This is the fourth installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section. Let’s have some fun!
Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip taken from a sermon preached by Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Evangelist Phil Kidd.
This is the third installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section. Let’s have some fun!
Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip taken from a sermon preached by Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Evangelist Phil Kidd.
This is the second installment in The Sounds of Fundamentalism series. This is a series that I would like readers to help me with. If you know of a video clip that shows the crazy, cantankerous, or contradictory side of Evangelical Christianity, please send me an email with the name or link to the video. Please do not leave suggestions in the comment section. Let’s have some fun!
Today’s Sound of Fundamentalism is a clip taken from a sermon preached by Charles Worley, pastor of Providence Road Baptist Church in Maiden, North Carolina. Providence Road Baptist is a “Fundamental, Independent Missionary Baptist church that believes in the power of the Gospel to save and secure the sinner.”
Last week, the National Football League (NFL) held its annual scouting combine. Eli Apple, an Ohio State standout, attended the event, which is meant to showcase the talents of NFL hopefuls. During one of the interview sessions, Atlanta Falcons secondary coach Marquand Manuel asked Apple, “Do you like men?” Manuel’s question caused quite an uproar, resulting in the Atlanta Falcons coaching staff being required to take an NFL-approved social training class. Atlanta coach Dan Quinn said Manuel received additional training. Most people think that a player’s sexuality is irrelevant. All that should matter is what players do while on the playing field.
Peter LaBarbera, chief homophobe for Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, wants to know who is doing the counseling. One News Now reports LaBarbera saying:
“First of all, who are the counselors? Are they bringing in people from groups like GLAAD, which is a homosexual activist group — which is bigoted against Christians? Are they bringing in anti-Christian homosexual activists to be their so-called advisors?”
First, why would it matter whether a counselor holds a negative view of Christianity (actually Evangelical Christianity)? Isn’t the ONLY issue the fact that a person’s sexual identity and preferences are out of bounds and have no bearing on whether a player is NFL material? LaBarbera needs to understand that people of his ilk are no longer in control of our culture’s understanding of human sexuality. Most Americans now know at least one person who is gay. They are no longer willing to damn to hell friends, family, and work colleagues who just so happen to be gay. As with many former homophobes, my view of homosexuality changed once I met and befriended someone who batted from the wrong side of the plate.
Second, I am convinced that those who scream the loudest about the sin of homosexuality often are closeted gays themselves. In the same One News Now article, LaBarbera stated:
“I saw — I think it was a hockey game — where they had the kissing cam, and it was two guys kissing. And our kids are there. Do we want our sons and daughters to think it’s okay for two people of the same sex to kiss? It’s not okay! It’s immoral! It’s wrong!”
I wonder, is LaBarbera really “offended” by two men kissing, or does their kiss cause some sort of sexual stirring — one that must be suppressed lest the true Peter LaBarbera be forced out of the closet? My money is on the latter. Every time I see a picture of LaBarbera I think, this guy is a closeted gay.
Here’s to hoping that contumacious LaBarbera will have a Ted Haggard moment. The Evangelical closet is chock-full of gays — male and female. Those who take the high moral road often drive off a cliff, crashing and bursting into flames, exposing for all to see their lies and hypocrisy. When these crashes happen, the world rightly laughs and ridicules the fallen saints—not because of their religion, but because they dared to think that they were morally superior to the unwashed, uncircumcised Philistines of the world.
For readers who might not be familiar with LaBarbera, here is a partial list of things he has said about gays:
“Only a decaying society pretends that homosexual relationships are morally equivalent to normal, male-female couples.”
“God detests homosexual practice and so we should expect that, since this is a sin movement, we should expect that they lie and are often nasty.”
It’s almost as if homosexual sodomy was created to spread disease.”
“My test is [to] substitute another sexual sin and see if it makes sense. Would we be talking about a survey of porn-using Christians or incestuous Christians? That sounds stark, but that’s, I believe, the appropriate biblical analogy.”
