To Marry Or To Be a Flamer, Part Three

To Marry Or To Be a Flamer, Part Three August 28, 2019

Part One; Part Two

I do think the Side A appeal to the text It is better to marry than to burn, (1) as a reason to accept gay marriage, has some teeth. I also think it’s not enough. And I think it fits into a broader framework, one that’s characteristic of American Christianity.

To explore this characteristic, I’d like to consider another text I’ve often heard cited as an argument against Side B: Ye shall know them by their fruits. The bad fruit so frequently (and with some reason) attributed to Side B beliefs—loneliness; self-hatred; impulsive, unsafe sexual behavior—are presented as evidence that Side B is a bad tree. And, as with better to marry, I don’t want to imply that that argument has no value. But I don’t think it’s what Christ was talking about.

The thing is, in both passages (from Matthew 7 and Luke 6) where this parable is used, the tree is not standing in for systems of teaching. It’s standing in for individual people. Matthew speaks specifically of false prophets, while Luke applies it to good and evil men generally, and it’s likely enough that our Lord used the same analogy more than once and in both contexts. The gist of the teaching is that you know a person’s character by their actions, not that you can judge a belief system by its adherents—which, if it were true, would be much more of a threat to Christianity in general than to Side B.

I think the application of the by their fruits rubric to belief systems is more than just the ordinary imprecision of the human mind, though. I think it reflects a typically American and quite false assumption: that the truth will make you successful.

Now, in the very last analysis, it will. The only success that will finally matter is success before the throne of God on the Last Day. But I know of no promise that we will experience earthly success or happiness by clinging to right doctrine or right practice; what we are promised are persecutions and temptations, and indeed a cross of our own. The martyrs received death: from an earthly standpoint, the worst possible fruit of a belief. We are not promised safety from heartbreak or suffering; worse still, we are promised grace to endure them. We are not told that ordinary earthly happiness and security will be ours—on any terms.

And I think that applies here. It is indeed better to marry than to burn; but it just doesn’t follow that everyone can marry, or that no one has to bear the cross of simply burning. To burn is an exceptional cross. Some crosses are. But we have to expect that sometimes. There’s no good trying to reshape our theology to avoid either this problem or some other just like it. Nothing is going to fully heal these burns except a new universe; we’re promised that, too.

(1) For those who haven’t read the preceding posts, the word burn here (and throughout) indicates burning with desire or passion. It has absolutely no connection to hell, or even to purgatory.

Images via Pixabay

"Sexual attractions don't change. Scientifically proved fact."

Clapback Comes for the Archbishop, Part ..."
"My only mild criticism is that when the bishop implies that the intellect and will ..."

Clapback Comes for the Archbishop, Part ..."
"Chaput is incredibly ignorant. Whoever replaces him should be better than this."

Clapback Comes for the Archbishop, Part ..."
""Studies have recently shown that there is no 'gay gene'..."If I recall correctly, the study ..."

Clapback Comes for the Archbishop, Part ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • nickRette

    He breathed in his disciples and said, receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you hold bound, they are held bound; whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven.

    Sanctity is a funny thing. Slippery. The minute you put your hands on it, the minute it ceases to be. The sanctity of marriage is often allied to Christ’s love for his Church. (Ephesians 5). And so it is, as it should be. What other sanctity can it have? Even the Gentiles marry. That they too believe it to be sacred is a strange truth. And now, same sex couples desire to be this thing called married.

    If we claim sanctity on some other grounds than Christ, we are surely mistaken. What grounds can there be? There is only one, and it is very scriptural, biblical, New Testament even. Paul appeals to it once that I can think of, that is, “nature itself.” ( 1st Cor 11:14)

    But the appeal to nature as the source of sanctity is problematic at best: “The natural man cannot receive the things of the spirit…” (1st Cor 2:14). In a natural church, there is no room for things contrary to nature. But in Christ, there is a new creation (2 Cor 5:17). The question then, is what room is there in the new creation for things natural?

  • DavidC

    Are we allowed to turn it around and examine the fruit of existing same-sex relationships? What if the fruit for a particular relationship was good, through and through? Would that mean anything?

  • Naters

    I support gay marriage, and I don’t think that all those who are Side B are lonely, depressed, or practice unsafe sexual behaviors. Side X people maybe, but Side B people? I don’t think so.

  • Wayfairer

    The Church doesn’t teach that nature I’d the *source* of sanctity, but that Grace builds upon nature.