This is For You Sam
September 10, 2009
Sam recently added the following comment on my post, “Change or Be Celibate” and rather than taking a chance of it slipping under the radar on the back side of the blog I’m adding it as a new post so it doesn’t get missed for those who share similar concerns and questions as the ones Sam expresses.
I agree with most of what you’re saying, but here is my hesitation. The Bible does state a man and woman should not have sex before marriage and just because we’re gay doesn’t give us the right to re-interpret Scripture. I think it is a sin to have sex before marriage and I am gay. I do not know where this leaves me. I can either remain celibate, or sin. It is not an easy choice obviously, but it is one I have to make. I do not see another way out unless same sex marriage becomes legal. What do you say to the passages that clearly speak against sex before marriage regardless of if you’re gay or straight?
I appreciate what Sam is saying and asking here and believe it’s an important conversation that I want to open up for others to enter in to. Let me begin by offering a couple thoughts, random though they might be of my own and then the floor will be open and operators will be standing by to take your calls and post your comments.
I think I’ve already stated for the record more than a time or two that I’m not a proponent of casual sex for a number of reasons that go far beyond what the Scriptures may or may not say, and while my faith and the Scriptures are central to the formation of my values and personal morality, were I to engage in an argument on the topic (who me? argue?) I suspect the word “fornication” or the phrase, “Biblical teaching prohibits pre-marital sex” wouldn’t be among my opening or closing arguments. Considering the emotional, physical, and spiritual wreckage potentially resulting from casual non-committal sex quoting Scriptures doesn’t seem a necessary road to travel.
So that Sam and anyone else interested understands, my personal belief concerning sex is that it’s to be held within an established commitment between two people that involves responsibility, faithfulness, and trust and is centered and motivated in love. Whether you call that shared commitment marriage, a holy union, domestic partnership or a covenental relationship makes no difference to me.
All above is just to establish that all I say below isn’t to be confused as a defense on behalf of pre-marital sex. I’m not arguing that pre-marital sex is just fine so go for it. Keep your pants or skirt on. I’m so not on that page.
The Bible does state a man and woman should not have sex before marriage and just because we’re gay doesn’t give us the right to re-interpret Scripture. . .What do you say to the passages that clearly speak against sex before marriage regardless of if you’re gay or straight?
Sam, I just don’t see where the Bible states that. Conservative Christianity does. The Trinity Broadcasting Network, The 700 Club, a hundred thousand preachers and my Aunt Bessie do (I don’t actually have an Aunt Bessie) but despite the traditional position that the Bible forbids pre-marital sex, the case is weak, something I’ve previously addressed in Gay? Okay. Sex? No way. In that post I contended that in the Old Testament the concerns regarding pre-martial sex had nothing to do with sexual morality but with the establishment and honoring of property rights, namely those of the father. Every woman was owned by a father and any man who had sex with her outside of marriage was required to make financial compensation to the father. (Exodus 22:16-17). A blood sacrifice for atonement wasn’t demanded of the man, neither did he incur divine punishment. Sin simply wasn’t part of the equation even, sadly enough, when the sex was an act of rape rather than consensual sex (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). I also presented the Song of Solomon which tells of the passionate courtship between two lovers who take unashamed delight in one anothers’ bodies without any hint of condemnation found anywhere in the narrative. In looking at the New Testament I pointed out that the Greek word porneia has been wrongly re-interpreted and narrowly-defined as fornication (sex between two unmarried people) in a number of versions of the Bible. Porneia, or sexual immorality, covers a number of sexual sins involving extra-marital sex that includes adultery, temple prostitution, pederasty, and a man having sex with his menstruating wife.
From my viewpoint Sam, I don’t see this has a case of re-interpreting the Scriptures but of honoring the integrity of the Scriptures; something religion and the church has often failed to do historically, and always to the detriment of human life and spirit. Ask people of color whose ancestors were enslaved. Ask women who lived as second class citizens. Ask children who were beaten by the rod. Ask yourself as gay or lesbian who would be barred from partaking of Christ’s table in far too many churches. Every time anyone comes along with an interpretation of the Scriptures that brings into question a traditional position, that person is viewed by some as re-interpreting the Scriptures when what might well be true is that they are “rightly dividing the Word of God.” Maybe it’s time we look at those long-held traditional views that have harmed, wounded, excluded, and condemned with as much pause and reflection as we do any seemingly conflicting view.
