The gentleman stood up during a lull in the Q&A session, and I was grateful for anyone to break the silence. In recent years I'd become used to this routine: I'd go to a small liberal-arts college to speak on homosexuality. The students, who were increasingly pro-gay, would respond with "friendly fire" or genial shrugs. I'd wait for the opposition to speak up, often to no avail.
Then John spoke. "Since there seems to be a lull," he began, "I suppose that this might be as good a time as any for me to come out...as a religious conservative."
There were no audible gasps, but there was palpable silence. John identified himself as a faculty member in the music department. He spoke for several long minutes, describing himself as theologically conservative but socially and politically liberal, opposed to same-sex marriage within his church but supportive of civil marriage (and adoption) for gays, skeptical of reconciling biblical faith with homosexual relationships but open to arguments for doing so. He also lamented what he perceived as my hostility toward religious believers (some of it deserved, he admitted) and my too-easy dismissal of opponents.
When John finally sat down, I thanked him for his candor and then launched into what was probably an overly defensive clarification of my position. I could tell that neither of us was entirely satisfied by the exchange (the audience for their part seemed quietly fascinated by it). But our time was soon up and that was that.
Until the next day, when John e-mailed me to thank me for my visit. We corresponded for a bit, and then he invited me to get together for coffee when I returned to town for some additional talks the following week.
And so I did. I picked John up at his office in my rented Ford Crown Victoria ("My students are going to think I'm being interrogated by a federal agent," he quipped). I did not quite know what to expect. Thoughtful academic? Stealthy religious nutcase? I had been reading Sam Harris lately (The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation), and as a result I'd become increasingly dubious about "moderate" or "tolerant" religion. (Harris, an outspoken atheist, argues that liberal religion tends to sugarcoat the still-problematic belief in scriptural authority.)
But John defied simple categories, except one that we both shared: college professor. Our common academic training and temperament made it easy to spend several hours together, discussing a paper of mine I had sent him on homosexuality and the bible (he read it within a day, despite being swamped with midterms), analyzing political rhetoric on various sides of the debate, and delving into deeper epistemological questions (What is the proper relationship between faith and reason?). It was a delightful and productive afternoon.
Later that day, John and his wife Sarah invited me to dinner at their home. His wife, I now knew, worked for Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, an organization that used to provide me with regular opposition during the early days of my campus speaking. This fact made me slightly apprehensive. But I was delighted by the opportunity to eat somewhere other than the Applebee's next to my hotel, and pleased to spend more time with John and to meet Sarah, so I accepted.
As we chatted over appetizers, Sarah asked me about my life, my family, my work, and my relationship with my partner Mark. At one point I mentioned that Mark and I would be going to Mexico in April for his sister's wedding. We were anxious about it, I explained, since Mark's parents generally refuse to be in the same room with me (they refer to me, not by name, but as "that man"--the one who corrupted their son). Sarah and John seemed genuinely sympathetic.
Then came dinner--a hearty yet delightfully simple meal of soup, salad, and bread. As we sat down, Sarah asked if she could say grace. I nodded and politely folded my hands and bowed my head (what else should polite atheists do during grace? Read the newspaper?). She invoked many blessings, but the one that stuck out most for me was the following:
"Bless John, whom we are delighted to have as our guest. Bless John and Mark, and their relationship. And in particular, bless the family gathering in April..."
I am not a Christian, and I don't believe that one needs to be religious to show warmth and hospitality. But that day kindness came with a Christian flavor, and I was deeply touched by it.
9 Comments for “Amazing Grace”
posted by Peter LaBarbera on
John, this professor friend may call himself a “theological conservative,” but apparently he is not. (Maybe he is only by today’s liberal academic standards.) Embracing “civil” same-sex “marriage,” gay adoption, and asking God to bless your homosexual relationship puts him outside the “theologically conservative” (i.e., orthodox Biblical) camp. He was kind to you, yes, but erred in asking a holy God to bless a relationship based on sexual misbehavior clearly condemned by the same “God-breathed” Scripture that he surely regards as inerrant. He may and probably did have some secret prayer regarding your relationship — say, that it become non-sexual — but by asking God, before you, to “bless” it wrongly implied God’s acceptance, and thereby misled you about the Christian faith. It might have been more difficult, but the professor could have extended the same kindness to you without compromising the Biblical position. The essence of evangelical, Bible-believing outreach to people (“non-believers”) is to warn them about the grave consequences of their sin, especially eternal separation from God — and then offer them the substitutionary redemption of Christ, who took the penalty for all sin on the Cross before conquering sin and death by rising again (Easter!). That’s true compassion. I’d be happy to discuss it with you if you’re ever in my part of the world (Chicago) and want to talk over a cup of coffee. I wouldn’t expect such an upbeat recounting of our conversation as this, but I believe you’d get a more accurate representation of the “theologically conservative” position. Sincerely, Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth, http://www.americansfortruth.org
posted by Toby Grace on
John: Beware of the “honey trap.” I sometimes think nice, polite, warm-hearted Christians are the most dangerous. No matter how they sugar coat it and no matter how many pleasant dinners they feed us, they are still peddling a religion that is, historically, a farago of nonsense, repressive and homophobic. When they abandon their core beliefs – a vengeful god of judgement who hates gays and pretty much anyone else who enjoys the pleasures of this life, they begin to fall apart, as the Episcopalians are now doing. My guess is that what you experienced with the music professor & his wife was neither acceptance nor tolerance. It was merely good manners combined with an academic enjoyment of discourse.
