The Church

It goes without saying that we have a long way to go with the Church, especially pertaining to LGBTIQA+ issues. In today’s paper we had Reverend Mazibuko commenting on Pastor Lukhele’s admission of being gay and being a pastor/ holy man at that. 

As opined by Rev Mazibuko, Gods love allows people to come as they are but not remain the same. I am not one to dismiss this notion as I myself am a person of faith (I believe in God). I believe that change/ not becoming the same, means that one drops certain behaviours which are viewed as not being conducive. According to Merriam-Webster in 2016, behaviour can be described as being the way in which one acts or conducts oneself, a form of stimulus towards a certain situation.  Now, being LGBTIQA+ cannot be categorised as being behaviour of sort. An individual’s sexual orientation is a part of who they are as a human being. I will make reference to the six dimensions of human health paying specific attention to the sexual and spiritual aspects. Each dimension interrelates with the other. One’s sexual aspect/dimension has an influence with their overall wellbeing. Sexual expression is very key in acknowledging the health of an individual; as equal as the spiritual aspect. 

The reason behind this analysis is purely to enlighten Mr Mazibuko and others who share in his opinion that someone’s sexual orientation is not to be considered as something separate from who a person is as an individual.  In sooth, it defines who a person is. Sexual orientation is not a behaviour trait, I repeat; it is not a conduct. 

Correspondingly, I must further mention that Reverend Mazibuko’s analogy of LGBTIQA+ identities being similar to drunkards is null and void. One cannot place comparison to these two different things; behaviour trait and personal identification and expression. I have never had an individual identify themselves as being a drunkard. If I recall very well, a person who drinks would usually say that, ’’I so and so drink occasionally’’. Moreover, to prove that being a drunkard is a behaviour trait, cis-heterosexual individuals also drink as well. It has no influence on their sexuality as that is a specific dimension of an individual’s wellbeing.

It must be noted that Rev Mazibuko’s statement opens up the violation of LGBTIQA+ identities through processes of conversion therapy. Mis-conceptualising the Bible and claiming that when one becomes born again, they should stop being LGBTIQA+ is utterely wrong. Conduct change is expected, but not a change in ‘ones’ self-identity. It is a growing norm for churches to then condemn ones sexuality and link it to immorality and force individuals to change in order to show that they have accepted God. I myself have been a victim of such, had 7 pastors challenge my sexuality, claiming I was an abomination and that I should change. Many more have suffered at the hands of the church; we even lost one Miss T Rudd, as she was going through depression. Part of this depression was inflicted by the church. In a conversation with her a few months before she died; she mentioned that she had tried to avow to the churches’ demands. This process had left her feeling misplaced and in distraught; in-fact she lost her self-identity. The only advice I could give to her at 18years of age was that she should be who she is and be proud of it. God loved her the way she was and God had no reason to change ones individuality but illicit behaviours. Sexual orientation as mentioned above is not meant to be treated as a behaviour trait. Part of the Pride concept encompasses being satisfied with who one is and coming to terms with that; overcoming all social ideals and constructs which might otherwise shun on individuality and diversity.

In conclusion, I implore that Rev Mazibuko and others who share in his sentiments do allow us as the community to sensitize churches. There still exists a big gap in respect to the teachings of the church which I believe are attributed to mis-conceptions on LGBTIQA+ issues.