The More The Man Says. . .
December 20, 2008
On Friday night’s airing of Dateline NBC Ann Curry interviewed Rev. Rick Warren and I’m more troubled today about all this than I was when I wrote my previous post. It seems the more Warren says these days, the more troubled I become and even if I have nothing new to add to the conversation I’m going to add it for this one reason. I don’t want anyone to have the impression I think any of this is okay.
I believe I can love the man as a human being. I can recognize him as a person of faith within the Christian tradition. I can appreciate the good he’s done in promoting the needs of Africa’s poor, global warming, and HIV/AIDS outreach in the evangelical Christian arena. At the same time I can say, and I believe I must say, that when it comes to his rhetoric concerning certain issues including homosexuality, and more importantly around gays and lesbians in their humanity, he’s doing incredible injustice to the message and witness of the Gospel.
I’m only going to comment on a brief section of the Dateline interview and so to understand the excerpts below within context please take a moment, if you haven’t already done so to read the transcript or view the video footage.
In the second half of the interview that dealt directly with the question of homosexuality and gay marriage, Warren expressed dismay at the hostile reaction of gay rights activists to his participation in the upcoming Presidential Inauguration.
The hate speech against me is incendiary. Tolerance used to mean, ‘I treat you with respect even though we disagree.’
I agree. Tolerance suggests respectful disagreement along with exploring and focusing on shared beliefs and values. The problem followed only moments later when articulating his belief that natural impulses (i.e., the desire for someone of the same sex) should be held in check by saying that doing so. . .
[. . .] is part of maturity. I think it’s part of delayed gratification. I think it’s part of character.
Warren directly implies that gay people (at least those in a sexual relationship) are immature, driven by a need for instant gratification and lack character. Combine that with his comparison in recent days between gay relationships and pedophilia, incest, and polygamy.
I’m opposed to having a brother and sister be together and call that marriage. I’m opposed to an older guy marrying a child and calling that a marriage. I’m opposed to one guy having multiple wives and calling that marriage.
Do you think, though, that they are equivalent to having gays getting married? (Steve Waldman, interviewer)
Oh I do.
If tolerance means that “I treat you with respect even though we disagree,” in two brief interviews Warren has demonstrated anything but respect toward gays and lesbians, and I would take that further to say that as a lesbian his characterization of my life and my relationship smacks of hate speech. I believe it would to anyone who falls under the blanket of such statements which makes his continual references to his gay friends all the more puzzling.
I’ve had many gay friends tell me, “Well, Rick, why shouldn’t I have multiple sexual partners? It’s the natural thing to do.”
Let’s go over this one more time in case any of it’s been forgotten. Rick Warren is a conservative evangelical Christian trained in the Baptist tradition. He’s the pastor of a mega-church that states upfront on their website that individuals unwilling to repent of their homosexual lifestyle will not be accepted as members; a church that leads a weekly 12-step recovery program that includes a sub-group for those with same-sex attractions. He’s gone on record comparing gay relationships to pedophilia and incest. He was a leading religious voice in support of Proposition 8.
And he has gay friends.
He has many gay friends.
He has many gay friends who have asked their conservative evangelical Christian friend, a friend who’s taken a public stand against homosexuality and marriage equality, and pastors a church with an ex-gayish ministry and a membership exemption clause for homosexuals why they should not have multiple partners.
Out of the kind of common respect I would extend to anyone I want so desperately to give Warren the benefit of the doubt but on this one, come on! As a lesbian and as someone who served in pastoral ministry within a conservative evangelical congregation for more than a decade I find it as believable that Rev. Warren has such friends within his circle of personal relationships as I believe that “one size fits all.”
I’m naturally inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman I see. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.
I should probably be clear that the above quote is from Rick Warren. I didn’t say it. Oh sure. I see beautiful women and appreciate that they’re beautiful but the apparent difference between Rev. Warren and myself is that while I see I am not so inclined. This girl is a married woman. I love my wife. She belongs to me and I to her. Exclusively. I won’t pretend to speak for anyone else but this is the way it is for me. I have no interest in any other woman nor a trace of a natural inclination to go kadoodling with any other woman no matter how beautiful they are because in my world none is more beautiful or desirable than the woman I married and to whom I promised to remain faithful all the days of my life. With no intention to be sardonic or flippant, I consider it a deeply troubling admission that a straight male pastor who’s been married for 30 years continues to be naturally inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman he sees.
