I don’t rule it [change] out because that would not be a scientific stance.

Warren, I’ve been thinking on this, and it seems as though even thinking about “change” is nonscientific because the parameters of “sexual orientation” have yet to be scientifically established. That is, orientation change is always tied to some purpose for “change” or “not change.” Any stance regarding change: yes it can happen, no it’s can’t, it shouldn’t be ruled out, etc, is more political than “scientific.”

I think part of what we’re dealing with are different understandings of terms. Not that Wikipedia is the be-all and end-all of knowledge, but here is their definition for “pastoral counseling.”

Pastoral counseling is a branch of counseling in which psychologically trained ministers, rabbis, priests and other non-ordained, lay persons provide therapy services. Pastoral counselors often integrate modern psychological thought and method with traditional religious training in an effort to address psychospiritual issues in addition to the traditional spectrum of counseling services.

That’s not what I mean when I use the phrase. I mean the counsel (usually spiritual) that a professional or volunteer pastor does in the day-to-day course of his/her ministry. Some have more training than others in psychological theory and practice; many don’t. Some reject psychology out of hand.

I’ll give another try at explaining what I mean by “honoring” choices. It means I will abide by that choice by not coercing or otherwise trying to force a different response, by not rejecting the person who makes the poor choice, by continuing to “shepherd” him/her as a pastor, by physically acting for his/her good as long as it doesn’t enable unhealthy or sinful behavior. Do I also have to hide the fact that I believe their choice was wrong? I don’t think so. Do I “whine” or “nag” them ab out it, as David may have been implying? Also, no. I see no conflict here.

David, I don’t think you should leave the discussion. By I perceive that so much of what you put out there is driven by your personal response to me, which is almost always negative almost all of the time. I am trying very hard to get past our personal tussles. I don’t always succeed in that, especially when posting on the Ex-Gay Watch blog. I’m trying to be better here. And I’d humbly ask you to do the same.

I think the best we can do is try to be aware of our biases, state them as such (not as fact or “God’s will”) — and not insist that those we try to guide “see” things they same way we do. Still working on it. I do not claim to have mastered it yet.

I really need to get a maginifier for my screen.

Oh geesh, don’t remind me. I’m just at the edge of needing to wear my reading glasses to use the computer and I can’t stand it.

I apologize if I misunderstood you.

The pastoral counselor cannot be neutral, the role of the shepherd is not neutral.

I wasn’t challenging what you said. I tend to agree with it. I was trying to point out that no therapist is really “neutral”. We all, like it or not, bring ourselves into the equation. We just been to be very carful how, when and for what reason. I think it’s kinda silly to say one is neutral and one is not. It’s a matter or awareness, degree, respect and intent.

your font is not invisible…although whom your are addressing in you latest post is a bit vague; I think it might be me.

From you:

after they have made that decision as an adult, one should not then interject one’s own feelings, needs or wants in to that post-decision equation.

And certainly one who does so can’t then say they are respecting that person’s decision. In plain language, once they decide the course, don’t whine and nag them about it. It’s not about you.

I injected the word “neutral”…in retrospect it is too simplistic a word. My apologies.

“Whine and Nag” are your terms, which are also simplistic…and do not describe Karen’s actions.

If Fred Phelps shows up at a pastors office…I hope he’ll get the full course, whining and nagging included.

Pastoral counseling is willing to run the risks of alienation in an effort to define the faith; theologically, scripturally, historically and culturally.

Actually, whining and nagging may be something that Paul, Jesus, OT prophets and others have done.

.

Before I could even address your statement I would need to know more specifically, neutral about what? And even then, it’s such a blanket pronouncement that I’m not sure I could say much about it even then.

I don’t mean to be terse, Michael, but re-explaining this has gotten frustrating. I’m going to leave it now as I thought I did before. Perhaps I’ll take the long trip over to Andrew Marin’s blog and see what’s happening there. The bridge may be out so you never know how long it will take