a family where the children have a father and mother.

But recognition of a legal union of some sort needs to be given
homosexuals and lesbians to help to define for society their
status and expectations. One of the problems of today in
the legal and social system, it appears to me, ? insufficient
legal and social recognition so that among homosexuals and
lesbians too much temporaneity and too many irresponsible and
non-enduring love associations are encouraged. Stability needs
to be encouraged in the life of lesbians and homosexuals by
legal recognition of their bonding and unions.

There remains the fact that a legal union recognized by the
state is not a spiritual union. Well, I say the legal union
is first needed but the unions might then be recognized
and blessed by various churches and ministers if the
Christian members of these unions desire. But the union
should be blessed as a union in love but not a marriage.

Let us remember that where homosexuality is condemned it is
usually because of the lack of commitment, responsibility,
self-control and spirituality that may be seen to go with
it. Let us remember where heterosexuality has been criticized,
it is usually because of the lack of commitment, responsibility,
excesses and depraved spiritual attitudes that may go with
it, for example, adultery, whoring, prostitution, and any
number of sins.

It is therefore relatively safe to say that it is
primarily the spiritual attitude that accompanies any
sexual commitment or orientation that is the most important
factor. So we should be looking not so much at sexual orientation
but the moral, spiritual attitudes that accompany the sexual
orientation in individuals.

However, we cannot fail to stress, or we should indeed be
decadent, that marriage and the family, because of their
role in the future of the race, are the most important social
priorities. While many famous persons, great contributors to
civilization, have been lesbians or homosexuals, the most
important priority SOCIALLY before churches is being supportive
of heterosexuality and. the family. This means in no way being
unfair or unjust to homosexuals or lesbians in recognition or
fact.

Homophobia is wrong. Blind hatred of any group, religion or
race is wrong. We tend to hate where we cannot relate. But
we may reason from Christ that we must be accepting of all.
If you do not relate fairly to homosexuals, that can be lived
with. Disaster looms only if you try to force yourself to feel
as you really don’t. Why be embarrassed by honesty?

You may not feel yourself a unity on on this issue. Not believing
as you feel your should or vice-versa. That happens a lot
as we spiritually grow. We cannot be expected to change an
attitude or emotion as easily as changing a coat. Leave it to
God. Do not feel you have to feel what you do not feel. You
must trust God on this. You do not necessarily have to do as
you feel, as any adult knows, but you do not have to be
hypocritical and feel what you don’t. By being honest with
ourselves we learn to move up in holiness.

It is good if we can accept difference without feeling an
obligation to be different. Therefore what is done differently
may not be so important as the spirituality and morality with
which the different is practiced.

IF WE REALIZE THIS, looking for the spiritual and moral helps
us to understand better. In Sodom, intimacy was not accompanied
by morality, spirituality, and transcendence. It was accompanied
by viciousness, amorality and uncontrolled lust. Israel
was sometimes blessed by a more spiritual transfiguration applied
to intimacy. Therefore we can understand the mourning cry of
King David, over his lover, Jonathan in II Samuel I:26.‘‘thy
love was wonderful, passing the love of women.” We are not called
upon to agree with this for ourselves but to acknowledge the wise
and moral use of the feeling sometimes in others.

HOME

Dr. James MacLeod may be contacted through the Neill Macaulay Foundation.