The Christian Sex Debate Nobody Wants to Have

From premarital sex and sexual compatibility to fantasies, fidelity, and whether God really cares what happens in the bedroom.

Try Before You Buy? Does Christian sexual morality still make sense in 2026?

Let’s talk about sex.

More specifically, let’s talk about Christianity and sex.

Because there is something rather fascinating about the relationship between the two.

Christianity has a lot to say about love, marriage, fidelity, temptation, desire, self-control and sexual morality. And yet, for something that is such a fundamental part of being human, sex can still be one of those subjects that Christians find incredibly difficult to talk about openly.

And perhaps that is why I wanted to write this.

Not to attack Christianity, not to tell Christians what they should or shouldn’t believe and certainly not to suggest that there is only one way to be a Christian.

I am a Christian woman myself.

I have been married. I have been divorced. I have experienced love, heartbreak, intimacy and betrayal and as someone who has studied therapy and the psychosexual side of relationships, I have spent a lot of time thinking about what actually makes relationships work.

My own beliefs around sex are fairly simple.

I believe intimacy should mean something, I believe commitment matters, I believe trust matters, I believe kindness matters, I believe consent matters and I believe that when you become intimate with somebody, you are stepping into something that can be incredibly vulnerable for both people.

However, does that necessarily mean we have to wait until a wedding ceremony before we can discover whether we are sexually compatible?

Well, that’s where things get interesting.

Does the Bible actually say you can’t have sex before marriage?

The traditional Christian answer is essentially yes.

Catholic teaching is very clear that sexual intercourse belongs within marriage and that unmarried couples are called to live chastely rather than engaging in sexual relations. The Catechism describes marriage as a complete and lifelong mutual gift and says that sexual intimacy becomes part of that marital commitment. (Vatican⁠)

Many conservative Protestant and evangelical churches hold a similar position, interpreting biblical passages concerning sexual immorality, marriage and the “one flesh” relationship as teaching that sex belongs within marriage.

But there is an important distinction. The Bible doesn’t actually contain a simple sentence saying:

“Thou shalt not have sex before marriage.”

The traditional Christian position is an interpretation drawn from a collection of passages and theological principles. The traditional Christian teaching that sex belongs within marriage come from how a number of biblical passages about sexual immorality, marriage and sexual desire and the ‘One flesh’ relationship have been interpreted together, the traditional conclusion is simply very well established. If we look at examples to help us look deeper..

1. 1 Corinthians 6:18–20 – “Flee from sexual immorality”

This is probably one of the strongest passages for the traditional argument.

Paul says:

“Flee from sexual immorality… honour God with your bodies.”

He then connects sexual union with the “one flesh” language from Genesis 2:24. 

The traditional interpretation is essentially:

Sexual union is not morally neutral. Your body belongs to God, and sexual intimacy creates a profound bodily union, so Christians are called to avoid sexual relationships outside God’s intended framework.

The interesting bit is that Paul doesn’t spell out every prohibited scenario. He uses the broad category sexual immorality, which Christians have subsequently interpreted in different ways.

2. 1 Corinthians 7:2 – marriage as the answer to sexual desire

Paul writes:

“Since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.”

He then discusses mutual sexual responsibilities within marriage. 

The traditional interpretation is fairly obvious:

If sexual desire is difficult to control, marriage provides the appropriate context for sexual intimacy.

That’s one of the passages behind the historic Christian teaching that sex belongs within marriage.

But notice something important for your article: Paul is not writing a modern sex-Ed manual. He’s addressing a particular Christian community with particular questions about sexual behaviour, marriage and celibacy.

So we shouldn’t pretend the verse is more explicit than it actually is.

3. 1 Thessalonians 4:3–7 – “avoid sexual immorality”

This is another major passage.

Paul says:

“It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality…”

He goes on to talk about controlling one’s body “in a way that is holy and honorable” and not wronging or taking advantage of another person. 

Don’t exploit another person.

That fits beautifully with what you’ve been saying about kindness.

The traditional Christian sexual ethic isn’t only about “Don’t have sex.”

It is also about:

self-control + holiness + honour + not taking advantage of another person.

4. Hebrews 13:4 – “the marriage bed”

This is probably one of the most direct verses for the traditional position.

Hebrews says:

“Marriage should be honoured by all, and the marriage bed kept pure…”

and then contrasts the marriage bed with adultery and sexual immorality. 

