Exodus International - 190 N Westmonte Dr Altamonte Springs , FL
Exodus President Alan Chambers called a meeting together this past November 16. The subject was quite simply how to keep Exodus International from social and financial oblivion. In attendance were Exodus leadership, prominent religious leaders (such as Gabe Lyons) and lay people. The latter were mostly those who once counted themselves in the ex-gay camp but now are either in the process of changing their views or are fully gay affirming.
We had been following odd activity at Exodus for some time. It was clear that something was up but only after being contacted by some of those directly involved did our speculation clarify into fact. The past couple of years have seen Exodus cut it’s staff, lose key alliances, and suffer from a general moderation in American views toward homosexuality. So difficult has this been for them that they have increased efforts abroad where there exists less formal opposition to their message — that living a gay affirming life is sinful, wrong and unhealthy, and change is the only way to truly please God.
Three years ago, Exodus purchased a building for a little over $1.1 Million. This was at the height of the real estate bubble and it’s value must have decreased significantly since. While they seem to have shed as many of their obligations as possible, debt service for that building must be a great draw on their meager resources. According to IRS documents, they burned through $200,000 of their savings in 2010 alone. In short, if they continue on their current trajectory, there seems little doubt that Exodus will fold in the near future.
Knowing this, Chambers called the New York meeting together and posed the question, “how can we save Exodus?” Unfortunately for those of us who might have a glimmer of hope to the contrary, this plea does not seem to be based on any deep, inner change of heart or ideology. According to first person accounts, the emphasis was on how to make Exodus more “donor accessible.” The meeting was filled with the modern lingo of those who advise on the solicitation of charitable funds. This is about money.
Chamber’s apparently wishes to “re-brand” Exodus into something more palatable to those with funds to give, and the general public alike. According to our sources, Chambers said that “everything is on the table.” That everything apparently includes the possibility of his resignation. It was also clear from the meeting that this is their last resort, their “Hail Mary” so to speak — they’ve tried everything else. Indeed, it seems certain that Chambers would have made pleas to anyone he knew with money before taking this drastic action. And we’ve all seen the odd inconsistencies apparent in their public face. Exodus is an organization fumbling for a solution.
Chambers mentioned how struck he was by the response to John Smid’s recent change in direction, particularly his apology. He seems to think that doing something similar might be one way that Exodus could gain some positive attention. Don’t forget, everything is on the table. We have confirmed that Smid has been in contact with Chambers recently, and has plans for more discussions in the future. It has been our understanding that there is no love lost on Smid by Chambers, so any future corroboration would likely have a more practical basis.
While more detail may come in a future post, we know that Chambers plans to make some announcements at the Exodus Leadership Conference in January, 2012. Speakers unusual for such an event have been invited, along with a church communications expert who was also present at the meeting. It may be through their voices that Chambers will frame the plan for re-branding Exodus.
It will be after this conference that Exodus announces whatever it is they decide, presumably some sort of apology which allows them to maintain their core ideology, while claiming to have gone about expressing it badly — too much truth and not enough grace, etc. Perhaps they will take on the name of the title holding company they created when they purchased the building, The Worthen Legacy Group. Chambers seems to be enthralled by The End of Sexual Identity lately, so that might also provide a clue to their new direction.
Our sources would speak on the record only on condition of anonymity, however after cross-checking we feel confident that what we have chosen to report is sound. We agree with their reasons for wishing to remain anonymous, at least for the time being.
In the coming months when you hear of changes from Exodus, or some event that seems heartfelt and spontaneous, or whatever this re-branding may eventually consist of, remember what got the ball rolling — money.
Great report. Bravo!
When Exodus apologizes we expect substance, not a strategy. Chambers must realize that Smid received support because his apology seemed sincere, or at least he was heading in the right direction.
Meanwhile, no one bought The International Healing Foundation’s recent apology from Richard Cohen, who we all thought was full of shit. Chambers would be wise to look at the Cohen flop, not just the Smid success.
The dishonesty and deciept; the semantic games and double talk; the arrogance and allegiance to the political right; the forays overseas that spread hate in places like Uganda; have earned Chambers incredible ill will.
An apology absent a resignation will ring hollow. Chambers should practice some of that conservative “personal responsibility” and admit he has been a failure as a leader and maybe as a human being. He should go somewhere peaceful and quiet to reflect on the harm he has caused as an agent of intolerance. When he returns from exile, he should consider spending the rest of his life undoing the damage that occurred at his hands.
To bad this gift won’t arrive in time for Christmas. If Chambers thinks some clever wording will work he’s wrong. John Smid came out and said, “I never met a person who changed their sexual orientation”
Probably the worst line I ever heard come out of Alan Chambers mouth is the line about the goal of Exodus is not to make you straight but to make you Holy. That line sticks in my craw. Well let’s hope they miss a few mortgage payments between now and their next big meeting. Exodus should remove that advertising pic of him and his wife as mixed orientation marriages are not likely to survive and putting that pic out there leads people to seek that which overwhelmingly statistically is not gonna work. It’s false advertising.
Ironically, a kinder, gentler re-branding would basically bring Exodus full circle. Before Chambers, Exodus was a relatively quiet Seattle-area based organization that failed to attract much attention. Chambers moved Exodus to the conservative South, associated the group with Religious Right organizations, and embarked on bold “Change Is Possible” campaigns. It seems any lighter re-branding would require the resignation of Chambers.
I’m a bit puzzled as to what type of donors would be attracted to a more fuzzy re-branded Exodus. It seems to me that most wealthy conservative Christian donors would want firm assurance that Exodus clearly denounces homosexuality. Exodus’s appeal to conservative Christianity is that it offers a simple solution to the messy and uncomfortable issue of homosexuality.
My guess is that Exodus may do what many of its member ministries have done and expand its customer base to heterosexuals (i.e. sexual addiction, porn, infidelity, premarital sex, etc.). Of course to make itself more palatable to straight conservative men, it will have to de-emphasize gay issues. It could try to spark a Promise Keepers-type of revival and merely mention homosexuality among a variety of sexual issues.
Wow. This is big news! Whatever happens, lets not forget that Exodus is just the umbrella organization. While they’re the ones that get most of the press and organize the member ministries, even if they fold (which I doubt) there will still be the 100+ member ministries that are actually working with the clients to become straight.
Although without the annual exodus conference and the emotional high it brings, I think the drop out rate will be even higher among the member ministries. Those exodus conferences used to give me the emotional boost to keep fighting for another 6 months!
“Before Chambers, Exodus was a relatively quiet Seattle-area based organization that failed to attract much attention.”
Well, not exactly. The politicization of this group happened pre-Chambers. Exodus starred in the massive 1998 “Truth in Love” campaign under Bob Davies — which was really the pinnacle of the “ex-gay” industry. Remember John Paulk?
Chambers promised to scale back such political involvement — but lied through his teeth. Instead, he forged an alliance with Focus on the Family. When these groups teamed up — Exodus’ money woes seemed to disappear overnight.
When Focus on the Family dumped Love Won Out, this was really the beginning of Exodus returning to pre-1998, as their funding base and enthusiastic support from the Religious Right began to recede.
Focus on the Family made Chambers look smart. Without FoF’s public relations team and access to donors — Chambers was left to run the show on his own — and he lacked the skills to pull it off.
This is why the rebranding effort will fail. It is like putting a new body of a car over a crappy engine. It won’t be long before people realize it is the same old lemon that doesn’t work.
Smid? Well, I’m willing to see where that goes.
Exodus International and Alan Chambers have been too slippery, too cynical, too mean and too outright dishonest to deserve our trust. If a rebranding comes out of this last-ditch attempt to drum up support, it will have all the credibility of Cohen’s recent stunt.
Surprising that they are in such financial trouble given the many tens of thousands of happy ex-gays that are supposedly walking around. Why not just ask each one to donate $20 and their coffers will be instantly refilled?
Anyway, if they are going to rebrand in order to attract donors, that would militate in favor of a more anti-gay posture. The big Christian money is driven by fear and the need to fight some perceived threat. You get big dollars talking about how the gay agenda threatens kids. They aren’t going to get big dollar contributions talking about the end of sexual identity.
Well done, David!! This is the best article I’ve read on XGW in a while (my own included 😉 ). Way to go!!
As a self-identified 70/30 split gay/bi-curious male, and a survivor of Love in Action 1988 -I would advise Exodus to give up its own religious fundamentalist agenda based behavior modification model and create sanctuaries and safe houses for men and women to come and discover for themselves who they are as human beings, as sexual beings, as embodied representations of the Divine (at our best, most honest and most transparent selves) and allow them to become absolutely free and at liberty to be at choice in this world to manifest their most authentic selves. To deconstruct the structures of patriarchy, of sexism, of racism, of essentialism, and even of inversion models of matriarchy and find out what it really means to live fully human, fully enfleshed and fully purposed towards our highest calling, whatever that looks like! I would introduce these men and women to various streams of consciousness awakening like the Mankind Project’s (www.mkp.org) New Warrior Training Adventure and it’s inclusive Gay/Bi gateway weekends, as well as its sister organization http://www.womanwithin.org. I would introduce them to the work of the Human Awareness Institute (www.hai.org) and the exploration of our lives as embodied spirits and what it means to love fully. I would share the work of David Deida and James B. Nelson and talk about what it means to walk in the world with integrity knowing that what you say and how you live align. To create spaces where the often labeled “negative” emotions were acceptable because the facilitators of this work knew how to hold space for it. If Exodus would be the umbrella organization for these kind of places, where the only outcome desired was the fullness of the Christ consciousness as lived out through each and every unique and particular human being whether they be LGBTQorStr8, monogamous, poly or whatever, then that would be an organization I could support. Until then, I think like everything, it needs to die and be reborn as something real or stay dead and not act the zombie or the vampire feeding off us in its own self-righteousness. Selah.
@David Chambers has even been heard to claim that there are “hundreds of thousands” of ex-gays. Even if that means only one hundred thousand satisfied ex-gays, a donation of just $10 from each one would bring in $1,000,000.
What’s always puzzled me is that the only ‘ex-gays’ these groups present to the world for promotion are themselves merely professional ex-gays. It’s like some kind of pyramid system. They never parade out ex-gay surgeons, pilots, or engineers. Why are ‘ex-gays’ always these unskilled people who seem to just live off various scams and donations?
Leon, Greg Quinlan President of PFOX answered your question in a recent interview. He said that they (ex-gays) do not come forward because they are all opposite sex married and have children and they don’t want their children to know their past. I am just passing along what he said in the interview Leon, I don’t believe him. I think in reality there are very very few people living in an open successful mixed orientation marriage. And by open I mean the spouse was fully aware before marriage what the deal was. The statistics are in that Jones & Yarhouse study on mixed orientation marriages.
Page 41-
“The research suggests, however, that many mixed orientation relationships do not survive. It has been estimated that only about a third of couples even attempt to stay together after disclosure (Buxton, 2004). Of that third that attempt to stay together, only about half remain intact for three or more years (Bux- ton).”
