Annotated Bibliography

Pastoral Theology & Care
Iliff School of Theology
Sharyl Bender Peterson
Fall, 1993

 

     In the past few years, as the United Methodist Church has struggled to decide upon appropriate forms of pastoral and congregational responses to lesbian women, gay men, and bisexual people, a number of alternatives have been suggested. One of those is the development of so-called "Transforming Congregations." While characterizing themselves as "a response of love," the basic premise of these groups is that "homosexual practice is a sin" and that for a homosexual person to "become a full and responsible member of a local church, " that person must, "experience restoration to a healthy heterosexuality" (see "Transforming congregations" reference below).

     On the other hand, the clinical literature in psychology suggests that rather than being a loving response to a person's sexuality, so called "transformations" of this type referred to in the psychological literature as "conversion therapy" or "reorientation" therapy are in fact questionable at best, and profoundly harmful at worst. Drawing upon that literature, recent social scientific data, and contemporary theological scholarship, many theologians and ethicists have questioned how and whether "transforming" or "exgay" movements in the churches are consistent or inconsistent with Christian teaching and practice. This bibliography is a compilation of current work in psychology, theology, and ethics, which addresses those questions, and which suggests some alternative, person affirming forms of pastoral response and care.

 

Blair, Ralph. (1984). Exgay. New York: HCCC.

     Blair begins with a brief review of ways in which Scripture has been used to support the oppression of Jewish people, of Catholics, and of people of color. He then notes the importance of recognizing how our understanding and perception of many groups of people have changed historically. Finally, he turns to a consideration of the oppression of homosexuals, and of the "exgay" literature, which he feels comprises "just a recent chapter in the recidivist wrong turnings in church history" (p. 2).

     Blair's central thesis is that "there is still no documented empirical verification of any permanent change from homosexual orientation to heterosexual orientation through the 'exgay' processes" (p. 2). He supports this by describing dozens of claims and publications proffered by allegedly "exgay" persons and organizations. And, he asserts that most persons who have claimed to have become "ex gay" have in fact returned to their original orientation. He also notes that the organizations that published the original "exgay" claims have not retracted those claims, in spite of their subsequent falsification. In fact, those organizations continue to publish information falsely alleging that these persons have become permanently "exgay."

     The primary usefulness of Blair's article is in raising readers' awareness that the claims offered by "exgay" groups appear to be misleading at best, and patently false at worst. The weakness of this article is Blair's use of nearly as anecdotal an approach to "research" and criticism as the approaches espoused by those he criticizes. He makes many excellent points, but also tends to perseverate in some of his arguments (e.g., going on for 10 long pages about a single study). He also mixes, somewhat randomly, sound criticisms based on research methodology and on theological scholarship, with criticisms based on his own apparent personal dislikes for some of the organizations described. In summary, this article provides an enlightening look at many of the spurious/inaccurate claims made by "exgay" groups, but would have been stronger and more convincing if it had been done in a somewhat more concise and scholarly way.

 

Cameron, Paul. (1992). What Causes Homosexual Desire and can it be Changed? Washington, D.C.: Family Research Institute, Inc.

     This piece is the basic position paper used by Focus on the Family; it has been and continues to be widely distributed to interested (presumably, conservative) Christians who want to know more about homosexual orientation and behavior. Using a simple question and answer format, it purports to provide data regarding the "etiology" of homosexual orientation, recruitment of children by homosexuals, the effect of religious convictions on sexual conduct, and "transformation" of homosexual orientation through psychotherapy, or through religious or spiritual conversion.

     The author (who has been ejected from the American Psychological Association for his consistently unethical misreporting of scientific data) asserts that homosexual orientation can "certainly (be changed and that) many people have turned away from homosexuality almost as many people as call themselves 'gay'" (p. 7). Not surprisingly, the data cited is outdated and inconsistent with more recent findings, as well as reinterpreted and misrepresented to fit the conservative, gay and lesbian hating agenda of the author. I include the piece only because it is now quite widely distributed, and may be the only thing people have read about this subject, and therefore potentially very influential, as well as harmful in presenting deliberately false information about gay men and lesbian women. It is also a strong example of how research findings may be deliberately twisted and/or misreported to support a person's or organization's particular ideological ends.

