In a short interview with Warren Throckmorton published today, former gay youth activist and now ex-gay Michael Glatze confirmed that he was recently baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, known popularly as the Mormons.
In the interview, which Throckmorton hints will be the first of several, Glatze denied rumours that he had been influenced by controversial self-help “guru” Roy Masters, but did state that he was now a member of the LDS Church. This was not mentioned in the WND story, nor in any Christian media, and for a very obvious reason: The LDS Church is generally regarded by conservative evangelical and orthodox Christians as a heretical, non-Christian cult. For evangelicals, this kind of disclosure would ordinarily cast a cloud over, and more likely completely invalidate, a person’s claim to have met with and been changed by God.
Of his testimony, Glatze said:
I did not have any counseling or ministry help. That was not the way God wanted it, for me. For others, that may be the case. For me, it was all on my own, and with God. I spent nights, days, so much time alone, praying and “giving up my will” to His.
Throckmorton elaborates:
One thing that seemed clear to me was that Michael wanted to convey that he has had an encounter with God. He said: “What changed me was the words of Jesus.”
Faith figures very large in Glatze’s conversion. His description of nights and days “alone,” “praying,” and “giving up [his] will” to God suggests a mystical or even miraculous process. He explicitly denies he received help from any person, whether religious or secular. God, Jesus and faith are not incidental to Glatze’s testimony, but absolutely central to its claims. But which God and which Jesus? The evangelical position on whether Mormons are Christian has historically been very clear. The words of Chuck Colson are typical in this regard:
[No] Christian body, even those liberal ones, accepts Mormon baptism as valid. It’s not a Christian baptism because Mormonism is not Christian.
Or again, from evangelical apologetics ministry CARM:
A [Mormon] has a false Jesus, and, therefore, a false hope of salvation.
So far, Exodus has wisely steered clear of endorsing Glatze. But this has not stopped other evangelicals from rushing in to validate Glatze’s testimony, including the American Family News Network/One News Now, Peter LaBarbera at Americans for Truth, Stephen Bennett, Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America, and of course WorldNetDaily, who broke the story. In doing so, they have not simply validated a moral decision, but a religious experience that in any other context would be denounced as false.
Given the crucial nature of Glatze’s religious experience to his testimony, how can evangelical leaders continue to hail Michael Glatze as an ex-gay success story without implicitly endorsing his religious beliefs?
To those ex-gay leaders who have been quick to endorse Glatze, XGW asks: Will you continue to endorse Michael Glatze’s religious testimony now that it appears his Jesus is that of the Latter Day Saints?
Update: Apology & belated hat-tip to Lynn David for uncovering the LDS connection.
2nd update: This article referenced by the Christian Post.
David,
I am a little surprised with much of this post. While it’s (obliquely) worth noting that the exgaydom is LDS derived, I’m not sure that issuing a challenge to those of other faiths about theological issues is in any way pertinent.
Exodus appears to have no problem working with Evergreen, or Jonah. They may well be thinking it’s such a pity everyone else but them is hell bound but, even if so, that appears overwhelmed by having a common enemy.
Sorry, “Dave”.
Aaaah!!! There’s too many of you! 😛
I am not sure of the grounds you are discounting Michael’s experience. In fact, after reading this new information, it makes me take him even more seriously. He seems to understand that a lot of the standard ex-gay groups are mostly into sing-songy verses and chapters. That is why it is so hard to believe an extremely queeny sounding John Paulk, among others, speak in rote cliches about “walking witht he Lord”.
At least Michael seems to have gone through a very real and personal miracle. I myself have not been able to fulfill the ideals of Christianity and am still 100% gay, but I can’t knock someone who seems to have hit rock bottom and then totally surrendered to God. Isn’t that how almost all historical salvation has occurred?
I said something in another post that was similiar, but I am glad you put this post. Mormon exgay situations are a different breed, I believe. As I stated, the LDS church has a very serious problem with gay or formerly gay converts. When I was a missionary, we would have to allow the convert a year before baptism if they were gay (sexually active heterosexuals can be baptized in days or weeks). Approval would have to come from the Mission President, the church hierarchy, and top ranks. The convert had to have an interview with the Seventies or Apostles (that is really high up there). It is a tough situation. The Church is very heterosexual and homosocial (males and females are often separated at many functions). Sex and heterosexuality are prime elements, and a non-married male comes under enormous pressure (after a mission, you are generally pressured to marry in six months). The afterlife is about sex, family, heterosexuality (in fact, without marriage, you cannot acheive the highest elements of heaven). If a male is over a certain age, they are (or at least were) considered special interest and had special activities to get them married. You are a leper if you are single without a clear reason. The Church favors males in all ways, so women are subservient for the most part. It is a hard road–and I suspect Michael knows very little about behind the scenes. I was attracted to the Church because of its ultra-maleness, and I think many people are, but that wears off.
The temple is the make or breaker—it broke me big time. It was so surreal and bizarre that I realized it had nothing to do with what I had come to believe about the Church. I think many people encounter the temple though and act as if everything is normal but is not.
Also, there is a serious tension between evengelicals and Mormons. I don’t know of any Mormons who would read WorldNetDaily or write an article for the place. Mormons are actually fairly tolerant of other religions (although they think theirs is correct), but they hate the attacks that come from places like WorldNetDaily. Perhaps it is a sign that WorldNetDaily is more comfortable with Mormonism than homosexuality.
Grantdale, you are missing the point. In this case, Glatze is attributing 100% of his ex-gay change to a religious conversion. Evangelical (and even not so evangelical) Christians take the firm stance that Mormonism is a heretical cult. Cooperating with eachother on lobbying efforts and such is one thing, but attributing a spiritual conversion to what they consider a false version of Jesus is quite another.
I realize you have little patience for matters of faith, but in this case the issue is quite germane I assure you. Aaron is heading in the right direction, this is a matter of priorities and for an evangelical Christian, there should be only one answer.
@Jerry
Dave wasn’t even attempting to do so. His post has nothing to do with whether your or I or anyone else here considers Glatze’s experience genuine – though I’m sure each person can evaluate that from the evidence as it unfolds. The point here is a matter of hypocrisy among those who are championing his conversion in direct contradiction to their own faith. There are times when you have to evaluate someone by their own rules.