Traditional Christians have understandably read this as supporting the idea that sexual intimacy has a particular place within marriage.

Again, though, it doesn’t literally say:

“Unmarried people must never have sex.”

It establishes a strong connection between marriage, sexual purity and the marriage bed.

5. Genesis 2:24 – “the two will become one flesh”

This one is incredibly important because it becomes a foundation for later Christian teaching.

Genesis describes marriage:

“A man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.”

Then Jesus repeats this teaching in Matthew 19:4–6, and Paul uses it again in 1 Corinthians 6:16 when discussing sexual union. 

This is where the traditional Christian concept becomes really interesting.

Sex isn’t regarded simply as:

two people doing a physical activity.

It is associated with becoming “one flesh.”

So the theological argument becomes:

If sexual union creates a “one flesh” relationship, shouldn’t that union belong within the covenant of marriage?

That’s a theological inference rather than a direct prohibition, but you can see exactly how Christians got there.

6. Matthew 19:4–6 – Jesus connects sex, marriage and “one flesh”

Jesus quotes Genesis when discussing marriage and divorce.

He says:

“The two will become one flesh.”

And then:

“Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Again, Jesus isn’t specifically answering the question:

“Can an unmarried couple have sex?”

He’s talking about marriage and divorce.

But Christian theology has connected these passages together to develop the idea that sexual union belongs within the permanent marital relationship.

7. Ephesians 5:3 – “among you there must not be even a hint…”

Paul writes that there should not be:

“sexual immorality, or any kind of impurity…” among Christians.

This passage is particularly interesting because Paul places sexual behaviour alongside greed, obscenity, foolish talk and impurity.

So again, the emphasis isn’t simply biological.

It’s about character and how someone lives.

8. Colossians 3:5 – “put to death… sexual immorality”

Paul again tells Christians to put away:

“sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires…”

This becomes part of the traditional Christian argument that Christians are expected to exercise self-control over sexual desire, rather than allowing desire to dictate behaviour.

Christianity isn’t necessarily saying:

“Don’t have sexual desires.”

It’s saying:

“Your desires don’t have to control your actions.”

That’s a very different proposition.

9. Matthew 5:27–28 – Jesus and lust

This is the famous passage where Jesus says:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

This is important because Christianity’s sexual ethic isn’t confined to physical behaviour. Jesus moves the conversation towards intention, desire and the inner life and that is exactly why Christian debates about pornography, masturbation and sexual fantasies become so complicated.

The question becomes:

What happens inside our minds as well as what we physically do?

 “When people say the Bible teaches that sex belongs within marriage, they aren’t pulling that belief out of thin air. There is a substantial biblical foundation for the traditional Christian interpretation however, there is also a difference between saying the Bible contains a number of passages from which this teaching is derived and saying the Bible contains one simple sentence explicitly prohibiting all sex before marriage.”

That doesn’t make the traditional interpretation meaningless. It simply means that interpretation matters and Christians have been interpreting Scripture for centuries.

There isn’t one giant Christian committee sitting somewhere deciding what every Christian in the world must believe about sex.

There are Catholics, Orthodox Christians, Anglicans, Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, evangelicals, progressive Protestants and many other traditions.

And… they don’t all agree.

Even the Church of England acknowledges that there are differences within Christianity over relationships, sexuality and family life, and its Living in Love and Faith work has deliberately brought together biblical, theological, historical, scientific and lived-experience perspectives. (Church of England⁠)

Perhaps that’s one of the beautiful things about faith.

We can believe deeply without necessarily believing identically.

So why does traditional Christianity put sex inside marriage?

I actually think Christians deserve a fair hearing here.

Because the traditional Christian argument isn’t simply:

“Sex is dirty.”

In fact, it is almost the opposite.

The traditional argument is that sex is so powerful that it deserves a meaningful framework around it.

Sex can create emotional attachment.

It can create children.

It can create vulnerability.

It can deepen a relationship.

It can expose parts of us that we don’t show everybody and it can hurt enormously when trust is broken.

Christian marriage is therefore supposed to be more than a legal document.It is intended to be a covenant: a promise of love, commitment, fidelity and mutual giving.

The Catholic Catechism describes marital sexuality as part of the total gift spouses make to one another, rather than something merely biological. (Vatican⁠)

And I actually understand that…I really do.

