Brokeback Mountain part 2

Since seeing the film Brokeback Mountain I've been thinking a lot about the issue of homosexualty (for obvious reasons!!) and I feel like my thinking has continued on a little from when I last posted on the subject of homosexuality. However I would like to say that this is in essence a 'draft' - I'm on a journey and I reserve the right to change my mind and go in a different direction without censorship!!

In my first post on the film I linked to Jonny Baker's post, where he askes the question what redemption could look like for the two men in the film.

I was reminded by Mark and Paul of talks I heard on the subject of sexual ethics a while ago by Dr Angelo Grazioli, professional South African sexologist and Director of the Sex Education and Dysfunction Unit of South Africa and Baptist minister, who has written a book (that I haven't read) called Question of Love: Answers to Questions on Homosexuality.

In the talks I heard he was speaking about sexual morality generally and not about homosexuality explicitly. (I want to say at this point that so far as my thinking has developed on this issue, I make no distinction between homosexual sex and sex outside of marriage between a heterosexual couple.)

I remember he spoke about the beliefs that evolved through the sexual revolution that happened in the 1960's (which as he pointed out is very recent in the sweep of human history) - it is only since that time that we have held the belief that we are entitled to have sex regardless of our circumstances. In our society sex has become for us a 'need' or a 'right' rather than an expression of Godly love in a specific context.

I think this is a hard concept for us to grasp, as we are so engrained in our culture that we don't see how much its particular slant on things affects our worldview, and this of course also affects how we read the bible passages about this - how many times have you heard people (yourself?? definitely myself) say 'If God is a God of love then how could he deprive people of sex when they have homosexual feelings that they feel are inescapable or make up who they are / when they haven't found a marriage partner?' But if I think about it, contained within this statement are so many cultural biases and assumptions - for starters 'we have a right to have sex if we feel like it' and 'not ever being allowed to have sex is intolerable', before we even go anywhere near the issues of whether homosexuality is a fundamental part of who a person is or whether people are "born homosexual" etc.

So we can't possibly read the bible passages about being single and celibate, homosexuality or sexual immorality in the translated English versions without these biases shaping our reading of the scriptures. We have to try and understand the context of the original authors, how the passages have been interpreted over the centuries to give us a different perspective and the underlying meaning it gives to our expression of our humanity.

And if like me that sounds like a bridge too far we should read the work of someone who emminently more qualified, like Dr Grazioli for instance.

One of the things that struck me about the relationship between Jack and Innis in the film was that their level of non-sexual intimacy was really high and far higher than either of them experienced in their other relationships (with wives or parents for example.) It felt to me that had they been free to live together and build a relationship based on this rather than on occassional times together involving mainly sex, then they could have experienced Godly love, and therin could lie their redemption and experience of God's Kingdom. That might be considered far-fetched, fanciful or romantic, but if you deliberately set aside the cultural bias that sex is a right, then maybe it's not quite so hard to see that God could manifest Himself through their relationship.

Any thoughts people?