Christianity Today recently published a three-part article series, claiming Christians are finally debating sterilization (vasectomies and tubal ligation). The announcement that this debate was raging was news to most of us who consistently debate Christian issues online. The series pushes on contraception, sterilization, and Christian sexual ethics that many ordinary evangelicals will instinctively recognize as foreign to the Protestant theology they inherited. The series included:
- Men Should Bear the Brunt of Contraception by Justin Whitmel Earley
- What the Awkwardness of Sterilization Tells Us by Katelyn Walls Shelton
- Christians Need Clearer Thinking About Sterilization by Matthew Lee Anderson
At first glance, the articles appear to be a simple call for Christians to think more carefully about vasectomies and sterilization. But taken together, the series advances something much larger: a new evangelical anthropology rooted less in historic Protestant theology and more in a sacramentalized “theology of the body” framework borrowed heavily from Roman Catholic natural-law ethics.
Head over to Reformation Journal to read the entire essay.
6 responses to “Christianity Today’s New Sexual Ethic”
8 “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me;
9 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’” (Matt. 15:8-9)
It takes a lot of work to obey the commandments of men. And that’s the snare that leads to a false gospel, where the corruption of the flesh from the sin of Adam is countered by oneself through a bunch of effort and work, rather than by the Holy Spirit. It’s a form of godliness that denies the power thereof. A fake godliness that is not based on the commandments of God is a fake godliness that will not align with the work of the Holy Spirit. And so it becomes a false gospel that is not a free gift and not the work of the Lord, but is a ton of effort that is the work of oneself (yet still inevitably falls woefully short).
They’re certainly off track. But the response is not to over-correct all the way to the other side of the straight and narrow. Not all of us are meant for marriage and children. Paul also said that it is better not to marry. And some of us haven’t had much choice the matter. But when that is the case, the Lord can and will, by the work of the Holy Spirit, stop the desire from getting out of control and making one’s life miserable. That is not to say, however, that celibacy and lack of marriage is the ideal standard, to which everyone should aspire, or anything of the sort. It is not a sin to remain unmarried. Nor is it a sin to marry. We area all different parts of the Body of Christ, having different roles and responsibilities. The Lord uses us for His work as He sees fit, and He equips us for the work He sets before us. For some that includes marriage. For others it does not. That’s all entirely up to the Lord.
None should be compelled or pressured to either marry or not marry. That is a matter that is between oneself and the Lord alone. Our lives belong to Him. Others’ opinion of what we should be doing with our lives is entirely irrelevant, when there is no sin involved. If it is not sinful, then it is not sinful. So do not stray to and start trying to impose the commandments of men. And that admonition goes for all sides of the debate. Stick with scripture, what God says is and is not sinful, and nothing else.
Good article David
My writing skills are no good. I did not intend to refer to celibacy and lack of marriage as different things. By God’s standards they are the same thing. Where there is no marriage, there must be celibacy. And the reverse is true, as it pertains to marriage. There’s no celibacy in marriage, and scripture never makes any such distinction. Which I believe is a point David already made in the article.
They talk about mortification of the flesh, but that somewhat misses the mark. Because everything that satisfies or pleases the flesh is not inherently sinful. Eating food for example. When Jesus spoke about marriage, He said “from the beginning”. Look back to Genesis. God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply before they sinned. He told them to eat of the garden, except for the fruit of one tree. It’s not a sin to be fruitful and multiply. What’s sinful is the enslavement to the corruption of the flesh, and the corruption of all of creation.
This is why we need to stick with the commandments of God, and only the commandments of God, and quit teaching as doctrine the commandments of men. Those who wrote the articles to which David has referred are like pharisees making up a bunch of hooey that God never commanded. And on the other “side” of the debate there are also some making up a bunch of hooey that God never commanded, essentially arguing that it’s a sin to not marry and have children. Just stick to the commandments of God, and get rid of the hooey. Lean on God’s word, not your own understanding. Do what He says to do, and rust Him with the outcome and results, rather than trying lead mankind in the direction you think man should go. It’s His vision for the future that counts. Not our own. Do what He says to do, and let Him worry about the future.
When did Christians start viewing children as a burden?
[…] Rising’ Hits 1 Billion ViewsFormer SBC Pastor Faces 7042 Child Sex-Abuse ChargesChristianity Today’s New Sexual Ethic‘Hail Satan’- Devil-Horned Satanist Leads Invocation at Nevada Commissions […]
The Reformers are not on your side for this conversation; Luther and Calvin said contraception is a horrible sin repugnant to nature, and the Westminster Annotations, Gill, and Matthew Henry said it is a terrible sin…
now ask what they might think about sterilization.