| Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A |
| Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A |
Christian Living/Human Behavior - Sexual Behavior
Out of curiosity, how do we (the WELS church) decide who is male and who is female? Can someone with only one sex chromosome be a pastor? Should someone who is androgen insensitive marry a woman or a man? I realize that none of this matters when it comes to salvation, but I thought this issue might be relevant to all the recent sex role questions.
A biological intersex condition (BIC) poses a challenge for those striving to follow the Scriptural teachings on proper role relationships. BICs generally consist of a genetic make-up that is contrary to the physical appearance with regard to sexual organs. BICs is a term that generally applies to the following:
Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), Androgen Resistance Syndrome, Testicular Feminization Syndrome, Feminizing Testes Syndrome, Male Pseudo-hermaphroditism, Morris's Syndrome (CAIS), Goldberg-Maxwell Syndrome, Reifenstein Syndrome (PAIS), Gilbert-Dreyfus Syndrome (PAIS), Rosewater Syndrome (PAIS), Lubs Syndrome (PAIS).
Other male (XY) conditions with some similarities to AIS: 5 alpha-reductase deficiency, 17 keto-steroid reductase deficiency, XY gonadal dysgenesis (Swyer Syndrome), leydig cell hypoplasia, Denys-Drash Syndrome, Smith-Lemli-Opitz Syndrome.
Female (XX) conditions with some similarities to AIS: Mayer Rokitansky Kuster Hauser (MRKH) Syndrome, Mullerian dysgenesis, vaginal atresia.
It may be helpful to think of the life developing from the point of conception to be inclined to develop as a female. When God uses the elements of the procreative process to trigger this child to be a male the child has the receives the distinctive XX chromosomal make-up. That, in turn, triggers a chain of events which prompts the development of male sexual organs and inhibits the development of female organs. In BICs these inhibitors malfunction in some manner, either partially or fully. The result is a person who is genetically one sex, but who also has some or many of the physical characteristics of the opposite sex.
A person who is genetically a one sex but has the physical characteristics of another sex experiences enormous, complicated and painful psychological conflicts. There are a number of support groups formed to help those wrestling with BICs.
The severity of a BIC can vary from mild to extreme. In extreme cases, for example, some contend that even though a male with a BIC cannot conceive a child, he may have a fully functional uterus. That means with the help of a procedure like IVF he can bear a child to term. While this could happen in only the most severe cases it illustrates how deep the conflicts can be. Any situations of public or partial nudity (public washrooms, locker rooms, etc.) could be embarrassing and distressing.
How is this condition treated by science. In the case of males born with substantially developed external female organs physicians often opt to encourage the development of the female characteristics. It is often the path of least resistance. It is far easier than suppressing further development of female organs, surgically changing them and fabricating male organs. So you have genetic males chemically treated to develop a more consistent female appearance.
The challenge facing a follower of Christ is how to define what is a "male" and "female" for purposes of complying with God's expressed wishes for the respective sexes. Science defines males as those carrying the XY chromosome. A female carries the XX chromosome. The writers of Scripture were unaware of this genetic information.
Instead, as I read Scripture, I see four consistently touted characteristics that would distinguish a male from a female:
(1) He is one of the two physical components of the procreative process (Genesis 1:28)
(2) He provides the procreative semen for fertilization (Genesis 38:8-9)
(3) He is able to bear the O.T. distinctive sign of God's chosen people - circumcision (Genesis 17:10)
(4) He looks like a male and/or is accepted by others as a male, often based on appearance (1 Samuel 17:42; Philippians 2:8)
Scripture readily acknowledges that there are aberrations to this intended order.
A) Some cannot produce offspring due to immaturity, disability or agedness (Genesis 17:17)
B) Some lack the physical means to bear the sign of circumcision (Matthew 19:12)
C) Some lack the strong male appearance (John 7:24)
In considering these four characteristics it should be observed that the first two reflect God's strong interest in the procreation of the human species. The latter two focus on how one is perceived by others. They are not in conflict. These are complimentary characteristics. They are supportive of each other.
In considering points 3 and 4, appearances did not change reality. Whether it be by birth or intervention of man, these appearance can be changed, but it doesn't change the reality. The eunuchs were still considered men and despite appearances men are men.
