So much has been going on in my little world that I have been pulled away from one of the things I like to do best – writing. On August 1 we moved (lipat bahay) from Quezon City to Pasig, to a much smaller dwelling, beginning the process of getting unneeded “things” out of my house and life, as I face the prospect of not living on this earth forever. Since then one “distraction” has been trying to adjust to living in much reduced space.
On September 5, I joined MCC Philippines (Manila, Makati) in the festive celebration of their 19th anniversary since our first service on September 7, 1991, when I arrived authorized to bring MCC Philippines into God-praising existence. In the anniversary celebration I observed 50-some Spirit-filled LGBT Christians worshipping wholeheartedly as MCC has done through many pastoral leaders every Sunday since that first service 19 years ago. I understand joyful photos have been posted on Facebook.
On August 28, I had an interesting experience at a Forum at MCC Quezon City, hosted by Rev. Ceejay Agbayani. (MCC Quezon City celebrated its 4th anniversary in early September. MCC Baguio is bringing the worship and message of MCC to people of the North under the spiritual guidance of seminarian Myke Sotero).
The Forum was more exciting because the 50 some people in attendance kept it going for several hours with comments after the presentations by me, Attorney Germaine Leonin, Oscar Atadero, and Prof Eric Manlastas.
It’s been more than 15 years now since Oscar worked with us at MCC Manila and Pro Gay Philippines to mobilize the first Gay and Lesbian Pride March in the Philippines on June 26, 1994 (the 25th anniversary of Stonewall). That turned out to be the first such LGBT march in Asia. Our focus that year, 1994, was to join the family of LGBT-alert nations around the world who celebrated the goodness and joy of being LGBT and beginning the quest for our LGBT rights. I attended a discussion hosted by Pro Gay at that time and the discussion was mostly about the pertinent topic: it’s time for the Philippines to stand up (march) and be counted.
This year, on August 28, I was overwhelmed by the savvy, shall I call it LGBT sophistication, in the forum discussion. Now it was a specific focused LGBT right that was being discussed in depth, the right to equal marriage.
Here I will share the presentation which the organizers asked me to make. I wish I had the ability and authorization to share the other brilliant presentations.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
”The Metropolitan Community Church of Quezon City would like to invite you to be our resource speaker on the topic
PP1 {PP is an abbreviation for Power Point]
“What does the Bible say about same-sex marriage?”
________________________
for our forum entitled, “When Two Men/Two Women Unite: Prospects of Same-Sex Marriage in the Philippines” on August 28 Saturday 7pm at the MCCQC-LGBT Center 3/F 56 Mindanao Avenue, Project 6, Quezon City.
PP1
Speaker: Bishop Richard R. Mickley,
Catholic Diocese of One Spirit, Philippines,
Founder MCC in the Philippines
Good evening beautiful people. I read in the Inquirer, “Where else can you find a land as beautiful as her people and a people as warm as her climate?” And I added where else will you find three of the 10 largest malls in the world in one city?
___________________________________________________
“The forum aims to provide participants with a basic understanding of the religious, historical and legal aspects and perspectives for same-sex marriage in the Philippines, as well as gather experiences and testimonies on the struggle for same-sex marriage.”
____________________________________________________-
PP2 Assigned Objectives
1.Establish and clarify
Religious/spiritual issues re
Same-sex marriage.
2.Clarify if RC opposition
has basis or not.
The speaker’s mandate is summarized, “We hope your presentation can help establish and clarify the religious/spiritual issues over same-sex marriage. “The objective of the first speaker is to clarify whether mainstream religious view against same-sex union has basis or not –since opposition comes mainly from the Roman Catholic Church.”
_______________________________
“What does the Bible say about same sex marriage?
“When Two Men/Two Women Unite”
“Clarify religious/spiritual issues in same sex marriage”
______________________________________________
At first I thought the topic was a dead end. Since there is nothing in the Bible about same sex marriage, I thought the topic would lead nowhere. But if you look at all the subjects mentioned in the Title and Objectives, you realize there is a lot of explaining to do.
Let’s go back in history and attack the challenge of the title. “What does the Bible say about same sex marriage?”
PP3
What is “Marriage”?
In order to discuss “marriage” in the Bible, we have to have a definition of just what marriage is. When you think of marriage, do you think of Aga and Charlene in the “Wedding of the year,” in a romantic story book, beautiful love story.
But that is not what marriage always is. Through the ages of history, it has often been more of a legal contract with little or no love and romance, with arranged marriages and marriages of convenience quite common.
