Faith continues as our theme for this date, with the sub-theme of the problem of faith in a natural world that is unfriendly to presumed blind faith. Any faith not founded on a creative constitution is blind. In this context, faith is blinded by demands of nature in the human experience. Christian faith is not blind, nor is it a guarantee that all is well, or expected to be, in the natural environment. In a book review, Sam Sacks quoted from the short stories of Don DeLillo about the dangers of earth. For DeLillo, astronauts are looking out of the hatch of their spaceship in outer space at the end of World War III. Horrorstruck, one says to the other as he looks at planet earth that: he can no longer imagine occupying: the floods, the droughts, volcanoes, earthquakes, avalanches, hurricanes and, above all, the havoc of war. “It’s crazy,” he marvels. “Who would live there?” (WSJ 11/15/11 Pg.A-17) For some time the astronaut appeared taken by the thought that he was safer in space than earth-bound persons too fearful to go into space. Space travel is safer than travel by auto, adopted daily without thought of any real danger by persons driving to work. (One wonders about the first space accident when two capsules collide because of pilot error.)
We are, as a society, somewhat inward looking, wondering if we are losing something of what makes life worth living. We are told some important factors are being lost, factors that make us noble and rightly to feel some nobility. Trust has declined, not so much from the decline of integrity in persons we know as from the news that informs us about how much chicanery is present. Family solidarity has declined, not so much in our own families perhaps, but registered in significant evidence from society. Freedom and democracy, in their political meaning, remain, but have declined when persons use freedom without responsibility, when government entities do not make effective laws, or move promptly enough for the good of society. Business is necessary for modern life, the good life, but offers economic breakdown by what’s-in-it-for-us? The story can be extended. Another pressure downward occurred recently when a candidate for president of the United States came out in favor of definition change for marriage. The concept defies reality and history. Debates often include numerous non-sequiturs about issues.
Christian faith is not endangered by violation of a principle given of God that makes man and woman one in the individualized society. To make it work, marriage was offered, proven in the birth of children and the fulfillment of the anatomies of genders. The Christian believes the society might readily define some system for same sex unions that would provide the desired privileges to persons turning away from the obvious plan in physical nature, without introducing into society confusion about the meaning of the plan of God in creative genders. Marriage ought to be kept within the boundaries held by nature and by society from time immemorial. Tolerance, leaving God to manage the meaning of it all as he wishes, is the solution pointing to a system that retains the freedom of the individual and the value system, biologically useful, that introduces children to life with parental identity. The difference is so great that Scripture holds stern (firm) evaluation of the matter as it relates to God’s people. This issue will divide Christians in that some will argue that Christian faith incorporates conflicting values. The problem will not be between Christian marriage, and same sex marriage, but between couples adamant over their faith, biblically based, and those redefining Christian values to fit their preferences. Perhaps the church should request Christian and secular identity for marriage, and have it recorded as such at the Court House and church.
The church, biblically based, will need to find a way to keep clear for faith the major analogy of Scripture, which is mother, father and child – the human family reflecting the family of God. Surely the society, under common grace from God, can accommodate peaceful solutions for all. God’s ideal order does not mean that secular society may not find a secular solution. This permits the Christian to leave ultimate resolution to the Lord who is competent for righteous judgment. The Christian is called to model/witness Christianity, avoiding judgment of any person. Ultimate faithful evaluation is from God. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020