Reconciling Religion and Queerness

For far too many LGBTQ+ people, religion has been used as a weapon–a source of shame, exclusion, and deep spiritual wounds. Many have been told they are “incompatible with scripture,” and some have left their faith communities altogether just to protect their own well-being. Today In the Den, Sara sits down with Reformation Project founder Matthew Vines, who offers an invitation to re-read the Bible with fresh eyes, to separate tradition from truth, and to imagine a church where everyone is welcomed without condition.

Special Guest: Matthew Vines

Matthew Vines is the Founder and Executive Director of The Reformation Project and the author of God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships. He lives in Dallas, Texas. Matthew attended Harvard University from 2008 to 2010. He then took a leave of absence in order to research the Bible and same-sex relationships. In March 2012, Matthew gave a speech at a church in his hometown of Wichita, Kansas, about the Bible and same-sex relationships, calling for acceptance of gay Christians and their marriage relationships. The video of the speech was viewed more than a million times on YouTube, leading to a feature story in The New York Times that fall. In 2013, Matthew launched The Reformation Project, a Bible-based, Christian non-profit organization that works to advance an orthodox and affirming vision for the church while remaining grounded in a love for God, a love for the Bible, and a love for the church. The Reformation Project hosts a variety of events, including a conference, a Parents in Process group, a Pastors in Process group, and leadership training cohorts.

Links from the Show:

• God and the Gay Christian: https://bookshop.org/p/books/god-and-the-gay-christian-the-biblical-case-in-support-of-same-sex-relationships-matthew-vines/6425211?ean=9781601425188&next=t  
• Find more about Matthew here: https://matthewvines.com/about/
• Matthew’s speech on gay Christians: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezQjNJUSraY 
• The Reformation Project: http://www.reformationproject.org/ 
• New York Times article on Matthew’s speech: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/fashion/matthew-vines-wont-rest-in-defending-gay-christians.html 
• Join Mama Dragons here: www.mamadragons.org

In the Den is made possible by generous donors like you. Help us continue to deliver quality content by becoming a donor today at www.mamadragons.org.  

Transcript

SARA: Hi everyone. Welcome to In the Den with Mama Dragons. A podcast and community to support, educate, and empower parents on the journey of raising happy and healthy LGBTQ+ humans. I’m your host, Sara LaWall. I’m a Mama Dragon myself and an advocate for our queer community. And I’m so glad to be part of this wild and wonderful parenting journey with all of you. Thanks for joining us. We’re so glad you’re here. 

For far too many LGBTQ+ people, religion has been used as a weapon, as a source of shame, exclusion, and deep spiritual wounds. And many have been told they are incompatible with scripture. And some have left their faith communities altogether just to protect their own well-being, understandably. Our guest today, Matthew Vines, grew up in a conservative Christian home where the Bible was central to daily life. When he came out as gay in college, he faced the same agonizing questions so many queer Christians do. Could he be faithful to God without denying who he was? And instead of walking away, Matthew turned toward scripture, digging deep into translations, original languages, historical contexts, and theology, and what he discovered transformed his life and has since helped thousands reconcile their own faith and identity. 

Today, Matthew is the author of God and the Gay Christian; The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships and a founder of the Reformation Project, a nonprofit dedicated to equipping Christians to champion LGBTQ+ inclusion in their churches. His work invites us to re-read the Bible with fresh eyes, to separate tradition from truth, and imagine a church where everyone is welcomed, and everyone is affirmed without condition. Matthew, I am so delighted to have you with us. Welcome to In the Den.

MATTHEW: Well, thank you so much for having me, Sarah, I appreciate it.

SARA: So, your incredible work, your book, the launching of the Reformation Project, all of this came about because of your own personal experience, discovering your own gay identity within the conservative religious context that you were raised. So I want to start with your story. Take us back to your childhood and your religious upbringing, and if you'll share with us a little bit about how you came to understand yourself as gay, how you came out, and how those experiences impacted you, your family, and your religious life. That's a whole big place to start, but go for it.

MATTHEW: I’ll go for it. So I grew up in Wichita, Kansas. And I'm 35, so I was born in 1990. And grew up, was raised in an evangelical Presbyterian church. And my parents, I'd say my parents were wonderful, still are. And I'd say the main thing that they wanted to share with my older sister and me was their faith in Jesus. And they did a very good job of modeling what that could look like, and how their own faith in Christ helped them to be loving, kind, caring people, sharing God's love with other people. It was presented, I think, in a much better way than sometimes what I'll hear from other people, where they had much more negative experiences just in general with the way they were raised in a religious community that was much more focused on fear, shame, and control, as opposed to the central message of God's love for us and for others leading us to love others well. And so I think if you – starting with that is part of the reason why I think I have not gone through some of the same challenges when it comes to my relationship with God that I know a lot of other people have. I think part of the reason is because I feel like the framework that I was given was a pretty healthy one that, yes, over time I came to believe needed certain reforms when it came to, right, LGBT topics, but not something that seemed like it was in any sense rotten to the core, and the fruit of it at the core was always very, very good. And so I felt like I was able to come to a very authentic relationship with God and love for Jesus, that wasn't kind of clouded by any number of other factors and distortions that can impede so many people's connection with God. So, from an early age, I've been a Christian, and my belief in Jesus has really been the foundation of my life, my understanding of who I am, my place in the world, how I want to live and treat other people, and all of that. And I'd say overall, the church that I was raised in was a positive experience for me, and I think overall did a good job of living out our faith. The big issue that I began to have, though, was once I began to meet gay people – and for me, I think I benefited from the fact that even though I could have been aware of being gay from an earlier age, probably age 14 or so, I was so not open to that possibility for myself that I just suppressed any awareness of that. Or you are kind of aware of it, but you can reinterpret it. And you can say, “Well, that doesn't necessarily mean this.” And because you've never had a different experience, you can't know for sure that suppressing same-sex attraction isn't what everyone else is doing, too, because I'm not talking about it. Maybe they're not talking about it. But, even though I had successfully suppressed any awareness of my own sexual orientation until I was 19, I still, once I began to meet openly gay people in high school, and especially in college, I began to feel a great sense of cognitive dissonance with what I had been taught about same-sex relationships, which admittedly wasn't much, it wasn't a huge topic. I mean, this was, it really didn't come up much until gay marriage became kind of a national debate when I was in high school. And even then, it's not like we were getting super in-depth teaching on it. But it was just nobody would question, there was no question around it. Everybody in our church seemingly was just in agreement that this was not right. I'd never known a gay couple before. Every marriage, every family, everybody who'd ever been a part of anything was part of a heterosexual couple or family. And so, you don't need to be told too much about it for it to be obvious that that's not a good thing, or not seen as a good thing in your community. But I remember because, for me, also, growing up in a conservative evangelical church, I was taught from a young age that sex should be for marriage. And even though that's not probably the most common attitude or belief, certainly in society at large. And I was very happy to commit myself to that. And so, for me, it wasn't the issue. The issue was, wait, but why are gay people not allowed to get married? Like, because the idea, I think, in a lot of conservative churches, the way that the entire LGBTQ conversation is seen is as a clash of two competing worldviews. So, they don't just see it as, “We're different, we're interpreting six passages in scripture differently.” It's, they see it as, there is the conservative Christian worldview that says that God created us for a purpose, that God created sex as something that is not just for pleasure or entertainment, but that is supposed to be for covenantal, faithful, self-giving love and commitment, and that we, as conservative Christians, believe that sex is something sacred, but the world and the culture tend to believe that it's just something that can be used casually, purely for entertainment, as long as people are consenting, that kind of thing.