Gee…. no atta-boy, honorable mention or hat-trick for my post at Dr Throckmorton’s blog about finding Glatze’s baptism into the LDS church or even my post here at Ex-Gay Watch:
https://exgaywatch.com/2007/07/2531/#comment-26499
Which pointed out the same and questioned the WND/Mormon connection and considered that WND would put aside the Mormon connection for anything to turn the screws on gay people.
But not to pitch a hissy-fit or spread the drama….. but I feel slighted.
*sulks*
@Lynn David
Your error post was accidentally deleted, but I would appreciate it if you would copy and paste the error next time and send it to me at david@exgaywatch.com. I suspect it is the edit plugin.
I apologize that we didn’t give you credit. I may have mistakenly thought that Warren’s discovery was a separate issue. If not, then technically I guess he should have given you the hat tip 😉 Do you want us to note at the bottom that you were the one to first discover that connection?
Update: I got your error information (thanks!) and I believe I fixed the problem, but please let me know if it happens again. If anyone else gets errors when posting or editing a comment, please let me know at the email above. Thank you.
You’ve done enough David… I’m just happy to see that others have now come to see the dichotomy between WND and Glatze as a Mormon. It’s not necessary to do anything to acknowledge that I discovered the Mormon connection. You let me throw my little hissy fit above, LOL! You were afterall quoting Dr T and he acknowledged my post as the source in his post. What’s strange is I cannot now post to that thead or anywhere on his blog, that has me flustered. I finally had tried to do it via Email, not sure if that works or not.
The gods must hate me…. *sigh* LOL!
I don’t believe anyone has the right to question someone’s personal experience with God. There is but one God and he listens to all of his children if they seek him in humble supplication. It doesn’t matter if they are Mormon, Jew, Baptist or any other religion. No one religion has sole ownership to prayer as a conduit to our Father in Heaven. You know it is good and true by seeing the fruit that it bears.
I don’t think I’ve shared this particular aspect of my vicarious experience with reparative therapy, but I believe it makes a great deal of sense in this particular instance. I was told several times by at least three (that I can think of off-hand) different therapists who treated ex-gays and their spouses, that the single most non-negotiable and primary factor leading toward success against unwanted same sex attraction was the motivation of the client. This wasn’t the most comforting news at the time, but, looking back on the whole ordeal, it may have been the most honest bit of information I recieved.
Viewing Glatze’s conversion in this light makes it more plausible for me based on the experiences I’ve had. It seems to me that, for the most part, people hear what they want to hear, see what they want to see, and believe what they want to believe. “White-knuckling” one’s way through life’s sexual temptations can very easily be viewed as the most scriptural thing to do for many folks, even if you’re in a cult or even if you’re straight. 😉
The proof of the pudding on this case, as it concerns the ex-gay movement at large, really will be whether or not Glatze’s religious attribution for his motivation/change will hold water with the overtly fundamental crowd of Exodus affiliated ministries.
Jerry, as David R explained, I was not personally discounting Glatze’s experience. The issue here is not Glatze’s experience, but the glaring inconsistency shown by those who have endorsed him. The encounter with God is not incidental to Glatze’s testimony, but absolutely central.
Lynn David, sorry! [Blushes]
Please David, don’t do this type of thing: I realize you have little patience for matters of faith.
We are quite deliberately secular here and avoid laying out our own personal beliefs, but you are really in no position to make that statement.
We questioned the “challenge” that was posed, not the fact that either group considers the other to be in the wrong religion.
The post contains a crucial but hidden assumption in the haste to issue that challenge: that “evangelicals” — let alone the one’s specifically mentioned — all believe that God would never do anything positive for a non-believer.
The conflicting beliefs regarding “true” vs “false” religions are about who will ultimately reach heaven. It has been assumed that this also means they think that God would never help a non-believer or a false-believer in this life.
“God did change him. He did it despite the fact Glatze is currently in a cult. He did it because he loves all people. And one day Glatze will truly find God.”
That’s how we expect they would respond to the challenge, such as it is. They will credit God for the change, and at the same time refuse to credit it to his membership of LDS.
(and hence: you may wish to restate what it is about the religious that we have little patience for. It is not “matters of faith” per se.)
Blimey Pam — I think you just said much the same sort of thing as we just did.
But… talk about a turnaround! This time you took it via the secular talking about motivation, and we answered from the religious talking about God performing small graces for anyone.
(AaaaaHHHHH!!!!!!!!! The shame. Our holiday in Bali is long overdue!)
Grantdale, I hear your concern but the nature of the coverage Glatze’s testimony has received from many quarters makes it very hard for leaders to take the position you describe without backtracking. Those I highlighted have specifically touted Glatze’s story as a religious conversion, not simply as an example of “common grace” (the theological term for the kind of divine help you describe).
Family News Network:
Stephen Bennett:
Concerned Women for America repeat the same message in their interview with Glatze, and Peter LaBarbera at Americans for Truth praises them.
While some evangelicals may have been cautious (or stayed clear altogether, like Exodus, so far), those who have explicitly embraced Glatze’s religious conversion have a problem.
G/D,
I’m in complete agreement with you regarding the holiday in Bali…..mine is looooong overdue as well! 😉
So where do I fit in the scale of good and bad ex-gays when it comes to this story>
🙂
Hmm. If Stephen Bennett is Skeletor, you’re probably Panthor. 😛
Seriously, I suppose it all depends what you say next, if anything, Peter. We await with baited breath!
Oh Peter, you’d be on the bad side for saying this about the comments made here:
It is truly amazing the scorn and hatred being poured upon Glatze because he didn’t make the same life-choices as some of the commentators.
Obviously you didn’t bother to do even a cursory content analysis. Someone did after reading your allegation… here, using their usual method. And quickly stopped bothering after it revealed a situation nothing like you had claimed.
Note: didn’t find a single person scorning Glatze at XGW for his “life-choices”. We don’t care.
The overwhelming majority of people were, however, mighty pissed of about the anti-gay abuse directed at themselves from Glatze, they questioned his motivation for the statement etc, and they didn’t think his tirade was ultimately going to be very helpful for exgays.
Didn’t bother reviewing Throckmorton’s site. Done too many of them over the years already.
