Not all desires are the same.
Kind of obvious? Yes! But important in a world whose ethical arguments depend so much on desire. What rights rule today, in the western world? The right to self-determination, to self-expression, and to self-definition. Desire is all-knowing.
If I will it then it is OK. (The usual illogical caveat that follows is as long as it hurts no one.) And more than OK, if I will it then it’s morally required. Desires reign.
Proverbs 6 shows how false that is. The back end of the chapter warns at length about giving in to the desire for illicit sex: don’t go to the strange woman, the adulteress, your neighbour’s wife.
But in the flow of the argument, there’s comment about stealing food. Why? Have a look at these verses (29-32).
So [burned] is he who goes in to his neighbour’s wife;
none who touches her will go unpunished.
People do not despise a thief if he steals
to satisfy his appetite when he is hungry,
but if he is caught, he will pay sevenfold;
he will give all the goods of his house.
He who commits adultery lacks sense;
he who does it destroys himself.
In the middle of warning against adultery, here is a hungry thief. He steals out of poverty and hunger. His desire for food is reasonable. We understand, and we don’t despise him for his crime. But we still punish him.
Theft remains theft, even when driven by the understandable desire for food.
But the point is not that the thief will still receive punishment. Not ‘the thief gets punishment, so too will the adulterer’.
The point is this: theft driven by hunger (though wrong) makes sense, but adultery is just plain stupid. Adultery is always self-harm.
He who commits adultery lacks sense;
he who does it destroys himself.
Proverbs compares two desires here – the desire for food, the desire for sex. The comparison is in the realm of wrongdoing (stealing and adultery). And the comparison tells us to treat different desires differently.
Now there are lots of ways we need to heed this point. It’s pretty plain that there’s a trendiness in pushing for same-sex marriage. And it would be easy for me to go there (‘just because two people desire sex with each other does not mean it is good, or needs state validation’).
But I’d prefer us to see that ethical difference between desires applies all over the place. Perhaps I – and maybe you too? – need to consider where I err in this matter?
We might think of:
- Any sexual desire outside of committed, life-long marriage
- The desire to enjoy alcohol
- Longing to see more of the world
- The desire to succeed in your chosen employment
- The longing for a successful ministry
- A desire to be well thought-of
- The desire for physical or mental health, for self or a loved one
And on and on we could go. Again and again, I believe, our desires take us. Then our reasons and arguments follow along to justify what we want.
So let’s remember that our desires can take us into error. Even the good desire for food can go feral. Jesus (in the final verse quoted below) said to desire first what is truly first – God’s kingdom.
The desire of the righteous ends only in good;
the expectation of the wicked in wrath. (Proverbs 11:23)
Whoever isolates himself seeks his own desire;
he breaks out against all sound judgment. (Proverbs 18:1)
But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,
and all these things will be added to you. (Matthew 6:33)