Who do you like?
We should not choose a candidate by voting record alone Marvin Olasky
Given how states are pushing up their presidential primaries, nominations are likely to be won or lost by February. Some readers are asking who I favor. That's a fair question, but I don't have any horse in this race.
It's not that I fall in line with journalists who refuse to disclose their preferences. I've argued over the years for transparency, noting that everyone has preferences and readers are best served when reporters are honest.
So, here's my first disclosure: My initial presidential vote, in 1972, was for George McGovern. My worldview changed over the next four years, and beginning in 1976 I've always voted for the Republican candidate for president.
Eight votes in a row for the GOP leader might make you think that I'm a party animal, but your assessment would be incorrect. If Republicans nominated someone who voted the right way most of the time but was personally slimy, and if Democrats chose a candidate with personal integrity who was tough on terrorism and even moderately pro-life, I'd probably vote for the Dem.
What's certain is this: I would not decide which candidate to support merely by examining voting records. Such records are important, but an American history book I wrote nine years ago, in the heat of the Clinton controversy, argued (among other things) that it's crucial to look at the religious beliefs of leaders and also their personal conduct.
One controversial conclusion of The American Leadership Tradition was that leaders who are unfaithful to their spouses are also likely to be unfaithful to the country: That rule of thumb has many exceptions, but I'd still call adultery a leading indicator of potential trouble. The New York Times castigated me for that view, but over the years I've received supportive notes from professional "opposition researchers"—those who ferret out weaknesses of opposing candidates.
Last year, for example, one researcher wrote me, "I personally know about a dozen cases of candidates in which adultery was either widely rumored or established by domestic incident reports or divorce court case files. Contrary to common belief, such material is not politically useful in itself—but it is a reliable indicator that other moral, legal, professional, or character faults are likely to be found."
This researcher gave examples. In a mayoral race rumors of sexual misconduct hung around one candidate, but nothing could be proven. Suspicion, though, led to a close examination of financial indiscretions that ended up sinking the candidate, because it turned out that he played fast and loose with not only dolls but dollars. The common denominator: a willingness to deviate from "conventional" norms and then lie to protect himself.
Spy novelists and biographers often write that adulterous situations are opportunities to recruit spies and traitors. Similarly, special interests looking for advantage seek out character flaws as a way to develop relationships that can then be mined for favors at the right time. Those who justify their abuse of trust in one key area are likely to do it in another.
And so we turn to 2008. Frontrunner Rudy Giuliani showed bold mayoral leadership after 9/11 but erratic personal behavior before it. For example, he astoundingly marched with Judith Nathan, then his mistress, in New York's St. Patrick's Day parade, a gambit one columnist equated with "groping in the window at Macy's." He shocked his second wife and others by announcing his decision to divorce at a press conference.
The oldest candidate, Sen. John McCain, deserves credit for his steadfast support of the war effort he voted for. Long ago he acknowledged his own responsibility for adultery that took place a long time ago: That ancient history no longer concerns me, but he has long seemed semi-erratic and impetuous.
The candidate with the best marital record, Mitt Romney, seems slick; I just haven't warmed to him yet. We'll all need to see how Fred Thompson does on the campaign trail. Mike Huckabee has been the most impressive of the "second tier" candidates, which is no surprise given his personable humor.
Sadly, every Democratic candidate supports the killing of unborn children and the massive killing of Iraqis that would take place if the United States gives up now. So all I can do is sit back and watch the jousting.
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineSeptember 22, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 34
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Friday, August 24, 2007
Congratulations Chris and Joy (Karis and Seth)
"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above" James 1:17
8 lbs, 11 oz, 20.5" long, Born 9:32 PM, August 22, 2007
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Academics Tolerate Everything. . .Except for Christianity
Tenured bigots
Back-to-school: It is a statistical reality that most faculty members don’t like evangelicals, and they aren't ashamed to admit it Mark Bergin
David French has known for years that college campuses are bastions of anti-evangelical bias. He knew it when he served on the admissions committee at Cornell Law School and watched his colleagues ridicule evangelical applicants as "Bible thumpers" or members of the "God squad." He knew it during his tenure with an education watchdog organization that routinely challenged university speech codes bent on silencing evangelical viewpoints. He knew it when he shifted into his current role as director of the Alliance Defense Fund's Center for Academic Freedom, a position from which he's filed numerous lawsuits on behalf of victimized evangelical students.
But only now can French declare with certainty that his anecdotal observations accurately represent a widespread statistical reality. In a recently released scientific survey of 1,269 faculty members across 712 different colleges and universities, 53 percent of respondents admitted to harboring unfavorable feelings toward evangelicals.
"The results were incredibly unsurprising but at the same time vitally important," French told WORLD. "For a long time, the academic freedom movement in this country has presented the academy with story after story of outrageous abuse, and the academy has steadfastly refused to admit that the sky is blue—that it has an overwhelming ideological bias that manifests itself in concrete ways. This is another brick in the wall of proving that there's a real problem."
Unlike much of the previous foundation for that proof, this brick hails from a non-evangelical source. Gary A. Tobin, president of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research, set out to gauge levels of academic anti-Semitism compared to hostility toward other religious groups. He found that only 3 percent of college faculty holds unfavorable views toward Jews. In fact, no religious group draws anywhere near the scorn of evangelicals, Mormons placing a distant second with a 33 percent unfavorable outcome.
Tobin was shocked. And his amazement only escalated upon hearing reaction to his results from the academy's top brass. Rather than deny the accuracy of Tobin's findings or question his methodology, academy leaders attempted to rationalize their bias. "The prejudice is so deep that faculty do not have any problem justifying it. They tried to dismiss it and said they had a good reason for it," Tobin told WORLD. "I don't think that if I'd uncovered bigotry or social dissonance about Latinos, women, blacks, or Jews, they would have had that same response."
Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), told The Washington Post that the poll merely reflects "a political and cultural resistance, not a form of religious bias." In other words, the college faculty members dislike evangelicals not for their faith but the practical outworking of that faith, which makes it OK.
Other prominent voices from the academy have suggested that the anti-evangelical bias does not likely translate into acts of classroom discrimination. Tobin intends to test that claim with a subsequent survey of 3,500 students in the coming academic year. "My guess: You can't have this much smoke without some fire," he said.
French can readily testify to that. Before the Alliance Defense Fund filed a federal lawsuit last year, Georgia Tech University maintained speech codes forbidding any student or campus group from making comments on homosexuality that someone might subjectively deem offensive. What's more, students serving as resident advisors were required to undergo diversity training in which moral positions against homosexual behavior were vilified and compared to justifying slavery with the Bible.
In another landmark case at Missouri State University, junior Emily Brooker objected to an assignment in which students were asked to write their state legislators and urge support for adoptions by same-sex couples. The evangelical social-work major was promptly hauled before a faculty panel and charged with maintaining an insufficient commitment to diversity. The panel grilled Brooker on her religious views without her parents present, convicted her of discrimination against gays, and informed her that to graduate she needed to lessen the gap between her own values and the values of the social-work profession.
The Alliance Defense Fund sued Missouri State on Brooker's behalf, pressuring the university into dropping the discrimination charges and paying for Brooker to attend graduate school. An independent investigation into the incident found such widespread intellectual bullying throughout the university's school of social work that investigators recommended shutting the program down and replacing the entire faculty.
