I appreciate the distinction that Todd makes in this post:
And I appreciate his taking a public stance, as well as coming down on the right side of this issue. But I would like to comment on one statement:
We have brothers and sisters in Christ who, while struggling with same sex attraction, persevere faithfully in God-honoring chastity recognizing that homosexuality is a sin.
This creates the impression, whether intentional or not, that celibacy is the only option for Christians who struggle with homosexual impulses. Here I think we need to avoid two extremes:
One extreme is giving such people false hope. Assuring them of an instant or total cure if they just pray enough, receiving the baptism of the Spirit, or undergo reparative therapy. God will take away their homosexual urges. That typically leads to bitter disillusionment and apostasy. They are worse off than before, because false assurance has made them cynical.
The other extreme is to give them no hope of recovery in this life. Seems to me that we should be encouraging them to work towards heterosexual marriage. Make that their goal, rather than lifelong celibacy. Of course, celibacy is a moral requirement for every single Christian. And there are circumstances under which a life of self-denial is the only option.
But there is evidence that some homosexuals can recover their natural heterosexual impulses:
Holding out that possibility spares them from falling into despair.
Seems to me that we should treat homosexuality like any other addiction. Addictions can be notoriously difficult to break. Yet society is extremely sympathetic when it comes to drug rehab, despite the rate of recidivism. Why should we demand a higher success rate for homosexuals? When recovering alcoholics fall off the wagon, we don't say that's a reason to stop treating alcoholism.
No comments:
Post a Comment