Roger was gay. We all knew it,
and we all made his life miserable. When we passed him in the hall, we called
out his name in an effeminate manner. We made crude gestures, and we made Roger
the brunt of cheap jokes. He never took showers with us after gym class because
he knew we’d whip him with our wet towels.
I wasn’t there the day some of the guys dragged Roger into the shower
room and shoved him into the corner.
Curled up on the floor, he cried and begged for mercy as five guys
urinated all over him. The reports said
that Roger went to bed that night as usual, and that sometime around two in the
morning he got up, went down to the basement of his house, and hanged
himself. When I heard about Roger, I
realized that I wasn’t a Christian. I was a theologically sound evangelical,
believed all the points of the Apostles’ Creed, and had declared Jesus to be my
Saviour. But I know now that if the Holy Spirit had actually been in me, I
would have stood up for Roger. When the guys came to make fun of him, I would
have put one arm around Roger’s shoulder, waved the guys off with the other,
and told them to leave him alone and not mess with him because he was my
friend. But I was afraid to be Roger’s
friend. I knew that if I stood up for a homosexual, people would say cruel
things about me too. So I kept my distance. If I had done better, who knows if
Roger might be alive today.[1]
This paper
seeks to give an overview of some of the major questions Christians face when
approaching the issue of same-gender attraction (SGA)[2]
and how the Church should respond. Although there is not sufficient space in
this paper to go into great depth on any of the questions, I pray that it will
encourage you to seek more education on the matter of SGA.
How Prevalent
is SGA in Canada?
“Broadly defined, [same gender
attraction] is an erotic attraction to persons of one’s own sex.”[3]
Recent studies indicate that 3.5% of the population identifies as lesbian, gay
or bisexual (LGB)[4].
This would mean that in Canada, based on recent population estimates[5],
there are roughly 1.2 million men and women who identify as LGB. In addition to those who identify as LGB,
another 8.2 percent (approx. 2.8 million Canadians) have engaged in same-sex
sexual behavior, and an additional 11 percent (approx. 3.9 million Canadians) admit
to some degree of SGA.[6]
This would indicate that over 22 percent of the Canadian population (approx.7.9
million) has had some degree of SGA. Given the prevalence of SGA in Canada, it
would be ignorant to think that it isn’t something with which the Church needs
to learn how to deal. If we minimize the importance of learning to relate to
such a large demographic, we walk dangerously close to violating the Great Commission’s
call to spread the Good News about Christ to all people.
Are People
Born SGA?
In the
debate between the Church and the SGA community, the issue of cause seems to surface
frequently. The more conservative Christian community believes there is either an
element of choice, or that it is entirely choice, while the SGA community
argues that no one would choose a sexual identity that would lead to
discrimination and, therefore, it is inborn with no element of choice. Often
the term ‘nature or nurture’ will appear in this debate. The term asks the
question: “Is SGA inborn (nature) or a result of one’s upbringing (nurture)?”
Initially, SGA
was listed in the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual (official list of mental disorders that all mental
health professionals refer when diagnosing patients). [7]
This changed in 1974 when, due to
political pressures, homosexuality was removed from the manual. Although this
may seem like a move forward to some, the process by which homosexuality was
removed from the manual may have stunted the discovery of cause. One
psychiatrist commented: “The entire process, from the first confrontation
organized by gay demonstrators to the referendum demanded by orthodox
psychiatrists, seemed to violate the most basic expectations about how
questions of science should be resolved. Instead of being engaged in sober
discussion of data, psychiatrists were swept up in a political controversy. The
result was not a conclusion based on an approximation of scientific truth as
dedicated by reason, but was instead an action demanded by the ideological
temper of the times.”[8]
Had proper procedure been followed, there would have been an acquisition of
supporting data, through experimentation and survey, to point to the cause of
SGA.
