Christianity and Homosexuality: Contradictory or Complementary? A Qualitative Study of The Experiences of Christian Homosexual University Students

CHRISTIANITY AND HOMOSEXUALITY: CONTRADICTORY OR
COMPLEMENTARY? A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF THE EXPERIENCES

OF CHRISTIAN HOMOSEXUAL UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
S. Nkosi
Social Work Department
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg, South Africa
e-mail: [email protected]
F. Masson
Social Work Department
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg, South Africa
e-mail: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Students at tertiary institutions encounter many challenges beyond academic performance, for
some these challenges entail the acceptance of their sexual identity alongside their religious
beliefs. For centuries, the acceptance of homosexuality within the Christian religion has been a
contentious issue. Whilst some Christians believe that Christianity and homosexuality can co-
exist, others advocate that the notion is contradictory to the basic tenets of the Christian faith.
Homosexuals and bisexuals are generally considered marginalised groups in society, which have
experienced discrimination in many ways. Drawing on social identity theory and utilising a
qualitative approach this phenomenological research study aimed to explore the individual
experiences, views and opinions of ten students about their sexuality and their religion. All
participants acknowledged that they were either homosexual or bisexual and considered
themselves to be Bible-believing Christians. Snowball sampling was used to identify and invite
potential participants to be part of the research study. The researcher used a semi-structured
interview schedule to guide the interviews which were recorded with the participants’ consent.
Data were analysed using thematic content analysis. The main findings of the research indicated
that participants experienced the church as a very unwelcoming environment and fellow Christians
as extremely judgemental. Feelings of rejection and of isolation were reinforced by people and a
system that participants felt should have been supportive. This study holds potential benefits for
educators and counselling practitioners at university institutions as it provides the opportunity to
learn about the dynamics and views of this often marginalised group whose religious experiences
may adversely impact on their studies.
Keywords: homosexuality, bisexuality, Christianity, coming out, students, discrimination
South African Journal of Higher Education http://dx.doi.org/10.20853/31-4-891

Volume 31 | Number 4 | 2017 | pages 72‒93 eISSN 1753-5913
72
Nkosi and Masson A qualitative study of the experiences of Christian homosexual university students
INTRODUCTION
Students studying at universities have many challenges to face, not only on an academic level
but also in their own quest for identity and purpose in life. According to Sakin Ozen, Ercan,
Irgil and Sigirli, (2010, 127) university youth may experience numerous psychological issues
as they are often sensitive to intrapersonal, interpersonal and sociocultural differences and
conflicts specially as students are generally at a stage in their lives when they are open to
change. Social identity theory is the framework for this study and advocates that a person’ s
sense of identity and self-esteem is largely influenced by their group memberships (Tajfel and
Turner 1979, 33). As individuals strive to reach a positive social identity, they compare
themselves to groups with which they can identify as well as groups with which they don’t
(Niens, Cairns, Finchilescu, Foster and Tredoux 2003, 109). For Christian students who are not
heteronormative, the journey of self-acceptance and of acceptance – or lack of acceptance ‒
from others within their faith may be a complicated process. This often tumultuous journey can
have numerous adverse effects on students’ academic performance and requires further
investigation in order to create understanding and awareness of the challenges that these
students may face.
Traditionally, the religion of Christianity promotes heterosexuality and does not advocate
for acceptance of homosexuality or bisexuality. The debate whether homosexuality is a sinful
act in the eyes of the Lord has been continuing on for centuries ‒ a debate that does not appear
to be drawing to any definitive conclusion in the near future. The pairing of these two aspects
has often led to conflict for homosexuals who practise Christianity (Rodriguez and Ouellette
2000, 333). While some may view the combining of these two aspects to be contradictory, many
believe that homosexual Christians should neither abandon their Christian beliefs nor their
sexual orientation. The decision taken by these Christians, to continue practising both
homosexuality and Christianity, has been accompanied by varied responses from the church
and other Christians. These responses vary from hostile to sympathetic, discriminating to
accepting, rejecting to welcoming. Amidst the negativity there are positive responses as well.
However, it needs to be noted that negative responses from the church and other Christians are
still very prevalent in South Africa, which has often adversely affected the Christians who do
not subscribe to being heterosexual.
As this debate continues, homosexual Christians continue to try to figure out a balance or
a way of merging these two very important aspects of their lives. Merging or finding a balance
may be a very difficult and complicated process. This research aimed to explore the experiences
of university students who are Christians and homosexual in their quest of merging and
73
integrating their religion and sexual orientation. The work of Erikson highlights the importance
of identity formation and how identity development and integration continues over time and
settings. Specifically, for the homosexual individual, disclosing one’s identity to others,
working through the prejudiced attitudes of others, and participating in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual
and Transgender (LGBT) related social activities, are essential aspects of identity integration
for a homosexual (Rosario, Schrimshaw and Hunter 2011, 5). As university students are often
in the later adolescent stage of the life cycle (18‒24 years), challenges with identity and
intimacy are developmentally appropriate (Newman and Newman 1999, 348). Furthermore,
tensions between religious beliefs and sexual orientation could potentially impact on their
studies and their ability to fulfil their academic potential, as well as their sense of wellbeing.
This study sought to understand the views and opinions that homosexual Christians have
crystallised through their experiences about the church, their sense of self, heterosexual
Christians, the Bible, and Christianity as a religion. As both sexuality and religion are rather
sensitive topics, people often avoid talking about these issues. It was hoped that through more
fervent discussion about these issues there would be more room for differences to be tolerated
and even accepted. Many universities have in recent years introduced programmes specifically
to assist LGBT students. It was also envisaged that the research would provide social workers
and psychologists, particularly those employed at university counselling centres, with more
insight into the experiences of homosexual Christians thus enabling them to better understand
individuals whose sexual orientation is often criticised by people, especially other Christians.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Social identity theory

