Gay man denied a funeral

[andrewlittle]

Originally Posted by mister e

Well, I've read up on the story, including your links, and all I find is that the fellow's sister says that they knew he was gay the whole time, while the pastor claims that they didn't realize it until the obituary said "life partner" and they started putting together the slideshow/video for the funeral. What I am saying is that it is not unreasonable that they wouldn't even be curious as to the man's orientation while he was sick. Best I can tell, they are one of those mega-church deals where they have thousands upon thousands of members. My thought is that they just heard that he was ailing, added him to the prayer list, and sent their visiting minister to visit him without giving a second thought about it. They knew that the family would need assistance (because the fellow's brother was a church janitor) so they offered to help, like a church would, and it was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened, I suppose. I mean, I don't notice people's homosexuality when I meet them, and I probably wouldn't even if I visited a person in the hospital. It just isn't something that I think to question, you know.

Hi mister e,

When I see a discussion like this, I try to determine what is at stake. I have read your posts and I am left with thinking, "So What?" What point, succinctly, are you trying to make, and why is it so important that you have expended so much effort on it? There appears to be something I'm missing, and I haven't been able to find it yet. Can you help me do that?

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by mister e

t was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened, I suppose. I mean, I don't notice people's homosexuality when I meet them, and I probably wouldn't even if I visited a person in the hospital. It just isn't something that I think to question, you know.

Speaking for myself, this paragraph, and boiled down to its essence, the part I put in bold, are what I take to be mister's point to make.

I'm sure when he comes back he will clarify if this is or is not in fact the point that motivated him to join the discussion.

I've been of the impression all along that the church officials found out the deceased was gay after the funeral had been offered. I don't know, but that's my impression.

That the offer was rescinded upon discovery of the deceased's orientation is HARDLY "just a more optimistic outlook," to the contrary, it is the cornerstone of the problem. As soon as those church officials learned that the man was gay, and had had a loving partnership that the family deemed worthy of recognition (thank God!), they rescinded their offer to host a funeral. Because they objected to his family relationships!! Nothing could be a greater slap in the face to all that Christ is and was and stood for than an action like that. Stories like this are the reason you cannot get me inside a church unless you're paying me to walk through the door.

[tdogg]

If the deceased's family was open to celebrating his life including his life with his partner, then I can't imagine the knowledge that this young man had a same sex partner would have been hidden during his illness and hospitalization. As long as the church's support included visits outside the church then perhaps the thought was the support would be seen as a Christian act of kindness. Once the issue was going to be brought into the church, those in charge (of/at the church) clammed up and said no.

Going out is seen as the charity, bringing it in would be seen as condoning the man's life with his partner. Huge difference in the religious fundamental circle.

As far as the family wanting pictures of their loved one with his partner, kissing and hugging, what difference would that make? I'd say explicit pics would be out of line (who would do that anyway), but please - pics of the couple together being affectionate??? If it wouldn't have been an issue were the couple heterosexual, then it shouldn't make a difference here either. And therein lies the true meaning of our struggle for equality. We aren't looking for anything special. We only want the SAME rights, priviledge and protections as the next (straight) person.

[Emproph]

Originally Posted by mister e

..and it was after they had already made that promise that they became uncomfortable with the idea of hosting a funeral with openly homosexual themes, like photos of him with his partner, and the choir. It's just a more optimistic outlook on what happened...

I'll take that as a yes. Which validates this perception:

Originally Posted by andrewlittle

I have read your posts and I am left with thinking, "So What?" What point, succinctly, are you trying to make, and why is it so important that you have expended so much effort on it? There appears to be something I'm missing, and I haven't been able to find it yet. Can you help me do that?

And this perception:

Originally Posted by Zerbie

Speaking for myself, this paragraph, and boiled down to its essence, the part I put in bold, are what I take to be mister's point to make.

The only reason I may be accepting this is because of mister e's gentle nature of explaining it, but it is an important consideration that I haven't yet seen elucidated so fully.

To be clear, I take it as no more than a glorified 'gay-panic' defense in mega-church-mentality. A reason, not an excuse, that may help to explain their behavior.

Given what mister e has shared, I can envision a person, or church, taking on the Christian role of ministering to those in need, without judgement.

Especially in the sense of the anti-gay context/climate. They would be able to think of themselves as not being "anti-gay," because hey, they aren't judging the homosexual persons they DO minister to.

