Mixed Orientation Marriage: a case study for the now and the not yet

This topic seems to have enough complexity to be a source of some consternation from multiple viewpoints within the larger conversation about faith and sexuality. Indeed, each individual situation is so unique that it is difficult to make generalizations without it feeling like a disconnect for at least some who live in this reality. The basic concept of mixed orientation marriage is descriptive of one or both spouses experiencing some degree of same-sex attraction. In light of this, it is easy to recognize that anyone who identifies as bi-sexual who is married could be described as being in a mixed orientation marriage. Bi-sexual individuals may or may not appreciate that description – not so much because it is inaccurate but perhaps because it may seem to have a connection to an ex-gay paradigm. Ironically, I have also encountered individuals within the ex-gay paradigm who don’t like the term. While they may be willing to clarify that they still experience some degree of same-sex attraction, the mixed-orientation descriptor seems to insult them. Perhaps, they take it as a statement asserting that complete orientation change is rare.

It seems to me that the usefulness of the description mixed-orientation marriage is less for the individual who might use it for themselves and more to aid in clarification and understanding in the larger conversations. The description, I think, does something very important. It brings a level of honesty and authenticity into the conversation. As I see it, the description is intended to be value-neutral. It isn’t a judgment on someone’s marriage.

If anything, where there has been honest disclosure of the reality of same-sex attraction, I have seen people in mixed-orientation marriages be much more intentional about their pre-marital preparation and their investment in the relationship during the marriage. Because there is a unique area of vulnerability, the strongest mixed-orientation marriages have very clear priorities and commitments, making use of accountability and support in a committed and consistent manner. In my experience, where there is a good level of self-acceptance on the part of both spouses that same-sex attraction is simply a part of their reality that they need to steward and navigate there is a greater capacity to maintain the fidelity that is consistent with their beliefs and values. And as I have often said, there are some very vibrant and healthy mixed orientation marriages.

I’m afraid, however, that these are the stories that don’t really make the headlines in this conversation. The headlines are the marriage break ups. The headlines are the individuals who emerge from denial and hiddenness. The headlines are the double-life exposures. The headlines are that folks who’d claimed to be healed but now evidence ongoing same-sex attraction. In the midst of these headlines are real people experiencing significant pain as they seek to come to grips with their honest reality. It is deeply unfortunate that such stories become fodder for the culture wars.

Because the truth is, marriage can be very difficult – whether same-sex attraction is part of the mix or not. And marriage break-down brings great pain – regardless of the catalyst.

Someone made this comment on a previous blog:

“I can't help but respond to your several references regarding the difficulties of mixed-orientation marriages. In our society, marriages are quickly crumbling if there is no sexual fulfillment. Marriages without some form of emotional spark can become drab much easier. My marriage started with emotional intensity, but it was not long before reality demonstrated that a fulfilling relationship requires more than sexual excitement; it needs on-going work and commitment. Is there any value in reassuring mixed-orientation relationships that in a significant number of heterosexual marriages, eventually one or both partners will no longer experience sexual fulfillment? In fact, one partner may become quite negative about sexual intimacy. Respectful compromises can be found and other areas of intimacy can become more fulfilling and certainly more stabilizing.”

Such a comment highlights the challenge that the heterosexual majority has in imagining life in a mixed-orientation marriage. It also highlights the mistaken assumption that the deficits that may be experienced in a mixed orientation marriage are merely experienced in the arena of sexual arousal and climax. This capitulates to a very reductionistic understanding of same-sex sexuality.

My response to the comment was: “Your observations about heterosexual marriages are important and probably not honestly articulated as often as should be within Christian communities. However, it is perhaps a bit naive to suggest that those in mixed-orientation marriages are unaware that marriage in general is difficult.

There are many in mixed-orientation marriages who are quietly and faithfully making a life together with plenty of unique accommodations and compromises and discovery of their own rhythm of intimacy and grace.

So while I have tried to point out the reality that mixed-orientation marriages are not something I would recommend, I would also be the first to say that I know some couples who are experiencing a life-giving marriage and the richness of God's grace together. Marriages need both intimacy and fidelity - and that can be navigated and stewarded well.

Why does any marriage come to a point of separation and divorce? Could we always just say, "Try harder? Make more compromises? Give more of yourself?"

The temptation for those of us in marriages who do make daily choices to remain faithful and to find innovative expressions of intimacy despite disappointment, loneliness and grief is to intimate that it is simply an issue of motivation. However, in a posture of humility and grace, we seek to listen well, to love unconditionally and to reserve judgment for God who fully knows the heart.

When we seek to hold in tension issues of authenticity, intimacy and fidelity, there is no mathematical formula that neatly works for every human being .... and at the end of the day, we are all desperately dependent on grace.”

I had a conversation with a long time friend a few days ago. This individual has been in a mixed-orientation marriage for many years. There is honesty, mutual respect and mutual support in their marriage relationship. But there are also deficits. This friend is struggling to know what he makes of the generous spaciousness posture of New Direction. On one hand, something about the dialogue and the acknowledgment of difference attracts him. On the other hand, there is tension. And the tension is complex. The freedom in generous spaciousness to not judge or feel compelled to demand repentance from those who hold an affirming view of covenanted same-sex relationships is both threatening and attractive. The willingness to relinquish some certainty for a posture of humility seems to smell like Jesus but also raises red flags. The language of modernity-shaped evangelicalism peeks through in concerns about “the truth” and “there can only be one right response”. But even these words connect to some confusion about whether that is really the way to move forward and whether that really conveys the good news of a personal and relational Jesus. And underneath all the thinking, reflecting and struggling are the haunting questions about their long-ago choice to live life in the covenant of a mixed orientation marriage. “If I embrace generous spaciousness what will that do to my motivation and foundation for my own marriage?” “If I make space for gay Christians who experience fulfillment in a gay marriage – what does that mean for me in the reality of the disappointment and deficits that my spouse and I experience in our marriage?”

