“You go back and there’s always some traumatic experience in somebody’s life or an unhealthy attachment to an object that has equated with some sort of sexual arousal that creates this fetish, and it’s just not normal. It’s not healthy. And especially when it involves inflicting abuse on somebody, that doesn’t seem to be glorifying God…”
Former Pastor Todd Wagner
“Real Truth. Real Quick.”
Watermark Community Church
With over 10,000 views, the video ranks as one of the top search results for “Christian BDSM” on YouTube. Senior Pastor Todd Wagner (resigned in 2021) is interviewed by Rick Smith, then the Director of Digital Ministry at Watermark. The short discussion is worth watching for additional context, beyond the quotes in this summary. In a previous blog post, we’ve already looked at the ways that Wagner’s sources seem to disagree with his argument.
Thanks to confirmation bias, we’re all guilty of skimming for sentences and phrases that support our own views. The tendency is a little more troubling in a pastor, who should be careful to avoid Eisegesis: interpreting a text in a way that inserts one’s own views. It’s hard to judge fairly from a casual ten-minute discussion, but an unsympathetic listener might suspect that Wagner has purposefully misrepresented his sources. On the other hand, he may simply have disagreed with the Psychology Today definition of Fetishistic Disorder.
Over the course of the discussion, several points are highlighted on screen as numbered “principles.” These appear to have been added afterward, paraphrasing Wagner’s statements, rather than planned in advance, like a sermon outline. Even so, they are worth considering in light of common misconceptions about BDSM.
Among people who reject BDSM as a whole, it’s pretty common to fixate on parts that sound horrible or shocking. Initial reactions like “I just don’t understand why anyone would enjoy that” get repeated to friends, and there may never be any genuine effort to understand. Pathologizing and saying, “Oh, those people must have been abused as children” …is a common reaction, but that isn’t a real attempt to understand. Your unchurched, agnostic friend may have theories about why you enjoy attending church, but that curious speculation doesn’t mean they’re getting a better understanding of your faith and that aspect of your life. It’s unclear whether Wagner or Smith made a good faith effort to understand why people engage in BDSM as a lifestyle. Nevertheless, the key points or principles are interesting.
Principle #1: It would be a perversion of God’s intent in marriage for spouses to experience joy by inflicting physical or mental suffering on one another.
FWIW, the “principles” as they appear on screen are slightly different from Wagner’s actual words. With Principle #1, he actually qualifies the statement with “In my opinion.” Understandably, Opinion #1, or Statement #1 wouldn’t sound as authoritative.
In many arguments against BDSM, there’s a tendency to make it sound as nefarious as possible. If your wife’s fantasy is to get spanked or tickled in bondage, isn’t it overkill to describe that type of play as “inflicting physical or mental suffering”?
And does Principle #1 hold up when applied to activities outside of BDSM? What if you enjoy watching your spouse’s reaction during a scary or suspenseful movie? What if you win a bet and “force” your spouse to do something embarrassing? How many jokes and pranks create amusement from some degree of physical or mental suffering? Are practical jokes a perversion of God’s intent in marriage?
It’s also problematic to imply divine authority for a statement that doesn’t come from scripture. The next time my wife asks me to do the dishes, I probably shouldn’t claim that “It would be a perversion of God’s intent in marriage…”
Principle #2: When we watch pornography, we are neurologically training our mind to be physically attracted to another woman, person, or activity.
Pornography is a huge industry in America, and it has a significant impact on the way we view sexuality. Although it seems like a separate issue from BDSM, some couples enjoy watching pornography together as a way to safely discuss and explore certain fantasies. Like alcohol and nicotine, addiction to pornography is clearly a struggle for some people. When its use is kept secret and/or makes a spouse uncomfortable, pornography can easily become a destructive force in a marriage.
Wagner cites a number of studies in his discussion of pornography, particularly with its impacts on younger people. This website is more concerned with BDSM and the boundaries for sexual immorality within a Christian marriage.
Of course, advertising, television shows, and other consumable content will affect the way that we view people and activities. Most Americans could be more cautious when it comes to the ways in which we consume media, whether that’s rants on talk radio or memes on social media.
Principle #3: A husband’s duty to his wife is not to inflict emotional or physical pain on her, even if it gives her pleasure.
This is the “principle” inserted into the middle of 1 Corinthians 7:3 “The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband.” Other Biblical translations are less euphemistic, like the NLT “fulfill his wife’s sexual needs” and the ESV “give to his wife her conjugal rights”.
Part of the problem, of course, is that the Bible is generally euphemistic about sex or carnal “knowing”. The ancient Romans and Hebrews didn’t ask for specific rules about erotic spankings.
