"Tender Fires" (Part 2)

Was Jesus sexual?  The book’s section on Jesus and sexuality ably puts into context the furor generated by such products of imaginative literature as “The Last Temptation of Christ” or “Da Vinci Code” – works that tend to challenge the validity of what seems to be taken-for-granted in the public mind.  The authors acknowledge that the New Testament is a product of its time and therefore, it is possible to think that it might have left out details about Jesus’ marital status or his most human experiences throughout his life. I shall not dwell too much into this but just to give prospective readers a peek into what the authors have to say about Jesus as a sexual being, here are some lines from Tender Fires:

 

“If sexuality is a God-given energy that draws all of us into relationships of love and care, then Jesus is among the most sexual beings who ever lived.  The story of his life is filled with intimate encounters with other people, and he made loving the primary mark of discipleship.” (p. 203)

 

“If someday we were to learn that Jesus was married that he made love with the same sensitivity, intensity, and passion that energized his ministry, would it make a difference for our faith?  If such a discovery would trouble us, perhaps this says more about our attitudes toward sexuality than it does about Jesus.  In the end, his marital status is not the real question.  Was he faithful in his commitment? Did he love with whole-hearted passion? Did his relationships with people make their lives a little less burdened?” (pp. 205, 208)

 

The sacred erotic

 

Engaging is how I would describe Tender Fires’ take on the erotic. In discussing this, the authors subvert the artificial dichotomy created by such ideas that what is erotic is mundane while the “love of God” or what is called “agape” is divine. In fact, the authors’ use of the following epigraph from lesbian Caribbean-American poet and activist Audre Lorde as a spin off point for discussion says a lot about the authors’ illuminating reflections:

 

“The very word ‘erotic’ comes from the Greek word eros, the personification of love in all its aspects – born of Chaos, and personifying creative power and harmony.  When I speak of the erotic, then I speak of it as an assertion of the life-force of women; of that creative energy empowered, the knowledge and use of which we are now reclaiming in our language, our history, our dancing, our loving, our work, our lives.” (p. 96)

 

To Ferder and Heagle, “Authentic eros… is not only hungry but also creative and generous. It wants to receive and give.”

 

‘The future of human loving’ (pp. 229-246)

 

Towards the end of the book, the authors call for a movement, a shift in perspective, in ways of viewing sexuality in the light of the evolving human consciousness. They articulate the following vision statements that, expressed in “contemporary terminology” not in “creedal statements or ethical mandates from the past,” they (the authors) hope to lend credibility to the truly timeless, enduring values of their faith tradition.

 

1. From a static to a developmental understanding of psychosexuality

 

2. From an emphasis on biological procreation to the more inclusive understanding of generativity as the goal of giving life

 

3. From speaking of sexuality as primarily as sexual behavior to expanding it to include energy for relationships

 

4. From suspicion of sexuality to its reverence and celebration as sacred energy

 

5. From sex education for youth to psychosexual formation for lifelong partners

 

6. From dualism to integration as the framework for a spirituality of human sexuality

 

7. From identifying sexual sin as illicit genital pleasure to recognizing it as the violation of persons

 

8. From patriarchy to partnership as the philosophical mindset for determining sexual and gender ethics

 

9. From sexual abstinence to reverence in relationships as the hallmark of psychosexual wholeness and holiness

 

These statements, I believe, are important to our contemporary debates that include among others the passage of a reproductive health bill, the integration of “sex education” in the school curricula or even the marriage of persons of the same gender (e.g., Can we truly say that marriage is the only legitimate space or, to borrow a line from the authors, “holy ground” for genital expression or sharing?)

 

I leave future readers to engage in a dialogue with the articulations of these statements in the final pages of Tender Fires, but I would like to leave at least a line or two on one of the vision statements mentioned above – particularly the one on generativity.

