Wendy Gritter of Exodus Member Ministry New Direction
Recently we became aware of Wendy Gritter’s keynote talk (mp3) at the Exodus leadership conference in January. Wendy is the executive director of an Exodus member ministry in Canada called New Direction. While it is what most here would describe as an ex-gay ministry, many things about it are unexpected. For one, you won’t find them using that term, “ex-gay” or many others associated with an Exodus ministry. Whether this is for show, or a sincere attempt to be different, you are free to explore here.
Many of her suggestions echo our own pleas to ex-gay ministries over the years; stop political lobbying, stop emphasizing “change,” genuine respect for those who are comfortable with their sexual orientation (even though this may come from a personal understanding of Scripture which diverges from their own), recognizing and removing the underlying tone which says that ex-ex-gays just didn’t try hard enough, and on and on.
We thought Wendy might just be a breath of fresh Canadian air and asked her to write a guest post to spur on discussion. What might Exodus, or any ex-gay ministry, be like if they were to take these suggestions to heart? What does it mean that an ex-gay ministry which may just “get it” more than any so far, grew out of a country largely unfriendly to the kind of fundamentalism that often surrounds their US counterparts? How close does New Direction come to your idea of what a fair ex-gay ministry should be, if it is to be at all?
Wendy will be available to respond off and on in comments, so don’t spare the hard questions. Her post follows:
–
Thank you for the invitation to write this piece. To be honest, my knees are knocking a bit.
I want to begin by saying I’m sorry. I’m sorry for the pain that some of those who follow this site have experienced from leaders like me and ministries like the one I lead. I’m sorry that some of you connected with this site who identify as Christian have had your faith questioned and judged. I’m sorry there is a felt need for a site like XGW. I’m sorry that it feels like legitimate concerns have not been listened to. I am sorry for the arrogance that can come across from leaders like me.
I suppose I’m not what some would assume to be your typical ex-gay leader. I’m not gay, not ex-gay, not ex-ex-gay. Not male. Not Southern Baptist. Not Republican. Not even American. I’m a Gen X postmodern whose perspectives are, depending on who you talk to, too liberal or too conservative, unorthodox or too orthodox, heretical or vibrantly Christ-centered.
The ministry I lead is over 20 years old. I’ve been at the helm for the last 6 years – although truth be told, the first 2 years I was just trying to get my head around what the heck God had called me to. It’s been the wildest learning curve of my life.
I deeply believe that God’s intention for sexual expression is the covenant of marriage between one man and one woman. God has also deeply convicted me of my own pride in assuming that I had a perfect pipeline to God and everyone who disagreed with me was simply deceived by the enemy or putting their own wants and desires ahead of commitment to God. I have had the opportunity that many conservatives have not had – and that is to come to know people who have deeply and honestly sought God through prayer and scripture and come to a different conclusion than I. Their faith was not trivial nor superficial, and though there were points of disagreement, I respect their deep commitment to God. And so, I’ve come to a place where I’m grateful that God has humbled me and given me the opportunity to listen, learn and engage with those who come to different perspectives.
I don’t think my job is to change the minds of all those who think differently than I do. As an eclectic Calvinist, I believe God is the one who convicts and reroutes us in our minds and hearts. My job is to walk in step with the Spirit and do my very best to do what he tells me to do. I find a lot of affinity in the words attributed to St. Francis, “Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.” As I work and serve, I find more often than not that what the Spirit whispers for me to do is to simply focus on serving and loving those he brings across my path.
I do think there needs to be a safe place within the Christian community for those who experience same-gender attraction who have wrestled with scripture and come to believe a traditional biblical sexual ethic. I believe we have a long way to go to eradicate hateful and homophobic environments and responses in the Christian community. We have a long way to go to demolish the pervasive hierarchy of sin. And we have a long way to go to counter-act the perpetual sense of shame that many experience due to the reality of their same-gender attraction.
I work towards the day when a follower of Jesus who experiences same-gender attraction can be honest and open about that reality and receive support and encouragement in living a life that is pleasing to God. And I feel particularly called to do that within the conservative church.
I also feel called to speak to the conservative church about some of the ways I believe we have been distracted from the primary calling to support and encourage deeply devoted disciples of Jesus Christ.
- We have been distracted by the politics around homosexuality. I do think there is a place for Christians to engage in the public arena. God calls his followers to be a blessing to all nations and to represent him by being the presence of shalom on the earth. Unfortunately, in many of the Christian political efforts regarding homosexuality there is little evidence of shalom. The result is that many who need to hear a gospel of good news perceive God’s people to be hypocritical and unloving (“you say you love us – but you’re fighting to prevent/take our rights”). This has perpetuated a sense of alienation that I believe, grieves the heart of God.
- We have been distracted by a focus on orientation change. The heart of Christian ministry was summed up by Jesus when he said, “Go, make disciples, teaching them to obey everything I’ve commanded you”. The point of a ministry like the one I lead is to support and encourage disciples of Jesus in their journey to live out their sexuality in a manner that they believe is God-honoring. If in that process they experience a deeper ability to love their opposite gender spouse (if they were already married) or a greater capacity to engage an authentic romantic, sexual, marital relationship with someone of the opposite gender, that is a gift that can be gratefully received. But such gifts can’t be predicted, they can’t be guaranteed, they don’t follow a set of instructions, or come after just the right combination of root identification and eradication. There is a sense of mystery that necessitates an attitude of humility, discussion of realistic expectations, and serenity. So at the end of the day, “change is possible” is not really the main point. Life in Christ is.
- We have been distracted by the question of causation. While there is clearly a place for research on this topic, and those involved in ministry should have the integrity to stay abreast of current research, by and large the conclusions (or lack of conclusion) on this matter are peripheral to the call of Christian ministry. Because there is currently such inconclusiveness on this question, conservative Christians would do well to humbly acknowledge that rather than being perceived as ill-informed, blinder-wearing, or agenda-promoting.
In light of some of these distractions, New Direction Ministries, under our current leadership, have laid out some distinctives for ministry:
- We are pastorally-focused, not politically driven.
- We are relationally-focused, not program driven.
- We are discipleship-focused, not change driven.
- We are partnership-focused, not empire driven.
Our Core Values are to be relational, respectful, relevant and redemptive.
I acknowledge that there have been people who have connected with our ministry who have left feeling hurt, confused and uncertain about how to go on with their life having not experienced change. I wish I could pass the buck and say all of that happened before my time. Sexuality is incredibly complex. People are complex. Their stories, their experiences, and their journeys are unique. In this midst of this complex uniqueness, as ministers of the gospel we don’t always get it right, we don’t always discern appropriately. I hope, that as a ministry, we are learning and growing and improving. I hope that we have created an environment that is open and safe regardless of what happens with someone’s attractions. I know our staff are open to engage people where they’re at. If people disengage from the ministry, which could happen for a multitude of different reasons, we hope that they would always feel they could return for a hot cup of coffee and be received with warmth, caring and respect – regardless of where they might land on the ex-gay ~ ex-ex-gay continuum. When we can, we try to follow-up with those who have left while respecting their privacy and right to be left alone as well. We believe God loves unconditionally and, though regularly faced with our own limitations, we seek to imitate him.