From a purely intellectual perspective, one can separate the two. An individual needs to own their decisions and commitments. They need to clarify their beliefs and values around fidelity and intimacy and then live in alignment with those values. But in the tangible reality of our human longing and disappointment and grief – the things that rise up in our heart in the middle of the night when we cannot sleep – such neat compartmentalization falls short.

The reality is, those in long term mixed-orientation marriages often deeply love one another. They have shared a depth of experience and life that means something. At the same time, in the depth of that shared life, there can be a poignant awareness that something is absent – something that transcends the normal challenge of married life. One same-sex attracted man said with great emotion that he had on occasion prayed that God would just take him home so that his straight wife could have a second chance and be loved by a straight husband the way she deserved. What a sign of love and devotion. What a gnawing sense of loss.

Our tendency in hearing something like this is to try to fix it. Some may think they just need to go to the right program, or get more prayer, or more counseling. Rest assured, this couple has gone above and beyond in pursuing God’s transforming grace. Others will want to affirm to them that God will understand and extend grace through separation and divorce because he wants them to be happy and fulfilled. This most often seems shallow and selfish to this couple and not representative of their love and commitment to God and to each other over the years.

I know another couple, both now affirming in their theological views about gay marriage, who have chosen to stay together. The man openly identifies as gay. This isn’t threatening to the wife. Together they model love and grace in living in the tension. I know another couple, both now affirming in their views, who had a ceremony in which they released one another from their vows and blessed one another to enter new covenants of love. They had the support and prayers of their faith community around them in this bittersweet transition.

Is one right? The other wrong? Is grace in one situation but lacking in the other? Is fear motiving one and love motivating the other?

If you speak to the four individuals represented by these different outcomes, you will encounter people of devout commitment to Jesus, people grateful for and exuding God’s grace, humble people who simply did the best they could in their unique situation to follow Jesus, to love well, and to move into their futures with honesty, authenticity and faith.

To me, this isn’t a matter of “everyone doing what is right in their own eyes” devoid of spiritual reflection. In both of these situations, the couples in question wrestled with Scripture and in prayer, reflected on their experiences and used the good minds God had given them. They also invited their community of faith to journey with them, to pray for them, and also to discern with them.

As someone with more than a decade of experience in pastoral care, you learn that a cookie cutter approach to these challenging realities will fall short. There is no formula. As pastors, we walk with people in their pain, disappointment and struggle. We wrestle with them to hear the voice of the Lord. We create a safe place to be present in the pain. We groan with the rest of creation awaiting the full consummation of Christ’s victory – when our tears will be wiped away, love will be perfect, and there will be no regret.

But now, we see through a glass dimly. We come to the foot of the cross with our deepest longings, with the parts of ourselves that feel so profoundly unfulfilled. We come with the visions of what could have been or what might yet be. We come with our fragile hopes and our cacophony of disappointment and resignation. We come wanting to energize our life’s decisions from a foundation of love rather than the house of fear. We come so weary from our best efforts seemingly always falling short. We come not wanting to discount our love, our care, our concern, protection and desire to serve. We come with wordless groans.

We are stuck in this time between the times. And sometimes it is so very hard to discern what that means in the practical reality of day-to-day life. Are we called to suffer and sacrifice in solidarity with Christ? Are we called to risk, to break out of frightened legalism into the freedom of a second chance? What counts more: our need for wholistic intimacy or our need to be faithful? Intimacy humanizes us. Fidelity humanizes us. Why does it sometimes feel like we have to choose one over the other?

The reality of mixed-orientation marriages baffle many of us – sometimes including those who experience them. Simplistic responses cannot suffice. In this complex kaleidoscope of human identity, longing, fulfillment, intimacy, fidelity, and love, mixed-orientation marriages invite us to a deeper humility. I pray they will also invite us to a deeper honesty. These stories, each one unique in its experiential facets, need to be heard with a generous commitment to listen and enter in. As friends and supportive community, let us not shy away from the tension, let us resist offering solutions, let us rejoice and grieve and hope and accept the reality for what it is. In so doing, let us be a conduit of grace ready to learn and to grow in being the Body of Christ together.

-WG

Day of Dialogue?

On Sunday night I had the opportunity to speak with a group of students. In the days prior to the talk I had several conversations with the youth pastor and with an elder from the church. It’s understandable, that the leaders of an evangelical church, who will also have to try to communicate with parents, would want to have clarification on my approach in coming to talk to their youth group. It was determined that one of the elders would open the meeting by communicating what the church’s leadership believed about homosexuality – which in this case was the affirmation of marriage being between one man and one woman and that same-sex sexual activity was sinful. Because the elder had clearly stated this position, that actually freed me to be able to present from a posture of generous spaciousness with this diverse group of students. Having felt like a misfit during my own teen years, I usually don’t feel incredibly comfortable speaking to a group of high schoolers. It tends to trigger all sorts of less than pleasant feelings for me. But over my years at New Direction I fairly regularly face my personal demons and try to serve this population to the best of my ability. Being able to speak from a posture of generous spaciousness made the task of speaking to students infinitely easier and more comfortable for me.

I could, for instance, say to the students that the elder had shared with them WHAT the church’s leadership believed – and I could encourage them to go and have conversation with the elders about WHY they believe that. I could challenge both the elders and the students to engage in dialogue together about WHY we think and believe what we do about the manner in which a same-sex oriented Christian should steward their relationships and sexuality. I could say to these students that each one of them needs to wrestle with Scripture, through prayer, reason, experience and in conversation with others in the Christian community to be able to own for themselves what they believe and why they believe it. I could talk to them about the fact that while WHAT we believe is important, it is also of critical importance to consider HOW we believe what we believe. That is, how do we convey our beliefs and values with others, including others who may disagree with us? And how can we do that in a manner that reflects the love of Christ for all people?

What was so refreshing about this particular talk was that our time together wasn’t sucked up by promoting, defending or refuting a particular theological position. We could simply focus on the reality that each one of us needs to grow in the maturity that owns what we truly believe. We can’t just inherit our beliefs – we need to really pray and think things through. We could focus on how a follower of Jesus can navigate the reality of complexity on this topic in a posture of humility and hospitality. And I could encourage these students to consider that asking questions isn’t a sign of a weak faith – but rather a sign of a faith willing to trust God to lead, guide and provide discernment.

