Apologizing to the Gay Community
I saw this at a website called God Hates Protestors; the sign on the bottom right is important – it reads, “I used to be a Bible-Banging homophobe – Sorry.”
Some context is required to appreciate this. The photo was taken during a gay pride parade in Chicago. Some Christians (not pictured) decided to show up and yell hateful messages at the homosexual crowd through loudspeakers. That is not the way Jesus ministered to people (“Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone” and all that), so another group of Christians decided to go and a non-hateful side of Christianity.
This man is inspiring to me. He doesn’t act immature and say that his Christianity is better than that of anyone else. He doesn’t get into an argument with the other Believers or the homosexual crowd. Instead, he humbly asked forgiveness for the hatred he had once displayed, and he showed love to his fellow man. No one remembers anything about the mean protestors who were heckling the crowd, but the gay man in this picture will never forget the time that a Christian stopped to say that he cared about him. (Of course, that doesn’t explain why he’s in his underwear.)
You might be wondering about the theology of that man on the other side of the fence. Does he accept the homosexual lifestyle? Do he disagree with it even though he wants to show that he cares for these people? We’ll never know – and it’s not the point.
A lot of healing needs to be done between the Christian and the homosexual communities. It’s common for people to assume that anyone who goes to church is a hateful person who would attack a gay man. This is because certain people have used Christianity as an excuse for gay bashing (an awful thing to do), and it’s going to take a lot of work to overcome this.
The world needs to know that Jesus’ followers are not a violent and hateful people who wish to hurt others. We must present the love of God to all men, and we must re-build the bridges that our past mistakes have torn down.
(More articles at www.ThinkingThroughChristianity.com)
Related Posts
About The Author
thinkingthrough
21 Comments
One big problem here is that, while we’re allowed (socially) to say “I’m sorry”, we’re not allowed to say “You’re wrong. What you’re doing is sin.” Ought we to be allowed to say this? Yes, we have the right to express our beliefs, too. Ought we to say it anyway? Yes, depending upon the context, the manner, etc. We can spend so much time apologizing that we never get the message across that God doesn’t look kindly on sin, not to mention the fact that, socially speaking, gay rights carries implications for all (or most) of us.
People are most certainly allowed to voice disagreements. I don’t mind people doing that. But, so far, Christians are mostly known for voicing those disagreements in hateful ways, and that is the issue I wish to resolve.
Adam, great post. I agree that we need to distance ourselves from the Christians (so-called) that behave so opposite of what Christ calls us to…
We can be straight-forward and honest about sin and its consequences and not be mean. Hellfire and Brimstone is not the best way to get things done at all… God wants a broken heart and a contrite spirit, not a fearful cowering worshiper afraid of being smited.
Quite honestly, the practicing homosexual is going to die in their sin if they don’t repent HOWEVER, it won’t be just because they were a homosexual… it will be because they, like every other human being on the planet, are sinners from birth… dead in sin and in need of God to bring life back to them…
God will forgive the sin of lying, murdering, gossiping, homosexuality… etc… If we approach the homosexual with the intent to “make them straight” then we are only addressing the symptom of the much larger issue which is the condition of their fallen heart…
Same goes for a liar, murderer, adulterer, etc…
I get angry at those who isolate just homosexuality as if it were the only sin on the planet that needs to be addressed… we probably do need to apologize of sorts, but as the way that anon posted and by telling them we are sorry for those who have been hostile towards them, show them that we love and care for them, and then tell them the truth… always speaking the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15)…
Adam, I agree 100% with your blog. I have been working on a message called, “Lord, I apologize” for sometime and it is about me, as a Christian, having to apologize for people claiming to be the same, but being hateful to those that disagree with them. Example: Ask a waitress of a major eating establishment if it is difficult to serve during the lunch hour on Sunday afternoon. The ones I have asked that question have said yes and usually refer to the “Christians” as being some of the most hateful people on the planet. They are rude, and usually leave a poor tip and then have the audacity to leave a “How to get to Heaven” tract. There are so many things wrong in my own life that I do not have time to be poking around someone else’s sin. Addressing sin is a must, but like you said Adam, there is a proper manner in which it should be done. I think it is so funny that some people think that it is their responsibility to point out everyone else’s sin. I would love to ask one of these gay bashing haters to wear a t-shirt depicting their own sin the next time they go out to “protest”. Think there will be any takers?