In the Philippines we have church weddings (in church), and we have civil weddings in a judge or mayor’s office.
I went with a heterosexual couple to a judge’s chamber for their civil marriage. It can best be described in these few words: The Judge asks, “Do you want to be married?” They each say. “I do.” The judge says, “Sign here; pay over there.”
My friend, Father Paul, in California, recently penned some insights on marriage which will be helpful for us. He went to the local government office where “people apply for marriage licenses and obtain marriage certificates.” He writes, “I did not see any reference whatsoever to marriage being a sacrament or for time and eternity (as the Mormons say). I saw no requirement for adherence to the Torah, the Bible, the Quran, …
“Everything was about civil law and exclusively civil law. And civil law is not concerned about romance, about tear-jerking movies, about love poems and love music, …
“Civil law is not concerned about covenants, promises, rings, exchanges, or how big the wedding party is. Civil law is not concerned about sexual behaviors, proclivities, openness or closedness.
“Civil law exists to protect the economic interests of a designated family. The fundamental issue is the human right of all people to call on the resources of civil law to protect their homes and families.” End of quote.
So what is the difference? Is there one definition of marriage? The answer is no.
In the churches, including MCC, marriage does involve love. In MCC, as in the Catholic church of the first few centuries (and in the 11th century), you find same sex union, which are called Holy Union in both MCC and the early Catholic Church.
In short, in the early church, John Boswell, the noted historian, tells us, if a boy and girl wanted to get married, they went to city hall. If a priest or a male-male or female-female couple wanted to be united, they had their ceremony in the church.
There was no Bible prohibition of same-sex unions. Priests routinely “took a wife.” And boys and girls who wanted to be married went to city hall.
PP4
The Catechism of the Catholic Church
says that marriage is
for the good of the spouses
and the procreation of children.
So the definition of marriage is not the same everywhere. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as a sacrament
__________________________________________________
ARTICLE 7
THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY
1601 "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 baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."84
________________________________________________________________
. But that definition does not apply to anybody but Catholics.
So you can see, without even talking about the arranged marriages throughout history, this whole thing about marriage and unions is not a simple exploration.
So let’s look at our own country. In MCC we have Holy Union. In City hall and in the churches we have marriage. But the marriage in church and the marriage in the judges’ chambers are different. Let’s take a look at this representation of the difference in general in the Philippines, not counting the allowance of polygamy in Mindanao.
PP5
MARRIAGE HOLY UNION
!!! !!!
ARE THE SAME IN:
Love,
VOWS,
COMMITMENT,
WEDDING
MARRIAGE HOLY Union
!!! !!!
ARE DIFFERENT IN:
--GENDER TEST --NO M-F TEST
MALE-FEMALE.
--MUST OBEY --FAM CODE
FAMILY CODE NOT APPL.
--MARRIAGE --BETWEEN
LICENSE Two & GOD
--REGISTERED --NOT Reg
WITH GOV. with Gov
--LEGALLY --MORALLY
BINDING BINDING
--NO DIVORCE
Last year I was invited to a nationally televised talk show on marriage and divorce, hosted by a lawyer.
He opened by saying, “Now tell me, Reverend, about these same sex marriages you have.”
I replied, “Sir we do not have any same sex marriages in the Philippines. You are a lawyer, Sir, and you know that the law. The Family Code defines marriage in the Philippines as between a male and a female.
____________________________________________-
How does the Family Code define marriage?
Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.
Then the qualiications include:
What are the essential requisites of marriage?
No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present:
(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and a female; and
(2) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.
___________________________________________________________
Then the lawyer-host backed down a little and asked, “Then what do you have?”
I replied, “Sir, we have Holy Union.” And I explained what that is. And he exclaimed, “Oh, I see, you change the name.”
That was my cue to remark, “Sir, I see that you are discussing Divorce also in your show today. You and I and everybody knows that the Catholic Church hates divorce and forbids its members to separate by divorce, in fact it does not even allow anybody, Catholic or not, in the Philippines to have divorce.” He agreed. I continued, “But, sir, is it not also true, that if you pay enough money in fees, you can obtain a separation under a different name – which we all know as annulment, which is quite all right with the church? We change the name to unite people. They change the name to separate people.” He calmly remarked, “You have a point there.”
Nobody has suggested that “changing the name” is in any way illegal.
That custom seems to have started in the early church. So where did the opposition to same sex unions come from?
Before we look at that, I want to say that I join the majority of LGBT leaders in our country who do not advocate activism for same sex marriage in the Philippines.