“In the area of sexual fidelity, sexual minority spouses reported a higher than average number of extramarital relationships (44.2% indicating an extra- marital relationship), whereas national averages are at about 10% of women and under 25% of men (Laumann et al., 1994).”
the sexual minorities said that 44.2% had cheated on their spouse and had an average of 3.14 same sex liaisons.
https://christianpsych.org/wp_scp/wp-content/uploads/edification_4_2.pdf
I went to look at who is Exodus’ current leadership and I noticed under Mark Whitten, the Chairman, how much it is emphasizes on how financially successful his ministries were. Maybe it’s why they brought him on? The board seems to be missing some of the key players from the past who lead various bedrock ex-gay ministries. I guess a good sound Christian ministry is one that brings in the dough.
“Under Pastor Whitten’s leadership and through a miraculous move of God, the church became a healthy, growing body and in October of 1994, Metro Church paid off the five million dollar debt that was incurred prior to Pastor Whitten’s tenure… In April 1995, Clark Whitten became the senior pastor of Calvary Assembly of God, Winter Park, Florida. Under his leadership, Calvary grew in many ways – spiritually, physically, and financially!”
I have a question about those in attendance. The article says those who attended included people who are “in the process of changing their views or are fully gay affirming.” Are you saying that Chambers deliberately invited these individuals or that he does not know they are changing their views? I find it strange that Chambers would invite those in opposition to his views to such a personal meeting.
Personally, I do not trust any image change. I’ve seen too much of that attempt with Exodus when the views of the staff had not really changed which simply resulted in a lot of double-speak. Plus, there is other dysfunction beyond that. The only way for Exodus to survive is if Chambers and all the current staff resign and its taken over by those who are truly moderate. This would also mean a new board since the current board as I understand it is comprises Chamber’s friends who hold the same ultra-conservative perspectives.
If it were about integrity and honesty, it would be strange, but not if it all comes down to money and doing whatever it takes to ensure the organization doesn’t go under. They’re just trying to play all sides.
Thanks for the update….when I was in college and Exodus was in Seattle, I tried to contact them to interveiw them for a paper and they refused to be interviewed….secrets runs high in Exodus!!!!
@StraightGrandmother
Thanks. Quinlan’s comments seem contrary to what Jesus commanded. If a person had been freed from homosexual demons, they would be joyous and want to share with others. If these supposedly successful ex-gays have kids, wouldn’t they want them to know this route to freedom and eternal life? It’s strange that they would want to keep it secret … unless of course they know that they wouldn’t be taken seriously. It just seems so selfish for them to hide from everyone else what they claim is a miraculous cure for homosexuality.
@Karen
Exactly. Chambers is very deceitful. I remember during that Lisa Ling show he was trying to appear very moderate and said he would meet gay men (not ex-gays) in heaven. It took less than 24 hours for right-wing groups (probably his funding base) to call him out on that and he immediately backtracked. He is very conniving.
@Karen
Karen, there were some in attendance who once were involved with Exodus but at some point realized being ex-gay was the problem. Alan believes these people indicate a weakness or to some extent a failure of their current approach. They were invited to speak to what Exodus might have done differently to keep them, or reach out to others like them. I got the impression that Alan thought he was being quite clever while at least some of them felt they were just being used all over again.
I tend to agree that any serious change could only begin after a complete changing of the guard. The current leadership, particularly Alan, simply have too much negative baggage to be trusted.
looks like some folks are going to have to get real jobs
Yes. A search of the tags Exodus International and Alan Chambers on this site will confirm exactly that. Under Alan’s leadership the last few years, Exodus has been nothing short of duplicitous. He should be ashamed of himself.
Thanks for your report on Exodus. To me, meeting with disaffected former ex-gays sounds like an attempt to follow typical advice given to evangelical churches. Church consultants recommend that pastors interview exiting members, especially if the church is in decline. The purpose is to listen for valid criticism, and in some cases, to regain the members. My guess is that Exodus is trying to apply this technique in the attempt to close the back door of their organization. What they (or their consultant?) may not get is that the problem is not with style but substance. Former ex-gays are rejecting the core message of ex-gay “ministries.” Tweeking the style or reframing the message will not help. The problem is with Exodus’s reason for existing. It needs to die.
@David G.
I think you are spot on.
@David Roberts
Thanks for the clarification David. This is an interesting development given that he would not meet with Beyond Ex-Gay folk to do exactly that in 2007.
What happened to all that money Schmierer said Ahmanson was giving Exodus?
Considering that Alan Chambers is a sociopath, I’m not surprised by this development.
@ Straight Grandmother:
If Chambers is correct that there are “hundreds of thousands” of Exodus alumni, then that means there are at least 200,000. The vast majority of these would be Christians who have an obligation to testify as to the saving power of the Cross. To fail to testify, knowing that their testimony of miraculous change could help bring others to Jesus, is to have blood on their hands. Now, some of the alumni will not be Christian and some of the Christian alumni will fail to meet their obligation. But wouldn’t it be safe to say that 20 percent or 10 percent would speak out? That’s 20-40,000 ex-gays. Heck, if only 1 out 100 alumni went public, that would be 2,000 amazing testimonials as to how one can go from homosexual to heterosexual.
But instead, all we have are the same 10-20 professional ex-gays and maybe a few dozen people who are forever “in the process” of changing or who have redefined change to mean a change from homosexual to “pure” and who disappear from public view after a few months.
Brilliant reporting, David. I hope this story gets picked up outside of the gay blogosphere.
“The dishonesty and deciept; the semantic games and double talk; the arrogance and allegiance to the political right; the forays overseas that spread hate in places like Uganda;”
When The Empress of Exgaynia shifted the goals from heterosexuality to holiness, the organization basically admitted to fraud; fraudulent heterosexuality and fraudulent holiness, and by implication, the likely fraudulence of any self-proclaimed holiness. what we normally call moral hypocrisy.
That should have been obvious to any intelligent person. And this may account for a drying up of funds. Just because you agree with the AntiGay agenda doesn’t mean you are also stupid, or willing to put your imprimatur on what is clearly a fraud.
I don’t understand the fundamentalist mindset in particular well enough, nor the more general mindset of people who positively eschew trying to be grounded in fact, experience, logic, and compassion, and hold their detachment up as a badge of honor. I have given up trying to figure out if they are 1) sincere but misguided 2) stupid enough to believe anything but smart enough to make money 3) completely amoral– or sociopathic, if that sounds less judgmental– SOBs, like arms dealers who live off death, but with worse haircuts 4) afflicted with megalomania composed of equal parts stupendous spiritual arrogance and massive moral myopia, expressed as an unshakeable belief in an otherwise wholly imaginary spiritual and moral superiority. (Of course I cannot believe they have any chance of actually being, oh, right).
Of course, I’m not sure it actually matters. You can tell me you love me all you want, and for whatever reasons you want. but when you call me a threat to freedom, god, children, family, and goddam western civilization (such as it seems to be becoming), I would have to be as deluded as you, for whatever reason, to believe it.
The product is dishonesty and deceipt. Their methods are semantic games and double talk. Their spiritual arrogance seems, to my mind, particularly endemic to A Certain Class of Christian. Why would you expect their rebranding and salvation campaign to be run or imagined any differently? (I know you don’t).
And of course, it is about money. Organizations need money to run anything. If you exerecise your Edifice Complex and buy a big building you can’t really afford, but it makes you feel more manly and in control, you need to know you have adequate funding for at leats half the length of the mortgage. and you have to hope their isn’t an economic downturn, especially ones that prevents you from selling your biggest but-no-longer-very-valuable asset and source of your greatest debt. If they were being successful with their current brand, they would be able to sell it to both the marks and the religio-politcal organizations.
Wayne, you and XGW have done a wonderful job over the years. I for one am very thankful.
Ben in Oakland, har har har, you had me rolling on the floor. Some of your best lines I thought are
afflicted with megalomania composed of equal parts stupendous spiritual arrogance and massive moral myopia
If you exerecise your Edifice Complex and buy a big building you can’t really afford, but it makes you feel more manly and in control
When The Empress of Exgaynia shifted the goals from heterosexuality to holiness, the organization basically admitted to fraud; fraudulent heterosexuality and fraudulent holiness, and by implication, the likely fraudulence of any self-proclaimed holiness. what we normally call moral hypocrisy.
I LOVED, LOVE, LOVE Edifice Complex!!
You must be a writer Ben and if you are not you should be.
Thank you. i have my designs on writingness.
Not sure how to enter into this conversation, but my burning issue is this: Some of those who were leaders in the ex-gay ministry movement now say they have NEVER known someone’s orientation to change. The implication is then that they were lying and falsely presenting the possibility of “change” to hundreds if not thousands of “clients” who paid great sums of money to enter into a process which was advertised as something which could and would fundamentally change their sexual orientation from one which was sinful to one which was in line with God’s original intent. And the implication is that the leaders were purposely lying. It wouldn’t have simply dawned upon them one day – out of the blue – that “this ex-gay stuff isn’t working.” So now, in the wake of these kinds of confessions and apologies and acknowledgements who is there to minister to those who personally felt that they were failures because they weren’t able to “change”? What is the responsibility of the leaders who have admitted their well-meaning but ineffective party-line proclamations? How can Christians who are homosexually oriented have trust in the Body of Christ to walk with them so to speak, given the disillusionment and deception they have experienced?
These are my questions at this point in the conversation…
“How can Christians who are homosexually oriented have trust in the Body of Christ to walk with them so to speak, given the disillusionment and deception they have experienced?
Tim, i can’t answer that question much, but merely re-ask it: After the 1700 year jihad of Christianity in general against our right to exist, in which every bit of theology was always twisted to make it ok to judge gay people, in which every shred of real compassion, truth-seeking, and logic was bent out of shape beyond recognition, how can any gay person trust the body of Christ for anything?
Probably the same way that witches, Jews, heretics, Moors, and everyone else who has been on the receiving end of Christian love.
Besides leaving the church altogether, I think the only answer is find a better class of Christian, and find a better class of church.
I understand what you are saying Ben. The problem is, according to my understanding of what The Church is, is that there is only one “Body of Christ” or Church. I mean, this is it… there is no better class of church or better class of christian. We are it! And I don’t want to leave it, even though I have been “out of fellowship” for about two years now. It’s tough!
Tim, the idea that there is only one Body of Christ is a variant of the “No True scotsman” fallacy, by which an individual attempts to avoid being associated with an unpleasant act by asserting that no true member of the group they belong to would do such a thing.
They’ve been doing “such a thing” for centuries.
We have nearly 1700 years of religious wars, Christian against Christian. We have the Mormons claiming that even though the bible says you can’t add anything to it, nevertheless, there is a highly improbable book of mormon which, with the other sacred texts of mormonism, relays a theology completely at variance with anything approaching traditional Christian theology. We have Baptists claiming that Mormons aren’t christians, and wish to convert them to the true faith, though the catholics would assert the Baptists are in error about whose faith is the true one, which the Baptists would dismiss as being the satanically inspired ravings of graven-image worshipping whore of Babylon.