How can I be anti-gay, I have gay friends, I even minister to them?

As the adage goes though, you find out who your friends are when the going gets tough. Which matches with the Family's account of events. Being that it was when the obituary appeared that the church had a change of heart.

IOW, it was ok for them to be "gay-friendly" - as long as nobody knew about it. Because before anyone knew they were being friendly to this gay couple and their family, they were just being Christian. Once people found out about it however, then it was all about the fact that they were supporting the "homosexual lifestyle" and therefore the "homosexual agenda."

IOW again, they weren't prepared to be found out as the actual Christians they were. And once found out -- via his obituary -- they panicked and pre-emptively succumbed to anti-gay peer pressure.

The important part that I think mister e may have been trying to say is that they truly wanted to be Christian, meaning that at heart they wanted to be unconditionally loving, to this gay man and his partner and family. Something that is insignificant at this point given their despicable behavior in their handling and public response to the situation, but important to recognize none the less.

It reminds me of a quote, I think By Thea Alexander, "You are your thoughts to you, but you are your behavior to others."

Also, Mel White and others here speak of how "they are sincere, just sincerely misguided." Which always pisses me off because it in essense confuses the situation. Murderers can be "sincere," but this situation, as mister e has described it, may help to explain how one, or a group, can be sincere at heart, and then behave despicably insincerely, seemingly at the same time.

Is this what you were trying to get at mister e?

[mister e]

Hello again-

I think what I'm driving at is not that they wanted to help the gay gentlemen when no one knew that they were gay, but that they really didn't care what the orientation of the fellow was when they were ministering to him. That's why I believe they didn't notice that he was gay until later.

It seems to me that they would not have offered the funeral to the family if they had known he was gay when they offered. It seems like they probably didn't think twice until they put 2 and 2 together and realized that he was gay. So yes, they were ministering to him, as Christians supposedly should, without really questioning whether he was gay or not (like I said in another post, I just don't notice people's sexual orientation by looking at them, and frankly it makes no difference to me). They might have thought that he was gay, but they thought it had no bearing on their ministry so they didn't ask. Only when they realized the funeral would have open celebration of the man's life with his partner, did they change plans. I do agree that they caved once they realized he was gay, but they had already made a promise, so instead of hosting it, they paid the rent for the funeral home where the funeral was held instead.

I find it hard to fault the church, after they paid for everything, and simply felt that a celebration of homosexuality, even as a part of someone's life, was not something they wanted to have in their church. It's really sad, but at the same time, they have to stand for what they profess to believe. To me, paying for the other location, paying for all the food, and ministering to the man while he was sick was indicative of a truly caring church, even if they follow a strict biblical worldview concerning homosexuality.

[Emproph]

Originally Posted by mister e

Hello again-

I think what I'm driving at is not that they wanted to help the gay gentlemen when no one knew that they were gay, but that they really didn't care what the orientation of the fellow was when they were ministering to him. That's why I believe they didn't notice that he was gay until later.

It seems to me that they would not have offered the funeral to the family if they had known he was gay when they offered. It seems like they probably didn't think twice until they put 2 and 2 together and realized that he was gay. So yes, they were ministering to him, as Christians supposedly should, without really questioning whether he was gay or not (like I said in another post, I just don't notice people's sexual orientation by looking at them, and frankly it makes no difference to me). They might have thought that he was gay, but they thought it had no bearing on their ministry so they didn't ask. Only when they realized the funeral would have open celebration of the man's life with his partner, did they change plans. I do agree that they caved once they realized he was gay, but they had already made a promise, so instead of hosting it, they paid the rent for the funeral home where the funeral was held instead.

I find it hard to fault the church, after they paid for everything, and simply felt that a celebration of homosexuality, even as a part of someone's life, was not something they wanted to have in their church. It's really sad, but at the same time, they have to stand for what they profess to believe. To me, paying for the other location, paying for all the food, and ministering to the man while he was sick was indicative of a truly caring church, even if they follow a strict biblical worldview concerning homosexuality.

Fire at will.

[tdogg]

I think they did some discussing and the pastor had a change of heart. Whether or not it was a change of his heart or those above him in the religious hierarchy in which he exists, it was a change of heart nonetheless.

Point here - no matter why the decision was made, it was made and it truly hurt people, and is just another fine example of the homophobia that runs rampant in this country. Specially homophobia fueled by religious conservatives.

