In this 5-part series, I’m simply seeking to embrace the beauty of my own silence long enough to learn about the church I love from the perspective of those whom we, for far too long, have dehumanized.  This fourth portion is the hardest one for me to read.  In it, Constantine and Annika talk frankly about the Jesus that is being made famous in our response toward the LGBTQ community.

If you haven’t already, you should read the previous 3 posts for context:

• Part 1 sets up why this project is so important and what my hope is behind it.
• In Part 2, Constantine and Annika reflect on their experience of identifying as lesbian and same-sex attracted within and with-out the Church.
• In Part 3, they reflect on what the Christian discourse in the aftermath of the World Vision flip-flop exposed about the Church.

Here’s a brief reminder of who my two friends are:

• Annika is an agnostic lesbian whose passion it is to see an interfaith network of queer and straight people, alongside atheists and agnostics, working together in order to see equitable treatment for all people.
• Constantine is an artist, a theologian, a minister, a follower of Jesus, and a gay man who desires to see the conversations shift from “sexuality” and “marriage” to “identity” and “intimacy.”

Here’s Question 3:

Christians understand that, for whatever reason, God chose to attach His reputation to human beings…specifically to the Church.  Again, in light of the recent discourse, how would you describe the Jesus that is being represented by His Church?

Annika’s Response:

Simply put, ‘G-D’s’ reputation, when informed by His followers that I’ve met and heard from, is horrendously off the mark. Instead of following Jesus as a way of life, the ones I’ve had contact with seem to live out of a rigid, narrow, constrictive view of ‘G-D.’

They are exclusive, concerned only with themselves, and love to fight.  Is this who ‘G-D’ is?  Is this what Jesus was like?

They are fear-driven, angry, and mean.  Is this who ‘G-D’ is?  Is this what Jesus was like?

They are manipulative, controlling, and out of touch.  Is this who ‘G-D’ is?  Is this what Jesus was like?

From my vantage point, all of this Christian in-fighting is preventing them from looking at their own issues and dealing with them. Speaking from experience, when we deal with our own issues, we are then freed up to look outside ourselves and have empathy for others. When we live in fear we stay stuck and cannot make a move toward anyone different from ourselves.  Fear causes us to distance ourselves from others and, in so doing, dehumanizes those we’re retreating from.

Wasn’t it Jesus who moved toward rather than distanced Himself from those who were “different” than He?

Constantine’s Response:

It’d be easy to say that the Jesus represented by the Church today is judgmental, harsh, unforgiving, hateful and hypocritical, but I think this misses the mark. If you look, listen and read carefully, you notice that most anti-gay propaganda – and for that matter, even traditional theology – doesn’t mention Jesus at all.

To espouse hate or even a conservative theology, folks have to invoke the “Old Testament God” or the apostle Paul. This would seem to be a flaw in either argument; how do you leave the central figure of the faith out of a conversation about belief and practice? And where Christ is mentioned, the real danger is not that folks will suddenly believe that “Jesus hates fags,” but that this wild and captivating figure will suddenly become tame and boring.

Throughout the New Testament, when confronted with complexities about what to believe and how to live, Jesus always does the most creative things: hanging with those who are shunned, answering challenges with more questions, not abolishing and not breaking laws, but fulfilling them, and living paradoxically. Some of the Church’s discourse today would have folks believing that Christ talked in slogans and sound bites, lived in a world of black and white, and followed tradition without reconsideration – and I think that does Him – and us – a disservice.

Enter the Dialogue:

Here are four questions for consideration (please keep your contribution civil and helpful, remembering that Annika, Constantine, and their many friends are reading along.)

1. What did I just learn about myself and my own biases, opinions, fears, and prejudices?
2. What did I just learn about my own contribution to the 2 severed relationships?
3. What did I just learn about the church?
4. What did I just learn about the LGBTQ community?

Tomorrow’s Question :: If there were one teaching of Jesus that you wish the Church took seriously today, what would it be? Click Here to read Part 5.

In part 1 of this five part series, I offered three altering interactions that fueled this project, the four questions of the LGBTQ community that emerged, and introductions of two gay friends who have committed to interacting with the questions.

In part 2, Annika and Constantine interacted with our first question: Can you reflect with us on your experience of being a gay, lesbian, or same-sex attracted human being?

Here are their responses to our second question.  My hope is that we’d listen longer than feels comfortable and learn something about ourselves, the “American Church,” and the LGBTQ community.

Question 2 :: If you were to isolate this most recent outpouring of Christian discourse about same-sex orientation, what does the entire episode communicate to you about the “American Church?”

Annika’s Response:

It seems to me that, for the most part, the conservative, anti-gay Christian voice is the primary voice being heard in the mainstream media. This is frustrating and damaging to the LGBTQ community. I feel like many in the conservative arm of the US American church are so focused on their idea of love and their interpretation of the Bible that it keeps them from authentically pursuing relationships with anyone who thinks, lives, sounds, or speaks differently then them. 

I wonder…what gets accomplished when one particular group of people are dehumanized, othered and treated like 2^nd class citizens by another? When has it ever been helpful to identify one group as less than?  It seems to me that in a world where so much is wrong,  focusing on who two consenting adults love and want to share a life with is crazy.

The Church should be the one standing up for every marginalized people group, including the queer people.  Because it doesn’t, is the Church alive or is it dead on the inside?

Constantine’s Response:

The recent World Vision flip-flop reminds me that the American Church is not a monolith. There are folks on both sides of the issue in the pews, serving as pastors, on boards, and volunteering. As a result, talking about the Church vs. Culture is a gross oversimplification. Christ followers are not only combative with the gay population, but with each other, which does terrible things for the Church’s witness to the outside world. A place commissioned to live counter-culturally in love, truth, grace, and forgiveness descends into the same bickering and squabbling that characterizes the conversation outside. Disagreement is fine, but can we not be civil about it?

