Antitheism is not the answer

As a gay Christian, you can often feel that you have your feet in two different camps that are often at war with each other.  For many gay Christians, the Christians in our past don't accept us after we share about who we truly are. Their thinking is often that this is a lifestyle "choice" that we have made, and have turned away from godly living (if that is their theology, they don't recognise that that is the human condition, and so we're all in the same boat).  So we may find ourselves without a faith community behind us, as we struggle to find a way forward in our faith.

On the other side of the fence is the LGBT community that welcomes us, but often struggles to accept our faith, because they have been exposed to cruel judgement and ostracism by many in the Church or - worse yet - subjected to attempts to "pray the gay away" or been coerced into "gay conversion therapy" or even being convinced to enter into a relationship with someone from the opposite sex in an attempt to "bring out the straight in you."  In my case, it was all three, which made for a rather dismal chapter of my life, where death became the only hope of release, and fear of hell became the only reason I chose not to end life at my own hands.  If they don't encounter such malevolent behaviour, they're often only too aware of the very negative messages in the press by outspoken anti-gay Christian lobbying groups or church groups.  It's easy to understand why many members of the LGBT community don't have a faith, and don't want one.  But that is often not the gay Christian's understanding of faith for them.  For many, despite the judgements, it will be what has kept them going.

So, you can see that if you happen to both be gay and have a faith, it's not a particularly easy place to be in. However, for many, as much as being gay is part of our identity, so is having a faith, and we're often presented with having to choose one of two options ... either we abandon our faith, or we try and find a way to exist with one foot in each camp.  Some may choose to leave their faith communities (sadly, sometimes they're forced out).  Some will join new faith communities that are inclusive, but many retain some connection with faith and struggle to find a way forward. (How good it would be if churches were able to look past the fear and the judging and the dogma, to see this need for nurturing.  Welcome these people back as they are, and - IF there is changing to be done - let God do it.  You may not be comfortable with them, or their partner, or their social lives, but they're God's children, as much as anyone else, and they often have no spiritual home to turn to.)

I have many friends who are not Christian, but respect my choice to be a Christian (for - at the end of the day - that is the choice ... my sexual identity is not). I also have some friends that don't respect my faith, and that can sometimes be difficult. I respect someone else's choice to not follow a faith, and I respect that they have every right to be atheist, but it can hurt to hear friends speaking against all people of faith, and blaming all believers for the Church's attitude to the LGBT community.

Some people portray all religion as irrelevant, harmful, and don't think it has anything good to say.  In many cases that may be true.  But, there are as many different ways of believing as there are people ... each person has a different experience of faith and a different way of expressing that.  Many people of faith are working hard to bring change from within, and make our communities of faith more inclusive places.

The danger of painting all people of faith with the same brush, and by declaring faith irrelevant is that by doing so, you silence the voices of those within that institution or faith who are fighting for equality and inclusion.  The only way to effectively bring change is to continue engaging with people, affirm positive change where you see it, inform viewpoints where you can, and support those members of the LGBT community who are struggling to maintain relationships on both sides of the fence.

Transgender Day of Remembrance #TDoR

Today is International Transgender Day of Remembrance.

I've been looking at the news articles about this this morning.  It makes for sombre reading.  One really brought the message home ... here is the headline and link ... "Beaten, stoned and burnt alive: 226 Trans people murdered this year" http://shar.es/1X78hY via @gaystarnews

It's a horrible thing to imagine the loneliness and the desolation of someone who feels they matter so little, that they should remove themselves from the earth.  It's even worse to read about some of the truly barbaric things and ruthless acts of violence and murder that other people commit against Trans members of society.

It shouldn't be that way.

For me, what is even more heartbreaking, is when faith groups abandon these people and perpetuate the message that they aren't valued or worthy.  Faith groups should be going forward with the message that all are valued by God, that all are loved, that all are worthy, that all are God's children. Instead, we have some groups in all faiths that feel that they have the right to sit in the judgement seat, and begin proclaiming who can and can't be a part of their faith and of society.  They always claim to be the only true adherents of their faith, thereby dismissing & claiming superiority over those who try to express the faith in a more inclusive way. The reality is that theirs is one possible expression of faith, not THE expression of faith, and there are other ways, that include and affirm.

I give thanks for those in all faiths who are working hard for the full inclusion of the LGBT community in their faiths (I blogged about some of the Christian groups doing just that in a previous post - here), and I hope, wish & pray that more and more faith communities can truly be places of refuge and hope for ALL people who are disempowered & voiceless ... as they should.

