American Public Media's "Speaking of Faith" has a must-listen panel discussion between evangelicals of three generations (Chuck Colson, Greg Boyd, Shane Claiborne). Go to minute 36:45, where homosexuality comes up, and stay tuned for a striking contrast between Colson and the younger men.
Colson answers a question about homosexuality with a doctrinaire natural-law exegisis of Paul. The younger men warn against Colson's hard-edged judgmentalism. Boyd agrees that homosexuality is wrong but can't understand why evangelicals pick on this one moral failing as a "deal breaker" while downplaying so many sins of their own (divorce, e.g.). He argues that evangelicals' reputation for "homophobia" (his word) is well earned and that Jesus ministered to prostitutes, rather than trying to pass laws against them. (Subtext here: the tension between the churches of Paul and Jesus.) Claiborne asks what sort of place the Church has become if it can't minister lovingly to a young gay man who feels like he is one of "God's mistakes" and wants to kill himself. "If that 'mistake' can't find a home in the church, who have we become?" He goes on to condemn the "meanness" of evangelical political style and speaks intriguingly of "post-Religious Right America."
More evidence here that homosexuality has become a major point of generational cleavage among evangelicals. Call me Pollyanna, but I think there's a new awakening of conscience happening among evangelicals and that homosexuality is at the heart of it.
More: Gay evangelical commenter Casey offers more evidence that change is afoot.
I agree with other commenters that the teachings, not just the tone, ultimately need to change. But I think the tone will tend to lead the teachings. And, as Greg Boyd implies in the panel discussion, no theological change is required for evangelicals to stop blowing homosexuality out of all proportion to its very minor role in the Bible. Proportionality alone would be major progress.
35 Comments for “Evangelicals’ Awakening”
posted by Amicus on
The generational changes are real. Hanna Rosen has put together as sensitive a compendium as could be written.
Still, they are not radical enough. What does it mean to teach someone gay they are a “mistake” a “non-deal”? It’s not “okay” to address that by choosing a *form* of ministry, such as “reducing meanness”, is it? While welcome, that’s a dodge.
They are unwilling, even in this snippet, to look at Romans 1 and realize that they could be mistaken, frankly.
After all, as a gay man, did you leave the use of women, literally? Put another way, gay is not a repudiation of the kind Paul lays out, is it?
One could go on.
posted by Amicus on
er…”non-deal” = “not ideal”
posted by Bobby on
Jesus did tell a prostitute to “sin no more” and he didn’t agree with prostitution. And frankly, comparing gays to hookers is offensive.
posted by Richard on
A change in tone, in how these people talk about gay people, is still an important change.
Their are many younger evangelical Christians who want to focus much more time and money on other issues; i.e. poverty and global warming.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Jonathan, I dount there’s a generational change occuring within the context of E-Christians.
I think it has more to do with younger E-Christians and Catholics sensing that all the hard political grassroots work of their parents’ generation wasn’t worth the price. Frankly, except for the ending of the welfare state and bringing about the collapse of an atheistic Communist superstructure, I’m not sure their parent’s generation accomplished all that much (smile).
Maybe now the interest in “global issues” are just part of a big pendulum swinging E-Christians and Catholics away from domestic issues and into global climate, African poverty, 3rd World Debt forgiveness, saving our oceans from all the pollution put out by those eco-friendly cruise ship tours… sort of looking beyond the borders for places to put their faith equity and browsweat to task.
Our church recently hosted a forum for Wolverine college students to participate in three Spring Break missions… one was to New Orleans, one was to West Virginia, one was to Morocco. Our church paid their way and did the pre-trip prep; the big choice was Morocco and teaching at small village schools there for 6 days.