We deserve it; we have a right to it. Judges are saying that in supreme courts throughout the world. So why do we not advocate activism for it?
Let me illustrate by an example. Shortly after Stonewall, when I was national Director of Prison Ministry for MCC in the United States, I wrote a book which contained the advice that prisoners should not break the rules of the prison about having sex and same sex activism. Many prisoners wrote to me, “Why not? You have marches and parades and rallies outside; why can’t we here in prison.” My answer then and now, was that they should not make life worse for themselves by breaking the rules, getting put in solitary confinement, etc.
The issue was not whether they had the “human right” to demand sex and LGBT rights. The issue was that it was harmful to make life worse for themselves. They were prisoners and subject to the laws of the prison.
PP6
In the Republic of the Philippines,
we are prisoners of homophobic
and heterosexist laws
– and, yes, they are all inspired
– and driven by the churches
– (not just the Roman Catholic Church). We indeed have to examine where prudence is the better part of wisdom. And that’s why the majority of the leaders in the LGBT community do not feel it is for our benefit – but rather for our harm – to fight for same sex marriage. Yes, we need to be informed, to strategize, but not to harm our movement by counter productive activism.
Here is an example to illustrate what is meant by counter productive. When Congresswoman Angara Castillo introduced a bill into congress a few years ago, we all agreed it was a fabulous proposed law, a courageous approach to LGBT rights in the country. It was unimaginably wonderful, an omnibus of idealistic legislation. But I had to tell her honestly that the LGBT leaders could not support it. It was too good. Almost immediately the Catholic church bishops and priests collected hundreds of thousands of signatures at Mass against the bill. And politically minded congress members saw those signatures as votes against them. That’s the power of the Catholic bishops.
There has to be a strategy, not just unplanned action. I am an activist and willing to die for our justice and rights. But there has to be a strategy.
PP7
Now back to the definition of marriage. We saw the definition of marriage in the law of the Philippines. But that is not the law of all countries. It is a matter of observation that
the people of the Philippines,
Muslims, Protestants, atheists,
as well as Catholic people
are in bondage, in chains, in slavery,
to the power of the Catholic bishops
who hold the whole country
hostage to their sex negative views.
But In Spain, another country described as a Catholic country, the legislators, unlike here, are not afraid of the Catholic bishops. In Spain the legislators granted LGBT people equal marriage rights, no gender test. I discreetly pointed that out to members of congress here in a hearing in the House.
In our country the members of congress bow and quiver in fear – that a word or campaign of the bishop will end their time in congress at the next election.
It’s a unique phenomenon here. Why is the Republic of the Philippines the only country in the world, besides the island of Malta, which does not allow its people the freedom of choice to separate by divorce? Why do we have trouble passing a Reproductive Health bill? Why will we not have an equal marriage law? The bishops won’t let us have divorce or condoms, do you think they will let us have equal marriage?.
So we have illustrated that the premise in the assignment is correct. The culprit is the church and churches. Fr. Paul made some interesting observations recently, when he wrote, “It is interesting to note that the Royal Kingdom of Spain is by culture and heritage Roman Catholic, yet it has a Socialist parliament which legalized same-sex marriage and the bishops there have not been able to overthrow it.
“The Republic of Argentina is by culture and heritage Roman Catholic, yet the parliament legalized same-sex marriage in that country in spite of the protestations of the bishops.
“Other countries in Central America are pursuing the same course. The legislative body of Mexico City has legalized same-sex marriages in the city. The supreme court of the Republic of Mexico has declared that these marriages must be recognized in each of the states of Mexico. And same-sex marriages were legalized in the Roman Catholic province of Quebec in Canada a few years ago.” End of quote.
We are familiar with the on again, off again equal marriage in California. And we continue to watch what happens there. “Courage Campaign and its\Chairman, Rick Jacobs, released a press release on the ruling that same-sex marriages may resume in California on August 18th.
“Today’s ruling means that in less than one week, equality under the law will be restored for millions of loving families across California. Lifting the stay is ultimately consistent with both legal precedent and the findings in this case.
“Specifically, that every American has a civil right to marriage, and that by depriving millions of families this right, Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. Judge Walker’s ruling affirms that the purpose of our judicial system is to protect our constitutional rights, not to take away those rights.” End of quote Fr. Paul adds: “it gives us all hope that the full protection of the U.S. Constitution guarantees of equal protection and due process will soon extend to all gay and lesbian Americans.
