Who is healthy and who is sick? Christianity and the 'gay cure'...

David, who is challenging his dear wife for the title 'blogger of the universe', has posted this great Q:

Do you think that because (Ted) Haggard was with a male prostitute he is seen as someone who needs a cure?

Would he be seen in the same light, if he was with a female prostitute?
I can only speculate, but I believe that if Haggard was with a woman, he'd be seen more as a horny middle aged man who wanted some excitement in life, whereas now he is seen as someone who, like an alcoholic, needs to be checked into rehab.

Should the responses be different because of the gender of his companion?

Here are my thoughts to the Q...

It's all too easy to say gay=sin therefore take the 'gay cure' and you'll be happy and hetrosexual - rather than conflicted and gay, or bisexual in the particular case that prompted David's thinking.

I have to say I have never really turned my thoughts to this area to do much in the way of study/reflection - theologically then I am at a weak point to say how this should inform our response as a church to homosexuality other than to treat people who are gay as Jesus would have done, which is to love them.

That in itself is a significant challenges as it asks the Q how do I love and the temptation to wrap the iron bar of 'truth' in a velvet glove of love and go out to do some bashing...

As I have posted here I have struggled with my sexual identity for yrs but then again I have been a christian for yrs so I at least knew something of the dynamic of the bible/church teaching vs my own sexuality. If I am in an environment where I did not have that then the natural thing would be to do what I was trying to do which is 'be me.'  I also know how personal my issues were, could I have taken a BDSM cure?  Would a one size fits all package work?  Or was it the divine intervention of revelation and healing in the face of my own honesty and brokeness shared  with, prayed for and encouraged onwards by loving christians?

Society is pretty clear about the need for people to be true to themselves, express the inner me, it's ok to be whatever you want etc and that of course is a powerful stuff to be exposed to. I think the church is seen as the opposite of that, don't be that, don't do that, don't have what you want etc and that is one reason why there is a disconnect.

I think personally the church needs to try and talk about liberation, of being our true selves, of finding out who we really are, which is more than a slogan on a t-shirt, or what the latest tv series portrays as the ideal life.

Not just talk about it but tell stories, encourage honest expression and move beyond we have the cure for your pediliction to we are a place where together we can explore who we are and what we have been created to be. If people feel they are gay then it to come for a cure for who they are is a big turn off - but what if they can share this, explore why they are gay and indeed reach out to the gay community as somone trying to follow christ who is gay? What about people who have followed christ for yrs who are gay - hearing their stories, were they cured, do they struggle with who they are, have they found something beyond their sexuality, how have they changed and not changed?

And what about the rest of the church, why focus in on this one sin, apart from it impacts on a minority group and it is easy to point a finger at a particular obviously identifiable group, it's much easier to spot 2 gals holding hands than it is to spot greed, pride, self-rightousness, selfishness etc

What if we instead focus on the sins of the majority, honest about our own failings and struggles, a process that is not all/nothing but a lifetime journey of transformation? What if this issue of homosexuality is not so much one of what the right anser is but how can we show love, mercy, grace, compassion, social, economic, environmental justice? To act on what we say and not just say... We also need to look ourselves in the eye and ask ourselves how much are we to blame for what happened with Ted Haggard, something I have reflected on here.

I recently read Jane Czyzselska's gay about town column in The London Paper, who begins her article thus...

"It’s funny that a lot of my hate mail is from Christians. That puts many of them in a bad light. My mum’s a Christian and she’s a trooper. What’s more I know that there are hundreds of happy lesbian Christians..."

My first thought is what are Christians doing writing anyone hate mail?  My second thought is what a generous response from someone who has received hate mail.  My third repsonse was how good is it that Jane has experience of Christians who do not hate her and infact love and care for her.  My fourth response was to send Jane an email apologising for the hate mail she has received from us Christians and asking her whether she has anything that she would like to say to us?

So my question/challenge for us who claim to follow Christ is this - what if we grow in those greater areas of love, mercy, grace first and point to ourselves first as examples of brokeness, selfishness, injustice, hate etc? 

