New Direction for Exodus?
The title is a bit of a word play in that I call attention to a keynote address (caution: large mp3 file) by Wendy Gritter at the 2008 Exodus Leadership Conference. Introduced by Exodus President, Alan Chambers, Mrs. Gritter is leader of the New Direction ministries in Canada. The mission of New Direction is “creating a safe place for same-gender-attracted people to journey towards wholeness in Christ.” The focus of New Direction appears to be much more focused on Christian ministry to same-sex attracted people as opposed to mediating change of sexual orientation.
The address is about an hour long and should be heard completely to get the message but I pulled out a couple of quotes to portray the tone:
What would it mean to stop seeing the gay affirming church as our enemy?
…when we look at those who now have their stories on the Beyond Ex-gay website…we also ought not to be patronizing? There can be this subtle sense that ‘you just didn’t try hard enough….but see we did.’ How can we engage relationally with those who have come to different theological understanding than we have?
I think we need to relinquish a defensive posture that would focus on what we are against instead of what we are for.
What the culture sees is that you guys are about reorientation.
We shoot ourselves in the foot when we put second things first.
There is much more and you can get a sense of the direction from the Power Point as well. The general tone is that Exodus would be wise to avoid political entanglements that prevent optimal Christian ministry. Ministry should be the main (sole?) focus. In addition, she takes on the messaging of Exodus that change is possible and causation is not inherent. She believes those issues should be secondary to actual Christian formation and living. With reorientation as the focus, Christian ministry can take a backseat. In other words, Exodus should not be a “poster child for straightness” as the main message.
There is much to unpack here so let’s talk…
(1) Exodus would be wise to avoid political entanglements that prevent optimal Christian ministry.
(2) Ministry should be the main (sole?) focus.
(3) The message of Exodus that “change is possible and causation is not inherent” should be secondary to actual Christian formation and living.
(4) Exodus should not be a “poster child for straightness” as the main message.
Wow. She sounds a lot like me.
Warren: I found this elsewhere on you blog, a comment by Mary, dated January 29, 2008 @ 4:16 pm
“Briefly, our focus should be on the Kingdom of Heaven and not on earthly matters and politics. It seems to sour the motivation that is presented to those who struggle or who are gay. It blurs the focus and intent of the mission.”
From Mary’s lips to Alan Chamber’s ears, huh? Now even EXODUS’s own keynote speaker seems to agree. Will EXODUS leadership listen?
I invited Wendy to speak at the Leadership Conference and was thrilled with what she presented. There is a lot to unpack; I am still processing. I can say that I did a lot of positive head-nodding.
Hope the head-nodding turns into some action.
Michael and Alan,
What exactly is the political involvement of Exodus versus their core mission of supporting people who do not want to act on their same gender attractions?
And while you’re at it, why not “do away with the term ex-gay entirely and see that it is never used again”? Why not “offically retire it” as you said you wanted to do back in 2006?
These two things, poltics and misleading language, are the only serious objections I have with EXODUS. As I have said many times, I support EXODUS’s ministry to help those who want to live in accordance with their beliefs — even though I disagree with many of those beliefs.
Ann: You will have to ask Alan. Alcoholics Anonymous has survived and thrived by deliberately avoiding political entanglements:
Tradition 10: “Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.”
And here is the text from the Big Book, the long form of the traditions:
“No A.A. group or member should ever, in such a way as to implicate A.A., express any opinion on outside controversial issues - particuarly those of politics, alcohol reform, or sectarian religion. The Alcoholics Anonymous groups oppose no one. Concerning such matters they can express no views whatever..”
AA knew that political entanglements would cloud their message and outreach. They were right. Why is EXODUS so opposed to doing likewise?
And while you’re at it, why not “do away with the term ex-gay entirely and see that it is never used again”?
Michael,
I believe if this term was never used again it would be too soon - I have never liked labels and this one has too many interpretations and used for and against any particular position. It also diminishes individuality.
AA knew that political entanglements would cloud their message and outreach. They were right. Why is EXODUS so opposed to doing likewise?
Michael,
Thanks for the reference - I know 12 step programs have helped and continue to help so many people. They stay focused on the 12 steps and do not venture into other areas - an individual stays concentrated and anonymous. I do not know what political affiliations Exodus has or is involved in or how that has helped or hurt them.
Trust me. It has hurt them. Many folks, who might otherwise seek out EXODUS for pastoral support, now assume that they may also have to “sign-on” to a list of political causes in order to be “ex-gay” or right with God. We, the founders of EXODUS, clearly saw that danger and wanted to avoid that impression at all costs.
As Mary pointed out on another thread: “It (political entanglement) seems to sour the motivation that is presented to those who struggle or who are gay. It blurs the focus and intent of the mission.” Mrs. Gritter seems to agree.
Mrs. Gritter is also right “on point” when she observes that EXODUS tends to alienate and stigmitize those who did not “change” with its condescending ‘you just didn’t try hard enough” message and tone — when even their leaders admit that they still are not straight.
Mrs. Gritter sounds like she is calling for some genuine reform. EXODUS would be well-advised to follow her suggestions.
I had the opportunity to meet Wendy a few years ago when I spoke at the ministry she directs in Toronto. Not that she needs any endorsements, but I found her and her staff to be people of great depth who had a real grasp of the many sides of the issues surrounding sexual identity. In my opinion, the PP that is posted is consistent with the substance she brings to the table.
Michael,
Does one have to have a religious belief or affiliation to be part of Exodus - either as a staff member or someone who is looking for support and/or understanding options regarding their unwanted same gender attractions? Also, if they have to have a religious belief, what is that? Is it exclusive to just a particular group of people or open to everyone?
Mrs. Gritter is also right “on point” when she observes that EXODUS tends to alienate and stigmitize those who did not “change” with its condescending ‘you just didn’t try hard enough” message and tone
Michael,
If this is true, and Exodus is indeed saying and doing this without correcting or amending it, then I am not interested in anything else they have to say. I really hope that whatever they have said in this direction, it has been since amended.
Ann–
You quoted Michael’s version of Mrs. Gritter’s comment. Her version was “There can be this subtle sense that ‘you just didn’t try hard enough….but see we did.’”
Big difference between ‘there can be this subtle sense’ and Michael’s version. I didn’t mean that to sound mean but rather to cut right to the point. I’ve been in situations where people took affront before I ever spoke a word…the simple fact that I still identified as ‘ex-gay’ gave off that subtle sense Wendy spoke about. No words, no message, no tone. The fact that I identfied as ‘ex-gay’ and showed up happy and sane was enough to affront more than a few.
When we dialogued some time ago in my early days on the blog, Michael and I had quite a few discussions about the term ‘ex-gay’. Lol. I believe I had about as many with Jayhuck. Anyway, I continued to make one important point. People who are in that mindset need a way to find each other; they need a way to find information on the internet. In short, they need a good handle, a good term that speaks both to those already ‘in the club’ and for those who might be curious. I think “ex-gay” does that. Many object to the term saying ‘ex’ implies ‘no longer, totally cut off’ but I was one of the staunchest supporters of the term emphasing that the most common use of ‘ex’ is “from”. Isn’t that what the “ex” in “Exodus” means?
Anyway, a good handle is needed; I like that one. And, the people who I have debated this with (again, primarily Michael and Jayhuck) 1) could never suggest a more suitable term 2) continued to use it themselves.