Great post. I’m behind its message 100%.
But I’m going to be contentious about this: “Christians are mostly known for voicing those disagreements in hateful ways, and that is the issue I wish to resolve.”
I’m not sure we can resolve it as Christians, other than being mindful of the stereotype and avoiding actions that may be misconstrued as falling within it, because I’m not convinced that today’s Christians are responsible for the stereotype. It’s (in my opinion) mostly a non-Christian prejudice, with non-Christian poster children [for example, Westboro], and a hard thing to dispel while maintaining principle in a world where the behavior has become an identity.
But this reservation in no way detracts from the importance of the message of healing that needs to take place between Christians and the gay community. Counter-measures, like the one described in this post, should be taken against the haters who are giving Christians a bad name. Apologies should take place, and every Christian should be ready to show a compassionate, open hand.
But I have a caveat on the nature of the apology in accordance with my reservation.
I saw a documentary you may want to check out, “Lord Save Us From Your Followers,” and near the end there’s a Christian who sets up a booth at a gay pride festival and apologizes on the behalf of Christians to the attendees. It’s a really awesome idea, the way that he goes about it. But one aspect of it troubled me: his apology was on behalf of all Christians and the way that they treated them.
I do not think such a blanket apology is just. I think as wide as any individual can go is for one’s personal hate — like the man with the sign here — and for any hurt from anyone felt by the individual. Anything wider than that — general statements of Christianity in general — is neither ours to give nor just to the innocent.
This is a good point, Jared, and that’s exactly why I appreciate the guy in this picture for apologizing for his own personal actions.
Of course, I’m probably not following my own advice by writing an article like this.
And, you’re right. Christians do not completely deserve the stereotypes they are normally given. Another reason to appreciate the personal nature of this man’s apology.
Adam,
Brilliant post as usual. This is close to my heart, not because I have much experience with homosexual people. Simply, I once was a part of this. I was definitely homophobic as a teen. Through grace, I have been shown that I don’t need to be afraid of or hateful toward homosexuals, and that loving them, and caring for them, is not tantamount to me approving of what they are doing. I, like a lot of other Christians, held homosexuality as some kind of extra bad sin. I would be loving to people who were adulterers, though I didn’t approve of adultery. I would be loving to liars, though I didn’t approve of lying. Yet, not homosexuals. That sin somehow was different. How prideful of me to think such a thing. How belittling to Christ’s forgiveness. Do I not struggle every single day in my own heart? Surely. So, thank you for vocalizing this reminder of our need to love everyone, even those who are living in sin, that they might turn from it.
While I certainly think it is a nice gesture to say that Christians ought to work toward building bridges with the gay community, in a broader sense I think it is naive to think it has so much to do with signs and rallies. If our message remains the same, the idea that Christians are hostile bigots is going to be prevalent in the culture at large and the people of Westboro are simply easy fuel for the fire.
I’ve got a few comments to make as a non-Christian.
Adam, you say that “…certain people have used Christianity as an excuse for gay bashing, but is that not explicitly allowed in the Bible? Leviticus 20:13 says “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” It’s easy to see why some Christians have interpreted the Bible to be ok with homophobia, since the punishment for homosexuality in the Bible is murder. Of course the argument is that not all the parts of the Bible should be taken literally/some parts only speak to certain groups/historical context/whatever, but it’s in there, plain as day, gays should be put to death, so you can’t exactly fault those who follow the letter of the Bible.
we’re not allowed to say “You’re wrong. What you’re doing is sin.” Ought we to be allowed to say this? Yes, we have the right to express our beliefs, too. Ought we to say it anyway? Yes, depending upon the context, the manner, etc.