The majority of our time together that evening was spent going through the questions that the students could anonymously text in. It was clear from the questions that the perspectives and levels of experience and use of language were very diverse in this group. I was able to encourage these students to learn the simple but important adage of entering dialogue ~ “This is what I believe ….. but I could be wrong….. tell me about what you believe.” And I could emphasize that the gospel is not ultimately about right belief ~ it is ultimately about right relationship: with God and with each other.

This generous experience with a group of students creates an interesting backdrop to the reminder that the Day of Dialogue is fast approaching (April 19). This initiative was formed in response to the GLSEN (gay, lesbian, straight education network) Day of Silence (April 20). The Day of Silence invites students to choose to refrain from speaking for a day as an act of solidarity with those whose voices are muted by unsafe environments of bullying and homophobia. Because this was perceived to be part of advancing an agenda of normalizing homosexuality in our society, the Day of Dialogue (originally called the Day of Truth) challenged Christian students to share with other students the traditional Biblical perspective that marriage is to be between one man and one woman and that there was hope for change for those who were same-sex attracted. Sponsorship of the Day of Truth/Dialogue has changed hands a few times from the Alliance Defense Fund to Exodus and now to Focus on the Family. The message has evolved slightly. This year’s cards (that students can download to hand out to other students) communicate this message:

I am giving you this card as a reminder that God cares about every single student in this school, including you—and to invite you to have a conversation about this concept. He knows your name, and He cares about your sexuality, your relationships and your soul. I believe Jesus Christ came to this earth to give his life for people like you and me. I believe He loves every person regardless of how they identify. That’s why as a Christian—someone who follows Jesus—I will stand up for students around me being teased, bullied or harmed for any reason. Because God cares so much about us, I also believe that He designed the best plan for our sexuality and relationships. And that He created every one of us, male and female, so that we could enjoy an intimate relationship with Him. Let’s talk about it!

I’m glad to see an acknowledgment that there are students who are bullied and that the card communicates that Christian students should stand up for those being mistreated. I’m glad the card articulates that God loves people regardless of how they identify. There’s no question in my mind that the card has been toned down from previous years. This is a sobering reality to take note of when one stops to remember that last year a gay student came home from school after the Day of Dialogue and hung himself in his bedroom.

When you go to the topic list under the “Dig Deeper” tag on the Day of Dialogue website, you see the following article links: God’s Design for Sexuality; Sex: A Gift & Responsibility; Hope for Those who Struggle; Having Healthy Friendships; Why We Should Stick up for Others; Why Male and Female Matter; Who am I? Finding Eternal Significance.

The website also listed some conversation starters: Does God really care about our sexuality and relationships?; What kind of advice does the Bible offer about this stuff – what does it say about the purpose of sex and God’s intention for it?; How is marriage reflected in God’s Word? How does the Bible present the idea of marriage as a spiritual picture? What is this important to think about?; What does it mean when the Bible says God made us in His own image, male and female?; How might masculinity and femininity reflect different things about God’s character?

As I looked through these articles, there was a very consistent tone. The articles were friendly, positive, and encouraging. They also presented a very consistent paradigm – one that can be described as an ex-gay paradigm. Such a paradigm not only views same-sex sexual activity as sinful, but it also discourages an individual from identifying as LGBT. The personal stories in the articles were consistently of those who felt same-sex attraction, some of whom had been involved in same-sex relationships or sexual activity, who turned away from anything associated with homosexuality to focus on a primary identity in Christ. The articles also had a strong tone of differentiation in gender.

When you consider the predominance of one paradigm and the conversation starters that point towards a particular discussion, one has to wonder why it is called the Day of Dialogue. It seems to me it might be much more honest to simply call it the Day of Defense of Traditional Marriage, Ex-Gay Response to Homosexuality and Traditional Gender Roles.

What struck me about the website was that I didn’t really see any guidance for high school students to understand what dialogue really is. I didn’t see any acknowledgement that they would encounter people with different views. I didn’t see any help for students to engage in conversation in a way that was open, humble and able to navigate difference and disagreement. I didn’t see any direction on listening skills. I didn’t see any acknowledgment that students may encounter a gay Christian.

Most promoters of dialogue have an emphasis on relationships. They recognize that dialogue happens over time with the goal of transformational, authentic relationships. There is an openness and often an expectation that dialogue will change us (note: not change the other person). Dialogue breaks down isolation and alienation because there is a mutuality and an opportunity to both listen and to share.

In the Day of Dialogue materials, I did not see much, if any, emphasis on dialogue taking time, on it being about building relationships, on a willingness to suspend one’s worldview to truly listen to another. There was no preparation for Christian high school students to really encounter difference and engage it in a manner that would open further conversation and deepen relationships. In fact, given the tone of apologetics and evangelism, it would seem to me that the drive-by conversation promoted by this initiative has the potential to create further alienation between Christian and gay students – with the additional sadness for gay Christian students caught in the cross-hairs.

It occurs to me that while gay-straight alliance students groups can easily be perceived as promoting a particular view of homosexuality, such groups are designed for open dialogue to happen in safe and positive environments. Students of majority and minority sexual identity have the opportunity to come together to hear one another’s experiences, one another’s beliefs and values, and learn to be supportive of one another despite any differences in perspective or experience. It occurs to me that the Day of Silence asks students to adopt the discipline of fasting from speaking as a tangible (and for some likely very challenging) sign of solidarity.

If the Day of Dialogue was actually encouraging dialogue that might be one thing. If it was willingly partnering with forums for ongoing conversation that might be something. But given the reality of its emphasis, one might do well to question whether this is really about concern for gay students, or the encouragement of Christian students, or whether the Day of Dialogue is an extension of the promotion and proselytizing of a particular worldview.

My hope and prayer is that on both days, April 19 & 20, students will pause and reflect on our interconnectedness one with another….. that we will remember my favorite quote from Desmond Tutu, “When I diminish you, I diminish myself.”