Moreover, the time and energy spent obsessing over this one issue robs the Church of its unique opportunity to address other ills where Christ’s radical thoughts need to be voiced: poverty, racism, war, and on and on. I’m not advocating that the Church stick its head in the sand on the gay debate, but rather that we place it in proper perspective, noting the infrequency with which Jesus addresses it as compared to other topics on which we too often remain silent.

In the same way that it similarly reduces the lives and identities of gays and lesbians, the Church is not living into its full identity.

Enter the Dialogue:

Here are four questions for consideration (please keep your contribution civil and helpful, remembering that Annika, Constantine, and their many friends are reading along.)

1. What did I just learn about myself and my own biases, opinions, fears, and prejudices?
2. What did I just learn about my own contribution to the 2 severed relationships?
3. What did I just learn about the church?
4. What did I just learn about the LGBTQ community?

Tomorrow’s Question :: Christians understand that, for whatever reason, God chose to attach His reputation to human beings…specifically to the Church.  Again, in light of the recent discourse, how would you describe the Jesus that is being represented by His Church? Click Here to read Part 4.

In part 1 of this 5-part series, I offered the three encounters that fueled this project:

1. This Quote: “The World Vision debacle exposed two severed relationships: the one between the American Church and the LGBT community and the other is between the American Church and itself.”
2. This Number: A key facilitator of cross-sector leadership, pointed to the now “10,000 UN-sponsored kids” as the most recent reason why the church is obsolete.
3. This Observation: A gay friend pointed out how efficient the “American Church” is at dehumanizing the LGBTQ community by “talking about us as though we’re not in the room.”

The more curious I got with my gay friends, the more I was confronted by the reality of our soiled reputation from the perspective of the LGBTQ community: a reputation that looks and sounds nothing like the Jesus that we claim to follow.

Four questions emerged from our conversations that two of my gay friends committed to interact with as authentically, colorfully, concisely, and constructively as possible.  They’ve agreed to let me post their answers because they trust our friendship and they believe, as do I, that what we learn may actually help repair the severed relationship between us.

Let me briefly re-introduce my two friends and then get to the first question.

• Annika is an agnostic lesbian whose passion it is to see an interfaith network of queer and straight people, alongside atheists and agnostics, working together in order to see equitable treatment for all people.
• Constantine is an artist, a theologian, a minister, a follower of Jesus, and a gay man who desires to see the conversations shift from “sexuality” and “marriage” to “identity” and “intimacy.”

Question 1 :: Can you reflect with us on your experience of being a gay, lesbian, or same-sex attracted human being?

Contstantine’s Response:

I’ve been a Christ follower my entire life, and I also identify as a man with same-sex attractions. I’ve always attended church – serving in full-time ministry for nine years – and also work in theatres, galleries and museums. My friends are theologians and addicts, evangelical pastors and gay rights advocates, Sunday school teachers and atheists. In all these environments, the conversation around “the gay issue” reduces me to only a portion of my full self.

Everyone wants to talk about “sexuality” – what I desire to do with whom within which parameters – when I’m more interested in exploring “identity,” the totality of who God created me to be, a portion of which concerns my body.

Marriage, ironically, is a hotly contested topic. Some of my Christian friends uphold it as the most sacred institution, forgetting that Paul encouraged us to do without it if we could, and extolled our relationships within the Church as the exemplar of agape love. Meanwhile, my gay friends fight to obtain equal marriage rights, knowing, though, that a license proves nothing.  The dialogue feels inadequate. In the middle again, I want to change the conversation from “marriage” to “intimacy” – how God calls me to know and be known by God, myself, and perhaps a spouse.

I don’t want to settle for anything less than my unique life warrants, and so I keep inviting friends on both sides of the debate into a bigger and better conversation about the identity and intimacy that we all – gay and straight – long for. And that conversation is a lot more complex than anything we have yet faced.

Annika’s Response:

I came out in 2006 after repressing my sexual orientation for many years. On the recommendations of pastors, I sought to “pray-away-the-gay” through reparative therapy and other various spiritual means.  These techniques ended up being harmful in that they produced self-hatred, self-loathing and, ultimately, a suicidal longing. As far as I knew, because it had been reinforced by the teachings of my church, G-d hated me.

Since I’ve come out and fully accepted and embraced my sexuality, a weight has lifted and I’ve discovered a freedom that I didn’t know was possible.

As I reflect back on my time with the church, I recognize just how lonely I was.  I think my loneliness and feelings of being less than human had something to do with the church’s commitment to being right instead of its commitment to developing authentic relationships with no strings attached. 

I ask you, what has the church’s commitment to being “right” on the gay issue produced?  I would suggest that it has produced a community of human beings that understands itself as disowned.

I don’t fit in the church. Christianity isn’t for me. That became clear years ago. I’m now agnostic.

Enter the Dialogue:

Here are four questions for consideration (please keep your contribution civil and helpful, remembering that Annika, Constantine, and their many friends are reading along.)

1. What did I just learn about myself and my own biases, opinions, fears, and prejudices?
2. What did I just learn about my own contribution to the 2 severed relationships?
3. What did I just learn about the church?
4. What did I just learn about the LGBTQ community?

Tomorrow’s Question :: If you were to isolate this most recent outpouring of Christian discourse about same-sex orientation, what does the entire episode communicate to you about the “American Church?” Click Here for Part 3.