Honesty and the ministry

[HarmlessEccentric]

I had a job in a fundamentalist church, my whole family belonged to the One True Church, and all my friends were part of the church as well. It seemed like there wasn't anything outside of it.

I got out anyway... but it wasn't easy or simple, and it didn't happen overnight. I had to find new work, and a new place to live, and a new community of friends. I didn't leave overnight; I took the time I needed to build a secure new life. Sometimes I felt so lost and lonely from everything I'd known. But in time, I saw the world opening up possibilities for me, and I felt like a girl raised in a convent who's been sent out into the world.

Making the transition from a life within a suffocating church to a life outside of it took time, planning, and emotional energy, but it was well worth it.

[Pablo Rafael]

It is easy on this forum to say that everyone in the closet should come out. That is easier said than done in many cases. For those of us who have made church work a career, it is no small decision to come out. The consequences can be substantial.

I was one of those closeted for many years. When I first entered the teaching ministry, I hadn't even admitted to myself that I was gay. I didn't make a conscious effort to cover it up or to pretend to be something I was not.

As I came to realize I was gay, I was still had the mindset that being gay was evil. Therefore I did what I could, which was dedicate myself to a life of celibacy. I firmly thought that I was doing the right thing. I would serve the Lord and refrain from acting on my desires. Again there was no effort to lie or betray the LGBT cause. I felt trapped, and the only path I saw was in the closet.

It has only been recently that I have come to the realization that being gay is OK. I still want to serve the Lord and I still want to be in church work. But now I feel that I can't in good conscience stay in the closet. (Plus in all honesty I really desire to be in a relationship. A little selfish I guess.)

It might be easier or me to come out than a lot of men my age. Financially I don't have a lot to fear from the loss of a job. I don't have family concerns. And though for me I feel it is important to come out, I can't criticize others who have decided that now is not the right time.

Each person has to decide on their own path. For some that might be waiting to fully come out until a later time. But I do think it is important that those of us who are respected workers in the church do need eventually to come out and show people that ministry and being gay are quite compatible.

Pablo

[Zerbie]

Yep. Thank you Pablo. That is correct.

I think it is easy to fall into the trap when you are an LGBT activist of towing the line "Everybody should come out." As I see it, being born LGB or T does not obligate an individual to the entire LGBT community (which is too diverse for that, anyway.) And besides, didn't we become activists because we want to make the world better for all LGBT people? And doesn't making the world better entail respecting everyone's prerogative to make deeply meaningful - and sometimes costly - personal decisions on their own terms?

Let me draw a comparison we're all familiar with:
Does the Equality Ride exist for the glory of the riders? Or does it exist (in part) to give quiet sustenance to closeted gay kids at institutions where they may otherwise never hear a truly accepting voice? If the Equality Ride activists can do that for closeted gay youth, then why should we as activists be any less invested in support and respect for closeted gay adults who made a difficult decision in the way that they deem best for their lives?

[Vanessa White]

Great point, Zerbie.

Equality Rides are a great example, to benefit the many. I mean, if I am recollecting accurately, the persons from those schools that seem to visibly come to SF after those visits isn't usually youths who now have the courage to come out, but rather, their peers, colleagues and friends who want to gain more understanding. I have anger and resentment at how some churches have not wanted to acknowledge or value LGBT persons. However, I think that it will all happen one purposeful step at a time. Sometimes we will be taking those steps together, sometimes alone. But coming out, no matter what a person's circumstance is, certainly is based on each individual, his/her situation, needs, and safety, emotional and physical.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

And doesn't making the world better entail respecting everyone's prerogative to make deeply meaningful - and sometimes costly - personal decisions on their own terms?

This thread started by looking at people in the ministry, specifically the Episcopal Bishops who are closeted while Gene Robinson and the American church "takes the fall". It also mentioned Seminarians I know who are openly gay and plan to enter the ministry by pulling the wool over the eyes of the hierarchy.

