1

I heard a statistic several years ago that adultery was the #1 reason that ministers left their positions.

Why does this happen? The talk was given by Steve Farrar and he had two main points.

1. Satan knows the weakness of men, even pastors, in this area and uses that failing to stop effective ministries and discredit the church.

2. Men foolishly put themselves in positions where they can be tempted. With ministers the start of an illiicit relationship often began in counseling. Steve told the group of men that they should never be alone with a woman who is not their wife to discuss personal matters. This is advice that I have followed in my marriage and it has served me well.

2

"Although my little slogan up there about sex being so good in marriage may sound nice and just like the thing a pastor should say, I realize that many people in the church don't really believe that in their hearts. This is why there is so much use of pornography and so much sexual activity outside of marriage."

Being married to literally one of the most beautiful women in Hawaii helps to reinforce that sentiment, but I firmly believe it is true. And if I had to do it over again, I would have married as a virgin, because sex within marriage is incredibly more fullfilling and is what God intended it to be. Surveying the unusual number of good looking women in our church, I have come to the conclusion that many Christians figured out this secret a long time ago.

3

Rufus:

"Men foolishly put themselves in positions where they can be tempted. With ministers the start of an illiicit relationship often began in counseling. Steve told the group of men that they should never be alone with a woman who is not their wife to discuss personal matters."

Excellent point. Also noteworthy is the fact that the Bible says that women should council other women. If the pastor did not foolishly assume that role they wouldn't have these problems. They have no business discussing with married women their problems at home and it is yet another example of pastors funneling too much authority on themselves.

4

Sex is at its best when it's part of a lifelong loving relationship. It's also the most intimate and private part of that relationship. In Genesis, the word describing the private relations between Adam and Eve literally means "to know". In other words, it's not just a physical act. Our emotions and intellect is also involved.

So how can we depict such ephemeral concepts in art? Especially without invading the privacy of the most intimate part of a relationship and without violating the Bible's call for modesty? (1Tim. 2:9)

The best I approach I can think of is by depicting truly loving relationships. One of the best photographs I've ever seen was of an older couple sitting on a park bench looking at each other. This photo was in a book on photography. The caption under it stated that the couple was the parents of the photographer. He had told them he needed to reload his camera then stepped behind the tree behind the bench. The couple chose to take advantage of the moment to enjoy each other's company. The look of love they shared spoke volumes about the depth and solidity of their relationship, one which almost certainly extended to their most private relations. That look was made even more powerful by the fact that it was completely unposed.

Other than such a picture, I don't see how art could reflect such a view precisely because what is critical is the relationship not the physical. How many such images would our society tolerate before they would be considered "stale"?

5

Ed,

So how can we depict such ephemeral concepts in art? Especially without invading the privacy of the most intimate part of a relationship and without violating the Bible's call for modesty? (1Tim. 2:9)

What about the Song of Solomon? That book explores in detail some the most intimate parts of a sexual relationship. I would say that work is a prime example of how the art can inspire the erotic imagination.

6

Why don't you keep your superstitions to yourself and let the rest of us enjoy our lives. You lie and cheat and steal and kill just like the rest of the world, stop pretending your opinions have so much added wait because they are based on 2000 year old lies.

7

Okay, Madmatt, now tell us what you really think...

8

Madmatt,
Remind me, did someone force you to come to this internet blog and read? When is the last time a Christian prevented you from enjoying your life? I missed it on the news, were the Christian sex police in your bedroom last night brandishing automatic weapons? Was their SWAT unit running around your neighborhood last night cutting cable TV connections? If you don't like ideas that run contrary to yours; you don't have to entertain them. I read your post, and am certainly not looking for a ledge. But, if you open your mind a bit, you might find that 2000 year old information could transform your life..

9

You brought the subject up when you tried to force your puppet judges and prurient views onto the Supremne Court.

I read your blog for the same reason I read others, to try and be aware of other views, something you people never do....I comment when they are horrible silly and offensive to the vast majority of americans.

I don't think anybody ever forced your kids to marry a member of the same sex yet you can't shut up about that. So how are we different?

10

I think it fairly complex. Most peple do seek out monagamy and the sense that wonderful, sensual things should happen within it is widespread.

However more so in some liberal states than conservative, the states with the lowest divorce rates are Democratic. Just as on average conservative states have a much higher crime rate than liberal, for example the murder rate in the "god fearing" south is 3 times that of the more secular north east.

It is also true that Republican states take in far more federal dollars than they pay in taxes while Democratic states tend to get less than they pay. Yet it is Republican's who hector others on the need for self sufficiency. Republican perceptions of an "ownership society" tend to be giving government aid to those who own and protecting established interests.

