Me Too - a response

(From my beloved, Terry Butler)

A long time ago, when I was in my late teens, I hit my girlfriend. It was done in a moment of grief, anger, and high emotion. She was having an emotional meltdown due to factors that had nothing to do with me. In my naivety, I tried to calm her, but being a clumsy teenager, what I said did not help an already volatile situation. She lashed out, hitting me quite hard in the face. I was shocked, not so much by the pain, but that someone would hit me. She hit me again, even harder, on the side of my head, giving me terrible pain to my ear. I was really stunned and now in pain. When she tried to hit me again I slapped her on the face. The slap shocked her into stopping her tirade of abuse, which in hindsight I realised was not really directed at me. It took a much wiser head to explain that to me a few days later. However, I was stunned at my own behaviour.

My brother and I were fortunate growing up. Our Dad instilled in us a good understanding of right and wrong, especially when it came to how you treat the opposite sex. He told us that any man who hit a woman is not real a man at all, rather a coward would be more appropriate. There were many other great bits of wisdom from him, and mum as well, but that was a real deal breaker in his eyes when measuring the worth of someone.

For days after the slap, I was racked with guilt. I was not trying to justify my actions to myself, and I’m certainly not trying to do that now. This is just an explanation of what happened. Eventually, I had to tell dad, mainly because I couldn’t bear to look him in the eye while carrying around the horrible thing that I’d done. So, when I told him, he asked me a lot of questions about the circumstances that drove me to the slap. Some of which were; Was she still talking to me? Yes. Do you still care about her? Yes. Would you do it again? No!

The important part of this story, for me, was how I felt when I did it. I didn’t feel powerful. I didn’t feel manly. I didn’t feel strong. I felt mortified.  I had apologised profusely to my girlfriend, and she said she forgave me, and laughingly apologised for beating me up and giving me a black ear.

The point is, how do men who inflict physical and sexual violence upon women and girls live with themselves? The recent wave of stories about men in positions of power, raping, groping, abusing, and physically attacking woman, makes me feel ill. How do they sleep at night? How do they look in the mirror, thinking things are ok? What kind of twisted world do they inhabit?

I don’t have to name them, you’ve all read the stories, you know who they are. However, there are lots more. Would they want their sisters treated that way? Or their mothers? Or do they just see women as ‘cock fodder’, another scalp to make them feel more like a man? Well not in my eyes.

I’m bereft of an answer to this disgusting problem and I’m still trying to get my head around the motivations, the justifications, the misremembering, and the denials.

I think men should start being real men and call it out when they see it. Groping, touching up, slapping. These things are not ok. Being with a bunch of mates, having a few drinks, and sexually intimidating women with lewd suggestions and catcalls is not ok. Be a real man and have some respect. We will all be better off. 

- TB

Giving Voice - singing a new song

Psalm 96:1
1 
O sing to the Lord a new song...


When I was a teenager, I loved to sing in the choir. Actually, I just loved to sing, but the choir was a particularly good place to do it. Singing took me away from the mundane and allowed me to glimpse something beyond. You could say, it was spiritual experience. It was available. It was accessible. It allowed my voice to get out of my body.

The Choir at my school was a joy to be a part of... there were several choirs and each held joy for me. Two weeks ago, I attended my 35 year reunion and I was reminded that Choirs (and the friendships made there) were a highlight. The Choirs sang interesting works. Some of them made me think... not just about the words, but about beauty and possibility. The songs helped me to believe in hope and heaven. They also provided my earliest theological fodder.

The school I went to had been shaped by some of the finest Australian feminists: Betty Archdale and Kath McCredie and a raft of brilliant and dedicated teachers... many of whom I still count as friends. They taught, stretched, questioned, cajoled, cared and blessed us by drawing us out. You always get a few dodgy teachers, but, on the whole, they liberated our hearts and minds to embrace the world. Seeing so many fine women thirty-five years later, we are strong and proud.

Last weekend, my voice was questioned and criticized. I was attacked not only for what I say, but also for being a woman saying it. I was shocked and angry. In gradually letting people know about this violation of identity, I have been grateful for the support and empathy of many friends and colleagues. I also have a heightened consciousness about who responds as a friend and who uses their influence and power to combat such behaviour in our society and our particular communities.

(My work, undertaken with a male colleague, was also criticized publicly with allegations of a flawed approach to the use of the Scriptures. This, coming from people who had not read our actual work.  Our publications stand on their own merit and cannot be interpreted in that way. I have previously experienced this same type of criticism from male academics who have seen fit to criticize my work without reading it. When called out, they revert to... ‘well, that is what someone said to me...’)

Many of my friends are in positions of respect and authority. They have the opportunity and capacity to give voice to justice and rebuke those who diminish us. In reality, we all want to speak up for ourselves, but sometimes it is those beyond (allies and companions), whose voices in harmony allow us the liberty of singing out. As a woman, I invite men to speak up. For people who are marginalized (whether it be migrants experiencing racism or people who identify as LGBTIQ who experience homophobia), I encourage ‘others’ to speak up, stand with, and provide harmony. We should not leave people alone in their struggle for inclusion love and acceptance.

So, just to respond to those who have contacted me, in whatever capacity - I will not shut up.

Missyology

Missy-ology

- the study of women responding to God’s mission to the world.

(Thanks to Ian Packer, from whom I first saw the term.)

I am a Missy-ologist.

I celebrate curves and communal instincts. I do not conform to an ordering or power in the world. For women, from Eve onwards, have subverted masculine dominance. It has something to do with breathing... with blowing the hair off your face while breastfeeding, because your hands and arms are busy holding the life of the world in your embrace.

I do not have time for cigars and whisky - leave that to the pontificating whisky-boys. They can enjoy their sessions of measuring the walls in front of them. I long for the creative circle, where generative and gentle conversation involves a sharing of experiences and ideas to try. Such circles prioritize a culture of refinement through encouragement rather than criticism. Rather than hacking off rough edges, as those boys are want to do, the Missies add some sugar and cream, growing the softer and more responsive parts of themselves, to better nurture the Realm of Heaven.

The embrace of Missies is the firm and authoritative encompassing of all the love for all the world. We do not own or control the embrace. Rather, we hold up our tuck-shop arms and join shoulders in acts of knitting the fabric of the fullness of humanity. We are found among Matrons and Maidens. We aspire to be spiritual Nannas.

Celebrate the Missy-ologists you know - hear our breath blowing the hair from your face as we encourage you as you embrace the world God loves.



(PS - the people who drink whisky and play board games are ok...)

Rome - Wanderings

What does one say about Rome?

For the first time I am here, not as a tourist, but as a Minister.. somehow it changes things! I have been to Rome before, as an opera-singer and as a tourist... and as an avid reader of history.
Today, I arrived differently. I was picked up at the airport and pretty much Chauffer-driven into †he Casa Maria Immacolata (a Sisters of Charity Hostel for pilgrims). I have a lovely single cell-room, with very well equipped ensuite.

Trying to stave off the inevitable jet lag, I wandered the streets, finding myself at St Peter’s Square (which is more of a round than a square), watching the lengthy lines/queues to get into the Vatican. I went into some of the religious stores, wondering if I might buy something not too tacky... have acquired a decent candle for worship for the next few days.

