What Is Her.meneutics?

The Christianity Today women's blog provides news and analysis from the perspective of evangelical women. We cover news stories and books related to international justice and evangelism, pregnancy and sexual ethics, marriage, parenting, and celibacy, pop culture, health and body image, raising girls, and women in the church and parachurch.

Her.meneutics is edited by associate editor Katelyn Beaty and online editor Sarah Pulliam Bailey.

Free Newsletters

books we're reading



« Modesty: A Female-Only Virtue? | Main | Christian Female Musicians, Missing in Action »

May 19, 2010

Adultery: My Genes Made Me Do It

Research like the kind in For Better: The Science of a Good Marriage runs the risk of reducing people to brain chemistry and DNA.

Amy Julia Becker

In her new and buzzworthy book, For Better: The Science of a Good Marriage, The New York Times's Tara Parker-Pope examines what brain chemistry and genes have to do with happy marriages. She begins a recent Well column with a question: “Why do some men and women cheat on their partners while others resist the temptation?” While she doesn’t come right out with an answer, she implies that the inclination toward adultery lies in our genes. Some researchers have dubbed the gene that predicts whether or not we will cheat the “fidelity gene” (though, as Parker-Pope notes, the label is a misnomer, since the study sets out to measure marital stability, not faithfulness). Her research shows that men with a variant of this gene are less likely to be in committed relationships and more likely to be in unhappy marriages.

41ur812HXJL._SS500_.jpg

Genetics. It’s a modern answer to an age-old question. In the past, other explanations have been proposed for immoral human behavior. First come spiritual explanations, perhaps best summed up by the phrase “the Devil made me do it.” Psychological explanations connect our behavior as adults to events that happened in our past. In recent years, biology has joined the list of reasons why humans behave badly.

Of course, none of these explanations are problematic in and of themselves. And none of them should surprise Christians. All aspects of our human nature are fallen, inclined to turn away from God’s good intentions for us. The problem comes when we reduce human behavior to any one of these explanations.

The Bible attests that we are physical, social, spiritual, emotional, and psychological beings at once. The complexity of our humanity has challenged Christians throughout church history. In the first few centuries of Christianity, some believers wanted to deny the significance of the body, claiming that our spiritual dimension was more significant and that Christ would liberate us from our bodies. Over and against this reasoning (eventually denounced as heresy) came the doctrine of the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and, in the fullness of time, of all of creation. The spirit matters, affirmed the early church, but only as it is integrated with the physical.

Well, the pendulum has swung in the other direction. Science is today's reigning explanatory paradigm, the ultimate lens we use to understand reality and ourselves. As a result, the biological explanation for behavior can quickly become divorced from the spiritual. Instead of ignoring the physical, we reduce the human person to genes and chemical reactions. Since we can’t “prove” the existence of the Holy Spirit or the human soul using scientific means, the spiritual gets sidelined to the realm of conjecture or opinion, while the physical becomes factual, real, true.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging a genetic component in our moral choices. Some people are more likely to become alcoholics, others to express anger with violence, others to cheat on their spouses. The danger comes when we don't acknowledge the wholeness of the human person, the complexity of our wills, and the fundamental spiritual reality that we are created in God's image. Parker-Pope nods to this complexity when she writes, “While there may be genetic differences that influence commitment, other studies suggest that the brain can be trained to resist temptation.”

238px-Ghent_Altarpiece_A_-_Adam_and_Eve_dressed.jpg

A Christian understanding of both temptation and fidelity goes further. It is God’s grace and the Spirit at work within us that enable us to resist temptation. Sure, those temptations come in different forms. But whatever the biological basis for temptation, the means of overcoming it involves more than changing behavior. It involves training the brain, yes, but training the brain in a spiritual way. As Paul writes, “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable — if anything is excellent or praiseworthy — think about such things” (Phil 4:8) and, “Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Rom. 12:2).

Finally, understanding the human as comprising body, mind, and spirit offers a different rationale for why we resist temptation. Parker-Pope never makes an argument for fidelity or for why it matters if people resist temptation. I suppose she would say that faithful relationships lead to social stability, happy children, perhaps even self-fulfillment. Toward the end of her article, she writes, “it may not be feelings of love or loyalty that keep couples together. Instead, scientists speculate that your level of commitment may depend on how much a partner enhances your life and broadens your horizons — a concept that Arthur Aron, a psychologist and relationship researcher at Stony Brook University, calls ‘self-expansion.’ ” For Parker-Pope, fidelity is still, ultimately, about the self.