Because when you have experienced what happens when somebody breaks a commitment, you understand that fidelity isn’t just a word. It matters.

But what happens when the world changes?

This is where I think Christians need to have an honest conversation. We don’t live in the same society that existed hundreds or thousands of years ago.

People marry later.

People date differently.

People live together before marriage.

People meet through apps.

People form relationships across countries.

..and perhaps most importantly, sex is more accessible than it has ever been.

You can literally meet someone, message them, flirt with them, exchange photographs and potentially begin an affair without leaving your bedroom.

Technology has changed the landscape of relationships and yet our desire for love, intimacy and connection hasn’t changed very much at all.

British attitudes have also changed dramatically over recent decades.

Research from the National Centre for Social Research shows a significant religious divide in attitudes towards premarital sex, but also demonstrates how much more permissive British society has become. In British Social Attitudes data, 93% of people identifying as non-religious regarded premarital sex as rarely wrong or not wrong at all, compared with 82% of those identifying as Anglican or Roman Catholic and 66% of people identifying as other Christian. (National Centre for Social Research⁠)

So Christianity hasn’t disappeared from the conversation.

But it is now having that conversation in a very different culture.

Try before you buy?

That phrase sounds awful when we’re talking about human beings.

People aren’t cars, People aren’t houses, People aren’t handbags and relationships certainly shouldn’t be treated like Amazon purchases with a fourteen-day return policy, but underneath the rather cheeky phrase is a genuine question.

Should sexual compatibility be something we discover before making a lifelong commitment?

Because we encourage people to discover compatibility in so many other areas.

Do you want children? Do you want to live in the same place? Do you have compatible financial values? Do you communicate well? Do you want the same kind of lifestyle? Can you resolve conflict? Do you share similar values?

Why, then, is sexual compatibility sometimes treated as the one area where we shouldn’t find out anything until after we’ve made the commitment?

The traditional Christian answer is that sex isn’t simply another compatibility test. It’s part of the covenant.

I understand that.

But as somebody who has explored relationships and sexuality from a therapeutic perspective, I also think we have to acknowledge something uncomfortable:

Two people can love each other deeply and still be sexually incompatible.

…and sadly love doesn’t always magically fix that.

What if the sex doesn’t grow?

We’ve all heard the advice:

“Wait for the right person. If you love each other enough, the sex will develop.”

Sometimes it probably does. Sometimes couples learn each other’s bodies.

They communicate.

They become more confident.

They discover what works.

They become safer with one another and the sexual relationship grows alongside the emotional one.

BUT….. sometimes it doesn’t.

One person may have a much higher libido.

One may want more physical affection.

One may have fantasies the other doesn’t share.

One may be adventurous and the other more reserved.

One may see sex as essential to feeling connected while the other doesn’t.

None of that necessarily means either person is bad.

It means they are human beings with different needs and this is why I think sexual compatibility deserves to be discussed without automatically dismissing it as shallow.

Sex isn’t everything, but for many couples, it is something.

What I believe as a Christian woman

This is where I want to make my own position very clear.

I don’t personally believe that a Christian has to follow exactly the same sexual boundaries as every other Christian. We are all individuals with our own minds, and bodies and opinions, and wow isn’t that what makes the world so great!!

Some Christians believe sex should only happen after marriage.

Some Christians believe that sex can be morally acceptable within a deeply committed relationship even if that relationship isn’t formally married.

Some Christians take a much more conservative interpretation of sexual behaviour.

Others are considerably more liberal.

And I think we can have those disagreements without turning on one another.

Personally, I believe commitment matters enormously.

If I were becoming intimate with somebody now, I wouldn’t want it to be casual in the sense of emotionally meaningless.

I would want trust, I would want to know the person, I would want to feel safe, I would want honesty, I would want mutual attraction, I would want emotional connection and I would want to know that if we became intimate, neither of us was treating the other person as disposable.

That, for me, is where my Christianity and my personal values meet.

Not necessarily in a list of sexual positions.

Not in a rulebook.

But in how I treat another human being. So recently for me, I moved away from celibacy and did have intimacy with someone I genuinely looked at and thought.. there was a genuine chance of a future together. 

Because intimacy creates responsibility

I’ve thought about this particularly recently.

When you become intimate with somebody and then that person pulls away, it can leave you sitting with an enormous amount of confusion.