And so then they'll say, “The secular LGBTQ movement doesn't believe in the same values we believe in. And so it's not really about any double standard or unfair discrimination, it's just about, we believe we have these certain values around sexuality, and they don't have those values.” And I think what was troubling for me was, I was like, “Hey, I'm totally on board with a Christian, approach towards sexuality as something sacred, and something really important.

But even accepting all of that, why can't gay people do that too? Why can't gay people participate in that?” And as I began to know more gay people, and just seeing the incredible damage that had been done to so many people by being told that, either by just rejection from families and churches, but even when people were trying to be kind about it, just by being told that you and only you, essentially, are never allowed to ever go on a date, hold someone's hand, fall in love. Every time you feel butterflies for someone, you should probably feel a sense of conviction or shame about this and try to remove yourself from that person in your life.

It's not just about, “Do you have a permissive or a conservative attitude towards sexuality in general?” It's like, no, you can have a conservative attitude, and conservative values about sexuality, which I always have had, and still do in so many ways, and still not want there to be unfair double standards that are put on people who are only attracted to the same sex. And I went through all of this process of actually feeling this cognitive dissonance, feeling great distress about this, while I still was actively suppressing any awareness of my own sexual orientation. 

SARA: Wow!

MATTHEW: I think I had to do it that way, because many gay Christians struggle with the fact that they are aware of being gay, from a young age, while they also still believe that it is wrong to be gay or to act on being gay. And that creates a lot of challenges. And it also can make it hard for people later, if they are changing their mind, to decide that it's okay to be gay, wondering, wait, is this just self-serving? Am I only changing my belief here because this is something I would prefer personally? Because this will make my life happier, better, or easier. And that's certainly the narrative that a lot of people are told by maybe non-affirming family members or friends. They say, “Oh, you're only thinking this now because this is what you want to be true. You want being gay to be okay because you are gay, and that's why you're thinking that way.” So, I think it actually helped me a lot. It was a protective shield for me because I actually still had very successfully suppressed awareness of that. I was just very deeply conflicted about this, because I was meeting more and more gay people, and it just seemed wrong. And so, I would have changed my mind about same-sex relationships, whether I had been gay or not. To me, it's, I think reality has a correcting influence and that if you begin to accept, if you do accept that some people are gay, that that is a real thing, that they didn't choose, and that is not something that people can just change, then that means that if all same-sex relationships are wrong, then gay people, uniquely, need to be single and celibate for their entire lives. And that is not a burden that the Christian church has ever thought appropriate to place on anybody as a class of people. So, even Protestants and Catholics will disagree about this. Protestants say priests can get married and Catholics say they can't. But even the Catholic Church will be very clear about saying, but nobody is forced to become a priest, and you should only become a priest if you discern that you have the gift of celibacy. So, Christianity and the Bible have always saw lifelong singleness and celibacy as a spiritual gift and calling that some people are called to. But what is the first thing in the book of Genesis that God says is not good? God goes through all these things in Genesis 1 and 2 about how the creation is good, good, very good. But the first thing that God says is not good is that the man is alone. And that is why, then, God creates a helper, a partner, a suitable partner for Adam because the problem of being alone is established. The first thing in the original creation that's not good, and you see this reflected as well in the New Testament. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 7, says that he kind of wishes that everybody could be single and celibate like him, but he says that he recognizes that we all have different gifts, and not everyone has that gift. Therefore, he said, “It's better to marry than to burn with passion,” which is not the most romantic view of marriage, admittedly. Right? But it's not wrong in the sense that, like, a lot of people are not going to be capable of lifelong singleness and celibacy. They have a very deep-seated yearning for that kind of human relationship and connection. And even Jesus talks about this as well in Matthew 19, when he's asked, “Hey, can a man just divorce his wife for any reason at all?” And he says, “No, actually.” And he raises the bar to infidelity, and then his disciples say, “Well, in that case, maybe we shouldn't get married at all, right? If we can't substitute the wives when we're not happy anymore.” And Jesus says, “No, no, no. That word of foregoing marriage can only be accepted by those to whom it is given.” And then he describes people who do, either people who may – he describes eunuchs, different categories, people who may be sexually impotent, people who may have been made eunuchs by others, like through castration, or people who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, people who choose the path of lifelong singleness and celibacy, which was the path that Jesus took, it also seems to be the path of Paul as well. But both Jesus and Paul, despite being big supporters of the possibility of celibacy, do not say that it is something you can impose on anybody. It is a gift, it is a spiritual gift that must be discerned. And people who don't have it need to have the option of marriage. And so that was my big issue with this from a conservative Christian standpoint, is if gay people exist, and I think that they do, and if being gay isn't something that you can change, and I don't think that it is, then we are uniquely telling this one group of people, that they and they alone, are being forced into lifelong singleness and celibacy in a way that I see bearing tremendous bad fruit in people's lives. 

SARA: You just really opened up so many interesting conversations, and pathways, some of which I hadn't really even thought about. I appreciate the reflection that you gave around conservative Christianity often kind of separating the culture: placing all LGBTQ people in this sort of hypersexual secular culture, and not even imagining that they could fit within the values culture of that faith tradition. I haven't heard that expressed quite in that way before, and that is really fascinating. And your biblical interpretations are extraordinary. And I want to get deeper into that. But I want to pause, and I want to go back for a minute, because I want to know what happened when you came out to your family?