Michael said:
I think Wendy is suggesting a more comprehensive move than that actually. If everyone here has not yet listened to the audio of her keynote, I encourage you to do so. If Exodus was to actually make these changes in a serious way, I don’t see what we would have to complain about at that point, at least pertaining to them.
I take no issue with Exodus being there for those who study scripture, and come to the conclusion that, to be who God wants them to be, they can’t be intimate with a member of the same sex. But they have to be willing to treat those who have come to a different conclusion after equal consideration as perfectly ok as well.
does one have to believe in God or be affiliated with a religion to be involved with Exodus on any level? If so, what religion or religious beliefs are required?
But they have to be willing to treat those who have come to a different conclusion after equal consideration as perfectly ok as well.
David,
Do you think the organizations who support the gay community (HRC, Soulforce, Truth Wins Out, etc.) should be willing to treat those who have come to a different conclusion after equal consideration as perfectly ok as well? If so, do they?
Ann, why don’t you email them and ask? I think there are basic requirements concerning belief - as with most ministries - but I’m sure they would answer you in more detail.
David,
I was asking you if YOU thought they should be willing to treat those who have come to a different conclusion after equal consideration as perfectly ok as well? You opined that Exodus should and I was wondering your thoughts on the equality of thought with other organizations regarding those who have come to a different conclusion.
I think Exodus is reacting to the realization that non-Christians (whose numbers are growing, not shrinking) are increasingly seeing Christians as abusive toward gay people and holding Christians in contempt for that behavior. Go visit barna.org if you want studies which support this idea. Christians are very conscious of their public image and while their hatred toward gay people (a.k.a. “homosexuality is a sin”) may not lessen, they’ll try and spin it differently so that they don’t look quite so bad.
David,
In reference to #86197, I thought this was in response to #85195 - am I right or were you responding to my other questions in 85194? I apologize if I answered the wrong one.
Ann: I went beyond what Mrs. Gritter said because she seriously understated the actual experience of “ex-gay survivors” She said: “There can be this subtle sense that ‘you just didn’t try hard enough….but see we did.’”
I know I am speaking for many, many “ex-gay suvivors”, and I can assure her, that “sense” is not so subtle. Frequently, it’s downright belittling, hostile, rejecting and abusive. People are routinely shunned when they don’t “change” — with devastating emotional and spritual effects. Some become hopeless, even suicidal. EXODUS turns a deaf ear to such folks.
Many like me have been told: “”You didn’t try hard enough. You didn’t pray hard enough. You didn’t fellowship enough. You didn’t trust God enough. You didn’t want it badly enough. You probably weren’r saved to begin with. You believed a different Gospel.” Previous friends and supporters are told to “have no fellowship” with us.
Mrs. Gritter asked: …when we look at those who now have their stories on the Beyond Ex-gay website…we also ought not to be patronizing?
David Roberts,
Could you clarify what you mean by “treat…as perfectly ok”?
Thanks.
dm
Thought I might add a few thoughts ….
This talk was presented at an Exodus Leadership Conference. Thoughout the talk I was very conscious of building bridges - so that some of the challenging things I had to say might have a greater opportunity of being heard. Change is difficult - particularly when you are addressing a very diverse network of autonomous ministry leaders. The kind of paradigmatic change that I was raising is not an easy “lightswitch on” implementation. Nor, was I the first or only one to raise these kinds of issues. The response to this address was overwhelmingly positive - though those who disagreed perhaps just didn’t speak to me. This shows me that Exodus leaders are thinking these things through - taking them seriously - and trying to discern how God will lead them forward in the new contexts we find ourselves in. I don’t doubt that the heart of Exodus is to glorify Christ and be his presence in the lives of those who experience same-gender attraction. At the same time, if you listen to the address in its entirety, you will hear significant critique. So, while I certainly had in the back of my mind what the talk might sound like to those beyond Exodus circles, it was not directly addressed to those beyond Exodus.
To suggest this is simply a “spin” to make us look better is to simplistically dismiss very genuine and deeply prayerful efforts to move forward in a manner that does not contribute to or perpetuate a sense of alienation between the gay community and the Christian community. While I cannot speak for all Exodus leaders, personally my hope is that I can lead in a manner that also builds bridges to those who identify as gay and Christian who hold a different perspective on sexual ethics than I do. Why? Because who am I to presume that I have a perfect pipeline to God and everyone else is wrong and completely deceived? While I believe what I believe about sexuality deeply - I hope that I can be humble enough to listen and learn from my gay Christian brothers and sisters. It seems to me that Scripture speaks much more often about pride than it does about homosexuality. So if someone wants to simply dismiss this as “spin” to look better - how does that contribute to a ministry of reconciliation? There is so much potential moving forward to actually engage same-gender attracted people beyond the Christian community with the love of Christ - for those of us who know and love Christ - let’s get on with that.
J.James:
Perceptions are valid as far as perceptions go, but they are not “reality” in a factual sense. Non-Christians may perceive Christians as “abusive” towards gay people, but would be hard pressed to show any examples of real “abuse”. Instead, what they see as “asbuse”, is merely “contempt”.
Therefor Christian contempt for homosexual behavior is no different than non-Christian contempt for Christian behaviour. Abuse is a much stronger word that simply doesn’t apply absent real “abuse”…
(PS: the example of Phelp’s Westboro Church is cancelled out by the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. Both are truly abusive, and both are tiny, fringe, and non-represenative of anything other than tiny abusive fringes)
Wendy: Thanks for your comments. If there were such a thing as “Super Wednesday” and you were on the ticket to become the new leader of EXODUS, you would have my vote!
I sincerely hope that EXODUS leadership will take up your vision, making “very genuine and deeply prayerful efforts to move forward in a manner that does not contribute to or perpetuate a sense of alienation between the gay community and the Christian community” In my view, this would be best accomplished by:
(1) Focussing on ministry, and getting out of politics.
(2) Dropping vague, misleading terms like “ex-gay” and “former homosexual”, as Alan Chambers seemed to indicate (in 2006) that he thought should be done — since these give the false impression of a change from gay to straight — something even EXODUS leaders acknowledge they have not done.
(3) Listening, really listening and reaching out to those sincere, Christian gay people who have “dropped out”, instead of seeing them as the enemy, or dismissing them as failures who did not do “enough”.
I believe it’s very, very difficult to shun someone who isn’t right in front of you. So, how is all of this shunning going on? Does someone from Exodus hunt you down to say “now I’m going to shun you” or could it be that many ex-ex’es keep presenting themselves to Exodus over and over again expecting a blessing Exodus can’t give?
I was in Exodus at the time that Michael left. No one told me to have nothing more to do with him and I know several Exodus leaders who continued to respond to his letters, emails and phone calls for years afterward. One reconnected briefly around the time that Michael and I started blogging here. Michael references both phone conversations and e-mail dialogues he’s had with the current Exodus president, Alan Chambers. These examples do not fit the accepted, conventional definition of ’shunning’.
And again I hear the complaints about the term “ex-gay” along with “former homosexual” and, yet again, I hear no suggestions of replacement terms. Anyone? I’ve long regarded Michael as one of the most talented wordsmiths I’ve ever encountered yet he’s not offering any solutions.
Exodus labored for 6 months or better before coming to agreement on the term ‘ex-gay’ approximately 30 years ago and, quite frankly, didn’t anticipate this backlash. In both of the common phrases, we were attempting to identify and dis-identify at the same time. I believe that would still be at least part of the goal of any new term or phrase. Exodus is attempting to reach people who identify as gay but have a conflict between their sexuality and their faith. Can anyone come up with a mutually agreeable term for that?