You can find yourself asking: Was it something I did? Did I misread the connection? Did intimacy mean something different to them? Did I become attached? Did they?

Why did it feel close one minute and distant the next?

And whether you’re Christian or not, there is something we need to remember.

There is another human being on the other side of our choices.

That matters….

If you know that intimacy creates vulnerability, then kindness matters. If you know somebody is becoming emotionally attached, honesty matters. If you know you’re not looking for a relationship, communication matters and if you’ve changed your mind, you are still entitled to change your mind.

But you should do so with kindness.

That’s important to me.

Because consent isn’t just about whether somebody agreed to have sex.

A healthy sexual relationship also involves honesty, respect and consideration for the emotional consequences.

Does God ask us to take responsibility for our choices?

I believe Christianity does.

The Bible repeatedly presents human beings as responsible moral agents.

Paul writes in Romans 14:12 that each person will give an account of themselves to God.

Galatians 6:5 speaks about each person carrying their own load.

Christianity’s concept of repentance only really makes sense if our choices matter.

But here’s the beautiful part.

Christianity doesn’t say:

“You must be perfect.”

It says:

“You are responsible for what you do, and when you get it wrong, there is a path back.”

That’s very different from shame and I think that’s something we sometimes lose.

Guilt doesn’t automatically make us better Christians

There is a difference between guilt and shame.

Guilt says:

“I did something I believe was wrong.”

Shame says:

“There is something fundamentally wrong with me.”

Those are not the same thing.

I don’t believe carrying enormous shame about sexuality automatically makes somebody a better Christian.

The Catholic Catechism itself recognises that when assessing personal responsibility, factors including psychological and social circumstances, anxiety, immaturity and habitual behaviour can affect culpability. (Vatican⁠)

Christianity has a concept called grace for a reason.

If the Christian life were simply about never making a mistake, none of us would stand much of a chance.

Are Christians supposed to have vanilla sex?

This might be my favourite question.

Because where exactly does the Bible say that good Christian sex has to be boring? It doesn’t. There isn’t a biblical list saying:

Missionary: yes.

Oral sex: maybe.

Anal sex: absolutely not.

Role play: consult your priest.

Lights on: questionable.

Lights off: definitely holier.

I’m being deliberately ridiculous here because sometimes we talk about Christian sexuality as though God handed humanity a bedroom instruction manual.

The reality is much more complicated.

The Song of Solomon is one of the Bible’s most sensual books, celebrating physical attraction, desire and erotic love.

Christianity isn’t inherently anti-sex.

Traditional Christianity is actually saying something much more interesting:

Sex is good, but it belongs within a particular moral framework.

The disagreement is about what that framework should be.

What about fantasies?

This is another area where Christians disagree.

Jesus’ teaching about lust in Matthew 5:28 has traditionally been interpreted as an important warning about the internal life of desire.

Catholic teaching, for example, places considerable emphasis on purity of heart, self-mastery and the intention behind sexual desire. (Vatican⁠)

But having a sexual thought isn’t necessarily the same thing as acting upon it.

Human beings have imaginations, we have fantasies, we have curiosity, we have desires that sometimes surprise us.

And perhaps the healthier question isn’t:

“Did I have a sexual thought?”

but:

“What do I choose to do with it?”

There is a world of difference between having a fantasy and exploiting another person. There is a difference between imagination and coercion. There is a difference between two consenting adults exploring their sexuality and somebody being pressured into something they don’t want and those distinctions matter.

What about being sexually adventurous within marriage?

Again, Christians disagree.

Some traditions impose considerably more restrictions on sexual behaviour than others.

Catholic teaching, for example, connects marital sexuality with both its unitive and procreative dimensions and places significant limits around what it considers morally permissible. (Vatican⁠)

Other Christians place greater emphasis on mutual consent, love, fidelity, conscience and the absence of harm.

So I don’t think it is fair to say:

“Christian sex must be vanilla.”

Nor is it fair to say:

“Anything goes because you’re married.”

There are Christians on both sides of that conversation.

..and that’s okay. People are allowed to interpret their faith differently. Everything is always down to those two consenting adults.

Catholicism, Protestantism and the importance of context

This is why I think we have to be careful whenever somebody says:

“Christians believe…”

Which Christians?

The Catholic Church has an authoritative Catechism and a very developed theology of sexuality, chastity and marriage.

Protestant Christianity is much more decentralised.

