Monday, April 23, 2018

What's at Stake? God's New Social Order

This is the fourth post in my blog series on same-gender marriage. For an outline with links to the whole series, click here. The views expressed in this series are my own and do not represent those of my denomination, conference, or local church.

In my last post, I laid out my Biblical argument for supporting same-gender marriage. In short, I argued that the New Testament abolishes gender norms, which opens up a path for Christians of the same gender to get married. Admittedly, this was a fairly dense argument, which engaged deeply with Scriptural texts but not as closely with the experiences of gay people. To offer some balance, I want to take a step back in this post and consider what it all means. Specifically, I want to engage the questions, Why does the Bible point us away from gender norms? What harm do gender norms in general – and prohibitions against homosexuality in particular - cause?

In my experience, most Christians who have come to affirm same-gender marriage have been inspired to take this position because they recognize that the conservative teaching against homosexuality causes harm. However, when pressed to ask how they are harmful, the answers that progressives offer often lack theological depth. Consider these common types of back-and-forth exchanges between conservatives and progressives. [E1]

Progressives: Prohibitions against same-gender marriage are harmful because they deny homosexuals the opportunity to have their heart’s desire.
Conservatives: That is true, and it is difficult. But is this really something that we want to guarantee to people – that everyone should be able to have their heart’s desire? How does it align with the Biblical ethic of self-denial?

Progressives: Prohibitions against same-gender marriage are harmful because they lead to discrimination against LGBTQ individuals.
Conservatives: Discrimination against LGBTQ individuals is wrong. We should work hard as a church to make sure this doesn’t happen. But we don’t have to support the behavior of gay people in order to oppose the discriminatory action of their persecutors.

Progressives: Prohibitions against same-gender marriage are harmful because they drive gay people, their loved ones, and younger generations in general away from the church.
Conservatives: Since when do we base our ethics on the way that the general public responds to them?

Now that we have done the work of articulating the Biblical trajectory on gender norms, we are in a better position to answer this question. Why do I believe that prohibitions against same-gender marriage are harmful?

Because they stand in the way of the kingdom of God. [E2]

In order to explain what I mean by this, I have to take a step back and share one of the biggest insights I’ve had in the past five years while serving as a pastor, which is about the significance of the New Testament teaching on spiritual gifts.

I was introduced to the concept of spiritual gifts at my church when I was a teenager. We looked at the Scripture passages that list them out, [E3] and sometimes we even took self-evaluation tests to figure out which spiritual gifts we had. I found this interesting, but it didn’t really have a big impact on how I lived my life. They felt like a combination of a personality test and a “Which Bible character are you?” Buzzfeed quiz.

Years later, I found myself serving a church that wanted to do a better job reaching out to its community, and I was asking tough questions, such as, “How do you do you help those in need in a way that isn’t condescending or enabling?” and “How can you ensure that your short-term efforts to alleviate suffering don’t cause long-term harm?” As I searched for models of communities that did outreach well, I was struck by the beauty and power of asset-based community development (ABCD). It is a strategy that seeks to relate to people first and foremost by identifying their assets, not their needs, and finding ways to build them up based on those strengths. Another word that one could use to talk about “assets” is “gifts.” [E4] Basically, ABCD was an organizational strategy that sought to integrate people into a larger community based on their God-given and life-cultivated gifts. Before long, we started applying this same concept to our own internal life as a congregation. Too much of our energy was focused on filling the “needs” of the church. New life emerged when we flipped the question and started by asking what our spiritual gifts were and how we could use them.

The key lesson that I learned is that the New Testament discussion of spiritual gifts was not just offered to help individuals understand themselves ourselves better. Instead, it is introduced as a new way of organizing society. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:7, “To each is given the manifestation of the spirit for the common good.” In other words, God has given each of us spiritual gifts so that each one of us can contribute to our community, our society, God’s kingdom. Indeed, we have an obligation to do so, for the social body cannot function properly unless every member is doing their part. [E5] I have come to believe deeply in this principle: that healthy communities, organizations, and societies work best when they find ways to build on the gifts and strengths of each individual member.

This, by the way, is a core piece of the gospel itself. For Jesus did not just come to save individuals from sin and hell, but to re-arrange and redeem entire societies. The good news that Jesus preached was that the kingdom of God was at hand, and this meant that God was introducing an entirely new social order to humanity. This was an order that included a different model of leadership [E6], a different approach to conflict-resolution [E7], a different set of social ethics [E8], and a different way of dividing “labor” – doing so according to spiritual gifts. [E9]

What does this have to do with our discussion of gender? This new way of organizing society according to spiritual gifts comes in direct conflict with gender norms. After all, gender norms are more than just rules that impact individuals; they are also structures that determine the way that society at large is shaped. Consider patriarchy, as an example. Not only does patriarchy harm individual women by insulting their dignity and preventing them from pursuing their dreams. It also has a negative impact on entire communities by preventing women who have gifts in the areas of leadership, wisdom, and innovation from being put in positions where those gifts are most needed. Thus, when we take our gender difference and attach a set of norms to it, it functions as a competing structure, a different way of organizing society, than the model that Jesus described as “the kingdom of God.” And the New Testament understands this conflict. This is why Paul cites the “abolishment clause” [E10] in the middle of his longest discussion of spiritual gifts, “For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit... All these are activated by one and the same Spirit, who allots to each one individually just a the Spirit chooses." [E11]

And this is how gender norms harm gay people. The pain that gay people experience when they are told that they are wrong to feel same-gender attraction is not the same as the pain that many Christians feel when we are told that we must moderate our excessive sexual impulses or when we are judged for acting out of line with God's will. Instead, this particular pain comes from the fact that we as a church are preventing gay people pursuing their spiritual gifts and callings - that which is good within them. 