And on and on and on. There hasn’t been a true Body of Christ since the first Catholic murdered the first Cathar– at least. But that’s because my memory only goes back to the 1200’s, and i didn’t want to include the crusades, because that bit of slaughter wasn’t Christians doing other christians.
In my early nearly-a-Christian days, when I eagerly read anything by CS Lewis that I could find (except his best book, the allegory of Love, which was dreary as all get out), he offered a metaphor for Jesus, which i only partially remember (It’s been over 40 years). Something to the effect that Jesus was like a rising tide or an extremely bouyant object, that lifts his flock with him as he rises.
There’s your standard. Is this Christian, or that Church, lifting people up, or beating them down? Is this Christian, or that Church, making the lives of the people they act upon better or worse? Is their Bible a support and a guide or a weapon and a reproach? Are they followers of Jesus or Paul, who not only never met Jesus, but never met a commandment of Jesus that he didn’t feel free to revise, contradict, or ignore?
Of course there is a better Christian, and a better class of Church. They are the ones who believe AND live in “Love one another”, “Judge not”, and “Do unto others.” They are the ones who don’t judge, who mind their own business, who support gay people not despite their faith but because of it, who don’t use their religion as a club against people whom they don’t know, are completely ignorant of, and who have done them no harm.
Jesus himself endorsed this manner of living when he said “By their fruits (giggle) shall you know them.”
He didn’t actually giggle.
Wow, Ben. That is a long list of grievances. Shall we throw in the kitchen sink?
Before continuing, I want to respect the fact that not all of us here claim Christianity. For them, this response may be irrelevant.
Ben, I understand the anger. For those Christians whose ignorance and prejudice and sometimes downright sinfulness have hurt us who are LGBTQ, I share your anger. FOTF comes to mind. But I don’t see that it helps a great deal to trot out the whole list of Christian failures. It feels like the kind of dysfunctional fighting in which the offended partner piles on the offender with a whole list of grievances never forgiven. Let’s stick to the point. We LGBTQ Christians have been offended, and many of us long for a church that supports us. As for the rest, how much does the church (any church) have to apologize for its past failings before it is forgiven? I’m thinking of the Catholic Church’s recent disavowals of anti-Semitism, for instance. Many Christians today, probably most, including Catholics and Baptists, recognize that the divisions in the church are a scandal. But healing those divisions is an extremely difficult task. As for the whole Jesus v. Paul thing, that’s too complex a theological argument to pursue here.
If the question is, is the church as a whole throughout time very lovable, hmm, maybe not. The problem is there are so many sinners in it. But that’s not news to anyone, the church most of all.
For me, the whole question of what to do with the church comes down to this: Do I believe in Jesus Christ or don’t I? If I have made a final decision that I don’t, then I can treat the church just as I would any other religious organization with whom I disagree. I may criticize them, but there is no need to spend too much energy doing it. If I do believe in Jesus Christ, then the church is the group of people with whom I belong, even if I am an offended member and need to confront some fellow Christians for their sins against me. I once hated my own homosexuality, and to the extent that I was complicit with that hatred in the church, I deeply apologize. I too was an offender.
Personally, I love the church, not because the church is so lovable, believe me, but because I love Christ, and he loves the church and gave his life for the church, as Scripture says. It’s a bit like my attitude toward online gaming. I think it’s a waste of time. But I respect gaming because my partner is a gamer and I love him. Blessedly, we’ve found a strongly gay-afirming Episcopal church where we feel most welcome. I would wish all of us who are Christians could be so blessed.
I think I would be good if the Church would just stop offending in the first place.
@Tim
“Some of those who were leaders in the ex-gay ministry movement now say they have NEVER known someone’s orientation to change. The implication is then that they were lying and falsely presenting the possibility of ‘change’ … purposely lying.”
Don’t underestimate the human capacity for self-deception. This self-deception may have stemmed not only from the fact that they earned their living by promoting change, but from the bind they were in between their beliefs and their homosexuality. Ministry tends to straitjacket a person. It doesn’t leave a lot of room for questioning and exploration. I’m just thankful some of the ex-gay leaders are having the courage to acknowledge the truth to themselves and the rest of us.
@David Roberts
No question. But is that humanly possible? We all have our blind spots.
We all have our blind spots? I wouldn’t accept that for a secular organization, so I certainly can’t accept it for the Church. But yes, I do believe they have stopped offending for the most part on matters of race in this country.
@David Roberts
Thanks for your response, David. I don’t quite understand what you’re saying. The United States government has offended its citizens and other countries in huge ways, sometimes even intentionally. Yet most Americans aren’t ready to throw it away. The University of Pennsylvania has offended several boys in devastating ways. Officials are fired. But I haven’t heard any calls for the university to be dissolved.
The church needs to be held accountable. Some of its leaders should be fired. Some have been. I’m simply saying that for Christians, throwing away the church is not a viable option.
For myself, I have come to the conclusion that I cannot live my life as a human being without offending sometimes. Sheer ignorance is one reason, not to mention the times when I knowingly offend because I’m angry.
May I be honest? The idea that the church has failed and therefore it should be rejected offends me. That’s OK.
The Church has been and, for the most part, still is involved in a systematic campaign against the rights, dignity and liberty of LGBTs, not to mention denial of fellowship. I can’t really compare that to isolated incidents, no matter how bad, of individual social institutions. I’m not sure where the idea that one could throw away the church came in, that won’t happen. But neither do I give it a pass for continuing this slander. As I said in the first place, I would be happy if they just stopped the offense — the apologies are not all that helpful to me while they continue the offense.
David, we’re actually in agreement.
I wasn’t trying to make a list of grievances, and certainly, none of those are my grievances. As a Jew and a gay man, I have my own extra special set, but they have little to do with the body of Christ. It was simply a list of observations. I was pointing out the the Body of Christ was long ago split by those who comprise it and who allegedly have the greatest stake– and greatest commandment– in preserving it.
It’s very much like the divorce, adultery and illegitimacy that plague the heterosexual majority. Gay people can’t get married because straight people screw up their marriages, families, and commitments. Gay people get blamed in advance for this, because it is easy to blame “the other” rather than question your own wholly imaginary spiritual, moral, sexual (ha!) and social superiority.
The Body of Christ, like the family, has been attacked and eaten away at from within. Those cankerous triplets– fundamentalist megalomania, spiritual arrogance, and moral myopia– have been chewing on their Host for centuries. Our current thread subject is the perfect avatar for that. Exodus is a religious fraud supported by other religious frauds, selling more religious fraud, sexual fraud, psychological fraud, marital fraud, and a cheap gimcrack of fraudulent holiness that wouldn’t fetch 20 cents in a back alley in Bangkok.
You wrote: “As for the rest, how much does the church (any church) have to apologize for its past failings before it is forgiven? I’m thinking of the Catholic Churches recent disavowals of anti-Semitism, for instance.” Interesting about that. Anti-semitism arguably got off to a good start in the gospel of John, right about the time that the Jewish heresy known as Christianity began to see itself as a new thing, not just a new version of the old thing, and then to turn on its former dominant paradigm. John was quite clear about “The Jews this” and “The Jews that”. Though I am no biblical scholar, I don’t buy the apologia that this was merely about an internal dissent amoung factions of Jews at the time. Not “Our Brothers” or “Our priests”, but “The Jews”, and Jews who were fathered by devils at that. It was intended to separate.
It took the Catholic Church 1900 years to aplogize for the anti-semitism it had fostered for most of that 1900 years. I doubt I’ll be here when they get around to apologizing to gay people for creating the wunderbar, wun-of-a-kind sin known as “an intrinsic tendency towards grave moral evil.” Coming from an organization iwth (at least) an 800 year history of pedophilia and enabling and covering up same, that’s really rich. (Now we’re getting in to some of MY grievances).
The statement I would make, and often have made, is this: if the Church wants ot be respected, maybe it should start acting respectably. If the cells that make up the body of Christ want wholeness in the body of Christ, then maybe they should strive to be more Christ-like? You know. judge not. Love one another. that sort of thing.
Which brings me to your other point. Instead, the Body of Christ is usually the dessicated bones of Paul. I would have to disagree that the Paul versus Jesus thing is complex, but then i am a simple guy. These days, I tend to follow Koschei the Deathless, who made things as they are. It makes thing simpler when you try to look at things that way instead of how one might prefer them to be.
Jesus said, “Judge not.” Paul said, “Why not.”
Jesus said: “Woe unto you, who bar the door to the Kingdom of Heaven. Prostitutes and sinners will enter before you.” Paul said, “Here’s a list. These people aren’t invited.”
Jesus said, “Don’t be like the hypocrites. Pray in private.” Paul said, “Let’s have a church. and rules. And donations.”
There are more examples, but you get the drift. I have no interest in trying to reconcile Paul and Jesus, because i have no dog in that race. I respect people’s religious beliefs, even though I am an atheist– well, strictly speaking, an it-doesn’t-matter-ist– because i especially respect Koschei the Deathless, who made things as they are.
And even you pay your respects to Koschei, because You did exactly what I advised Tim to do. Whatever your intentions may be about healing the body of Christ, you ALSO found a better class of church to go to and a better class of Christian to hang out with.
@David Roberts
I am sorry that you evidently see the church, this organism of which I am part, as monolithic. I think it would also be wise for us LGBTQs to recognize that not all teaching/preaching against homosexual behavior, etc., is intentionally hurtful or hateful. There is room in my world for honest difference of opinion/interpretation. I agree with those in the LGBTQ world who are realizing we will not win the day by being intolerant, especially not when those who accept us are politically in the majority.
Please understand. I am not defending Exodus. I am defending the church AS that group of people who believe in Jesus Christ. This is what defines the church, not people’s attitudes toward LGBTQs. It’s not all about us.
“I think I would be good if the Church would just stop offending in the first place.”
David Roberts said what I said. if the Church wants to be respected, maybe it should start acting respectably.
The Church can act respectably, though it must often be dragged kicking and screaming to respectability.
No one– and certainly not I– is suggesting that the church should be rejected. I’m practically a christian in the matter. I love the sinner, but I really despise the sin. Don’t you you think it is a little odd that I, thoroughgoing atheist/it-doesn’t-matter-ist that I am, encouraged Tim to find a better class of Christian in a better class of church to associate with? And supported you in it? I truly believe that whatever makes you a better person, whatever makes your life better, whatever brings you peace and happiness, is a good thing in the world. The purpose of any relationship, whether with another person, or a religion, or money, or alcohol, or sex, is to make your life better by the fact that you are in it. If it’s not making your life better, then it is probably not a good idea to be in that relationship.
@David G.
What you are hearing and what I am saying seem to be two different things. I did not say the Church must agree in every way with us, I said they need to stop offending, which I described above as much more than a theological disagreement.
I really don’t have time to discuss this further with that attitude. You almost seem to be looking for a fight and this is the wrong place for that.