MATTHEW: Okay, so first, I had to change my mind about the topic on an impersonal level. My first year at college, I ended up doing a Bible study with other students from my Christian ministry. The Christian ministry itself was not affirming. But I found some other students who were asking similar questions, and so we did a Bible study working through it. And that was really important for me to understand that, “Okay, I don't think this is quite as cut and dry as I had once thought. And I don't think that these biblical texts are as clearly applicable to what we're talking about today as I had once thought.” And that was very important for me because the Bible has always been very important for my life and my beliefs. So after I'd done a little study, I did change my mind on the topic, and actually felt increasingly passionate about it. I felt like, “Wow, the church is really shooting ourselves in the foot when it comes to this, and we need to have a conversation about this. Like, we've got to reconsider this.” And I remember thinking it would be really nice if some gay person who came out was willing to stick around for a little bit and just explain how they interpret these verses, because it's complicated for those of – I think there are a lot of heterosexual Christians who feel that same cognitive dissonance, and who feel conflicted about it, but they don't see how the pieces biblically can be put together, and so they're kind of – they feel stuck in limbo. You know, fast forward to my sophomore year in college, and long story short, but I had to change my mind about it impersonally before I could even ask those questions later of myself. It's like I was separating the processing and it wouldn't have been possible for me to process it personally if I still thought that it was wrong. So, and I actually think I had to become passionate about it for the sake of other people. And then was able to process things personally. So yeah, I ended up acknowledging this to myself around the age of 19. I ended up taking a semester off from college to go home and come out to my parents, because I knew that they were not in the same place as I was, because we've been having some conversations about the topic. And I knew that my dad still thought that being gay maybe was something that wouldn't be permanent. It maybe was something that people could seek to change through prayer, therapy, something like that. Because he had never met an openly gay person until I came out to him. But I ended up then coming out to my parents. They both responded in a very loving way. They were like, “We love you. Thank you for telling us.” But it was still challenging. My dad in particular still definitely did not think that it was okay to be in a same-sex relationship, but he was committed to loving me, which is amazing, and obviously, nobody can go wrong with responding in love to your child, no matter what you believe, right? That's a great starting point, but part of the reason I took a semester off from college is because I had a close relationship with my parents, and I wanted to maintain that. And I knew that my dad and my differing understanding of this topic was potentially going to cause some tensions going forward in our relationship. And we both basically agreed to study the topic together while I was home from college for this semester, each of us hoping that the other would change their mind. And, it was a really wonderful experience. And my dad ended up changing his mind, and he didn't expect that, but once we studied the main biblical passages together, there are six biblical texts, I'm sure we can get into this, that refer to same-sex relations, and once we studied them all together, my dad, one by one said, “You know, this isn't really… There's more going on here than I had realized. And the type of same-sex behavior that's being described or condemned in this passage, doesn't really seem to match up with the types of same-sex marriage relationships that you are talking about, and the type of relationship that you would like to have.” And so… That process also was very helpful for me. It's part of why I have a, I guess, hopeful posture toward conservative Christians. It's not that everybody is in a place where they're willing to hear or change their mind today, but I do think there are a lot of conservative Christians who, if they're approached in the right way, both relationally, right? It needs to be somebody where there's a meaningful relationship, but also theologically, in a way that is showing how an affirming position can uphold the authority of the Bible and not be asking them to, kind of, tear down a lot of their beliefs across the board. Then I think there's a lot of conservative Christians who have the capacity to change their minds on the topic, if they're approached in the right way, and I've seen that in my own life, and so I think that gives me encouragement in, you know, trying to, kind of reach… reach a broader audience.

SARA: So, I’m curious if there was a particular passage in this time with your dad that really was a linchpin or a turning point for him. Because, as is part of your work in the religious context, we so often hear this blanket argument, “The Bible clearly condemns homosexuality!” And people kind of attached to a couple few passages. You've named six, but oftentimes it's… Two, and that's the only foundation they have for that argument. Was there a passage that really… stuck with your dad that was a linchpin for him?

MATTHEW: Yeah, I'd say there were a couple. The first one was… so three of these six passages in the Bible that refer to same-sex behaviors, I can't even really say same-sex relationships, because what's being described isn't very relational. It's more… it's like practices, behaviors, it's, and the worst one is in the book of Genesis, Genesis 19, it's the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. And I remember… So what happens in this passage is, God sends a couple of angels disguised as men into the city of Sodom. And God was already planning on destroying Sodom before this even happened, but this was, like, a final, kind of, check, just to make sure, you know, Abraham, God bargained with Abraham, that if God could find even 10 righteous people in Sodom, then God would spare Sodom. And so, this is the test, or can we even find 10 righteous people in this terrible city? And they don't. What happens is Lot, who's Abraham's nephew, and who's not a native to Sodom, he moved there after he and Abraham got into a dispute about land; they needed a little personal space. And, so then Lot invites the angels into his home, is showing them hospitality, but then it says that all of the men, both young and old, from every part of the city of Sodom, surrounded the house, banged on the doors, and said, bring out the men who came to you tonight so that we can have sex with them.

And Lot refuses, disturbingly offers his virgin daughters to the mob instead. And fortunately, nothing happens, because the men, the angels, blind the men, thwarting their attack plan.

And then tell Lot and his family, flee this city now, because God's about to destroy it. Lot and his family flee, God destroys the city with fire and brimstone. So, this story is famous, because for much of Christian history, although not all of Christian history, it was interpreted as a condemnation of homosexuality specifically.

And I remember when same-sex marriage was being debated in Kansas, and 20 years ago about a constitutional amendment to ban it. And I asked my dad, okay, like, you know, so where are we at on this? Because some of my friends at school are saying that they think this is discrimination against gay people, and I thought about that, and that does sound like maybe, maybe it is discrimination against gay people. And so what he did, what he said is he opened up his Bible to Genesis 19, and he read that passage where it says, “Bring out the men who came to you tonight so we can have sex with them. And God said, look, it's men who want to have sex with other men. And God destroyed the city for it, and so that's a clear sign that God does not look favorably upon same-sex relationships.” And remember, even at the time, first when I was 15, and he told me this, this is before I came out, this was four years before I came out.

I remember thinking, “I don't know, it doesn't seem like a slam dunk argument to me, but I also don't really have a response to it, so… I guess.” But then, four years later, once I came out to him, we went back to that same passage, and he started to read it very differently, because, and this is one of the big dividing lines, I think, for a lot of conservative Christians, is if your question is simply, “What is anything same-sex related in the Bible, and is it positive or negative?” Then you'll find six passages that are same-sex related, and they're all negative, so it feels really straightforward, like, “Aha, that means… same-sex relationships are all bad!” but once I came out to my dad, his question, he realized he needed to ask a more specific question.