 

Comstock, Gary D. (1993). Gay Theology Without Apology. Cleveland: The Pilgrim Press.

     This is an outstanding book, written primarily for readers who have already given some thought to relevant theological and social scientific work in this area. Comstock uses the Exodus story and the Jesus story to frame his theology, and to argue for appropriate forms of pastoral/church responsiveness to gay men and lesbian women. The common threads (between the two stories) he explicates are "the unacceptability of pain and suffering inflicted upon one person or people by another" and the significance of both as "stor(ies) of liberation and change from slavery to freedom" (p. 10).

     He raises several issues that I found particularly exciting, interesting, and useful in thinking about pastoral care. The first is his insistence that we do not just accept the fact that the Bible contains biases (he addresses these biases most particularly in the Levitical codes), but that we engage and challenge them. The second is his analysis of parallels between Israelite culture around the time of the exile to Babylonia, and U.S. culture over the past three decades, and how in both cases relative economic strength or weakness led to relative acceptance or rejection of marginal members of communities. The third is his notion that the meaning of Jesus' story is not about looking to Jesus for answers to our human quandaries, or as "the answer" to our dilemmas, but is about finding our own answers, specifically through working out our relationships with others. And fourth, his notion that God is not outside us, but between us that God exists in our mutuality and reciprocity in relationships. Comstock's last chapter, "Credo," addresses issues of God's identity, sin, salvation, grace, the meaning of Jesus, sacraments of Baptism and Communion, and especially, the essentialness of "creat(ing) and be(ing) in community in which (all) people can give, contribute, and feel valuable" (p. 20).

     While this book doesn't consider the issue of reorientation specifically, Comstock makes it abundantly clear why changing one's orientation is not a possibility that any truly Christian person would consider advocating for another. I liked this book tremendously, and found that his proposed theology (particularly the idea of God existing in our relationships) powerful and helpful. The only shortcoming I found in this book was his general emphasis on gay men, with considerably less attention to lesbian women, although they are implicitly included in much of his discourse. Overall, however, this is a terrific book, and would be one of the two "must reads" I would suggest from this bibliography.

 

Hilton, Bruce. (1993). Can Homophobia Be Cured? Nashville: Abingdon Press.

     This book, written from a United Methodist perspective, begins with a chapter that briefly defines and describes homophobia. In setting the tone for the remainder of the book, the author notes that "we of the Church have forgotten that the primary issue is not the causes of homosexuality, or whether it can be 'cured,' or whether its practice is a sin, but do we love our neighbors, whoever they are?" (p. 21).

     Hilton uses a simple question and answer format to address a variety of issues, including people's feelings and attitudes toward many issues related to sexuality, and some of what we know about gay people (including a debunking of many of the common myths about gay men and lesbians). He also lays out (at a fairly basic level) some of the current scholarship on Biblical statements about homosexuality and homosexual acts, and describes parallels between the contemporary use of Scripture to support the oppression of gay people and historical uses of Scripture to support other forms of oppression. He also describes what the United Methodist Church has had to say, and currently says about some of these issues, and most importantly, describes what our ministry should be to each other. And, he speaks specifically to the "exgay" movement, and the many problems with that approach.

     His final chapter focuses on whether homophobia, not homosexual orientation, can be cured, and how to get started on the road to change, offering suggestions both for individuals, and for congregations who are interested in examining and changing their own homophobia attitudes and behaviors.

     The book is intended as a first-read, perhaps, for people who are just starting to think about some of these issues. Hilton speaks to the reader who is willing to consider arguments that come from a place other than Biblical literalism and/or unexamined homophobia. This would be an excellent resource for confused, or uncertain, or wondering people in a congregation who are willing to learn more, and to examine their own prejudices in the light of current theological and social scientific thought.

 

Krajeski, James P., Myers, Michael F., Valgemae, Allan, and Pattison, E. Mansell. (1981). "Exgays": Religious Abuse of Psychiatry? American Journal of Psychiatry, 138(6), 852853.