I am now sitting in a quiet taverna close to the Case and the Mercato. I thoroughly broke the fast I have been on by ordering the fried 7 pieces of antipasti... the anchovy-stuffed-olives and the deep fired mozzarella  went well with the house red!

My first coffee in a month is perfect roman espresso... bless the Italians!

To be here for vocation rather than vacation subtley changes the world view... suddenly, I look at the many pilgrims differently.  I observe the Chapel and the local churches differently. I wonder how much of the character of Romans remains from the days when Paul wrote to the early church.

Romans have a confidence about their place in the world that traces back to pre-Paul times... yet, the heritage of Peter and Paul in this city is palpable. Rome was for Peter and Paul what Jerusalem had been to Jesus. It was the place of their final words, suffering, wisdom and blessing.

As I watch a pigeon consuming some crusts and sit at my red and white table-clothed place on the pavement, I smell the tobacco from the diner behind me. In a time when smoking at a restaurant is unthinkable in Australia, it is surprisingly evocative, to sense the slower change of the people and culture here.

Prophetic ministry - gets a Bedding down

For decades the reputation of the Christian Churches in Australia has been eroded by scandal upon scandal. I recollect my Nana telling me she had no time for the Church because of the hypocrisy she had witnessed - of people preaching against the ‘demon drink’ having one or two OR people talking about forgiveness condemning the poor, marginalised or outcast. Indeed, the Church seems to be particularly adept at crucifixion. 

Growing up ‘outside the Church’, I share the wider society’s suspicion of Church motives and Church behaviours. As a Minister in the Church, this makes me particularly mindful of guarding integrity, truth and transparency as precious and necessary for our wellbeing.

I become more conscious of the societal suspicion when I venture into public spaces. People harbour very long-term hurts and experiences of confusion and rejection, often arising from past encounters with an institutional mentality that appears as the antithesis to the teachings and example of Jesus. One might almost say, some in our society view the institutional Church as the Anti-Christ!

When I was the Uniting Church Minister at the city congregation in Newcastle, this was particularly evident. Weekly (sometimes daily) news stories about paedophilia and institutional cover-ups haunted  both Catholic and Anglican communities. Being a woman Minister, many of the victims approached me for conversation. I was shocked and horrified at the shunning of these people from their own places. It was shameful to witness, particularly as I knew so many people in both churches who were working very hard to change things. However, individuals struggle to redeem the culture of institutions if those same institutions pull the wagons around in defense, and do not allow themselves to be refined and restored, through confession and correction.   

The public places where I have heard so much disappointment and disillusionment have included: NAIDOC and Reconciliation Week events, Rallies supporting humane responses to refugees and asylum-seekers (Love Makes a Way, Jesus was a Refugee, Release children from detention, Public readings of leaked files from Manus and Nauru), and Marriage Equality (Australian Christians for Marriage Equality, Love is Love). At such events, wearing a clergy collar brings two major responses: people cursing or spitting at you OR thanking you for restoring their faith and confidence that God cares (or, at least, that “the Church doesn’t just comprise arseholes!”). 

Being engaged in public ministry, prophetic action and public theology is complex and difficult. It requires spiritual discipline, as the stories are hard and challenging. It requires deep commitment to prayer and bible study, as finding the faith response means plumbing the depths of lament and identifying hope and light in the darkness. It requires friends and colleagues, companions on the Way of Jesus together, who understand what it is to carry the burdens of others and share the responsibility for ministering to a hurt and broken world.

One of our companions on this prophetic journey is, in the words of a member of his Parish, “a deeply spiritual man”, and, in the words of a member of his Parish Council, “creative and faithful”. He is also funny. When you are in his presence, you want to smile, because there is honesty and hope and the deep joy that comes from knowing Our Lord. He is human, enjoys a good meal and good company, but never forgets that we are blessed in order to bless others. As a true Evangelist, he has a heart for reaching, connecting with, communicating with those who are beyond the Church’s current reach. His name is Chris. He is my friend. Just over a week ago, he celebrated a “YES” mass, welcoming people to the Lord’s Table who had felt unable to approach for a very long time. What wonderful ministry.

It was therefore with dismay that I learnt that Chris was to be suspended from ministry, pending institutional procedures...

                       

Yesterday, Chris sat in a pew in the Parish where he is Priest, listening to a letter being read to his congregation informing them that he was “suspended from ministry”.  It did clarify that the issue/s of concern had nothing to do with sexual abuse of children... something Churches always need to clarify these days, due to our decimated reputation.

The Mass was celebrated (minus a few people who walked out).
Then the Parish Council then made their own courageous response in a statement.
You really couldn’t write a script like this. Unless, perhaps, you were TS Eliot describing the corruption and lack of transparency in Church politics.

What the institution may not understand is that prophets (whether on social media or on the stage or in the pulpit) are accountable for their calling to God. Most of us are also accountable to our churches (denominational structures) and so we obediently sit there and take what committees and councils dish out. Deep down, we know, however, that the institutions also will face God. This gives us the courage to continue. When one falls, another picks up the cross, and then another. The public prophetic calling doesn’t go away with one scalp or two. Call us heretics or blasphemous, but don’t underestimate God’s capacity to raise up more of us.

Prophets make religious institutions uncomfortable. Largely, this is because the prophetic ministry involves telling truth to the world, to self, AND, most dangerously, to Church. If Pirate Church has accomplished one thing, it is to let people know that the whole Church is not oblivious to its own failings. The Church should stop claiming to be perfect and remember that it is a house of sinners. As such, it is able to offer a foretaste of the Kingdom of Heaven... not in its fullness, but a glimpse. One which was seen when people take a risk to stand for good.

Despite their fears and concerns and despite the punishing experience Fr Chris must be enduring, I believe the Parish has been blessed, is blessed and will emerge from this wiser, stronger and better equipped for mission and ministry in the world. Chris’ exemplary leadership is a great contributor to that. 

My prayer for the Parish and for Chris:

Gracious One, who was rejected by the authorities,

You understand the pain and frustration being experienced.

Place your Wisdom within Chris - and your patience and comfort.

Give your energy and confidence in the Gospel to the people of St Cuthbert’s, 

especially their Parish Council. 

Bless the Diocese with fresh commonsense and humility 

And a spirit of reconciliation.

Above all, O Lord,

May you work for good in all things.

Amen

For published news on the situation:
To read the Perth Newspaper Report - click here!

Marriage Talk - Vilification or the new Evangelism?

I was reading Mathew 23 and it dawned upon me that it was describing an experience I have been seeing as Christians alternate between arrogance and shame in their discoures (or lack thereof) when it comes to this damned Plebiscite on Marriage Equality. Note: I am using ‘damned’ in the technical sense here, not as a swear word. To be ‘damned’ can mean: a cause or occasion of being damned or condemned (whether by God or others).

I have on occasions seen people as willing to condemn others as they are right now. It has happened in a few places: ‘Children overboard scandal’ in 2001, ‘the Cronulla riots’ of 2005, ‘the Aboriginal Intervention in the Northern Territory’ in 2007 (extended to 2022), ‘Reclaim Australia protests in Canberra in 2016’ and ‘Anti-immigration Rallies in Melbourne’ in February 2017.

