There has been much public furore over the issue of the AWARE change of guard. The issue has moved into the sphere of religion, with many arguing that religious views (in particular, Christianity) should not be brought into the secular sphere of civil society. One of the most sensitive issues in the debate is that of homosexuality. This post aims to answer a few questions. Firstly, what does the Bible say about homosexuality? Secondly, how should Christians respond to homosexuality? Thirdly, what exactly is the church-state divide. Lastly, how should Christians respond?
Please note that this is specifically written with Christianity in mind. I’m writing this because much has been said without substantiation, especially biblical substantiation.
But before we actually get into the issue, I need to make a clarification. If people claim that the new exco came into ‘power’ through underhanded means or ‘infiltrated’ the society, let’s be clear that what they did was constitutional. Now their intent may have been questionable, but the means with which they became the exco was not: they were voted in. So let’s not get caught up in emotive misnomers that imply that the democratic process was hijacked and subverted.
What does the Bible say about homosexuality?
The Bible is quite clear about homosexuality. It says that it is a sin. “Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion” (Rom. 1:26-27).
How should Christians respond to homosexuality and homosexuals?
Now we know that the Bible calls homosexuality a sin, how should Christians respond? Evidently, Christians should stand by what they know as true and not condone homosexuality, in the same way we shouldn’t promote promiscuity among heterosexuals.
However, there needs to be a distinction drawn between sin and the sinner. Too often, Christians are very quick to condemn the sin and the sinner. Christians are called to have love for everyone (1 Thess. 3:12) and which, at the same time, hates what is evil (Rom. 12:9). We do not condemn the sinner because all of us have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). The ultimate example that Christians can learn from is Christ. Christ associated with prostitutes, traitors, liars, thieves and so on. Yet, he did not condone the sin that they were living in (refer to John 8:1-11).
Likewise, Christians must stand for what is true, but not judge others (Matt. 7:1-5) as God is the only judge. The best response that Christians should have to homosexuality is to speak “the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15).
What exactly is the church-state divide?
The church-state divide is a doctrine that government and religious institutions should be kept separate. It gained prominence as the First Amendment to the US Constitution in which there would be a wall between church and state (as Thomas Jefferson put it). Note that it started as a divide to prevent the state from interfering with religion, something put forth by the Anabaptists or Danbury Baptist Association. Over time, it has also meant the reverse: that political decisions should not be made on religious grounds (often known as secularism). As such, many have decried the expression of religious sentiments in the political sphere, the issue of the possible repeal of Article 377A being just one example in Singapore. Moreover, many have argued that the inclusion of religious opinions in debate on public issues infringes on others’ right to hold an opinion (quoting Article 19 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights).
The separation of church and state is especially important in Singapore, which has a variety of religions. Religion has always been a sensitive issue with Singaporeans always being reminded that we are all citizens “regardless of race, language or religion“.
How should Christians respond?
In a society of such plurality, what should Christians do? First of all, Christians are called to take an active role in society, being “salt and light” (Matt. 5:13-16) and standing up for the truth.
Christians tend to go from one extreme to the other. Firstly, some become extreme and dogmatic in their beliefs, refusing to listen to others. We want to avoid another Spanish Inquisition. In this case, we need to couple our belief in the truth with love. There is no point speaking with great fire without respecting others (1 Cor. 13:1), for if we do so, our message simply falls on deaf and hostile ears.
On the other hand, much of Christian society (I don’t know if this is simply a symptom of Singaporean society as a whole) have become apathetic and fearful of voicing their opinions on contentious moral issues for fear of backlash. Many argue that Christians (or any other religion) should keep their religious opinions to within the church. Now, that is an extreme that Christians must not go to. For in those circumstances in which we accept the truth of relativism, we lose the essence of Christ being THE truth, THE way and THE life (John 14:6). In doing so, we also lose our “saltiness” (Luke 14:34-35a) and we become lukewarm (Rev. 3:15-16).
It is a hard balancing act but one that must be done by ALL Christians and churches, actually by any person who believes in the absolute nature of morality (I personally haven’t found anyone who believes in total relative morality, but enough with the paradoxes). But for Christians, good examples that we can look to are Joseph, Daniel and Esther. Joseph could have claimed credit for the interpretation of Pharaoh’s dream but he gave credit to God (Gen. 41:1-40). Daniel could have done what was popular and safe by obeying King Darius’ decree to not pray to any god or man, but he still chose to do what was right (Dan. 6:1-28). Queen Esther could have saved her life by allowing King Xerxes to kill her people, but she stuck her neck out by admitting that she was a Jew (Esther 7:1-6).
———
To those who argue that Christian opinion (or any form of religious opinions) should be kept out of public debate, let me tell you what kind of world we’ll be living in. We’ll be living in a world where slavery still exists because William Wilberforce would have never pushed for the abolishment of slavery, the civil rights movement would have never taken place. Even what we believe as universal and secular human rights are based on religious texts and belief in the value of man.
