Ex-Gay Watch

David,

I am a little surprised with much of this post. While it’s (obliquely) worth noting that the exgaydom is LDS derived, I’m not sure that issuing a challenge to those of other faiths about theological issues is in any way pertinent.

Exodus appears to have no problem working with Evergreen, or Jonah. They may well be thinking it’s such a pity everyone else but them is hell bound but, even if so, that appears overwhelmed by having a common enemy.

Sorry, “Dave”.

Aaaah!!! There’s too many of you!

I am not sure of the grounds you are discounting Michael’s experience. In fact, after reading this new information, it makes me take him even more seriously. He seems to understand that a lot of the standard ex-gay groups are mostly into sing-songy verses and chapters. That is why it is so hard to believe an extremely queeny sounding John Paulk, among others, speak in rote cliches about “walking witht he Lord”.

At least Michael seems to have gone through a very real and personal miracle. I myself have not been able to fulfill the ideals of Christianity and am still 100% gay, but I can’t knock someone who seems to have hit rock bottom and then totally surrendered to God. Isn’t that how almost all historical salvation has occurred?

I said something in another post that was similiar, but I am glad you put this post. Mormon exgay situations are a different breed, I believe. As I stated, the LDS church has a very serious problem with gay or formerly gay converts. When I was a missionary, we would have to allow the convert a year before baptism if they were gay (sexually active heterosexuals can be baptized in days or weeks). Approval would have to come from the Mission President, the church hierarchy, and top ranks. The convert had to have an interview with the Seventies or Apostles (that is really high up there). It is a tough situation. The Church is very heterosexual and homosocial (males and females are often separated at many functions). Sex and heterosexuality are prime elements, and a non-married male comes under enormous pressure (after a mission, you are generally pressured to marry in six months). The afterlife is about sex, family, heterosexuality (in fact, without marriage, you cannot acheive the highest elements of heaven). If a male is over a certain age, they are (or at least were) considered special interest and had special activities to get them married. You are a leper if you are single without a clear reason. The Church favors males in all ways, so women are subservient for the most part. It is a hard road–and I suspect Michael knows very little about behind the scenes. I was attracted to the Church because of its ultra-maleness, and I think many people are, but that wears off.

The temple is the make or breaker—it broke me big time. It was so surreal and bizarre that I realized it had nothing to do with what I had come to believe about the Church. I think many people encounter the temple though and act as if everything is normal but is not.

Also, there is a serious tension between evengelicals and Mormons. I don’t know of any Mormons who would read WorldNetDaily or write an article for the place. Mormons are actually fairly tolerant of other religions (although they think theirs is correct), but they hate the attacks that come from places like WorldNetDaily. Perhaps it is a sign that WorldNetDaily is more comfortable with Mormonism than homosexuality.

Grantdale, you are missing the point. In this case, Glatze is attributing 100% of his ex-gay change to a religious conversion. Evangelical (and even not so evangelical) Christians take the firm stance that Mormonism is a heretical cult. Cooperating with eachother on lobbying efforts and such is one thing, but attributing a spiritual conversion to what they consider a false version of Jesus is quite another.

I realize you have little patience for matters of faith, but in this case the issue is quite germane I assure you. Aaron is heading in the right direction, this is a matter of priorities and for an evangelical Christian, there should be only one answer.

@Jerry

I am not sure of the grounds you are discounting Michael’s experience.

Dave wasn’t even attempting to do so. His post has nothing to do with whether your or I or anyone else here considers Glatze’s experience genuine – though I’m sure each person can evaluate that from the evidence as it unfolds. The point here is a matter of hypocrisy among those who are championing his conversion in direct contradiction to their own faith. There are times when you have to evaluate someone by their own rules.

Gee…. no atta-boy, honorable mention or hat-trick for my post at Dr Throckmorton’s blog about finding Glatze’s baptism into the LDS church or even my post here at Ex-Gay Watch:

http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/2007/07/2531/#comment-26499

Which pointed out the same and questioned the WND/Mormon connection and considered that WND would put aside the Mormon connection for anything to turn the screws on gay people.