“I think there are Christians who struggle with the sin of homosexuality — but proud homosexual Christians? That’s an oxymoron to me in the same way as I would say proud adulterous Christians,” he adds. “And so, I think we have to be very careful because I see the tactic of the Emergent Church and the Christian left is to start talking more and more about ‘gay Christians,’ and what they end up doing is demonizing the so-called ‘Religious Right’ and saying that the Religious Right is all wrong in the way it has talked about homosexuality.”
“And have you considered the likelihood that some of the homosexuals will request sex-change procedures? I know for a fact that a significant percentage of my Law School class was undergoing sex-change therapy or surgery.”
“During my enlisted service, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down an engineroom ladder. Some were even known to trip on deck and “fall” overboard.”
“If we get to pick and choose which laws we uphold, which laws are next on the line to ignore? Carnal Knowledge? I would think a service man or woman who has sex with a minor (Carnal Knowledge) could perform military duties as well, if not better, than a homosexual.”
“This is what’s going to happen all across the country the more homosexuality is promoted by the armed services. I would venture to say that someday, we’ll see servicemen marching in uniform in a sexual sin parade like what we saw here in San Diego. So the fact is homosexuality, in other words sin, does not stay in its closet; it always wants to boast and be prideful.”
Let me conclude this post with a video of Dan Savage’s masterful four minute take down of LaBarbera — also known as Porno Pete.
Along with tens of millions of Americans, I watched the Super Bowl on Sunday. The Gerencser family has a Super Bowl tradition of gathering at the home of our second-oldest son and daughter-in-law to watch the game. Following the Baptist tradition of our past, we gather together for fun, food, and fellowship. Well, that and lots of beer. All of our children and their spouses were there, as were all our grandchildren. We had a delightful time.
As with every Super Bowl gathering, the women gathered in the kitchen while the men watched the game. The men lamented the fact that our team, the Cincinnati Bengals, should have been the team playing the Carolina Panthers. Thanks to an end-of-game meltdown in the playoffs, the Bengals players were sitting at home watching the AFC-champion Denver Broncos defensively manhandle Panthers quarterback Cam Newton.
We subscribe to the NFL football package, and during the season our sons come over on Sundays to watch the game. This is also the one day in the week when they can enjoy their mom’s cooking. These Sunday gatherings are very much a part of the rhythm of our lives. Cousins get to play with each other while their fathers and uncles drink beer and swear at the TV.
I record part of the games so I can then skip through the commercials and halftime show. On Super Bowl Sunday, things are different. Since companies roll out new commercials for the Super Bowl, and the halftime show features musical performances, we watch the game live. Like millions of Americans, I thought the Doritos/Fetus commercial was hilarious, Lady GaGa’s rendition of The Star Spangled Banner was awesome, and Coldplay/Bruno Mars/Beyoncé put on a great halftime show. Little did I know that by watching the Super Bowl, I was unwittingly celebrating homosexual love.
Are you saying, huh? right now? That is the same response I had when I read Charisma writer Landon Schott’s article, 114 Million Super Bowl Viewers Blatantly Ignore God’s Word. According to Schott, the Super Bowl halftime show glorified homosexual love:
Last night I was at church watching the Super Bowl with a bunch of young adults in the student ministry. We had a concert planned for the halftime show, and I was in the sound booth watching hundreds of young people enjoy contemporary music that glorified Jesus. My phone started to buzz over and over with friends of mine asking if I saw the Super Bowl half-time show. I knew instantly that it had to do with gay awareness and homosexuality.
The moment I looked at the live TV screen, I saw an entire football stadium designed in rainbow colors that read, “Believe In Love.” Over 114 million people tuned in around the world to be made more aware and celebrate homosexuality from the largest single platform on the planet.