I doubt that attitudes toward gays is what might be changing inside the E-Christian community… I think it has more to do with leaving behind political activism and being different by being interested in non-domestic, global affairs.
posted by Casey on
I absolutely agree that there has been a dramatic shift in attitudes towards gays among the younger evangelical community – and given that I am a member of that community, I’d think I’d be in a decent place to know! The simple fact is, younger evangelicals are much more likely to know gay and lesbian people, and more than that, the gay and lesbian people they know are more likely to be well-adjusted and comfortable with their identities both as gay and as people of faith, simply because the burden of the closet has been lightened for us, more of us are coming out of our own free will, rather than being outed by disease, etc., and we have a greater sense of our own self-worth than in past generations, because we’ve grown up in a world where true equality, while not yet achieved, is at least imaginable. As these younger evangelicals come to know us as people with dreams and desires and struggles very similar to their own, they find it much harder to condemn us they way their parents did, when gays were invisible when they weren’t dying of AIDS or the inhabitants of eccentric counter-cultural communities. Like Peter with the gentile centurion, when confronted by gay Christians in particular, these younger evangelicals are more and more seeing that the Spirit is within us and working through us – and they can’t deny that, even though they may not entirely understand it yet… even if they haven’t reconciled that reality with the interpretation of scripture they’ve always been taught. Give them time – but take hope… the change we are seeing is real. Don’t give up on them yet – only by living with them will this change continue to happen.
posted by The Gay Species on
Who cares what the Evangelicals think? If they subscribe to a literal reading of 18 and Romans 1, as they are certainly free to do, who cares. It is religion. Religion does not establish policy! Politics “separate from religion” is the principle in the First Amendment. I thought that was self-evident? The DofI safeguards “equality of all people” as the standard, not the Tankah or Greek Testament (which never mentions human equality, human rights, democracy, one person one vote, pluralism, liberty, autonomy) because those ancients books are irrelevant to the American Experiment. Let them be Branch Davidians, for all I care, or Heaven’s Gate Sci-Fi.
As long as POLITICALLY we are the same page, who cares about superstitions?
posted by RIchard on
Well, few politicans and voters have expressed not much interest in a seperation between church and state.
Religion and politics have — for better and for the worse — often mixed.
Faith is important to many LGBT people and I know many LGBT Christians and their family members who care about a relationship with their God and changing church policy.
Faith is important to most Americans. Period. Political equality is good, but social equality (changing people’s hearts and minds) requires lots of voluntary, non-governmental conversations.
posted by Marc on
You are confusing a brand-name religious faith with a spiritual need that many people, including myself, possess. I wont go as far to say that “religion poisons everything” (as one infamous athiest says), but it certainly has been one of the greatest barriers to equality for gay people. I have absolutely no need for man-made religions, and I am often kind of surprised to find gays complain about teh homophobia in their brand of religion, but refuse to give it up because “it’s my church.” Well, dogma, like any other club, comes with rules and regulations that define its membership. If oyu dont like them, you leave. Saying “I will make changes from within” is a cop-out; leaving the religion and calling it to task for its homophobia would send a stronger message.
Still, this is encouraging that young Evangalicals are starting to get the idea that most religions’ views on homosexuality are hurtful, unnecessary and hypocritical. But i think a more telling sign is the growing number of people who refuse to identify themselves by any religion, and dont attend any church on a regular basis. They are the people who are going to make the biggest difference for LGBT persons.
posted by JimG on
Casey,
I loved what you said. You give me hope and faith in a brighter tomorrow. And that tomorrow is yours. I am 54 and have seen quite a lot and I’m sure I will see some more before my time is done.
And I look forward to seeing you and others like you in that future scenario.
Best.
posted by Casey on
JimG, thanks for the kind words (and thanks Jonathan, for the note – that was a pleasant surprise!) I have a lot of hope that tomorrow will be a brighter day, but I never forget that it was the work that was done yesterday that made it possible – it was guys like you being honest that made the burden of the closet lighter for people like me, and who made it easier to leave in my own time, and able to have the conversations with the members of my church that I like to think contributes in some small way to the change we’re seeing. Keeping a sense of that history helps to keep things in perspective, I think, and certainly helps in keeping a spirit of hope and gratitude. There’s work to be done, but it’s worth doing. Best to you, and God bless.
posted by Charles Wilson on
Our church recently hosted a forum for Wolverine college students to participate in three Spring Break missions… one was to New Orleans, one was to West Virginia, one was to Morocco. Our church paid their way and did the pre-trip prep; the big choice was Morocco and teaching at small village schools there for 6 days.
