“God, I marvel that You want anything to do with us, we are so stupid and sucky.”

I picked the title for this post from the session-opening prayer by Jocelyn Wallace, director of Vision of Hope Residential Treatment Center here in Lafayette, because it reflects a refreshing attitude in contrast to our self-esteem culture.

Mrs. Wallace works with young women from age 14-28 who struggle with a wide range of problems. She taught a workshop called "Counseling Those Struggling with Their Sexual Identity." I chose this topic for today's post because those of us who belong to the generation doing the parenting and counseling of young people are largely ignorant that those very young people are immersed in a sexually explicit and sexually confused culture.

The challenge is to both teach a biblical view of sexuality as well as model it. If we do not respond we are pushing the problem off on the next generation of Christian parents and teachers. We tend to fear a number of things:

1. Falling into the immorality we are fighting in the culture
2. Becoming exposed because we have become absorbed in our own forms of immorality
3. Having to provide an example in our own homes of how a marriage ought to run
4. Having to overcome our laziness and inattentiveness in failing to teach our children how to biblically define family, sexuality and marriage

Jocelyn pointed out that we should resist calling people "gay" or "lesbian" because that is a subtle indication that we accept those terms as the identity of those people. In truth, these are people who have been caught up in sexual sin, but their identity is not wrapped up in their behavior. For example, you do not become "country" or "goth" just by dressing that way. The confusion over gender roles may be reflected in the unisex dress of our world, but the real issue is the attitude of the heart. Many (most) young people have grown up thinking we get to decide what we are and do not know what it means to be masculine or feminine.

Rather than cave in to the culture, the Church needs to communicate that the greatest pleasure in this world is to to find our identity in the way God made us and to delight in the boundaries He has established for our good and His glory.

"Let the thrill go—let it die away."

I am adapting this entry from my comments on a chapter in C. S. Lewis's Mere Christianity entitled "Christian Marriage." It is from a note I sent to our college-age young people in another blog (that you probably do not read). It primarily surrounds the urging of the unmarried (at that time) Lewis to contrast loving with being in love. The quote in the title above forms the basis for my comments.

First, by this statement Lewis combats “shacking up” and other forms of intentionally arousing sexual passion in someone to whom you are not married. People who believe they are “in love” may set aside responsibility because the feelings of being in love are so intense. People who love their boyfriend or girlfriend rather than being in love with them know that stirring passions that cannot be satisfied righteously is unloving. They should “let the thrill go” because they are dooming the future of something God created to be enjoyed in its proper context to a guilty pleasure. Lewis effectively illustrates with food. When we want the thrill without the responsibility, we are like bulimics who binge and purge to avoid the natural consequences of overeating. Sexual experimentation outside marriage is relational bulemia. It makes the “feast” of marriage a guilty pleasure instead of a motivation to bless the Lord who gave it to us.

Next, by this statement Lewis combats the divorce problem. The biblical teaching on marriage is not first and foremost good because it helps marriage. It is good because it is marriage that helps us see the relationship God has with his people. God is not “in love” with us. He loves us. And it is not being in love with someone that prepares you for the commitment required for a 50-year (lifetime) marriage. It is loving someone even when the original feeling has waned. Loving someone makes you to keep the contract and, yes, even savor the sweetness of the contract. People who love each other can have productive disagreements because they quarrel with a resolution in mind rather the end of the relationship. The idea of going their separate ways is off the table because they honor the contract more than they honor the thrill. People who are merely in love quarrel selfishly, fearing the loss of the feeling and the person who brings it.

Finally, by this statement Lewis combats the controversy over biblical marital roles. It is not the thrill of being in love that makes a man love and lead his wife or moves a wife to joyfully follow her husband. Loving headship and joyful submission are not for the benefit of the male sex but for the stability of the world that is founded on the family order. The thrill that Lewis says needs to die rarely produces situations that require loving leadership or joyful submission (please read that twice). For example, that young man who is such a good leader in deciding which movie to attend on Friday night should also be evaluated by the way he acts when he is required to inconvenience himself to serve others. That picture of feminine charm may look good on your arm at the movie theater or at a concert but what is her attitude when it is her turn to deal with screaming babies in the church nursery? This is why I urge young believers to identify potential mates by observing them in situations that require unselfish service and even stressful problem-solving. He needs to show his love by humbly accepting the responsibility that comes with leadership. She needs to love by joyfully serving under the authority of another. Some couples get along great so long as there are dating diversions to keep them from addressing real life. Long-term relationships run in orderly ways that transcend difficult relational trials because more is at stake than the thrill.

Can You Be a Virgin and Have a Promiscuous Heart?

Dear Boris:

I have been brewing on the sexual abstinence rally at our local high school. I do not wish to take away from what was a needed and well-presented challenge, so I will not address the rally in particular.

My thinking relates more to our long-term strategy for challenging teens, particularly those who follow Christ, to remain sexually pure. The standard reason we are given from well-meaning evangelicals for remaining pure is that we are valuable. The biblical teaching is that we should remain pure because ­he is valuable. There is a radical difference between the two.

Christian teenagers need to hear that the very reason for their existence is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. You cannot adopt that worldview if your greatest pleasure in God is that he makes much of you. He created us to find pleasure in making much of him. Is it possible that we have youth-grouped a generation of children into theological ignorance?

It is a man-centered theology which says that Jesus came and died because we are so special. This is error. Jesus came to please his Father and to rescue people who had no worth apart from him. You do not have to learn to love yourself in order to love others. The Bible says we very naturally love ourselves.

Our selfish generation must come to terms with the truth that we must be holy --different, entirely "other"-- not because we are valuable but because our Savior is valuable. We are called to be holy because he is holy. We are called to be holy because he is our greatest treasure. When he is not that treasure, young people are in bed in their hearts long before they violate their abstinence pledges.

How does this look in shoe leather for ministry to teens? For the promiscuous girl coming to our Crisis Pregnancy Center for a pregnancy test it means that her counselor points her to a Savior who is all about his own glory rather than about filling her emptiness. The picture to be painted is not of a pale, anemic Jesus waiting outside the door of her heart to be let in along with all her other gods (Revelation 3:20 is about a group of believers, not a sinner’s heart). The accurate picture is of a condemned sinner on the outside of the only ark of safety with a flood on the way. Sinners who repent do so because they recognize the worth of Jesus and their own corruption, not a Jesus who came to bring people personal fulfillment.

Can that message be delivered in the context of love? It has to be. For the abstinence instructor, giving the earthly “acceptable in public school” reasons for abstinence (avoiding STD’s, unwed pregnancies and disrespect) is helpful for public health. It is a good start at neighbor loving. Let’s do that, but not stop there. A God-centered theology demands that we present a Jesus who is glorified by those who give up the lusting that leads to fornication and the anger that leads to murder. We do our community a favor by promoting outward abstinence. We do our community an eternal favor by promoting a Savior who enables inward transformation.