Previous Post – Hospitality, Economics & The Suffering Church
If you are new my blog or do not know me personally, you might not know a critical part of my own journey. While in high school I came to the realization that much of my sexual attraction was for the same-sex. Most of you will know that I am also happily married to a beautiful woman who I love with all my heart and who is the object of my desire- that is, I think my wife is the sexiest person on the planet. With that being said, it might be easy for many people to assume that, through the intervention of God (through whatever means one imagine), I have been “healed”, “freed” and/or “changed” from my same-sex attraction. This would be a false assumption.
In truth, my sexual orientation has not changed since high school. If you noticed, I said that much of my attraction was for men, but not my only attraction. I have always had a strong sexual attraction for both genders. I think this is important to state for a couple of reasons. First, my marriage is not a sham that I took on to convince myself or others that I was “normal”. I did not choose my wife because I denied myself the option of men. I choose my wife because I loved her and wanted to spend the rest of my life building a family together.
Second, from all my experience, relationships and years of research (from sources across the board), I firmly reject efforts made to “repair” or reverse someones sexual orientation. This says nothing about what I believe about whether I am affirming of same-sex relationships or not, only that those efforts have been proven futile and damaging, and therefore want to be very clear that no such reparation occurred in my life.
Recently, a friend in very much the same situation as me wrote me an email and asked me a question I wasn’t prepared for. He asked:
“Jamie, do you identify as gay?”
His question has stuck with me ever since, as the issue of terminology with respect to sexuality and specifically same-sex attraction is one which the Christian community is largely floundering over. What does it really mean for a person to say, “I am gay”? For many of my friends, this is an easy question to answer, but interestingly, despite how obvious the answer is to those friend, many of them come to a entirely different answer. Let me explain.
For gay friends, both Christian and otherwise (and a few straight Christian friends), to be gay means to be attracted to the same-sex.
For most of my straight Christian friends, to be gay means to not only be attracted to the same-sex, but to affirm and participate in same-sex sexual relationships.
So which is it? Recently, this topic came up on an intense (and somewhat controversial) panel discussion at the Gay Christian Network conference. Justin Lee, executive director of GCN said (see full video here):
“In most of the world- certainly in most of America, and certainly for folk in my generation and younger- we’ve grown up in a world where ‘gay’ means one thing and that is ‘a person who is attracted to the same sex’.”
My friend Wendy Gritter, executive director of New Direction Ministries of Canada, was also on the panel and added:
“If indeed the term ‘gay’, in our broader culture, is received as descriptive and not an all-encompassing identity, by encouraging people to not describe themselves as gay, isn’t that inherently encouraging a lack of honesty and self-acceptance of the reality of same-sex attraction?”
These two comments reflect well the stance that most of my gay Christian friends hold, as well as some of straight Christian friends. However, anyone who have grown up in the wider evangelical community in North America will realize that such positions run contrary to most of the understandings and assumptions with the church. For example, another panelist, Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International (a ministry which describes itself as “the world’s largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by homosexuality”), recently wrote the following for Charisma magazine:
“Celibacy is the godly option for all single men and women. Yet today, while many Christians with same-sex attractions are choosing celibacy, they’re also opting to keep the gay identity/label. This falls short of God’s best because identity matters. How we view and refer to ourselves is very important.”
For Alan, as well as most Christians I’ve encountered in the wider church, it seems that to refer to oneself as gay is to accept it as an identity defining. This position has fueled the assumption among many Christians that to identify oneself as gay was to affirm the orientation and therefore be willing to participate in the “gay lifestyle”. They take exception to statements like the ones that Justin and Wendy made, claiming that the word does, in fact, mean what their understanding affirms. However, dictionary definitions do little to help the discussion, with some leaning towards one side of this argument, some to the other, while still others that affirm both.
(As a brief, but critical aside, let me encourage those who are unaware that, for the most part, referring to a gay person as a “homosexual” is not generally appropriate. The term has come to be a derogatory expression that all of my gay friends- and myself- strongly find offensive and ask that you refrain from using.)
While I strongly agree Justin and Wendy, both for the definition of gay, but also with their convictions about the need for the church to accept that definition, I would call for caution. While challenging someone like Alan Chambers, whose role is to represent one of the worlds largest ministries to gay people, is a prophetic necessity, we must have much grace to other Christians who find themselves in often very hostile environments where such a change is concerned. I am not saying we should soft-pedal on injustice out of self-protection- even writing this could threaten my own financial stability in ministry- but instead recognize that this issue is first pastoral, not simply ideological. We may to navigate like people who are bilingual, slowly helping others understand the differences.