Christians understand marriage as a union before God. Yes, he intended it to provide social stability and personal well-being. But it is also intended to mirror the love that Christ has for his body, the church. Faithfulness in human relationships is meant to give flesh to the faithfulness of God. Here again, on a grander scale, the physical is linked to the spiritual and the emotional. Research that unearths the biology behind immoral choices helps us understand one aspect of our humanity, but such research is only helpful if it is integrated with a holistic understanding of the human as a creature, a soul whose life has been given by God.

Share |

Posted by Katelyn Beaty on May 19, 2010 9:45 AM

Comments

Hi -- Thanks for your comments about my book and article. The article you cite clearly states that any genetic findings aren't fully understood and it's absolutely misleading to call this "a fidelity gene" or a "cheating gene.'' That's simply not the case. In the study cited, the men with two copies of this genetic variant were more likely to report an unhappy relationships, but the study didn't track fidelity. In fact, all of these men were highly committed, married for at least five years.

If you read the book, you'll see that it devotes a full chapter to the science of monogamy and fidelity and makes a compelling case why humans value monogamy. It also explores the statistics on infidelity, making the strong case that many more people are faithful in their relationships than not. Finally, the book explores the misleading statistics around marriage and divorce and shows how divorce is getting less common and marriage is getting stronger.

Regards

Tara Parker-Pope
Author, "For Better: The Science of a Good Marriage.''

Posted By: Tara Parker-Pope | May 19, 2010 12:24 PM

I think this topic, and the way it is addressed by Ms. Parker-Pope and Ms. Becker, reinforce my belief that science does a generally good job discovering and describing HOW things work/occur, but is ill equipped to explain WHY they work/occur. So science can identify the mechanism(s) within us that might lead us into unhappy relationships (which might then lead to infidelity - but not always), but we need the "why" explained to us as it is in the Bible - i.e. that we are born into and live in a sinful condition. And, we need the Bible to tell us how we may escape this condition.

Posted By: John M | May 19, 2010 3:31 PM

I'm glad you brought up the alcholic example. It's the exact one that came to my mind. A genetic tendency to behavior does not equal a mandate that one must engage in said behavior. As believers, we are new creations. The old has gone. The new has come. There are no excuses for sin. Only forgiveness from God through Jesus Christ.

Posted By: Robyn | May 19, 2010 3:41 PM

Ms. Parker-Pope,

Thank you for reading and for continuing the conversation and adding some necessary clarifications. First of all, I'm sorry for the careless use of the term "fidelity gene." I understood from your article that some researchers have referred to it in this manner, even though, as you explain, it isn't helpful to think of it that way. I should have been more careful in my own explanation, and the post has been edited to reflect your points.

Secondly, I'm curious to know from your own research whether you do find an inclination to reduce behavior to biology or to excuse unhappiness/infidelity based upon genetic predispositions. Again, from your article it is clear that you would not personally hold such a view, that human beings are far more complex than their genetic predispositions. But I'm wondering whether you think we might be tempted to excuse ourselves for hurtful and wrong deeds based upon our genetic makeup.

Thanks again,

Amy Julia Becker

Posted By: Amy Julia | May 19, 2010 4:27 PM

As a professor of ethics, I always remind my students that: BIOLOGY IS NOT DESTINY! We live by the WORD of GOD.

Posted By: Eldin Villafane | May 20, 2010 9:22 AM

This whole discussion reminds me of the limits of science and the necessity of trusting God with the invisible, inexplicable elements of our humanity. "For what is seen in temporary, but what is unseen is eternal."

Also, this new book just came out called "Anatomy of the Soul," which examines the ability of spiritual disciplines to literally rewire the brain into improved behavior patterns. If anyone is interested in how biology, the Holy Spirit, and human free will/accountability interact, I highly recommend this book! (See here: http://www.amazon.com/Anatomy-Soul-Surprising-Connections-Neuroscience/dp/141433415X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1274368622&sr=8-1)

In the midst of all this, though, let's remember: our God is the creator of our entire beings - body, mind, and soul. We would do well to balance our fascination with science with a humble admission of our very limited knowledge and our limitless need for Someone to save us from our soul's dark side.

Posted By: B | May 20, 2010 10:25 AM

Genetics are important, but they are not destiny. We need to stop worshipping science. Its core is always limited by human capabilities since humans are the ones doing the science. Understanding complex human behavior through genetics is in its infancy. Some people have to overcome more because of genetic tendencies, but we've all been given the opportunity to choose. I believe God knows how each of us is tempted and the greater difficulty some have in overcoming certain kinds of temptation. Bottom line: the devil might have made you do it, but the devil ain't necessarily in your genes.

