“Dear Michael, thank you for the email and for clarifying your statement about Alan Chambers. You are right, I was uninformed. I apologize.”

To Karen: I also apologize for my sometimes rude and nasty tone. I do tend to get over-wrought at times and need to decrease the sarcasm. Thanks, Karen, for your comments, your scolding (which I deserved) and your apology. I hope you will accept my apology as well. Have a great Thanksgiving and may God less those you love.

I assumed that if he was “officially announcing” something that he was speaking for EXODUS. Are you saying that Alan did NOT have the authority to “officially” make such an announcement?

If you doubt me, ask Alan himself. I think he’s a basically honest man. I took him at his word. This is what he said. He announced it like it was a done deal. I don’t appreciate you my calling my honesty into question when you seem to be the one who is uninformmed on this particular matter. Go to the source. Ask Alan.

Is Ms. Booth suggesting that Mr. Chambers spoke out of turn?

That’s the problem, the term ex-gay is prevalent but there is no common understanding of what it means and unfortunately, the change movement has failed to define it. You may think you’re “getting your point across quickly”, but something is getting lost in the translation.

Alan Chambers told me personally that he wanted to “do away with the term (exgay) intirely and see that it is never used again.” Ask Dr. Throckmorton. Alan confirmed it. He was quite empahtic about it and seemed to be speaking as EXODUS’s leader, not just expressing a casual opinion. He said he felt it was “more negative than anything” and did not clearly communicate “what the change process is really about”. He thought that getting rid of the term might “give EXODUS a chance to clarify what it actually does.” He and I agreed that clearing up the language was long overdue. It’s been 30 years.

Clarifying terms and methods employed would be a very helpful step. I believe that a LOT of the confusion and skepticism has NOT been the fault of “poltical motivation” — but created instead by the very therapists, organizations and ministries who speak of change, but seem unwilling or unable to explain what they mean by the terms they use and or they actually DO. Even people with NO politcal motivation would like a clear explanation in plain English. The general public deserves nothing less.

Consider this confusion among EXODUS’s own leaders; Frank Worthen defends the term ex-gay and insists that any person who calls themselves otherwise, especially those (like me and thousands of others) who call ourselves “gay Christians”. will spend eternity in Hell for our misuse of labels. (Talk about insulting…) Then you have Joe Dallas, who says ex-gay doesn’t mean ex-homosexual at all, but instead refers to a Christian who would “rather not have those tendencies”. Finally, Alan wants to reitre the term entirely. Did political motivation create this mess? No.

By the way, I agree COMPLETELY that our sexuality needs to be transformed and sancitified by God. Do you presume that I am in favor of ANY sort of sexual expression, no matter how selfish or self-destructive? If you do, you are mistaken. There is sinful homosexuality just as there is sinful heterosexuality.

Sorry I didn’t take the time to express myself more clearly. I was mainly responding (reacting, actually) to Michael Bussee’s flippant remarks about “ex-gay,” “post-gay,” etc. And also to Bussee’s statement that he himself is a therapist.

Alan Chambers didn’t “do away with the term” ex-gay. (As if he doesn’t consult with his staff or have a Board of Directors that he’s accountable to.) There’s been ongoing, serious conversation – at least for the three years that I’ve been involved – among Exodus member ministries about the meaning of change and how it can be accurately described without resorting to labels. Bussee’s jibes were not only uninformed, they were highly insulting.

It’s equally insulting when activists lump all transformational ministries into the category of “reparative therapy” in an attempt to dismiss or disparage them. Formational prayer, Christian coaching, and spiritual guidance and healing are NOT the same as therapy. And the failure to distinguish between them is usually politically motivated.

“When did it happen that “labels” became a bad thing? They are useful tools in communication, as long as they are not used to mistreat or disrespect another person.”

Labels might be useful as a sort of shorthand. And because they’re fairly prevalent in culture, I use both “ex-gay” and “pro-gay” if I need to get a point across quickly. But I don’t find them very helpful when trying to understand or explain complex issues – like sexual sanctification.

I would go a bit further and say that the language should get away from “we don’t do this because it’s evil and horrible and let me tell ya what they do (ICK) and throw some fake statistics at you” but perhaps consider the approach that orthodox Jews use: “we don’t do this because we believe God said not to, end of sentence”.

Then there’s no need for accusations, or culture wars, or demonizing each other, or passing laws. Those who feel there is a conviction or biblical instruction to live a certain way will follow their faith. Those who believe that contextual Scriptural understanding lead them in another direction can also live in accordance with their faith.

We apply labels to different schools of poltical or religious thought. (Democrats won the last election, for example.) We even label cereal boxes and restroom doors.

What I object to is poorly defined or misleading labels. If a person he says he is “ex-gay” he should mean “no longer homosexual in orientation”. If he doesn’t mean that, he should clarify what he does mean — and not get touchy when someone asks him to explain.