Which was, “Well, what does the Bible have to say about the kind of same-sex relationship Matthew would like to have? Like, a loving, committed, monogamous, same-sex relationship.” And suddenly then, he goes back and he reads the story together, with me, of Genesis 19, and he's like, yeah, these men are actually threatening to gang rape the angels. This is not a romantic encounter. This isn't even a, like, casual hookup situation. This is a whole other level, and there's a parallel story in Judges 19 that's one of the most horrific stories in the Bible, so I'll spare you all the details. But it is something that's very similar, but in this situation, it… because the attack is not thwarted, it ends with sexual violence and death. And so the stories are very, very similar, and so, what the men of Sodom are trying to do is they are seeking to humiliate, degrade, shame, and assault these men, and it's just a further illustration of really how wicked the people of these cities are, that when foreigners come to town, this is how they treat them. But it doesn't really have anything to do with same-sex attraction as such, and the Bible refers to Sodom and Gomorrah over 20 times after Genesis 19, and it never connects the sin of Sodom to same-sex relations, even. Even as bad as the threatened gang rape was, God was already going to destroy Sodom before that anyway, that was just kind of the cherry on top of depravity.

And so Ezekiel 16 says, “This was the sin of your sister Sodom. She and her daughters were arrogant, and they did not attend to the poor and the needy, they were, you know, arrogant and overfed, they were haughty.” And so, there are two passages in the New Testament that connect the sin of Sodom to sexual sin in general, but it's just general, talking about sexual immorality in general, not same-sex relations specifically. And one text in the book of Jude, which is this very short book of the Bible right before the book of Revelation in the New Testament, that connects it to, specifically, the attempted rape of angels. Like, to be crossing the boundary between human and angel, but it's not about same-sex, as such. And so, my dad then, upon kind of, I think he was going back to the Bible, and he was just reading it with a more specific question in mind, and realizing, “Okay, this is a horrific story of abuse and violence, and that really doesn't tell me anything about loving same-sex relationships any more than stories of heterosexual violence and abuse tell me about my marriage with my wife.” Right? And so, because he was able to go back and kind of have a more nuanced way of thinking about what is the question he's even asking? That really was a significant shift for him in how he was approaching and understanding, like, what does this text tell us about loving, committed, same-sex marriages today? It really doesn't speak to that at all.

SARA: That is really helpful, and really insightful. And as you're unpacking the story for us in a different way, I'm also thinking about historical context, and thinking about the historical power structure of the time, when those in power felt they had the freedom to assault anyone, right? To exert their power over people in any number of ways, and men on men included. And it was about power and maintaining one's status and privilege. Which really connects to your interpretation of them being, kind of overfed and arrogant and in positions of power and kind of abusing their power. And I think we don't go there these days because we have a completely different understanding of how we want to interpret to men in any kind of sexual relationship, and you know, we don't think in those terms of when those men could also do whatever they wanted to women, and I always get stuck in, why doesn't anybody rail against Lot offering his virgin daughters? That is also real problematic, and we don't do that anymore.

MATTHEW: Yeah. And thank goodness we don't. But the fact that he does do that tells you a lot about how women were perceived back then, right? It tells you a lot about how women were viewed as property of either their fathers or their husbands. And that does get to a fundamental issue. I mean, really across all… I don't have to go into detail, but all six of the verses in the Bible that refer to same-sex relations, but that's a consistent theme across all of them, which is that the types of same-sex practices that existed in the biblical world are very, very different from the types of same-sex marriage relationships that we're talking about today, and the fundamental difference, so the way that I distinguish this is that the relationships that we're talking about in the church, in terms of relationships we're asking the church to bless, are marked by three key features. One is that they are lifelong. They are monogamous, and they are between partners who are social equals. It's not like one person is the social inferior and one is the social superior. The partners are not seen as one where we know this one is the subjugated partner, right? And this one is the partner with the power. And to the extent that relationships like that exist today, people don't like that, right? To the extent that heterosexual or same-sex relationships seem to have a big gap in power differential, where you feel like one partner doesn't have an equal say in the relationship, most of us feel very uncomfortable with that, right? We don't feel good about that. That's not what we're wanting to be blessing or promoting or encouraging in the church. And when it comes to ancient same-sex practices, it's not just in the Bible, it's throughout all of ancient literature. There aren't any examples of same-sex relationships that fit those three criteria, and the primary reason is because of how deeply patriarchal the ancient world was.

In societies that viewed women as fundamentally inferior in value to men, even heterosexual relationships were predicated on a hierarchy of it was men over women. It wasn't men with women in some sense of mutuality and equality, right? It was men over women, and in a very literal sense of legal rights and protections that women simply lacked, right? Like that men simply had the power in those relationships. So a lot of ancient Greece and Rome did accept various forms of same-sex behaviors. But all of the same-sex behaviors that they accept are not behaviors that very many of any LGBTQ advocates today are advocating for, because they're all behaviors that are based on a hierarchy, because same-sex practices, to be accepted by the Greeks and Romans, had to mirror the broader patriarchal hierarchy of society. So that's why one of their most notorious practices was something that's called pederasty, and that was sexual relationships between adult men and adolescent boys. And it was fundamentally based on the differential in power between the two of them. And we just call that a felony. And that's what it should be called. It's a very prominent part of ancient Greece, in particular, when you read some of the literature. And just in terms of their understanding of same-sex relations. Prostitution was another very common same-sex practice, but even then, you had to have a clear status distinction, like, so you would need a free citizen who was the client, and then the prostitute themselves would need to be somebody who was a foreigner or somebody who didn't have the same legal rights and status. So there was this clear difference. Another, particularly terrible practice was people using people they owned as slaves, for sexual purposes.

And so, your average free adult Roman male citizen was allowed, socially, it was seen as acceptable for him to engage in pederastic relationships with adolescent boys, prostitution with foreigners, or to use both his male and female slaves, essentially just for his sexual purposes.