But not to pitch a hissy-fit or spread the drama….. but I feel slighted.

*sulks*

@Lynn David

Your error post was accidentally deleted, but I would appreciate it if you would copy and paste the error next time and send it to me at david@exgaywatch.com. I suspect it is the edit plugin.

I apologize that we didn’t give you credit. I may have mistakenly thought that Warren’s discovery was a separate issue. If not, then technically I guess he should have given you the hat tip Do you want us to note at the bottom that you were the one to first discover that connection?

Update: I got your error information (thanks!) and I believe I fixed the problem, but please let me know if it happens again. If anyone else gets errors when posting or editing a comment, please let me know at the email above. Thank you.

You’ve done enough David… I’m just happy to see that others have now come to see the dichotomy between WND and Glatze as a Mormon. It’s not necessary to do anything to acknowledge that I discovered the Mormon connection. You let me throw my little hissy fit above, LOL! You were afterall quoting Dr T and he acknowledged my post as the source in his post. What’s strange is I cannot now post to that thead or anywhere on his blog, that has me flustered. I finally had tried to do it via Email, not sure if that works or not.

The gods must hate me…. *sigh* LOL!

I don’t believe anyone has the right to question someone’s personal experience with God. There is but one God and he listens to all of his children if they seek him in humble supplication. It doesn’t matter if they are Mormon, Jew, Baptist or any other religion. No one religion has sole ownership to prayer as a conduit to our Father in Heaven. You know it is good and true by seeing the fruit that it bears.

I don’t think I’ve shared this particular aspect of my vicarious experience with reparative therapy, but I believe it makes a great deal of sense in this particular instance. I was told several times by at least three (that I can think of off-hand) different therapists who treated ex-gays and their spouses, that the single most non-negotiable and primary factor leading toward success against unwanted same sex attraction was the motivation of the client. This wasn’t the most comforting news at the time, but, looking back on the whole ordeal, it may have been the most honest bit of information I recieved.

Viewing Glatze’s conversion in this light makes it more plausible for me based on the experiences I’ve had. It seems to me that, for the most part, people hear what they want to hear, see what they want to see, and believe what they want to believe. “White-knuckling” one’s way through life’s sexual temptations can very easily be viewed as the most scriptural thing to do for many folks, even if you’re in a cult or even if you’re straight.

The proof of the pudding on this case, as it concerns the ex-gay movement at large, really will be whether or not Glatze’s religious attribution for his motivation/change will hold water with the overtly fundamental crowd of Exodus affiliated ministries.

Please David, don’t do this type of thing: I realize you have little patience for matters of faith.

We are quite deliberately secular here and avoid laying out our own personal beliefs, but you are really in no position to make that statement.

We questioned the “challenge” that was posed, not the fact that either group considers the other to be in the wrong religion.

The post contains a crucial but hidden assumption in the haste to issue that challenge: that “evangelicals” — let alone the one’s specifically mentioned — all believe that God would never do anything positive for a non-believer.

The conflicting beliefs regarding “true” vs “false” religions are about who will ultimately reach heaven. It has been assumed that this also means they think that God would never help a non-believer or a false-believer in this life.

“God did change him. He did it despite the fact Glatze is currently in a cult. He did it because he loves all people. And one day Glatze will truly find God.”

That’s how we expect they would respond to the challenge, such as it is. They will credit God for the change, and at the same time refuse to credit it to his membership of LDS.

(and hence: you may wish to restate what it is about the religious that we have little patience for. It is not “matters of faith” per se.)

Blimey Pam — I think you just said much the same sort of thing as we just did.

But… talk about a turnaround! This time you took it via the secular talking about motivation, and we answered from the religious talking about God performing small graces for anyone.

(AaaaaHHHHH!!!!!!!!! The shame. Our holiday in Bali is long overdue!)

G/D,

I’m in complete agreement with you regarding the holiday in Bali…..mine is looooong overdue as well!

So where do I fit in the scale of good and bad ex-gays when it comes to this story>

Oh Peter, you’d be on the bad side for saying this about the comments made here:

It is truly amazing the scorn and hatred being poured upon Glatze because he didn’t make the same life-choices as some of the commentators.