Earlier this year, the Missouri House of Representatives passed the Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act, a bill now pending Senate approval that would mandate efforts from the state's public colleges to prevent "viewpoint discrimination." The AAUP has written the state Senate urging that it not pass "such dangerous and unnecessary legislation" because "there is no evidence that a widespread problem exists."
But Robert Shibley, vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), told WORLD his organization can hardly keep up with intellectual intolerance and free-speech infringements against evangelical and conservative groups. "College campuses overall are not living up to the ideal of having a marketplace of ideas, of having true intellectual diversity to go along with racial and religious diversity," he said. "In too many cases we see groups—evangelical Christians and conservatives, primarily—face sanctions or punishments that are more severe than those of groups with other viewpoints. Or they're punished for things that other groups wouldn't be punished for at all."
French says the continued advancement of evangelicals to high places within academia is critical to effecting change. During his stint on the Cornell Law School admissions board, the longtime lawyer and evangelical stuck up for at least one highly qualified applicant whose previous work as a part-time pastor nearly generated a rejection letter.
"I said, 'Wait a minute. My own religious background makes this poor guy look like a heathen, and I'm on this committee. I think we should give him another look,'" French recalls. "I actually had people, to their credit, come up and apologize to me afterwards for adopting an unthinking stance towards this student. Having a living, breathing, in-the-flesh Christian with ideas and thoughts and whom people could occasionally respect made a difference."
That's multiculturalism at its best.
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineAugust 18, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 30
Back-to-school: It is a statistical reality that most faculty members don’t like evangelicals, and they aren't ashamed to admit it Mark Bergin
David French has known for years that college campuses are bastions of anti-evangelical bias. He knew it when he served on the admissions committee at Cornell Law School and watched his colleagues ridicule evangelical applicants as "Bible thumpers" or members of the "God squad." He knew it during his tenure with an education watchdog organization that routinely challenged university speech codes bent on silencing evangelical viewpoints. He knew it when he shifted into his current role as director of the Alliance Defense Fund's Center for Academic Freedom, a position from which he's filed numerous lawsuits on behalf of victimized evangelical students.
But only now can French declare with certainty that his anecdotal observations accurately represent a widespread statistical reality. In a recently released scientific survey of 1,269 faculty members across 712 different colleges and universities, 53 percent of respondents admitted to harboring unfavorable feelings toward evangelicals.
"The results were incredibly unsurprising but at the same time vitally important," French told WORLD. "For a long time, the academic freedom movement in this country has presented the academy with story after story of outrageous abuse, and the academy has steadfastly refused to admit that the sky is blue—that it has an overwhelming ideological bias that manifests itself in concrete ways. This is another brick in the wall of proving that there's a real problem."
Unlike much of the previous foundation for that proof, this brick hails from a non-evangelical source. Gary A. Tobin, president of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research, set out to gauge levels of academic anti-Semitism compared to hostility toward other religious groups. He found that only 3 percent of college faculty holds unfavorable views toward Jews. In fact, no religious group draws anywhere near the scorn of evangelicals, Mormons placing a distant second with a 33 percent unfavorable outcome.
Tobin was shocked. And his amazement only escalated upon hearing reaction to his results from the academy's top brass. Rather than deny the accuracy of Tobin's findings or question his methodology, academy leaders attempted to rationalize their bias. "The prejudice is so deep that faculty do not have any problem justifying it. They tried to dismiss it and said they had a good reason for it," Tobin told WORLD. "I don't think that if I'd uncovered bigotry or social dissonance about Latinos, women, blacks, or Jews, they would have had that same response."
Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), told The Washington Post that the poll merely reflects "a political and cultural resistance, not a form of religious bias." In other words, the college faculty members dislike evangelicals not for their faith but the practical outworking of that faith, which makes it OK.
Other prominent voices from the academy have suggested that the anti-evangelical bias does not likely translate into acts of classroom discrimination. Tobin intends to test that claim with a subsequent survey of 3,500 students in the coming academic year. "My guess: You can't have this much smoke without some fire," he said.
French can readily testify to that. Before the Alliance Defense Fund filed a federal lawsuit last year, Georgia Tech University maintained speech codes forbidding any student or campus group from making comments on homosexuality that someone might subjectively deem offensive. What's more, students serving as resident advisors were required to undergo diversity training in which moral positions against homosexual behavior were vilified and compared to justifying slavery with the Bible.
In another landmark case at Missouri State University, junior Emily Brooker objected to an assignment in which students were asked to write their state legislators and urge support for adoptions by same-sex couples. The evangelical social-work major was promptly hauled before a faculty panel and charged with maintaining an insufficient commitment to diversity. The panel grilled Brooker on her religious views without her parents present, convicted her of discrimination against gays, and informed her that to graduate she needed to lessen the gap between her own values and the values of the social-work profession.
The Alliance Defense Fund sued Missouri State on Brooker's behalf, pressuring the university into dropping the discrimination charges and paying for Brooker to attend graduate school. An independent investigation into the incident found such widespread intellectual bullying throughout the university's school of social work that investigators recommended shutting the program down and replacing the entire faculty.
Earlier this year, the Missouri House of Representatives passed the Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act, a bill now pending Senate approval that would mandate efforts from the state's public colleges to prevent "viewpoint discrimination." The AAUP has written the state Senate urging that it not pass "such dangerous and unnecessary legislation" because "there is no evidence that a widespread problem exists."
But Robert Shibley, vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), told WORLD his organization can hardly keep up with intellectual intolerance and free-speech infringements against evangelical and conservative groups. "College campuses overall are not living up to the ideal of having a marketplace of ideas, of having true intellectual diversity to go along with racial and religious diversity," he said. "In too many cases we see groups—evangelical Christians and conservatives, primarily—face sanctions or punishments that are more severe than those of groups with other viewpoints. Or they're punished for things that other groups wouldn't be punished for at all."
French says the continued advancement of evangelicals to high places within academia is critical to effecting change. During his stint on the Cornell Law School admissions board, the longtime lawyer and evangelical stuck up for at least one highly qualified applicant whose previous work as a part-time pastor nearly generated a rejection letter.
"I said, 'Wait a minute. My own religious background makes this poor guy look like a heathen, and I'm on this committee. I think we should give him another look,'" French recalls. "I actually had people, to their credit, come up and apologize to me afterwards for adopting an unthinking stance towards this student. Having a living, breathing, in-the-flesh Christian with ideas and thoughts and whom people could occasionally respect made a difference."
That's multiculturalism at its best.
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineAugust 18, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 30
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Good Stewards. . . Giving. . . to Good Stewards
Lone sentry on the wall
How do wealthy ministries spend the millions of dollars that Americans give them? Many of them won’t say, and few donors seem to know. That’s where Rusty Leonard and Wall Watchers come in Jamie Dean
PHILADELPHIA— Early this summer, Paul Crouch of the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) wrote to supporters, telling them that the network's spring "Praise-a-Thon" was a success. For five days, Crouch and a slate of other televangelists had raised money on-air for TBN, the largest Christian television network in the world. "TBN is debt free," Crouch wrote. "Free to invest every penny into expansion to the rest of the world!"
For TBN, that means investing in broadcasting its Christian-themed programs on thousands of cable systems and more than 5,000 television stations. But it also means investing in something else: Southern California real estate.
The 34-year-old ministry based in Santa Ana, Calif., owns a slew of real estate in Southern California, as well as a mobile home park in Florida. But it's not the mobile homes that have drawn national attention. Instead, the public's gaze has fallen on a pair of TBN-owned mansions in Orange County, Calif., that are reportedly worth millions.