-WG

Conversations on Generous Spaciousness

Part of my doctoral journey is to invite a small group of folks from diverse backgrounds to gather with me on a regular basis to engage with me on my research topic. At this point, I am planning on looking at the impact and effectiveness of the concept of generous spaciousness on a church’s experience navigating the conversation about faithful discipleship for LGBT people. My hope, of course, is that by introducing the concept and then facilitating dialogue from the posture of generous spaciousness, that a congregation will experience honest, open conversation without coercion, debate, power struggles, shame, fear or paralyzing anxiety. My hope is that generous spaciousness might generate a sense of meaning-making for this conversation – that rather than the discussion being polarizing and threatening fracture, the conversation would enlarge in members of the congregation the capacity to be patient, humble and gracious with each other despite any differences in perspectives that emerge. If this hypothesis is demonstrated, then not only will engaging this conversation be healthy for a congregation, it will be a safe and spacious place for any individuals who find themselves not neatly fitting into the majority heterosexual experience. Lots of churches talk about being welcoming. But if the conversation about how an LGBT person ought to faithfully navigate their life as a follower of Jesus is ignored or the source of argumentation and fracture, it is a hollow welcome.

The small group that I have pulled together is a wonderful tapestry. Several LGBT people, some who identify as Christian and some who do not, sit alongside pastors and chaplains from denominations holding a traditional perspective on marriage, who find a place at the table with straight allies who are lay people in the church. What is wonderful is that very quickly we are experiencing generous spaciousness together.

The dialogue that emerged in our meeting yesterday was robust yet irenic. I had asked each person to share their impression of what generous spaciousness was. One of the participants shared a very interesting metaphor. She said, “Generous spaciousness reminds me of something I’m learning to prevent personal battles in my own mind. The technique is to not take sides in these battles because as a battle in my own head if I choose a side and win then I lose because I am the other side too. The approach was to frame this as a volleyball game where I was not to take sides, nor be referee or judge either side, as they launched volleys, by the rules or not, against each other. I am the volleyball court; aware of the game going on, of what each side is doing and why – but impartial, even though sometimes damaged in the aggressiveness of the game. This is all done to allow me, the court, to find a way to better mental and emotional health by the gradual fading of the game due to lack of interest. So here we have a volleyball game between, perhaps multiple teams at once, where theological positions, judgments and reactions are volleyed back and forth. Generous spaciousness is the court, or perhaps more correctly, the community of Christ is the court and the objective is not to participate in the game, not to judge any position, but to observe and note where various emotions, thoughts, and actions fit the game – but to let them go so as to allow the community to find a healthy relationship with God and Christ.”

Now as an avid lover of volleyball, this metaphor especially piqued my interest. But what was even more fascinating was to see how this metaphor was picked up by other members in the group. The question of boundaries came up in light of the idea that the church is like the volleyball court. Someone wondered about how we clarify these boundaries. I mentioned that there are three ways a church can clarify its boundaries: First, it can articulate a clear commitment to a traditional understanding that sexual intimacy is reserved for the marriage between one man and one woman. Secondly, it can articulate a clear commitment to the understanding that God blesses and extends grace to the covenant of marriage regardless of the gender of the partners. Third, a church can articulate that they clearly acknowledge that Christians disagree on this particular matter and that they choose to live in that tension as they extend hospitality to all. Then the comment was made that on the basis of one of these clearly stated positions, a congregation then plays within the boundaries of the court as defined by this position.

Calling on my many years of playing volleyball, I suggested that you can actually run outside of the boundaries to retrieve a ball and bring it back into play. So there was a sense that the boundaries are markers and yet there was some degree of flexibility in particular circumstances. Then another member of the group suggested that this conversation highlights the difference between a squash court and a volleyball court. In volleyball, the boundaries are marked on the floor. Players can stay within them or run outside of them – depending on what is going on in the game. The boundaries are, one might suggest, contextualized to the particular play. A squash court however has a very different experience of boundaries. If you’ve never played squash, it is a court where the boundaries are marked by walls. You can’t run outside the boundaries – and if you try you might just break your nose or at least get a good goosebump on your noggin.

One of the group members suggested that they’d been searching in the life of Jesus in the gospels to see examples of whether generous spaciousness could be seen in his ministry. And I mentioned that I really saw it in Jesus relationship with the law. Jesus says that he has not come to abolish the law – but to fulfill it. He says that all the law and the prophets hang on the command to love God with everything in you and to love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus also says that the Sabbath was made for man – not man for the Sabbath. And he has no problem with his disciples picking grain on the Sabbath – even though that transgressed the accepted interpretation of the law in his day.

In response another member suggested that the law was like a moral map – one on which we are invited to plan our own route – to guide our own navigation. He contrasted this with the idea of a GPS where your route is planned for you and you are simply expected to follow that calm, hypnotic voice. Those who hold to a GPS model of the law don’t need to think, they don’t need to own their choices, or wrestle with God – they just need to follow very rigid, defined directions. But those who understand that the law is like a map realize that they are responsible to chart their own course. And there may be many different ways to get to the same place, with different adventures on different routes. This idea of the law requires you to think and take ownership.

Another member simply said that while she might not be able to articulate what generous spaciousness was, she did know that she could tell the difference when she experienced and when she didn’t. She shared the example of two family members’ reactions to the recent announcement of her engagement to her partner. Both of these family members hold to a more traditional theological understanding of marriage. One family member has been present in this young woman’s life, taking the time to get to know her partner, being supportive in the day-to-day realities of life, being an encouragement, and being willing to stand up at the wedding as an attendant as an expression of their love for this woman and her partner. The other family member has clearly expressed that unless this young woman gets in alignment with their perspective on these matters they will take that as an indication of weak or no faith and as an open invitation to consistently try to convince this young woman of the error of her ways. In light of these contrasting experiences, this young woman suggested that the challenge of generous spaciousness was to not respond to the judgment of others with your own judgment of them. Generous spaciousness enlarges us in patience, humility and grace – but that doesn’t always mean that it is easy.

