The headline in the February 15, 2008 St. Petersburg Times said it all: “God Wants You to Have Sex.” The story was about a local church that invited its married members to make a commitment to have sex every day for 30 days and journal their experience. Those not married were asked to abstain from any promiscuous sex for the same period of time.
The focus on married couples was not explicitly limited to heterosexual couples, but the article made clear that the church had not included same-gender loving couples. The point of the experiment was to reinforce the idea that God created sex, and sex is a good thing if you are married to someone of the opposite gender.
The challenge the church made to its members created a new way to talk about sex, but the privileged limitations remained the same: man and woman, always inside marriage. Interestingly, there was no mention of procreation as a reason underlying the call to sex, even though this rationale has dominated directives about sex within the Christian church for centuries.
Throughout history, religions, governments, cultures and even families have created rules regarding the practice of sex; often with severe punishments—public and private—if the rules were violated. The basis most often used for these rules has been the Bible.
Ancient Greco-Roman culture sanctioned various sexual behaviors, but this had more to do with status than gender. Approved sex was between two people of unequal power, one dominant and one submissive, and these roles could not be reversed. These roles were not determined by personal preference. The status of your birth family determined your status for life, even in the bedroom.
Free men could have sex with those in servile positions, but they could not have sex with each other because they were of equal status. If they did, the shift in power and position would reduce one to the female role, thus rendering the sexual encounter an ‘abomination’ punishable by death.
These rules, handed down from the antiquity, are the framework for sexual references in the Bible, and they cannot be accurately understood outside this context. The best analogy I can offer is way we give directions. We use numbers, street names, landmarks and directions to guide others to a specific location. We do not say, “When you come to a stop sign, stop completely, and if there is no traffic you may proceed.” These details are unnecessary because they are inferred from universally accepted rules of the road.
The same was true when it came to sex in the antiquity. We misinterpret sexual references in the time of the Bible without knowledge of the context—the rules of the road. Further complicating understanding is the fact that there are no original autographed books of the Bible. The scriptures are thus interpretations that have been translated many times, applied to disparate cultures using vastly different languages.
Most of us are not taught how to read the Bible. We read it literally, and not as people lived when it was written. We impose our morals, values and purity codes on their stories. And that is how a church in St. Petersburg can encourage some of their congregation to go and have great sex, while at the same time admonishing other groups to abstain. The Christian church has a long history of extrapolating chapters and verses of the Bible to keep certain people at the margins in deference to those chosen for privilege.
One of the greatest gifts the LGTBIQ communities offer the world is the importance of embracing sexual orientation and gender identity as essential to a balanced sexuality. By ignoring the truth of homosexuality, the Christian church avoids dealing with the complexity of human experience.
If religious institutions would dedicate themselves to addressing human sexuality from a place of original blessing instead of original sin, sex acts would no longer be the focus. If sexual enjoyment was taught emphasizing respect and integrity, there would be no need for purity codes designed to control and create shame and guilt. The vast energy and resources spent on issues of sexuality could be channeled into making the world a better place to live together.
We know that the physiology of human beings is designed for sexual pleasure, so I offer you this challenge: Make a plan to have respectful sex, full of integrity as you define it, for the next 30 days, and then journal your experience. See what you learn, and then make it have meaning in the world you touch.