     This is actually a Letters to the Editor section of the Journal, in response to the Pattison & Pattison article described elsewhere in this bibliography, and Mansell Pattison's reply to those letters. The first three authors discuss some of the biases in the Pattison & Pattison research, including the following. (1) Krajeski notes that "(T)he authors did not examine the possible abuse of psychiatry by religion evidenced in the buttressing of religious tenets by questionable or inaccurate psychiatric concepts. For example, all respondents were reported to find homosexual relationships fleeting and emotionally unfulfilling. Since many homosexuals form long lasting, emotionally fulfilling relationships, the subjects' conclusions would appear to represent their own homophobia or neuroticism. Rather than exploring these issues and providing education concerning homosexuality, it appears that these inaccurate stereotypes were used as a tool to enforce adherence to a religious belief concerning the immorality of homosexual behavior" (p. 852). (2) Myers notes that the study contains "obvious and therapeutic bias, small study sample, and less than rigorous methodology" (p. 852), and points out that "(P)atients in severe moral conflict about their homosexual behavior who do embrace the tenets of a particular religion, no matter how ambivalent, should be supported in their efforts to seek clarity.

     The therapeutic task is one of assessing what homosexual behavior means to the individual in the context of his or her total life experience. Therapist neutrality is fundamental; bias in either direction ('gay is good' or 'gay is sinful') may be alienating or destructive to the patient" (pp. 852853). (3) Valgemae notes that "(T)he term 'exgay' does great injustice to the variations present among people who exhibit homosexual behavior... If investigators do not differentiate among origins of homosexual behavior, they only make more difficult the efforts to legitimize true homosexuality in a society that currently loads all homosexuals with an extra burden in life: if not that of trying to change one's sexual orientation, then that of trying to accept homosexuality within oneself" (p. 853). In his reply, Pattison does not address any of these criticisms, but repeats some of the rationale and claims from the original study.

     This is an important piece to read after reading the original research. While these responses fail to note all of the problems with the Pattison & Pattison research, the Blair article listed elsewhere in this bibliography does raise additional other issues not addressed here, and between this article and the one by Blair, one can get a good sense of some of the serious problems with a piece of research that is being repeatedly cited in support of reorientation therapy.

 

Morin, Stephen F., & Charles, Kenneth A. (1983). Heterosexual Bias in Psychotherapy. In Joan Murray and Paul R. Abramson (Eds.), Bias in Psychotherapy (pp. 309338). New York: Praeger.

     This chapter offers a clearly written critique of many of the heterosexist biases that are prevalent in psychotherapy today. Many of the issues raised here are also relevant to the provision of pastoral care. Briefly, the authors define "heterosexual bias. . . as a belief system that values heterosexuality as superior to and/or more 'natural' than homosexuality" (p. 309). These biases include: (1) those in the basic value systems underlying therapy (and pastoral care), (2) biases in certain specific psychological theories (particularly in psycho dynamic and learning theories), (3) biases in language used to describe behaviors and feelings, and (4) biases in interventions including conversion therapy.

     With regard to the last issue, the authors note that while the many methods that have been employed in attempts to alter homosexual orientation have "regularly fail(ed). . . their poor success rates do not mean that these efforts are harmless" (p. 321). And, the authors go on to describe the various forms of harm caused by such interventions. The authors also describe the evolution of lesbian and gay affirmative therapies, and offer a brief summary of current developmental thought on the coming-out process. Finally, they provide an excellent analysis of the power politics of psychotherapy, and offer four important guidelines that should be taken to heart by any care provider secular or pastoral when working with lesbian women, gay men, or bisexual people.

     I think this is a particularly useful article. The authors are much more attentive to gender inclusivity than are many others. While much of the work in this area focuses specifically on gay men, this article considers lesbian women as well, in both language and in assumptions. Their descriptions of biases can help caregivers examine their own belief systems more carefully and critically, and their list of guidelines offer the potential for radically improving the quality of care that one gives.

 

Murphy, Timothy F. (1992). Freud and Sexual Reorientation Therapy. Journal of Homosexuality, 23(3), 2138.

