« "Tolerance" Fumbles | Main | The Sight of the Cross is Dangerous »

Learning to speak the language, part I: being purposeful

The language of sex, that is.

I’ve gotten the idea from several sources that many Christians younger than me (and perhaps not) are not convinced by the statement that sex ought to be reserved for marriage. Nor do they view all extra- or premarital experiences or solo sex as necessarily wrong. Rather than hear that doing these things is wrong, though, they want to know why the alternative is better. They want constructive suggestions toward a positive view of sex.

Well, I’m all for the positive. I have many thoughts on this, as well as doubts as to my ability to articulate them in a meaningful way. I have doubts as to whether my thoughts might be meaningful to anyone besides me. Sex is a, uh, touchy subject. Discussions of sexual morality can release negative passions rivaling their positive counterparts in sex.

And you may wonder, what could a 40-something woman who’s been married for 19 years have in common with a single person, in the sexual arena, so as to have anything worthwhile to say to them? Well, trust me, more than you might think. My own journey to discover what sexuality is and what it means, both personally and in the sense of the absolute, has been long and torturous. But along the way I’ve come up with some things, I think. I humbly offer them here.

There has of course been great writing on sexuality over the years. Writing solid in scholarship, theology, and wisdom. Much of it has also been suppositional in nature. My writing here will be no different. However, as this is a blog series I have not prepared for it as I would a book, and I suffer no delusions as to my writing ability. So I can with all confidence say that my commentary will be neither thorough, detailed, nor entertaining. But hopefully it will be clear enough in its own right, and contribute to the overall discussion.

First, I want to establish that sex and sexual desire are intrinsically good. As are multitudinous instances of their expression. However, not every sexual act is good (no kidding) nor is every instance of indulged desire. The trick is figuring out which is which.

While I understand the wish for a fleshing-out of the positive reasons for non-marital abstinence, I can’t help but be reminded of how I felt at age 13. I really wanted to drive. I thought it was stupid that I had to wait 'til I was 16. But though I may have been perfectly capable of driving at 13, rules is rules. It didn’t hurt me, anyway, to wait, and probably kept me from causing damage. This is just one of many things I’ve wanted in life before its proper time. In pursuit of these I bungled a lot of other things, and ultimately didn’t achieve what I was hoping for in the first place.

But I don’t know how someone who doesn’t want to delay gratification can be convinced that doing so is best, especially if they’re like me (stubborn, needing "good" reasons). As I’ve learned, though, commitment to such a delay has to be made in faith. It's done not because one feels like it or really wants to, but because one trusts in Something greater than one’s immediate wishes or desires. In this trust one can find the strength and peace necessary to turn one’s energies toward another activity.

The truth is, most of the benefits of this decision to trust may not actually be appreciated until much later (if ever) in this life. There may indeed be worldly rewards for illicit sexual activity. But the Christian’s reward is in heaven...why trade it for a paltry one?

Guilt is another reason people may react against a seemingly nebulous charge to not do something they have a strong desire to do. They may blame this guilt on society, the church, their parents, or whatever. But it pays to read what the Bible has to say about sex (for example, Genesis 1:27-28, Genesis 2:18-24, Proverbs 5:15-23, Matthew 19:5-6, Romans 12:1-2, I Corinthians 6:12-20, I Corinthians.7:1-7, Ephesians 5:25-33, Hebrews 13:4), as well as find out what others have to say about why one’s guilt might be before God. Otherwise a person may go through all sorts of mental and emotional machinations trying to justify their indulgence. Or blame others for their guilt rather than examine all these things at the feet of God.

(A brief word on guilt: guilt grounded in people- or institution-pleasing causes all sorts of trouble. Guilt before God will rightly produce chagrin and remorse; but, if one accepts His forgiveness and salvation, it will not produce torment. Forgiveness can provide motivation to repent, as well as strength to “go and sin no more.”)

Some rationalize masturbation and extra- or pre-marital sex by saying things like, well, why would I have such an overwhelming drive to something if it’s wrong? Sort of a natural-law-type argument. I don’t have a good answer to that except to say that acting on that overwhelming desire in the right context is one of the most amazing experiences one can have in this life. Obviously, overwhelming desire or compulsion is not in itself a proper rationale for doing something; such a rationale has been historically used to excuse any number of atrocities. The trick is to not deny sexual desire, but to put it aside if the time is not right.

I would also ask, is it sometimes OK to deceive, because sometimes people just can’t help deceiving? Even if most of the time they don’t? Is it OK to do something hateful if it’s only done under certain special circumstances? Is it ever legitimate to rationalize sin? (Here’s what you really want to know: Do I, moi, ever sin in a way having to do with sex? Yes, I do. Do I excuse it? No. Do I beat myself up about it? No.)

