Previous | Next 

Welcoming and yet not affirming

Harold Jantz

Skjold Photos

The question of how to deal with homosexuality, and specifically with homosexual practice, is one of the most troubling facing the church today. The culture in which we live has come to accept all kinds of alternative lifestyles. Laws and court rulings appear to be giving committed homosexual relationships the same value as any committed heterosexual relationship. Who are we to say such laws may not be right?

Furthermore, the church wants to be a welcoming place. The mission statement of the Manitoba MB Conference, for example, reads: “Our mission is to be a community of Jesus, infused by the Spirit, centered in God’s Word, making room for all.” What message do we convey to those in our communities who may be in gay or lesbian relationships if we tell them we do not believe they are acting according to God’s will? Are we really making room?

Can we welcome and yet not affirm, as Canadian Baptist professor Stan Grenz has put it? This is not an easy question. There are many people who will tell us it can’t be done. As a result, many of us prefer not to deal with such issues.

The question is not made easier by the fact that there has been a growing debate within Christian circles about what the Bible has to teach us. Have we been wrong after all in saying that homosexual practice is outside the will of God? Should we describe it as “intrinsically disordered” as the Roman Catholic Church does in its catechism? Or is Old Testament scholar Walter Bruggemann correct that the debate around homosexuality is merely “the respectable point around which to quarrel about the loss of our known world,” – so that the debate is not about “sexuality but about the re-ordering of social power” (Texts under Negotiation, Fortress Press)? Are we “mired in an interpretive quicksand,” as prominent Bible scholar Walter Wink has said, with the Bible essentially unable to speak to “our confusion on this issue”? Or can we, as Thomas Schmidt insists in the book Straight and Narrow, affirm “that homosexual acts depart from the only acceptable avenue for the full expression of sexuality, which is heterosexual marriage”?

Our starting point

It is in the Scriptures and in God’s work in history that we must find our starting point. The Scriptures provide us with the story of salvation. They tell us of a God who created this world and all that is within it, including a human family with the freedom to choose to obey or disobey Him. They tell us of rebellion against God, and of a creation everywhere touched by the effects of sin. The Scriptures are also God’s account of how He has acted to restore what’s gone wrong in our world; this restoration culminates in the redemption, healing, salvation and transformation which He makes available in Jesus Christ.

The church has confessed throughout its history that the Scriptures have the authority to direct our thinking on this and many other issues. In some cases, the teaching is clear and straightforward. In other cases, we derive the teaching through theological reflection. In the case of homosexual practice, we need to read the message of the Scriptures in both ways.

If we take the passages of the Bible which speak directly to homosexual practice, their message appears to be abundantly clear. Even those who have come to the conclusion that the Bible can be read to approve homosexual practice will generally agree that none of the passages can, on their face, be read positively. All reflect a negative attitude to homosexual practice.

Back to the creation account

To find our biblical direction, we must keep two perspectives in view. One revolves around the creation, and the other revolves around the redemptive work of God through Jesus Christ. What do these mean in relation to the sexual brokenness that is so evident in our world?

Genesis says: “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them and said to them, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over every living creature.’…Then the LORD God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make a helper suitable for him.’…The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called “woman,” for she was taken out of man’. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Genesis 1:27-28, Genesis 2:18,23-24).

As Thomas Schmidt puts it, our view of homosexuality is not rooted as much in a number of prooftext prohibitions against it as in the “pervasiveness and reasonableness of an affirmed activity – heterosexual marriage.” That’s what Genesis 1 and 2 are about. This is what they show us about God’s intention for humanity:

