Loren Rosson has an absolutely fantastic guest post by his friend Ray Vaillancourt, offering a truly Biblical approach to a contemporary issue. Here is an excerpt:
Conservatives remind us that the Bible is clear: homosexual behavior is a sin. We have a moral duty to stop it. God wants us to teach homosexuals some Bible values.
Some folks protest, though. Itโs discrimination. Weโre not supposed to judge. Weโre supposed to love and accept people.
Who are we to believe? Well, if we say we believe in Jesus, then letโs look to Jesus. What would he say about the Christian campaign against homosexuality and gay marriage? To help understand how Jesus might respond, letโs look at a case of sexual sin brought before him.
Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to Jesus, โTeacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?โ (John 8:3-5)
The scribes and Pharisees are technically correct in their application of the law to this woman caught in adultery. The Law proscribes death for adultery. But their justice is partial, by both meanings of the word โpartial.โ It is partial (incomplete) because the Law (Deuteronomy 22:22) calls for death for both the man and the woman, and theyโre only charging the woman; and it is partial (discriminatory) because they are clearly using part of the law as an instrument of oppression against those they hate. Itโs hateful politics disguised as righteousness.
This is the problem with many Christians trying to use the political process to defend marriage from homosexuality. While technically correct in isolation, the effort is partialโ incomplete and discriminatory. Itโs only about homosexuality. Conservative Catholics like to quote the terms โintrinsically disorderedโ or โobjectively disorderedโ from the Catechism (#2357,2358) to show just how terrible homosexuality is. But I wonder how many can name the sexual sins that go with these labels:
- โmorally disorderedโ
- โintrinsically and gravely disorderedโ
- โgravely contrary to the dignity of personsโ
- โa grave offenseโ
- โa grave offense against the natural lawโ
- an โinjusticeโ that โundermines the institution of marriageโ
They are, in order, lust, masturbation, fornication, pornography, divorce, and adultery (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2351-2384). Why arenโt Catholics pushing to criminalize these grave sins? Why doesnโt the defense of marriage address the โinjusticeโ that โundermines the institution of marriage?โ Partiality. Theyโre not trying to codify the beautiful Christian morality of human sexuality into civil lawโ just the parts about homosexuality. Itโs hateful politics disguised as righteousness.
Whether Christian sexual morality should be written into civil law is a matter for discussion. But doing so partially is wrong from both a civil and a moral perspective. The Bible is clear: โYou must not distort justice: you shall not show partiality.โ (Deuteronomy 16:18-20; cf Leviticus 19:15, Proverbs 24:23, Proverbs 28:21, Acts 10:34, James 2:1-13, Romans 2:11, Ephesians 6:9, Colossians 3:25)
Click through to read the rest. Of related interest, Bob Cornwallย shared a video of David Gushee speaking about ending the churchโs contempt towards sexual minorities, and Ben Dixon explains why Kim Davis is Pharaoh and not Moses, Nebuchadnezzar and not Daniel and his friends.