GOING TO THE CHAPEL

Right...so I'm about to go up to the Chapel here at Holy Cross for Vespers. Moreover, in two and a half weeks I'm going to the chapel in the sense meant by the old song. With which fact I am richly blessed. But what I really mean to do here is weigh in on this whole gay marriage thing.

My thinking is very under-developed on this at the moment. There are a number of different "arenas" that meet and conflict on this issue. My libertarian, live-and-let-live instinct says that the homosexual desire to gain the legal benefits that come from marriage (if that's what drives them) is legitimate--that is to say, I can even see a place for permitting two people who are NOT practicing homosexuality to contract together to hold property in common, be taxed together, etc. Such relationships are rare (I don't think I've ever even heard of it, come to think of it), but theoretically possible. At any rate--I'm inclined to be willing to grant that if someone wants it--I just don't want to hear about what they do behind closed doors. That's between them and God.

Now--calling that union or contract or whatever "marriage" is a completely different issue. However...there are many marriages today which are little more than legalized fornication. To Yoda-ize the issue: "Having-sex-and-holding-common-property-do-not-a-true-marriage-make." A true marriage is a spiritual, emotional, psychological AND physical union between two people, found only in a simultaneous spiritual, emotionial, psychological AND physical union with God in Christ through the Holy Spirit. The state cannot make such marriages. To call a homosexual union a marriage in this sense is, to me, nonsensical. I know full well that such people as Metzger disagree with me. I'd love to talk more about that, but suffice to say, Christian marriage in my opinion is limited to a man and a woman. There may be holy relationships (non-sexual) between members of the same sex, but they are not marriages. IMHO, of course. And in the opinion of the Church to which I submit. So I can't really negotiate this. Even if I wanted to. Which I don't. Anyway...

In the modern day, this true marriage and the contractual idea of marriage are conflated. Example--I had a friend who cohabited with his girlfriend for several months. (for various reasons, I do not condemn him--primarily because that's not my place, but also because he and she did what they did in good conscience. That in case he reads this--I don't want him to think I condemn him for this--'cause I don't. Anyway...) His family (and hers, I presume) went ballistic. All was made right with them, however, when they had a little ceremony performed by a JP. This is silly to me. The state grants to a clergyman the function of the magistrate in matters of matrimony--the Church does not grant the function of the priesthood to the magistrates. Nor should it.

But I have to go now, so I'll wrap this up, and hone the ideas further later. I don't like the idea of gay marriage being legalized, but if it is, I'm not going to lose much sleep over it. I already distinguish between legal marriage and Christian marriage. The faithful Christian churches throughout America will have to make the same distinction, clearly and forthrightly, to their people and to the public. The Orthodox Church already does anyway. It will just have to clarify once again to make sure people understand.

Christianity was born in a hostile, non-Christian environment. I wouldn't say that I welcome the current process of return to that state of affairs, but neither do I fear it. It'll probably be good for us.

'Nuff said--I'm off to chapel. Hopefully this will foster some discussion. As I said above, I'm not certain about much of this--just musing.