I see a lot of triumphalistic “name it, claim it” kind of stuff in the church and it always makes me nervous. I don’t particularly see evidence that the Christian journey should be about getting all the things we want – or even about our individual happiness. We see in Jesus Christ someone who poured himself out for the world and he calls his followers to imitate him. Frankly, Christians aren’t very good at pouring ourselves out for others, especially for those who disagree with us. The world sees this – and it compromises our ability to share the love and life of God with our neighbors. At the risk of being misunderstood or called heretics, we want to engage, listen, and be the presence of Christ with those who hold differing perspectives. We want to hang out with all the folks that make church leaders nervous (and frankly want to be the kind of people who make church leaders nervous) – because we know that is who Jesus was and what Jesus did. We do this, in part, because there is more common ground than might be initially apparent. And I think there could be more understanding and respect.
I’ve been very encouraged by some of the conversations I’ve had over the years that were respectful, charitable and gracious. For all the caricatures Christians may have of gay people, I have encountered a whole array of responses – some not so nice – but many kind and thoughtful. I’m very grateful to those who, though personally holding a gay affirmative perspective, have acknowledged a place and even a need for a ministry like New Direction. And in those conversations, you’ve earned the right to keep us sharp and on our toes. You’ve been an interesting accountability partner at times – and my hope is that I will continue to be open to hear any appropriate critique that is offered. Likewise, I hope that in my engagement and offering of input, I will also earn the right to speak – particularly with those who name the name of Jesus Christ. The perception of polarization and enmity between Christians of differing minds on sexual ethics is so damaging to a unified Christian witness to an increasingly post-Christian, skeptical generation. I want to be part of doing something about that.
So, we seek to be a nuanced, moderate voice in this area of ministry. The attempt at introducing this level of nuance has, in part, been impacted by listening to the critique of people like those represented at XGW. The listening process has, at times, been difficult and frustrating. It can be discouraging to feel “lumped in” with others, despite real attempts to chart our own distinct course. It can be painful to reach an impasse and feel there is no way through. It is disappointing to be accused of being disingenuous in attempts at bridge-building.
But I’m grateful for this journey none-the-less. Because in the process, we have felt compelled to put “first things first” and recognize when second place things were encroaching on an essential focus on Jesus Christ. One of the contributors to XGW at one point, somewhere, said something like, “The mission of ex-gay ministries should be to support those, who for religious reasons, seek to not be mastered by their experience of same-gender attraction.” I think that is pretty darn close to what I would suggest too.
I am deeply passionate about contributing to a climate where anyone questioning, struggling or embracing an alternative sexual identity can encounter the presence of Jesus Christ. My focus in this area of engagement is unapologetically Christ-centered. Some might say that by the very nature of holding a traditional sexual ethic, I contribute to the inaccessibility of the gospel for gay and lesbian people. I believe the power of the gospel is not thwarted by a call to radical discipleship. And my prayer is that as we, at New Direction, commit ourselves to loving, serving and building bridges with same-gender attracted people, Jesus will be seen in and through us.
Thank you for the opportunity to share my heart for Christian ministry from a conservative perspective. I look forward to further conversation.
–
Wendy Gritter is the executive director of New Direction Ministries of Canada. For more information on New Direction: www.newdirection.ca
Wendy: Any idea yet on how EXODUS leadership may respond to the changes you are suggesting? In particular, do you have any estimate on the percentage of EXODUS member ministries who agree with your suggestion that EXODUS “make a clean break” from politics? Any idea on what sort of resistance such an idea (maintaining political neutrality) might stir up within EXODUS — and why?
As one of the original Founders, I can tell you that this was always the intent — to focus on ministry only. We believed that anything else confused and clouded our mission of communicating the love of God to the gay community. Over the years, we have watched in dismay as EXODUS has taken this disturbing detour. Are you hopeful that you might be able to inspire EXODUS leadership to get back on track?
Hello Michael,
The questions you ask are important but difficult to answer. I’m not sure how Exodus leadership will act in response to some of the nuances I’ve suggested. To this point, it seems that there is some thinking and processing going on….. but I really have no idea how this might translate into action at this point.
A few leaders either personally connected with me at the conference or have since emailed to communicate a sense of resonance with my address ….. but I really don’t know the percentage of those who would find affinity with New Direction’s approach. The leadership conference did not have 100% attendance of all the leaders – and I don’t know if those who did not attend have listened or not.
As for resistance, people can be resistant to change for many different reasons. I have heard that some ministries are concerned that New Direction “no longer offers hope” but this seems to be based more on us taking distance from re-orientation being a main focus. I do think there are Exodus leaders who feel it is their moral responsibility to engage in political engagement ….. so I would imagine that to them the idea of non-political involvement seems like they are not living out their understanding of their calling…. As you would know, Exodus draws people from many different traditions within the Christian church – so there are perhaps different perspectives based on some of these traditional backgrounds. As a Canadian, I have a hard time really understanding how religion and politics seem to be so intertwined in the US.
I don’t have any grandiose ideas about inspiring Exodus leadership …. though I do hope that by sticking around and continuing to engage with humility and grace, that some fruit will emerge. In a similar manner, I would guess that there are different people observing this dialogue for different reasons. But I do hope that persevering through this dialogue without adversarial or snarky remarks will speak for something.
Overall, however, I am hopeful that the Christian community can emerge into a less adversarial, less hostile, less harmful approach in ministry in this area. There are points of common ground. I think we would all want to experience the day when someone who experiences same-gender attraction could be honest and real in their faith community without a sense of shame or judgment. I think those of us who name the name of Jesus, all want to see God’s people more fully representing the love of Christ in our culture. I trust we all want to bring about a deeper sense of shalom in our fractured world. So I am hopeful that there will be less polarization ….. and despite the challenges at various points in this dialogue, I am also grateful for those of differing perspectives who have listened to and engaged with my thoughts. I hope to see more of this in the future.
Thanks Michael for your graciousness in the process.
Wendy,
I truly, TRULY appreciate your message, but I just have a small suggestion -you seem to talk about the Christian community as if it only encompasses conservative Evangelical groups. There are many Christian groups who don’t believe that being gay is a sin. So when you mention “the Christian community”, you might instead say something like: some Christians….
Wendy, I agree with Jayhuck. The particular Christian communities you’re talking would be more correctly labeled “non gay-affirming Christians.”
Wendy: I also thank you for your graciousness. I would really appreciate the opportuntity to meet you or speak with you by phone sometime. I think you would find that we have much in common. God bless.
Hi Wendy — re:
reference to Richard Cohen being adopted as a resource during my tenure… I don’t believe that is the case… but you have perhaps researched me [etc]
Wayback Machine has a better memory than, I dare say, any of us here. If you’re not familiar with Wayback… basically it trawls around and keeps a back record of webpages. So understand we are not relying on our memory. We are using a fact about New Direction. We didn’t research “you”.
I simply went back to an old dump of the ND site — we do those from time to time — and found the old page that listed ND’s suggested references. I used the URL to search for the page history. (we have dumps of the ND site dating back to looooong before you appeared!) It took all of 5 minutes.
The ND “suggested resources” page did not list Cohen before you started. It didn’t list him on 26 April 2003, after you had started. The reference list was updated on the ND site on 12 Feb 2004 — and added Cohen’s hideous “Alfie’s Home”. Who added that book to the list, and on who’s advice… well, we cannot tell and we’re not in a position to find out (even if we even wished to… we’re more than a few miles away from Toronto).
And, we’re sorry, but we simply cannot accept “teachability and a humility to acknowledge past mistakes” if that is a patent excuse (ref: Alan Chambers). We hope you can personally rise above that.
(There’s only so many “Oh, really?, I didn’t notice. Not my fault. Gee, how terrible that makes us look. I promise to stop that.” one can apologise for… especially if it all happens on your watch and is repeated time and time again. Suspiciously, frequently. And almost never carried through. Again… Alan, not you.)