———————————–
Pam — ha ha, but ours is already booked… 11 more sleeps until we’re slopping around in our sarong and enjoying long gin-and-pomelo-juices as the sun sets over Seminyak. We’ll post up a photo or two for you when we get back. Promise 🙂
We need our Indonesia-fix every couple of years or we go quite silly. Love the place.
———————————-
Dave, we do get it (really). “He has found Jesus, but he is following false doctrine in false church.” blah blah etc. You’ll get nothing but spin out of them, but guess you’ve already guessed that’s how they’ll respond. Annoying aren’t they 🙂
Dave R,
Warren and I are working on a follow-up to his interview with Glatze. If it comes off you might find the answer you want.
I am going to post on Glatze’s mormonism, I just want to wait for a few more things to drop through my email box.
Oh, and where do I get the woprdpress plugin to do the “5 minute editing” thing you have?
You’d have to speak to David Roberts or Mike Airhart to find out about the plug-in – I don’t know anything about the technical side of this site.
Look forward to the piece with Warren.
Lynn David:
I was about to post the VERY FIRST COMMENT on this post but decided I’d posted enough for the night and went to bed instead. I want to say I immediately thought of your comment in the “Blame Game” entry when I saw this one! I appologize for not speaking up sooner. I have definitely learned a lesson! catching “ward” – a minute detail – and associating it with the LDS church was an excellent deduction. Great work on your part! You found a detail that opens up a huge can of worms and makes this case very interesting!
I couldn’t bear to see Lynn go without recognition any longer, so I added a belated hat-tip!
@David Rattigan… whoops, my bit of apology as I got my David “R’s” confused and thought David Roberts wrote the piece. But alls well that ends well…. unless I drop my first name and add my last name to my posting persona… then we’d have a third David “R!” That’d probably break the Blog! LOL!
As far as Glatze goes, there is ex-gay and then there is the more “clinical” ex-homosexual, concerning the sexual gender orientation. Glatze almost seems to be one of Nicolosi’s perfect ex-gay, whose psychosis was driven by parental issues and when confronted, his gayness disappeared. But I am not sure that has any applicability to homosexuality in general. Even Glatze has been quoted as saying “Healing from the sins of the world will not happen in an instant, but, it will happen” [From: Wayne Besen – Fall Church News Press]. So perhaps not so instantaneous.
It could be that those with who are highly motivated individuals are those who simply can see the “other side” clearly in their mind, because for them homosexuality is not innate. Still a high degree of motivation is not necessarily a sign of eventual “success.” It is taken as a given that those who enter Exodus ministries or other therapies are highly motivated individuals, seeking “change.” The generally quoted quarter to third of those who find “success” however don’t necessarily find what they considered their definition of “change” going into their attempt. But then there are the two-thirds to three-quarter of “highly motivated” individuals who do not find that “success” in any form.
Thanks to you both, Emily K and David Rattigan… ;~)
Damn, it seems I’m a day late and a dollar short, but here’s two more cents.
I admit that Glatze’s Mormon conversion story struck me the same way. Bennett, LaBarbera and Glatze seem odd bedfellows, maybe they will form a new denomination.
I will have to concede my original emotional reaction (surviving fundamental roots, I guess) to grantdale’s logic. He’s right, these people have the common ground that gays suck to build on. I should have known this since Exodus referred me to a Mormon counselor back in the 90’s. When I questioned that, they told me there was no one else in my area.
As an aside, I am curious about Glatze’s religious “aunt” who “never judged, but was firm” about Glatze’s former untoward ways. Glatze wants everyone to believe that he wrestled with God one on one and voila, presto chango. But he was “weak” and open to influence. His Christianity could have been caused by an overbearing aunt from his childhood.
GD,
That content analysis thing is hilarious!!! Where did you find that?
@grantdale
The persona you offer here is really the only valid reference for me to use. This isn’t a value judgment, but an observation — one which apparently agrees with your own desire to remain secular here. Dave’s post elaborates on core doctrines and the hypocrisy of not following one’s own beliefs, and these can be tedious to even the most fully indoctrinated.
For all I know, in real life you are closet evangelicals 😉
Hi. This is Michael Glatze. Just wanted to let you know that my born-again experience was in 2003. My conversion took from 2003 to 2006-ish. I’ve only been associated with the LDS church in the last two months, because I have some friends there. Hope that helps.
Michael Glatze
I thought the open letter to Glatze addressed the concerns well. However, considering YGA’s target market is youth, I found the language and debate to possibly be a little above the comprehension level of most of the magazine/website’s readers.
On a side note, Michael Glatze just wrote quite a long comment on my blog post about him. The post goes into how he believes homosexuality is a human construct and doesn’t exist in reality. Unfortunately, while he does appear to be trying to save people in the name of God, his words don’t show me that he remembers where he came from. He offers no real compassion or empathy for gay youth struggling with being gay, and really offers nothing for the thousands of ex-gays that are trying to come out of being gay but haven’t had the success he claims to have had
I emailed Glatze and he responded to my concerns that he seems to have forgotten where he came from, even if he has gone ex-gay. I plan to post about both of our emails soon.
I wish Mr. Glatze well in his faith journey and recovery from undesired behaviors.
However, I hope LaBarbera, Bennett, CWFA et al reconsider their hasty, knee-jerk exploitation of ex-gay struggles — and their embarrassing assumption that all people who believe in Jesus are alike and must march in lockstep behind orthodox Christian evangelical or fundamentalist theological leadership. Obviously — in the case of Mormons as well as mainline and progressive Christians — they do not.
And I hope Mr. Glatze might eventually address my original objections to his story in WorldNetDaily:
– He has not accepted personal responsibility for addictive/compulsive behavior, but instead blamed “homosexuality,” whatever that word means.
– He has not clearly stated that he is now sexually attracted to women, nor has he clarified that, while he is “repulsed” by same-sex activity, he is also no longer aroused or attracted to it.
– He has not explained the stark disconnect between his past gay-affirming testimonies and his sudden sweeping condemnation of all things “gay”
– He claims not to have experienced “homosexuality” until age 14. That does not
remotelyresonate with the experience ofmostmany ex-gays/strugglers, much lessmostmany gay people, including me.– He has wrongly assumed that, because he behaved irresponsibly, immaturely or sinfully as a gay youth, the rest of us do. And by broadcasting that false assumption as a fact, he has libeled us.