Vilification and ‘alt-Truth’ became a Government-sponsored political device when it used its resources to criticize the former Human Rights Commissioner, Gillian Triggs. Professor Triggs was known to be a defender of freedom of speech, but also argued that with freedom came responsibility. She argued that most Australians were unaware of their rights under the Constitution and that there should be a Charter of Rights.

Such a Charter of Rights would be advantageous to the many, but would see those who claim privilege by diminishing others lose some of their ill-gotten power. Those who are arrogant enough to claim they deserve power and believe themselves to be entitled are also those who will most readily belittle and put down others. Christians need to be wary of this tendency and remember the Master’s command, “Do not judge, and you will not be judged; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven.” (Luke 6:37).  

   

I think the tendency to judge is about a Human “world view” and the ease with which some people deHumanize other people with a different world-view... it has something to do with individualism and self-referencing. It is an arrogance. I believe this is only broken when our world-view is challenged by stepping out of it and learning to appreciate something else. God’s world-view, on the other hand, has more to do with viewing all of God’s good creation, including God’s creatures. God saw everything that God had made, and indeed, it was very good. (Genesis 1:31a)  

This is why travel is so important and intercultural or ecumenical or interfaith relations. I believe this was the message following the Tower of Babel incident (Genesis 11:1-9). God commanded that we “go and generate (be creative) all over the earth”. That was not about simply populating... (simplistic definition!), it was about developing cultures and poetry and thinking and different ways of loving and appreciating. 

Pentecost (after much prayer) was the sign that God never intended people to think one way or the other (or use only one dominant language), but people were able to understand “each in their own language” in a radically diverse community. This, for me, represents a much clearer vision of Heaven. (See Acts 2).

I come from mixed ethnicity, so I recollect being called mongrel, Chink, Slope and half-caste, as I was growing up in Australia. It didn’t feel quite so bad when children made racial slurs, but it was deeply shocking when politicians did it (after all adults elected them). I remember people questioning my parents’ marriage and my Aussie grandparents’ response of making me sit down and watch ‘Guess who’s coming to dinner’ with Tracey, Hepburn, Poitier and Houghton (1967, two years after I was born).I also remember discovering that two of my great-grandparents did not marry because one was Jewish and one was Catholic. It would be many decades before inter-faith marriages would become acceptable. I could not understand why other people felt it was necessary to critique or advise or praise my family - from the outside, where they had little or no real knowledge of it.  

People who called us names have my forgiveness, but that doesn’t mean I now regard them as credible when it comes to commenting on other people’s marriages (current or hoped for) today. Their ongoing vilification and de-Humanizing of others continues to be deeply sinful (building up obstacles to themselves of others experiencing the grace of God). Every time they judge and name call, they work against the gospel of grace. The walls go up, higher and higher, as obstacle after obstacle prevents anything being heard, in the desperation to simply survive the onslaught. 

People from a dominant white culture in Australia have usually never experienced the daily or weekly abuse, the threats of violence (or death), the bullying, the denigration and the constant fear of exclusion... unless, of course, they are gay. 

As one of the Moderators on the Australian Christians for Marriage Equality FB page, I have had to use my learnings from years of combatting and confronting the systemic and enculturated abuse that has been made somehow acceptable in our society. The rudeness and threats of violence, arising from the current non-binding postal survey, are of the same ilk as that experienced under the title of racism. It is the same kind of persistent hounding that was experienced by Gillian Triggs and it is arising from the capacity of people to treat others as Sub-Human. I have often said that I can tolerate stupidity, but I cannot stand rudeness. It costs nothing to be courteous, so why do people feel free to write hate-speech?

Christians who participate in such behaviour bring the Gospel into disrepute. According to the dictionary, intolerance toward those who hold options different to oneself has a term: bigotry. Yet, people who exhibit bigoted behaviour do not see themselves as bigots. They simply see their view as absolute. They are right and everyone else is wrong. This is an example of dualistic thinking. Christians who are dualistic thinkers believe there is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. When talking about Marriage Equality, some Christians think Heterosexual Marriage is absolutely right and anything else is wrong. There are other Christians who think Marriage can be between two people, no matter what their gender-identity. Then, there are many Christians who hold a view that is somewhere else entirely. 

E.g.1. 1  I am Heterosexual and so marriage to the opposite sex is important for me, but I cant really speak for anyone else.

E.g.2. Religious people should observe only Religiously-defined marriage.

E.g.3. Religious people can be in interfaith marriages.  

E.g.4. My religion should influence the values of the society, including those who do not follow my religion.

E.g.5. My religion should be one of many voices contributing to the framing of our society.

Among Christians in Australia, there is a diversity of opinion on Marriage Equality. There has also been a range of behaviours. The Moderators’ Group on Australian Christians for Marriage Equality have seen literally thousands of people saying:

“Thanks for restoring my hope.”

“I thought Christians hated us. Thanks for proving me wrong.”

“Thank goodness I found your page”

“...because someone's faith doesn't have to limit their humanity... Some great stories on this group.”

Of greater concern has been those who have said:

“Impressed, from the other pages claiming to be christian pushing the No agenda the behaviour from them had me lose all respect for christians, they even attacked less conservative christians as false believers. Good to see more tolerance and love being shared.”

“my grandfather was a minister when he was alive, and i have not entered since being made to feel like i was a sin of a person  .. so this helps alot...”

“Thanks for your support. i'm gobsmacked. After hearing all the lies & hate elsewhere, this is a breath of fresh air...”

I am not going to post samples of the posts we have hidden or deleted. Many have contained threats of violence or hatred, either for the church or on behalf of sectors of the church. Seemingly, the most virulent comments have come from people whose faith seems to be threatened by our presence. Most of these have denied that we are Christian, called us abominations and compared us to Satan’s spawn.  People have felt free to rubbish respected biblical and theological scholars and Pastors/Ministers/Priests. 

We have also deleted large numbers of YES comments, because they also broke the rules of the site. Some were haranguing or aggressive. Some were rude or used inappropriate language. We also deleted posts from both sides who misused scriptures by proof-texting or not indicating an interpretive understanding.  

While some of the Moderators have suffered homophobic hate for many years, some are simply straight Christian leaders who see the pastoral and ethical need to stand with those most impacted by the debate. To say we have been shocked would be an understatement. Most of the Moderators have engaged in extra Pastoral Supervision for themselves due to the overwhelming number of tragic and terrible stories, the sheer quantity of grieving and hurting people, and the violence of some of the hate attacks. 

Why do we do it? 

We believe it is the right thing to do. We stand alongside the marginalized. We identify with those who are disadvantaged and who are in the wilderness. We believe God didn’t make mistakes when creating the diversity of humanity. We love God and those whom God made.

I also do it because I am an evangelist. I am most certainly not looking for Christians scalps to carve into the spine of my Bible! I believe evangelism is being a messenger of good news, and amid the clamor and clashes of debate, some still small voices can say to people, “God loves you!” When people come to our site on the verge of taking their own lives, because they feel so battered by what other Christians have said, we get the opportunity to engage in crisis ministry and show genuine love and support. I have no doubt that we have talked a number of people “off the edge” - at least for a time.

