|
Sermon at The Church of
the Holy Apostles, New York City,
October 8, 2006, The Eighteenth Sunday of Pentecost:
Year B
The
Reverend William A. Greenlaw, Ph.D., Rector
Genesis 2: 18 - 24
Psalm 128
Hebrews 2: 1 - 18
Mark 10: 2 - 9
Try these words from our Old Testament lesson: “It is
not good that the man should be alone; I will make him
a helper as his partner.... whatever the man called
every living creature, that was its name.... the rib that the
Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and
brought her to the man.”
Or these words from our Psalm: “Your wife shall be
like a fruitful vine within your house, your children like olive
shoots round about your table.... the man who fears the
Lord shall thus indeed be blessed.”
Or these words from our gospel lesson: “is it lawful
for a man to divorce his wife?”
Creation, sexuality, marriage, children, divorce--all
written about and discussed from the point of view of the man--and
a very narrow sort of man to boot. Always the subject. The woman
an object. All these things written by and of men—men who were,
at least in the New Testament, often not themselves married. But
remember also that this was really about property rights from the
perspective of those who had the rights: men—and their seeming
overwhelming concern not to be stuck with “damaged goods.”
Now I know it can be argued that Jesus' prohibition
against divorce was actually enlightened, to protect women from
arbitrarily being “put away” by their husbands and in effect
becoming non-persons. Now, thankfully, the church has moved away
from such notions as “property” and moved toward something much
more relational and equal. But still and all, the church through
much of its history, has treated this prohibition of divorce as an
immutable law, applicable in all times and in all places with
vehemence—unless, of course, one has the means to get an
annulment.
And so, here we have the universal Christian norm:
lifelong marriage with children round about the table, all from a
male-dominant perspective. And we know how easily this can be
embellished with all sorts of scriptural references concerning
women that are far less enlightened than the lessons we have
heard. An opportunity that conservative church people in many
parts of our country might rejoice in on this day. “The festival
of the Christian home,” the Sunday where “Christian family values”
are affirmed front and center, or, something similar.
For most of us here this morning, I dare say these
lessons are among those that leave us pretty cold, we grit our
teeth as we hear them, and we hope our preacher will simply
ignore—or, at the very least, attempt to unpack them. Well, for
good or ill, I feel constrained this morning to try to say
something constructive concerning these lessons.
To start, if we could somehow attempt to bracket out
the male-dominant perspective, where does this put most of us who
are gathered here this morning? Well, just look around you.
Not only would these lessons not seem to say much to
those whose orientation is gay or lesbian, except to give
extremely negative vibes. The same thing is also true for those
of us gathered here who have discovered ourselves to be heterosexual.
Stated most simply, very few of us find ourselves within the
“Christian ideal” of an intact nuclear family, with husband, wife,
and 2.6 children.
And so, let me just begin to suggest some of the riches
that may be gleaned from these seemingly problematic lessons,
especially when we see them in their larger contexts.
“It is not good that the man should be alone.” We,
male and female among us, are not created as atomized, detached
beings whose ideal is to make it in splendid isolation. We find
ourselves, we find our own identity, we find meaning in
relationship, in relationship with God, in relationships,
plural, with each other, but also in that most special, deep,
intimate relationship we can have with another, with our
beloved. The need for and the blessing and hallowing of the
most profound and real intimacy and longing and yearning is at the
very heart and soul and center of this ancient creation story.
Even in this admittedly patriarchal story, the man
first needed a partner--admittedly, maybe a junior partner,
but nevertheless a partner, not a slave or servant—and, very
importantly, not in the first instance a mother for his children.
That was to come later. I think it is therefore not at all
problematic to suggest that sexual intimacy whose purpose is
primarily relational is at the heart of creation. It is
part of the essence of what it means to be human. And it is very
good. And it is no accident that sexual and religious ecstasy are
so very closely related.
Everything I have just said arguably comes directly out
of our Genesis lesson. And there is nothing that I have said that
cannot apply to gay as well as straight relationships.
And I have to say that apart from the procreative
potential of a heterosexual relationship, I am not sure ultimately
what differences there are or might be qualitatively in a
straight or in a gay relationship. The need for and the
capability of this kind of intimacy seems to be a beautiful part
of the created order. But, it is just like everything else in
life. We can use or misuse or even abuse any good gift that has
been given to us. But this cannot detract from this gift to
all of us.
