
So, I've been thinking about sex. That's right. I said it. And it's not only because Angela keeps mentioning
the joys of married life, or that my best friends are either
enjoying or
planning to enjoy said rights, or that I've seen far too much
lingerie in the past month, or that I have an incredible (and hot)
boyfriend, or that I'm currently listening to
Barry White sing "
I'm Gonna Love You Just a Little More, Baby", but ALSO because I'm halfway through reading a book entitled "
Real Sex" by Lauren F. Winner. It's a book on chastity.
I found it uncomfortable to read on public transit as the original cover jacket has a huge picture of a blossoming magnolia on it and
REAL SEX printed in red hot lettering, so I took the cover off. Still, I had a guy chatting me up the other day, asking me what I was reading.
Me: "A book called 'Real Sex'."
Him: [eyes widen]
Me: "It's a book on chastity."
Him: "What?"
Me: "Chastity."
Him: "What's that?"
Me: "Not having sex."
Him: [eyes narrow]
In the book, Winner addresses sex and how far culture has come in providing a healthy, balanced view of sex. She starts by outlining sex in its rightful, spiritual, Biblical and marital context:
It is a law that invites into the created order of marital sex; a law that rightly orders our created desires for sexual pleasure and sexual connectedness; a law, in short, that cares for us and protects us, written by a Lawgiver who understands that life outside of God's created intent destroys us. By contrast, life lived inside the contours of God's law humanizes us and makes us beautiful. It makes us creatures living well in the created order. It gives us the opportunity to become who we are meant to be. (p. 42)
And talks about the social responsibilities that married couples have to their community, and their community to them:
...When we realize that sexual love is a primary force in constructing a household, and that households are primary components of constructing community, it begins to appear, indeed, that sexuality is something that should have a public, communal face...Sexuality is an integral part of human mutual dependence. Sex, then, is a communal topic. We Christians - whose primary idioms are not individualistic, but communal, the Body of God and the church - are to see in sexuality the bonds of community. (p. 58)
In thomas Cranmer's sixteenth-century language, brides and grooms vow that "with my body, I thee worship." Not a private affair between to atomized adults who contract to live together, Christian weddings are essentially communal. The bride and groom are surrounded by their community, and one of the most important moments of the ceremony is when the minister asks the congregation whether it will do all in its power to uphold the bride and groom intheir covenant of marriage. The congregation answers, "We will." (p.58-59)
I always liked that part of a wedding. I liked the feeling of hearing my own voice chorus with everyone else's, pledging to support the marriage, and have always looked forward to the day when I will hear a chours of voices pledging to support my own.
It's made me think of how open our culture is to discuss, analyse, dissect, scrutinize, detail, categorize, exaggerate, rate, and portray sex but how far from the marriage bed the subject has wandered. How every nuance and variety of sex is open for discussion except for married sex. It's like the only taboo sex these days is sex after marriage.
There was a commercial I remember seeing a few years ago that showed a couple furiously making out while crashing through the door of a hotel and falling on to a bed. The tag line was, "The best sex I ever had was with my wife."
If anyone can remember the advertising campaign, client, or product, let me know. I'd like to express my gratitude.
Thank you Andrew for your deep thoughts on the matter. You make me largh too.
Sure blogging takes the place of conversations once made in person. Maybe the place of literary masterpieces that would have taken time, energy and discipline. Much like Michelangelo vs. ceiling tiles, or Mozart vs. "The Salads", "The Strokes", "The Spoons", "The White Stripes" and I'm sure; "The Lettuce".
I think worse than this, is the generation's tendency to look at their life from some image of a "larger perspective" (any good emo likes to dabble with this), and see that they are born so they can go to school, so they can get a job, so they can retire, so they can die. They read about DaVinci, Michelangelo, and Mozart while getting their necessary education, and see "life".
"This guy had accomplishments that people even now are talking about. DaVinci had a book of pictures of helicopters - maybe I can do that too. Maybe I can make a dent in the world. Maybe I'm worth something. Maybe I can have people talk about me years from now. Because right now - I'm not worth sh!t. I live, and I die. I need to scream my thoughts from rooftops; I need to get my word out there. I need to mean something, to someone - but even so - who are they, to be worth anything for me to care? When I die - I'm dead."
Now, depending on the person, the root isn't quite this well known. The world is set up according to "action/reaction" laws - and it doesn't matter on whether or not one sees the "action" - there's still a reaction. There are still countries under the poverty line whether or not you choose to go on a mission to see it, or not. There is a noise in the forest when a tree falls. You will still be producing rotten fruit, whether you realize a part of you is not in His perfect plan or not. Saving treasures where computer viruses and network crashes destroy? In the true eternal picture: who the crap really cares?
But who am I? I have rotten fruit; but I am not moved to make an entropic society. That is, after all, another law of nature.
“Hey, look at me, I posted my opinion on the inter-web!” Just live in the vine, and go out and heal someone. I’m tired of the noise.