It’s no secret that our culture has undergone a sea change in our attitudes about sexuality during our lifetimes. I remember watching old TV shows, for example, where couples were depicted as sleeping in separate beds, houses seemed to have no bathrooms, and even the word “pregnant” made network censors nervous. That seems quaint today given that, according to a University of Washington study, two out of every three television shows include sexual content (that’s up from half in 1997/98). Some of us are old enough to remember when Bruce Jenner was a gold medal decathlete in the 1976 Olympics, the all-American man, the one who adorned my Wheaties box as a kid. Now he is known for identifying as she, Caitlyn Jenner.
One of the biggest changes, of course, has to do with our views on sex and marriage. According to a Pew Research Study, Americans opposed same sex marriage in 2001 by a 57% to 35% margin, but by 2015 those numbers have flipped with 55% in support of same sex marriage and 39% opposed. That’s a major shift in a very short amount of time.
As a historian at heart, the big question for me is about what changed? How did we get to this point? Most people would trace it back to the sexual revolution of the late 1960s, but you could argue that it goes back even farther than that. There seems to be a connection between major wars and the beginning of shifting attitudes toward sex, for example—WWI led to the “Roaring 20s” for example, and WWII may have laid the groundwork for the Baby Boom generation’s sexual revolution. Sex and death seem to be connected in some way (which would make for a great doctoral dissertation if anyone is interested). Of course, the 1950s brought us the Kinsey report on sexuality and the early 60s brought us the birth control pill, which meant that sex was no longer just about procreation, but about recreation. Reproduction, family, and religious mores were suddenly optional components of sexuality and people began to see sex as an activity rather than an integrated part of family and culture.
Admittedly, that’s a very rudimentary history of American sexuality, but there’s another piece within it that is often overlooked and taken for granted. According to cultural anthropologist Jennell Williams Paris, in the late 19th century, the medical profession used the terms “heterosexuality” and “homosexuality” for the first time but, interestingly, both of these terms were used to describe sexual deviants who pursued sexual pleasure without concern for procreation. Well into the 20th century there was no word to describe what most people considered to be healthy sexual activity, that is, sex between a man and a woman that did not involve contraception. Gender identity, man and woman, assumed proper sexuality. Only deviants were labeled.
In fact, the words, “heterosexual” and “homosexual” were not used in the mainstream U.S. until the 1930s, but again as labeling those outside the normal construct of male/female sex for procreation. But as contraception became more available and reliable in the 1960s, along with loosening attitudes about sexuality in general, suddenly those terms took on new meaning—not as a way of describing deviant behavior, but rather as terms describing a person’s sexual identity and feelings. Our cultural view of sexuality turned from a means of producing new human life to being the focus on human desire—“an essential force that exists not between two persons but within each individual, one that is expected to provide personal identity and happiness.”
To put it another way, our culture sees identity as bound up in what we want. We are what we desire, and we label ourselves and others accordingly. I mean, think about those two words: heterosexual and homosexual. You are likely sitting there and, without even thinking about it, you have assigned yourself to one of those two categories. Most of you, statistically speaking, think of yourselves as heterosexual—your sexual feelings are aimed at the opposite sex. And, being the majority, you may assume that those feelings are all right and good—mostly because they are not homosexual feelings, which are bad…so bad that we would do anything to avoid the appearance of them. Think about it, men don’t hug much in our culture and when they do, how do they do it? Always with three pats on the back, which means, “I’m-not-gay.”
But here’s the problem with labeling ourselves and others in this way—are all of our heterosexual feelings and desires right and good? I know mine are not—two words, guys—yoga pants. In fact, we in the majority let a lot of sexual behavior slide as long as it’s not homosexual. Lust? Well, I may not be hungry but I can check out the menu. Adultery? Bad, but better than being gay. You have to think that Ted Haggard would have been better off having an affair with a woman instead of a male prostitute, right? We privilege heterosexual behavior, even heterosexual sin, over homosexuality.
It’s no wonder, then, that the minority of people who wrestle with homosexual desire see themselves as second class citizens who are being unfairly treated as though their behavior is somehow more deviant than that of the heterosexual majority. Just as being a heterosexual isn’t inherently “good,” neither is being a homosexual inherently “bad.” We do ourselves and others a major disservice when we reduce people to a categorical label. In fact, when heterosexuals condemn homosexuality with such vehemence, we are actually contributing to the idea that sexual desire is the most central thing that constitutes human identity. Sociologist Jeffery Weeks says that in the Western world, “Women and men have mobilized around their sense of sexual identity…because it was in their sexuality that they felt most powerfully validated.”
But as I have said before, when we make sex an idol, and when we make sexual desire the ground of our identity, it follows that all of our sexual orientations will be disoriented. Indeed, the Bible warns us about using the desires of our hearts as our primary identity. In our Old Testament lesson today, the prophet Jeremiah (17:9-10) lays out the problem. As The Message translation puts it, “The heart is hopelessly dark and deceitful, a puzzle that no one can figure out. But I, God, search the heart and examine the mind. I get to the heart of the human. I get to the root of things. I treat them as they really are and not as they pretend to be.” When we are labeled by what we desire, says the writer of James (1:14-15), it leads us to act on those desires. “Everyone is tempted by their own cravings,” says James. “They are lured away and enticed by them. Once those cravings conceive, they give birth to sin; and when sin grows up, it gives birth to death.” By labeling ourselves and others by what we desire, we are actually contributing to the brokenness in a sinful culture and a wayward world.