I believe a great deal of the stringency and judgemental attitide comes from people with more difficult lives who are desperately trying to achieve real values while around them entrenched groups limit them. The Democratic states tend to be more capitalist with innovative and competitive industries and their increased wealth, accomplishment and openness within the worldly structure makes them more relaxed and confident. They are less afraid of various explorarations and while this may create a certain slackness, many conservatives by desperately trying to discipline themselves and cutting off all perception of various "lifestyles" tend to convince themselves the forbidden fruit is more sweet. Those who see it and are less afraid of it know that it has it's rots and worms. Just a hypothesis.

But the statistic do show that when it comes to various measures of morality liberal societies do better than evangelical. Again part of it may be desperaton. The troubled black areas within liberal regions tend to have far more churches and to be more critical of those who stray than the wealthier areas.

11

Madmatt,

So how are we different?

I didn't tell you to shut up. Get it? By the way, it's not my blog, and you sure seem to know a lot about the reading habits of Christians, and the opinions of the vast majority of Americans. Anyhow, enjoy sophomore year..

12

Janet,
Very interesting for a study of sweeping generalization and non correlating assertions...fee fi fo fum...I smell an academic..

13

I think that we as Christians should put less emphasis on the act of sex (between a man and a woman) and more emphasis on God's plan for its correct timing. By making our focus the act instead of the timing we have further heightened the excitement behind the social taboo of the act. Our emphasis should be that God's plan for sex to be between a married man and woman is a perfect plan, which gives freedom and that outside of the constructs of marriage it can be a very destructive force, which enslaves willing participants.

14

Madmatt-

I hope you read the above post, as it is actually something of a repudiation of the conventional wisdom regarding sex and art for evangelical Christians. It is well thought out and interesting, and I would really like to hear your views on the topic. Furthermore, not all of us are Republicans (I actually work in Democratic politics and consider myself a liberal with a few notable differences) and many of us could give a rip about the Supreme Court. For me, I don't feel the need to protect marriage. Marriage is an institution created by and governed by the Almighty God. I don't think he's afraid that any judges can undo anything he doesn't want undone.

Ed-

I think that it is easy to forget in our visually-oriented culture that there are art forms other than the visual. As for Christian eroticism (never thought I'd see those two words used together!), film, literature and song can all be used to express these ideas. Furthermore, as a writer, I sometimes write in a modest way about sinful sex in order to demonstrate the emptiness of it all.

Great post!

15

I suppose that different people find fulfillment in different ways. For some, married sex is the best, perhaps only, sex possible for them. Others, I'm sure find great sexual fulfillment in more casual sexual encounters. To say that married sex is, or ought to be, the most fulfilling sex is to assume a truth beyond our knowledge. You may be right, or you may be wrong.

Janet, you are a breath of fresh air.

16

In regard to the assertion that divorce rates are lower in Democratic states:

Are marriage rates also lower there? In other words, are divorce rates lower because the percentage of couples deciding to marry (rather than simply living together for whatever period of time suits them) is lower, implying that there is less social pressure to marry and that those who do make that choice are motivated by conviction rather than custom?

This is not a rhetorical question; I'm really asking.

17

Wow!!! This post really got me thinking. Thank you for posting it!

18

A tough question Bragg. To make a sensible comparision you'd have to control for population demographics. If Blue States have older populations, for example, then that would mean a lower divorce rate (younger people, I imagine are more unstable than older established people). You'd have to break the populations into segments....say looking at the divorce and marriage rates for 20 somethings in Red and Blue, then 30 somethings and so on. You'd also have to do this with other factors that play a role in divorce such as poverty & income.

Depending on how much you are willing to dive into this, you could end up with a Phd in sociology by just answering a blog question!

19

An interesting post. There is a genuine problem, however. You quote Peck as saying: "Because Christians are under the inspiration of the cross and the resurrection and because of the fact that we worship a rescuing God, Christian art has to be something that sees itself as liberating people’s imagination so that things which otherwise would be unthinkable become possible."

The section I've boldified could have been penned by Oscar Wilde, or perhaps more accurately, by the Marquise de Sade who spoils otherwise great porn by going on for page after page, philosophizing in just this way. Nothing in your discussion necessarily excludes either author, although I assume you want to, yes? And nothing distinguishes "Christian eroticism" as I think you describe it from plain old eroticism. I can easily argue that Story of O, one of the few masterpieces of pornography, is a work of christian eroticism. I assume, however, you would not want to promote the book!

The problem partly focuses, I think, on a false dichotomy between the pornographic and the erotic. It has been said wisely that the pornographic is merely the uneducated person's erotica, and vice versa. Both are meant to sexually arouse. That is all they do. A literary work may have erotic elements - such as the sublime Lolita - but it is not an erotic book. In fact, at its most basic level it's actually an argument against fascism, not a sexy subject (has anyone ever gotten aroused by reading 1984's sex scenes?).

