One of the things that has bothered me about the "church" for some time is its lack of love and acceptance for all of God's children. My own denomination has a typically middle of the road approach to the issue of sexuality. While affirming that all people are individuals of sacred worth, we also make LGBTQ folk second class citizens by denying them the right to be ordained as pastors.
I realize that part of this is personal. My own sexual identity has often been very confused. Early in my life, I saw myself as heterosexual. I had girlfriends and went on dates and got excited while holding hands or kissing my current love. I had never given a thought to being anything but attracted to members of the opposite sex.
But in high school I was molested by an uncle only 8 years older than myself. I was scared and upset and nearly ended dropping out of school because of the trauma I experienced, and only the support of one or two or my teachers brought me through this dark time. Needless to say, I never told anyone about the molestation at the time (I only told my mom a few years ago when she told me that this same uncle was under arrest for statutory rape, and then her only response was to tell me not to say anything to anyone else).
One of the most upsetting things about being molested was that, while it was terrifying, it was also exciting and arousing. I came to think that I must be homosexual because of the arousal I felt and because my uncle had "chosen" me to molest. Further, since at the time I was a rather small kid and was constantly being picked on and called "fag" by the tougher, bigger boys, my confusion only deepened. My own experiences thus drew me closer to the few gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people I met along the way. I began to feel I was one of them, not because of the abuse, but because I identified with being an outsider or outcast (if I can use that term without offending), and I decided that it was better to be on the outside with those I could identify with than on the inside with those who hated or did not accept me.
As time went on, however, I guess I chose the easier, heterosexual path - all of my significant relationships, including my marriage, were with women. But, I still found myself attracted to men as well, and when I was not involved with anyone else, I did have a couple of one-night encounters with men. I found them thrilling and scary and extremely guilt-inducing (I was raised in an extremely conservative, fundamentalist and pentecostal church).
When i met my ex-wife, in trying to be open with her, I naively shared with her all my experiences, as well as the fact that on a sexuality scale of 1 to 10, I felt that I was pretty much a five. I did not realize at the time how this revelation would eventually damn our marriage. Never a very trusting person, my ex became convinced that I would have an affair, and not only that, since I was a bisexual, she once told me, "I can't trust you with anyone. I can't trust you with women and I can't trust you with men either."
After our separation (she's the one who had an affair - projection anyone?), she even tried to used my "bisexuality" against me in custody hearings over my daughter (Thank God it didn't work). Also in my defense, let me say that I was never unfaithful to my wife, and I don't believe that I would have ever been since I took my marriage vows seriously.
At this time I am not involved with anyone, male or female, but I feel it is incredibly sad that neither I nor anyone else can love a member of the same sex and be ordained or maintain one's ordination in my denomination or in many others. And as time goes on, it makes me more and more angry as well.
And yes, I know that the few (four or so) references to homosexuality in the bible are negative, but there are good arguments as to why these may not apply to our own time (maybe we can debate this if anyone is willing to do so in a considerate manner). And as for myself, I have come to honestly believe that God does not care about who I love or make love to. Too bad the church I also love and serve does not feel the same.
One of my favorite poems by Alice Walker gives voice to my feelings in this area. And what she says about love can easily be said of God (or at least the God I believe in).
Love Is Not Concerned
love is not concerned
with whom you pray
or where you slept
the night you ran away
from home
love is concerned
that the beating of your heart
should kill no one.
For the record, I have received counseling about being abused, as well as about my sexual identity.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Stathi Stathi
rita shibr
James M. Emmerling
Scylla the Rock
Snowden
Maria Ross
Salon.com
Comments
And of course, the Bible speaks of many other "sins" that people get ordained with anyway.
Divorse, with some exeptions? My pastor and his wife are divorsed from first marriages.
In talking to my fellow church goers, a lot of their confusion stems from the big difference in tone between the Old Testiment vs the New.
A more "punishing" God..vs a more "forgiving" one. While the pastor makes great mention of the Jesus factor as to why the tones might be different, there is still often some confusion over the two sections.
Anyway...of the path with my comment a bit.but look forward to reading the comments of others tonight.
r --
Bill - Thank you. I am usually much more of a coward I assure you.