Posted By: Truthmeister | May 21, 2010 3:51 PM

As a newly remarried "adulterer" with two advanced degrees, including law, I submit the following, which indeed is a warning to you ladies. You are "over thinking" the problem of modern adultery. My first wife continues as an evangelical pastor (obviously not in the pulpit) with her bachelor and masters degrees in church organizations. We were married 25 yrs. A comment above from a female professor suggests Biology is not Destiny - Perhaps, or no. My first wife and I were married very young. We had our children children by the time we were both 27 yrs old. Even in the beginning of our relationship can I point to anymore than a dutiful sexual relationship. Over the years, sexual activity decreased to 4 or 5 times a year. The Warning To You: God made man differently than you - you know that, but yet, articles such as these look to "rationalize" the fact that a man merely wants to feel as though he is loved. If a man doesn't feel loved, he will go elsewhere - I submit that such a case is not merely a failure of character or spirit, but something greater to be laid at the feet of the actors in the relationship.

I married my mistress. We have been together for six years, yes, some while I was married to my first wife. For the first time in my life, I feel loved, both emotionally (important) and physically (equally important - and women do not seem to realize this). I have no interest or lust for anyone else. I suggest that if you have a partner, that you discuss this concept - you might either be: (1) surprised by the result; or (2) surprised by a highly elusive answer.

Further consider as I do daily: (1) has this situation, which is clearly sinful put me farther away for the arms of a loving, yet just God? (2) the entire situation has left my ex-wife more "powerful" within my old church, because fault has clearly been laid at my feet - am I the only one to blame?

God bless you, I hope my insights help you somehow.

Posted By: William | May 24, 2010 10:40 AM

William, you clearly place your "feelings" of being loved above your marriage covenant and the word of God. You are probably not the only one to "blame," for the sorry state of your first marriage, but you surely do bear all the blame for your choice to commit adultery. No one else is responsible for your choices.

There is no "rationalization" going on in the original post, but I sure see a whole lot of it in your comment. Somehow you have rationalized that it was acceptable for you to commit adultery because you didn't FEEL "loved." For Christians, marriage is not based on feelings. It's based on committment and covenant. Your sexual desires are feelings. You chose to act on them. That doesn't make you an "adulterer;" It makes you an adulterer. That was sin.

We are all sinners. Your sin is no worse than mine. You can be forgiven. But at least admit that what you did was sin. Without quotes.

Posted By: Robyn | May 27, 2010 5:29 PM

I am so tired of this poor excuse for the male genes. I knew that this was alway's a choice. You can fight any addiction, or habit, or you decide to just break down and do what is wrong to your mental state of mind. I don't ever want to hear this misguided male ego trip & excuse to be used in this day and age of time. CAUSE WE ALL KNOW DIFFERENT, RIGHT HERE IS THE PROOF IN THE PUDDING.

Posted By: Debra Rincon Lopez | June 2, 2010 12:21 PM

William did not "feel" loved.

He explains this by saying that for him love is not just an emotional thing it is also a physical thing. He wants the nice words and the cuddles, but he wants the sex as well. Sex between his frst wife and him, after they had their children by age 27, dwindled to "four or five times a year". This was clearly not enough for William.

A man who does not feel loved in the way Willaim wanted to be will he believes,"go elsewhere". In his opinion "such a case is not merely a failure of character or spirit, but something greater to be laid at the feet of the actors in the relationship".

In response someone said that William had clearly placed his "feelings" of being loved above his "marriage covenant and the word of God". What William was trying to explain was that he believed "feeling" loved was the part of the marriage covenant of which he was being deprived.

The same person said that William alone was to blame for his adultery. What I understand William to be saying is that while he takes responsibility for going "elsewhere" to "feel" loved, his first wife must also accept her rsponsibility for the reduced sexual "activity" within the marriage which drove him "elsewhere".

Interestingly enough, William believes that by leaving the marriage he has done both himself and his first wife a favour, since he is now being "loved" the way he wants to be, and his wife, having laid the full blame for the failure of the marriage at his feet is now "more powerful" in her church.

I believe William's story needs more that just a disdainful dismissal. Someone should provide answers to some of the questions that he raises such as 1)Is it possible for one partner to contribute to the infidelity of the other? 2)What happens when "sex four or five times a year" is adequate for one partner and not nearly enough for the other? And 3)what does one partner do when the other replaces them with the children? Or having had the desired number of children one partner is no longer physically interested in the other?

We have heard what happened to William. Providing some answers may prevent the same thing from happening to some other husband.

Posted By: Steve Skeete | June 9, 2010 5:58 PM

I think every thing is being reduced to brain chemistry, genes and DNA. I work in the alcoholism and addiction treatment field and it's the same story.

It's not my fault I'm a heavy drinker, my genes made me do it.

Hopefully, we haven't lost the ability to look at our actions, take responsiblity for them and change them.

Posted By: DA WIcker | June 24, 2010 1:45 PM

Post a comment:





Verification (needed to reduce spam):

tags

May 2012
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31