;)
Can People Change?
Posted by Bowden McElroy in News & Culture
The American Psychological Association (APA) released a report earlier this month: Report of the APA Task Force on Appropriate Theraputic Responses to Sexual Orientation.
The headlines ranged from the refreshing (A New Therapy on Faith and Sexual Identity: Psychological Association Revises Treatment Guidelines to Allow Counselors to Help Clients Reject Their Same-Sex Attractions) to the same tired mantra (Psychologists repudiate gay-to-straight therapy).
At the same conference Mark Yarhouse (Regent University) and Stanton Jones (Wheaton College) reported on a longitudinal study they are doing with participants from Exodus International. Dr. Yarhouse has stated on his blog -Limning the Psyche – that 53% of the participants reported success with changing their sexual orientation with another 16% indicating they have experienced enough success to continue with the treatment approach.
Which is it? Can people change or not? The answer depends on how one defines success or change.
We can talk about sexual preference (whom do you desire) or sexual behavior (who do you actually have sex with) or sexual identity (how do you view or describe yourself).
It looks to me like the APA defines success in terms of desire: moving completely away from same sex attraction – no thoughts, no desires, no temptations – to a position of 100% opposite sex attraction.
Yarhouse and Jones appear to be thinking in terms of identity. (Remember Ted Haggard? “I’m a straight man with issues.“)
If sexual orientation is defined solely in terms of desire, then the least intrusive thought – what we Christians would label “temptation” – becomes proof that one cannot change sexual orientation.
Utilizing the concept of identity opens up the possibilities for ministry to people wanting to change their lifestyle. Dr. Yarhouse writes,
“(Churches) may be at their best when they focus on fostering a religious identity that is in keeping with the ministry statements of faith. In the context of this support, might some people experience a reduction in same-sex attraction? Apparently some do. Might some even experience an increase in attraction to the opposite sex? Apparently some do, although this seems less likely and less salient (again, on average, for those who reported it).
The evidence from the Exodus study does not appear to reflect categorical change (from completely gay to completely straight). Rather, these are meaningful shifts for some participants, and some individuals experienced more of a shift. That was enough for us to conclude that change is possible for some, but it is unclear exactly what percentage. That we are talking more about shifts in degree (rather than categorical shifts) will be important to a ministry and to participants.”
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for making these important distinctions between preference, behavior, and identity. FINALLY! Someone is injecting a way to approach this issue that is rooted in good sense and not just knee-jerk reactionism. Thank you SO much for charting a converstional direction that will allow us to articulate a Biblical position that is not “gay bashing.”
Thank Dr.’s Yarhouse and Jones. And Dr. Warren Throckmorton (Grove City College). These three do solid research and writing that is respected by the professional community without sacrificing their Christian identity or values.
This is just another way in which we treat homosexual sin differently than we do heterosexual sin. We do not consider heterosexual temptation as sin. Many believe that just having a homosexual desire is a sin.
Bowden, I have another question. What do you believe about the genesis of homosexual desire? Where does it come from?
Some say nature – we generally reject that.
Some say nurture – dysfunction in the home.
Others maintain conscious choice – which most homosexuals deny.
Any insight?
Any studies which can be helpful?
The nature v. nurture dichotomy is almost certainly false. I suspect the more we learn about sexual orientation, the more we will realize there is an intersection between the biological, environmental, and cognitive factors. IOW, biological/genetic predispositions, life experiences, family dynamics, and one’s self-talk (thoughts) probably interact in such a way as to form our sexual identity.
I don’t like the word “choice” because sexual orientation is not as simple as choosing to wear a suit v. jeans or the choice to eat at one restaurant v. another one. People don’t change their orientation on a whim.
Bowden,
Well said. I read this book some years back: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Sex and found it particularly constructive. It helps identify the intersection of hormones, neurochemistry, sexual development, and sexual identity. I learned in physics class that one can predict the force of gravity between two points, but once you have three or more, the calculations go out the window. It appears that sexual identity also depends on multiple forces interacting in unpredictable ways with varying results depending on the circumstances. In other words, there is no one predictor of sexual identity,nor is there one “fix” for people who don’t care for their particular identity.
I think there are some who feel like if we accept the idea that homosexuality is anything but a conscious choice on a person’s part, then we are compromising and justifying. I had just such a conversation after a couple of blogs I wrote here and at my site.
I think that is basically an expression of ignorance and prejudice, Dave. Careful investigation and research of the medical findings show that this is far more complex than a simple choice, with much more involved.
One of the things I find interesting in this discussion is to put the shoe on the other foot. Ask critics if they choose to be heterosexual or if they are wired that way? Challenge them to honestly confront whether or not they could choose to identify with homosexuals. In most cases, they admit that there really is no choice for them. I then admonish them to make it a two-way street. I never much cared for people who reserve a privilege to themselves that they do not afford for others.
