On the fold lines of this cosmic map, between Sun and Moon, Earth and Heaven stands a forbidden city. I circled seven times to wear the blood walls, knowing they would still stand strong. Without I remain, waiting a cosmic thousand years.
I beg you pardon, I do not know why. What escapes your eye? To know my enemy I became my enemy. I lost and won. There's a time for everything you say.
A time to be born, another to die.
A time to cry, another to laugh.
A time to hate, another to love.
A time to begin, another to end.
A time to win, another to lose.
A time to move, another to stand still.
I dwell on the day between the towers drum and bell. The air full of expectation blew through Sycamore branches casting dancing shades on our skins. The branches exposed, harmony became another word.
Christian Defense of (Gay) Marriage
What constitutes a marriage in the Bible, is it a big party (like in Kana); or is it just the physical joining of man and woman (arguably, like in the account of Adam and Eve); is it pre-arranged (Jakob went horribly wrong there); is it with one woman or more (polygamous arrangements are recurring throughout the Bible)?... It's actually quite hard to pin down what marriage really is, let alone a 'Christian marriage'. But one thing that wedding ceremonies have in common, not only in the Bible, is that there are formal and informal witnesses.* Rather than a sacrament between two persons, according to Biblical narrative and cross-cultural historical experience wedding ceremony is - in fact - a wedding into a broader social circle of friends and family. I therefore argue that marriage is an anthropological function in human society rather than a delineated sacrosanct law of God. I put it in very general terms because the evidence comes not only from the Bible, but also - and especially - from very distinct cultures.A common modern misunderstanding about marriage is that it involves a romantic or divine institution between two people. A world history of arranged marriages (also in the Bible), polygamous arrangements, and same sex arrangements, teaches us this view is factually wrong. Marriage is a social tool for social organization and social recognition. This may sound horribly utilitarian, void of all mystery, but let me illustrate it. I know a pastor who has a tile on his toilet saying that love is not (only) to look at each other, but to look in the same direction. The pastor seems to be happily married for decades now, so - at least in this case - the formula seems to work like a charm. I think this formula is actually a basic anthropological truth. Even if I have not had many relationships (nor have I ever married), I know that lovesick feelings are fleeting experiences. To base an enduring institution upon such a fleeting experience is rather futile. No wonder in our days many people conclude that marriage is a superfluous, pre-modern remnant.
To look in the same direction, in addition to looking at each other, seems to be a rather romantic way of expressing a biological need and a social function. I believe that loneliness is one of the greatest diseases of our time. Never before has such a large part of humanity experienced such detachment from social bonds. First extended families became smaller and smaller; then the 'nuclear family' became smaller; then the number of single parent household went through the roof; and what used to be extended family under one roof is now safely tucked away in elderly homes; and more and more people are living 'single', perhaps with occasional encounters. I don't pass a moral judgment on these developments, however, I believe modern solitude and loneliness bring out the need of social embedding. We witness this primordial urge in online social networking, where people hunger for intimate relations with known and unknown people, usually far away. At the same time, many of us seem to be unable to maintain sustained relationships, let alone a singular exclusive relationship which we call marriage. I think the mistake that we make is that we are driven by individual demand and supply with regard to our relationships. A perfect match is one where I meet the demand of the significant other and the other meets my demands. This individualist rationalist perspective - like so many - fails to pass the reality test (we only need to look at divorce figures). It fails because we fail to recognize we are also social (and political) people. Even the cold calculation of demand and supply should take into account social transaction costs. The anthropological function of wedlock is not to lock each other in a perfect market equilibrium, but the function of marriage is to build a better society. I realize, these are big words. However, both from an evolutionary perspective and from a Biblical 'cultural mandate' perspective this makes perfect sense. The pooled power and resources does not only make the lives better of individuals joining in matrimony, it also increases the efficiency of use of resources of much wider social group, it also allows for greater social service provision. In other words, you do not marry one significant partner, you marry the partner and the whole social circle around it (the 'witnesses'). Marriage is a social/anthropological affirmative action that rests upon the consent and support of a wider community; not on fleeting individual romantic feelings, nor is marriage the curious perversion in some Christian circles that view marriage as a licence to legitimate sex.
Contrary to the modern Christian discourse which pictures a modern ideal wedding (which it pretends to be ancient, even primordial), wedding is not a sacrosanct institution, exclusively between one woman and one man. Historically, anthropologically and biblically,wedding is much more about community, in its many different forms. From this follows that the withholding of social affirmation (marriage) of homosexual relation, is a blatant dismissal of the social position of gay people; it is a condemnation and a confinement to loneliness and social death. Fortunately, it doesn't always play out that way, because people are inventive enough to explore different strategies (as 'open relationships', 'registered partnerships', 'celibacy', etc.). Nonetheless, it is a disgrace when politicians, churches and Christian brothers and sisters withhold the blessing of homosexuals of full acceptance as a members of a beautifully created order.
* Perhaps Adam and Eve's wedding being a exception, but since they were the first people it was logical God and the rest of creation were the only witnesses.
gay marriage,emancipation,Bible,Christianity,anthropology
The American People...
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-may-5-2010/american-apparently
"The American people" is a meaningless phrase that should be struck from public utterance along with, "Nobody doesn't like Sara Lee."
"The American people" is a meaningless phrase that should be struck from public utterance along with, "Nobody doesn't like Sara Lee."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)