Thursday, August 2, 2012

An Open Letter To My Homosexual Friends and Family


I wish to set the record straight on a couple of things regarding Christianity and the furor raging over homosexual marriage. I do this in hopes that we can have future discourse, and that it not be poisoned by straw man arguments or name-calling. Understand that this is written in a spirit of genuine sincerity, by a man who does not wish to be at war with his fellow Americans for any reason.

I am a Christian. This most likely does not mean what you think it means; in fact, allow me to share all the things it does NOT mean—for these myths are merely designed to shut down discourse, not foster it. I was not born a Christian. I willingly chose this path in my life, and was fortunate enough to be born into a country where I have that freedom. Throughout most of recorded history, in other places, making this choice has cost people their lives.

Being a Christian does NOT mean that I hate you. I do not hate you. In fact, I love you. After all, it was because someone else loved me that I learned to trust Christ—and I would be the ultimate ingrate to Him if I responded to that love by not also giving it to you. Being a Christian does NOT mean that I’m perfect, or even consider myself perfect. Being a Christian does NOT mean that I am intolerant or hateful or bigoted or narrow-minded. On the contrary….being a Christian requires me to share my faith, which cannot be done in a vacuum. If I’m to obey that missive, I have to know you and love you and listen to you. I actually have to be tolerant of you to have discourse with you.

Being a Christian simply means that I have come to terms with my own essential worthlessness. I recognize that I am totally depraved. I was born that way; it wasn’t a choice I made. It’s one of the ramifications of the broken world in which we live, and I am humble enough to admit that there is no good in me apart from Him. Being a Christian also means that I accept that the Bible is the Word of God. You may find this ridiculous, but I did not make that choice to win your approval—or anyone else’s. In fact, I was openly hostile to this belief before I came around, and I totally understand that this view is openly reviled in our culture today. I hold it anyhow. Such a belief is no less indefensible than any of the other things we humans put our faith in on a daily basis.

Yes, the Bible does teach that homosexuality is a sin. But in one such passage (Romans 1.24-32), the apostle Paul makes the argument that we are all born into depravity. That infamous list of sins he catalogues also contains “refusal to acknowledge God,” “greed,” “envy,” “strife,” “deceit,” “gossips,” “slanderers,” “haters of God,” “insolent,” “arrogant,” “boastful,” “disobedient to parents,” “unloving,” and “unmerciful.” So, in the eyes of God, being disobedient to one’s parents is in the same category as homosexuality. If I am to point a finger of harshness at the homosexual, I will have to point one at myself, too. Full disclosure: I have been guilty of every single one these things EXCEPT homosexuality. What is the significance of this? It means that I’m no better than you, and you’re no better than I. It means I’m no worse than you, and you’re no worse than I. The Christian, by definition, simply believes that we are all born into sin—and that we are constitutionally incapable of rectifying that. I can’t be “good,” no matter how I try. Apart from God’s grace, I cannot help but continue to be guilty of the aforementioned sins. In fact, even with God’s grace, I frequently have a whale of a time wrestling with them anyhow.

If I try to follow someone else’s rules for being “good,” I will fail. If I trust myself to be “good,” I will fail. I can only find redemption by trusting Christ for my salvation—not my ability to be a good boy, or follow rules, or go to church, or win arguments. I am powerless to save myself; He alone can save me.

It’s very important to me that you understand this last part especially….because my belief in the total depravity of Man is an inherently cardinal doctrine of historic Christianity. It is not a personal judgment that I pass on you. It is not a form of hate. It is not bigotry. In fact, if you’ve ever said, “nobody’s perfect,” you’ve essentially landed on the same fundamental human truth. I believe this, and to the extent that I have any righteousness in me at all—well, it ain’t because of anything I do (or don’t do). Anything good about me at all is a gift from Him.

This is a humbling fact, and one of its ramifications is that I am not at liberty to see anyone else’s sin as being greater or lesser than mine. It means that I am not free to place myself on a level above anyone else. It means that, as long as I’ve been given breath in this life, I should live out my faith sincerely and in love toward others. This doesn’t mean, however, that I must always acquiesce to others’ point of view.

I mentioned earlier that I live in a free country. This individual freedom has its genesis in a group of Puritan Christians who had wandered from England to Holland and finally to these shores, hoping to set up a society in which they were free from persecution for their beliefs. By the time the nation was born more than a century later, the Founding Fathers weren’t explicitly Christian—in fact, they deliberately set up a pluralistic society, in which all are free to worship and believe as they see fit. I personally like this set-up. If we lived in a deliberately “Christian” country, my guess is that it wouldn’t take long to degenerate into sectarian violence and oppression…because, again, that’s just what is inherently in us. But to be free to be Christian or atheist, Buddhist or Hindu, Catholic or Protestant, heretic or unbeliever….this is the essence of individual liberties. I support this—wholeheartedly, because I believe that a free country is the safest place to live out my beliefs.