You may have a desire to “help”, but with that — professionally, or at least socially — comes a demand that you be knowledgeable.
On that…. Mario Bergner, hmmm???
We hate to be Cassandra, but consider that as our middle name
(If we bring a jaundiced eye to this site, we hope it’s at least tempered (mostly) by people knowing we also carry the baggage of our cynical Australian sense of humour and the perspective that comes along with it. There really isn’t much we don’t tolerate — or as we would say, “put up with” — at the end of the day, apart from the obvious intolerables… but thickly-spread B.S. is not one of them. Even if the person has a PhD and an ego to match.)
Wendy, I am afraid I have to agree with Grantdale on this:
(There’s only so many “Oh, really?, I didn’t notice. Not my fault. Gee, how terrible that makes us look. I promise to stop that.” one can apologise for… especially if it all happens on your watch and is repeated time and time again. Suspiciously, frequently. And almost never carried through. Again… Alan, not you.)
I would add other excuses like: Gee, EXODUS is very diverse…We can’t accept any responsibility for what our member agencies may say or do… or, Gee, that was the leader before me…. or, Gee, that was three years ago…
EXODUS does give the impression of never clearly, boldly and corporately owning up to its “mistakes”> Classic example: last year’s official EXODUS radio spots that promised “sudden, radical and complete change” — then an “oops, we’re sorry if we gave the wrong impression. We meant the CHURCH could suddenly, radically and completely change — NOT that gays could suddenly become straight.”
EXODUS leadership never explained how such a “mistake” could happen. Very slippery when it comes to taking responsibility. Too many “oop”s and “gee”s. Gives one the impression the either (1) EXODUS is lying or (2) no one is minding the store — or both.
Jayhuck and Steve – you’re both quite right – a good reminder for me to be more specific
grantdale & Michael….. i don’t appreciate b.s. either. So, while I really don’t remember that particular book or how it got on the list, I have no intention of relying on a “gee, I don’t remember” pattern of excuses. You’re right to point out that pattern when it seems the “go to” response.
Wendy: Here is what I would like to see: Redesign the EXODUS homepage so that anyone who signs on could quickly and clearly determine EXODUS’s mission, philosophy, policies and beliefs. In particular,
(1) A clear statement that EXODUS does not promise a change in sexual orientation from gay to straight — and an apology for giving that impression either intentionally (as in the radio ads) or unintentionally. It’s simply not true.
(2) Either do away with entirely — or give an honest explanation of what words like “ex-gay”, “former homosexual”, “freedom from homosexuality” and “change” actually mean. These phrases have been referred to — even by some past and present EXODUS leaders — as “hype” and “Christianese”. Such linguistic sloppiness has confused, misled and ultimately harmed many people. Last Summer, Alan Chambers said he wanted to “officially retire” the term “ex-gay”, but I have seen NO official action of any sort.
(3) A permanent and prominent spot, on the front page of the website, that clearly and unmistakably denounces bullying, hatred and violence. Folks should not have to search the archives to find out that EXODUS condemns such behavior and attitudes.
(4) A statement similar to Alcoholics Anonymous’s “10th Tradtion” about avoiding political affilations and remaining officialy neutral on political matters. This is the way we designed EXODUS and the way it should have remained.
EXODUS needs to focus on how it communicates and how it is percieved. The webpage would be a great place for EXODUS to keep its promise to get honest with the public.
Hi Michael,
I wouldn’t disagree with your suggestions. I may take and integrate some of them into the homepages of the three websites that New Direction operates. We currently have these statements in our distinctives – but not on the homepages.
Wendy,
I am trying to appreciate all of the positive things you are saying here as well as the goals or directions that you are trying to move towards. I would like to make you aware of what I see as potential problems.
I have been on the receiving end of ‘ministry’ from New Directions for two decades, and I think one big problem you are going to have with your change of focus is the lingering ghost of Pat Allen, (now Lawrence). For others, Pat Allen began New Directions and led it for more than a decade. She was a relentless promoter and I don’t think there was a church council or church magazine in all of Ontario that did not hear her speak, or carry her story, -disfunctional childhood, sexual abuse, descent into homosexuality and a life of alcoholism, infidelity, misery, emptiness that still makes up for her, The Gay Lifestyle. And then she was made “whole”.
She moved on to Exodus leadership at the time the group became political and she now heads Exodus World Alliance where she is still trying to combat the “promotion” of homosexuality world wide, by campaigning to keep it illegal in Barbados, and bemoaning that it was dropped as a mental illness in China. For a real descent into Hades, check out the resources on her website; Cohen, van den Aardweg, Cameron, Satinover, Nicolosi, Mediger, Paynne – the whole nine yards.
Aside from parading as Canada’s Healed Lesbian, she led a vigourous campaign to “Counter the Pro-gay Church Movement”, equipping people to use all sorts of mantras to stop gay people at the door of any church.
The mantra she employed for Metropolitan Community Church was that they were “promoting their gayness instead of bringing honour to Christ”. This was at a time when one third of the congregation of MCC had committed themselves to being 24/7 AIDS buddies during the height of the epidemic, but nevermind.
Like you, she claimed she was not political, but she always seemed to be visible as the The Healed Lesbian whenever gay rights were being debated, and she always endorsed the arguments used by the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, – that legislation against discrimination against gays would protect pedophiles from being fired; that legislation recognizing gay couples was wrong because there was no such thing as a monogamous gay couple, and so on.
I know many people who still think of New Directions from that context of Pat Allen.
The other problem comes from your own history. Earlier in your carreer, you were promoting all sorts of Exodus literature aside from Richard Cohen, no doubt because you felt at that time they were worthy. One of them was Jeffrey Satinover’s Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (?) – the one which claimed that homosexuality was dropped as a mental illness due to the hostile threats of gay activists against the medical profession.
I’m not trying to be negative in reminding you of this. Bless you, you got rid of many of these books, and it seems that you are willing to consider doing more.
However, some people are going to be very cautious for a long time to see how genuine your change in attitude is. Some people have lasting memories of the times they were clobberred over the head during church discussions by people using these ‘resources’.
I’m not sure how you can or should deal with this, but I just thought you should be aware of it.
Don
Don Baxter,
Please contact me privately regarding Exodus Global Alliance. I am working on a research project that involves them. Thanks.
Don,
I understand what you’re saying …. though truthfully you likely know much more about New Direction’s history than I do. I had not heard of the ministry before I applied for the position of executive director in the spring of 2002. I started out part-time (my youngest of three children was still in diapers and I worked almost exclusively from home). There was so much that was new to me ….. and initially I did really rely on what others before me had done and said. Over time, in part due to listening to the critique of people like yourself – but also in large part due to the patience of my friend and former colleague David (a celibate gay man) from whom I have learned a great deal, I began to better understand what I have now articulated as “distractions” for the church (causation, orientation change, politics – the three big ones). It took me a while to think through the bigger picture of cultural engagement and I’m still thinking and learning. I feel it is really only the last couple of years – maybe three – that I feel like I am able to grasp a clearer sense of what the mission and vision of New Direction needs to be in today’s context. Even moving towards a greater focus on relational engagement at a simpler level feels like quite a significant shift to me given a legacy of focus on counseling and support groups with very specific goals. But as I look at the ministry of Jesus, as I look at moving beyond some of the legacy of the past, as I look at the future and my deep desire to build bridges and actually earn the right to represent Jesus to gay people – I am convinced that respectful, relevant and redemptive relationships are the way forward. Note: by redemptive I simply mean a relationship that embodies the presence of Jesus Christ who, I believe, is about the work of redeeming all things.