All of us need a different identity—in fact, the identity we were all given in the beginning. The first and only label that God gives humanity, you will remember, is “the image of God.” We said in the first sermon in this series that that image reflects God’s nature in community and in mission. But we know that image has been marred by human sin—sin that robs us of our identity and turns us into people who hold up our idols and labels instead of remembering our true selves. We need an identity makeover.
Holiness – Romans 12:1-2
“Brothers and sisters, because of God’s mercies, I encourage you to present your bodies as a living sacrifice that is holy and pleasing to God,” says the apostle Paul. “This is your appropriate priestly service.” The reconstruction of our identity begins with the recognition that the goal of life is not the achievement of that which we desire, be it sexual fulfillment, or money, fame, or validation, or even marriage itself. The goal of life, rather, is to live a life “holy and pleasing to God.” That’s been the goal since the beginning—we were created in God’s image to reflect his nature in community and to work his will in creation—we were created as priests to manage and mediate his earthly temple. Our worship, then, is a life that is holy, set-apart, pleasing to God. We find our true identity, our validation, only in him, the one who loves us more than anyone else could. But living that life of holiness requires a “living sacrifice”—it requires that we present our bodies, individually and collectively, as belonging to God. As Paul puts it in I Corinthians 6:19 – “Don’t you know that your body (plural) is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you? Don’t you know that you have the Holy Spirit from God, and you don’t belong to yourselves? You have been bought and paid for, so honor God with your body.” Many of our desires have to do with longing and belonging. Paul says that, ultimately, we belong to God. He has labeled us as his own.
But in order for us to live into that label, he need a transformation. “Don’t be conformed to the patterns of this world,” says Paul, “but be transformed by the renewing of your minds so that you can figure out what God’s will is—what is good and pleasing and mature.” When we realize that we belong to God, that we find our identity in him, then our lives and our desires can be transformed. We need no longer live according to the “patterns of this world” with its labels, its prejudices, its hypocrisies and idols, but instead we can be renewed in our minds and set them on the things that matter most to God—what is good and pleasing and mature, or perfect.
That maturity, that brand of perfection in holiness, is the end goal of the Christian life. We’re Methodists, so we know this better than most. John Wesley defined that perfection as “holiness of heart and life,” a life that imitates and reflects Jesus, who is the full example of the image of God. It is a goal that costs us something—it requires us to submit all of our desires to his lordship, including our sexual desires.
The church of Jesus Christ has argued about homosexuality and heterosexuality because we have bought into the culture’s view that a fulfilled sexual identity expressed in marriage is the goal. But as I said last week, marriage is merely a sign that points to something beyond itself. The goal is full communion and intimacy with God and being remade in his image. We must all continue “going on to perfection” as Wesley put it.
Humility – Romans 12:3
All of us are called to holiness of heart and life, but we know that we are all struggling to get there. Therefore, says Paul, “Don’t think of yourself more highly than you ought to think. Instead, be reasonable since God has measured out a portion of faith to each one of you.” When the goal is Christ-likeness, none of us can claim moral superiority over the other. In the light of God’s grace it becomes clear that all of our orientations have been disoriented and it is only through that grace that we can change. There is no label we can claim that makes us better than anyone else—we are all labeled as sinners. But, then again, we are also labeled as beloved children of God. And that includes everyone.
To sum it up another way, we all need to adopt a posture of humility and holiness. We need humility, because no matter what label we have adopted, we are all sinners in need of grace. There is no moral high ground. But we also need holiness—to no longer conform to the patterns of this world, including its sexual brokenness, both hetero and homosexual, but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds—to move toward what is pleasing and acceptable to God and not settle for what is pleasing and acceptable to ourselves and our culture. We need to find our true identity in him.
Humility and holiness. We need both together, and I think the root of the current debate about same sex marriage in the church comes down to a lack of one or the other. The conservative side looks at the same sex marriage advocacy of the liberal side and demands sexual holiness while neglecting a repentant humility about the state of marriage and sexuality in the church in general. The liberal side, on the other hand, demands humility and compromise from the conservative side without acknowledging the biblical call for sexual holiness for all people. There is no middle ground.
But that’s a falsely constructed binary, just like the constructs of heterosexuality and homosexuality. We need a different vision, a different pattern for living and being in humility and holiness. And I would argue that we find it in Jesus himself, the perfect image of God. If the goal is becoming more like Jesus, particularly when it comes to our attitudes about sexuality, then we need to look at his example. We will do that in next week’s sermon, for which I hope you will plan to be here. I think Jesus gives us the perfect pattern for how to love people in a culture that is struggling with its own identity. It is, indeed, the pattern of humility and holiness.
In the meantime, I want to invite you think about your own labels—not just sexual labels but all the others we use to define ourselves. What is it that you desire most? How do those desires drive your thoughts and actions? And what about those “other” people that you label? Anytime you are using the word “them,” you can be sure you’re applying a label. How do you suppose God feels about “them?” How might a renewed mind and a focus on humility and holiness change your view?
We live in a changing world. It’s time the church of Jesus Christ begin modeling a way of life that changes it for the better.
Source:
Paris, Jennell Williams. The End of Sexual Identity: Why Sex is Too Important to Define Who We Are. IVP Books, 2011.