I just had a look at their Form 990. No doubt they are in trouble, as their deficit sharply reduced their net assets, which they now value at $250K. $250K is approximately what they had on hand in 2004 and 2007, and it is a lot more than they have had on hand in other years. The big difference is their one-year deficit of $180K. In the last 10 years or so, Exodus would usually run a surplus and in one year a very small deficit. It has never run a deficit of the size that it ran last year, and clearly if it continues at this rate, the assets will be depleted in 2 years or so.
The problem seems to me to be that they have very big expenses associated with their conferences, but they can’t cut back on those b/c those same conferences account for a huge portion of their revenue. Also, they have 23 employees, which adds up to a lot of expense, even if no one employee is highly compensated (and that includes Alan Chambers, who to his credit, takes modest compensation).
There are 2 interesting items that raise questions for me, and i would appreciate any input from EGW that you can provide.
First, they appear to rent their facilities from Worthen Legacy Group, which is run by the same board of directors as Exodus. I assume that WLG owns the building and then Exodus rents it for a reported $78,000/yr. What is this about? Why doesn’t Exodus just own the property and pay its $896K mortgage? On its website, it talks about the building and the mortgage as if it all belongs to Exodus, with no mention of Worthen.
The second interesting item that raised a question is the revenue they get from membership dues. The membership dues may provide some insight as to how many people are involved with this outfit. The reported membership dues are $14,901. This is way down from years past. For example, in 2007, it was more than double, $29,805. You wouldn’t expect dues to be reduced over time, so I presume that this represents a real loss in members. However, I can’t determine from the crappy Exodus website what the membership dues are per member, so it is hard to tell from the raw number how many individuals and churches we are talking about. I would ask EGW and its readers to pipe up if they can offer any info as to what Exodus membership dues are.
@Ben in Oakland
Thanks, David, for your clarification. I enjoy the lively discussion. I didn’t mean to step on your toes as a Jewish man. You confirm my belief that it is not realistic to expect to never offend. Or to expect that others never to offend.
Yes, I agree with you on most of what you say. I totally agree with you that the hatefulness many Christians have displayed toward us is not only dispicable, it is a disease that eats away at the heart of what the church is. You are exactly right. I could not have said it better. In fact, I may steal your way of saying it in the future. I believe that what we are asking of the church is simply that the church be true to its own identity.
I am sorely tempted to discuss theological issues with you. I am trying to respect the purpose of this website. I understand what you say about John. I am not one who believes the Christian scriptures are inerrant in the sense of containing no kind of error. I do believe they are infallable (reliable) in pointing toward God and truth. Sorry for the technical lingo. I think you have misunderstood Paul at points. “And such were some of you,” he says to Christians when listing Kingdom-barring offenses. These lists do not include gay behavior per se, so recent research indicates, though his words have often been mistranslated to say such. He probably is referring to abusive forms of homosexuality — selling sex slaves, and the like — some forms of homosexuality that he saw around him in the Roman empire. Paul is saying that selling male sex slaves is death-dealing to the human spirit. Beyond that, I’m going to leave the theological issues to the side.
Thank you for your sympathetic understanding of Christianity. I will watch out for references to Koschei so I can better understand what you believe.
@David Roberts
I am sorry if I have misunderstood you.
@William Brown
Thanks for the input William. You can find more about WLG in a previous post here. It appears to be a title holding company set up just to hold the asset of the building. Check about halfway down that post.
As I remember, membership dues are $50/yr unless they have gone up. I think they claim to have a total of 250 churches and ministries in their group. The rough estimate according to the figures looks like 298 entitites paying dues of $50/yr. Perhaps they raised the dues a bit.
@David Roberts
David,
If I could take this conversation offline at this point, I would. But that doesn’t seem possible. I can’t find an email address for you. I’m a fairly new respondant here. Maybe there are some unspoken rules I don’t understand yet. But please hear me: I was not trying to pick a fight with you or anyone else.
The heart of the matter for me is this: I often hear/read other gays railing against the church. I understand this. The church, or more specifically, certain evangelicals, have hurt me deeply. I will probably never recover from the self-hatred inculcated in me as a child by my family and my church. So I understand. But as a matter of clear perception and clear thinking, it is not the church as a whole or the church in its true identity that has hurt me. It is specific people who called themselves Christian and claimed to speak for the church. So when I hear you or others making blanket all-inclusive criticisms against the church, I understand, but I disagree. I happen to know a few churches and several Christians who don’t hate us. Homosexuality and how to respond to it is an issue of major conflict in many churches now, as you know. There are many Catholics and Southern Baptists and Presbyterians and Methodists who believe the dominant Christian position over the past several hundred years has been wrong. They also are the church. Moreover, I am not willing to impute bad motives to all the historic Christians who have spoken, sometimes vehemently, against homosexuality. Many of them were simply passing on what they had been taught. They did not know better. No doubt some of them had learned to hate their own sexuality, and that hatred entered into the way they spoke and wrote. It is important to me to allow the church some room to change her mind. This in no way takes away from the culpability of those who perpetuate hate.
If you want me to go away, I will. I will not post again. But I don’t think that represents what this website is about. You encouraged me when you wrote in response to an earlier post that I was “spot on.” Now, though, it would be easy for me to disappear. I am trying not to do that.
You assumed that my words, “It’s not all about us,” reflected some kind of bad attitude. I think you are wrong. You, as a leader on this blog, dismissed me: “I really don’t have time to discuss this further with that attitude. You almost seem to be looking for a fight and this is the wrong place for that.” As a gay man, I am learning to stand up for myself. So I am standing up to you. I think I deserve an apology.
This thread has gone too wild for me, a newcomer! Where is the discussion about the leadership of Ex-Gay ministries who are starting to deal with the failures of “change”? That’s probably where I belong. I lost contact with (and interest in) Exodus about the time Alan Chambers took over. To be honest, although I never met him, I didn’t trust him one bit. My entire affiliation with “Ex-gay” ministries had everything to do with living in The Truth, whatever that turn(s,ed) out to be. When the Ex-gay ethos fundamentally changed, and “ministries” became products to sell, and images to maintain, I lost heart, faith and trust. And I saw this from the perspective of living in a ex-gay residential “program” for four years, and then working on staff of the same program for another year or so. My occupation was that of a buildings maintenance man and NOT a counselor. However, I was afforded an insider’s view. I have no qualms with The Gospel of Christ, nor the Church. I do think that Truth has been compromised however by the ex-gay leaders and ministries. The biggest point of contention I have with “Ex-gay” ministry is the fact that there are too many lies, too many distortions and deceptions, and too many claims which are unsubstantiated. I get that the goal is holiness and not heterosexuality. I understood that my first couple of months in Love in Action. And, while I still haven’t achieved the status of Christian behavior and faithfulness which I desire, that became my goal, rather than hetero-sexuality. I could go on and on and as I said above, there might be a better discussion forum or topic for me than this current one… I am willing to take directions to it.
David and Tim… you’ve given me a lot to write about. hopefully, my husband won’t be on me this early in the morning about writing when we’re supposed to be doing other things.
First and foremost– stay here. don’t leave. you have a lot to contribute, and there are people here who can contribute to you. I hope I can.
Second, i’m not really a believer in Koschei, though I did almost become a christian once. I am not really jewish anymore, either. But I am a Really Big Queer, and a lot of what I think comes from that perspective. When I write, i like to play with words, concepts, and stuff in old books that no one reads any more. Koschei is one of those concepts. He’s a convenient way of saying “stop looking at what people say they are doing and look at what they actually ARE doing.” If you would prefer, substitute the basic principles of functionalism in sociology and transactional analysis in psychology and you will understand where I am coming from.
David and Tim, my point was that the Church (in general) has a very long history of not being the Body of Christ that it has frequently claimed itself to be. This isn’t news. It started with John, continued with Paul, and it has been merrily singing the same old tune, so very off-key, till today. Long ago, it left the idea that being a Christian meant only that one had a personal relationship with Jesus, and became what it is, multiple organisms with laws, doctrines, buildings, insurance, business enterprises, political opinions, and an attachment to This World. And you know who the Prince of This World is. That’s what Paul is all about, why he was writing all of those letters.
I don’t mean this in any way as a put down, but you both seems like little kids who were told there’s a Santa Claus, only to find he’s just some alcoholic old pedophile in a red suit. Of course you are hurt and surprised. “But Daddy, you PROMISED!” isn’t going to work for you. “When i was a child, I thought as a child.” For your own health and happiness, stop it. Forgive them their trespasses and move on.
The Church has a great deal to repent in its 1700 year old jihad against gay people (for just one example), all based upon some badly mistranslated and misapplied bits of unintelligble Scripture placed into the service of people’s personal agendas, misunderstandings, and fears, starting with Old-Thorn-in-My-Side himself, and continuing in an unbroken line to Ted Haggard, Eddie Long, and a noticeable proportion of the catholic priesthood. The history of the word Sodomy is very illustrative of this, having been defined not only as a sex act but also as heresy, witchcraft, and a catch-all for everything that a certian class of Christian doesn’t like in its not-so-illustrious history. But then so is the supression of the rites of Sts. Sergius and Bacchus.
Tim wrote, “I have no qualms with The Gospel of Christ, nor the Church. I do think that Truth has been compromised however by the ex-gay leaders and ministries.” Absolutely the case, as it was compromised by the witch burners, the heresy hunters, Allesandro Borgia, the revilers, the bearers of false witness, and the self-proclaimed claims to infallibility by a mere man, self-proclaimed Vicar of Christ or not.
So what? It has nothing to do with you, other than you have been the victim of it. It has nothing to do with your relationship with Jesus. And if their theological beliefs are correct, they may well be in for a nasty, eternal surprise for their actions. After all, “What you have done to the least of these my brothers, you have done to me.” As David said, “Don’t underestimate the human capacity for self-deception. This self-deception may have stemmed not only from the fact that they earned their living by promoting change, but from the bind they were in between their beliefs and their homosexuality.”
Don’t get mad. Get even. Gandhi said, “Be the change you would see in the world.” Be a proud gay man. Be a moral gay man, whatever that means to you. Be a better class of Christian than the hypocrites and the bigots. Be a member of your better class of church. Stand up for that. Your path is clear.
If healing your church is important to you, you cannot begin that task until you can first heal yourselves. And you can’t do that until you can forgive the Church not for betraying YOU, but for being what it has always been and betraying itself.
Hi Ben, you cover so much ground in your posts that I don’t know how to respond. I can definitely say that I don’t feel like a victim… I simply wasn’t able t admit the truth to myself until relatively recently because i was afraid that somehow to do so would injure my relationship with God. That is MY twisted rationalizing thinking. I have no desire to abandon Christianity, even though I am in a bit of a dilemma presently. If anything — and probably this is beyond the scope of XGW — i would love the discussion of these issues among the brethren and also I would love the prayers of those who pray!
Ben, you truly are an amazing fellow, by the way. It shines through in your posts here and in your compassion and willingness to engage with others. Your partner should be mighty proud of you!
Tim, thank you for your kinds words about me. I’m glad i can help.