posted by Peter LaBarbera on
I’m sorry: I have ascribed the Christian professor’s wife’s prayer to him. Nevertheless, the same concern applies: can God bless a homosexual union? Not unless He is prepared to bless other sins that are condemned in the Bible. Best–pl
posted by Bob Schwartz on
Sam Harris and fellow atheist Richard Dawkins are correct. It is religious “faith” itself that is problematic, no matter how gay friendly some theists appear to be. The core idea that there is a way of knowing that is outside the normal rational process is what leads adults to teach children to obey blindly and propels some believers to kill for Yahweh, The Lord Jesus, and Allah.
As for Peter LaBarbera, his record of failure with the Illinois Family Institute was so severe, that he was booted from the “executive directorship” of that band of bible bigots. He is now the “president” of a website, a PO Box, and a collection of gay pornography he collects in “research” visits to leather conventions and other gay events.
posted by Casey on
John,
The previous comments pain me to read, both from one who claims, Pharisee-like, to know too clearly the will of God and dares to draw the line between goat and sheep which should be left for our Lord, and the painful cynicism of gay readers who admonish you to beware the “honey trap.” Beware kindness, open conversation, good-faith attempts at understanding… that is the attitude of one who has been beaten into submission and perpetual defensiveness – I should know, I’ve been there when it comes to Christianity. Thankfully, I was blessed to meet some of His conservative, evangelical, Intervarsity-member followers who really showed me the heart of Christ – love and justice – and many things changed (though not my sexual orientation *grins* They never asked it of me, either).
The thing is, you are absolutely correct to have titled this piece “amazing grace,” with both meanings that phrase allows. By praying that your partnership be blessed – that God’s hand would be upon it, and His Spirit would open the eyes of Mark’s family that their cruelty was wrong – this couple was behaving in a most Christian manner. The heart of evangelism, of sharing the Gospel, is to take a step of radical love in faith and thus demonstrate what Christ does in our lives. For somebody who is deeply skeptical of homosexuality, yet sees the humanity and suffering of the way Mark’s parents treat you, the ultimate sacrifice possible, the act of radical love, was to give up their certainty of what is right and wrong and just love you by offering that prayer and accepting you into their home… and letting God sort it out.
That sort of faith is an incredibly hard thing to do – to actually believe that the Holy Spirit will inform a person that his actions are sinful, and move him to repent, rather than having human beings do so through judgment – and so it does not surprise me that few people can do it… the way is narrow like that. Somebody mentioned that the Episcopals are falling apart – though I strongly disagree with some of their theology (I’m conservative that way) I’d contend that what they are losing are those unwilling to make the sacrifice of their own certainty and trust in God’s grace to all. The idea that God accepts everybody where they are, and it is He who works, not us, is hard for many to accept. They’d rather an easier path.
And yes, this is conservative theology – it comes directly from the Gospels, it depends upon the Cross, and acknowledges the supremacy of God over man. That couple acted with impressive grace to meet you where you are – please, see that as real Christ-like behavior… give us a little grace, too. Happy Easter.
posted by Jimmy Gatt on
Peter LaBarbera,
I am honored to have the opportunity to dialogue with you. Since I honor your right to express your views and try to win people over to your way of thinking, I think it is fair that you honor my right to tell you exactly what I find wrong and harmful with your views.
The reason I object to Christianity is because I find the Gospel offensive and harmful. And, as far as I know, you can’t have Christianity without the Gospel, so this means that I find Christinaity itself to be offensive and harmful.
