« Ur Video: Mark Driscoll on Hell | Main | Chris Seay: Don't Begin with Morality »
February 26, 2010
A Christian Sexual Alternative?
Both conservatives and liberals have had their views of sexuality shaped by the culture.
The title caught my eye: “Reverend reconciles sex and religion.” Was another church challenging married couples to make time for sexual intimacy for seven days straight? A pastor making headlines for an edgy sermon about the goodness of sex? A review of the latest book from a Christian relationship expert with new statistics about Christians’ sex lives?
Actually, the article was much less predictable than any of my guesses. The story’s focus, Debra Haffner, has the distinction of being both a reverend and a sexologist who believes her two professions “offer a unique insight into modern sexuality.” The Revered Haffner—who, by the way, won’t marry people who are virgins—thinks it necessary for “conservative religious leaders to reform their doctrines to fit modern times.” Such a shift includes focusing on the “quality of relationships” rather than on the morality of sexual practices.
As someone who falls within Haffner’s “conservative religious leader” category, it’s tempting to write her off. There’s little new in her claim that our sexual ethics need updating for a new day. Her reading of the Bible (“Genesis is full of affirmations of humans as sexual beings”) is certainly culturally bound and would likely confuse the Bible’s early interpreters. Frankly, it’s hard for me to take seriously any expert who doesn’t strongly consider the historic claims and traditions of the Church.
That’s why I also have trouble with much of the teaching and preaching about sexuality that originates closer to home.
The ways those of us with more traditional interpretations of the Bible interact with this subject aren’t much more helpful. Is our language any less culturally bound than Haffner’s? What about our theology and methodology?
For example, at a conference for church leaders I listened to a pastor tout his congregation’s recent advertising campaign. To promote a sermon series about sex, the church mass-mailed glossy postcards and purchased billboards, each with a suggestive bedroom photo. Acknowledging the complaints the church received from some in their town, the pastor said something to the effect of, “We’re willing to risk any method to get people to church on Sunday.”
And we’re probably all familiar with the stories of pastors who urged the married couples in their churches to have sex for multiple days in a row. With clever branding—“Seven Days of Sex” and “The Thirty Day Sex Challenge”—these campaigns informed the surrounding culture that Christians have sex, too. (Though they may have communicated that Christians need their pastor to remind them to have sex.) Through clever marketing, these churches attempted to show their relevancy while shedding any prudish reputation.
The Reverend/Sexologists and Pastor/Marketers are more closely related than they’d like to admit. In discussing and preaching about sexuality they both borrow from the enlightened and glitzy present while neglecting the alternative kingdom proclaimed by saints past. Such a move may enthrall for a time, but always leaves us hungry for something substantially different.
Last year my wife and I spoke about sexuality to a Christian fellowship at a nearby university. Our talk that night centered on one question: How does the Gospel of Jesus transform the way we think about sexuality? In other words, does the fact that Jesus was crucified and resurrected have any bearing on how we view the sexuality of others and ourselves? By evening’s end I was both hopeful and discouraged. Hopeful because we watched light bulbs turning on as students encountered a distinct way to interact with the complexities of sexuality on campus. As those pursued by God, hidden in Christ, and filled with the Holy Spirit, these young women and men have access to a Gospel that transcends the culturally captive methods and language of Reverend/Sexologists and Pastor/Marketers.
The experience also left me discouraged. In a room of bright college students, many who had been raised in the church, there was a palpable sense of frustration and helplessness at the prospect of experiencing a Christian sexual ethic. Why is this? Have Christian leaders neglected the counter-intuitive Gospel implications for our sexuality in order to portray a Christianity that is more culturally acceptable? While many of us would disagree with the Reverend Haffner’s theology, I’m not sure we’re offering a more genuinely liberating alternative.
For all our talk about sex, I wonder if we have forgotten the only distinct and life-giving thing we have to say on the subject: Jesus changes everything. As one student put it at the close of our evening, “This is really hard stuff….but it’s also really good news.” When it comes to the complexities of sexuality we don’t need more sexologists or marketers. We could, however, use more pastors and leaders willing to echo this student’s insight. The Gospel of Jesus is really hard and really good and offers entirely new ways to consider the mysteries and joys of our sexuality.