Earlier this year, ABC's 20/20 reported that property records revealed one of TBN's mansions is worth about $4 million. A second home with more than 10,000 square feet is worth about $6 million, according to the report.
TBN spokesman Colby May wouldn't confirm or deny those figures, but told WORLD that the mansions are used for "ministry purposes" like taping shows and hosting guests. TBN founders Crouch and his wife, Jan, sometimes stay in the homes as well. May says the couple reimburses TBN when they use the homes for purposes unrelated to the ministry.
May also explains why TBN owns the expensive properties: He says they are a wise investment of the ministry's funds, including more than $110 million that donors give to TBN each year.
Some 3,000 miles away, in a modest living room in suburban Philadelphia, Rusty Leonard wonders whether TBN donors would agree. Leonard is the founder of Wall Watchers, an independent watchdog organization that reports on the finances of more than 500 Christian ministries, including TBN. The group's website features data for donors, outlining how much money ministries have and how they spend it.
For Leonard, the idea for Wall Watchers was born out of a practical need. A former vice president at Templeton Investment Counsel Inc., Leonard once managed a $3.5 billion portfolio of client assets. He also managed his own personal wealth and donated large sums of money to Christian ministries.
That's where Leonard encountered a problem: He realized he knew much more about the stocks that he invested in than the ministries to which he donated. Companies release "volumes of financial information," he says, but ministries often release little.
To make sure they were donating wisely, Leonard and his wife, Carol, began asking the ministries they supported for annual financial statements. They were stunned by the result: "We got a very bad reaction."
Many of the ministries resisted Leonard's request, and he came to an unsettling conclusion: "I realized these ministries had no accountability, and that the donor was completely unrepresented in the transaction that goes on."
That's a common problem in the nonprofit sector, Christian and otherwise, according to Leonard. "Nobody's going to invest in a company without having an idea of what's going on with the money," he says. "But everybody gives to charities without giving a thought to what they are actually doing with the money."
Convinced that Christian donors needed more information, the Leonards used their own money to start Wall Watchers in 1998. Two years later, Leonard left his high-profile job at Templeton to donate his full-time efforts to the organization and to Stewardship Partners, a Christian investment firm he also started.
Wall Watchers asks Christian ministries for audited financial statements, and most eventually comply. But a handful of organizations refuse, creating troubling questions about how they handle millions of donor dollars.
Some financial information about nonprofits is already available through publicly accessible tax records called 990s. The forms include broad information, including revenue and the salaries of top officials. But churches aren't required to file the forms, and IRS standards are broad: Ministries that hold little resemblance to a traditional church often gain church status and the freedom from public filings.
One high-profile example is Benny Hinn Ministries. The Texas-based, international organization is known for its appeals for financial donations and its "miracle crusades" where ministry founder Benny Hinn claims to heal participants of a range of diseases and disabilities. The organization also claims it is a church, and the IRS agrees. The group isn't required to file public tax records. That means the public doesn't know how much money Hinn takes in, or how the ministry spends it.
But media reports have given some indication of where the organization's money goes. NBC's Dateline reported in 2002 that Hinn lived in a ministry-owned home in California worth $10 million. In a letter to supporters Hinn defended the oceanfront mansion, calling it a "parsonage." He added that the property was a wise investment and noted that it had quadrupled in value.
The segment also reported that Hinn drove a Mercedes SUV and a convertible, both valued at about $80,000. The report documented hotel stays for Hinn ranging from $900 to $3,000 per night, all charged to the ministry. Hinn called the hotel stays "international stopovers" designed for rest.
Hinn says an independent accounting firm audits his organization's finances each year, but he refuses to make the results public. The organization hasn't responded to Wall Watchers' requests for audited financial statements, and Hinn officials did not return calls from WORLD seeking comment. Creflo Dollar Ministries, another nonprofit that would not release financial statements to Wall Watchers, also did not return phone calls from WORLD.
Wall Watchers knows more about the finances of TBN. The network does file public tax returns, and Leonard says the documents reveal some striking information: According to its 2004 filings, TBN's cash and short-term investments totaled more than $340 million. Leonard calls that "a huge cash hoard" for a nonprofit ministry: "They have the profit margins of Microsoft."
TBN's March newsletter announcing the network's spring fundraising telethon included 15 separate links to donating options. Crouch wrote: "If you have a need—'GIVE GOD A SEED!' . . . Fill out your pledge on the flap of your envelope."
In a two-part investigation of TBN, the Los Angeles Times noted that in a past telethon, Crouch encouraged viewers to pledge $1,000, even if they didn't have it. "Do you think God would have any trouble getting 1,000 extra dollars to you somehow?" Crouch asked. The report added that Crouch told viewers: "If you have been healed or saved or blessed through TBN, and have not contributed . . . you are robbing God and will lose your reward in heaven."
TBN spokesman Colby May defends the organization's substantial cash holdings and its appeals for more donations. He points out that television is expensive and says TBN incurs costs of "tens of millions of dollars a month" to broadcast around the world. He also says new FCC regulations will require the organization to make changes that will cost millions more.
May also defends the salaries reported on TBN's tax returns. Paul and Jan Crouch take in a combined total of nearly $800,000 a year, another figure Leonard calls high for a nonprofit ministry. "I'm not saying that people in ministry should be poor," says Leonard, "but you do want to see some degree of sacrifice." May counters by saying that the Crouches built TBN from scratch and that their salaries are small compared to television executives.
Wall Watchers has asked TBN to disclose more financial information, specifically a consolidated audited financial statement that would give a clearer picture of how money flows between TBN and its related corporations. Leonard says TBN has consistently rejected the requests.
May contends that TBN sent Wall Watchers audited financial statements from its individual stations around the country. He forwarded to WORLD a copy of a March 2004 letter to Wall Watchers that said financial statements were enclosed, but did not forward the enclosures.
Leonard says Wall Watchers has never received financial statements from TBN, and showed WORLD an April 2005 letter on TBN letterhead that said: "As stated in past letters to your organization our policy restricts us from including any audited financial statements."
Leonard rejects TBN's assertions that he targets the organization because he disagrees with its theological bent. He does acknowledge his disagreements with so-called "prosperity theology" that emphasizes personal health and wealth as a sign of spiritual blessing: "It's turning the gospel on its head."
But Leonard says he reports fairly on organizations that emphasize prosperity, and points to the St. Louis-based Joyce Meyer Ministries (JMM). In 2005, Wall Watchers issued a "donor alert" for JMM, noting that the ministry did not make financial records public.
The alert also noted a series of reports from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that revealed Meyer and her four children lived with their families in a five-home compound owned by the ministry. The homes were worth a combined total of more than $3.7 million. Meyer's home included a putting green and an eight-car heated garage, according to the report.
After months of criticism, JMM relented. The ministry sold the homes, paid $1.56 million in real estate and property taxes, and started making audited financial statements available on its website. Wall Watchers removed its donor alert and reported JMM's efforts at financial transparency.
Leonard doesn't expect all of the 29 ministries on Wall Watchers' "transparency watch" list to follow suit. The list reports ministries that refuse to make financial statements available. At least eight of the organizations, including Benny Hinn and Creflo Dollar Ministries, have programs on TBN.
But Leonard does hope that at least a small percentage of donors will consider diverting donations to organizations that are more transparent with funds. He's convinced the work is important and says he has largely funded Wall Watchers himself, pouring in more than $2 million.
