Adherence to what most evangelicals would regard as a false religion is apparently acceptable under some circumstances, according to the Christian Post:
Christians need to understand that any support for Glatze should not be interpreted as support for the Mormon church. Instead it should be viewed as support for an individual and a very important movement, as is done during any interfaith activity.
Glatze should be accepted for who he is – not the result of Mormon conversion, but one of the latest and most prominent examples of former homosexuals who came to acknowledge homosexuality as sin and made the decision to turn away from the sinful lifestyle.
And because Glatze’s conversion is more likely to pull people away from homosexuality than draw people towards the Mormon church, believers should be more concerned about Glatze returning to homosexuality than him joining the Mormon church.
One wonders if ex-gay Scientologists would receive a similarly warm welcome.
WOW! I never would have thought evangelicals would believe that what they considered a cult (Mormonism) to be more acceptable in their eyes than someone who is gay. I guess they believe that what they call the sin of homosexuality is the greater evil over false doctrine and heresy.
What is that old saying? “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”?
This is so ridiculous. The point of being exgay is to submit to God’s will and be born again, according to most evangelicals. If Michael is Mormon, he is still not saved according to most Christian churches. So, what would be the point of his exgay conversion? Is it simply it makes some evangelicals more comfortable? If change comes from committing oneself to Christ and being born again, his being Mormon is not proof of that. Let’s say it is just a fornicating young couple who stop the fornicating and join the Mormon Church. I can’t imagine the author of the article thinking that was necessarily a beneficial thing. Another sign to me that some people have sold their souls to politics and tradition–not God.
However, as a gay:
Glatze should not be accepted for who he is-he is the result of bad parenting.
Glatze may not be saved even through Mormonism just yet. Please correct me if I am wrong.
One of the Elders of LDS in Malaysia once told me a few years back that homosexuality is a sin that can only be cleansed through some sort of blood covenant. In Mormon teachings, Christ only died for Adam’s sins. I wonder if he had done it yet.
I was shown only one verse in their Book that says nothing much about homosexuality, but only Sodom. I tried to google it up, and I think this is it:
“2 Nephi 13:9 The show of their countenance doth witness against them, and doth declare their sin to be even as Sodom, and they cannot hide it. Wo unto their souls, for they have rewarded evil unto themselves!”
Other than this, there is not even the scantest mention of homosexuality in their Book.
I agree that there is not much point with his exgay conversion. Christian fundamentalogically, Glatze is going to hell even as a former homosexual poster boy.
If the fundies were to separate religion from orientation in this case for him, why is it not possible to do it for us LGTs? Just how can they make the statement that it is impossible to be gay and Christian, when they are saying it is OKAY to be Mormon and exgay?
So are they implying the conversion may not be permanent? And are we to call Mormons brothers and sisters now?
Come to think of it, I really kind of pity Glatze for the kind of devious people he is mixing into with now. I wonder what is next for evangelicals in this issue though… Endorsing Mormon’s 1970s electro shock gay repair therapy?
This doesn’t surprise me at all. I’ve met more than one fundamentalist Christian who seemed to be more bothered by the fact that I was gay than they were bothered by the fact that I’m a goddess-worshipping witch.
Yuki, blood covenent is only regarding murder–and it is generally presented as self-imposed. There is a very serious process that the gay person has to go through to become a member of the church, but if they stay chaste while a member of the church, there is no issue.
Another sign to me that some people have sold their souls to politics and tradition–not God.
Amen
Incidentally, folks, we’re not sure Glatze is staying a Mormon. He’s seeking advice from Bam Bam Barber on a good church to attend.
Much like Richard Cohen with his atypical religious history (Moonies and nudist cults), Glatze seems to be searching for Truth (with a capital T). His search has lead him through Budhisms, Taoism, Mormonism, and perhaps is leading to Evangelicalism. Who knows where it will lead from here.
But it does bring up an observation that seems to hold true – those most certain and convinced about their belief – to the point where they want to force others to conform – often flit from theology to theology. Odd, isn’t it?
