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?