So I can’t speak to much from the past, other than to humbly ask for grace from those who encountered New Direction in the past, to give us the space as we seek to chart a distinct course for the future. I would expect that it will not be quick or easy to emerge from the shadow of the past….. but I will seek to continue to lead in a consistent manner to earn the right to engage relationally. I expect God will have me serving in this role for some time to come – and I hope one day to earn the respect of those who disagree….. a la “We don’t agree with her on sexual ethics, but we don’t doubt her love for gay people.” If some day I earn that respect, I will know that I have been faithful in reflecting the Jesus I know and love.
I do hope Don that one day we can have coffee together…. I’m sure you have some insights that would help me in my ongoing thinking and reflecting.
Wendy said:
Wendy, at the risk of piling on, I would like to make a personal note. Since I come from the evangelical world, having grown up the son of a Baptist minister, I think I know what you’re trying to say up there.
But what it SOUNDS like is that you’re only goal for establishing relationships is to convert people. To get them “redeemed.” It gives one the feeling that you’re not really interested in non-affirming gay people unless it’s to get them recruited to your version of Jesus.
I’m sorry if that sounds harsh, but if I were to enter into a relationship with you, it wouldn’t be to change you. I might disagree with you things and we could even have a few rough debates, but I wouldn’t approach becoming your friend with the hidden agenda of converting you to something.
It’s an inherently dishonest relationship.
What is your attitude about creating these “relationships” across the divide? What goal do you really have in mind?
Hi Mike,
I can’t find your email address. Let me know if you would like me to provide mine.
Don
oops! it’s mairhart (at) gmail dot com
Wendy, still grateful to have the opportunity to follow this bridge building expedition. I linked both blogs to GCN as well!
But you are correct that it will take time to “earn the right to represent Jesus to gay people.” It will take time and consistency… The message you have to share is not your burden alone either…. Christians as a whole have centuries of damage to undo when it comes to living as genuine “Christ-followers” and it will take time… Christians will have to “earn the right” to represent Jesus to many people in our world today… I am so very cautious when choosing to which of my “Christian friends” I introduce my girlfriend…
Steve, coming from a very conservative background myself, I think I hear what you’re saying about doubting the sincerety of relationships founded with “bridge building” as the intent. However, if in fact, individuals are known as “Christ-followers” by the love they demonstrate… and if in fact the values of “Christ-followers” are to live as He purportedly did (ie, in selfless service to others, in defense of the weak and powerless, in playful generosity with children and the childlike)… wouldn’t that kind of person be a great friend to have?
Regardless, the words we use are so loaded with emotional experiences… and for those of us who have been hurt by people using the power of “the divine” to strengthen their stance, those familiar words ride into our souls on waves of emotion. But if we break down the word redemptive , it has so much more meaning than that to which it’s often tied in traditional Christianity… When Jesus said He was to “redeem” us, Christian culture often interprets it as “save us from our sins” and usually, it’s the biggies like sexual immorality, stealing, lying… But a great deal more could be inferred from that word that what we often think (or words such as “salvation”)… For instance, “To restore the honor, worth, or reputation of” and you can fill in the blank here… me, you, God…
I think what I hear Wendy saying here that she wants to build relationships that restore the honor and reputation of Jesus’ name which places the redemptive work on herself and not the salvation of her friend. And that she wants to live congruently with the values of this Jesus that she loves…
Please keep in mind also that it isn’t just those in “ex-gay ministries” that have some redemptive relationship work to do… In our culture and society today, all those wearing the name “Christian” have make up work, including gay Christians. Unfortunately, there will always be those false shepherds who use their power to abuse the weak… Be it as that may, Christians are each called to care for the least, to live in peace, to act justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly before the Creator, to speak truth (and I know we often may disagree as to how that looks exactly!) in love…
I really do believe that truth and love will prevail, and in the end, it is the peacemakers who will be called children of God.
Biana, I don’t form relationships in order for that friend to impose his or her own version of Jesus and “redemption” upon me. I make friends in order to make a friend.
If a spiritual connection forms, and if we share our particular journeys, and it leads to one of us having a personal revelation or healing or “redemption,” that’s fine. But I am skeptical of people who make friends with me only to convert me to their religion.
And that’s what that verbiage sounds like, whether it’s intentional or not. I don’t need someone standing over me looking at their watch waiting for me to come to my senses.
Steve, I can understand what you’re saying. I was simply saying that the words “redemptive relationships” doesn’t necessarily equate with “relationships to bring about prescribed spiritual redemption”… Merely that they seek to have redeeming value… Again, semantics… The concept of “redemptive relationships” is part of Emergent Christianity, a relatively young movement in “the church” which seeks to live life authentically and in community despite differences…
I am a side-A, gay, not-sure-how-it-all-plays-out Christian in a committed relationship with a woman… certainly nobody’s poster child for an “evangalist”…
and each friendship I have is driven by the desire for it to have “redeeming value”, something of worth, a relationship which will sharpen my spirit and my character… Not so that others will come to the same beliefs I have about religion or spirituality… But so that I can be challenged in my own journey… And how I choose to behave in any relationship is with authenticity, congruent with my understanding of how Jesus lived and loved.
You make an excellent point as to why we need to be aware of verbiage… in any relationship, personal or otherwise! A problem noted multiple times over that creates barriers between “ex-gay” folk and the gay community at large is the difference in intended meaning behind the word “gay”… If we are ever to bridge this divide, we have to be willing to shed our definitions and try on another’s, long enough at least to seek understanding…
While I am familiar with the nauseating variety of evangelical Christianity that would advocate making friends as a means to convert them, I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that this is what Wendy meant by “redemptive”.
I think she was just expressing in her own language what most of us might hope of our friendships and relationships – that they’re fulfilling, positive, life-affirming, and spiritually and emotionally beneficial relationships. This is what I’d look for in friendships – and if I were in a particularly spiritual frame of mind, I might even describe it as “redemptive”!
I would see that as a two-way street in a friendship, of course, and hope Wendy sees it that way, too. That’s the whole point of relationships, isn’t it? To share (and enjoy) the experience of human growth?
My staff always challenge me in my great difficulty to leave “christaneze” behind
….. sadly, I’m not that proficient – but still committed to the process of learning …..
I have consistently tried to communicate (ie. through our newsletters etc.) that our focus on relational engagement is to be without an agenda. So Steve, I quite agree with you – if I’m encouraging a Christ-follower to befriend their gay neighbour …. I will encourage them to be a true and good friend – period. That, in and of itself, I hope will have a redemptive effect on the Christian community being less hostile and/or misinformed about gay people.
Now, as a Christ-follower, I believe that the presence of Christ is in his followers….. so our hope is that as we are a good friend, as we love, serve, form meaningful relationships (love your comments on that Bianca) …. that our friends (gay or not) will encounter the presence of Christ – not by what we say, not by an agenda – but simply by who we are.
If our friends encounter the presence of Christ in us…. that is really up to them what they will do with that encounter…. perhaps they’ll ask us about it and perhaps we’ll have the opportunity to speak about what our faith means to us …. perhaps they’ll never ask about it – in which case, I would suggest we continue to enjoy the friendship and simply rest in knowing that God is present in ways we may not see or discern.
My gay friends bring a lot of richness into my life …. they help me loosen up a bit and laugh more …. we share meaningful conversations about all kinds of things …. they enjoy my kids ….. and I enjoy them.
So sorry for unclear language in the previous post ….. it is good to be reminded of the kind of baggage people have from their own past experiences ….. and I’m always glad for an opportunity to try to bring more clarity rather than assumptions behind the scenes.