The effort is depleting his savings, but Leonard says it's worth it: "If we can just move 10 percent of donations from unworthy ministries to worthy ministries, that's a huge, huge impact."
There are signs the efforts may be working. After ABC's 20/20 ran its report featuring Wall Watchers and TBN, Leonard says he received more than 2,000 emails in response. Most were positive, he said.
But Leonard's favorite sign of progress so far is a money order Wall Watchers received from a man who discovered the group's work. On the "pay to" line, the donor had scratched out "Benny Hinn Ministries."
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineJuly 28, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 27
How do wealthy ministries spend the millions of dollars that Americans give them? Many of them won’t say, and few donors seem to know. That’s where Rusty Leonard and Wall Watchers come in Jamie Dean
PHILADELPHIA— Early this summer, Paul Crouch of the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) wrote to supporters, telling them that the network's spring "Praise-a-Thon" was a success. For five days, Crouch and a slate of other televangelists had raised money on-air for TBN, the largest Christian television network in the world. "TBN is debt free," Crouch wrote. "Free to invest every penny into expansion to the rest of the world!"
For TBN, that means investing in broadcasting its Christian-themed programs on thousands of cable systems and more than 5,000 television stations. But it also means investing in something else: Southern California real estate.
The 34-year-old ministry based in Santa Ana, Calif., owns a slew of real estate in Southern California, as well as a mobile home park in Florida. But it's not the mobile homes that have drawn national attention. Instead, the public's gaze has fallen on a pair of TBN-owned mansions in Orange County, Calif., that are reportedly worth millions.
Earlier this year, ABC's 20/20 reported that property records revealed one of TBN's mansions is worth about $4 million. A second home with more than 10,000 square feet is worth about $6 million, according to the report.
TBN spokesman Colby May wouldn't confirm or deny those figures, but told WORLD that the mansions are used for "ministry purposes" like taping shows and hosting guests. TBN founders Crouch and his wife, Jan, sometimes stay in the homes as well. May says the couple reimburses TBN when they use the homes for purposes unrelated to the ministry.
May also explains why TBN owns the expensive properties: He says they are a wise investment of the ministry's funds, including more than $110 million that donors give to TBN each year.
Some 3,000 miles away, in a modest living room in suburban Philadelphia, Rusty Leonard wonders whether TBN donors would agree. Leonard is the founder of Wall Watchers, an independent watchdog organization that reports on the finances of more than 500 Christian ministries, including TBN. The group's website features data for donors, outlining how much money ministries have and how they spend it.
For Leonard, the idea for Wall Watchers was born out of a practical need. A former vice president at Templeton Investment Counsel Inc., Leonard once managed a $3.5 billion portfolio of client assets. He also managed his own personal wealth and donated large sums of money to Christian ministries.
That's where Leonard encountered a problem: He realized he knew much more about the stocks that he invested in than the ministries to which he donated. Companies release "volumes of financial information," he says, but ministries often release little.
To make sure they were donating wisely, Leonard and his wife, Carol, began asking the ministries they supported for annual financial statements. They were stunned by the result: "We got a very bad reaction."
Many of the ministries resisted Leonard's request, and he came to an unsettling conclusion: "I realized these ministries had no accountability, and that the donor was completely unrepresented in the transaction that goes on."
That's a common problem in the nonprofit sector, Christian and otherwise, according to Leonard. "Nobody's going to invest in a company without having an idea of what's going on with the money," he says. "But everybody gives to charities without giving a thought to what they are actually doing with the money."
Convinced that Christian donors needed more information, the Leonards used their own money to start Wall Watchers in 1998. Two years later, Leonard left his high-profile job at Templeton to donate his full-time efforts to the organization and to Stewardship Partners, a Christian investment firm he also started.
Wall Watchers asks Christian ministries for audited financial statements, and most eventually comply. But a handful of organizations refuse, creating troubling questions about how they handle millions of donor dollars.
Some financial information about nonprofits is already available through publicly accessible tax records called 990s. The forms include broad information, including revenue and the salaries of top officials. But churches aren't required to file the forms, and IRS standards are broad: Ministries that hold little resemblance to a traditional church often gain church status and the freedom from public filings.
One high-profile example is Benny Hinn Ministries. The Texas-based, international organization is known for its appeals for financial donations and its "miracle crusades" where ministry founder Benny Hinn claims to heal participants of a range of diseases and disabilities. The organization also claims it is a church, and the IRS agrees. The group isn't required to file public tax records. That means the public doesn't know how much money Hinn takes in, or how the ministry spends it.
But media reports have given some indication of where the organization's money goes. NBC's Dateline reported in 2002 that Hinn lived in a ministry-owned home in California worth $10 million. In a letter to supporters Hinn defended the oceanfront mansion, calling it a "parsonage." He added that the property was a wise investment and noted that it had quadrupled in value.
The segment also reported that Hinn drove a Mercedes SUV and a convertible, both valued at about $80,000. The report documented hotel stays for Hinn ranging from $900 to $3,000 per night, all charged to the ministry. Hinn called the hotel stays "international stopovers" designed for rest.
Hinn says an independent accounting firm audits his organization's finances each year, but he refuses to make the results public. The organization hasn't responded to Wall Watchers' requests for audited financial statements, and Hinn officials did not return calls from WORLD seeking comment. Creflo Dollar Ministries, another nonprofit that would not release financial statements to Wall Watchers, also did not return phone calls from WORLD.
Wall Watchers knows more about the finances of TBN. The network does file public tax returns, and Leonard says the documents reveal some striking information: According to its 2004 filings, TBN's cash and short-term investments totaled more than $340 million. Leonard calls that "a huge cash hoard" for a nonprofit ministry: "They have the profit margins of Microsoft."
TBN's March newsletter announcing the network's spring fundraising telethon included 15 separate links to donating options. Crouch wrote: "If you have a need—'GIVE GOD A SEED!' . . . Fill out your pledge on the flap of your envelope."
In a two-part investigation of TBN, the Los Angeles Times noted that in a past telethon, Crouch encouraged viewers to pledge $1,000, even if they didn't have it. "Do you think God would have any trouble getting 1,000 extra dollars to you somehow?" Crouch asked. The report added that Crouch told viewers: "If you have been healed or saved or blessed through TBN, and have not contributed . . . you are robbing God and will lose your reward in heaven."
TBN spokesman Colby May defends the organization's substantial cash holdings and its appeals for more donations. He points out that television is expensive and says TBN incurs costs of "tens of millions of dollars a month" to broadcast around the world. He also says new FCC regulations will require the organization to make changes that will cost millions more.
May also defends the salaries reported on TBN's tax returns. Paul and Jan Crouch take in a combined total of nearly $800,000 a year, another figure Leonard calls high for a nonprofit ministry. "I'm not saying that people in ministry should be poor," says Leonard, "but you do want to see some degree of sacrifice." May counters by saying that the Crouches built TBN from scratch and that their salaries are small compared to television executives.
Wall Watchers has asked TBN to disclose more financial information, specifically a consolidated audited financial statement that would give a clearer picture of how money flows between TBN and its related corporations. Leonard says TBN has consistently rejected the requests.
May contends that TBN sent Wall Watchers audited financial statements from its individual stations around the country. He forwarded to WORLD a copy of a March 2004 letter to Wall Watchers that said financial statements were enclosed, but did not forward the enclosures.
Leonard says Wall Watchers has never received financial statements from TBN, and showed WORLD an April 2005 letter on TBN letterhead that said: "As stated in past letters to your organization our policy restricts us from including any audited financial statements."