And all of this, you're talking about men who are married to women. Or who will be married to women. And so Christianity comes along. I mean, Judaism too, but Christianity comes along and is like, “Let's not do this. Let's have husbands and wives be faithful to one another exclusively.” And, really, this didn't change anything for wives, because wives were already only supposed to be faithful to their husband. And so it’s not surprising that in the same way that the early Christians rejected all extramarital activity, same-sex relations were just one component of that. And the vast majority of same-sex practices that existed then are not things that we want to be celebrating, because they're wrong at, like, fundamental levels that have nothing to do with the gender of the people involved in them. It's about the fact that they are not based on mutuality, that they are not based on equality, that they are very rarely involving any kind of commitment or love. And so, that's. To me, it's like… I mean, this is why the whole concept of same-sex marriage wasn't something that was even conceivable in the ancient world. Because same-sex marriage is not conceivable until women are treated, broadly speaking, equally. If the common, prevailing view of women is that they are inferior to men, then same-sex marriage threatens that, right? Because same-sex marriage, it suggests that marriage doesn't need to involve one gender dominating the other. 

SARA: So, Matthew, I'm curious to hear, as I'm listening to you, how do you reflect in this moment about the, what looks like more visible, maybe in this increased conservative Christian movement to go back to this kind of patriarchy, to actually, repress the rights of women and kind of male head of household and male power and women shouldn't get voting rights and that kind of thing that we're hearing really articulated, and I kind of want to just also name it in the context of this conservative, white Christian nationalism that is really exploding in this moment. How do you make sense of that, kind of, what looks like reverting back to?

MATTHEW: Yeah, I mean, it's not great. It is concerning. At the same time, I think that so much has changed over the last 100 years, over the last 50 years in roles for women, in understanding of and acceptance of people who are gay, bisexual, transgender, that I think it would be quite challenging to truly reconstruct some, you know, Victorian era… like, patriarchal society, but the question is: Even if you can't take everyone back, can you take a third of society back, right? Can you turn it into a hyperpolarized thing where Republicans no longer believe women should be working, or in elected office, or something like that? I doubt they'll get to… I mean, it doesn't make a lot of sense, given that both the right and the left are quite strong, in the sense of their numbers. There's a lot of them. And so, this is why I often feel like part of the… if the goal of any group is ever to, like, oh, if the right wants the left, basically, to no longer exist.

Then you'll always be frustrated, and the left wants conservatives to no longer exist, they'll always be frustrated. I think the better thing is, how can we... Like, I don't know if you're familiar with Jonathan Haidt's work.

SARA: Mmhmm

MATTHEW: So, this is kind of part of his whole theory, is that, like, it's not trying to say that all views are equally valid. Because rarely is that the case, but it is trying to say that this is a natural part of human diversity, that some people lean more conservative and some people lean more progressive, and that actually there can be value in those things interacting with one another if they're able to find a healthy way to interact. Because there can be value in the progressives pointing out, “Hey, something we're doing right now is harming these people, and, like, people, you know, this minority group is being hurt. And some of our current status quo is harming people.” And there can also be value in conservatives sometimes saying, “Hey, maybe there's a certain institution or tradition, on certain issues today, it's the progressives defending some of these traditions, like free speech, or, like, certain constitutional, right, things that used to be more something conservatives are talking about, right?” But certain traditions, where it's like, oh, maybe we don't on the surface understand the value of these, but we should think carefully before necessarily undoing some of these things. But it's about finding that balance between those two, so if we got to the point where even just, like, the conservative wing of society rolled back its acceptance for women in leadership positions or something. And not just in the church, right? The issue now is much broader than that. That would be not a good thing, right? It wouldn't fundamentally take us back to where it used to be, but it would definitely make life much more unpleasant, for anybody who doesn't fit into, you know, those boxes of what is seen as acceptable then by that contingent of society. I do think that we're kind of at a strange point where even the role of women, a lot of this is a response somewhat to the LGBTQ.

SARA: Oh, I think very much of it is. It is a way like, if we go back to that patriarchy model, then that empowers the oppression of Queer people, because… We're oppressing everybody now.

MATTHEW: Yeah, and so I think it's… I mean, I want to say… I want to, like, I don't want to be too negative, but what I'm thinking through is just I think the power that we currently see, or the energy or interest or momentum in certain quarters tToward more of a patriarchal, “let's roll back a lot of things as much as possible,” I think that while those impulses have always been there to some degree, they feed off of the perception, or the narrative that, for instance, the LGBTQ movement or community wants to completely eradicate all social norms related to sexuality, to gender. And there are differences of opinion, even within the LGBTQ movement and community, about what the right approach is. And there are some people who would have a more “Let's deconstruct absolutely everything" posture, and then there are others who would say, “No, let's just have a posture of saying, gay people, bi people, trans people exist, and let's just be included in society, but we don't necessarily want a default posture of protest against society in general. We want to make certain reforms to society for inclusion, equality, and equal rights, and equal treatment, but for the purpose, then, of being able to move forward with our lives, as people who happen to be gay, bisexual, or transgender.” And so I think sometimes those internal ideological differences or conflicts within the LGBTQ community, there can be an incentive for people who are much more conservative to focus on maybe some of the more radical approaches that maybe only represent 15% of -  I don't know the numbers, but that aren't representative of what most LGBTQ people are seeking. You try to find, look for the most radical or extreme perspective in any group, use this to cover the whole group, and then you say, because of this, the whole group is now a threat. And this is part of the challenge of social media, is that social media, its algorithms are oriented toward outrage, so whoever says the most offensive thing gets the most attention, and therefore increasingly becomes to shape perceptions of whatever their group believes, especially if they happen to be part of a minority group, but even really if they don't. Like, just because your perceptions of anything are shaped by what you see about it. If you are a conservative, if you watch Fox News, right? If you're watching, if you listen to conservatively-leaning podcasts, most of the things that you were seeing related to LGBTQ six years ago were more accepting, more mainstream. Now, most of what those people are seeing is, in many ways, yes, things that are cherry-picked. 

SARA: Without a doubt.

MATTHEW: But things that are more extreme, and things that can be upsetting, or alienating to people. I mean, even in Dallas, where I live we had, like, there was an event a couple years ago that, fortunately, even a lot of the LGBT community was like, “Please don't do this again, this wasn't helpful.” It was an event that was for kids, but it was at a gay bar that had all along the walls, there was just a lot of hypersexual stuff. And you're like, “Hey, if you want to do an event for kids, just make sure the venue is appropriate because that's not we're not trying –  but, so of course, then, conservative activists are able to seat on this to say, “Look.This is how they are trying to push sexual content on your children.” And it's like, “Yeah, we should this i's unfortunate that that is used to try to paint a lot more people, right, than, but that may that is kind of the reality, so I do think there is value in trying to make sure that what the average LGBTQ person is seeking, which is just to live a life of dignity, equality, respect. It's not about trying to antagonize, right? It's not about trying to push the envelope for the sake of shock value. That's not what the vast majority of LGBTQ people want or are trying to do. And so, I think that, to the extent that that message and narrative can be promoted more, I think that will be necessary to help to undercut some of the force and some of the power that is coming from using the most extreme clip here and there in order to say, “Wow, this entire group is really just trying to dismantle society. They don't really just want equality.”

