A
sermon preached at Old South Congregational Church, United Church of
Christ, Hallowell, Maine, May 10, 2009.
Text: 1 Corinthians
7
The Rev. Susan M. Reisert, Minister
If you want to get a
pulse on at least one segment of life here in Central Maine, I would
suggest visiting the Hannaford supermarket after 9:00 in the evening.
That's when it is quiet; not a lot of customers milling around. And,
the employees, especially those at the front of the store-the
cashiers and baggers, etc-are chatting. And, even when you line up
your items on the conveyor belt and they are pulling your items
through their line, they don't even seem to notice that you are
there. Whatever conversation they are in the middle of continues on,
mostly unabated. The only pause is when there is a question about
what that strange looking fruit or vegetable is called or when they
pause to let you know how much you owe. And, occasionally, a customer
will join in the conversation briefly.
Especially
in the summer, after a church meeting, I sometimes find myself at the
Hannaford after nine in the evening and I have heard the most
fascinating, and I must admit disturbing, conversations. The people
who work at the front of the Hannaford at night are almost always
young and they are very chatty. Their view into the world, I have
found, can stop you cold.
One
time, I found myself observing a part of a conversation between two
young women. One of them was seriously thinking about moving south
with her boyfriend. He had been offered a job in a faraway state and
this young woman, who was probably no more than twenty, was just on
the verge of deciding to join him, to quit her job and leave her
family behind. The other young woman, who was bagging the groceries,
seemed concerned. This was big leap for anyone. How serious was the
relationship? What if she had a hard time finding a job? Would he
support her?
And,
then, she - the woman doing the bagging of the groceries - asked the
ultimate question: Don't you think you should get married before
moving away with your boyfriend?
And,
the cashier's response, well that's where I almost fell on the floor.
She scoffed at the mere suggestion of marriage and then she added:
"I'm not getting married until after I have children." As
if that was the obvious response. Of course. Who would ever get
married before they had children?
It was one of those moments
when I was rendered utterly and completely speechless. If only I
could have thought of something witty, perhaps, I would have said
something. But, yet, I couldn't think of one thing to say; I had
never heard such a response and I certainly wasn't expecting that
one.
For
quite some time now-probably because of the prominence of the issue
of gay marriage and certainly because of these little conversations I
sometimes overhear at places like the Hannaford - I have been
wondering about and pondering marriage. What is marriage and what is
it for?
In the highly intensified recent debate over gay marriage,
I have been especially aware that, though this one particular word,
"marriage" is thrown around a lot with a seemingly large
element of authority, it also seems clear that we are not all working
from a common definition of marriage. Listen to those who are arguing
fervently for the defense of marriage as it is. They don't really
even agree about what marriage is and what it is for, its purpose.
Listen to those who wish to expand the range of marriage. They don't
seem to agree either on what marriage is and what it is for.
I think we can all agree that marriage is an institution that is a supremely important one, a bedrock of our society and our communities. Yet, we have allowed marriage to just wander about, without any renewal or common awareness of what it is really is and what it is for.
Just
look at the beginning of marriage: the wedding. Sometimes it is in a
church. Sometimes in a family backyard. Sometimes on a beach.
Sometimes in a faraway place, a "destination wedding."
Sometimes there are a lot of people who witness the event. Sometimes
just a few. And, sometimes it's just the couple in front of a justice
of the peace or some kind of clergy member who works at one of those
Vegas chapels.
Is
marriage public or private? Although marriage certainly bestows
public benefits and a public acknowledgement, we also seem to
treasure a high level of privacy when it comes to marriage.
And,
beyond that, there are many questions that we really ought to
consider, talk about and explore as we bandy about this word
"marriage." I suspect that, in engaging in some
conversation, we would find quite an amazing array of definitions of
what this ancient tradition is all about and what its purpose is, and
what it means to us today.
In
the current debate, one hears a wide spectrum of what marriage seems
to mean. For some, marriage is about companionship, whether life-long
or for some, extended part of life's journey. For others, marriage is
about creating a family-having or adopting children and rearing those
children (hopefully) in a loving, stable environment. Families not
only benefit the members of that family, but promote good citizens
for the present and for the future. For still others, marriage is a
kind of temporal symbol of the relationship between Christ and the
church, with two becoming as one in a mystical union.
All
of these definitions have their good points. But, each has its
problems as well.
Let's
take children, to start. The current debate includes a lot of talk
about children. I'll admit that it's a big contributing factor to my
motivation to get married, almost fifteen years ago. Like my parents
before me and so many around me, I wanted to have children and to
rear them in a loving, stable environment, not only to benefit them,
but myself as well. Family life isn't perfect, but it's about the
best way I could see for the living of my adult life.
But,
children bring up lots of other issues. I know plenty of same gender
couples who have children. And those families are loving and stable.
