A critique of the Journey Into Manhood claims of change.
Recently, People Can Change issued a press release (PDF) suggesting 79% of respondents reported (PDF) a decrease in frequency or intensity of homosexual feelings as a result of participating in a Journey Into Manhood weekend retreat. Furthermore, in supporting documents, they indicate 13% of the respondents now consider themselves to be straight, all thanks to a two-day retreat. However, as with so many other claims of change, they are without any substance.
People Can Change queried 500 men who had participated in the retreats ranging from 6 months to 5.5 years prior to the study. They suggest 45% of the 500 men queried responded to the survey and that the results of the survey are consistent with other studies demonstrating homosexuals can change: specifically, a 1997 study from NARTH, Robert Spitzer’s controversial 2003 peer-reviewed article, and the recent Jones and Yarhouse book Ex-gays? Read more…
Reverend John Smid, one of the founders and now president and CEO of Love In Action (LIA), recently claimed homosexuals are intolerant of those who wish to seek “change” of their sexual orientation.
There are many people within that community who are very intolerant of people who choose to walk away from it,” says Smid. “And I find that some of the people like that are unsupportive of someone who says, “I want to be free from homosexuality, I want to walk away from this lifestyle. Or I want to live sexually celibate and free, or I want to pursue marriage.” There’s very little tolerance for the choices I’ve made in my life.
I think that we put our head in the sand and we kind of cover things with “plastic answers” about sexuality rather than really being willing to get into what I call the “swamp trip of life,” he says. “It’s hard to invest in people who are confused and struggling and have some really ugly things in their life“. [emphasis added]
The reasons for any individual’s decision to pursue “freedom” from homosexuality — whether due to societal prejudice or family concerns, or even pressure from groups such as LIA — are not presented for all to see. Mr. Smid’s own understanding of homosexuality (PDF) is already questionable. Read more…
Conservative Anglicans are launching a new book to coincide with the homosexuality debate at this week’s General Synod of the Church of England.
God, Gays and the Church will feature ex-gay testimonies, along with contributions by biblical scholar Robert Gagnon and the increasingly discredited Dr Joseph Nicolosi of NARTH. Chapter titles include “Post-Gay: The Transforming Power of God,” “Post-Lesbian: My Testimony” and “Same Sex Attraction. Is it innate and immutable?”.
The launch comes the week after the Bishop of Liverpool, the Church of England’s leading evangelical, broke ranks with conservatives by drawing attention to same-sex relationships in the Bible and calling for a more open debate on homosexuality.
The mysterious “Doug Narthian” has created another parody (link above) which should require very little explanation. As with most good parody, there is a healthy dose of sarcasm, but only as much as is appropriate to illustrate a contrary point of view. In this case, the subject really does deserve the attention.
Over 100 Christian ministers will be showing their support for Australia’s gay and lesbian community by marching in this year’s Sydney Mardi Gras parade. The multi-denominational group, which calls itself 100 Revs, has issued a formal apology for the Church’s mistreatment of gays, confessing that Christians have been “profoundly unloving” towards homosexuals:
As ministers of various churches and denominations we recognise that the churches we belong to, and the church in general, have not been places of welcome for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) people, For these things we apologise. We are deeply sorry and ask the forgiveness of the GBLT community.
Author and former Assemblies of God evangelist Anthony Venn-Brown applauded the move towards reconciliation:
This wonderful act reminds me of the time the NSW Police marched in the parade for the first time. It was a sign of progress when the very organisation that had imprisoned the first marchers in 1978, joined the parade as participants, 20 or so years later.
He added that it was “a way forward of healing for us all.” Venn-Brown believes that those who sign the 100 Revs statement may become the targets of anger and hostility, even ostracized for their willingness to admit the wrongs. “Thank you for standing with us and welcome to our world,” he concluded.
The Bishop of Liverpool has apologized for his part in opposing the proposed appointment of openly gay cleric Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading. The Right Reverend James Jones – perhaps the Church of England’s most prominent evangelical bishop – has also drawn attention to God-sanctioned same-sex relationships in the Bible, describing the story of David and Jonathan as a “witness to love between two people of the same gender,” and signalling an openness to more dialogue on the subject.
Jones was one of nine Anglican bishops to put his name to a letter publicly opposing Jeffrey John’s consecration in 2005. The Very Reverend John, currently Dean of St Albans, has been in a civil union with his long-time partner since 2006, but has always said the relationship is celibate, in keeping with Church rules. Writing of the controversy, the Bishop of Liverpool now says:
I deeply regret this episode in our common life. … I still believe that it was unwise to try to take us to a place that evidently did not command the broad support of the Church of England but I am sorry for the way I opposed it and I am sorry too for adding to the pain and distress of Dr. John and his partner. I regret too that this particular controversy narrowed rather than enlarged the space for healthy debate within the church.
In the essay, which was published last month in A Fallible Church: Lambeth Essays (ed. Kenneth Stevenson), the Bishop goes on to talk about the Old Testament story of David and Jonathan: Read more…
Beyond Ex-Gay, in conjunction with the Memphis Gay & Lesbian Community Center, will be holding an art show and local gathering February 22-24. The schedule and other details are available here; events will include the Ex-Gay Survivor Art Show, two performances by Peterson Toscano and a preview of Morgan Fox’s new film, This Is What Love In Action Looks Like.
The event will provide a counterpoint to Love Won Out, which is holding a conference in Memphis on the 23rd.
Daniel Gonzales has created a video ad for the event:
A few days ago, we posted about a video parody which illustrates the profoundly general nature of one of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi’s (NARTH) personal theories — the “Grey Zone.” Essentially, this is supposed to be a grief state when one feels really bad, then seeks to act out homosexually in an attempt to feel better. Nicolosi uses a lot more space and Freudian overtones to explain it, but that’s basically it.
Even to the layman, it’s obvious that this pattern could fit any number of moods and behaviors, most having absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality. The parody was amusing and it made a valid point. Unfortunately, as many of our readers will no doubt understand first hand, painful consequences can result when people are herded down these pseudo-psychological paths.
Quite by accident, I ran across one such heart-wrenching example shortly after posting about the parody above. A blog entry, apparently written in the third person by a young man named Alex, about his therapy by phone under Nicolosi: Read more…
Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality (JONAH), whose “alternatives” are not new and aren’t that Jewish, has a lot to answer for. That’s why not long ago I sent them the following email:
My name is Emily Kesselman and I’m a writer for Ex-Gay Watch (www.exgaywatch.com). I author articles under the pseudonym “Emily K” and specialize in researching the Jewish end of the ex-gay spectrum. I have some questions that I would love for you to take the time to answer, because I want to report only the facts on your organization. In turn, I request permission to publish the answers – which I will faithfully report – in an upcoming article.
1. NARTH has used rhetoric to discuss homosexuals which, and I don’t say this lightly, eerily parallels that used by the Nazis. Even if you agree with NARTH on the nature of homosexuality, how can you not openly call them on this horrendous characterization? What are your feelings about this?
2. You have several articles in your online library written by a man that advocates Jewish conversion to Christianity. How do you justify this to your Jewish clientèle?
3. Richard Cohen has disgraced himself publicly numerous times, including disastrous television appearances. Many ex-gay groups and ministries have erased his name and books from their websites as a result. He is also well known as a man who was stripped of his counseling license, had ties to the Moonies, and has renounced his Jewish faith. Do you have any concerns endorsing Mr. Cohen, bearing all this in mind? Why/Why not? Read more…
Recent Comments