SARA: Which is why I think it helps to hear these interpretations and this really deep theological grounding around these biblical arguments, because it gives us language and tools to have a clearer conversation with those who feel like the opposition. And oftentimes those folks in real life are in our families and in our workplaces and in our communities. It isn't just the monolith of those “Evil Conservative Christian Nationalists" we’re fighting, but we’re running up against this in our own lives. And as I'm listening to you explain all these Bible passages, I'm reminded yet again that the Bible is so full of contradictions. Right? Even in that story of Sodom and Gomorrah, Lot offers his daughters, and even in Leviticus, we say, this is wrong, but we also say we can stone women. So there's all these contradictions in the Bible, and so I want to chat with you a little bit about when you're in this work, and you're doing this theological excavation and conversation with people. How do you approach and talk about inerrancy? When someone says, “I'm just being faithful to God's word, or the Bible is God's word,” right?

How do you understand that and talk about that with folks?

MATTHEW: That's a really good question. And so, I think in a lot of ways, the whole question of inerrancy is kind of separate from the question of the Bible and same-sex relationships, because my argument is not that any of these biblical passages are wrong. My argument is not that the Bible is in error in any of these ways, but simply that we need to interpret these passages carefully and apply them faithfully. And that when we do we can recognize that the types of same-sex practices that the biblical authors condemned are practices that made a lot of sense to condemn, actually, and are very different from the types of loving, committed, same-sex relationships that we're talking about today. And so, that's why, in a lot of ways, I think the whole inerrancy question.Is almost a separate question, but I don't think it's particularly constructive – sometimes in broader theological debates, between, like, theological progressives versus conservatives – I don't think it's particularly constructive in the context of talking to conservative Christians about same-sex relationships in the Bible to approach it from anything related to critiquing inerrancy because what it tends to make people hear, whether it's intended or not, is, “Oh, so you're just saying, you know the Bible's against it, and you think the Bible's wrong.” That's how it's heard by people. And it's a little bit funny, too, because the 1988 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, which is look to today by a lot of conservative evangelicals as, like, the definition of it. What it says is that the original autographs of the biblical manuscripts are without error. And no one has ever seen them. Well, not today, at least. We don't have the original autographs of any of the biblical texts at all, and so there is a slight irony to the fact that, like what's being affirmed as without error is something we don't have. Now I actually think that the Bible, in many ways, has been extremely well-preserved. But the vast, vast majority, even very conservative Christians, don't believe that. They do acknowledge that translations can be wrong. And that all of our translations that are in English are not the original, and that even the Greek and the Hebrew text that we sometimes have competing variants that we have to go, like, to biblical scholars to debate which one they think was closest to the original, and that sometimes we don't know. Now, fortunately, the vast majority of the discrepancies that do exist in the manuscripts of Greek and Hebrew are not pertinent to the core questions and doctrines of the faith. But it is relevant, especially when it comes to the translation, right, of a Greek term that gets translated as saying that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God, right? The Bible that we have is amazing and beautiful and a gift. The main question is the question of translation, in 1 Corinthians 6:9, and that's where these two Greek terms, arsenakoitai and malakoi, in 1946 for the first time, were put together and translated to say that homosexuals, it's this list,  a vice lists, a list of different types of people who it says will not inherit the kingdom of God. But all of these types of people, importantly, are not actually – It’s not like short people, or children, or people with blonde hair. It's all based on behaviors. So, it's all things that could change. 

SARA: Like, laziness, greed.

MATTHEW: Yeah, like, like, swindlers, extortioners, people engaging in bad behaviors. And so it's not condemning any group of people based on their fundamental identity in a way that can't be changed. It's not being like, “Oh, everybody from this country, bye.” Like, no, it's just saying, it's basically listing bad behaviors, but in the form of nouns, of people doing these bad behaviors, right? The drunkards, the swindlers, right, the extortioners, all of that. And so you have these two words that can encompass forms of male same-sex relations that are included in them that were then translated in 1946 to, say, homosexuals. There's two big problems with that translation, though. The first one is that not only the word homosexuals as a noun, I mean, that didn't exist in any language until 1869 in German, and then 1892 in English, but it's not just that the word didn't exist, it's the concept of people who were exclusively attracted to the same sex did not actually exist until the late 19th century, because in the ancient world, there wasn't kind of as much of a need for it, because same-sex behaviors were often accepted, as long as you engaged them in ways that most of us would say are not good, right, these hierarchical, exploitative, approaches. And so, they just had a fundamentally different way of conceiving and thinking about sexuality and sexual identity. Almost all sexual identity labels that they had were based on the gender role that a person took during a sexual relationship or encounter. It was not about the gender of the person they were in a relationship with. That was not what gay people identity. So their identities for men who were masculine or feminine, women who were masculine or feminine, for the Romans and the Greeks, the gender role inversion was the problem. And it's fundamentally about the patriarchal norms of society, right? That men are supposed to be dominating, and women are supposed to be subordinate. And so, that shaped all the norms around sexuality. That's why this concept of homosexuals did not exist in any ancient society, culture, or language. And so, it's not only using a term that didn't exist, it's also importing a concept that did not exist back then. 

SARA: So, as you're talking, what I'm thinking about when we're talking about authority and inerrancy and bringing in this, all of these challenges with translation, particularly as the translations continue into English in multiple forms, is that it's always passing through human hands and human brains. So, even if, sort of setting inerrancy aside, but even if we want to attach to the idea of God's Word and the authority of the Scripture, we also have to recognize that that has been handled by and massaged and worked over by humans. 

MATTHEW: Right. And one thing I appreciate about Kathy Baldock's work, right, that's in the 1946 documentary film. And she has a book coming out later this year. 

SARA: And we hope to get her on the podcast very soon. 

