Alright, I’d just like to start by saying thank you
to everybody for coming tonight – I really appreciate it – and for
being interested in learning more about this subject. I also want to
thank College Hill United Methodist for graciously agreeing to host the
event. My name is Matthew Vines, I’m 21 years old, and I’m currently a
student in college, although I’ve been on leave for most of the last two
years in order to study the material that I’ll be presenting tonight. I
was born and raised here in Wichita, in a loving Christian home and in a
church community that holds to the traditional interpretation of
Scripture on this subject.
Just to offer a brief outline for this
presentation: I’ll start by considering some of the broader issues and
divisions that are behind this debate; and then I’ll move to a closer
examination of the main biblical texts that are involved in it; and then
I’ll offer some concluding remarks. The issue of homosexuality, of the
ordination of gay clergy and of the blessing of same-sex unions, has
caused tremendous divisions in the church in recent decades, and the
church remains substantially divided over the issue today.
On the one
hand, the most common themes voiced by those who support changing
traditional church teaching on homosexuality are those of acceptance,
inclusion, and love, while on the other hand, those who oppose these
changes express concerns about sexual purity, holiness, and most
fundamentally, the place of Scripture in our communities. Are we
continuing to uphold the Bible as authoritative, and are we taking
biblical teachings seriously, even if they make us uncomfortable?
I want to begin tonight by considering the
traditional interpretation of Scripture on this subject, in part because
its conclusions have a much longer history within the church, and also
because I think that many who adhere to that position feel that those
who are arguing for a new position haven’t yet put forth theological
arguments that are as well-grounded in Scripture as their own, in which
case the most biblically sound position should prevail.
The traditional interpretation, in summary form, is
this: There are six passages in the Bible that refer in some way to
same-sex behavior, and they are all negative. Three of them are direct
and clear. In the Old Testament, in Leviticus, male same-sex relations
are prohibited, and labeled an “abomination.” And in the New Testament,
in Romans, Paul speaks of women “exchanging natural relations for
unnatural ones,” and of men abandoning “natural relations with women and
committing shameful acts with other men.”
And so according to the
traditional interpretation, both the Old and the New Testament are
consistent in their rejection of same-sex relationships. But it’s not
just those three verses, as well as three others that I’ll come to
later. It’s true that 6 verses isn’t all that many out of Scripture’s
31,000. But not only are they all negative, from the traditional
viewpoint, they gain broader meaning and coherence from the opening
chapters of Genesis, in which God creates Adam and Eve, male and female.
That was the original creation – before the fall, before sin entered
the world. That was the way that things were supposed to be.
And so
according to this view, if someone is gay, then their sexual orientation
is a sign of the fall, a sign of human fallenness and brokenness. That
was not the way that things were supposed to be. And while having a
same-sex orientation is not in and of itself a sin, according to the
traditional interpretation, acting upon it is, because the Bible is
clear, both in what it negatively prohibits and in what it positively
approves.
Christians who are gay – those who are only attracted to
members of the same sex – are thus called to refrain from acting on
those attractions, to deny themselves, to take up their crosses and to
follow Christ. And though it may not seem fair to us, God’s ways are
higher than our own, and it’s not our role to question, but to obey.
Within this framework, gay people have a problem,
and that is that they want to have sex with the wrong people. They tend
to be viewed as essentially lustful, sexual beings. So while straight
people fall in love, get married, and start families, gay people just
have sex. But everyone has a sexual orientation – and it isn’t just
about sex. Straight people are never really forced to think about their
sexual orientation as a distinctive characteristic, but it’s still a
part of them, and it affects an enormous amount of their lives.
What
sexual orientation is for straight people is their capacity for romantic
love and self-giving. It’s not just about sexual attraction and
behavior. It’s because we have a sexual orientation that we’re able to
fall in love with someone, to build a long-term, committed relationship
with them, and to form a family. Family is not about sex, but for so
many of us, it still depends upon having a companion, a spouse. And
that’s true for gay people as well as for straight people. That is what
sexual orientation means for them, too. Gay people have the very same
capacity for romantic love and self-giving that straight people do. The
emotional bond that gay couples share, the quality of love, is identical
to that of straight couples. Gay people, like almost all of us, come
from families, and they, too, long to build one of their own.
But the consequence of the traditional
interpretation of the Bible is that, while straight people are told to
avoid lust, casual relationships, and promiscuity, gay people are told
to avoid romantic relationships entirely. Straight people’s sexuality is
seen as a fundamentally good thing, as a gift. It can be used in sinful
or irresponsible ways, but it can also be harnessed and oriented toward
a loving marriage relationship that will be blessed and celebrated by
their community. But gay people, though they are capable of and desire
loving relationships that are just as important to them, are told that,
for them, even lifelong, committed relationships would be sinful,
because their sexual orientation is completely broken.
It’s not an issue
of lust versus love, or of casual versus committed relationships,
because same-sex relationships are intrinsically sinful, no matter the
quality and no matter the context. Gay people’s sexual orientation is so
broken, so messed up that nothing good can come from it – no morally
good, godly relationship could ever come from it. And so they are told
that they will never have a romantic bond that will be celebrated by
their community; they are told that they will never have a family.
Philippians 2:4 tells us to look not only to our
own interests, but also to the interests of others. And in Matthew 5,
Jesus instructs that if someone makes you go one mile, go with them two
miles.
And so I’m going to ask you: Would you step into my shoes for a
moment, and walk with me just one mile, even if it makes you a bit
uncomfortable? I am gay. I didn’t choose to be gay. It’s not something
that I would have chosen, not because it’s necessarily a bad thing to
be, but because it’s extremely inconvenient, it’s stressful, it’s
difficult, and it can often be isolating and lonely – to be different,
to feel not understood, to feel not accepted.
I grew up in as loving and
stable of a family and home as I can imagine. I love my parents, and I
have strong relationships with them both. No one ever molested or abused
me growing up, and I couldn’t have asked for a more supportive and
nurturing childhood than the one that I had. I’ve never been in a
relationship, and I’ve always believed in abstinence until marriage. But
I also have a deeply-rooted desire to one day be married, to share my
life with someone, and to build a family of my own.
-Matthew Vines
Pt. 2 Coming soon.
J-Bo
No comments:
Post a Comment