<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Saturday, March 13, 2004

Christianity and Homosexuality   [Rick Barry]

Tonight on ABC I saw an interview with Kelli O’Donnell, Rosie’s partner. It was a very difficult and heartbreaking interview for me to watch. Kelli was a beautiful, charming, most likeable person. I wanted so much for her to be happy. I have always liked Rosie O’Donnell as well. They have triggered love in my heart, and fundamental questions. The most fundamental is this, how should Christians respond to homosexuals?

Let me lay out some of my basic beliefs here. First, Christianity is a religion about love. One of my least favorite criticisms of The Passion of the Christ is that it does not emphasize Christ’s basic teachings. It does not stress his teaching that one should be “kind to others”. These critics are right, the movie does not contain long sequences in which Christ tells people to be nice to each other. It is far more powerful than that. The movie is about God’s love for mankind. The excessive blood in the movie does not distract from the core message, rather, it is a most eloquent illustration of the core message. God loves us so much he would die a thief’s death to save us. We, therefore, should love others just as fervently.

I also believe that there is such a thing as sin. The principle I use when considering sin, however, is the principle of love. Why is there such a thing as sin? Has God created arbitrary boundaries that we must not cross just to test us? Most certainly not! Those things we call sin are things that are harmful to ones self and others. This is not a cosmic test to see who is good or bad. This is about God saying, “I love you and I loathe to see you hurt yourselves.” When we sin we hurt ourselves and others, and because of God’s love for us he cannot bear to see it happen. Is this an overly “touchy-feely” understanding of sin? Maybe. Is it a complete explanation of sin? No. But again, when I consider theology I consider it in the context of love.

I also believe that homosexual behavior is a sin. I believe it is a sin because it is self-harming. Why? I will summarize my convocations on this here, but be forewarned: I am generalizing here. This is an incredibly brief summary of a complex matter. I believe that homosexuality is a predominantly psychological orientation. It is not something one is “born with.” It occurs when a fundamental disconnect occurs in the psyche of an individual between themselves and their gender. In males, for example, it occurs when a boy sees manhood as “other.” This fundamental disconnect from ones true identity creates a craving for that identity. This craving becomes sexualized at puberty, leading to sexual encounters with the same sex in an attempt to find one’s own (in this example) masculinity. This, of course, is a false way of reconnecting with ones true self. It is a behavior that is ultimately harmful to the individual because the core needs are not addressed.

Homosexual behavior does not deal with the true issues involved, the need for love and acceptance and self-integration. It is a poor attempt to solve a profound hurt. That is why it is a sin, because it looks to solve a problem in a way that makes the problem worse. Homosexual behavior is a sin because of God’s infinite love for those who have same sex attraction. It is not a sin because homosexual people are worthless. To the contrary! It is a sin because they are so very valuable in the eyes of God.

So, what do we know? God is love. There is such a thing as sin because of God’s unending love. In this context, homosexual behavior is a sin.

Christians have been doing a horrific job of dealing with the same-sex marriage debate. We will never succeed by pointing to “tradition.” Tradition has no heart. It is cold and dead (not in my opinion, but in the eyes of the world). We will never get anywhere with little slogans. “Hate the sin, love the sinner!”

Here is the fundamental problem: Rosie and Kelli love each other. These two people are in love and want to be with each other. What is wrong with love? What do Christians have against love? Oh, we respond, but we do love them, we just hate their sin. The media responds: what is their sin? “Homosexuality” says the Christian. The media says…oh, so their only sin is that they love each other? What’s so bad about love?

Christianity is the religion of love, and we have been boxed out of the discussion. How is it that the people who know true love the best (Christians) are the same people who sneer and scowl at homosexuals? Where is our love for homosexuals? We as a church should overflow with love, and yet the overflow never makes it to Dupont Circle or San Francisco.

Some Christians have experienced hearts warmed by homosexuals, and they have wanted to show their love for them. So they sold the store. They have said, “Sure you can get married! We love you, and we celebrate with you your love!” However, what these people don’t understand is that this not true love for homosexuals. If I am correct that homosexual behavior is ultimately harmful to the homosexual, then to encourage such behavior is an astoundingly unloving act. Naturally, people who do promote homosexual marriage do not believe the behavior is self-harming, so that is an important point of debate. My argument is that giving up and saying “do as you please” is not the truly loving act.

Then again, the current way in which conservative Christians behave is certainly not overflowing with love. Most Christians simply are not radically and unendingly loving homosexual men and women the way God loves them. They back away and keep their distance. In the process of backing away they look heartless and cruel. Homosexuals seem loving people who are under attack from Christians. Christians are not showing the love of Christ through their actions, and homosexuals are promoting a love that seems so right, even if it ultimately does not satisfy.

What am I trying to say? In this same-sex marriage debate, Christians have been failing. The lesson is: the best defense is a strong offense. We need to show in our every action that Christ loves homosexuals very, very much. We also need to argue that it is our deep love for the individuals that prevents us from endorsing the behavior. The behavior is a form of self-mutilation of the soul, and because of our love we cannot bring ourselves to approve. But this cannot be rhetoric. Our love must be true, because God’s love is true.

I hate this debate because I hate the fact that Christians end up seeming so heartless. We need to make strong our offense. We need to love more radically than ever before. Nothing can ever change a homosexual’s mind. We must go for their heart. This is a debate about love, and The Passion of the Christ emphasizes what love is all about. It is about God sacrificing himself for us. Now that we know what love is, we must spread that love far and wide. We must show homosexuals that our love for them tells bars us from smiling upon homosexual marriage.

This is long, but it is important to me to sort of arrange some of my thoughts on this matter. If anyone has any thoughts on it, please let me know.


Tuesday, March 09, 2004

Marriage Madness   [Rick Barry]

I have been driven nearly mad with the "arguments" presented in favor of "gay marriage" (civil rights, separation of church and state, etc). The utter lack of depth to these arguments, the total reliance on rhetoric over any from of reason, has been very difficult to listen to day after day. The very idea that a marriage amendment would enshrine intolerance into the constitution...what can be said other than that this is thoughtless.

Naturally, there are lazy thinkers on the right too. Simple appeals to "tradition" or God's opinion of homosexuals (and by the way, I am sure God would be far more gracious and loving towards homosexuals than many of these people would be) will not cut it. However, it is the nature of political debate to throw around phrases that have little meaning or depth.

My problem is, when I read liberal arguments for gay marriage in places where there is plenty of room for well articulated, coherent thought, they seem to continue to rely on their catch phrases. Heaven only knows what they mean by "rights". Where can the "right to marry" be found? By what logic? On the other hand, when given the space to lay out their case, I find conservatives set aside their rhetoric and point out the natural law on this issue. A good example is Thomas Sowell's piece. Look it over, it is a needed breath of fresh air.

Monday, March 08, 2004

The Passion and its detractors   [Rick Barry]

I have written before about the negative film critics of the Passion and what I supposed might be some of their motives. These earlier film reviewers were most likely liberals and probably agnostics or liberal Christians. Now, however, there is a strange new occurrence. The conservative critic. Over the last couple of days we have seen reviews come out by Charles Krauthammer and Gertrude Himmelfarb slamming the film. Stunningly, Himmelfarb has not even seen the movie.

Both writers said, again, that the movie was anti-Semitic. Neither seems to understand Christianity at all. Both said the movie was too gory. I would be interested to hear what reactions people on this blog have to these two editorials on the movie. What are these people missing?