This is a book that needs to be carefully read by every pastor and Christian leader. We live in a time that cries out for careful definitions for just about everything, and this book supplies us with a careful definition of marriage.
It does so in the realm of common grace. In other words, the arguments here are philosophical, historical, and sociological, not exegetical. But what they argue is fully consistent with Scripture, and I believe the book helpfully addresses some areas that exegetical arguments frequently do not.
In other words, the “traditional” view of marriage should not be understood as a practice of marriage on autopilot, with no one quite knowing what they were doing or why. The issues before us now have been thoroughly dealt with over the course of centuries, and the modern novelties simply have not done their homework. Fortunately for them, homework is not necessary if the approach you are taking is that of raw judicial tyranny.
For example, the ancient Greeks had the same basic understanding of marriage as modern traditionalists do, while at the same time celebrating homo-eroticism. This means that while they did not have a scriptural understanding of sexual morality, they did define marriage correctly — and that definition cannot simply be dismissed (in secular terms) as “homophobic.” In a similar way, how can it be “homophobic” to say that two men cannot consummate a marriage by means of (say) fellatio, when the tradition has always consistently held that a heterosexual couple cannot consummate a marriage that way either?
This is a very helpful book. Even in those places where I might find myself differing with something, I found the reasoning here to be careful, judicious, and on point.
“Rigorously pursued, the logic of rejecting the conjugal conception of marriage thus leads, by way of formlessness, toward pointlessness” (p. 21).
I had posted this on “A Rook for a Queen” but am reposting for possible input: I wonder if like the returned exiles in Ezra, Christians should be building up a damn against the flood of death with one hand and wielding a sword to ward off its causes with the other. I think it would be amazing if we could replace planned parenthood with a Nation-wide institution aimed at preserving and supporting marriages. It would be 100% free and would need to have an impeccable reputation. It’s mantra, “Every Marriage Is Worth Saving.” It would be staffed with the… Read more »
Yeah, this was really good. I confess I had no clue about how to think about or talk about marriage from a legal/social perspective (ie: non-theological) until reading this book. It’s a quick and concise read.
legal/social/philosophical perspective*
Thankfully, my library had this available on the Kindle. A great read. I was hoping for a bit more examination rather than just mentions of the historical societies that affirmed marriage while also affirming deviant sexualities, but it’s an intriguing opportunity for more research.