Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Putting the Protest in Protestant

Home
Evangelical
Why Are Christians Obsessed with Sex?

Why Are Christians Obsessed with Sex?

Last updated on: January 16, 2018 at 4:17 pm by D. G. Hart

Why Are Christians Obsessed with Sex? 2018-01-16T16:17:35-04:00 D. G. Hart

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Some people are worried about Christian/evangelical higher education and think the current climate of gay marriage and transgenderism may be the one that forces religious institutions either to conform or to resist. Either way, they lose their identity or their legitimacy.

Near as I can tell, Carl Trueman kicked off the worried blog posts:

Thus, for Christian educational institutions, the way ahead may be very hard. It will not simply be a matter of budgeting without federal loans. It could easily become a matter of budgeting without not-for-profit status. That double whammy is likely to annihilate many of those institutions which refuse to accommodate themselves to the dominant sexual culture. And that means that educators may need to look to new models of pursuing their callings.

Alan Jacobs picked up on Trueman’s warning to express greater alarm:

The people who argue that Christian institutions should support the modern left’s model of sexual ethics or else suffer a comprehensive shunning do not think of themselves as opponents of religion. And they are not, given their definition of religion, which is “a disembodied, Gnostic realm of private worship and thought”. But that is not what Christianity is. Christianity intrinsically, necessarily involves embodied action in the public world. And this the secular left cannot and will not tolerate, if it can help it, because it rightly understands that Christianity stands opposed to the secular left’s own gospel, which, popular opinion notwithstanding, is not essentially about sex but rather may be summed up as: “I am my own.”

All this to say that while I agree with Trueman that Christian institutions need to plan for a dark financial future, I also believe that the Christian community as a whole needs to plan for a future in which most or all of its educational institutions have been forced either to close or to accommodate themselves to Gnostic disembodiment. What does Christian formation — paideia and catechesis — look like in a world in which many of the institutions that have long supported that formation have been shut down or substantively eviscerated?

Then Rod Dreher added his fears:

What is it going to take for us conservative Christians to realize that we can’t keep living like this? Is it going to take watching our college and universities either capitulate or be forced to close? Because Alan Jacobs is right: it is coming.

What will we do then? How will we explain to ourselves why we wasted this time in which we could have been making alternative plans, and getting ready for the time of trial ahead?

Here’s maybe not THE but a thing: the #metoo moment may be one when Christians can make a case for a coherent sexual ethic when it sure looks like the wider society wants one. Consider the plight of Aziz Ansari and the seemingly arbitrary standards his accusers are using, explained by Damon Linker:

In a workplace, expectations regarding interactions among employees are clearly defined by law and binding regulations. That makes it possible to define sexual misconduct with some precision as a violation of those expectations. But Grace didn’t work for Ansari, and they weren’t coworkers. He had no authority over her at all (beyond the authority she may have invested in him by virtue of his celebrity). In that open-ended context of two people who decided to go home together, describing his actions as “sexual misconduct” sounds vaguely Orwellian — as a transgression against norms that are presumed to be binding on all despite the fact that they have yet to be defined.

I am not so delusional as to think that Hollywood or millennials or universities will adopt Christian norms about sex and marriage. But I can well imagine that the institutions that accredit evangelical colleges and universities might in the near term be sympathetic — even amazed — a policies that provide a reasonably stable norm for judging appropriate sexual interaction. If accreditor are already in the business of evaluating schools according to mission statements, why would they be any less amenable — in this environment — to giving evangelical colleges independence to implement moral standards that dovetail with religious mission?

Here the problem is not the terror of sexual libertines, but what success, even flourishing, has done to evangelical schools. Consider what is going on at Moody Bible Institute where officials have resigned over concerns about the direction of the school. As the Underground Pilgim explains:

From Moody and Wheaton to Houghton, BIOLA, Fuller and other institutions, the desire for accreditation and respect has led to certain compromises with the secular academy. To borrow from a chapter heading in Iain Murray’s Evangelicalism Divided there have been certain compromises made in the realm of intellectual respectability and Scripture.

It is inevitable that not only will the tenured faculty be susceptible to cultural influence but unless a rigorous gate-keeping system is erected, those with less than solid views of Scripture would creep in.

. . . Regarding Moody, here is the dilemma. If you’re a conservative Evangelical or someone leaning toward the Fundamentalist spectrum, why would you consider Moody? If they have a reputation for being less than solid, why invest the time and money? Serious students of that stripe are going to affiliate with institutions that will strengthen already existing faith-structures and prepare them to function within that limited ecclesiastical sphere.

For those more broad-minded, which in this case is not necessarily a compliment, for those seeking academic challenge and/or seeking credentials, why pick Moody? Why not go to Duke, Union, Yale or Princeton? If you want your degree to grant you access to wider academic endeavour, Moody is less than impressive.

Then there is the case of Calvin College and the demands that branding place on an institution’s mission:

I will use as my example, and it’s not an exceptional one, my Alma Mater Calvin College. It may be that there was an office of Marketing with Branding guidelines when I was a student there in the 80’s (although I doubt it), but scant attention was paid to it. Professors who were there then have no memory of it now. What we did have when I was a student there were excellent professors who knew their stuff and taught it well. We had a logo we took some pride in, but in the main we went to Calvin because of its tradition. Indeed, I never even visited the campus before matriculating. Some might have considered Calvin “parochial,” immersed in church politics and defending a particular orthodoxy, but it is also what made Calvin “distinctive.”

Did Calvin lose its distinctiveness because it became obsessed with branding or did it become obsessed with branding because it lost its distinctiveness? Or are they unrelated? I can’t really say.

What I can say is that a school that unapologetically sustained a tradition shifted its emphasis to be like all the other schools “with a difference” (which meant a difference that didn’t really matter). The core curriculum got hollowed out. Admissions standards were watered down. A school that had provided an excellent liberal arts education inflated to 127 majors and programs with the concomitant incoherence and balkanization. (That’s one major or program for every 30 students. In general, a liberal arts college should have no more than 20 such majors and programs.)

The point is that success is as threatening if not more so than sex. Shouldn’t the worriers worry more about that?

Image

Moody Bible Institute

Rod Dreher

Previous Post

January 13, 2018

Edgardo Mortara

Next Post

January 22, 2018 What Would Luther Do?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2016 Presidential Election 2020 Presidential Election Apocalypse Bible in American Life Biblical authority Books and culture Calvinism Church Life Civil Religion Culture Wars Doctrine evangelicalism Gullibility Heaven and Hell Intellectual life Jesus Ministry modernity moralism Nationalism New Testament Old Testament Otherworldiness Otherworldliness Paul Peter Piety Popular culture Protestantism Psalms Puritans Race Roman Catholicism sacred/secular distinction Sex Shameless Self Promotion Sports Ten Commandments U.S. politics Uncategorized vulgarity worship

Select a Month January 2022 October 2021 August 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz