JESUS & PORNOGRAPHY

Since the issue of sex comes up so much and since the internet has changed the terms of pornography so much (so much more available, so much more vivid, exotic and scary) I thought I’d put in 1,000 word’s-worth.  In some ways I don’t believe in pornography.  In other ways, I see it everywhere.

www.apologetics.com has the motto “Challenging believers to think and thinkers to believe.”  Apologetics are a sub-category of theological thought that tries to reframe the previously writing-prescribed church theology when it no longer fits the reality of the present.  For instance,  this quote is from http://www.apologetics.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=67643

“The literal definition of “pornography,” comes from the combined meaning of the two components, pornea which means “forbidden sexual behavior,” (Biblically verifiable) and grapho which means “to write.”

So “pornography” is, literally, writings about forbidden sexual behavior. By extension it includes photographs and movies about forbidden sexual behavior. Let us be sure we understand: it is not “writing about sex” that is illicit; it is writing about “forbidden sex,” that is wrong. The Scriptures use the word "pornea" to define illegal sexual activity.”

This reflection on “pornography” uses this definition as a starting point.  There are two categories (porn + graph) at issue here.  I’ll take the last one first, though I’m a little distracted by the idea of “graphoporn.”  Isn’t there a kind of pornography of writing itself, elevating a common act like writing into something glamorous and privileged, which is the strategy of commercial sex porn?  Or otherwise illegal to publish, like government secrets?  At the heart is money, right?  Well -- we’re quickly taking the money out of writing so it’s less pornie all the time.

I googled “sex and Jesus” which brought up all sorts of things, including the apologetics site above and one I quote below:  http://www.religioustolerance.org/sex_jesu.htm#  

“Jesus is recorded as having made only four direct comments that might be interpreted as relating to sexual behavior.

Matthew 5:31-32 states:
“It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery." (KJV)  

Matthew 19:9 states similarly:

"And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery."  (KJV)

Here, Jesus prohibits divorce, except in a case of sexual misconduct -- "porneia" in the original Greek. Various versions of the Bible have translated "porneia" as adultery, fornication, unchastity, unfaithfulness or marital unfaithfulness. Jesus here deviated from Jewish law, which said that a man could freely divorce his wife.

Mark 10:11-12 states:

"...Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

Luke 16:18 states:

"Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery."

These gospel writers record Jesus as having taken a different stance on divorce. He said that it is unacceptable for any reason at all. 

These statements are about legal matters, normally the business of Caesar rather than the church, though today’s church in the Christian tradition claims parallel jurisdiction and “Caesar” permits it.  Let the church scribes keep the records and the responsibility for propriety.  Usually, Jesus doesn’t interfere, although later when he says his followers should “forsake all others” he defies the claims of church, state and family.  When he protects prostitutes, he acts on principle rather than laws.  He does NOT define them as porniea.  (Some would claim that prostitution protects marriage.)  He always seeks to protect the poor, the outcast, and the diseased, conditions which press people into sexwork.  There is enough evidence in the “gospels” that were not accepted by the church patriarchs (the Apocrypha) to persuade some people that Jesus had a male lover.  It is OTHER parts of the Bible that are quoted to condemn same-sex relationships and then only males.

  

It seems clear that “porniea” is a legal category relating to the state of marriage, which controls economics, lines of inheritance (the importance of a woman being inseminated by only one man so that his bloodline is continued), and -- in cultures that see wives as belongings -- property.  Fertile sex-acts outside marriage mess up inheritance, though many narrative plots (including the Old Testament) rely on regularizing what are technically bastards.  Any force that shakes up the legal status quo can be heretical and pornographic in its writing, even feminism.  (I’m not talking about same sex acts, but rather about stepping outside marriage.)

The biggest “porniea” now (and I think Pope Francis I would agree with this) is not prostitution but the challenge to ideas of conception and family patterns.  In vitro conception; multiple mothers; DNA proof of fatherhood; single or multiple or same sex families based on nurturing instead of biology or legal status; the definition of when a fetus becomes a person -- all these and more have challenged everything previously assumed.  Our understanding of homosexuality, gender identification, maturation, brain function and so on have also challenged the legal definition of marriage, which in view of the multiple religions in the United States, is less and less related to church views because of the problem of determining WHICH church.

Since the biological understanding and management of sex is so radically changed since two millennia ago, then we must go to Jesus’ principles of behavior rather than legal definitions, which is the brilliant shift Jesus made anyway.  This is why it’s so hard for the Supreme Court to define what pornography is -- it’s hard to define marriage.  It has become a category based on cultural proprieties instead of principle.  Common law marriage is literally common behavior.

What would I see as an alternative?   First, I would move the definition of “marriage” out of the legal realm and into the biological/psychological context since that is the origin of the confusion.  That’s what’s changed so drastically.  I would define “marriage” as something more like “bonding”, a state of commitment that doesn’t depend on gender, age, nationality, skin color, or even species -- though that last is taking it a bit too far unless you’re talking about swans.  Still, some people bond with dogs or horses.  It is a brain phenomenon that supports mutual protection and shared goals.  Excellent for the raising of families, but not necessarily even physical in the sense of coition.  I would reduce the legalities of marriage to the status of contracts, “pre-nups” about things like money management, residence and process of termination.   Enforce THAT and really do it. How then does one detect “bonds of marriage”?  Behavior -- what is loving and nurturing indicates a bond.  This is like the common law definition of marriage.

Jesus was addressing divorce, but I don’t know of any biological/psychological research that defines an end to bonding, which can persist even after death.  (There is a lot of work done on grief and trauma, which might be helpful.)  Clearly Jesus objects to anything that disrupts a bonded marriage, no doubt including economics.  He does not say whether lust interferes with or supports emotional pair-bonds.  He doesn’t address sex as a bodily act one way or another.  Nor does he talk about children.  If we’re talking about writing that challenges pair-bonds, one has to admit that Jesus himself recommends leaving one’s family and marriage partner -- Jesus as pornographer.  The pornography of the Gospels.

The main strategy of Christian theology is to separate human conventional phenomena from “higher” mystical participation in another world, a “felt” connection beyond any earthly terms.  One marries God.  (Of course, the Church claims IT is the bride, which is a kind of pornography because it reduces mysticism to a set of written bureaucratic rules.)  If one is in a predominantly Christian culture and committed to it, then this discussion and the other websites that relate to it (just google “Jesus + sex”) will be meaningful and possibly help to guide behavior without hurting other people or oneself.

  

So now I’m going to google “Tao + Pornography” and see what I find.