Human sexual expression is never condemned by the Bible. When I say "human," it has the richness and the beauty of full humanity with its well-ordered and balanced components. If I'm fully human, I have the intellectual, physical, spiritual and emotional sides of my being in harmony. These are in quantities and qualities which exist only in the human species.
The type of behavior that led Leo Echagaray to the death chamber was not, of course, fully human sexual expression. Humanity was abused. In this case, Leo's humanity and Baby's humanity.
Then there was the case of a man raping a man. A 21-year-old security guard said he woke up feeling extreme pain in his anus and filed charges against a 37-year-old head waiter. How could that be called a "human" act, as opposed to a non-human act if the victim was asleep? A double inhumanity -- force and force while asleep.
Something was missing. It's not what it's supposed to be. It's not that there happened to be two men involved. It's that it is missing all the "redeeming" factors. Perhaps more disgusting, can necrophilia be called a "human" act?
And that brings us back to sex and salvation (since "redeeming" and "salvation" are related in Christian usage). Sex has redeeming factors if it is truly human sex. (Truly human sex, for instance, is different from the sex of two cats thumping on a tin roof.)
First of all, sex is good if it is not harmful or forceful. The Bible is quite positive about sex as a matter of fact, and that prompts me to believe that sex is good. One whole book of the Bible, for instance, is devoted to an explicit romance of an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. In the "Song of Songs" God is never directly mentioned, but sensuous descriptions and passionate feelings fill the pages.
Churches and church people have developed theologies and traditions about what sex is good and what sex is bad, but the Bible guides me to believe that all sex is good if it is not harmful or forceful.
In the story of Sodom in Genesis 19 there was no sex at all, and today nobody is absolutely sure about the meaning of the story. If there was reference to sex, it could only have been non-human sex, such as "attempted" rape (force). Twenty-some times the Bible refers to Sodom and neither sex nor homosexuality is mentioned in any of them. Jesus referred to Sodom in the context of inhospitality with no mention of sex.
In Leviticus 18 and 20 and Romans I, same-sex behavior seems to be in the context of pagan temple worship -- behavior not acceptable for the Jewish or Christian or Moslem people of the One True God. In Bible terms, it was "abominable" behavior. People who use that term today do not know that the Bible uses that word (toeveh, abominable) to mean worshipping a pagan god in any way (with temple prostitution sex, or otherwise). Such worship is harmful to the faith commitment of God's people.
Nowhere in the Bible, in truth, is there any word or passage which condemns homosexual sexual orientation, gay and lesbian love, or same-sex loving relationships (or marriages). It's totally unfair (dishonest, discriminatory) that in some English Bibles the word "homosexual" appears in I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10. The Greek words used by St. Paul definitely do not mean "homosexual." In fact that English word (and concept as used in modern psychology and every day usage) was not invented until the late 1800's, almost 2000 years after St. Paul. So it is wrong for the word to be used in the Bible. It is wrong for the translators to translate the words used by St. Paul (malakos and arsenokoites ) as "homosexual" for two reasons: (1) it is anachronistic, and (2) the Greek words do not mean the modern meaning anyway.
So you see, we could talk a long time about sex and salvation. The traditions most of us have grown up with perceive most sex as an obstacle to salvation. But if you understand sex as an invention of God and given by God and positively viewed in God's Word, then it must be joyfully embraced as a means to salvation.
So, if all sex is good which is not harmful or forceful, we can also distinguish some sex which is better on the continuum of fully human sex. Sex is better, more "human," if it is a way of expressing love and caring that is not harmful. For an employer to express love and caring for an employee by sex is harmful (as in the example of President Clinton and Monica). The harm is not that it could lead to impeachment, but that persons in positions of power (such as professionals with clients and older persons with minors) cause harm to the subordinate person. Sex between consenting (equal) adults is better when it expresses love and caring.
If we have good sex and better sex, we can also have best sex. Thus we can speak of the best situation of human sexual expression as that sex which takes place in the context of a loving, enduring, committed relationship. Of course, this can be true of a heterosexual relationship. But, by the same tokens it can also be true of a same-sex relationship.
People who say that God told Adam and Eve to multiply often forget that God also said in Genesis 2 that "it is not good for a person to be alone." God recognizes the need and the human redeeming value of companionship. There is more blasphemy than justice in the Adam and Steve derision which projects that God rejects the enjoyment of companionship by God's children who are born homosexual.
If God's children, Adam and Eve, were understandably heterosexual, it also must be understood that some of God's children, through Adam and Eve, evolved to be homosexual (just as children of heterosexual parents today often are born homosexual). And they too are entitled to the best expression of their sexuality in a loving, enduring, committed relationship. This is true whether Adam and Eve are historical or mythical. We are in a world that has evolved, and God is prime mover of that evolution. Some of God's children are homosexual and deserve same-sex companionship and entitlement to the best of all sex.
It can be said that all people can discover their salvation through sex, if you will, but more accurately, by living fully human lives, bringing into harmony and balance our intellectual, physical, spiritual, and emotional components -- blending, then, our spirituality and sexuality.
In this month's column I have tried to give you the central core of my approach to sexual theology, based on the writings of dozens of today's best theologians.
For more information about these or similar issues, e-mail your questions or comments to me at saintaelred@gmail.com (just click on the moving envelope)