7.08.2007

SEX Part II

In our previous post (click the title link) we laid the foundation for a discussion of sexuality upon the nature of human beings and the state of humanity's relationship with God.

We described human beings as deeply sexual, constantly and hauntingly aware of the gender distinction, and yet ultimately humans are not to be defined by their sexuality, but rather by their spirituality. The center of a human being is the unique desires, intentions, emotions, and will, that constitute the human spirit.

We described our relationship with God in terms of separation, isolation and division. This division constitutes a serious perversion of the human spirit; we are separated from reality in ways that deeply distort our humanity into a charicature of itself.

In light of this, we must come to understand that our current sexuality is not good, nor is it natural. God created humanity a certain way, for His glory (of course), but also for our joy! To be separated from Him is to have the central core of our being (our spirit) twisted in such a way as to desire, rather than the deep abiding joys for which we were intended, the fleeting dregs of pleasure that come from drinking the sweet-tasting-poison of all manner of distorted humanity. This is most accute at a spiritual level, but it plays itself out, as the nature of the tree plays itself out in the fruit it produces, in every area of human existence not the least of which is our present discussion.

===========================

Sexuality as it was intended must be distinguished from sexuality as it is. (This of course ignores, for the present moment, that some people, and some cultures, have a sexuality that is much more in line with God's intent, and others much less...) Our present situation sees essentially an overblown sense of sex.

Sex is used by most as a way of self-definition. We have only to look so far as the childhood playground to see this truth. A primary-school insult is likely to take the form of attributing male characteristics to the girl in question, and conversly to take the form of attributing female characteristics to the boy in question. As we move on in age, young men begin to define themselves by their sexual conquests and sexual prowess, as well as their domination over their male peers; young women define themselves by their ability to attract sexual attention. Sexuality continues to play a self-defining role throughout life; homosexual, straight, married, single, etc., these labels are used not as attachments to the central characteristic of the individual, but rather often are the central defining traits of the individual. Even within the spritual community these are defining monikers (ie 'family values' and its self-contrasting over against the 'homosexual agenda').

This belies the fundamental mistake we are making in understanding our sexuality: we see it as central, when it is not. We fail to diagnose diseased humanity, or we misdiagnose it, or (worse yet) we celebrate it, when we mistake the fundamental nature of human beings.

This first problem with our current views on sex can be briefly stated by saying, "We mistakenly believe sexuality to be the center of a human being, and fail to understand human beings in light of their true core which is their spirit."

===========================

The first problem is a failure to undertand that the bone is broken (perhaps because in many cases we are unaware that there even exists such a bone!), the much larger problem is the broken bone itself.

This second and much deeper problem, lies with our disconnect, at a spiritual level, from God. We form our wills largely with disregard for and/or ignorance of the truly beautiful and joyous state for which God has intended our will to be formed. We believe that our desires are to be revered as gods, that our intentions should always be pursued, and that our emotional comfort is the guiding force for ethics in the world. (We in the Western world have even codified this into many of the founding documents of our nations legal systems!)

We largely ignore the desires, emotions, intentions, and will that are consistent with reality, beauty, justice etc. (consistent with God and His spirit, ie His desires, emotions, intentions, and will). Our spirit is the guiding force in our lives (whether we believe in it's existence or not!) and so will govern our sexuality.

Our sexuality has become a thing of surface pleasure. What was, by design, intended to be a deeply personal and radical co-mingling of two human beings (with what takes place in the sex act mirroring what is taking place on a spiritual level) has become instead simply another avenue for an individual to seek his/her own pleasure and ego.

Because our spirit is no longer aligned with God's we have come to the conclusion that whatever we desire is what we should pursue, throwing off any restraint upon behaviors that align with our personal desires over against God's; sexuality has become the testing ground for the total abnegation of such restraint. We are largely encouraged to view sex as the pursuit of 'whatever makes you feel good' with it's sometimes added (and largely underemphasized) correllary 'so long as you don't hurt anyone.' This is a fundamentally flawed view of healthy humanity. (And ignores large amounts of actual harm done in the process) LINK

A basic symptom of our separation from God is that we no longer desire to do that which is good and beautiful, just and true. To claim that what we are doing is good, beautiful, just, or true, simply because it is what we find within us when we search our hearts, is to see the world up-side-down. It is the very heart within us that is the problem with the world, we cannot use it as a guiding impulse in our lives without serious transformation. To see this as true one has only to look in other areas of our person, are we willing to argue that I am justified in taking someone elses car because, when I looked deep within myself, I found that I sincerely wanted it? Is the same true of punching my annoying co-worker in the face?

To Be Continued

1 comment:

David said...

What up Dr. Ruth?
The big city sure has some diversity, don't it?