The church in which I was raised, Disciples of Christ, is a very liberal denomination (our music director was gay and there were numerous other "others"). When I outgrew the constraints of the church I was drawn directly to the Moorish Orthodox Church, which I describe rather cavalierly in my above-mentioned post. In its most serious moments (of which there are plenty, to balance the good lunacy), it is a sort of fist raised for tolerance. The patron saints of the New Jersey diocese are Sts. Sergius and Bacchus, gay lovers who are commemorated by many of the Eastern Orthodox churches as well as the Coptic Christian Orthodox Church of Egypt. There is plenty of precedent for tolerance and even celebration of those who fall anywhere along the very broad spectrum of what is more than or different than straight heterosexuality.
What I feel is important here is that just as "the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath," so was any church made for man, and not man for the church. If the church no longer serves the man (or woman) then it becomes necessary for the person to question his or her relationship with the church. As a pastor you have been faced with a question of what will serve you as a good and earnest man in his seeking his personal relationship with his God. There is 0r, in my humble opinion should be, no obligation to take any rules made by men to apply to one's self.
If our Founder could set aside judgement then our local organization should hold no sway over our God-given nature. I feel I should perhaps refer you to my above-referenced post, as I think there are some useful, if heretical, ideas to consider. I think you will find it suggests your sexual identity may be more pure and more precious than your religious identity. It is a matter of your soul vs. an organization that may be for a while putting a roof over your head.
I wish you peace.
As a youth, I was approached two or three times by gay males, tho my reaction was far, far from attraction. Still, as you say, the doubt creeps in about why they imagined I might be so inclined. In time, I came to realize the attraction was like any other physical attraction, and it was no reflection on me.
I share all this because I want to assure you that even tho I am hopelessly straight, it matters not to me whether you are gay or straight or anywhere in between. Neither I or anyone else has any business judging you by your sexual appetite any more than any other appetite. Outside of your family, your sexual orientation is -- or at least it ought to be -- no one else's business.
Unfortunately, the Latter-Day Pharisees who have corrupted the teaching of the Prophet of Love see it otherwise, and they are bound and determined not only to make your sexual orientation their business -- but to cure you of your "disease".
At what the faith he founded has become, Jesus wept.
In order to respond, I want to quote your last two paragraphs. You write:
"What I feel is important here is that just as "the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath," so was any church made for man, and not man for the church. If the church no longer serves the man (or woman) then it becomes necessary for the person to question his or her relationship with the church. As a pastor you have been faced with a question of what will serve you as a good and earnest man in his seeking his personal relationship with his God. There is 0r, in my humble opinion should be, no obligation to take any rules made by men to apply to one's self."
I have had a love-hate relationship with the organized church for most of my life. I saw the commitment of good Christians in the church of my youth and childhood, and very much appreciated their commitment to improving their lives, or to use their parlance: living more holy lives. At the same time, I saw blatant racism exhibited by some in the church and a total lack of grace when my father failed as a pastor (he committed adultery with a church member). It wasn't that I thought he should just be forgiven and restored, as much as I felt that the prevailing attitude for many was "we shoot our wounded." In addition, my mother was often blamed for the marriage failing and even for my father's waywardness. After all, if she had been a good wife, he would have never strayed from the home fires in the first place, right?
If I had my druthers, I would start a small home church and avoid the big organization altogether.
If our Founder could set aside judgement then our local organization should hold no sway over our God-given nature. I feel I should perhaps refer you to my above-referenced post, as I think there are some useful, if heretical, ideas to consider. I think you will find it suggests your sexual identity may be more pure and more precious than your religious identity. It is a matter of your soul vs. an organization that may be for a while putting a roof over your head.
I did read your post, but I will do so again. The kicker for me is the last part of your last line though. "while putting a roof over your head." Yeah, that's the problem. How much is one's soul worth? A salary and a parsonage? I'm afraid that given where I am now in my life, that is the price. :^(
"Unfortunately, the Latter-Day Pharisees who have corrupted the teaching of the Prophet of Love see it otherwise, and they are bound and determined not only to make your sexual orientation their business -- but to cure you of your "disease".
At what the faith he founded has become, Jesus wept."
