Rainbows Today

And Jesus sent messengers ahead of him. On their way they entered a village of the Samaritans to make ready for him; but they did not receive him, because his face was set toward Jerusalem. When his disciples James and John saw it, they said, “Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” But he turned and rebuked them. Luke 9:52-55

Cartoonist Chan Lowe could have been reading this week’s selection from the Revised Standard Lectionary.

Lowe’s cartoon in the South Florida Sun Sentinel Wednesday  shows a winged figure on a cloud, gazing intently downward.

“Boss,” the figure says, “the Zealots are calling for lightning strikes on the Supreme Court.”

A disembodied voice above him replies, “Tell ‘em all I’ve got in stock today are rainbows.”

That is Jesus’ approximate response when the disciples suggest barbecuing a group of uncooperative Samaritans with fire from heaven. Luke leaves out a few details when he says Jesus “turned and rebuked them,” and we can only guess what choice words he used. 

No doubt he expressed his frustration that, nearly three years into his earthly ministry, his closest followers were clueless about his true purpose. Jesus didn’t come to incinerate people. He came to love them.

If their angry reactions to this week’s Supreme Court decisions are an indication, some church folk are still ignorant of Jesus’ purpose. 

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court announced 5-4 decisions that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, and declining to interfere with lower court decisions that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. Both measures said marriage was for heterosexual couples only.

But angry church folk denounced the decisions, basing their angst on two mistaken notions.

The first mistaken notion is that the United States is a Christian nation and the laws of the land should be based on narrowly defined Christian principles. 

But in fact, the United States is founded on the principle that the law should apply equally to all citizens. Achieving this ideal is an unfulfilled process that has been evolving for 237 years. But the nation’s founders, whose parents endured state-sanctioned religious persecution, insisted religion should be kept out of the affairs of the state. The majority of the court applied these principles to its decisions on DOMA and Proposition 8.

As a matter of equal justice under the law, it is logical to conclude the same marital rights should apply to all persons who make loving commitments – who look into each other’s eyes and declare, “I take thee.” When interfering parties start imposing reasons these rights ought not apply to certain couples, it is no longer equal justice under the law.

There are, of course, circumstances when civil authorities should intervene, as when one or more parties are too young to make logical decisions about marriage, or are being forced into an unwanted relationship. Clearly bans against pedophilia, incest, and rape are necessary, moral, and constitutional.

But pious legislators have often ventured into bedrooms where normal, consensual, and loving sexual activity is taking place.

For centuries, anti-miscegenation laws prescribed long jail sentences for persons of different races who married or voluntarily shared living quarters. It was not until 1967, in a case appropriately entitled Loving v. Virginia, that the Supreme Court struck down these laws.

In some states, laws have been passed against all manner of pre-marital, consensual, or private sexual activity, often encouraging law enforcement officers to violate fundamental rights of privacy.

Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state. In 1778, the broadminded Thomas Jefferson sought to liberalize sodomy laws in Virginia by making the act punishable by castration rather than summary execution. Until 2003, when the Supreme Court declared such laws unconstitutional, persons convicted in Idaho of engaging voluntarily in the act could spend the rest of their lives in jail.

Today, I daresay most people don’t want legislators and magistrates interfering in people’s sex lives, or making arbitrary judgments about what sex is good and what sex is bad.

That kind of judgment is a matter of individual morality. And one can easily make the case that standards of sexual morality are in the purview of the church. 

But here is where the U.S. Constitution is revealed to be a marvelously ingenious document. Under the first amendment, the government must stay out of the church’s discussions about sex. And the church must not dictate sex legislation to the government. 

Which brings us to the second unfounded position of church folk who are reacting so bitterly against the Supreme Court decisions on DOMA and Proposition 8.

That unfounded position is based on the assumption that all religious people, especially Christians and Jews, have an ironclad consensus on the subject. 

Actually, we don’t. 

Many wise and loving church leaders believe scripture condemns homosexuality as “an abomination,” and therefore marriage between persons of the same gender must be offensive to God.  Given the deep convictions of these religious leaders, I would never suggest they stop preaching what they believe.

But I would hope they would stop trying to implement their beliefs in civil law. A lot of persons of faith believe God cannot possibly be offended by gay and lesbian couples who make a commitment to share God’s unconditional love.

Sure there are Levitical laws that appear to condemn homosexuality (chapters 18 and 20), and many well-meaning people elevate these scriptural laws above all others to defend their homophobia.

But these laws have no more significance than other Levitical condemnations, including the eating of any animal that has paws (11:27), picking up grapes that have fallen in your vineyard (19:10), mixing fabrics in clothing (19:19), cross-breeding animals (19:19), getting tattoos (19:28), not standing in the presence of senior citizens (19:32), mistreating immigrants (19:33-34), or selling your land permanently (25:23). 

Most of us no longer see the sense of these laws. Neither does it make sense to honor iron-age condemnations of same-sex encounters. Five-thousand years ago, sheep-herding patriarchs had no concept of homosexuality.  They thought perversely minded straight people were deliberately taunting God, and to them it was an abomination. 

Even today, some well-meaning Christians assume homosexuality is an option. They think some people choose gayness arbitrarily as a mark of rebellion against God and society.

But that makes no sense. Most people – including psychiatric professionals – understand that one does not choose to be gay. 

One is born gay, or lesbian, or bi-sexual, or transsexual. One’s sexual orientation is a determined by a loving God Who also determines one’s race, ethnicity, hair color, male pattern baldness, artistic gifts, and other marks of our basic humanity.

Who could possibly argue that God would abominate that which God so lovingly creates?

Desmond Tutu, South Africa’s great spiritual and human rights leader said this:

The Jesus I worship is not likely to collaborate with those who vilify and persecute an already oppressed minority. I myself could not have opposed the injustice of penalizing people for something about which they could do nothing -- their race -- and then have kept quiet as women were being penalized for something they could do nothing about -- their gender; hence my support for the ordination of women to the priesthood and the episcopate.

Equally, I cannot keep quiet while people are being penalized for something about which they can do nothing -- their sexuality. To discriminate against our sisters and brothers who are lesbian or gay on grounds of their sexual orientation for me is as totally unacceptable and unjust as apartheid ever was.

For those who are distracted by archaic Levitical laws, it is helpful to remember what Jesus said about the law:

“Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” He said to him, “’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:36-40)

This week, the Supreme Court of the United States decided in favor of all persons – and all couples – who dedicate their lives to carry out God’s commandment to love unconditionally.

That’s equal justice under the law. 

The court's decision also eliminated two painful laws that got in the way of God’s love and opened a pathway to God’s justice for all the Creator's adored and cherished creatures.