Now, I do not for one moment wish to underestimate the
importance of the potential or actual procreative function in a
relationship. The nurture, education, and protection of children
are certainly necessary and appropriate concerns for the whole
society. Parenting needs to be responsible parenting for both
mothers and fathers, or from both partners in a gay or lesbian
relationship. I am distressed that such increasing numbers of
children are born out of wedlock, or a real union, without the
love and support of two parents, biological or adoptive. For it
is so much harder in countless ways for both a single
parent and the child, and children can derive so much from two
parents who, among other things, have the potential for modeling
what human relationships can mean .
But, even acknowledging the societal importance of
safeguarding children, I also have to say that the possibility of
reliable birth control opens a whole host of questions about
straight relationships quite apart from the question of
procreation.
These questions go to the very heart of our identity as
sexual beings, with what marriage is or might be or should be in
an era when procreation may not be part of the picture for large
numbers of straight people. I do in fact believe that some of our
conservative friends are right when they suggest that to open the
door to things homosexual might also challenge some of the eternal
verities on the straight side. Rather than recoil in fear, maybe
that should be cause for rejoicing!
And let me say it as clearly as I by turning that
conservative equation around. Once we have imagined the
possibility and meaning and purpose and validity of marriage that
does not include procreation for straight people, how can we
possibly deny the right to marry to same-gender couples?
It is right here that the spirit underlying all
of Jesus’ teaching can speak to us. What is the ideal toward
which we should strive? How do we find ourselves and develop most
fully in relation to another? How do we look at a beloved? What
words might describe such a relationship, whether it be straight
or gay?...
Covenant, trust, truthfulness, fidelity, commitment,
love, life-long--some of these might do for starters. To pray
for, to invoke God's blessing on our most intimate relationships
seems so basic, such an obvious good. I cannot but
believe that in time, such goings on will promote rejoicing and
celebration rather than fear and outrage—and that one day in this
land, the rights and privileges and obligations of marriage will
be open to all couples who desire it. And I mean that both
civilly and religiously.
As events of this kind happen more and more, I cannot
but believe that the world will not only “get used to it,” but
that more and more people will see the power and grace and beauty
of lesbian and gay relationships that are the equal of anything in
the straight world. Just look at all the smiling couples in the
Sunday “Styles” section of the New York Times. Few seem to bat an
eye to seeing more and more same-gender couples being featured.
Gradually, I have to believe that hearts will soften, feelings
will evolve, and minds will change.
I do need to say a word on the explicit topic of our
gospel lesson—divorce, and I would expand this to the ending of
any committed relationship. The church has thankfully begun to
see Jesus’ teaching on marriage and divorce as similar to the
Beatitudes contained in the Sermon on the Mount. That is to say,
a lifelong covenant of love is the ideal, but is an ideal that in
a broken world, will only be fully incarnated when the kingdom
comes. But like the Beatitudes, this is the norm toward for which
we must nevertheless strive and measure ourselves by. I believe
this applies to each one of us.
But I also believe that some relationships, be they gay
or straight, quite simply die, however much we may have intended
that they be lifelong. Some relationships become brutal and
abusive, psychologically and even physically. Jesus’ teaching was
in part for the protection of those who could be abused in his
culture. But when the church has told women to stay in abusive
relationships in order to uphold the so-called sanctity of
marriage, it has become nothing less than a partner in abuse. I
cannot believe that this was what Jesus was talking about in his
words on marriage and divorce.
But I also have to believe in the spirit—rather than
the letter. Relationships do die, even given our best intentions
and best efforts. And it serves no good end not to recognize
that. If there is any meaning to forgiveness, to the promise of
new life, to new possibilities, they have to apply here as well as
in every other aspect of life.
In closing, let me say simply this. We were not
created to be alone. We are restless until we find God. And most
of us are also restless until we find true love and relationship
and intimacy with another human being. And this is nothing less
than a reflection of the divine love which permeates all things—if
only we have eyes to see. Our sexuality is not something to be
feared and controlled, it is rather a divine gift that is bestowed
on all humanity, regardless of our orientation. If only, if
only, a fearful church and society could understand this, so
much else could and would follow.
If our love is a reflection of the divine love, then we
can be and are transformed, not only in our most intimate
relationships, but far beyond, better able to love and serve and
transform all God’s world—until finally we and all the world are
brought to perfection in the one who redeems us, Jesus Christ our
Lord.
Amen.
Back to Sermon Selections |