Leonard rejects TBN's assertions that he targets the organization because he disagrees with its theological bent. He does acknowledge his disagreements with so-called "prosperity theology" that emphasizes personal health and wealth as a sign of spiritual blessing: "It's turning the gospel on its head."
But Leonard says he reports fairly on organizations that emphasize prosperity, and points to the St. Louis-based Joyce Meyer Ministries (JMM). In 2005, Wall Watchers issued a "donor alert" for JMM, noting that the ministry did not make financial records public.
The alert also noted a series of reports from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that revealed Meyer and her four children lived with their families in a five-home compound owned by the ministry. The homes were worth a combined total of more than $3.7 million. Meyer's home included a putting green and an eight-car heated garage, according to the report.
After months of criticism, JMM relented. The ministry sold the homes, paid $1.56 million in real estate and property taxes, and started making audited financial statements available on its website. Wall Watchers removed its donor alert and reported JMM's efforts at financial transparency.
Leonard doesn't expect all of the 29 ministries on Wall Watchers' "transparency watch" list to follow suit. The list reports ministries that refuse to make financial statements available. At least eight of the organizations, including Benny Hinn and Creflo Dollar Ministries, have programs on TBN.
But Leonard does hope that at least a small percentage of donors will consider diverting donations to organizations that are more transparent with funds. He's convinced the work is important and says he has largely funded Wall Watchers himself, pouring in more than $2 million.
The effort is depleting his savings, but Leonard says it's worth it: "If we can just move 10 percent of donations from unworthy ministries to worthy ministries, that's a huge, huge impact."
There are signs the efforts may be working. After ABC's 20/20 ran its report featuring Wall Watchers and TBN, Leonard says he received more than 2,000 emails in response. Most were positive, he said.
But Leonard's favorite sign of progress so far is a money order Wall Watchers received from a man who discovered the group's work. On the "pay to" line, the donor had scratched out "Benny Hinn Ministries."
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineJuly 28, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 27
Friday, July 13, 2007
Think Small
Think small
When confronting massive problems like African poverty, forget theme parks and golf courses Joel Belz
If, whenever you ponder the immense problems of the African continent, you don't think about the role of microenterprise and microfinance, it could be that you're just not thinking small enough.
The very enormity of Africa's challenges might tempt you to reason that only enormous programs with equally enormous budgets can faze them. AIDS and poverty and tribalism and famine and endemic corruption in government are not likely to be brushed aside with lightweight efforts.
But then you should pick up the Dec. 19 issue of The Wall Street Journal and read the sad front-page story of evangelical author and leader Bruce Wilkinson. True to his quirky Prayer of Jabez philosophy of always thinking bigger, Mr. Wilkinson went to Africa over the last couple of years with a program of breathtaking scope. His plan, as reported by the Journal, included building 50,000 cottages for a million orphans of AIDS in Swaziland, and a scheme for charging Americans $500 a week to stay in those homes while getting to know and helping the children. There was a theme park and golf course for tourists, and a program for the kids to put on rodeos and serve as guides in the wild game reserves. Just the first phase of the dream was pegged at $50 million, which was going to take a lot of Jabez-type praying. Now it has all collapsed, and Mr. Wilkinson has come back to the United States disappointed and disillusioned.
I couldn't help thinking about all that as I sat on New Year's night talking with my friend Peter Brinkerhoff, who had also just returned from a year in Africa—chastened by realism, for sure, but by no means disillusioned. Peter had gone to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with a Pennsylvania-based organization called Hope International. Hope has a simple strategy of feeding a modest stream of capital into the local economy, from the grassroots up, and then watching it have its effect.
For Peter, that meant heading last spring to Kisangani, a heart-of-Africa city that in colonial days was known as Stanleyville. Because of that colonial past, French is still the more-or-less official language for Kisangani's million people, but Swahili is what really gets you around. Peter is conversant but not fluent in French, and he speaks no Swahili. His assignment was to recruit half a dozen young men and women whom he would train over several weeks as his loan officers. Those young people would then hit the streets of Kisangani looking for folks eligible to sign up for tiny, short-term loans that would enhance their personal financial situations.
For example, a $40 loan was extended to a woman who sold pastries off a tray on Kisangani's streets. The $40, accompanied with a little business counsel and encouragement, let her expand the variety of her offerings and buy her product more prudently and at lower cost. Over the next few weeks, during which the loan officer touched base with her every few days both for continued counsel and to collect regular payments on the loan, her bottom line improved. At the end of the 16-week cycle, her loan was totally repaid—with 16 percent interest—and she was ready for a new and slightly larger loan to propel her to a new level in her little business.
Tiny and insignificant in the global scheme of things? Of course. Except that during his nine months in Kisangani, Peter Brinkerhoff and his little team of newly trained loan officers oversaw the closing of more than 800 such loans, with a total face value of about $50,000. Strict guidelines are in place to monitor repayment procedures, and the 95 percent rate of timely return would make many U.S. banks envious. Best of all, the original $50,000 is not used up, but is constantly available in its entirety for new rounds of equally prudent lending.
No, not even that is "best of all." What is really best of all is that Peter will return to Kisangani with a new vision not just for enhancing the lending program, but incorporating an ever more explicit sense of accompanying those loans with the truth of the gospel and nuggets of biblically based business wisdom. Peter (who is only 23 and just out of the Chalmers Center program at Covenant College) prays daily with and counsels his team of loan officers and wants to extend that into a more thorough education program.
It's hard to think of an effort better calculated to reach into the warp and woof of a needy society. And all because someone had the vision to think so very small.
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineJanuary 14, 2006, Vol. 21, No. 2
When confronting massive problems like African poverty, forget theme parks and golf courses Joel Belz
If, whenever you ponder the immense problems of the African continent, you don't think about the role of microenterprise and microfinance, it could be that you're just not thinking small enough.
The very enormity of Africa's challenges might tempt you to reason that only enormous programs with equally enormous budgets can faze them. AIDS and poverty and tribalism and famine and endemic corruption in government are not likely to be brushed aside with lightweight efforts.
But then you should pick up the Dec. 19 issue of The Wall Street Journal and read the sad front-page story of evangelical author and leader Bruce Wilkinson. True to his quirky Prayer of Jabez philosophy of always thinking bigger, Mr. Wilkinson went to Africa over the last couple of years with a program of breathtaking scope. His plan, as reported by the Journal, included building 50,000 cottages for a million orphans of AIDS in Swaziland, and a scheme for charging Americans $500 a week to stay in those homes while getting to know and helping the children. There was a theme park and golf course for tourists, and a program for the kids to put on rodeos and serve as guides in the wild game reserves. Just the first phase of the dream was pegged at $50 million, which was going to take a lot of Jabez-type praying. Now it has all collapsed, and Mr. Wilkinson has come back to the United States disappointed and disillusioned.
I couldn't help thinking about all that as I sat on New Year's night talking with my friend Peter Brinkerhoff, who had also just returned from a year in Africa—chastened by realism, for sure, but by no means disillusioned. Peter had gone to the Democratic Republic of the Congo with a Pennsylvania-based organization called Hope International. Hope has a simple strategy of feeding a modest stream of capital into the local economy, from the grassroots up, and then watching it have its effect.
