Many evangelicals have cheapened the notions of “grace” and “repentance” by contending that a verbal apology by itself means anything.

I was never an ex-gay activist, but as closeted gay conservative Christian in high school and early in college, I did withhold assistance from a few people who were being bullied; I occasionally led some of my phobic classmates to believe I was on their side; and I “heroically” preached the “love the sinner” line in opposition to nasty classmates who were simply more honest and proud of their unjust attitudes.

I have spent two decades working to undo those few years of damage in various ways.

When John Smid pays for the years of counseling that teen-agers needed to reverse his program’s abuse; when Smid personally visits the hundreds of parents whom he deliberately alienated from their LGBT children and tells them that he lied to them; when Smid revisits his previous speaking engagements and tells them, too, that he lied; when Smid actively condemns the reparative therapy of NARTH and the deliberate religious and social ostracism and bigotry of Exodus — then I will believe that he is apologizing.

But mere catchphrases like “I’m sorry” do not constitute an apology.

“We acknowledge the sinfulness of any sexual act outside of the scriptural context of Holy Matrimony between a man and a woman.”

I also note several references to those who are “impacted [sic] by homosexuality” and a link to Exodus International.

In the words of Scripture, “What need we any further witnesses?”

When Jeremy Marks of the Courage Trust in the UK finally confessed to the world that he had failed, after years of striving, to change his own sexual orientation, and that “none of the people we’ve counselled have converted [to heterosexuality] no matter how much effort and prayer they’ve put into it”, he transformed Courage into a gay-affirmative Christian ministry.

To me the crux of the matter is this: is the new ministry that John Smid is now running similar to the one that Courage UK has now become? Or is it simply another “ex-gay” ministry, only with an even thicker veneer of “love” and “redemptive compassion” than the one that he ran before? If it is the latter — and I’m stressing the word “if” — then it’ going to be even more dangerous and insidious than the previous one. I’m reminded of a little rhyme that I read years ago as a kid:

“It’ not enough to say,
“I’m sorry; I repent’
And then go on the same old way,
Just like I always went.”

I’m sorry, but John Smid has been tied to James Dobson, Rick Warren and Pat Robertson for too many years to really accept his apology at this time.

Now if he PROVES that he has repented and is truly sorry, then he will DO SOMETHING for those who remain, that he and his ilk have condemned to committing suicide. I’ve personally buried too many of those young men and women who have chosen to leave this life than listen to the constant HOMOPHOBIA!!!

PROVE it John!

2. Unfortunately, Smid still doesn’t get it. He still doesn’t affirm our relationships or respect embracing a LGBT identity. The harm begins here (to paraphrase a comment I read on another blog). Smid says his new ministry is not PRIMARILY (read it closely) focused on ex-gay ministry. But it IS an ex-gay ministry, and therefore it will continue to propagate harm — for LGBT people, for those who are conflicted, and for anyone who does not accept Smid’ version of Christianity (these people believe this last group will be punished by god just as this first group will). Mr. Smid, I appreciate your apology; however, I believe you have a long way to go to truly understand the harm you continue to cause.

3. Survivors of ex-gay ministries BEWARE: While I think the potential for healing by speaking about the harm to the person who harmed you is possible, when this person (John Smid) does not realize that he is still contributing to the abuse of others (see point #2), then he is a dangerous person for survivors to talk with. He is still an abuser, with a more subtle brand of heterosexism and condemnation, which is why he is MORE dangerous now than before. That he thinks by “revamping the methods” of Love in Action now makes LIA not harmful reveals that he does not understand the nature of the abuse he (and other ex-gay organizations) continues to perpetrate.

4. Last point. This apology from Smid came about/happened as a result of an invitation for dialogue by a writer over at http://www.exgaywatch.com, David Roberts. Roberts makes the point in his article about this there that Smid’ apology and new ministry sounds a lot like the work of Andrew Marin (author of _Love is an Orientation_) of The Marin Foundation. Marin’ book/perspective, I think, is MORE dangerous in some ways than Exodus, because it’ a kinder, gentler version of the same condemning, heterosexist message, and Marin offers in this book a strategy for Christians to develop relationships with LGBT people for the ultimate purpose of converting them to [their version of] Christianity (which they then think will lead converts eventually to renounce their homosexuality).

Guess what one of Marin’ first suggested steps in this process is?

Yep, an apology.

Read this book so you know about the newest strategy for more subtle attempts to “reach” us – apparently lots of people supporting ex-gay ministry and psychology are reading it (including Chambers, who seems to be apologizing all over the place).

Be careful of kinder, gentler Christian supremacists. They won’t call you “HO-MO-SEX-SHALL” and, in fact, some of them might even be very educated about our lives(rather than the so-called “lifestyle” of the less educated brand of heterosexist).

They will listen to you, they will care about you, they will acknowledge that Christians have and do oppress us as a people. You will sincerely think your relationship and your identity as a GLBT person is genuinely respected. But make no mistake – they eventually want you to accept [their version of] Christianity and they do want you to renounce your homosexuality in good time, but they know they have to get into your heart and soul first, however long that takes.

I believe that many of the people who approach evangelism in this slicker style are indeed very sincere, they really do believe they love us deeply and that what they have to offer is good for us.

They’re dangerous.

If people cannot accept you for who you are, and what you believe, then you don’t need to be fawning over those people in the first place. Respect from a few is worth more than false friendship from the many, when reason is on your side. Christians are called to take the rocky high road – I hope Mr Smid can follow in these footsteps.

I accept you Michael, you’ve apologized enough for me. You stopped trying to oppress gays and started supporting equal rights – that’s enough for me.