If someone has sinned sexually, or indulged in premarital sex, can their married sexual relationship(s) be everything it could’ve been otherwise? In terms of honoring God and the relationship, and achieving gratification? Probably not. Forgiveness does not provide escape from consequences, in most cases. But how many things are what they “coulda, woulda, shoulda" been? Not many. This is not reason to go ahead and sin when it can be avoided, but it’s reason not to despair when the sin’s already been committed. We can confess, repent, and go forward. We can set out to prepare for or build a God-honoring marital relationship from where we are. (And a good place to start is...honesty, before God and others.)

There are some who commit to chastity after having been sexually active and refer to this as secondary virginity. Of this term, though, Shannon Harris, wife of Josh Harris (author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye and Boy Meets Girl) says,

I really don't think there's such a thing as secondary virginity. By the very nature of the word, you either are or you aren't. You can't reclaim your virginity.

Shannon was not a virgin when she married Josh. She regrets this and, in The Power of Sexual Purity is quoted as saying,

The point of remaining abstinent is to enjoy sex as God designed it in marriage and only in marriage, to enjoy a oneness with your husband that can only be with the two of you.

She also speaks of having lived for the pleasure of the moment and been reckless – neither of which characterize a healthy sexual relationship.

In addition, I came across this quote by god-is-in-the-tv in a comment to The Sexual Revolution may not be questioned by Rod Dreher, the Crunchy Con:

Rod - it's refreshing that, unlike so many other conservative pundits who point fingers at the individuals caught up in the actions - and I say this full knowing that while engaging in extra- or pre-marital sexual behavior is a choice, I don't think the majority of people of *any* age actively go through their days "making choices" so much as just reacting to circumstance.

It appears, then, that a rationale for chastity must be deliberate and purposeful. As is the use of language, and sex is a language. If the rationale is deliberate and purposeful rather than impulsive, then a person stands a better chance of honoring himself, his future spouse(s), and the sexuality he’s been given.

(Stay tuned for Part II...)

Comments

Well written, Bonnie.

Posted by: Rusty Lopez at February 15, 2007 12:48 AM

The most helpful thing I ever heard was the idea that sex is God's wedding present. It's something beautiful that he reserves for us as his gift, to demonstrate the unity and commitment of marriage. After leaving our parents, we cleave to our spouse. To indulge before marriage is therefore a kind of stealing. Not an unforgivable sin, of course, but so much less than what God wants to give us.

Posted by: Sue at February 15, 2007 5:52 AM

Bonnie, I think you might find John Paul II's "Theology of the Body" very interesting. This was a long series of short talks given over a period of several years - you can find them all here, and here and here are good short articles about it.

We are created in the image of God as souls with bodies, and the sexual union of two people is an image of His own eternal, complete triune communion and His communion with us. Our bodies are created with this inherent 'nuptial meaning', so when we have sex without the total commitment and self-giving of marriage, we are lying with our bodies.

Posted by: Atlantic at February 15, 2007 3:16 PM

Oh, and the phrase "language of the body" turns up constantly in Theology of the Body. :)

Posted by: Atlantic at February 15, 2007 3:22 PM

I think the biggest argument against pre-marital sex is the way it interferes with the ability to achieve real intimacy. It short circuits the will to get to know the person inside the body, something some people might get past- but many never can. Maybe because the view of "intimacy" is so tied up with sexual actions that it removes much of the process of true intimacy. It fools you into thinking you really know the person once you have had sex. And some people take that to be that that is all there is to know.

If you want an illustration just look at how much initial time is spent on getting to know "technique" and how much of the later efforts are made at trying to make a relationship work through "getting to know" your partner. There are probably lots of explanations... but I think it is because so many couples have bought into the cultural OK on premarital sex.

You know what kills sexual desire and intimacy? guilt and resentment. Premarital sex is a recipe for both.

Posted by: ilona at February 15, 2007 4:10 PM

I used to occasionally have an almost uncontrollable urge (drive?) to clobber someone, usually one of my brothers. That didn't make it right for me to do so.

Posted by: Martin LaBar at February 22, 2007 8:16 PM

Hi Atlantic,

A couple years ago I read parts of Theology of the Body, specifically toward learning about NFP. I remember my impression being that at least the parts I read seemed to almost over-spiritualize the body, to the neglect of other aspects. But admittedly that was from an incomplete reading, so I appreciate your links. I will read them.

Posted by: Bonnie at March 3, 2007 11:36 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.

About

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.