Clarification appended
Since the former editor of Young Gay America Magazine announced publicly this month that he’s been “healed” from homosexuality thanks to God and the Bible, there has been a flurry of discussions – first, over the more-frequently publicized ex-gay movement and second, over the fact that he was baptized into the Mormon church.
"Given the crucial nature of Glatze’s religious experience to his testimony, how can evangelical leaders continue to hail Michael Glatze as an ex-gay success story without implicitly endorsing his religious beliefs?" posed Ex-Gay Watch, a watchdog group tracking reparative therapy and the ex-gay movement.
Glatze, however, has made it clear that his transformation through Jesus Christ, which ultimately led him to denounce homosexuality, began in 2003 – four years before he was baptized into the Mormon church. He also says his association with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – the official name of the Mormon church – is "just part of a huge process and journey," and that he is receiving help from Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America who is suggesting some "scripturally-sound" evangelical churches for Glatze to attend.
This being said, there should be no reason why the Christian community should not embrace Glatze and hail his departure from homosexuality.
“But what if Glatze decides in the end to remain with the LDS church?” some may ask. Would pointing to Glatze’s ex-gay success story be endorsing Mormonism?
If, at the end of his “journey,” Glatze decides to remain with the Mormon church, the path he will have chosen is most certainly the wrong one, and he will have to later face the consequences of his decision. However, despite what path Glatze chooses, his “coming out” story should not be ignored. The story of change should be used by believers to open the eyes of others like him and to lead them out of the homosexual lifestyle into a more godly one. And doing so is not an endorsement of the Mormon church.
It’s a scenario that the Christian community may find themselves faced with next year if presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, a Mormon, becomes the Republican pick for the White House. And already people are asking whether political support for a Mormon candidate somehow translates to support for Mormonism.
Earlier this month on “Larry King Live,” the Rev. Dr. R. Albert Mohler – one of the nation’s pre-eminent evangelicals – was asked whether or not Romney’s faith bothered him.
“Oh, it does certainly concern me as an Evangelical Christian,” answered Mohler, who is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary – the flagship seminary of the Southern Baptist Convention. “I have to answer first as a Christian and say I believe Mormonism is a false that is antithetical to historic orthodox Christianity.”
“But,” he went on to say, “at the same time, I'm not electing a theologian. I'm looking at electing a president, and I will have to consider all of those things in the context of what a candidate represents.”
Fellow Southern Baptist Dr. Richard Land, who has met with Romney, gave a similar response, stating that Romney’s Mormon background should not be the reason to reject his candidacy.
"Most Southern Baptists understand we're voting for a commander in chief, not pastor in chief," said Land, who is president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) – the SBC’s public policy arm. Land, whose words have been echoed by religious leaders and pastors of various faiths, was recently listed by Religion News Service as one of the top 10 most influential GOP “kingmakers.”
In the same way, Christians need to understand that pointing to Glatze as an example of overcoming homosexuality should not be equated to supporting the Mormon church. Instead it should be viewed as supporting a very important movement (in this case, the ex-gay movement), as is done during any interfaith activity.
Furthermore, Glatze should be accepted for who he says he is – not the result of Mormon conversion, but one of the latest and most prominent examples of former homosexuals who came to acknowledge homosexuality as sin and made the decision to turn away from the sinful lifestyle.
And as he continues his journey towards truth, believers should be more eager to encourage him to take the right path than to rebuke him for the Mormon “part of [his] “huge process.” He hasn’t been lost yet, so why treat him as if he is?
Clarification : Friday, July 20, 2007
An editorial on Monday, July 16, 2007, about the debate over a former gay rights activist's "coming out" story originally stated that “believers should be more concerned about Michael Glatze returning to homosexuality than him joining the Mormon church.” To clarify, the editorial staff at The Christian Post would like to first of all affirm that it does not view homosexuality as more perverse than Mormonism, despite the wording of the original statement. Furthermore, while Glatze’s ties to the Mormon church will undoubtedly be a problem with eternal consequences if he chooses to remain, the editorial staff would like to re-emphasize – as he has emphasized – that the Mormon church is just “part of a huge process and journey” and that he is currently receiving help. And so the staff believes that it would be better for believers to help and encourage individuals such as Glatze – like Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America is doing by suggesting some "scripturally-sound" evangelical churches for Glatze to attend – than to reject and criticize, as is more often the case now. Lastly, the staff believes hailing Glatze as an ex-gay success story does not equate to endorsing whatever beliefs he may have adopted from the Mormon church in the same way that the decision not to reject the candidacy of presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, a Mormon, does not equate to acceptance of Mormonism. Glatze does not claim to have been “healed” by the Mormon church, and neither should anyone else.
Comments
Hello Fellow Christians.
In a day when we are being assaulted from every angle it would seem very "Christian Like" if we could ban together and unite in our one ideal.
The Lord and Savior of the World Jesus Christ.
My News is that tonight I just came home from one of a series of interviews I need to go through inorder to be able to come back to my Church. This is a faith that I was excommunicated for being homosexual. I am happy to say I have never denounced my Faith in God or his True Church on earth. I am going back and I am excited to be re baptized and I am happy to put my being gay behind me. Am I cured? I have faith I will be and know as I apply it I can over come a lot.
Sometimes there are more important thing to life than looking for a perfect someone!
Peace and God Bless you all.
