Reverend Tom Brock’s “Courage” Falters When Faced With Exposure
“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
—Queen Gertrude in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet
It’s a common human foible to say one thing, and then do the exact opposite. For example, a mother who smokes forbids her child to do so, or a father who watches violent television programs won’t let his child do so. In these cases, a double standard is perfectly defensible.
However, in a free society of consenting adult citizens, “live and let live” should remain the common baseline. I may not like what you do or believe, but as long as you’re not hurting anyone, destroying common property, or infringing on the rights or life of others, including myself, then it’s no problem. As the New Testament holds: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
Unfortunately, petty demagogues of various religious faiths will claim that it’s their way to heaven, or the highway to hell—black and white, with no gray. If you disagree, you’re deemed to be a moral relativist who at the very least will be trivialized. At worst, like Joan of Arc in the Middle Ages, you’ll be burned at the stake by the Catholic Church as a crossdressing heretic. Or, in 21st-Century Iran, you’ll be hanged for being a gay teen under Islamic law.
Of course, these are extreme examples, but they caution that zealotry, too long unchecked, can be disastrous. They’re reminders that two of the world’s largest religions have barbaric cruelty in their legacies.
That said, the major religions and countless minor ones have adherents who contribute assiduously in myriad ways toward bettering the human condition. But the faithful of any sect or movement always should be on guard against demagoguery.
The Ethics of Outing
As cantankerous and varied as GLBT activism is, virtually everyone holds privacy sacred. The exception is if someone in a public position of political, social, or theological influence engages in homosexual or transgender activity while at the same time denouncing the basic civil rights of GLBT citizens. Former Senator Larry Craig’s restroom cruising and Dr. George Rekers’s Rentboy.com allegations come to mind.
The GLBT community and its allies have a wide variety of principled viewpoints, often conflicting, on just how out a GLBT person should or should not be, as well as what constitutes healthy sexuality or sexual excess. Both sides of these big philosophical questions are discussed and argued conscientiously every day.
However, it’s a universal consensus among GLBT individuals and straight allies that to bash GLBT persons physically and/or sociopolitically—but then turn around, and be homosexually active oneself—is hypocrisy.
Reverend Tom Brock Versus ELCA
Reverend Tom Brock is the Associate Pastor at Hope Lutheran Church in North Minneapolis. He is known for his denunciations of homosexuality and GLBT rights on his daily KKMS AM 980 radio program, The Pastor’s Study. His video series lambastes with outrage the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) for progressive attitudes toward women’s reproductive rights, racial equality, ecological stewardship—and, worst of all in his view, openly gay or lesbian pastors having the right to minister if they are in a committed monogamous relationship with a member of the same sex.
The latter breakthrough, which ELCA enacted last year, led to the Hope congregation’s breaking with ELCA, and affiliating with the Association of Free Lutheran Congregations (AFLC).
Last August, on the day ELCA began debate over whether gay and lesbian clergy in committed relationships would be ordained as pastors, a tornado that had not been forecast ripped off part of the roof at the Minneapolis Convention Center, where the national ELCA conference was being held, as well as the cross on the roof of Central Lutheran Church, the conference host, across the street. As put forth in his video series, Brock saw this as a sign from God that Lutherans must break away from ELCA.
Brock, who finds omens in any number of things, noted that what he calls the ELCA “sex statement” passed by 66.6 percent—a reference to 666, the “Number of the Beast” (the Antichrist) in the Bible’s Book of Revelation. The actual vote was 559 to 451.
Amid Brock’s panic over gays in the video series is a lower-intensity level of distress about Lutheran Church financial duress supposedly caused by liberal attitudes. He seems to doubt that God will provide.
Internalizing Homophobic Shame, Twelve-Step Style
In stunning contrast to all this homophobic vitriol, I observed firsthand that the words spoken by the 49-year-old, unmarried Brock from his ivory bully pulpits do not match his actions.
My first encounter with Brock was at a confidential meeting of gay men “struggling with chastity” at St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church in St. Anthony, a suburb northeast of Minneapolis. It’s not a Lutheran church, but rather a Catholic one. This group is sponsored by Faith in Action (FIA), Minnesota’s official arm of the global Catholic gay-chastity-maintenance organization called Courage. It models itself after the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous.