I'm reminded of the lyrics of the Depeche Mode song, "People are people" ... and praying for a change.

Will you join in me in asking whether or not you could be a part of that change?

Depeche Mode - People are people

People are people so why should it be
You and I should get along so awfully
So we're different colours
And we're different creeds
And different people have different needs
It's obvious you hate me
Though I've done nothing wrong
I never even met you
So what could I have done
I can't understand
What makes a man
Hate another man
Help me understand
People are people so why should it be
You and I should get along so awfully
Help me understand
Now you're punching and you're kicking
And you're shouting at me
I'm relying on your common decency
So far it hasn't surfaced
But I'm sure it exists
It just takes a while to travel
From your head to your fist
I can't understand
What makes a man
Hate another man
Help me understand

Songwriters: GORE, MARTIN LEE

Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. (1 John 4:8)

As Mike & are planning our Civil Partnership in a few week's time, I've been following the public outcry by SOME people in SOME OF the Christian churches against the prospect of Equal Civil Marriage with a degree of sadness. I would love a marriage ... it is a deep public expression of our love for each other, with the community gathered around us, pledging their support. We can't have a marriage, because the law doesn't yet offer it.  Many think that Civil Partnership is the same as marriage, but it isn't (see http://youtu.be/vT6I72W9SMM). I also don't see why some Christians are being so outspoken and bitter about it, when the proposal is about CIVIL marriage equality. It wouldn't affect them, and they would not be forced to perform same sex marriages, in the same way that some churches can refuse to remarry divorcees without repercussions.

I don't believe that Christianity is exclusive or judgemental, and I think people have got it wrong.  To explain this better, I will include the conversation between myself and a facebook friend...

Sam:
Hi Andy, noticed you've been putting a lot about Facebook on this issue. I'm not coming to start an argument, I just genuinely want to know how you (and I guess how Tutu too!) would interpret a verse like this from the NT? http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1%3A18-27&version=NIV

Me:
Hi Sam,
No offence taken, as I couldn't expect you to understand how deeply hurtful and exclusive the common interpretation of these verses are for gays, lesbians, bisexual & transgender people. In my view, there are a grand total of 6 ver...ses in the whole of Scripture that COULD speak of homosexuality, but whether or not they do is arguable.

For a start, as I say, there are only 6 verses, while there are hundreds that deal with behaviour in straight relationships that get overlooked. Why is the religious right focusing on loving gay relationships, but not being outspoken about other issues condemned in Scripture like divorce, adultery, etc.? Why are they focusing on condemning loving, consenting relationships, based on a POSSIBLE interpretation of 6 verses, when there are bigger Biblical issues like corruption, murder, war, poverty, deception, etc., etc.? Why are they focusing on excluding the LGBT community from discovering the loving, inclusive nature of Christ's love, while ignoring other commandments to not eat pork or wear mixed fabrics, or marry their deceased brother's widow, etc., etc.?

If ALL Scripture is infallible, what gives them the freedom to decide which bits they can enforce or not enforce.

Think for a moment, that they did not understand Homosexuality as we do, when they wrote Scripture. They didn't even have a term for it. As far as Paul was concerned, these were straight people engaging in sexual practises with other stra...ight people of the same sex.
Clearly that would be unnatural, but he had no idea that there could be people who were not straight, or who could only love people of the same sex, because that was how they were made.
Consider what it would be like, if you were only able to love someone of the same sex, and people told you that that was wrong. How would facing a life of loneliness feel to you? If you were told that you were unable to love a woman ... where would that leave your desire for a future and happiness? Celibacy has to remain a higher CALLING, not a sentence.

And then, think, if the term "Homosexual" didn't exist, where did it come from ... which translater decided on that possible translation, when they could have used words that translate to mean someone who is morally weak or someone who uses... power to get sex. Is the current exclusion of the LGBT people, and the attempt to enforce their loneliness in order to belong, based on a possible mistranslation?

Can we afford to exclude from the faith, an entire segment of the community, based on what may not be an accurate translation?

Have a look at http://wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence.html

And also at http://wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/no_fems_no_fairies.html

Sam:
Hi Andy, Yeah I totally agree with all of that. I think there are much more important issues that we need to focus on as Christians. And it goes without saying that Christian persecution of the LGBT community is outrageous and horrible.

