I accidentally came across "The Making of Me" on IPlayer, see the related article. It was about John Barrowman trying to discover why he prefers the same sex.
It seems appropriate to write about it here, as this neglected blog (I do have other blogs!) has another post related to him just below, written quite far in time, but close in distance of posts.
The program did seem to focus one sidedly on research into causes of homosexuality from nature (as opposed to nurture). That being the case, Barrowman still allowed us to find out that his Father used to cross dress him.
This does seems a particularly odd and confusing thing to do to a young boy, utterly reprehensible in fact. I am making a different point tho'
What I detected from Barrowman was a genuine sincerity in trying to get to the roots of the matter, what caused his homosexual desire? So he was quite open in showing his life, and even the stranger side of his childhood as shown above. When he went for the brain scan, he admitted to having some panic attack and some fairly mentally disturbed thoughts. This did not seem to be the actions of someone trying to produce dishonest propaganda. It smacked of an honest search.
When he met an ex-gay Christian man who gave up his homosexual relations for the love of Christ (and then gained a family), the dialogue, although brief, seemed respectful and sincere. The ex-gay Christian said that just because you desire something, like tobacco, does not make it good for you. The clip finished by Barrowman saying that unlike tobacco, he did not see anything wrong with the desires leading to his lifestyle.
Barrowman even preceded the interview by saying he admired the Christian guy being open enough to discuss why he was "ex-gay" with him. From this, I was genuinely convinced that Barrowman is not to be associated with Elton John's ripping-up bible attitude. Here there seemed to be a man genuinely searching. Fearful that scientific tests (which are, in any case, presently of unproven reliability) might reveal he was straight.
Towards the end, he was glad that some "tests" seemed to demonstrate his gay inclinations were nature and not nurture so that those who say "homosexuality is evil" could be proved wrong.
Here, he showed that he does not actually seem to know where people have a problem, it is not with the people themselves. Reading the Catechism on homosexuality it says
"It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
"
Firstly, that never, never, are people who have homosexual desires to be called evil, as Barrowman objects. He would be offended to hear homosexual acts are called disordered, but at least such a dialogue would make it clear what is the issue and what is not. I remember chatting at a party to someone who had never heard this explained to them, that Catholics differentiate between homosexual desire, which may be out of someone's control and but homosexual acts which are in a person's control.
Also, Barrowman has hit on something when he says he cannot deny his deep seated inclinations. Psychologists have warned repression is dangerous for mental health. Acknowledging thoughts and desires does not mean we have to act on them. Having, as it seems, no Christian upbringing, Barrowman knows he experiences these inclinations, it raises a question for him, what is the meaning of it? His choice has been to "embrace them".
Here, I saw a man reflecting, angered by hatred, but who seemed to have a certain amount of openness.
In a culture where sex is made out to be the be all and end all of everything, (unlike the poor Ethiopians who have to worry about there next scrap of food lest they die), it is not that surprising that our culture becomes introspective about whether all sexual rights and desires have been satisfied.
But in my opinion, what I saw in Barrowman, was a man asking questions, taking the decision to "embrace" his gay lifestyle, but one who could engage in a dialogue, and who meant it when he said he wanted to talk to the ex-gay Christian. The Catholic approach is to engage in dialogue. Before this program I had thought all the gay rights movement was anti-Christian.
I now think it must contain many who are confused about what the Christian stance is, who know little or nothing about what the Gospel does and does not propose for their lives and maybe who have never heard. Among those people are those who would, if the the right person came along, be prepared to enter into a dialogue. I'm increasingly convinced such a dialogue needs to be with those, like the ex-Gay Christian Barrowman met, who can understanding the whole story from their own experience.
It seems appropriate to write about it here, as this neglected blog (I do have other blogs!) has another post related to him just below, written quite far in time, but close in distance of posts.
The program did seem to focus one sidedly on research into causes of homosexuality from nature (as opposed to nurture). That being the case, Barrowman still allowed us to find out that his Father used to cross dress him.
This does seems a particularly odd and confusing thing to do to a young boy, utterly reprehensible in fact. I am making a different point tho'
What I detected from Barrowman was a genuine sincerity in trying to get to the roots of the matter, what caused his homosexual desire? So he was quite open in showing his life, and even the stranger side of his childhood as shown above. When he went for the brain scan, he admitted to having some panic attack and some fairly mentally disturbed thoughts. This did not seem to be the actions of someone trying to produce dishonest propaganda. It smacked of an honest search.
When he met an ex-gay Christian man who gave up his homosexual relations for the love of Christ (and then gained a family), the dialogue, although brief, seemed respectful and sincere. The ex-gay Christian said that just because you desire something, like tobacco, does not make it good for you. The clip finished by Barrowman saying that unlike tobacco, he did not see anything wrong with the desires leading to his lifestyle.
Barrowman even preceded the interview by saying he admired the Christian guy being open enough to discuss why he was "ex-gay" with him. From this, I was genuinely convinced that Barrowman is not to be associated with Elton John's ripping-up bible attitude. Here there seemed to be a man genuinely searching. Fearful that scientific tests (which are, in any case, presently of unproven reliability) might reveal he was straight.
Towards the end, he was glad that some "tests" seemed to demonstrate his gay inclinations were nature and not nurture so that those who say "homosexuality is evil" could be proved wrong.
Here, he showed that he does not actually seem to know where people have a problem, it is not with the people themselves. Reading the Catechism on homosexuality it says
"It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
"
Firstly, that never, never, are people who have homosexual desires to be called evil, as Barrowman objects. He would be offended to hear homosexual acts are called disordered, but at least such a dialogue would make it clear what is the issue and what is not. I remember chatting at a party to someone who had never heard this explained to them, that Catholics differentiate between homosexual desire, which may be out of someone's control and but homosexual acts which are in a person's control.
Also, Barrowman has hit on something when he says he cannot deny his deep seated inclinations. Psychologists have warned repression is dangerous for mental health. Acknowledging thoughts and desires does not mean we have to act on them. Having, as it seems, no Christian upbringing, Barrowman knows he experiences these inclinations, it raises a question for him, what is the meaning of it? His choice has been to "embrace them".
Here, I saw a man reflecting, angered by hatred, but who seemed to have a certain amount of openness.
In a culture where sex is made out to be the be all and end all of everything, (unlike the poor Ethiopians who have to worry about there next scrap of food lest they die), it is not that surprising that our culture becomes introspective about whether all sexual rights and desires have been satisfied.
But in my opinion, what I saw in Barrowman, was a man asking questions, taking the decision to "embrace" his gay lifestyle, but one who could engage in a dialogue, and who meant it when he said he wanted to talk to the ex-gay Christian. The Catholic approach is to engage in dialogue. Before this program I had thought all the gay rights movement was anti-Christian.
I now think it must contain many who are confused about what the Christian stance is, who know little or nothing about what the Gospel does and does not propose for their lives and maybe who have never heard. Among those people are those who would, if the the right person came along, be prepared to enter into a dialogue. I'm increasingly convinced such a dialogue needs to be with those, like the ex-Gay Christian Barrowman met, who can understanding the whole story from their own experience.