For example, there are many gay people who are "made for marriage." [E12] They are caring and loyal and patient and giving - and they both yearn for and are called to share these gifts in a covenantal bond with another human being. Additionally, there are gay people who called to do very intense and important work – the kind of work that faces the ugliest aspects of our fallen nature or that can easily use up spiritual strength – and they need the support of a marriage partner to get through it. To offer one more example, there are gay people who are called to be parents; they have the particular gifts that one needs to relate to and care for children, a job which is best done when there are two caring people working at it together. [E13] And in all of these cases, the gender norm that prohibits a person from marrying someone of thee same gender gets in the way of their God-given gifts and call.

When a Christian community discerns clearly that an individual has a spiritual gift and a specific calling, and the only objection that is raised is a norm that declares that they are not right “kind of person” to pursue it, then this norm stands in the way of the kingdom of God. [E14] May God’s Spirit break every barrier until our community reflects God’s kingdom.

End Notes

[E1] In the following dialogues, I am putting “conservatives” – i.e. Christians who oppose same-gender marriage – in the best possible light. I assume that they care about and are empathetic toward gay people, that they want to ensure that gay people are not discriminate against for reasons unaffected to their sexual orientation, and that they believe intellectual dialogue on the topic of homosexuality is important, despite the fact that they believe same-gender sexual intimacy is sinful. Harold Miller, a pastor in the Mennonite Church, is one strong example of a compassionate conservative, and many of the question-and-answers I write below can be found in this article he wrote.

In truth, this only represents a subset of conservatives. There are many conservatives who do not show the love of Christ even in these basic ways, and their actions should be criticized by conservative and progressive Christians alike. I don’t  think it would be an optimum use of my time to criticize their positions here, but I don’t want to deny that there is a dangerous anti-gay stream within the Church either.

[E2] It’s not by accident that I frame my answer in objective rather than subjective terms. Of course, I too am considered with the effect that gender norms have on individual gay people, but I recognize that suffering itself is morally neutral – it’s not necessarily good or bad. Consequently, in order to move from talking about the pain that these prohibitions cause gay people to talking about the harm it causes them, we have to attach their experiences to a larger value system. Of course, many people do this, but I am seeking to tie it more closely to the Biblical narrative itself.

[E3] The most extensive discussions of spiritual gifts are in 1 Corinthians 12:1-31, Romans 12:3-8, and Ephesians 4:7-16. There are additionally several other passages that mention specific gifts or that touch on the theme of spiritual gifts in general.

[E4] Actually, the concept of assets is a little broader than the concept of gifts, as it includes not only one’s personal strengths and passions but also connections, physical resources, etc. But the core of it is what the Bible would call “spiritual gifts.”

[E5] This is especially clear in 1 Cor 12:14-20.

[E6] Cf. Luke 22:24-27.

[E7] Cf. Matthew 18:15-20

[E8] Cf. Matthew 5-7

[E9] To say a little more on the subject, the New Testament not only divides labor according to “gifts” – which other social groups do – but it combines this with a radical “egalitarian” ethic where no one dictates who does what except the Holy Spirit – cf. 1 Cor 14:26-33a.

[E10] I am using the phrase “abolishment clause” to refer to the saying that circulated in the early church, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Paul alluded to this at several times in his letters, and quoted it explicitly in Galatians 3:28. However, in this instance, Paul does not quote the entire phrase and drops the “male and female” part.  There may be a reason for this. Paul himself held views about women that conflicted with this great principle he articulated in Galatians, and no where does his bias toward women come out more strongly than in 1 Corinthians. He may have recognized the inherent threat that made to his argument and omitted it for that reason. I’ll wrestle with this in more detail in my upcoming post about Paul’s writings on gender norms in general and same-gender intimacy in particular.

[E11] 1 Corinthians 12:11-13. I moved verse 11 to the end for the sake of emphasis.

[E12] These examples focus on marriage, but this is not because I undervalue the spiritual gift of celibacy. On the contrary, I believe it is a very important and underappreciated spiritual gift, which in my mind is closely tied to apostleship. I know people who have this spiritual gift. (Incidentally, I have no idea what their sexual orientation is. Why would I?) And I know gay people who don’t have this spiritual gift but who feel compelled to live by it due to a gender norm that forces them into singleness. The difference is pretty clear.

The New Testament suggests that those who cannot live according to the ideal of celibacy should fall back on the option of marriage. But for gay people, we have reversed this order, suggesting that those who may not participate in marriage must pursue a life of celibacy. In my mind, this is an insult both to gay Christians and to those for whom celibacy is a true gift.

[E13] I do not say this with the intention to insult single parents. I recognize that there are many instances in which it is better for the kids to be with one parent instead of both or in which parents are forced into single parenting against their will. By the grace of God, these parents can still raise their children effectively.

That being said, I don’t think this detracts from the concept that having two parents are better. In fact, I don’t personally know any single parent who would disagree with me.


[E14] You may have noticed that my argument up to this point only goes as far as saying, “Removing gender norms opens up the possibility that God may call two people of the same gender into marriage.” That is because I leave it to the Holy Spirit to decide if and when this possibility is a reality.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

The last sentence makes more sense using 'May God,'
rather than 'My God,' imho. Thoughtful series Brian.

Brian Bither said...

Fixed it! Thanks for pointing it out. I am afraid that I am behind my self-imposed writing deadline now, which means I don't have as much time for editing (or to send them to my unofficial editor for review), which means you may seem a lot more errors like this in the upcoming posts...

Amy said...

Your editor apologizes for being unable to keep up with this one. :)