[1] A few years ago, I walked into confirmation class and asked
with great enthusiasm, "Guess what we're going to talk about
tonight, kids?" "What?" they replied, in their normal
eye-rolling manner. "SEX!" I proclaimed. One boy looked
at me in horror as the rest of the class tried to look anyplace
else but in my direction. "You mean," he stammered,
"how…it…works?" This was clearly among the worst
moments of his life so far; to talk with your pastor (your girl
pastor, no less) about the biology of raging hormones was a
terrifying prospect. "Not really," I said. "Not the
'how-to' part, but what it means and what guidance God has given us
about sex." The class breathed a sigh of relief. At
least there wouldn't be any diagrams.
[2] Our topic that night was actually the sixth commandment, the
perfect opportunity to open up discussion about human
sexuality. The truth is, I was as nervous as they
were. But I also knew that if they received nothing from the
church about sex, the church was only doing them, and their
families, a huge disservice. A clergy friend told me recently
that it was never clear to her what "adultery" was when it was
mentioned in confirmation class. "But I figured it had the
word 'adult' in it," she said, "so it wasn't possibly something I
could do since I was still a kid." Take a deep breath, ELCA
clergy: it's time to talk about sex.
[3] I imagined the whole ELCA with that metaphorical look of
horror on its face when word came to us that the draft of our
Social Statement on Human Sexuality would be released. What
would it say - or not say? Would we welcome it with open arms
and publish it far and wide in our congregations - or round-file it
immediately and hope no one read the news release of its
publication? The last time we tried this, as I was entering
seminary, all I heard were "wars and rumors of wars," and despite
Jesus' counsel on that matter, there seemed to be a great deal of
alarm.
[4] What does a Social Statement on Human Sexuality mean for my
pastoral ministry? As I write this, I imagine the two
congregations in which I have served as pastor, and I know that my
first answer to that question depends a great deal upon which
congregation I am in when the conversation takes
place. Obviously, every pastor in the ELCA will need to
translate the statement as well into his or her own
context. Pieces of the document which create worry in one
congregation may pass by without comment in another, and vice
versa. No social statement of this or any church exists in a
void. They, too, are living documents and we who read and
teach them should realize both their value and their
limitations.
[5] For my pastoral ministry now, in which I work largely with
youth and families, the primary purpose of this social statement is
to provoke discussion about the complicated gift of human sexuality
and its enormously complicated place in our society. I would
assume that, had there been a statement about human sexuality in
the church of the 1950's, it would have contained little to no
discussion about the need for churches to be safe places for
children; about our denominational support for preventing and
addressing sexual harassment on the job; or about the economic and
societal forces at work which favor cohabitation over
marriage. My confirmation students would not use any of that
language specifically, but they know those murky waters. Sex
is everywhere, all the time, in their lives. Sex sells them
cell phones and magazines and music and makeup. They worry
about body images in the second grade. They watch their own
families or those of their friends disintegrate or
explode. There are very few safe places for them to confide
their fears and worries, ask their questions, be taken
seriously. Parents can certainly do it - but some don't want
to. Others don't feel equipped to. And because their
church has said little to them about their own sexuality, parents
may not even know where to begin.
[6] For my pastoral ministry now, these are the living and
important questions about sexuality. It may well be that the
bulk of society no longer cares what any church says about sex;
that most people will see the church as either hopelessly outdated
or relentlessly vague, and dismiss any statement out of hand, on
the rare occasion that they even know such a statement
exists. Much media and congregational attention is given to
matters of sexual orientation, and I would guess that there are
those in our worshipping communities who will be disappointed that
this draft statement says almost nothing about those questions
other than to acknowledge much fundamental disagreement among
us. I worry, however, that when it comes to my pastoral
ministry, the arguments about orientation take up so much time that
they leave no space for discussions which affect all of us,
regardless of our sexual orientation. Whether you are straight
or gay, single or married, cohabitating out of pure choice or
economic necessity, the place of human sexuality in our society
raises serious issues for we who believe that all people are
created in the image of God. If we began our conversations
about human sexuality from that which we have in common, if we
spent more time imagining how sexuality of all people could find a
healthy and respectful place in our society; if we as a church said
together that regardless of orientation, we believe that sex is not
a product, not ever - now that, in my mind, would be a starting
point for meaningful pastoral ministry with all
people. Certainly with children and families.
[7] Although there are plenty of people inside and outside the
ELCA who expect a very clear-cut statement about what is right and
wrong when it comes to human sexuality, I have found very few
moments in pastoral ministry when clear-cut answers are either
helpful or appropriate. For that reason, I find the openness
of this draft meaningful, insofar as it acknowledges the
complexities surrounding sexuality. Of the many weddings at
which I have presided in nine years, fewer than five were for
couples not already living together, and I know very few pastors
who do not have exactly the same experience. One of the newest
and most wide-reaching programs in the congregation I currently
serve is "Safe Haven," a training which is required for all
volunteers who work with children, providing them a vocabulary like
"good touch," and "appropriate boundaries," and reminding them why
you can't be alone in a room with a child. All pastors know
plenty of elderly couples who genuinely love each other but simply
can't afford to marry and give up social security benefits.
[8] This is not a clear-cut world. The church and its
pastors might be tempted to get attention by trying to be
black-and-white about sexuality, but that's nothing more than sound
and fury, and we all know what that signifies. Meaningful
pastoral conversation about human sexuality must be clear about one
primary thing: a lot of this stuff isn't clear anymore. If the
church is not willing to acknowledge that, no one will care what we
say about anything else. To give a pastoral example: I would
rather talk with a cohabitating couple about the expectations and
realities of marriage than turn them out of my office for living
together. They'll find someone to marry them without much
trouble. If I believe my church has something meaningful to
say to them about sex, then I need to keep the door open.
[9] Our theological and biblical heritage ought to give us
freedom for just that kind of openness. We are not working on
matters of salvation when we talk about sexuality, but on matters
of just and good living for ourselves and our neighbors. In a
time when many people assume that talking about sexuality in church
probably involves a list of a thousand things you shouldn't do in
order to avoid hell - and who wants to hear that? - it ought to put
our Lutheran tradition at the forefront to be freed from such a
burden. Our congregations can be exactly the places where
people confess and confront and wrestle with these very complex
issues. All the reasons we have avoided that task over the
years no longer matter. For the ELCA to provide me a statement
on human sexuality which takes seriously the convoluted journey
before us is, I believe, the best way for my pastoral ministry to
be taken seriously when it comes to human sexuality. Anything
less wouldn't matter to me, or to anyone else.
© April 2008
Journal of Lutheran Ethics (JLE)
Volume 8, Issue 4