The creation of male and female has a biological purpose: “the survival and flourishing of the human race” (Stephen Noll, Two Sexes One Flesh, to whom I’m indebted for the outline that is used here). Male and female are to unite so that they will reproduce according to their kind. Genesis assumes that reproduction is good and that male and female are necessary to achieve it. The coming together into a heterosexual union is the result of God’s creative work and is blessed by Him. “Be fruitful and increase in number,” God says (Genesis 1:28). Thomas Schmidt says, “From this point, the Bible assumes the goodness of reproduction, most clearly in the promised blessing to Abraham that God will make him exceedingly numerous.” It is only in eternity, according to Jesus (Mark 12:25), that marriage will cease to have this reproductive purpose. The creation of male and female has an erotic purpose: Sex is good. There’s a drama in the first chapters of Genesis, and it begins with the words, “It is not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 1:18). So God brings the creatures to him, and he names them, but they can’t meet his needs for an intimate companion. Finally, God brings to him someone who is made of the same stuff as he is and who truly is his opposite. He recognizes her as the companion he’s been longing for: “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (2:24). Their joy in one another is emphasized by the observation that both were naked in each other’s presence and “not ashamed” (2:25). Erotic love is intended to be enjoyed, as the Song of Solomon makes abundantly clear. In the New Testament, Paul affirms that husband and wife have mutual rights to sexual pleasure and only invite temptation if they abstain too long (I Corinthians 7:4-5). The Scriptures also make it clear that this sexual desire can express itself in harmful and sinful ways. That happens when we reverse a fundamental order, which is that we are persons before we are sexual beings: “The person was not made for sexuality, but sexuality for the person” (L’Osservatore Romano, March 12, 1997). When used appropriately, the erotic purpose of our sexual nature is good. Even the exclusiveness and jealousy inherent in it is good, for erotic sexual union is intended to be experienced within a lifelong committed relationship. The creation of male and female has a social purpose. The story in Paradise concludes with the public institution of marriage: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife” (2:24). Marriage has all sorts of positive and negative possibilities and affects the wider community in a host of ways, but the Bible teaches us that fundamentally it is good. It is a union which is meant to be indissoluble and monogamous. Within its boundaries, the children born of that union are to find safety, shelter and nurture – for the good of the larger community. “While marriage may be preceded by erotic courtship and fulfilled in sexual delight, the union of a man and a woman brings about a new reality, a society, which in turn finds its place in the greater society. The home is the place where the biological drive to procreate children finds its fulfillment in their nurture in the knowledge and love of the Lord” (Noll).

Why homosexuality turns away from God’s intention

It is at this point that we must make clear why homosexual activity moves away from what God intended in creating us male and female. Along with every other kind of illicit sexual activity outside marriage, homosexual activity is an affront to marriage. As Schmidt says, “Every sexual act that the Bible calls sin is essentially a violation of marriage, whether existing or potential.” One of our time’s leading theologians, the German Wolfhart Pannenberg, has written, “Any sexual activity that does not intend the goal of marriage between man and wife . . . constitutes a departure from the norm for sexual behaviour which has been given to men and women as creatures of God.” Just as premarital sexual activity, adultery, the consumption of pornography or the act of rape must be seen as assaults against the present or future marriage of a man and a woman, so is homosexual activity. None of these can receive the approval of the Christian community.

(There is a discussion that we could have at this point about those who nonetheless choose this life and what provisions the state might make for their long-term relationships. I won’t argue that there might not be some legitimacy to such provisions, on the basis that they are “domestic partnerships.” We should, however, argue strongly against calling such relationships “marriages” and the partners “spouses.” Such “domestic partnerships” could also include other combinations, such as sisters living together, a parent and an adult child, etc.)

The fundamental reality concerning a homosexual relationship is that it is, in principle, sterile. It cannot be fruitful. If there are children in such a relationship, it is because they have been brought to it from a heterosexual union. The relationship is self-centred, fundamentally rooted in a desire for self-fulfillment, disconnected from the rest of life. As Thomas Schmidt says, “Personal fulfillment involves no necessary obligation to the wider human community and its procreative family model. Homosexual practice proclaims the independence rather than the interdependence of each relationship or individual.” It is precisely because the direction of homosexual relationships is fundamentally inward and self-serving that, in terms of public policy, they ought not to be given the same value as the marriages of heterosexual couples.