The characteristics, however, that deal with the male role in procreation seem consistently valid. Even in the case of the elderly and the children, their maleness was validified by either the potential of procreativity or the past existence of it. Even eunuchs were considered men because it was recognized that if not for an error in birth or by the hand of men there rested within them the potential to serve the male role in procreation even if it could not practically happen.
In this regard science has done a service in understanding aberrations to the norm of male and female. Science has recognized that a consistent marker for the male species is the XY chromosome, and for female it is the XX chromosome. From those standards aberrations are recognized and judged as the exceptions to the rule.
In the case of BICs we have chromosomal men and chromosomal women with aberrations. Whether it be men with whom the development of female sexual organs was not suppressed or it is women who have the strong presence of certain male hormones, it doesn't change the fact that these are men or women - they are not both.
Recognizing this reality does not somehow condone homosexuality. These observations are made within the context of the natural order of things. To medically alter one's biology to enable them to do contrary to their created nature would simply be a move to circumvent the practical relevance of the logical construct. Its factual relevance in reference to its natural state remains intact and applicable. In other words, if one possesses the chromosomal genetics of a male but wishes to live as a woman and undergoes operations and treatments to change his appearance to that effect, does not change the reality he is still a man.
When wrestling with how someone with a BIC assumes some of the more public roles in the Christian community assigned to either men or women there is the issue of causing offense or causing a weaker Christian to stumble in faith. For example, a Christian with a BIC who is a male could serve as a WELS pastor and assume all leadership responsibilities consistent with that gender. Physical appearances because of the BIC may give the impression that the person is not a male. If not afforded the opportunity to clarify the matter it may cause some to stumble in their faith. One with a BIC will want to carefully judge whether this malady would interfere with his public service in a male role.
Is it fair? Of course not! Yet, the inclination for the general public to stumble is a reality. All of us must balance that reality and all of our alternatives as we seek to glorify God with our bodies and lives.
My husband and I just had a baby. I am breast feeding our baby. My husband wants to suck on my breasts. I am uncomfortable with this. Am I uncomfortable because it would be wrong or is my husband okay because he wants to experience that?
There is no definite statement in Scripture that forbids what your husband wants to do.
You may feel uncomfortable because you recognize that your husband may be wanting to turn what God has designed for the feeding of babies into a sexually arousing activity.
As with the practice of many things that are sexual in a marriage, if one spouse feels uncomfortable doing it, the other spouse, out of love will respect the uncomfortable feelings of his/her spouse and will not insist upon practicing it.
Talk with your husband about how uncomfortable you feel about this practice and ask him to respect your feelings. You do not need to have a reason for your feeling uncomfortable. You simply say that it makes you feel uncomfortable. Ask him to respect your feelings.
We are not experts in the field of medicine. You might want to check with your pediatrician or family practice doctor about any physical changes or damage the nursing of a strong adult may do to your breasts. We strongly suggest that you consult with your local hospital's lactation consultant about what this practice might do to your production of milk in a physical way, the possibility of infection and other cleanliness issues for you and your baby, the possible negative psychological effects this practice might have upon your production of milk, etc..
Certain schools of psychology may ascribe sexual and oedipal perversions to your husbands desire.
If your husband simply wants to taste breast milk, a breast pump may be useful.
Bob and Sue are friends. They've been best friends since they were little and are like brother and sister. They end up going to the same college. They can't get into a dorm, so they decide to look for apartments. While looking they decide to room together so they could each split the rent. They are not attracted to each other in any way at all, and they sleep in different beds in different rooms. There is no sexual activity going on at all. Would this be sinful? I know that living together and being involved sexually is a sin, but what if its not sexual? Would Bob and Sue be sinning?
What you describe has happened very often. Two people of the opposite sex who are good friends move in together. Nothing sexual happens between them.
However, my parish experience has presented me with situation after situation in which two people start off platonic in living together in order to save money. But one thing leads to another. Soon the relationship has become sexual. That is the first warning. The change from platonic to sexual in their relationship happens because of the closeness of living together. My parish experience as a pastor tells me that this happens most often to single mothers who need a roommate and a young man who needs a place to live. It can easily happen to two young people who are "just good friends."
