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.