Total change of topic warning:
My best friend is an ex-ex! Of all of the ex-ex’es I’ve ever known, he’s the only one that listens back. When I say I feel happy and fulfilled, he doesn’t think I’m saying “and you’ll never be”. It’s just me saying where I’m at. And, if I say I’m having a bad week, he doesn’t try to tell me it’s because I’m ‘denying my true gay self’…he sees it for a bad week. Conversely, when he’s having relationship problems, I don’t tell him ‘that’s because you’re with a man’; I attempt to see the problem at hand. And when he’s on cloud nine over a relationship, I don’t think he’s judging my ex-gayness. It would be nice to have more friendships such as this one. It sounds like part of what Wendy envisions.
Eddy,
In addition to the tremendous word-smithing challenges is the seeming suspicion that simmers beneath the surface making any attempted changes suspect. At New Direction we tend to simply say same-gender attracted people - but we’ve had people take great exception to that description as well.
In terms of your friendship with your best friend - I do agree that there is some very important learning in precisely that kind of relationship. It would seem to me that learning to listen and be a true friend despite deeply personal and divergent views on sexuality, demonstrates a dependence on the Spirit and an exercise in the fruits of the Spirit in both of you - that much of the church would benefit greatly from observing and respecting. This sort of friendship transcends our sexuality - and we all know the damage that can be done when people are reduced to their sexuality.
A couple of years ago I attended a GCN conference after clearing it with Justin. I felt very honoured to be able to be there and to listen and learn. I will never forget the moments after Ron Belgau (side B) finished his keynote. There was a sustained and warm applause (not a standing ovation - but genuine none-the-less :). In that moment I witnessed a group of men and women putting Christ first - and honouring a brother’s commitment to Christ - despite the reality that many in the audience held a side A perspective. As an ever-straight, in that moment I felt this longing for the church at large to be able to witness what I was witnessing. For all of the fighting that has taken place over gay issues - how many have been able to witness something like that? My theology hasn’t changed - nor is it wishy-washy … but my heart for people I pray continues to enlarge. God is big enough - big enough to keep me in the midst of mysteries I don’t fully understand and won’t fully understand this side of heaven.
Might it be that despite the limitations of wording and language - we would see each other’s hearts and find Christ alive in that place. Other things are important - but they are secondary.
Thanks Wendy. I’ve appreciated your comments. I think one reason my friend and I have endured is that we became friends despite theological differences in the first place. I was an exuberant charismatic bible school graduate and he was a conservative Wisconsin synod Lutheran. Beyond that, we had more in common than just being ‘ex’. So our friendship just kept growing and when he went ‘ex-ex’, it merely marked another chapter.
It really only gets tricky when we’re around others. I don’t tell people ‘his story’ and he doesn’t tell people mine. We find they make assumptions. His boyfriend who thinks I’m ‘a stitch’ recently tried to set me up with a work-buddy. I’m trying to avoid using ‘ex-gay’ myself so I gave him my new line: “No thanks, I’m trying to quit.” It’s clever and all that but my friend’s partner still doesn’t understand where I’m at. “Same-gender attracted” is good but doesn’t have any sense of “I’m trying to quit.”
And as with all terms and labels, there’s the statement it makes. Whatever term or label we come up with, I would hope that, for most, that label wouldn’t be what defines them. There was a time when I was principally “Ed, the ex-gay” but I’m also Ed, the stitch; Ed, the brother; Ed, the thinker; Eddy, karaoke man; Eddy, the friendly guy (Eddy, the couch potato has given way to Eddy, the computer junkie). There are so many things that occupy more of my focus than sexual attractions. If I’m reduced to just one label, it ought to be one of those others.
As an Exodus leader who attended the conference and heard Wendy’s presentation in its entirety, I am strongly supportive of her comments. I also believe that Wendy’s views represent those of the majority of Exodus leaders whom I know. This will not be a flash in the pan.
I urge readers to remember that Exodus consists of over 190 ministries across North America. These ministries include people from a wide range of experiences, educational backgrounds and spiritual views. We need to be cautious about making broad generalizations about the the positions and record of Exodus because many points mentioned in this blog may apply to one or more individual ministries without necessarily applying to the whole.
However, I agree strongly with Wendy that there has all too often been a subtle accusation communicated to those who have sought ministry for SSA and have failed to “change.” The message has been, “You just didn’t try hard enough.” Michael, I regret that has been your experience and that of others.
Movements that endure over the long haul demonstrate the capacity to change and mature, and I believe that we are witnesses to that quality of growth in Exodus.
Exodus will focus more purely on Christian character formation and minister to those who retain SSA feelings but wish to live by the biblical principles of sexual self-restraint. We will reduce our preoccupation with total shifts in sexual orientation, and build bridges with the gay community, even with those who may hate us. I believe we will do this with courage and sensitivity.
There are additional positive trends that emerged in this conference that Warren will likely have us address in other posts. Nevertheless, I am grateful for the experience this conference provided for growth and dialogue and for the opportunity to learn from our critics both in this blog and in other venues.
@ Ann
Yes, you are correct. This positively annoying and absurd obsession Warren has with pre-screening comments appears to have confused the order - argh.
As to the organizations you listed, they are very different from each other, but none are a ministry. I expect far more from a ministry than a political advocacy. However, take the HRC for instance, what in their policy has any problem with an individual’s desire to be anything? In my opinion, no, I’ve stated this so many times I can’t imagine, but if you truly believe that God does not want you acting on your same-sex desires, then don’t.
My issues are with a) standing in the way of my right to live as you do, and that includes a formally recognized union with the person I love, and b) false claims of change which lead to defeat and frustration and pain and possibly a loss of faith. In fact, forget the change part entirely - it ain’t happening and we all know it. Instead, say we are hear to support you in what you feel God wants in your life. If that’s celibacy or attempting to emphasize any heterosexual feelings one may have, fine. It makes you no better or worse than they guy who doesn’t, but that’s not you.
@DM
As in, not in need of change. As in, all things being equal, your relationship with someone of the same sex is between you and God.
…say we are here(sic) to support you in what you feel God wants in your life. If that’s celibacy or attempting to emphasize any heterosexual feelings one may have, fine. It makes you no better or worse than they guy who [wants to reinstate temple prostitution and ritual orgies].
Good luck with that David. Some things ARE better and others ARE worse. An organization that refuses to make a moral judgement doesn’t have much of a mission at all.
With all due respect, Marty, you have provided a prime example of what Exodus will be up against should they take the path Wendy has suggested. You, or more correctly the attitude that would assume that any deviation from a certain understanding of scripture (certainly on peripheral issues such as this) is an evil compromise, giving ground to the enemy, IS the problem.
You don’t give God room to deal with his children, you don’t even give Him room to breath. You have it all figured out for them. This is valid for your own life, not mine. If I start messing with the virgin birth or salvation by grace, you might have a case. And you may offer your opinion on the rest to me, if asked, but otherwise it really is none of your business to judge.
I pray Alan Chambers is up to the job.
At New Direction we tend to simply say same-gender attracted people - but we’ve had people take great exception to that description as well.
My preference would be to identify the individual first and then whatever else. Puts the priorities in order.