Some additional observations

Up to this point, I’ve tried to show that the Scriptures – both through specific commands and through a theology of sexuality rooted in creation – do not provide us with the permission to engage in homosexual activity. Now I would like to make a few additional observations about homosexual activity and the ideology which supports it, because I believe it is necessary to understand how far it wanders from a biblical expression of our sexuality. These are general observations, all of which can be expanded upon and documented.

The reasons for a homosexual orientation for males or females are complex and varied. It is not clear that they are genetic (that is, that people are born that way), nor is it clear that they are the result of the environment. Research like that done by Dean Hamer of the US National Research Institute or by neurobiologist Simon LeVay, which appeared to show a biological link, are at best inconclusive. It is striking, on the other hand, how often those who choose a gay or lesbian lifestyle have experienced an emotionally distant parent, or abuse of some sort. Either way, a homosexual orientation invariably reflects the reality of our fallenness as human beings. Regardless of its source, we must be clear that a homosexual orientation does not confer the right to act on that orientation. There is much to which we are by nature inclined, or to which our environment might tilt us. This is the reality of our sinful nature. Yet, even when we are predisposed by our fallen humanity toward sins of envy, greed, gluttony, jealousy and lust, we need to find the grace from above, as Ted Peters puts it, to “control and constructively channel [these] desires” (Playing God: Genetic Determinism and Human Freedom). The effort to gain support for homosexual unions is at times specifically and deliberately directed at deconstructing the basis for heterosexual marriages. In other words, it aims at removing the social and legislative supports for marriages in which a father and mother are valued for their role in bringing children into this world and for nurturing them for constructive roles in society. Implicitly, support for homosexual practice is always a departure from the biblical norms for sexual behaviour, which aim at the faithful union of a man and a woman. Homosexual practice – particularly in the case of gay men – is often exceedingly self-gratifying, compulsive, addictive and dangerous. Many studies have shown the same results. One very well known study found that 74% of the homosexual subjects had had a hundred or more partners during their lifetime; 28% had had more than a thousand. A major survey on the sexual practices of Americans found that only 2% of homosexual couples were monogamous (completely faithful to their partners), while 83% of heterosexual couples were monogamous. For their numbers within the population, homosexual men are disproportionately represented in the sexual exploitation of children. Several studies have shown that while only about 2% of males are homosexuals, approximately 35% of pedophiles are homosexual. Moreover, homosexual pedophiles are likely to abuse far more children (150 on average) than do heterosexual pedophiles (20 victims) (Schmidt, Straight and Narrow). Homosexual activity is inherently risky and unhealthy, and the life expectancy of persons engaged in homosexual activity is significantly lower than that of heterosexuals. It is possible to reverse the patterns of homosexual behaviour if the desire and commitment to change are there and when appropriate support from the outside is present. Such healing has been documented in many studies and has happened in both secular and Christian settings. Healing has led to changes in both behaviour and orientation. Under the guidance of Christian counsellors, there has also been deep inner healing of memories and values which supported earlier behaviour. The changes do not come easily, and few if any would claim that same-sex erotic fantasies never again arise, just as few single or married persons could claim never to be tempted by wayward thoughts or lust. Yet healing is real.

There is healing in the Saviour

The road to healing begins with church communities that open their hearts and arms to those who are struggling with their sexuality.

Perhaps what we need more than anything is a change in our language. We may need to confess that many more of us than we would like to admit are sexual strugglers. The possibilities for failure, both as heterosexuals and as homosexuals, are huge. Indeed, the reality is that, because of the numbers, there are many more people who fail as heterosexual sinners than as homosexual sinners. We have every reason to love and care about both.

We also need to understand the pain of families when a son or daughter declares that he or she has a gay or lesbian identity. The turmoil in such families may be immense. Some feel torn apart. Others become convinced that they must approve what their children are doing. In most cases, the families are forced to walk a lonely path. But it doesn’t need to be that way.

