Essay: Of Church Pews And Bedrooms

The Protestant churches seem obsessed with sex these days. Not that their interest in the subject is new. Puritan disquisitions on sex were so plainspoken that early 20th century editions of them had to be bowdlerized. But the terms of today's discussion are revolutionary -- not Why do men sin? but Why shouldn't they party? Traditional strictures against homosexuality, premarital sex (once called fornication), even adultery, are up for theological debate. The Presbyterians in conclave assembled gave thumbs down to the new morality; the Episcopalians gave thumbs sideways; the United Methodist Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America will not be far behind in giving their thumb signals. Bees do it; do Wasps?

Roman Catholics have caught the bug too (as in so many other areas, liberal American Catholics find themselves playing catch-up with their Protestant soul mates). Their arguments over sex are complicated by the fact that the Vatican, the ultimate source of authority in their church, is not known for taking its cues on matters of discipline from Gallup polls or what it hears on Oprah. Or from Protestants.

The obvious secular explanation for this hubbub is that America's churches are internalizing the mores of a developed society. Once the automobile, the college dorm and the Pill became almost universally available, it was inevitable that men and women would start their sexual careers earlier and build up longer and more varied resumes. It was also inevitable that the churches would adjust to the new reality. If that meant adjusting traditional interpretations of the Ten Commandments, so be it.

Like most obvious secular explanations, this one is shallow. American churches don't just passively receive ideas from the general culture. They also stimulate them. (Thomas Jefferson wrote about the "wall of separation" between church and state in a letter to a group of Baptist political allies.) If America's pews ring with debate about America's bedrooms, that is because the churches have their own reasons for grappling with the subject.

What we are witnessing is in fact a clash between two earnest and articulated theological impulses. Traditionalists and innovators disagree about sex because they disagree about the universe, and about God.

Defenders of tradition are often accused of blindly upholding the social status quo. That is selling them short. Even the most conservative American churches have assailed aspects of the status quo, from dueling to saloons to the 12-hour workday. Instead the sexual conservatives see themselves as defending divinely given guides to human behavior. Fundamentalists look for these instructions primarily in scripture, such as St. Paul's comments on homosexuality. Conservatives who are not fundamentalists can agree that the God who made covenants with ancient Israel and with the church wants sexuality to be restricted to the covenant of matrimony.