Ch5 – The Trickster Shows Up – Again!

Gay Marriage and the Separation of Church and State

It’s good to be back from vacation, friends!  My family and I had a great time in Bandon, OR.  Sorry for not posting during that time, but I’ve gotten a lot better about making vacation a true vacation over the years …

Since the last subject I preached a (full) sermon on was homosexuality and the Bible, and the subject while I was away was Affirmation 7 and the separation of church and state, I thought it might be appropriate to post the article that Dr. Jim Keck (First Plymouth, Lincoln) and I wrote in the editorial section of the Omaha World-Herald last April concerning the Iowa Supreme Court decision on gay marriage.  It speaks to both topics!  By the way, I’ll be teaching a class on the Bible and homosexuality in September – one version on Sunday evenings at the church and another version theology-on-tap-style at Myth Lounge in the Old Market on Wednesday evenings.  Sign up at the Information Station on Sundays or call the church office (402-391-0350).  Now here’s the article:

An April 8 World Herald editorial regarding the recent ruling by the Iowa Supreme Court concerning gay marriage urged readers not to let debate on the issue “devolve into … ugliness and angry stereotyping.”  It also asked some important questions of Omaha’s clergy: “How will clergy advise their membership on how to deal with this? Will they be accepting of gay couples, or will those church or synagogue members need to go elsewhere to worship?”

As the pastors of large churches in Omaha and Lincoln, we thought we would take this newspaper up on its query.  This is how we would advise not only our congregations but any student of the Bible and the US Constitution:

According to the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  Contrary to popular assumption, Christians overwhelmingly supported the adoption of this amendment, as they believed it to be vital for the protection of religion even more so than protection of the state.  By and large, we in the US have tried to hold true to this principle in all areas except one: marriage.

As opposed to certain European countries, where marriage is kept strictly separated into a civil function and a religious one, we combine them in the US without batting an eye.  For many couples in Europe, if they wish their marriage to be recognized by both the church and the state, they must receive a certificate of civil union issued by the state alone, and undergo a service of “holy matrimony” performed by the church alone.  For those with no desire for church or other religious recognition, the civil union certificate is all they need.  This arrangement recognizes that the state has an interest in marriage only in so far as it furthers civic interests, and that the church has an interest in marriage only in so far as it furthers theological interests.

In the US, where no legal differentiation exists between a civil marriage and holy matrimony, we place our clergy in the odd (and dare we say, unconstitutional) role of determining which relationships are in the state’s interest and which are not.  Similarly, the state is given implied authority to determine which relationships are blessed by God and which are not.

Consider the problem posed by Cal Thomas, whose column appeared on the same day as the World-Herald editorial.  In making his case that gay marriage is a “dangerous precedent,” he states that “the problem with the Iowa Court ruling is that it vitiates a standard that defined marriage as between two people of the opposite sex, which was God’s idea, not government’s (see Genesis 2:24), while failing to substitute a new standard.”

The fact that Genesis 2:24 makes no comment on the legal institution of marriage, and the fact that many God-honoring churches and synagogues in the US are in favor of gay marriage, are minor problems raised by his assertion, compared to the problem it raises for government.  Is it the government’s role to discern the mind of God?  And shall it pass laws based on its discernment?

The reason why debate on gay marriage tends to break down so quickly is because by failing to distinguish between the civic and religious functions of marriage, we give religious institutions and the state powers that do not properly reside with them, which they do not have the means to adequately arbitrate.

Realizing this Catch-22, some have suggested that gay people receive “civil unions,” reserving “marriage” to heterosexuals.  Yet while this solution at least recognizes the problem of mixing the functions of religion and government, it actually reinforces the problem.  The reasons for separating gay and straight relationships into civil unions and marriage remain strongly theologically based.

Until or unless the US adopts a stricter separation between civil and religious marriages that apply to all couples across the board, the best route through this issue is to allow states the ability to marry gays and religious institutions the right to marry or not marry them depending on their theological commitments.

This arrangement at least respects the fact that the First Amendment’ requires the free exercise of religion.   It recognizes that, assured of this freedom, some religious institutions will marry gay people and some won’t.  And by granting marriage licenses to both gay and straight couples alike, the state is protected from having to determine which marriages are blessed by God and which are not.

We feel the Iowa decision should be applauded by all religious people, regardless of their theological views on marriage, for it at least rebuilds a section of the wall that protects not only the state from religion, but religion from the state.

No Comments

Reflections on Affirmation 6

Affirmation 6
Standing, as Jesus does, with the outcast and oppressed, the denigrated and afflicted, seeking peace and justice with or without the support of others;

Evangelical Christian activist Jim Wallis writes in his book, God’s Politics, that he often does a little “Bible quiz” for audiences he speaks to.  He asks, “What is the most famous biblical text in America about the poor?”  He writes, “Every time, I mean every single time, I receive the same answer: ‘The poor you will always have with you!’  they shout out.”

I can relate to this experience.  Growing up in the affluent suburban community of Mercer Island, Washington (a suburb of Seattle) this phrase was drilled into my head over and over.  However, Jesus’ saying that “the poor you will always have with you” is far from the sum total of what the Bible has to say about poverty and, in fact, this passage is misinterpreted to mean that Jesus didn’t care about the poor (If so, why did he care in so many other passages?).

