06/23/2000
An article in the Dallas Morning News featured the headline Presbyterians to debate same-sex unions By Susan Hogan/Albach / The Dallas Morning News (http://dallasnews.com/metro/100596_presbys_23reli.html). Many denominations have faced this question in the recent past. I was curious to see how the Presbyterian denomination would handle the issue.
This issue is that the Presbyterian hierarchy has handed down a decision that local pastors can perform "commitment ceremonies" between same-sex partners—as long as they don’t treat them like a marriage. Sounds to me like they have a rose that won’t smell as long as they don’t call it a rose. Now, I am not trying to beat up on the Presbyterian church. But let’s consider what is at stake.
At the heart of the gay/lesbian issue is acceptance. Gay and lesbian individuals who have identified themselves as Christians and who say they want to commit to a monogamous relationship with a single partner are being told by conservative denominations that they cannot do so. Gays and Lesbians argue that they are being ostracized from the church based on preferential prejudice—like prohibiting bleach-blondes from joining the church or teaching Sunday School.
But, is the issue that simple? If we reduce marriage to terms like "monogamous relationship" or other gender neutral terms, then their argument seems to stand. However, when considering the nature of marriage in light of the Bible, we clearly get a different picture. Consider the order and purpose of marriage. The order of marriage is that the anatomy of a male and female are physically reciprocal—unlike male-to-male or female-to-female unions. I believe that God crafted that order with the specific purpose in mind. The purpose is two-fold: first, to make man and woman a single flesh (union) and second for procreation. Homosexual relations fulfill neither the order or purpose of marriage.
Now, let’s consider the question of whether gay and lesbian church members should be allowed to teach or take leadership roles in a church. I believe the Bible is clear that homosexual relationships are sin.
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1:25 - 27 NIV)
We are also admonished to ensure that our leadership are of the highest moral character.
Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach. (1 Tim 3:1 - 2 NIV)
This same passage goes on to talk about deacons. I believe it is fair to apply the same standard to anyone of authority in the church.
What would you do if a person stood before your congregation and said: "I am a pedophile, and I believe that it is my prerogative and I am not going to change. I am going to teach your children in Sunday School and if you prohibit me, then you are a bigot and hypocrite." I dare to say that the person would be driven from the church, strongly rebuked, or at the very lease, not allowed near the children. Is the congregation acting in a bigoted or hypocritical manner? Not at all. Sin is sin and just as we would not allow an avowed pedophile to teach our children, I believe it is inappropriate to allow gays and lesbians to hold positions in the church.
But what about "commitment ceremonies" or same-sex marriages?
Barbara Wheeler, president of Auburn Theological Seminary in New York City, said that denying blessings to gay and lesbian couples would compromise the freedom of the clergy to make pastoral judgments. "People are forgetting that it's God who blesses and the pastors are merely the means," she said. "To say that certain things cannot be blessed is to tell God what God can and cannot do."
Is she saying that God will bless a sinful union? I do not think that God will bless a sinful union, and furthermore, for a pastor to pretend to do so is heresy.
The article of course was politically balanced by presenting the opinions and quotes from both sides of the issue. I was however, looking for certain queue words like "the Bible", "Jesus", or "the scriptures." I did not see any of those references. Instead I saw lots of secular reasoning and questions of tradition.
When we look to God’s word and seek the truth in it, and ignore human reasoning, we find God’s will and God’s heart.
Follow-up: The Presbyterian church decided not to sanction commitment ceremonies.
©2000, Cleff Publishing. All rights reserved.