The Gospel asserts that a human being is created wrong, broken, flawed, and sinful. Christians often use the “Are you perfect? Have you ever done anything wrong?” tactic to convince people that since they aren’t perfect, therefore, they must be flawed, broken, and wrong. In other words, there’s something wrong with you. Inherently. The reason Christians try make you feel like you’re inherently wrong is because Christianity also provides the “fix” for this inherent wrongness: it’s Jesus! This is why Dan Barber wrote, “A Christian is someone who cuts you with a knife and then tries to sell you a bandage.”
It should be clear enough that in order for Christianity to “fix” a problem (by using Jesus), it has to create the problem first. I strongly dislike the way that the Gospel is presented as “Good News!” because the “good news” attempts to hide the fact that “bad news” has to be delivered first: you were born shit. Worthless. Abhorrent to God by nature. You’re just as bad as Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot, and you were that way from the moment that you were conceived.
As if this wasn’t bad enough, Christianity, in practice, encourages self-abuse. I know this because I am an Ex-Christian, and I remember the exercises and dialogues that we used to go through to convince ourselves that not only were we bad enough to merit an innocent man to be tortured to death on behalf of the horrible things that we did (and were), but also that we were active participants in that torture and murder. Every time we sinned, we drove a nail into Jesus’ hand. Mel Gibson expressed this belief when he substituted his own hands in the crucifixion scene in his snuff film “The Passion of the Christ” (a.k.a. “The Jesus Chainsaw Massacre”).
But I wasn’t Catholic. I wasn’t even “Charismatic”. I went to a “mainstream”, even “liberal” (by some churches’ lens) congregation. I remember the skit being performed several times at youth events. It went like this: a youth and his friend are sitting in the room. The youth gets a call and is invited to a party where there will be drinking, drugs, and sex. He tries to tell his friend about it, and his friend gets really upset. The youth decides to go anyway, and stops to nail his friend to a pantomimed cross before he walks out. It’s then clear to the audience that his mute friend was Jesus, and the larger message is this: every time you sin, you help torture Jesus to death. And you can’t help sinning because you were made sinful, so you are always an active particpant in torturing an innocent man to death.
The constant, implied message is this: “Don’t you feel guilty?” It’s no small wonder why Christianity employs guilt so heavily. If you feel guilty, better yet, inherently worthless, then you’ll feel compelled to go seek the “fix”, which is Jesus in theory, but church in practice. Notice that Christians always, always, always include “going to church” as a necessary part of your salvation. Salvation is never described as a personal spiritual decision. It requires outward action. Join a Bible-based church, they say … where the message can be delivered to the faithful “sheep” (that’s Christian parlance!) every week, and where the collection plate can be passed for the privilege of hearing it.
Naturually, I’m leaving out all the good parts of being a Christian: a loving fellowship, the focus on the raising of children, and the community of friendly people. But I didn’t write this message to tell you things that you already knew. I am writing this to tell you what I think is wrong and harmful about your message. It is wrong and harmful to convince people that they are bad and broken, and it is wrong and harmful to compel people to join an organiztion becase of a guilt complex that you helped to create. And you can’t tell me that churches don’t employ guilt to keep congregants in line. I’m an Ex-Christian, and I know all the words to “In the Garden”, “Amazing Grace” (four verses, even!), and “Blessed Assurance”. I’ve been on four missions. I was on the (paid) church staff at a church. Don’t tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about. I know it intimately.
And please resist the temptation to quote scripture with me. I am very, very strong on scriptural knowledge. If you wish to make this discussion personal and degrading, then I will respond in kind, and 100% of my attacks against you with come directly from the Bible. And I will not show kindness or mercy.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this with you.
posted by Catherine Lebusque on
Thanks so much Jimmy Gatt for your most eleoquent post. I couldnt have said it better myself and I agree 100% with you.
Religion is all about power and control. By making you feel worthless and broken and guilty about being worthless and broken, the church tries to excercise power and control over us. The church has always tried to do this including fighting tooth and nail in the 16th century in England to not have the Bible translated into English. In the past it also tried to excercise this power by filling the brains of the masses with myths and fanatsies such as “the earth is flat”, “the sun orbits around the earth”, the world is only 5000 years old and was created in a week ” etc etc…Gradually this power was lost and attitudes continue to change. Increasingly religion is seen by many people for what it is (fairy tale nonsense based on wishful thinking that there is life after death).
