Authentic Sexuality, part 1

Many of you know that I am teaching “Human Sexuality” this semester (for the first time). We are several weeks into the semester and I haven’t had anyone faint from embarrassment – yet. We may have some awkward moments coming up as we discuss anatomy/physiology and the sexual response cycle in the next few class periods. But our discussions so far have been open, honest, and fruitful.

I have several thoughts and observations to make about the topic and our class discussions – today’s post is just the first.

One of our texts (Authentic Human Sexuality, by Balswick and Balswick) has helped us lay a good theological foundation for the rest of our studies. The Balswicks suggest two options for developing a theology of sexuality. One is to do a search for all references to sexuality in the Bible and then do an exegetical study on each of them. This approach would be worthwhile if the Balswicks’ focus was on sexual morality. But they are interested in more than a list or a review of what is “right and wrong.” In an effort to develop a more comprehensive theology of sexuality, the Balswicks suggest another option – an analogical approach where we study the relationship God has with His people and discover lessons for our own relationships, including sexual ones. In particular, there are lessons to learn from God’s relationship to Israel in the OT and from Jesus’ relationship to the church in the NT. “A relational God establishes a model of human relationships in general and authentic sexual relationships in particular.”

Here’s a very short version of their theology of authentic sexuality. Each of these four elements is found in God’s relationship to us. We should strive for them in our own relationships. (1) Authentic sexuality is based on a covenant commitment – the unconditional and sacrificial pursuit to love and be loved. Inauthentic sexuality is conditional. (2) Authentic sexuality is based on grace – the willingness to forgive and seek forgiveness. Grace restores relationships when they are broken. Grace eliminates shame. And grace prohibits anything that is sexually dehumanizing or degrading. (3) Authentic sexuality is based on empowerment – the decision to serve and be served. Rather than using sexuality as power to control or manipulate, we use it to serve and encourage. We are committed to providing an abundant life to our spouses and to doing whatever is in their best interest. (4) Authentic sexuality is based on intimacy – the desire to deeply know and be known. Intimacy risks vulnerability, requires open communication, and prohibits secrecy.

Observation #1 – Many of us found ourselves a little uneasy discussing God’s relationship to us in sexual terms. We acknowledged it was biblical – here are just two quick illustrations…. The book of Hosea speaks of God’s people committing spiritual adultery and prostitution. And yet God pursues His people with passion – romancing them back to Himself. In addition, Jesus is often described as the groom to his bride (the church). And sexuality is never far removed from the language of marriage. Despite these passages (and others), we still felt uncomfortable with the sexual connections. It seems we have separated sexuality and spirituality to such extremes that they now seem incompatible with each other. How did we ever end up in such a place?

Observation #2 – I am finding Balswicks’ theological framework helpful in working through some of the trickier issues of human sexuality. As students have asked about the appropriateness or certain behaviors and activities, we have looked at each of the four elements proposed by the Balswicks. Rather than giving an easy answer (“that is right” or “this is wrong”) based on some Scripture passages we are likely to take out of context, we can apply the four criteria: Does this behavior/activity promote unconditional love and acceptance? Does it demonstrate grace that eliminates shame and degrading attitudes? Does it seek to accomplish what is in the other person’s best interest? Does it foster communication and deeper levels of intimacy? If something meets these criteria, perhaps it is part of God’s plan for your sexual relationship. If it misses these criteria, perhaps it is not.

Your turn. What do you think of our uneasiness with the spiritual-sexual connection? What do you make of the Balswicks’ theology for authentic sexuality?