In the broader community, the association of NO vote hardline condemnation with Christianity has done immeasurable damage to the reputation of the Christian church. People associate the emphasis on ‘biblical teaching’ with the findings of the Royal Commission on Institutional Child Abuse and they find the church to be hypocritical and not credible. Such judgmentalism from Christians invites the wider society to be judgmental of Christians... and we all bear the responsibility for what has been allowed to happen in our religious organizations. And so, the Christian message is damaged. It loses credibility, because those charged with the responsibility to proclaim the good new are seen to be hypocritical judges without compassion. We are labeled as those who hate and vilify, rather than those who love and care.  

The church does not exist to live in holy isolation. It exists to be in the world (but not of it) so that it may worship God and display the love that arises from the experience of Heaven... “they will know we are Christians by our love”. Honestly, I don’t mind that some people choose to vote NO. I find it terrifying that Christians (from both sides) think it is okay to abuse one another. 

This debate isn’t about defining marriage. For Australian Christians, it is about defining how we communicate the Gospel of Jesus Christ in Australia today. 

Is our Evangel (message), “turn or burn”, or is it, “God created you and loves you as you are”?

Marriage: Blessing or Discrimination – for some not others?

Coming from a mixed-ethnicity household, I grew up being called a mongrel. Back in the day, politicians argued about preserving racial purity or weaving together a diverse society. The ‘White Australia Policy” sought to keep undesirables out and policies to identify and remove mixed-race children from Aboriginal mothers provided fodder for Stolen Generations. First Australians, with complex kinship codes and millennia-established rite and ceremony were told they were not legal and now needed permission from successive colonising Governments (and the Churches that were in league with them) in order to marry. To make matters worse, the same state and religious leaders then developed a coordinated approach to removing children from such unions. 

So it was with some dismay that I read an article in yesterday’s SMH. Rev Dr Michael Jensen, rector of St Mark’s Anglican Church at Darling Point, wrote about why he is voting NO in the postal survey on same-gender marriage. 

Dr Jensen noted that for some Christians, “Opposition to the redefinition of marriage seems obstructionist at best and driven by prejudice at worst.” He readily admitted “there are terrible stories that GLBTQI people have to tell about rejection, vilification and violence”. He wrote of the shame that people like him have not spoken loudly enough against the bullying of our fellow citizens. 

      

It is curious, then, that Dr Jensen believes that “preserving the current definition of marriage will be good for Australia and for all Australians”. I wonder how he thinks it will be good for those who have been rejected, vilified and violently abused? Surely, it should be the victims who should receive the restorative justice of being recognised, heard and affirmed. The principles of restorative justice are based on the idea that it is not enough to either punish or rehabilitate perpetrators of abuse, but that people who have been victimised should be restored to wholeness, and that this may require particular support from those perpetrators. At the very least, it is beholden to those who have contributed to systemic abuse to get out of the way and stop colluding with systems of oppression.  This was the basis for much of Jesus’ teachings about the Kingdom of Heaven.

Of course, the current definition of marriage, was only codified in such a restrictive way just over a decade ago (2004). Dr Jensen calls this ‘classical marriage’. It is as if such a form was something coming to us down the ages from Ancient Greece, or at least from the period of Mozart. In fact, up until recent times, formally registered marriage was largely reserved for those with property or inheritance concerns. Indeed, many of the scriptural references about marriage or divorce are about ensuring women are not abandoned or left without provision.

Within our society, we have marriages and de facto relationships. Marriages are entered into and recognised under two distinct authorisation processes – civil and religious. As religious celebrants, neither Dr Jensen nor I are authorised to celebrate civil wedding ceremonies. We perform religious rites and testify that they have been observed. We sign documentation testifying that we have sighted documentation relating to the legitimacy of the people being married.

In the 1961 Marriage Act, under the guidance of Sir Garfield Barwick, marriage in Australia was understood as:
• as a lifelong and exclusive union between two people
• a bond that draws two people together in a relationship framed not just by feelings of love but by promises of commitment and faithfulness.

The legal framers chose not to define gender at that time, despite pressure from complementarians to do so. It was, of course, the ‘60’s, and women were beginning to appear at Law School and make the case for Women’s rights, not to be treated differently under the law. It took over 40 years for the law to change to specifically restrict marriage to a man and a woman. This was done to prevent the recognition of same gender couples marrying in the ACT and overseas.

As fellow followers of Jesus Christ, Dr Jensen and I agree that we are called to recognise all human beings as made in the image of God. As he says, “Jesus calls his disciples to love and protect the vulnerable, reminding of our frailties and proneness to error.” Where we differ is in how we believe we are called to respond.  While Dr Jensen assumes that saying YES is the most peaceable thing to do. It is also, for many, the right thing to do. 

In ministering alongside and with diverse people, I have learnt that they are no less pastoral, generous, creative, beautiful or flawed just because they identify as LGBTIQ. They are no less able to enter into a lifelong and exclusive union with another person, based on commitment and faithfulness. Indeed, many of them are in such relationships. The obstacle to experiencing grace, for them, is the lack of affirmation, blessing and support from the wider community that comes with marriage. Their rejection and experience of discrimination impacts negatively on their capacity to contribute to society to their fullest potential.

I find it disturbing to think that somehow my husband and I have a valid marriage because of our physical attributes. Our marriage bears witness to sharing a creative, hospitable, community-nourishing life. We have countless ‘kids’ through sport-coaching, choir-directing and mentoring. Over the years, many of them have lived in our home. We have blended extended family. Indeed, when we were married, my stepson and grandma stood and affirmed the covenant we were making to be household and kin together. To me, this is more in keeping with God’s instructions in scripture to live out the realm of God wherever we are. It takes more than ‘giving birth’ to give life to children. For many, we have been able to offer the comfort and security of a loving and stable home.

Biblical imagery talks about becoming one flesh (Genesis) or one body (Corinthians). While it is easy, in today’s individualistic society, to assume this is about one person and another person, the unity described in the Body of Christ is about formation for Community, reflecting the Triune Community of God. Likewise, the Oneness described in Genesis stories of family are a far cry from the type of ‘classical marriage’ Dr Jensen seems to propose. (These included polygamy, mixed wives and concubines and arranged marriages.) 

What does become clear is that people are made to be together in relationships of intimacy, companionship and partnership. This sits well with an overarching theme in scripture about the importance of incarnation – being fully and physically present and actively involved, not just words or intentions. While every couple should complement (contribute to and balance) each other, I take exception to the idea that this is defined by gender. I certainly dispute the argument that one spouse should be subject to the other. Rather than focusing on subjugation and headship, we could see marriage as the honouring and upholding of one another. (My husband is nodding and saying, “It works for us.”) Moreover, the couple is created and affirmed in relation to contributing to the creation of community beyond themselves. Marriage (an expression of love) is not selfish, but kind. It is a building block for the wellbeing of extended family and tribe.

Finally, I have found it interesting that so many christians believe that Australia has such a strongly Christian heritage. I am of Chinese-Buddhist-Scottish-Atheist descent. I am simultaneously 2nd generation and seventh generation Australian and adopted Adnyamathana (rock people of the Ikara-Flinders). Australians have at least 60,000 years of heritage, much of which was destroyed and stolen in the last 200 years in the colonising name of Christianity.