You should tell my husband, since he seems to think my formal title is Goddammit, as in “Goddammit Ben”. 🙂
@Tim Warner, you said,
StraightGrandmother = Tim this is as good of place as any, tell us your story. Why did you go to Love In Action, is that the one you were in (?), why did you stay, and then why did you leave? Did you get changed into heterosexual? Did it help you or hurt you and please set the time period for us if you would.
I will tell my story… I will condense it so that it makes sense and doesn’t bore . Hopefully I can get to it in the next day or so. Thanks for the invitation and the welcome to do so.
Ben, you do have a way with words, and a lot of cynicism about the church. I think I’ve made my position clear enough, so I won’t respond — except, for what it’s worth, I don’t feel like a disillusioned little boy. What’s your story? What experience brings you here?
I am like you, Tim, in wishing for a place to discuss with fellow believers how to live a holy life as a gay man. I once belonged to a 7th Day Adventist gay discussion group online. Some members were active sexually, others were celibate. That’s the closest I’ve had to an experience like that.
The only hard and fast rules here are that basic respect be maintained, discussions should remain germane to the topic in some way, and statements of fact which are not common knowledge must be supported by authoritative references. It should also be noted that this is not a Christian forum, but as most ex-gay issues are intertwined with that faith in some way, it does get a disproportionate degree of attention.
That said, bashing of other faiths or those who share no religious faith at all, will not be tolerated. It’s fine to express one’s own personal belief as it may related to the discussion, as long as it is done in such a way as to respect that of others, and without attempts to proselytize.
Beyond these basic guidelines, there may be times when discussions get out of hand or otherwise cause disruption. In those cases the participants may be asked to change course. Also, there are occasionally open threads where topics are relaxed. Weekly digests are generally considered open.
Trying to maintain this kind of balance is not easy, especially with so many participants having experienced pain and agony at the hands of those who profess a faith which others here credit with their salvation (however that might be defined). To be honest, all other things being equal, we will most likely err on the side of the former, and hope the latter can appreciate the reasoning.
StraightGrandmother = Tim this is as good of place as any, tell us your story. Why did you go to Love In Action, is that the one you were in (?), why did you stay, and then why did you leave? Did you get changed into heterosexual? Did it help you or hurt you and please set the time period for us if you would.
In the late 1980s I was living in Paris. I had spent the precious nearly 20 years living a life which in most ways was typical of gay men. I grew up near San Francisco, and in the early 70s was afforded that particularly open gay culture in which to “come out”. I met a guy and we developed a relationship which in turn led us to moving to Europe.
Having grown up as a nomiinal Christian, and then having been impacted deeply by the “Jesus movement ” of the late 60s/early 70s I constantly experienced a conflict between my sexual expression and my Christian faith and practical life. For me it was always an “either/or” situation. So, for most of the decades of the 1970s and 1980s I was actively engaged in homosexual behavior, including a 7 year living together relationship.
In the late 80s I experienced a re-re-re-comversion to Christ and and a return to my fundamentalist, conservative theology. I met a fellow through the Church in Paris I had been attending who was also a “gay Christian” . He, being British, told me about a group outside of London with which he was involved called “Courage.” I contacted them, went up for a visit and decided that this was the place for me. Courage in those days was an ex-gay ministry .
The leadership of Courage (Jeremy Marks) suggested that it would be better for me to return to the states and contact Love in Action upon which Courage was modeled. I did as he suggested and after 11 years of living abroad, moved back to California and applied for LIA and was accepted into the 1992 year long program. I was 42 years old. (I am now 61)
My reason for applying to LIA was that I saw the conflict between my Christian faith and my homosexual constitution as irreconcilable. And I decided that I wanted to be a completely sold-out committed Christian, in the Evangelical/protestant sense.
Since those days, I have been committed to , and have maintained celibacy. My one year involvement in the residential program turned into a 4 year stay. I never actually experienced a change from a homosexual constitution to a hetero-sexual constitution. I had early on figured that was impossible. But I did want some kind of morally acceptable life – acceptable to God and the church. The best I could do and be was a “non-practicing” homosexually oriented Christian man, i.e. “ex-gay”.
Some of my fellow program participants went on to marry and work in the ex-gay ministries of large Christian organizations. I was always a bit cynical about their transformation(s).
For me the four-year program had everything to do about my relationship to/with God and for me the only option was a chaste and celibate lifestyle. I realized that I couldn’t break through the bounds of being oriented sexually and emotionally to other men, no matter how much counseling I had, no matter how deeply I prayed and tried and so forth. My best efforts produced abstinence and chastity in all areas of my sexual life. I still suffered from episodic emotional “crushes” and physical attractions.
I ended my 4 years and converted to Eastern Orthodoxy. I lived in an Orthodox community in No. California for three years. I then dedicated myself to exploring monastic life and spent 6 years living monastically in several different monasteries in America and abroad. I was completely asexual. About 7 years ago I realized that my Protestant formation (dogmatically and theologically/doctrinally) prevented me from making a whole-hearted commitment ot Eastern Orthodox monasticism, so to maintain integrity I declined to become a monk and sought a way out of monasticism and a return to “the world.” I explored different avenues and was eventually offered a job with Love in Action which had since moved to Memphis. As I had been involved with all phases of the construction industry over my adult life, I was hired to be their buildings maintenance man. I left LIA after about a year or so. They were having a lot of administrative problems and I was no longer interested in what they were up to.
Since then, I have been eeking out a living as a self-employed home repair specialist and house painter. About two years ago, everything sort of hit me and I realized that all of my 15 or 20 years of effort to live as an ex-gay or an a-sexual man had frustrated me in deep ways. I admitted my deep homosexual attractions and began looking at what had really been going on with Christians who were attempting reconciliation with their faith and their sexuality. And that is where I am today. Unfortunately, I have become interested in the more base elements of homosexuality which for me means I am heavily into porn and attendant practices as a celibate but not abstinent man. I stopped going to church about two years ago as well. I still pray and read the Bible.
Now I realize that I have merely drawn a bare bones outline of my life over the past twenty years. I haven’t answered the underlying questions of how I felt and now feel about ex-gay ministry. For me it was extremely valuable in terms of the discipleship and the building of a genuine path of Christian life. I also experienced deeply transparent honest living in community. I however am angry about the claims of conversion to heterosexuality and I feel that there is a duplicitous deception within the ranks of Exodus and that ilk. There is so much more I could say, and I probably will. But for now this is kind of an introduction. I am still making my way, even at the ripe old age of 61!
I hope I have answered the questions of Straight Grandmother. If not, ask away; I am not afraid to tell my story. And I am not bitter at all towards ex-gay ministry nor its leaders, some of whom remain my friends today. However there are also some whom I do not trust nor think are acting with integrity and honesty. But then, I am the chief of sinners and have only myself to worry about, which I do (worry about — a lot).
Tim Warner, thank you or sharing your story. The world is different now Tim, we have culturally changed over the last 20 years, and thank God we have. Thank you for sharing your story you did a good job of condensing it and bringing out the main points.
@Tim Warner
Thanks, Tim, for sharing your story. While I’ve never been part of Orthodox communities, I have benefited from reading Orthodox writers, including a fair amount of the Philokalia. You might be interested in a website called “Inclusive Orthodoxy.” Fr. Justin Cannon, whose site this is, is an Episcopal priest who has edited an anthology by Orthodox LGBT writers.
@ David G. Thanks for your feedback. I participated for a brief time in the 7th day adventist discussion group you mentioned. I will check out the Orthodox site/group you mention. I am interested in what sort of church you participate these days. thanks!
@Straight Grandmother: I also appreciate your encouragement and feedback. Yes, I see that the world has changed. I was more or less living a “sequestered” life until about 2005. Love in Action lmited my exposure to American culture, the Orthodox community in which I lived was in the hills of No. California and I chose to live there in relative cultural and social isolation. And then my foray into monastic life de facto sealed my isolation from the world. It has only been in the past two years that I have ever owned a computer which has given me access to “the world” through the internet. I don’t watch television. I listen to “right wing” talk radio exclusively for my news. I read non-stop when I am not working. When I stopped going to church about two years ago, I lost my remaining link to the culture. Even though I live in Memphis, being from the Western USA I feel out of touch.
@Tim Warner
My partner and I attend an Episcopal church. We go to a Sunday evening service modeled on the Taize community. The Inclusive Orthodoxy site, BTW, is just that, a site. It’s not a group, unfortunately. I do hope you can find some relief from your apparent isolation. I’ve been relatively isolated myself (except for my partner) over the past few years. Between working on a degree and my job, it’s difficult to find time to socialize.
Tim, I have to admit what I thought but didn’t post after I read your story. What immediately came into my mind was the song, “Lord Lift Us Up Where We Belong” Strictly speaking as a stranger looking from the outside in I would say Tim you belong where the Lord made you. You belong with Christians who are gay who are not ashamed of how God made them, in his image.
Actually I have about as much experience in this area as you do (your life being primarily religiously closeted) as far as the current situation for sexual minorities, having just started investigating about 2 years ago. What I do is go to Google, then up at the top I go to Google News, then once in Google News I search for one word, “Gay” I read all kinds of information about people who are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender.
It seems to me you have reconciled yourself that you are a man who is gay, maybe Tim as the song says, get lifted up where you belong. It’s never to late in life for Love Tim, never.
Another website I frequent is Dr. Warren Throckmorton. He is an Evangelical college professor, psychology, and does research on Sexual Orientation Change. He was actually part of, and a reviewer of the American Psychological Associations task force on Appropriate Therapeutic treatment for Sexual Orientation Change Efforts. My base for learning about SOCE is from Throckmorton, I have learned tons over there.
I come to the topic strictly for political reasons, I don’t know any sexual minorities who have ever wanted to change their sexual orientation, but the ability to change your sexual orientation has legal and political ramifications as I am sure you are well aware. In my mind it basically boils down to right wing propaganda that says that sexual minorities do not deserve the same rights, the right to marriage, adoption etc. because they don’t have to be gay, they can change if they want to. So my search is to validate or invalidate that point of view. So far I am in the camp of “People very rarely are able to change their sexual orientation” This is based on what I have learned in the past 10 months to a year. Other websites I like are http://www.GoodAsYou.org and http://www.BoxTurtleBulletin.com Mainly I just use Google news and search for news stories on the word Gay. I have gotten quite an education in the last 2 years. Pls stop listening to right wing radio, please. It is not good for you.
Tim, thanks for sharing your story. If I have time to write later, I will.
I can say this much now– what I said to you. Be a moral gay man, whatever that means to you. There is no one true Christian view on just about any subject it considers. If there were, there would only be one denomination, headed by Popa-tine. That has never been the case except perhaps in the very earliest years of the Church. But even then, there is evidence that there were two churches already by the time of the Gospel of John, that more-or-less headed by James, and that begat by Paul.
David, I hope we haven’t departed too far from the original topic of this thread. Though I am enjoying the stories that are being shared here, I do remember where we began — with some excellent reporting on your part. Thank you for the work you do in helping to bring news like this to the rest of us. It matters, and your work is appreciated. I am encouraged that the balance in the debate about change and ex-gay “ministries” in general seems to be shifting. The claims so many of us have found unlivable are being exposed as wishful thinking at best, and in some cases, blatant lies. Keep up the good work.