Contrary to what some would have us believe, the Bible is far more concerned with justice for the poor, widow, orphan, and foreigner than the issues like homosexuality, abortion, and prayer in schools.  For instance, in contrast to the six passages that could be construed as having to do with homosexuality (and not all of them hold up to closer scrutiny), there are over 2,000 passages in the Bible that have to do with wealth and our use of material possessions.  In some of the prophetic literature (Amos and Jeremiah), the claim is even made that you can be among the most pious people in the world and if you fail to care for society’s marginalized and denigrated, you may as well be worshipping astral deities or Canaanite gods, not the God of the Hebrews.

On the other hand, contrary to the view of some Christians who would claim that social justice is the ONLY issue God is concerned about, the biblical tradition  speaks quite assertively that turning our lives over to God and attending to our spiritual path are at least as important as social justice.  In fact, the great prophets of old would have thought it absurd to invest energy in the very justice issues they were so passionate about without turning one’s heart, and indeed one’s very life, over to the will and guidance of God’s spirit.

In this the prophets were utterly practical.  They recognized that the interests of society are fickle and tend to drift with the wind.  Without an adequate grounding in the spiritual path, they recognized that justice would be subject to people’s momentary whims and desires.  People would work on behalf of the marginalized only as long as it was the socially acceptable thing to do, rather than as a long-term commitment to doing “on earth as it is in heaven.”  Justice would be subject to fads, or to the exigencies of self-interest (“I’ll be glad to help the poor as long as I can make a buck off it.”).

It may seem contrary to popular wisdom, but the spiritual disciplines of prayer, Bible study, worship, and fellowship in a faith community, are critical to the maintenance of a long-term commitment to (and energy for) social justice.  This isn’t merely personal opinion, but is backed by solid evidence.  Throughout American history, issues of social justice have had a very hard time gaining traction in society until communities of faith took them up and began seeing them as part of their spiritual walk with God.

Of course, there have been many times when faith communities were the very ones standing in the way of justice, whether it was during the struggle against slavery, or for women’s rights, or for civil rights for all races.  Nevertheless, none of these movements caught fire in our society until a critical mass of faith communities began to embrace and sustain them.

One possible exception to this pattern is the current struggle for civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people (LGBT).  As in the “days of old,” many churches have followed the pattern of being slow to awaken to this social justice issue.  Yet what seems to be breaking the pattern is that a strong and growing consensus is developing in our society – particularly among those under the age of thirty – that LGBT equality is basic to our social contract.  This is happening despite faith communities, not because of them. To this day, being an active member of a faith community is the biggest predictor of support (or rather, lack of support) for LGBT equality.

To me, this break in the pattern of justice being carried forward by communities of faith is troubling.  For “secular” society to be the champion of social justice for LGBT people suggests that churches and other communities of Spirit have somehow lost a connection to the historical relationship between faith and justice for the marginalized.  What is particularly troubling about this break is that, whenever this happened in biblical history, the faith community went into steep and even disastrous decline.  It is as if God’s Spirit has a flow to it, and when that flow is impeded by the communities of Spirit overly long, it jumps boundaries and flows into “back channels” (These days, the “secular” community.).  While this new pattern cannot be sustained over long periods of time (the Spirit is intelligent enough to know that it flows most robustly when it is sustained by those committed to its flow), it can indeed work temporarily.  Justice can be sustained in the short-run by those who do not connect justice with their spiritual path – as long as it’s the “socially acceptable” or self-interested thing to do (On this latter point, note the embrace of LGBT equality by corporations who have realized it’s not profitable to discriminate based on sexual orientation).  In the meantime, the spirit-communities flounder, lose spirit and energy, and eventually begin to collapse in on themselves.

When this happens, the basic pattern morphs, and looks like this:  When the pain of collapse becomes widespread enough, and great enough, people begin realize once-again that they can’t sustain their faith communities under their own will and direction.  Some of them begin to rediscover the classic spiritual disciples – the things that turn their heads and hearts over to the Spirit – and this re-ignites their essential spark.  They begin to wake up and come alive in their worship and community life, and in their work in the community, even as other faith communities continue to implode.  Eventually, thus, this generalized implosion among the faith communities leads to an explosion of new energy similar to what happens when a star collapses in on itself (Supernova!).  Unlike stars, whose supernovas signal their final end, supernovas in the faith community tend to thrust them into another dimension or sorts – a higher level of existence.  These periods become known as “Great Revivals” and “Great Reformations.”

This pattern was perhaps best articulated for our times with respect to the Christian faith community by the late William Sloan Coffin, former Senior Minister of Riverside Church, who observed:

The Church, of all the institutions in society, interprets the memory and proclaims the message of the coming kingdom.  The Church may distort Jesus into a white middle-class pillar of American respectability; it may pervert his image into that of a religious Babbitt pushing the cult of successfulness; it may distort and pervert his image, but the Church cannot forget Jesus.  And in spite of its best efforts to domesticate that Jesus, the Church knows and frequently fears that his message will be rediscovered.  The Church cannot help but keep the name in circulation, and where the name is remembered there is hope.” (Credo, p. 138)

A true church is one which is “joyfully and unapologetically Christian” and is just as ”joyfully and unapologetically” justice-oriented.  As in biblical times, these go hand in hand, and lead to amazing vitality and life not just for the marginalized but for the whole community.

No Comments