Social identity theory proposes that people need to know which groups they belong to (in-
groups) and which groups they don’t belong to (out-groups) in order to understand more about
themselves. In evaluating others and one’s own sense of social identity, three mental processes
occur: namely, social categorisation, social identification and social comparison (McLeod
2008, 3). During the first stage of social categorisation individuals categorise people or aspects
so that we understand how they fit and belong in their social environments. Individuals then
define which categories they belong to through a process of social identification as they adopt
the identities of these groups. During this stage self-esteem is increased and behaviour
normative to the group is adopted. In the final stage of social comparison individuals start to
compare the groups that they have identified with to other groups. The groups that individuals
74
have identified with need to compare favourably with other groups if their self-esteem and
positive social identity is to be maintained (McLeod 2008, 2; Tajfel and Turner 1979, 36). For
students who are homosexual or bisexual and who identify with the Christian faith, this process
of determining their social identity can be complicated as many sectors within the Christian
community may only support heteronormative behaviour. Furthermore many cultures,
particularly African cultures, do not condone homosexuality and/or bisexuality. As all the
participants in the study were African, it was important to understand African cultural views on
homosexuality and bisexuality. These religious and cultural perspectives may challenge the
individual’s sense of social identification and are discussed in the following sections.
Biblical perspectives about homosexuality

Many theologians argue that throughout the old and the New Testament the practice of
homosexuality is condemned. Possibly, the most well-known Old Testament passages that
address homosexuality are the scriptures in Leviticus and the biblical account of Sodom and
Gomorrah. According to the New King James Version of the Bible, Leviticus 18:22 states that,
‘You must not have sexual intercourse with a man as you would with a woman; it is a detestable
practice’. Further on this idea is reinforced in Leviticus 20:13, ‘If a man lies with a male as he
lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to
death.’ Well-known biblical historian, Henry (1811) maintained that according to some Bible
analysts it is understood that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for its citizens’ immoral and
detestable behaviour that had become an accepted way of life in these two cities.
We see in the book of Genesis chapter 19 verse 5 when the men of Sodom wanted to rape
or sodomise the two male visitors who had entered the city of Sodom, it reads ‘They called to
Lot: Where are the men that came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex
with them.’ Some authors, such as Gnuse (2015, 72), argue that what was abhorrent to God was
not the homosexual act itself but that the people of Sodom were violating the customs of
hospitability, which were highly valued in that time in the Middle East. Furthermore, the people
of Sodom wanted to use sexual violence to show power and dominance over strangers,
displaying a lack of social justice and thereby incurring the wrath of God.
Many scriptures in the New Testament also speak against homosexuality. 1 Cor. 6:9‒10
(English Standard Version) reads,
9
or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived:
neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
10
nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom
of God.
75
This condemnation of homosexuality is also stipulated in 1Tim. 1:10 where the Apostle Paul
talks about the unnaturalness of homosexual practice, ‘the sexually immoral, men who practice
homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine’.
Again in the book of Romans, the apostle Paul talks about God’s wrath against sinful humanity.
Chapter 1 vs 26 and 27 reads:
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural
sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations
with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other
men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Many Christians emphatically quote these scriptures and use them as a basis to condemn
homosexuality, saying that the Bible is very clear on the position.
Gnuse (2015, 71) argues that the word ‘homosexuality’ in these passages has been
incorrectly interpreted from the meaning of the Greek word and that instead the words refer to
male prostitutes. Henry (1811) believed that the main purpose of these texts is to understand
how humankind has wandered from God. The Apostle Paul explains in his letter to the Romans
how it is the nature of humankind to prefer the dark and to do evil, than the light and to do good
deeds. He explains that people who have strayed from God hold on to the truth of
unrighteousness and reason with themselves to justify their sinful acts. The Apostle Paul then
says that God gave humankind over to its shameful lusts because there is no greater slavery
than to be given up to your own sinful nature. The book of Romans is thus a call to self-
examination, the end of which should be, a deep conviction of sin, and of the necessity of
deliverance from a state of condemnation.
Different Christian perspectives concerning homosexuality

The Christian church comprises numerous denominations, each with various interpretations of
the Bible and Christianity. Within the Christian church, there are numerous positions on the
debate of homosexuality and Christianity (Bosman 2009, 2). These contrasting viewpoints are
based on different interpretations of the Bible. Traditionalists, who are against homosexuality,
argue that sex was strictly intended for procreation purposes. Although not all traditional
Christians stand united in this argument, as some argue that it is not a sin to enjoy sex. They
argue that is not a sin before God’s eyes when a married couple engages in sexual activity not
only for procreation purposes but also for pleasure. Only the Roman Catholic Church still holds
the teaching that God intended sex for procreation purposes only; they teach that sex is sinful
whenever it is not engaged in with the intention of procreating (Crooks and Baur 2013; Ellens
76
2006, 8).
A more liberal view about the purpose of sex is that sex is both for pleasure and
procreation. The Songs of Solomon describe a married man and a woman enjoying moments
of sexual intimacy. In this description, there is no mention of procreation (Crooks and Baur
2013, 179). Further, in Genesis 2:24 it is suggested that sex is for creating oneness and
agreement in marriage. The passage reads, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and his
mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh’. The act of intimacy with
one’s spouse also protects one from sexual temptation which could lead to adultery and
fornication. Being intimate can comfort a hurting spouse (Driscoll and Driscoll 2012, 211).
These claims are supported by scriptures in the Bible such as 2 Samuel 2:24 which reads as
follows: ‘Then David comforted his wife, Bathsheba, and went in to her and lay with her, and
she bore a son, and he called his name Solomon. And the Lord loved him.’
Yarhouse (2010, 17) argues that if sex is not only for procreation purposes and is also for
pleasure then why should homosexuals be deprived of sex? Would God condemn a loving,
monogamous, relationship? Some Christians acknowledge that individuals may be homosexual
but advocate that these individuals must remain celibate as it is the homosexual sexual act that
is sinful. Others argue that Jesus came to preach the message of love and acceptance and that
God is not an unfair God and would never punish a loving, monogamous, Christ-centred,
homosexual relationship.
The second argument against homosexuality is that there are no examples of homosexual
marriages in the Bible as homosexuality is unnatural and inconsistent with what God had
intended for humans. These Christians argue that there are no examples of gay marriages
because in God’s eyes all marriages are heterosexual and anything other than that is illegitimate
and not recognised. However, liberal Christians justify the lack of homosexual examples in the
Bible with a cultural explanation. Gnuse (2015, 70) believes the Scriptures are historically and
culturally limited. As times change culture also changes. He purports that relying on scriptures
which were written thousands of years ago can be limiting as they are not relevant to the culture
of today. To further this discourse, Phillips (2005, 17), raises the issue of polygamy and how in
the olden times that practice was acceptable but now in the New Testament it is not approved
of. Exodus 21:10‒11 reads, ‘10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one
of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she
is to go free, without any payment of money.’ McNeill (1993) argues that there are many other
examples of behaviours which are regarded as sins but are not mentioned in the Bible because
they weren’t as prominent when the Bible was written; such as watching pornography, genetic
77
manipulation, and drug abuse to name a few.