David, I don’t have much time to write at the moment. Later this evening.
Thanks for the compliment. Words are fun.
I don’t think I am cynical about the Church. I think I see it pretty much as Koschei, who made things as they are, would want me to see it. Though why that would matter to Koschei, who made things as they are, is a mystery. (And if you understand that conundrum– it took me a while to figure it out– you understand Koschei).
What I mean is this. Suppose the Church commits five pounds of evil for every 10 pounds of good. What most people do is subtract the evil from the good, note that you have a five pound surplus of good, and conclude, q.e.d., that the Church is a force, not only of good, but of goodness. From there, it is a short step to saying that the Church represents God on earth, and an even shorter step to being the personal representative of god on earth– which is where so many love-the-sinner-hate-the-sin types end up.
All you need after that is a mere soupcon of ground megalomania, perhaps a lardon of rendered self-righteousness, and you’re God’s Viceroy on Earth, you have a palace, a royal title and number, and a fab art collection.
I see it much differently. I see that the organization that is supposed to represents God’s best wishes for humanity has commited five pounds of evil and ten pounds of good. They don’t cancel each other out. I see that this is a long term, historical fact. (The child molestation things is at least 800 years old).
One portion of these five pounds of evil is a heavy chunk that keeps landing on my foot. It is one thing to believe that homosexuality is a sin. I think that is stupid, not justified by scripture, and most likely reflects what you might call a Thorn-In-My-Side disposition towards self-hatred and bad translations. But I really don’t have much of a problem with it. People believe all kinds of interesting things. Unfortunately, they just don’t ask whether believing them makes their lives better or worse.
It is quite another thing to ignore all of one’s own biblical failings and replace that with over-attention to other people’s alleged failings, a sort of meta-failure in a mote/speck sort of a way. But even that is not a problem for me. It’s just annoying and hypocritical.
But then it is still another thing to claim you represent the forces of goodness and light, and yet will tell any lie, no matter how vicious or divorced from reality, no matter how much harm you cause, no matter how stupid, no matter how much truth you have twist, no matter how many people starve because you have your moral knickers in an uncomfortable twist.
It’s not enough to say that “oh well., they are human beings and they make mistakes, Forgive them their trespasses yadayaydayada.” All of that is true. Hundreds of thousands of so-called witches were murdered by these types, and neither the witches nor the murderers learned a thing from that mistake, nor their spiritual and actual descendants.
What’s really interesting to me is that it doesn’t matter to this (oh, well, I’ll say it) Certain Class of Christian that they also would appear to be total ASSHOLES (not to malign a perfectly good orifice) to any thinking, compassionate, rational person who hasn’t drunk the homo-hatred koolaid. But like the ten pounds of good above, their humanity does not cancel this ASSHOLERY out.
It merely underlines it. A lot of churches have lost their homohatred not despite the One True Church Position on Homosexuality, but because of their faith, because of their humanity.
My conclusion is that these people and Churches do not represent God, they represent themselves. Even the best of them have a distance to go. I don’t think I am being cynical about this.
Were I a Christian, I would– and did already– put it this way.
“Long ago, it left the idea that being a Christian meant only that one had a personal relationship with Jesus, and became what it is, multiple organisms with laws, doctrines, buildings, insurance, business enterprises, political opinions, and an attachment to This World. And you know who the Prince of This World is. “
David Roberts, I hope we have not gone to far astray. I wanted to hear Tim’s story since he said he was in Love In Action and then an employee of Love in Acton and we know how that is connected to Exodus. I thought he would have an interesting life story and he does. Then, since he has put himself out there it is only courteous to respond back for a bit. Back to our regularly scheduled programming 🙂
@Ben in Oakland
Well, Ben, what can I say? If Koschei is a male archetype, as I read he is on that great font of all knowledge, Wikipedia, then I suppose the only reason he wants anything is because he is part of you. I don’t want to argue about this, especially not here, but the idea that Christianity is merely a matter of a personal relationship with Jesus is a modern evangelical notion. And I’m afraid you have Jesus to blame or thank for the Church’s existence. As you are wont, you raise way too many issues to deal with in a post of reasonable length. Call me an idealist, but I think most pessimists see themselves as realists. The assessment you call realism strikes me as made through very dark glasses, and focused on Roman Catholics. I can only imagine they must figure prominently in your own story, which I would still like to read. My beliefs about the church are not a matter of weighing good against bad. The church is my people. For good or ill, I am one of them. I am a baptized believer in Jesus Christ, and that makes me part of the church. To take Luther’s phrase out of context, here I stand, I can do no other. I can’t make myself unbelieve what I truly believe. You may tell me many of my people are a bunch of assholes. Not only is that rude. It doesn’t matter. They are still my people. Incidentally, Christianity is not the only religion that has had a problem with homosexual behavior. Would you feel so free to call people of other faiths assholes?
Ben in Oakland, somebody has to have the “last word”, why don’t we let David G take it this time? Someone has to be the one to yield the floor on an off topic discussion even though it is not finished, for the simple sake of courtesy, would you be the one? Guys, can we return to our regularly scheduled programming?
Not to be intrusive, but what exactly is the “on” topic in this thread?
@Tim Warner
You’re fine.
Hey Tim,
I think when we’re confused about something we can become a bit of a camelian for what we may think is “right” for us even if we have not explored all the “truths” needing rational investigation. I have to agree w str8 gmthr, str8 homophobic rhetoric via right wingery of any sort can seem like the answer, but really it turns out to be your worst poison regarding your sexuality. The truth is, God only creates and emanates love, the rest is all heresay. You are free will itself, don’t give it to anyone
else. Use it, it’s yours. Now go have that great gay life and love you know you’ve always wanted, and deserve. That’s what Jesus wants for you, fearlessness in all areas of your life. That’s what he taught through example. Love is fearlessness.
Times a wast’in.
you might be right, David.
I am eager to hear what all of you have said in previous posts/threads/etc about how you have come to terms of reconciliation. Is there somewhere to which you would direct me? Or is this not the forum?
Ok, new found friends…. I wrote this as a response to leadership in Love in Action and as a note to clarify my feelings based upon transformations in ideology going on within ex-gay culture. I originally sent it to a friend of mine who once worked in the ex-gay counseling department of Focus on the Family. He has given me permission to share it, and so I do….
it starts here:
When I was younger, and desperately seeking God’s will for my life I realized that even though I was a Christian I was deeply homosexual.
I looked for a resolution. I didn’t want to displease God. When Love In Action came along in my life, it resonated with my conscience, and my heart. Yes I am homosexual, but God can help me to live in Christ. So I “bought into” Love in Action’s philosophy and discipline and everything the program offered. I lived within the program for 4 years . Now all of a sudden John, representing the leadership of LIA is saying “well, we didn’t really mean what we taught or professed.”
oh…ok,….
Another way to look at this is the “Third Way”. A Christian who is deeply homosexual senses that something is “wrong”. Yet, he can’t change himself no matter how hard he prays or repents or cries out to God or whatever he does to attempt to change his internal orientation or as I prefer to call it, his homosexual constitution.
Along comes someone who says ” I am just like you, but God showed me that this is the way I can change so that I can be the man God wants me to be, free from the homosexual struggle which is causing you such deep pain and shame. God doesn’t want you to live as an active homosexual, and He can change you, I promise, He changed me.”
So the poor young man goes through the program. He enjoys the fellowship and the honesty and friendship and freedom from shame and hiding and so forth with which he had been living. He feels that God is truly entering deeply into his life and it brings him a lot of joy.. However, he cannot seem to overcome his homosexual yearnings. He acknowledges this and is told to do this more, try that harder, come on…. here read this book, ok see this counselor…. well, maybe you should do this, do that, what’s wrong with you? You must not be following the program.
Finally the young man gives up in despair because, here he was, in the place of healing, the place of deliverance from homosexuality and everyone around him was getting healed and married, and the leaders were shining examples of the glory of true transformation from homosexual to ex-homosexual. Everyone was getting it but him. What a bummer!
So the young man is stuck in a place of not only having homosexual feelings, knowing that therefore he is a sinner and incapable of ever being anything else… incapable of entering into God’s Original Intention for him and his life, but also, he has done everything he could do to try and change and even in that, he failed. No wonder the young man is bummed out. And he is probably going to go to hell too! Oh well… might as well get it over with….
And then, one day , oh, I don’t know, …. maybe twenty years later, the man (no longer young) hears the leader of the ex-homosexual “ministry” say, “You know, we never really were able to do what we said we could do. None of us ever changed. We just said that we did, and we just said that we could help you change.”
Of course the problem was that the young man knew that there was truth in what he was being told about living in Christ, being able to live a Truly Godly Life, even though he had “this problem.” Combined with the young man’s love for God, and his sense that there was something wrong with himself that could be “fixed,” there was a perfect “dovetail fit” with what the ex-homosexual ministry presented and the claims of its leader. In fact many many many many people similar to the young man trusted the claims as well. And then, what a blow! They find out it isn’t true. And they find it out from the Leader himself.
Now what?
The point I am trying to make is that there aren’t just two options; one being embrace homosexuality and live it out OR the other option, repent repent repent (but really just repress and deny and ignore. Lie about it, in other words.)
I just don’t know what that third option is, but if the first two are false, there has to be another way.
(post edit) well, that is my frustration in a nutshell based upon my feelings and experience. I think I am moving past this now… it has been about 5 weeks since I wrote this. I am frustrated, but not yet clear on the future pathway to take…
This is probably the last post from me for a while. gotta lot of work to catch up on… but I am extremely appreciative of you that I have encountered here. I am not disappearing….
Tim and I am pleased to meet your acquaintance 🙂 Yeah what a blow isn’t it to have the leader John Smid come along 20 years later and say, “Well, on further review, the ruling on the field is overruled by the refs in the booth who are able to see clearly that really nobody changes their sexual orientation no matter how hard they pray and try.” On the one hand it is great that he finally steps forward and tells the truth…. but on the other hand it IS a real blow to you, who basically threw your young life and mid life away seeking to live what they told you was possible for YOU. They just stole it from you Tim.
I bought John Shore’s book on Amazon,
“UNFAIR: Why the “Christian” View of Gays Doesn’t Work [Kindle Edition]” $9.95.
Amazon has a free app for your computer. If you don’t have a Kindle (I don’t) you download this free app and you can read Kindle books on your computer. I am able to lend the book out to others, all completely legal from Amazon. Trust me I am not rolling in dough and my few recent book purchases were a splurge, normally I would want people to buy the book in order to make sure the author is compensated for his work product but I figure you have been through enough hell on earth I don’t think John Shore would mind me lending you (and only you) the book. Send me an email at my forum name at Gmail. Download the Kindle app first on your computer and send me an e-mail then I will figure out with you how I can lend you this book through Amazon. Especially relevant for you Tim is the last chapter and maybe you want to actually read that first. It does blow Tim, you were suckered in and you are just now finding this out at age 61, it really DOES BLOW!
