In Australia Vic Government trying to pass laws that criminalise preaching

creslaw said:

Joe Bloggs: I believe the Bible teaches that homosexuality is wrong. Would you pray for me that God will take away my homosexual feelings?

Pastor A: Sorry, John, I can't do that because it is illegal.

Pastor B: God bless you John, I sure will even if I end up in jail because God's Word is paramount.

Click to expand...

I think the matter is more complex and deeper than feelings. And the Lord usually wants to work at a deeper level and also on other issues. So I think as a better practice the pastor should seek to help Joe understand God wants to bring about a renewal of his mind (Romans 12:1-2) and that in God's way and timing things will begin to change if Joe follows through and builds some spiritual disciplines into his life. A period of abstinence usually would preceed any further progress. I think he should take a fairly comprehensive history - ie . Complaint, The Onset, Family history, Previous Personal History, Previous Personality, Religious Attitudes and Christian encounter/experience, Dynamic Formulation of the problem (Frank Lake's Clinical Theology Vol 2 - has plenty of guidance for pastors on how to record a case history arising out of pastoral dialogue). He should make sure Joe has understood the Gospel. If Joe is definitely a christian, his pastor should help him into a better understanding of who he is in Christ, and direct him to meditate on some of the scriptures concerning that, as well as on God's promises to provide a way out if he falls into temptation. He should give Joe some homework questions to see how well he understands these things and see him again in a few weeks and proceed from there.

We should never push a seeker in the direction we think they should go, but we can walk beside them so we are headed in the same direction. Sometimes this may take us into territory forbidden by the Victorian Bill. Then the helper should be guided by conscience rather than fear of the law, "for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe" (Martin Luther)

Paidiske said:

Pastor C: Holy God, I thank you for Joe. I thank you for creating him, a good part of your good creation. I thank you for the gifts you've given him, and the faith and trust he places in you. I thank you that you love him, and that he can come to you no matter what burdens him, knowing that you are always there for him.
I pray that you would be with him in this matter, that you would help him to grow in grace and faith and love. That you would help him to know your will, and to live according to it. That you would be at work in his mind and heart, healing and making whole whatever needs setting to rights. And that Joe would know your comfort and your peace.
And I ask all of this in Jesus' precious name, Amen.

Click to expand...

I think such prayer offered in faith could be answered in various ways depending on the needs of "Joe". Praying for God to help him to know His will - knowing God's will presupposes the renewing of one's mind (Romans 12:1-2). If Joe is a christian, he may need prayer help to see himself as God sees him in Christ. People seeking personal wholeness regardless of what issues they are struggling with often need to exchange old patterns of relating to life for new ones, to build new patterns of thinking about themselves and others, or seeing themselves and others.

It seems to me the misunderstandings people fall into in regard to pastoral care in this sort of case are of two sorts, one is to think they can direct the order or process of how God works - rather than submitting to His sovereignty, direction, and timing. The other is to believe the rhetoric of the LGBT lobby and conclude change is impossible.

The Liturgist said:

I would also never lead a congregation in a public prayer concerning the sexuality of a specific person. Singling someone out in that manner could be extremely harmful.

Click to expand...

I think because most people have never spoken to a Pastor about such things or been to a psychiatrist either, peoples minds are filled with a fiction of what takes place fueled by some cherry picked examples of admittedly poor care which are thrown in the mix for what might be rather dubious reasons.

ken777 said:

There are hundreds of testimonies online of former homosexuals. None of those I have read/heard changed because of any conversion therapy (drugs, aversion treatments and the like) but because they had an encounter with Jesus Christ.
The Church has a role in teaching the truth of Scripture and helping those with problems by providing appropriate support. Unfortunately the line between offering help & support and "encouraging change or suppression" is likely to cause some to fall foul of the proposed law.

Click to expand...

there are ten of thousands of testimonies online of people who say they have been abducted by UFO's That isn't evidence of little gray men from Beta Riticuli visiting earth.

creslaw said:

"Vulnerable people" obviously does not include those who are seeking help to live according to their faith, nor those who offer help & support to them.

Click to expand...

my professional experience with the survivors of conversion therapy says you are very wrong on this point.

dms1972 said:

I think the matter is more complex and deeper than feelings. And the Lord usually wants to work at a deeper level and also on other issues. So I think as a better practice the pastor should seek to help Joe understand God wants to bring about a renewal of his mind (Romans 12:1-2) and that in God's way and timing things will begin to change if Joe follows through and builds some spiritual disciplines into his life. A period of abstinence usually would preceed any further progress. I think he should take a fairly comprehensive history - ie . Complaint, The Onset, Family history, Previous Personal History, Previous Personality, Religious Attitudes and Christian encounter/experience, Dynamic Formulation of the problem (Frank Lake's Clinical Theology Vol 2 - has plenty of guidance for pastors on how to record a case history arising out of pastoral dialogue). He should make sure Joe has understood the Gospel. If Joe is definitely a christian, his pastor should help him into a better understanding of who he is in Christ, and direct him to meditate on some of the scriptures concerning that, as well as on God's promises to provide a way out if he falls into temptation. He should give Joe some homework questions to see how well he understands these things and see him again in a few weeks and proceed from there.

