New York Times
December 12, 2006
Gay and Evangelical, Seeking Paths of AcceptanceBy NEELA BANERJEE
RALEIGH, N.C. — Justin Lee
believes that the Virgin birth was real, that there is a heaven and a
hell, that salvation comes through Christ alone and that he, the
29-year-old son of Southern Baptists, is an evangelical Christian.
Just as he is certain about the tenets of his faith, Mr. Lee also
knows he is gay, that he did not choose it and cannot change it.
To many people, Mr. Lee is a walking contradiction, and most
evangelicals and gay people alike consider Christians like him horribly
deluded about their faith. “I’ve gotten hate mail from both sides,”
said Mr. Lee, who runs gaychristian.net, a Web site with 4,700 registered users that mostly attracts gay evangelicals.
. . .
[O]ver the last 30 years, ... gay evangelicals have ... created organizations where
they are accepted.
Members of Evangelicals Concerned, founded in 1975 by a therapist
from New York, Ralph Blair, worship in cities including Denver, New
York and Seattle. Web sites have emerged, like Christianlesbians.com
and Mr. Lee’s gaychristian.net, whose members include gay people
struggling with coming out, those who lead celibate lives and those in
relationships.
Justin Cannon, 22, a seminarian who grew up in a conservative
Episcopal parish in Michigan, started two Web sites, including an
Internet dating site for gay Christians.
“About 90 percent of the profiles say ‘Looking for someone with whom
I can share my faith and that it would be a central part of our
relationship,’ ” Mr. Cannon said, “so not just a life partner but
someone with whom they can connect spiritually.”
But for most evangelicals, gay men and lesbians cannot truly be considered Christian, let alone evangelical.
“If by gay evangelical is meant someone who claims both to abide by
the authority of Scripture and to engage in a self-affirming manner in
homosexual unions, then the concept gay evangelical is a
contradiction,” Robert A. J. Gagnon, associate professor of New
Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, said in an e-mail
message.
“Scripture clearly, pervasively, strongly, absolutely and
counterculturally opposes all homosexual practice,” Dr. Gagnon said. “I
trust that gay evangelicals would argue otherwise, but Christian
proponents of homosexual practice have not made their case from
Scripture.”
In fact, both sides look to Scripture. The debate is largely over
seven passages in the Bible about same-sex couplings. Mr. Gagnon and
other traditionalists say those passages unequivocally condemn same-sex
couplings.
Those who advocate acceptance of gay people assert that the passages
have to do with acts in the context of idolatry, prostitution or
violence. The Bible, they argue, says nothing about homosexuality as it
is largely understood today as an enduring orientation, or about
committed long-term, same-sex relationships.
For some gay evangelicals, their faith in God helped them override
the biblical restrictions people preached to them. One lesbian who
attends Pullen Memorial Baptist Church in Raleigh said she grew up in a
devout Southern Baptist family and still has what she calls the “faith
of a child.” When she figured out at 13 that she was gay, she believed
there must have been something wrong with the Bible for condemning her.
“I always knew my own heart: that I loved the Lord, I loved Jesus,
loved the church and felt the Spirit move through me when we sang,”
said the woman, who declined to be identified to protect her partner’s
privacy. “I felt that if God created me, how is that wrong?”
But most evangelicals struggle profoundly with reconciling their
faith and homosexuality, and they write to people like Mr. Lee.
There is the 65-year-old minister who is a married father and gay.
There are the teenagers considering suicide because they have been
taught that gay people are an abomination. There are those who have
tried the evangelical “ex-gay” therapies and never became straight.
Mr. Lee said he and his family, who live in Raleigh, have been
through almost all of it. His faith was central to his life from an
early age, he said. He got the nickname Godboy in high school. But
because of his attraction to other boys, he wept at night and begged
God to change him. He was certain God would, but when that did not
happen, he said, it called everything into question.
He knew no one who was gay who could help, and he could not turn to
his church. So for a year, Mr. Lee went to the library almost every day
with a notebook and the bright blue leather-bound Bible his parents had
given him. He set up his Web site to tell his friends what he was
learning through his readings, but e-mail rolled in from strangers,
because, he says, other gay evangelicals came to understand they were
not alone.
“I told them I don’t have the answers,” Mr. Lee said, “but we can pray together and see where God takes us.”
But even when they accept themselves, gay evangelicals often have
difficulty finding a community. They are too Christian for many gay
people, with the evangelical rock they listen to and their talk of
loving God. Mr. Lee plans to remain sexually abstinent until he is in a
long-term, religiously blessed relationship, which would make him a
curiosity in straight and gay circles alike.
Gay evangelicals seldom find churches that fit. Congregations and
denominations that are open to gay people are often too liberal
theologically for evangelicals. Yet those congregations whose preaching
is familiar do not welcome gay members, those evangelicals said.
Clyde Zuber, 49, and Martin Fowler, 55, remember sitting on the curb
outside Lakeview Baptist Church in Grand Prairie, Tex., almost 20 years
ago, Sunday after Sunday, reading the Bible together, after the pastor
told them they were not welcome inside. The men met at a Dallas church
and have been together 23 years. In Durham, N.C., they attend an
Episcopal church and hold a Bible study for gay evangelicals every
Friday night at their home.
“Our faith is the basis of our lives,” said Mr. Fowler, a
soft-spoken professor of philosophy. “It means that Jesus is the Lord
of our household, that we resolve differences peacefully and through
love.”