I would argue that the most widely accepted understanding of the word “gay” is someone attracted to the same-sex. However, the fact is that millions of Christians utilize the word with their understanding in context often isolated from the wider context. To see change in how Christians understand and use the term will take a long time- longer than is probably right or fair. Further, there will be some circles in which the change will not happen at all. For Christians and Christian communities that genuinely desire to missionally engage gay people outside of the church or with gay Christians (which there are many, many, many) or even with people in the wider post-Christendom culture, this is a change we must work at diligently.
Why? Because, we are to follow Christ, who “did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself” (Phil. 2:6,7). In other words, the onus of connecting meaningfully with people falls to the Christian. We do not require people to adapt to us, to our language or our culture, in order to encounter Christ. This is not license to be amoral, but rather a foundational missiological commitment that we affirm in almost every other expression of Christian mission.
Some may argue, like Alan Chambers that the “problem with being a gay Christian is that gay takes center stage. But God won’t share His throne with anyone or anything.” After all, some will say, I don’t identify as a ’straight Christian’. yet these statements miss the fact that we live in a heteronormative culture, which means that we don’t have to say we are “straight Christians” because heterosexuality is by far the assumed reality of most people until they identify otherwise.
Therefore, when my gay friends refer to themselves as “gay Christians” they do not do so because their orientation is somehow more primary than their identity in Christ, but rather because it is all too often assumed that the words gay and Christian are irreconcilable. It is a response to year beyond counting where gay people have had to live in fear and silence regarding their sexuality, even (and sometime especially) from the church.
So, what then do I say when someone asks me if I am gay? My response has general been to explain that my sexual orientation is bisexual. Does this mean I am not gay? Not necessarily. It depends on who is asking and what they mean by the word? Am I happy with that ambiguity? No, but it is my commitment to continue to have these kinds of conversations, the broaden peoples understanding so that the divergence between these two understandings becomes less and less. It is not something I do because I owe it to my fellow gay Christians- though that is a motivation- but rather because faithfulness to Christ requires no less.
Let’s explore this with comments and questions. However, any attacks or offensive posts will be deleted. Thanks for keeping this a safe place.
Dear Jamie:
Paul says, ‘If I boast, I shall boast of my weaknesses.’ So then, I often say to the poor in the woods near us: “On the left hand, I am a transsexual and bisexual. On the right hand, I am a follower of Jesus Christ. What is your excuse?” And then, I wait for an answer…. whatever their answer, I normally say the following from I Cor 7, (paraphrased by me), “Were you called being a slave? Think nothing of it. But if you can gain your freedom do so. But if not, remember this: the man that is a slave, is the Lord’s freedman.”
Then, I explain to them that Christ came to give us freedom. Either freedom ‘from’ the slavery; or freedom ‘within’ the slavery. Christ did not set me free from transsexualism; He set me free within it. I have incredible peace, joy, and faith – and I am honored to work in His harvest field among the least that believe. And also, Christ did not set me free from bisexuality; He taught me to enjoy the ’sexual static’ that occurs, but engage in intimacy with only my wife. And then, I encourage the men and women that live in tents in the woods to walk with Christ ‘now’ – even if they are alcoholics, drug users, needing psych meds, or suffering from PTSD due to many years of combat.
I also teach the word of God (as if on the left hand), and per James 3, the wisdom that comes from heaven (as if on the right hand). The Word of God is not an error – but true; however, the wisdom from heaven is ‘full of mercy… and impartial’, and triumphs over judgment.
I teach that mercy should be given to those that divorce, and to those that marry a divorced woman (though the latter live in adultery per Matt 5). But wait… divorce and remarriage are normally considered ’sins of choice’… yet I teach mercy, even upon such sins of choice. I show the men and women in the woods the words in Matt 5, and in James 3. They then ponder the concepts of mercy dominating – even triumphing – over judgment.
I further teach that mercy should be given to women that marry, even though they are not virgins and should be stoned for their prior sins – even if they no longer ‘living in sin’ or ‘have repented’. Yes, promiscuity is considered a ’sin of choice’, and once virginity is gone, it cannot be re-done…. yet I teach mercy, even upon sins that demand the death penalty without regard to a change of heart or life-style (Deut 22).