Obviously you didn’t bother to do even a cursory content analysis. Someone did after reading your allegation… here, using their usual method. And quickly stopped bothering after it revealed a situation nothing like you had claimed.

Note: didn’t find a single person scorning Glatze at XGW for his “life-choices”. We don’t care.

The overwhelming majority of people were, however, mighty pissed of about the anti-gay abuse directed at themselves from Glatze, they questioned his motivation for the statement etc, and they didn’t think his tirade was ultimately going to be very helpful for exgays.

Didn’t bother reviewing Throckmorton’s site. Done too many of them over the years already.

———————————–

Pam — ha ha, but ours is already booked… 11 more sleeps until we’re slopping around in our sarong and enjoying long gin-and-pomelo-juices as the sun sets over Seminyak. We’ll post up a photo or two for you when we get back. Promise

We need our Indonesia-fix every couple of years or we go quite silly. Love the place.

———————————-

Dave, we do get it (really). “He has found Jesus, but he is following false doctrine in false church.” blah blah etc. You’ll get nothing but spin out of them, but guess you’ve already guessed that’s how they’ll respond. Annoying aren’t they

Dave R,

Warren and I are working on a follow-up to his interview with Glatze. If it comes off you might find the answer you want.

I am going to post on Glatze’s mormonism, I just want to wait for a few more things to drop through my email box.

Oh, and where do I get the woprdpress plugin to do the “5 minute editing” thing you have?

Lynn David:

I was about to post the VERY FIRST COMMENT on this post but decided I’d posted enough for the night and went to bed instead. I want to say I immediately thought of your comment in the “Blame Game” entry when I saw this one! I appologize for not speaking up sooner. I have definitely learned a lesson! catching “ward” – a minute detail – and associating it with the LDS church was an excellent deduction. Great work on your part! You found a detail that opens up a huge can of worms and makes this case very interesting!

@David Rattigan… whoops, my bit of apology as I got my David “R’s” confused and thought David Roberts wrote the piece. But alls well that ends well…. unless I drop my first name and add my last name to my posting persona… then we’d have a third David “R!” That’d probably break the Blog! LOL!

As far as Glatze goes, there is ex-gay and then there is the more “clinical” ex-homosexual, concerning the sexual gender orientation. Glatze almost seems to be one of Nicolosi’s perfect ex-gay, whose psychosis was driven by parental issues and when confronted, his gayness disappeared. But I am not sure that has any applicability to homosexuality in general. Even Glatze has been quoted as saying “Healing from the sins of the world will not happen in an instant, but, it will happen” [From: Wayne Besen - Fall Church News Press]. So perhaps not so instantaneous.

It could be that those with who are highly motivated individuals are those who simply can see the “other side” clearly in their mind, because for them homosexuality is not innate. Still a high degree of motivation is not necessarily a sign of eventual “success.” It is taken as a given that those who enter Exodus ministries or other therapies are highly motivated individuals, seeking “change.” The generally quoted quarter to third of those who find “success” however don’t necessarily find what they considered their definition of “change” going into their attempt. But then there are the two-thirds to three-quarter of “highly motivated” individuals who do not find that “success” in any form.

Thanks to you both, Emily K and David Rattigan… ;~)

Damn, it seems I’m a day late and a dollar short, but here’s two more cents.

For evangelicals, this kind of disclosure would ordinarily cast a cloud over, and more likely completely invalidate, a person’s claim to have met with and been changed by God.

I admit that Glatze’s Mormon conversion story struck me the same way. Bennett, LaBarbera and Glatze seem odd bedfellows, maybe they will form a new denomination.

I will have to concede my original emotional reaction (surviving fundamental roots, I guess) to grantdale’s logic. He’s right, these people have the common ground that gays suck to build on. I should have known this since Exodus referred me to a Mormon counselor back in the 90′s. When I questioned that, they told me there was no one else in my area.