It is something that Brian McLaren reflects on far more eloquently than me in this article although not everyone agrees with him which is healthy as it promotes conversation as in McLaren's response.

Maybe when we as christians live the cure, reflect the cure, embrace the cure until we are transformed and changed by Christ in such a way that we reflect/embody/act out his love and grace we will be in a position to suggest we have the cure for anyone else?

Comments

[dh]

Paul, I think what is difficult is that homosexuality has to do with someones nature. We were all created with certain desires from Adam and Eve. When one reads Romans 1 and 1 Cor 6 we understand the progression of how homsexuality is caused from previous sins. That it is actually a progression. Now I have never condoned not loving homosexuals. We should love all people. However, we should never love people in such a way as to condone immoral behavior. I also feel that just because Mr. Haggard was a hypocrite doesn't change the fact that homosexuality is a sin. Now I must also explain that being tempted isdifferent that sin. Temptation is not a sin. So many people can be tempted in the area of homosexuality but that is not sin. It is the acting upon those desires that is sin. However, one should control those desires as to not sin.

However, all sin is equal so I'm not saying this to single out homosexuality. For it makes no difference whether it was a female or male prostitute. In fact I believe strongly that the response from the church would be the same.

As you know from previous posts and stories I have had a friend who was homosexual. I always showed the love of Jesus to him but he knew without me telling him that I didn't approve of his behavior and yet he understood that I still cared about him.

Everyone says that loving the person yet hating the sin can't be done. I say hogwash to that. While I at one time way before interaction with gays didn't embody truly that behavior, I understood after Christ somehow brought him into acquatance, that loving people but hating behavior can be done just like Christ did. Christ never condoned sinful behavior but He always loved all people in spite of their sin. Christ loved them in spite of their sin because His desire is for as many freely ask for repentence to receive the Grace made available to all people. Grace truly can't be received until repentence.

[Toni]

Hi Paul - I went back and read your post about your own struggles, as well as the above post. If I can quote you on your own blog, it seems the solution isn't about 'cure' at all.

"The courage of someone being honest with me inspired courage in me to be honest and I asked for prayer - beginning with lust that I was feeling at that time and then it came tumbling out, issue by issue, like words appearing in my head and a dynamic liberating encounter with The Truth, Jesus. Each sin confessed, repented, prayed for, darkness and dark forces released, light, liberation and an uncovering of me rushing in. I was honest with my self, with God and with a bunch of guys who followed Jesus and who committed to praying with me and for me - it was an amazing moment of love, acceptance and grace."

Whether gay or not, the answer to sin is an encounter with Jesus, confessing, repenting and receiving liberation and forgiveness.

I guess the issue of the type of prostitute Haggard was with is more obvious in America, with its tribal homophobia and demands to find an immediate 'fix' for the problem. It seems to me that he was just a guy in leadership that gave in to sin, and then compounded it through trying to pretend everything was OK. Being on a pedestal, as leaders often are, made it all the harder to do what he should have done.

As for being 'true' to ourselves, we often want to find a truth that fits for us, but we are also usually aware of a greater, 'absolute' truth against which we don't measure up. For me, it's one of those things that brings me back to realise I need to ask forgiveness, to change, to align myself with. It doesn't make statements about how others fit with it, but it does make me want to line up with it.

Christian hate-mail: isn't there a contradiction somewhere?

[dh]

I see Toni, however I don't see anyone trying to "fix" the problem but people recognizing that it is sin and people truly trying to help him away from that sin through the power of the Holy Spirit. I believe strongly that if people truly have arepentent heart, like you say, that people will not want to commit the sin of homosexuality or for any sin for that matter. That is not to say we won't sin but the desire to do the same behavior repeatedly will go away by God's Holy Spirit power. I think care for others and for ourselves is so important thus making these issue important for helping ourselves and helping other people from destructive behaviors whatever they may be.

[blind beggar]

Toni, that is a very insightful comment. James was pretty plain when he told us to "confess [our] sins to one another and pray for one another that you may be healed."