Dr Jensen claims that The Christian Bible provides the foundation for our laws.  I confess, along with many Australians, my sorrow and grief that the scriptures have been used to justify genocide and break up families, particularly those of First Australians. I pray that we do not try to do the same thing to rainbow families. Rainbows remind us, after all, of God’s Covenantal history – a history of unexpected relationships and blessings. The purpose of Covenant is to hold us closer to God, that we might seek God’s blessing.

All praise be to the God who created all Humans to be blessed!

Rev Dr Amelia Koh-Butler is a Minister of the Uniting Church in Australia. Her research is in intercultural studies (anthropological missiology) and applied theology. She is transitioning from being the Executive Director of Mission Resourcing in South Australia to take up a new appointment as Parramatta Mission’s Chaplain to the University of Western Sydney.

A follow up on Power and Prayer

Only a few days ago, I wrote a post on Power and Prayer.  This morning I woke up to an article published yesterday, reporting on an interview with a public figure in Australian society, Mr Lyle Shelton, calling for "conversion therapy" for children. Correctly naming that it was not appropriate for adults to be forced to undertake such a highly disputed and controversial "treatment", yet, encouraging parents to inflict it upon their children.

This is encouragement to undertake what I believe to be child abuse. I can only think of it as being destructive and willfully dehumanizing. The World Council of Churches supports a position regarding the Rights of the Child. Activities that are coercive or done against a person's will (implied in Mr Shelton's statement) contravene what mainstream Church leaders around the world.

As a Christian Minister, I reject Mr Shelton's stance and call on him to retract his damaging words.
As a person of faith, I call on God to protect children from this kind of hateful abuse.

O God, who sees the vulnerability of each child,
Protect them from the harm of ignorance and abuse.
We pray for hearts to be filled with your love 
and minds to be led by your wisdom,  
So that parents and advisors can see each child for what they truly are:
Your precious creations, made beautifully in your image.
Jesus Christ, friend of Children,
Let the little ones know your protection from experimental 'treatments' 
that seek to change them from who you created them to be.
May those who seek to coerce parents or violate the security of trust within families
come face to face with you... for only you are Judge.
Amen. 

Affirming MARRIAGE

Nearly a quarter of a century ago, T and I said I Will and I Do. Now we are saying YES!

I was delighted when I was first exploring Christianity and was given a Bible to start reading from the front - Genesis. When I got to Leah and Rachel, I suddenly realized that the Big God Story in the Bible was not just about European Western cultural privilege. God was quite prepared to work through the stories of other cultures and other family structures. This came as a relief to me because previously Christians had shamed me and my family for having a grandfather with multiple wives and concubines and for having a multitude of offspring. (He was faithful to all of them.)
I discovered that the issue about polygamy was a cultural tradition and that it did not limit God's capacity to bless the family. Now, continuing to read the story, I soon discovered that there were significant disadvantages to being part of that family - not the least being if you were a daughter... poor Dinah. BUT - again, despite the less-than-ideal family decisions (like a genocide of the in-laws and first converts top the Covenant) God continued to pursue prevenient grace (when God loves us before we even know) for a seemingly dysfunctional family anyway.

My point is - much of our reading of marriage in the Bible is what we choose to privilege as relevant. We read through cultural lenses. Now we are challenged to think about how do we bear witness to our faith in a secular society around the creation and reform of secular law.

I value my delightfully monogamous heterosexual marriage. For us, we experience the grace and blessings of God on a daily basis, but it is not about sex, nor is it just about the two of us. It is about the community around us that is committed to us and our commitment to them. It is about our care for each other's siblings and the home we provide for immediate and extended family. It is about household and community and blessing. It is about being part of a Covenantal relationship and a community that honours our commitment to Covenant with/under God. It is about witnessing to the love of the One who invites us all to share compassion and be self-sacrificing in doing so.

There are people in same-gender life-long relationships, including immediate family. I pray for them to have the opportunity to be blessed by God and surrounded by a church community, who encourages them in spiritual life, witness to God's liberating love and service to the world that Christ loves, without the judgment and vilification of people who express hate.

Don't forget that we are talking about real people who read these posts, trying to figure out if they will ever be welcome in a church. Be assured that if we ever feel the calling to rebuke, we only ever get the right to do so because we have earned it with the trusting relationships that arise from extended unconditional hospitality AND because people have invited us to participate in co-accountable relationships of Christian fellowship.

In a secular society, I do not believe Christians should act as if we have the right or privilege of dominating or deciding definitions for others. However, we do have both the capacity and responsibility to contribute to a more generous, kinder society. We are not there to police others, but to be first on the scene when someone needs a hand or a tissue. We should be there when people are hungry, lonely or feeling vulnerable... ah yes - the Beattitudes (T's favorite passage)!

So, today I pray for all married people and all those who wish to marry. I also pray for those who have been married and for whom it didn't work out. I pray for those who missed out on marriage, especially those who have loved and lost. Most of all, I pray for my darling. I wish our marriage could go on for eternity, but I will settle for every day you can give me. Please God - bless marriage!

Power And Prayer

The Late theologian and non-violence advocate, Walter Wink, wrote,

“Intercession is spiritual defiance of what is, in the name of what God has promised. Intercession visualizes an alternative future to the one apparently fated by the momentum of current contradictory forces.”
“The message is clear: history belongs to the intercessors, who believe the future into being....Even a small number of people, firmly committed to the new inevitability on which they have fixed their imaginations, can decisively affect the shape the future takes. These shapers of the future are the intercessors, who call out of the future the longed-for new present...the reign of God.” 

Becoming aware of the vulnerable and persecuted is difficult. For one thing, the very nature of vulnerability means powerlessness and invisibility. It is what happens when people exercise power over others. It is a dishonouring of the power of God, who chooses to reveal Godself in the reflected image of the most vulnerable. When we recognize the face of the crucified One as our example of Godly behaviour, we convict ourselves of being more attracted to Human power than following humility.

I see people wielding power - and it is not pretty. In a time and place where we have the opportunity to empower the poor and vulnerable, I see Christian leaders choosing values that I believe to be inconsistent with the Gospel of Liberation and the God of self-giving. I see risk-assessments based on avoiding the spiritual disciplines of faith, generosity, service, acts of justice and sacrifice. I see ecclesial procedures built upon short-term 'business practices' (under the guise of somewhat simplistic compliance policies) instead of a focus on obedience to the call to participate in God's mission.

Such deception of the people of God is perpetuated by claiming that an object of our role in mission is to 'build the Church' - as if this is about building the legal entity. The scriptural charge tells us to Go - Make Disciples and Baptize. It focuses our work on relationships of empowering, not relationships of exercising "power-over".

To pray is to make ourselves vulnerable before God and open ourselves and the world around us up to the transforming work of the Spirit. When we pray for our enemies (or for those we disagree with) we are brought into the possibility that, through the forgiving spirit of God, we might sacrifice ourselves for the sake of those who hate us, judge us or belittle us. How can we do this? When we pray, we also learn that the opinion that counts is God's, no one else's.

So, God, today I pray...

For the abusive, unjust and ungenerous in our churches,
For their meetings, their collusion with dominating powers and their strategies,
For victims and perpetrators, for onlookers and bystanders,
For those who are silent and those who have been silenced.
Come,  Good Shepherd,
Lead us to the waters of life
And help me not to drown the idiots!
Amen

1-2 CALD 2nd Gens - What's Next?