One of the things that has become important in my own reflections on generous spaciousness is to view it as foundational for a healthy experience of true Christian community. The LGBT conversation is just one case study for the application of generous spaciousness. This led to some important distinctions in our group’s conversation. When it was suggested that generous spaciousness might also be a foundation for a case study like racism, there are some clarifications that need to be made. Generous spaciousness acknowledges difference and invites all into the conversation. Part of this space is a willingness to live with the tension of some difference. Part of living in this tension is identifying and addressing any energy behind the convictions people hold as being unhelpful. Examples would be fear, shame, prejudice, privilege or anger. Such energy is not consistent with generous space. The problem with using racism as a case study for generous spaciousness is the reality that you want to root out racist attitudes and positions. In other words, you don’t want to live in the tension with a racist. In the same way, in the LGBT conversation, the intention is not to live in the tension with someone who demeans, disrespects, or devalues those outside the heterosexual mainstream. The challenge is that some people would view anyone who holds a traditional view of marriage as automatically doing those very things to LGBT people. Yet, for New Direction, a critical part of generous spaciousness is ensuring that Christians who hold differing views are able to enter a shared space and experience common ground in our love for Christ and for one another. Indeed, there are gay Christians who hold to a traditional understanding of Scripture – and they too need a safe place to be honest and authentic without the assumed projection that they are simply filled with internalized homophobia.

So generous spaciousness isn’t always the easiest concept to nail down and articulate. For those of us who live in the realty of these conversations, sometimes the best we can do is to indicate when we experience it and when we don’t. The problem is, that isn’t very helpful when you’re trying to build a conceptual model for a doctoral thesis.

So…. What do you think generous spaciousness is? What story can you share of experiencing it in this conversation at the intersection of faith and sexuality? What do you think are the core values of generous spaciousness? What makes up the common ground that we can share in such space?

As challenging as it is to articulate all the nuances of this concept in a concise and readable fashion, I am committed to nurturing and promoting generous spaciousness. For those of us who have experienced it, we know it allows us to experience the freedom, unity and maturity that God has intended for his gathered people.

-WG

How to Talk to your Kids About Homosexuality

It is not uncommon for me to be asked, “How did you speak with your kids about your job?” What these parents are really asking is for guidance on how to speak to their own children about homosexuality. Particularly for Christian parents, who either hold to a traditional understanding of marriage or are somewhat uncertain about how they will interpret Scripture regarding committed same-sex relationships, this can seem to be a daunting task in our current cultural context. (note: In this post, I haven't addressed parents who hold affirming views - simply because their conversations with their kids about this matter will be relatively straight-forward) For those who have no gay friends and a simplistic commitment to avoid anything they disagree with, this matter of communication isn’t that challenging. They simply tell their children it is wrong and that is the end of the conversation. But many Christian parents recognize that it is more nuanced and complex than that.

The challenge is, that as parents we generally speaking want to protect our children’s innocence. We somehow want to shield them from a culture that has become alarmingly sexualized. And I would dare to wager that a lot of Christian parents, with perhaps the exception of the Amish, experience guilt over the ways we cave in and allow our kids to be exposed to this culture. A sure sign of this guilt is when the religious right regularly uses alarmist fundraising tactics related to stopping public matters connected to children and sexuality whether that be gay Teletubbies, anti-bullying measures, music videos or sex education curriculum.

This anxiety and guilt can spill over into the reflection that parents do on how to try to convey the inevitable tensions that many feel over the increasing societal acceptance of LGBT people. On one hand, there is a recognition that we have the opportunity to choose love over hate in our response to LGBT friends and neighbours. On the other hand, there is a hesitation about whether their kids will be able to make some kind of differentiation akin to the generally held adage “love the sinner, hate the sin”. Part of this hesitation is that despite how glibly this cliché can roll off people’s lips, in 2012 any thinking Christian has heard the reality that such a clichéd attempt at loving people and upholding traditional Biblical teaching by saying you "hate the sin" is often a complete disconnect with gay people. The cliché just doesn’t capture the complexity of the matter-at-hand. It doesn’t recognize that a gay person is much more than what they do or do not do between the sheets. It doesn’t recognize the reality of gay Christians, who after significant and prayerful wrestling with Scripture believe deeply that God’s grace and blessing extends to their covenanted relationship. It doesn’t acknowledge that in the Christian church there is disagreement among committed Christian people regarding what behavior is immoral and what behavior might be an expression of the fidelity consistent with Scripture.

And if this sounds complicated, that’s because it is. Adults are having a hard time navigating it all. How can we expect our kids, who don’t yet have the capacity to think through complex matters with inherent paradox, to be able to make sense of it all? As parents, we want our kids to be bolstered and encouraged in their faith and in the formation of their beliefs and values. Introducing paradox and uncertainty seems counterintuitive to these priorities. And if there is anything that makes a Christian parent anxious, it is the idea that our kids will reject faith in Jesus and embrace beliefs and values that are inconsistent with following Christ.

So, in light of all of this, how should we talk to our kids about homosexuality?
First of all, I think it is never too early to begin this conversation. My personal thought was that I wanted to be the one to set the tone for learning about relationships, identity, sexuality, and values for my children. I didn’t want them to hear about matters of sex from some mis-informed, insecure kid on the playground. Whether your kids are in public school, Christian school, or home-schooled, unless you plan on keeping them away from all other children and all forms of media, your kids are going to be exposed to other’ ideas and attitudes about sexuality. So, you want to be the one who begins the conversation, sets the tone for the conversation, brings accurate information into the conversation, and establishes trust in the conversation. As scary as that might be for you, if you make this investment, you will be the one your kids turn to with their questions and uncertainty down the road.

I often say that God has a great sense of humour in calling me to speak about matters of sexuality on a regular basis. Growing up, there was a typical awkward silence about sex. Over the years I had to piece together various bits of information to try to have some understanding about this significant arena of life. A sense of embarrassment and shame went along with any efforts I made to try to better understand sexuality in general. And I’m not even sure when I first was exposed to the idea that some people were attracted to their own gender.
So I understand what it is like to feel inadequate and intimidated to speak to your kids about sex. But as understanding as I am, basically, you’ve got to suck it up and take the risk. It is too important. Your kids need you as a calm, non-anxious presence to help them understand how to steward their own sexuality and how to live in a world that continually calls them to relate, with discernment, to many diverse expressions of sexuality.

