How Should We Think About Homosexuality?
By Mark A. Yarhouse
Reviewed by
Geoffrey W. Sutton
CITE THIS REVIEW:
Sutton, G. W. (2025, September 25). Framing Sexuality Through Lenses: A Review of Mark Yarhouse’s How Should We Think About Homosexuality? Interdisciplinary Book and Film Reviews. https://suttonreviews.suttong.com/2025/09/framing-sexuality-through-lenses-review.html
ABSTRACT
This review examines Mark A. Yarhouse’s How Should We Think About Homosexuality? (2022), a contribution to the Questions for Restless Minds series. Yarhouse presents a tripartite framework—the integrity, disability, and diversity lenses—through which Christians might engage questions of sexuality. Yarhouse succeeds in offering accessible categories and pastoral exhortations toward humility and compassion, yet there are also limitations. The framework risks reinforcing heteronormative assumptions, pathologizing lesbian and gay (LG) identities, and abstracting sexuality into theological models that overlook lived experience. From a survivor-centered perspective, these shortcomings highlight the need for approaches that prioritize the painful spiritual struggles experienced by gay Christians, questions of biblical interpretation, and the capacity for systemic change (Sutton, 2025).
Keywords: homosexuality, Christian ethics, identity, survivor narratives, institutional critique
BOOK SUMMARY
Yarhouse (2020) grounds his discussion of homosexuality in a theological vision of sex and marriage rooted in Genesis 1–2. He argues that sexuality is a divine gift designed for covenantal, lifelong heterosexual marriage and that sexual intimacy carries a spiritual dimension beyond physical expression. To help Christians navigate contemporary debates, Yarhouse distinguishes between same-sex attraction, orientation, and identity, underscoring the importance of how individuals narrate their experiences.
Central to the book is Yarhouse’s three-lens framework. The integrity lens emphasizes moral and ethical boundaries, affirming heterosexual marriage as the only faithful context for sexual expression. The disability lens interprets same-sex attraction as part of human brokenness, not chosen but reflective of the fall. The diversity lens highlights the dignity and resilience of LG communities, encouraging recognition of sexual minorities as cultural groups with their own strengths. Yarhouse encourages readers to understand all three perspectives, even if they privilege one, and he consistently calls for pastoral sensitivity, humility, and hospitality in Christian engagement.
Yarhouse demonstrates an understanding of the challenges faced by Christians who experience same-sex attraction. He explores strategies to assist individuals in managing these intersecting identities. Possible approaches include affirming a gay identity in alignment with contemporary societal norms, considering transitions from a same-sex to a heterosexual orientation—though Yarhouse advises prudence regarding expectations of a successful transition—and, alternatively, choosing to refrain from publicly identifying as gay while still acknowledging their sexuality. In conclusion, Yarhouse identifies Christlikeness as the primary standard for evaluating spiritual maturity, rather than emphasizing the reduction of same-sex attraction or the enhancement of heterosexual attraction.
EVALUATION
Yarhouse’s work offers several strengths. His distinctions between attraction, orientation, and identity provide clarity for lay readers, resisting simplistic conflations. His pastoral emphasis—urging compassion, humility, and listening—marks a constructive shift from adversarial rhetoric that has often characterized conservative discourse. For conservative Christians seeking to engage LG persons without resorting to condemnation, these exhortations represent a meaningful contribution.
However, the framework also reveals the boundaries of a conservative approach unlikely to please either evangelicals focused on a close reading of scripture or the affirmative stance of scholars like
David P. Gushee (2017) or
Hays and Hays (2024). The integrity lens, by grounding sexual ethics exclusively in heterosexual marriage, reinforces heteronormative assumptions that marginalize LG Christians and foreclose the possibility of affirming same-sex relationships as covenantal and faithful. The disability lens, while intended to reduce moral blame, inadvertently pathologizes queer existence, echoing institutional myths that cast LG persons as deficient or disordered. The diversity lens, though it acknowledges the dignity of LG individuals, is presented as one option among others rather than as a fully valid theological stance, subtly undermining its affirming potential.
From a person-centered perspective, the abstraction of sexuality into select theological categories is particularly problematic. By privileging doctrinal models over lived testimony, Yarhouse risks perpetuating institutional harm, even under the guise of pastoral care or Christian counseling. Survivors of religious trauma often testify that theological systems which pathologize or marginalize their identities contribute directly to long-term psychological and spiritual harm. In this light, the book’s pastoral sensitivity, while highly commendable, may function as a softer rhetorical strategy that leaves exclusionary structures intact.
The implications for faith communities are therefore mixed. On one hand, Yarhouse provides a framework and resolution strategies that may encourage Christians to approach LG persons with greater compassion. On the other hand, by maintaining heteronormative boundaries and pathologizing queer identities, the framework risks reinforcing the very institutional policies that have historically silenced and harmed sexual minorities.
CONCLUSION
How Should We Think About Homosexuality? succeeds in offering accessible categories and a pastoral tone that may help compassionate evangelical Christians engage questions of sexuality with greater humility. Yet its conservative theological commitments, categorical framing, and nonaffirming trajectories ultimately limit its usefulness for Christian congregations committed to inclusivity. By abstracting sexuality into lenses rather than centering lived experience, Yarhouse risks perpetuating the very harms his genuine sensitivity seeks to mitigate. For LG Christians, I suspect that maintaining both identities—gay and Christian—will mean finding sacred spaces where neither identity is invisible nor erased.
REFERENCES
Gushee, D. P. (2017). Changing our mind: A call from America’s leading evangelical ethics scholar for full acceptance of LGBT Christians in the church. Read the Spirit Books.
Hays, C. B., & Hays, R. B. (2024). The widening of God's mercy: Sexuality within the biblical story. Yale University Press.
Sutton, G. W. (2025). Framing Sexuality Through Lenses: A Critical Review of Mark Yarhouse’s How Should We Think About Homosexuality? Interdisciplinary Book and Film Reviews.
Yarhouse, M. A. (2022). How should we think about homosexuality? Lexham Press. [AMAZON]
Book Author – Recent Bio
Mark A. Yarhouse, Psy.D., is a clinical psychologist who specializes in conflicts tied to religious identity and sexual and gender identity. He assists people who are navigating the complex relationship between their sexual or gender identity and Christian faith. He is the Dr. Arthur P. Rech and Mrs. Jean May Rech Professor of Psychology at Wheaton College, where he runs the Sexual and Gender Identity (SGI) Institute and the Mental Health Collective.
Review Author
Geoffrey W. Sutton, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Evangel University, holds a master’s degree in counseling and a PhD in psychology from the University of Missouri-Columbia. His postdoctoral work encompassed education and supervision in forensic and neuropsychology. As a licensed psychologist, he conducted clinical and neuropsychological evaluations and provided psychotherapy for patients in various settings, including schools, hospitals, and private offices. During his tenure as a professor, Dr. Sutton taught courses on psychotherapy, assessment, and research. He has authored over one hundred publications, including books, book chapters, and articles in peer-reviewed psychology journals.
REFLECTIONS
“Three lenses, one question: does Yarhouse’s framework heal or harm?”
“Pastoral sensitivity without structural change risks becoming compassion without justice.”
“Integrity, disability, diversity—what’s missing is dignity rooted in lived experience.”
“A softer tone doesn’t undo exclusionary structures.”
“Survivor voices remind us: frameworks matter less than the harm they perpetuate.”
“Christlikeness measured by compassion, not conformity.”
“Hospitality is not enough if the door remains closed to full belonging.”
“Pastoral care that pathologizes is still harm, even when spoken gently.”
Comments
Post a Comment