Purity Culture in the Contemporary Charismatic Movement

Getty Images 471739380

The task of every new generation of Christians is to sift what they have inherited from their forebears in a spirit of respect, humility, prayerfulness, discernment and critical thinking, so as to determine which parts of their theological heritage God wants them to maintain and which parts God wants them to jettison or at least rethink. This is essentially the purpose of this blog as a whole, focused specifically on the charismatic movement. As I have matured, grown and learned over the last 15 or so years, one of the areas which I think certain parts of the charismatic movement need to prayerfully rethink, without disrespecting those who have gone before us, is the whole issue of sex and what is sometimes referred to as 'purity culture'.

            This is one of the many areas in which the charismatic movement, especially in North America, has been greatly influenced by and so shares many of the issues of conservative evangelicalism or outright North American fundamentalism. I would say that the book 'Kiss Dating Goodbye' by Joshua Harris  (who has now apologized and, sadly totally deconstructed) was as influential in some parts of the North American charismatic movement as it was in conservative evangelicalism/fundamentalism. The main idea of the book is that Christians should not be engaged in dating at all, but should rather practice courting i.e. only being in a relationship with someone who you know you intend to marry. Concomitant with this perspective was the idea that any and all physical intimacy should be reserved for marriage, i.e. those in a courting relationship should not engage in almost any expressions of physical intimacy. This extreme form of physical distancing was then often valorized in such a way that it became the gold standard of godliness for young couples. I have myself heard pastors and leaders lift up young couples as prime examples of holiness and godliness because they did not even hold hands prior to their wedding day.

            Whilst I want to be sympathetic towards the intention behind this kind of reasoning, it is now a widespread idea within more moderate forms of evangelicalism and charismatic Christianity that this teaching was not only unhelpful, but deeply and profoundly harmful. My sympathy comes from the fact that this whole range of ideas was clearly formed in the crucible of American evangelicals trying to shield themselves and their kids from the influence of the ever-increasing sexual sin of the post-1960s West. Throughout human history, religious communities of all creeds, shapes and sizes have always felt it necessary to create boundaries between themselves and those not a part of the group so as to maintain standards of ethics, holiness and ritual purity. The Jewish people are probably the standout example of this, given their very long history of existing in foreign and hostile environments as a distinct people called by God. But I would like to suggest, along with many others, that just as 'purity culture' was a reaction against ethical/social trends stemming from the 1960s counter culture, so the 'sexual revolution' of the 1960s was itself a reaction against ways of understanding sex that were greatly influenced by a form of Christianity that had some very unhealthy ideas about sex baked into its generally positive desire to be holy unto the Lord in this area. It is almost as if the pre-1960s West had the pendulum swung all the way to one side, whilst the 1960s to the present has swung it all the way to the other extreme.

            I think now is the time for Christians to seek a more balanced approach to sex, one that absolutely insists, with no compromise, on what the Bible actually teaches (i.e. no fornication, no adultery, no same-sex sexual activity, and so on), but one which also appreciates and actively teaches some other very important emphases in the Bible which have often remained totally unknown or underemphasized, such as loving and valuing our body and every part of our embodied experience, including our sex drive and need to connect not only emotionally but physically with those we love. The primary problems, to my eye anyway, with purity culture messaging in the contemporary context are that it:

A. Demonizes sex in general, causing Christians to be afraid of it, to hate it, to be disgusted by it, to be ashamed of it, to tolerate it rather than deeply longing for it, embracing it and enjoying it.

B. Demonizes the human body with its natural needs, wants and quirks. Although Christian teachers from the earliest centuries of the church have been combating heresies than demean the human body, Christianity for much of its history has continued to resist the fact that human sexuality and the embodied nature of this phenomenon is not evil, shameful, or something to be feared, hated and put in a strait jacket.

C. Turns women into walking sex objects who must curtail every part of their self-expression so that they don't 'make the men stumble'. This is still a newsflash for many Christians today, including some charismatic Christians - what goes on in a man's head and what he does with his body are the responsibility of that man. Women are not responsible for the ways in which they are sexually demeaned, objectified or assaulted by men.

D. Turns men into/imagines men as unrestrainable sex animals who are incapable, even with the Spirit of Christ living within them, of maintaining control over their thoughts and actions.