Many of these points were raised — more directly and diplomatically — in the open letter by Daniel DiRito at the newly restored YGA Magazine web site.
As Mr. Glatze strives to walk in the footsteps of Jesus, I hope he will eventually repent of these offenses and seek reconciliation with those who have been wronged.
Well, having been Mormon for 37 years, I know that the LDS Church’s current stance for men with same sex attarctions is to remain single and celibate. Unfortunatley, I went the “get married hoping it would cure me” route, and while it was not a disaster, it did not end happily. I worked for many years with therapists and counselors hoping to at least gain an attraction to women if nothing else. I hoped I could deal with my feelings and somehow gain the “perfect” life I had been promised. After 12 years of struggling, I accepted who I am and that if God made me this way it was for a reason.
I wish Michael the best of luck. I would not judge those who walk down that path. I do, however, beleive, that the most one can accomplish is to dampen down the feelings and try to accept the substitute that is a heterosexual relationship. In my case, I managed, but it was so much less fulfilling.
Mike A,
It seems everytime anyone leaves a link to the YGA magazine website I get a server cannot be found. Same thing happens when I Google YGA and use those links provided. I used both IE 7 and FireFox. Nada. No server can be found.
Anyone else having the same trouble?
I get really tired of addictive personalities, who abandon one of their addictions (sexual compulsion, risky behavior, substance abuse, & etc.) for another (religiosity).
I hope that is not the case with Glatze, but if it is, it would hardly be the first.
And, it has nothing to do with sex, orientation, alcohol consumption, or religion. These can be morally neutral, or positive in the right context.
But in the hands of the addictive personality they can be weapons of abuse – of others and/or self.
Michael,
By now you must understand the issue here. One does not casually become baptized into the Mormon church because one has nice friends there. According to those in that faith, baptism makes you a member of the Celestial Kingdom (the highest), you carry the blood of Abraham and this is the process by which they consider your sins removed. To leave that church after baptism (baptism being the method by which you join), is to leave salvation.
Also, since you are involved with Mormon theology, those in evangelical Christian faiths who are promoting your story can not assume that you mean the same things they do when you say the same words (born again, for example, may mean something very much different to you than it does to them).
Our interest here is not to suggest that you are right or wrong for whatever your faith may be, but that we get a clear statement from people like Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber (and even tag-a-long Stephen Bennett) on whether they now support the god of Mormon belief (contrary to their previous stance) or if they just believe that being a gay Christian is so bad that an ex-gay Mormon is now acceptable to them.
Michael,
Be careful. Take some advice from some of us who are familiar with Mormons. This counsel is not offered in spite but as a loving Brother.
Please, do not jump hastily into marriage and then a Temple sealing no matter how much they (the Mormons) feel you may have conquered your queerness. The lives of innocent people can be affected.
I use the term queerness instead of gayness because I think you know there is a difference. Being able to squelch the queer may not entirely mean you are no longer gay.
If you find a LDS girl who also accepts your gayness and is willing to marry you please be aware of the major tasks and tribulations you both will encounter.
If you plan to stay celibate: Understand with the credo of Mormons so heavily favoring a concept of Eternal Families®, you will be relegated to the back pew in the chapel and never considered for anything more than a tithe-paying member. Realize that no homo (recovering, ex- or former) will EVER play a part in their lay clergy.
Sincerely, Michael, I wish I could take you around Salt Lake City and visit some of my friends and explain it all before you are made into a token to be displayed and manipulated by some very good-intentioned people.
Seriously, be careful.
Good As You has been corresponding with (someone claiming to be) Mr. Glatze.
In the correspondence trail, Glatze:
— neglects to define “homosexuality”
— neglects to define “change”
— declines to identify the gender(s) to which he is primarily attracted
— engages in identity politics, but instead of owning up to this, he projects that preoccupation with identities upon those to whom he preaches
(If that’s him, then) Perhaps he means well, but Glatze has immersed himself in an ideology, instead of taking the time to ground himself in real-world issues and the reality of his listeners.
I don’t know if that is actually Michael or not, but I don’t care (and I don’t think anyone else does here) if he considers himself exgay. So what? No one has attacked him for that (unlike what CWA was saying). What bothers people is that he is generalizing his very personal experience to all. I read Brady’s site, and Michael (if it is Michael) is saying stuff like he believes that we all know homosexuality is wrong, etc. When I was a missionary, we had a trick–we would say–pray and look deep inside yourself. Everyone knows the Mormon church is true. A good missionary/salesperson could convince almost anyone that they knew intrinsically that the Church was true. No, pressure can do that. I do not feel in any way homosexuality is wrong. It is benign. Then, such as in the CWA interview, Michael again says that if the public policy did not support/allow homosexuality, less would be doing it (he does not know much about church history then). Again, this is disturbing–he is essentially saying that because he needs/needed help, public policy should reenforce it.
One odd thing–A person goes exgay, evangelical, then Mormon, because of friends? Uh, strange. Seems to me someone who is not comfortable in his skin. I could be wrong, but going into the LDS church is a big move.
I blogged about Glatze in response to the entry on Ex-Gay Watch, and I, like Good As You, got hit with the same e-mail, which I then posted this morning.
Mike Airheart’s bullet points says it all about Glatze’s letter.
I just read the correspondence on Good as you and I definately picked up on some Roy Master’s verbage there. I also noticed a definate lack of evangelical verbage there also. Am I to understand that all I had to do was “think” my way out of being gay. I tried that while I was taking electric shock and all the other stuff and it didn’t work then, why would I expect it to work now..
Moderator note: deleted automated comments from some bot.
– He claims not to have experienced “homosexuality” until age 14. That does not remotely resonate with the experience of most ex-gays/strugglers, much less most gay people.
I can only speak for myself, but I was not aware of any same sex romantic/sexual attraction until about that age. I am a secular gay man.
I seem to recall when I was in 5th grade I developed a crush on a boy in my class. Also, there was another boy that I thought was cute too. Even at an earlier age I played around with a neighbor boy a few times. Nothing went beyond noticing each others “equipment”. I was unaware about sex and sexual attraction. Same thing happened between me and one girl. It was all about discovering ourselves.