Their lives seem a testament to all that is changing and all that
holds fast among evangelicals. Their parents came to their commitment
ceremony 20 years ago, their decision ultimately an act of loyalty to
their sons, Mr. Zuber said.
But Mr. Zuber’s sister and brother-in-law in Virginia remain
convinced that the couple is sinning. “They’re worried we’re going to
hell,” Mr. Zuber said. “They say, ‘We love you, but we’re concerned.’ ”
Monday, December 11, 2006
Sightings 12/11/06
Against Coercion
-- Martin E. Marty
Two events this season led me
to go back to the Sightings archive, to a column dated October 29, 2001
("Listening to Lactantius"). Giving evidence of our passion always to be
current, we cited Lactantius from the years 302 and 303, because what he wrote
then spoke so directly to current affairs. Incident one here is the flap
over new Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, who brought the Qur'an along
when he took the oath of office. Some howled that this was outrageous in
this Christian country. While the use of the Bible at oath-taking time has
always been voluntary, never coerced, using any other book, it was said,
blasphemes against the God of America and demeans the tradition of godly
Americans.
Incident two won't end until December 26, when partisans will
begin to gear up for next year's "December Wars," when devotion to Christian
Christmas gets upstaged by verbal war-makers. One side wants
Jesus-Christmas to be privileged and officially sanctioned in the "public
square." The other wants a Jesus-free public square. While tempted
to wish a plague on both their houses, I choose to tilt, by reference to
Lactantius, for a theological angle and one side.
The public can fight
over whether there is or is not enough Jesus-Christmas in the department stores,
the malls, the corridors. A half hour in such places should move one to
pity the clerks who have usually sappy versions of Jesus-Christmas songs
bombarding their ears all day, depriving them and their customers of any chance
to experience awe and wonder. Some in the public, and many in the
opinion-world, however, want Jesus-Christmas to be privileged in the official
public space and in the times that belong to the whole public. If we do
not "coerce" the Jesus-presence, it is asked, how can American tradition
survive? Is not all this a shunning of God?
Enter Lactantius,
anticipator of James Madison, 1,400 years in the offing. Both of them,
wrote Robert Louis Wilken, had a "religious understanding of religious
freedom." Wilken also quoted the Vatican II bishops who preached "that the
response of people to God in faith should be voluntary .... In matters of
religion every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded."
And then Lactantius -- the "first Western thinker to adumbrate a theory of
religious freedom rooted not in notions about toleration but in the nature of
religious belief."
Those who wanted Congressman Ellison to be a
hypocrite, or to deprive him of his scripture, usually profess to seek sincerity
in religion and attachment to sacred books, even if his was the "wrong
one." It's not mine. And coercing people to be obeisant to a god in
whom they do not believe would, in Lactantius's terms, be "inimical to the
nature of religion." The man of 302-303 asked, "Why should a god love a
person who does not feel love in return?" Scholar Elizabeth DePalma
Digeser cites Lactantius: "Those who strive to defend religion with force make a
deity appear weak." And anyone who lacks the requisite inner conviction is
"useless to God."
Those who have confidence in a "strong God," one who
loves to be loved freely and not by coercion, no matter how light and how slight
the weight of its force, will let Mr. Ellison vow as he chooses and will not
impose Jesus on others.
References:
Elizabeth DePalma Digeser, The Making of a Christian
Empire: Lactantius and Rome (Cornell, 2000); Robert Louis Wilken, "In
Defense of Constantine," First Things (April 2001),
http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft0104/articles/wilken.html.
----------
Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the
University of Chicago Divinity School.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
New York Times
December 10, 2006
Nobel Winner Warns of Dangers of Globalization
By WALTER GIBBS
OSLO, Dec. 10 — The
Bangladeshi banker Muhammad Yunus, who invented the practice of making
small, unsecured loans to the poor, warned today that the globalized
economy was becoming a dangerous “free-for-all highway.”
“Its lanes will be taken over by the giant trucks from powerful
economies,” Dr. Yunus said during a lavish ceremony at which he was
awarded the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize. “Bangladeshi rickshaws will be
thrown off the highway.”
While international companies motivated by profit may be crucial in
addressing global poverty, he said, nations must also cultivate
grassroots enterprises and the human impulse to do good.
Challenging economic theories that he learned as a Ph.D. student at Vanderbilt University,
in Nashville in the 1970s, he said glorification of the entrepreneurial
spirit has led to “one-dimensional human beings” motivated only by
profit.
Dr. Yunus, 66, then took a direct jibe at the United States for its
war on terror, telling about 1,000 dignitaries at Oslo’s City Hall that
recent American military campaigns in Iraq and elsewhere had diverted
global resources and attention from a more pressing project: halving
worldwide poverty by 2015, as envisaged by the United Nations six years ago.
“Never in human history had such a bold goal been adopted by the
entire world in one voice, one that specified time and size,” he said.
“But then came Sept. 11 and the Iraq war, and suddenly the world became
derailed from the pursuit of this dream.”
He said terrorism cannot be defeated militarily and the concept of
peace requires broadening. “Peace should be understood in a human way,
in a broad social, political and economic way,” Dr. Yunus said.
[To read the whole article, click here.]
The Mystery of Love. This PBS documentary, to be broadcast this Wednesday evening, looks to be well worth making time to watch. Click here to read a piece about the documentary that was published in yesterday's New York Times. Click here to go to the website for the show.