Because of my beliefs as a Christian, I disagree with many of you on the subject of homosexual marriage. This doesn’t mean that this is the default position of Christians, however: there are Christians who disagree with me on this issue, as well. It is important for you to remember that much of my disagreement comes from my political understanding of the definition of “rights” and freedoms, much more so than it does my faith. But my faith DOES inform my beliefs, and that shouldn't be a bad thing. Many of you no doubt think it’s completely preposterous that a college-educated man could possibly believe that Jesus is the Son of God and that the Bible is His Word. I respect that view, as well. Believe me….walking through this life by faith seems ridiculous to even the most ardent Christians, many times. I’m no angel, and never have been. I don’t hold myself out to be a great example of some sort of model “man of God.” But I believe what I believe, as I’m sure you do, as well.

You are free to think of me as misguided and misled. I am free to think of you the same way. You are free to believe that “sin” isn’t how I have described it here. You are free to reject Scripture. You are free to reject my argument entirely. This doesn’t mean that we hate each other. My disagreement with many of you on this issue is on the basis of principles which I hold very dear. Your support on the other side of this issue is, I assume, also based on principles which you hold dear.  As long as we both realize that there are good people on both sides of this issue, we can keep from descending into the abyss of real bigotry and intolerance by assuming that The Other Guy is motivated by hate. Disagreement on a political issue is not the same thing as hate. Please….let’s both agree to this.

I will, of course, exercise my freedom of speech to advance the cause that I care about. Just as you no doubt find fault with my premise, I will find fault with yours. But this isn’t “hate” so much as it is simple civil discourse. I don’t want to see one homosexual beaten or cut off or harmed in any way. I don’t want to see any business interests by homosexuals shouted out of the public sphere. I don’t want to see building permits denied to homosexuals. I want supporters of homosexual marriage to be free to donate their money to GLAAD without fear of public mugging on Facebook. If you can admit that you feel the same about my side of the equation, then I believe that we have set the parameters for the sort of healthy cultural debate that could only happen in our great nation.

Because I love and value you, I look forward to having it.

3 comments:

  1. Hello, Guy That Digs Theology, you posted on my blog earlier, and wanted to pay you the same respect by reading your blog post. I have to say, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this and agree with you... mostly. In fact, I agreed with you in everything until paragraph 10. Would it be a fair assessment to say that your view on Same Sex Marriage is informed primarily by your American convictions as opposed to your Christian convictions? Free Speech is something quite different than Free Action. Marriage is obviously (and I'm sure you know this) designed by God to be a picture of Christ and the Church. It has become a cultural rite, but was ordained by God. We wouldn't let culture redefine the Eucharist or Baptism would we? Certainly not. They are not the cultures to redefine--neither is marriage. Is it?

    Blessings,
    Ben Lowery.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I guess I would have to say that I agree with everything you said here. But your assessment of my view on same-sex marriage is not formed at all by way of my culture or my country's laws. Like you, I recognize it as a sacrament ordained by God--and therefore completely above all this fray. Even if they get to finally call themselves "married," they still will not have sullied God's definition of it.

    The distinction I make is that I object to proponents of same-sex marriage referring to marriage as a civil right. The term "right" has objective definitions that are bound in the Constitution and the Federalist Papers, and is not to be construed as "stuff that I would like to have." This is why I don't have a right to hunt, or be a hairdresser, or drive a car. Each state licenses privileged members of the society for these activities at its own discretion (10 Amendment). For this reason, arguing in favor of same-sex marriage on the basis of civil rights is a non-sequitur, since there is no such thing as a "right to marry."

    I want to reiterate how right you are that it's not the culture's job to redefine this. Even if they "do," they can't. They are powerless to, because His sovereignty is greater than ours. I appreciate you reading. I started this a year back or so, mostly just to write satirical pieces, but every now and then I include something serious like this. I always like hearing from you, Ben.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, okay. I can get behind that. That makes more sense. I misunderstood your original post. You would love this book: Wilhelm von Humboldt and “The Limits of State Action." It's a piece I was turned on to in college. It is right up your alley, my brother. Your thoughts on rights vs wants are SPOT ON!

      Delete