The Christian Vote and Gay Marriage - by Ben Robinson
July 26, 2008
How should we as Christians think and vote about same-sex marriage? There are a variety of approaches and perspectives, but the one approach we should avoid is banning same-sex marriage from society because we find it sinful. This is not to say that we should condemn or condone same- sex relations in the church. As Christians, our conclusions about the church’s stance on same-sex marriage should be based on thorough study of the biblical witness, Christian tradition, and the leading of the Holy Spirit. We must not, however, use these same criteria when we attempt to discern what is best for the society in which we live. What is best for our church is often not what is best for the whole country.
The imposition of Christian values upon all of society creates a sort of neo-Christendom in which all are forced to conform to the religious ethics of the majority. Such a scenario is bad for society and bad for the church. Americans pride themselves on religious freedom, but such pride is merely a self-aggrandizing ruse if we vote based on how we believe God wants people to act rather than what is best for those who do not share our religious convictions. Varying forms of Christendom have been established throughout history with often embarrassing results. We would be wise to listen to the prophetic words of Soren Kirkegaard - who railed against the establishment of the church, going so far as to say that “when everyone is a Christian, ipso facto, no one is a Christian.” We cannot let our eschatological hope fool us into thinking our votes will bring about the adherence to God’s will that we long for. We do the church no favors when we create rules which restrict people from sinning rather than relying on the values that accompany fidelity to Christ.
So where does this leave Christians; should we follow the Amish and abstain from political involvement? Rather, as we vote we must ask ourselves, if we are voting in such a manner because we find an issue against God’s will for humanity, or because we find it destructive for society and against the constitution of which guides our laws. As we think about same-sex marriage, we must ask ourselves questions which have put those who do not share our values first. We must ask if those whose values differ from ours should share in the same privileges as those whose values are in conformity with mainstream Christianity. We must look at the impact of same-sex marriage on society: if it actually leads to more broken homes, higher rates of domestic partner violence, child abuse, and the other benchmarks by which we judge traditional forms of marriage. These must be the questions we ask, rather than using the bible to dictate the norms of those who don’t view the bible as authoritative.
Our inclination to help people avoid sin should not be avoided, but this is a matter for the church, not for the state. Being an American and a Christian are not one and the same. Let this be reflected in how we vote.
Ben Robinson is currently a student at Princeton Theological Seminary where he
is pursuing a Masters in Divinity. Previous to attending PTS, Robinson lived,
worked and studied in Cairo, Egypt. In addition to serving as the Youth
Director at St. John the Baptist Anglican Church, he received a Master of Arts
in Theology studying Middle Eastern Christianity at the Evangelical Theological
Seminary in Cairo. When he has time Ben enjoys traveling, running, reading,
photography, cooking, good beer, and numerous other activities he canât
afford. He digs Karl Barth, Miroslav Volf, St. Origen, Kierkegaard, Kenneth
Cragg, and others of similar ilk.
Posted by Tony 
Posted in Guest Writers Re: 'Coming Out', Posts by Guest Writers
September 12th, 2008 at 10:01 am
Ben,
I wanted to mark a few places I agree and a few in which I disagree in regards to the above post. In other words, I am going to tell you where you are right and where you are wrong.
But let me start with this caveat: I hold strong opinions and I defend them vigorously, but not so vigorously as to exclude the possibility of me being wrong. So, I hope that my comments are taken in a way that acknowledge an attempted humility by the writer (me). I also pray that I am writing with humility.
I’ll start at the beginning of your post and work my way down.
Quote: “What is best for our church is often not what is best for the whole country.”