As I grew up my feelings towards boys/men grew stronger. There was no desire for girls/women. I knew then that I was gay. As far back as I can remember I’ve always felt different.
David R For all I know, in real life you are closet evangelicals
Well, we’re gay. I think you maybe mean chiffoniered evangelicals???
Not to belabour it, but our desire not to wear our faith (or even lack there of) on our sleeve doesn’t allow you to say we have no interest — q.e.d. patience — in matters in faith.
Undeclared is not the same as uninterested, and I’d hope nobody here needs announce how they are churched to avoid that assumption from you or anyone. Case in point: a few days ago I started re-reading sections of Norwich’s Byzantium: The Early Centuries for a very deliberate reason. And it isn’t because I’m designing a floor mosaic.
For our own part, we’d have worded the challenge differently: something along the line of “Regardless of the fact he’s now declared himself as exgay, is Glatze still going to hell unless he leaves LDS?”. Or words to that effect. That side-steps any of that (yes, mostly tedious) circular nonsense / verbaling and goes directly to the heart of the beliefs. (we understand what it was about the veracity or cause of the “miraculous healing” etc that Dave R wanted to do with his post, but questions of that nature have been squibbed over for centuries. “They” see no hypocrisy in holding both views — God’s small graces for anyone, but ultimate damanation nevertheless. Old hat, honestly.)
As far as the type of evangelicals we are discussing are concerned, the answer is yes. He may now be exgay, but in their opinion unless he further “changes” Glatze the exgay Mormon is nevertheless going to end up the same place as grantdale and David R.
At least it’ll be beach weather. We’ll bring a salad. Do you mind whipping up a dessert? 🙂
(and PS Lynn David: /snort please don’t do that! We’re having enough trouble dealing with “Dave R” and “David R” as it is!)
Mark — it’s not just yourself, that was also something not sitting right with us.
Some are late bloomers. I’m not sure “14” is a suitable test point that proves much about a particular individual, even if most have become sexually aware by that age. Mike A’s point about it being atypical is certainly a valid observation, but, well, so what?
For our own part, we’d planned on an age of 25 for the nieces. (we lost).
Michael Glatze has made another comment on my website that is worth reading as part of this story and some even more interesting comments to me in email exchanges. I plan to post about those email exchanges over the weekend.
We’ll bring a salad. Do you mind whipping up a dessert?
Well I won’t bring a jello salad. It would melt.
But I do make a mean devil’s food cake.
Brady,
Glatze has been a very busy boy, hasn’t he?
Mark and Grantdale, point well taken — as someone who acknowledges variation and fluidity, I should have taken care not to overgeneralize in opposition to Glatze’s own generalizations.
It almost sounds as if people are jealous of Michael. I respect the risk he took at leaving the lifestyle and finding new found freedom. Shouldn’t we all be happy for that?
LDS has a history of embracing family-values and promoting a very wholesome image and lifestyle. If everyone decided to become as clean-cut as Michael, there would be far fewer problems in the world.
I believe in his WND article he spoke about contracting intestinal disease from gay lifestyle practices. Isn’t it a testiment to his own resolve that he gave up the behaviors associated with his former sexual preference? I consider him a pioneer and a spokesmen for struggling youth everywhere who want to choose what’s right for themselves and our Nation rather than the emptiness of narcissism. Our heroic soldiers protecting us from the terrorist overseas have done no less than what Michael has. Both seek a Nation in which evil doesn’t follow us home. Let’s support these American heroes.
Two words…
STEPHEN FALES!
Charles, that is the funniest spoof post I have ever seen. Keep it up. It almost sounds real.
Regan… that is your shortest post EVER 🙂
But, good point. However it should be linked
Stephen Fales
Charles F:
Is it a risk he took to LEAVE the “lifestyle,” or is it a risk he took to STAY IN the “lifestyle?” Ex-gay advocates are masters of doublespeak. You mention risks in both directions, as if being same-sex attracted is equal to joining the Crips or the Bloods (dangerous gangs). People like this will say gays are weak members of society who do nothing positive to contribute and then in the same breath say they’re a powerful sect of society that is inches away from destroying “Christian America.” If you ask Matthew Shepard, I’m sure he’d tell you it’s a greater risk to tell people you’re in the “lifestyle” than to tell people you’re out of it.
Michael didn’t contract his intestinal condition because he was attracted to and having relations with the same sex. He contracted it most likely because of poor decision-making. A woman married for 10 years can contract a disease having sex with her husband in a careless manner, too (e.g., yeast infections, or cervical cancer at worst if she doesn’t have regular checkups). Now, I do not mean to cast judgment on Michael’s sex life- everyone can make mistakes, everyone does. But it is a great error to associate any one disease with sexual orientation. It has everything to do with how one personally treats their body and takes care of themselves when they are sexually active.
And this belief of Mormons, more than anything else, is why we part company. It shouldn’t be a surprise since we both believe the other has an inherently flawed Christology, nor is this a trifling matter. Of course such theological concerns are not really germaine to the central issue of this post, but since you raised them…
I highly recommend anyone to listen to Michael in his own words in a radio interview at the CWA site. It is amazing.
There are many innacuracies being spread. Micheal didn’t get the intestinal illness from sexual behavior. On the radio he clearly says that he had become sick from contemplating his life and thought he had developed a heart condition that killed his father.
Also, Michael didn’t suddenly become ex-gay. In the interview he says it took years of self-searching and at one point he even thought he might be a gay Christian. It is an amazing interview and I encourage everyone to listen to Michael in his own words. He is extremely strong and courageous as you will hear. In the interview he speaks of his work at Harvard, his ivy league degree, and many other accomplishments that people are not aware of. This guys is a true renaissance man and willing to forge any path towards truth. You will be fascinated hearing him.
https://www.cwfa.org/articles/13383/CFI/family/index.htm
Having now listened all the way through the CWFA interview with Bennett, there are a few things that Bennett has said that cannot be squibbed, and that do deserve Dave R’s question directly put: eg Bennett said Glatze “was a new man in Christ”.
That’s stepping well over the “God did it!” and claiming an LDS member is something they normally would deny. Bennett did do the expected “God gets all the glory and all the credit for this.” — but since when has a Mormon truly been a new man in Christ in his eyes???