Another argument presented by Christians who are against homosexuality and believe that
same sex relationships are sinful and not acceptable, is simply because God says so in the Bible.
Some denominations, such as charismatic and Pentecostal churches, place strong emphasis on
the literal interpretation of the bible (Bosman 2009, 4). They maintain that they can all try to
explain and interpret but at the end of the day God has given His word and He has said all
human beings should live by it. Even if we do not fully understand or cannot explain the
rationale behind it, in the end we are expected to obey this precept. They urge that the Bible’s
teachings should not be ignored as it is the primary source of authority in questions of morality
and of faith for all Christians (Yarhouse 2010, 17).
Other liberal Christian groups argue that the rejection of homosexuality is not
representative of God’s love. They argue that in the New Testament Jesus speaks the gospel of
love and acceptance. They believe that homosexuality cannot be separated from other sins and
that needs to be understood within the context of the theology of sin (Masango 2002, 956).
Boswell (1979) believes that the hostility and rejection of homosexual behaviour didn’t
arise from the doctrine of Christianity. According to Boswell (1979) there is no Latin word for
homosexuality and that meaning of words could be lost through interpretation as the bible was
originally translated from Greek and Hebrew (Mirke-Sellassie 2000, 306). The modern
translation of the Bible which is against homosexual behaviour could have been misinterpreted
or lost during translation from the original meaning. For instance, he uses Genesis chapter 19
(which has already been quoted above) to show how Bible scriptures can be interpreted and
understood in different ways. He explains that many scholars have come to understand that the
sin of Sodom was inhospitality and that the story of Sodom was probably not intended as any
sort of comment on homosexuality.
African views on homosexuality

While most European Union countries appear to accept homosexuality (Gerhards 2010, 5), the
same views are not held by most African countries. According to Kutsch (2013, 1)
homosexuality is still considered a crime in 38 African countries and many of these countries
still retain their laws against homosexuality that were promulgated during the colonial era. The
reason behind this rejection and hostility towards homosexuality that is often provided, is that
many African leaders feel that gay rights are against their cultural and religious value systems
and consider the advent of homosexuality to be an imposition by Western nations.
Homosexuality has been described as a lifestyle which is foreign to Africans and is considered
78
morally, culturally and religiously wrong by the majority of the African society (Epprecht,
2013). In some parts of the continent such as Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania and Sudan,
homosexuality is punishable by death. The recent Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014 also
referred to as the ‘Kill the Gays’ Bill is evidence of the intolerance of homosexuality. Leaders
such as Robert Mugabe, the president of Zimbabwe and chairperson of the Southern African
Development Community (SADC), have recently expressed the extent to which they are against
homosexuality. Mugabe believes that homosexuality is ‘un-African’, is a ‘white disease’ and
also a ‘colonial import’. He has threatened to expel gay-rights promoting diplomats in
Zimbabwe, and has stated, ‘Europeans must keep their inhuman homosexual practices within
their own territories and not try to impose them on Africans’. He often refers to homosexuals
as ‘worse than pigs and dogs’ (New Zimbabwe 2014). However, Kaoma (2014, 230) argues that
homosexuality existed in Africa long before colonialism and that the criminalisation of
homosexuality began in England under Henry VIII and was subsequently spread to all the
British colonies. Lopang (2014, 83) believes that the need to present homosexuality as foreign
to the African continent and to promote heterosexuality as part of the African identity was a
‘desperate attempt to define morality through sexual practices’.
The acceptance of homosexuality in South Africa

While South Africa has one of the most advanced constitutions in the world, it does not
necessarily mean that South African society is free of discrimination towards homosexuals. The
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) community continues to confront
challenges because of their sexual orientation. Challenges which are faced by these individuals
include social stigma, homophobic violence (particularly corrective rape), and high rates of
HIV/AIDS infection. In recent years there has also been an increase in reported hate crimes
towards homosexuals. In contrast, homosexuality appears to be more acceptable in the modern
or developed parts of South Africa, as exemplified by Annual Gay Pride events which are held
along the streets of Johannesburg and Cape Town.
In recent years academic institutions have been far more vocal about advocating for LGBT
equality. The University of the Witwatersrand publicly declared its opposing stance on the
recent anti-homosexual legislation in Nigeria and Uganda which criminalises women and men
involved in relationships other than those defined as heterosexual. The university also
denounced the targeted violence that has accompanied this legislation in these and other
countries (University of the Witwatersrand 2014). In addition, the university has launched the
Wits Safe Zones programme in the weeks leading up to the Wits Pride Event. The programme
79
aimed to support members of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, Queer, Intersex,
Asexual (LGBTQIA) community at Wits University and ensure a campus atmosphere that was
supportive, informative and welcoming to all members of the community. The goals of the Safe
Zones programme included ‘1) to increase the overall campus community’s understanding and
awareness of LGBTQIA issues; 2) to provide a greater sense of safety for the gay, lesbian,
bisexual, and transgender student community; 3) to offer information to straight allies in
positions where they may be in contact with LGBTQIA people (as classmates, roommates,
friends, residents, students, staff, faculty, etc.; 4) to act as a resource of information regarding
homophobia, heterosexism, transphobia and LGBTQIA issues at Wits’ (University of the
Witwatersrand 2014).
The LGBT community has emphatically stated that one’s sexual orientation is not a choice
that one is free to make; it is beyond people’s control to choose their attractions. Therefore
members of the LGBT community experience their sexual orientation as part of God’s creation
and not as a result of an intrinsic orientation to evil (Haslan and Levy 2006). Perceiving the
churches’ teachings as wrong, not from God, and as sadistic, is perceived as a far more
comfortable alternative.
Reconciling Christianity and homosexuality