We now await the decision of the Ninth Circuit (and potentially the U.S. Supreme Court) on whether to stay the Judgment or to allow same-sex marriages to resume in California during the appeal.” End of quote
PP8
Now if you look at the definition of marriage in the
Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden,
Spain, South Africa, Canada, Argentina,
and all the countries which allow LGBT
to have legal marriage on an equal basis,
of course their definition of marriage
does not include a gender test,
a male-female requirement.
So it’s obvious such laws are made by humans,
and laws forbidding same sex love and marriage
are made by human beings too..
PP9
This is happening in our own day. Now look at the Bible. You will immediately see that The Bible is not a very good place to look for encouragement of Catholic conservative practice of marriage. One web site summarizes some Bible facts thus: “The question of polygamy is an interesting one in that most people today view polygamy as immoral while the Bible nowhere explicitly condemns it. The first instance of polygamy/bigamy in the Bible was that of Lamech in Genesis 4:19: “Lamech married two women.” Several prominent men in the Old Testament were polygamists. Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and others all had multiple wives. In 2 Samuel 12:8, God, speaking through the prophet Nathan, said that if David’s wives and concubines were not enough, He would have given David even more.
Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines
(essentially wives of a lower status), according to 1 Kings 11:3. What are we to do with these instances of polygamy in the Old Testament? My question is: what does one do with 1000 wives. 3 a day for a year would barely see each once a year.
PP10
Those are good questions for some other day. Today our question is,
Is there Biblical basis
for denying same-sex marriage
to same sex couples who desire it?
And the answer is NO!
So where did the church and churches get this astoundingly abhorrent sex negative attitude? The church definition virtually makes childbearing the purpose of marriage.
But in the Bible, Not one verse, not one story, not one word in the entire Bible condemns same sex love, same sex companionship, or same sex marriage. There are 5 or 6 verses (some are duplicates) that are called “clobber” verses which are said to be condemnatory and are used to try to show that the Bible condemns same sex love. These verses do not condemn our love. I present a 12 hour seminar on these verses to show the absurdity of using them to condemn our love.
PP11 I Cor 6:9 Malakoi, Arsenokoitai
Just let me give you a small sample. I Cor 6:9 gives a list of the sinners who can’t enter heaven. Most English translations say that murderers, robbers, homosexuals, etc can’t enter heaven. I have 17 English translations and most of them use some form of the word homosexual in this verse. BUT St. Paul wrote in Greek. His Greek words were malakoi and arsenokoitai.
These words do not mean homosexual.
Malakoi means soft
Nobody knows what arsenokoitai means
because St. Paul made it up
and does not define it.
SO, every translator guesses what St. Paul might have meant by using these words.
One thing we know for sure: St. Paul did not mean “the homosexuals” because that idea was not invented yet. For him to speak of “the homosexuals” would be just as impossible as for him to speak of flying in an airplane. Neither the idea of airplanes nor the idea of homosexuals was invented yet. Almost 2000 years later, In Rizal’s time, psychiatrists decided, “Ah, yes, there are some people who are constitutionally attracted to the same sex. Let’s call them ‘homosexuals.’” The only logical conclusion is that
St. Paul could not have meant,
“the murderers, robbers
and homosexuals cannot enter heaven
” It is a very wrong, unscholarly translation.
The use of the other clobber verses is also very unscholarly. Good scholars nowadays realize that. But we will save that for another seminar.
PP12
The important thing to remember
is there is no Biblical basis
for condemning LGBT love.
There is no condemnation,
no mention of same sex marriage in the Bible.
BUT, we shall see that the Bible is an embarrassing place to go for clarity about marital ethics in general.
_____________________________________
One website observes:
There are no passages in the Bible that deal directly with same-sex marriage (SSM). Like abortion access, followers of the Bible have had to develop a position on SSM by using biblical passages dealing with other, related topics:
Generally speaking:
Religious conservatives use their interpretation of the six "clobber passages" and of passages discussing opposite-sex marriage to condemn SSM.
Religious liberals use the Bible's general themes on same-sex relationships, love, and justice to argue that SSM is a human right.
PP13
I find it is better to look at the
general themes of the Bible
on same-sex relationships,
love and justice.
So, in conclusion, I like to look at the Book of Ruth and the charming love vows of Ruth and Naomi and delight in that whole book of the Bible focused on the beautiful love of two women for each other. And, regardless of how many wives King David had later, I like to read the romantic account of David’s exciting love story with Jonathan, after David defeated the giant Goliath.