FIA holds a two-hour support group at St. Charles every Friday evening from 7 to 9 PM, facilitated by a Catholic priest. It sometimes starts a few minutes late, giving participants a chance to settle in, and grab a cup of coffee or a soda. The men gather around a long table. The priest begins with a scripturally inspired reading—which in one session was referred to as a homily—followed by recitations spoken by participants, and prayer.
Once this opening ritual concludes, the next phase commences, as each person directly shares how well or not he fared during the previous week, or since the last meeting he attended, in his struggle to maintain homosexual chastity. He reports any homosexual fantasies or feelings; any resistance or nonresistance to masturbation; any homosexual contact or activity experienced; and/or any encounter with homoerotic or arousal-inducing images of men. He also may digress to other topics triggered by his “sharing”—which is within permissible parameters.
A group for women meets separately. On one occasion, a middle-aged lesbian fondly regarded by members sat in with us.
After the first round, conversation continues, ranging from discussions about a particular homosexual rut one of the members was in, to financial worries, criticism of progay political efforts, and defenses of Catholicism. The term “gay” is eschewed in favor of words like “disorder” or “gender disorder.” However, very occasionally, unsquelched comments cropped up about homophobic bigotry, plus even grudging admiration for the tenacity of out gay men facing societal ridicule.
When Brock was in attendance, the conversation inevitably would turn political, focusing on gay and church issues, and beyond—not only during his first round, but also in his sharing time, and before the session commenced.
My First Meeting
I encountered Brock at my very first FIA meeting on April 16.
Having arrived 10 minutes early, I was greeted amicably outside St. Charles Church by its Pastor, Father Paul A. La Fontaine. He escorted me inside, down some stairs, through a kitchen, and into a meeting room.
At 7 PM, Brock entered with two younger men, who immediately swooped toward where I was seated. They grilled me to ferret out if I was Catholic, or at least Christian, and how I found out about the meeting. I was taken aback, as Father Jim Livingston, in my initial interview at North Memorial Hospital through which I was granted access to participate, gave the impression that the group was comparatively low-key and easygoing. I told the two that I was Baptist, not Catholic, but that I had great respect for Catholicism, having defended the Catholic Church to friends and family. I added that I had Googled to find the location.
One of the two younger men laughed, teasing that “now, Tom isn’t the only non-Catholic in the group.”
At one end of the table, Brock sat adjacent to me. At the opposite end was La Fontaine. After opening remarks, reading, recitation, and prayer, he asked how we had been faring—over the past week, since we last attended, or in my case since my interview—with what participants were calling a “gender disorder.”
Brock recounted that it had been “a good week.” He had been on a trip to the East Coast, and had kept his mind off men.
Following the first round were moments when attendees brought up feeling excluded and stigmatized as boys for being inept at sports.
Brock observed that he sometimes “feels effeminate” because he has no interest in the sports page, and that he feels deficient because he finds society’s mass interest in sports to be a bore.
On the other hand, most of the men, including Brock, expressed a deep love for opera and classical music. He related that he was especially fond of a Ralph Vaughan Williams composition.
When the topic of same-sex marriage came up, Brock stated, “The world needs [heterosexual] marriage.”
Another person chimed in, calling same-sex marriage “a cult of mutual masturbation”—oblivious to the unintentional humor.
At one point, Brock became very intense in talking about some recent statistics that the percentage of HIV/AIDS cases caused by homosexual contact had increased. He was accurate, which is why safer-sex information should be widely available—something the group certainly would oppose.
Brock Wrestles With “Weird” Demons
At the May 28 meeting, as usual, the priest facilitator—this time, Livingston—opened with a reading and prayer. The individual participants then shared how well or not their efforts to maintain chastity had been over the past week, or since their last attendance.
Brock looked buffer than previously, in a tight-fitting, short-sleeve shirt that accentuated biceps and triceps more ripped than the month before.
When it was Brock’s turn to share, he related that he recently had been on “a preaching mission to Slovakia,” where he met with other clergy.
Then, Brock admitted, “I fell into temptation. I was weak. That place has this really, really weird, demonic energy. I just got weak, and I had been so good for a long time. Things had been going so well for a long time. There’s a lot of gypsies there.”
According to Brock, he confessed the foregoing to someone at Hope Lutheran Church.
Brock clearly was put off by the gypsy presence in Slovakia, continuing with a sense of revulsion in his voice, “They’re toothless, filthy; they smell, stink; and the gypsies are trained in how to pick your pocket.”