Subhi et al. (2011, 13) conducted a study exploring the challenges faced by Christians who are
homosexual in their attempt at reconciling their sexual orientation with their religious and
spiritual beliefs. Their results showed that the church proposed that the best way to deal with
homosexuality is for the individual to deny and overcome their homosexual feelings. Many of
the participants in the study adopted this approach, which resulted in deleterious effects to their
mental health, as they experienced depression, guilt, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and alienation.
In another study, Rosario, Scrimshaw and Hunter (2011, 3) examined the link between
acceptance, disclosure of sexual orientation and ‘positive affectivity’ (They define positive
affectivity as a state of mood that embraces happiness and satisfaction). The findings of the
study showed that the more open an individual was about sexual orientation the higher their
self-esteem and positive affectivity.
The most common source of conflict for Christians who were trying to accept their sexual
identity is often religious teachings about homosexuality. This conflict was the main finding of
Schuck and Liddle’s (2001, 63) study which explored the religious conflicts experienced by
homosexual individuals. Their participants all said that their priesthood or religious
denomination taught that sex between members of the same gender was a sin or that
80
homosexual people were immoral. Another frequently mentioned source of conflict was that
the church condemned non-marital sex, which dictates eternal celibacy for homosexuals as most
countries do not accept homosexual marriages. Participants felt that there was no place for
homosexuals in the faith in which they were raised due to the prejudicial and discriminatory
views that emanated from the church. Waidzunas (2015, 171) explains that often Christian gays
live painful lives in the ‘toxic closet’, as a result of the fear of condemnation.
Conflicts of religion and sexuality, and the effects on homosexual individuals

The cognitive and emotional effects experienced by homosexuals that could arise from the
conflict between religion and homosexuality were explored in a study by Subhi et al. (2011,
19). In the study it emerged that only a few homosexual Christians were left unaffected by the
conflicts they faced because of their contravening sexuality and religion. The fear that they
would go to hell or that God had rejected them was the most prominent concern. Feelings of
guilt and shame were common as participants felt judged by their religious communities and
were made to feel less than human. Participants often felt depressed, had feelings of self-
loathing or were suicidal.
Coming to terms with their sexuality is not always an easy process due to the religious
conflict. Schuck and Liddle (2001, 63) found that homosexuals identified their homosexual
friends as most helpful in dealing with the conflict of being homosexual and Christian. Talking
to family members, romantic partners or seeking professional help also assisted. Reading books
that addressed the topic of homosexuality and religion also enabled them to gain perspective.
Some respondents stated that joining religious homosexual congregations was helpful as they
did not feel judged and condemned by members of these congregations.
Rodriguez and Ouellette (2000) identified common strategies adopted by homosexuals
when working through these religious conflicts. These included, firstly, rejecting the religious
identity of a Christian and becoming atheist or joining a religion that accepts homosexuality;
secondly, rejecting the homosexual identity and striving to be heterosexual; and thirdly,
developing the skill of ‘compartmentalisation’, when a compromise between two contravening
identities is reached. By keeping the two contravening aspects rigidly separate, conflict
resolution is achieved. They are kept separate to avoid conflicting prescriptions for behaviour.
A final strategy included, identity integration when homosexual Christians are able to
successfully integrate the two contravening identities into a single, new, workable
understanding of the self, being a Christian homosexual.
81
METHODOLOGY
A phenomenological qualitative research approach was chosen for the study in order to obtain
insights into the experiences, views and opinions of homosexual and bisexual students about
their Christian faith. This type of design was selected due its flexibility which would allow for
defining the exploration of themes, enhancing understanding of new terms, as well as the
clarification of existing concepts (Creswell 2009, 203). Inclusion criteria for participants
included that participants had to be homosexual or bisexual, participants needed to consider
themselves to be Christians, and lastly, they had to be a student at the University of the
Witwatersrand (WITS). Snowball sampling was used to invite potential participants and
individual interviews were conducted face-to-face. The researcher used a semi-structured
interview schedule to obtain data and interviews were recorded with participants’ consent. A
pre-test was conducted to ensure the appropriateness of the schedule with two students who met
the criteria for the study. As a result of the pre-test, subsequent changes were made to enhance
the validity of the tool, and the pre-test interviews were not incorporated in the final analysis.
The interview schedule incorporated questions to explore the following research objectives:
• To understand the views and opinions held by homosexual Christians with regards to the
Bible’s teachings on the topic of homosexuality
• To explore the views and opinions Christian homosexuals have about the church’s
response to their sexuality
• To understand how homosexual Christians integrate their sexual orientation with their
Christian faith
• To elicit information on the level of interaction and integration homosexual Christians
experience in the Church and with the Christian community at large.
Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data. To enhance the trustworthiness of the
study the research tool was pretested and the same researcher conducted all the interviews.
Ethical clearance for this study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at
the University of the Witwatersrand. Ethical principles of beneficence, informed consent,
voluntary participation, autonomy, confidentiality and anonymity informed the study. In
particular, privacy and confidentiality were crucial to this study as participants expressed very
personal views on two very sensitive topics, sexuality and religion. Furthermore, participants’
identities were protected, especially as they may have not come out about their sexual
orientation to others. Participants were offered counselling from the Counselling and Career
Development Unit at Wits University if they felt it was necessary after talking about these
82
sensitive issues in the research interviews.
Demographic profile of participants

Ten students participated in the study, including two black females and eight black males.
Participant’s ages ranged from 18‒26, with the average age of participants being 22. The
participants were all Christians and belonged to different Christian denominations: three were
Roman Catholic; five were Protestant; one was a Seventh Day Adventist and one did not belong
to any specific denomination. Both female participants were lesbian, seven of the male
participants were gay and one male participant was bisexual, meaning that he was sexually
attracted to both males and females. There were no transgendered students in the sample.
Participants were given pseudonyms to protect their identities. The pseudonyms were selected
considering the ethnicity of the participant. In South Africa, it is common practice that people
move to the bigger cities in pursuit of furthering their studies as there are many universities and
colleges in the cities. As such only three participants were originally from the Gauteng Province,
three from the Eastern Cape Province, two from KwaZulu-Natal, one from the Free State and one
from the Limpopo province.
Participants were studying in various faculties which ranged from Law and Commerce
(four participants); Humanities (four participants); Science (one participant) and Medicine (one
participant) (See Figure 1). All the participants were students at the University of the
Witwatersrand; most (seven) were undergraduates while three participants were completing
post graduate degrees.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Accepting the Christian faith