For Peter, that meant heading last spring to Kisangani, a heart-of-Africa city that in colonial days was known as Stanleyville. Because of that colonial past, French is still the more-or-less official language for Kisangani's million people, but Swahili is what really gets you around. Peter is conversant but not fluent in French, and he speaks no Swahili. His assignment was to recruit half a dozen young men and women whom he would train over several weeks as his loan officers. Those young people would then hit the streets of Kisangani looking for folks eligible to sign up for tiny, short-term loans that would enhance their personal financial situations.
For example, a $40 loan was extended to a woman who sold pastries off a tray on Kisangani's streets. The $40, accompanied with a little business counsel and encouragement, let her expand the variety of her offerings and buy her product more prudently and at lower cost. Over the next few weeks, during which the loan officer touched base with her every few days both for continued counsel and to collect regular payments on the loan, her bottom line improved. At the end of the 16-week cycle, her loan was totally repaid—with 16 percent interest—and she was ready for a new and slightly larger loan to propel her to a new level in her little business.
Tiny and insignificant in the global scheme of things? Of course. Except that during his nine months in Kisangani, Peter Brinkerhoff and his little team of newly trained loan officers oversaw the closing of more than 800 such loans, with a total face value of about $50,000. Strict guidelines are in place to monitor repayment procedures, and the 95 percent rate of timely return would make many U.S. banks envious. Best of all, the original $50,000 is not used up, but is constantly available in its entirety for new rounds of equally prudent lending.
No, not even that is "best of all." What is really best of all is that Peter will return to Kisangani with a new vision not just for enhancing the lending program, but incorporating an ever more explicit sense of accompanying those loans with the truth of the gospel and nuggets of biblically based business wisdom. Peter (who is only 23 and just out of the Chalmers Center program at Covenant College) prays daily with and counsels his team of loan officers and wants to extend that into a more thorough education program.
It's hard to think of an effort better calculated to reach into the warp and woof of a needy society. And all because someone had the vision to think so very small.
Copyright © 2007 WORLD MagazineJanuary 14, 2006, Vol. 21, No. 2
Monday, July 9, 2007
How a 'gay rights' leader became straight
Editor's note: See the news story about Michael Glatze in today's WND, titled "'Gay'-rights leader quits homosexuality."
By Michael Glatze
Homosexuality came easy to me, because I was already weak.
My mom died when I was 19. My father had died when I was 13. At an early age, I was already confused about who I was and how I felt about others.
My confusion about "desire" and the fact that I noticed I was "attracted" to guys made me put myself into the "gay" category at age 14. At age 20, I came out as gay to everybody else around me.
At age 22, I became an editor of the first magazine aimed at a young, gay male audience. It bordered on pornography in its photographic content, but I figured I could use it as a platform to bigger and better things.
Sure enough, Young Gay America came around. It was meant to fill the void that the other magazine I'd worked for had created – namely, anything not-so-pornographic, aimed at the population of young, gay Americans. Young Gay America took off.
Gay people responded happily to Young Gay America. It received awards, recognition, respectability and great honors, including the National Role Model Award from major gay organization Equality Forum – which was given to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien a year later – and a whole host of appearances in the media, from PBS to the Seattle Times, from MSNBC to the cover story in Time magazine.
I produced, with the help of PBS-affiliates and Equality Forum, the first major documentary film to tackle gay teen suicide, "Jim In Bold," which toured the world and received numerous "best in festival" awards.
Young Gay America created a photo exhibit, full of photographs and stories of gay youth all across the North American continent, which toured Europe, Canada and parts of the United States.
Young Gay America launched YGA Magazine in 2004, to pretend to provide a "virtuous counterpart" to the other newsstand media aimed at gay youth. I say "pretend" because the truth was, YGA was as damaging as anything else out there, just not overtly pornographic, so it was more "respected."
It took me almost 16 years to discover that homosexuality itself is not exactly "virtuous." It was difficult for me to clarify my feelings on the issue, given that my life was so caught up in it.
Homosexuality, delivered to young minds, is by its very nature pornographic. It destroys impressionable minds and confuses their developing sexuality; I did not realize this, however, until I was 30 years old.
YGA Magazine sold out of its first issue in several North American cities. There was extreme support, by all sides, for YGA Magazine; schools, parent groups, libraries, governmental associations, everyone seemed to want it. It tapped right into the zeitgeist of "accepting and promoting" homosexuality, and I was considered a leader. I was asked to speak on the prestigious JFK Jr. Forum at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government in 2005.
It was, after viewing my words on a videotape of that "performance," that I began to seriously doubt what I was doing with my life and influence.
Knowing no one who I could approach with my questions and my doubts, I turned to God; I'd developed a growing relationship with God, thanks to a debilitating bout with intestinal cramps caused by the upset stomach-inducing behaviors I'd been engaged in.
Soon, I began to understand things I'd never known could possibly be real, such as the fact that I was leading a movement of sin and corruption – which is not to sound as though my discovery was based on dogma, because decidedly it was not.
I came to the conclusions on my own.
It became clear to me, as I really thought about it – and really prayed about it – that homosexuality prevents us from finding our true self within. We cannot see the truth when we're blinded by homosexuality.
We believe, under the influence of homosexuality, that lust is not just acceptable, but a virtue. But there is no homosexual "desire" that is apart from lust.
In denial of this fact, I'd fought to erase such truth at all costs, and participated in the various popular ways of taking responsibility out of human hands for challenging the temptations of lust and other behaviors. I was sure – thanks to culture and world leaders – that I was doing the right thing.
Driven to look for truth, because nothing felt right, I looked within. Jesus Christ repeatedly advises us not to trust anybody other than Him. I did what He said, knowing that the Kingdom of God does reside in the heart and mind of every man.
What I discovered – what I learned – about homosexuality was amazing. How I'd first "discovered" homosexual desires back in high school was by noticing that I looked at other guys. How I healed, when it became decidedly clear that I should – or risk hurting more people – is that I paid attention to myself.
Every time I was tempted to lust, I noticed it, caught it, dealt with it. I called it what it was, and then just let it disappear on its own. A huge and vital difference exists between superficial admiration – of yourself, or others – and integral admiration. In loving ourselves fully, we no longer need anything from the "outside" world of lustful desire, recognition from others, or physical satisfaction. Our drives become intrinsic to our very essence, unbridled by neurotic distractions.
Homosexuality allows us to avoid digging deeper, through superficiality and lust-inspired attractions – at least, as long as it remains "accepted" by law. As a result, countless miss out on their truest self, their God-given Christ-self.
Homosexuality, for me, began at age 13 and ended – once I "cut myself off" from outside influences and intensely focused on inner truth – when I discovered the depths of my God-given self at age 30.
God is regarded as an enemy by many in the grip of homosexuality or other lustful behavior, because He reminds them of who and what they truly are meant to be. People caught in the act would rather stay "blissfully ignorant" by silencing truth and those who speak it, through antagonism, condemnation and calling them words like "racist," "insensitive," "evil" and "discriminatory."
Healing from the wounds caused by homosexuality is not easy – there's little obvious support. What support remains is shamed, ridiculed, silenced by rhetoric or made illegal by twisting of laws. I had to sift through my own embarrassment and the disapproving "voices" of all I'd ever known to find it. Part of the homosexual agenda is getting people to stop considering that conversion is even a viable question to be asked, let alone whether or not it works.
In my experience, "coming out" from under the influence of the homosexual mindset was the most liberating, beautiful and astonishing thing I've ever experienced in my entire life.
Lust takes us out of our bodies, "attaching" our psyche onto someone else's physical form. That's why homosexual sex – and all other lust-based sex – is never satisfactory: It's a neurotic process rather than a natural, normal one. Normal is normal – and has been called normal for a reason.