Generally speaking, these negative implications of purity culture teaching have led to Christians approaching their sex drive and their body with a kind of hatred, fear and violence, rather than with tender care, kindness and compassion. Back when I was deeply entrenched within these kinds of teachings, any time I had a thought or felt an emotion or impulse within my person that did not obviously, immediately and totally comply my understanding of 'holiness', rather than getting curious about what my body and my inner person might need, I basically pointed a thousand spiritual ballistic missiles at it as just destroyed it with all kinds of internal, cruel and violent self-repressive spirituality. It is an established fact within psychology that if you want to avoid unhealth in a certain part of your lived experience or lived practice, the worst possible thing you can do is to violently and shamefully suppress it. Suppression always leads to an explosion later down the line. Someone once said to me that human sexuality is like a powerful river. If you try and block it altogether, it will just divert and leak out in other unhelpful areas which you have increasingly diminishing control over. Is it any wonder that the Christian church, across virtually all traditions and denominations, has a massive problem with sexual sin, sexual abuse and sexual violence against women (and young girls and boys)?

So where do we go from here? We are not going to be able to totally reconstruct our theology in the charismatic movement of sex and the body overnight. I think it needs to be a shared, prayerful process. But here are some good starting points from my perspective:

1. Christian leaders and teachers MUST continue to insist, with no compromise or slippage, on what the Bible does actually teach about sex and the human body - that sex outside of marriage, adultery, pornography and same-sex sexual acts are sin.

2. Christian leaders and teachers must also stop teaching harmful things that the Bible does not say or imply - e.g. A. that it is never acceptable to date someone so as to get to know them before you commit to spending your entire life with them. The number of stories I have heard, especially in charismatic circles, of Christian leaders stating that they proposed to the person they were courting on their first date, or that God told them to marry this person without any discernment or prayer or getting-to-know-them process. This is a downright irresponsible thing for Christian leaders to teach in public settings because impressionable young 19-year old’s, whose brains are not fully developed yet, are likely to follow in their footsteps and whilst sometimes this does work out, oftentimes it leads to bad choices and broken lives down the road. For every unusual, prophetic or dramatic Christian marriage story that works out well, there are at least a hundred that don't (I would guess). B. that Christians in a dating relationship should not even hold hands, or engage in any other forms of physical connection prior to their wedding day. I am still astounded, looking back, that Christian leaders are willing to create the no hand-holding and no-kissing standard prior to the wedding day, and then expect that the couple will on their wedding night be immediately able to morph into the 'let's be super sexy' mode of a married couple. Once again, this teaching has resulted in severely broken hearts and broken marriages, not to mention long term sexual dysfunction and/or unfulfillment in Christian marriages.

3. Christian leaders and teachers should teach the many underemphasized or completely ignored facets of what the Bible teaches about sex and the human body - e.g. your sex drive and your body are your allies in living life for God in holiness and joy, not your enemies. We should treat them as such, with compassion and care and love, steering clear of suppression whilst still holding firmly to a Christian sexual ethic (see point 1 above). It often comes as a surprise to many of the students I teach at Alberta Bible College that the Bible contains, right smack dap in the middle, a collection of extremely erotic love poetry (that is, the Song of Songs). This is not something I ever heard when I was previously running in the purity culture circles of charismatic Christianity. Such an idea would likely scandalize many more conservative Christians today. In fact, one of my seminary professors noted that generally most English translations of the Song of Songs 'clean it up a bit', by which he meant the original Hebrew is even more explicit and erotic. Many charismatic Christians at this point use the 'get-out-of-jail-free card' of an allegorical interpretation of the Song that pays no attention to what is obviously its first application - describing, extolling and recommending intensely pleasurable and fulfilling sexual experiences for the people of God within the correct boundaries (see point 1 above). 

As I bring this post to a close, there remains an obvious and important question: if I am suggesting that Christians need to stop demonizing sex and the body, and yet they also still need to maintain the very high standards of the biblical sexual ethic, what are younger unmarried people supposed to do with their sex drive? Am I suggesting too high a standard, an impossible task, given that repression and demonization of sex is often the means by which Christians attempt to maintain a biblical sexual ethic? What I certainly don't want to do is insist on some kind of Donatist pure church which is unrealistic and itself harmful. I would argue that it is possible, by the Spirit of God dwelling in us, for unmarried Christians to maintain a biblical sexual ethic without resorting to the distortions and pitfalls of purity culture that I have discussed above. I think accountability is especially important here. The more we can lean on other, preferably older and of the same gender, mature Christian leaders for support in this endeavour, the better we are going to do. Ultimately, the Lord's ability to keep us walking in his ways is greater than our ability to wander from his ways - see Jude 1:24-25 (NIV) "To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen." This means that we need to rely on God and his Spirit, rather than the force of our own willpower alone, to live holy and healthy lives.

As usual, I have likely rattled some cages or tugged on some rugs under people's feet. As someone who very much does not like confrontation, this is not easy for me. My goal is collective cooperation, healing and growth, not getting back at or disrespecting those with whom I differ. Please let me know what you think in the comments here on the blog post or on socials, I would love to hear what other people think.