In his video series, Brock slams ELCA Bishop Mark Hanson for his call to “combat racism” at a New Orleans youth conference.
However, Brock did clarify that as a pastor, he got to meet a group of Christian gypsies who “were so in love with God.”
Brock’s admission of his Slovakian sexual breakdown seemed to have had a subtly stunning effect on the group. Livingston made no comment.
Brock went on to tell about a side trip on to Salzburg and Vienna, Austria, then to Bavaria, Germany, where he visited Adolf Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest retreat at Berchtesgaden. He joked about a “fat woman tour guide,” and how the food was good, but heavy with meat and potatoes.
In what seemed like an effort to break the ice over the shock of Brock’s sexual stumbling in Slovakia, one fellow made a coy comment about German composer Richard Wagner, a favorite among the Nazis. He started intoning the notes of Flight of the Valkyries. A smiling Brock joined in wafting his hand as if he were a conductor with a baton.
Lutheran Pastor Picks Catholic Priest’s Brain
Before the May 28 meeting started, Brock wondered if Livingston ever got hostile feedback from seriously ill patients at North Memorial. Always on an even keel, Livingston responded that when it does occur, some patients will claim they are all right with God, and don’t really need a priest.
Shaking his head with condescending affirmation, Brock declared, “Yeah, they think they can do it all on their own, and don’t need anyone to help them.”
Later on, Brock told of a Catholic priest in St. Michael, Minnesota, who recently officiated the funeral of a man who had lived with a longtime same-sex partner. Brock questioned the rightness of this situation, pointing out if he were in the priest’s shoes, he would have been reluctant to conduct the funeral.
Livingston countered that it could be done as “an act of charity.”
Brock on Women
Later in the session, Brock remarked that even though he is “against the ordination of women pastors,” he presented a workshop to female Lutheran pastors in Slovakia. But, in his words, “I didn’t tell these women that I actually don’t believe in women being pastors.” However, he learned that many women pastors there were “assistant pastors to their husband, who was the head pastor,” and that ultimately, “nature takes over, when they have children, and they then assume their role as mother and leave ministry behind.”
That very day, on The Pastor’s Study, in describing the plight of an abused wife, Brock asserted that one “is to suffer for Christ. Her husband was a stinker, but she stuck it out for the sake of Christ.” In the same episode, he also railed against ELCA’s GLBT tolerance.
Homophobia or Heterosexism?
When I asked Dr. Steve Burns, a Licensed Psychologist, about the internalized homophobia of closeted gay and bisexual men, he explained that it was not homophobia, but rather “heterosexism—that the only truly normal way to believe is heterosexual. So, it follows, then, that if you were anything other than heterosexual—gay, for instance—growing up in the culture, then every image you get is that there’s something wrong with you, and you need to hide it.”
Burns stressed that help is available at every level of being closeted, and that capable therapists will not push anyone toward some agenda.
One thing I noticed is that all FIA participants held a sweepingly generalized caricature view of how they thought gay men interacted and lived in general. The myth of the so-called “gay agenda,” along with a basic ignorance of myriad differences between gay men, was intrinsic.
Lutheran Rupture/Lutheran Healing
In his video series, seething with disgust, Brock stirs his viewers to leave ELCA because of its inclusion of gay and lesbian pastors in committed relationships. He exhorts his flock: “Game over!”
The fourth stated AFLC principle is: “It is therefore the sacred obligation of the congregation to purify itself by the quickening preaching of the Word of God, by earnest admonition and exhortation, and by expelling the openly sinful and perverse.”
This grim, abject theology is echoed in two films, Fanny and Alexander and The White Ribbon. In both, the internalized horror of Lutheran pastors over eternal damnation is projected unmercifully onto those they deem foul. And in doing so, they actually contradict themselves—because if God is perfect, He does not make mistakes.
French novelist Romain Gary once remarked about the Iowa Lutheran upbringing of his tormented ex-wife, actress Jean Seberg, that it indoctrinated her with “its inbred poison of original sin.”
ELCA wisely and urgently has intuited this contradiction between spiritual colonialism and spiritual wholeness. The GLBT controversies are only symptomatic of a larger obstinacy that seems more fitting not in a free society, but in a fear-based culture where adherents congregate in secret to ward off Satanic spirits. ELCA’s loving moral courage and serious efforts toward restoring compassion, as well as a concept maligned a lot lately by reactionary rhetoric—“justice”—serve to rescue Christianity from the pre-Enlightenment crowd. It’s cause for optimism.