So, Michigan-Matt, the self-described “moderate” who is actually just another self-hating wingnut on the Internet, tell us about your church. Are you a priest in that church, by chance?
If not, then what does your priest say about your homosexuality? Or are you in the closet at your church?
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ChasWilson asks: “So, Michigan-Matt, the self-described “moderate” who is actually just another self-hating wingnut on the Internet, tell us about your church. Are you a priest in that church, by chance? If not, then what does your priest say about your homosexuality? Or are you in the closet at your church?”
Wow, ChasWilson.
You have become quite the little stalker… others would argue that your repeated uncivil acts and slanderous tongue don’t merit or warrant a response until you act in a civil manner, but that might never happen.
I’m not a priest as you’ve claimed elsewhere.
I’m definitely not in the closet. It’d be hard to sponsor a Gay Parents Party in a public park and advertise same in the local paper and remain in the closet, eh?
I’m not self-hating. I don’t know where you get that one… oh, I know… if I’m a GOPer I must be self-loathing and self-hating, right? Are you going to revoke my GayCard, now?
I’m not a wingnut -in fact, I’ve railed against those “wingnuts” as you like to call them on issues of immigration, repeal of DADT, repeal of DOMA and other issues.
Michigan-Matt partner and I and our family attend a Catholic Church here in A2. Our parish priest baptized our two sons… I didn’t ask if he was gay. He did come back to our home both times for lunch and cake. He liked Michigan-Matt partner’s carrot cake with sour cream frosting.
Now that you know I’m Catholic, will that add another little notch on your “spite pistol” along with being a GOP moderate, pro troops and pro-mission, a soccer Dad and the owner of 2 Hummers now?
posted by Michigan-Matt on
GaySpecies opines incorrectly “Religion does not establish policy!Politics “separate from religion” is the principle in the First Amendment. I thought that was self-evident? The DofI safeguards “equality of all people” as the standard”
Ummm, GaySpecies, you got a whole lot wrong in a little space. The Constitution guarantees freedom OF religion, not freedom from religion. There is not “wall of separation” in the Constitution; that was a fiction created by the Deist Jeffersonian followers who turned a constitutional right into a secular privilege and the urban myth lives on in glwoing tradition of activist judges.
As many have discussed here and others have proven reasonably elsewhere, we are a Christian Nation and our public values are based on those shared beliefs. The Pilgrims and Purtians and pioneers came to America for profit, religious enterprise and God. Please take a second and read anything about the early settlers, the settlements’ contracts and governing documents.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
GaySpecies, final point, about your comment “I thought that was self-evident? The DofI safeguards “equality of all people” as the standard”
Ummm, the line from the DofI is “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
Endowed by man’s Creator… God.
That’s what secularists are always fond of quickly dismissing. Or are you one of those who contend the writer, Thos Jefferson -a self-described Deist- meant that mankind was man’s creator? Not God?
What it all comes down to is you’d avoid history in order to butress the claims of modern day secular pluralist liberals. It doesn’t work that way when the Founders -and one of your own hallowed Heroes- state it differently.
posted by Amicus on
But I think the tone will tend to lead the teachings. …
=====
Well, I, for one, cannot disagree wholly, but I’m … anxious. A change in tone might simply result in tabling the issue, rather than dealing with it decisively, in a way that might bring balance back to the theological discussion(s) of topics like gay marriage.
Proportionality alone would be major progress.
===========
True. Except that so many now sit behind the giant hurdle of Constitutional Amendments, so that it remains a time of work, not a time of rest. The pendulum needs to swing the other way before coming to rest, otherwise …
posted by Charles Wilson on
You have become quite the little stalker
Only a self-hating, lying wingnut who stays in his catholic church when they hate his guts would say that someone who bothers to read what he writes is “quite the little stalker.” Like Log Cabinettes everywhere, Matt counts on no one paying attention.
Is this what your pope is talking about when he calls you “objectively disordered?”