I think it is a sin to have sex before marriage and I am gay. I do not know where this leaves me. I can either remain celibate, or sin. It is not an easy choice obviously, but it is one I have to make. I do not see another way out unless same sex marriage becomes legal.
The part I could use help understanding is where you say “I see no way out (of remaining celibate) unless same sex marriage becomes legal.” I wonder what it means to you that there are countries in the world where same-sex marriage is legal. This raises so many questions for me Sam. Must same-sex marriage be legal in the United States at the federal level for you to feel more freedom to consider getting married should a wonderful someone come along? Must it be legal in every country in the world? Would a gay couple in a life-long committed relationship living in a state that prohibits same-sex marriage be committing sexual sin but if they moved to the Netherlands and obtained a marriage license where same-sex marriage is legal, be free of the judgment of sin in the eyes of God?
I cringe at the idea that location, the vote of the people, or the rule of government can determine what is or is not sin. Again, the question comes back to the only one that matters to me, and that’s what makes a marriage a marriage to God? and the only way I know to answer that question is to repeat what I wrote in Gay? Okay. Sex? No Way :
What makes a marriage a marriage to God? I’m not all that certain God’s concerned with marriage as a definition for a particular type of relationship. Marriage. Holy Union. Covenant Relationship. Kinship. Friendship. Parent and Child. Siblings. Pastor and congregants. God would seem to me to be less concerned with the category of a relationship than with the quality of the relationship but if defining relationship matters to God then I believe a marriage is a marriage in the eyes of God when two people enter into a covenantal relationship, exchanging the commitment of their heart to one another before the presence of God. I believe the intention of their hearts and the action of their lives is what God recognizes and that establishes the relationship as authentic, meaningful, and holy. I believe pure love (1 Corinthians 13) matters and is the single highest consideration to God in what gains God’s approval or disapproval. No offense to the church or to the majority of conservative Christians intended but I’d be hard-pressed to think God’s hanging on their thumbs up or thumbs down to reach a decision on the matter. God doesn’t seem to be the kind of God influenced by majority rule, status quo or accepted norms, at least if Jesus’ life and teaching was any indication, and therefore marriage in the eyes of God doesn’t hinge on how this society or any defines it.
Sam, I have nothing but respect and compassion for your commitment. I really do understand how sincerely motivated you are and how hungry you are to do what you believe is right and that God is calling you to do. Your words were my own a dozen years ago and my resolve just as strongly held. There came a time when my position changed along with a new understanding. Maybe one day your position will change. Maybe it won’t. I have no intention to convince you otherwise and would gain nothing in doing so. I’ve only responded as honestly as I know how to your questioning and would simply hope that in asking it meant you were open to reflecting on another perspective. If at the end of the day your commitments as they are remain steadfast then I would do nothing but honor the place where you are because the best thing any of us can do is live true to our convictions and to the life we believe God is calling us to live.
I hope to hear more from you Sam and from any others who have something to add to this conversation, and you know you have something to say.
Posted in Marriage, Sexual Ethics
Sweet Hope Cookies
September 10th, 2009 at 9:57 am
I think we must always remember that our definition of “legality” is man-made/human-created, thus what is considered “legal” in a given culture at a given time may or may not be of love or of God. It was once legal to own slaves (and the Bible was used as justification for that!); it was once legal to beat and sell your children; women were once men’s legal property. I’d like to put forth that, in industrialized nations at least, now we deem these once-legal acts as wrong. I feel Anita hit it right on when she asked “what makes a marriage in God’s eyes?” I think we do our best to keep God in our heart and make our decisions and commitments from there – not necessarily always from another human group’s idea of what is “legal” at a given time.
September 10th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I think the definition that Sam is using of marriage is limiting. But then maybe that is what she is looking for. I consider a committment as being important in an intimate relationshiip but also what is best for both people(so both might have a committment but for some reason still would not be good for them to be intimate). Which maybe sounds wishing washy. I guess I am not asking for someone else’s intrepretation of God’s “rules” for my life. I think there is a point where one has an idea about what is “loving” behavoir and what is not. At some point we have (or can have) an awareness/discernment over whether or not what we are doing is out of love or not. And I feel open to the fact that I am not perfect and will continue to sin through out my entire life here on earth…. I find everyday to be a challenge in regards to gossip and being kind in word and deed. Wow, sort of a revelation to me….that I am comfortable now in my own skin. Dogma is not the issue for me, pleasing God and being honoring and respectful in my relationships is….