I like to look at Jesus himself. First of all, the Gospel tells us eight times that Jesus had a “beloved.” And that beloved was a same-sex beloved, the one whom Jesus loved, the one who was allowed to lie with his head of Jesus’ heart, to cuddle with Jesus. Of course there is no intention to imply that the love or cuddling had any orgasmic physical sexual content. No evidence at all. But there can be no denying there was a same sex relationship with a special love. No doubt Jesus loved all 12 of his closest followers, but no doubt also that this one special one had a special place. For example, when Jesus was dying on the cross, who did he ask to take care of his Mother after he died? Yes, of course, it was his beloved, and from that moment the beloved took Jesus’ Mother into his home…
But I like to look beyond even the personal same sex love of Jesus -- to the whole ambiance of his life. Just for example, He showed his acceptance of all people, sinful or not, when he allowed a sinful woman to give him a very romantic foot massage, even drying his feet with her own hair.
Then Jesus shows this same attitude of acceptance when a Roman military officer asked Jesus to heal his gravely ill lover. (We know from the Greek word Pais that the servant was his lover, a common experience for military officers from Alexander the Great onwards.) Jesus healed the bakla with no hesitation. Surely there is enough evidence in the Gospel to show us that Jesus knew what was going on around him, and he knew he was healing a gay man.
And finally briefly to keep this narration short, Jesus saved a woman from stoning who was caught in adultery according to Leviticus 22. If Jesus saved that woman in adultery, would he not also save a man who lies with a man who also is to be stoned according to the same Leviticus 22?
PP14
In short
the whole ambiance
of Jesus’ life, love, and ministry
is acceptance, justice, common sense.
When the “rules rules rules guys,” the Pharisees, questioned Jesus about allowing his disciples to pick some grain to appease their hunger while walking through a wheat field on the Sabbath day when it was forbidden to do any work like picking grain, he told them that people were more important than rules.
Well the early church got off to a good start following what Jesus was really like, even having wedding ceremonies for same sex couples.
There were a lot of debates in the early church, about if Jesus was God and many more things that were settled in the various meetings of bishops, called Councils, notably the Council of Nicea in the year 325.
But the debate heated up in regard to sexual issues by the year 400 with the teachings, writing of many books, and influence of St. Augustine, the great doctor of the church who is revered as a foremost teacher of Christian philosophy and theology. He himself was a very sexual person in his younger years, with more than one concubine, fathering a child, etc. But after his conversion and becoming bishop of Hippo in his native North Africa, he developed a very sex negative approach to sexuality.
PP15
Augustine’s unfortunate
sex negative theology
can be summarized thus:
All sex is bad,
except for a married man and women
once a year to make a baby;
under the covers, with the clothes on;
get in there fast, make the baby fast,
get out of there fast, and don’t enjoy it.
He was a great theologian of the church and his influence had a great impact on sexual attitudes – to this day. We firmly believe, along with many theologians of today, that his sex negative theology is wrong. He is also criticized for his theology of predestination, so we know he can be wrong.
PP16
That, ladies and gentlemen, was the beginning of the massive sex negative theology in the church which has persisted through the years.
MCC and countless great thinkers and writers like Fr. McNeil and Fr Pittenger, who both have spoken to MCC General Conferences, have begun to point out to the world that
Condemning same sex love;
sex negative theology
does not come from Jesus or the Bible.
And that is the Good News
MCC continues to share with all.
In addition, I myself conduct full length seminars on sex positive theology to aid this battle which fights the forces that corrupt the true spirit of Jesus’ teachings.
PP17
Assigned objective clarified
Neiher Bible nor Jesus
Condemn same-sex love’
But the church – St. Augustine.
Popes, and Cardinal Sin
Condemn us
And influence society
To deny us human rights.
Thus, in conclusion, we have accomplished our objective, we have clarified in this short time that neither the Bible, nor Jesus condemn same sex love or unions. But the church, composed of human beings like St. Augustine, popes, and Cardinal Sin, condemns us. And because of the power of the church and the influence of the church, much of society condemns our love and love unions and denies us our human rights.
Marriage has so many definitions. Marriage might even have many wives., even in the Philippines. It can even be a commercial contract. It is subject to the whims and laws of government. So we cannot look forward to equal marriage in the Philippines.
PP18
Holy Union is always about love,
not about laws.
It is about commitment
nd making each other happy.
holy, blessed by God.
PP19
What is needed
is a radical commitment
to the real Jesus,
the Way, the Truth, the Life –
In his way,
people are more important
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)