Upon being asked to explain how participants had become acquainted with the religion of
Christianity, all the participants explained that they were born into the faith. Through
socialisation, Christian values and culture were assimilated. This theme is captured in the
following responses:
You know when you come from a Christian background you get swallowed into the religion (Roto,
male).
I can’t remember not knowing Christianity. I was brought up in a family where every Sunday
everyone went to Church (Thami, male).
83
3.5
2.5
Year of Study 2
1.5 Under Graduate

1 Post Graduate
0.5
Field of Study
Figure 1: Participants’ field of study and year of study (N=10)
All the participants acknowledged how during their teenage years they had made the conscious
decision to identify themselves as Christians and had also freely adopted the values of
Christianity. Participants spoke about how they were socialised into the religion of Christianity
through their parents, family, and the church. In the process of socialisation children or any
other person learns and adopts norms. Norms refers to what is appropriate and what is
inappropriate, the roles, and also what is expected by society of someone in their role and also
their behaviour in general (Shepard 2009). Relating to social identity theory, participants
acceptance of the Christian faith involved the processes of social categorisation and social
identification. Participants were taught about the Christian faith (social categorisation) and
assimilated many of the teachings, beliefs and practices of the Christian faith and incorporated
them into their religious identity (social identification).
Being a Christian and realising that you’re attracted to people of the same sex
Participants identified that they had felt sexual attraction towards the opposite sex at a very
early age, some as young as four or five. However as they got older they realised that their
sexual attractions did not comply with heterosexual expectations. Their feelings for the same
sex only became problematic when they learnt the word to define these feelings as
‘homosexual’. Only once their feelings had been given a name, did they see and experience
these feelings in a totally different way. The following responses, encapsulates some of these
experiences:
84
I was very very young hey, but I didn’t understand what exactly it was ... I became very concerned
after I read in a book that I am actually gay, all these feelings meant that I am gay (Rotonda, male).
My feelings for girls were the most normal thing until my parents got called into the school for
my asking a girl to be my valentine, that is when I realised that liking people of the same is not
acceptable (Asanda, female).
I always knew that there was something different about me, and I liked it until I realised that I was
different because I was gay (Mzwanele, male).
In line with these findings, constructivists advocate that sexuality is subject to different cultural
variations and that sexual orientations are socially constructed. Existentialists believe that
sexual orientations are grounded in biology and have limited cultural influences (Haslam and
Levy 2006, 472‒485). Within the Christian faith, the expectation is that when one has reached
an acceptable age, one will marry a person of the opposite sex and start a family through means
of procreation. However, this linear projection is not as straightforward for homosexual
individuals. Their process of love and relationships deviates from the standard expectations of
Christianity. Social learning theory suggests that learning and the formation of identity occurs
as a response to social stimuli. Our behaviours and attitudes develop in response from
reinforcement and encouragement from those around us (Anderson and Taylor 2007, 81).
Accepting their sexuality was not necessarily easy, as social responses to their awakening
sexuality made participants feel different and labelled. Furthermore, the Christian teaching of
homosexuality ‘being a sin’ was often confusing for participants as they wrestled with their
sexual identity.
Table 1: Participants’ emotions experienced whilst coming to terms with being homosexual (N=10)
Theme Number of Quotations to illustrate the theme

participants
Confusion 3 ‘I was so confused. I had never met a gay person in my life
besides myself’ (Rotonda, male).
‘I didn’t know what was happening because I clearly understood
that this is wrong’ (Zandile, female).
‘I didn’t even know who to ask or who to talk to because I knew it
was a sin, and I couldn’t out myself to anyone’ (Thami, male).
Denial 4 ‘I began to over masculinise myself’ (Nhlanhla, male).
‘I started off as bisexual actually; I couldn’t accept that I’m
lesbian’ (Asanda, female).
‘I had quite a few girlfriends at once, to prove that I’m not only
straight but I am a player also’ (Sihle, male).
‘I started wearing dresses. I even forced myself to have a crush
on a guy’ (Zandile, female).
Anger towards 4 ‘I always asked God why did this have to happen to me, why
God didn’t he give me a fair chance at life’ (Vuyo, male).
‘My family and I are so devoted to you, why would you punish us
so badly’ (John, male).
‘God said he loves me but why would he give me that is going to
make the whole world hate me’ (Roto, male).
‘God is unfair’ (Asanda, female).
Bargaining with 4 ‘I prayed with all my might, I fasted for days just praying that God
85
Theme Number of Quotations to illustrate the theme

participants
God takes it away’ (Sihle, male).
‘I gave God time frames, I would ask him to prove that he loves
me by taking these feelings away’.
‘I even got baptised, thinking that my sin would be washed away’
(Zandile, male).
‘I pray hard and asked God to take it away, I even swore that I
would deliver the good news of salvation to everyone I met’
(Vuyo, male).
Shame and self- 4 ‘I kept it a secret. It’s still a secret to others even now’ (Nhlanhla,
loathing male).
‘I hated myself so much that I tried to kill myself so that I wouldn’t
be this disgrace that I am’ (Zandile, female).
‘I was so ashamed of myself; I went through a phase of
depression’ (Sihle, male).
‘I didn’t feel clean; I didn’t even want to be around other people,
that’s how much I disgusted myself’ (Mzwanele, male).
Table 1 shows different emotions that participants felt during the process of coming to terms
with their sexuality. For most of the participants this experience was also a spiritual journey as
they looked to God to help them deal with their sexuality. Only one participant felt that he did
not go through an emotional journey in accepting his sexuality. Acknowledging that he always
felt different to others, his family’s unconditional acceptance helped him to be at peace with
who he was. What was apparent from the emotions that participants identified in Table 1 was
that the second stage of social learning theory, the social identification stage was problematic
for participants as their growing sexual identity was often in conflict with fundamentalist
Christian perspectives and African cultural views. This inner turmoil and reflections upon social
identification, resulted in participants starting to question their identification with their own in-
group and compare and potentially view other out-groups as more desirable than the particular
Christian group with which they had initially identified.
Participants’ views about the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality

While the condemnation of homosexual acts in the Bible appears fairly unambiguous, this factor
is only relevant if one views the Bible to be morally sound and that the biblical writers were not
story tellers but actual channels for the voice of God (Hand 2007, 78). None of the participants
felt that the Bible was an authentic authority of what is acceptable in the eyes of God. They
justified this view as they felt that the Bible was written in a specific historical and cultural
context and questioned whether the Bible should be interpreted literally. Slavery, polygamy,
subordination of woman, animal sacrifice are all sanctioned in either the Old or the New
Testament, practices which are not condoned by many societies today (Sumerau, Padavic and
Schrock 2015, 306; Hand 2007, 77).
While participants mostly indicated that they found the Bible oppressive and unreliable,
86
five of the participants expressed the comfort that they found in reading the text. As these
participants explained, they would rather focus on the sections of the Bible which reaffirmed
God’s love and acceptance of them as homosexuals, than give credence to the six or seven
scriptures that speak against homosexuality.
After all is said and done I always sit to myself and think that the Bible says that God created me
in his own image. Why am I so worried then? (Mzwanele, male).
God would never make a faulty productive, after all I did not choose this, my father created me
in His own image (Mbongeni, male).
It doesn’t make sense that God would create us this way only to condemn us, Isaiah 1 verse 18
says the Lord accepts us as we are (John, male).
The Bible says God knew me even before I was born, he knows what is happening to me, and he
knows that I have no power to change it (Asanda, female).
I know that my Father loves me. In the Bible it says Jesus died for all our sins. If being gay is a
sin then my Jesus has died for it (Vuyo, male).
Focusing on the essence of Christianity, which, includes the deeper message of forgiveness and
spiritual reconciliation, motivated participants to continue in their journey of Christian faith and
getting to know God. Participants focused on the greater message in the Bible which is love
and forgiveness. Because of the comfort that these participants found in the Bible they were
motivated to continue in their journey of Christianity and getting to know God more.
In terms of social identity theory, participants may have questioned the legitimacy of the
Christian group to which they belonged. As most churches do not see homosexuality as
complementary to the Christian faith, these ideals would have challenged participants’ sense of
belonging and self-identity. As Niens, Cairns, Finchilescu, Foster and Tredoux (2003, 109)
explain the perceived loss of legitimacy of the in-group results in a ‘negative social identity’
and evokes one of the three responses from an individual: Individual mobility; social creativity
(change of comparison group or change in comparison dimension) and social competition. As
Bosman (2009, 1) explains, many gay Christians may look beyond their own churches due to
the churches discriminatory beliefs about homosexuality and find a new spiritual home
(individual mobility). As new relationships are formed, a deeper sense of meaning and existence
may also be experienced.
‘Coming out’ to family members

‘Coming out’ is the term used to describe the act of letting people know that you are not a
heterosexual through means of dating people of the same sex freely and openly. In fact the issue
of ‘coming out’ was seen to be a contentious one. Three participants felt that they did not owe
any explanations to others about who they were and said:
87
I find it unfair that we have to come out, I’ve never heard of anyone sitting anyone down to explain
to them that they are straight (Nhlanhla, male).
... they have known me my whole life, and besides, I don’t owe anyone any explanations (Roto,
male).
I’m not coming out to anyone until someone comes out to me announcing how much of a man or
a woman they are (Mzwanele, male).
Hand (2007, 69) contends that homosexuality should not be viewed by society as a ‘contentious
issue’ but instead should be viewed as morally legitimate or unproblematic. Only three of the
participants had ‘come out’ and openly spoken about their sexual preferences to their families.
Most participants did not want to be open with their family and cited numerous reasons for this
stance, including the fact that their parents were homophobic; the fear that they would be
disowned; their family would deny or avoid the issue; or the concern that their family would be
disappointed. One participant explained that being a student, she was still financially dependent
on her parents:
I’m still financially dependent on my parents, I feel I like I will be comfortable telling them when
I know that even if they cut ties with me, I am not depending on them for anything (Asanda,
female).
Participants who had come out to their families had mostly experienced the kinds of family
reactions that were anticipated by those who had not come out. The responses revealed how
some parents battled to accept their children’s choices:
My mom hates it, my mom is too religious, she hates it she even prayed that God kills me for
being gay (Thami, male).
My mom doesn’t want to hear anything about it, its Satanism as far as she is concerned (Vuyo,
male).
My mom always includes it in her prayers, even though she has never said it to me, she has made
it quite clear that she thinks being gay is unnatural and we are possessed by some kind of demon
(Zandile, female).
The perceived loss of family or an important social grouping can be very unsettling and for
some even traumatic. Consequently, participants were reluctant to openly admit and
acknowledge their identification with a social group that may have been considered an out-
group by many. As a result most of the participants had not ‘come out’. Some participants felt
that the timing was not yet appropriate to come out to their families but felt that they would be
supported when they did share with family members. Only one participant felt that his family’s
unconditional acceptance of his sexuality helped him to be at peace with who he was.
88
The church and Christians’ response to participants’ sexuality