The Church of England is currently continuing its work on relationships, sexuality and gender following the Living in Love and Faith process.

The Methodist Church has also developed its understanding of marriage and relationships over recent years, explicitly acknowledging different understandings within the Church. Its guidance on relationships has described good relationships in terms including commitment, care and mutuality, while recognising that Christians can hold differing convictions. (The Methodist Church⁠)

That doesn’t mean every Protestant church agrees with every other Protestant church.

Quite the opposite and I think that’s worth celebrating rather than fearing.

What about other cultures and religions?

Christianity isn’t the only religion to have a strong sexual ethic.

Islam places significant emphasis on sex within marriage and discourages premarital sexual relationships.

Judaism has its own rich and varied traditions concerning marriage, intimacy and sexual ethics.

Hindu traditions are diverse, with different philosophical and cultural approaches to sexuality, marriage and desire.

Plus secular societies increasingly tend to frame sexual ethics around consent, autonomy, equality, safety and responsibility rather than religious prohibition.

There isn’t one global human consensus about sex.

There never has been.

Cultures develop different answers because sex sits at the intersection of biology, reproduction, family, religion, morality, identity and social organisation.

So perhaps the question isn’t:

“Which culture has the one perfect answer?”

Perhaps the question is:

“What values do we want our sexual relationships to embody?”

What does modern science tell us?

Science can’t tell us whether God considers premarital sex sinful.

That’s a theological question. However science can tell us about sexual health, relationships and the consequences of different forms of education.

The World Health Organization’s current guidance supports comprehensive sexuality education that includes relationships, consent, bodily autonomy, contraception, pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. It says high-quality comprehensive sexuality education can delay sexual initiation and reduce sexual risk-taking while increasing contraceptive use. It also states that abstinence-only programmes are ineffective at preventing early sexual activity and risk-taking. (World Health Organization⁠)

That doesn’t mean Christians shouldn’t teach abstinence.

If a Christian believes abstinence is part of their faith, they should be free to teach and practise it, but education and personal conviction are two different things.

We can teach young people:

“You don’t have to have sex.”

while also teaching:

“If you do become sexually active, you need to understand consent, contraception, sexual health, boundaries, emotional consequences and respect.”

That’s not undermining morality, That’s responsibility.

Does having sex before marriage make you less of a Christian?

This is perhaps the question underneath all of this.

And I would say:

It depends upon what you mean by “less of a Christian.”

If somebody belongs to a Christian tradition that teaches premarital sex is sinful, then having sex outside marriage would be considered contrary to that teaching.

We shouldn’t pretend otherwise.

But does one sexual decision erase somebody’s faith?

Does it mean they no longer love God?

Does it mean they are incapable of being kind?

Does it mean they cannot repent?

Does it mean they are morally inferior to somebody who has never had sex?

I don’t think we can reduce Christianity to a sexual purity scoreboard.

What actually makes somebody a good person?

This is where I keep coming back to character.

You can be sexually inexperienced and still be cruel.

You can be sexually experienced and incredibly compassionate.

You can be religious and unfaithful.

You can be non-religious and deeply committed.

You can be married and betray somebody.

You can be unmarried and treat someone with extraordinary care.

Sexual history tells us something about a person.

But it doesn’t tell us everything.

And certainly not their worth.

Maybe kindness is the missing piece

Perhaps this is the part I most want to emphasise.

Whether you’re Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, atheist, agnostic or anything else, kindness should matter in our sexual relationships.

If you know somebody is vulnerable, be careful with them.

If you know they are developing feelings, don’t deliberately exploit that.

If you know you’re not available for a relationship, be honest.

If you change your mind, communicate.

If you make a mistake, own it….

If you hurt somebody, don’t hide behind technicalities.

and if somebody hurts you, remember that their behaviour doesn’t determine your worth.

That, to me, feels deeply compatible with Christianity.

Because Christianity is not simply about rules.

It is about how we love one another.

Love, sex and the reality of compatibility

I don’t believe that sex should be treated as the most important part of a relationship, but I also don’t believe we should pretend it doesn’t matter.

For some people, physical intimacy is a central expression of love. For others, it is less important. Neither person is necessarily wrong.

The challenge comes when two people have fundamentally different needs and neither feels able to talk about them. That is where communication becomes so important.

Perhaps we need to teach people that sexual compatibility isn’t about finding somebody who performs perfectly. It is about finding somebody with whom you can communicate.