@Tim,
I just wrote this but did not see your recent post. I’ll post it anyway and hope to hear from you again soon.
My take of this forum, though not a traditional “support group”, is nonetheless very supportive of recovering ex-gays. It’s every day gay people who are countering attack from misguided religious sextremists with rational solid factual based sexual/social data fully supporting living full and happy lives as gay people. There are ex-ex-gay forums i.e. beyondexgay.com by Peter Toscano which is more support group style. John Smid, who ran LIA for Exodus, who Peter Toscano was under tutelage long ago, has taken a full 180 within the last few months on his stance and is in the midst of great apology for all the emotional sexually abusive damage he caused gay people. His web sight is gracerivers.com. You might like it, it’s very cool. There is also Newdirection.ca by Wendy Gritter, a once right wing religious group in Canada that has also done a 180 saying, “we don’t believe the Bible writers of those times understood the full content of sexuality”. They have really come a long way supporting gay couples and sexually active gay people where once it was a “sin”. The tides are definitely turning, and in a good way.
My take is that those that have reconciled their sexuality w religion at some point, realized that much of the biblical lines against homosexuality were from straight bible writers who chose not to understand gays and found them repulsive, hence their take was inputted biblicaly as the “moral majority”. Then those in recovery began to understand God loves them regardless of their sexual orientation and went on to have full loving sexual lives free of corrupt biblical data. In essence, they went from extremist to moderate in their take on the bible, throwing out obvious errors and keeping the rest.
I think it is helpful to lay down books of any nature and just look at the present time situation. Is God striking people dead for being sexually active and gay? Is the motivation from straight right wing religious groups filled with personal hate towards gays, while throwing the “God card” in for good measure? Did Jesus ever hate the underdog? Are sexually active gay people deserving of death? If you study at what is going on, you’re really in the clear, because you are unchangeably gay, and how others perceive you is their take, their “sin” if negative, where yours is yours religious or not. It comes down to healthy boundaries. Some people who are Christian are going to hate you for being gay, there is no doubt. But you don’t have to hate you for being you, gay and Christian. God and Jesus don’t when looked at rationally, and this is pivotal, so why should you? That seems to be the reconciliation I observe happening.
I greatly support you in getting back to your old gay life free from corrupted religious data while keeping the rational best. Jesus did not teach hate therefore, I find it ripe and fitting that we don’t teach it to ourselves.
Tim, the way you describe yourself I bet you would find that you would fit in very well with Quakers. Have you ever investigated the Quaker religion?
David R did you see where you were mentioned in this article on Alan Chambers?
“Most of his critics contend it’s destructive. Websites like Truth Wins Out and Ex-Gay Watch have whole sections devoted to condemning Chambers and other ministries to homosexuals. They note that some prominent former leaders of Exodus have returned to homosexuality. Chambers acknowledges that many people do return to homosexuality, but he says that doesn’t negate the validity of Exodus’ message. ”
https://www.worldmag.com/articles/18908
David, I didn’t get around to writing last night. I actually said most of what I wanted to say in my previous posts. I will try to write my religious story at another time, since you ask.
I’m not telling you to abandon the church or the body of Christ. I’m telling you to be a member of a better class of church, and hang out with a better class of Christian, which you’re doing. iDavid said it perfectly: “You are free will itself, don’t give it to anyone
else. Use it, it’s yours. Now go have that great gay life and love you know you’ve always wanted, and deserve. That’s what Jesus wants for you, fearlessness in all areas of your life. That’s what he taught through example. Love is fearlessness. ”
For Koschei, you really need to read James Branch Cabell, not wikipedia. cabell tended to adopt all kinds of folklore from everywhere– a very learned man– and use them for his own purposes to comment on life, love, belief, morals, sex, and everything else. I would recommend Jurgen and The silver Stallion, to start.
I only tend to focus on the RCC because their sins are so egregious, so obvious, and so easy to deal with. Friday night fish in a barrel.
I wasn’t telling you that your people are a bunch of assholes. I’m telling you that SOME of your people are a bunch of assholes, and your life is going to be better without them in it. Paraphrasing iDavid, have a great Christian life. Remember, I was telling you to GO to church, not leave it. but you only have so much time in your life. Why waste it on people who don’t make your life better?
It may be rude to call people assholes, but if they are going to act like assholes, why not point it out? Being religious is not the same thing as being polite, being truthful, being kind. It certianly is rude to tell me that I am a threat to children, marriage, the military, faith, and Western Cvilization, especially when I am not any of those things. I’m just a guy.
As for Christianity not being the only religion that has a problem with homosexual behaviour– well, to start with, I don’t agree that it is only with homosexual behaviour. That’s their excuse and their get-out-of-hell card, but they actually have a problem with homosexual people. And I think there is a good deal of evidence that a great deal of the homohatred to day was exported to societies by Christianity. But it doesn’t matter because frankly, what kind of an excuse is that? They disagree in toto about the nature of God, or the Gods, and his place and message to the world, and the history of the western world is writ large in the blood of that disagreement, but they can all agree (and they don’t actually) that homosexuality is bad, and that makes it respectable, possibly true, and right? Nope. It only makes it yet another prejudice given its very thin skin of respectability by attributing it to God.
My basic point is that the church has been demonstrably wrong about all kinds of things that they formerly gave a theological imprimatur to. You cannot save them from themselves, and you’ve already concluded they were wrong about you.
@StraightGrandmother
In Chamber’s mind, nothing negates their message. World Magazine has a history of being basically PR for Exodus. This article follows the trend, with numerous factual errors and a lot of spin. Thanks for the heads up.
@StraightGrandmother
https://exgaywatch.com/2011/12/exodus-alan-chambers-wins-award-re-branding-begins/
I seriously, genuinely, honestly and sincerely appreciate all of your support and feedback. You have ALL addressed my specific points and issues, and that is very, very kind of you. I am grateful to have discovered you and this site. My desire is to give something of benefit to you folks as well.
Tim no sweat. I am waiting for your e-mail.
@Ben in Oakland
Thanks, Ben. You have the last word.
@iDavid
iDavid, I’m fine with you setting aside the “biblical lines against homosexuality.” It’s also quite possible that there are no biblical lines against homosexuality per se that apply to Christians. Justin Cannon has a Bible study to this effect on the “Inclusive Orthodoxy” site. Also, Dr. A. Nyland newly translates the clobber passages of the New Testament. Based on the best recent scholarship (over the last century), she finds Paul scarcely if ever refers to what we call gay behavior. He talks about Roman temple prostitutes (Romans 1) and the male sex slave traders. But if all this is correct — and it makes a lot of sense to me — we would be hard pressed to find anything in the New Testament about being gay, or non-exploitive gay sex, or anything of the kind. Let’s watch now and see if other Bible translators will pay attention to good scholarship rather than outdated 15th and 16th century mistranslations.
Disclaimer: XGW automatically linked the “Romans 1” reference to BibleGateway. That wasn’t my intention. If I could, I’d link to Nyland’s The Source New Testament.
@Tim Warner
Tim, I found your letter compelling. You are justified in feeling completely frustrated and angry.
I hope I won’t be out line if I share a bit of my story too. I got married (heterosexually) in 1984 not knowing what my attraction to guys would mean. I had grown up in a holiness church, had attended a Christian college, and read a book by Tim LaHaye called The Unhappy Gays. I was convinced that homosexual activity (including fantasy) was sin, and determined I wouldn’t go there. In fact, over the years, I prayed many times that God would take my life before he would let me have sex with another man. I told my wife-to-be of my attraction, and said I didn’t know what it would mean but I still wanted to be with her. It was a short conversation, and that was that.
Within a few months of getting married, I started using gay porn for the first time in my life. It was an immediate obsession. I would continue to struggle with that through the years of my marriage. Looking back on it, I think my psyche was trying to tell me something. As long as I repressed my homosexuality, it was going to come out in ways that were destructive for me (whatever porn is to others).
Finally at age 40, 15 years into our marriage, I admitted to myself for the first time that I am gay. Before that I would tell myself I was a struggler or had SSA or whatnot. You know the drill. There was tremendous relief in that admission. I struggled for a while with the possibility of divorcing my wife and finding a man to love, but decided to stay married. I determined, among other things, that I would never let my mother — my dad had died much earlier — never let my mother know that I was gay. She couldn’t handle it. And I never did. It was only a few years after her death that I was forced out to my family.
Meanwhile, in addition to repeated rounds of counseling, I went to Living Waters and Sex Addicts Anonymous for my porn “addiction.” By this time, I didn’t buy the ex-gay lines, but I was looking for strength to not act out sexually. I was actually able to avoid using porn for two years, but only with a major threat hanging over my head in accountability. In essence, I couldn’t avoid porn except by putting myself in a situation where I was essentially blackmailed into it. When that threat ended, so did my abstinence.
But then the totally unexpected happened. I fell in love. I didn’t intend to. I didn’t see it coming. I deceived myself about what it was for many months. But ultimately, there was no denying it. I was totally, completely in love. For the first time in my life, I had sex with a man. Now what was I going to do? I had cheated on my wife — we hadn’t had sex for a long time anyway. I was desperately in love and I knew this love would last a lifetime whatever I did. I tried multiple times to end the relationship. I would cut my lover off completely, only to pick up where we had left off a week or two later. The longest hiatus was about six months in which my wife and I tried to rescue our marriage through counseling. It didn’t work. The couple with whom we counseled really had no conception of what it means to be gay. They thought if my wife could just be made to want me enough and emote enough that I would be happy. I slowly realized my marriage was done. I could no longer pretend.
My wife eventually gave me an ultimatum and I left the house. I stayed alone in my apartment for several month, until the loneliness caused me panic attacks. At that point, my lover, who had patiently stuck with me through thick and thin, moved in with me. Believe it or not, I tried one more time to “quit” him. I couldn’t. We both knew that whatever we chose to do about it, we would always be one another’s first love, so to speak. I was his first lover, and he was my first gay lover. But more than that, we had a profound love which we both knew could never be matched. I am not being a hopeless romantic to say this. I am simply recognizing what was and is there.
Suffice to say, we have been together since. I am still trying to work through the baggage of being raised in a homophobic and homo-hating way. Intellectually, I’m good with being gay. But at deeper levels, it is still difficult for me, for instance, to know in my heart of hearts that I’m OK with God. I find myself avoiding God sometimes, for no good reason. Except that somewhere down deep I still have trouble believing that God is good enough or gracious enough to take me as I am. I know I would never condemn someone like me. I would feel compassion. But do I believe God is at least as good and gracious as I am?
And this is where I am today. Looking forward to a long-long-awaited divorce and to officially marrying my partner, and still very much in process.
@Ben in Oakland,
Yes, trade UP. I love that!
@David G
Very interesting. Romans 1:26 goes on to say “in the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another”. (Kick me under the table if you like, but that’s just very hot : ). Was this R1 passage re-translated “correctly” along with Leviticus 18:22?
@Tim Warner …… great you like our input. Now don’t be a stranger. We can be more entertaining than porn. Ok, well maybe not. : )
@David G,
That is sooo beautiful. Thanks so much, very inspiring. It just brings to mind, “ain’t love grand”.