MATTHEW: She's going to be speaking at the Reformation Projects Conference in Atlanta this October, as well. And one thing that I really appreciate about the research that she's done into the translation is that she says that this translation, this choice of translation of homosexuals in 1946. Actually, it wasn't done with ill intent. It was really just done out of ignorance. And that especially, and you can see this in the correspondence that happened later between the head of that translation committee, Right, and David Fearon, who was the man who wrote him about it, is that the head of the translation committee was very open and receptive to this critique. And clearly, nobody had made that critique, because, you know, it hadn't been something where there had been a lot of  careful consideration and discussion. And then once he was getting critiques he's like, “You know what, that's kind of a good point.” So it's not like he was dedicated to trying to, trying to create animosity toward gay people or anything like that. It was more done out of ignorance and a lack of carefulness. But there are some translations then, like the NIV in 2011 changed it, because they acknowledged that homosexuals is an anachronism. And so they changed it to just men who have sex with men. So they say, oh, now we're avoiding the issue of anachronism, because there were men who had sex with men back then, there are today. Well, the problem is that the male same-sex behaviors that were around in the times of Paul are really, really different than what we're talking about. And so at one level, yes, I do think it's true that the Bible does not directly address either sexual orientation or same-sex marriage as such. I think the types of same-sex practices are very different. But it is true, some people say, “Well, just because it's not addressing it doesn't necessarily mean that it's okay. You could imagine any number of things aren't necessarily directly addressed that we still wouldn't support.” And I think that's true. But that's why I want to invite Christians to go back to the fundamentals of the Bible's teachings about marriage and sexuality. Which even though same-sex marriage was not on the radar in the ancient world at all, but the fundamental teachings of Scripture about marriage is that marriage is about covenant keeping in order to reflect God's covenant with humanity through Jesus. And so that marriage is fundamentally, even though procreation is important, the Bible never teaches that procreation is actually essential to what makes a marriage a marriage. That's why even infertile couples like Abraham and Sarah in the Old Testament they're still seen as having a valid, legitimate marriage, even though nobody thinks they're going to be able to procreate. In the New Testament, Jesus, when he's talking about marriage, the only exception he gives to his prohibition of divorce is the case of infidelity. He does not say infertility is an exception. And a lot of men in the ancient Mediterranean world would have been very upset by this, because they would feel like having a male heir in particular is their number one goal. And so, of course they should have an opportunity. And so for Jesus, that indicates that covenantal faithfulness and commitment is foundational to what makes a marriage a marriage in a way that even procreative capacity is not. And so, I think that opens the door for looking at same-sex married couples are able to live out that kind of self-giving, covenantal faithfulness to one another in marriage in order to reflect God's covenantal, faithful love for humanity through Jesus. And so even though, yes, same-sex couples cannot biologically procreate, that is not, according to Scripture, what is at the essence of what makes a marriage a marriage. And that's why, because I think that same-sex marriages can reflect and be in keeping with the covenant-keeping character of God, that's why I think that Christians can and should bless them. 

SARA: Beautiful. And this kind of deep theological exchange and reflection and these scriptural interpretations, this is exactly the kind of work that you are doing that led you to start The Reformation Project, to engage with Christians and churches across the country about how they can have these kinds of conversations and Bible studies in their church to work towards becoming more welcoming, more affirming. Talk a little bit about the work that the Reformation Project does. 

MATTHEW: Yes, the Reformation Project is the organization that I started in 2013 now. Which has been a while, and we do a number of different –  we offer a lot of theological resources, right, related to the biblical case for LGBTQ inclusion. And we also offer various training programs. We have a conference called the Reconcile and Reform Conference that this year is going to be in early October in Atlanta. And even if people can't come in person, you can sign up for a virtual pass to watch it online, live. We have programs for pastors in process, for parents in process. But our kind of motto as an organization is Advancing an Orthodox and Affirming Church, is that we want to help churches become affirming in a way that is deepening their love for Scripture, and deepening their commitment to the Christian faith, because that is, it’'s a personal passion of mine, but it's also something that is one of the chief concerns of a lot of non-affirming Christians, where they may say,”Okay, I kind of see how you can interpret it the way you interpret it.” But they're still concerned. They need to see it lived out, that this is not going to cause churches to then care less about Scripture, that it's not going to cause churches to be less committed to preaching the gospel, less committed to keeping God and Jesus the central focus, right, of the church's message and preaching. Yeah, something that we particularly emphasize in trying to help churches put those two things together. There's a lot of moderate non-affirming churches, and then there's a lot of hardcore non-affirming Christians. The hardcore non-affirming Christians are not our primary audience currently. I hope they can be our audience in the future. I'm happy to engage with anyone, want to treat anybody with kindness and respect. But I also know that if people have no interest or willingness to consider another perspective then it's not going to be that much worth our time to invest a huge amount of time in trying to talk with somebody who doesn't really want to have the conversation. But,in the moderate non-informing churches where our  particular approach of emphasizing both being affirming and orthodox, little ‘o’ orthodox, in that sense of committed to things like the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed, and just a commitment to Scripture in general, is particularly important because a lot of them, even though they're sometimes on the fence, they're like, “I can kind of see it your way, I can kind of see it my way.” But they ultimately look to, and this is another thing, people look to the fruit. They want to see the fruit of things. This has always been one of my biggest issues with non-affirming theology, is that I believe that the fruit of non-affirming theology is very bad. And it causes lots of negative, harmful consequences in people's lives. But the flip side of that is that many moderate non-affirring Christians want to see affirming Christian churches that are maintaining that central passionate focus on Scripture, the Gospel, Jesus, even after becoming affirming. And so that's something that we really emphasize, because we want to help those two things to go hand in hand. And that is also, I think, ultimately going to be helpful for moving past some of our very challenging current culture wars, where things get framed – It's not ever just one issue, right? Any issue becomes part of the broader clash of worldviews. And that's then what adds a lot more potency to disagreement about any one particular issue is, no, it's not just we think this and we think this. It's also this is who we are, this is just connected to who we are and our fundamental values and beliefs about our place in the world, and who you are, and those differences, and that's why, oftentimes it can make it difficult to even have a respectful conversation about single issues where people may disagree, because those issues then get brought up into much more existential feeling disagreements. And so that's part of what we're trying to focus on as well, is to not still be operating within the existential clash of cultures and worldviews frame.

SARA: So, you know, many of our mama dragons. Parents have come out of conservative Christianity, have seen their LGBTQ+ kids hurt by their religious communities and religious messages. And I'm curious what encouragement, advice you have to offer folks who are navigating this space, family members, pastors, churches that hold non-affirming views.

