A same-sex wedding is the ceremonial blessing of behavior the Bible condemns. Affirmation of homosexual practice is intrinsic to… [same-sex] nuptials. There is no need to ask the history of the couple or their reasons for marrying in order to figure out whether or not the marriage is one that God would approve. In contrast, while two heterosexuals wishing to marry may or may not be obeying God’s commands, the institution itself is one that God has affirmed.
Hypocritical Christians are those who forget that they are sinners in need of a savior. Apart from God’s grace we would be damned, and we are hypocrites if we refuse to call others from their sin to experience that same grace. To profit by helping others celebrate their sin, thereby perpetuating the illusion that homosexual behavior is not sin, would be hypocritical for any Christian, be he butcher, baker, or candlestick maker.
“A same sex wedding is the ceremonial blessing of behavior the bible condemns.”
As long as there are Christians who refuse to acknowledge this truth, then argument about hypocrisy is lost on the lost.
True, #1.
But the fact that the powerful argument made by Betsy Childs in this brief piece won’t convince diehard advocates of same-sex marriage like Kristen Powers and Jonathan Merritt by no means makes such attempts at defending biblical morality pointless. Even fighting a losing battle can be a worthwhile exercise. Indeed, one could turn the charge of hypocrisy by Powers and Merritt on its head and suggest that when committed Christians choose to engage in battles of the Culture War knowing full well that they are likely to lose in the current state of public opinion, well, I’d say that such courage and tenacity displays an admirable integrity and a loyalty to truth at all costs that is the very opposite of hypocrisy.
What we are witnessing in this country is a very ominous move toward restricting religious freedom when it conflicts with what is widely perceived (incorrectly and without warrant) as the most important civil rights issue of our time. The Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment is in grave danger of being forgotten or minimized in the mad rush to support the current PC fad.
I would add one more idea to #1’s brief comment. In a post-modern society like ours, the very idea of natural law is ruled out a priori. There are no universal, objective moral laws written into the universe, according to the postmodern worldview. So attempts to appeal to natural law, as St. Paul does in Romans 1, where he takes it for granted that homosexual behaviro is “contrary to nature,” are doomed to fall on deaf ears when it comes to a large part of the populace. For we live in a land that has fallen for the fallacy of moral antinomianism, a culture that is in moral free fall, which is the inevitable result of an aggressively secular ideological relativism.
But just because many people stop believing that there is such a thing as natural law doesn’t make such laws go away or cease to exist. No, the shoe is actually on the other foot. It is actually the “reappraiser” types who claim, falsely, that there is some way to reconcile the new pro-gay agenda with the Bible and the great consensual Tradition of the Church over the last 2000 years who are the real hypocrites. They are wanting to be regarded as faithful Christians when in fact they are not, and that is rank hypocrisy. Or to be more fair, since so many advocates of the pro-gay agenda are utterly sincere, they are self-deceived, which makes their hypocrisy unwitting, but nonetheless real.
David Handy+
(FWIW, this is my 2900th post here at T19).
Well stated #2. I especially like your closing paragraph. Great insight.
Happy 2900th and keep up the good work!