Whilst churches in the city appeared to be less condemning of homosexuality than churches in
the rural areas, there does not appear to uniformity amongst Christians about the issue of
homosexuality. Sumerau, Padavic and Schrock (2015, 306) note the contradictions that exist
between Christian denominations as some vilify homosexuality whilst others, for example,
mainstream liberal Protestant denominations, have recently started recruiting LGBT members.
Only the participants who attended a Roman Catholic Church felt that they were not
discriminated against by the church on the grounds of their sexuality. For most participants the
most common strategy was to keep their sexuality a secret from the church for fear of rejection.
Instead participants observed how their fellow church members responded to issues pertaining
to homosexuality and subsequently decided not to disclose their sexual identity. Participants
were concerned about the judgmental attitudes of most Christians, and felt that these prejudicial
attitudes did not resonate with the essence of the Christian message of forgiveness and love.
These sentiments were evident in the following quotations:
I wonder if Christians are familiar with the commandment that says thou shall not judge. Christians
are the most judgemental people on earth (Asanda, female).
I have been judged less by non-Christians (Thami, male).
Feelings of disappointment with fellow Christians were also apparent, as participants did not
feel that they received the expected support and nurturance from their faith. Instead, criticism
and judgement were conveyed, as reflected in the following quotations:
When people look at you in disgust, that you even ask yourself if you’re still at church. I don’t
know if Christians don’t realise that they all have their own sins, it’s just that we don’t know about
them (John, male).
They never tried to understand me as a person, they just saw demons and starting bombarding me
with Bible verses (Zandile, female).
It pains when people treat you like less of a person for something that you didn’t even choose
yourself, you’d think Christians would be more compassionate (Asanda, female).
Most Christian churches predominantly view homosexuality as a violation of God’s law and a
threat to family values (Kaoma 2014, 229). Participants were concerned with what they felt
were levels of hypocrisy amongst Christians. They explained that that they were judged on a
daily basis by their fellow Christians because their sin was external, yet the Christian faith
advocates that everyone is a sinner. Drawing upon social identity theory, one of the central
hypotheses of this theory is that in order to enhance one’s own self-esteem and beliefs, members
of an in-group will find negative aspects about an out-group, often resulting in prejudice and
89
discriminatory behaviours towards the out-group (McLeod 2008, 4). In this regard Haslam and
Levy (2006, 484) raise the question whether fundamentalist beliefs serve as a form of ‘boundary
reinforcement’ and is an ego-defensive response that helps fundamentalists to feel validated, in
this way being assured that their approach to sexuality is the correct one.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Participants did not view their sexuality as ‘abnormal’ and ‘sinful’ and therefore did not feel a
need to reconcile the two concepts of homosexuality and Christianity. They perceived their
relationship with Christ as the same as that of any other Christian. Participants were mostly
impacted or affected in the beginning stages of realising and accepting that they were sexually
attracted to people of the same sex. This realisation affected them negatively as they became
aware that who they were was contradicting what was stated in the Bible about being desirable
or acceptable in the eyes of the Lord. Most of the participants reported feelings of confusion,
anger, denial and self-loathing in the initial stages of their realisation. However, as time
progressed they moved into the stage of accepting that there was nothing that they could do to
change. This acceptance emerged after many days of fasting, prayer, and negotiating with God
to take away their feelings of same sex attractions.
All participants had often experienced discrimination and prejudice from the church. They
felt that it was unfair that they were persecuted for a sin that they did not choose to commit and
over which they had no control. The participants reported experiencing hostility almost on a
daily basis and consequently, they had adapted coping strategies which they felt make them
appear rude and harsh to others. Through acknowledging the need to first be true to themselves,
participants realised that their sexuality was a matter between God and themselves.
The issue of homosexuality and Christianity is perhaps more complicated than initially
perceived by many. Accepting their homosexuality was an emotional journey for the
participants, especially since the predominant message from the church is that these two
concepts cannot coexist. Participants spoke of the inner turmoil that they had undergone whilst
working through and accepting their sexual orientation. For participants this process was also
a spiritual journey as they sought solace and guidance from God. Initially this meant fasting
and praying for their sexual desires to change in order to conform to society’s expectations of
a Christian. Hostile responses of Christians to gay issues often caused the participants to cease
fellowship, which further isolated participants. However, this isolation yielded different results
as some felt that they were stronger in their spiritual beliefs and not having to rely on others to
dictate the terms of their spirituality, religious and cultural identity. Social identity theory
90
explains this process as subordinate and superordinate recategorisation as participants reviewed

the social categories to which they had initially identified and then expanded or narrowed their
initial understandings of these social categories (Niens et al. 2003, 110). The result of this
process was that participants could merge their sexual identity and their religious beliefs into
one, despite differing cultural and religious views on the matter. For others ceasing fellowship
had adverse effects upon their relationship with God as they felt a void was created which
moved them further from God. Recommendations for further research would include:
• Research should be conducted to explore the effects on academic performance of students