We’re beginning to touch on the core question of how one contextualizes that gospel in a morally relativist, post-modern context. We certainly see in Scripture that the Gospel is scandalous - it does offend and it does divide. We also see in Scripture apostles being challenged to not make people “outsiders” who God has received as sons. I’m not at a place at all of saying that sexual ethics don’t matter. As I look at Scripture, sexual conduct generally speaking is clearly important to God. And I have a position on what I believe is God’s best for sexuality - one that is different, for instance, than David R’s. However, I agree with David that sexual ethics are secondary sanctification issues - not in the realm of justification or essential doctrine. (Now I understand that for many sexual ethics is tied to the authority of Scripture - which is an essential doctrine.) But as we engage the messy reality of relationship and community, I have felt convicted to humble myself and be able to say, “I could be wrong”…. therefore, in my engagement with those who identify as Christian who come to a different conclusion on sexual ethics than I do, I will focus my energies on encouraging the life of Christ within us. Because if God is on the throne, I don’t have to convince anyone of anything - I just need to keep showing up in humility and love and bear witness to the presence of the Spirit by staying alive to that myself. Frankly, that is tough enough in my own selfish brokenness.
If we are going to be effective in contextualizing the gospel in the midst of a legacy of a lot of baggage back and forth between conservatives and liberals regarding gay issues, I think we will really need to rediscover and reimagine what Micah 6:8 means, “What does the Lord require of you? To do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.”
I could not agree more.
And I might add that the presumption that the gay Christian is somehow trying to get around scripture for selfish gain is. in my view, a horrible misjudgment. Most of us have agonized, perhaps poured over scripture more than the average Christian, just to find out how God wants us to live. In the end, some believe that is celibacy, some believe it is a monogamous same-sex relationship.
I gave God complete authority in these issues long ago; at some point I had to move forward with what I felt He was saying to me, through scripture and spirit. But this idea that one cannot take a different view of any verse for any reason, it’s just plain odd. I will not make an idol out of scripture - God inspired it, but it is not God.
Eddy,
Ok, I never thought of it like that and understand that there needs to be a reference point that individuals can look up, etc. - I also understand what you are writing about Exodus. I have always liked them and their purpose but want to be mindful of how others feel as well. My observation of them recently is that they have acted in an admirable and honorable way by listening and making amendments as needed. If there are some who are arrogant and condescening, then other leaders should bring it to their attention and monitor them for a change in attitude. I also think there is nothing wrong with a person saying they have significant changes in their attractions to the opposite gender - we are all different and this person should not be looked down upon or doubted by those who do not have the same experience. Respect goes both ways and it hurts just as much to the person who has experienced authentic opposite gender attractions and are doubted as those who have not had that experience and their efforts are questioned.
There is a difference, however, from experiencing shifts and saying one can help make them happen. I think the latter is perfectly possible in some people to some degree - stranger things certainly happen - but whether that change, certainly to any major degree, can be made to happen and with any regularity, is highly debatable.
In fact, perhaps if those who peddle “change” would stop doing so, the experience would not be so cheapened when it does occur on it’s own. Something to think about.
stranger things certainly happen
David,
This is the kind of comment I was referring to - this kind of sarcasm and doubt, expressed this way without regard to the effect has, hurts. Respect does go both ways.
Modifications in feelings and attractions, and how they change over time and with circumstance, is an individual dynamic and not one to be measured or judged according to another’s point of view.
David,
Regarding those who boast loudly about what “they” can do as opposed to what “others” cannot do usually reveals an insecurity about what they really feel and believe. I have always said it is the individual who quietly and in a measured way, over time, notices and realizes shifts in their feelings and attractions to the opposite gender or has a shift in perspective on current attractions/desires that I want to pay attention to - seems they have more substance and conviction.
For the most part, I think I just said that. One can certainly read the results of attempts to cause such change, and make judgments from that.
But honestly, until we can get rid of nuts like this, and Nicolosi who glibly states that “once a [man with a homosexual problem] learns to trust men, his homosexuality goes away, and on and on, there will be some doubt and sarcasm. I just don’t understand why it doesn’t bother you as much as it does me. Does it?
And before you say that Exodus is different, I just got done reading a pamphlet from them that has Nicolosi plastered all over it. I think they are headed in the right direction, but they still use this junk when they need to. Deception doesn’t help anyone, Ann, you or me.
And believe it or not, that particular comment was not meant to be either sarcastic or doubtful, though I can see that it would look that way. Sexuality is complicated, that is my meaning.
It should be underscored (again) that Exodus is a very diverse network. While the head office of Exodus does set standards for ministry - it is very challenging to form and shape the nuance and ethos of over 120 autonomous ministries. If you can think about how challenging it can be to go through change management in one organization - try introducing a change management process to 120+.
I would perhaps encourage those who offer critique (some of which is very helpful and needed - some of which not so helpful and not so charitable) to be aware that lumping everyone together into some homogeneous group called Exodus is actually not very fruitful in encouraging change - even if it is a convenient release for frustration and impatience with ongoing issues with which one takes exception.
p.s. Ned thanks so much for weighing in - great to have another Exodus’ leaders thoughts as part of the conversation.
Wendy, Ned, Eddy,
Is Exodus a religious organization/ministry? If one does not have any religious belief or affiliation, can Exodus help them understand and modify their unwanted same gender attractions or the desire to act on them?
This is true, and I accept this to a point as a reason for inconsistencies, but it does not have anything to do with material coming directly from the home office. I don’t know if my reference to their recent pamphlet comes under your useful or not so useful suggestions, but it’s hard to blame a member ministry when the main office endorses such.
If they are going to lead, then let them lead. No one expects the entire network to change overnight, but where does it start if not with them?
I just don’t understand why it doesn’t bother you as much as it does me. Does it?
David,
We are two different people and have the privilege of undestanding things according to our own perceptions. I have read your posts with respect and do not hold quite the same feeling you do about Dr. Dobson and Dr. Nicolosi, and Exodus. They have had a different effect on me. I am concerned about any negative effect they have had on others and am also mindful that we all develope and evolve and mature as people and organizations. Many times that means adjusting our thoughts and views and long held beliefs to align with new information and circumstances that will bring the most optimal good to those involved. That goes for everyone who has been or is affected by this issue and all that pertains to it.
Ann,
Exodus does have a distinctly Christian mission statement - but they themselves do not engage in front-line ministry. Front-line ministry happens locally through the member ministries - and here again there may be diversity.
For New Direction, the ministry I lead, we also have a distinctly Christian mission statement. However, we are quite open to engaging anyone regardless of religious affiliation. Over the years we have engaged people of other faiths such as Hinduism and Islam. We have also had many people who are at a place of ambivalence about the integration of faith and sexuality - and we seek to meet them where they’re at. In those situations, we do not see our role as one of proselytizing but rather share as respectfully as we can some of the insights we have gleaned about the journey with unwanted same-gender attraction in line with the individual’s stated goals.
As we’ve become more nuanced in our messaging, the number of people unsure about the place of faith in their journey has increased - we’re grateful for the opportunity to serve them. We believe that God has put his people in the world to be a blessing - and so we seek to be a blessing regardless of where a person is in terms of faith.
We believe that God has put his people in the world to be a blessing - and so we seek to be a blessing regardless of where a person is in terms of faith.
Wendy,
These are indeed refreshing words - this really opens up a whole new opportunity for people who are not of the Christian faith and are looking for resources to understand and modify their same gender attractions/desires. I can only imagine how many people have felt excluded and/or intimidated by organizations who have a Christian theme and/or requirement. It almost sounds like an exclusive country club to those who do not share the same beliefs. I never thought it should be a pre-requisite for those who choose to seek a different perspective on that (same gender attractions) which they never asked for, do not want or value and want to modify according to their individuality.