September 10th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Like Sam, I have felt God calling me to a life of celibacy. The Bible is open to interpretation and we all have to do what we feel God is calling us to do. I think it is possible to find someone who feels the same way as I do and I look forward to the day when I meet her. My church is very supportive of gay marriage and gay rights. It means a lot to me to know that I belong to a church that is supportive of who I am and would feel better too if my state were to take the same stance. Nonetheless, in my own life I have felt God leading me towards a life of celibacy and to only dating other chrisitians. I know that I need to do what I feel God is calling me to do.
September 10th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Your reply was to Sam, but this Susan appreciated reading your thoughts on this matter. Speaking only to my limited experience of the place where I live now(Florida), I find the whole “celibacy” issue very painful.
In my little corner of the country, if I, or any gay person, were to feel God calling us to the priesthood, we would have to promise that we would be celibate. The fact that I’m in a relationship would make me suspicious, and probably lead one to believe that I can’t possibly be celibate *and* in a relationship… but that’s a whole other matter. This idea that, as a lesbian, I must vow to be celibate… while a single straight woman would have the opportunity to date and marry so she can have a sexual relationship (pardon me while I roll my eyes) means that I am being held to a higher standard. And, if we go by what Sam says, a lesbian or gay man is in a no-win situation in a state such as Florida because my brothers and sisters decided to make me, and every one like me, into second-class citizens on November 4th. And even though I think my relationship is sanctified by God, the fact that God’s earthly representative (the Church) won’t recognize my relationship, and the State confirms that in the constitution, means there’s no point in a gay person exploring ordination in Florida. However, go to another state, another diocese, and the rules for gay people are different. Yeah, that makes sense–not!
I believe that celibacy should be a choice; not something forced upon a person to satisfy some institution’s wigginess about the body. As for pre-marital sex, I don’t think it’s a good idea to just sleep around because you can, and it’s fun. But that’s also because I am someone who simply can’t have that sort of intimacy for one night. If we’re going down that road, I have to feel there’s more of a commitment than “casual sex”. For me, it all comes back to the idea that you don’t use people for your own gratification.
And last of all… I think the Song of Solomon is some of the most exquisitely beautiful poetry in the Bible! Thanks for mentioning it! Christians don’t seem to read it much, but it is often used for Jewish weddings.
September 11th, 2009 at 6:38 am
I remember being stuck on this issue for a bit until I asked myself a series of questions.
What constitutes “marriage”?
Were Adam and Eve married?
What are the differences between marriage back then vs. today?
Why was it ok for David, a man after God’s own heart, to have more than one wife AND concubines too (busy man!) but it’s supposedly not ok for me to marry the ONE woman whom I adore, love, cherish and desire to be with everyday of my life, in the state of Missouri. It seems pretty contradicting.
These few questions launched me in to an honest search and it was an interesting search.
As Anita already expressed, marriage back then was more about property ownership. But also, if we look at the overall view that many folks had on marriage and the other issues Laura expressed….legal to own slaves, beat and sell children and treat women as property. And let’s not forget it was ok to have concubines and more than one wife back then too, I think it’s safe to say we missed the mark on some stuff back then.
We weren’t right in the way we treated one another. Our system of doing things was not right and Jesus knew that. He spent his life trying to teach us new ways that actually went against some of the laws.
We have grown a lot since biblical times and many things have changed, as they should and I think it’s ok to change with them and not stay in the same place.
Best wishes with your journey Sam.
September 11th, 2009 at 11:28 am
I don’t know whether I can add anything to this other than my own experience and a truckload of empathy.
For twenty years, I chose celibacy. Well, sorta. I was very involved in evangelical Christianity, the eldest daughter of an evangelical minister. I had standards to live up to, both externally and internally imposed (internally by me, not by God). I absorbed, like you do Sam, the belief that premarital sex was a sin.
And for twenty years, all the while knowing deep in my heart I was gay and really didn’t want ever to be sexually involved with a man, I wanted someday to be in a relationship for keeps. I wanted to be married. But not the whole white picket fence two-car garage suburbia dream. My sister’s childhood fantasies were that, mine were always me alone. And it was because my dreams never involved a man, and my conceptual apparatus forbade me a woman.
