itficult to sort out these distinctions. See , 'Psychology and the Church's Teaching pp. 6-23. msibility trans. H. T. Willetts (New York: rrice Vaticana/Paulist Press, 1994), $2357. 'l Children and Suggestions for Pastoral Sanctifi catioil, Homosexuality, and God's Triune Life Eugene F. Rogers, Jr. While Christians have always debated "practical" issues like ordination of women, freeing of slaves, and marriage-like unions for gay and lesbian people,l they have also always treated embodiment as one of the "highest" concerns of their intellectual discourse, from the election of Israel to the incarnation of God and the resurrection of the dead. Put another way, theology has used one set of terms - creation, election, incarnition, resurrection - while ethically charged post-modern discourse uses another - embodiment, race, gender, orientation. Theologians such as Karl Barth tell us that ethics and high theology ought to be closely related,z and anthropologists of religion such as Clifford Geertz tell us similar things about ethos and worldview, or social and intellectual practices.3 Yet only too rarely do Christian ethicists connect doctrines such as incarnation, election, and resurrection with race, gender, and orientation.a My constructive proposals attempt to renegotiate ethos and worldview in Christianity by reference to the central symbols that connect them - where ethos includes the practices of marriage (or lack thereof) for straight, gay, and lesbian people; worldview includes what Christians believe about the world, signally dogmatics ("a critical native model"s); and the central symbol is the body of Christ enacted in the sacraments. Marriage and the Eucharist (as well as baptism and monastic vows) tell Christians what bodies are for before God, or what they mean, by incorporating them into the body of Christ. Along the wide spectrum of views about marriage for gay and lesbian couples, the extremes sometimes meet in claims that gay and lesbian marriages are irredeemable, on the far right because they are gay, on the far left because they are marriages. I claim the opposite: they can be a means of redemption. ':i 217 Sanufficati Eugene F. Rogers, Jr, has been said Moreover, they can be a means of anticipating God's catching human beings in theology. It of K up into that wedding feast that God celebrates in the life of the Trinity, an Protestant theologian since the R elevation that the tradition has had the wisdom to call consummation. The aesthetically, or by thick descript question for the right is: Given that gay and lesbian people are not going to go communal Christian language molc practice, away, what shall the church do wtth theml The question for the left is: Given usage in worship, instruct rather that gay and lesbian people are part of the church, how much shall it allow their redescribed them, than evolv does bodies to mean? In the context of baptism, Eucharist, and (yes) monastic vows, conceptual description argue, ir the Spirit is now moving Christian communities to see marriage as the central Even a theologian as famous for formr symbol by which to test and renegotiate the fit of gay and lesbian bodies into Considering how theology properly r the body of Christ. way lies open to Persuade an oppor Rowan Williams puts it this way: except to start from one's own and t argum.enta, difficulties to be overcor The whole story of creation, incarnation, and our incorporation into the The argument I offer is less the s fellowship of Christ's body tells us that God desires us, as if oe were Cod, as if with definitions and entailments, gi we were that unconditional response to God's giving that God's self makes in the would have called an argument d,r z life of the Trinity. The life of the Christian community has as its rationale that in part. It is more an attempt t - if not invariably its practical reality - the task of teaching us this: so ordering story so as to reveal the coherence relations human beings may see themselves as desired, as the occasion our that marriage broad enough to include ga of joy.6 vowed celibates in community. Far mounts an argument of a different st The question for both sides is then this: By what sort of sacramental practices ex cTnaenientia, or ftom fittingness, a can the church best teach gay and lesbian Christians to see themselves as It tests the hypothesis that gay and I occasions of joy, that God desires them as if they were God?i Marriage is tradition. I hope to identi peculiarly suited to teaching God's desire for human beings because it mirrors Christian -God's matters, and treat traditional or choosing of human beings for God'3 own. As Barth puts it, "In that the these than polemically, as difficult election of God is real, there is such a thing as love and marriage."8 God's rather uses objections and repliel election of Israel, like marriage, involves a discipline of faithfulness in which Thomas it God permits human beings to become what God sees. God's election of the could not exist otherwise, but that sense central claims about mostly gentile church, Iike marriage for gay and lesbian couples, is (in Paul's better of does them gre metaphor) God's overturning of nature to graft wild olives onto a domestic tree their relationship. It I ask such questions as these: Wt - to include them, that is, in a structure (the law of the Spirit) that allows their of God? To the incar selves, their souls and bodies, to mean much more than they would by nature, trinitarian life the body of Ch: to be caught up into the very life and love by which God loves God. the churchl To procreation relate to divine creatior nature relate to redemPtion and t Definitions and Disclairners celibates forl What does God wan' The question of Christian marria primarily in the sense that all theolog A critic has complained that Williams's essay, just quoted, makes no *irn ,n. q,r.stion of life with God; t "argument."e Williams seems to take the licitness of gay and lesbian God and with other human be, relationships of certain sorts as given, and goes on from there. The critic with what life in community ought to bel thought the essay begged the question, and I thought it refreshed the debate, heavenlY citY, or a ni by not starting from the shared premises but by attempting to make its own or house, of a So Thomas Aquinas characterizes I premises attractive through disciplined elaboration. That is not a bad procedure 218 Sancttfication, Homosexuality, and God,s Triune Life ting God's catching human beings in theology. It has been said of Karl Barth, perhaps the most important theologian since the Reformation (d. 1968), rates in the life of the Trinity, an Prorestant ('He that he argued isdom to call consummation. The aesthetically, or by thick description: took the classical themes of I lesbian people are not going to go communal Christian language molded by the Bible, tradition and constant The question for the left is: Given usage in worship, practice, instruction and controversy, and he restated or iurch, how much shall it allow their redescribed them, rather than evolving arguments on their behalf."l0 Such a )ucharist, and (yes) monastic vows, conceptual description does argue, implicitly; it argues from and to coherence. rities to see marriage as the central Even a theologian as famous for formal deduction as Thomas Aquinas can agree. e fit of gay and lesbian bodies into Considering how theology properly mounts arguments, Thomas insists that no way lies open to persuade an opponent who begins from different premises, except to start from one's own and treat the opponent's generously as solubilia algumenta, difficulties to be overcome.ll and our incorporation into the The argument I offer is less the sort Christian theologians sometimes offer desires us, as d we were God,, as if with definitions and entailments, givens and therefores, the sort a scholastic ; giving that God's self makes in the would have called an argument ex necessitate, or from necessity, although it is :ian community has as its rationale that in part. It is more an attempt to retell and renarrate bits of the Christian ask of teaching us this: so ordering story so as to reveal the coherence of Christian thought with a practice of mselves as desired, as the occasion marriage broad enough to include gay and lesbian couples and leaving room for vowed celibates in community. Far from a lack of argument, that procedure y what sort of sacramental practices mounts an argument of a different sort - one the scholastics called an argument from fittingness, and one Geertz would call thick description. r Christians to see themselves as ex contsenientia,or s if they were Godli Marriage is It tests the hypothesis that gay and lesbian marriage can newly suit or befit the rr human beings because it mirrors Christian tradition. I hope to identify fresh starting places for thinking about own. As Barth puts it, "In that the these matters, and treat traditional ones, liberal and conservative, constructively ng as love and marriage."8 God's rather than polemically, as difficulties leading to a more adequate account, as discipline of faithfulness in which Thomas uses objections and replies. I do not argue, that is, that Christianity rt God sees. God's election of the could not exist otherwise, but that its existence in the way I describe does make r and lesbian couples, is (in Paul's better sense of central claims about God, the community of the faithful, and justice.