who are struggling to accept and integrate their sexual orientation and their religion;
• The opinions of campus pastors or ministers on the complementary or contradictory
understanding of homosexuality and Christianity need to be explored;
• A similar study should be conducted with a larger sample at another university. In
particular women should be included in the study so that the views of women students on
this subject are explored;
• It would be interesting to conduct a similar study at a university that is located in a rural
area and then compare the findings from this study which was undertaken at a university
located in an urban area in order to test the assertion in this research that it appears the
urban areas are more accommodating of the LGBT community than the rural areas.
The challenge is for all sectors of society, including religious and academic institutions to
examine the manner in which they address marginalised groups. Not only should there be
support provided for individuals who wrestle with aspects of their sexual orientation but
proactive campaigns need to be conducted promoting and celebrating difference. University
student counselling centres have a vital role to fulfil in this regard. Essentially it is the
individual’s decision as to whether he/she believes that Christianity and homosexuality can
coexist. At the end of the day we each have to live with our own choices.
ACKNOWLDEGEMENT
This work is based on the research supported in part by the National Research Foundation of
South Africa (Unique Grant No 92681).
REFERENCES
Anderson, M. and H. Taylor. 2007. Sociology: Understanding a diverse society. 4th Edition. Wadsworth,
United States of America: Thompson.
91
Bosman, J. 2009. Re-interpreting the spiritual experience of gay men in the Pentecostal/Charismatic
tradition. Practical Theology in South Africa 23(1): 1‒18.
Boswell, J. 1979. The church and the homosexual: An historical perspective, 1979. http://sourcebooks.
fordham.edu/pwh/1979boswell.asp (accessed 15 June 2015).
Creswell, J. W. 2009. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 3rd
Edition. London, United Kingdom: Sage Publishers.
Crooks, R. and K. Baur. 2013. Our sexuality. 12th Edition. Colorado, United States of America:
Benjamin/ Cumming Publishers.
Driscoll, M. and G. Driscoll. 2012. Real marriage: The truth about sex, friendship, and life together.
Tennessee, United States of America: Thomas Nelson Inc.
Ellens, J. 2006. Sex in the Bible: A new consideration. Westport, United States of America: Praeger
Publishers.
Epprecht, M. 2013: Sexuality and social justice in Africa: Rethinking homophobia and forging
resistance. London: Zed Books.
Gerhards, J. 2010. Non-discrimination towards homosexuality: The European Union’s policy and
citizens: Attitudes towards homosexuality in 27 European Countries. International Sociology
25(1): 5‒28.
Gnuse, R. K. 2015. Seven gay texts: Biblical passages used to condemn homosexuality. Biblical
Theology Bulletin 45(2): 68‒87.
Hand, M. 2007. Should we teach homosexuality as a controversial issue? Theory and Research in
Education 5(1): 69‒86.
Haslam, N. and S. R. Levy. 2006. Essential beliefs about homosexuality: Structure and implications for
prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(2): 472‒485.
Henry, M. 1811. Matthew Henry's commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and unabridged.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/ (accessed 22 June
2015).
Kaoma, K. 2014. The paradox and tension of moral claims: Evangelical Christianity, the politicization
and globalization of sexual politics in sub-Saharan Africa. Critical Research on Religion 2(3):
227‒245.
Kutsch, T. 2013. Homosexuality still a crime in 38 African countries. http://america.aljazeera.com/
articles/2013/11/14/senegala-s-criminalizationofhomosexualitypartofaregionaltrend.html
(accessed 2 February 2016).
Lopang, W. 2014. No place for gays: Colonialism and the African homosexual in African literature.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 4(9): 77‒83.
Masango, M. 2002. Homosexuality: A challenge to African churches. HTS: Theological Studies 58(3):
956‒972.
McLeod, S. A. 2008. Social identity theory. www.simplypsychology.org/social-identity-theory.html
(accessed 3 November 2016)
McNeil, J. J. 1993. The church and the homosexual. Boston, United States of America: Beacon Press.
Mirke-Sellassie, G. A. 2000. Early translation of the Bible into Ethiopic/Geez. The Bible Translator
51(3): 302‒316.
New Zimbabwe. 2014. Mugabe threatens to expel gay promoting diplomats. Staff reporter, 18 April
2014. http://www.newzimbabwe.com/news5320Mugabe+to+expel+gay+promoting+envoys/
news.aspx (accessed 5 May 2015).
Niens, U., E. Cairns, G. Finchilescu, D. Foster and C. Tredoux. 2003. Social identity theory and the
authoritarian personality theory in South Africa. South African Journal of Psychology 33(20):
109‒117.
Newman, B. M and P. R. Newman. 1999. Development through life: A psychosocial approach. Belmont,
92
CA. Brooks/Cole Wadsworth.

Phillips, R. 2005. Conservative Christian identity and same-sex orientation: The case of gay Mormons.
New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.
Rodriguez, E. M. and C. S. Ouellette. 2000. Gay and lesbian Christians: Homosexual and religious
identity integration in the members and participants of a gay-positive church. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 39(3): 333‒347.
Rosario, M., E. Schrimshaw and J. Hunter. 2011. Different patterns of sexual identity development over
time: Implications for the psychological adjustment of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths. Journal
of Sex Research 48(1): 3–15.
Sakin Ozen, N., I. Ercan, E. Irgil and D. Sigirli. 2010. Anxiety prevalence and affecting factors among
university students. Asian-Pacific Journal of Public Health 22(1): 127‒133.
Schuck, K. D. and B. J. Liddle. 2001. Religious conflicts experienced by lesbian, gay, and bisexual
individuals. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Psychotherapy 5(2): 63‒82.
Shepard, J. M. 2009. Cenage advantage books: Sociology. 10th Edition. Wadsworth, United States of
America: Cenage Learning.
Subhi, N., D. Geelan, M. McMahon, K. Jusoff, S. M. Mohamad, N. Sarnon, S. Nen, S. Hoesni, S. T.
Chong, I. Fauziah and K. Alavi. 2011. A better understanding of the potential conflict between
Christianity and homosexuality. World Applied Sciences Journal 12(SPL ISS): 13‒19.
Sumerau, J. E., I. Padavic and D. P. Schrock. 2015. Little girls unwilling to do what’s best for them:
Resurrecting patriarchy in an LGBT Christian church. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography
44(3): 306‒334.
Tajfel, H. and J. C. Turmer. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The social psychology
of intergroup relations? ed. W. G. Austin and S. Worchel, 33‒47. Monterey, California:
Brooks/Cole.
University of the Witwatersrand. 2014. Safe zones. http://www.wits.ac.za/safezones (accessed 22 June
2015).
Waidzunas, T. 2015. Reviews: Pray the gay away. American Sociological Association 44(2): 171‒172.
Yarhouse, M. A. 2010. Homosexuality and the Christian: A guide for parents, pastors, and friends.
Minnesota, United States of America: Baker Publishing Group.
93

Christianity and Homosexuality: Contradictory or Complementary? A Qualitative Study of The Experiences of Christian Homosexual University Students

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Christianity and Homosexuality: Contradictory or Complementary? A Qualitative Study of The Experiences of Christian Homosexual University Students

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHRISTIANITY AND HOMOSEXUALITY: CONTRADICTORY OR

COMPLEMENTARY? A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF THE EXPERIENCES

South African Journal of Higher Education http://dx.doi.org/10.20853/31-4-891

Social identity theory

Biblical perspectives about homosexuality

Different Christian perspectives concerning homosexuality

manipulation, and drug abuse to name a few.

African views on homosexuality

The acceptance of homosexuality in South Africa

Reconciling Christianity and homosexuality

Conflicts of religion and sexuality, and the effects on homosexual individuals

sensitive issues in the research interviews.

Demographic profile of participants

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Accepting the Christian faith

1.5 Under Graduate

Figure 1: Participants’ field of study and year of study (N=10)

Theme Number of Quotations to illustrate the theme

Theme Number of Quotations to illustrate the theme

Participants’ views about the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality

‘Coming out’ to family members

The church and Christians’ response to participants’ sexuality

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

explains this process as subordinate and superordinate recategorisation as participants reviewed

• Research should be conducted to explore the effects on academic performance of students

CA. Brooks/Cole Wadsworth.

You might also like