Glatze’s strange public announcement that he is renouncing his homosexuality isn’t really a religious issue to begin with. It is a political announcement and puts him in line with the anti-gay religious right. Mormon’s have been members of the religious right on the issue of homosexuality for a long time. In fact, Mormons have been huge donors (encouraged through their church) to anti-gay state initiative campaigns (same-sex marriage ammendments, etc). To me, this example of Evangelicals holding their noses while embracing another political ally is consistent with their previous behavior. This is about something far more important than religion: it is about right wing politics.
It’s obvious that the evango-politicians have aligned themselves with what they consider to be the lesser of two evils (The Mormon Church vs. Homosexuality.)
But the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Politics make strange bedfellows, no?
Glatze’s attendance in a Mormon Church will be short lived. Trust me.
There is a certain nuance, that is hard to describe, but Latter-Day Saints eschew controversy and publicity by its members. Shouting from roof-tops (TV/Cable, internet blogs) about your conversion and “problems” is not relished by the LDS General Authorities.
I could almost feel a whole room full of squirming men in a conference room in the Salt Lake HQ when Brother Glatze made some headlines and spoke about his conversion and baptism. Certain aspects of his conversion would have been better handled through the PR division of the Mormon Church. Brother Glatze is acting outside the norm for an L-D Saint.
LDS Authorities admonish a more of a quiet, but proud countenance: Quaker-like. Okay…some might call it smug because Mormons smile so much, but nevertheless, it is quiet and reverenced.
I think it is important to try to understand just what Glatze’s “success” has been. In effect in accepting God and Jesus Christ he accepted also the Bible and what it says about same-sex behavior. He made a choice which is a change of heart about his behavior. While he admits that the thought of sex with men is now disgusting to him, that seems to come from his acceptance of the Biblical injunctions, not a real change of attractiveness. He seems overly needful of marrying and procreating, as that is the real ‘sign’ of his change. Other ex-gay men have followed that rather quick plan with some disastrous results. In other words, Glatze seems too good to be true.
Also, if Glatze had a conversion experience and was led by God, the Holy Spirit, into his faith with Jesus Christ, then how did he end up going to the Mormon church? Glatze has said elsewhere that it was because he had friends there he gravitated to the LDS church. In other words Glatze may have joined the Mormon church ‘on a whim’ without any real knowledge about it; and now Concerned Women leader, Matt Barber, is counseling him about joining an evangelical church? Trying getting out of the Mormon church, that can be a trial itself.
But I don’t get it, God, the Holy Spirit, Jesus took Glatze out of homosexuality, but failed to get him into the “correct” church? Isn’t that at least a relatively more ‘easy’ task than denouncing homosexuality which for Glatze was apparently a two or three-year trial?
YukiChoe some of the dumbest notions are believed and even taught by Mormon missionaries, most of whom are 19 through their early 20’s. That is why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sends them out with disussion manuals which they are supposed to memorize and keep to the basic teachings. People (including Mormon Missionaries) can believe what they want to but there is no such doctrine in the LDS Church that states the only way homosexuality can be cleansed is through some blood covenant. That missionary was pretty clueless and sounds very stupid when it comes to the atonement of Jesus Christ.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that each person will be accountable for their own sins and not for Adams transgression (NOT the notion that Jesus died only for Adam) as stated in one of the LDS Articles of Faith. The LDS Church also teaches that Christ died for ALL people (Mormon and non-Mormon) everywhere and that all will eventually be saved from hell unless they are a child of perdition. Children of perdition are Satan and his angels and a few others who have had the knowledge and seen Christ face to face and turned completely away from Him and chosen to do reject all that is good. Every degree of glory as taught in Mormon doctrine was bought and purchased by the blood of Christ.
17 And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.
(Book of Mormon – Mosiah 3:17)
If that is not Christian I don’t know what is and there are a whole host of other teachings found within the Book of Mormon that are like this as they exalt Christ and give Him glory.