As an aside, I am curious about Glatze’s religious “aunt” who “never judged, but was firm” about Glatze’s former untoward ways. Glatze wants everyone to believe that he wrestled with God one on one and voila, presto chango. But he was “weak” and open to influence. His Christianity could have been caused by an overbearing aunt from his childhood.

GD,

That content analysis thing is hilarious!!! Where did you find that?

Please David, don’t do this type of thing: I realize you have little patience for matters of faith.

We are quite deliberately secular here and avoid laying out our own personal beliefs, but you are really in no position to make that statement.

@grantdale

The persona you offer here is really the only valid reference for me to use. This isn’t a value judgment, but an observation — one which apparently agrees with your own desire to remain secular here. Dave’s post elaborates on core doctrines and the hypocrisy of not following one’s own beliefs, and these can be tedious to even the most fully indoctrinated.

For all I know, in real life you are closet evangelicals

Hi. This is Michael Glatze. Just wanted to let you know that my born-again experience was in 2003. My conversion took from 2003 to 2006-ish. I’ve only been associated with the LDS church in the last two months, because I have some friends there. Hope that helps.

Michael Glatze

I thought the open letter to Glatze addressed the concerns well. However, considering YGA’s target market is youth, I found the language and debate to possibly be a little above the comprehension level of most of the magazine/website’s readers.

On a side note, Michael Glatze just wrote quite a long comment on my blog post about him. The post goes into how he believes homosexuality is a human construct and doesn’t exist in reality. Unfortunately, while he does appear to be trying to save people in the name of God, his words don’t show me that he remembers where he came from. He offers no real compassion or empathy for gay youth struggling with being gay, and really offers nothing for the thousands of ex-gays that are trying to come out of being gay but haven’t had the success he claims to have had

I emailed Glatze and he responded to my concerns that he seems to have forgotten where he came from, even if he has gone ex-gay. I plan to post about both of our emails soon.

I wish Mr. Glatze well in his faith journey and recovery from undesired behaviors.

However, I hope LaBarbera, Bennett, CWFA et al reconsider their hasty, knee-jerk exploitation of ex-gay struggles — and their embarrassing assumption that all people who believe in Jesus are alike and must march in lockstep behind orthodox Christian evangelical or fundamentalist theological leadership. Obviously — in the case of Mormons as well as mainline and progressive Christians — they do not.

And I hope Mr. Glatze might eventually address my original objections to his story in WorldNetDaily:

– He has not accepted personal responsibility for addictive/compulsive behavior, but instead blamed “homosexuality,” whatever that word means.

– He has not clearly stated that he is now sexually attracted to women, nor has he clarified that, while he is “repulsed” by same-sex activity, he is also no longer aroused or attracted to it.

– He has not explained the stark disconnect between his past gay-affirming testimonies and his sudden sweeping condemnation of all things “gay”

– He claims not to have experienced “homosexuality” until age 14. That does not remotely resonate with the experience of most many ex-gays/strugglers, much less most many gay people, including me.

– He has wrongly assumed that, because he behaved irresponsibly, immaturely or sinfully as a gay youth, the rest of us do. And by broadcasting that false assumption as a fact, he has libeled us.

Many of these points were raised — more directly and diplomatically — in the open letter by Daniel DiRito at the newly restored YGA Magazine web site.

As Mr. Glatze strives to walk in the footsteps of Jesus, I hope he will eventually repent of these offenses and seek reconciliation with those who have been wronged.

Well, having been Mormon for 37 years, I know that the LDS Church’s current stance for men with same sex attarctions is to remain single and celibate. Unfortunatley, I went the “get married hoping it would cure me” route, and while it was not a disaster, it did not end happily. I worked for many years with therapists and counselors hoping to at least gain an attraction to women if nothing else. I hoped I could deal with my feelings and somehow gain the “perfect” life I had been promised. After 12 years of struggling, I accepted who I am and that if God made me this way it was for a reason.

I wish Michael the best of luck. I would not judge those who walk down that path. I do, however, beleive, that the most one can accomplish is to dampen down the feelings and try to accept the substitute that is a heterosexual relationship. In my case, I managed, but it was so much less fulfilling.