Wagner anticipates the pro-BDSM interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:3. If your wife enjoys and “needs” a certain type of BDSM play, then doesn’t it become part of a husband’s duty to satisfy her needs in the bedroom? The BDSM community is generally opposed to defining any particular kinky (or sexual) activity as part of your “duty.”
In practice, if your spouse is uncomfortable playing along with your fantasy, that preference may define a longterm boundary in your marriage. Even if you feel like your sexual desires are “normal,” it’s probably a bad idea to use the Bible to demand your conjugal rights. Rather than focusing on rights and duties, it’s more fun to open up communication and see where your desires and fantasies overlap.
Principle #4a: We should honor our wives/husbands and make sure the marriage bed is not defiled by anything as selfish as a fetish.
Hebrews 13:4 is a shaky foundation for passing judgment on other married couples. The King James Version is probably the most familiar: “Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.” There’s a lively debate about how broadly to interpret “honourable in all,” but it seems fair that certain judgments should be left to God. If a married couple enjoys a particular roleplay or fetish in the bedroom, then it’s quite bold to say that the couple’s marriage bed is automatically defiled.
It’s interesting that fetishes are presented as particularly selfish. To someone in the BDSM community, a fetish is more like a personal interest or preference. Some people, no doubt, become obsessed with their personal fetishes, but plenty of “normal” people seem obsessed with their favorite sport team or hobby. A husband might selfishly want his wife to attend a baseball game, but if they end up enjoying the event together, wasn’t that activity good for the marriage?
The phrase “anything as selfish as a fetish” suggests that it’s selfish to have any kind of unusual preferences (or fantasies) in the bedroom. With Principle #5, it’s clear that couples should talk about “what gives them sexual pleasure” but the boundaries remain very unclear. In Principle #3, it’s confirmed that your wife’s pleasure shouldn’t guide your decision. Boundaries and comfort zones will vary from one married couple to the next, but sometimes the selfish act would be judging and condemning the harmless fetish that gives your wife pleasure.
Principle #4b: Because you love your spouse, seek to live with them in an understanding way.
To some extent, the principles near the end of the discussion seem to contradict what was said earlier. If you try to understand your spouse, shouldn’t that mean discussing and exploring some of their fantasies? Particularly any fetishes that don’t make you uncomfortable?
As with selfishness, this principle works both ways. If you are more kinky (or have a higher sex drive) than your spouse, it’s still important to be compassionate and understanding. Your spouse isn’t obligated to fulfill or indulge your fetishes. If your fantasies make your spouse uncomfortable, then try to sympathize with how they are feeling, potentially trapped and overwhelmed. Without being manipulative or transactional in your mindset, try to put more energy into making your spouse happy, instead of dwelling on your own fantasies.
Principle #5: It is healthy for married couples to talk to each other about what gives them sexual pleasure.
Although it’s undercut by the rest of the discussion, this point is an important one. How can a couple talk freely about their turn-ons when anything unusual can be condemned as defiling the marriage bed? Elsewhere in the video, anal sex is condemned as “completely backwards.” Possibly out of concern for the podcast audience, Wagner avoids using the word “anal.” Would oral sex be acceptable as “less backwards” than anal? It’s hard to imagine open discussion when the words for common sex acts are taboo.
These kinds of questions, perhaps, could be considered unfair. Nobody actually wants their pastor to publish a checklist of acceptable and unacceptable bedroom activities. And yet, that’s the kind of arbitrary judgment that’s often involved in sweeping statements about BDSM. The judgment is particularly unreliable when the speaker doesn’t seem to know very much about BDSM.
A Personal Note
I’ve tried to write this response in good faith, not deliberately misinterpreting Wagner. For the previous blog, I still need to find an older version of the Psychology Today page, in case some of the wording had been changed since the video was made. Honestly, I feel a bit silly already, putting this much care into a response to a discussion that was clearly somewhat improvised.
Given that Todd Wagner is no longer a pastor at Watermark, it’s unclear whether they would continue to stand by his statements. Hopefully this series doesn’t sound like a personal attack. Rather, the goal was to thoughtfully consider and wrestle with the ideas presented. Arguments against the idea of Christian BDSM deserve fair consideration.
“Does BDSM Have a Place in a Healthy Christian Marriage?”
Real Truth. Real Quick. Mar 16, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WG6rOsYj9k
Sadomasochism on Dictionary.com
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/sadomasochism
Fetishistic Disorder on PsychologyToday.com (Updated 02/23/2019)
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/fetishistic-disorder
Wagner’s Resignation
Wagner resigned as Pastor of Watermark in April of 2021, citing “the sin of pride” as the reason. The statement from church elders describes “…an erosion of trust in Todd Wagner’s ability to lead…”
https://www.watermark.org/update