Sometimes it’s absolutely delightful to be wrong. When I got home from work and booted up the PC, I cringed when I saw more than a dozen new comments on this thread. “Oh no”, I thought, “somebody’s on a rant!” Thanks to all who blogged today while I was off to work. Thanks for some of the best dialogue I’ve yet witnessed here.
Ann, thanks for understanding about the need for a handle. The challenge (after an appropriate handle is settled on) is to avoid the common pitfalls of labeling.
Wendy, thanks for your openness and for creating a more clear picture of the dynamics of Exodus and its agencies.
And, David, thanks. I think we’ve mostly encountered each other in ‘the heat of battle’; it was refreshing and challenging (in the good way) to read your comments today.
I really don’t have much to add. Wendy did a good job answering Ann’s question about Exodus’ Christian focus. I also had occasion to meet with folks whose ‘motivation for change’ was not Christian beliefs. I was a rather prolific writer of ‘teaching sheets’…newsletter inserts. I was both criticized and applauded for the fact that I didn’t fill them with bible verses and ‘God said…’ statements. I always figured that a Christian might get a little extra heavenly assistance working things out but that the applied principles had to make sense outside of the Christian realm as well. I believe it was the contact with these people that influenced that change in my writing approach.
Wendy, Ned: Michael Bussee was one of the founders of Exodus. I showed up in the second year as a delegate from my bible school and then, after graduation, joined Outpost as co-director. I believe Michael moved on by Exodus III or shortly thereafter. I moved back and forth between Texas and Minnesota over the next decade and was involved through Exodus X–give or take a year or two. Long story short: Warren got us both blogging here at approximately the same time…and it’s very difficult to escape.
Thanks for the retrospective Ed…. I’ve lurked for a while so I’m pretty familiar with the history
I’ve never commented on a blog as much as I have in the last couple of days …. hopefully I won’t look back in a couple of weeks and cringe. I tend to be an advocate for very careful input in such a public forum.
Ann:
I would concur with Wendy’s comments about the mission of Exodus. I, too, am sensitive to the concern that Christian ministries have the potential to create the impression of being a group for those in the insider elite. On the other hand, there is also the risk that being vague or too nuanced about one’s message can lead to a loss of purpose or effectiveness. It is indeed difficult to balance the need to be clear about one’s purpose with the need to invite a warm engagement with those who have differing views, or who are simply uncertain!
As a mental health professional, it may be less conflictual for me to provide assistance to both Christian believers and to those of other faiths or of no faith than it is for some Exodus affiliated organizations. My colleagues and I (in our place of work) seek to present ourselves authentically, which entails being open about our Christian perspective and world view, although we never want to pressure others, covertly or overtly, into altering their opinions simply to conform to any expectations they think we might have.
I intend to be a good listener to all voices in this debate. I appreciate many of the comments I have read here, especially yours, Wendy, that have further enhanced your presentation. Unlike some here, I have been helped by Dr. Joe Nicolosi as well as by Dr. James Dobson. Dr. Nicolosi’s description of the development of SSA in males fits very closely with the experiences of many of my clients. These men have been helped by Dr. Nicolosi’s writings and professional example. I do not object to Exodus quoting Dr. Nicolosi in its publications, nor do I think that doing so compromises either our ministry purpose nor our intention to be conciliatory with those holding views opposed to our own.
However, I probably differ with Dr. Nicolosi in that I do not believe that the evidence is conclusive that reparative theory uniformly describes all with SSA. I especially question the position that adequate and honest confrontation of psychological issues will always bring a shift in sexual orientation.
Like you, Wendy, I am not accustomed to spending as much time blogging as I have in recent days. Perhaps this behavior may be my adaptation to the dramatic cultural shifts you described in your presentation!
Wow, that’s a hard one to swallow, Ned. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard even Nicolosi’s “sort of” supporters characterize him as professional. And I have to admit, your not being concerned about using him in Exodus material is sad to me. NARTH is bad on so many levels it would be hard to cover them all.
I’m curious, are you a member of NARTH? Nicolosi and NARTH are pretty much one and the same from what I have seen. Certainly he is the driving personality behind it, no?
I just wanted to pipe in for a moment and say thank you for your compassionate and considerate conversation. This dialogue was forwarded to me by a dear friend, one who was part of my own journey in dealing with my sexuality from the beginning. As a brief framing, I am part of GCN and side A. Wendy, I was delighted to see your mention of the respect and genuine love that GCN seeks to foster amongst those who love Jesus and find that their sexuality is at odds with conventional understanding of scripture. GCN became home for me when my own church disfellowshipped me… a difficult time when I didn’t know how to define my sexuality, but knew that without a doubt, loving Jesus had to be the focus of my journey…
Regarding the use of the term “ex-gay”… Isn’t the root issue how both camps define the word “gay”? My understanding in reading “ex-gay” literature is that homosexuality is defined as a chosen behavior, actions stemming from an attraction to the same gender. However the GLBT community as well as mainstream culture define “gay” as the attraction itself, not simply the behavior. I’ve read in numerous places online and in books where leaders within “ex-gay” ministries admit a contiued struggle SSA, at least to some degree but make a faith driven choice to not act accordingly. The primary reason we’ve been able to create a community on GCN that can be “ohana” (family) for those who of differing conclusions about the same-sex intimate relationships is because most identify as “gay”, according to the societally accepted definition. The difference occurs in how each of us experience God’s direction in faithfully living out our intimate lives.
Wendy, I appreciate your use of “same gender attracted people” for that reason… Though it is a mouthful!
The reality is, language creates our reality. The words we use and the definitions we associate with them either bind us together or divide us. It is impossible to deny that semantics are important, particularly when we as the Body are functioning in a world that is increasingly faced with negative perceptions of Jesus via mainstream Christianity. Words such as “saved” and “sin” and “born again” and “religion” come packaged with different emotional experiences for those within Christianity than for those without. In a world that needs Jesus so desparately, the words we use truly make a difference. Is it possible to create a term to describe those who experience SSA yet choose to live withi the context of heterosexuality without directly confronting the entire GLBT community by saying “ex-gay”?
Ned: I pray that EXODUS will adopt and live by these words you wrote:
“Exodus will focus more purely on Christian character formation and minister to those who retain SSA feelings but wish to live by the biblical principles of sexual self-restraint. We will reduce our preoccupation with total shifts in sexual orientation, and build bridges with the gay community,” They should make it a Mission Statement.
By the way, I know it’s long, but “those who retain SSA feelings but wish to live by the biblical principles of sexual self-restraint.” is much better than “ex-gay” or “former homosexual”" because it is more straightforward and gives no intentional or unintentiional false impressions.
I appreciate Eddy’s compliment about me being a “wordsmith” and I have tried very hard to come up with something, but I just don’t think there is one buzzword or snazzy label that can communicate that.
Now, let’s pray that EXODUS will follow Wendy’s very wise counsel, get out of politics and, as Ned put it, “focus more purely” on what’s important — communicating the love of God to all His children.
NARTH is bad on so many levels it would be hard to cover them all.
David,
This is a subjective opinion and not all people and organizations feel the same as you do about Narth and/or Dr. Nicolosi. The fact that Narth has helped many people cannot be diminished because you do not hold the same opinion. While you do not agree with Narth or Dr. Nicolosi’s theories about same gender attractions, other people in fact do benefit from his knowledge and therapy and writing.
I also sat in on Wendy’s teaching at the Exodus Leadership Conference and really appreciated her thoughtful and nuanced, yet challenging words. Much of it – her spot-on assessment of post-modern and post-Christian culture – was not new to me. The “sticking point,” obviously, comes in how we are called to respond.