Click to expand...

Do you think any of the things you recommend could be captured under the Victorian Change or Suppression Bill?

ken777 said:

Do you think any of the things you recommend could be captured under the Victorian Change or Suppression Bill?

Click to expand...

Since none of them are aimed specifically at changing sexual orientation or gender identity, no.

The Liturgist said:

Very cool. I would love to see your liturgical texts.

Click to expand...

Currently I am a member of a liturgical commission discussing our liturgical resources. You can pm me on my email address and I'll forward you our basal texts.

dms1972 said:

I think because most people have never spoken to a Pastor about such things or been to a psychiatrist either, peoples minds are filled with a fiction of what takes place fueled by some cherry picked examples of admittedly poor care which are thrown in the mix for what might be rather dubious reasons.

Click to expand...

That might well be, however, I would never single out any member of my congregation in prayer calling them out for a sinful action.

There is precisely one service Cranmer wrote for the Book of Common Prayer that I object to, and @Paidiske will be familiar with this, that being Commination (I also object to the way the 1662 BCP does Visitation of the Sick and Visitation of Prisoners in the Irish edition).

If we're going to critique Cranmer's work, I'm not a fan of the "churching" of women, either. I'm glad in later prayer books we've turned that into a service of thanksgiving for the birth of a child.

ken777 said:

Do you think any of the things you recommend could be captured under the Victorian Change or Suppression Bill?

Click to expand...

I don't know for sure, I think there could be more clarity there to avoid misinterpretation - that people are already interpreting its scope in different ways is evidence it could be better formulated.

To include under the ban those providing this kind of psychotherapy or counselling to someone who expressly requests it is what is controversial. Also the meaning of 'suppression' and would moral or parental guidance really amount to that? Suppression practice would seem to refer to preventing someone not just asking them to abstain. But this bill seems to define it rather widely, and that is a cause for concern. I think some interpret it in a way to capture asking someone to abstain for life on the basis of them being LGBT, but then what about asking a person to abstain on the basis that they are a christian, or consider themselves "Ex-gay", how would that sit with this bill? Some people who identify as "Ex-gay" are so of their own free choice without having ever been for any sort of counselling - so that class of people and their needs should be recognised I think, as well as anyone seeking this sort of help for reasons of their own.

I don't counsel people, I just have an academic interest in the subject, but I don't believe doing any of what I said could constitute "conversion therapy" in the sense of one person acting on another to bring about a change in sexual "orientation" - a christian counsellor cannot effect that sort of change merely by their words. A christian counsellor however would seek to be open to anything the Holy Spirit is doing in a counsellee and not suppose change in this area to be impossible for God to bring about.

I see this sort of law as fundamentally flawed, because for many people their desires are in conflict and attempting to legislate so as to only permit a them a solution to that problem in the direction homosexuality is wrong.

dms1972 said:

I don't know for sure, I think there could be more clarity there to avoid misinterpretation - that people are already interpreting its scope in different ways is evidence it could be better formulated.

To include under the ban those providing this kind of psychotherapy or counselling to someone who expressly requests it is what is controversial. Also the meaning of 'suppression' and would moral or parental guidance really amount to that? Suppression practice would seem to refer to preventing someone not just asking them to abstain. But this bill seems to define it rather widely, and is a cause for concern. I think some interpret it in a way to capture asking someone to abstain for life on the basis of them being LGBT, but then what about asking a person to abstain on the basis that they are a christian, or consider themselves "Ex-gay", how would that sit with this bill? Some people who identify as "Ex-gay" are so of their own free choice without having ever been for any sort of counselling - so that class of people and their needs should be recognised I think, as well as anyone seeking this sort of help for reasons of their own.

I don't counsel people, I just have an academic interest in the subject, but I don't believe doing any of what I said could constitute "conversion therapy" in the sense of one person acting on another to bring about a change in sexual "orientation" - a christian counsellor cannot effect that sort of change merely by their words. A christian counsellor however would seek to be open to anything the Holy Spirit is doing in a counsellee and not suppose change in this area to be impossible for God to bring about.

Click to expand...

I really don't see a place for telling, or even asking people, to do or not do anything. Unless it is a decision that comes from their own personal faith & convictions, seekers are likely to have disappointing outcomes.

SilverBear said:

there are ten of thousands of testimonies online of people who say they have been abducted by UFO's That isn't evidence of little gray men from Beta Riticuli visiting earth.

Click to expand...

I think you are right to be skeptical about what people say. It is a matter of examining the evidence for individual claims.
I can't seem to remember any abductions in the Bible (unless we count Elijah and his chariot of fire ) but some Christians do see examples of people in the Bible being changed.

