Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
I. The Verse in Question:
The tradition of centuries stands as a towering cathedral of moral certainty, constructed from the fine-hewn stones of inherited dogma and polished by the relentless friction of institutional repetition. Within these hallowed halls, the air is thick with the incense of a perceived holiness that demands absolute conformity to a specific narrative of human behavior. This structure provides a sanctuary of clarity for the weary soul, offering a definitive map of the moral universe where every boundary is clearly marked and every deviation is met with the gravity of eternal consequence. To look upon this edifice is to see the pinnacle of the Contrived Institutional Narrative (CIN Pronounced SIN – also known as Religion/Christianity), a majestic system that purports to hold the very keys to the favor of the Creator. It is a masterpiece of social and spiritual architecture, designed to create a uniform landscape of piety where the complexity of the human experience is distilled into binary categories of pure and profane. The beauty of this narrative lies in its simplicity and its promise of a secure identity within a global community of believers who speak with one voice against the encroaching tides of a changing world. It is the steady heartbeat of a religion that has survived by the strength of its walls, ensuring that the ancient echoes of the law are heard through the megaphone of modern traditionalism.
At the center of this majestic sanctuary, enshrined in the golden reliquary of the King James and its many descendants, lies a singular decree that has served as the cornerstone of the institutional moral code. The words resonate with a heavy, archaic authority, vibrating through the rafters of the mind like a low, mournful bell. You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination. In the theater of the Contrived Institutional Narrative, this sentence is not merely a instruction but a cosmic boundary. It is presented as the ultimate standard of biological and spiritual purity, a clear and present wall erected by the Divine to separate the righteous from the fallen. This perspective paints the verse as a timeless prohibition against the very nature of innate biological (born) same-sex attraction, framing it as an inherent stain upon the soul that must be scrubbed away by the harsh soaps of repentance and denial. Within this polished veneer, the word abomination is wielded not as a technical ritual term, but as a moral cudgel, a descriptor of the Father’s supposed visceral hatred for a specific category of love and intimacy. The contrived institutional narrative finds its strength in this interpretation, using it to define the outer limits of the community and to justify the exclusion of those who do not fit the narrow mold of the traditional family unit.
Imagine a gardener who has spent his entire life tending to a topiary garden where every hedge is trimmed into the shape of a perfect, unmoving statue. To this gardener, the beauty of the garden is found in its rigidity and its refusal to grow beyond the sharp blades of his shears. Any branch that dares to reach toward the sun in a direction not prescribed by the blueprint is viewed as a threat to the harmony of the whole. This is the essence of the Contrived Institutional Narrative. it views the vast, wild forest of human relation and agency through the narrow lens of the topiary garden. It mistakes the shears for the life-force and the statue for the living tree. The narrative demands that the vibrant, breathing reality of the soul be compressed into a static form that can be easily managed by the institution. It is a seductive vision because it removes the burden of discernment and replaces it with the comfort of a pre-packaged morality. One does not need to understand the function of the soil or the direction of the roots; one only needs to obey the shape of the hedge. In this environment, the verse from NASB is treated as the sharpest blade in the gardener’s kit, used to prune away any expression of male identity that does not serve the institutional goal of a predictable, homogenous social order.
The gravity of this narrative is bolstered by a selective reading of the ancient scrolls, where the Hebrew text is often treated as a mere servant to the English gloss. The institution claims to speak for the Creator by invoking the weight of the Leningrad and Aleppo codices, yet it often overlooks the functional mechanics of the language in favor of a spiritualized abstraction. In the halls of religion, the verse is proclaimed with a finality that brooked no questioning.
Leviticus 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as [l]one lies with a female; it is an abomination. NASB.
In the ears of the institutional follower, this sounds like a universal condemnation of a person’s being. The Contrived Institutional Narrative interprets the Zakar (Zah-khar) — Male merely as a gendered category and the To’ebah (To-ay-vah) — Abomination as a moral stain of the heart. This perspective is the high-water mark of a theology that has traded the living agency of the covenant for the dead weight of a institutional script. It is a narrative that thrives on the “thou shalt not,” turning a functional protection order into a weapon of psychological and spiritual war. The “beauty” of this section is found in its ability to make the reader feel like they are standing on the solid ground of a long-standing truth, even if that ground is actually a layer of ice over a deep and misunderstood ancient ocean.