The Twelve Steps of Courage
(taken from the Courage Handbook)
We admitted that we were powerless over homosexuality and our lives had become unmanageable.*
We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
We made a decision to turn our will and our lives to the care of God as we understood Him.
We made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
We admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
We were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of our character.
We humbly asked God to remove our shortcomings.
We made a list of all persons we had harmed and became willing to make direct amends to them all.
We made the direct amends to such people whenever possible except when to do so would injure them or others.
We continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.
We sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for the knowledge of God’s Will for us and the power to carry it out.
Having had a spiritual awakening as a result of these Steps, we tried to carry this message to others and to practice these principles in all our affairs.
What I really want to know is: did Fr. Livingston know you were a reporter from the start? And, did he know which publication you were from?
On the ethics of outing people who seek to oppress us, I’ll steal a line from Ayn Rand: “I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had the right to choose: his own.”
As a reader and advertiser, I have to say I’m appalled. 12 step programs, regardless of what is at issue or who attends, are sacred. This isn’t journalism, this is tabloid trash. Your attempts to justify your actions fall short. He didn’t try to cruise and get caught, he went to a meeting where the first rule of attendence is “who you see and what you hear, stays here”.
Look, the guy’s an a** with an agenda, I get it. Yet there are some lines you just don’t cross without losing respectibility. Fight “the good fight” with integrety not with deceit. Sneaking around and taking names? Really? Did you also follow the other attendees home and check to see if they’ve ever said anything you can print too?
I’ll be contacting the advertising dept. first thing in the morning. I don’t want my business associated with this type of “journalism”.
I recently read an article that discussed the ethics behind the reporting on this article.
As a survivor of christian-based, ex-gay deprogramming over a period of about 12 yrs, I would like to speak up and tell you that I don’t find any part of the reporting or the tactic unethical at all. (I don’t use the term “survivor” lightly either. Going back into the closet walls enclosed by self-loathing, disdain for one’s true self, was harmful and destructive, and sent me into a spiral of deep depression that nearly caused my death.)
Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous and groups like them are based on sound principles rooted in widely accepted psychology…and endorsed by most (if not all) psych. professionals as being helpful to the recovering addict. In contrast, the “ex-gay” movement is eschewed by most members of the mental health/helping professionals as being harmful to the participants. Ex-gay programs are rooted in condemnation and guilt and promote a very unhealthy detachment from one’s self that can lead to any number of bona fide psychological disorders (note: homosexuality is NOT a bona fide psychological disorder).
It is up to us to expose fraudulent, and downright nefarious ex-gay organizations and “ministries” (and frankly, all of christianity) for the sham that they are. What your reporter did was a public service, and I laud him for having had the courage to do so.
Roland
St George, UT
Thank you for this excellent article, exposing the hypocrisy of this man. He is truly sick, and I feel some sympathy for his self-loathing, but he has done an enormous amount of damage to others and needs to be called on it.
It’s the same old story, some “queen” gets a taste of power, and wants to run everyone’s life!
This is a weak story. The only newsworthy piece is that he is a gay man who is ashamed of his sexuality.
Ends and means, Mr. Townsend, ends and means. Infiltrating a supposedly anonymous group meeting is pretty low. Yeah, Brock’s a hypocrite of the first order…but I’m not sure what that makes you.
I have little hope that John Townsend will ever see any harm in what he has done, so my comment is probably wasted. But as someone who is both gay and in recovery, I find his actions reprehensible. Is Brock a hypocrite? Certainly. But Townsend’s hypocrisy shines in every smug word of this article. Basically, his message is that if he disagrees with you, then you don’t deserve to struggle with your personal demons in your own way, even in an environment which is supposed to be confidential. Thus, basic human decency is only accorded to those who adhere to a certain standard of behavior. Isn’t that what we’re trying to avoid in the first place?
Townsend seems to see himself as a hero, but to me he’s a liar and a gossip, and nothing more.
To the author of this article, John T.:
God created you into existince. God is the reason why you’re here. He wants you to know Him. He wants you to be his child, to live for Him and to bring him Glory. He wants you to follow his Word, the Bible.