[stev0]

Originally Posted by Daniel

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...l.3617689.html

This situation cries out for some kind of response.

Okay I think it's pretty terrible thing to just opt out on them on the last second...

but I've also got to have understanding for the church... the church has to have a strong footing. It would be different if the church did not have prior rules and such against things of this sort and denied him a funeral, but the people holding the funeral had to have some speculation that they would be uncooperative with the idea of highlighting something they are obviously against in their "sanctuary."

I'm for giving a proper and fitting memorial for someone's life. Gay, lesbian, Christian, non-Christian, Buddhist.
Just, if they were going to have that kinda of memorial they should have found a fitting church or building.

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by stev0

Okay I think it's pretty terrible thing to just opt out on them on the last second...

but I've also got to have understanding for the church... the church has to have a strong footing. It would be different if the church did not have prior rules and such against things of this sort and denied him a funeral, but the people holding the funeral had to have some speculation that they would be uncooperative with the idea of highlighting something they are obviously against in their "sanctuary."

I'm for giving a proper and fitting memorial for someone's life. Gay, lesbian, Christian, non-Christian, Buddhist.
Just, if they were going to have that kinda of memorial they should have found a fitting church or building.

Sorry stev0, you didn't read this thread or the links very well. The church cared for the man while he was sick, knew the family, and offered the church for the funeral. THEN they backed out. the church lied on several occasions as to their reasons for withdrawing their offer. And YOU want to blame the victim!

[antiochian]

I went to High Point "Church"s website and gave them a little piece of my mind. Seriously, I'd consider it a blessing if every church like this in America would go bankrupt and have to close. Of course, there are only far too many fundamentalists who gladly fill their offering plates.

Ya know, the Bible has a few little pesky verses about judging others, apparently those passages aren't in the NIBV (New International Bigot's Version).

[progressive4christ]

Originally Posted by Jamie McDaniel

I read that article and yeah, I was shocked at how a pastor (Gary Simons, brother-in-law of Joel Osteen) of a huge church could say something like that, not to a few fellow members and overheard by someone, mind you, but spoken directly to the media. Wow. A letter to him will not be effective as he's clearly clueless. (Note to Christians of goodwill -- you must stop giving these people your attendance, money, and loyalty. More on that below.)



This is a great statement. I'm filing it away for when someone offers us water or a donut while supporting anti-gay policies and tries to play that off like Pastor Simons. What was it he said. Oh yeah, this:



Acts of love towards the family, including this little comment about the deceased's mother:



Someone obviously slept during Jesus 101.

Nice work. Sometimes a phone call and a handful of personal letters can be more effective than a single letter with lots of signatures.

Now to add something. It would be remiss, I think, to not point to the anti-gay teachings, and then point to the anti-gay actions, and ask how people with LGBT loved ones were caught off guard. So many people who love and affirm their gay family members continue to feed both these mega-churches with their money and the egos of these pastors with their attendance.

My brother and sister-in-law delighted me by attending our wedding, but then, at the lunch following the ceremony, shared they were now happily involved with Lexington's largest church, which surprise, surprise, is very anti-gay. It caused a bit of a heated argument, because, well, when it comes to family, nonviolent, diplomatic, "let's investigate why" Jamie is slow to the draw, while WTF?! Jamie is quite swift.

Anyhow, this denial of a funeral is a sad case and kudos to the family for not accepting the church's offer of food and funeral hosting in exchange for silence. I'm just thinking about how good folks can stop giving these people opportunities to do this.

Perfectly said. People of tolerance need not to feed these people and kind of amunition. I think the best we can do is tend to the wounded in matters like this so they do not feel alone. Also keep it at a political level in the since of changing laws to protect rights. My heart is so heavey lainden with such sorrow and disgust. I signed Cecil's obit too.

[progressive4christ]

I checked out the churches website and of course they have a section on this. My only question is; Why the hell would any family want to have their openly gay son's funeral at a right wing neo con church anyways? That is like pokeing the bear. Even if they were nice to them in the begining. People by now should know not to even bother with thses kind of Christians. Why did not the MCC of Houston area step out and ofer their services or did they? The chapel of Hope is in Houston.

