And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. – John 21:25 (KJV)
FATHER CHARLES MORRIS, thumping on the desk, eyes wide, and with the wryest of smiles, always challenges his opponents to show him where in The Bible Jesus ever spoke to or against homosexuality. And he never ceases to mortify – and silence – them.
By extrapolation, his Religiously Reasoning antagonists are subdued into quietude when he dares them to show where and why Jesus might be opposed to same-sex marriage. It is an argumentative ruse that seemingly works well for the Anglican cleric in debates of the CBCTV8 kind.
While none of the Gospels records Jesus speaking directly and specifically about homosexual matters, it is hard to imagine that the Master had no position on it, and even more difficult contemplating that He knew not of the practice, which was common among the affluent and licentious Romans of the day.
And it is most mind-boggling of all thinking that Jesus would have approved and been a part of it.
It really is a most spurious submission that because the Saviour is not mentioned in the Good Book as having utterances on homosexuality that its indulgence must be okay. It is a foolishness to the summit!
As far as I know, Jesus is not on record in any of the Gospels as having had say on violence against women, rape, paedophilia, bestiality, kidnapping, torture, gambling, or being a lady of the night. But could that possibly or sensibly suggest the Saviour gave tacit approval of all these acts?
I recall The Bible featuring Jesus’ feelings on love for fellow man and family, and his reference to marriage as between man and woman.
Jesus himself did allude to Genesis 2:24 as being God’s plan for a wholesome sexual relationship.
And He answered and said to [the Pharisees], “Have you not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh?
“Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4 to 6)
If we can drag Jesus to a side, his utterance to the bigoted religious leaders of his day addresses a social understanding that marriages are definitely not meant to be between man and man, or woman and woman.
Such imagery of same-sex unions hardly consumed the minds of Jesus and his faithful followers. Even male-dominated ancient Israel imaged itself as Yahweh’s wife to obviate any connotation of a same-sex marriage, in much the same way as the Apostles regarded the church as the bride of the very Christ.
So let the pro-same-sex theologians continue on their merry wrong way.
And are we to assume that the Apostle Paul was so mistaken, given his specific epistolary writings against the homosexual act, about the feelings of Jesus and fellow apostles? Truth be told, temple prostitutes were in abundance in biblical times, and it beats me how they didn’t make much of a conversation for Jesus and his disciples – or even a sermon for the Master.
It appears some things were better left to themselves, unheralded and undiscussed.
Further, Jesus spent a great deal of time dealing with the positive, wholesome and praiseworthy throughout His mission on Earth. I never read anywhere He had to make a case for having a gay among his Chosen Twelve.
He would be led up to his enemies by a traitor, have a curse bird and an extortioner among the ranks; but not a single gay guy – unless Father Morris can spring another spin on this.
Just because Jesus didn’t speak to homosexuality, or what He said of it wasn’t written down, doesn’t give Controversial Charles theological ground to defend it.
Otherwise it would be comical.
• Ridley Greene is a Caribbean multi-award-winning journalist. Email [email protected]
