Let's Talk About Sex

Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.

[DesiringTruth]

Miss Current, you might try looking at:

http://www.blogger.com/profile/4696007

I think Gary's e-mail can be found on this site.

[Left]

I know there were alot of replies to the original post - I am only really responding to that.   I definitely agree that there were inappropriate discussions of sex.

My experience has been that the people seemed to wait for a couple to fail at keeping "boundaries" (I could write a book about the damaging effects of that), or for people to have personal struggles with purity, but there were no real solutions to the problem.   It wasn't a real discussion to talk about how to overcome it.

If there were problems with a couple keeping purity boundaries, they were forced to share ALL the gory details of where, when and what happened.  If a couple fell into "sin" they were forced to have more accountability - and in one extreme case ended up getting excommunicated due to a miscommunication between the couple refusing to share the details and the pastor wanting to know everything.  If a couple was strugglign with purity, but didn't actually fall into "sin" it didn't seem as big of a deal.   There was no real useful purpose to sharing the details.
 Why does a pastor have to know that at 11 pm on a weekday with the lights on, in a bedroom, and on a bed did two people kiss open-mouthed with tongue and clothes on for maybe about, but not more than 10 minutes - which lead to ...more details that needed to be shared about that event?  And why would it needed to be shared with one or two members of leadership?

[nateswinton]

GC at some point made a transition from the very Biblical model of confession and repentance, to an "accountability" model with minimal Biblical backing, and a tremendous amount of impotence and embarrassment.

Confession and repentance can happen between any believers, and actually is best done in prayer between the sinner and God.  For all GC's Catholic bashing, the confession model is VERY similar.  But there is no downward vulnerability, and no real call to sincere repentance in GC's model.

That verse in Hebrews fits here: "The High Priest is able to have mercy on the people, because he too is subject to weakness."  The weaknesses of the pastor holding his "flock" to accountability can and should be widely known - we have such a wonderful God that forgives every sin, why not brag about that Grace?!  What a beautiful leadership model that would be, if pastors were open about all their weaknesses, and how God provides for them and is gracious with them.  How many people struggle with guilt and shame because they have the impression that their church leaders are darn near perfect?

[namaste]

Confession and repentance can happen between any believers, and actually is best done in prayer between the sinner and God. For all GC's Catholic bashing, the confession model is VERY similar. But there is no downward vulnerability, and no real call to sincere repentance in GC's model.

As someone who celebrates the sacraments in the Catholic Church, I can tell you that there is absolutely no similarity between the GCx model of "confession" and the sacrament celebrated by Catholics.

For one thing, when I confess something to my priest, there is complete confidence that the issue will be kept in absolute confidence.  Furthermore, when confessing, I've never had my priest ask for all of the gory, nit picky details.  And, I've never felt that I was being judged, or was a failure, or any other bad adjective, when confessing.

[nateswinton]

Fair enough, no offense intended.  My point was that GC tries a holier than thou angle towards Catholics, but then requires confession to leaders.  The differences are clearly noteworthy and even more ironic, in my opinion.

Thanks for saying something, I definitely wasn't trying to bash catholics at all.

[namaste]

No prob, and no offense taken.

[Valley Noir]

Someone else mentioned this, and I faintly remember a small group meeting when we talked about sex, and it did seem instrusive.

After reading all these posts, though, I wonder if there is a power dynamic at work here.  Our sexuality is one of the most basic things about us, and violating someone's sexual boundaries can be a sure way of gaining power over them.  Think of the "interrogation techniques" at Abu Ghraib.  If you put someone in a sexually shaming situation, with either public confessions or explicit sex talk, you can violate their personal integrity and make them easier to control.  I'm not saying that someone is doing this intentionally, but that it could be learned by experience.  "Gee, so-and-so had a problem with purity, confessed it to all the guys, and now he doesn't have a problem!"  There's more concern with desired effect (abstinence) than cause (mortification and shame, rather than spiritual growth).

That's what I find most troubling about this stuff--it can become a coercive transfer of power from the individual to the church leaders.  

In my current church, I was approached once by the pastor about my sex life.  An out-of-control ex-girlfriend had gone to him, accusing me of certain things.  He was extremely apologetic, didn't overly pry into details, we talked about what was needed, and, most importantly, I kept my dignity, because he was very careful to not take it away from me.

That seems to be missing in some of these stories.  Granted, everyone has different sexual boundaries, but we should be circumspect when there's a possibility we may infringing on them.  Most men I know don't sit around comparing notes on masturbation, and I think forcing the conversation on them as a spiritual exercise can be abusive and compromise personal integrity.  It can become a power play.

[AgathaL'Orange]

After reading all these posts, though, I wonder if there is a power dynamic at work here.  Our sexuality is one of the most basic things about us, and violating someone's sexual boundaries can be a sure way of gaining power over them.  Think of the "interrogation techniques" at Abu Ghraib.  If you put someone in a sexually shaming situation, with either public confessions or explicit sex talk, you can violate their personal integrity and make them easier to control.  I'm not saying that someone is doing this intentionally, but that it could be learned by experience.  

You know out of all the things GC said and did, I think for me personally, the way that GC forced itself into my marriage and family has been the most long lasting and devastating.  GC told me when I should have sex, the kind of attitude I should have toward sex, they way I should parent,  how we should have kids, how to live, how to be, WHO to be.  They told me to spank my kids and spank often.  They told my husband what kind of wife he should want and what kind of husband he should be.  They took us when we were young and impressionable and I feel they built the foundation for our marriage the way they wanted it.