Dave,
I understand what you are saying, but I have a hard time accepting the logic. To say there is a biological component is not the same as saying sexual orientation is 100% genetically determined.
We’re not talking about the veracity or integrity of God’s Word. We’re talking about the mechanism(s) by which human beings manifest sexual orientation.
We need to remember that we are most certainly tainted with sin that that once we’ve been immersed in it, it begins to feel normal. I don’t have any issue calling homosexuality a choice any more than I do calling pride a choice (although preference, behavior, and identity can muddy the water when we have one term for all three). Ultimately all sin begins with a choice.
Bowden says, “I don’t like the word “choice” because sexual orientation is not as simple as choosing to wear a suit v. jeans or the choice to eat at one restaurant v. another one. People don’t change their orientation on a whim.”
I agree with Bowden in that sexual orientation isn’t like a light switch that you can flip whenever you feel like. I do believe that God can change someone’s orientation on a whim, so the last statement could use a qualifier. As for the word “choice,” I think it depends on who you’re talking with. I prefer to use the term “God’s plan” or “God’s work” instead of “God’s sovereignty” when talking with my non-Calvinist friends.
I believe caution is in order. Having the right mix of salt with our compassion can be challenging and can vary from person to person. Bowden’s statements above on homosexuality can be easily changed to fit other sins like this: “IOW, biological/genetic predispositions, life experiences, family dynamics, and one’s self-talk (thoughts) probably interact in such a way as to form our [pride, selfishness, bitterness, etc].” We have to ask ourselves, “Am I trying to understand how sin got a hold of this person’s life or am I trying to diminish the seriousness of their sin?”
We just need to be careful that in our push to be compassionate that we don’t turn sin into a psychological sickness. I think we need to maintain a balance in our lives that is expressed in the Bible. On the one hand we should have compassion because people are captive(in bondage) to sin without many real choices. On the other hand we have to remember that every person is responsible and guilty before God. The worst thing we could do (besides preaching condemnation instead of the gospel) is to ignore the seriousness of our sin.
Bowden,
I didn’t read Dave as saying it was 100% genetically determined. Once again, this is a case of the road not running both ways. If, as homosexuals claim, it is 100% genetically determined, then my heterosexuality must also be 100% genetically determined. Don’t know many heteros who would assent to that.
But then, is it a sin to “be” homosexual if one never engages in homosexual sex? When I ask gays this question, they act like they don’t understand it and say, “What’s the point?” Exactly. This is why I think the distinctions you make between one’s preferences and one’s behavior and one’s identity are so crucial. One’s preference need not determine one’s identity, nor drive one’s behavior. A preference for profligacy in heteros is a sin only if it translates to a behavior and an identity. Why do we not treat homosexuality the same?
To clarify, I agree with Bowden that homosexuality is probably a combination of factors. I was trying to get information based on a discussion (argument?) I had with another blogger who insisted that we must maintain that homosexuality is a conscious choice.
Eve saw the fruit as something that would nourish the body, have a pleasing appearance and could take her to the next level (Gen.3:6). Her temptation followed the same pattern found in I John 2:16 which says, “For all that [is] in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.” All temptation follows this same or similar pattern. I see the temptation as the make-up of the person in what they desire. Each of us has a “DNA pattern”, for lack of a better phrase, that makes us who we are. Each of us must resist those drives. When we do not resist, it becomes a choice. That choice sets the future ability to resist that internal drive. In James 1:14,15 – “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.”
Do some have that homosexual drive in them? If the scriptures above place all temptations in the same pool, I would have to conclude that there is something inside some that the homosexual temptation would appeal to. It is when the lust is conceived, it grows until it is finished and when it is finished it brings death to the individual. The drive is set and, in that area, the ability to chage without Divine influence is too close to impossible, humanly speaking.
I know that I am late commenting on this issue but I would like to say a few things. I have never struggled with homosexuality and it used to bother me that men, or women, would make the statement that they could never remember a time when they did not have these desires. Therefore, to them it was not a sin because they were created that way. Well, I can never remember a time when I was not a jerk who responded negatively to any who expressed any kind of opposition to me or my opinion. Was I born this way? Can I pass it off as me just being created that way? If so, then let’s just all continue to relish in our faults and never preach or write about sin. Because I do not know how I became what I was does not make it any less sinful. I am very grateful that there has been a positive attitude here in this thread. I have learned, the hard way, to take the advice of a former mentor and stop playing the role of the Holy Spirit. Truth spoken to me became a seed that grew because the Holy Spirit became the One who revealed to me my need for change and repentance. And though I would never think of having sex with another man, my sin of offense was in need of exposure. But the second that someone passed judgment on me it was Katy-bar-the-door. There is a better way to address sinners without be offensive, even the sin of homosexuality.