I remember being told by a friend several years ago that most gay people particularly those who do not have or bear children of their flesh and blood are actually “genetically selfish” since they do not contribute to the genetic pool. This is of course a myopic view of life-giving. The concept of generativity expands what it means to “give life.” It acknowledges that life-giving happens even beyond the genital aspects of our sexuality. As my playwright friend would tell me, “There are many ways of giving birth; one could give birth to a book, an art work, or even an institution” (One could very well interpret that of course as a resort to Freudian sublimation!)

 

But generativity is actually much more than accomplishing feats that undeniably have impact on other people’s lives. Quite relevant to our changing times, this broader understanding of life-giving, the authors suggest, impact even “our approach to the rainforests and rivers, the air and soil.”

 

At the risk of sounding redundant, I say that this beautifully written book is a must read for those who want to reaffirm the Christian faith tradition but who at the same time would like to critically engage in a dialogue on issues on sexuality that continue to confront our human existence. I would like to end this two-part series with the epigraph from which the authors Fran Ferder and John Heagle drew their inspiration for Tender Fires. They are the prophetic words of mystic and Jesuit philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin:

 

“Some day after we have mastered the winds, the waves, the tides, and gravity, we will harness for God the energies of love, and then, for the second time in the history of the world, we will have discovered fire.”

 Acknowledgments:

Poster from the movie "The Last Temptation of Christ" directed by Martin Scorsese

Photo of Audre Lorde from http://cache.eb.com

Pencil drawing of "Jesus and Women" by Jean Keaton

Photos of me by Lorie Santos, Fred Oplado, and Angie Wong

 

 

“Tender Fires”: Some notes on sexuality, spirituality, and the ‘sacred erotic’ in the evolving human consciousness (Part 1)

I am as sexual and as capable of loving as any person currently enjoying the pleasures of his/her intimate relationship with his/her partner.  And that will remain so even if, due to circumstances or due to personal choice, I should end up celibate all my life.

That conviction is reaffirmed by the book, Tender Fires: The Spiritual Promise of Sexuality. Written in a prose style that combines philosophical insights with snippets of general knowledge and what may be construed as “commonsensical,” this gem of a book by Franciscan Sister Fran Ferder and Father John Heagle is a delight to read. Thanks to Ate Lourie (Victor), dear friend and a guiding light of our community of practice in the Philippines, for giving me a copy of the book – a very precious gift on Christmas 2008.

I would perhaps consider this text as one of the most provocative readings of my (relatively) young life. Riveting, radical and refreshing, the book, I must hasten to add, does not sensationalize issues about human sexuality and how they have been historically conceptualized in the Judeo-Christian faith traditions, but it definitely invites controversy – which is good. It is through controversy that people start to talk about, and perhaps, redefine their constructed social realities. It is controversy that invites us to see that our definitions are actually nebulous and that further negotiations can or should be made.

The book is certainly not dogmatic. In contextualizing human sexuality in the faith tradition of Christianity, it successfully veers away from providing definitive answers to controversial questions, a common feature of texts and publications steeped in the ways of dogmatism and orthodoxy. Like any good book, Tender Fires invites readers to think and think further, to question what is, and to engage themselves in a dialogue.

A thorough and incisive review of the text would perhaps generate several treatises on human sexuality and its interface with spirituality. I am honestly not ready to do that. So in this entry, I feature only some of the textual extracts which I find very interesting – words over which I have mulled during these past few days and which I intend to use as points of departure for future personal reflections. (The pictures of me and the statues at Haw Par Villa – courtesy of friend Angie Wong – should not be taken as visual interpretations of the book. They’re meant to provide those who dare read this blog a somewhat playful form of respite, especially if s/he gets exhausted by plowing through my usually torturous, convoluted and lengthy prose.)

Sexuality and the questions on love and life-giving

An important point raised by the authors is how sexuality should be understood. Sexuality cannot be merely reduced to “genitality” or “genital expression” or “genital sharing” (that is, in the words of DH Lawrence, “having sex”).