I cant even see even attending a church like this for regular church services. Let them have theirs and we can have ours; full of friuts of the spirit and acceptance. I am so tired of being embarrased and irritatied with thse kind of christians. if they want to change they can come to us instead of us going to them for any reason.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by progressive4christ

I checked out the churches website and of course they have a section on this. My only question is; Why the hell would any family want to have their openly gay son's funeral at a right wing neo con church anyways? That is like pokeing the bear. Even if they were nice to them in the begining. People by now should know not to even bother with thses kind of Christians. Why did not the MCC of Houston area step out and ofer their services or did they? The chapel of Hope is in Houston.

I cant even see even attending a church like this for regular church services. Let them have theirs and we can have ours; full of friuts of the spirit and acceptance. I am so tired of being embarrased and irritatied with thse kind of christians. if they want to change they can come to us instead of us going to them for any reason.

I don't think you fully understand the context in which the bereaved family found themselves in relationship to this congregation (it's a long story). Maybe it would be nice if we didn't have to live in the same world as Fundamentalists, but we don't have that option. There will continue to be instances where individual LGBT people and their families find themselves in relationship to Fundamentalist congregations--not necessarily by deliberate and fully informed choice, but by circumstance.

Those of us who remain in denominations that are not fully LGBT affirming (I'm a Methodist) often say that if we left, there still would be LGBT kids born within the denomination who would grow up to suffer oppression. So it's our duty (some of us think) to remain and seek to reform the denomination.

We could try to ignore the Fundamentalists, but it is hard to avoid them entirely.

Steven Webster

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by progressive4christ

I checked out the churches website and of course they have a section on this. My only question is; Why the hell would any family want to have their openly gay son's funeral at a right wing neo con church anyways? That is like pokeing the bear. Even if they were nice to them in the begining. People by now should know not to even bother with thses kind of Christians. Why did not the MCC of Houston area step out and ofer their services or did they? The chapel of Hope is in Houston.

I cant even see even attending a church like this for regular church services. Let them have theirs and we can have ours; full of friuts of the spirit and acceptance. I am so tired of being embarrased and irritatied with thse kind of christians. if they want to change they can come to us instead of us going to them for any reason.

you do realize that this section was added after the situation occurred, right? there was a lot of backpedalling, and storychanging, and some might even say that various individuals from the church distorted the truth.

[progressive4christ]

Originally Posted by keltic63

you do realize that this section was added after the situation occurred, right? there was a lot of backpedalling, and storychanging, and some might even say that various individuals from the church distorted the truth.

yes, and even if it were not, I would expect them to lie anyways. I just don't see dealing with right wing churches period is my point. I am not sticking up for the church. I just do not see why gays and their families want to be apart of this kind of church for any reason.

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by progressive4christ

yes, and even if it were not, I would expect them to lie anyways. I just don't see dealing with right wing churches period is my point. I am not sticking up for the church. I just do not see why gays and their families want to be apart of this kind of church for any reason.

it appears that most of this family did not have a church home, although the brother held a job at this particular church, and as part of their ministry to him, became involved with this family that included a gay couple. The church wanted to minister and show their love, but unfortunately, their love doesn't include everyone. I'm willing to bet that they will do funerals for unrepentant divorcees, though.

[progressive4christ]

I myself attent an UMC church that has several recociliation classes and I am apart of the recon board, but I grew up right wing neocon evangelical and I can say nothing will change these peopl on a whole. I have no hope.

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by progressive4christ

I myself attent an UMC church that has several recociliation classes and I am apart of the recon board, but I grew up right wing neocon evangelical and I can say nothing will change these peopl on a whole. I have no hope.

I do have hope. Young evangelicals are looking at the gay issue and saying that there are more important issues to address. I also know that within my denomination, there are conservative churches that would hate I'm in the position I hold within my local congregation, and others that make our liberal congregation look like a restricted country club. I think the UMC is the same way. But I do have hope, and that's why it's important to confront these people with their homophobia and force them to examine it. Slowly, things change. Someday, orientation will be understood and no longer an issue. Oh how we long for that time!

[progressive4christ]

I just hate seeing GLBT people hurt in the name of God. I am a bit emotional about this subject matter. so, sometimes I feel all lose of hope; for hate is a sin and sin will always exist. I know that not the whole world will change , but so many lose out on that relationship with God because of this hate which I find to be a horrible part of some churches and there are masses of them.

I agree with you saying about a liberal country club. I do not want that either.