Dave – thanks for weighing in – we’re on the same page
Bianca said: A problem noted multiple times over that creates barriers between “ex-gay” folk and the gay community at large is the difference in intended meaning behind the word “gay”…
I agree, but I think that while we have been wrangling over semantics, the general public has already solved this problem — they have figured out long ago that “gay” and “homosexual” mean the same thing (a person who is attracted to the same sex) just as “straight” and “heterosexual” both mean a person who is attracted to the opposite sex.
“Gay” may have had a more “political” or “social” connotation in the past, but now it’s part of everyday vocabulary and conversation. “Ex-gays” may not like it, but “gay” has just become slang for homosexual. It’s a synonym. To say that someone is “gay” says nothing about the person — except that they are attracted (primarily or exclusively) to their own gender.
And I would have to agree with you Michael about the public’s consensus. The only reason I brought up the “wrangling words” was because it was a semantics issue at hand, ie. Steve’s concern that “redemptive relationships” were about converting someone to a particular view of redemption was getting in the way of him hearing what Wendy was saying. My only point was that in order to build bridges, we have to be willing to look at someone else’s statement through their lenses of definition and meaning… So much time is lost on trying to convince each other to see the world exactly the same way we do, which just creates defensiveness, and eventually builds walls. Rather than expect others to use my definitions in order to make their point, I try to set aside my own definitions and try on theirs, at least long enough to understand them… And that was my only, only, only reason for bringing up the example once again! I’m sorry!
I think you and I are on the same page when it comes to how the majority of society attributes meaning to the word gay and why “ex-gay” is a word of contention…
Bianca: I may be old-fashioned, but I still like “homosexual” since it’s not politically or socially “loaded” — and everyone seems to know what “homosexual” means: attracted to members of the same sex. We really don’t need new words like “SSA” (Same Sex Attracted) since we already have a word that conveys that.
That’s what really bugs me about Alan Chambers and Randy Thomas continuing to call themselves “former homosexuals”. It’s dishonest — especially when they both admit ongoing sexual attractions to men. “Former” means: “no longer” — and they still are.
Michael,
Good points. I like “homosexual” as a clinical term like “homo sapien” or “caucasian”, but as I don’t go around calling myself a caucasian, I also don’t call myself a homosexual.
I’m too lazy, and the fact that the word is ____sexual puts far too much emphasis on the sexual aspect. To me, the sex I have with my partner is the least definitive part of our relationship. If, for example, my partner and I were rendered incapable of having sex with each other or anyone else, we’d still have a lot of things that bond us.
Homo-amorous is more appropriate, but sounds needlessly specific (and also like some sort of dinosaur) but is more descriptive of what I feel is central to being gay. If it were just about sex, I think it would be a hell of a lot easier to “leave behind”.
I don’t want to leave it behind, I’m just saying that if it just amounted to behavior, then it would be very easy to stop being gay. Obviously it’s much more than that —which is the fly in the ointment of the ex-gay industry.
Jason–thirty years ago, I tried to get the words “affectional orientation” in to replace sexual preference, which i loathed, and sexual orientaton, which placed too much emphasis on the sexual.
I could have sex with a woman every day for the next twenty years, and it would never make me straight, nor would i ever love a woman like I love my husband. due to his school work, our sex life is way on the back burner, but that doesn’t make me love him the less, or make me any less gay big fag homo.
that to me is one of the worst lies of all of this ex-gay crap– that this has only something to do with my actions, not my being.
I like “same-sex attracted” because I think it accurately describes what could be an ambiguous orientation. Sometimes people have one gay relationship their entire life, and otherwise date the opposite sex. Others are bisexual the whole way. Still others switch back and forth between same-gender and opposite-gender relationships over periods of years at a time. Social conservatives use the term “SSA” to make all non-heterosexual orientations seem like fleeting, casual lifestyle choices, rather than something permanently ingrained. And, just because one is not cemented one way or the other, does not mean they are not “same-sex attracted.” I understand how it can be a loathesome term for some, as “SSA” also sounds like something that belongs in disease terminology, something that needs to be treated. As though everybody is heterosexual first, but happens to be “suffering from SSA.” That being said, I like SSA merely as a descriptor. I’m Same-Sex Attracted. DEFINITELY. Not casually, not in a fleeting sense.
But I’ve said before, my favorite term is “queer.” I like this one because I think it describes my entire being. Honestly, EVERYTHING about me is kinda queer.
Emily: alas “same-sex attracted” could also describe near every STRAIGHT person on Earth.
Same-sex attracted to… what? Fishing trips with the mates, tick. Tennis with the girlfriends, tick. We’re really trying to refer to pair-bonding, not same-sex friendships; even though they too will obviously also be based on some sort of mutual attraction. Just not the kissin’ kind.
(And we loath “queer”. It seems, at least here, to have been too often adopted by young heterosexuals with strange haircuts and a lack of hygiene, rather than indicating anything in particular about affectional, romantic, sexual interests. It had its’ day, in the 90′s…)
I suspect “SSA” seeks merely to avoid saying “gay” or “homosexual” — the words that ARE in common currency — and also to deliberately create a sense of distancing (or even disconnection) among those who ARE homosexual but don’t want to be.
I’m trying to think of anyone who uses SSA, preferentially, and who doesn’t also see gay as some sort of “condition” open to being “overcome”. Like a fungal infection, or something.
Is it really that hard for people to just use “gay”? Perhaps I’m just feeling rather frustrated at the moment, but I’m growing tired of all the minutia surrounding why we use this word and that. To most of the known world. gay means one is primarily romantically attracted to others of the same sex. It doesn’t necessarily mean you are happy about it, or accept it or anything else – it just means you are.
Perhaps the first step for those in ex-gay ministries should be to stop making such a big deal over having that term applied to them. It would certainly be more honest than the passive-aggressive “gay-identified” which I think Exodus has been trying to push for the past couple of years. They can’t even say the word without adding a little mini-policy statement.
The irony being that they feel no need to explain the words “change” and “ex-gay” which they use on billboards and advertising propaganda.
I like “gay”.
I know what it means, my neighbors know what it means, my family knows what it means, my community, city, state, nation all know what it means.
In fact, the only people who don’t know what “gay” means are the phobes and the ex-gays. And I suspect they really must be trying terribly hard to keep it that way.
I have never ever ever understood those who have such a horrible distaste for the word gay on one hand, yet honestly think we’re supposed to buy into “ex-gay” as a seperate orientation unto itself. boggles my little mind.
The big stink they raise over using the word gay does nothing but draw attention to how bigoted they are against gay folks.
I so appreciate what Wendy has expressed here and at the Exodus leaders event. She is a tremendous encouragement to those of us who are committed to ministry without political entanglements, humility in regards to unresolved scientific questions, and invitations expressed in an accessible language. I am also grateful for the hospitality extended here in this forum.
Sonia
I have been reading and pondering these comments, it has been very interesting…
For me personally, I am being challenged in my own way of thinking. I have tried on numerous occasions to type out a response to both Wendy’s comments as well as those who may think differently than her. It is causing me to dig deeper and formulate a non apologetic stand on who I am as a person. I have written several responsed only to delete them before posting, because I want to give an honest comment..
I understand Wendy, and her words, and the way she is expressing herself, and the respect that she is showing. That is evident.
I also understand the view point of those who believe differently than her, and the respect that they are showing. (though I believe that there are some responses that were more reactive rather than self reflective)
When ever you have differing views of something, you will be challenged to walk with others, dialogue with others, and come to a place of knowing that there is a difference, yet respect still plays a part in that relationship.