Sexuality, the authors argue, is a relational energy. Genital expression, in all its forms, is just a component of sexuality. “Sexuality is love energy.  It refers to the spiritual, emotional, physical, psychological, social, and cultural aspects of relating to one another as embodied male and female persons” (p. 29)

They add, “Sexuality, a still evolving term, has to do with all the ways we try to reach one another at the level of the heart. It involves our efforts to communicate, our acts of tenderness, and even our struggle to find each other again after an argument.  It is the constantly burning fire within us that compels us to turn toward one another” (Ibid.).

Seen this way, sexuality is something that everyone has a capacity of exercising. Even the religious, who, by choice, are celibate, can be considered sexual beings when they exert effort to relate with other people. Sexuality is present in all aspects of human-to-human relations.

The authors further point out that “[t]he central question regarding our sexuality is not about our gender, ethnic background, age, vocation, sexual orientation, faith tradition, or even religious and moral convictions, though each of these helps define our uniqueness.  But in our heart of hearts – and we believe in God’s eyes – the core issue is not whether we’re married or single, divorced or remarried, celibate or sexually active, gay or straight, wounded or well, old or young, male or female.  The central question is:  How can I – in the unique circumstances of my life and with God’s help and grace – become a more responsible love and life-giver? How can I receive the gift of life more reverently and humbly?  How can I give life more creatively and joyfully? How can I receive love with more trust and mutuality? How can I give love with more freedom and generosity?”  (pp. 21-22).

The book does not offer quick answers to these questions. In the succeeding sections, the authors invite the readers to reflect on their own stories and the embodied experiences of people on ground.

Same-gender love

Perhaps, one of the more controversial issues brought up by the authors is that of sexual diversity, particularly of same-gender love. 

In exploring this issue, the authors raise the question, “Did God create human persons to fall in love outside the confines of heterosexuality?” which they indirectly address with a rather controversial yet convincing point from a member of the faithful on the ground:  “This is the conviction among those who believe that same-gender love expresses acceptable sexual diversity. ‘Love is what is important.  It is the heart of Christian vocation.  God created the universe with diversity in all other areas.  It is difficult to believe that such a God could imagine only one acceptable way in which human love could be expressed sexually.  Same-gender love might even represent a natural way of limiting overpopulation.’ This statement, spoken passionately by an Episcopalian minister whose son is gay, resonates with many in our church communities who find no contradiction between fidelity to Gospel values and faithful, committed love between two persons of the same gender” (p. 76).

The statement from the Episcopalian minister may of course invite strong counter-arguments or counter-propositions. Moreover, his views may be dismissed for apparently being defensive of his gay son. But if sexuality is seen as a relational energy, then any human being should be capable of loving any of his fellow human beings – man or woman, gay or straight.  The position is also warranted by the authors’ conviction that the Creation Story is a “work in progress, an unfinished symphony of God’s desire to be known and be heard.” They concur with contemporary cosmologists that the universe is ever-expanding and that one of the fundamental dynamics at work in this expansion is differentiation.

“Differentiation,” the authors explain, “describes God’s creative energy as it expands outwardly creating time and space. It encompasses the variety and uniqueness of every snowflake, seabird, flower, and agate, all of which reveal a diversity that is as colorful as it is incomprehensible. Each galaxy and person is unique. Apparently our God delights in such profligate variety and invites us also to rejoice in the heavens and the earth ‘with all their array’ (Gn 2:11)” (pp. 82-83).

Viewed from a rather secular perspective, differentiation recognizes the human capacity to undo certain social structures or categories like gender (in this case, heterosexuality) that restrict what Judith Butler calls “greater livability.”  As Butler points out, “The experience of normative restriction becoming undone can undo a prior conception of who one is only to inaugurate a relatively newer one that has greater livability as its aim” (p. 1, Undoing Gender, 2004).

I believe greater livability is the point of embracing the diversity of the world around us and consequently, the uniqueness of every living thing.