We have to be really careful with analogies. Too often we try and teach with analogies in the wrong circumstances. Sometimes metaphors can really enhance a lesson, but far too often people in the Church will use an analogy incorrectly in their attempts to understand and explain homosexuality. I think that my Bishop is such a person.
Weeks ago he compared my suffering to the suffering of blacks in the Church before Temple and priesthood opportunities were offered to them. He meant that the Church just didn’t understand homosexuality yet, but that it eventually would. When I took it to mean that Temple blessings would one day be offered to same-gender couples, he immediately backed off the analogy saying that it was way different. Same-gender relationships will never be ok.
Today he used the new popular fat girl analogy. The church doesn’t expect anything more from me than what it expects from any single person. It’s like the fat girls in the church who, through no fault of their own, can’t get a date or marry, and therefore can’t have sex. Ok, so I can do what single people do, then, and (despite my fatness) do my best to attract someone that I like, hold hands, kiss, court, and ok I’ll stop there because we can’t get married. Sexual abstinence is fine, but that’s not what they are asking. The Bishop was quick to say, “Ok that’s not a good analogy either. You can’t be romantically involved with a man.” Ok. Celibacy.
There is no analogy in the Church for celibacy. (unless you can think of one, in which case, do share).
Clearly homosexuality in the Church is its own circumstance. It just doesn’t compare to anything else; it is its own ballgame, with its own rules. The problem is, too many people are trying to write the rules, and too few are actually trying to play the game. (did you like how I hit the message home with that nice baseball analogy)