And, to be very biblical, any person that can trace their heritage to an illegitimate child, is not to be welcomed in the church for 10 generations – by the way, two of my great grandparents were abandoned at an orphanage, and both are considered illegitimate births. I hope that mercy will be given to me, even though I have sin-of-no-choice (genetic sin), Deut 23:2.
Shall we only give mercy to the divorced, the remarried, and the non-virgin? I offer that we give mercy to all, even those that have committed a ’sin of choice’, and whose life-style God rebukes. What of those that have ’sins of the fall of man’, or even ‘genetic sin’? I offer that we should give them mercy all the more, for the matter of choice is greatly reduced for same-sex-attracted, bisexuals, transsexuals, alcoholics, drug-users, PTSD men and women, and a hundred other ’sins’.
I teach these things to those that have damaged minds, wounded hearts, shattered motivations – beautiful people that are called ‘homeless’. I teach them the Word of God, but especially the priority of mercy as shown in His word. And they learn, grow, and slowly heal. They will be set free – either ‘from’ or ‘within’ their ’sin’.
I have great sadness that many in the Christian community have forsaken the Word of God – and are embracing philosophies for, or against, a selected ’sin’. I offer that if we embrace the Word of God, we shall see many, many ’sins’ of all kinds – yet we shall also see the blinding light of mercy radiating above, over, and through that ’sin’, causing us to be vulnerable about our own ’sins’, open and honest, authentic — we shall then see ‘for God has bound us all to disobediance – all of us means all of us – so that He might have mercy upon us all.’
Much love in Christ always and unconditionally; Caryn
Thanks for posting this to your blog! Soooo good!
Caryn, while I think we approach Scripture differently, I appreciate your obviously love for Christ and others. Thank you for sharing your journey.
Adam, thanks so much! Your take on this is very important to me, so I am glad you approve.
Hi Jamie,
Thank you for your post. As this is all very “new” for me (because of my upbringing) it is helpful to hear these thoughts and opinions.
I like many of the things you say and agree on the importance of words and not having presumptions when they are heard, but my two questions are this:
Do other minorities present themselves by their identifying titles? Or should they? (2nd question coming…)
Most minorities, at least to my knowledge, do not present themselves using the “terms” which identifies them. Now, that may be because those words have turned negative (in most minorities?) but I still feel that the importance of identity (in which Kenny talks about, which I really appreciated) definitely causes one to think about whether they should identify with that word. But then comes the question of the difference of identities based on culture, race, or sexual relation…is there a difference?
I suppose maybe a recovered alcoholic, who will still most likely, have a craving to drink, still refers to themselves as an alcoholic, but for the most part, unless someone is proud of their title (which means they do not mind the title whether it be bad or good, i.e. being American may be a good thing or patriotic, but go to the near east and decide whether you still want to hold that title everywhere you go)…thus, my other question, again, honestly out of ignorance and curiosity:
Is it good or necessary to redeem or identify with a title that, whether or not turned negative, still implies or relates to our sin nature or something that is not a part of the Kingdom of God?
Anyway, I hope I made sense. I do believe we (the Church) needs to be more open and vulnerable about these issues and discussions. So thank you for helping me in my journey of working through these complicated issues.
Peace be with you-
Michael
Thanks for your openness & questions, Michael.
You asked: “Do other minorities present themselves by their identifying titles? Or should they?”
I should clarify. There are two dynamics here. First and foremost, I was addressing their freedom to simply identify themselves as gay without preconceived notions, such as whether that means they are pro-gay or anything, etc. It should mean simply that they are attracted to the same sex. The church, generally, is very bad at this. Second, most of my gay friends don’t present themselves as gay Christians. Instead, that expression usually comes up only when it is necessary because of the assumption by many that those two words are mutually exclusive. In other words, it is a necessity created, in large part, by Christians. There is something of a difference, though, as race is a difference that is generally visible, whereas orientation is not. In the end, I don’t want to give the impression that gay Christian walk around identifying themselves as such all the time. I was referring to contexts in which such identification was necessary or helpful.
The comparison to alcoholism comes up a lot. However, I would caution against it. Sexual orientation is NOT an addiction, making the analogy unhelpful. Whether you believe same-sex orientation is against God’s best intentions or not, this comparison can be very offensive and functionally dangerous (i.e. “treating” same-sex orientation, especially as an addiction, has proven damaging for many). For the sake of this conversation, though, an alcoholic is an alcoholic for life, even if sober for decades. Most recovery programs encourage them to identify as such, in part for the sake of honesty.