I love what she wrote above … “As (New Direction has) become more nuanced in our messaging, the number of people unsure about the place of faith in their journey has increased - we’re grateful for the opportunity to serve them. We believe that God has put his people in the world to be a blessing - and so we seek to be a blessing regardless of where a person is in terms of faith.”
That’s a wonderful gift and calling – both from God to New Direction and from them on into the world. In some ways, I envy it. But not all of us connected with Exodus have that particular calling. My calling – and that of my ministry Transforming Congregations – is not to bridge building with unbelievers or even the LGBT community. It’s primarily to educate, equip and encourage like-minded church leaders to develop ministries for those already secure in their evangelical faith but uncertain about how to deal with their (or their loved one’s) unwanted same-sex attraction or other sexual sin.
I thought Randy Thomas’s presentation, which followed Wendy’s, was a good counterpoint. He spoke of prophetic call – not in the sense of predicting the future, but in the classic Biblical way of calling God’s people and the culture back to faithfulness in God’s will. Some scholar (can’t remember who) described it as not only “comforting the afflicted,” but also “afflicting the comfortable” when it’s needed. Whether that’s people in the pew who are content with their homophobia and apathy or folk who have psychologically and practically adjusted to their sin.
Sometimes, the expression of that prophetic call - especially to the culture - will be perceived as “politics,” and sometimes it may be coupled with real political action, which is the right of an American Christian. I personally believe that Exodusians have a mandate to do the former; I’m of mixed mind about the latter.
However, this I know for sure. Many of us in the Exodus Network – myself and my ministry included – share a prophetic call. It’s as much a legitimate, God-given gift and vocation as bridge building. As I’ve posted here and elsewhere many times before, the Exodus Network does not march in lockstep. Thanks Wendy, Eddy, Ned and others for further clarifying that.
Wendy, Karen, Ned, Eddy,
Just think about all the people who have turned to God , pleading and praying, day after day, to take away their unwanted same gender attractions - they never wanted them, they don’t want them now, and feel as though God has met them with a deaf ear. Many of those people have turned away from God and Christianity - because of this they do not come to Exodus or other ministries because they do not want to experience that same desperation as before when they turned to their religion or church or God or pastors and never felt a shift in their attractions. What do you tell these people who do not want to or are not ready to involve religion again into their lives. How can these people feel accepted and comfortable where they are if they still want to find support in understanding and modifiying their unwanted same gender attractions instead of acting on them. Do you see where many people can and do feel excluded because they feel they do not meet the requirements put forth by these organizations?
Ann … to your last question, yes, and to the rest, I don’t know. As I explained above, building bridges to unbelievers or the disaffected is not my gift or call. I appreciate your questions and concern, but I don’t have answers for you.
Thank you Karen. I truly believe that in not having the answers, we as a society, are failing. Not only that, but it is a certain arrogance and exclusivity that turns and drives people away who want and need support - don’t they deserve the same as someone who proclaims Christianity, even if that proclamation is and can be hypocritical many times? Ministries and organizations and individuals are failing at the most basic level - they say “meet us on our terms not your’s” - saying this to a person who is suffering and hates what and how they feel, only validates these feelings for them. How can we be so blind and arrogant? Also, if a person has a religious faith and it isn’t Christian, they automatically feel they will not belong. Why do we put out the axiom that ONLY Christianity can save you from same gender attractions? All of the people and organizations and ministires who promote this are failing - not just in their reputations but in excluding the many people who have turned away from religion, those who do not share the same religion and those who just have never believed. God’s view of our life is eternity - not just how we are now. I wonder how many people - could it be thousands - who do not fit the mold that is promoted or required and are left just where they are instead of where they want to be?
Karen: I am not challenging the idea that EXODUS has the “right” to engage in political activism. But having the “right” doesn’t make it right. I join other EXODUS leaders, past and present, who just think it’s a very bad idea — and alienates many who might otherwise seek out EXODUS for ministry.
Many AA members are very political, but AA remains, as an organization, poltically neutral. EXODUS ought to follow suit — otherwise you give the impression that Jesus was a right-wing Republican and that “good” Chistians must be also.
As Mary pointed out in an earlier post: “It (political entanglement) seems to sour the motivation that is presented to those who struggle or who are gay. It blurs the focus and intent of the mission.” I am with Ned and Wendy that EXODUS should “focus more purely”. It is truly exciting that EXODUS seems to be giving the idea some serious thought and prayer.
Michael, I thought I said above that I was of mixed mind about whether it is “right” to exercise the right of political activism. I join other Exodus leaders, both past and present, who don’t have a firm opinion about it. And yet other former early leaders, one of whom (Ron Dennis) serves on my Board of Directors, believe it is acceptable or even necessary.
My impression from the Leadership Conference is that much thought and prayer have been given to it and will be given to it in the future. I think that you and others of your mindset have been heard, but it doesn’t mean the consensus (if there even is such a thing in the Exodus Network) will be to agree with you.
Again Ann, yours are very thought provoking questions. But because I am a Christian who believes the axiom that “ONLY Christianity can save you” from anything, I simply can’t begin to address them.
Wendy sees it! It’s not just “gay activists”, like me, who have noticed that “certain arrogance and exclusivity that turns and drives people away who want and need support”. Sincere, same-sex-attracted Christians everywhere are made to feel like “strangers at the gate”. That’s the real problem with EXODUS’s “over-promises”, the “hype”, the political divisiveness and the “you didn’t believe hard enough” message.
Like Wendy, I also wonder “how many people - could it be thousands - who do not fit the mold that is promoted or required and are left just where they are instead of where they want to be? Awhile back, Peterson Toscano asked a simikar question: “What happens to these people and who cares? Really want to know? Really care? Stop and listen to the “ex-gay” Survivors.
By the way, I know it’s long, but “those who retain SSA feelings but wish to live by the biblical principles of sexual self-restraint.” is much better than “ex-gay” or “former homosexual”” because it is more straightforward and gives no intentional or unintentiional false impressions.
Michael,
I understand that this description might be good for some people, however, it does not address other people and their reality. Some have quietly turned away from same gender relationships and identity without fanfare or proclamations and do not want to be associated with or referred to or remembered by a phrase or label. I respect them for that.
But because I am a Christian who believes the axiom that “ONLY Christianity can save you” from anything, I simply can’t begin to address them.
Karen,
I am not talking about what you and others “believe” - I am referring to how you can align yourselves more with what you believe and feel secure enough with that to let it show in how you interact with those who are not of the same belief. Isn’t that what Jesus did? He did not exclude anyone because they were not perfect like Him, rather people gravitated to Him because he was assessible to them and they did not feel excluded - He made it possible for them to see things from a different perspective without requiring them to be “Christians”. He was of the Jewish faith. Does your ministry accept someone from the Jewish faith who wants to learn a different perspective on how to respond to their same gender attractions or do you require them to be Christian in order to have this privilege?
Michael,
Regarding #85773, are you referring to Wendy or me?
Michael,
I was not referring to the ex-gay survivors in my post #85761 - I was referring to individuals who were not Christian and wanted support in finding ways to understand and modify their same gender attractions.
Ann, perhaps I have not been clear enough. My ministry does not work with individuals who are SSA. We work with conservative, evangelical church leaders, who are not required to describe anything about their sexuality as part of the process.