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ChasWilson, it isn’t the “reading” of the threads here that constitutes stalking… it’s googling me and looking for comments at other sites -as you freely admitted.
It’s entering those sites and spreading more of the spew, vile, foaming spittle that represents much of your special vindictive work here.
And what does all of that get you? The editors at Wiki had to ban you. Other sites have had to ban your multiple IP addresses. Some sites have taken down your stalker like comments. Webmasters have told you you’re obsessed.
But go ahead. Tell everyone I’m a priest. Tell everyone I’m a GOPer. Tell everyone I’m gay… it’s not getting you any closer to believable or trustworthy.
You’re just taking threads off topic. To everyone’s detriment and an honest examination of issues.
posted by michgan-alex on
Michigan-Matt partner and I and our family attend a Catholic Church here in A2. Our parish priest baptized our two sons… I didn’t ask if he was gay. He did come back to our home both times for lunch and cake. He liked Michigan-Matt partner’s carrot cake with sour cream frosting.
This is a matter of a local priest turning a blind eye to the “official doctrine” of the church, which many do (as much as local bishops allow). It’s one of the realities of a large multi-national instution: Global policy can give way to local realities.
posted by Charles Wilson on
ChasWilson, it isn’t the “reading” of the threads here that constitutes stalking… it’s googling me and looking for comments at other sites -as you freely admitted.
You’re ashamed of what you’ve written elsewhere? Or are you ashamed that what you’ve written elsewhere exposes you as another wingnut liar when it comes to your claims to be some sort of “moderate?” Welcome to the age of the Internet search engine, Matt.
But go ahead. Tell everyone I’m a priest. Tell everyone I’m a GOPer. Tell everyone I’m gay… it’s not getting you any closer to believable or trustworthy.
Oh, this is interesting. Are you now claiming not to be gay? If so, then what the hell are you doing on so many gay websites?
posted by Charles Wilson on
Seeing as how Matt wants to imply that he’s not a Republican, not a wingnut, and not gay, I thought it might be fun to assemble a Gay Michigan-Matt Greatest Moderate Hits list:
Michigan Matt leads wingnut boycott of gay website in Tampa.
Garden variety wingnut Clinton hatred at far right-wing “Gay Patriot” site.
Michigan Matt rants against liberals and says (his quotation marks) “gay marriage” comes from the far radical Left.
Someone decries attempted murder of four people in a gay bar. Michigan Matt says: put away the victim/pity card.
“Moderate” not-Republican Michigan Matt unloads on Democratic Party leadership.
posted by Charles Wilson on
And a few more:
Michigan Matt throws the terrorist card at website he doesn’t like.
Someone decries attempted murder of four people in a gay bar. Michigan Matt says: put away the victim/pity card.
Michigan Matt sides with the American Family Association‘s “clean up TV” campaigns.
Michigan Matt supports expulsion of high school student for film that showed chest-high pic of two males snuggling in bed, calling it “porn-as-art.”
No wonder Michigan Matt thinks that anyone who reads his output elsewhere on the Internet is a “stalker.” He doesn’t want anyone nailing him for his lies. Gee, I wonder where I’ve seen that before.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
LOL…..nice job, Matt. The more you can provoke them into screaming temper tantrums and fits and making it clear what THEY support, the worse they end up looking.
One of these days, gay liberals might figure that out — and they might realize that allowing their Charles Wilson types to rant about how anyone who objects to making Nazi comparisons is a wingnut, or how anyone who opposes adult content on broadcast TV without warning for kids is awful, doesn’t help them any in appealing to the average American.
posted by Charles Wilson on
Anyone who does a Google search on both Matt and North Liar will get 1,030 hits. They tend to flock together. Ha! Oh, and I found out why Michigan Matt has been calling me “obsessed” with Matt Sanchez. Turns out that Matt has an interest of his own.
I give the guy credit ?he sure took great care of his body? proving once again, if you?re a REAL gay man, your body is far more important than your mind, heart, pocketbook, arm baggage or character. Whether he?s repented of any sins or not, $200-250/hr was a bargain in any book. Woof. Damn.