Your second question: “Is it good or necessary to redeem or identify with a title that, whether or not turned negative, still implies or relates to our sin nature or something that is not a part of the Kingdom of God?”
First, if you believe that same-sex relationships are contrary to God’s best intentions- that is sin- then it is the acceptance of and/or participation in such a lifestyle that would be “part of a sin nature” and “contrary to the Kingdom of God”. Their orientation, on the other hand, is not immoral at all. Therefore, since “gay” refers to orientation, the term should not be associated with those negative things. It is only in the church that it is such and, as my post argues, the church should adapt our language, not require that our misuse and misunderstanding of the term be the normative use/understanding.
Thanks for your honest questions. Please feel free to keep sending questions. Also, Wendy’s post that will go up soon will answer some of your questions too.
Thanks Jamie. That is very helpful, especially regarding the second question. I now can understand the differentiation between orientation and lifestyle, and particularly pertaining to the word gay.
I appreciate the caution too. My judgements on these issues is one of very little knowledge and understanding. I found it conveniently divine that I stumbled upon this post since a very dear friend of mine just recently revealed to me (me being the first and only, mostly based on fear from his culture..not american) that he had an attraction to men. My response, at the time, was very gentle and cautious as I did not want to say anything of the matter yet, as he is in a very sensitive place, but to continue, I am unsure, especially knowing my understanding is very tainted. I would truly appreciate any resources or even simple discussions if you had a little time to spare…?
Peace to you-
Hey Jamie,
thanks for facebooking me personnaly to invite me to read your blog. I so appreciate the spirit with which you approach the subject. The way you respond to each and every person who has responded to your blog with a personal comment is a strong indication to your very pastoral approach to the issue. I think it’s in the context of grace, of mutual trust and openness, that we can actually make some headway. This is truly being missional, being inclusive and recognizing each person in their particular context and their personal understanding and working from there. Thanks for modelling for us the needed wisdom for community building.
Thanks Michael. I would be happy to discuss this further by email, if you would like. Drop me a line & let me know.
Thanks Pierre. That means a lot. Peace!
[...] Previous Post – Gay Christians & Missional Integrity [...]
I wish we were as far along culturally with acepting sexual orientation as we are with accepting women leaders. I operate in very conservative environments and get annoyed when someone says they wishgay people wouldn’t “throw it in their face” because I know as a married woman I “throwin their face” my straight identity every time I kiss my husband or hold his hand. The church must stop assuming we are God with the right and ability to judge. We don’t change people by telling them to change and pushing them out. We change people through love and acceptance and then learn their orientation is not something needing change. Thanks for opening this dialogue and encouraging us to open our hearts.
Joy, thanks for your comment. You are right. The heteronormative context is something so many take for granted, not realizing that people who don’t fit that “model” live in stark contrast. What we see (or don’t see) as normal is a waving flag for them. Thanks again!
Good stuff. Interestingly, my husband and I are both sexually attracted to the same gender, as well as other gender…and happily married to each other and very satisfied. Neither of us identify as bisexual…probably because we were never “out” as such before we got married. You bring up a very interesting issue.
Good job, Jamie!!
Makeesha, thanks for sharing. It is, I think, an easier place to be having an orientation in the middle, as it is easier to fit into a heteronormative context. However, it can help us be more sensitive to the more difficult reality that others live with.
Thanks Clemens!
I think for me, where I personally “land” makes the whole conflict more perplexing…I don’t get why traditionalists get so worked up about it.
Makeesha, could you unpack that a bit more? If not, no worries. Just curious.
Thanks, Jamie. I appreciate your honesty, thorough research, and courage. More on this later. I will not be “unfriending” you. Peace, Russ
Thanks Russ. I look forward to the “more later” later!
Jamie–I appreciate this post a lot. The church universal needs to hear this message, but I’m particularly glad that someone as articulate and compassionate as you is helping to carry the torch in Winnipeg. The comments make me hopeful too.
Thanks Matt. That means a lot. Hopeful indeed!
I have to write more on this soon. I’m a transsexual in process. this article and the comments were very appreciated!
Kim Schroeder
Kim, I am so glad it was appreciated. Thanks for taking the time. I look forward to hearing more from you later.
Jamie,
I appreciate your candor and spirit in this post.
I liked how you said “In other words, the onus of connecting meaningfully with people falls to the Christian. We do not require people to adapt to us, to our language or our culture, in order to encounter Christ.”