If we did work with SSA individuals, without a doubt we would welcome those from other faith perspectives, including Judaism, or those with no faith perspective at all. But our program would be firmly Christian in teaching and approach. I don’t consider that exclusive; I consider it having integrity. I don’t much see the point of inviting folk to join you and then later springing it on them, “Oh by the way, we’re Christian and here’s what that means.”
BTW, I’m not implying that’s what either Wendy or you mean. And I’d welcome her answers to your questions, since that’s more her focus.
I’m also sensing that the thread is deteriorating into an argument since I joined in, and whether that’s of my or others’ doing, I’m going to bow out gracefully and just lurk for a while.
Karen,
I did not realize the focus of your ministry and appreciate your patience in having me understand. I am also sorry if I sounded confrontational - that is not my style and I hope you continue to write on this thread.
wow - your daughter breaks her arm and by the time you get back from the doctor’s there’s been a flurry of activity
Ann - a few thoughts: there are some organizations within different faith groups for the population you refer to - Jonah for those of Jewish faith and Evergreen for those of Mormon faith to name a couple. Additionally, there are reparative therapists (IF someone is looking for that) who operate a secular practice. New Direction over ten years ago developed a faith neutral youth website called: http://www.freetobeme.com in the effort to provide a respectful alternative for youth (in the early days it spoke a lot about potential orientation change - and we’re in the process of trying to revise/update it - a slow and time consuming process). Additionally, I think there would be many front-line Exodus ministries that would not turn away someone sincerely seeking their support just because they didn’t hold a Christian faith (at least I would hope so).
Michael - I do agree that our legacy hasn’t been one of particular focus on bridge-building with those who disengaged (for a variety of reasons) from an Exodus-like process. I think that has been to our poverty - in that we have perhaps missed opportunities to re-engage discussions about faith (even if it meant leaving sexuality out of the conversation for a season). In some of our equipping for pastors and leaders, we encourage them to read the stories on ‘Beyond Ex-Gay’ because we want them to grasp that this is not a simplistic - “I, 2, 3 get straight, date and mate” kind of thing. We want them to know that there are very sincere people who attempted to change their orientation and were hurt and disillusioned in the process - because we want pastors and leaders to put discipleship first - and any shift in the direction of attractions in its proper secondary place. I know there are quiet relationships that have been invested in (ie. Eddy’s friend and others - for which I’m grateful), and public attempts at dialogue (like Bridges Across) …. but the public perception continues to be that there is a sense of enmity between “ex-gay” and “ex-ex-gay” (for the record I am not a fan of these terms - but it is a mouthful to find any kind of alternative - you’re quite right about that Bianca). So I do support innovative and creative ways to encourage relationships that focus on faith (recognizing that for some in vulnerable places this just might not be a good idea at this time). At the end of the day, I always come back to the reality that our Christian witness to the Good News of Jesus Christ is compromised when the world sees infighting between gay Christians and Exodus-like folks….. that ought not to be. I know there is a lot of nuance here and a lot of complexity - but at the end of the day ….. are we actually representing the Gospel of Christ in an attractive and winsome manner to those who do not yet know him? Regardless of our particular call and mission - I believe this needs to on the heart of every Christ-follower.
Bianca - thanks for your comments. I agree that language is one of the significant challenges facing Christ-followers seeking to be relevant in this arena today. We keep working at it - in fact one of our core values is “relevance” and in that description we commit ourselves to regularly reviewing our language usage. It is one of the reasons that this kind of dialogue is so helpful for me. I also just wanted to say that I am truly grateful that you have found a safe place at GCN to heal from the hurts caused by the church - and pray that you will be blessed as you put Christ first.
Wendy: I am certainly impressed by your line of thinking — and I pray EXODUS takes heed: “We want them to know that there are very sincere people who attempted to change their orientation and were hurt and disillusioned in the process - because we want pastors and leaders to put discipleship first - and any shift in the direction of attractions in its proper secondary place.”
A loud and enthusiastic AMEN! The dialog you are suggesting and the changes you are promposing are long overdue.
Thank you Wendy - I am aware of most of those organizations. I hope my point was made and that all the people and ministries and organizations that proclaim Christianity is the only way one can have a different perspective about their unwanted same gender attractions will realize that they are failing others who feel excluded because they do not share the same belief - whether it is from past disappointments, another religion, or no religion. I guess I am an idealist when I visualize a world where people from all walks of life who share a common unwanted attraction toward the same gender and they can feel accepted into organizations who have a common goal to help support them in their quest to gain a different perspective on how to respond to these desires/attractions so they are not acted upon. I wonder out of this kind of kindness and assessibility, how many of them would want to know more about the people who are assessable to them. I wonder if those who walked away previously because of disappointment would return to Christianity. I wonder if those of other religions would respect Christianity more because they have actually experienced Christ’s teachings through other’s deeds rather than words. Like I said before - how many, perhaps thousands, are left behind and stay where they are rather than where they want to be because religious organizations fail to see that in order to believe a religion, one has to experience it through the people who promote it. That can only be done the way Jesus did it - we have a lot to learn.
Ann–
I think one of the reasons I enjoy you so much is that you’ll ask tough questions of both sides! I mentioned earlier that I began to make my teaching sheets a bit less ‘churchy’ and that staff was available for one to one chats or ongoing sessions with folks who didn’t identify as Christian.
But the ministry itself, as well as its various group programs, maintained a strong Christian identity and focus. The primary reason for this is that most of those who came to us were Christians who struggled silently in their church pew. Some were sure their pastors would disfellowship them if they learned of their struggles; others weren’t sure what their pastors believed on the issue. So we focussed on that gap. My personal goal was to give my clients enough of a sense of their own relationship with God through Christ that they could find whatever ‘meat’ was available in their pastor’s exhortations. For that reason, we would focus on scriptures or portions of sermons that our group members brought to the table and then tried to see how those scriptures or lessons applied to their individual journeys or struggles.
At the time I had heard of one group out of New York City that was addressing the issue from a totally secular viewpoint. I provided contact address and how to find out more about the group but didn’t know how to proceed further. I feel like the name will come to me…but, so far, it’s eluding me…we’re going back 30 years. I do recall my one reservation about this group was that they seemed to have just one theory and one approach; the diversity I’d witnessed in those I’d met suggested that it might work for one or two but not for all.
But even when you try not to bring the issue of Christianity to the table, it will likely surface quickly anyway. Envision this typical first conversation: “So, you’re not sure that homosexuality is right for you? Why is that? What motivates you to pursue change?” 9 times out of 10, the person will counter with “so what’s your motivation?” And, my primary motivation is my Christian belief. So, it ends up on the table pretty quickly. The trick is not to get hung up there. “Okay, we do have different motivations for why we’re pursuing change but let’s take a look at the things we have in common. Despite your clear motivation, this is still quite a struggle for you; do you lose sight of your motivation? Does something come up that simply knocks you off course? That makes you doubt your original intent? Let’s start there.”
One of the great things about the Bible is that truth is simply truth. I know there are lots of verses we could debate but I’m opting for a simpler truth. I fully believe, Christian or not, that “the double-minded man is unstable in all of his ways”. Instead of a verse though, I could say “well, if you’re really not sure why you want to change or if you want to change, it’s going to continue to be a battle for you. As long as you’re divided about what you want…or think…or believe, it’s likely to be a rocky road.”