Just over a week ago, I was involved in the "1-2 What's Next/Second Gen Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Conference".
I have had a week to reflect.

Others have reported on the wonderful enthusiasm and wisdom emerging from diverse Aussie/CALD leaders, mostly in their 20's (with a few in their 30's). I had the privilege of facilitating some of their sessions. We used the Space for Grace process mentioned in other places on this blog. (We were not discussing Marriage, but life, spirituality, context and ministry.) The process involves setting some ground rules and then standing back while they take on co-leading themselves.

The themes emerging from 2nd generation leaders (not in order) were:
1. tradition, culture and faith
2. discovering and inherited faith
3. perserverence of faith
4. discerment and hyphenated identity
5. transition in growing cross cultural communities
6. cultural expectation
7. parenting 3rd generation

Each of these themes warrants further work, but my focus today is on the community and the process and what I observed.
   
The Community
 
Diversity is a challenge for any gathering. Building a sense of group identity and shared community requires finding commonality within the mosaic (and confusion) of competing stories. Allowing participants the room to be able to share uninterrupted stories on their own terms (rather than being dissected by others) invited people to learn about the rich Humanity within their new community. This is about building a new community (a new foretaste of Heaven) rather than privileging the previous identity groups as constrictive and limiting experiences. The new community is called into being by the breath of the Spirit made known by those who are present and engaged with one another.

One of the participants commented afterward,

After only a morning, we felt as if we had been growing together as a community for a week or more. It was a profound experience of knowing one another in a new way.

And,

I really noticed the difference when we left the safety of the S4G and went into another setting. 

We printed several key questions that people could choose from:

Space 4 Grace
Questions for everyone  – sharing of life
Share a story to:
1. Tell us about your life, communities, your ministry context
2. Help us to see and handle differences
3. Identity
    a. How do you understand your place in the household / family / workplace?
    b. Is your faith inherited or personally discovered?
4. Tell us about your Spiritual Life
    a. What kinds of practices nourish your spirit?
    b. How do you pray? What is important in praying for you?
    c. How do you connect with the Scriptures? Are there special passages for you?
    d. Tell us about your spiritual community

After everyone had an opportunity to share stories related to the above questions, small groups explored emerging themes...

Questions for Small Groups
1. What did you notice?
2. Are there any emerging issues?
3. What is Important about identify?
4. What is important regarding spiritual disciplines?

The Community was also built by having generous times for games and meals and plenty of opportunities for informal conversations. It reminded me of an old Youth-work learning: All Youth Ministry involves food and/or music. Certainly, these help to build and nourish community - a bit like Communion really.

The Process

Using Space 4 Grace can take a really long time for deep issues, but it can take a couple of hours, as we did in this setting. We divided into two manageable groups once everyone had mastered the skills of RESPECT Guidelines and MUTUAL INVITATION and done a demonstration of how to do these. We called for volunteers to be theme note-takers and invited the first story-sharers for each group. A couple of the older people visited each group to see how they were getting on.

Being in groups of 15 was big enough to get real diversity and small enough to develop a sense of community intimacy. I know other larger groups have experienced the same kind of intimacy, but that takes greater listening discipline to sustain for a longer period of time.

When both groups were done, we gathered together and checked the themes across the groups and then got people to circle those that were most important from the conversations. That is how we got the list (above). Everyone had two goes at refining the themes, so there was built-in validation within the process.

What I observed

I was expecting life-issues to surface and I was expecting community to be built. I was surprised by how quickly the participants entered into very deep sharing. It was a privilege to be present as God graced us all with an experience of holiness. The Spirit was present and it felt amazing. I can logic about this experience, but nothing I write can adequately reflect the profound sense of the presence of God among God's people.

Others talked about the experience, too. The next day, participants shared about their desire to extend the community they had experienced and try out the methods in other contexts.

Asian, European, Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern and African followers of Jesus have different traditions and experiences of faith. They read the Bible in different languages and give emphasis to different parts of Scripture and different spiritual practices. They often get segregated and hide behind their own cultural limitations. Yet, in this context, people were able to learn from one another, pushing beyond "fear of the other" into exploring how we might be informed by one another and through relationship.

God was glorified from multiple perspectives!

Where to from here?

I now firmly believe that God is revealed in the multitude that makes up the Body of Christ, not by the individual voice of the dominant culture. Therefore, I will work to enable the members of the multitude to find their voices and develop listening skills. This is why I have served on the various Councils of the Church and why I will continue to encourage people who do not automatically get approached. We need the voices God calls - not just the ones we are comfortable with.
__________________

Blest to be a blessing

My friend, Dr Liz Boase, recently led a brief workshop on the themes in the Hebrew Scriptures that help us to think about Mission and Evangelism. As she was speaking, I couldn't help thinking about my own questions about what blessing is for me and how that sometimes differs from what others think should be a blessing for me.

My early experience of evangelism was that someone was just being generous and loving. However, it was not long before others started interfering with what God was doing. "Blessing" can so easily turn into judging or colonizing or fitting someone into a box that really doesn't fit.

Here are some of my notes from what Liz said about Blessing in the Hebrew Scriptures...

Blessing is complicated.
The core meaning has to do with fullness of life - sometimes linked with the blessing of children, community and prosperity, but only in terms of what they represent - being able to live life to capacity. It is about flourishing.
Sufficiency is related to fullness of life - the experience of providence allows the freedom to live in a particular way.
When people do and are how they are meant to be there is a sense of blessing unfolding. (LB, Aug 2017)

This sat well with the thinking of God's SHALOM and desire for all Creation to live into a foretaste of Heaven. This is what Ministers and Churches and Disciples seek to promote when they follow Jesus, but it can be so easy to get distracted! How often do we let go of the priority of Blessing in favour of the easier choice to judge and tell others to fit more neatly into my life and my world-view?

Liz pointed us to two helpful texts:
Christopher Wright - The Mission of God's People
James Okoye - Israel and the Nations

The Call of Abram is full of emphasis on BLESSING...
Genesis 12:1-3New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

And the encounter of Moses at Mount Sinai emphasized Covenant and knowing our story of liberation and blessing.

Exodus 19:1-8New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

God blesses US and wants us to be a blessing to others!

Weavers - Carers for Carers

My Husband was diagnosed with Stage 1 lung cancer in mid-2013. In 2015 he was diagnosed with Stage 4 brain cancer. It has been one helluva ride and, while I wouldn't wish cancer on anyone, we have grown closer and have deepened in our relationship. Being a Lover and Wife is challenging when you are also a Provider and Carer. This is why I sought help.

We moved from Newcastle to Adelaide in January 2015. We had never lived in South Australia before, so most of our 'friends' were work-related. When Terry was diagnosed again, I knew I needed some contacts who were not work-related. I looked at possibilities for Support Groups, but most of those were for the person with Cancer, less was around for the Carers.

I found Weavers online. This is my story.

I went through a process to find the right person.

Having a Weaver as a Carer enabled me to be cared for myself. It didn't place huge obligations on me, but gave me the opportunity to be supported.