I'm also pleased we agree all scripture is infallible. And I agree it's not always easy to interpret the OT law and how it applies. I think most people would make a distinction between moral and cultural laws which would help iron out some of what you mentioned about pork, fabrics etc...though not all of it.

It's your second comment that really gets to the heart of the issue, I think. Although I have to admit I've never encountered the view that the above scripture was about straight people engaging in sexual practises with other straight people. Surely by definition, sexual practises between 2 straight people would mean they were gay? (I assume you don't mind me using terms of straight/gay, let me know if you do and I'll happily change. Have to be careful as some find them offensive.)

Paul was a devout Jew who knew the Torah inside out so if the OT verses didn't actually mean that homosexuality was morally wrong - wouldn't he correct them? And wouldn't Jesus? Again - I'm just asking the question, not trying to get at anyone. I really appreciate you taking the time to write a detailed response as I have yet to discuss this with anyone and have been somewhat afriad of doing so for coming across as a nasty homophobic so and so and adding to the unfortunate stereotype that christians hate gays. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I'm pretty sure that homosexuality was being practised in places like Corinth and Paul would have known about it. I've also yet to see any scholarly work that says the NT hasn't translated words around homosexuality correctly.

Do either of your links talk about this issue of mistranslation further? For me, as someone who believes in scripture as the ultimate authority, it's where I'd like to focus my reading.

Me:
I don't think they mean the same thing ... two straight people of the same sex engaging in sex does not make them gay, and would not be thought of as natural. It is also not the same as two people of the same sex who fall in love. I'm uncomfortable with the obsession on genitalia and the ignoring of deep love. Homosexuality has always been around, but not with the same level of understanding as we have now. Paul would not have understood that people are born gay, and can only fall in love with others of the same sex. He would have made the assumption that they were straight and choosing to do gay things (which is the misconception people still make ... that it is somehow a choice). It is definitely not a choice, and if it was, with the struggles and the bullying and the hatred they receive, most would choose to be straight. People are gay because they can only be gay. And it's not about sex ... it's about identity, and who they fall in love with.

Both of the links deal with the Scriptures.

Me:
I should add that in the current understanding of sexual identity, two people of the same sex engaging in sexual activity could mean any number of things, but in Paul's understanding, I think he assumed that they were straight and engaging in unnatural behaviour, rather than being aware of any other way of being.

I also think that, for me, the core of the matter is about love, and who people are able to love, and how we support that. Some of the ignorant comments coming out about this potentially leading to the legalisation of paedophilia, beastiality or rape, are obviously unhelpful and incorrect, as they are about malicious and harmful behaviour, and not about love between consenting adults in love with each other.

As for the infallibility of Scripture, I agree, but I think we may have different angles on it. I view the WHOLE of Scripture as infallible, not necessarily all the parts thereof. So, I think as a whole, Scripture is a guide to life and a witness of the love of God for all of creation & the saving grace of God through Christ. But where the parts can potentially be used to disagree with that core message, I disagree.

Surely the best way to encourage healing, wholeness and family values, and at the same time, discourage promiscuity, is to allow people to enter into loving long-term relationships that they can be open and honest about, without having to hide them.

Sam:
I take your point but I can also see why people would want to preserve and not re-define what marriage is. I'll respond to the rest of it later :)

Me:
Indeed, but Marriage is not a Christian instution. It's origin is in secular, civil contracts between wealthy people or rulers. When Christianity became popular under Constantinople, it was brought inside Churches, because the wealthy wanted to show they had religious approval. It was also brought into churches to try to encourage openness.

The current consultation is about Civil Marriage, not religious marriage. So it is wrong for some Christians to assume that they own the whole of marriage, when historically they only have involvement in the very recent history of marriage as a whole.

No churches will be forced to perform same sex marriages, and will still be able to marry, bury, baptise & confirm who they wish to (in the same way they can now, and many churches have the practise where they won't remarry divorcees, and have the freedom to do so).

But same sex couples will have the opportunity to have Civil Marriages, with the same protection that offers to the rest of society. Because, at the end of the day, a Civil Partnership is not the same as a marriage (see http://youtu.be/vT6I72W9SMM )

Another epistle about being both gay and Christian ...