This institutional posture creates a world where the Father is seen as a meticulous bookkeeper of sexual deviance, watching from a distance with a furrowed brow. It suggests that the primary concern of the Almighty is the enforcement of a Victorian-esque social decorum rather than the functional health and agency of His people. The narrative acts as a heavy velvet curtain, draped over the window of the soul, blocking out the light of the original cultural context and replacing it with the dim, artificial glow of the sanctuary lamp. It is a comprehensive system that answers every question before it can be asked, providing a sense of belonging to those who stay within the lines and a terrifying sense of exile to those who find themselves outside of them. By presenting this verse as a simple, moralistic ban, the institution avoids the difficult work of looking at the power dynamics, the ritual boundaries, and the tribal protections that actually fueled the ancient world. It is much easier to maintain a “religion” of forbidden acts than it is to live a “covenant” of functional agency. This is the veneer—the smooth, painted surface of a ship that has long since lost its rudder and is now merely floating in the stagnant waters of tradition.
The seduction of this polished narrative is found in its promise of an objective “good” and “evil” that requires no further investigation. It is the ultimate expression of the CIN, where the institution becomes the mediator of reality. When the voice of the preacher rises to deliver the sentence of abomination, it carries the weight of a thousand years of Western thought, none of which existed when the ink was wet on the parchment. This is the “mirror” we hold up in this introduction—a reflection of a system that is powerful, compelling, and deeply resonant with the human desire for certainty. It is a system that speaks of “purity” while ignoring “function,” and of “holiness” while ignoring “agency.” The contrived institutional narrative is so pervasive that it becomes the very air we breathe, making any other interpretation seem like a heresy or a modern compromise. However, this series aims to show that the real compromise was made by the institution when it stripped the Hebrew roots of their grit and their cultural fire to make them palatable for a sedentary, religious audience. The gravity of the CIN is the weight of a leaden crown; it looks like gold to the casual observer, but it eventually crushes the neck of the one who wears it.
As we stand in this cathedral of thought, we see the icons of the patriarchs and the martyrs, all drafted into the service of this singular, restrictive interpretation. The narrative weaves a tapestry where the biological male is perpetually at risk of falling into a category of being that is “disgusting” to God. This creates a posture of constant self-surveillance, where the natural inclinations of the heart are viewed with suspicion and dread. The analogy of the fortress is apt here: the institution builds a wall to keep the “world” out, but that same wall becomes a prison for those inside. The “abomination” is the crack in the wall, the boogeyman used to keep the inhabitants from looking too closely at what lies beyond the gate. It is a masterful use of fear disguised as love, and of control disguised as protection. The more “favorable” this section appears, the more clearly we see the desperation of a system that cannot handle the nuanced, functional, and relational reality of the original Hebrew mind. The CIN is the ultimate contrived institutional narrative because it invents a God who is as narrow-minded and bureaucratic as the men who created the institution.
To conclude this introductory vista, we must recognize that the Contrived Institutional Narrative has done its job well. It has provided a framework for millions to navigate their lives, albeit a framework built on the shifting sands of anachronism. It has taken the deliberate, functional words of YHWH and turned them into a moralistic maze. The verse in question has become the signature of a specific kind of religious identity, one that defines itself more by what it opposes than what it builds. We are looking at the “polished rot,” the beautiful exterior of a structure that has hollowed out the core of the covenantal promise. The systematic excavation that follows will not be an act of destruction for the sake of destruction, but a rescue mission. We are stripping away the veneer to find the original, unpainted wood. We are breaking the topiary shapes to find the living tree. The CIN says, “this is who you cannot be.” The Covenantal Relational Agency says, “this is who you are designed to function as.” The journey from the former to the latter begins here, in the recognition of the sheer, overwhelming power of the narrative we have inherited. We have seen the mirror; now, we must walk through it to the ancient world that lies on the other side.
The final word of this introductory witness is a call to observe the silence between the words of the institutional decree. In that silence, there is a hidden tension, a realization that the traditional gloss does not fully satisfy the deep hunger for a truth that is both ancient and functional. The Contrived Institutional Narrative provides a “safe” harbor, but the water is stagnant and the ships are rotting at the pier. The Covenantal Relational Agency offers the open, turbulent, and living sea. As we move into the excavation of the Zakar and the Ish, we leave behind the comfort of the cathedral for the grit of the desert tabernacle. We leave behind the “abomination” of the religious mind for the “To’ebah” of the ritual boundary. The transition will be devastating to the religious ego, but it will be life to the covenantal spirit. We have looked upon the polished surface of the institution; it is time to look into the depths of the Word of God, validated not by the traditions of men, but by the sharp, pointed reality of the ancient Hebrew witness.