What the Haggard episode points out is a system that doesn't allow leaders to be honest and confess their sexual struggles. And it is not just leaders who are fearful of honest talk, who among us would be as forthright as Paul has been and confess such a struggle?

As for hate-mail, one must keep in mind that any email that is not affirming of the chosen life style is by definition condemning to many and therefore "hate mail." I’m not suggesting that Jane Czyzselska doesn’t receive real hate mail, but that we should understand the definitional bias.

[dh]

blind beggar I agree. From what I read from Haggard's church there was that. They might have been "full talk" but there was in place a discipleship group that he was part of with members of the church. I think the fact remains that full discipleship in the body of Christ is needed and we must stand up so people don't give into sin wherever and whatever particular sin it may be.

[Toni]

There is a problem with leadership in the way we currently have it though. It's great having all these full time guys and big churches, but what happens when one of them DOES fall?

Do the leaders keep quiet about it, with the fallen one retaining their position (and salary)?

Do they go 'public' with it, but leave him up there?

Does he step down from that position (and goodbye income)?

This IS the thorny question. Positions have been created where to admit to falling isn't like getting caught stealing pens out of the stationary cupboard in secular employment. It's much more like being found conducting insider trading, with all the penalties and public shame that go with such a thing. I'd suggest the present leadership system makes it impossible for guys to 'fess up to potentially career-killing 'mistakes' because we've allowed the stakes to be set too high.

What's the answer? I've no idea realistically. It's hard enough confessing stuff if you're a minor leader, let alone knowing it could be your livelihood - home even.

[Makeesha Fisher]

Really good thoughts Paul. I like your approach a lot.

[dh]

Does he step down from that position (and goodbye income)?

This is what happened at Ted's church and I feel this is the one that is appropriate irregardless of whether or not there was discipleship or not. There is personal responsibility on this and for a person to "give into" this is strange.

[Celestial]

All sins are equal in God's eyes - a lie is the same as murder say it isn't so...LOL

I don't judge anyone and personally I have very strong feelings about the attutide that is sometimes prevelant in the church towards homosexuals - it makes me want to scream, "Well alrighty then, the next time you see a single pregnent woman (obvious sign of sin) then are you going to lecture her on fornication?

I just dont' get the catagorization of sin - really I don't - but then maybe that's because I understand the depth of my own depravity (in the past) and therefore know that ALL my sins are equally offensive to God.

The bottom line for ALL people is the heart condition - not the sin of choice. None of have arrived - the best we can do is to put our hearts right with God and move forward from there.

Nice Post :D

[britt]

Paul, thank-you so much for your candid honesty, for keeping the questions coming and allowing more questions to pour in. That's what it's all about...
Peace my friend-
Britt

[Paul]

Thanks DH, I appreciate you sharing your stories and perspective.

[Paul]

Toni, please do quote me back to me, it's one of the reasons for blogging is to try and wrestle with my thinking and share it in a communal context - or to put it another way i get sick of just hearing my own voice!

I think i never realised how liberating it is to share my own struggles with folks and in turn share in theirs - i guess one thing i have learnt is that you can't bounce someone into sharing something and that sometimes what I think needs to be sorted out is nothing like what God thinks needs to be brought out...

Yes christian and hate strikes me as contradiction too!

[marc]

I think being true to ourselves is not always the saving grace that many would presuppose.

Being true to ourselves may unleash all the greed, dishonesty and hatred that humans have.

It's about balance and that's what we brits used to do very well.

being liberated may not be all you want it to be.

[Paul]

Toni, Rick/BB I agree we need more open churches and smarter realisation that only Jesus is not perfect not our leaders - look at King David the man after God's own heart who still fell... he didn't stop being king.

Scott McKnight has an excellent post on the power of the confessing church here http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=1663

[Paul]

Thanks Celestial, I think putting it into the context of our own depravity is so healthy in terms of showing mercy/grace to others. We are all in the same boat and there's no nice curtain between the cattle sinners in the back and the more stretchy leg room sinners up front... :)

[Paul]

Thank you Britt for your encouragement, it is so good to have you sharing in this questing journey!