I think you have done an excellent job explaining the conflict between how fundamentalists feel about gay people and mormons. You’re also right that LDS scriptures do not even mention homosexuality at all. The LDS Church has found itself in bed with some “strange bedfellows” (the LDS/Evangelical situation) that the LDS Church has been wrestling with as the Church has gotten more involved in politics regarding same sex marriage a situation that I think is a travesty.
There are many LDS bishops and other leaders who are more liberal in their approach to GLBT issues but unfortunately the LDS Church hierarchy has had a tough time wrapping their minds around the reality that God has created a minority of us who are different than the dominating doctrine that they emphasize. They have tried to fit the proverbial round peg into a square hole trying to force us to conform but their track record has been dismal. As Carol Lynn Pearson (a famous LDS poet and writer) stated in her book No More Goodbyes: Circling the Wagons Around Our Gay Loved Ones that the LDS Church has moved forward a little bit because at least they currently realize that most gay people were probably born gay. Many LDS leaders at headquarters in Salt Lake City are somewhat suspicious of the ex-gay movement. They aren’t dumb. The ex-gay Evergreen organization has become an organization that fulfills two needs. One is to keep the Church’s policy against GLBT alive by denying GLBT equal rights because of the denial of the reality that we deserve these blessings. The other need is to at least keep GLBT people celibate even if the majority cannot in all good conscience mary opposite sex parnters. Check out http://www.affirmation.org when you get a chance.
I think that the only thing that will change the situation with Fundamentalists and Mormons is when the majority of Americans force them to change because all of society has changed and to be homophobic will be an embarassment and shame to these religions. So we must educate and keep up with these blogs and forums. Things are slowly changing.
The commenters at Christianity Today’s blog seem to agree, thus far, that the Christian Post is way out of line with the teachings of Jesus.
I just read the editorial that this post is talking about on the Christian Post and it seems they added a clarification at the bottom. The focus of the editorial is that this man was seeking Christ and realizing that he was sinning. Yet it never endorsed the Mormon Church. It does in fact say that him going into the Mormon Church has its eternal consequence. I think people should read the whole editorial first before they make the judgment of saying that it is an edorsement. As our responsibility as Christians we should reach out to people like Glatze to guide them away from such mistakes. It is not uncommon for people who are new in the Christian faith to become easily misguided. It is our responsibility to shepherd them and our fault when we allow these things to occur knowingly around us. Just as the book of James states Faith is not faith without deeds. So to reflect the Love of God that we were given and the convictions that we claim we should be active in sharing this love and guiding the lost and young toward Christ and our father with a tense heart. We were not asked to save them but we have been given the responsibility.
The conclusion is I think someone who is reaching to Christ so earnestly is more likely to have open ears to the truth. This alone is a miracle of God that he worked to open this manâs heart and mind to receive the truth. We have to be the Christians that act like Philip in Acts 8:26 when he met the Ethiopian eunuch. Not to criticize but I believe that God is at work and in the end his glory will be revealed.
Some would call that “clarification” damage control. The addendum doesn’t clarify, it says something else. When that is done, it is customary to issue a retraction.
The original post is not about Glatze’s misguided actions, but those of the Christians around him. Many here are quite familiar with this attitude, that it is most important that a person decide they don’t want to be gay and all else comes second.
I’m sure they would if they were a newbie to Christianity and were in the process of getting help from someone who was suggesting some “scripturally-sound” evangelical churches for them to attend, as Glatze is.
And, personally, I liked the Christian Post editorial, and agree with its conclusion:
We’ve all made mistakes on our paths toward God. But what’s more important than the decisions we’ve made in the past is THE decision we make in the end – that is, the decision for Christ.
For an evangelical right-wing fundie to say that they are concerned about a mormon’s state of grace is laughable. Politically conservative evangelicalism is no more orthodox to the teachings of Christ than McDonald’s hamburgers are true to being actual organic foodstuffs.