If religion wasnt so dangerous I wouldnt care less about what people chose to believe. However this is not the case. Virtually every war being fought in the world today (and indeed in the past) is being fought by world leaders in the name of some religion or other. Why do we continue to tolerate this? Why are Americans so obessessed with having a Christian president? This kind of religious nuttery is very dangerous. Despite their sycophantic arrogance religious people are far more intolerant and aggressive than atheisists and happily persecute people when they have no right whatsoever to do so. They arent even bothered about persecuting each other. Persecution by Christians on Christians has happened over very minor differences in religious beliefs and over many centuries. For example Catholics and Protestants burned each other at the stake, hung drawn and quartered each other and gruesomely tortured each other for nearly 400 years in Britain and these are people who were all Christians!
Even in the 21st Century we are still being persecuted by people who use the bible to support their bigotry particularly their homophobia. (why oh why are Christians and other religious freaks so obsessed with my sex life?..I couldnt give a damn about theres!)
If we want to “pray” for anything lets all “pray” that this silly debate over homosexuality is the last attempt by Christians to weald power and control over the rest of us. They will fail of course just as they have failed over other things but this will surely happen sooner if we refuse to tolerate even the most liberal minded Christians.
posted by Jimmy Gatt on
Catherine Lebusque,
Thank you for your reply and for your kind words. I do have a few comments on what you wrote, and please don’t take my criticism too strongly for I see that we are kindred spirits in the rejection of wrong thoughts.
While I won’t retreat from my position that Christianity is harmful, there are many evils in the world which pose greater threats to the good. I only take time to criticize Christianity at this moment because I have been given a golden opportunity: the attention of an organization which explicitly sees me as a threat that deserves to be destroyed.
That said, religions are merely ideologies that are superstitious and mystical. An ideology can be less superstitious and less mystical, and yet do more evil. Pol Pot’s regime murdered at least 1/3 of the citizens of his country, and his ideology (communism) has yet to be pilloried as much as Christianity has been by our own culture. Is American Christianity (of today) more threatening than Pol Pot’s regime (of the 1970s)? Hardly. Evangelical Christians today have to apologize for seeming anti-gay! To me, the evangelican Christians look humbled and muzzled, and I think that’s a good thing, though I think the root of the problem in that regard ought be better articulated. And that, namely, is the harmful nature of the gospel, and said articulation has been done by me (above) and will continue to be.
But let’s keep in mind that there are greater threats to gay people in general than is the threat posed to American gays by the evangelical movement. Iran hangs gay people, and does so based on their horrible, threat-based religion. (Christianity is a guilt-based religion.) When was the last time a Christian was able to hang people for being gay, based on their religious beliefs? Forget how much they may want to do that, I’m comparing actions, not desires.
So I only ask you to keep things in perspective, in particular, the threat posed to gay people. Yes, horrible things have been done in the name of religion. More horrible things have been done than that in the names of “progress” and “enlightenment”. Naturally, I view all of these things through the lens of my own values, and I won’t claim to be free of bias. My biases are individualism, life, liberty, and property. So I tolerate Christians provided that they don’t try to deprive me of life, liberty, or property. It’s their life, they can follow whatever ideology that they want to. But they can’t use their religion as an excuse or pretext to insult or denigrate me, just as I can’t use my lack of one to insult or denigrate them. When they choose to attack me, then I have the right of self-defense.
I was kind of meandering, so I hope that I made my point.
posted by Kevin Kaatz on
Dear John, That is great news about your conversations with this conservative and his wife. Personal meetings and discussion are always a good way to go in cases like this. You should be touched by the kindness of this family, despite what people like Peter LaBarbera has to say. I fully support his right to free speech, however, that does not mean I have to sacrifice my own free speech about him and his organization. Peter LaBarbera may think his organization is a Christian organization, but that is definitely not the case. He has been obsessed with all things gay and lesbian his entire adult life. He is not interested in discussions on the so-called inerrancy of the Bible (how can it be inerrant with there are thousands of manuscripts that are nearly all different and the oldest scrap dates from the middle of the second century?). Nor is he interested in really helping you to understand his position. He is more interested in telling you how disgusting your sexual orientation and sexual practices are while putting a sugar coating on it to make him look like he really cares. All you have to do is look at his website to see what he is really about. He actively works to silence gays and lesbians. He actively works to stop the proposed Hate Crime Legislation that will help to stop violence (and NOT free speech, as he would like people to think) against gays and lesbians. He uses junk science by the disgraced Paul Cameron to try and stop gays and lesbians from adopting–all in the name of God. By the way, the legal title for his website is Americans for Truth About Homosexuality and not just Americans For Truth. You will find that truth is pretty hard to come by at AFTAH. Sincerely, Dr. Kevin Kaatz