Mike A,

It seems everytime anyone leaves a link to the YGA magazine website I get a server cannot be found. Same thing happens when I Google YGA and use those links provided. I used both IE 7 and FireFox. Nada. No server can be found.

Anyone else having the same trouble?

I get really tired of addictive personalities, who abandon one of their addictions (sexual compulsion, risky behavior, substance abuse, & etc.) for another (religiosity).

I hope that is not the case with Glatze, but if it is, it would hardly be the first.

And, it has nothing to do with sex, orientation, alcohol consumption, or religion. These can be morally neutral, or positive in the right context.

But in the hands of the addictive personality they can be weapons of abuse – of others and/or self.

Hi. This is Michael Glatze. Just wanted to let you know that my born-again experience was in 2003. My conversion took from 2003 to 2006-ish. I’ve only been associated with the LDS church in the last two months, because I have some friends there. Hope that helps.

Michael,

By now you must understand the issue here. One does not casually become baptized into the Mormon church because one has nice friends there. According to those in that faith, baptism makes you a member of the Celestial Kingdom (the highest), you carry the blood of Abraham and this is the process by which they consider your sins removed. To leave that church after baptism (baptism being the method by which you join), is to leave salvation.

Also, since you are involved with Mormon theology, those in evangelical Christian faiths who are promoting your story can not assume that you mean the same things they do when you say the same words (born again, for example, may mean something very much different to you than it does to them).

Our interest here is not to suggest that you are right or wrong for whatever your faith may be, but that we get a clear statement from people like Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber (and even tag-a-long Stephen Bennett) on whether they now support the god of Mormon belief (contrary to their previous stance) or if they just believe that being a gay Christian is so bad that an ex-gay Mormon is now acceptable to them.

Michael,

Be careful. Take some advice from some of us who are familiar with Mormons. This counsel is not offered in spite but as a loving Brother.

Please, do not jump hastily into marriage and then a Temple sealing no matter how much they (the Mormons) feel you may have conquered your queerness. The lives of innocent people can be affected.

I use the term queerness instead of gayness because I think you know there is a difference. Being able to squelch the queer may not entirely mean you are no longer gay.

If you find a LDS girl who also accepts your gayness and is willing to marry you please be aware of the major tasks and tribulations you both will encounter.

If you plan to stay celibate: Understand with the credo of Mormons so heavily favoring a concept of Eternal Families®, you will be relegated to the back pew in the chapel and never considered for anything more than a tithe-paying member. Realize that no homo (recovering, ex- or former) will EVER play a part in their lay clergy.

Sincerely, Michael, I wish I could take you around Salt Lake City and visit some of my friends and explain it all before you are made into a token to be displayed and manipulated by some very good-intentioned people.

Seriously, be careful.

Good As You has been corresponding with (someone claiming to be) Mr. Glatze.

In the correspondence trail, Glatze:

– neglects to define “homosexuality”
– neglects to define “change”
– declines to identify the gender(s) to which he is primarily attracted
– engages in identity politics, but instead of owning up to this, he projects that preoccupation with identities upon those to whom he preaches

(If that’s him, then) Perhaps he means well, but Glatze has immersed himself in an ideology, instead of taking the time to ground himself in real-world issues and the reality of his listeners.

I don’t know if that is actually Michael or not, but I don’t care (and I don’t think anyone else does here) if he considers himself exgay. So what? No one has attacked him for that (unlike what CWA was saying). What bothers people is that he is generalizing his very personal experience to all. I read Brady’s site, and Michael (if it is Michael) is saying stuff like he believes that we all know homosexuality is wrong, etc. When I was a missionary, we had a trick–we would say–pray and look deep inside yourself. Everyone knows the Mormon church is true. A good missionary/salesperson could convince almost anyone that they knew intrinsically that the Church was true. No, pressure can do that. I do not feel in any way homosexuality is wrong. It is benign. Then, such as in the CWA interview, Michael again says that if the public policy did not support/allow homosexuality, less would be doing it (he does not know much about church history then). Again, this is disturbing–he is essentially saying that because he needs/needed help, public policy should reenforce it.