Jesus Christ died on the cross for you. He did it so the wrath of God would not be poured out on you when you die. Jesus lives! He rose again and has victory over death. He is your Redeemer. It’s your choice, to follow Jesus and be saved (the narrow gate) or go your own way, live for yourself and be destroyed (the broad gate). Most people will not be saved, I didn’t make up the rules, God did. He deserves to. He is the reason why we’re here!
Pastor Tom Brock I believe is saved. He does not fear you. He fears God. What personel struggles he is faced with is not anyone’s business. That’s between him and God. I support Pastor Tom. He is a Bible beleiving Christain and one of my personal heroes. He vocalizes the Bible, so your argument is NOT with Pastor Tom Brock, it’s with God’s word.
I find Brock’s hypocrisy and lack of compassion to be in excusable.
However, I am deeply disturbed by John Townsend’s breach of commonly accepted journalistic ethics to get this story. Attending a gathering at which participants are granted, by the very ground rules of the meeting, confidentiality not identifying himself as a reporter, and then disclosing what was said by Brock in a published story is irresponsible.
Lavender Magazine is equally culpable for publishing this story that contains ill-gotten gains
I am not categorically against “outing,” but in this case, the ends do not justify the means.
This article is just sad – I feel gross just reading it because what was done was so unethical. I stopped once it got to his personal life.
Yeah, Pastor Brock is publicly rough on the gay movement, but don’t rummage threw his personal confidential life to crush the man. I am sorry, but this article backfired & makes you guys look like lowlifes…
This is troubling. Clearly, Brock should be exposed as the tremendous hypocrite and liar that he is. But to penetrate a 12-step group–even one that is potentially injurious to its participants–makes me very uncomfortable.
I know from first-hand experience 25 years ago how damaging these groups can be–after a year I was suicidal. However, for many LGBT people from conservative religious backgrounds it can be the first step to liberation. It was the first time I ever talked openly with other gay men and resulted in my first trip to a gay bar. And I must allow, however reluctantly, that if individuals choose a belief system that requires their chastity, that’s their choice. I may view that as being enslaved to their religious indoctrination and family/societal pressure, but that’s my belief, not theirs.
I’m concerned that violating the confidentiality of a group such as this goes a step beyond just outing a self-loathing homophobe. It implies a hostility and disrespect by LGBT people towards not just the groups, but also the individuals who attend them.
I’m especially troubled by identifying the specific name, location, and schedule of this group. I can only imagine the terror I would have felt if the “bible study” I attended regularly had been so publicly identified. I’m certain that I would have been ill-prepared for the emotional upheaval of such a publication, even if there was little chance of friends or family discovering the truth.
I agree with outing this hateful, evil man. But I’m extremely uncomfortable with how far this article went in doing it.
Nice piece of work, thanks John.
After reading the comments, I’ve distilled my thinking. As I posted on the NLGJA blog:
I see three levels of difficulty here:
1. Outing Brock. This I have no trouble with.
2. Attending a self-help group undercover. Regardless of my personal distaste for “ex-gay” or “chaste gay” groups, I find this troubling. I certainly think Townsend and his editors have failed to explain the extraordinary journalistic justification for doing this.
3. Specifically identifying the location, and time. I cannot see any justification for this. When I attended a religious”ex-gay” group (which I referred to as my “bible study”) I would have been horrified if it had been publicly identified. I would not have been emotionally equiped to handle even the potential exposure. This I unequivocally oppose.
There is sufficient cause to question several aspects of this story and I think the editors and publisher of Lavendar need to respond.
Wonderful that we have the pastor’s image isn’t it, but the coward that broke the trust of that group has not the courage to show his face.
There is no such thing as a “12 step program to cure one’s homesexuality”. No scientific group of professionals would sanction such a thing. To even label a group as such is an insult. God, if you believe in him/her made us either gay, straight, bi. or transgender. It is natural. It is akin to creating a 12 step program for those left handed.
So to all of you who are crying foul because the author broke the confidentiality of a 12 step program, get real. This so called 12 step program is a sham. It is bogus. It is designed to create and maintain self hatred. It is sanctioned by no one except homophobic faiths.
a 12-step program for homosexuals? homosexuality is NOT a disorder NOR an addiction. I can’t find fault in John’s disregarding the privacy issue, the whole premise of a 12-step program for homosexuality is bogus. You may argue that it isn’t for us to decide or judge, but I understand his reasoning. And if his outing this asshole saves other’s from this liar’s bullshit, then hallelujah and amen!