But, at least somethings stay the same: no let up in the all too typically confused message:
Glatze to Bennett (claims Bennett): “Steve, this is a process I’ve just begun.” (about “coming out of this lifestyle”)
From someone claiming to be Glatze: “I am not just a celibate man who is avoiding the homosexual tendencies. I no longer have desires of that nature at all and DO have normal male desires.” [1]
OK…. beginning, or end? Or just plain nonsense?
Interestingly, Matt Barber (CWFA) claimed Glatze rang him looking for guidance for “getting his message out”. Barber referred him to Bennett. Glatze rang Bennett.
Doesn’t sound a very passive couple of days for Glatze.
——————————–
Mike A: no probs. It just seemed oddly unlike what you’d normally say. Apparently, it was!
Gene, I had listened to that interview also, and I still took it as if it was gay related. Not only that, but it is obviously the original WND article seems to imply it. Maybe it was related to other issues, but then why bring it up at all in the original article in relation to self-destructive activities. Gene, my definition of renaissance man and yours differ greatly.
I forgot to mention, but in the interview Michael cryptically mentions that he is anticipating death threats and almost seems to consider himself a martyr. Is was the only part of the interview I found somewhat troubling.
The other part that was unusual is that he says he began his spiritual journey in 2003 but didn’t leave YGA until 2006 when he left the computer message about “homosexuality=death”. I am curious how he performed his job at a company that espoused homoesxuality while he was troubled by it. That would be a fascinating story.
Also, Michael does not mention being Morman once in the extensive CWA interview so I don’t think that was a cruicial element of his being saved. From the interview, it sounds as if he went on the journey much of the time all by himself similar to either John the Baptist or Jesus himself in the early years.
Gene, from my experience, a person who considers himself or herself Mormon is not considered saved by the general Christian public. I could be wrong, but I have been told over and over that if someone is truly “saved,” they are not led in a direction where a person can do something against the gospel of Christ. Now, I am not a Christian (agnostic here), but I doubt most mainstream Christians would see Mormonism as saved. (I am not saying Mormons are not Christian).
I suspect that the reason the LDS aspect was not brought up is because it would make the CWA audience question the testimony.
Here is a really great article that someone emailed me about the origins of World Net Daily. This may explain why Michael reached out to them: https://conwebwatch.tripod.com/stories/2006/wndmasters.html
I might guess that Glatze has been baptized into the LDS because his friends could then get him work through the church. You just don’t join the LDS and get baptized if you arer gay or have been homosexually active, I have been told [not sure of the veracity] that the church requires a year-long period of celibacy before you may be baptized. So I am somewhat skeptical of Glatze’s admission of only 2 months before being baptized.
Glatze doesn’t seem to understand his accepted religion. His story seem almost robotically spoken. I once had a discussion about Mormonism with the Mormon director of a stake’s genealogical library after we shared our enjoyment of science fiction. He the pointed out to me that his religion was very much like Heinleinian Sci-Fi in which persons may become elevated enough to go off and create for themselves new worlds, in which they were then ‘the god.’ His comment specifically to me was that most Mormons don’t realize that is the actual meaning of their religion.
I thought that over a while back then and thought it sounded better than the mainline Christian religions, certainly more interesting…. I mean I’d at least like to go fishing in heaven or antiquing, but then everything is shiny new. Oh well….
Gene, if the LDS connection isn’t mentioned prominently in the interview, it’s just as likely because it is being played down in the Christian media, for the reasons I outlined above.
I find it very strange that Glatze would say he has been baptized into LDS simply because his friends go there. The LDS isn’t simply another evangelical corner church among others. There are some very specific steps you go through when you convert to LDS, not least confessing your belief in Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon.
Organizations like Focus on the Family would most likely attack and demonize the LDS Church if it did not have gays and lesbians to demonize.
Latter-day Saints look at Evangelicals and other mainstream Christians in a similar way that the ancient first century Christians looked at the Jewish sects of their day. The ancient Jewish sects typically looked at the ancient Christians as heretics, extremists, etc.
Benjamin: there’s a famous joke among my people- God created Mormons so that Christians would know how Jews feel.
😀 8)
The only way to get some of the answers to these questions is to ask Michael yourselves. He will be live on Michelangelo Signorile’s Sirius radio show next week (don’t know which day yet). In a few seconds you can sign-up for a free three day trial with just an email addy(upper right corner of site): https://www.siriusoutq.com/
Dave, I agree. People don’t just get baptized because of friends. The Mormon Church has a very strict way of “weeding” out undesirables. On the other hand, the social community of the LDS is very insular, and friends are encouraged to bring non-LDS friends into the fold (young Mormon women are notorious for bring non-LDS boys into the Church). From my experience though, once baptized, if you leave the Church, you lose your friends. My best friend told me point blank 17 years ago that unless I repented and returned to the Church, he had nothing to say to me. The process is very strict, so you don’t just do it for friends. Most converts I have met also tend to early on be eager to talk about the Church. Interestingly, the retention rate is very small. Most people leave soon after baptism. This is just strange and not familiar to my experience overall.
P.S. One thing I have noticed in Michael’s interviews and posts–Straight=real man. Masculinity is a big issue for him, but I don’t understand how being gay makes one less masculine. I never cared about gender.
The article that started this thread actually is asking questions of those who are promoting Glatze, not Glatze himself.
Sometimes I wonder if this is really a sincere conversion for Michael or if this simply is a ruse to get YGA Magazine up and running again. It appears that YGA Magazine had published 4 or 5 so issues and then ran out of money (www.ygamag.com). In the April/May 2005 issue of YGA, Mike wrote an ed-op piece titled “God: You.” I don’t doubt that Michael wants a relationship with God, but his conversion came from looking at God from different religions and viewpoints, including meditation (he was working for Shambhala Institute during 2006(https://www.shambhalainstitute.org/Fieldnotes/Issue11/index.html). Mike then became involved with the Mormon Church in Halifax and was baptized in late April 2007. I wonder if Mr. Glatze really has a deep understanding of the true grace of God? It sounded like he went to a revival meeting of some sort and came back accepting the Lord as his savior and then decided to publically announce this to the world. If so, let us hope that as he grows in his faith, he will achieve a better understanding of God’s true and ultimate grace for all.
