So says one of my favorite contemporary spirituality writers, Rolheiser, as reported by Carl McColman who is faithfully redacting Chris Hooten.
A sampling:
“To understand our sexuality and to live with its unfulfilled tensions, it can be most helpful simply to understand this. In loving, the ultimate wound is not to be able to marry everyone. The greatest human hunger, felt in every cell in our being, is that we cannot be completely united with everyone and everything.”
Can I get an ‘amen’ in the comments section? No? 
What, is it too close to Valentine’s Day? Well by all means, read it in context before casting thy stones of moral indignation. Rolheiser’s original writing (and the courageous bloggers willing to wrestle with his subversive orthodoxy) challenge me to be a better author, husband, friend, and lover of God as a result. Bravo, all.
Related: Dan Brennan maintains and entire blog devoted to spirituality, sexuality, and cross-gendered friendships.
Hi Mike,
No stone casting here. I’ve been *stoned* enough all on my own. I’ll check out the blog. It looks interesting.
As all of the ancients who wrote on the Song of Songs going back to Origen knew that intimacy with God is such a profound topic that it seems like sex might be the best metaphor. But even then it is still a metaphor. And one that might not work for everyone. For some (as far too many people know) sex is an act of violence and violation.
Did you see the story last week about the “Relevant Church” in Fla whose pastor is encouraging married couples to copulate for 30 days straight. (I assume they;re allowed to break for food, sleep, and restroom visits). It is an attempt to help couples develop intimacy and “redeem” sexuality. Allegedly.
What about any of the people in church who were molested as children and now have difficulty with the physical act. Their “spiritual leader” has just given God’s dictate to mandatory sex. That’s way too creepy and thoughtless.
It seems to me that this is using sex to, perhaps, cover up and avoid dealing with issues instead of fostering true intimacy. Sometimes, the greatest act of intimacy is simply looking into someone else’s eyes and listening gently. After all, intimacy comes from the Latin, meaning to announce or to make known. That doesn’t always happen in the sex act.
Thanks for the link and all of the thoughtful posts.
Kevin
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the link!
Hey Mike,
Thanks for the good word and understanding where I was coming from. It was a big joy to run across your post while I’m getting some flack from mine. Thanks, you made my day.
I appreciated Kevin’s comments about this. I think I’d rather use the metaphor of eating to describe the desire for unification with all…that should resonate with you
I’m not sure if it is more or less creepy to say, “I want to eat everyone,” versus, “I want to sleep with everyone.” But, a good point I’ve heard made fairly often around here is that food is the only art that becomes a part of you. I guess I’d prefer to use the metaphor that allows people to be walking, edible art I want to ingest, rather than sexual objects. And there’s this guy I know I say something about eating his flesh, drinking his blood, creepy, yeah, but if he wants me to become that intimately connected with him, I guess I’m all for it (he’s kind of special that way). I appreciate the sexual metaphor as well of course, but for my 2 cents worth, I like the eating one better.
I’d also be curious to hear some other women comment about this.