You are absolutely allowed to say it, just like anyone you say it to is absolutely allowed to ignore it. If someone wants to hear your views on their relationship, they will ask. Just like homosexuals have no business in the relationships of straight people, straight people have no business telling gay people how to live their lives.
socially speaking, gay rights carries implications for all (or most) of us.
This is probably the most important aspect of the whole homosexuality issue as it relates to Christianity. Gay rights do carry implications for all of us; namely, whether or not we are a nation that stands up for the rights and freedoms of all its citizens. Denying someone rights because of their sexuality is no different than doing so because of their race, and once we as a society realize that, the anti-gay movement will be looked back on with embarrassment, much as the anti-integration movement in the 1960s is viewed today.
Adam is right, the Christian community has a lot of fences to mend with the gay community, and while it’s not fair to pigeonhole all Christians as anti-gay bigots, it’s not a stretch to see where that idea might have come from.
Justin, I’m here asking people to love each other. I don’t think you’re doing that – I think you’re trying to criticize my Faith.
Ditto everything Jared said, and thanks to him for saving me a long post. On his point about apologizing for others, compare this apologizing for men video that lit up the blogsphere a few months ago. Many suggested, in dry and witty ways, that perhaps the men were apologizing for the bad men as a way to get women to sleep with them (though as Ann Althouse pointed out, that won’t happen because the apologizers were “insufficiently manly.”) The main point was that by apologizing for the bad behaviors of others, the apologists were really trying to say how swell they were.
It isn’t that apologies are bad, but some are more self serving than others. Many Christians, and conservatives too, buy into the media stereotype and end up reinforcing it with apologies meant to showcase that they aren’t one of THOSE boogy men.
Links:
I did westboro. http://americanhousewifeinlondon.blogspot.com/2010/09/forced-perspectives.html
Ann Althouse’s analysis and link to the man apology.
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/hello-my-name-is-eric-and-im-recovering.html
To Justin T, yes lazy Christians can take some passages from the Bible and use them as an excuse for gay bashing. Is that wrong? yes, and it is the responsibility of people like Adam and myself and other Christians in the body of Christ to call each other out on this. That is our responsibility and one made more difficult by people blindly buying into the Christian boogey man. We cannot easily distinguish between the gay basher and the Christian who disapproves of homosexuality, because the mere disapproval is considered bashing. Tolerance, the term, has been corrupted with acceptance; only those who are willing to accept homosexual behavior are deemed tolerant, and by that standard Christians will always fail. Nothing we do short of ignoring tenants of our faith, in this case the ‘go and sin no more’ part, perhaps the most frequently forgotten or ignored aspect of Christianity, nothing will convince society that we aren’t a bunch of boogey men.
Adam, my point is not to criticize your faith, my point is to show that because the Bible, by its very nature, requires subjective interpretation, it’s impossible to say that the person who demands death for homosexuals is “wrong” according to the Bible, since it’s explicitly stated in the Bible. It’s obviously impossible to interpret the Bible literally in every way, ergo each passage is subject to individual interpretation, and the results are what you see- some Christians maintaining a tolerant, cooperative spirit with homosexuals, and others taking a hard-line Old Testament stance toward it. Neither one is necessarily wrong, which was my point. As a formerly homophobic Christian myself, I can certainly understand how easy it is to demonize homosexuality over other sins, even though there’s no inherent justification for doing so.
One cannot understand any part of the Bible as an instruction toward hatred if they claim to understand the most minute part of Jesus’ ministry. Thus, I can fault those who use the Bible to justify their hatred. They are wrong.
Tolerance, the term, has been corrupted with acceptance; only those who are willing to accept homosexual behavior are deemed tolerant, and by that standard Christians will always fail. Nothing we do short of ignoring tenants of our faith, in this case the ‘go and sin no more’ part, perhaps the most frequently forgotten or ignored aspect of Christianity, nothing will convince society that we aren’t a bunch of boogey men.
