By Christopher Roberts, T & T Clark International, 2009.<\/p>\n
I recently spent some time talking to author Christopher Roberts about his 2009 book Creation and Covenant: The Significance of Sexual Difference in the Moral Theology of Marriage<\/i><\/a>. In our conversation, Roberts explained the background of his book and also highlighted a few of his thoughts about the issue of sexual ethics.<\/p>\n The Book<\/b><\/p>\n Roberts offers a fresh and balanced approach to understanding the complicated issue of marriage. Although the book is not specifically about same-sex marriage, it definitely provides solid ground for considering how the current debates about marriage should look in the twenty-first century.<\/p>\n Roberts was working as a journalist when he started reporting on Christianity\u2019s response to the question of same-sex marriage. He noted that neither extreme in the debate offered a satisfying way of understanding the question of same-sex marriage. The liberal side focused too much on the inner-nature and attempted to identify ontological realities based on one\u2019s felt passions. The conservatives, on the contrary, thought they could simply reject homosexuality by quoting a few verses from Leviticus and Romans. Roberts\u2019 instincts led him to find a solidly Christian definition of marriage that would avoid the dangers of partial answers on both the left and right.<\/p>\n Through his Ph.D. research, Roberts investigated the Christian tradition to see if there was a consensus that spoke to the need for sexual differentiation within marriage. The simple answer is yes. For most of its existence, the church has unanimously agreed that sexual differentiation is necessary for marriage as God intended it.<\/p>\n I\u2019d like to highlight three main ideas that can help shape a theological understanding of the importance of gender in regard to marriage. The first two ideas are summaries of Augustine and Barth; the third idea explores the notion of celibacy.<\/p>\n Augustine<\/b><\/p>\n Augustine is definitely the most important Christian theologian after Paul.\u00a0 For Augustine, \u201cto have a sex and to have desire are not necessarily the same thing.\u201d Any reader of The Confessions<\/i> knows about Augustine\u2019s legendary sexual impulses. Indeed, his consuming sexual appetites drove him away from committing his life to the church. His cravings kept him in bondage, leaving him unavailable for God\u2019s service. These carnal desires, according to Augustine, are barriers which mask the true self. In contrast, however, many want to use appetites as pointers to one\u2019s true nature. Augustine absolutely disagrees that sexual inclination reveals one\u2019s sexual orientation, and his successful delivery from such all-consuming sexual desires, I would suggest, shows that questions of personal identity must start and end with God\u2019s word, not our reckoning of ourselves.<\/p>\n Barth<\/b><\/p>\n God, according to Barth, shows “that He has created man male and female, and in this way in His own image and likeness” Put differently, there are some things about being made male and female that highlight the Dei<\/i> of the imago Dei<\/i>.<\/p>\n Roberts importantly credits Barth with helping him better understand how God\u2019s nature is, at least partially, revealed through humanity. For Barth, God is apprehended through Jesus. His incarnation lends great credibility to the created human body. Christ also shows that we were created for relationship with God and other human beings. Barth, probably more than any other theologian, shows that \u201cwhen Genesis speaks of the imago Dei<\/i>, it suggests to us an analogy between God\u2019s triune relationality and human sexual difference.\u201d\u00a0 Barth is a great ally for anyone wanting to address same-sex issues from a robustly theological perspective, because differentiation is built into the story of creation and redemption.<\/p>\n Even if one is suspicious of Barth\u2019s view of Scripture, his Christ-centered epistemology should be encouraged. From a Barthian perspective, same-sex marriage would be rejected not because it conflicts with puritan mores, but rather because it fails to fit into a Christological cosmology or teleology. At its core covenantal creation demands a complementary other. This can only be achieved through a gender differentiated from oneself. Roberts rightly points out, therefore, that \u201cBarth condemns homosexual relations, seeing in them at least an implicit refusal of his claim that each man or woman has a vocation with respect to the other sex.\u201d<\/p>\n Celibacy<\/b><\/p>\n I found Roberts\u2019 observations about celibacy very helpful in understanding the church\u2019s historical views of sexuality. In today\u2019s culture it seems that having a romantic partner is everyone\u2019s right. Celibacy is somehow an aberration; it\u2019s just not normal to be single.<\/p>\n In earlier times, however, celibacy was a perfectly ordinary way of living. Believers accepted the fact that one could be single and yet live a satisfying life of community within God\u2019s family. Marriage is one way of living with another person; celibacy is also a perfectly healthy means of living in community with others. Consequently, Roberts believes that if we could rediscover a healthier way of honoring the vocation of celibacy, same-sex marriages would not be so easily endorsed.<\/p>\n Roberts recommends Wesley Hill\u2019s book Washed and Waiting<\/i> as a good example of a gay Christian\u2019s decision to embrace celibacy as the only acceptable way of living out his Christian identity. I also endorse Hill\u2019s book, partly because it offers a sometimes painfully candid portrait of a sincere believer who is striving to be identified more by his allegiance to God than his sexual identity.<\/p>\n Conclusion<\/b><\/p>\n In our conversation, Roberts mentioned that Colossians 3:3 is a central verse for his understanding of the Christian life:\u00a0 \u201cFor you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God.\u201d<\/p>\n An Augustinian reading of this verse might highlight the fact that we can only discover ourselves, including our sexual identities, through first seeking God. A Barthian reading might encourage us that this search for ourselves within God is achieved only through Christ. Both propositions ring true.<\/p>\n I highly endorse Robert\u2019s book. It is solid evidence of the church\u2019s strong advocacy for heterosexual marriage and celibacy as the only ways for Christians to live out their sexuality in God-honoring lives. Enjoy our conversation!<\/p>\n Click here to view Roberts interview<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Christopher Roberts, T & T Clark International, 2009. I recently spent some time talking to author Christopher Roberts about his 2009 book Creation and Covenant: The Significance of Sexual Difference in the Moral Theology of Marriage. In our conversation, … Continue reading