And finally,
I don’t think gay marriage is any threat to marriage. So that’s not why I voted the way I did. I think divorce is a bigger problem to marriage than anything else.
While I stand firmly in agreement with Warren’s concluding words in the interview, I can’t understand for the life of me how he can say gay marriage isn’t a threat to marriage while he continues to argue (three times in this one interview alone) that his primary objection to gay marriage is that it would redefine a 5000 year history of marriage as being between one man and one woman. Since gay marriage is no threat to marriage, then it would seem to follow that the act of redefining marriage to include gay couples would equally be no threat to marriage. It seems that for Warren the problem with gay marriage isn’t that it’s a threat to marriage but that it’s just wrong. It’s so wrong that by extending marriage to include gay couples it would result in pain to millions, pain far more severe than the pain felt by gay people in reaction to his recent statements.
Gay marriage is no threat to marriage.
Divorce is the greatest threat to marriage.
Millions of dollars have been given in an effort to prevent legal gay marriages.
Not one dollar has been given in an effort to invalidate legal divorce.
Gays and lesbians will not be accepted as members of Saddleback unless they repent of their homosexual lifestyles.
Divorced men and women will be welcomed as members of Saddleback without being required to remarry their former spouse.
And the wheels on the bus go round and round.
So no, it’s not okay. It’s a whole lot of ‘not okay.’
Posted in Marriage, News and Events
Sweet Hope Cookies
December 21st, 2008 at 7:07 am
One big word for that is Amen. It smacks of contradiction from corner to corner and all four sides.
December 21st, 2008 at 8:38 am
I too wondered why a man his age was inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman he sees. I think teenagers go through that phase, and maybe into young adulthood. But he should be waaaaay past that by now. Maybe this is the root of his problem: hypersexuality. Alternatively, this could simply be a statemtn that reflects his belief that this is how SHOULD be inclined, in which case this may be another case of a closeted pastor. Unlike you, Anita, I have no inclination to give this man the benefit of any doubt. If you want to read what womanist theologian Renita Weems, go here.
December 21st, 2008 at 9:52 am
Could not have said it better myself, Anita. I’m just totally bewildered by this man, who speaks the same duplicities and follows the same fallacious lines of reasoning as the church I spent sixteen years of my life in. And then I feel profoundly sad.
December 21st, 2008 at 11:18 am
anita, 3 words: Log Cabin Republicans. (I’m not meaning to sound cynical; my guess is that this is probably true, or very close to the truth re. Warren’s gay friends.)
The more he says, the more troubling he is (I think). I want to give him the benefit of the doubt on many issues (not just this one), but the more he says, the harder that becomes.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I love how Warren said that marriage over the last 5,000 years has been between a man and a woman and he feels as though gay marriage is a threat to that long tradition. BUT, also many of those religions he talked about never allowed for divorce until recently and we have all seen what that has done to society. Divorce has made many people look at marriage with a casual, whatever attitude. I don’t think gay marriage is a threat to marriage. If anything, the “whatever” attitude about marriage and the high divorce rate are a threat to marriage. NOT gays and lesbians getting married.
Anita I liked your comment about how you don’t look at other women because the lady in your life is the only one for you. Very nice!
December 21st, 2008 at 10:16 pm
ughh. i, also, ache.
and i adore sweet and typically mild ann curry who had to tactfully endure the duration of the interview…she was clearly in pain.
December 21st, 2008 at 10:22 pm
actions always speak louder than words, as I look at the actions of Obama toward gays and Warren’s actions towards gays…. I am concerned that we will be thrown under the bus…..again.
December 22nd, 2008 at 9:06 am
AAARGH! You’re right, Anita… he does just get worse. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt too, to say maybe we can just all learn to work together, that he has done a lot of good for evangelical Christianity (and he has) — but why can’t he just leave this one alone?!? He’d have so much more of my respect if he could just keep his mouth shut.