For the most part my denomination is a rather liberal and tolerant one. But this only goes so far as I stated above. I don't think most folk in it, even the leadership, would go so far as to try to "cure" me, but neither will they or can they openly affirm who I am.
As for you last sentence, I agree with you completely.
Your kindness is amazing and a source of much comfort to me.
The fact is that I too have no faith in organized religion. We humans have an amazing ability to corrupt the things we touch and even love. And when you add in the dynamics of power and control . . . well, we all know what happens then. So while I love some aspects of the church when it is at its best: a sense of community, ministry to the poor, a place of acceptance and mercy; I cannot put my faith in it.
As for the rest of what you wrote, I greatly appreciate your kind words and I sincerely hope that someone else will find what I have written to be of some help. Thanks.
Thanks for your comment. I can understand the trouble or lack of comfort that someone like me might cause church folk. Of course, there have been many like me through the 2000 years of the church, though most chose to remain hidden or closeted, so to speak. I still choose this path since this blog is written under a pseudonym.
In issues like this one, as well as many others, I am often reminded of the power of fear, and then I think of the verse in 1 John which reads, "Perfect love casts out fear." Would that this were true.
Thank you for your prayers. I appreciate them. And yes, peace would be very nice.
Thank you, and it's good to be seen.
Thank you for your remarks, and I could use as much peace and love as you can send. Btw, given your posts and the video you put up the other day, I now want to move to Iceland. Any churches available there that you know of? :^)
I have always noted that "church time" is never real time. The sands of change are ground long and fine by slow moving wheels in the grist mill of the church. That leads to a lot of stupid decisions on the part of church leaders. But I do not think that is ever going to change.
However, fortunately there is no such thing as "The" church. While often a bane in other areas one good thing about the Protestant reformation is the ability of members to choose to belong to any of many denominations (The abuse of Christ's prayer, "that they all may be one" is a subject for another time.)
I am ordained in the United Church of Christ, and open and affirming church which supports the ordination of gays and lesbians, and has for many years. Unfortunately, it also has a polity which is local church driven, so while the denomination can speak to the local church and must approve the local church's selection of its pastor, the local church actually chooses its own pastor. And, mostly, the local churches are more conservative than the denomination is. So there is still some "tension" on LGBT issues.
But most of the gays and lesbians I know, including all I know that I went to seminary with, have all found a calling within the UCC, many as pastors and in a few instances as co-pastors who live together serving fully "integrated" congregations. The Episcopal Church openly ordains not only gay priests but bishops. And there are others.
So things do change. I say this because the UCC needs good pastors of all sexual orientations and is in full communion with the DofC meaning that your ordination would entitle you to be a pastor in a UCC church without jumping through any hoops if a UCC church called you. Just sayin'.
As to the larger issue as to the theological question of sexual orientation. Two legitimate liberal positions are possible as I read both the traditions of the church and the Bible.
The least liberal of the two starts with the assumption that homosexuality is a "sin." Let's say that an honest reading of some parts of the Bible could lead one to that conclusion. But the response to that has to be "so what?" So too is divorce by that narrow reading and so are hundreds of other acts that we constantly repeat that keep us from being in right relationship with God. It is human nature to sin. Were it not we would not NEED Christ.
But Christ does not categorize into greater and lesser sins. Sin is sin. The "sin" of homosexual acts is no greater or no lesser than the sin of lust or pride or divorce, etc. Thus, homosexual orientation is not an impediment to ordination if ALL of the other sins are not also an impediment, in which case there would be no clergy (No jokes, please, about how that might be a good thing! ;-).
A better argument is that the arguments against homosexual activity in the Bible are culturally and temporally bound, that they were prohibitions intended to maintain social stability and control of members of the church, synagogue, etc. in that time and place and were not intended to be seen as "universal" truths for all people at all time. However, Jesus' admonitions as to loving one another, caring for others, having compassion, not judging others, etc. ARE universal and timeless admonitions of how to lead the good and Godly life. I find a careful reading of Christ's teachings leads me to but one conclusion.
If God is love there is no room for discrimination against others on the basis of sexual orientation.
Blessings,
Monte
To me one theme which runs through what you have shared is that secrecy and covering up facts, events, or one's way of being does not heal, or even move towards working out an issue. It also seems to me that much of any religion based on morals or codes of ethics often end up encouraging just such behavior, that is, covering the undesirable or inconvenient things in our lives. Perhaps that is why so many of us remain so broken and isolated, even in our religion.