One man’s primary motivation was that he was the last male in the family to pass on the genes and family name. It was a strong motivation but it was also the only motivation he had to change. So, I encouraged him to weigh that motivation against the other motivations in his life. Could he reconcile his different motivations in life to each other? If not, which ones could thrive together and bring him the bigger sense of inner peace. He decided that carrying on the family line wasn’t worth 1) the sense of entrapment he’d feel in a hetero marriage 2) the responsibility for his wife never being completely loved 3) not finding out what gay love was really all about.
An extremely likable man, once he became ‘available’, he had a partner within a month! They both came back to talk to me. LOL! I think his introductory line was something like “This is Ed, he’s a Christian but he’s really got his head on straight.” Rare for Christians, so I’ve heard. I guess it’s a good thing Exodus wasn’t keeping stats. Even though the young man didn’t go straight or Christian, I’ve still got that filed away in my mental ’success’ category.
I believe Wendy was the one who touched on the notion of simply extending love and compassion and letting God do His part in His time.
Bianca–welcome aboard. I appreciated your comments. I think you may have hit on one big reason why it’s so difficult to find that mutually agreeable term. Most of the time, our discussions here have focussed on the ‘ex’ part, the ‘former’ part. I see ‘ex’ as ‘out of’; many see ‘ex’ as ‘no more, no how, no way’. But, you’re right that we have a difference of meaning re ‘gay’ also.
Karen–
I agree with Ann…keep on posting. I feel this has been one of the healthiest discussions we’ve yet had here and I appreciate seeing and hearing the different voices within Exodus. I’ve mentioned in the past how different ministries were quite unique…different approaches, styles, goals. The various comments have given better shape to that image for the other readers.
Eddy,
From the bottom of my heart I am grateful for the Christian ministries and the support and encouragement they have given so many people. My concern is for those people who have either been disappointed (see post #85754) or those who do not understand Christianity (other religions) or who have no religion at all. In the fullness of time and with the exposure to positive experiences I know where “I” would like them to be regarding faith but “I” am not them. It just hurts to think about all the people who want encouragement and support in their desire to live a valued life without acting on their same gender attractions and feel excluded or not qualified because they initially do not want to be affiliated with Christianity. I saw this verse today and perhaps it can better describe what I have been trying to say - only God can give us the gift of grace, it cannot be forced from someone else onto someone else. I know God’s timing is perfect and we can count on that.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and
this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God — not by works, so that no one can boast.
— Ephesians 2:8-9
I have to compliment all of the participants on this blog. What thoughtful discourse and genuine passion to make a positive difference! I’m amazed by how much goes on in the twenty-four hours between my posts.
David, I believe one of the most important steps we need to take is to demonstrate dignity and respect by listening to everyone who has a stake in the issues we are addressing. To suggest that Dr. Nicolosi is not a professional would be to deny the fact that he is a licensed psychologist (in the State of California) as well as the testimonies of many people who have been helped by his counsel and his writings. I have found them to be helpful to me even though, as I said earlier, my views appear to differ from his on some critical points.
You have a very strong negative opinion about his work. Perhaps you have good reason. Maybe you know former counselees who have been disappointed with their therapy experiences or you have found points with which you disagree in his writings. If you would share your thoughts, I think that perhaps we would all be interested. What I am not interested in is stigmatizing anyone, suggesting that any person in this discussion is less worthy of dignity than any other. I am seeking to learn the lesson Wendy has presented — to listen to and learn from even our greatest critics. Are you willing to take that journey with us?
To answer your question, I am a member of NARTH, I read their publications and stay in contact with some of their members. I am relatively distant from the organization, however, for a number of reasons. Nevertheless, I also appreciate many of the contributions that they have made.
Michael, frankly I am honored by your affirmation of some of my comments. It seems to me that getting past our defenses into genuine dialogue offers such enormous potential. It offers tremendous potential for transforming Christian ministry (referring to character, not necessarily to sexual attractions) and also potential for cutting edge research. Just imagine what could happen if gay researchers, sexual identity therapists, reparative therapists, Exodus ministries, etc. could collaborate on research?
I would like to comment in response to Ann’s excellent question, but my wife is calling me right now. I’ll have to get back to this later. Best wishes.
Ned,
A license does not mean one is professional, nor does the lack of one mean they are not. I’ve spoken with too many people who earnestly sought his help, only to realize some time in that he breaches boundaries and is driven by his own sense of infallibility.
I’ve read as much of his work as I can really stand to, and listened to as much of his talks as he will allow posted online or through DVD. It is not necessarily his goals that I find repugnant, though I do personally disagree with them. It is simply the content of his theories, and the - and I’m sorry there is no way around this one - juvenile manor in which he deals with disagreement.
To be perfectly honest, just knowing that you don’t report in your description of him at least some of what I say as true, makes me leery. I honestly can’t believe that deep down you are proud to be associated with NARTH. Isn’t Schoenewolf still an advisor there? Come on Ned, what kind of ethical or moral compass is at work in that mess?
I certainly hope we can disagree without feeling that ones dignity has been denied, Ned. But when people do things in the name of therapy which don’t make any sense, or which cause pain and frustration by their very nature, I think we need to call attention to that. And if constantly insisting 2+2=5 brings stigma to a Nicolosi, or a Richard Cohen, or Paul Cameron, then who is at fault for that? Do you not think there should be some stigma surrounding the use of material from Paul Cameron at least?
In the end, as I said to Ann earlier, people who chose to seek some way around expressing their sexual attractions - whatever their reason - deserve to find better choices than these. I believe there are people out there who have the right idea of where to begin, but they won’t be talking about “Grey Zones” or made up neurosis, they won’t be naming themselves “Graceful Cow” while sitting around naked in the woods, and they won’t be cuddling with their clients on the couch.
Honestly, who is messing with people’s dignity in this picture?
David,
What measures did you or Ex-Gay Watch take to verify Alex’s story about phone therapy with Dr. Nicolosi? I’m particularly interested in the validity of the conversation that was cited on Ex-Gay Watch.
None. The narrative itself was not our story. It was already on the web (we linked to it and described it as such), written some time ago. In fact, it was someone on your side of the issue that pointed it out to me with the lament that it was very sad.
I would be happy to put you in touch with someone who has a verified history of treatment with Nicolosi, however. Or you can read the rest of Alex’s blog to get a sense of his candor. I should also note that he has been in contact with us since, and also commented on that post.
The validity of such a personal story, as always, must be determined by the reader, though his comments are quite familiar.
Were you concerned that he might be lying?
In fact, it was someone on your side of the issue that pointed it out to me with the lament that it was very sad.
What is my side of the issue?
None.
Thanks David -
Let’s just say they would not necessarily be considered “pro-gay” and leave it at that. Or did I misunderstand the view you bring to the debate?
Before this devolves into innuendo, what exactly is the point of your last comment? I’ll ask again, are you concerned that Alex might be lying? If you are, just say so. It does happen, though I don’t personally get that sense here.
David,
I don’t look at meaningful conversation on this blog or elsewhere as a debate.
I have no idea who Alex is or his credibility so I am not sure if he is telling the truth or not.
Now we are into semantics, and the tedious misdirections about minutia with which everyone here is familiar. Bleh.
Wendy Gritter has really started something here. It will be very interesting to see how EXODUS responds to all of this — political neutrality, less focus on “reorientation”, more sensitivity to those who may have been harmed along the way, listening and building bridges to the “gay community” — a strong commitment to “focus more clearly” on ministry.
It has been easy to dismiss suggestions when they come from “pro-gay activists”. It gets much trickier when many of the same ideas are put now forth by one of EXODUS’s own.
Totally off the topic–
The “Home-Mark Broussard” link in &