Erotic works are meant to arouse, but nothing else. I may happen to love Sappho, you might like Girls Gone Wild. That's a difference in taste, artistry and class, but the intent - in Sappho's most erotic poetry, surely - is just not that different.

As for "Christian eroticism" itself, again you have to point to an example. The Song of Songs is in the Hebrew Bible, as you know. I would argue that PJ Harvey's music is both deeply Christian and intensely erotic. Again, I am sure you would disagree but you'd have a very hard time saying exactly why.

20

tristero,

Nothing in your discussion necessarily excludes either author, although I assume you want to, yes?

I have to disagree. What excludes both author is that the are not “under the inspiration of the cross and the resurrection.” That sentence – which immediately precedes the bolded passage—is essential for context.

As for "Christian eroticism" itself, again you have to point to an example. The Song of Songs is in the Hebrew Bible, as you know.

Whoa, wait a minute. Last time I checked, the Song of Songs was in the “Christian Bible” too. You can’t just throw out that book unless you are willing to throw out the entire Old Testament canon.

21

I am not sure that excludes them, Joe. Both men, no matter how distasteful you find them, were deeply familiar with the cross and the resurrection to the point of being inspired - to reject them.

My point, of course, is the notion that art is a liberation that enables us to think the unthinkable is a commonplace notion of modern art theories. There is nothing that requires holy inspiration to conceive of art this way. There is also nothing that prevents one from using holy inspiration to create liberating art. I'm thinking of Arvo Part's masterful music.

Okay, yeah, the Song of Songs is part of the Christian Bible because the Hebrew Bible is considered part of the Christian Bible. But it predates the Gospels.

What, post-Gospels, are you talking about? Again, I can think of numerous examples of magnificent erotic art deeply inspired by Christianity. Anyone remotely familiar with Western civilization can.

But you are referring to something that is not Tom Waits' music which is often quite erotic and spiritual, not Dali's paintings which are deeply Christian, not Whitman's poetry, not Lars von Trier's films which are often nothing if not Catholic and I think you're gonna have a heckuva time claiming that while they may be erotic, they are not "Christian." They most certainly are, by any standard except a Puritan's. And I am not suggesting you're a Puritan.

22

tristero,

...not Lars von Trier's films which are often nothing if not Catholic and I think you're gonna have a heckuva time claiming that while they may be erotic, they are not "Christian."

While I probably wouldn't have thought of it before you mentioned it, "Breaking the Waves" would be a good example of the type of erotically imaginative artwork that I think Christians should be producing.

23

We should untangle some of these thoughts. The schizophrenic relationship that characterizes the American sexual gestalt isn't uniformly that of Christian vs. secular sexuality. Because that posits a strawman argument of devout Christians wrestling with thier consciences and a bunch of gadabout heathens cavorting willy nilly. Nice contrast but not useful.

In the larger context, Americans in general would prefer to privately think of themselves as sexually satisfied, but speak of themselves publicly as sexually chaste. It's the old saw of wanting a virgin for a wife but a whore in the sack. Jimmy Swaggart talks a great sex game from the pulpit, but he gets caught in the sleazy motel parking lot just the same.

See, you only have so many years on this planet. And before you know it, the apple-cheeked bloom fades to a wizened countenance. There's only so much sex you're going to get, and on your deathbed, as you review the course of your existence and weigh the value of your choices, you might well regret not having explored all the opportunities for self-actualization that had presented themselves. You might take great solace in your rejection of temptation, but then again you might value those few transcendent moments of bliss you attained - biblically sanctioned or not.

I suggest per this discussion that sexual activity should not be tied so tightly to religious obligation. The bible, sorry to say, is a sexual buzz-kill. It leads to guilt and shame and angst for so many people, and at the end of the day, all you can really say is that if more people had more oral sex in their lives, they'd probably be more well adjusted.

24

Joe writes:

While most Christians would claim that they believe the Biblical view of sex and that true sexual fulfillment can only be found in marriage, our actions show that we don’t really believe that to be the case at all. Many of us secretly harbor a suspicion that somebody somewhere really is finding both fun and fulfillment while being sexually promiscuous.

Well, you can give up your suspicion and just accept the truth: Many people do find sex outside of marriage both fun and fulfilling. The only relevant issue for me around sex is that some become obsessed with it and some manipulate others to get their sexual satisfaction. The same is true with people's fascination and often obession with cars and money.

25

Joe, I'm glad that you agree with me about Breaking the Waves, which is a very profound, and often troubling film. I must say that I'm surprised that you agree, and I don't think that's because of typecasting you in some way.

Breaking the Waves is an exceedingly hard film to take even for most of us New Yorkers as the level of psychological and emotional conflict seems often close to abuse. I think the chapters - when the film stops and some old sixties rock is played - make the experience of watching the film bearable. But just barely.

