Author: Richard R. Tryon
Among the many points of religious turmoil in the 21st century that have caused much pain and anguish among Christians, none has been more impacted by aggressive advocacy groups that can compare with the ‘noise’ being generated by the historic change that has brought not only gays ‘out of the closet’ but also lesbians and a seemingly endless array of on-going discovery of those whose sexual preferences seem to require ever more adjectives and descriptors to segregate their special requirements for everything from reconstructive anatomical surgery to be added, subtracted and perhaps one day multiplied or divided?
In any case, the push for equality in all of life in spite of the on-going significant discoveries of endless variations in human gene selection and control thereof make a mockery out of every definition. One day soon, I hope, even religious animals, currently thought to be limited to the species called homo-sapiens will be challenged.
Further to this chapter will be others dealing with possible theological changes over issues of long standing beliefs to which science either reinforces or tends to ridicule the how, what and why. Only Christians believe that their former Jewish faith did not need to be replaced, but only modified by the unexpected nature of the long awaited Savior. Instead of one stronger than Saul and wiser than Solomon, a simple, plain spoken, but eloquent man of the people or man directly from Heaven, sent by God the Father came to teach our species about love and forgiveness as an added Testament of faith.
While history indicates that many tenants of both Chrisitanity and Judaism were known ideas long before written records about Abraham came into existence, none have ever been known to indicate that God deliberately directs the genetic combinations of each of us, as though He did not invent just the first of each species of plants and animals but also is tasked with designing each of the countless variation that have apparently been different for each copy of what biologists call species or vaieties.
People of this kind of thinking, can’t believe that God was so clever as to build in concepts of automation to avoid need for constant manipulation of each new example. Few, if any human inventors of anything you can name have assumed such a role to make sure that each chicken is exactly like all others gene by gene. We alter life but can’t control mutations that lead to another of God’s inventions that we call evolution. Why would we expect God to have to contend with the mind boggling array of detailed management? Why not automate the process as we strive to do with inamminate things?
It is from this perspective that I think about how religion has to cope with discovery of errors in theology. All of religion suffers from bureaucratic contention and even warfare over theological differences. Perhaps the most classic difference in the world today in religion involves the division among Muslims-most simply said to split followers over the issue of succession of leadership and the tenants connected to each major choice.
For the moment this is sufficient introduction to the American political scene and its infatuation with equal marital rights for committed gays or lesbians, etc. who wish to have church based weddings and be declared as married on equal footing with those that happen to be of different physical make-up generally known as men and women or more simply as males and females. No doubt some would prefer males to be called non-females, but must worry that it is too easy to drop the ‘non-fe’ part to describe the other sex.
But, the task of dealing with the notion that gay or lesbians couples represent identical positions to the Creator as is found in the case of one man and one woman is too simplistic. For there are real differences in most men to most women in terms of genes that drive even the mental stimulation to be sexually active. Two highly active sexual males or females are usually highly motivated to find new partners for their favorite exercise in an ever longing search for the perfect result. It happens with heterosexuals too, but the genetic factors give an edge to same sex coupling. But, I stray from the fact that the whole response mechanism was not caused by mutations that eventually relieved God of having to build each new life. He successfully seems to have included reproduction as the first requirement for all new plants and animals.
So,, when I read words of one named Kris put forth a response to another that said:
“David could you please explain how gay marriage will effect your life. I know lots of gay people, and even taught gay students. If anything they made my life richer by their knowledge and creativity. If knowing them has changed anything in my life it is to be more tolerant and appreciative of differences.”
This caused me to enter the conversation on the web with:
Dear Kris,
Religious men and women, married in both civil and religious agreements have a more frequent understanding of the word ‘marriage’ being related to a God given Sacramental union that represents a contract between them and God in which we assumed the responsibility for continuing God’s creation of our species with a view toward raising and teaching our young to learn about how important it is to maintain and continue the process by which new bodies with souls intended to serve God’s purposes are put into place.
Those who lack such understanding are often married in some church and perhaps more frequently live together with a different relationship, and if we could determine, possibly a higher rate of divorce. Some use the divorce as a bridge to accepting discovery or renewal of earlier desire for gay or lesbian, or other sexually driven combinations. Aside from this consideration, it is important to ask if gays, lesbians, or others in need of other configurations between two or more persons or species need to be both recognized as having rights of civil contracts dealing with property rights, access to medical information, or right to negotiate special insurance contracts to be paid for by employers, who may be reluctant to expand family coverage to include however many other beneficiaries are included, because of open ended right of so-called marital contracts and useful tax deductions.
Because Christians constitute the largest number of citizens of the U.S., and because a majority of us also participated in agreeing to a Holy Sacramental marriage before God in our hearts and minds, we accepted a responsibility to create more of our species, and to raise and teach our children about the kind of marriage contract we made, we have to come to grips with the now openly gay and lesbian, etc. community of fellow members of our species who wish to contract for more than civil unions so as to be recognized in our religious life as being participants in a contract with God that is similar but lacks access, at least via the union of man and woman in God’s prescribed way to continue the species. To call such a sexual preference of any configuration but one man and one woman joined together physically and mentally in the union that connects to procreation, a marriage is difficult for us to accept.
Love and Forgiveness are the chief tenants to Christians added to those of the Jewish Torah. We are all sinners, so it is possible for Christians to accept sin and forgive it. That is not to say that sin should be encouraged by the God given Sacrament called marriage. We must ask you to tolerate our right to claim use of the word as is so well established. We do not know how to rename civil unions to deal with the laws of fifty states for those who wish special contract conditions dealing with whatever combinations are driven apparently by what we think of as deviant sexual preference. If it is civil union type 3-a in one state and 4-f in another, we have no voice except via voting within our own states.
So, it is fair to state that the desire of some for so-called equal right of Sacramental marriage before God to be inclusive of other configurations seems to many as a request to recognize an idea that is not part of God’s plan any more than it is proper to pay insurance money to the man sharing a hospital room with our adult son being treated for a broken leg, and having to hear his roommate speak via cell phone that no, his infected anus was not going to stop him from his sexual preference.
If some wish to prove that God’s Willingness to provide for reproductive mutations causes unintended sexual preferences and find that societal mores and leisure that leads to seeking a greater emphasis on seeking pleasure that is encouraged by modern technologies of many sorts, more power to them. If a genetic cause is clearly identified as an independent and immutable factor, we may need to encourage special education and locations in which such persons can be assisted in maintaining and developing their special needs, let them organize and pay for it. Older gay men have long been seeking involvement with young boys. Why not let them provide places for them to be admitted, because of their genetic need? If many survive and come to a loving connection that demands a civil union, so be it. We all can tolerate and forgive sin, but that doesn’t mean that our churches should allow civil liberties to infect God’s notions of Sacramental unions as the favored means for animals to pair off into basic family configurations. Does this help you understand that I am among those who can accept and recognize many fine attributes among gay and lesbian friends-be they open or still in the closet- but do not see a reason to revise God’s ancient law that fits better than any other the definition of marriage.
| Previous Chapter | To TOC | Next Chapter |