According to Signorile just now, Glatze not only “chickened out” and will not appear on his show today, but he did the same thing last night on CNN, resulting in the cancellation of that segment. Signorile added that he only found out about the cancellation through a third party.
I guess Glatze isn’t all that interested in being in a real spotlight, just those venues which support and promote him.
David,
What I believe is happening to Glatze is he’ll reach out to anyone that is willing to listen to him without being challenged. WND, Bennet, CWA will not challenge his testimony of change. He probably feels the GLBT community will not listen to him. Or he will speak to the GLBT community but only if he is not challenged.
These cancelations sound like he cannot deal with confrontation by anyone that has reservations about his change. Which makes me believe there are other personal issues he’s dealing with.
87 On July 10, 2007 at 6:59 PM, billy wrote —
I watch the gay community struggling for acceptance for a behavioral problem that can be readily changed by making and identifying the confusion of same sex attraction and love. The agenda of the gay community in itself proves that they are reaching out for acceptance for sexual behavior that defies natural law. This confusion of love is the monster that rages inside, the monster of same sex attraction. I know that monster is a strong word, however that is how it starts then we begin to sugar coat it in order to cope until eventually we become callous to it’s existence and begin to accept it as being natural.
I express my feelings when I first recognized that same sex attraction was a problem I had to confront head on and eventually deal with it. Do you remember those initial feelings? Do you remember the humiliation, the embarrassment, the feeling of despair? You are now faced with same sex attraction that is outside natural law and now being confronted of being sexually abnormal? Do you remember how you felt as being defined as a “queer”?
Do you remember the failure of being different and not really understanding why? Do you remember the first sexual encounter, the gratification, the resentment, then the justification, but most of all the confusion? Isn’t this where we begin to sugar coat the feeling trying to make it acceptable? When we began to sugar coat our urges we began to choose our destiny. Did we not choose to accept this behavior despite all the emotional conflicts raging within. How many times did you quit, denied being gay, but lost control, and eventually moved back to what is now addictive sexual behavior. How long did you fight yourself until finally you gave in, became deceived and called same sex attraction normal behavior? Has your deception been so sugar coated that you totally believe it is acceptable? If you could change it, would you? If you would change it, could you?
Realize that truth and eternal laws cannot be changed. It is key to understand that the natural laws affect your life even when you are oblivious to their existence. It is our responsibility to identify truth and live accordingly. Otherwise we will pay some consequence for its violation or at the very least not enjoy the benefit of its existence. An extreme example would be the Law of Gravity. We cannot see it but we know it is there. We can choose to ignore the law and suffer the consequences by violating the law or we can choose to accept it as law and use it for our benefit.
It was by choice that we started down the path of being an active homosexual or other addictions i.e. pornography, adultery, drugs, alcohol, all of which destroys, not only the person but also the family. The family is the core of our existence, and being a homosexual violates that very existence.
If there were no males and females, then families wouldn’t exist. Thus you and I wouldn’t exist.
Gay “free” for 35 years
Seriously BillyBob, it sounds to me like you weren’t gay but just experimenting with the possibility that you might be.
I had no monster as you describe it. I experienced rage, true, but that was due to others that felt the need to call me names and pick on me because of their need to feel superior. I never fought my sexuality once. It seemed fighting against what came to me naturally at the demands of those that believed I had to change in order to “fit in” was a fruitless attempt at something I believe would never happen (heterosexuality). Just read all the ex-ex gay stories Mr. BillyBob. They tried to free themselves from their homosexuality but could not even after long prayer, sacrifice, and countless dollars. Are they giving into their Monster urges? Have they been deceived?
And I don’t buy the “natural law” theory as you explain it. Our struggles are not due to the fact we are going against what you call “natural law” but we struggle because of those that wish to suppress our very lives through the legislation process and through condemnation, justified by, their use of the Bible as their chosen weapon against us. Same as Hitler did to the Jews and others than were beneath him during WWII. Suppression first, leading up to extinction. Same as those people throughout history that have suppressed others they claimed were inferior because they didn’t follow a certain pattern of life that was prescribed by the majority.
I seem to recall a man named Galileo that was condemned for his belief that the Earth revolved around the sun while the Church held to the Scriptural belief that the Earth was fixed and unmoving. Which we now understand is untrue. God has revealed a great many mysteries in our lives through science. Science is not our enemy. Bigotry and intolerance is.
Yes, thank God for our parents! 🙂
It seems I decided to go for a sugar-coating…. while others went for a bile-coating. I certainly am happy I didn’t choose that!!
But seriously, the gravity analogy is not bad. Just as with gravity, there is an invisible pull that draws people together. There is that spark of attraction, that inner pull that when it is right results in love, deep and true.
And just like we can tie helium baloons to our belt, or put springs in our shoes, or even swing from ropes, there is still that natural draw, that law of attraction (one might even note that it’s Newton’s law of attraction) that pulls us in the direction we were intended. And though we can claim to be gravity free for 35 years or even longer, ultimately the draw is still there.
Perhaps one is happiest when one lets go of the artificial means used to fight this natural pull and relax knowing that the pull, the draw, the attraction is in the natural and intended direction.
I think billybob is queer-free and not gay-free. I can stay out of the gay clubs and miss every circuit-party from now until gravity takes over (get my drift). But, I’m still gay. I could marry and breed some mini-mes until I formed my own football/hockey team. But, I’m still gay. I could become a hermit and dwell in self-loathing pity. But, I’m still gay.
There is a choice. Choose to be miserable or choose to be what nature intended you to be. Fearing of being labeled a queer is not being “free” of being gay.
It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not. Andre Gide – French critic, essayist, & novelist (1869 – 1951)
Natural law is a very problematic concept. There is always ambiguity to natural law, so that is why natural law theorists, such as on the Supreme Court, will often fight over what is and isn’t natural law. Gravity is testable; natural law is not (bad analogy).
The questions and situations you posed do not sound like my experience. The only problem I had was with my religion, family, and community. On my end, I was completely fine–no resentment, no guilt. I did feel resentment and guilt when I tried to pretend I was something I was not. There is no sugar coating to feelings. My family and community largely found it was not an issue. The religion did. I dealt with the consequences of the religion aspect, but I felt mutally that the religion was not the right place for me. Everyone’s happy, and it was one of the best choices I ever made. I could be in a household with a wife I am not attracted to, kids that don’t know their own father, playing house, involved in a religion where I would nod my head and “agree,” but I realized that was all a lie, and I chose (yes, I chose) to be honest about deep-seated feelings, and I did the best thing possible. And that path is the one that made all the difference.
