Cross to Crown Blog

...fail their congregations and their Lord (not to mention their wives).

If the body of Christ cannot look to the elders for models of something as important as marriage, how can they respect us in anything else? Managing the home well is one of the basic qualifications to lead.

Husbands are called to reflect Christ to their wives. Christ doesn't abandon, shun, or push us to the corner. His bride is way up on the priority list. And He never makes us wonder if His attention is elsewhere. Pastors, of all people, should be leading the way for other married men. Let's show our people a Christ-like romance.

And, our wives married men, not ministries. There was no fine print in our wedding vows that releases us from them if we get called to church leadership. Loving, cherishing, and spending time with our wives is not optional. If we cannot do that while serving the body, we should choose her and find a new job.

Pastors and elders, let's love our wife like Christ loves His.

Here is an example of the kind of argument I was speaking of here. I suggest you read both, in reverse order, then come back.

Ms. Gallagher rightly points out that the marriage issue is very important in American culture and politics. Hetero marriage should be defended by presidential candidates because longstanding traditions value it, and because of the alternative's negative impact on the family economically and structurally. Furthermore, opponents (or non-committers) risk alienating Americans who hold to a Judeo-Christian ethic. 

I do not object to the article. I am simply using it as an example of how some Christians try to debate. It's a fine argument. It's just not a Christian argument.

Let me expand a bit. A Christian argument centers on and derives from Christ. He is King, Lord, and Law-giver. We bow the knee to Him and Him alone. There really is no Judeoin the Christian ethic, just Jesus. The reason why marriage must be between a man and a woman is because it was created by God to be a picture of Christ and the Church. Notice, that I did not stop after the word "God." We shouldn't argue merely according to the command of God, but according to the purpose of God. Everything, including marriage, was created for Christ. 

If I were an unbeliever who wanted to oppose Ms. Gallagher, all I would have to do is argue that traditions change (so get over it), and find survey data showing that same-sex parents are actually better for our kids. Which brings up the most obvious question—Who gets to define better? Traditionalists? Government? Conservatives? And on what basis? This kind of argument is built on shifting sand.

Christians have an answer, the answer: Christ determines our ethics. All nations are under His jurisdiction. His followers need to let them know that.

There are two ways to oppose murder…

We can condemn the unrest and further aggression it provokes along with its needless destruction of another living being. Or we can oppose it because God tells us to, because humans are created in His image. Which is the uniquely Christian response?

There are two ways to oppose drunkenness…

We can argue that getting sloshed on a regular basis is self-destructive behavior, that it leads to brokenness, strained relationships, ineffectiveness, and liver disease. Or we can argue that God prohibits intoxication, requiring us instead to be controlled by His Spirit. Which is the uniquely Christianresponse?

There are two ways to oppose same-sex marriage…

We can sound the alarm about the coming doom to civilization and culture as we know it, the breakdown of the family, and the negative impact on children. Or we can proclaim that marriage is intended by God to be a picture of Christ and the Church, a picture which cannot be pictured without a man and a woman. Again, which is the uniquely Christian response?

Let me explain.

"Same-sex marriage" is a meaningless concept. It's like two people holding only gloves and saying they're playing a game of catch, or putting two nuts on a piece of metal and claiming to have bolted it down, or holding two halves of a bun and calling it a hamburger. Same-sex marriage is like that. Without both genders, something essential is missing. I'm not talking about reproductive organs (though that is certainly true), I'm talking about the essence of what makes marriage marriage. Although people of like gender are clearly capable of having orgasmic experiences and committed affection with each other, what they cannot have is marriage because its purpose requires more than sex and vows.

Marriage is not, ultimately, a civil union or a state issue. It's a Christ issue. God established it at the beginning of human existence not merely to lay the foundation for the family and society, but, far more importantly, to foreshadow the marriage between the Son of God and His Wife (Eph. 5:31-32). This is why there will be no marriage in the next age. The shadow will give way to the substance. Marriage will serve its intended purpose and then pass away. Therefore, the rationale for defining marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman is only secondarily about preserving civilization or the family. The primary reason is because marriage pictures Christ and His bride, the Church. The husband is to stand as the Christ-representative exercising headship, authority, cherishing, nourishing, and sacrificial love, thereby mirroring Christ's responsibility; the wife is to represent the Church exercising submission, respect, admiration, honor, and devoted love, thereby mirroring the Church's role. You cannot have this picture with two men or two women.

Now, the advocates of same-sex marriage are not my intended audience here. I am speaking to Christians who respond to them. We tend to fight more as human beings or American citizens or natural philosophers than as Christians. We argue that with same-sex marriage the family is at stake, or that a well-ordered society requires both parents in the home, and so on. But there is nothing uniquely Christian in those conclusions. A well-educated atheist might make the same claims. The Christian opposition to the decision of New York and other states employs an argument that unbelievers must deny, because the true significance of marriage is something they must deny. 

It's time for Christians to debate as Christians rather than as Americans, conservatives, or philosophers. Like everything else, marriage was created for Christ (Col. 1:15-18). Let's stop helping unbelievers in their efforts to steal it away from Him.