Because of the process by which homosexuality
was removed from the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual, it is sometimes difficult to find reliable, unbiased
research to discuss cause. As a result, research materials regarding cause must
be reviewed in considerable detail in order to determine reliability. We must
be careful when reviewing data regarding cause of SGA that we don’t draw
conclusions too quickly. We will now review four cases put forth as evidence
for the cause of SGA, and we will review the opposition to those evidences. This
will by no means be an exhaustive representation of the research on the cause
of SGA, but rather, will serve as a guide to how we might objectively question
research findings.
A study
done in 1991 by Simon LeVay is often touted as evidence for genetic cause of
homosexuality. It was a study of cadavers: thirty-five men, nineteen believed
to be homosexual and sixteen believed to be heterosexual. “LeVay found a group
of neurons in the hypothalamus that appeared to be twice as large in the
heterosexual men as in the homosexual men.[9]
He then suggests the size of this group of neurons, called the INAH3, might
have something to do with sexual orientation.”[10]
This
research does seem to point to a genetic component. However, critics of LeVay’s
work point out that “…the changes in the brain structure could have been the
result of homosexual behavior, rather than the cause… there is a body of
evidence that shows the brain’s neural networks reconfigure themselves in response
to certain experiences. Therefore, the difference in homosexual brain structure
may be a result of behavioral and environmental conditions.”[11]
As a matter of fact, LeVay himself never claimed to have discovered a genetic
cause of homosexuality (or SGA) and stated that conclusion as, “…the most
common mistake people make in interpreting my work.”[12]
Although LeVay’s work does point to the possibility of a genetic cause, it
remains inconclusive.
Next we will look at a study conducted
by Baily and Pillard. “J.
Michael-Bailey and Richard Pillard published a study in the Archives of
General Psychiatry in December of 1991 on the prevalence of homosexuality
among twins. They studied
56 pairs of identical twins, where at least one brother was homosexual, and
found that 29 of them (52 percent) were both homosexual. They also found that
12 of 54 pairs of fraternal twins (22 percent) were both homosexual and 6 out
of 57 pairs of adopted brothers (11 percent) were both homosexual.”[13]
Due to the high
incidence of homosexuality in twins, Baily and Pillard concluded that there
must be a genetic component to explain the higher than usual number. This conclusion,
however, is flawed. The issue with this study is that it assumed that
environment did not play a role in the sexual identity development of the
subjects. In other words, in order to truly show a genetic factor in twins,
they would have to have been raised in separate environments. These twins were
raised in the same home, having the same or similar experiences that could have
contributed to the development of their SGA. Once again we arrive at
inconclusive.
Conservative Christian groups often hold
the next position, which involves family systems theory. Family systems theory
suggests that there is one of the following family patterns result in SGA: “A
powerful mother figure who is both feared and needed and a father who is
passive and ineffectual, often absent; A hostile, aggressive, rejecting father
with a seductive but sexually inhibited mother who needs the attention and
dependence of her son for her own self-worth; Both parents passive,
overprotective, and afraid of aggression; Seduction or erotic exploitation
during childhood by an older sibling, parent, or other extended family member
over a period of time.”[14]
Switzer, one of the critics of family
systems theory, points out that the subjects of this study are, “sufficiently
troubled as to seek psychotherapy.”[15]
He also suggests “Studies of gays and lesbians who are reasonably happy and are
not in therapy do not reveal much of any of the theories or any combination of
them.”[16]
Switzer continues by insisting, “there are many people whose childhood and
adolescence were spent in a family such as those described, but who are
heterosexual, although they may often be troubled in some way [and that] none
of the data come out of a genuine experimental setting. There are no control
groups of gays and lesbians who are not and have not been in psychotherapy in
order to make direct comparison. There are no control groups of heterosexual
persons whose early life experiences were like these described in the theories
in order to make comparisons. There were no independent judges evaluating the
material.”[17]
As
we can see, the data put forth in family systems theory provides no more of a
clear picture than the studies conducted by LeVay or Baily and Pillard. At
best, family systems theory suggests environmental factors that may play a role
in cause of SGA, but without further study one could not conclude that family
systems theory’s assertions are factual.