This is another email to my friend about being gay and Christian and trying to reconcile the two ... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for your honesty and your reply. Sorry it's taken me a while. I respect your view ... it was one I tried to live by for a long time, but it was self-destructive. I tried to do what your friend is currently doing ... it left me so deep in depression, because I couldn't change who I was and I believed therefore that who I was was an abhorration to God and that would never be able to change. It was a bit of a rough place to be believing that my salvation had been removed from me because I couldn't become someone that God would approve of, and yet I didn't want to live because life was desperately lonely. [As I mentioned in my other note, caught between the hell I was living with and the hell I thought I was inevitably going to.] I suppose I should also add that the ex-Gay "ministries" that originated in the States have been discredited by medical boards and governments in the West as misleading, misguided and extremely harmful. Several of their spokespeople and directors have either left them or been caught soliciting sex in public places, because they craved companionship but couldn't pursue it openly, and were therefore reduced to the risky and emotionally harmful act of trying to secretly have anonymous sex with strangers, and then return to their 'wonderful and healed lives'. Consider the apology from some of the former leaders of such movements at http://www.beyondexgay.com/article/apology Take a look at the story of Randolph Baxter on the website of Courage UK , who used to be part of an ex-Gay ministry and is now part of an ex-ex-Gay ministry. ;o) http://www.courage.org.uk/testimonies/Baxter.shtml Look at their 'Basis of faith'. The ex-gay ministries still have their fans, and some of those are politicians, and some of the programmes are extremely powerful, but they are largely discredited in the West. Those programmes are now trying to market themselves to developing markets and Africa, in the hopes that they'll be able to develop their agenda there. So, in addition to being discredited and harmful, I often wonder if it's a power agenda, rather than a faith one, using a very credible-sounding faith façade for their own purposes. I don't agree with a purely fundamental reading of Scripture, as it's a vibrant and adapting document that remains relevant to all cultures but cannot be enforced in it's original context without mercy because - after all - it communicates a loving and merciful God. But, I am prepared to say that - as much as I believe my reading of the verses to be correct, the fundamentalists believe theirs to be correct - and they're not trying to be hurtful, they're only trying to be true to what they believe is right. I often wish they would have the same respect for my views. In my mind, rather than thinking of it as absolute in it's current English translation, I think it depends on the reading and the translation. There are a few verses (I think 6 in total) that speak against homosexuality, but the difficulty is in context and translation. The Greek and Hebrew words that were translated into 'homosexual' could mean several things, including 'promiscuous', 'people who use power to obtain sex' or even 'idol worship'. The difficulty in some of the cases is that the original word is used so rarely that it's difficult to find a confident translation. But someone settled on homosexual and since then, evangelical Christians the world over have used it to judge gays, lesbians, bi's and transgendered people, and even advocated hate crimes (and more recently, not speaking out against human rights violations, such as the Ugandan Government's new law which punishes gay men with the death penalty if discovered - or even if outed by someone else, that evidence is sufficient to sentence them to death, but the evangelical churches are silent on the issue). Of course, in the past, evangelicals have also supported racism, slavery and misogyny ... all of which is now acknowledged to be hugely incorrect ... but homophobia is still popular in faith. It's a very difficult and painful issue for a lot of people, and to be honest, influences a lot of evangelical Christians, and there is a lot of power play and a lot of money being poured into supporting Christians and churches that follow their lead in enforcing the judgement and/or expulsion of gays. They will hide behind 'we love gays, we just don't love what they do', and say that gay people are ok, as long as they're celibate and lonely, but they're operating under the severely erred belief that gay and lesbian people are actually straight people CHOOSING to have sex with people of the same gender ... not recognising that it's about identity, about love, about personality ... not just genitalia. Take a look at the http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/ page. And they offer a few alternative interpretations and insights on http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence.html Now, I recognise that some of the views they express may be difficult, as they're contrary to the views you've been taught so far, and go against what you believe, but if nothing else, look at them as an opportunity to discover that there are other ways of reading the scriptures out there, and each side believes their way to be correct, and tries their best to live it out in a way that honours their faith. Hope you're well, and as awesome as you always were! Luv Andy

Some informed and inclusive thoughts ...

I am encouraged today by a few pieces in a recent edition of the Church
Times ...
Firstly, by an article in the Comments section, by Dr Michael King.
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=60752
Secondly, of some interest are the letters in the same edition ...
http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=60769
And thirdly, not from the Church Times, but a link I've often mentioned
before which is good for generating some informed discussion is
http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/ , which also has a very good video
introduction.

Thank God for a healthy faith approach to sexuality

This is a greeting from Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu for the beginning of the 2006 Out in Africa Film Festival.

If only more people practised this approach, rather than religious bigotry, how much better would the world be?!