The world is celebrating a definition of love that has no biblical foundation. The Bible tells us that “love does not delight in evil but rejoiced in the truth” (1 Cor. 13:6). If the Bible refers to homosexual practice on all account as evil (ungodly) behavior, then it can’t be love as God defines it or intended it. It’s a carnal love, a deceptive love, a love of the world masquerading as the love of God. They can wrap their slogan of gay awareness in the rainbow, but that doesn’t make their love godly.
Are you still saying, huh? Me too. Evidently, when the stands showed the message Believe in Love with rainbow colors, this was proof to the homophobic Schott that the Super Bowl halftime show was all about advancing carnal, wicked, vile homosexual love. Schott’s reaction to the halftime show is reminder of the fact that McCarthyite Evangelicals see a sodomite under every bed.
Landon Schott has a new book coming out in March titled, Gay Awareness. According to the book’s website, Schott’s book is about:
Homosexuality has taken center stage in our nation, churches, and homes. Everyone knows or cares deeply for someone who experiences same-sex attraction, sexual confusion, or practices homosexuality. While the entire world talks about homosexuality, the subject remains taboo in many churches. The fear of being labeled as hateful, a bigot, or ignorant has kept many Christians out of the conversation. The church remains silent, leaving many people who love God confused about what the Bible really says about sexuality.
Did God make people gay? Does God love homosexuals? Will people have to deal with same-sex attraction their entire lives? Landon Schott brings truth and clarity to sexual confusion, using over 400 scripture references to reveal the heart of the Father and mind of Christ.
Gay Awareness exposes false teaching and deception that have created a false identity through the lens of sexuality instead of the eyes of God’s Word. Gay Awareness will stretch you and challenge you, but with relentless love bring you comfort and healing.
In other words, Schott wrote a book to defend himself against charges of being a hateful, homophobic bigot.
In his Charisma article, Schott repeats the oft-told Evangelical conspiracy that the gay moment chose the rainbow as their banner because they hate God:
Over the years, it has grieved me that the gay community has adopted the rainbow as their emblem. This was the sign to the people of God that He would never again destroy the earth with a flood. Genesis 9:13 says, “I have set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth.” The interesting part is the relationship between the rainbow on the banner of the gay community and a sign of the promise of God related to God’s judgment on the world. The people who don’t want to be judged chose the sign of God’s promise against the backdrop of God’s judgment of the world.
I began to pray and ask God to speak to me concerning why the gay community chose the rainbow as their own. One day, in the middle of my daily Bible reading, I came across the reason. Revelation 4:3 says, “And He who sat there appeared like a jasper and a sardius stone. There was a rainbow around the throne, appearing like an emerald.” Follow me on this. In Revelation 4, God was showing the disciple John a vision of heaven and the throne room of God. John puts into words what he saw in the presence of God, and describes it and all of its colors like a rainbow.
I believe the gay community unconsciously chose the rainbow as their banner because, on some level, they desire the presence of God without passing through the judgment of God. The flood of judgment came first. The rainbow of the presence of God followed.
A spectrum obtained using a glass prism and a point source is a continuum of wavelengths without bands. The number of colours that the human eye is able to distinguish in a spectrum is in the order of 100. Accordingly, the Munsell colour system (a 20th-century system for numerically describing colours, based on equal steps for human visual perception) distinguishes 100 hues. The apparent discreteness of main colours is an artefact of human perception and the exact number of main colours is a somewhat arbitrary choice.
Newton, who admitted his eyes were not very critical in distinguishing colours,[8] originally (1672) divided the spectrum into five main colours: red, yellow, green, blue and violet. Later he included orange and indigo, giving seven main colours by analogy to the number of notes in a musical scale. Newton chose to divide the visible spectrum into seven colours out of a belief derived from the beliefs of the ancient Greek sophists, who thought there was a connection between the colours, the musical notes, the known objects in the Solar System, and the days of the week.
According to Isaac Asimov, “It is customary to list indigo as a color lying between blue and violet, but it has never seemed to me that indigo is worth the dignity of being considered a separate color. To my eyes it seems merely deep blue.”