It’s actually coming to a place that says…okay, you fundamentally believe in something else, which goes contrary to what I think, yet, I will respect you, because you respect me. It challenges us to guard our words, guard our actions.
For me this thread is doing just that. My experiences have been on both sides of this issue. What I do not want is to have to apologize for who I am. I will not apologize because of my faith, and that expression of my faith…but I long to walk with others in that expression.
What I am finding in this thread is that we sure use a lot of fancy lingo, and the new terminology and nuances and what have you, and that is all good, yet, are we getting to the core of the main hurts and wounding that people are expressing?
We have all experienced hurt, pain from both sides. Ultimately we will hurt each other, with things we say and do. Our actions, often cause a reaction. This is no excuse, rather, how do we heal, and move on. Often times when we are offended, it is because there is something in us that needs to change…rather than pointing a finger at the other who offended us. How are we reacting and responding?
Wendy is showing us that she is willing to walk the talk. Does she have an agenda? Probably, but so do the rest of us. We all have the thought in the deep center of our being, that fundimentally thinks…if I plead my case, or say the right things, or do the right things, that person may eventually believe what I believe. That person will then be just like me.
What we forget then is that each person is on a journey. Each person has the right to be on the journey that they are on. Each person has the right to be informed, educated so they can make their own decision, rather than letting someone make their decisions for them.
For me that process has taken 40 years. I come from a faith based background and believe in Jesus, and do not apologize for my faith. It has caused me to look at my life, and how I live it…rather than looking at others and thinking that is how I should live. I have allowed the Holy Spirit to challenge me, to open my eyes to the Biblical standard of God ordained words. It is me who will stand in front of God, who will be judged according to what I did, and what I didn’t do…so I am constantly being challenged to live a life pleasing to God, rather than pleasing to other people. Yet, that does not mean I am to live judging others, and their experiences. I am not here to point fingers, rather look at my own life, and reflect…is there any wickedness in me, that needs to be changed? Is there ways that I react to what others say, that needs to change?
I am change focused…I do not want to be the same person tomorrow, and this is a way of living that isn’t feelings based. It is not about how good I will feel, or how good I will look, rather, a refining and evolving into the man I am created to be. I am not here to change others, that is no ones job. But I will share my experiences with others, my story, because it is mine to share and only by invitation, with respect and honor to all those involved in my journey.
gays, ex gay’s, ex-ex gays…we are all on a journey, all processing life, and the experiences that we have had, and all are coming to different conclusions.
I was going to say that no one decided for me how I am living…yet that would be a lie. For me my journey includes a profound Damascus Road experience, which has radically changed me forever. No “human” told me that I should live this way or that way, rather God himself defined me…and continues to mold me and shape me, and with that, no apologies are needed.
He clears the path infront of me, He give me wisdom and understanding. My prayer is this, that each one of us come to a place of realizing that it is not others we look to for our definition, that we realize that we are all unique and wonderful in God’s sight and it is He who defines us.
Blessings…
Wendy,
Thank you for your heart of compassion, yet uncompromising devotion to Christ.
Just recently (about 5 months ago) I was lifted out of homosexuality. I cannot lie and say that I do not struggle… I still “feel” as if I’m walking, slowly in the midst of a thick fog… but I know that Jesus is worth the fight. I get discouraged and then He lifts me up and leads me to sites like yours to let me know I’m going the right way. He is most gracious and overwhelmingly kind, I deserve death for eternity, I know I do. The hope that keeps me going is that He didn’t call me out to “turn me away”. I desperately NEED Him to water my faith of a mustard seed.
Romans 8:28
And we know that all tings work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
I was created to worship my Creator, not His creation.
I’m learning to trust Him, He’ll surely see me through.
May God bless you as you seek to glorify Him!
Wendy,
Thank you for your heart of compassion, yet uncompromising devotion to Christ.
Just recently (about 5 months ago) I was lifted out of homosexuality. I cannot lie and say that I do not struggle… I still “feel” as if I’m walking, slowly in the midst of a thick fog… but I know that Jesus is worth the fight. I get discouraged and then He lifts me up and leads me to sites like yours to let me know I’m going the right way. He is most gracious and overwhelmingly kind, I deserve death for eternity, I know I do. The hope that keeps me going is that He didn’t call me out to “turn me away”. I desperately NEED Him to water my faith of a mustard seed.
Romans 8:28
And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
I was created to worship my Creator, not His creation.
I’m learning to trust Him, He’ll surely see me through.
May God bless you as you seek to glorify Him!
I too have read Wendy’s original post and the dialogue with great interest. At first I was concerned about the tone of some the dialogue. However, I was pleased to see a thread of respect that ultimately weaved it’s way through the dialogue as questions were raised, challenges made and stands taken.
I too would say as you, Kenny, have so well expressed…”I am change focused…I do not want to be the same person tomorrow, and this is a way of living that isn’t feelings based. It is not about how good I will feel, or how good I will look, rather, a refining and evolving into the man I am created to be. I am not here to change others, that is no ones job. But I will share my experiences with others, my story, because it is mine to share and only by invitation, with respect and honor to all those involved in my journey.”
It is in the interaction with others, whether of like mind or not, that we become who we are intended to be. Learning and becoming are life-long processes enhanced by experience on our own and with others as we journey through life. How, unfulfilling life would be without this.
I do not believe the day will come that I will ever be able to say I know it all, I know I am right, I know the truth. At least not in this life where being human in itself is imperfect.
I do believe that we are all created uniquely for such a time as this. I will walk my journey with integrity being true to what I believe and when I encounter others on their journey, to listen and share with authenticity and respect so we may grow from the experience and continue on our journeys even if we, as Kenny said, “come to different conclusions.”
Wendy,
Thanks for your words, they are interesting. I would ask the following for your comment:
1) What is your typical response to someone who is struggling with SSA?
2) Have you considered that the Bible is not inerrantly “the word of God” and that the cultural situations at the time of writing may have had effect on what men allowed into the Bible?
There has been talk and writings about the fact that pedophelia was rampant when the Bible was written, and therefore the verses referred to such acts.
Thanks for your input. I do think one needs to cut to the chase if this cultural war is ever going to resolve. You must hold whether those beliefs in the Bible really hold water. They must be taken to task by reason, not opinion. Not to mention the plethora of Leviticus statements on other death sentence issues, like working on the Sabath, that are just plain silly. There is no back story to much of the rhetoric in the Bible concerning this subject of homosexuality. It seems they are more than not, fear based horrific rules out to control the population, giving absolutely no reason in fact.
These are the topics and qustions most priests and clergy hide under the carpet rather than answer. Using common sense, can you be a sport and give your insights?
Devlin, the last comment here was in March, you may not get a response.
yeah, rolling the dice here, thanks David.
Hello Devlin,
My typical response to someone struggling with ssa is not typical. Each person is unique – their journey and story are unique – so there is no typical response. I would first of all want to know why they are struggling: are they struggling because they hate themselves (some internalized homophobia)? If so, i would want to work through that self-hatred to self-acceptance. Are they struggling because of a conflict with their spirituality and sexuality? If so, I would want to explore where they are spiritually, what their values are, what the tough questions for them, and help them own their values and develop a plan so that they are best equipped to live consistently with those values. (Which by the way, may or may not line up with the values of New Direction. If their values do not line up with New Direction’s values then we would explore potential referrals with them) Are they struggling because they have behaviours or patterns that feel out of control that they want to address? If so, I would walk with them in equipping them to experience more mastery and management over their behaviours / addictions etc.