     This is a good, concise piece, accessible to readers without extensive background in psychology, that summarizes some of Freud's key views on homosexuality and on reorientation therapy. The key points include: (1) Freud's belief that human beings are by nature bisexual, and a brief discussion of the ways in which he construed bisexuality, (2) the importance of constitutional bisexuality for the origins of homo-eroticism; and (3) the influence of psycho developmental events on the development of homo--erotic desires and behaviors. More important in their implications for psychotherapy, and potentially for pastoral care as well, are Freud's: (1) rejection of the belief that homo-eroticism in and of itself constituted pathological behavior (although this must be tempered by his belief that homo-eroticism did reflect a form of "inferior" or "arrested" development), (2) purported general refusal to accept patients for treatment if their "only complaint was homosexuality," (p. 28), (3) resistance to the legal prosecution of homo-eroticism, and (4) advocacy for social tolerance of homo-eroticism.

     With regard to reorientation therapy, Murphy describes several examples where Freud questions or cautions against the likely success of conversion therapy, including the full text of Freud's now famous letter to the mother of a homosexual son. Interestingly, it is Murphy's contention that neither does Freud "rule out conversion therapy as impossible," (p. 27), but Murphy fails to provide much evidence to support his case. Freud's general assertion was that if a person was not neurotically conflicted about her or his homo-eroticism, neither reorientation or other forms of psychotherapy were particularly likely to be successful. And, as Murphy repeatedly notes, "Whatever he thought about conversion therapy, Freud thought society could and should reduce the burdens on those who loved in homo-erotic ways" (p. 36).

     Although a little simplistic, Murphy's article offers a good place to begin to understand some of Freud's thoughts about homo-eroticism. Freud's work is particularly important since it has provided the foundation for much psycho dynamic thinking today. And, it is important to recognize that it is primarily psycho dynamically oriented clinicians who continue to cling today, in spite of the lack of any supporting empirical evidence, to the notion that homo-eroticism does in fact constitute a form of pathology. I believe that as pastoral caregivers, we have a responsibility to understand both historical thought and contemporary research in this area, rather than relying on possibly inaccurate perceptions of what "psychologists believe" about homo-eroticism.

 

Murphy, Timothy F. (1992). Redirecting sexual orientation: Techniques and justifications. The Journal of Sex Research, 29(4), 501523.

     This article provides a very good historical overview of various techniques that have been employed in attempts to change homosexual persons' orientation. Murphy describes three major classes of treatments behavioral techniques, psycho dynamic interventions, and biological therapies. Justification for the use of particular forms of reorientation therapy varied. In some cases, implementation of therapy was based specifically on beliefs that homo-erotic orientation was pathological, and should therefore be "treated" as were other conditions that warranted medical treatment. In other cases, treatment stemmed from "respecting the wishes of certain individuals who would rather have sexual desires and behaviors other than the ones they do" (p. 505). Murphy notes a general historical shift in attitudes from the former perspective to the latter, "as evidenced by the fluid status of homo-eroticism within orthodox psychiatry's diagnostic nomenclature" (p. 517), which he also reviews. However, despite some changes in ways of talking about homo-eroticism (e.g., as a disease process, psycho social mal development, or moral defect) thinking about it in the psychiatric community appears to retain the assumption that despite a plethora of scientific evidence to the contrary it is indeed a "pathological state or psychological disorder. Indeed, even in the U.S., despite the formal action of the APA, many psychiatrists continue to believe that homo-eroticism is a serious psychic disorder. . . Some even hold the view that involuntary treatment is appropriate. . . Such views, of course, continue to encourage the experimental pursuit and use of reorientation techniques" (p. 518).

     Murphy raises a number of important questions and issues. (1) Historically, most reorientation therapy has been conducted on men; Murphy's analysis of possible reasons for this unevenness is very good. (2) Despite a history of failure, there has been and is an ongoing search for reorientation methods that "work." (3) "(I)t is a matter of debate whether a person can come to seek reorientation in a way that is properly called 'voluntary'" (p. 519). Both overt punitive circumstances like incarceration in a Nazi concentration camp or in a U.S. prison, and more covert (sometimes) forces like societal pressures and homophobic responses lead one to seriously question whether "men and women requesting reorientation do so in a truly voluntary way" (p. 519).