The colour pattern of a rainbow is different from a spectrum, and the colours are less saturated. There is spectral smearing in a rainbow owing to the fact that for any particular wavelength, there is a distribution of exit angles, rather than a single unvarying angle. In addition, a rainbow is a blurred version of the bow obtained from a point source, because the disk diameter of the sun (0.5°) cannot be neglected compared to the width of a rainbow (2°). The number of colour bands of a rainbow may therefore be different from the number of bands in a spectrum, especially if the droplets are particularly large or small. Therefore, the number of colours of a rainbow is variable. If, however, the word rainbow is used inaccurately to mean spectrum, it is the number of main colours in the spectrum.
The question of whether everyone sees seven colours in a rainbow is related to the idea of Linguistic relativity. Suggestions have been made that there is universality in the way that a rainbow is perceived. However, more recent research suggests that the number of distinct colours observed and what these are called depend on the language that one uses with people whose language has fewer colour words seeing fewer discrete colour bands.
Of course, Evangelicals aren’t known for letting science get in the way of a good conspiracy story. If Schott (and Escalera) had bothered to check the Wikipedia entry for the history of the Rainbow flag, he would have found out:
The rainbow flag, commonly the gay pride flag and LGBT pride flag, is a symbol of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) pride and LGBT social movements. (Other uses of rainbow flags include a symbol of peace.) The colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community, and the flag is often used as a symbol of gay pride when it comes to LGBTQ+ rights marches. It originated in Northern California, but is now used worldwide.
Designed by San Francisco artist Gilbert Baker in 1978, the design has undergone several revisions to first remove then re-add colors due to widely available fabrics. As of 2008, the most common variant consists of six stripes, with the colors red, orange, yellow, green, blue, and violet. The flag is commonly flown horizontally, with the red stripe on top, as it would be in a natural rainbow.
The original gay pride flag flew in the San Francisco Gay Freedom Day Parade on June 25, 1978. It has been suggested that Baker was inspired by Judy Garland’s singing “Over the Rainbow” and the Stonewall riots that happened a few days after Garland’s death (she was one of the first gay icons). Another suggestion for how the rainbow flag originated is that at college campuses during the 1960s, some people demonstrated for world peace by carrying a Flag of the Races (also called the Flag of the Human Race) with five horizontal stripes (from top to bottom they were red, white, brown, yellow, and black). Gilbert Baker is said to have gotten the idea for the rainbow flag from this flag in borrowing it from the Hippie movement of that time largely influenced by pioneering gay activist Allen Ginsberg. The flag consisted of eight stripes; Baker assigned specific meaning to each of the colors:
It is clear to all who dare to exercise a modicum of reason and common sense, that the real issue for Schott is that he has an aversion to homosexual sex or he is a closeted homosexual. Despite the first chapter of his book being titled I Love Gay People, Schott loathes those who dare to love someone of the same-sex.
I am sure Schott will object to me labeling him as a hateful, homophobic bigot, but I can easily prove my contention. The Super Bowl halftime show featured songs with references to illicit sex. Millions of viewers watched Beyoncé and her dancers bumping and grinding along to the song Formation. Yet, out of all that went on during the Super Bowl halftime show, Schott focuses on the rainbow-colored message, Believe in Love. I am certain that the vast majority of Super Bowl viewers failed to see the homosexual agenda behind the halftime show. Schott is so immersed in all things homosexual that he sees male-on-male anal sex, woman-on-woman scissoring, and oral sex galore everywhere he looks. In being so gay-focused, Schott missed the heterosexual aspects of the halftime show. Or perhaps, the married heterosexual Schott felt a bit of stirring as he watch the show, and he dared not admit that he and his student ministry buddies “enjoyed” watching Beyoncé shake her booty. Surely, if Schott is the pillar of moral virtue he says he is, he would have turned off the TV as soon as he saw Beyoncé do her first pelvic thrust. That he didn’t shows that Schott is fine with heterosexual displays of human love, but not homosexual. Schott is not only a bigot, he is also a hypocrite.