Andrew F. Walls put it this way: “The Fundamental missionary experience is to live on terms set by others.”
Something easier said than done — especially when dealing with issues that culturally seem to divide the church and that confront us at the core of our belief. Here’s believing we can find the heart of God in the midst of issues like this.
Michael
Thanks Michael. I appreciate the encouragement. And I love the Walls quote- where is it from?
Thank you so much for this. I’m a Presbyterian pastor in a congregation that has made a commitment to and open and inclusive posture. But there are always these distinctions, always these questions hanging in the air. I will share this blog with our elders as I think you have said so much, with clarity and with an attitude of grace. You may have lost “friends” or been “unfollowed” yesterday, but today, you have gained one in me!
Thanks so much, Debra. I have been tremendously encouraged by the support, openness & new friendship this has brought about.
Jamie,
A few years back we were having a conversation in a Bible study about wisdom. The definition of wisdom that came to mind for me was this: Wisdom is the application of truth with grace.
We were looking at James 3, in the conversation John 1:14-18 came coming up for me, Jesus was/is full of grace and truth, he knew the truth but chose not arbitrarily institute it, he chose to use grace a method/mode to apply the truth. I believe that this is the Godly wisdom of which James 3 is speaking.
I believe the wisdom with which wrote the blog was Godly wisdom and I am aware that some may not like me calling it that.
I believe the one thing that this conversation needs more than anything else is the application of grace.
Thanks for writing, as for where I might stand in the conversation I don’t believe is really significant.
But whenever anyone asks the question it will be grace and truth that guide the conversation.
Thanks for sharing.
Grace and Peace,
Gary
Thank you, Gary. I appreciate that a lot. Grace & peace too you as well.
Jamie
Dear Jamie,
Thank you for your reflexion. It could surely help people with a similar dual orientation like you. I think many marriage broke because of the hidden culpability of people with dual attraction.
But, I believe that things are not so simple. There are several causes to gay inclinations, some are congenital, other educational, other psychological, some spiritual.
In my own experience such inclinations could vary with the circumstances. When I was a teenager, I was attracted by women, a little before twenty, I lose interest in women, with caused some trouble in me. Some months later I become a christian, and I lose all gay inclinations.
I know similar experiences in others. The founder of the ExWitch site was a wiccan, married and a practicing bisexual. When she discovered Jesus Christ, she immediately lost all attraction toward women.
So, some become straight through Jesus Christ and stay gay. So please don’t generalize. For some their gay inclination is a real burden, and I firmly believe that they can be relieved by the Spirit.
But, i’m totally unable to understand transsexuality, because it implies external medical intervention and it denies the following verse “I will give thanks unto thee; For I am fearfully and wonderfully made: Wonderful are thy works; And that my soul knoweth right well.” Psalms 139:14, ASV. Tu desire a sex change is not proclaiming that one is wonderfully made.
Hey Désiré. Thank you for sharing your perspective. I do not doubt that there are those who have a significant change in their sexual orientation. However, I firmly believe that they represent a small percentage. To project the experience of a few as an expectation upon the many is dangerous, no matter how well intentioned it might be.
If you read my blog post carefully, you will see that I never claim this to be true of all, which means I am speaking to a specific segment of people- not generalizing. The president of Exodus International, the largest organization committed to helping people achieve what you suggest, recently stated that of the thousands and thousands of people they (and other organizations like them) have served over decades and decade, very, very few ever experience the change you suggest.
Again, I do believe some people have experienced a change in their orientation. It should be noted, however, that of them there are those who lose that attraction due to natural sexual development. Your own story- that of experiencing same sex attraction in your teens which wanes in early adulthood- is uncommon. A huge percentage of people experience that at that age. That is not the same as someone with a lifelong, consistent sexual orientation. This dynamic, of same-sex curiosity in teen years, is a well documented reality that most Christian psychologists will acknowledge and affirm that it differs from sexual orientation at large.
You seem also to misunderstand my point. I am not suggesting that this fact- that orientation rarely changes- means that people should accept it. If they believe that it is not in line with God’s best intentions for them, they should live accordingly. Yes, it will be a burden for the rest of their lives. I am not suggesting that accepting this truth will make it easy.
As for transexuality, you are right- you do not understand. It is a very complex reality that deserves to be researched and understood instead of making assumptions and judgments that are neither fair nor representative of Christian thought.
Jamie,
The Andrew Walls quote is from his book “The Cross Cultural Process in Christian History: Studies in the Transmission and Appropriation of Faith” (Maryknoll: New York), 41.