Brock is not a private person. He is a public person. He uses his public position to deny the civil rights of gay people and to create oppression for gay people. By virtue of his public position, he has forfeited his right to privacy. I commend the journalist for refusing to be cowed by the claims of this cultish group that uses the “12-step” principles to stigmatize gay people, as though homosexuality is an addiction. Brock needed to be exposed. Since he has helped create the oppressive conditions under which gay people must live in this country, he can hardly complain when he finds that his employment prospects suddenly evaporate. After all, he has used his pulpit to justify discrimination against gay people. He should get some pleasure when his church fires him. That’s what he said they should do to sexually active gay people, isn’t it?
Point of clarification: Hope Lutheran left the ELCA in 2001–not immediately following last August’s vote. They (Tom Brock) have long had problems with the ELCA. Hope Lutheran is Lutheran in name, but Southern Baptist in action.
Gay people who are in a position of authority, yet demean gays, should be outed by any means possible. This is a war for gay rights.
You may disagree with Pastor Brock, but another aspect of the story is the members of the support group. Their privacy was totally spit on by Lavender. There needs to be an apology.
Well done! My heart goes out for Mr. Brock, who is clearly afflicted by mental and spiritual illness. But for the damage he afflicts on others, this is a needed step to silent, or at least, curb Mr. Brock’s voice. I hope and pray that Mr. Brock take this as a moment to move closer to Christ in coming to terms with how God made him. I hope this will assist non-heterosexuals in healing and empowerment.
God bless you, Mr. Townsend! Keep up the great work!
The writer, Townsend, demonstrated that his personal integrity is dubious when he “exposed” the inner workings of a 12-step group. So why should I believe anything he writes? And if Lavender had any journalistic integrity, they wouldn’t have run the piece. If the allegations are true, there are honest albeit more difficult ways to expose this guy. Exposing him responsibly would be a public service. But there are no heros here, just dishonest, self-serving bad guys. This is an Epic Fail all the way around.
This is vile. It is inexcusable and reprehensible.
When you justify your own unethical, immoral and irresponsible actions because of the hypocrisy of your target, you become worse than they are.
You do damage to your cause with these kinds of tactics.
I’ve been to support groups in the past. The reason they WORK, if they do, is because the group shares some common purpose and they TRUST each other. Human beings can help each other through enormous life challenges. This is the kind of inhumane situation that wrecks such potential for whatever insight or growth or healing people need. It wrecks trust.
Deciding to attend a support group of any kind takes a great amount of humility and courage…faith in the group and trust.
I don’t even care about this report because the method of reporting (and in an ironic way, going on and on about “ethics”) is so highly disturbing.
No wonder the writer felt grilled. The group wanted to know they could trust him. And he was not trustworthy, but rather selfishly looking for a story. What has this done to the trust level for those in that group? As the story appears across the state and people in support groups of all kinds read, what does it do for their level of trust or willingness to hope for some human goodness within a support group? Even with our human imperfections, which actually make things easier on members, the one thing that does not fit in such a group is an undercover writer, posing as a potential member.
And what does it do for the Lavendar Magazine? Who allows this kind of reporting? What kind of ethical standards do you have for yourselves, as you go about judging others?
Unethical on the part of Mr. Townsend? Unconscionable is a better word. Unethical for Lavender to publish? Absolutely. But the irony that strikes me is that I read this almost immediately after reading that the Pride movement is seeking a court order to ban an anti-gay protester from their gay pride festivities in a Minneapolis Park this week. Is this seeking free speech to apply to Lavender, but not to anti-gays? Now there is real hypocrisy.
I think Brock is a joker. Even he, however, has privacy. More importantly, I have fought long and hard for at-risk students to attend groups. The biggest obstacle….trust and faith in being able to say anything.
I wrote a blog on the Independence Party website (http://www.independenceminnesota.org). Tomorrow I am going to call NAMI (mental illness association) and AA to see what their opinions are on this journalism. I will write an article on their reaction.
Can’t the good old reverend’s words be fought with…words?
As someone who has attended a 12-step group and other support groups this article makes me shudder. What Lavendar and John Townsend did is so horrible it’s hard to describe. First he lied to Livingston to get into the program, then lied to everyone in the program, then completely disregarded the confidentiality rule that is a prerequisite for every support/therapy meeting. If this happened to any support group I was in I would never be able to go back and I would have a hard time ever trusting a support group again. And that’s a shame, cause they do a lot of good.