Well, I cycled. It was about every three months (yes, for the whole twenty years), and I would crash into a debilitating loneliness, a cavern of black isolation and depression. And then I’d pick myself back up and move on. To crash again in another three or so months. To move on. And so on.
In short, I wasn’t gifted as one of those to live alone. Is that celibacy? Or is celibacy supposed to refer only to sexual acts? But then, what is sexual? Rob Bell argues, compellingly, that our sexuality permeates everything, that it is in fact a weak image of our relationship with God (in Sex God, a great title to read on a plane if you want to be prevocative). I really don’t have a clue what celibacy is, so I guess I will look to the idea that as a lesbian, I was supposed to (according to my religious community) live alone. Not without roommates—I have had a number of those—but alone nonetheless. A solitary unit.
The issue for me is whether or not I was called to that. The answer is “no.” I wouldn’t have cycled. People who are called to be single shouldn’t be forced to be married, nor should those called to partnership be forced to be single.
Return to the question, but maybe in different words. Who gets to define such things as “marriage,” “celibacy,” and “immoral”? It seems to me that whomever you allow the power to define them will be the one who determines your life path.
I’ve spent many, many years studying language, thought, morality, and tradition. I’ve built a career on it. And what I’ve found is that everything on the human level changes. If you allow humans to define things, then over time, the definitions change. A hundred years ago, “browse” was a thing a cow did with her cud. Fifty years ago, it was something somebody did in library stacks when unsure of what exactly one wanted to read. Now it’s an internet term. Word meanings change.
Marriage was once a legal contract under property law. Then it was a religious commitment governed by the church, considered a sacrament. Then it became a legal contract. In some places, for some people, it retains all three meanings. If it doesn’t have all three, is it somehow less marriage? If I have the right to share property with somebody, am I married? What if I can do that and have the sacramental and church-sanctioned, but not legal connotations? Or what if it has the legal, but not the church connotations?
My point is probably not a surprising one to any who know me professionally. It is simply this: I believe you need to ask yourself the same sorts of questions Steph lists. But alongside that arises the question about who you are taking definitions from.
Oh, and a total tangent, but I wanted to comment on what Susan said about being held to a “higher” standard than straight women. I don’t see how high or low has anything to do with it. A different, stricter standard, sure. But I fail to see how the standards thunked on one’s shoulders by a group of people is high or low, implying better or worse. I think strictness has nothing to do with moral superiority. Considering the strict dietary, celibacy, and excersize standards Hitler lived by, I think you might get my intent here. Something other than human traditions is what will be what constitutes and determines the height of a standard. (Bonjee steps off her soapbox, now).
September 11th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Many people have made very thought provoking comments on this post. Thanks to all. I am afraid that my thoughts aren’t that deep.
I believe that our sexuality is a gift from God and that our sexual expression and relations should honor this gift. I had convinced myself that I was born to be single, which I now understand, is not what God wants for me.
So when I come to the time in my life where I ready to share intimacy with someone, I hope and pray it will be – as Anita says “held within an established commitment between two people that involves responsibility, faithfulness, and trust and is centered and motivated in love”.
I would like to get legally married to a woman someday.
Peace to all.
September 11th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
These comments remind me yet again of how fortunate I am to be surrounded by such a remarkable *tribe of SisterFriends. I’m so grateful that you took my invitation to share your own ideas and that you shared so honestly from your lives to do so. I read each entry amazed and moved.
Thank you. I can add nothing more than that.
*I choose tribe of SisterFriends because it conjures up images of power and wildness and because a gang of SisterFriends sounds a little too finger-snapping West Side Story and a team of SisterFriends invites calls to “Play Ball!” Yep, I’m sticking with tribe.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:39 am
I recently met a woman who I thought was a true body, soul and spirit match for me. Intellectually I totally believe that sex should follow marriage since I live in Massachusetts. Unfortunately we entered into sexual intimacy after knowing each other for only 2 months. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. I soon realized that I did not want to merely have a sexual encounter with a woman who I did not really know. She was ok with that. Not thrilled but ok.
Then we started a conversation about living as roommates which was merely a conversation. Gradually she began to withdraw until I had to ask what was going on with her. She explained that for her sex and commitment were synonymous. Since we were not having sex then she did not feel that we were committed to one another. We agreed that we would continue to explore moving forward in a relationship. Then I didnt’ hear from her until she sent me and email stating that she accepted my views but that we were on a different path spiritually and she no longer wanted to pursue having a relationship with me.