I disagree. The model that the church is supposed to live in (we rarely do this however) IS what is best for the whole country and the whole world. If it wasn’t, then Jesus is wrong. Now, to go further in your post, I do agree that this model should not be forced upon society. Maybe that is what you meant to say, but not forcing (through laws, police, and military) the radical and perfect “best” of God’s Kingdom is not an admission that that Kingdom is not the best thing for everyone everywhere… it is. But you are correct when you say this can never come about through force (and I don’t just mean physical). Every time this has been attempted, as you and Kirkegaard point out, it fails miserably and deeply wounds the church as well as blocks its prophetic message. All laws serve to accomplish is managing behavior… they can never change a heart and that is what the church is called to do. Origen (who I don’t believe is actually canonized as a “Saint” as you have him in your bio, but maybe regionally in the Middle East, where it looks like you studied… I am jealous by the way… he is considered as such) makes this point to Celsus when he says that by the church refusing to adopt the methods of the world’s kingdoms, the world will actually be changed. It doesn’t matter who is in power, as the church maintains its prophetic nature, the people will move towards Christ and thus their behavior will change because their attitudes and hearts have changed. Simple behavior management only lasts as long as the gun is pointed in that person’s direction (as you seem to agree with).
Quote: “We cannot let our eschatological hope fool us into thinking our votes will bring about the adherence to God’s will that we long for.” I totally agree with this (as I say above), but where does this leave us? It is impossible, as you suggest, to separate my belief that the practices of sharing, non-violence, community provision for all members, and love as being the best way from the way that I vote. How can I vote for a candidate that I KNOW is willing (and perhaps wanting) to kill to defend, not just land and people but ECONOMIC INTERESTS, when this directly contradicts the message of Christ? But by voting for someone unwilling to do kill for those things, I am voting my beliefs and basically forcing them on the rest of the country (if my candidate prevails that is). So, my question is: how can a Christian even participate in the political process? We are either forced to compromise our beliefs and adopt the ways of this “kingdom” consequently losing our prophetic voice, or we are forcing our beliefs on those who do not share the same motivations for adhering to those beliefs… thus losing our prophetic voice. It is a Catch 22. In all honesty, I wrestle with this question. Governments DO have the ability to do good, but they forego that ability and act in their own self-interests instead. Do we, as Christians, abandon the hope of the good that is possible through these worldly structures or do we attempt to be a voice within the structure calling for good to be done (but by doing so, running the risk of forcing our world view onto those who do not share it)?
Overall, the sentiment of your post is right on, but the contradictions (that maybe I am misreading or wrong in my interpretation about) make the post difficult for me to necessarily go along with. Are you calling for Christians to just vote for the interests of the country (or society) which often directly goes against the message of Christ, or are we to vote out of our beliefs but force those on others? Or are we supposed to remove ourselves from the process entirely?
Incidentally, for societal interests I think gay marriage is necessary. Marriage, from a lay rather than ecclesiastical perspective, inherently brings stability. Allowing two people to commit to each other and to experience the society’s acknowledgment and support of that commitment through the benefits (tax, insurance, etc.) serves to strengthen the overall stability of society.
For theological reasons, I lean towards gay marriage as being something the church itself should support. However, I still (and maybe this is just residue from a lifetime of indoctrination of homosexuals as “evil”) balk at going all out and fighting for that belief. Partially because I cannot (yet) fully support my argument theologically (although I can somewhat), and partially because I just don’t have the “stones” to die on that hill (yet).
Sorry for the long response. You might not even ever see this since I just found this post nearly 2 months after you wrote it. On a different note, I am actually going to be visiting Princeton Seminary in two weeks (9/24-27/08) for purposes of possibly attending next year. If you are around, I’d love to share a “good beer” with you and maybe we can discuss this stuff more. Or maybe I can just grill you about your studies in Egypt.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
I absolutely LOVE gay people and always will , I find them so fun and easy to get along with. But even though I love them like this I feel it still comes down to defending moral values. Its not about are they sinning or not sinning in Gods eyes because God right now cares about the heart connection he has with each person not about right from wrong .. a lifestyle of what God calls us to obviously comes after our heart has come to life and been connected to His.. BUT I dont believe that believers should set aside defending certain moral values . God created man and women to marry , marriage is a sacred thing on so many levels .. more than most people in this generation realize with all the divorces going on . What happens spiritually even when you are married is so precious and as much as I love gay people and as much as I know its about a heart connection with God and not a “law” .. I still belive very strongly that standing for what God created marriage to be is something that is worth doing ..