Different Carers need different things from the people who care for them. Other people need information or someone to reflect with. Sometimes I just needed to be reassured that what I thought I knew was reasonably sound. With the stress of caring, you start to question yourself, because you know you can't control the situation. Being able to reflect with someone (who had good active listening training) meant being able to check in with someone who was not being emotive.

When I talk to many of my friends, they are also having to come to terms with their love and grief or confusion about our situation. When I talk with work colleagues, they obviously think about how this may impact on our shared work. With a Weaver, there are no other vested interests other than just supporting me. It helped. It helped to keep me sane, on-track and strong.

On Women and Men and Ministry in the Uniting Church - One Women’s Response

One Women’s Response
– A response to Nancy Beach’s presentation at the UL2017 National Ministers’ conference.

The Uniting Church is Australia’s Ordination questions highlight the importance of an egalitarian approach to men and women in ministry. However, we have mistakenly assumed that this would mean a commitment to public advocacy and leadership in combatting the dehumanising rhetoric of complementarianism in the life of the Church. It was deeply disturbing to many at the recent UL2017 National Ministers’ Conference to be presented with the continuum of “Complementarianism to Egalitarianism” as reflective of the current spectrum of belief and behaviour in the Uniting Church in Australia. How far we have fallen!

This is not a criticism of the excellent presenter, Nancy Beach, who was refreshing in her well-grounded and insightful comments. It is just that 25 years ago I did not think we would need to revisit such arguments within the UCA. I thought we learnt these approaches simply to offer support, advocacy and solidarity to our ecumenically oppressed sisters-in-ministry. Alas, Nancy’s presentation was needed in a Church that is seeing women walk away from working in hostile environments.

After the well-constructed and engaging session on women and men in ministry, I asked a few people what they thought about the current climate in the UCA. Several spoke of their concern that we were sliding backward, reiterating some comments Nancy had made in her presentation. Another expressed surprise at hearing this spoken about at a National Conference, asking: ‘It seems like she hasn’t been well-briefed about our position’.

On reflection, even if Nancy was aware of ‘our doctrinal position’ of women and men being equal in ministry, she was very effectively addressing the reality that there is doctrine and then there is belief – and they do not always match up. She highlighted this with a particularly helpful example:

[paraphrased from Nancy Beach 24 Aug 2017]

When women contribute in a meeting, they tend to hold back until they are 90% sure about what they are saying, whereas men will contribute their thinking when they have a 40-50% formed idea. 

My response to that is:

YES!

And – when a woman presents a 90% formed idea to a bunch of 40-50% thinkers, they often treat it as if it is a 30% formed idea that will need their validation. This is why I believe women need to be particularly attentive to other women’s voices in meetings. They need to listen carefully to one another and reflect back what they are hearing, repeating those things that resonate, and removing the enculturated habits of men from assuming that it is a role (attached to their gender) to validate considered thinking, (sometimes with questions that show they have not bothered reading the paperwork or asking in advance). Of course, this becomes impossible when you are the only female in the meeting OR when women are trying to behave like men in order to get on (more on this later).

Aside for Executives: I have always prioritized business relationships where a 
member of a Board has sought answers to their questions when they read the 
report, in advance of the meeting. Such courtesy is to be treasured and invites a reflective relationship. When such a relationship is established, I am much more likely to seek out that Board member for further refining of emerging work. They have demonstrated how to improve work 
rather than destroy it.

I was, however, bothered by the advice that women should speak up earlier when they have less formed ideas. An alternative would be to tell some people to shut up until they have engaged their brains better. An in-between compromise, which has been around for a long time, is to invite people to toss in partly formed ideas for the group to play with respectfully.

Respectful engagement is about relational behaviour. Women are not the minority in the Uniting Church, but we can sometimes be treated as minority voices, and we often act as a passive majority. The rise of UnitingWomen and Women-in-Theology and new forms of expression are signs of the desire for a more active engagement. Such gatherings of women include welcome experiences of freedom and empowerment. They also highlight that this is no longer the expectation in our mixed gatherings.

It is difficult to discuss women and men without falling into unhelpful cultural stereotyping. When thinking about Gender, we need to critique our own world views and cultural assumptions. One way of doing this is to consider perspectives from other cultures, examining alternate values and then reconsidering our own situation, enlightened by other ways of looking at things. (Essentially, this is part of what we are doing when we do Bible study.)

Within the Uniting Church in Australia, many of our comments and assumptions about women are also Western ones. Some of the strongest women of influence and authority are from non-Western cultures. I have been privileged to learn from indigenous sisters from both patriarchal and matriarchal social systems. I have witnessed the shift in style when four female Moderators (2 Western and 2 non-Western) get together. I have experienced Executive Leadership gatherings, in Australia and overseas, with some gender balance and, more often, with minority women. These are stories our Church could learn from.

If it is appropriate to ask a Keynote Speaker to come and talk about Women and Men in Ministry at a Uniting Church National Ministers’ Conference in 2017, perhaps it will be timely in 2018 to commission a new expression of Gospel and Gender to further explore our common good?

Marriage Couples - "Developing a Theology of Marriage" Questions...

Fascinated by the comment on FB posts about passages of Scripture and what they might mean in the current conversations about marriage...
I wonder if we might be getting a bit obsessed by a few passages... i.e. Led down a path of limited reading and limited reasoning...

It seems to me, people are using the Bible to argue about sexuality and are taking 'marriage' as a given, rather than doing the harder work of developing a genuine theology of marriage and relationship. (Much of the 'Christian marriage' definition seems to be based on cultural Christianity from dominant culture settings or secular society and rebranding it, rather than on really looking at the myriad types of marriage practiced by Christians globally.)

I would argue, therefore, that it may be helpful for people who get married (whatever their situations) might be encouraged to develop a theology of marriage together. AND it may be helpful for those of us who care about scripture to get in and encourage people to read the scriptures more deeply and comprehensively... or - at least - more often.

E.g. Some questions for couples:
What parts of scripture will inform how you will live, work, play together?
What parts of scripture will guide your responses to God's calling on you?
What is God's call to you as a discipleship couple?
What models will you take for family life and household?

Developing a biblical theology of marriage - not for you, but for me

Today I read a very helpful article by Robyn Whitaker. It outlines some of the biblical passages that some people think are important when considering same-gender marriage.

What I have found most unhelpful in the debate so far is that the comments seem to be about critiquing same-gender relationships. Not all same gender relationships involve physical intimacy or sex. Not all marriages involve physical initimacy or sex either. I suspect some of the conversation is impacted by our incapacity to talk about sex. I am no different. So, I am not going to start by talking about sex. Instead, I want to talk about marriage.

Every marriage needs a conversation about how we enter into it and understand it. Because marriage involves more than one, it requires communication and negotiation about values, purposes, commitments, goals and outcomes. For people of faith, there needs to be a further conversation about whether what is being entered into has a faith basis. For people of deistic faith, there is a further question about developing a theology of marriage.

My husband and I are both in the latter category. We both believe in God and have a shared faith that commits us both to a journey of shared discipleship. We follow Jesus. We try to reflect Jesus' teachings in our lives. We try to live into the calling of being a blessing for others.