Comments
Dave - I think one of the main reasons evangelicals get so gimmick-y about sex is that we really don't have an evangelical theology of sexuality. We need to be able to answer the questions you raised to ourselves, before we can lead others.
Posted By: nate j | February 26, 2010 9:05 AM
You ask, "does the fact that Jesus was crucified and resurrected have any bearing on how we view the sexuality of others and ourselves?" What is your response? Jesus spoke very little about sexuality. I am not sure what you are suggesting here -- that we are holier if we are non-sexual?
Posted By: Tim | February 26, 2010 10:34 AM
I'm confused as well.
Posted By: muse | February 26, 2010 2:35 PM
Wonderful!
We really have allowed ourselves to be polarized into one of two completely ignorant camps on sexual ethics...
The traditional camp that claims to know what redeemed humanity looks like, but that knowledge somehow fails to communicate what our genitals are for!
...and the laissez faire approach of our culture that seems to know everything about what to do with your genitals, but doesn't really seem to understand what a human being is for!
Posted By: Steve | February 26, 2010 3:39 PM
The traditional camp that claims to know what redeemed humanity looks like, but that knowledge somehow fails to communicate what our genitals are for!
...and the laissez faire approach of our culture that seems to know everything about what to do with your genitals, but doesn't really seem to understand what a human being is for!
A very good observation, and also all to true.
Posted By: sheerahkahn | February 26, 2010 5:35 PM
David,
You give us a cursory critique of two approaches to sexuality, and describe the reaction to your own presentation/talk about the subject.
I'm interested in the substance of your talk to that college students. How do you suggest the Gospel of Jesus transforms the way we think about sexuality?
Posted By: Nate | February 27, 2010 11:02 AM
it seems to me that the paramount ethical concern for evangelicals relates inordinately to "genital control".
IMO, it's because sexuality = sex to most evangelicals.
it's the cart before the horse. genital expression is just that--an expression.
It's not the sum of sexuality.
Highly recommend "Sex for Christians" by Lew Smedes.
Posted By: nathan | February 27, 2010 11:36 AM
Chirrup, guys!
Do you want to know the secret of the great Christian sex life?
The secret is in this verse:"But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." (Matthew 6:33)
Sounds dry and trite? Please keep on reading.
Here are excerpts from the book "Further Along The Road Less Traveled" by M. Scott Peck, M.D.:
"About a dozen years ago, after many months of working with a rigid, frigid woman in her mid-thirties, I had the opportunity to witness her undergo a sudden and quite profound Christian conversion. And within three weeks of that conversion, she became orgasmic for the first time in her life. Could the timing have been accidental? I doubt it.
"As a friend of mine put it, 'The sexual and the spiritual parts of our personality lie so close together that it is hardly possible to arouse one without arousing the other.'"
In a capsule: Spirituality is directly proportional to sexuality.
His own findings gave even Peck a shot in the arm.
"I do not think it an accident that when this woman became able to give herself wholeheartedly to God, in very short order she became able to give herself wholeheartedly to a human partner, praise the Lord!
"I have another friend, a priest, who actually uses this phenomenon as a yardstick of conversion. He tells me that if a conversion occurs in a previously sexually repressed individual and is not accompanied by some kind of sexual awakening or blossoming, then he has reason to doubt the depth of the conversion.
"So it is that you hear stories about ministers who become involved with female parishioners. Ministers and other people in similar positions tend to be sitting ducks when such passions are aroused. And I will confess that when I was practicing psychotherapy, any time I got on the same spiritual wavelength with a female patient of mine under the age of ninety, I had to watch my step."
Practical Question: Am I now on the same spiritual wavelength with my spouse?
If my answer is NO, (say, on the scale of 1 to 10, she's 3, I'm 5) then, I need to LOVE her more. Meaning, I will apply M. Scott Peck's definition of LOVE: that is, I will extend myself to nurture her spiritual growth. Moreover, our relatively low scores imply we both need to spiritually grow more.
If my answer is YES, (say, on the scale of 1 to 10, we're both 7 or 8 and growing) then, hep-hep-hurrah!