Just because you don’t like this support group doesn’t mean it’s ok to violate people’s trust. It’s horrible, unbelievably horrible. awful, repugnant, no journalistic integrity whatsoever. The reporter should be fired along with whoever gave the OK on this deceitful little adventure.
This was nothing more than a personal vendetta against someone who disagrees with your beliefs. Basically, if you don’t like someone then they aren’t deserving of basic rights afforded to other people. That seems like casebook intolerance. Brock wasn’t being a hypocrite. He was trying to control something in him that he felt was not acceptable privately. That is nowhere near catching someone who preaches against homosexuality in the act like Larry Craig.
You are awful people for violating the confidentiality of a support group. Hope you never have to use one yourself. someone might be spying on you.
Good piece of writing. When a person uses the pulpit to bring on hate to the gay community he deserves his fall from his high tower face first. As for the supposed infiltration of this “gay group” its laughable at best. Here you have a bunch of gays screwing around and having sex with men and then feeling they are getting forgiven by God for their “indiscretions” if they admit to it in group. What a farce. And to think that they believe they are the direct intermediaries to God to save us sinners is just plain wrong.I don’t need any of those fools asking for my forgiveness I ask that of God myself thank you very much. I am tired of old closeted gays verbally attacking those of us out of the closet because they think we are “morally corrupt” When they can cruise the parks and gay spots with the best of us. But Oh I forgot they ask God for forgiveness and that makes it ok. So that on Sunday they can preach to the flock about how bad we out gays are. And create more hate. But then on Monday its back to the cruising spots.
John Townsend’s article is not to be trusted. It is filled with half-truths and a few out and out lies.
Extremely unethical journalism and a poorly-written article to boot. You’ve done the gay community a disservice.
I think it is reprehensible what you did here. I don’t care how you characterize the group I have to believe there was an expectancy of confidentiality. You have no reason to be proud of yourself or what you have done.
Having known Tom Brock since 1982, this doesn’t surprise me. I applaud your article. Those who attend confidential support groups, should be aware of their words & actions when they are outside the group, as well as in….if Tom Brock hadn’t spewed outrageous and deadly remarks at every opportunity, he wouldn’t have had anyone expose his homophobic self hatred in the media. What’s really pathetic is that Tom is undoubtedly relishing all the pree he’s getting. While he loves the limelight, it doesn’t suit his complexion.
I can’t for the life of me remember which verse it was where Jesus said, “They’re toothless, filthy; they smell, stink; and the gypsies are trained in how to pick your pocket.”
Was it Luke?
This is a low point for Lavender and Mr. Townsend. I was going to use the word reporter for Mr. Townsend but what he did was not report but create a gossip piece that is disgusting. Okay the man is a hypocrite, but let’s remove him from the story and look at the aspect of how difficult it is to seek support without the stigma of seeking therapy. Whether the group can be justified as a true 12 step is beyond the point, but you have made anyone on the verge of attending a support group for any matter, suspect and may give pause to seeking help. Struggling with your sexual identity is the hardest as it is often the most stigmatized along with seeking help with your HIV status. It takes trust to go to those groups and you have shown that not only can there be mistrust but you can be exposed. I’m sorry for the people who were on the verge of seeking help for whatever ailment and don’t let this trash story deter them from seeking help.
“Brock’s admission of his Slovakian sexual breakdown seemed to have had a subtly stunning effect on the group.”
A woody for each and everyone?
“Yeah, they think they can do it all on their own, and don’t need anyone to help them.”
Unlike Jesus……………..oh, wait.
What if Brock gave multiple public speeches about African Americans not deserving equal rights, but then in private, he attended a 12-step program for people who secretly admire African Americans.
Would we be sickened if Townsend had outed him then?
I’m just sayin’.
Mr. Townsend did not out the other participants at the meeting. He outed the one who causes severe emotional harm to people who are struggling with their sexuality. He chooses to spout his hate on the radio and on television. And he gets in the pulpit every Sunday morning to not preach the Gospel, but rather to admonish those who he feels don’t meet his ideal of what God wants in the bible. I can’t imagine how many people have been severely hurt by his rhetoric. Frankly, I could care less how this information was obtained.