@iDavid
Well, iDavid, I think you’re still free to find the passage very hot. Nyland translates it, “Because of this [willful idolatry], God handed them over to experiences of public stigma, for the females exchanged natural sex for what is other than nature. And the same goes for males too. The males got rid of natural sex with the female and burned with their mutual yearning — males producing indecency with one another…” The key element, it seems to me, comes in her notes in the Study New Testament for Lesbians, Gays, Bi, and Transgender. The phrase “other than nature” has a fairly long history in Jewish apocalyptic literature. It is used for fallen angels (the Watchers) having sex with humans, and humans having sex with angels, and both thus becoming defiled. In Paul’s mind, having sex with temple prostitutes who represent deities (which he sees as demonic) is equivalent to having sex with demons. That’s why it is “other than nature” and “defiling.” The fact that it was homosexual is for Paul a cause of “public stigma,” it is “not appropriate.” But that’s not what he finds so unnatural.
So it seems Paul couldn’t conceive of gay sex that was socially acceptable. But the central concern he has is not with gay sex. It would have been “other than nature” even if the males had sex with female temple prostitutes. Gay sex is repugnant to him (after all, he was a first century Jew), and that gets all tangled up with demon worship in his mind. But it doesn’t really tell us what Paul might have thought of gay sex all by itself, and whether he would have condemned it as sinful all by itself.
What is natural in his mind is men having sex with women, and what is unnatural is men or women having sex with demons. But what about men having sex with men? It’s not really all that clear what he thinks of it. He wasn’t confronted with non-expoitive, non-idolatrous gay sex so far as we can tell.
Nyland doesn’t deal with Leviticus. She is a New Testament scholar. Justin Cannon does in his Bible study. He notes first that the text you mention is in the “Holiness Code” section of Leviticus, the laws that made the Hebrews/Jews different than others. It’s there along with other commands like not shaving the corners of your beard and not harvesting two kinds of grain out of the same field. These are parts of the Law that Christians no longer feel obligated to fulfill. Also, contextually, the issue is not merely to lie with a man (have sex with him) but to have sex with him as with a woman. Women were considered property in the day. At least part of the issue here is expoitation of another man, subjugating another man. In any case, it is not about a committed, long-term relationship of equality.
Hope this helps answer your question.
@iDavid
Thanks, iDavid. Yes, love is grand!
@David G.
David, thank you for sharing your story with me I can’t relate completely to your story, but I can relate to the struggle which you eloquently define. I have much more to say in response and I will when I get a moment. But thank you for being honest and open and willing to allow me and us here to see you.
@Straight Grandmother
Thanks for your offer to read the book… I just might accept that offer.. I attended several Quaker meetings at one point in time….
David, I wasn’t trying to have the last word. I think we are fundamentally in agreement. you have gone to a better church, you are hanging out with a better class of Christian, you are living a fuller, more authentic life that brings you happiness.
So, i’ll just leave that subject alone.
Regarding Paul, it seems to me the meaning of romans is found in one word “wherefore”, also translated as “for this cause”. It seems to me that Paul is saying that these people were so reprehensible that god turned them gay as a punishment. And as you learned in your marriage– thanks for your story, BTW– that was hell trying to make yourself be straight when you actually were not.
As gay people, we can relate.
Tim, thank you for your story.
Like you, I’m 61. I never had a problem with being gay. I knew when I was three or four years old. I didn’t know what “it” was or what to call “it”, but I knew it was me and that I wasn’t supposed to talk about it.
Thanks to the Magic dictionary, wherein is all knowledge, I found the word that applied to me, as well as a bunch of others. I still knew I wasn’t supposed to talk about it.
You asked about the third way, between repentance for being a human being made in a particular way. and acceptance of yourself for beibng a human being made in a particular way. iDavid has stated it, you have hinted it.
The problem is not, and never has been, your homosexuality. It is a benign conditon, clearly a natural part of being a human being, as well as a natural part of being any other of the 500-1500 warm blooded animals in which it has been observed. The problem is first and foremost, and always has been, the attitudes and beliefs of other people, especially the homo-hating-homos, of which I believe old Thorn-in-my-side was one. There are too many parallels between what is observable in Paul and what is observable in people like alan chambers. And AC, lest that get you excited, I am not making a favorable comparison between you and Paul.
From my perspective, the problem is not, and never has been, your homosexuality. The problem is that you have been taught to hate yourself, long before you ever had the slightest clue that you were gay, but especially as that fact began to dawn on you. One of the worst things that Christianity has ever foisted on the human race is the idea that we are born to sin, we are born to be damned, that we are base, evil, damnable wretches, to quote Amazing Grace, unless we drink the magic kool-aid and miraculously become saved, even though we remain damnable wretches.
A truer, and far less damaging idea, is that we’re none of us perfect, we’re none of us even perfectible, but we are to try to be the best person we can be.
I truly believe that if you learn to deal with your self hatred, whatever problems you have with being gay will eventually wither and die. Self hatred is the stumbling block you throw in your own way as you go up the mountain. There is nothing in the mountain that gets in your way. It’s just a mountain.
When i was 19 or 20, I read a book that changed my life profoundly. tom robbins “Another Roadside Attraction”. I don’t think everything he has ever written approached that book for its mastery. Looking for a particular quote for you that I remember only imperfectly, I came across a website of quotes from hisd many books. I pulled out a few for you.
“If you believe in peace, act peacefully; if you believe in love, acting lovingly; if you believe every which way, then act every which way, that’s perfectly valid – but don’t go out trying to sell your beliefs to the system. You end up contradicting what you profess to believe in, and you set a bum example. If you want to change the world, change yourself.” ‘
“You risked your life, but what else have you ever risked? Have you risked disapproval? Have you ever risked economic security? Have you ever risked a belief? I see nothing particularly courageous about risking one’s life. So you lose it, you go to your hero’s heaven and everything is milk and honey ’til the end of time. Right? You get your reward and suffer no earthly consequences. That’s not courage. Real courage is risking something that might force you to rethink your thoughts and suffer change and stretch consciousness. Real courage is risking one’s clichés.”
“My faith is whatever makes me feel good about being alive. If your religion doesn’t make you feel good to be alive, what the hell is the point of it?”
“The enemy of the black is not the white. The enemy of capitalist is not communist, the enemy of homosexual is not heterosexual, the enemy of Jew is not Arab, the enemy of youth is not the old, the enemy of hip is not redneck, the enemy of Chicano is not gringo and the enemy of women is not men. We all have the same enemy. The enemy is the tyranny of the dull mind. The enemy is every expert who practices technocratic manipulation, the enemy is every proponent of standardization and the enemy is every victim who is so dull and lazy and weak as to allow himself to be manipulated and standardized.”
“If you lack the iron and the fuzz to take control of your own life, if you insist on leaving your fate to the gods, then the gods will repay your weakness by having a grin or two at your expense. Should you fail to pilot your own ship, don’t be surprised at what inappropriate port you find yourself docked. The dull and prosaic will be granted adventures that will dice their central nervous systems like an onion, romantic dreamers will end up in the rope yard. You may protest that it is too much to ask of an uneducated fifteen-year-old girl that she defy her family, her society, her weighty cultural and religious heritage in order to pursue a dream that she doesn’t really understand. Of course it is asking too much. The price of self-destiny is never cheap, and in certain situations it is unthinkable. But to achieve the marvelous, it is precisely the unthinkable that must be thought.”
“Don’t let yourself be victimized by the age you live in. It’s not the times that will bring us down, any more than it’s society. When you put the blame on society, then you end up turning to society for the solution. Just like those poor neurotics at the Care Fest. There’s a
tendency today to absolve individuals of moral responsiblity and treat them as victims of social circumstance. You buy that, you pay with your soul. It’s not men who limit women, it’s not straights who limit gays, it’s not whites who limit black. what limits people is lack of
character. What limites people is that they don’t have the fucking nerve or imagination to star in their own movie, let alone direct it. Yuck….It’s a wonderful time to be alive. As long as one has enough dynamite’
“The fact is, what I hated in the Church was what I hated in society. Namely, authoritarians. Power freaks. Rigid dogmatists. Those greedy, underloved, undersexed twits who want to run everything. While the rest of us are busy living – busy tasting and testing and hugging and kissing and goofing and growing – they are busy taking over.”
“The Divine was expansive, but religion was reductive. Religion attempted to reduce the Divine to a knowable quantity with which mortals might efficiently deal, to pigeonhole it once and for all so that we never had to reevaluate it. With hammers of cant and spikes of dogma, we crucified and crucified again, trying to nail to our stationary altars the migratory light of the world.”
“There is a particularly unattractive and discouragingly common affliction called tunnel vision, which, for all the misery it causes, ought to top the job list at the World Health Organization. Tunnel vision is a disease in which perception is restricted by ignorance and distorted by vested interest. Tunnel vision is caused by an optic fungus that multiplies when the brain is less energetic than the ego. It is complicated by exposure to politics. When a good idea is run through the filters and compressors of ordinary tunnel vision, it not only comes out reduced in scale and value but in its new dogmatic configuration produces effects the opposite of those for which it originally was intended. That is how the loving ideas of Jesus Christ became the sinister cliches of Christianity.”
Just some thoughts.
Just some thoughts Ben in Oakland? LOL.
I am teasing you Ben.
Did you make this sentence up yourself?
No, none of it’s mine. It’s all Tom robbins.
I don’t think any of his books subsequent to Another Roadside Attraction were as good and as revolutionary. but it only means it was such a good book that the others paled by comparision. It totally changed my life and my way of thinking.
All the rest of his books are on the same themes. He’s an amazingly clever writer. At my best, I’m like is 3rd cousin tweice removed.
@Ben in Oakland
Ben, I meant no offense by my short reply. I just picked up (especially from SGM’s post) that it was time for us to move on for the sake of the whole XGW community. Yes, I agree that we’re mostly in agreement.
As for Romans, that’s one interpretation, certainly. But it’s not actually what Paul says. I just don’t think Paul is that focused on the homosexuality aspect. I’m not at all sure, for instance, that the women were having lesbian sex. At least, Paul never says so. They were having sex that was “other than nature,” but the phrase seems to mean something more akin to “interspecies,” i.e., sex with demons. The other passage where Paul talks about people being “handed over” is 1 Timothy 1:20 where Paul says he handed two men over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme. The handing over in Romans 1 is to public humiliation, and I presume it’s for the purpose of teaching these folks not to be idolatrous. To be handed over is not a kind of final judgment, but an educational experience, a spanking, so to speak. I think the focus on the homosexual behavior in Romans 1 has skewed our reading for so long, it’s hard for us to focus on what Paul is really saying.
David, thanks for your reply.
I agree about where the focus has been on Paul. That was my point. Every translation I’ve evr read seems barely to be a condemnation at worst, and about something else entirely at best..
@Ben in Oakland
What you said was beautiful. Thank you.
You’re welcome. The two people I hoped to reach– well, I don’t know if I did.