Posted By: still | February 27, 2010 12:17 PM
@Nate- thanks for the question. In brief, the substance of our talk about sexuality had to do with our identity as people pursued by God, hidden in Christ, and filled with the Holy Spirit.
My hunch is that most college-age Christians have not been spiritually formed in such a way that this Gospel-identity informs all of life, including their sexuality. So, rather than interacting with the complexities of sexuality with the "mind of Christ", these students have only been given a set of religious principles meant to keep them from making poor decisions. It doesn't take long to learn from these students that such an approach isn't working for them.
It seems to be that neither the Reverend/Sexologist or Pastor/Marketer offers what is actually needed and life-giving: a Gospel-formed discipleship that cares more about transformation than behavior-modification.
Posted By: David Swanson | March 1, 2010 4:55 PM
I had no idea what this guy was talking about...thankfully the response by still at least put some context to merging our sexuality with the gospel.
I get it... the best sex happens after we pray together ;)
Posted By: Chapp | March 2, 2010 2:38 PM
You didn't come across clearly or explicitly enough for me. You left me in horrible suspense like an ad of a commercial enterprise. I'm left unsatisfied. You left far too much unsaid and wasted my time reading.
Posted By: Anthony | March 2, 2010 11:48 PM
For so many Christians, adult and teens, we have been taught nothing more than to wait for marriage for sex...but no one explained why this is so relevant in our walk with Christ. Not all Sex Therapist (and I have a degree in Sex Therapy from the National Christian Counselors Association) are on the level akin to Debra Haffner in forgoing the MOST imperative element of Sexuality in Christianity. I take sexuality as a Christian seriously, as a wonderful and glorious gift TO marriage. NOT the other way around. GOD created sex, to be between husband and wife, man and woman. He entwined our souls spiritually to join one another on a plain so glorious that He touches our very spirits. Without God as the key part of this element, sex is nothing more than a shiny outfit displayed in the window, untouchable, and empty of life. The devil and his minions try many lures to dissuade our Christian community on WHAT sex is, WHAT sex is about, and WHY it was created…he actually has people believing that he created it! He only knows a lie. He knows not the real thing! God does! God created sex. He created us as spiritual beings. The reason that He wants us to wait FOR marriage, is because of the spiritual bond that is entwined within our spirits when we have sex. Intimacy is a large part of our communicational responses with our spouses. Intimacy creates a blanket of emotions that entwine our spiritual beings with our physical responses to one another. Our spiritual bond is OF GOD. When man and woman “join’ it is NOT merely for the purpose of a piece of paper that states you are married. It is FAR more than that. “Joining” entails a physical, mental, and spiritual response and acceptance TO that person with whom you are having sexual relations which BONDS us to them in situations both sinfully (outside), and (sanctified by God) within marriage. Men are created as givers. They GIVE of their spirit physically, mentally, and spiritually TO the women they join with intimately and physically. Women are receivers. We are created to BE receivers of our husband flesh. That means that when a woman or young lady has sexual relations outside of marriage, she is RECEIVING that man’s spirit. That man’s spirit in turn is BONDING with her spirit as ONE. THAT is NOT the plan of God, nor the GIFT that He has given us. God wants us to WAIT for marriage BECAUSE this spiritual and physical bond is SO STRONG which He has created that we are therefore bound to one whom we are NOT meant to be with physically, mentally, and spiritually when we have sex outside of marriage. God wants us bound with ONLY our husband and our wife in which He has created us to be with. HOW can we discern our wives, or our husband to be’s spirit and KNOW that he or she is the one God created FOR us, or expect to have an untouched and undefiled bond with our husband or wife as God sanctifies when we have all of those other spirits attached to ours, roaming around within us, fighting and carrying on because THEY ARE NOT supposed to be there? We can't! That is WHY God wants us to WAIT for marriage. So that our spiritual, physical, and mental bond is ONLY with our husband or our wife. Man and woman. This is WHY Satan and his minions TRY so hard to cause society to relay that sex is NOT important enough to save for marriage. Even he knows that the Gift God has given us FOR marriage is sacred. Even he understands the severity of our spiritual, sexual, mental and physical bond with one another. It is SO sacred that an orgasm is akin to the way we will FEEL when we are WITH God in Heaven. Our beautiful! WHY would we want to otherwise pervert that gift? God created our bond so soul wrenching that He enjoys being a part of our marriage bed, allowing our sexual bond with our spouse to be a beautiful gift to us physically, emotionally, and spiritually as ONE, and not a perverted pleasure of the flesh. As Jesus will join with His bride, the Church, so too do we JOIN with our spouse.