Abnormal means "that which hurts us, hurts normal." Homosexuality takes us out of our normal state, of being perfectly united in all things, and divides us, causing us to forever pine for an outside physical object that we can never possess. Homosexual people – like all people – yearn for the mythical true love, which does actually exist. The problem with homosexuality is that true love only comes when we have nothing preventing us from letting it shine forth from within. We cannot fully be ourselves when our minds are trapped in a cycle and group-mentality of sanctioned, protected and celebrated lust.
God came to me when I was confused and lost, alone, afraid and upset. He told me – through prayer – that I had nothing at all to be afraid of, and that I was home; I just needed to do a little house cleaning in my mind.
I believe that all people, intrinsically, know the truth. I believe that is why Christianity scares people so much. It reminds them of their conscience, which we all possess.
Conscience tells us right from wrong and is a guide by which we can grow and become stronger and freer human beings. Healing from sin and ignorance is always possible, but the first thing anyone must do is get out of the mentalities that divide and conquer humanity.
Sexual truth can be found, provided we're all willing and driven to accept that our culture sanctions behaviors that harm life. Guilt should be no reason to avoid the difficult questions.
Homosexuality took almost 16 years of my life and compromised them with one lie or another, perpetuated through national media targeted at children. In European countries, homosexuality is considered so normal that grade-school children are being provided "gay" children's books as required reading in public schools.
Poland, a country all-too familiar with the destruction of its people by outside influences, is bravely attempting to stop the European Union from indoctrinating its children with homosexual propaganda. In response, the European Union has called the prime minister of Poland "repulsive."
I was repulsive for quite some time; I am still dealing with all of my guilt.
As a leader in the "gay rights" movement, I was given the opportunity to address the public many times. If I could take back some of the things I said, I would. Now I know that homosexuality is lust and pornography wrapped into one. I'll never let anybody try to convince me otherwise, no matter how slick their tongues or how sad their story. I have seen it. I know the truth.
God gave us truth for a reason. It exists so we could be ourselves. It exists so we could share that perfect self with the world, to make the perfect world. These are not fanciful schemes or strange ideals – these are the Truth.
Healing from the sins of the world will not happen in an instant; but, it will happen – if we don't pridefully block it. God wins in the end, in case you didn't know.
Related story:
'Gay rights' leader quits homosexuality
Related special offer:
"Male and Female He Made Them"
Michael Glatze is the former editor in chief of YGA Magazine and founder of Young Gay America.
By Michael Glatze
Homosexuality came easy to me, because I was already weak.
My mom died when I was 19. My father had died when I was 13. At an early age, I was already confused about who I was and how I felt about others.
My confusion about "desire" and the fact that I noticed I was "attracted" to guys made me put myself into the "gay" category at age 14. At age 20, I came out as gay to everybody else around me.
At age 22, I became an editor of the first magazine aimed at a young, gay male audience. It bordered on pornography in its photographic content, but I figured I could use it as a platform to bigger and better things.
Sure enough, Young Gay America came around. It was meant to fill the void that the other magazine I'd worked for had created – namely, anything not-so-pornographic, aimed at the population of young, gay Americans. Young Gay America took off.
Gay people responded happily to Young Gay America. It received awards, recognition, respectability and great honors, including the National Role Model Award from major gay organization Equality Forum – which was given to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien a year later – and a whole host of appearances in the media, from PBS to the Seattle Times, from MSNBC to the cover story in Time magazine.
I produced, with the help of PBS-affiliates and Equality Forum, the first major documentary film to tackle gay teen suicide, "Jim In Bold," which toured the world and received numerous "best in festival" awards.
Young Gay America created a photo exhibit, full of photographs and stories of gay youth all across the North American continent, which toured Europe, Canada and parts of the United States.
Young Gay America launched YGA Magazine in 2004, to pretend to provide a "virtuous counterpart" to the other newsstand media aimed at gay youth. I say "pretend" because the truth was, YGA was as damaging as anything else out there, just not overtly pornographic, so it was more "respected."
It took me almost 16 years to discover that homosexuality itself is not exactly "virtuous." It was difficult for me to clarify my feelings on the issue, given that my life was so caught up in it.
Homosexuality, delivered to young minds, is by its very nature pornographic. It destroys impressionable minds and confuses their developing sexuality; I did not realize this, however, until I was 30 years old.
YGA Magazine sold out of its first issue in several North American cities. There was extreme support, by all sides, for YGA Magazine; schools, parent groups, libraries, governmental associations, everyone seemed to want it. It tapped right into the zeitgeist of "accepting and promoting" homosexuality, and I was considered a leader. I was asked to speak on the prestigious JFK Jr. Forum at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government in 2005.
It was, after viewing my words on a videotape of that "performance," that I began to seriously doubt what I was doing with my life and influence.
Knowing no one who I could approach with my questions and my doubts, I turned to God; I'd developed a growing relationship with God, thanks to a debilitating bout with intestinal cramps caused by the upset stomach-inducing behaviors I'd been engaged in.
Soon, I began to understand things I'd never known could possibly be real, such as the fact that I was leading a movement of sin and corruption – which is not to sound as though my discovery was based on dogma, because decidedly it was not.
I came to the conclusions on my own.
It became clear to me, as I really thought about it – and really prayed about it – that homosexuality prevents us from finding our true self within. We cannot see the truth when we're blinded by homosexuality.
We believe, under the influence of homosexuality, that lust is not just acceptable, but a virtue. But there is no homosexual "desire" that is apart from lust.
In denial of this fact, I'd fought to erase such truth at all costs, and participated in the various popular ways of taking responsibility out of human hands for challenging the temptations of lust and other behaviors. I was sure – thanks to culture and world leaders – that I was doing the right thing.
Driven to look for truth, because nothing felt right, I looked within. Jesus Christ repeatedly advises us not to trust anybody other than Him. I did what He said, knowing that the Kingdom of God does reside in the heart and mind of every man.
What I discovered – what I learned – about homosexuality was amazing. How I'd first "discovered" homosexual desires back in high school was by noticing that I looked at other guys. How I healed, when it became decidedly clear that I should – or risk hurting more people – is that I paid attention to myself.
Every time I was tempted to lust, I noticed it, caught it, dealt with it. I called it what it was, and then just let it disappear on its own. A huge and vital difference exists between superficial admiration – of yourself, or others – and integral admiration. In loving ourselves fully, we no longer need anything from the "outside" world of lustful desire, recognition from others, or physical satisfaction. Our drives become intrinsic to our very essence, unbridled by neurotic distractions.
Homosexuality allows us to avoid digging deeper, through superficiality and lust-inspired attractions – at least, as long as it remains "accepted" by law. As a result, countless miss out on their truest self, their God-given Christ-self.
Homosexuality, for me, began at age 13 and ended – once I "cut myself off" from outside influences and intensely focused on inner truth – when I discovered the depths of my God-given self at age 30.
God is regarded as an enemy by many in the grip of homosexuality or other lustful behavior, because He reminds them of who and what they truly are meant to be. People caught in the act would rather stay "blissfully ignorant" by silencing truth and those who speak it, through antagonism, condemnation and calling them words like "racist," "insensitive," "evil" and "discriminatory."