I believe you are correct in your assumption that our Creator recognizes love as love. If our expressions of that love fit the description in 1 Corinthians 13, then it should not be a problem in the eyes of our Creator or his creations.
For me 'Church' has become a difficult concept to visualize in our modern world for she appears so splintered and at odds with herself. However, any church can only be made up of imperfect beings such as myself. Hopefully those in leadership are much wiser than I, and much closer to the mark of perfection as well. But even if they are, they do not lead perfectly nor without flaw or prejudice. My hope is (maybe there is some evidence) that slowly over history it moves closer to the mark. Much time and much movement is yet required in my opinion.
Your writing also reminds me that my actions have hurt others in deep ways I may be unaware. That I do not love or express love in a way that matches 1 Corinthians 13 very well. And finally, that our corporate healing may only fully be reached when we are as open, honest and genuine as you have been with these issues.
Peace, my friend
Thank you for your kind words. They mean a great deal to me. At times it seems as though I am caught between a rock and a hard place (to use the old cliche). My hope is that I can make at least a small bit of difference in the church and denomination I serve so that those who come after me will find it easier to truly be who they are.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments on my post. They are much appreciated. Unfortunately, I am of the United Methodist persuasion and, out of all the mainline denominations, the UMC has been the most entrenched in its views that "homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching." This position and admonitions against more acceptance have been affirmed by ever larger majorities at our church's General Conference (held every 4 years) since the late 80s.
I also agree with the more liberal view of homosexuality that you describe and see the biblical view as being culturally bound and not applicable to the 21st century church.
Who knows what the future will hold for me. I am currently in flux . . . unable to make many changes for fear of not being able to adequately support my daughter, who is a high school senior this year and will go off to college next year.
Thanks again for your comments and your support.
Thanks for your comment. Although I have been a Christian for most of my life, I still feel as though I am still babe when it comes to actually following him.
-Joe Orton
Good old Joe was right. To really live is something unknown to the institution's ways.
I have quoted you below in order to better respond to your comment.
"One has to have courage of their convictions as well as a compelling desire to investigate their faith path to share what you have here. It is refreshing to read openness and honesty such as this, especially from someone in a pastor's role."
Thanks for this, but I am afraid that my courage is of the very limited variety since I am not brave enough to post or proclaim this as publicly as I should.
"To me one theme which runs through what you have shared is that secrecy and covering up facts, events, or one's way of being does not heal, or even move towards working out an issue. It also seems to me that much of any religion based on morals or codes of ethics often end up encouraging just such behavior, that is, covering the undesirable or inconvenient things in our lives. Perhaps that is why so many of us remain so broken and isolated, even in our religion."
I couldn't agree with you more. It was Frederick Buechner who once wrote, "We are our secrets." And if we cannot be open to others and share these secrets, then true healing and acceptance cannot really take place. I would highly recommend the fourth (or maybe it is the third) volume of his memoirs entitled "Telling Secrets."
"For me 'Church' has become a difficult concept to visualize in our modern world for she appears so splintered and at odds with herself. However, any church can only be made up of imperfect beings such as myself. Hopefully those in leadership are much wiser than I, and much closer to the mark of perfection as well. But even if they are, they do not lead perfectly nor without flaw or prejudice. My hope is (maybe there is some evidence) that slowly over history it moves closer to the mark. Much time and much movement is yet required in my opinion. "
Again, I couldn't agree more. Maybe I should write a book called "Church: the Problem." I'll get right on that after I write one called "God: the Problen." :^)
"Your writing also reminds me that my actions have hurt others in deep ways I may be unaware. That I do not love or express love in a way that matches 1 Corinthians 13 very well. And finally, that our corporate healing may only fully be reached when we are as open, honest and genuine as you have been with these issues."
Thanks again, John. I really appreciate your reading what I wrote and taking the time to write such a thoughtful reply. You are in my thoughts and prayers.
Peace, my friend
I believe that Father Robert Farrar Capon says something to the effect that only those willing to die (the church included) are truly able to live. Thanks for stopping by my blog.