Posted By: Rev Tia Buchanan MA Sex Therapist | March 3, 2010 6:55 AM
I too found this article interesting and disappointing. As a researcher for an intinerant speaker, I had hoped to offer something to my boss that would help him address a quietly key issue in church life. Instead, I'm left wondering what the author's thoughts on the matter are; and while I know the purpose of the article was to stimulate thought, a few more helps would have been great.
As it is, far too many people don't see faith as an integrative concept (which may be the overall point of the piece), so how can they think that way in terms of sexuality?
I'd love to see a follow-up piece!
Posted By: Jason | March 3, 2010 7:00 AM
To me, it comes down to 2 points about how church and pastors approach and talk about sex, particulary from the pulpit:
1) Sex before/outside of marriage: BAD BAD BAD BAD SIN SIN SIN SIN EVIL EVIL EVIL EVIL WORDLY WORDLY WORDLY
2) Sex in marriage:
Maybe if they started doing something about #2, there'd be less need to talk about #1.
Posted By: John | March 3, 2010 7:20 AM
I spent most of my young adult life in church and I can honestly say that I don't remember hearing anything about sex except, don't do it till your married. Why? Why not? These questions need to be answered better by spiritual leaders so the young adults that are searching, like I was, for answers, will have some spiritual knowledge as to what God expects from us in the sex department.
Posted By: Rachel | March 3, 2010 8:00 AM
The simplest Christian response to the questions raised in this article is also the most traditional response. Christians should not concern themselves with sexuality apart from the aim of reproduction. The idea that Christianity needs somehow to be 'reconciled' with sexuality only makes sense from a liberal, and thus ultimately non-Christian and worldly, standpoint. The idea that sex should be pleasurable simply isn't Christian, and the messages we get from contemporary culture are simply worldly temptations which the true Christian must be able to resist, with God's help. So, no problem here. And certainly no need for such an artificial construction as a 'theology of sexuality.' Our Christian ancestors understood this quite well, and there is no reason why today's Christians can't learn the same message.
Posted By: Jim | March 3, 2010 4:11 PM
Maybe we should rewrite the Bible too, and Gods Law for Christians?
God does not look to sex as being a bad thing, I believe he wants us to enjoy sex with our Husband/ wife... I think it all comes down to your own personal relationship with God, if you strive for that first.. everything else will work out in what you feel is right for yourself
Posted By: http://jennifer-myrandomthoughts.blogspot.com/ | March 4, 2010 9:28 AM
Jim - do you even read your Bible? Try starting with Song of Solomon. Even if you try to say that its just symbolism (which its not), its rife with sexual symbolism. And it certainly doesn't talk about reproduction. Read chapter 4, and tell me that there isn't pleasure to be had between a man and his wife. If all sex is to be is about reproduction, then Solomon wouldn't be saying "Your two breasts are like two fawns, twins of a gazelle, that graze among the lilies."
Posted By: John | March 4, 2010 10:01 AM
"1) Sex before/outside of marriage: BAD BAD BAD BAD SIN SIN SIN SIN EVIL EVIL EVIL EVIL WORDLY WORDLY WORDLY"
Uh - is this a Freudian slip?
(Speaking of Freudian slips, my captcha for this message is "swelled plus" - I cannot make this up!)
Posted By: Mary Shannon | March 4, 2010 6:52 PM
The writer said "Debra Haffner, has the distinction of being both a reverend and a sexologist who believes her two professions."
A magazine and a writer that holds itself out as a serious magazine on the subject of religion should know that there is no such thing as "a reverend" -- although the uneducated sometimes use reverend improperly in place of the noun "minister."
"Reverend" is an honorific adjective, only properly used in the phrase "the Reverend Jones" or "the Reverend Doctor Jones" or "the Reverend Father O'Malley."