As an aside, maybe you’re reading this post and realize you’ve dropped the ball. That you let your own anxiety get the best of you and that you haven’t engaged your kids the way you could have. Or maybe you’re thinking of another family where the kids have been very ill-equipped to navigate these matters. Don’t focus on what can’t be undone – focus on what is ahead. It is better late than never. Even if your kids are teens or young adults or maybe even with their own young children, have an intentional conversation. Be as honest and transparent as you can be about why this conversation was so hard for you to have with them – but how much you want to stop the cycle of anxiety of shame for them and your grandchildren.

Being sensitive to age-appropriateness, any conversation about homosexuality must begin in the larger conversation about: our humanity; our image-bearing of a relational God; our call to model the faithfulness of God’s character in our relationships; God’s good gift of sex within covenant; the importance of valuing ourselves and others by not cheapening one-flesh unions; the variety of ways we experience intimacy in spiritual, emotional, and physical ways; the uniqueness of our expressions of our gender ….. as just some basic examples. Homosexuality isn’t something you should parachute in to talk about. Rather, let the conversation be part of the larger question of who we are as human beings driven to overcome our aloneness.

In this context, I began to talk about the reality of LGBT people with my kids from the perspective of extending respect. Note: I didn’t start by talking about homosexuality as an abstract idea – I talked about the reality of people who were different than the heteronormative experience of mommy and daddy. My kids could easily relate to the idea that sometimes people who are different are made fun of by others. They could also easily understand concrete examples from the Bible where Jesus made a special point of talking to and touching people who were different in his culture. And consequently, they could understand that Jesus, in our day and context, would want us to love, befriend and stand up for people who are different. This was the first lesson they learned on this topic.

The second lesson they learned was to not reduce LGBT people to their sexuality – and to understand that same-sex sexuality was about much more than just sex. To instill this understanding, I talked about how we, as human beings, express ourselves to others. We share ourselves through our faith, our creativity, through our humour, through caring and giving to others, through the knowledge we have, through the skills and abilities we have, through shared experiences of beauty, pain, joy, hope etc. I talked to them about how as we grow we want to express and share of ourselves with one special person – and that sometimes it can feel like that special person helps us to feel more complete. Many people when they grow up, feel like that would be someone of the opposite sex that they would like to marry. But a smaller number of people feel like that would be someone of the same sex. This establishes human sexuality as part of the larger expression of our personhood – and does not reduce it to a physical sex drive.

The next thing to talk about was the different ways that LGBT people live their lives. Here is an opportunity to help your kids understand that an idea like “the gay lifestyle” is really unhelpful because gay people live their lives in many different ways. You could begin by saying that some gay people live a single life because they believe that is what is most pleasing to God. You might also say that some people live with a special friend (this would refer to those who have a committed but non-consummated friendship). And some people marry a partner of the same sex (I live in Canada, so the reality is that my kids need to know that they will encounter gay people are married). Depending on the age of your kids and their ability to understand some of the complexity, you might also want to describe to them a person who experiences some same-sex attraction but marries a person of the opposite sex (mixed-orientation marriage) and believes that God will give them grace as they love one another and their family. If they are old enough to understand, you could tell them that some people are able to feel attraction for both men and women and we call that bisexuality.

As you describe the different ways that gay people live their lives you can begin to talk about what you believe the Bible says. One way to start that conversation is to explain to your kids what promiscuity is (again in age-appropriate ways) and how the Bible warns us that promiscuity will hurt us and others. Note: I would suggest that the conversation about promiscuity be general in nature encompassing both heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Regardless of the direction of someone’s attractions, promiscuity is inconsistent with God’s best for us.

If you have very clear convictions about homosexual behavior, I would suggest that you share these with your kids with an emphasis on why you believe these things. At the same time, I would challenge you to also share with your kids that there are people in the church who see things differently than you do. I think this is important because it is very likely that your children will be engaging an even more diverse Christian community than you currently do. By acknowledging that there are Christians who disagree with you, you will prepare your kids for this discovery. Hopefully, your calm and non-anxious presence will help them to see that these differences in the context of the reality of a Christian community that differs on a great many interpretive issues. Your children will be well served by learning early on that the unity of the church is not uniformity, that we grow in our capacity for humility, patience and hospitality as we learn to relate across our differences, and that faith is invitational not coercive. As you have these conversations with your kids, you will be modeling the reality that each person needs to actually own what they believe – including your own kids. They need to realize as they grow older that they will be given the room to wrestle with these matters – and that your deepest desire is that they would put Christ at the center of all their searching. And you can honestly talk to them about the fact that we need the larger community of faith, beginning with our own family, to help us discern and embrace our beliefs and values.

So if you clearly want to convey a traditional understanding of marriage to your kids, make sure you know WHY you believe that. As you share how you have wrestled with Scripture to come to that conclusion, take the risk to share with them that this is a question that Christians today need to really wrestle with. And that Christians disagree with one another – but can still love one another and find a way to follow Christ despite these differences. It would also be really helpful if you would affirm to your kids that God loves gay people, that the church needs our gay sisters and brothers, and that we, as followers of Jesus, need to be committed to welcoming and being in relationship with gay people – even if there are some points on which we disagree.

If you honestly feel unsure about whether or not covenanted same-sex relationships are given God’s grace, I encourage you (being sensitive of age and maturity) to be honest and transparent with your kids. What a conversation to have! Perhaps you’ll talk about the fact that there aren’t any positive references to same-sex behavior in the Bible – but that there also isn’t a reference to a life-long committed same-sex relationship either. Maybe you’ll talk about God’s provision for marriage and family in the creation account – but also that the authors’ of Scripture didn’t understand sexual orientation the way we do today. Maybe you’ll talk about how God hates promiscuity and divorce – and yet the ways he still extends grace to people in a broken world. Maybe you’ll talk about how we wrestle with what parts of the law we need to learn from – and the reality that the Bible also speaks to a particular people in a particular time, place and culture. Maybe you’ll talk about how Jesus spoke about the law – and how important it seemed to be to him and also the ways he seemed to critique it.

