The following is the first of a three-part essay by the Rev. Stephen-Claude Hyatt.
IT IS a commonly accepted fact that the Church Universal is described as ecclesia. However, ecclesia must be interpreted as called out from something to do something. Within the context of the early Church, the Church was called out of a Pagan way of life, to experiencing the truth.
They were called out from being slaves of the law, to being interpreters and fulfillers of the law. They were called out of darkness into light, in order to be the light of the world.
The early Church, however, was rather cognisant of the fact that they had a task to perform. They were called out, not only to be set apart, but to also herald the good news, so others too could experience in the Church, this sense of ecclesia. Paul recognised this duty of his; therefore, he extended his ministry to include the excommunicated Gentiles.
It is interesting to note that, like Jesus, the apostles never made a certain assumption. They never assumed that people could change their situations outside the reality of Christ. This I find particularly refreshing, especially since the Church today seems to be redefining what it is called out to do.
'White cane'
The Church is willing to extend a helping hand to individuals with a 'white cane', and this is good. However, if this person is in need of a 'white cane' because they are blinded by certain factors, the Church is quick to withdraw the extended arm for fear of contamination.
Homosexuality, common-law unions, and the ever-growing spirit of carnival, are three areas in which the Church seems to be saying, 'get thee hence' to individuals. The Church seems to be living the myth that these individuals can heal themselves outside the reality of Christ.
To the Church I say get real, awake and sense the reality of that which you are called out to do. The healthy person has no need for a physician, only the sick. The Church must act as the channel in the lives of people, interpreting in a meaningful way, the action of God in their lives. The Church needs to become relevant to what people are experiencing, in order to overcome the unnecessary dichotomy of sacred and secular.
This misconception and short-sightedness by the Church is extended to the homosexual community. Let me be quick to state that there is nowhere in scripture which supports the practice of homosexuals, nowhere which calls us to be merciful or accommodating. However, there is no verse that stipulates that homosexuality is the greatest, unpardonable sin. I am not calling for the Church to embrace homosexuality and make it an accepted norm within her walls. However, I am calling for the Church to examine all the possible explanations objectively, then decide her role in the scenario.
Genetics
Homosexuality has taken on a new twist in the world, which is quite evident even in our Caribbean region. Scientists are now suggesting that homosexuality is not just a result of conditioning and inculcation, but also a direct result of genetics and heredity. They have submitted that some people are born homosexual, as a result of genes passed on to them by one or both parents, or a result of happenings in the prenatal stage of development. Some even posit that the section of the brain responsible for sexual drive in the homosexual male is identical to that of the heterosexual female.
This is why Ronnie Thwaites may have postulated within Parliament that homosexuality should be accepted, but only between consenting adults. The Christian community refuses to accept these explanations and suggestions, and rightly so. How could God be so totally cruel, to create someone homosexual, only to condemn such a one to death. I am not calling for a legalisation of homosexuality, as I believe we would be putting the horse before the carriage. What I am calling for is an understanding of why people are homosexuals before we condemn them to hell.
One area of concern for consideration has to do with the cause of abnormalities during the prenatal environment. Why is it that some are born hermaphrodites (both sex organs present), some eunuchs (no developed sex organ present), while others are born with other abnormalities, bearing in mind that an abnormality is anything outside of the norm? What would we suggest that the sexual preference of a hermaphrodite should be? When and how do we determine which is the dominant gender in the individual?
Prenatal
environment
It has been noted that some children were considered to be a particular gender, and grown as such, be it male or female, then at puberty it is discovered that there is really more of the other gender present. How do we accommodate the sexual preference of these individuals, or do we condemn them for something entirely out of their control? I do not for one minute believe that God created anyone homosexual; however, I do believe that happenings within the prenatal environment can cause someone to be born with the tendency to be homosexual.
I am not sure what those happenings may be, but I do know that they would be similar to the happenings which cause all the other abnormalities. This does not mean we should necessarily accept individuals in their states of homosexuality; rather, we should seek to understand and discover if there is a way to help them. With hermaphrodites and eunuchs, cosmetic surgery is done to correct the abnormalities. Certainly, correcting a psychological abnormality is much more complicated these days than a physical one.
However, we should seek to try instead of condemning. I guess as a Church we are no longer in the business of searching for the 'sick' and rendering healing; rather, we search for them and chase them away, wounded, condemned and broken.
I have heard of no less than three separate cases, where local congregations have dismembered individuals because it was suggested that they were homosexuals. Might I add that there was no substantial evidence as to the sexual preference and practices of these individuals. However, gossip was enough for these ministers, some of whom took their findings to the pulpit.
What have we become, gods who determine the fate of an individual? 'Gods' who write others off as being tainted and blemished, no longer redeemable or usable by the Church?
How can we break up marriages and relationships because of speculations which are not even permissible in a court of law. God forbid the day someone decide to generate a rumour about you, simply because they dislike you. Would you not want to be given the benefit of the doubt, and to be innocent until proven guilty?
Scripture declares that if a brother or a sister is overtaken by a fault, the rest of us should restore such a one in the spirit of meekness and love, less we also be likewise tempted. Unless we feel that we are above being tempted, or above being targeted for scandal.
Let us get real, there are several individuals present within the Church, some Ministers of Religion, struggling with their sexuality. Does this mean that they should be condemned and banned from Church? No, it means that they need help. We should know the word, because, being tempted is no sin, it is yielding to temptation that is the sin. If this is so, why then do we judge people for being tempted? Jesus was tempted, mind you not with homosexuality, however, the concept is the same, He was tempted, but that did not make him a sinner.
The Church needs to find a way to minister to its many members who are struggling with their sexuality, helping them to overcome this challenge. Might I remind us that there is a difference between someone being homosexual, as opposed to them having homosexual tendencies. The former suggests that the individual is practising homosexuality, while the latter is someone who feels a sexual attraction to their gender, though they have never encouraged same, or had homosexual relations.
Dichotomy
This distinction is important, and should be dichotomised. I have had several Christians approach me in need of help, because they have homosexual feelings, and they condemn themselves because their church condemns even the thought of feeling that way. Why are we killing the sheep instead of feeding them? Despite our stance on the matter, the Church needs to recognise that there are several factors at play in this scenario:
The society, previously caught between the scientific discovery of the world, and the religious and moral explanation of the Church, is now shifting. It is now embracing the explanation of science because the Church has not, to this date, sought to give an apology (defence) for her stance in terms of a response to these scientific viewpoints. The Church has become silent on this issue for whatever reason, and has allowed the voice of science to be the voice of authority on the matter.
Homosexuality can be likened to heroin addiction. Once hooked, it is totally difficult to break the habit, outside the ambit of prolonged counselling, deep prayer and much anguish. The reality, however, is that many individuals caught in the web of homosexuality are victims of circumstances. Many were enticed into homosexual activities as a means to an end, that end being getting money in order to survive. Others were coerced into same, by parents, guardians and even older siblings. As the Church of God, are we to condemn them for actions which they may or may not have had control over, or assist them in dealing with and overcoming same?
Many individuals have condemned themselves because of the condemnation they feel from the Church. Why do they condemn themselves? They cannot find a way to eradicate the feelings they have, nor can they explain them. Many of these individuals are dedicated church members and even leaders, yet they struggle with this reality, confused no doubt by the discovery of science and the silence of the Church.
In light of these three factors, it is now time for the Church to have a reality check and seek to act. It is time to act against the findings of science, and to establish various programmes to council those homosexuals who are desirous of help, and not write them off as not being redeemable.
