Authors: Jones, Stanton L.; Kwee, Alex W.

Journal of Psychology & Christianity, Vol. 24(4), Win 2005, pp. 304-316

Abstract: Contemporary scientific findings are selectively reviewed to ascertain if recent research necessitates altering the conclusion of Jones and Yarhouse (2000) that scientific arguments fail to warrant overturning the Church’s traditional teaching about homosexuality. Reviewing the findings in six key areas of etiological research, we conclude that findings of biological causation of homosexuality are not unequivocal, while there is suggestive but similarly inconclusive evidence of environmental causation. Next, using a cross-cultural comparison of psychopathology rates among homosexuals, we challenge the ‘heterosexist rejection’ argument as the sole causative explanation for heightened psychological distress in LGBT populations. Finally, we discuss Spitzer’s (2003) treatment outcome research and conclude that change, though of unknown frequency, does occur for some individuals and reorientation therapy (offered with appropriate informed consent) should not be dismissed as a treatment option. We reaffirm our prior conclusion that scientific research does not warrant a revision of the Church’s historic position on homosexuality.