For something to be ethical, the motive, means and end need to be good. The 'end' of being ordained is good. But if your 'means' of getting there requires duplicity and lies, your actions are not ethical. Then there is the 'motive'. What sort of 'motive' animates a person willing to lie and deceive to enter and sustain their ministry?

Does the homophobic reality in most Christian denominations allow us to absolve duplicity and lies as understandable realities for LGBT spiritual leaders? Does the good they do for others some how make their actions acceptable? Should integrity be something we expect from a spiritual leader?

Like the anti-gay Anglican Bishop of Horsham. Like in the Haggard situation, a male blogger is claiming to have had a sexual relationship with him.

http://denniswine.blogspot.com/2008/...f-horsham.html

Allegations of course, but honestly, does this do much for the church and the ministry? Who has more integrity, Robinson or Horsham? Does it matter?

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by antonyh

For something to be ethical, the motive, means and end need to be good. The 'end' of being ordained is good. But if your 'means' of getting there requires duplicity and lies, your actions are not ethical. Then there is the 'motive'. What sort of 'motive' animates a person willing to lie and deceive to enter and sustain their ministry?

Does the homophobic reality in most Christian denominations allow us to absolve duplicity and lies as understandable realities for LGBT spiritual leaders? Does the good they do for others some how make their actions acceptable? Should integrity be something we expect from a spiritual leader?

Does the end (the 'good' that is done) justify the means (the motive)?

Just how 'good' is the 'good' when tainted with self-interest? With duplicity?

How is it that we too often expect honesty and integrity from everyone else but ourselves?

And I want to make something clear here: there is a price to be paid for coming out in conservative churches. I paid it. My husband paid it, who was fired from three church music jobs because when it became known that he was gay (they were all Catholic Churches btw).

But what is the alternative?

Sure - life is damn hard. And I am sorry for my 'hard line' about this issue about coming out. If everyone would come out right now the face or Christendom would change overnight. What stops that?

Fear! Fear of losing what little we have.

We need to give each other support and not excuses.

[missionarymiles]

Originally Posted by antonyh

For something to be ethical, the motive, means and end need to be good. The 'end' of being ordained is good. But if your 'means' of getting there requires duplicity and lies, your actions are not ethical. Then there is the 'motive'. What sort of 'motive' animates a person willing to lie and deceive to enter and sustain their ministry?

Does the homophobic reality in most Christian denominations allow us to absolve duplicity and lies as understandable realities for LGBT spiritual leaders? Does the good they do for others some how make their actions acceptable? Should integrity be something we expect from a spiritual leader?

Presently I serve in a country that requires a "platform" to minister in because you cannot come in as open missionary. This means that we need to either run a legitimate business or perform some legitimate humanitarian work. Now this has caused intense debate over the last 20 years in missions circles because the ethics of saying you are doing one thing and then doing another has been questioned as legitimate. I see this as the same argument just different circumstances.

We have resolved that "ethical" question in ourselves by running a legitimate humanitarian service that meets peoples needs regardless of their faith or desire to hear about ours. However, we publically live our lives as Christians not hiding that so that all can examine it. This is difficult and some people believe we should be more discrete about openly living out our faith. Maybe I am making an argument for just coming out.

I would agree that people seeking to "infiltrate" the ranks of the clergy by lies are behaving with questionable ethics, in the same way, I believe that missionaries who hide their own faith are questionable. A visa is not worth a lie, yet the question here seems to be is changing a denominational culture worth a lie?

[Zerbie]

I was side-tracking the subject Antony, sorry. I really have no sense of how ministry works, and was speaking in general terms. Personally, I cannot imagine being able to speak lies in pursuit of a job, and that's something I cannot relate to. I guess my statements weren't completely relevant to this thread.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

I was side-tracking the subject Antony, sorry. I really have no sense of how ministry works, and was speaking in general terms. Personally, I cannot imagine being able to speak lies in pursuit of a job, and that's something I cannot relate to. I guess my statements weren't completely relevant to this thread.

Your comments were very relevant. I was just thinking in terms of the ministry.