We would have failed in our discussion of this issue if we did not complete the picture the Scriptures present by drawing attention to what Christ can do. Jesus not only reaffirmed the intention of God in creation when He answered the question about divorce (Matthew 19:3-9). He also offered Himself up for us through His death on the cross, so that we might be healed of our sins. He says, “Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28).

Homosexual behaviours, like other sexual aberrations, often become addictive, and so the people doing them may feel they no longer have any control over them. But such activities have always involved choices, and the gospel offers hope for people who truly seek release and want to be healed of their sexual brokenness. Rather than be silent about the promise of the gospel, Thomas Schmidt says the “better course for church leaders is to periodically make clear from the pulpit (and privately in specific cases of concern) that the church represents forgiveness and the power to change, and it also exercises redemptive discipline in cases of sexual disobedience, including homosexual acts. If this is done in a humble and inclusive manner, it should be well received by all.”

Schmidt recalls the leader in a ministry to homosexuals who traced the radical change in his own life back to the moment when a pastor decided to depart from his sermon text to talk about the love of Jesus for homosexuals.

Healing ministries

The ministry of the church may be what is needed to help someone maintain a celibate lifestyle. Or, as has happened in a surprising number of instances, it may open the door to a genuine heterosexual relationship that can lead to marriage and a family.

Several very fine programs have been developed to help people struggling with sexual addictions and specifically with homosexual addictions. I’m indebted in the descriptions that follow to Jeffrey Satinover, a Jewish psychiatrist who has embraced Christian faith and who has written a very fine book called Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth.

One option is a 12-step program very like what is used in Alcoholics Anonymous. In fact, this is called Homosexuals Anonymous. There are chapters of this in several places across Canada. It works on the assumption that while abstinence is the precondition to a cure, it is not the cure itself. Two features are central to this program – that persons have to acknowledge their powerlessness over homosexuality, and that they have to express their dependence on a Higher Power. The strength of the program is the self-discipline and mutual accountability it fosters. The weakness is that it is not often enough coupled to love and compassion and the hope for change, and so it too frequently ends with episodes of relapse and rebellion. A program employed in many of the ministries connected to Exodus International comes out of the Desert Stream organization and is called Living Waters. (In Canada, the New Direction for Life Ministries are part of Exodus.) Living Waters was developed by Andrew Comiskey, a former homosexual. While this ministry has homosexuals especially in mind, it appeals to all who are experiencing sexual brokenness, and offers healing and regeneration. The program, which runs for 25-30 weeks, requires a clear commitment. Those who enter are screened to assess their desire for change, and the program is expressly designed for people who have committed their lives to Christ and desire the healing of their sexuality through the power of the Holy Spirit. The record of those who enter is that about 50% make significant progress in moving out of homosexuality to heterosexuality; 25% marry within eight years and demonstrate that the changes in their lives are lasting. Another ministry is Redeemed Life, founded by a former homosexual, Mario Bergner, who wrote a book called Setting Love in Order. He says that for years while struggling with homosexuality he found himself either in churches where homosexuality was simply condemned or churches where it was outrightly accepted. Redeemed Life combines in-depth psychology in a group setting with healing prayer. Participants make a minimum eight-month commitment to a group in which the focus is on sexual redemption in Christ. Then there are the pastoral care ministries of Leanne Payne, who has written Crisis in Masculinity and The Healing of the Homosexual. Payne has profoundly influenced many of those providing Christian healing ministries to people suffering sexual brokenness. Her ministry is based on the healing of memories in a way that goes very deep, and on the assumption that real forgiveness and healing come ultimately from God. The idea is that we can consciously hold ideas, beliefs, values, attitudes and memories at one level, while unconsciously holding another set at another level. Our deepest wounds and most sinful responses may therefore lie unrecognized and out of sight at the subconscious level. When memories are healed, those wounds and our sinful responses to them are remembered, acknowledged, understood for what they are and then presented to God for forgiveness and healing. Payne’s ministry is based on the belief that God can heal because it is He who has placed a conscience within our hearts; the wounded parts of our lives have to be progressively presented to God for forgiveness and healing. The key here is that if we try to deal with our wounds apart from God, we almost always do it in sinful ways. Our wounds must be laid bare before Him to be healed. That’s a very important insight.