Here are some of the passages I think of as informing my theological reflections about marriage:

• Abused concubine as blessed mother (Hagar) Genesis 16 and 21    

I saw a wonderful painting by the artist, Frank Wesley, of Hagar and Ishmael. Rejected and cast-out, Hagar was punished for doing what was required of her. Abraham fell down on his responsibilities to her and their son. Sarah did not provide protection for her. Hagar's story points to the failures of Abraham and Sarah. Ordered to Go forth and multiply, they set up a permanent settlement. Both of their relationships with Hagar diminish their marriage. They (as a couple) are not a blessing to her or to Ishmael. God has mercy on Hagar and Inmael anyway. They had the opportunity to offer mercy and chose to withhold grace. This led to generations of global schism.

• Finding a wife for Isaac (Rebekah) Genesis 24

Families tend to seek marriages 'amongst their own kind'. Familial blessing or criticism of marriage is often connected with racism, classism, ethno-centrism... It challenges people's comfort zones to contemplate marrying outside of narrow expectations. There is default resistance to even talking about alternative expectations. The film, Guess who's coming to dinner, tells the story of families coming to terms with moving beyond intellectual assent to difference, to actually welcoming a marriage that moves beyond the expected.

How much of our theologising also defaults to fear of discussing 'the other'? How much may that impact on discussions about who we may or may not marry?

I was struck by this story of an arranged marriage. The values expressed prioritized family, ethnicity, culture, language and upbringing, OVER love. Rebekkah's response was connected to adventure, possibility, promise, faith and vision, OVER love.

Learning: Biblical marriage does not automatically place great value on heart-felt love as the foundation of the marriage relationship. However, there is value placed on preparation, commitment and vision.

• Jacob's wives and Concubines (Rachel, Leah, Zilpah, Bilhah) Genesis 29. 

When I first read this passage I remember the relief that Jacob had a family like mine! My grandfather had four wives and several concubines. He was faithful to all of them. There were many children and many grandchildren. There was no expectation of the two parents, two kids and labrador household. For many of us, such a household is impossible! AND - it isn't even biblical!!!

Learning: Biblical marriage includes models we do not have here. Biblical models may be abusive and illegal. They may also be acceptable for good reasons in other places. E.g.1 Ensuring there is a large enough family to ensure a workforce for surviving in a place.

• Familial destruction of marriage - withholding blessing (Dinah and Shechem) Genesis 34 and 46:15

I visited a Sunday School once when I was doing a sleepover at a friend's place. It meant that I didn't need to go to Chinese school that week. The Sunday School were "doing Joseph" - so we learnt about the colored cloak and lots of brothers.

Many years later I read about their sister. The one whose marriage they destroyed. Some translations claim she was raped. Others claim she was taken and then Shechem begged to marry her. This would have ensured her survival and future. It may also have been a loveless and abusive marriage.

Whatever the reasonings, Dinah's brothers conspire to deceive and murder, not just Shechem, but his entire tribe. It is the first biblical genocide - of people who had just committed to and covenanting with God (through circumcision). It was the missionaries murdering the new converts. The murderers justified themselves saying they were standing up for their sister, but, in fact, they sacrificed her future for their property and financial gain.

I have seen families reject brides or grooms. There are often concerns about property or financial security or possible abuse. Sometimes the families are acting in the protecting role with their loved ones. Sometimes they have self-interests that cloud other issues.

Learning: When it comes to marriage, people will make up their own reasons for supporting or rejecting marriage. It doesn't need to be logical and can be violent and emotive. Often the behaviors demonstrate how important marital assets are to a whole range of people other than the couple concerned.

• Marital abuse victims and survivors (Esther and Vashti) Esther

Both Vashti and Esther were abused in their marriages. They lived with fear and daily possibilities of rejection and violence. They lived in political marriages, where "love" was misused as a substitute term for lust.

Learning: Even in abusive or political marriages there are questions about what can be accomplished in faith. Sometimes marriage is one-sided. This is not an endorsement, but it is a reality. There are both those who benefit from and blossom in marriages AND there are those who find marriage to be oppressive, dangerous and debilitating.

• Familial rejection (no room for Mary and Joseph) Luke 2

Joseph was from the family of David from Bethlehem, so it was part of the Torah (Law) that his kin should have provided for Joseph and Mary and the new baby. They obviously didn't... because the baby was to be born "out-of-wedlock" (beyond the blessing of family)? Where is God's love in such judgmentalism?

Learning: Real families behave badly when they think they are being right or correct. Hospitality may be offered, conveying grace, or it may be withheld, conveying judgement.

• Many rooms (Divine Household) Matthew 14:2

It is just as well there are many rooms 'in my father's house' - as some of us might not like to share! The implication is that many different types of people may find their home in God. This leads us to believe that God can be inclusive, even when communities want to be exclusive.

Learning: God is generally more generous-spirited than most people!

• Marriage and in-laws (Peter's mother-in-law) Matthew 8:14

Marriage is not just about spouses. It is also about in-laws and others - be they children or friendship or relational connections. There is Jesus generously healing his disciple's mother-in-law, but the story tells us more than that. It tells us about Simon-Peter's relationship with his mother-in-law, such that she serves her son-in-law's friend AND the friend does a healing.

Learning: Biblical marriage has implied relationships attached. Marriage brings different connections that lead to more connections.

• Marriage Commitments and Future Responsibilities Matthew 22:23-33

If all marriage is off the table when it comes to heaven, we ought to ask more about what it means to be like angels? Most of us consider gender to be a key aspect of our experience of identity. Gender is not just related to sex, but is connected to how we relate, how we speak, how we dance, how we dress. Few of us can imagine being like angels. It is also something that hasn't really made it through to core beliefs for the faithful. After all, many spouses plan to be buried together. Yet, this doesn't make sense if there is no longer marriage in Heaven.

• Relational foundation of AGAPE Love and honoring/respect Leviticus 19:18, Matthew 19:19 and 22:39 and 1 Corinthians 13:4-8

'Love one another' in the biblical sense is not 'know one another'. Yet there is much confusion about what biblical love (or knowledge) mean. When we think of knowing and loving someone, we think of loving them despite knowing the truth of them. Physical intimacy, however, is only a small part of truly knowing someone.

The unconditional love that is described in parts of the New Testament, does not ask for something in return.

• Marriage and provision and security (Ruth) Ruth 3

Ruth and Naomi's story highlights that whatever the 'love aspects', marriage is largely about the security and future of women, including migrants and refugees. Expect a long study to come out on this one!

• Bride and Bridegroom

The passages read at Terry's and my wedding were from Isaiah 62 and Revelation. They were featuring bride and bridegroom imagery about the relationship between God and the Church. They stand in stark contrast to the criticisms leveled at the 'faithless' who are often called prostitues for turning their attentions to other attractions, getting distracted from the true relationship that is for life and nurture.

Biblical reflection: Some marriages are about blessing, life-affirming, nurturing one another and impacting other relationships around them positively. Other marriages are more like the fickle relationships that are for use and profit, services rendered and temporary gains. Marriage should be measured and corrected with these two extremes in mind.

AND
 
There are countless more texts to list and explore. I have started with these ones because they shape me. Others will identify other texts. Between us all, we could help each other in gathering resources for exploring a biblical theology of marriage.

If people are going to discuss Christian understandings of marriage, I suggest they start to share what shapes their own experiences and understandings. What biblical stories shape your thinking?