There it is, my friends: I’ve let the cat out of the bag.
The problem with current discourse in Lutheran circles regarding sexuality is, well, the word sexuality. You can’t find sexuality in the Bible (oh, sure, there are male and female, marriage, sex, more sex, approved sex, prohibited sex, and so on), but not sexuality. You can’t find sexuality in the Lutheran Confessions (yeah, there are marriage, procreation, moral prophylaxis, celibacy, and so on). But no sexuality.
Sexuality as a word came into use about 1800 AD. Which means that, until about two hundred years ago, we didn’t talk this way about male and female, the purpose of marriage, and so on.
Which makes me wonder: when it comes to Lutheran ethics within the household of faith, Why do we use it at all? It is loaded with a lot of freight. Sure, the term is popularly used in our culture, especially by sociologists, evolutionary biologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and so on. And we should rightly familiarize ourselves with the term and all that it implies in the public square.
But in the Church? Shouldn’t we be speaking (and writing) in the language of Scripture?
Interestingly enough, the ELCA’s Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust uses the word “sexuality” 123 times. “Bible” is mentioned 3 times, “Scripture” 20 times, and “Confessions” 13 times. “Marriage” is mentioned 60 times, and “children” 45 times. Although “sin” is mentioned 34 times, specific sexual sins (which we might expect in a document on sexuality), are not mentioned. “Fornication” is mentioned once, “civil unions” beats “heterosexual” 3 to 2, and the sexual virtues of “continence”, “chastity”, “purity”, and “holiness” are down for the count at zero.
Which makes me wonder: If sexuality were not in our Lutheran Church vocabulary, would there be a “human sexuality” document at all?
What a wonderful blog, pastor! Thank you so much.
May God bless you and your future posts!
Rob Olson
Hillsdale, Michigan
With two teenage daughters, I have also been looking for “dating” in the Holy Scriptures, and so far, I have not had much luck. It seems that marriage is taking a backseat to this particular form of “sexuality.”
Where do these ideas come from? I have been asking this question as I have recently pondered the words of Pastors Wilken and Stuckwunsch, who in the past few months have asked some good questions:
Pastor Wilken: “Are Christian Parents Leading Their Children into Undue Temptation by Encouraging Them to Wait on Marriage?”
http://www.issuesetc.org/podcast/Show48090308H1S2.mp3
Pastor Stuckwisch: “What This World Needs is less celibacy and more chastity.” http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=75712241182&h=d-Epu&u=yOamF&ref=mf
I am wondering if the Church would be better if the word “dating” were also expunged from our discourse. For the most part, it seems like a very broken modern innovation.
Blessings.
Rob Olson
Hillsdale, MI
Thanks, Rob. You pose an interesting question. Although our vocabulary need not be limited to words found in the Bible, Scripture’s teaching on marriage and family does need to permeate and influence how we go about things. Have you considered “betrothal”?
I just found this blog courtesy of a friend. Thank you for doing this tough work.
Kamilla
You’re welcome, Kamilla. Hope to hear from you again soon!
Kamilla and I belong to the same list and I’m happy I stopped by. Good post.
Thank you for an insightful, helpful blog! If only more in the ELCA could read what you have written.
I do not believe that we should restrict our language to words used in the Bible (“Trinity”, for instance, is not there but is a most useful word considering the teachings throughout the Bible of the relations between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit–three “persons” yet one (echad) God). S
hould a church body approach everything like ecclesiastical sociologists and psychologists? To be sure, where we can learn from these sciences, their is nothing wrong with gleaning from them. Yet the Bible says, “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind…” (Romans 12:2 NIV)
When a church body conforms to the evil and corrupt world in an attempt to try to be relevent, it is indeed a sad day. Yes, the love of Christ should cause us to desire to reach all people despite what sins ensnare them, but we are not to endorse sin. Are we not to be transformed? How can we be salt and light to the world when we succumb to the same thoughts practices that we have been rescued from by our most gracious God? Verse 2 continues, “Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is–his good, pleasing and perfect will.” “Perfect” relates not to what societal ethics distills as “perfect,” but rather what God defines as perfect. No improvement can be made on God’s standards!
Yes, another sexuality statement out of Chicago. How I wish they could start with Holy Scripture and go from there, rather than beginning with culture and the latest trends in society. I think if we back up a verse, Romans 12:1 is as good as any place to begin a sexuality study: “Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God–this is your spiritual act of worship.” (NIV) Or has God’s revealed Word gone out of style in some sectors. May it never be so! May God have mercy on any “church” that considers itself more intelligent than God himself. Kyrie Eleison!
Hi Rik–
I agree. We shouldn’t limit our vocabulary to “Bible words,” otherwise what would we call a “blog”?
As a former member of the ELCA, I join you in hoping that more of our brothers and sisters will join us in conversation at Bioethike. All of us need diligently to inquire into the ideas underlying Church documents. My underlying thesis about “sexuality” is that many Lutherans frequently operate with a post-Kantian empirical epistomology foreign to the Bible, Luther, and the Lutheran Confessions–and don’t even know it. They believe that what they’re saying or writing is Lutheran, even though it’s goobledegook. That makes it very sad for our laity.
Robert
[...] more-than-unfortunate verbiage remained in a document passed by thie UN group. This goes to what I’ve cautioned before about Lutherans using the word “sexuality”. It is word freighted with all sorts of sin [...]
[...] Sexuality: Gift and Trust is neither biblical, nor is it confessional. Heck, it mentions the word “sexuality” 123 times, but the word “Bible” only 3 times. As I’ve argued before, it is the last, gasping breath of the Twentieth Century Project, [...]