Imagine a roundtable
discussion in the early Church with the apostles in attendance that addressed
questions about sexuality and culture. This 1st century discussion would
not have been very different from a discussion in our day. There were
some teachers who approached the culture from Scripture, and others who
approached Scripture from the influence of the culture. The Christian
apostles had to respond: would they maintain the sexual ethics of the Old
Testament, an ethic from Judaism, even in a Gentile world, or would they
accommodate their theology to the Graeco-Roman practices of their day?
This imaginary meeting that follows did, in fact, take place (Acts 15)—we just
do not have details of the discussion. Yet we do have the writings of the
apostles in the New Testament, which are presented here.
In attendance of the
imaginary meeting were Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, Jude, and an
unknown apostle who was writing a detailed work to a Hebrew church in the
diaspora. All agreed that sexual issues were not peripheral teaching in
the Church, nor were they to be accommodated to the culture. While some
not part of the meeting apparently were suggesting that Christians could hold
different views and still walk together, was this really true? Could
Christians really entertain a variety of views? These were questions that
could divide the Church—as they have done today. What did the apostolic
Church—authors of Scripture—conclude?
Paul spoke first, saying
‘“Flee sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the
body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do
you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you
have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a
price. So glorify God in your body”’ (1 Corinthians 6.18-20). He
looked around, adding, ‘Sexual immorality, impurity, and sensuality are works
of the flesh. “Those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of
God” (Galatians 5.19, 21; cf. Ephesians 5.5).
Matthew agreed, ‘I recall
Jesus saying that out of the heart come various sins, including sexual
immorality’ (15.19). ‘Yes,’ said Mark, ‘He said that about sexual
immorality, adultery, and sensuality along with other sins like murder, theft,
and evil thoughts’ (7.20-23). ‘He didn’t limit sin to acts, as some are
in the habit of doing, but also spoke against sinful thoughts.’ Matthew
said, ‘Oh, yes, He warned against lust, not just adultery’ (Matthew
5.27).
John reflected, ‘“The world
is passing away with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides
forever’” (1 John 2.17).
The rest looked at Peter
and asked for his thoughts. ‘Well,’ he said, ‘we have the classic example
of Sodom and Gomorrah when we ask whether sexual ethics is a crucial concern
for God. Whatever their lawless deeds—deeds that God so dramatically
punished—they especially included those who “indulge in the lust of defiling
passion and despise authority”’ (2 Peter 2.10). Jude nodded. ‘We
must “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints,” and
this faith includes understanding that God’s grace is not a license for
sensuality. I mean the sort of indulging in sexual immorality and
unnatural desire that was found in Sodom and Gomorrah (Jude 3-7).
Paul added, ‘There is also
the case of when the Israelites committed sexual immorality with Moabites and
God turned His anger on them. Some twenty-three thousand were killed by a
plague’ (1 Corinthians 10.8; cf. Numbers 25.1-9).
The unknown apostle
agreed. ‘Look, none of us are against sexuality, just immorality.
The proper place for sex is within the marriage between a husband and wife—“The
marriage bed is undefiled.” But “God will judge the sexually immoral and
adulterous”’ (Hebrews 13.4).
“Frankly,” Luke said,
“We’ve addressed this issue before in Jerusalem, and I’m glad to say that the
same position was reached there. Paul, Peter—you remember; you were
there. So was James, the brother of our Lord, as well as His
disciples. We even wrote a letter to the Gentile believers because we
needed to decide what from the Old Testament law applied to them. We said
that they were to abstain from sexual immorality’ (Acts 15.20, 29;
21.25).
‘I suppose,’ one of them
reflected, ‘some people will say we are simply all about judgement and not very
pastoral.’ ‘They will say that, for sure,’ said Paul. ‘But the will
of God is our sanctification’ (1 Thessalonians 4.3). ‘I can’t imagine
anything more pastoral than that.” Peter nodded. ‘Look, we know
that those who do not know God think we are quite weird because we do not do
what they do, “living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies,” and so
on—living in a “flood of debauchery” (1 Peter 4.2-3). But we have Jesus Christ,
the chief Shepherd” (5.4). He suffered in the flesh, and we should too,
ceasing from sin and no longer living for human passions but God’s will’
(4.1-2).
Paul said, “God’s
grace is not just about forgiveness; it is also about the transformation of
unhealthy hearts and activities. Pastoral care is the outworking of a
life in Christ. We could call it a kind of “conversion therapy,” as long
as we mean by that that God’s power is at work within us (Ephesians 3.20; 1
Thessalonians 2.13). We are no longer to present our “members as slaves to impurity
and lawlessness leading to more lawlessness” but to “righteousness leading to
sanctification”’ (Romans 6.19). ‘Yes,’ added the unknown apostle, ‘God is
at work within us, equipping us “with everything good” so that we can do His
will. He works in us what is “pleasing in His sight, through Jesus
Christ”’ (Hebrews 13.21).
Peter stood up. 'Good,' he
said. 'We are at one on this crucial issue—everyone, everywhere, always.[1]
It is not a peripheral issue. It is not one on which we can agree to disagree.
It is about continuing in Scriptural teaching and not following the culture,
which opposes God's design for human sexuality. Moreover, the Gospel
itself is at stake here, for we believe that God has called us to holiness,
forgiven our sins, and empowers us to live according to His good will.'
'And what if this splits the Church?' someone asked. John stood up, '“If
some go out from us, then we know that “they were not of us; for if they had
been of us, they would have continued with us." But if they go out,
that only makes it "plain that they all are not of us"' (1 John
2.19). Jude stood up, '"Certain people have crept in unnoticed who
long ago were designed for this condemnation, ungodly people who pervert the
grace of our God into sensuality” (v. 4). “In the last time there will be
scoffers, following their own ungodly passions. It is these who cause
divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit" (18-19).
In an amazing twist to the
event, a whirlwind and shaking took place in the room. The apostles
looked over to a corner of the room, expecting to see the Lord. Instead,
a red call box had arrived. The door opened, and out stepped several
mainline denomination leaders. 'Time machine,' one of them explained,
with a wave of his hand to the call box. 'Twenty-first century,' another
said, with a proud smile. The apostles blinked in astonishment.
'So,' said another of the new arrivals, 'sorry we’re a little late. Have
we missed anything in your proceedings? Never mind. Hope we can
move quickly to find a way to bless cohabitation and same-sex marriages.
Even when we disagree, the main thing is walking together: unity in community,
not bothering with the fine print, right? Must stay relevant to
culture--especially Western culture--if we're to be liked by everyone,
everywhere, and always.'
[1] This reference is to St.
Vincent of Lérins’ understanding of orthodoxy as what has been believed everywhere,
always, and by all. See The Commonitory
of Vincent of Lérins (2.6). Vincent is
not arguing that these criteria stand alone, giving final authority to the
Church, but regard the interpretation of Scripture, which is itself sufficient for
everything (2.5), were it not for disagreement over interpretation. Church tradition has to do with
interpretation, not a second authority independent from Scripture.
Comments