The picture above is from Schott’s Twitter page. Evidently, using the rainbow flag to hawk your book is okay. It is only bad when gays and loving same-sex couples use it. Again, Schott is a hypocrite. Besides, to this staunchly heterosexual, same-sex-supporting, man. Schott styled hair seems a bit “gay,” a sure sign that Landon Schott is a closeted homosexual. See how easy it is to make dumbass connections where none exist?
Note
Land Schott is 32 years old, married, and the father of two children. He is the founder of The Rev Ministries. He and his wife Heather are the founders of REVtv.
What follows is a video clip from a sermon by Jim Veitch, pastor of Bible Truth Baptist Church in Griffin, Georgia. According to the church’s website, Bible Truth is a church that believes:
…in what the Bible teaches. If the Bible says it’s sin, then we believe it’s sin. If the Bible commands it, we believe it to be the commandment of God. We strive to live out the commandments of the Bible in our lives as the Holy Spirit gives us power.
Evidently, Pastor Veitch’s King James Bible doesn’t have those verses that call gluttony a sin.
Pastor Veitch is a typical southern Independent Fundamentalist Baptist (IFB) preacher. His camp meeting style of preaching is quite common in the south. If you would like to listen to more of Veitch’s preaching, please check out his page on sermonaudio.com. You can check out Bible Truth Baptist Church’s Facebook page here.
Back in my camp meeting days, I heard numerous sermons similar Veitch’s. Fundamentalist Baptist crowds eat up this kind of preaching.
Recently, Dr. Peter Scaer, an associate professor at Concordia Theological Seminary, a fundamentalist Lutheran Church-Missouri-Synod institution in Fort Wayne, Indiana, took to the opinion page of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette to demonstrate his Bible-driven view of homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Scaer wrote:
The First Amendment guarantees our rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion. Yet, college campuses have implemented speech codes and created “safe spaces” to protect people from opinions they find disagreeable. Corporations have followed suit, as have governmental agencies. Increasingly, differences of opinion are labeled “hate speech,” thus ending reasonable debate.
Now the Indiana legislature, through Senate Bill 100, is on the verge of weaponizing this politically correct movement by giving protected-class status to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. People with differing worldviews can coexist as neighbors who care for one another. This, sadly, is not where the politicized LGBT movement is leading. Brendan Eich, former CEO of Mozilla Firefox, was stripped of his position simply for supporting a traditional marriage amendment. Kelvin Cochran, an African-American fire chief, lost his job for writing a book on marriage. ESPN commentator Craig James was fired for expressing his views on traditional morality. Government agencies and corporate America have grown inhospitable to people of faith.
I believe in marriage equality, but I hold to the definition of marriage that has itself defined civilization. Every child has a reasonable right to a father and a mother.
Parents are equal but not interchangeable. Not every couple has a child, but every child has a biological mom and dad, and for that there is marriage. While some disagree, this position is based on reason and love.
Meanwhile, as our society moves from same-sex marriage to legalized polygamy, polyamory, temporary, open and even incestual marriage, we do well to encourage public discourse. Together, we need to ask, “What is marriage?”
Our opponents seem to think that marriage is a societal construct, something we can change as we please. But any type of marriage that purposefully deprives a child of a mom or dad is unjust.
SB 100 is called a compromise by offering certain protections for churches and religious institutions. There are two basic problems to this approach.
First, SB 100 turns our inalienable rights into privileges and exemptions. Second, rights belong not simply to groups, but to individuals. The free exercise of religion is more than the freedom of worship; it is the right of every single person to live according to his conscience.
…..