I could share so many other ways that this conversation opens up a whole dialogue about who Jesus is, who God is, what Scripture is, how we engage the Bible, how we discern how to apply things from the Bible to our lives today, how we navigate the tension of the “now and the not yet”. While it can feel scary to say to your kids that you are unsure, especially to those of us who grew up in a Christian system where everyone around us was so absolutely certain of everything pertaining to faith, I want to encourage you to see opportunity in this risk.

1. If you’re honest with your kids about things you’re uncertain about – it gives them the freedom to not have all the answers either. This can give them some much needed breathing room in the development of their own faith and prevent unnecessary ultimatums. For example, they don’t have to choose between loving their gay friends and loving God – they can hold both in tension as they continue to seek understanding.
2. If you model fully engaged, robust interaction with prayer, Scripture and listening for the Holy Spirit on a matter that you don’t feel you have the complete answer to, your kids have an amazing example of integrating your faith with critical thinking, spiritual disciplines, reverence and awe, and a humility that can embrace mystery.
3. If you include your kids in searching out God’s heart on these matters (again with sensitivity to age-appropriateness) you give them the opportunity to own their own faith, to be a full participant in your family’s spiritual journey, and you honour the gifts that God is giving your kids.
4. If, perchance, one of your own kids is wrestling with matters of identity, sexual attraction, or faith itself, the honesty and authenticity you share with them could be invaluable to encourage them to stay in the game rather than walking away.

You’ll notice that after almost 3,000 words describing how I’ve talked to my kids about homosexuality, that I haven’t said that much about sex itself. My emphasis was on how we treat people, on seeing people as more than their sexuality, and on helping our kids to be prepared to navigate relationships with people who disagree with them. And these are my main priorities. However, I am pretty candid with my kids too and have had very practical, concrete conversations about the mechanics of sex. These talks were often integrated to describe both heterosexual and homosexual sexual behavior and they were led by the questions of my kids. One of my children has a natural level of embarrassment in these conversations, was inevitably rather squirmy and grossed out by the whole business. This child never initiated questions for further clarification. Another one of my children was the exact opposite. This child had unending curiosity, had no sense of embarrassment (or boundaries for that matter) and asked all kinds of questions. Each kid will be different – so let your kids lead you to understand what they need from you. My kids needed me to be relaxed, bring a mixture of seriousness and humour, a confidence in God’s goodness and grace, and my unconditional support and encouragement of them into the conversation.

My kids are old enough now to have internalized years of these conversations. I’m proud to say that all three of them understand my work to be that of advocacy – to ensure that the church is a safe place for our LGBT sisters and brothers to come and explore and grow in faith in Jesus Christ. And each in their own way, have had opportunities to stand up for gay people. The theological conversations continue. My kids are still shaping and owning their own faith. And so am I. And hopefully we’ll continue to honestly encourage and challenge one another in the spiritual journey for the rest of our lives. That’s the way it should be.

-WG

Speaking Out of Both Sides of my Mouth?

An interesting aspect of my work these days is the opportunity to have conversations with people who hold different perspectives on the question of whether a covenanted same-sex relationship is an appropriate life choice for a disciple of Jesus. In the early years, most of my conversations were with Christians who held to a traditional understanding that sexual intimacy ought to be reserved for the marriage between one man and one woman. At that time, Christians who held an affirming view of same-sex relationships were seen as a very separate group – perhaps perceived by those with whom I was talking as dangerous, not particularly serious about scripture or the Christian faith, or misguided by their emotions. That separateness was not an easy barrier to dismantle with people – mainly because their focus was not on the shared faith in Christ with affirming folks – but on the moral differences in viewing a faithful discipleship journey for gay people.

Fast forward to today, and in the course of any given 24 hour period I might have several conversations with people from very diverse perspectives. In fact, sometimes those conversations happen within minutes of one another. Sometimes, the individuals with whom I’m speaking assume that I share the same perspective they do …. And sometimes they assume that I don’t. When a person’s position is explicitly stated, some degree of “us vs. them” often creeps into the conversation. Sometimes I am assumed to be part of “us” and sometimes I’m assumed to be one of “them”.

My role in these conversations, regardless of the perspective the person holds and regardless of whether they view me as with them or against them, is to be a non-anxious presence. My role is to listen carefully. As I listen, I will hear their expectations – but these are not my focus. Their expectations may be to try to confirm where I stand. Or to influence me. Or to leverage solidarity with their position. But none of these things can be my focus. My focus is to nurture generous patience as I introduce postures of humility and hospitality and grace into the conversation. I am always called to ask, “How now shall we live with those with whom we differ?” And not only how shall we live and relate and walk forward – but how shall we do so in the way of Jesus?

One of the realities of New Direction intentionally choosing to live in the tension of generous spaciousness is that those who hold a traditional view may assume that we are affirming – since we are welcoming into conversation those that hold affirming views. Another reality is that those with affirming views may think we are just being a kinder, gentler version of impeding progress to full inclusion given our openness to those who hold traditional views.

The truth is, this is a really hard place to be. To intentionally situate yourself in the very midst of those who are trying to assert the dominance of their perspective is a very vulnerable place. And I understand that the reason people are seeking to assert the dominance of their perspective is most often because they deeply, truly believe that their position is true, is life-giving, is most representative of the revelation of God through Scripture. And when you intentionally stand in the midst of such passion and intensity, it can easily be seen as some wishy-washy, politically correct effort to forge a false peace and a superficial chorus of kumbiya.