Breaking the Waves also has, as you know full frontal nudity, and a violent (and fortunately off screen) rape. But we do see the aftereffects. I would be interested in your comments about it in some post.

I also thought of some examples of explicitly Christian eroticism. Hildegard von Bingen's visions, poetry and drawings are certainly deeply erotic, but they express a relationship that is an erotic spirituality rather an a physicality. Graham Greene also writes supremely well and seductively on occasion.

26

An intelligent & thoughtful post, but may I suggest another problem you haven't tackled? Namely, the fact that most of the Western artistic tradition since the Middle Ages views sexual passion as the ultimate threat to marriage. Most great legends of lovers shows them as both adulterous & doomed--Tristan & Isolde being the best example, but far from the only one.

Marriage, after all, has historically been more about property, stability, & alliances rather than the satisfaction of sexual desire. It wasn't until the Enlightment that the idea that love was a major element in marriage gained currency, and there are plenty of historians who would argue that became the point when marriage changed into a far more unstable institution.

When you combine the above strands with Christianity's tradition of hostility to the flesh, I think it will take a great deal of deep thinking & creativity to forge a Christian erotic art that is worthy to take its place with the great works of the past.

BTW--this is not meant as a negative post (though I freely acknowledge being a liberal). I would like to hear your thoughts, Joe, on how these rooted patterns in Western culture could be changed successfully.

27

Is that supposed to be Christian masturbation material?

28

Does an abstractly moral religion seem like a bit of mental S&M? Does having a part of yourself deny a pleasure make another part enjoy it even more? Its amazing how much fundamentalists and epicureans have in common.

29

Many people believe that marital sex is bad sex not because of their "plausibility structure" but because of their experience.

30

I think C. S. Lewis, as usual, has good insight here:

"If anyone thinks Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronising and spoiling sport, and backbiting; the pleasures of power, of hatred ... That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitue. But, of course, it is better to be neither."
Mere Christianity

The "neither" that Lewis talks about, I think, is what Joe is trying to get at here. There is undeniable power and attraction in sex. Even when it is bad, it is good. It is the probably the closest we come to transcendence in this life - which is why sex is the greatest idol of our age, and is worshipped in books, movies and music.

But, of course, God wants us to worship Him and keep secondary pleasures in their proper place; which, ironically, frees us to enjoy the pleasures He provides even more than if we seek them for themselves. This was borne out in a famous Redbook survey (and supported by follow-up surveys) which showed that compared to sexually-actives singles, married women experienced orgasm more often and were much more sexually satisfied. The couple that prays together...

31

Your kind condones incest, rape, and sexual molestation of girls and women, and wants to force them to deal with the consequences of abominable abuse. You are immoral and repugnant.

If you want to eradicate abortions, put your money where your hypocritical mouths are: underwrite programs to help single mothers raise their children -- and that includes rape and incest victims.

Otherwise, shut up.

You people are hijacking Jesus Christ when it suits you, but you are no Christians. In fact, you do not know the basic principles of Christianity: charity and compassion.

You people -- the so-called conservative Christians -- are the most immoral people I have ever come across. Shame on you!

You go to Church on Sunday, and you believe that it gives you license to cheat, lie, and rob, for the rest of the week.

32

Madmatt: You brought the subject up when you tried to force your puppet judges and prurient views onto the Supremne Court.

doubleplusgood duckspeak, comrade!

doubleplusungood: did not include doubleplusduckspeakwords 'vast right-wing conspiracy', 'primitive superstitions', 'fascist theocracy', 'womyn's right to choose', and 'yankee capitalist-imperialist-fascist running-dogs'.

EvilProgressive: Your kind condones incest, rape, and sexual molestation of girls and women, and wants to force them to deal with the consequences of abominable abuse.

doubleplusgoodthink, comrade!

doubleplusungood: no mention of doubleplusduckspeakwords 'romish popery' and 'child molestation'. more identification of 'your kind' as thoughtcriminals/bushists-goldsteinists; see list of doubleplusduckspeakwords for madmatt. mention of star trek or federation as source for citing 'religion = primitive superstition' refs unpersons refs unevents. mention doubleplusgoodthink of 'total sexual freedom (tm)' refs unpersons refs unevents unless blackwhiting re 'sexual molestation' and 'abominable abuse'.

;)

33

Well unfortunately not all of us Christians can get married (me being gay). Pretty unfortunate that their are so many committed gays and lesbians who are excluded from marriage. And please....no judgement with me being gay and Christian. It's the Pat Robertsons who are going to be in big trouble on judgement day because of all the gays and lesbians he's pushed away from God and Christianity. We are supposed to leave the judging up to God.

34

Sex is a private thing - it only concerns the three people involved ;)

35

Right on Scott!! You nailed it right on the head!!