Conversely, I know married couples whose families clearly are not
stable or loving. And, what about those couples whose marriages end
in divorce? And, what about women who have children outside of
marriage?
And,
in addition to all of those questions, there is this question: what
about heterosexual couples who brazenly get married without any
intention of having children? Shall we insist that couples seeking
marriage sign a document promising to procreate, or adopt if they are
not able to procreate themselves? What about couples who are beyond
their child-bearing years? Shall we deny them marriage?
And,
what about that stable and loving environment stuff? The government
doesn't do anything to attempt to determine if two people who wish to
marry will be good parents and will actually be able to create a
loving and stable environment. In many churches, premarital
counseling is usually required. But, any couple can show up at a
justice of the peace or a little Vegas wedding chapel and find no
hindrance whatsoever to their ability to get married.
In
the definition of marriage being a temporal symbol of the
relationship between Christ and the Church, well, that sounds really
religious to me. For people who choose to get married at city hall
then: are they really married? Should be consider them a married
couple or something else?
And,
beyond these contemporary concerns and issues, there is the history
of marriage, which in some parts of the world is not history at all
but current practice, where marriage is an arrangement between two
families for the expansion or preservation of land or power. Or where
a daughter is offered for marriage for the relief of debts. And,
there is polygamy, something that we frown on, yet it has a Biblical
basis.
Finally, beyond even all of these things, there is the Bible itself and the range of models and guidance that it offers. There are those in the current debate who like to point to the Bible as if it contains some monolithic, unwavering view of marriage-one man, one woman. Some children. Maybe a dog or a cat. Done.
But,
the Bible doesn't actually do that. And, if marriage were the ideal
state given by God for the expression of the church and the
relationship between Christ and the church, what's the deal with
insistence on celibate priests in the largest Christian denomination
in the world? Are the Roman Catholics doing it wrong?
Today's
passage, of which I only read part, throws yet another iron into the
fire. For all of the talk of marriage between one man and one woman,
a flowering expression of what God wishes for creation, 1 Corinthians
7 remains remarkably, and conveniently, absent from the current
debate. Perhaps that's because it is unfamiliar to those of us who
follow the lectionary. It was an interesting surprise to me to find
that only one little part of 1 Corinthians 7 ever appears in the
lectionary, a few verses in the whole of the three year cycle of
readings.
First
Corinthians 7, however, provides another dimension in what it means
to follow Christ, what it means to serve, how to support and
encourage one another, and a response to those issues of deep
attraction of one person to another. On first reading, Paul may seem
to be suggesting that married life is not an ideal state, the
pinnacle of expression of God's wishes for humanity, that, instead,
true followers should remain unmarried-which offers really quite a
whole new twist in the marriage debate. Maybe, gasp, churches
shouldn't offer marriage at all??
But,
that's of course, not really what Paul is arguing. Instead, he seems
to be providing a more complex view: that there is a range and a
variety of relationship and service to the Lord. There is no "best
way" of being a disciple. We must all learn to discern and find
confidence in the path that we are called to walk. There are gifts in
the path of service of the single person. As well, there are
gifts in the path of service of those who marry. And, then, in our
current situation, are there gifts in the path of service for those
who wish to marry someone of the same gender?
But,
I'm not going to take that on today. Instead, I would say this:
1.
We must talk about marriage-what it means for us, why is it
important.
2.
We must educate ourselves-educate ourselves about the history of
marriage and educate ourselves about what the Bible actually says.
Please don't leave that up to somebody else. Each and every one of us
should be engaging in some form of study and learning. I will be
announcing in the next week or so opportunities for us, as a church,
to learn and to discuss marriage. I know, as well, that the Standing
Committee and the Deacons will be talking about marriage. I'll keep
you posted.
3.
We must find ways of asking our questions in a honest and respectful
way. Our passage today was a response to a question, or perhaps a
series of questions, posed by the church in Corinth, to Paul. The
church was founded by Paul and he continued to offer guidance to
them, even from a distance. We don't have Paul available to us, at
least not in that way. But, we do have the Holy Spirit, the Holy
Spirit of God who nurtures and guides us on this journey of life and
faith. We ought to re-tune our ears and our hearts to listen, to
listen for the promptings of the Holy Spirit.
Marriage
is indeed an important element to our lives together, as church and
in our wider community. Though we may prefer to focus on something
else, the current climate, which will certainly extend for some
months to come a people's veto is launched, provides an opportunity
for us to learn, to discuss, to deepen our awareness of where God is
calling us. I would hope that such a discussion will not only help us
clarify what we believe about marriage, but will strengthen us as a
church of Jesus Christ, as we seek to be his witness not simply in
the beliefs that we share, but in the relationships we cultivate with
each other.
May our loving and faithful God continue to make His presence known among us. Praise be to God. Amen