I’m glad you like him, Michigan Matt. Really, it’s okay that you go for the blatino facersized look. Each to their own. But there’s no need to project your fantasy onto me. He ain’t my type and never was. Ha!
posted by Charles Wilson on
Incidentally, a Google search on “North Dallas Thirty” “Matt Sanchez” gets 1,060 hits.
“Charles Wilson” “Matt Sanchez” gets 140 hits.
“Michigan-Matt” “Matt Sanchez” gets 37 hits.
So, Michigan Matt, are you going to go after your wingnut buddy North Liar Forty for his Matt Sanchez obsession? Didn’t think so. Ha!
posted by Charles Wilson on
p.s. to Matt: Woof. Damn. But never God damn America. Ha!
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
He ain’t my type and never was. Ha!
Which is why, of course, Charles Wilson maintains such a large archive of his alleged porn, and in fact has a whole website devoted to encouraging people to view said porn.
And of course, you won’t find many hits on “Charles Wilson”. Try googling “Willysnout1”, or “Willy”, and what you’ll find is not only that he’s obsessed with Matt Sanchez, among other things, but that this stalking behavior, namecalling, and insulting others takes place on every blog in which he participates — with this one being a prime example.
posted by Charles Wilson on
For North Liar Forty to object to insulting people on websites is funny. Anyhow, Google “willysnout1” “matt sanchez” and you get … ta da! … eight more hits. So, North Liar Forty, we are up to 148 of mine versus 1,060 of yours.
Tell me, are you in love with Matt Sanchez?
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Anyhow, Google “willysnout1” “matt sanchez” and you get … ta da! … eight more hits. So, North Liar Forty, we are up to 148 of mine versus 1,060 of yours.
If you Google “William Wilson” and “Matt Sanchez”, you get another 93 hits.
If you Google “Willy” and “Matt Sanchez”, as you were asked to do in the first place and inexplicably didn’t, you return 6,260 hits.
And, if you google “Wilson” and “Matt Sanchez”, that returns 20,300 hits.
So let’s see; aside from the hit counts, that’s no less than four aliases that you’ve been under in your attempt to stalk and smear other people — plus another example of your typical behavior and subsequent bannings even in NON-gay forums.
posted by Charles Wilson on
North Liar Forty, you’re pathetic. The word “willy” refers to a whole lot of things or people other than me, as you well know. Same goes for “Wilson.” But, since you’ve lied before, and since you’re a wingnut, you’ll go right on lying. Ha!
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
And, with that last attempt at a Pythian shot, Charles Wilson picks up his Google-hits tactic and runs home. 🙂
Mission accomplished.
posted by Charles Wilson on
“Mission accomplished.”
You’ve gotta love it. Ha!
posted by Hank on
Reading the posts here from sanctimonious jerks, on all sides, convinces me more and more of the wisdom of Sullivan’s decision NOT to allow comments.
Are there any adults in charge of this place at all?
posted by Patrick on
Hank you should try getting the biggest juvenile here -CWilson and all his sockpuppets- to listen since he is a flamer from your side. When he attacks, people ought to respond or they get walked all over like Michiagn-Mark and others here. Someone noted CWilson has been banned at several blogs because of his bad conduct and lying. If you want to be fair and honest, start condemning CWilson because he’s the loudest, heat but no light flamer here.
You won’t because you agree with his tactics.
posted by Patrick on
CWilson, you lie like a Georgia coon dog on a hot summer day. “Someone decries attempted murder of four people in a gay bar. Michigan Matt says: put away the victim/pity card.” His (M-M) comments are callling upon the gay community to resist being content in just playing the victim. M-M implores them to rise above that and join others in the community to work for understanding, dialogue, and growth.
You seem to have a habit of lying and distorting what people write on this web blog and others (military, medical issues, food and travel blogs, community discussion sites, political and economic issue blogs). It seems your conduct ends with the blog masters banning or barring you from further comment.
Like other blogmasters, I think you need help to address the real reason why you go from one blog to the next fouling the air, the debate, the discussion.
JMHO