The
final case put forth is less a scientific study than a conclusion drawn by a
Christian theologian. Karl Barth argued
that homosexuality is unnatural because homosexual partner’s sexual organs do
not go together. “Hence,
for Barth, homosexual intercourse is wrong because of certain biological
characteristics of this behavior.”[18]
The Church often uses a similar line
of argument when discussing cause of SGA.
The lynchpin of this approach is: “one who infers a moral judgment from
biological characteristics commits a naturalistic fallacy.”[19]
The naturalistic fallacy is sometimes referred to as ‘argument from nature’ and
it is the claim that what is natural is inherently
good or right, and that what is unnatural is inherently bad or wrong. The issue
with making this line of argumentation as a Christian is that it places natural
law over moral law. In other words, if homosexuality is wrong because the
sexual organs don’t go together, what are we to conclude if we find a genetic
cause that suggests parts can or do go together?
As Christians,
we must be careful not to become too dogmatic in our assertions about cause of
SGA. At best, research is inconclusive as to the cause of SGA and as we see in
the naturalistic fallacy, we cannot appeal to nature to give grounds for moral
law. Regardless of cause, be it ‘nature’ or ‘nurture’, Biblical moral law does
not change and that should be the foundation of our stance on SGA.
What Issues do
SGA people and their families face?
Those
who struggle with SGA face issues that many in the Church may find difficult with
which to relate. Gary Collins, a Christian counselor and author, offers a few
of the issues faced by those struggling with SGA. “These issues include struggles with
one’s homosexual orientation and temptations, estrangements from one’s family,
loneliness and inability to find or to trust others who can give support,
struggles with self-esteem, anti-gay attitudes or harassment, mental-health concerns,
or grappling with the issue of whether to be honest with others about one’s
homoerotic tendencies.”[20]
In addition to the issues mentioned by Collins, SGA persons who are part of a
faith based community, such as Christianity, often face “[a] knee-jerk abandonment
of…valued religion [which] can result in extreme isolation in the same way that
leading a double life to maintain ties inevitably results in alienation from
self and valued others.”[21]
In addition to the issues faced by
those who are SGA, their family members often encounter challenges when their
loved one ‘comes out.’ “… [D]iscovering
a family member is lesbian, gay, or bisexual can pose new questions about faith
and often causes individuals to reevaluate their previous religious beliefs.”[22]
In fact, statistics shows that a large percent of families impacted by the SGA
of their loved ones leave their place of worship. “14% left their congregation
and did not seek another place of worship, 8% left their denomination and
sought out a new denomination known for affirming LGB members, and 3% left
their specific congregation and sought a new one within the same denomination
that was known for affirming LGB members. Sixteen percent worked to change the
doctrine of their congregation or religion.”[23]
The impact that SGA can have on
individuals and families is significant. As the Church moves to better
understand how to approach the issue of SGA, it is important that we learn how
to walk through some of these battles alongside those who are struggling. Whether
or not we are licensed counselors, we can all take part in showing the love of
Christ to individuals who are going through very emotional trying times as they
attempt to work through their SGA.
Is Sexual Re-Orientation the
Goal?
The last question we will deal with
is whether or not the goal of the Church should be to see individuals who
struggle with SGA re-oriented sexually from homosexual to heterosexual. Many things must be considered when posing
this question. First we will look at the emotional and social impact of such a
goal. Then we will consider the plausibility of re-orientation therapy, and
finally, we will decide if sexual re-orientation is the goal.