Secondly, you’ve asked about how rigid my hermeneutic is. My hope is that I have a humble hermeneutic – that is I recognize that my interpretation of Scripture is fallible and I want to be open to listen, learn and continue to refine how I view and engage Scripture. I do think that cultural context has implications in Scripture. I also think that Scripture is not meant to be a textbook of rules – rather it is a story that demonstrates the move of God towards humanity. This movement is loving and good – and at least for me – mysterious and beyond my full comprehension.
At the end of the day, I believe Scripture points us to God and as human beings, our lives are incomplete without God. This side of heaven, with all of our flaws and mistakes, we are invited to be in relationship with God – and as that relationship grows, in part informed by Scripture, we better understand God’s will for our lives. Wrestling to know what that will is – for me – is an ongoing reality of the journey of faith.
I don’t view Scripture as some archaic, outdated book. I see it rather as a living document. That is, the Holy Spirit continues to illumine the will of God for those in relationship with God who are open to listening and hearing what the Spirit is saying. I do think one needs to consider the whole of Scripture rather than ripping this or that verse out of context. And, to be truthful, I think it is really challenging to understand and know what to do with certain aspects of Scripture. The safety for me is that it isn’t just a book that is old and hard to understand – it is a story that is still unfolding and through the presence of the Holy Spirit I get to be in relationship with the storyteller. For me, however, that necessitates a humility as I seek to interpret the story for others – I need to rely on the leading of the Holy Spirit – and I don’t always perfectly understand or interpret what he seems to be saying. So even though I have been a preacher of Scripture for over ten years, I seek to do so with humility and gentleness – forever grateful that I can entrust my hearers to God. I think one of the most significant tasks of preachers of the gospel is to equip people to hear God for themselves – through Scripture and through the Holy Spirit. Some would say this is relativistic and far too skewed towards experience. I think it is simply personal – and the God I have come to know is personal and knows me personally. The balance to this is that God calls us into community where we submit what God has been saying and teaching us – and we have the opportunity to learn together. Where this happens in mutual love and submission and servanthood – it is a good thing. Where that happens with weird power issues and broken trust and self-righteous, judgmentalism – it can be a very hurtful thing ….. and something that I believe brings grief to the heart of God.
What this means in the nitty gritty for same-gender attracted and gay people is that I hope they find themselves in a humble and secure community where they can have the safe and spacious place to wrestle with God and hear what he is saying to them – and then share that with their community of faith. In sharing, it is my prayer that they will encounter feeling valued, honoured, and deeply encouraged to continue to move forward with God, continue to wrestle with him to more fully understand and own his will for their life.
Thanks for your reply Wendy. I hope another reply is not too much to ask.
There are a few things I take into consideration when determining value in a belief:
1) Is the belief presented fully, research background etc 2) does it make sense 3) is it motivated by evil (D’evil) 4) is it motivated by good (God)? The answers are either yes no maybe or unknown. If I get 3 yes, it is a good balanced common sense idea/belief. If not, it is discarded.
With you being a straight white woman, you cannot fully recognize the chemical biological reality homosexual and bisexual people know as real and undeniably authentic regarding their sexual attractions. And the confusion they are experiencing at the hands of fallable religious beliefs.
However, you are a woman. And I portend that you most likely know the burdens women have suffered at the hands of religious bigotry. You know when you are right and religion has done you wrong. You know the chemical reaction your body feels, the anger it induces, the rage it provokes, when you know in your soul you are right and are being told you are unacceptable, without merit and just plain wrong.
I entertain to you, that if you teach that homosexuality is detestable to God, that you might want to put yourself in the “woman being religiously persecuted” position, and feel again, the burn.
It is that kind of reaction that gay people feel when they are told they are straight and their homosexuality is inadmissable and rejected as a real authentic human trait. It is the same “burn” that blacks have felt, that Jews have felt, and that all people at some level have felt from religion, when not a member. Are you simply propelling past models of negative religious warrior behavior, onto the next sacrifical lamb that seems to be blocking your set world view, i.e. homosexuality?
I would imagine that people that don’t “line up with New Directions” and are shipped off to other counselors, may feel greatly dis-service by religious mentors, feeling great rejection by your organization, possibly shaking their emotional foundations to the core.
I get, you have compassion for the human race. What I am not sure of, is how far that compassion goes when determining true and false “fallable” beliefs for your flock. Of that I find you still suspect. Do you import into your consciousness, that the biblical verses face value, about homosexuality are true, and therefore determine your counseling tech?
You say you are listening to God, which makes you a channel/psychic in current day terminology. I propose that all channelled information is subject to conjecture and embellishment by the channel. The Bible is a partially “channelled” document, leaving it potentially fully open to interpretation, due to the channels potential portense to embellish. With this in mind, regarding your values when interpreting a fallable belief in the bible, how do you go about validating correctly that homosexuality is detestable and against God’s will? What formula do you use to determine correct beliefs from fallable beliefs?
You have a chance to make a difference in peoples lives that need assurance that their sexuality is ok, fully, without reservation, without flaw, and is a native part of the human template. If your bottom line is hard core bible beliefs for New Directions, the game is lost, there are no winners. With rejection as the basis, instead of acceptance, the persecuted might as well take up residence in Iran, and step up to the gallows. When it comes to the rejection/acceptance model, there is no in between. None. At some level, no matter how much sugar and spice you toss on it, the persecuted will feel hanged.
Thanks again Wendy. It’s the open honesty in your writings that can make change realistic.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Devlin Bach
Devlin,
With all due respect I believe you’ve made some assumptions about me – that perhaps even if you’d read through all the comments on this long thread you would have a better sense of my perspective.
I do believe that God’s best intention for sexual intimacy is within the covenant of marriage between husband and wife. I understand that you clearly disagree with this. However, this is not the same as teaching that homosexuality is detestable. Rather, I spend a great deal of time teaching in the Christian community that the ground is level at the foot of the cross – that we all, gay or straight, come to the same place needing grace – needing Jesus Christ.
I have been very clear about saying that I believe that part of my role is to normalize the experience of same-gender attraction for those who can’t personally relate – and did so recently on my newly launched blog: http://www.btgproject.blogspot.com (the post “the biggest limper” in particular). I know that there are some who say, “there is no such thing as a homosexual – only heterosexuals with a homosexual problem”. I do not think this statement is helpful at all. I think it smacks with an arrogence that alienates and shames. A huge part of the advocacy that I seek to do within the Christian community is to speak to our shared humanity, the dignity and value of all persons, and the love of God for all persons.
In terms of making referrals – that is out of respect for a person’s ability to choose and own their own path. As I have said previously, New Direction mentors gladly stay part of an individual’s life regardless of their beliefs and values if they invite us to continue to be in relationship. We love and care for people – not just because they agree with us and do as we do – but because they are deeply loved and valued by God.
Finally, I have spoke out decisively against anti-gay rhetoric – including that spoken by those who identify as Christian. My staff and I have many opportunities to engage families in crisis when a child comes out. Often Christian parents have very high freak out levels and we consistently advocate for parents to offer love and acceptance. We are grieved when gay people feel rejection because of their experience of same-gender attraction.
I do think you can offer acceptance even when there are points of disagreement. You may disagree – and I can accept that.
I do get that you are more for letting the Holy Spirit “do the wooing” and not ones limping mind. In some ways I see you as the feminine part of Exodus and Alan Chambers as the masculine. You stay open and want to talk about it, Alan, well, he just kind of bumbles and hides out. But I do believe that you live in an ideology that is disruptive to those who are not within it. The us and them, if they just “got it like I do” mentality, in itself is separatist. And it engenders fear.
