Wednesday 19 February 2014

The Same Sex Package Deal

Furthermore, what is said about the value of same sex relationships totally misses the point. The Church has never at any time had any problems with same sex relationships as such. Monks living in community with other men, friendships between people of the same sex and strong relationships between family members of the same sex have all been supported by the Church. What the Church has objected to, on the basis of clear biblical teaching, is same sex sexual activity, just as it has objected to all forms of sexual activity outside of a monogamous heterosexual marriage.
The failure to distinguish between same sex relationships generally and sexually active same-sex partnerships is surprisingly frequent in current discussions, as is the refusal to distinguish between same-sex attraction and sexual activity outside marriage. Thurstan Stigand suggests
What the archbishops should have done was make this point clear and then explained that it is the calling of faithful Christians to refrain from sexual activity outside marriage themselves and to encourage others to do the same, while at the same time supporting, prayerfully, emotionally and practically those who struggle in this area, particularly because of same sex attraction.
Maybe this is one of the ways in which people talk past each others. Is it possible to distinguish between different aspects of relationships, affirming love and commitment without endorsing the use of sex to cement non-marital relationships? Is it possible to affirm same-sex attraction as a different giftedness without allowing for this attraction to be expressed in sexual intimacy? Or does one of necessity entail the other? Are these package deals? Being gay is more than a desire for gay sex, as Ron Belgau explains. To lump being gay with lust is wrong but so is the presumption that true affirmation of LGBT people requires the acceptance of sexual activity outside marriage.