Somebody who listens, Somebody who respects boundaries, Somebody who can tell you what they like without humiliating you for what you like. Somebody who can hear “no” without taking it personally, Somebody who can say “I don’t know” without feeling ashamed.

And somebody who can say:

“Let’s work this out together.”

Would I abstain from sex until marriage?

Personally?

No.

Not at this stage of my life. I’m 43. I’m an adult woman. I understand my values. I understand consequences. I take responsibility for my choices and I don’t think being Christian means I have to hand over my entire decision-making process to somebody else’s interpretation of Scripture.

That doesn’t mean I have no boundaries.

Quite the opposite.

There are things I would only explore with somebody I deeply trusted. There are things I would only do within a secure, committed relationship. There are things I would say no to regardless of how much I loved somebody and there are things I might say yes to because they felt right for me and the person I was with.

Those decisions would be mine.

And I Kerry, would take responsibility for them.

Perhaps that is what being liberated actually means

Being sexually liberated doesn’t have to mean:

“I will sleep with anybody and do anything.”

It can mean:

“I know myself.”

“I know my boundaries.”

“I know my values.”

“I can make an informed decision.”

“I can say yes without shame.”

“I can say no without guilt.”

“I can change my mind.”

“I can take responsibility for the consequences of my choices.”

And perhaps most importantly:

“I can respect somebody else’s humanity while still honouring my own.”

That’s a very different definition of sexual liberation.

So, is the Bible a bedroom rule book?

Maybe that’s the question we should leave ourselves with, because I don’t think Christianity needs to be afraid of conversations about sex.

I don’t think Christians need to be embarrassed about having sexual desires. I don’t think having fantasies automatically makes somebody dirty. I don’t think a person’s sexual history determines their spiritual worth and I don’t think sexual liberation automatically means moral recklessness.

But equally, I don’t think we should dismiss the traditional Christian sexual ethic as old-fashioned nonsense.

There is something profoundly valuable in the Christian insistence on fidelity, commitment, self-control, responsibility and the dignity of another person.

Those are values I can get behind.

The question is whether those values necessarily require exactly the same sexual rules for every Christian and I don’t think we can answer that honestly without acknowledging that Christians themselves disagree.

Maybe there isn’t one answer

Some Christians will wait until marriage.

Some won’t.

Some will believe sex outside marriage is sinful.

Some will believe that committed, loving relationships can have a moral sexual foundation even without marriage.

Some Christians will have very traditional sexual boundaries.

Others will be much more adventurous.

Some will have no problem with fantasies.

Others will feel uncomfortable with them.

Some will believe that particular sexual practices are wrong.

Others will believe that between consenting adults in a committed relationship, those decisions belong to the couple.

And I think we can disagree.

Actually, I think we should be able to disagree.

Because faith is personal.

Morality is personal.

Values are personal.

And ultimately, each of us has to live with our own decisions.

The Christian sex debate nobody wants to have

Perhaps the question isn’t:

“Are Christians allowed to have sex?”

Perhaps it’s:

“What makes sex loving?”

Is it marriage?

Is it commitment?

Is it consent?

Is it fidelity?

Is it responsibility?

Is it emotional safety?

Is it all of those things?

And perhaps the answer isn’t exactly the same for everyone. I can respect the Christian who chooses abstinence. I can respect the Christian who believes deeply that sex belongs within marriage and I can also respect the Christian who has wrestled with Scripture, thought deeply about their faith and reached a different conclusion.

What I don’t think we need is shame.

What I don’t think we need is judgement.

And what I definitely don’t think we need is the idea that somebody’s sexual choices automatically tell us whether they are a “good” or “bad” Christian.

Because perhaps the more important question is not simply what happened in the bedroom.

Perhaps it’s what happened between two human beings.

Was there honesty?

Was there kindness?

Was there respect?

Was there consent?

Was there responsibility?

Was there care?

Was there love?

Those questions matter to me.

Perhaps they should matter to all of us, regardless of what we believe happens after we die because if Christianity teaches us anything, surely one of the most important lessons is this:

We are responsible for how we love one another.

Perhaps that’s where sex, faith and morality meet.

Not in a perfect bedroom.

Not in a list of rules.

Not in shame.

But in love, responsibility, kindness and the choices we make when another human being has trusted us with something vulnerable.