It is important to note that “…the
concept of using sexuality as a way of framing a person’s identity dates only
as far back as the late seventeenth century…”[24]
This has led many people to report that “…their sexual orientation is a stable
part of themselves and central to their identity. Others find their sexual
orientation to be a more fluid identity….[we] must be careful not to…presume
that sexual orientation is always central to identity, because [it] may differ
from [person to person].”[25]
Sexual re-orientation therapy remains
largely unsupported by the medical community, “Because conversion therapy is a
religiously and not scientifically based practice, [therefore] there is no
professional training condoned by ACA or other prominent mental health
associations that would prepare counselors to provide conversion therapy”[26]
As a result, many doubt the legitimacy of such therapy. Two reputable Christian counselors concluded,
after much research in sexual re-orientation they: “…did not share the
optimistic and seemingly universal generalization of some conservative
Christians who seem to imply that anyone with any motivation can change, if
change is taken to mean complete alteration of sexual orientation to replace
homosexual with heterosexual erotic orientation.”[27]
Based on the lack of medical support
and the evidence against re-orientation therapy’s success, we can agree that
re-orientation may not always be possible; but is it necessary? The Biblical
condemnation of homosexuality refers strictly to the ‘acts’ of homosexuality,
not the attraction itself. We must understand that someone who struggles with
SGA may continue in that struggle even as they pursue their relationship with
Christ. My pastor of many years once wrote an article on the topic of
homosexuality and in it he made this statement: “Many Christians with
homosexual orientation fight against their desires for homosexual relationships
through the power of the Holy Spirit. I admire these brave saints who endure
lives of sexual frustration because of their commitment to Christ.”[28]
I think that summarized the attitude we must have toward those who may discover
they cannot alter their SGA.
Conclusion
“The
reality of homosexuality isn’t ‘out there’. It’s here, inside the church, in
youth groups across the country.”[29]
We need to ensure the Church is a place that is conducive to healing for those
struggling with their sexual identity. If we truly have a heart for the lost,
and we honestly want to see people transformed by Christ, we will take time to
educate ourselves on the subject of same-gender attraction in order that we
might fully understand the pain that someone goes through when dealing with
their sexual identity, SGA and sexual identity confusion.
[1] Anthony Campolo, Speaking My Mind (Nashville, TN:
W Pub. Group, 2004), Ch. 5.
[2] The
abbreviation SGA may be used throughout the paper to represent same-gender
attraction, which includes homosexuality and bisexuality.
[3] Gary R. Collins, Christian Counseling: A Comprehensive
Guide, Third ed. (Waco, TX: Word Books, 2007), 377.
[4] Gary J. Gates, How Many People Are Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual and Transgendered, April 2012, The Williams Institute, UCLA Law,
University of California School of Law, Los Angeles.
[5] Statistics
Canada. "Population Estimate 2014." Statistics Canada: Canada's
National Statistical Agency. January 2014.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/start-debut-eng.html.
[6] Gates.
[7] The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual had
this listed as homosexuality referring to same-sex attraction.
[8] Chad W. Thompson, Loving Homosexuals as Jesus Would: A
Fresh Christian Approach (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2004), 105.
[9] The
hypothalamus has been associated with the regulation of hormone release and
reproductive behavior.
[10] Thompson, 100.
[11] Ibid., 101.
[12] Ibid., 101.
[13] INqUEERY, "What Does Science Say about
Homosexuality," INqUEERY, 2006, Baily & Pillard,
http://www.inqueery.com/index.html.
[14] David K. Switzer and John Thornburg, Pastoral Care of
Gays, Lesbians, and Their Families (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), 23.
[15] Ibid., 23, 24.
[16] Ibid., 23, 24.
[17] Ibid., 23, 24.
[18] Pim Pronk, Against Nature?: Types of Moral
Argumentation regarding Homosexuality (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans,
1993), 216.
[19] Ibid., 216.
[20] Collins, 389.
[21] Ruperto M. Perez, Kurt A. DeBord, and Kathleen J.
Bieschke, Handbook of Counseling and Psychotherapy with Lesbian, Gay, and
Bisexual Clients (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association,
2000), 424.
[22] Suzanne H. Lease and Julie L. Shulman, "A Preliminary
Investigation of the Role of Religion for Family Members of Lesbian, Gay Male,
or Bisexual Male and Female Individuals," Counseling and Values 47,
no. 3 (April 2003): 196, doi:10.1002/j.2161-007X.2003.tb00266.x.
[23] Ibid.
[24] Perez, DeBord, and Bieschke, 16.
[25] Ibid., 26.
[26] Joy S. Whitman and Markus P. Bidell, "Affirmative
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Counselor Education and Religious Beliefs: How Do We
Bridge the Gap?," Journal of Counseling & Development 92 (April
2014): 169, accessed April 1, 2014, doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2014.00144.x.