While Scaer doesn’t directly mention the Bible (he is much too smart for that), make no mistake about it, it is, for Scaer and his fellow Missouri-Synod Lutherans, God’s infallible word that has the final say on human sexuality. The Lutheran Church-Missouri-Synod (LCMS) denomination officially espouses Evangelical beliefs such as creationism and Bible inerrancy. Missouri-Synod Lutherans vehemently reject homosexuality and same-sex marriage, considering both to be sinful rejections of God’s version of Masters’ and Johnson’s book on human sexuality (see LCMS position papers on human sexuality).
This post is designed to briefly show that Fundamentalism is not only the domain of Baptists and Evangelicals. Every Christian sect has a wing-nut division.
Today, The Christian Post published an article with the headline, What to Do with Teen Caught Texting Same-sex Partner. The article, written by Evangelical family guru’s Marina and Gregory Slayton, purports to answer a question a reader asked about their rebellious 16-year-old daughter:
My wife just read to me an article you wrote providing advice to a parent of a 16 year old girl caught lying, with the discovery having been through reading her text messages. My wife and I are trying to work through a similar problem with our daughter. The issue is more complicated in that:
(A) our daughter was caught once before, about – months ago, conducting an inappropriate relationship by text message. Months earlier she had embarked on another inappropriate relationship by email.
(B) in both cases the inappropriate relationships were with other girls.
(C) the conversations were filled with fantastic lies about our home life. Everything in her descriptions were completely “over the top.”
So far we’ve ended outside communication for her and restricted her freedom outside the house. Her learner’s permit has been put on indefinite hold. Most importantly, my wife and I have had three significant, God-centered and scripture centered discussions with her. These have been wonderful opportunities to see her grow dramatically in faith.
We are working with a Christian counsellor and our Pastor to try to get through this. Our level of oversight and conversation have increased dramatically. And we are looking at issues like her appearance (between androgynous and masculine), and memberships in (name withheld).
By way of background, she was adopted from (info withheld) by me and my first wife. My daughter suffered emotional and physical abuse as a result of (info withheld). When my daughter was (info withheld) we separated and she and her brother lived with me full time. Over the course of the following four years, we divorced, my ex-wife was in and out of mental hospitals and ultimately committed suicide. I remarried – to a wonderful Christian woman (who helped bring me to the Lord!). My daughter and my wife get along very well, but there are still wounds that need healing. Your advice on our next steps would be greatly appreciated – but also our anonymity.
Thank you and bless you,
Parents of troubled daughter
Evidently, the parents took a look at their daughter’s smartphone and found inappropriate text messages; inappropriate being exaggerations and lies about them and sexually oriented texts and emails between two fellow students of the same sex. The parents confronted their daughter and did the following:
Took away her phone and access to the outside world
Restricted her freedom outside of the house, also known as being grounded
Took her to a Christian counselor
Had their pastor talk to her
Took a look at their daughter’s appearance specifically her androgynous and masculine appearance
Took a look at what groups their daughter is a part of
Most important, the parents sat her down three times with Bible in hand and had “God-centered and scripture centered discussions” with her.
What is clear to me and I suspect is clear to you is that what we have here is a teenager who is either gay, bisexual, or questioning her sexuality and this is conflicting with the religious beliefs of the parents. I think it is safe to assume that the parents are part of a heterosexual only Evangelical sect and that the thought of their daughter being gay is viewed as a horrible sin and an attack from Satan.
…We wholeheartedly support your efforts to seek outside counseling with your pastor and a professional Christian counselor. Hopefully both will bring wisdom, perspective and guidance. As it is written in the Scriptures, there is victory in the counsel of many.
Here are a few thoughts for you, humbly recognizing that in this limited venue I can only skim the surface:
Perhaps your daughter does not understand who she is or whose she is for a very good reason: rejection. Rejected by her birth parents, rejected from her country and then (effectively) rejected by the mother who adopted her. As a result she probably feels she is “different” and “unacceptable.” She is not alone. In a generation that worships tolerance many modern teens are actually intolerant of each other because they themselves do not feel they belong. They cannot show love in a healthy manner because they don’t feel loved. Teen suicide is at record levels in part because so many don’t have a sense of belonging and they don’t feel loved.