I’ve dumped the bad teaching, the stupid authority structure, the vocabulary, basically all the bad sermons.  What I still have left behind is the idea that I am not a good enough wife and mother.  I still have their words that echo in my head.  I honestly feel violated as though they have placed a little GC photo on my nightstand and on a refrigerator magnet.
“Women, you should pray to please your husbands sexually.”
“As we serve our families…”
“Women, be open, be available, be ready for sex.”
Pastor’s wife to pastor, “Honey, I am going to have sex with you every day!” 
“Romance books for women are as bad as porn is for men.”
The hidden yet always present model of the ideal, submissive woman… beautiful, feminine, sexually available, always welcoming to children, homeschooler, lesser in some way , the quiet voices, the expectation of hospitality always, the complete denial of self… these are the things that still haunt me.  GC expected an open door to your inner thoughts, your bedroom, your home, your dinner table, and our calendars.  In GC the only right answer was, “Yes.”
It’s this “Big Brother” feeling that I find the hardest to shake.

[Linda]

I'm sorry Agatha. I would like to read over this entire thread more later when I have more time and make more of a comment, but for the time being I just wanted to say I'm sorry.

[calgal]

Hey all ... I know I've been replying to almost all these threads, but being new, I find all these postings so interesting.  And having been in this cult for over 10 years, I have some experience from which to speak.

My experience regarding sex:

1. in 1980s and 1990s, Hyper diligence toward single women and men so that they  do not become "distracted" from the great commission by becoming "distractated" by the opposite sex. This meant micomanaging who sat by whom at meetings (you would be talked to if you sat by the same person of the opposite sex repeatly), women would be asked to not wear certain items of clothing (and this was at the discretion of leadership and often only the more attractive single women singled out), etc. 

2.  Meetings would be held for single men to discuss masturbation and its sin.  The sin of "Onanism" was sited - the only reference in the bible they can come up with and if you know your bible history, it is actually references prostitution.

3.  Kissing or fondling was discouraged until marriage although assumed that it might take place whlie you were "praying for the purpose to decide to become married." - I think that is called dating ... but they would never admit that.

4.  As a married woman, a Phyllis Shafleys (sp?) book was circulated among the group and we were encouraged to only partipate in missionary style sex only.  Any exploration as a young couple any of us were having came to a complete stop!

5. Anytime a man masturbated (married or not) he was encouraged to confess to either a felow brother or to his wife ... can you imagine how this helped a marriage??

6.  I know that most of the above still takes place today in may GC churches.

I would challenge anyone to offer another bible verse against masturbation ...and where are the ones pertaining to women?

My two cents.

Calgal

[wastedyearsthere]

4.  As a married woman, a Phyllis Shafleys (sp?) book was circulated among the group and we were encouraged to only partipate in missionary style sex only.  Any exploration as a young couple any of us were having came to a complete stop!

what was the reason given for this??  This just seems like extreme control!!  What business of the church is it if married couples do what they like in this regard?

I do remember lots of strange ideas at GCx regarding sex.  One elder told my husband that orgasm was nothing more than a sneeze.  Lots of legalism regarding clothing that still goes on today at our local GCx church.  Women were told to go home and change. 

[calgal]

I was the woman ... I was not to question!!!!

Oh, yes, it was questioning that ushered my exit .... maybe I should have questioned!!!!

[wastedyearsthere]

My husband laughed when he read your post.  How would the elders enforce what positions married couples use in the privacy of their bedroom?  BIZARRE to say the least

[calgal]

Well, they had to have something to pray about!

Or ... maybe like the single men had to fill out masterbation surveys, the married men had to fill out copulation surveys!

[Rebekah]

Sex in GC is just strange. It's all about the men. Wives weren't really expected to enjoy sex for themselves but because it pleases their husbands. It's all about "serving" each other, which just seems weird in the bedroom.

Oh, and I found out the hard way that even married women weren't supposed to have vibrators when I mentioned recently buying one to a group of other newly married women. Oops! 

[Note: This conversation was in a small group, which is also weird that we talked about sex in a formal life group setting.]

[calgal]

Ha!

[G_Prince]

I do remember lots of strange ideas at GCx regarding sex.  One elder told my husband that orgasm was nothing more than a sneeze.  

Awesome! I have a cold coming on.

[MidnightRider]

One elder told my husband that orgasm was nothing more than a sneeze. 

He's not doing it right.

[EverAStudent]

It should be most illuminating for all Christians to realize that the Bible is absolutely silent on sexual "style" or positions.  Why do we even talk about regulating things that are not regulated in either the NT or the OT?  Shameful.  But we sinful people do love to create rules, don't we?

[Immortal_Raven]

GC is the first and only church I've seen that discusses sexual..."positions" I think is the term.  A couple thoughts though:

-I've spoken to several people about masturbation including several women.  Their responses were a bit shocking, but raised a good point.  If you're masturbating, you're most likely not out having an affair.

-I remember a Mark Darling message at a retreat I went to.  He said 90% of women will not experience a true orgasm.  I want to know if that's within the movement or worldwide?

-Their view of a woman's role in sex treats her no better than a prostitute.  Seriously, she's only there to serve the man.  At least a prostitute gets paid.

-Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Onan's sin was effectively "pulling out".  He was supposed to have sex with his older brother's wife to preserve the family line.  He spilled his semen on the ground.  Not trying to be contentious, just trying to keep my facts straight.

-Does GC have an official stance on the use of birth control? 

-An orgasm is nothing more than a sneeze?  Sneezes do not feel good and a big sneeze hurts.  I've never had an orgasm I didn't like.

-Immortal_Raven