Healing from the wounds caused by homosexuality is not easy – there's little obvious support. What support remains is shamed, ridiculed, silenced by rhetoric or made illegal by twisting of laws. I had to sift through my own embarrassment and the disapproving "voices" of all I'd ever known to find it. Part of the homosexual agenda is getting people to stop considering that conversion is even a viable question to be asked, let alone whether or not it works.
In my experience, "coming out" from under the influence of the homosexual mindset was the most liberating, beautiful and astonishing thing I've ever experienced in my entire life.
Lust takes us out of our bodies, "attaching" our psyche onto someone else's physical form. That's why homosexual sex – and all other lust-based sex – is never satisfactory: It's a neurotic process rather than a natural, normal one. Normal is normal – and has been called normal for a reason.
Abnormal means "that which hurts us, hurts normal." Homosexuality takes us out of our normal state, of being perfectly united in all things, and divides us, causing us to forever pine for an outside physical object that we can never possess. Homosexual people – like all people – yearn for the mythical true love, which does actually exist. The problem with homosexuality is that true love only comes when we have nothing preventing us from letting it shine forth from within. We cannot fully be ourselves when our minds are trapped in a cycle and group-mentality of sanctioned, protected and celebrated lust.
God came to me when I was confused and lost, alone, afraid and upset. He told me – through prayer – that I had nothing at all to be afraid of, and that I was home; I just needed to do a little house cleaning in my mind.
I believe that all people, intrinsically, know the truth. I believe that is why Christianity scares people so much. It reminds them of their conscience, which we all possess.
Conscience tells us right from wrong and is a guide by which we can grow and become stronger and freer human beings. Healing from sin and ignorance is always possible, but the first thing anyone must do is get out of the mentalities that divide and conquer humanity.
Sexual truth can be found, provided we're all willing and driven to accept that our culture sanctions behaviors that harm life. Guilt should be no reason to avoid the difficult questions.
Homosexuality took almost 16 years of my life and compromised them with one lie or another, perpetuated through national media targeted at children. In European countries, homosexuality is considered so normal that grade-school children are being provided "gay" children's books as required reading in public schools.
Poland, a country all-too familiar with the destruction of its people by outside influences, is bravely attempting to stop the European Union from indoctrinating its children with homosexual propaganda. In response, the European Union has called the prime minister of Poland "repulsive."
I was repulsive for quite some time; I am still dealing with all of my guilt.
As a leader in the "gay rights" movement, I was given the opportunity to address the public many times. If I could take back some of the things I said, I would. Now I know that homosexuality is lust and pornography wrapped into one. I'll never let anybody try to convince me otherwise, no matter how slick their tongues or how sad their story. I have seen it. I know the truth.
God gave us truth for a reason. It exists so we could be ourselves. It exists so we could share that perfect self with the world, to make the perfect world. These are not fanciful schemes or strange ideals – these are the Truth.
Healing from the sins of the world will not happen in an instant; but, it will happen – if we don't pridefully block it. God wins in the end, in case you didn't know.
Related story:
'Gay rights' leader quits homosexuality
Related special offer:
"Male and Female He Made Them"
Michael Glatze is the former editor in chief of YGA Magazine and founder of Young Gay America.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
July 8, 2007 - Sunday School
July 8, 2007
Dealing with Rejection - Part 1
Psalm 139:14-17
14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
15My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
16Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
17How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
We have a desire to feel needed or to be appreciated for what we are and do. What others think about us can have a big impact on our attitudes about ourselves. A sense of rejection can be destructive, leading to years of attacking self, withdrawing from others, or even doubting and attacking God. But as Christians we must recognize the rejection syndrome for what it is, self-protection in action. Those who feel rejected are focusing on self, not others; they are living for self, not God. Their emotions are most important, not God’s Word or God’s purpose.
Galatians 2:20 sets forth God’s cure for rejection syndrome—“I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.”
I. Rejection—The Causes
Remember the words of John the Baptist, “He must increase, but I must decrease” John 3:30
A. Impact of Others
• We are “social” creatures, and having a basic desire to be accepted by others is
natural.
• Everyone experiences rejection at some time.
B. Impact of Self
• Many people view themselves through the eyes of others, and those opinions become
the basis for that view. And these evaluations tend to be inaccurate.
• We fail to recognize that blemishes, birthmarks, irregular teeth, freckles, large ears,
big noses, and receding chins are not the measure of our worth and that driving a 1972 Ford Pinto is not the end of the world!
C. A Balanced Perspective
• A case in point is the Apostle Paul. Tradition tells us that Paul was no physical
beauty—short and bald with a big nose and bowed legs. Paul lets us know that he was not impressive to look at or listen to: “in presence [I] am base among you” (II Cor. 10:1), “[my] bodily presence is weak, and [my] . . . speech contemptible” (10:10).
• But Paul spent little time comparing himself to other people, and he refused to let
others’ evaluations control him. “It is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self” (I Cor. 4:3). “For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth” (II Cor. 10:18).
• Paul sets forth a balanced perspective—The person who is active serving God has
little time to look at himself. He yearns for God’s approval, not the approval of his peers. He focuses on eternal matters, not earthly externals. He knows that God’s grace is sufficient no matter how great his imperfections, and he is too busy using what he has to worry about what he does not have.
• Note Paul’s words: “For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet [or
“worthy”] to be called an apostle. . . . But by the grace of God I am what I am. . . but I laboured more abundantly than they all” (I Cor. 15:9-10).
Dealing with Rejection - Part 1
Psalm 139:14-17
14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
15My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
16Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
17How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
We have a desire to feel needed or to be appreciated for what we are and do. What others think about us can have a big impact on our attitudes about ourselves. A sense of rejection can be destructive, leading to years of attacking self, withdrawing from others, or even doubting and attacking God. But as Christians we must recognize the rejection syndrome for what it is, self-protection in action. Those who feel rejected are focusing on self, not others; they are living for self, not God. Their emotions are most important, not God’s Word or God’s purpose.
Galatians 2:20 sets forth God’s cure for rejection syndrome—“I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.”
I. Rejection—The Causes
Remember the words of John the Baptist, “He must increase, but I must decrease” John 3:30
A. Impact of Others
• We are “social” creatures, and having a basic desire to be accepted by others is
natural.
• Everyone experiences rejection at some time.
B. Impact of Self
• Many people view themselves through the eyes of others, and those opinions become
the basis for that view. And these evaluations tend to be inaccurate.
• We fail to recognize that blemishes, birthmarks, irregular teeth, freckles, large ears,
big noses, and receding chins are not the measure of our worth and that driving a 1972 Ford Pinto is not the end of the world!
C. A Balanced Perspective
• A case in point is the Apostle Paul. Tradition tells us that Paul was no physical
beauty—short and bald with a big nose and bowed legs. Paul lets us know that he was not impressive to look at or listen to: “in presence [I] am base among you” (II Cor. 10:1), “[my] bodily presence is weak, and [my] . . . speech contemptible” (10:10).
• But Paul spent little time comparing himself to other people, and he refused to let
others’ evaluations control him. “It is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self” (I Cor. 4:3). “For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth” (II Cor. 10:18).
• Paul sets forth a balanced perspective—The person who is active serving God has
little time to look at himself. He yearns for God’s approval, not the approval of his peers. He focuses on eternal matters, not earthly externals. He knows that God’s grace is sufficient no matter how great his imperfections, and he is too busy using what he has to worry about what he does not have.
• Note Paul’s words: “For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet [or
“worthy”] to be called an apostle. . . . But by the grace of God I am what I am. . . but I laboured more abundantly than they all” (I Cor. 15:9-10).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