     Finally, Murphy notes that psychiatry has continually treated the "problems" with homo-eroticism as if they were centered in the individual rather than in that person's social surroundings. and that contemporary psychiatric practice continues to "treat the person who suffers rather than ameliorating the social forces which devalue homo-eroticism" (p. 519). This last point brings us to issues that are particularly relevant to pastoral care. Pastors need to be aware of the data on reorientation therapies, and the implicit and profound biases in the use of such techniques. As Murphy notes, "(T)here would be no reorientation techniques where there was no interpretation that homo-eroticism is an inferior state, an interpretation that in many ways continues to be medically defined, criminally enforced, socially sanctioned, and religiously justified" (p. 520). Murphy raises a host of important issues that should help pastoral caregivers reflect upon their own assumptions and the kinds of care they advocate and provide.

Pattison, E. Mansell, & Pattison, Myrna Loy. (1980). "Exgays": Religiously Mediated Changed in Homosexuals. American Journal of Psychiatry, 137(12), 15531562.

     This is a research report that is perhaps the most widely cited recent article in support of reorientation therapy. The authors describe a psychiatric study of 11 men who self identified as homosexual and who reportedly, through their involvement in "folk therapy" in a Pentecostal church, changed their orientation to heterosexual. Based on their findings, the authors conclude that "the phenomenon of substantiated change in sexual orientation without explicit (psychiatric) treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy may be much more common than previously thought" (p. 1553). They argue that if a person is ideologically committed to change, and engages in a milieu (e.g., that provided by a church with a 'gay is sinful' stance) that supports his or her ideology, change may be a relatively common, if not easy, outcome.

     The study itself suffers from numerous methodological flaws, which have been addressed at length elsewhere (see, for example, the Blair and Krajeski et al. pieces in this bibliography). Perhaps two of the most glaring problems are the incredibly small sample size, and the authors' conclusions based on their own reports of subjects' responses.

     With regard to sample size, the authors' review of participants in the particular church's "exgay" program offered a potential pool of 300 such persons. However, of those 300 clients (over a 5 year period), only 30 "claimed to have changed from homosexuality to heterosexuality" (p. 1554). And of those, only 11 men agreed to participate in the study. This degree of self-selection alone should make the reader cautious about the meaningfulness of the data.

     With regard to the second problem, of those 11 men who participated, only four scored as Kinsey 60 (that is, as having an exclusively homosexual orientation upon entering the program, and having an exclusively heterosexual orientation upon completing it). The majority of men interviewed (including those who had subsequently entered into heterosexual marriages) reported continuing to have recurrent same sex dreams, fantasies, and impulses. One questions how they can then be accurately characterized as "exgay."

     The authors' own biases are evident throughout, in repeatedly describing homosexuality as "deviant," and in suggesting that the "social position that 'gay is good'. . . does not change the problem of destruction of personal identity inherent in (that position)" (p. 1561). They cite another study regarding "a homophile church, (in which) the search for identity and community support was often vitiated by its liberal theological stance, which accepted the identify of the person as homosexual. Thus, the church ideology perpetuated the confusional problem of identity" (p. 1561). In contrast, Pattison and Pattison's note that "our subjects rejected the ideology that 'gay is good' within the framework of their orthodox Christian theology (and)
reduced the social deviancy of homosexuality . . . through personally changing the deviant condition" (p. 1561). The authors clearly view homosexuality as a pathological, deviant, and highly undesirable condition which they assert can be changed in people who want to change. They argue, based on their correspondence with unidentified "numerous informal 'exgay' self-help groups in existence throughout the U.S., Europe, and Asia . . . (that) there appears to be a substantial number of persons who are similar (in changing their orientation) to the population represented here" (pp. 156162).