What is at issue here is the gospel. It is not a reformed life, but a transformed life. Moral people are the worst people to see they need the righteousness, not morality, of God from Christ's atoning work on the Cross. This is dittos for religious people. It was the Pharisees to whom Jesus said publicans and sinners go into the kingdon before they did because they thought they were righteous by their own righteousness. Sinners (which we all are, but most will not admit) know they are because of their lifestyles.
the devil can pose as an angel of light,
I wont vote unless a real christian was running,evil is evil, our familys have been torn apart by radical femists,pro homosexuals,anti God /all gods are fake or equal groups,anti goverment/goverment can do no wrong/the constitution is= to replacing the bible,sex is for fun only bunch,higher learning has been turned into liberal man is the center of all, and the answer to all,we as a nation cannot stand with evil within,
In response to those who list same-sex marraige as one of the main issues in the coming election, I know this may be an unpopular opinion, but I was disppointed at how prioritized it was in the last election. There are many more issues that are would impact the country in great ways and that were so much more pressing than the same-sex marriage issue and yet it was featured over health care and even the war.
I agree that this is a polarizing issue and has the potential to reveal a lot about each candidate's perspectives, but it certainly is not my pick for a top debate topic.
Just my 2 very oxidized green bent little pennies.
crossfire writes:
'Can you imagine having a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-embryonic stem cell research president at a time like this?'
We don't have to imagine what a anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, anti-embryonic stem cell research president, can do to this country.
Call me crazy, but I think Christian Post has a good point. Although for Glatze joining the Mormon church is BY FAR worse than returning to homosexuality, for the U.S. as whole, his returning to homosexuality may be worse because of the large numbers of people that could influence. His return to homosexuality would be cited by pro-gay individuals as evidence that people are born homosexual and that nothing can be done about it. And the name of God could be blasphemed because people could argue that (1) God had created him as gay and/or (2) God couldn't change him. But if he stays straight but ends up joining the Mormon ''church,'' I don't believe that homosexuals who want to change would end up seeing the Mormon ''church'' as being the better/best place to change, as opposed to evangelical churches. I want to hear what everyone thinks about this. Or am I just crazy? (and don't misunderstand me; I am not homophobic; I love homosexuals as I do any other person, but I do affirm that homosexuality is a sin and feel the manipulation of Scriptures to justify it reflects a more serious problem within a number of churches - in particular the Episcopal Church and the UCC)
Even though I am strongly against the teachings of Mormonism, if it came down to it, I would probably vote for Romney to keep the U.S. from having a liberal president who might cause irreparable harm to this nation. Can you imagine having a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-embryonic stem cell research president at a time like this?
theazntrackstar, I disagree. It is your duty to vote for the best candidate in the race. No person running for an office will ever be perfect (personally or even on every issue), and you just have to thoughtfully choose the "best answer." I think it's clear that, even just based on what judges he would pick (let alone sanctity of life, national defense, same-sex "marriage", and a host of other issues), that Romney would be the better choice over Clinton. A form of government like ours relies on citizens who are proactive about those they choose to lead them.
Many new converts initially end up in false religions. It is really easy to do if you are not around Christians that are willing to disciple new converts the truth about Christ. It sounds like this might have been the case with this fellow. Mormons and other religious groups are very aggresive in reaching others for their faith. My cousin's husband is Mormon so I know this first hand. We are horribly poor at that. In fact I had a discussion with a friend of mine about the problem with the lack of discipleship. However the good news is that many in these groups eventually meet believers and learn the truth and eventually get out.
I remember watching Debra Paget on a program many years ago. She was in the original Ten Commandments movie. She was giving her testimony. She knew nothing about the word. Since she had not attended church before then it never crossed her mind about reading the Bible. She ended up in Christian Science for a few years. At some point she met some Christians in the industry that had a Bible study that she was invited to attend. Not long she left that group never to return.
Through him coming out about walking free that some Christians will come alongside and reach him through the love of Christ. Sad to say there might have been some Christians around him that had total disdain for him because the sin was homosexuality. Hopefully things are changing. I wish him well.
I like how CP clarified their editorial, though I, personally, still would not vote for Romney if it came down to him and Clinton or Obama. I'd rather not vote at all and pray for God to continue blessing our nation and to keep it from further moral degradation.
Also, if Glatze had a conversion experience and was led by God, the Holy Spirit, into his faith with Jesus Christ, then how did he end up going to the Mormon church? Glatze has said elsewhere that it was because he had friends there he gravitated to the LDS church. In other words Glatze may have joined the Mormon church 'on a whim' without any real knowledge about it; and now Concerned Women leader, Matt Barber, is counsellilng him about joining an evangelical church? Trying getting out of the Mormon church, that can be a trial itself.
But I don't get it, God, the Holy Spirit, Jesus took Glatze out of homosexuality, but failed to get him into the "correct" church? Isn't that at least a relatively more 'easy' task than denouncing homosexuality which for Glatze was apparently a two or three-year trial?
I think it is important to try to understand just what Glatze's "success" has been. In effect in accepting God and Jesus Christ he accepted also the Bible and what it says about same-sex behavior. He made a choice which is a change of heart about his behavior. While he admits that the thought of sex with men is now disgusting to him, that seems to come from his acceptance of the Biblical injunctions, not a real change of attractiveness. He seems overly needful of marrying and procreating, as that is the real 'sign' of his change. Other ex-gay men have followed that rather quick plan with some disastrous results. In other words, Glatze seems too good to be true.
Black Rose Warrior, you have to justify your views or educated people will not accept it.
BTW, this is a good editorial & a somewhat balanced view of the situation.
All the best to Glatze.
Sticky issue. Good editorial.