[Paul]

marc i agree, I found that being true to myself was being true to a distorted image of myself - it felt right but that was because I was embracing broken me... in fact if i look at my actions I was being incredibly selfish and hurting, not to mention unleashing a tonne of lust, anger, manipulation etc...

And the funny thing is that once i caught a glimpse of why i was how i was i was like ok actually this being me thang is just swapping one lie for another, it is not the truth of who i am, it is the truth of who the damaged, fallen, broken, incomplete me is...

The real me is who I am becoming in my honesty, brokeness and openness as I journey with Jesus and the community of his followers...

[dh]

Celestial, I'm not categorizing sin. All sin is equal but at the same time sin is sin. Paul and you seem to imply like the Apostle Paul addressed wrong actions in this passage: "What shall we say then shall we continue to sin that Grace may abound? God forbid! How are we who aredead to sin liveany long in it?" The fact thatnone of us has made it doesn't change the fact that particular sin are actually sin. God looksat theheart andwants us to repent rather than say "Oh well we all sin so it is okay and because of God's Grace it is okay." It is not okay until we repent andturn from our wicked ways whatever that may be whether lying, homosexuality, fornication, etc. True brokeness doesn't include condoning behavior that isactually wrong. David may have not stopped being King but he sure did have consequences. I still think being King and being a pastor tho are two different things. I think when we let God point out the things that are messed up and we let HIM CHANGE those things that are wrong rather than staying in our brokeness without any change that that is what living for Christ is all about.

[molly]

great great great post...

[molly]

Have to see this repeated, sorry, can't help it:

***marc i agree, I found that being true to myself was being true to a distorted image of myself - it felt right but that was because I was embracing broken me... in fact if i look at my actions I was being incredibly selfish and hurting, not to mention unleashing a tonne of lust, anger, manipulation etc...

And the funny thing is that once i caught a glimpse of why i was how i was i was like ok actually this being me thang is just swapping one lie for another, it is not the truth of who i am, it is the truth of who the damaged, fallen, broken, incomplete me is...

The real me is who I am becoming in my honesty, brokeness and openness as I journey with Jesus and the community of his followers...****

PAUL, this is SO right on!!!!!!!

[Paul]

DH, in many ways being king to me is a higher caller than just being a pastor, altho david did see himself as a shepard king, so no doubt he did have a lot of the pastor in him...

So i agree that they are the same but nevertheless i think we send out wrong messages when we cut out leaders instead of helping them - maybe cos we are supporting them we give them a break from leading...?

[Paul]

Thanks Molls, i agree transmission without transformation is cheap grace...

[dh]

Paul, how isbeing King a higher calling than a pastor when apastor is the Spiritual head whereas a king is a physical head? It doesn't make snese to say physical things are greater than Spiritual things. THere is no such thing as "cheap Grace" it is either Grace or no Grace at all. Grace must be recieved to be Grace. Grace is made available to all but cannot be actualized until people recieve the gift made available. So as you see no Grace isn't "cheap".

[Paul]

I think DH I am referring to the context of Israel and the king was the spirtual head as well as the physical head - he set the tone for the nation, just look at the impact of the bad kings and the good kings and how they pulled the nation either towards God or away... does that make sense?

I am gonna disagree with you on the cheap grace front - i get what you are saying and agree with you in terms of grace as you and i understand it - on the other hand i think there is less full versions of this and that gets the handy name cheap as in shoddy, maybe counterfeit would have been a term...?

[dh]

Well if it is counterfeit than it isn't Grace. :) Kind of reminds meof the Scripture (love analogous to Grace) "Tho I give my alms to the poor and have not love I'm a clanging gong and cymbel." It seems to me that the passage is pointing out that the giving money to the poor, while it may appear Gracious, isn't Gracious at all because no love is there. So it is with all of those whatyou call "cheap Grace" moments. However, to call it cheap does a disservice to the Truth of the action seperate from the motive. For me we must seperate actions from motives and look at those independently of each other. If you do that excercise you can see where I'm coming from and possibly agree with my statements.