I never was able to have her understand that for me it wasnt about following a biblical law. It was about the biblical law being there for a reason. If we really study the laws in the bible they are there to protect us. Entering into a sexual encounter without a true commitment developed over time and a vast array of situations and circumstances is often doomed to failure. I had enough of those.
September 14th, 2009 at 9:14 am
Gail –> it sounds like the woman was committed to you, and you and she just weren’t on the same page in how committment should be shown. I wonder, if you didn’t have your particular interpretation of “biblical law” would you have stayed together, in a committed and full relationship? You talk about the “law” being there for a reason, and perhaps so, but again, laws are human creations, interpreted and understood by other humans in varying cultures in varying times, and may or may not be the best thing for individuals personally. There are lots of “laws” in the Bible that in our culture today we just don’t apply. One could argue that, because it’s in the Book, we should apply it. I just don’t think there’s a one-size-fits-all “law” other than love, and everyone’s situation is different.
September 14th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
I saw your link on John Shore’s Blog. So excuse me for probably speaking a little out of turn. I think your general notion that we are all obliged to be faithful to our interpretation of what we hear from God is so true.
As it rests with me, my interpretation of marriage is qualified in Scripture. Mark 10:6&7. As I see it, “God is still making us male and female—and for this reason, a man will leave his parents and be united to his wife.” Whether a man or woman desires to marry in that context is up to them. Safe to believe you don’t see those verses the same as I do?
I don’t think its profitable for me to insist that my interpretation of those verses are right and someone else’s are wrong. Obviously I think my interpretation is right, and if the opportunity happens to arise as the Spirit may avail…and someone asks me what I believe, I will tell them. I will leave their interpretation of the text to their own relationship with the Holy Spirit. If my interpretation chafes, they will hopefully know that was not my intent. God willing, they will take it in the spirit with which it was given.
My sister is gay, and I’m certainly concerned for her eternal salvation. Hell, I’m concerned for my own salvation. I believe in my soul that we are saved by grace and no amount of sin (willful or otherwise) is any more able to retract His grace than our kindness or good deeds can invoke His grace. I think we are justified by God. Our ragged left and ragged right eventually come into perfect alignment when we acknowledge that Jesus sets our type. (A little publishing humor—Very little!)
In the end, I am responsible for my relationship with Christ, and my relationship with those He died for. Like…uh…everyone including myself. My heart, mind, soul, and strength seeks to look out for the best interests of all mankind (and womankind). Even if my interpretation of “biblical marriage” galls someone else, I pray in all earnest that somehow, such gall would be used by Him (wrong or right) for the perfection of His children. Sorry if this comes off wrong-hearted.
September 14th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Timothy –> Good ol’ John Shore gets folks connected in the most unlikely of ways through his wonderful, moving, and often plain goofy blog. It sounds like we agree more than we disagree Timothy and where we don’t I would never expect or want for you to change your convictions around what constitutes a marriage if that’s what you hold as God’s truth though my convictions regarding marriage are very different and just as centered in what I believe is the heart of God for His people. And so as I respect your right to believe as you believe and to act on that belief in whatever way you believe God calls you to do, I will continue to advocate and work on behalf of marriage equality motivated not by self-interest alone as a married (legally) lesbian but out of the conviction of my faith that God would have me do nothing less than work for justice and equality for all God’s people.
I also couldn’t agree with you more that no amount of sin nor countless good deeds have any impact on the grace of God. Grace either lies fully in the character of God and the gift of His Son or it can’t be called Grace at all. It’s funny Timothy. John made a big deal about me sending him a box of cookies on his blog and now on in the comments section it seems that someone there has concluded that as a lesbian I think baking cookies will earn me favor in God’s eyes. As I said in my own comment over there, I find that idea more offensive than being called a sinner or someone who is deceived because it suggests I would cheapen the grace of God by thinking I could buy it with any effort on my part.
As to your interpretation of marriage galling anyone, it’s not galling Timothy. I don’t agree with it but it won’t change how I live and how I believe because in the end, as you said, “I am responsible for my relationship with Christ, and my relationship with those He died for.” It seems where it most eternally matters, our agreements are more than where we part ways. See you over on John’s blog
Blessings, Anita