Gay Marriage is not Marriage

The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony is under threat from revisionists

“The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptised persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church holds firm a standard definition of marriage as the Christian sacrament of Holy Matrimony. Between one man and one woman for the purposes of procreation and education of offspring.

Likewise, the Anglican Communion holds to Lambeth Conference Resolution I.10, “in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage” and “rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture.”

This has been the consensus amongst Christians for 2,000 years. Why, then, is a growing number of bishops within the Church of England looking to alter that fundamental Christian teaching to allow the blessing and/or marriage of two men or two women?

Civil partnerships and civil marriages are an option for people outside of the Church, so this is not an issue of equality. Within the faith, Christians who are not called to marriage are called to a life of celibacy. The Bible lays this out quite clearly and is re-affirmed in the Church of England’s “Issues in Human Sexuality” (1991).

Of course, we should listen to marginalised communities. There’s no harm in listening to opposing viewpoints. The issue is when we take those perspectives as gospel, so to speak, and put them over and above the Gospel. Listen, yes, but then respond with the Truth in a compassionate manner.

I have no doubt there has been pain and a lack of understanding. But we now live in a society where LGB persons are not only no longer marginalised, but their sexuality and often associated lifestyles are celebrated. Pride month became Pride season, and rainbow flags adorn more public buildings than the flag of the nation. Time has moved on, and so must the conversation. We must encourage people to break free from their victimhood mentality – which will only hold them back – and acknowledge the progress that has been made whilst we acknowledge there is work yet to be done.

In this conversation, there is a patronising assumption that all LGBTQ+ people share one voice, one narrative, and that particular voice/narrative must be listened to. Almost as if their “lived experience” should outweigh reason, tradition and Scripture. Firstly, the idea that the LGB community is the same as the T and Q+ communities is nonsense. We’re primarily addressing sexuality here, not gender. But more importantly, the idea that all gay/lesbian/bisexual people are part of one homogenous group must be insulting? They can’t all agree; surely, they’re just as diverse a community as any other. I experience the same issue with my race; metropolitan liberal elite types say we need to “listen more” to the “lived experience” of “BAME/UKME” people but then disregard my voice because it does not fit the narrative. They assume we’re all of one group-think mentality, and when you demonstrate otherwise, they cast you aside because it breaks down their logic. How must homosexual men and women be feeling, after spending years discerning ways to live a holy life in Christ through celibacy and prayer, now to be told that they’re wrong and should instead embrace sin?

That is what we are talking about; sex outside of marriage is a sin. Marriage in a Biblical context is between one man and one woman; anything else is heretical and sinful. For the Bishop of Oxford and his contemporaries to be promoting sin is scandalous.

It should go without saying that we should provide pastoral assistance to people who are struggling with sin. That means encouraging people to move away from their sin, not towards it. We are all sinners in some way or another, and Christ tells us we must repent.

The Bishop of Oxford acknowledges that gay marriage would mean stepping away from doctrine and requests it anyway. The Bible has many things to say about bishops who would bring further division to the Church, but my issue here isn’t personal with the bishop but with the message he and his peers are spreading. In the report, he states, “The creational-covenant pattern of marriage…is a consensus doctrine of the church catholic. Until the present generation, all Christians everywhere have believed, and every branch of the Christian tradition has taught, that marriage is man-woman monogamy’” A direct proposal to break up the Church, to move away from the church catholic (church universal), to deny its teaching. When one no longer subscribes to the Creeds, which all express belief in the holy catholic Church, can one still call one’s self a Christian?

The cusp of the matter is that the Church has been rapidly moving toward secular society in an attempt to be more ‘relevant’. The report talks about “a radical dislocation between the Church of England and the culture and society we are attempting to serve” As society becomes more secular, more sinful and further from God’s Kingdom, is it not our job as His Church to become more radical in that dislocation? Is it not our job to be a light in the ever-darkening world around us? Not to embrace the darkness but to shine a light on it. The bishop’s logic is flawed and inconsistent. Many African and Asian countries have cultures that are radically dislocated from the Church, too. Would he recommend the Church embraces the caste systems, polygamy, patriarchy and oppression? Highly unlikely.

The problem with the bishop’s standpoint is that he admits to using Scripture in an effort to justify his objective, “As I listen to the stories and experiences of LGBTQ+ people, all of my pastoral instincts point to finding a way of interpreting the Scriptures that allows for greater love and support, tolerance and the blessing of [same-sex] partnerships, even where this interpretation seems, at first sight, to be in conflict with some of the obvious interpretations of key biblical passages.” He had a goal in mind, to approve of homosexual marriage, and attempted to squeeze a solution out of the scriptures rather than turning to the Bible for the answer. This back-to-front approach is unhelpful and obviously led him down the wrong path.

The Scriptures talk of marriage a lot. Paul talks at length about marriage in his epistles. In his letter to the Corinthians, he lays out the Christian teaching on sexuality – that singleness is good. Celibacy is good. And that if you’re not called to a life of celibacy, marriage is good. Marriage being between one man and one woman. Paul also writes on marriage in Ephesians and Hebrews, joined by Timothy in Colossians. Peter talks about marriage in his first epistle. There are references in the Old Testament, too, in Isaiah and Ecclesiastes, but of course, it is in Genesis that marriage is first outlined, “And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him… she shall be called woman because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” In Matthew’s Gospel, Christ himself speaks of singleness as a good thing, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”

So-called progressives often say Jesus doesn’t talk about same-sex marriage. Therefore, he wouldn’t be bothered by it. This is wrong. In Mark’s Gospel (10:6-9) and again in Matthew (19:4-6), Christ re-affirms Genesis, “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” To quote Vaughn Roberts, “It was universally accepted by all first-century Jews that sex should not take place outside the marriage of a man and a woman. The only area of debate was over divorce and remarriage, which is why Jesus engages with that subject. There was no need for him to speak about homosexual practice, as none of his audience would have been in any doubt that it was wrong.” It is disingenuous then to say Jesus’ silence works for change in Church teaching rather than against it.

This is not an issue of equality or of human rights – it’s not about man. As Christians, we’re called to be Christ-centred. That means following the Truth, the Way and the Life. We should not be attempting to bend the Scriptures to fit our lifestyles but adapting our lifestyles to be more Christlike.

Everyone should be treated with respect and dignity, but we cannot, and we must not alter Christian doctrine in order to make sinners more comfortable with their sins. That undermines the very purpose of the teachings and is a slippery slope to apostasy and irrelevance.

As I see it, there can be no compromise on this matter. The Church is the bride to the groom of Christ. Christ does not marry himself, he marries himself to us. If we choose to marry ourselves to ourselves, we are pushing out Christ. A marriage needs a bride and a groom; anything else is not Holy Matrimony, it’s a farce. Let us return to Christ.

Lord have mercy.