2 of 3

Despite the hysterical rhetoric of the sexual Left, Christian involvement in this debate is not based on fear or hatred or lust for power. Instead, we engage in this debate because, with love and honor toward God, we love our neighbors and want the best for them.

We are witnessing a concerted effort to turn words on their heads. We've already seen the vast cultural harm of serial monogamy, no-fault divorce, deadbeat dads, and trophy wives. (Tellingly, the Massachusetts court counts no-fault divorce as a "transformation," even a milestone of progress. "Alarms about the imminent erosion of the 'natural' order of marriage were sounded over the demise of antimiscegenation laws, the expansion of the rights of married women, and the introduction of 'no-fault' divorce," the court's majority opinion says. "Marriage has survived all of these transformations.")

Truth be told, heterosexuals have been poor stewards of marriage in recent decades. But the answer to heterosexual abuses does not rest in diluting the definition of marriage still further and hoping that Marriage Lite somehow improves on the real thing.

It's a matter of faithful citizenship for Christians to be involved in this historic debate. Marriage is a common-grace gift of God, and the church offers the fullest realization of that gift. Christians must contend for truth and justice, protecting children and other innocent parties from further assaults.

Let us keep in sight, in the years ahead, that at its most faithful, the church does not take its orders from the surrounding culture. We will rejoice if this nation chooses to protect the historic definition of marriage through a constitutional amendment. Otherwise, we will look to the church to embrace, with humility and joy, a new opportunity for countercultural witness. If American culture takes yet one more step into moral confusion, may subsequent generations record that the church refused to join this narcissistic parade.

Copyright © 2004 Christianity Today.Click for reprint information.

Other CT articles on the marriage amendment include:

Weblog: Marriage Amendment Introduced in Senate (Nov. 26, 2003)

'A Man and a Woman' | Activists say the Federal Marriage Amendment will be the defining issue in the next election. (Nov. 24, 2003)

Christian Conservatives Split on Federal Marriage Amendment | Law would protect marriage from courts, but legislatures could still extend marital benefits to same-sex unions. (June 20, 2002)

Defining Marriage | Conservatives advocate amendment to preserve traditional matrimony. (Oct. 1, 2001)

Marriage in the Dock | Massachusetts case on gay marriage could set off chain reaction. (April 25, 2003)

The Next Sexual Revolution | By practicing what it preaches on marriage, the church could transform society. (Aug. 27, 2003)

The Marriage Battle Begins | Profamily and gay activists agree: Texas decision sets significant precedent. (Aug. 11, 2003)

Does Lawrence v. Texas Signal the End of the American Family? | Evangelicals may not agree on antisodomy laws, but they're all concerned about what the Supreme Court's decision of them means. (June 30, 2003)

Past Christianity Today coverage of same-sex marriage includes:

Church Federation in the Netherlands Closes in on Blessing Same-Sex Unions | Three months after country recognized gay matrimony, proposal suggests distinguishing between "life unions" and marriage. (July 19, 2001)

No Balm in Denver | Episcopalians defer debate over same-sex blessings for another three years. (July 17, 2001)

next page... |  2 of 3

share this page

February 2004, Vol. 48, No. 2