If they just got “Jesus” then all would all be ok and we would then have more limpers in our club who think like we do. I think a good example of how it has not worked as one may want, is in the fact there are so many “Jesus” people who are still very very conflicted, and very separate, hence the model is flawed in thinking it’s the only way. That is in itself, inaccurate and separatist.
I know why the model is flawed, it is the underlying structure of the mind BELIEFS that set the chism.
That is why Wendy when you say, your free will choice belief, that God’s intention for marriage is between a man and a woman, a polarizing conflict ensues, and causes fear in the marketplace. The belief of the conditional mind sets up the conflict with the heart, or unconditional love. Snap, a break sets in between mind thoughts and spiritual reality. You may therefore be calling forth the disonant term “tolerating” gay marriage, rather than call forth the harmonious term, that being to include gay marriage in the tapestry of human love bonds.
If your God is unconditional love like you have said, then that God would have no opinion either way about marriage. God is love, and nothing else. Fear comes in when mankind tries to interpret what God’s love is, relegates it to categories, hailing conditional love to set in. And love with conditions is a man made love, not God’s love. The, I will love you if you believe as I do, conflict arises.
I think this is the level playing field at the foot of the cross you grapple with, as we all do to some degree. It is level, but lets THINK about it and put it into boxes, probably not a good idea. Staying level in all situations could be the best ploy, though the mind would surely have a say in that, letting conflict based beliefs taint love.
Regardless of whether you believe homosexual and bisexual lovers are second class and not deserving of marriage and sexual expression, really isn’t the point. The point is, will you realize that God’s love truly is unconditional, and build your beliefs around that.
Having had the privilege of experiencing “the other side” or “heaven” with “the veil” completely dropping twice in my life, I can tell you that the concept of God being a punishing God is fully false. It is a grave error, and unfortunately, many have built their realities on this flaw. The truth is, God is perfect peace.
I believe that God the Father, and the man who is a father of human children, have been significantly intertwined in the Bible, making a human Father, and God the Father, meshed. One knows well of the punishment a human father mets out. God the Father is the exact opposite. It may be our job to separate the two.
If all had memory with no veil, we would not be having this discussion. You would be marrying gay couples with full support and love. But you hold a mind based God model, so be it. It is quite popular. And I accept your reality as yours.
So yes we can agree to disagree. But at the end of the day, God the Father’s love will win out. Not the human mind’s interpretation of God’s love. This is why your country has legalized gay marriage, regardless of fear based beliefs. The entire world will be this way some day. That is the meaning of Christ returning, it is the return of unconditional love on all fronts, not merely a return of a male figure. Peace knows we don’t need another slaughter.
I understand the threat some Christians feel around the acceptance of homosexuals as part of their humanity they must at some point accept. And I also understand the threat gays feel by being told they are wrong in the church’s eyes. I also know first hand, the difference between God’s unconditional love and mankind’s conditional love, and the two teams that play the game. I’ve played on both. Tossing the ball back and forth can be emotionally devastating. But on it goes.
Regarding this cultural homosexual man made threat, my peace lays in; this too shall pass.
Peace
Devlin said:
Setting aside whether one agrees with you or not (along with the meaning of “the veil dropping”), how might you react if this type of statement were made by another in defense of “God is against gay marriage (or any number of things)?” Don’t you think your comments are crossing over into dogma?
Hi David,
Thanks for your reply.
My reaction when someone says “God is against gay marriage (or any number of things)” hits me like playing a beautiful cord on a piano but the strings are out of tune. God might play the perfect concerto called the multi sexual human race, but the out of tune strings, being mankind’s interpretation, warp the output. It sets forth a glitch, turning harmony into dissonance or discordance. My inner response would be that this person does not know what perfect peace/love, or God, is. Depending on the atmosphere in which the belief was stated to me, my outter response could bring forth a list of replies, from; interesting thought, care to dialogue, to thanks for sharing, I’m going skiing now.
To those who might put my knowledge that God is perfect peace and/or love, and only this, into the category of dogma, I would ask them, what produces peace in the long run regarding the topic of discussion.
I will always concur that peace/love is the natural order and stands the test of time, is unalterable eternal and unambiguous, and real. For me, this is what I know. Beliefs however, are changeable uneternal and are ambiguous and can be frought with controversy and fear. Is the idea that perfect peace/love/God is dogma? Maybe to some who are filtering with belief, but in and of itself, the concept needs no defense that it is real. So I do not concur that I am wallowing in the dogma category with regard to my statements. I think the “God” word has been so stigmatized, that replacing it with love/peace would have this discussion make more sense. Regarding the Bible, they got it right, God is unconditional love. That is all God is. And the term “God” is the descriptive label. All other statements that lack peace and love, “God says” is heresay, conjecture and muddled man made beliefs.
With regard to sexuality, gay people are in “the know” about their sexuality. They have first hand knowledge that they are attracted to the same sex. This is unalterable by beliefs. They know they are capable of the same love sex and intimacy as heterosexuals. It is not a “belief” to be defended, it is a reality to be lived. It does not fall into the category of dogma, or the unprovable. It is factual knowledge, standing the test of reason and time, regardless of opinion.
I do believe Wendy Gritter wants peace instead of war, and this is admirable. I think her courageous ploy however, is to tolerate nicely through belief, rather than include fully through God’s love. I must say, getting people to “agree to disagree” soas to stop war, is priceless. It’s a start. It brings discussion to the table, and teaches angry souls to calm down. This is her piece in the puzzle. For that I thank her. I also however, see that she is not addressing the cause of the war, that being the origin of her beliefs. Her beliefs, separate. Her beliefs, discriminate. They do not support homosexual expression. They do not produce peace for injured parties. “Sorry” is meaningless without change. In this she has not been forthcoming with research about her beliefs, why she believes what she does, do her beliefs produce peace, and from what I can tell, they are not up for discussion. Much like Alan Chambers, the discussion of beliefs is where they lock the door.
Regarding the cultural war on homosexuality and gay marriage; it is not my desire to try and change the minds of the Christians of the world, for me that is a useless waste of energy. I am more inclined to call HRC and write a check, a big check, to thwart off the discriminative November initiative to ban gay marriage.
In time gays and lesbians, like many other minority situations of this world that have sustained tyranny from erroneous dogma, will also live in peace with the rest of the human race. Will that mean that God’s perfect peace, or peace and love will prevail? Yes. Is that dogma? That is a question I would now pose, to you.
——————————————————————————–
Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars.
Devlin,
I would rather have dialogue with someone like Wendy than someone who would attempt at every turn to discredit my personal beliefs. Wendy’s listening to God has no less merit than you “having had the privilege of experiencing “the other side” or “heaven” with “the veil” completely dropping twice in my life.” Who is there to validate your experience but you?
New Direction has helped me seek a personal understanding and peace to Christian held beliefs and living sga. The fact that New Direction remains out of “politics” and does not seek to “change” me or make me “ex-gay” is what attracted me to seek them out. Do I believe everything New Direction and Wendy do? No. But it has been the first place I have been respected and walked along side of despite our differences. I certainly did not get that in the church or even in the gay community, both who claim to accept/love unconditionally.
No two journeys are the same. We are all unique. Therefore our journeys are unique. We cross each others paths only for a moment and for a purpose. We should be seeking to help each other in that moment to find its purpose, as different as it may be for each of us. That is when God’s perfect peace and love will prevail.