Michael
Thanks Michael.
Thanks Jamie for this thoughtful and extremely important post. I did get your email from a long time ago and I will send my address. My best, as always, to you and the fam. -Janelle
Thanks Janelle. I look forward to hearing from you.
Hey Jamie! I have to say thank you for your courage in writing this post. Your honesty is so refreshing. For years I have struggled with this part of Christianity. Who are we to judge? I remember being shown a video back in highschool of a particular tribe in Africa who were giving birth to girls, but who would then grow up to be men. and vice versa. I knew then and there that we have NO IDEA. Period. Not that I am comparing the gay community to that video, but my point is, humans don’t have a lot of control over their sexual orientation. We just don’t and that should not be shameful. Sexual orientation aside, it is perversion that is the real problem. but perversion is prevalent in as many straight relationships as gay, not to mention the Church. So, once again, I ask, ‘Who are we to judge?’
Anyways, much love to you Jamie, you are certainly an inspiration to me
Jamie, thanks for demonstrating the kind of missional integrity you are advocating for. Much respect and much love!
Thanks Megan. I think it is so critical that Christian be willing to acknowledge the complexity of these issues rather than simply spout of verses of Scripture- which are valuable, but need understanding and context. Thanks for your encouragement. Love ya!
Thanks Steve. That means a lot. Peace!
[...] Gay Christians & Missional Integrity For gay friends, both Christian and otherwise (and a few straight Christian friends), to be gay [...]
I’m curious as to why the word “homosexual” is offensive? ‘Homo’ = “same” & ’sexual’ = “relating to the instincts, physological precesses & activities connected with physical attraction”. Up until the 1960’s ‘gay’ meant either ‘carefree’ or ‘bright & showy’; I personally find it sad that I can no longer use the word ‘gay’ in its original meaning without feeling self-concious. Along the same lines, I also find it curious that the word ‘virgin’ has degenerated to a derogatory description. I’m 44 and a virgin (and not a nun!) yet if I tell that to someone, they look at me oddly and pity me. If I tell someone I am a Christian I shouldn’t need to preface it with anything else — if they ask, “What is a Christian?” I need to send them to Galatians 5:16-26. I am trying to follow this, but because I am human I have a long way to go, but in Christ Jesus I have hope.
Thanks for letting me sound off. Your post is making think — which is always good, but often uncomfortable!
Tonia, sadly the use of words in certain contexts change the way that word is received. In this case, “homosexual” has been used so very widely by those who believe that it is wrong, that its use became derogatory. So, out of respect, we choose not to use it. It is not that people don’t know its original meaning, but it has been sullied by misuse. It is just good missiology to make that change.
Thanks!
As far as I understand it, it is not understood as derogatory when used as an adjective, e.g. “homosexual orientation”, etc. but only when used for a person, i.e. “a homosexual”. The definition Tonia described is the definition of an adjective and there’s nothing wrong with that in my opinion. But then English is not my mother tongue…
Tobias, you are right. I think I mentioned it in an earlier comment (or on Facebook), but referring to “homsexuality” or “homosexual orientation” is acceptable, but (as you say) referring to a person as “a homosexual” is what is offensive. Thanks.
Jamie,
Thank you for your courage in being honest about your bisexuality as a public Christian figure. I hope it gives others the courage to be honest with fellow Christians in their local contexts.
I’m wondering if you would be willing to say more about what you mean by recommending that we take a “pastoral approach” to the topic? Does this mean setting aside an opinion about whether homosexuality is right or wrong, and asking, “What is God up to in this person’s life?” Does it mean mostly listening? If you could spell out a little more content to your recommendation I’d appreciate it.
Thanks much!
Thanks Tim.
My admonition that this issue must be treated first as pastoral simply means that we need to change the posture and context of the conversation. We don’t have to put aside beliefs, but instead not making our theological statements the first and most important thing we have to put forward.
Further, we make those theological statements in very public contexts with little to no qualification. While it might be an honest representation of our belief, it is an insensitive way of communicating. It does not suggest an environment within the church where people are welcome to come with their brokenness and/or uncertainty.
Therefore, for example, when we blog about these dynamics, it is important that we consider the fact that anyone with Google could land on our words. Will the WAY we present ourselves lead people to be drawn to Christ? Will it affirm a sense of safety, grace and humility amongst God’s people?
A lot could be said here, but I hope this gives you an idea.
Peace,
Jamie