One odd thing–A person goes exgay, evangelical, then Mormon, because of friends? Uh, strange. Seems to me someone who is not comfortable in his skin. I could be wrong, but going into the LDS church is a big move.

I blogged about Glatze in response to the entry on Ex-Gay Watch, and I, like Good As You, got hit with the same e-mail, which I then posted this morning.

Mike Airheart’s bullet points says it all about Glatze’s letter.

I just read the correspondence on Good as you and I definately picked up on some Roy Master’s verbage there. I also noticed a definate lack of evangelical verbage there also. Am I to understand that all I had to do was “think” my way out of being gay. I tried that while I was taking electric shock and all the other stuff and it didn’t work then, why would I expect it to work now..

Moderator note: deleted automated comments from some bot.

– He claims not to have experienced “homosexuality” until age 14. That does not remotely resonate with the experience of most ex-gays/strugglers, much less most gay people.

I can only speak for myself, but I was not aware of any same sex romantic/sexual attraction until about that age. I am a secular gay man.

Mark says:

I can only speak for myself, but I was not aware of any same sex romantic/sexual attraction until about that age. I am a secular gay man.

I seem to recall when I was in 5th grade I developed a crush on a boy in my class. Also, there was another boy that I thought was cute too. Even at an earlier age I played around with a neighbor boy a few times. Nothing went beyond noticing each others “equipment”. I was unaware about sex and sexual attraction. Same thing happened between me and one girl. It was all about discovering ourselves.

As I grew up my feelings towards boys/men grew stronger. There was no desire for girls/women. I knew then that I was gay. As far back as I can remember I’ve always felt different.

David R For all I know, in real life you are closet evangelicals

Well, we’re gay. I think you maybe mean chiffoniered evangelicals???

Not to belabour it, but our desire not to wear our faith (or even lack there of) on our sleeve doesn’t allow you to say we have no interest — q.e.d. patience — in matters in faith.

Undeclared is not the same as uninterested, and I’d hope nobody here needs announce how they are churched to avoid that assumption from you or anyone. Case in point: a few days ago I started re-reading sections of Norwich’s Byzantium: The Early Centuries for a very deliberate reason. And it isn’t because I’m designing a floor mosaic.

For our own part, we’d have worded the challenge differently: something along the line of “Regardless of the fact he’s now declared himself as exgay, is Glatze still going to hell unless he leaves LDS?”. Or words to that effect. That side-steps any of that (yes, mostly tedious) circular nonsense / verbaling and goes directly to the heart of the beliefs. (we understand what it was about the veracity or cause of the “miraculous healing” etc that Dave R wanted to do with his post, but questions of that nature have been squibbed over for centuries. “They” see no hypocrisy in holding both views — God’s small graces for anyone, but ultimate damanation nevertheless. Old hat, honestly.)

As far as the type of evangelicals we are discussing are concerned, the answer is yes. He may now be exgay, but in their opinion unless he further “changes” Glatze the exgay Mormon is nevertheless going to end up the same place as grantdale and David R.

At least it’ll be beach weather. We’ll bring a salad. Do you mind whipping up a dessert?

(and PS Lynn David: /snort please don’t do that! We’re having enough trouble dealing with “Dave R” and “David R” as it is!)

Mark — it’s not just yourself, that was also something not sitting right with us.

Some are late bloomers. I’m not sure “14″ is a suitable test point that proves much about a particular individual, even if most have become sexually aware by that age. Mike A’s point about it being atypical is certainly a valid observation, but, well, so what?

For our own part, we’d planned on an age of 25 for the nieces. (we lost).

Michael Glatze has made another comment on my website that is worth reading as part of this story and some even more interesting comments to me in email exchanges. I plan to post about those email exchanges over the weekend.

We’ll bring a salad. Do you mind whipping up a dessert?

Well I won’t bring a jello salad. It would melt.

But I do make a mean devil’s food cake.

Brady,

Glatze has been a very busy boy, hasn’t he?

Mark and Grantdale, point well taken — as someone who acknowledges variation and fluidity, I should have taken care not to overgeneralize in opposition to Glatze’s own generalizations.