I am sorry, but this article is a joke. It doesn’t matter if any one you of believe this is a real program or not, or if you disagree with it or not. The people attending this program expected privacy and that is what they should have had. John Stewart is a joke of a journalist who lied and cheated to get a story. Since he lied and cheated to get the story, who knows what else he lied about in the story. I agree that Brock is a hypocrite and that deprogramming is a myth, but that is for these gentleman to decide and not for Lavender to decide for these gentleman.
Mr. Townsend writes about his visit to Courage as if he had been to a zoo featuring exotic animals.
Puh-leez.
Of course hypocrites like Brock should be outed.
As for the sniveling cowards who attend this group: grow a backbone. Are you really so weak that you need to justify your lives vis a vis a book of superstitions and fairy tales?
Nice work Mr. Townsend.
Poorly written unethical journalism -”Brock looked buffer than previously, in a tight-fitting, short-sleeve shirt that accentuated biceps and triceps more ripped than the month before”. What does this have to do with anything? Sounds like writing from a cheesey romance novel. Typical gayboy can’t keep his mind out of the gutter for 2 seconds. You should have warned him against going to the Catholic Pedophile Rape Church for help. Hypocritical religious literalists will all eventually self desctruct without any help from you or any others.
So Townsend and Lavender got this info on Brock on the slimiest, most disgusting way possible, but yet they pretty defend it by saying, “just trust us, we only out ‘public’ figures and this wasn’t a legit support group anyway – piss on everyone there” –
Ok, “golly thanks” Townsend and Lavender for playing dictator and deciding which support groups are legit & who’s confidentiality is worthy of keeping.
All people in any support groups really find you “trustworthy” now…Sickening
Brock is a scumbag. If he had chosen to live his life as a self-hating scumbag boring his few friends with stories of how scary and horrible homosexuality is – he’d be off limits. But he chose to pursue a public career where his words, actions and advice pose a clear public danger. Both individuals and society are being hurt by this man. Lavender and Townsend are to be commended – you made the right choice and I thank you.
This was NOT A SUPPORT GROUP; This is a HATE GROUP. The people running this group are religious nuts whose only agenda is to loosen the purse strings of the poor ego-less saps that are being duped while they are at their lowest ebb in their search for identity. Anyone who believes that the “ex-gay” ministry does anything more than teach self-loathing gays to repress their natural sexuality is fooling themselves and harming the individual and the resulting forced families. Eventually all these people will realize the bill of goods they have been sold and be extremely angry or they will commit suicide doing it.
I am disappointed. I’ve been going to Courage for two years now, it’s helped me tremendously. No one is deprogramming or forcing men to go. It’s a voluntary thing. I realize I will always prefer musicals to football, I want to be happier. Here are men who get me and I can have a special intimacy with them I can’t get in a genital way. I don’t blame the Pastor for standing up against sins of the flesh; it might seem like he’s more of a hypocrite for committing a sexual sin, but the flesh is weak, no matter how strong the spirit. The loss of anonymity and confidentiality really galls me. If this had been Alcoholics/Narcotics/Sex Anonymous there would be a great outcry. God will allow this to bear fruit.
Oh, and BTW, unlike the twelve-step groups, Courage doesn’t pass around a hat, so I don’t know why “MYKELB” thinks it is trying to loosen anyone’s purse strings!
Brock is not a hypocrite if he says homosexuality is wrong and if he is “fighting” it.
Pastor Tom Brock is a person of incredible character and humility. What he teaches is based on the Word of God. We don’t know why he chose not to make his struggle public, but that should be his choice. Not the choice of a slimy, low-life reporter. Though I don’t know Townsend, based on his article, he is a terrible journalist, and seeks only to destroy character. In Scripture (Romans 3:23), it says that we all fall short of what God has intended us to be. Because of our condition, we all have to struggle with behavior that is not what it should be, whether it be a dependency on the world’s provisions (greed), a self-seeking tendency (pride), or a twisted view of sexuality, there is a continual struggle with sin.
Pastor Brock’s complaint with the ELCA is against unrepentant homosexuality in the church. Scripture states over and over that homosexuality is a sin. He preaches that we have to struggle against the sin that we all have in our lives, and he is doing exactly as he preaches. Those who advocate open, unrepentant homosexuality in the church are shredding the Word of God, and allowing culture to dictate what is right and wrong.
Pastor Brock will come out of this with a stronger voice against the practices of the liberal churches because he is an example to those struggling with this.