Wheaton response to Mel White's article

[sam]

My father is a pastor at conservative Christian church and has been trying to get me to "see the light" ever since I came out to him. Here is his most recent endeavor an article by Dr. Stanton L. Jones published by our good friends at Wheaton College on the site "Center for Applied Christian Ethics."

The whole article is only a few paragraphs, but evidently that's enough to malign all Mel White and Soulforce supporters stand for. One of his opening sentences is just so blatantly untrue that it is clear Jones has no desire to open his mind and heart to God's truth, "You will find in White’s document very little in the way of a deep reading of the message of the Bible." Pretty sickening...

Here's the website and I would love any feedback you all had!
http://www.wheaton.edu/CACE/ethics/ethics.htm
Thanks,
Samantha

[Steven E. Webster]

Samantha,

Actually, the very short "conclusion" that you refer to is just a tiny taste of a much longer article. You will find a link to a pdf file containing the whole article if you look at the URL you give us more closely.

I find the "debate" between those of us on "Mel's side" and those of the mindset of Stanton Jones to be somewhat frustrating. It seems to me that there is almost no chance of there being a "meeting of the minds" on this issue.

Stanton reads scripture through a set of biases that we do not share. In short, his bias is heterosexist as well as sexist.

No doubt Stanton would accuse us of having certain biases. It seems like there is little chance of finding common ground.

Actually, I am drawn to Soulforce's use of the methods of Gandhi and King because they do not rely merely on intellectual debate. If we are going to achieve any change it will be by reaching people's hearts, and through that eventually opening their otherwise closed minds.

I've seen a book co-authored by Stanton Jones--I found it rather absurd. Jones believes the bible is "inerrant" and in any case where science or "the facts" contradict the view of reality he thinks he reads in his bible, Jones goes with his reading of the bible and dismisses science and "the facts." Like I say, there's no debating with someone with that point of view.

Steven Webster

[Daniel]

Samantha,

I can only surmise that your father's efforts are troubling to you (my own family is conservative- a brother is a missionary- and there have been disagreeable moments at times). Though one thing comes to mind: a troubling as his views are, at least he is communicating with you. Communication that keeps going can, one hopes, lead to better things.

Like Steven, I am drawn to the work of Gandhi and King (Soulforce) because it does indeed bypass intellectual debate- it gets to the heart of the matter. The mind can only go so far in these matters.

[sam]

Daniel and Steven,
I feel like it always goes back to being an intellectual debate with people like my father. How would you suggest going about reaching those kinds of people with the philosophies of gandi, king and soulforce?

Samantha

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by sam

Daniel and Steven,
I feel like it always goes back to being an intellectual debate with people like my father. How would you suggest going about reaching those kinds of people with the philosophies of gandi, king and soulforce?

Hi Samantha,

I take your question to heart, seeing that I've worked to establish some kind of meaningful relationship with my family who still- in some respects- don't 'get it' that I'm Ok the way I am (though may father has said some amazing things to me this past summer- we're talking a good 18 years since I came out). My siblings and parents (three of my four siblings are very conservative- I'm in the middle of five) still attend churchs that are conservative where they hear negative stuff about gay people from the pulpit.

It's a matter that still gives me pain. I've had work at making peace with the notion that I may never have the close relationship with my family that I would like. There is still the occasional night where I don't get any sleep thinkng about it. And, for all intent and purposes, I feel like I am left to do all the 'work' in the relationship. I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way. It just boggles my mind to refect on the fact that, in the end, my family has made choices which crowd me out of the family picture. What kind of faith is that, I wonder?

At rock bottom, even though I have gone through periods of being very very angry, I've learned (and am learning still) that active compassion is the only way to go. And I try to keep in mind that the 'debate' my family is having is not with me, but with themselves.

I work at loving them rather than being mad about things (and I remind myself to take pleasure in small things- my parents are older now so I make a point to call them more often and let then know I care about them- half of life is showing up- as they say). For me, this has taken the from of practicing Metta meditation (a Buddhist meditation practice which is about generating compassion for one's self and others) as well as being mindful of what I am saying and thinking. "More love, less fuss" I tell myself.

Everyone who is interested in the methods of nonviolence finds their own way. And each situation is different and requires a nuanced response.

Case is point: there was a time years ago when I had to tell my parents that either my boyfriend was coming with me to Thanksgiving or I wouldn't attend (I was 'invited' and told that he should not come). In sum, I felt like I was being told to 'show up and shut up'. I took a stand. Things changed for the better after that (my boyfriend went with me). And I have always thought that this had to do with them seeing, perhaps for the first time, that I was a person with his own life and love. That line in the sand made a difference. I didn't attack them. I just let them know that I wasn't going to bargain away my self-respect.

I guess what I'm suggesting here is that if the stuff your father is sending you is upsetting, you might tell him how you feel about it and ask him to stop. Refraining from the (understandable) desire to let him 'have it' while you do it may be the hard part- which- in itself- points out the wisdom of nonviolence. When the person 'gets' that they aren't being attacked and that you will not attack them, matters start to change, abet, in subtle ways at first. He won't be able to keep attacking you (and that is what the stuff he is sending you is- an attack) if you don't take the bait and respond in kind.

It's not about whether it bothers you or not. Or course it's going to set your hair on fire. The trick is to see and act differently. See his fear and love him anyway.

As for matters of the head: if he really wants to 'understand' things intellectually, he'll start reading stuff that does a better job than what he sent you.

Send him Mel's book! (wink wink)

[sam]

I was actually considering giving my father Mel's book to counter all the false impressions he blindly (but in his mind righteously) reads on homosexuality. Thanks for your imput, that was a very helpful perspective. I liked what you said about not bargaining away my self-respect. I think that's the key.
Thanks for your advice!
Samantha