     This is a particularly dangerous kind of article. It is published in a highly prestigious professional journal, which alone lends it credence that it does not deserve, based on its shoddy methodology, and clearly biased assumptions. It appears to be sufficiently "scientific" that is may be (and in fact, has been) appropriated as "sound evidence" by those who would argue for the appropriateness and success of reorientation therapy, and of "exgay" movements in churches. It is to be hoped that pastors seeking support for a response to persons in their congregations would reflect carefully and thoughtfully about similar pseudoscientific reports, before accepting them as a basis upon which to construct pastoral care.

 

Scanzoni, Letha, & Mollenkott, Virginia Ramey. (1978). Is the Homosexual My Neighbor: Another Christian View. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

     This book is probably the classic work that addresses issues of homosexuality, theology, and the church. Although it only mentions the specific issue of change in orientation briefly (on p. 4), it raises a host of issues that are the focus of much of today's conversation about "appropriate" responses (by the church) to homosexual persons. The authors provide a basic grounding in some of the myths, research issues, and relevant data regarding homosexuality.

     They include an excellent description and critique of the widely used Kinsey scale, and its relation to the broader issue of orientation, a brief review of much of the other contemporary (as of their date of writing) scientific research in this area, and of the inadequacies of research models (many of which persist today). They also provide an exegesis of what has become the classic "Samaritan" analogy, of the Levitical codes (including perhaps the only reference to lesbian women in the literature visa vis these codes), of Paul's pronouncements about sexuality, and of questions that are not answered by the Scriptures.

     Perhaps the most useful chapters from a pastoral care perspective are the last three in the book, which deal with ethical and theological issues. In Ch. 7, the authors describe current fears that many people have about homosexuals, which fears (among other factors) give rise to homophobia, and note that the church has a responsibility to respond both to fears and to homophobia. In Ch. 8, the continuing "debate in American Christendom" is described, including three prevalent perspectives that appear to characterize many Christians and Christian churches today. And, Ch. 9 proposes a "homosexual Christian ethic" which draws together knowledge about sexuality, Scriptural understandings, and our God given capacity to care for one another.

     This is a strong book, in spite of its age. Rather than being outdated, most of what the authors discuss is even more strongly supported today by contemporary theological and social scientific scholarship that has occurred since the book was first published. If you are just starting to think about these issues, and want a good theologically informed starting place, and were only going to read one selection from this bibliography, this would probably be the book to read.

 

(No author). (1991, February). Transforming Congregations: Upholding Biblical standards. Christian Social Action, p. 31.

     This article briefly describes the basic assumptions of the Transforming Congregations movement in United Methodism. Briefly, this movement asserts that: (1) they are "a ministry to and with homosexuals and their families," (2) that "the acceptance . . . of homosexuality as a normal sexual expression . . . is harmful to the homosexual person, compromising to the biblical integrity we are called to uphold, and destructive to the religious heritage we so dearly cherish," (3) that "homosexual persons . . . 'are persons of sacred worth who bear the wounds of fallen humanity and need the sexual healing only Christ can bring,'" and (4) that only through restoration of a "healthy heterosexuality" can homosexuals become "full and responsible member(s) of a local church" (p. 31). The article basically asserts that the beliefs espoused are accurate (without providing supporting evidence of any kind), and fails to note that other forms of loving, Christian response are possible, or that there is any psychological or alternative contemporary theological scholarship which should be considered in deciding on the appropriate form of response. This article is useful in providing a snapshot view of the Transforming Congregations movement.

 

Additional Resources

     While the majority of these do not consider reorientation specifically, they are very useful in considering a variety of issues in psychotherapy and in pastoral care primarily of lesbian women, gay men, and bisexual people, although many of the theological and ethical issues addressed in these materials are relevant to all persons.

Boston Lesbian Psychologies Collective. (1987). Lesbian Psychologies Explorations & Challenges. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

     An excellent collection of contemporary work on a range of topics related to lesbian women's lives and experiences, including identity, relationships, family, therapy, and community issues. An extremely valuable resource for pastoral care.

 

Boswell, John. (1980). Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

     This is the classic treatise on social responses to gay men (primarily), with particular attention to responses by the Christian church, in Western European cultures, from the beginning of the Christian era to the 14th century. The first two chapters, "Introduction" and "Definitions," stand well on their own, and provide an excellent introduction to important concepts and issues.