Marsha Linehan who has developed a form of psychotherapy called Dialectical Behaviour Therapy, which incidently is nothing to do with conversion therapy, its a set of skills for things like developing distress tolerance , emotional regulation, better interpersonal communication, giving up problematic or destructive behaviours. It contains a good deal of wisdom. Because its fairly modular some of it might be able to be incorporated with a christian counselling approach. As far as I can tell it leaves it up to to the person seeking help to say what is a destructive behaviour for them. DBT has a concept, or skill called Dialectical Abstinence aimed for breaking the cycle of addictive behaviours.

ken777 said:

I really don't see a place for telling, or even asking people, to do or not do anything. Unless it is a decision that comes from their own personal faith & convictions, seekers are likely to have disappointing outcomes.

Click to expand...

I think its important that for those seeking change it needs to come from a internal conviction or desire rather externally because of others. And I think if one's only interest is in acquiring hetrosexual desires rather than the pursuit of holiness then priorties are wrong. I think it would be wrong for a church to suggest you must have hetrosexual desires to belong here or submit to "conversion therapy" - I think that is wrong, that may not be possible for everyone and we cannot always know why, so there is a issue with promoting that as a sort of strict ideal in the church when the Bible mainly talks about abstinence. I think some people seeking "conversion therapy" may also have a simplistic view that things will be plain sailing afterward - or that hetrosexual marriage would be just wonderful and not require a lot of effort to make it work. If God does bring about the sought after change in sexual feelings - well and good - but another who is abstaining and hasn't experienced that release might be further on in sanctification in other areas. That said if we start to depend on our progress in sanctification as the basis for our acceptance with God, rather than Jesus Christ and His Righteousness, we are going to either end in either pride or despair.

See this article by CS Lewis on the topic:

A Letter from C.S. Lewis on Christian Piety and Homosexuality

dms1972 said:

I think its important that for those seeking change it needs to come from a internal conviction or desire rather externally because of others. And I think if one's only interest is in acquiring hetrosexual desires rather than the pursuit of holiness then priorties are wrong. I think it would be wrong for a church to suggest you must have hetrosexual desires to belong here or submit to "conversion therapy" - I think that is wrong, that may not be possible for everyone and we cannot always know why, so there is a issue with promoting that as a sort of strict ideal in the church when the Bible mainly talks about abstinence. I think some people seeking "conversion therapy" may also have a simplistic view that things will be plain sailing afterward - or that hetrosexual marriage would be just wonderful and not require a lot of effort to make it work. If God does bring about the sought after change in sexual feelings - well and good - but another who is abstaining and hasn't experienced that release might be further on in sanctification in other areas. That said if we start to depend on our progress in sanctification as the basis for our acceptance with God, rather than Jesus Christ and His Righteousness, we are going to either end in either pride or despair.

See this article by CS Lewis on the topic:

A Letter from C.S. Lewis on Christian Piety and Homosexuality

Click to expand...

I have long admired C S Lewis and his comments are always compassionate. It seems he might be relating to those who are eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven in Matthew 19

11 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.” 12 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

I like his comments about people with homosexual urges being included in the life of the church, without condoning homosexual acts. Becket Cook, who is a fairly high profile character on Youtube, seems to be living the life Lewis describes.

ken777 said:

I have long admired C S Lewis and his comments are always compassionate. It seems he might be relating to those who are eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven in Matthew 19

11 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.” 12 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

I like his comments about people with homosexual urges being included in the life of the church, without condoning homosexual acts. Becket Cook, who is a fairly high profile character on Youtube, seems to be living the life Lewis describes.

Click to expand...

I didn't think he was refering to those verses for he would likely have made reference. I think those verses refer those who could not marry for some physical reason. There are people nowadays who fall somewhere between exclusive hetrosexuality and exclusive homosexuality, whose background for instance is largely hetrosexual with only incidental homosexual history. Some of that could have arisen situationally rather than be due to an innate disposition.

dms1972 said:

I didn't think he was refering to those verses for he would likely have made reference. I think those verses refer those who could not marry for some physical reason. There are people nowadays who fall somewhere between exclusive hetrosexuality and exclusive homosexuality, whose background for instance is largely hetrosexual with only incidental homosexual history. Some of that could have arisen situationally rather than be due to an innate disposition.

Click to expand...

Probably a "physical reason" in the case of the first two categories but not this one I think: "there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."
The NIV makes it clear that this is a choice to live a celibate life.
I liked the way C S Lewis suggests homosexuals who choose to be celibate can use their experience to extend what he called "certain kinds of sympathy and understanding".

Your reference to the range from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual, seems to indicate that change may mean a shift in the desired direction rather than a complete reversal.

ken777 said:

Probably a "physical reason" in the case of the first two categories but not this one I think: "there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."
The NIV makes it clear that this is a choice to live a celibate life.
I liked the way C S Lewis suggests homosexuals who choose to be celibate can use their experience to extend what he called "certain kinds of sympathy and understanding".

Your reference to the range from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual, seems to indicate that change may mean a shift in the desired direction rather than a complete reversal.

Click to expand...

Yes for some people sexual attraction (rather than biological sex) doesn't seem to be a binary issue.