Two stories of hope

Two years ago, I attended a conference for people who are leaving a homosexual lifestyle,

For further reading Mario Bergner, Setting Love in Order: Hope and Healing for the Homosexual (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1995). A. Comiskey, Pursuing Sexual Wholeness (Lake Mary, Fla.: Creation House, 1989). Stan Grenz, Sexual Ethics (Dallas, Tex.: Word, 1990); Welcoming but not Affirming (John Knox Press, 1999). Steven Noll, Two Sexes, One Flesh (Solon, Ohio: Latimer Press, 1997). Leanne Payne, The Broken Image (Westchester, Ill.: Crossway, 1981). Jeffrey Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1996). Thomas Schmidt, Straight and Narrow: Compassion and Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate (Downers Grove, Ill: Inter-Varsity Press, 1995). More information about healing ministries for persons struggling with issues of homosexuality can be found at the Web site for New Direction for Life Ministries of Canada. Requests for information can also be directed to New Direction for Life Ministries, Box 1493, Winnipeg, Man. R3C 2Z4, phone (204) 452-1826, fax (204) 452-1799, email wpg@newdirection.ca.

sponsored by Exodus International. In the room were scores of people who had experienced great sexual brokenness. At the opening, there was a time of worship, with singing, Scripture readings and prayer. As we sang, I became aware of deep emotion in the group. I found myself weeping. I’ve seldom sensed such deep emotion in a time of worship. I realized then how real is the promise of the gospel that “there is a fountain filled with blood, drawn from Emmanuel’s veins, and sinners plunged beneath the flood lose all their guilty stains.” If ever I have felt how precious is the promise that Christ can redeem and heal, it was there.

Some months ago, I heard a man describe his journey from sexual brokenness. He is married with children, and is a churchman. He is gifted with great talents and an attractive personality. He described how he had indulged in pornography. Then, over a long period of time, he began to engage in occasional homosexual encounters. They started as rare events, but as time passed, they increased, until eventually he was engaging in such encounters weekly and oftener. He reached a point in his life, he says, when he felt emotionally dead. He could not deal with life. In church, he tagged along behind his wife so that she could speak with others and he wouldn’t need to. One day, his pastor preached a sermon and in it used the expression “sexual brokenness,” inviting anyone who needed help with such issues to come to him.

It gave him the door he needed. He is now on the road to healing. When I heard him, it was the first time he had spoken about his problem publicly. He had been in a Living Waters program and had already experienced a great deal of healing. His wife also has been part of a support group that has brought healing to her for the betrayal she has experienced. The transformation and redemption will need to go on for a long time yet, but listening to him was deeply moving and left little doubt that God was performing a genuine work of grace in him.

And that, I believe, needs to be our message. God has created us male and female so that we might find one another in ways that reflect His will. But ours is a fallen world, and the sexual brokenness that we see around us, and that all of us experience in some ways, needs the redeeming presence of Christ. The church is for such people. Christ welcomes them, and so must we. We all are sinners and need His healing touch. There truly is a promise of change with Him.

Harold Jantz is a former editor of Mennonite Brethren Herald, former founding editor of ChristianWeek and a member of the Canadian MB Conference Board of Faith and Life. This article is adapted from a presentation originally prepared for a Sunday school class at McIvor Ave. MB Church, Winnipeg, Man.

Previous | Next 

Last modified November 23, 1999.

© 1999 Mennonite Brethren Herald.
Published by the Canadian Conference of MB Churches.
Masthead and usage information.