[27] Collins, 389.
[28] Verner Drost and Smythe Street Cathedral, Homosexuality
- A Christian Response, PDF, August 2007.
[29] Alan Chambers, God's Grace and the Homosexual next
Door (Eugene, Or.: Harvest House Publishers, 2006), 137.
Bibliography
Campolo, Anthony. Speaking
My Mind. Nashville, TN: W Pub. Group, 2004.
Collins, Gary R. Christian
Counseling: A Comprehensive Guide. Third ed. Waco, TX: Word Books, 2007.
Gates, Gary J. How Many
People Are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered. April 2012. The
Williams Institute, UCLA Law, University of California School of Law, Los
Angeles.
Statistics Canada. "Population
Estimate 2014." Statistics Canada: Canada's National Statistical Agency.
January 2014. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/start-debut-eng.html.
Thompson, Chad W. Loving
Homosexuals as Jesus Would: A Fresh Christian Approach. Grand Rapids, MI:
Brazos, 2004.
INqUEERY. "What Does
Science Say about Homosexuality." INqUEERY. 2006. http://www.inqueery.com/index.html.
The Baily & Pillard study is familiar to many
Journals, I was not able to access the appropriate journals for this particular
study, but attest to the accuracy of this site in relation to psychological
journals I have reviewed.
Switzer, David K., and John
Thornburg. Pastoral Care of Gays, Lesbians, and Their Families.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.
Pronk, Pim. Against
Nature?: Types of Moral Argumentation regarding Homosexuality. Grand
Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993.
Perez, Ruperto M., Kurt A.
DeBord, and Kathleen J. Bieschke. Handbook of Counseling and Psychotherapy
with Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association, 2000.
Lease, Suzanne H., and Julie
L. Shulman. "A Preliminary Investigation of the Role of Religion for
Family Members of Lesbian, Gay Male, or Bisexual Male and Female
Individuals." Counseling and Values 47, no. 3 (April 2003):
195-209. doi:10.1002/j.2161-007X.2003.tb00266.x.
Whitman, Joy S., and Markus P.
Bidell. "Affirmative Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Counselor Education and
Religious Beliefs: How Do We Bridge the Gap?" Journal of Counseling
& Development 92 (April 2014): 162-71. Accessed April 1, 2014.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2014.00144.x.
Drost, Verner, and Smythe
Street Cathedral. Homosexuality - A Christian Response. PDF. August
2007.
An article written by the senior pastor
of Smythe Street Cathedral during his sermon series on 'Christian Morality.'
Chambers, Alan. God's Grace
and the Homosexual next Door. Eugene, Or.: Harvest House Publishers, 2006.
Other Sources
Referenced but not cited:
Balch, David L. Homosexuality,
Science, and the "Plain Sense" of Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI:
W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2000.
Balkin, Richard S., Richard E.
Watts, and Saba R. Ali. "A Conversation About the Intersection of Faith,
Sexual Orientation, and Gender: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives."
Journal of Counseling & Development 92 (April 2014): 187-95.
Accessed April 1, 2014. EBSCO.
The Book of Discipline of the
United Methodist Church.
Nashville, TN: United Methodist Pub. House, 1993.
Comstock, Gary David. Gay
Theology without Apology. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 1993.
Grenz, Stanley J. Welcoming
but Not Affirming: An Evangelical Response to Homosexuality. Louisville,
KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998.
Jones, Stanton L., and Mark A.
Yarhouse. Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's
Moral Debate. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000.
Mazzalongo, Michael. Gay
Rights or Wrongs: A Christian's Guide to Homosexual Issues and Ministry.
Joplin, MO: College Press Pub., 1995.
Pronk, Pim. Against
Nature?: Types of Moral Argumentation regarding Homosexuality. Grand
Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993.
Swartley, Willard M. Homosexuality:
Biblical Interpretation and Moral Discernment. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press,
2003.
DesRoches, Bonita L. The Journey. A paper written while
searching for answers – for the truth that would dispel the lies many believe
about the subject of homosexuality. 2002
No comments:
Post a Comment