# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2001_S146
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

146 CONGREGATIONAL SERVICES

agenda (complete and total acceptance of homosexuality), calling it
an “alternative lifestyle” when in fact it is only a “death style” (no
life can come from it); therefore be it

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in con-
vention reaffirm the position stated in 1973 Res. 2-04 that “the
Synod recognize homophile behavior as intrinsically sinful”; and
be it further

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod reaffirm
1992 Res. 3-12A that “it is necessary for the church to expose and
resist sexual idolatry of our society”; and be it further

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod com-
mend President Barry for the What About pamphlets, namely, What
about Homosexuality; and be it finally

Resolved, That President Barry form a task force to help both
pastors and laypeople to better proclaim God’s love to men and
women who are struggling with homosexual tendencies and to pro-
vide resources and support for families and churches whose mem-
bers are actively involved in homosexual activities.

Pilgrim
West Bend, WI

2-40

To Reject and Request Revision
of Report on Ministry to Homosexuals

WHEREAS, In 1999 the Task Force on Ministry to Homosexuals
and Their Families organized by the LCMS, issued its report, “A
Plan for Ministry to Homosexuals and Their Families”; and

Wuereas, Beginning on page 6 of the report it discussed the
nature and origin of homosexuality and raised the question, “Is it an
innate condition (nature) or a learned behavior (nurture)?”; and

Wuereas, On page 7 the report properly evaluates the innate
condition, “To date, no reliable research substantiates a biological
or genetic cause for homosexuality”; and

WuerEAS, On page 7 the report wrongly dismisses the learned
behavior (nurture) theory with the intellectually deficient assess-
ment: ‘Research in this area is even less reliable or determinative
than its biological/genetic counterpart”; and

WHEREAS, There is substantial research gathered over a 40-year
period, which concludes that homosexuality is a learned behavior
(nurture), which includes the following:

Wainwright Churchill in Homosexual Behavior among
Males: “There are no sexual instincts in man. ... Human sexual-
ity is entirely dependent upon learning and conditioning. The
individual's pattern of sexual behavior is acquired {emphasis in
original] in the contex1 of his unique experiences and [is] in no
sense innate or inherited.”

Robert Frumkin in The Encyclopedia of Sexual Behavior:
“Without [emphasis in original] specific sexual experiences,
man outside of cultures—that is, so called feral or natural man—
or the extreme social isolate, does not generally engage in sexual
behavior upon reaching puberty. There is no sexual instinct in
man.”

H. C. Resnick and Marvin Wolfgang in Sexual Behaviors:
Social, Clinical, and Legal Aspects: “One is normally born with
a given sex and the capacity to manifest the sex drive, but the
expression of that drive is more intimately related to one’s cul-
ture and social system than any other drive.”

Charles Socarides in Homosexuality: Basic Concepts and
Psychodynamics: “Homosexuality, the choice of a partner of the
same sex for orgastic satisfaction, is not innate. There is no con-
nection belween sexual instinct and choice of sexual object.
Such an object choice is learned, acquired behavior; there is no
inevitable genetically inborn propensity toward the choice of a
partner of either the same or opposite sex.”

John Money in Sexual Dimorphism and Homosexual Gen-
der Identity. “Whatever may be the possible unlearned assis-
lance from constitutional sources, the child’s psychosexual iden-
lily is not writlen, unlearned, in the genetic code, the hormonal
syslem or the nervous system at birth.”

2001 Convention Workbook

A. Limentani in Sexual Deviation: “The development of ho-
mosexual attitudes and impulses can be and often [is] used as a
defense against neurotic and psychotic processes.”

Joyce McDougall in Sexual Deviation: “Female homosexu-
ality is an attempt to resolve conflict concerning the two poles of
psychic identity; one’s identity as a separate individual and
one’s sexual identity.”

William H. Masters, Virginia E. Brown, and Robert C.
Kolodny (i.e., Masters and Johnson) in Human Sexuality: “The
genetic theory of homosexuality has been generally discarded
today.” “Despite the interest in possible hormone mechanisms in
the origin of homosexuality, no serious scientist today suggests
that a simple cause-effect relationship applies.”

George A. Rekers in The Formation of Homosexual Orien-
tation, an address before the North American Social Science
Network Conference: “At the present time, we may tentatively
conclude that the main source for gender and sexual behavior
deviance is found in social learning and psychological develop-
ment variables ... allhough we should recognize that there re-
mains the theorelical possibility that biological abnormalities
could contribute a potential vulnerability factor in some indirect
way.”

WHEREAS, In the face of the overwhelming foregoing data com-
piled by sexologists and researchers over forty years that the state-
ment on page 14 of this report—‘A second boundary that needs to
be noted is the silence of the Bible on the origin of homosexuality.
Given this silence, the pastor has no warrant, for example. to de-
clare homosexuality an orientation of choice. The pastor should re-
alize that, due to psychological] and emotional burdens many (if not
most) homosexuals live under, it hardly seems to be a choice they
would readily make”—sends the wrong message to pastors as to
how they should counsel persons pursuing the homosexual
lifestyle; and

WHEREAS, On pages 16-17 of the report advice is given on the
subject “pastoral care of the homosexual,” and four separate ques-
tions and suggestions are mentioned on page 17, but the glaring
omission is the extensive existence of reparative therapy, which is
available to lead homosexuals out of the lifestyle; this reparative
therapy option is wrongly dismissed on page 18 with the negative
comment that “not all homosexuals can reach the goal of becoming
heterosexual,” which is kind of like the doctor, when explaining
the medicine of choice to an ill patient telling the patient, don’t take
it because it may not work; and

WHEREAS, On pages 19-29 of the report is found the “Goals for
Ministry for Homosexuals and Their Families,” with specific ref-
erence to Goals ]-6, and none of these goals list the availability of
reparative therapy, which is the means whereby homosexuals can
leave the homosexual lifestyle, and that the indirect reference to
these reparative therapies on page 29 by referring the reader to the
“Resources” section best illustrates that in the minds of the authors
of the report their reparative therapies are of marginal use or im-
portance; and

WHEREAS, There is an extensive network of reparative therapies
in America, some of which are Regeneration in Baltimore; White
Stone Ministries, Boston; Desert Stream Ministries, Santa Monica;
LIFE, New York City; Courage, New York City; Exodus Interna-
tional, San Rafael. Calif.; and

WHEREAS, The report on pages 34-35 mentions two organiza-
tions in reparative therapy, Keys Ministries and Exodus Interna-
tional, but their location in the Resources section of the report at
almost the end of the report sends a message to the reader that they
are of marginal usefulness to a homosexual when in fact their
reparative ministries should have been prominently mentioned in
the report, not at the end but in the main body of the report as ad-
vice to pastors on how to counsel homosexuals; and

WHEREAS, On page 30 of the report under the title of Resources
is a listing of books that may be of use to the reader, but there is no
mention of a book, Shadow in the Land, written by a former 14-
year member of the U.S. House of Representatives who is also a
lifetime member of the LCMS. This book contains much useful in-
formation on the entire subject of this plan and should have been
included as a reference; therefore be it