And…we’re back.

After a long summer break, we have returned. We skip all the niceties and how are yous and plunge in to recent discussions about the relationship between ‘orthodoxy’ and sexual ethics. The Nashville Statement makes an appearance, of course, as well.

If you like the show, please do leave us a review on iTunes. We are also available on Google Play.

If you’re interested in supporting the show financially, you can check out our Patreon here.

Posted by Matthew Lee Anderson

Matthew Lee Anderson is the Founder and Lead Writer of Mere Orthodoxy. He is the author of Earthen Vessels: Why Our Bodies Matter to our Faith and The End of Our Exploring: A Book about Questioning and the Confidence of Faith. Follow him on Twitter or on Facebook.

  • Wintery Knight

    I take a conservative view of sexual ethics (no sex outside of heterosexual marriage permitted), but there is an additional practical concern: what impact does the Sexual Revolution have on Christian parents ability to pass along their faith?

    According to a Swiss study linked in this post, children are far more likely to accept the religion of their parents when the father is present in the home and active in the religion:
    https://winteryknight.com/2016/07/12/how-the-presence-and-quality-of-fathers-affects-belief-in-god-4/

    There is also evidence that a weak or absent father figure is linked to atheism.

    So, not only should Christians consider taking a strong stand in favor of behaviors likely to lead to strong and stable marriages (e.g. – premarital chastity), but they should also be opposed to cultural currents (no-fault divorce) and social policies (e.g. – single mother welfare) that weaken marriage as an institution.

    • hoosier_bob

      The problem is that this “conservative view” functions as something of a least common denominator. It articulates nothing positive about sex, and is far more lax regarding sexuality than the position the Christian church has taken historically. It’s a position that allows Christians to make a qualified embrace of certain aspects of the Sexual Revolution (at least the 1950s neo-Freudian version of it). One thinks of Mark Driscoll’s book on sex from a few years back. Once one adopts that view, there’s little logical basis for opposing same-sex marriage.

  • Elizabeth Johnston

    Wonderful discussion. Thanks also for the mention of the complementarian issues with how to handle abuse.