When Jesus says, "Do not put the Lord your God to the test," in Mt. 4:7, he is not talking only about situations connected with throwing yourself off of a high wall and daring God to protect you with his angels. He is also talking about deliberately putting yourself into the path of temptation. Not only is it not a part of mature Christian wisdom to deliberately put yourself into the path of temptation. It is may be doing what God forbids -- putting God to the test -- daring God to protect you as you put yourself into the path of temptation.
God instructs us to avoid speech, entertainment, or activity that might tempt us to sin sexually or to demean in any way his precious gifts of sex and marriage. Ephesians 5:3 "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality."
This brings us to a second warning about the living together situation you describe. The second warning is connected with the sin of offense. The actions of these two young people may lead weak Christians into sin. Weaker Christians than they are may be emboldened by observing their live-in arrangement to try the same thing. The couple who imitates may not be as strong as the couple they are imitating. In this way the couple you are describing may be encouraging other Christians to fall into sin. God counsels us not to use our Christian freedom in such a way that we lead weak Christians into sin. I Corinthians 8:9 "Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak."
A second part of giving offense is the offense given to unbelievers. (I am using the term, "offense," here to mean, "give another a reason to stumble from faith or stumble into sin.") Unbelievers may see the live-in situation and may say, "These two Christians are doing it. We can to." The unbelievers may soon fall into sexual sin. If that happens, the believers who are acting in strong Christian freedom, may have encouraged an unbelieving couple to sin sexually. God wants us to avoid words or actions that might encourage unbelievers to sin. He wants us to live in a way that leads them to praise him. I Peter 2:12 "Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us."
In summary, then. It is not a part of mature Christian wisdom, imitation of God, or giving glory to God in Christ for unmarried males and females to put God to the test by living together on a college campus or anywhere with people of the opposite sex. This action puts their own faith and the faith of others at risk. It may be the sin of offense. Matthew 18:6 "But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."
According to the bible, is masturbation wrong? If so, why? If there is no lust involved and it is used strictly as a stress reliever is it still considered a sin? I would appreciate any information you can give me regarding these questions. Thank you.
The Bible does not address the subject of masturbation directly. It does condemn the immoral thoughts and desires that one usually associates with masturbation (Matthew 5:27-29; Ephesians 5:3-4; I Thessalonians 4:3-5; II Timothy 2:22).
God's Word also says that we should do all things to the glory of God ( I Corinthians 10:31). "Solo Sex" (auto eroticism) by definition seems to run in conflict with God's design at creation in making humans male and female (Genesis 2:20-25). One also wonders how one honors God with her or his body through masturbation (I Corinthians 6:12-20).
We realize that masturbation has become a common way for many secular therapists to suggest as a method for stress reduction. Perhaps it all goes back to Freud and his overt stress upon sexual things. Is there no better way to accomplish the reduction of stress? Many people recommend exercise for stress reduction. I would encourage you to get a physical check up from your medical doctor. If he approves an exercise regimen, I would recommend exercise done with a group of friends or acquaintances -- at a gym, perhaps.
In my counseling, I have never encountered a male or a female who is masturbating who is also not lusting. Most are using some form of pornography in connection with their masturbation. Masturbation has never been just a physical act. Perhaps you are different? Perhaps you are different for now? But the temptation that accompanies masturbation is that one becomes obsessively involved to the point at which one cannot control oneself. Then pornography is used. Lust is a desire to sin that is present in our thoughts about others -- about previous lovers, about current acquaintances, about celebrities, etc. As you note: Lust is a sin.
One can easily become addicted to masturbation as a stress reliever.
Where is God in all of this? He is no longer the source of comfort and peace. The acts and the thoughts connected with masturbation become the source of comfort and peace, not God. I would encourage you to consider this point also.
Talk with your pastor. Find a way to relieve stress that is not suspect according to God's Word. There is a lot of volunteer work or hobby and craft work that one could use to serve the Lord in His Kingdom. Those things also help to relieve stress.
How do I know my question hasn't already been answered?
SEARCH our Q&A archives using the subject you have in question as your keyword.
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod ©
2929 N Mayfair Road
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53222
www.wels.net content is copyrighted unless otherwise stated.
Request written permission to copy.
Bravo! Bravo!