So remember: Love your daughter! Her spirit of rejection is most likely daring you to reject her. You and your wife have been chosen by God to be His minister of love to her. We realize this will not be easy given the circumstances. Years of feeling rejected and alone cannot be overcome in a few months. It will take years. And that is OK.
Ask our Heavenly Father to be working in her heart too. That is critical. He can help from the inside out: building vision and love and forgiveness in her heart…
Not one word about her sexuality. Not one word about what is likely the REAL issue driving their daughter’s parent described rebellious behavior. Remember, rebellion in Evangelical circles is a catch-all for every teenage behavior the parents don’t like or approve of. As some of the regular readers of this blog will testify, Evangelicals have sent their children off to Evangelical behavioral modification camps, AKA Christian group homes, for things as trivial as smoking, listening to rock music, or fooling around with their boyfriend. What non-Evangelical parents would consider typical behavior from a 16-year-old is viewed as rebellion against not only parental authority and the church’s beliefs, but also rebellion against God, the very God who said, for rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.
Enlist close friends to join you in praying for her…
Fast for her as God leads. Jesus tells us that fasting is very powerful and He is right. I try to fast for my family once a week. A great Christian brother taught me a lot of fasting…and I’m still learning. But there is power there – God’s power.
Most importantly, please know that our Heavenly Father loves your daughter very, very much. He has entrusted her to you and your wife. So you can expect (and should ask for) God’s help in these challenges. The Holy Spirit is powerful. Super powerful. So ask God’s Spirit to be at work in your daughter’s heart for healing, repentance, and restoration…
Ah yes, pray, fast, know that God loves their daughter very, very, very much, and rely on the super-duper power of the Holy Spirit to change her life, which is Greek for deliver her the sin of homosexuality.
Like his wife, Gregory Slayton makes no mention of the rainbow-colored elephant in the room. And therein lies the biggest problem for this girl. The behaviors the parents are calling rebellion are likely a result of their daughter’s blossoming sexuality. She feels and thinks one way and her parents, church, and pastor think another way. Not skilled in the art of hiding one’s feelings, I suspect her honesty is being misinterpreted as rebellion. What the girl really needs is to see a counselor who is able to separate her sexuality from the guilt and anger generated by her parent’s beliefs about homosexuality. Put yourself in her shoes. She thinks she is gay, but her parents, church, pastor, and church friends are telling her that her same-sex desire is evil and a sin against God and nature. How would you respond?
Millennials, those born between 1981-2000, (there is some debate over the exact time frame) now ages 15 to 34, are less religious than their parents and grandparents. Why they are remains a subject of intense debate. Regardless of the reasons why, millennials are less likely to be a part of an organized religion than earlier generations. According to a 2014 study by the Pew Research Center, nones, those who are not affiliated with any religion, continue to increase numerically. 55 million Americans are now a none. Granted, this is still a small percentage of the total U.S. population, but 34-36% of millennials are a none, compared to just 17% of their parents and 11% of their grandparents.
While the media tends to focus on millennials leaving Evangelical sects and churches, the Catholic church also has a millennial problem. Kaya Oakes, a writer for Religion Dispatches and a one time atheist who returned to the Catholic church of her youth, had this to say about the Catholic church and millennials:
A new survey from Catholics for Choice on the opinions of Catholic millennials as regards doctrinal issues might make the church’s traditionalists want to brace themselves. But its findings are also somewhat unsurprising to anyone who spends time around younger Catholics, whose political and social leanings mirror the open-minded stances of their increasingly non-religious peers.
Birth control and abortion, arguably the Catholic church’s most contentious issues, are not always perceived in a negative light by young Catholics. Among those polled, more than half say abortion should be legal in “almost all” or “most” cases, and 31 percent say it should be legal in “just a few” cases. Only 17 percent say it should be illegal. 78 percent say birth control should be included in insurance coverage, no matter where a woman works.