 

Gonsiorek, John C. (1988). Current and Future Directions in Gay/Lesbian Affirmative Mental Health Practice. In Michael Shernoff & William Scott (Eds.), The Sourcebook of Lesbian/Gay Health Care, 2nd ed. (pp. 107113). Washington, D.C.: National Lesbian/Gay Health Foundation.

     Delineates areas where the author feels current work on therapy with gay men and lesbian women has fallen short, and suggests directions for future research in this area.

 

Greenberg, Daniel F., & Bystryn, Marcia H. (1982). Christian Intolerance of Homosexuality. American Journal of Sociology, 88(3), 515548.

     For people who don't have time to read Boswell (elsewhere in this list), this article briefly outlines the history of Christian responses to homosexuality from "late antiquity" (ancient Greece) to the Middle Ages. What is most notable is that, contrary to the oft cited "fact" that all cultures at all times and locations have condemned homosexual relationships, the evidence shows that cultural responses have been highly variable. The authors suggest several hypotheses to explain this variability.

 

Hunt, Mary E. (1992). Fierce Tenderness: A Feminist Theology of Friendship. New York: Crossroad.

     This is a wonderful book that puts friendships of all kinds, between women of all kinds, at the center of a theological ethical framework. This work has profound implications for pastoral care of all kinds.

 

Krajeski, James P. (1986). Psychotherapy with Gay Men and Lesbians: A History of Controversy. In Terry S. Stein & Carol J. Cohen (Eds.), Contemporary Perspectives on Psychotherapy with Lesbians and Gay Men (pp. 925). New York: Plenum.

     This first chapter to a very good book identifies key issues regarding past research on homosexuality, current research issues in this area, trends in psychotherapy, blind spots in the psychotherapeutic literature (including a failure to address possible negative effects of psychotherapy on lesbians and gay men), and the emergence of new ethical issues in this area, including a discussion of reorientation programs.

 

Martin, A. Damien. (1984). The Perennial Canaanites: The Sin of Homosexuality. Et cetera, 41, 340361.

     This is a delightful piece that takes on, with wit, intelligence, and thoughtful consideration, the Fundamentalist arguments against homosexuality based on the Creation story, the Sodom story, the Levitical codes, and the four New Testament statements by Paul.

 

Miletich, Leo N. (1984). Now I Lay Me Down to Sleep. The Humanist, 44, 2831.

     This is a slightly satirical "bedtime prayer" intended to raise readers' consciousness about gay people, and about many churches' and public figures' responses to them.

 

Mollenkott, Virginia Ramey. (1992). Sensuous Spirituality: Out From Fundamentalism. New York: Crossroad.

     This was my very favorite of all the things I read. It is an extraordinary book on theology, framed by, in, and around issues of gender and sexuality.

 

Nelson, James B. (1978). Embodiment An Approach to Sexuality and Christian Theology. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House.

     This book makes an especially important contribution in placing homosexuality (on which there is one chapter) within the much broader context of human sexuality. Nelson's thesis is that a fundamental part of our humanity is our sexuality, and that understanding our sexuality and understanding ourselves as embodied creatures is a critically important task for theology.

 

Rice, Howard R. (1982). Homophobia: The overlooked sin. Church & Society, 73, 513.

     Writing from a Presbyterian (USA) perspective, the author outlines many of the causes of and appropriate responses to homophobia.

 

Sheppard, Gerald T. (1985). The Use of Scripture within the Christian Ethical Debate Concerning Same Sex Oriented Persons. Union Theological Seminary Quarterly Review, 40, 1335.

     I found this article to be a very tough read, but well worthwhile. The author provides a very interesting ethical analysis of "homosexualities," Scriptural responses to them, and alternative Christian ethical responses. A good piece that offers some unique insights.

 

Woodman, Natalie Jane, & Lenna, Harry R. (1980). Counseling with Gay Men and Women. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

     Offers gay and lesbian affirming approach to counseling, including chapters on the coming out process, working with gay couples and their families, working with gay youth specifically, and a historical and contemporary overview of social, clinical, and religious responses to homosexuality.