It is important to note that choices are critical in determining which course we take in life and what our end result will be. My character as it now stands is defined by the choices that I made. Good choices or bad, it doesn’t matter, we always have the same opportunity to turn mistakes into something good and uplifting. When we own our choices, there is no one to blame. We choose who we are.
We have the ability to turn our weaknesses into strengths if we so choose.
Love and sex are not the same and the confusion of love mixes the two.
Otherwise sex is not love and love is not sex. The expression of love can be demonstrated with two people of the same gender without sex and that confusion of love leads to homosexuality.
I may have started out “queer free” but I am now “gay free” with a lovely wife, 3 children and 4 grandchildren. It can’t get any better
Why is it everybody who aligns same sex attraction with addiction, brokenness, and pornography cannot fathom that an intense, genuine, real romantic love can exist between two same-gendered people? That love and sex are not the same and can be confused has nothing to do with WHO you love. Bringing forth a point about “Natural Law” is so useless because it is so ambiguous a term. Natural law for seahorses has fathers giving birth instead of mothers. Natural law for rams (male sheep) means that 8% of their population will be “non-breeding” – that is, spend the rest of their lives around other rams.
I’ve never tried to be straight – i never tried to “test” myself by being with men instead of women. Why? Because my parents raised me to be myself and never force anything to happen when you feel it won’t. So sometimes I’m asked, “well, then how do you know you’re gay if you’ve never been with men?” and to them i respond, “How do you know you’re straight if you’ve never been with anyone of the same sex?” And then they usually get it – for me it is and always has been about love and attraction, about genuine feelings, not sex acts.
billybob, this isn’t an open forum and you are moving it off topic. Please confine your comments to the subject, which in this case is why there has been such great silence in the Christian media reports concerning the fact that Michael Glatze was baptized into the Mormon church.
No billybob, we have never felt the way you have. Your age — the times in which you grew up — and the attitudes you absorbed at that time probably is the cause of that difference.
We never felt “the humiliation, the embarrassment, the feeling of despair” about our sexuality — that has always been a joy, and accepted as the wonderful, terrible gift that it is; and we are truly sorry you feel otherwise.
Instead, what we were long aware of was the scalding ignorance and prejudice around us. We didn’t fear our behaviour or our attractions, but we feared the behaviour and attitudes of others. There is still barely a day that passes when we are not reminded of the wilful prejudice of some people. Because of that alone we experience everything from rudeness to violence from others.
However, such people do not include our families. Whatever surprise they may have felt on knowing, it was not followed by rejection. Whatever concerns they may have, those are not ultimately about our sexuality or ourselves as a couple. Regardless of all the many ways they hold a faith or worship; none of them hear voices, imagine people to possessed by demons and none are plagued by visions of the fires of hell. Thus far — when our families do unreasonable, it isn’t for those reasons.
Hence the general silliness of comparing gravity to your religious beliefs. One does not need to believe in gravity. Gravity doesn’t care what you think. It applies to all, regardless. Jumping from a height has the same outcome whether you are the Pope, the Dalai Lama, Richard Dawkins or Mel White. Gene Robinson or Peter Akinola. The same force was felt by the Pharoah and Moses, by Socrates, by Saul, by the Stoic or the Epicurean, by Martin Luther and by Thomas Acquinas. By the children of Israel on one side of the wall, and by those who submit to the will of Allah on the other.
Quite plainly, how you experience your sexuality is a world away from our own. We cannot say the same about gravity.
For the sheer irony of it all: as a proponent of The Natural Law, you no doubt also subscribe to the belief that it must be either heterosexual marriage or complete celibacy for gay men and women.
How celibacy for two disconnected, tormented gay individuals is supposedly better than the unconflicted connection to the river of life within a loving gay couple remains, as always, as yet unexplained. Such views are completely at odds with those who know us best — those who raised us as children, grew togther a friends, and then witnessed us first find and join with each other. What fate, one can wonder, is behind that?
Far from being anti-family, our commitment to each other is the highest expression of family. Within that relationship we achieve our best, for each other and for others. That is the choice we have, not heterosexuality.
Apart from that, mind your own business: it’s your own relationships that need your consideration, not ours.
WELL, I am a Mmeber of the Church of CHrist. It views all other Churches as flatly wrong.It’s also labled a Cult, a word used well too often, by Evangelicals.
My own take is “So?”
If Michael Glatze wants ot eb a Mormon, this is his decision.If he beleives Mormionism is true, this also is his right. I also do not see the Mormon Church as worshipping a different God and different Jesus.I am aware many do, but not all, and I think you will find most Average Christains just don’t care enough about the difference. He has found God and Jesus is his Saviour. Surely this makes him a Christian, even if a Misguided one.(At leats if I am right and SMith was not a Prophet, but I digress.)
Now, I disagree wit much in the LAtter-Day Saints movement, but I do not queasiton their sincerity, and he fruits of their faith are evident in helpful, well adjusted people. Not all Mormons, of ocurse, are helpful and well adjusted, but most are, and Mormons tend ot be family-oriented, friendly people who are kind, compassionate, and overall live in accordance tot he teahcigns of Jesus.
So, as much as they may be wrogn on theological matters, at leats if I am correct in my own theology, or else someone els is, one canot fault their moral teaching, which is the same as most other CHristans, with only minor vaiation here and thee.
I’d still count my dear Michael Glatze as a Fellow Christian, and if I ran a pub;icaiton in Christian Media ( I don’t) I’d see no reason not to mention this, if indeed it was needful.
That said, there may be, in charity, a reaosn it was not mentioned to WND that he was LDS. He may not have told them, or ele it may just have not been central to o the sory, it may not be a diliberate obfusiation.
All this said, I do wonder why it matters. Michael Glatze has found God, and has accepted the Lord Jesus as his Saviour.(Not to talk like an Evangleical, I am not.) I see no reason why we shoudl subject him to ridicule based spley on his choice of Church.
That aid, we can now all maeke fun of Katherine Jefferts-Schori’s hat, and the Popes frilly robes.