In spite of the widely mocked Catholic Vote video of young people “coming out” as believing that marriage is between a man and a woman, marriage equality is embraced by Catholic millennials. 69% “strongly” or “somewhat” support legal same-sex marriage.
In the wake of the firing of multiple Catholic school teachers who are openly gay or lesbian or married to a same-sex partner, and the ensuing grappling over Catholic teacher contracts that explicitly prevent teachers from being open about their sexuality, younger Catholics have chosen the side of the teachers. 71% say Catholic schools should not be able to fire teachers for being LGBTQ. On gender in the church, Catholic millennials follow similar thinking, with 75% supporting women having an equal role in the church.
Pope Francis is popular among young Catholics, with only two percent having a negative view of him. But the American church hierarchy is not looked on so kindly, and there is an increasing emphasis on a separation between politics and religion. A full 80 percent of respondents said they felt no need to follow the bishops’ advice when it comes time to vote, and 77 percent said Catholic politicians were under no obligation to follow the bishops either.
They are also opposed by a wide margin to bishops withholding communion to the divorced and remarried, those who support legal abortion, and those who support marriage equality.
What’s missing from this survey, however, is the question of church attendance. How much are these Catholics who disagree with and question church teaching are actually showing up? Christian Smith, the head of the National Study of Youth and Religion at Notre Dame, says the situation with Catholic millennials participating in church culture is “in fact, grim.” Only 16% of millennials self-identify as Catholic according to Pew. That 16% is the group the church is struggling to hold on to.
So if they are increasingly choosing the liberal side in the culture wars, are they really still Catholic?…
…What is clear, however, is that the more young Catholics start to embrace marriage equality, safe and legal abortion, access to contraception, and the liberal side on many other issues in the culture wars, the more of those same Catholics will also drift away from a church they perceive as incapable of change.
Perhaps they’ll attend mass on occasion, and perhaps they’ll still call themselves Catholic, but in many ways, their faith will be a loose garment rather than a straightjacket.
Evangelical Christians are infuriated over the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. Granting U.S. citizens equal protection under the law and affording them the same civil rights heterosexuals have is seen as an affront to God, the Bible, and true Christians everywhere. As a result, a handful of Christian government officials are refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, claiming doing so would violate their religious beliefs.
Should government officials be required to violate their religious beliefs in the execution of their duties? They serve the public, and when they walk in the door of their respective place of duty, what God, the Bible, or their pastor has to say has no authority or relevance. The United States is a secular state, and the highest court in the land has determined that marriage laws discriminating against same-sex couples are unconstitutional. Every government official is duty bound to obey the law, and if they can’t they should either quit, be fired, or removed from office.
Evangelicals and their counterparts in the Catholic and Mormon church have at their disposal all the means necessary to undo same-sex marriage. If they feel the Court acted unjustly, the proper recourse is to work towards a constitutional amendment that establishes marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Empty threats of second amendment remedies, secession from the union, and Sodom and Gomorrah-like judgment from God change nothing. If Christians want real change, a return to Ozzie and Harriet’s 1950’s, then they should work to amend the Constitution. They won’t do this, of course, because they know they don’t have sufficient numbers to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision.
Why is it Christian government officials issue marriage licenses to adulterers and fornicators, but draw the line at same-sex couples? The Bible sure has a lot to say about adultery and fornication, yet these “sins” are routinely ignored. Only homosexuals and same-sex couples are singled out for discrimination and abuse. Why is this?
This question is not hard to answer. Having spent the first 50 years of my life in the Evangelical church, 25 years as a pastor, I know firsthand the rampant hysterical bigotry and homophobia within Evangelicalism. Evangelicals are now known as the religion of hate, and every time people like Franklin Graham, Tim Wildmon, Al Mohler, Ken Ham, or James Dobson open their mouth, the public is reminded of this fact.
