Lewis writes this chapter to provide a more positive context for sexuality, which he admits was mostly ‘negative’ in the previous chapter. And ‘context’ is very quickly the leading theme as he talks about sexuality apart from marriage. Lewis writes,
“The monstrosity of sexual intercourse outside marriage is that those who indulge in it are trying to isolate one kind of union (the sexual) from all the other kinds of union which were intended to go along with it and make up the total union. The Christian attitude does not mean that there is anything wrong about sexual pleasure, any more than about the pleasure of eating. It means that you must not isolate that pleasure and try to get it by itself, any more than you ought to try to get the pleasures of taste without swallowing and digesting, by chewing and spitting them out again.”
And so here, Lewis is saying that there is a context for sexuality. It is not something all by itself, it is a part of something larger. And experiencing it all on its own is robbing it of the larger context. We do this all the time, even as we often will quote someone without using this quote in the larger context in which it was written or spoken. Sexuality is one union among others (emotionally, spiritually, intellectually…) that form the oneness that is described in the Scriptures as “one flesh.” And so it is within the marriage relationship that this union is experienced with all the other unions within this one flesh kind of relationship.
From here, Lewis quickly moves to the motivations of marriage and the way so many choose marriage in order to satisfy the public (church?) yet have no intentions of living as married people, that is, living in the reality of a lifelong covenant relationship. He writes, “More often, I think, the couple (or one of them) hoped to deceive the public. They wanted the respectability that is attached to marriage without intending to pay the price: that is, they were imposters, they cheated.” And yes, this is certainly very evident in our North American culture today. Lewis contends it is better for two people to live together than not take serious the covenant of marriage. He says, “One fault is not mended by adding another.” Meaning, the “fault” of fornication” is not mended by getting married (yet not committing to it). I like that approach, although, is he talking about civil marriage or Christian marriage (something he will get to later)?
I like what he says about lifelong commitment. He talks about how our culture speaks of love that lasts forever, etc etc. And then he writes, “The Christian law is not forcing upon the passion of love something which is foreign to that passion’s own nature: it is demanding that lovers should take seriously something which their passion of itself impels them to do.” The nature of passion or love itself is a long lasting nature. All the Christian viewpoint is saying is to take seriously the nature of what you are feeling and thinking about your lover. Yet to watch out for those feelings. Marriage is not committing that you will feel the same way all the time. Marriage is committing that you will love, not that you will feel love. As Lewis states, “No one can promise to go on feeling in a certain way. He might as well promise to never have a headache or always to feel hungry.”
Lewis says that ‘being in love’ is a good thing. It conquers the animal lust we have in us because ‘being in love’ makes one generous and courageous. He says it is a good thing, but not the best thing. And then he makes a statement that should probably be read at all weddings,
“But, of course, ceasing to be ‘in love’ need not mean ceasing to love. Love in this second sense – love as distinct from ‘being in love’ – is not merely a feeling. It is a deep unity, maintained by the will and deliberately strengthened by habit; reinforced by (in Christian marriages) the grace which both partners ask, and receive, from God.”
I like the phrase ‘deliberately strengthened by habit.’ There is something here that a lot of people just don’t get. And Lewis takes a stab at one of the reasons why, “Our experience is coloured through and through by books and plays and the cinema, and it takes patience and skill to disentangle the things we have really learned from life for ourselves.”
The patience and skill to disentangle is what I feel we need to spend a whole lot more time on. WE all have reasons why we make the decisions that we do, but I would suggest that are not aware of those reasons even within their own self and as a society we need help (from each other) to patiently, and with skill, disentangle all that we have learned through inappropriate means of teaching. Maybe this is why the church was created?
I especially appreciate Peterson’s perspective on the pastorate because no one else is saying what he is saying. And for the life of me I can’t make sense of his vision for the church because we are so far from where we should be. And so to read this and let it dive subversively into the soil of my vocation and the soil of my congregation, perhaps something will grow that will resemble the kingdom of God, that which Jesus spent most of his time walking about. He writes of spirituality, “So the task is not to get God to do something I think needs to be done, but to become aware of what God is doing so that I can respond to it and participate and take delight in it” (4). He talks about busyness and the cult that it is and has become and he asks, “How can I lead people into the quiet place beside still waters if I am in perpetual motion?” (19). I have thought about this concept a lot because I get stuck in perpetual motion too often, and then not emotionally ready to listen. I am assuming this is not a problem that is limited to pastors. And so with humility, we need to walk together, helping each other become “poised harpooners” as Peterson goes on to explain the atmosphere on Captain Ahab’s ship on pursuit of Moby Dick. Everyone was frantic. Everyone is working, sweating, oaring the ship in its great hunt; everyone of course but the harpooner, who is quiet and poised, waiting. Then Melville writes, “To insure the greatest efficiency in the dart, the harpooners of this world must start to their feet out of idleness, and not out of toil” (24). As the pastor (Christian) readies her/himself for those moments in which they were created-equipped-trained for they do well to not attempt this great work out of toil, busyness or perpetual motion. I don’t sense from the context Peterson is encouraging the idleness that the Bible speaks against, but an idleness that rejects our world’s description of importance or our general idea of worthwhileness (or worthiness).
So I have been spending a lot of time in a little story called “Jonah” from the Old Testament. And it is amazing how many things about this little story can touch our lives. This last Sunday I talked about the object lesson, the plant, of the gourd, that God appointed to provide shade for Jonah while he sat east of the city after preaching up a storm. It was a lot of fun exploring how alike I am to Jonah. I don’t think I am necessarily running of to Tarshish, but I so often find myself developing my skills at “religious careerism” instead of joining God in His pursuit to love the world. And so with Jonah, I sit underneath the plant, and as it withers, I sulk and get angry and wish more things could go my way.
A book that has been very dear to me, not only during this Jonah series, but also many other times that I find myself wandering through pastoral ministry is Eugene Peterson’s “Under the Unpredictable Plant.” There is really nothing like it on the market. Peterson is one of a kind and this book is nearly his best. I can honestly say that I would not be a pastor if it were not for the wisdom I have gained through Peterson’s insights. And all it took was a slight comment about this book and it has already left my hands and into the hands of someone else who will hopefully unlock all the treasures that awaits any reader of this book. If you don’t have it, I highly recommend it. But then again, maybe it’s just not your thing 
One person’s treasure is sometimes just that!