I’m not denying that religion has its problems or that there will be no abuse at all due to fundamentalism, but it is difficult to deny that religion (whether Christianity or otherwise) has had a positive role to play in modern society. It would be impossible to try and shut out religion from public discourse without negative repercussions. But religion does need to be engaged (as the Singaporean government does) while being sensitive to the fact that we live in a plural society with myriad beliefs.
John Stuart Mill was famous for his essay, “On Liberty”, in which he argued that the state (or anyone else) has no right to force people to believe in something or to quash the voicing of those opinions. He argued that Christians should not prevent others from voicing their opposing opinions in the name of protecting their “sensitivities”. Nowadays, secularists do the same thing. They say that the expression of religious opinions cannnot take place because of we need to protect everyone’s freedom of opinion and expression. Yet, the irony is that in doing so, they are quashing others’ freedom of expression.
As Ronald Sider wrote, “Because we respect the freedom and dignity of every person, we will nurture not a naked public square free of all religious reasons for political proposals, but rather an open, pluralistic, and civil public square, open to all the different religiously and philosophically grounded arguments and proposals that every citizen and every particular community wish to advance“.
I started off with talking about AWARE and I do know that I haven’t provided any concrete responses. To make it crystal clear, I think that Christians should be involved in society but respect others and their views without necessarily buying everything everyone else says. I guess that’s the point of civil society, that we differ, yet we are still civil, something I hope the members of AWARE and Singaporean society as a whole will be.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 20, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Cuthbert
The words of Screwtape, a devil: ‘About the general connection between Christianity and politics, our position is more delicate. Certainly we do not want men to allow their Christianity to flow over into their political life, for the establishment of anything like a just society would be a major disaster. On the other hand we do want, and want very much, to make men treat Christianity as a means; preferably, of course, as a means to their own advancement, but, failing that, as a means to anything — even social justice. The thing to do is to et a man at first to value social justice as a thing which the Enemy demands, and then work him on to the stage at which he values Christianity because it may produce social justice. For the Enemy will not be used as a convenience.’
The above from The Screwtape Letters by C. S. Lewis
I suppose this is more of a tangentially-relevant warning than a response to the issue. The book is fantastic.
May 28, 2009 at 10:15 pm
R
I am a Christian too, and while the Bible condemns homosexuality, for whatever reasons, insofar as the state exists SEPARATE from the Bible, then homosexuals should have the same rights as everyone else. I’m not sure if this is completely analagous, but we still grant equality and not prosecute other sinners like prostitutes (they can still marry, for instance).
May 31, 2009 at 1:29 am
Anonymous
Should we necessarily take what’s religiously right as what’s right to our personal conscience?
June 10, 2009 at 11:13 am
Kia Hua
hmm I don’t think I agree with the above two comments. Let me just address a few points:
Firstly, no-one is suggesting that we persecute homosexuals. Neither do we persecute prostitutes. As the common stand goes, hate the sin, love the sinner. However, as Christians, we should be firmly opposed to anything that condones or promotes sinning, and that includes homosexual marriages but not prostitutes marrying.
Next, homosexual marriages are not a ‘right’. Marrying itself isn’t a right. It’s forming a sacred convenant before God and the state. Even if you take a secular point of view, where does it state that homosexual marriage is a fundamental human right?
This may be a little more subversive, but where does the idea of human rights come from? I don’t think it’s from God. God doesn’t say in the Bible, “here are your rights and I won’t infringe them”. He doesn’t say, “these people have a right to say what they want, let them say it” or even “these people have a right to live”. Instead, life, liberty and happiness are all gifts from Him, not because we deserve it.
Unfortunately, thinking of ‘human rights’ is very pervasive even among many Christians, because it’s such a pleasant thing to have. Christians too, want these rights being guaranteed to them, and so they are willing to grant it to others. That’s where the idea of a secular state originates. The right to worship freely is not something that comes from the Bible. Instead, we ourselves are afraid of being persecuted for our faith, living in a society that doesn’t allow us to worship freely, that we let this idea of a secular state exist. In reality, how secular will God’s Judgement be on the last day?
And to Anon, yes we should, as long as you admit to being a Christian. It’s like walking in a forest at night. If you follow your conscience, it’s like following your feeling of walking straight: you’ll eventually end up walking in circles. It’s not to be trusted. The only thing you can trust is the word of God, which is your compass.
June 29, 2009 at 9:41 am
On Cynicism and Criticism « becktan
[...] groups, teachings extolling moderation in behaviour (especially Christian living), my stance on the AWARE issue, money and so on. Looking back, I have not endeared myself to others in such arguments as I [...]