December 22nd, 2008 at 11:30 am
As I’ve been thinking about this whole thing as well as reading everyone’s comments here, I’m beginning to wonder if some of the frustration we feel with Warren is actually misdirected with what we might be feeling toward Obama. Warren is a conservative evangelical after all and has always been clear that he considers homosexuality a sin and gay marriage unacceptable. He’s also said he shares the same views as Dobson though he’s suggested his rhetoric is toned down from that of Dobson. All we’ve seen in these last days is that he actually is not all that toned down but not that he’s expressing any surprising views on any of this. At the same time Obama has talked about inclusiveness in his administration and his commitment to equality under the law and yet…is he really? Not only has he chosen Warren which seems to lack all sensitivity toward gays and lesbians (we have to know he knows exactly how Warren has described us) but Obama seems as so many others to value our relationships as less than equal to his and Michelle’s since he doesn’t support marriage equality but rather another “separate but equal (not)” solution. Maybe we just feel a little used by someone many of us fully supported during the election but that in turn hasn’t really fully supported us. Maybe it’s less disappointment in Warren than disappointment in our President-Elect and the hopes we have for the coming Presidency. I don’t think the Warren choice is a true indication of what the next four/eight years hold for the GLBTQ community and I do hope Obama makes good on many of the glowing goals his team has offered to our community. This choice was just a disturbing beginning…
December 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 pm
I can’t speak for the LGBQT folks who post here, because for me, the marriage thing is less directly personal. But I think anita is right re. the frustration many feel being directed at Rick Warren and, to some extent, Obama. (I’m sure I’d be PO’d if it affected me the way it affects so many of you.)
However, re. Obama, I wouldn’t suggest taking his choice of Warren as a prediction of things to come. Like it or not, he’s president of the entire country, and he has to make some “inclusive” choices that will please some but hurt or anger others. Since my neck of the woods was Sarah Palin Central for the final 2 weeks of the campaign, I think it makes sense for him to make a conciliatory gesture – the Lord knows, there was enough hostility here to scare me away from even putting up a tiny Obama sign in my window, because I was afraid of vandalism or worse. (I live alone.)
Do I wish he’d chosen someone else? yes and no. Personally, I’d like it if he’d picked someone less biased (and less enamored of prejudiced ideas), but I also think it would be unwise to withdraw the invitation. (Unless Warren does another interview and says even more outrageous things, that is…)
December 22nd, 2008 at 7:13 pm
LGBQT
Well there now, see how I got the letters out of order – guess you all can tell I’m straight, eh? ;P
December 22nd, 2008 at 7:45 pm
et2c–> Trust me, there’s not a universally required order in the letters. I go back and forth myself between LGBTQ and GLBTQ and when I’m verbally saying them all bets are off. Some queers intentionally mix them up, putting T or B closer to “the front” to work against the old notion that importance is established by prominence in ordering. And the first shall be last, the last shall be first…
Beyond that aside, I very much appreciated the thoughts you shared on all this.
December 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
anita, I was being tongue in cheek about that last post, but it’s neat to find out that there *is* no set order. (Come to think of it, I’ve seen the letters in more than one sequence myself…)
And thanks! I actually found myself having to back away from watching any news coverage during the campaign. It just got too stressful, and I had the option of watching clips on YouTube, which came in very handy.
My part of PA is rural and very conservative. Obama signs were rare, and I know I’m speaking for others when I say that I felt like I had to be very guarded in public, both before and after the election. (Something I’d never have dreamt would be true pre-9/11, but it’s a harsh reality now – fwiw, I lived pretty close to the Pentagon at that time…) I got a huge kick out of taking my elderly mom to the polls. She’s partially disabled, and has to use a walker, but she was adamant about going in person to vote for Obama. The irony (to me) is that a lot of the people waiting in line probably thought she was there to cast her vote for McCain-Palin. And (again, fwiw), there were no Obama signs or canvassers at my polling place in the a.m., when I voted. There was 1 sign (but still no canvassers) around 3:00 p.m., when I took my mom to vote. (My celebrating was strictly an at-home thing, and I know that’s true for many others – and not just in my locale, or even in my state.)
December 22nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
As long as Gene Robinson does the invocation at any future inauguration, I’ll be willing to overlook Warren. It’s about dialogue, right? For me it definitely is about Obama. I have this suspicion that he doesn’t really get gays, particularly gays and religion (why we got Donnie McClurkin). But I’ve also never expected that we would get what he promised. Fervent? Not so much. And I say that as someone who voted for him knowing that. I still think he’s competent and choosing competent people for his cabinet, But on gay stuff, just not buying what he’s selling.