As New Direction seeks to be intentional in living out the model of generous spaciousness, particularly in the diverse make up of our board and staff, it can feel like we are walking in a minefield where even a minor mis-step might just blow up in our face. Our board is, itself, a diverse group who comes together to lead the mission of New Direction in building bridges. Someone with whom I was having initial conversation about participation with our board of directors indicated that while he was intrigued by and even supportive of what we were doing in seeking to diffuse the polarity and nurture peaceful and spacious places – he felt he could never have enough patience to deal with those who held traditional views. Later that afternoon I received an email from a long-time supporter of the ministry who indicated that he wanted his monthly donations stopped immediately and his name taken off the mailing list since, in his estimation, we were no longer preaching the truth. I understand both of these situations and honour each of these individuals’ autonomy to be where they need to be in this broader conversation. But it is hard. Painful to know that some feel betrayed by our stepping into the tensions of generous spaciousness.

At the same time, it has been an incredible learning experience for me to grow into my capacity to be a non-anxious presence. To learn the spiritual and emotional disciplines that enable me to keep my reactions in check and listen for the Spirit’s promptings in each of these kinds of exchanges. To extend grace. To live in robust patience. To trust more deeply that God is in control.

It has been incredible to glimpse moments of breakthrough where the mystery of humility triumphs over arrogant certainty. Where hearts open to experience challenging but important relational growth with those with whom they disagree. To see a pastor’s eyes well up with tears when he says that he used to want to err on the side of orthodoxy, but he now wants to lean on the side of love.

These moments make my sometimes schizophrenic-feeling days matter. These moments make the whip-lash feeling dissipate and I remember that I have been called for such a time as this, to live into the tensions and be that non-anxious presence of peace ….. where God reveals not necessarily the exact right answer to the question of how a gay person ought to relationally live as a disciple of Christ …. but where God reveals his deep and vast and unfathomable love for each one of us, in our different places, doing the best we can to know him, see him, honour him. For in the end, all things are caught up in him. For he is the author and finisher of our faith.

“We have been drawn together by God to be a sign of the resurrection and a sign of unity in this world where there is so much division and inner and outer death. We feel small and weak, but we are gathered together to signify the power of God who transforms death into life. That is our hope, that God is doing the impossible: changing death to life inside of each of us, and that perhaps, through our community, each one of us can be agents in the world of this transformation of brokenness into wholeness, and of death into life.” ~ Jean Vanier, “From Brokenness to Community”

-WG

A Study in Contrasts: how those with traditional views can speak publicly about homosexuality

Yesterday I had the opportunity to engage two very different audio accounts of a Christian person holding a traditional view of marriage speak about homosexuality. The first was the President of Fuller Seminary, Dr. Richard Mouw, speaking in an address to the Fuller community about these matters. The second, was Kirk Cameron, perhaps best known as a child actor from the show Growing Pains, in an interview with Piers Morgan.

Mouw was very clear in his articulation that after much study, reflection and conversation with scholars and colleagues who hold an affirming view, he continues to hold a heteronormative view of covenanted and consummated relationships. However, in the midst of this articulation, he shared his story and journey that acknowledged his relationships with gay Christians in long-term committed partnerships, his encounters with their faith and vocational callings into ministry, and his first-hand experience in navigating deep friendship in the midst of differences. While clearly affirming his own traditional convictions, his generosity of spirit acknowledged both the humanity and the faith of those who hold different convictions on the basis of their prayerful and thorough wrestling with Scripture. Mouw encouraged us to find common ground in elevating and promoting fidelity. He spoke of the principles from which Christians ought to engage this topic – and it almost sounded like he took a page from the generous spaciousness playbook: he spoke of humility and generosity and grace. And he spoke of Fuller needing to be a place of hospitality where different views were engaged robustly without fear.

I put the link to Mouw’s talk on my facebook wall because I wanted to see how some of my LGBT friends might respond to it. One friend in a committed partnership said, “I can respect his strategic and missional approach to the topic, I personally take a more inclusive stance... obviously. I get that he is navigating his way through the topic with some authenticity. If I had his ear, I would support his stance against promiscuity...in both the heterosexual and homosexual situation.”

Contrast this with the backlash from the LGBT community in response to Kirk Cameron’s comments. Cameron publicly identifies as an evangelical Christian. When asked about his views on homosexuality, he said, “I think it’s unnatural. I think it’s detrimental and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization.”

GLAAD was quick to respond saying,

“Cameron is out of step with a growing majority of Americans, particularly people of faith who believe that their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters should be loved and accepted based on their character and not condemned because of their sexual orientation." The public discussion continued when Kirk responded by saying, “I should be able to express moral views on social issues, especially those that have been the underpinning of Western civilization for 2,000 years — without being slandered, accused of hate speech, and told from those who preach ‘tolerance’ that I need to either bend my beliefs to their moral standards or be silent when I’m in the public square.”

This public exchange is yet another brick in the wall that divides. It is the kind of dividing wall that, I believe, breaks God’s heart ….. because his heart is that all would experience the joy of reconciled relationship with him and a sense of unity with one another.

So what can we learn from these two different experiences? Is there a way to hold traditional views and not contribute to the walls that divide and polarize us?

Cameron’s remarks may reflect his personal convictions about morality but they demonstrate no particular connection to the lives of real people. As Christians, we must always be concerned about the impact of our words on the people to whom they are directed. Cameron’s remarks are consistent with a typical disconnection that situates ideas and values in the world of the theoretical. This becomes a problem, however, because homosexuality is not a theoretical idea. Homosexuality is meaningless when it is disconnected from the lives of men, women and young people who experience the reality of being same-sex oriented.

Mouw, on the other hand, demonstrates relational connection. He acknowledges in a respectful and engaged manner the humanity, morality and faith of the partnered gay Christians he has invested time in getting to know.

Where Cameron is defensive, entitled and playing the victim, Mouw emphasizes humility, hospitality and grace.

Cameron seems to be using this opportunity to assert his rights to communicate his beliefs regardless of how it might affect real people. He claims that his mission is to love all people, but one might ask whether a gay person feels loved by being referred to as unnatural, detrimental and destructive. He claims he should be able to state his views without being slandered, accused of hate speech or pressured to either change his views or remain silent.

Well Kirk, if you expressed your views with the kind of relational connection, humility, generosity, hospitality and grace of Dr. Mouw, you might just find that those who disagree you, including your LGBT neighbours, might extend you the kind of respect and space that you seem to feel you are entitled to.

-WG