Perhaps you could enlighten me on the difference between tolerance and acceptance. I don’t think I understand the distinction you are drawing between tolerating something and accepting it. How does one tolerate something without accepting it?
I forgot to subscribe to comments. Glad I checked back.
To Justin re tolerance and acceptance.
Acceptance is akin to endorsement. Remember that Seinfeld line about “not that there is anything wrong with that”? That is acceptance. Tolerance drops that line.
Tolerance is belief that homosexuals have free will to choose how to live their life and acting accordingly. Tolerance, however, does not think that there is nothing wrong with that. If asked, and I have been asked, by a homosexual how I think they should live their life, homosexual relationships are not my advice. Tolerance doesn’t approve, endorse, or espouse.
You mentioned that you are not a Christian anymore. So think about how you think of Christians. You might not agree with our choice, might advise us against the church if asked, wouldn’t counsel anyone to attend church, but otherwise figure it is our business. You only really care about Christians as affects you and the health of society, I’d guess. You tolerate Christians.
Re “Neither one is necessarily wrong, which was my point.” I’m going to get out of my depth quickly here, but yes one is necessarily wrong. Can you find logical support for either in the Bible, for the sake of this argument I will say yes. But as for that being definitive on right and wrong, I think it is an over reading of sola scriputra as the sole authority of the Bible vs the primary authority of the Bible. Debating sola scriptura will get me underwater quickly, but I am confident that other authorities, such as one’s own judgment and conscious, matter, hence the supposed logical basis of gay punishment does not make gay punishment ok.
Back to the original apology, I’d be more impressed by a church member who stands up to a fellow member about, for instance, the idea that homosexuality stands out among any of the other sins. I think that would do more for society than the public apologist who is likely apologizing for the sins of others to make himself look better. No one wins there, not the homosexual, the slandered church nor the apologist. It is virtue in the service of pride, Satan’s favored gambit.
Where is the follow comments button?! Never mind. I need to sleep obviously. (had to post something to follow)
Tolerance is belief that homosexuals have free will to choose how to live their life and acting accordingly.
This is why I call the anti-gay marriage movement intolerant- it’s one thing to believe that homosexuality is morally or Biblically wrong, but when that belief turns into legislation that denies homosexuals the right to marry each other, it stops becoming a private issue and becomes a public concern.
“[B]ut when that belief turns into legislation that denies homosexuals the right to marry each other, it stops becoming a private issue and becomes a public concern.”
True. But a few points about that. First, most assume that all or the majority of Christians would legislate the matter. That is not the case. Most evangelicals I know, and all of the non-religious conservatives, would not legislate against civil unions–we care a lot less about whether the state marries same sex couples. I grew weary in London of hearing things like the UK not having such contentious social battles over gay marriage because they have civil unions there.
We don’t see civil union proposals because homosexuals as a policy reject them. They want Marriage.
So if we don’t care about the state marrying same sex couples, why do we care about Marriage? This is where our public concerns come in.–Later. Kids everywhere. Guests coming. I can’t get this written in time.
We don’t see civil union proposals because homosexuals as a policy reject them. They want Marriage.
What is unreasonable about this? They want the government to acknowledge that their choice to marry someone of the same sex is no better or worse than the choice to marry someone of the opposite sex. Would you be ok if the government told you that your relationship with your wife was somehow different merely because of your gender? Why would a civil union be a compromise for a gay couple? What right does the government have to make that moral judgment?
Truthfully, the government doesn’t need to be concerned with marriage. All government-sanctioned unions should be civil unions, and same sex couples should have equal rights as heterosexual couples. “Marriage” should remain the province of the church; the government has no business making moral judgments on anyone’s choice of gender. There is no legitimate reason for the government to deny the right of same sex couples to enjoy the same privileges and responsibilities conferred upon heterosexual couples. Period.
Figures. I post something about Christians and gays getting along, and all I get for my trouble are people arguing in my inbox. Why do I bother?