December 22nd, 2008 at 8:38 pm
What bothers me most about Warren is his self aggrandizing. At one point he was a humble man who seemed to have a good approach to helping Christians think in new ways about a life lived for Christ. After a million or so books sold and everything you can imagine now having a ‘purpose driven something’ that becomes his next best book sale… sigh… he is touted at the new Billy Graham. come ON now… AND… I saw last night on tv we can celebrate Christmas with Rick Warren this year.. I mean really .. he is bigger then Jesus! For some reason when he lifts his arms in the air I don’t get the idea he is praising the God of heaven.. it looks more like he is accepting the adulation of the crowd.
Not very nice to say all that I know… I almost feel bad, till I remember that he also said God doesn’t hold Nations to the same standards as individuals and it IS perfectly fine for us to attack and kill people in the Nations we see as our enemies. Puke!
enough of my thoughts ….
December 22nd, 2008 at 11:25 pm
I agree with you, deb, on the self-aggrandizing aspects of Warren’s public presentation of himself… And I don’t think it’s a slam to say that he’s not the first to fall for that, and won’t be the last. (Our human nature, with all its flaws, being what it is.)
As for many of the reactions to Obama’s invitation to Warren (stuff I’ve seen on sites like Salon.com), it seems like a slightly reframed version of the reaction to the Obama’s membership in Jeremiah Wright’s church. I think it’s very important to try and keep this in some kind of perspective, especially given the fact that many of us have unrealistic expectations of what can achieve once he’s sworn in. He’s walking into a whirlwind of crises, and it’s going to be a bumpy ride….
December 26th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Rick Warren talks about homosexuality and being gay as if it were something dirty. But what if you love someone and are committed to them, and the other person is another adult who can give consent and loves you back? What does he think of love that is mutually rewarding that creates a new family (that begins with the happy couple)? Is that dirty too? What if the happy couple was able to get married before the election, before hundreds of family and friends who came to witness their declaration of love and commitment? Are they are dirty and sinful too? He has no respect for his fellow Americans or their beliefs, and his words are hypocritical. Voting against and encouraging others to vote against love and commitment is not respectful. I don’t know what kinds of conversations he had with Melissa Etheridge, but nothing less than a public apology and declaration of a change of heart would make me even consider trusting him.
January 18th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Okay, so I posted in October and then my life entered this major transition. I am now living as a single mom, separated from my pastor husband, working out finances, and figuring out what it means to be the me I’ve always known PLUS honoring the lesbian in me who I have always known. Big chunk of life to chew on ..
My gf is constantly challenging me to be rigorous in this process, so I’m back to this site with a few comments about “Christian” community, which also appears to be “American” community in some respects. Regardless of religious persuasion, I am quickly finding Anita’s comment true ..
“Obama seems as so many others to value our relationships as less than equal to his and Michelle’s since he doesn’t support marriage equality but rather another “separate but equal (not)” solution.”
From my close Christian associates, one time friends and future unknown quantities, I have heard the phrase “I love you anyway” .. Anyway what? I’ve asked. “Regardless of your sexual orientation” they respond. And then we talk about everything BUT my new life as a lesbian .. unless I want to see the sad eyes and feel the target of “evangelism”. I even heard through the grapevine that one of my dearest “friends” told another woman that she wants no gays or lesbians around her grandchildren and that “they” should just go live in another state. Phew! I’ve always been welcome around her grandkids .. what now? Will she let me around them “anyway”?
My love for women, one woman in particular, is not valued by the few friends who have stuck around since the separation. They let me talk for a minute, but then the discomfort in the room is palpable. I am feeling like I am too hard for them now .. they don’t want to think hard enough to find a real welcoming of who I am (BTW – who I’ve always been but was afraid to say). So, maybe it will be too hard .. and we will begin to say “let’s get together sometime” .. and then comes the painful silence of having coffee without my friends of 10 years or more.
That same friend has also said that love doesn’t mean acceptance. Another example of shallow thinking .. what does “love” mean, then? In terms of Warren, or Obama, will they be friends with the GLBTQ community “anyway”? And what kind of friendship is that “anyway” .. not really one that I want to be with for coffee, methinks.