MATTHEW: Oh, well, first of all, I would just thank all of them for loving their children because there's not anything I can think of that has a bigger impact on an LGBTQ person than whether their family is responding in a loving way. And it doesn't mean that they can't still have many other challenges based on rejection from other people. But if you choose to love your child, and if you choose to support your child, you have just elevated the floor for your child in terms of just how hard life is going to get, how lonely it's going to feel sometimes. And it doesn't mean that you're able to push the floor as high as you want it to be, but you, by supporting your child, have raised the floor of, like, how low things can get for them. And that matters so much, so I just want to, first of all, say thank you for loving and supporting your children. It does make a world of difference. And then when it comes to the challenges of engaging with non-affirming family, friends, I don't have a cookie cutter, right? It depends so much on the particular person, the particular relationship. Sometimes there are people who you've tried so hard, right, to have a loving, respectful, open conversation with, and they're just not interested. And so, in those situations there's not a lot you can do other than treat them with the kindness that you want to be treated with. And maybe there are some boundaries that end up needing to be put in place for you and your children in terms of where people are coming from. For family members who aren't affirming but who are willing to have a conversation with you that is respectful, that is kind, 

who genuinely want to love you and your child, but have a different belief about things , that's where I think there can be benefit to finding constructive resources that are engaging some of these questions in a respectful way that is also more tailored to a more conservative audience. I mean, that's part of why I wrote, right, God and the Gay Christian in the first place was so people could sometimes give the book to a family member or friend without having to have this entire super detailed conversation themselves. And then maybe see what can come of that. See if there's any possibility for a conversation based on that. Maybe there is. Maybe there isn't, right? But I have been particularly encouraged when people will say that sharing that with someone did help to spark a new conversation, create a new space for people to reconsider things. But it depends how you approach, it depends so much on just your relationship with each person, and whether any given non-affirming person in your life is trying to be kind and loving, 

SARA: That's really helpful. Thank you for naming that. And I want to make sure we let folks know we'll put links in the show notes, and our Mama Dragons bookshop is the place where you can go and order God and the Gay Christian. And give it to somebody if you're having trouble having that conversation. It is a wonderful and great resource. Matthew, do you think we'll ever get to the queer-affirming Promised Land? Do you think we'll always be so polarized? Or do you see a future where there is greater and greater inclusion and affirmation of LGBTQ+ folks in Christianity?

MATTHEW: Well, ironically and somewhat depressingly, I feel like we were in a better place five years ago than we are now. And while that is depressing, it also means that I don't think that we should accept some of the current challenges as necessarily they will always –I think we're in a moment of backlash that's shaped by a number of different factors, including just smartphones, social media. Including things going back to COVID, and how, you know, lockdowns change some people's media intake. And, there's always a number of different factors that are happening, and who knows? Maybe AI is just gonna make everything a thousand times harder.

And I think when it comes to reaching conservatives that the only way that we can get to a better place with conservatives is by offering an approach to inclusion and acceptance and equality that is aligned with their core values. And so, I don't think that we're ever going to get to a place where most Republicans want to be going to Pride parades. But I also don't think we necessarily need to if we can get to a place where most Republicans want to be kind, loving, and respectful to people who are LGBTQ. And sometimes, just especially the way that some of it's propaganda, some of it's unfortunate algorithms, right? But really, the main thing we have to do is just make sure we get back to the point where we're able to reach them with the stories and the narratives and the experiences in ways that are aligned with their values. And so, I think that means, like, fundamentally, we're just talking about people who happen to be gay, or bisexual, or transgender, and who want to live lives where they are treated with dignity and respect and equal rights. I feel like we had been making progress on that. We were making progress even with conservatives on that. And there's a number of factors that I think have contributed to our stalling and current  rollback. But no, I'm not despairing. It's not ideal. But it's all about reaching people with the right message, and the message that is going to actually resonate with them.

SARA: That's great. That's hopeful. I hear hope in that. I'm really grateful for this extraordinary conversation. This is one of my favorite topics, so thank you so much for your time and your talent. And before you go, we do have some final questions, two final questions that we like to ask all of our guests at the end of every episode. And the first question has to do with the mama dragon's name. Mama Dragons was created out of a sense of fierceness and fierce protection for our LGBTQ+ kids. And so we like to ask our guests, besides the hour-long conversation that we've just had, what is it you are fierce about?

MATTHEW: Oh, wow, that's a really good question. Well, all of these topics for sure, but if I can't pick one of those, fierce is such a strong word. I'm like, I feel like I don't want to claim it too much. I mean, I enjoy theater quite a lot. I'm sure there are other people out there who could best me in their commitment. But, I love Broadway. I love musical theater, always have since I was a kid, so that's always really fun. I always love getting to go to New York and see shows.

and I know I'm not breaking any stereotypes there, but that's okay that's okay.

SARA: Oh, no, that's fantastic, and you, of course, Fierce is not about being good, it is just about passion, passion, and protection of the arts, which are so needed right now. The final question that we like to ask our guests is, what is bringing you joy right now? Recognizing that in these times in particular, we need to cultivate as much joy as possible.

MATTHEW: I mean, really, I'd say my husband. I got married 3 years ago, and my life has just been a lot happier ever since I met him. His name is Zach. He's just an amazing person. And it's just been such a blessing to have him in my life, and to be married. And so  I think it's just a beautiful thing that I hope as many people as possible, or if that's something people want, that I hope they're able to experience. And it also does motivate me to be like, “Hey, we really shouldn't be telling this whole group of people that they and they alone are never allowed to have an experience like that. 

SARA: That's wonderful, and beautiful. And in light of our conversation, I just have to ask, where did you get married, and who performed your ceremony? 

MATTHEW: We got married, at a church here in Dallas, which is where we live. And our ceremony was performed by a retired minister from our church. 

SARA: That's fantastic. Do you want to name the church for our community? We can lift up those affirming churches out there. 

MATTHEW: It’s called Wilshire Baptist Church. 

SARA: I really like to celebrate, make sure we're celebrating those faith communities that are already doing the work and affirming and welcoming. Thanks again, Matthew, for your time and for your great work. And we look forward to what comes next.

MATTHEW: Well, thank you so much for having me, Sarah, I appreciate it.

SARA: Thanks so much for joining us here In the Den. Did you know that Mama Dragons offers an eLearning program called Parachute? This is an interactive learning platform where you can learn more about how to affirm, support, and celebrate the LGBTQ+ people in your life. Learn more at Mamadragons.org/parachute or find the link in the episode show notes under links. 

If you enjoyed this episode, we hope you’ll take a moment to tell your friends and leave us a positive rating and review wherever it is you listen. Good reviews make us more visible and help us reach more folks who could benefit from being part of this community. And if you’d like to help Mama Dragons in our mission to support, educate, and empower the parents of LGBTQ+ children, please donate at Mama Dragons.org or click the donate link in the show notes. For more information on Mama Dragons and the podcast, you can follow us on Instagram or Facebook or visit our website mamadragons.org.