Posted By: ChristianHumanist | March 5, 2010 9:25 PM
After 22 years i got healed from a sexual addiction just by praying with a scripture and even confessed my constant masturbation and use of pornography to my wife. I learnt something crucial. God created sex and it is important for Christians to enjoy sex within their marriages but we've got to have a healthy perspective of it. Sex i believe was created for two reasons. Firstly for procreation and also to create an environment of openness and intimacy between husband and wife leading to more honest communication which is necessarily to build trust. We are supposed to marry as virgins so that we can both learn about our sexuality as we talk, explore and pray together to develop a strong sexual relationship. Plus sex before marriage really is a selfish act. It's based purely on a craving to satisfy sexual pleasure. It has nothing to do with unconditional love. If you love someone and you really wanna have sex, try buying a ring first and being committed. It's a long route and does not align with our microwave thinking today but God meant us to have fulfilling relationships in marriage and that includes sex.
Whenever someone starts to bring their worldly views into something God created we have to be careful. After all sex is not the world's creation it's God's.
Posted By: Bola Owoade | March 6, 2010 3:44 AM
Because the church is divorced from her Torah roots, she entertains herself with various kinds of dribble - here is a good example.
By the way there is a REASON women leaders in general are forbidden in both the Jewish religion and the "New Testament". There is a REASON women don't have the right to divorce, men do.
Unfortunately the church has been taken over by the divorce feminists... Goodbye church...
Posted By: Landon Lochlan | March 8, 2010 6:06 AM
I definitely wish there was more dialog about this topic within the church. Like other commenters, the majority of teaching I've heard has been that sex is to be saved for marriage. The church doesn't seem to know what to do with those of us who don't marry by the time we graduate from college. Just saying "don't do it" does not address the fact that we are still sexual beings. The older I get, the harder it is to remain obedient in this area. I would love to get married but this is not guaranteed and I'm not willing to settle or compromise to do so. For now, I'm taking it one day at a time and praying that God will give me strength to remain obedient and wisdom to figure out who I am as a sexual being without a spouse.
Posted By: Leigh | March 13, 2010 1:21 PM
Dear Leigh,
This one's for you.
"God doesn't have favorites, but he does have intimates," writes Kenneth Swanson, an Episcopal priest whose 1987 book "Uncommon Prayer: Approaching Intimacy With God" stresses that ordinary people can become very intimate with God....
"I decided to inform God that I henceforth would trust him utterly in terms of marriage and sex. I placed my sexual future in his hands. It was the most precious thing I could turn over to him and it was a risk, but if I didn't, I knew our relationship would stagnate. So I went for broke. I laid everything on the altar and waited for an answer.
"His response was a most gracious, tender answer to prayer. He didn't remove any of my desires, but he gave me more power to say no to them. In surrendering them to him, I paradoxically got them back in a redeemed form. In other words, he wasn't out to de-sex or make a female eunuch out of me, but to give me a greater ability to bring my thoughts out in the light and discuss them with him. I found that he was less concerned with their content than he was in my willingness to surrender them to him. He wanted to be part of my pain. In surrender, I was admitting them and placing them in his hands to do as he wanted....
"I asked to see the gentleness of God and I got an exclusive love. It was clear that he wanted me for himself. Amazed at this, I brashly promised I'd be exclusively his - for now and forever - if he wished. I wasn't vowing never to marry, but I was promising to forego all kinds of sexual satisfaction until marriage - if I should ever marry. Although I'd always been chaste, I hadn't committed myself to that in so many words. Life with the Lord is made up of many little surrenders and this was one. There was a burning of bridges here and it means that should I never get married, I would never experience sex, a frightening thought in our society. In exchange, I received from the Lord the kind of intimacy that went beyond sex and which satisfied....
"It has been more than fifteen years since I decided to pay that price and believe that God could be trusted to run my life...The price is high but, if I can paraphrase Revelation 14:3-4, he will give us a song that no one else knows. We will be the first fruits and the pick of his harvest. We will follow the Lamb wherever he goes."
- Excerpted from 1988 book, "Purity Makes The Heart Grow Stronger," by Julia Duin, author, writer, and religion editor for the Washington Times; won many local and national awards for her religion coverage.
God bless you!
Posted By: still | March 17, 2010 12:47 PM
Post a comment: