The top of Sunday’s Metro section of The Washington Post focused on anti-gay "hate." The headline was "A Sanctuary From Hate: Pastor, D.C. Church Offer Gay African Americans A Message of Acceptance and Responsibility."
What followed was a splashy article by reporter Darryl Fears with five photographs that offered no reply or rebuttal from the alleged forces of "hate," and no real exploration of what the church was teaching, beyond acceptance and preaching "safe sex." Fears described the tiny church sympathetically:
Inner Light Ministries in the District's H Street corridor might seem like a traditional black church, with fiery sermons, electric gospel music, a soulful choir and a congregation that sways and claps in rhythm. But it is hardly that.
For 16 years, it has served as a sanctuary for a small community of black gays and lesbians who say they feel shunned from all directions -- by black men and women who give them cutting looks of disapproval, by mainstream black ministers who condemn homosexuality, and by white gays who make them feel unwelcome in subtle ways, such as switching from hip-hop to country music in a club when too many black men hit the dance floor.
At Inner Light, members say they can be themselves. In the pews on a recent Sunday, a woman adoringly placed an arm around the shoulders of her girlfriend. A man with a linebacker's strong build sat near the front wearing mascara. And condoms sat in a basket near the door in case any worshipers wanted to grab some on their way out.
Safe sex is part of the message Cheeks preaches. Two-thirds of his 100 or so parishioners are gay and lesbian, a congregation that includes the young and the old; the healthy and the sick; those who are open about their sexual orientation and those who are more guarded.
They come to the church to pray for forgiveness and seek redemption. But many also come to share their experience of being black and gay, living and loving in a city where HIV and AIDS lurk in epidemic proportions in nearly every community.
Pray for forgiveness to Whom? The first mention of God came in paragraph 21, as the minister shakes his fist:
Cheeks, who had been ordained by the nondenominational National Spiritual Science Center in Takoma Park, found himself praying at the bedside of men taking their last breaths and presiding at dozens of funerals.
In November 1988 alone, he said, "I preached at 17 funerals." He was exhausted. "I didn't have another sermon in me. I was so angry that I told God to stop it."
A year later, Cheeks fell ill with pneumonia and a condition that attacked his nervous system. Doctors at George Washington University Hospital told him that he wouldn't walk again and might die. He thanks God that they were wrong.
Is Inner Light Ministries a Christian ministry? The website suggests it is a "Christ-centered community," and Cheeks preaches the "radical inclusiveness" of Jesus, but Fears and his editors kept the name and subject of Jesus out of the story entirely. Bishop Cheeks lists quite a mish-mash of religions in his biography:
He was initiated in Krya Yoga by Swami Hariharananda Giri and ordained as a Minister of Spiritual Science at the National Spiritual Science Center in Washington, D.C., received a Doctor of Divinity from the St. Andrews Theological Seminary of London and is an elder in the Akan Religion.
The Akan religion is west African, and has multiple gods.
Fears and the Post didn't really want to write a story about theology, but to remember the devastation of AIDS in the gay black community in the District of Columbia in the 1980s, and to feel sympathy for gay blacks who they feel are doubly cursed by discrimination.
The sermon of "safe sex" re-emerges at the end, as Cheeks is saddened by young people with the casual attitude that HIV is easily manageable:
As he left the Blade's offices, Cheeks said the discussion had driven home the need to start a youth mentoring program at Inner Light. "Most messages...to young folk is if you're gay or lesbian, you're going to hell," he said. "So why take responsibility if you're already condemned?
"They need to understand God loves them. But they also need to be accountable for their sexual behavior. Not everything goes."
That's a pretty vague ending. What are the limits? Or is the only limit being "safe" with a condom?
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Love the sinner....
July 27, 2009 - 07:33 ET by GecksHate the sin. \
I'm old enough to remember the AIDS epidemic killing left and right in the 80's and early 90's. If you had HIV back then, it was a death sentence. Now with medications, people with HIV can now live 15/20/25 years after diagnosis. Only problem, it is not a cure, it is a treatment, and it is not cheap. Anywhere from 20 to 30 thousand a month. Unless you're wealthy like Magic Johnson, I can guarantee those infected are not paying for this out of thier own pocket. If you had insurance when you were diagnosed, as long as you pay your premium every month, your covered. if you didin't, then the government pays for it. Either way, it comes out of my pocket. Since insurance companies are not in the business to lose money, my premiums are raised every year to pay. My taxes are raised to pay for the others.
Everybody, especially the young have got to realize that there is no cure for this devestating disease, and that thier "loose" behaviours have consequences for all of us.
It is sad that these people are being discriminated against because they are black, but if thier life did not revolve around thier sexuality, most people wouldn't care if they were gay.
"Your right to life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness ends at my front door and wallet" - Me.
Yes, that's exactly what is
July 27, 2009 - 07:53 ET by motherbeltYes, that's exactly what is needed: a modern day version of Rev. Leroy's (Flip Wilson) "Church of What's Happenin' Now."
They could call it the "Church of Whatever Makes You Feel Good."
On the other hand, maybe they should just call it the "Church of Safe Sex." That seems to be the whole theme and purpose: that homosexual sex not spread disease.
Seems to me they have it
July 27, 2009 - 08:08 ET by misterbee241Seems to me they have it with this church. Besides, there a lots of feel good churches around.
"I dont need to read a newspaper to know the world's been shaved by a drunken barber."
Walter Brennan, The Colonel, Meet John Doe, 1941
"Reverend Cheeks"???
July 27, 2009 - 08:08 ET by SickofLibsCmon, Tim, you made that up!
Huh!
July 27, 2009 - 08:13 ET by sic721" But they also need to be accountable for their sexual behavior. Not everything goes."
Most black men "on the down-low" do not consider themselves 'gay'. Speaking of "down-low", think President Stupidly checked out this church as possibly being the one for him? Heh heh heh. Holy Larry Sinclair, Batman!!! ZAP! BOOM! POW!
"Let us disappoint the Men who are raising themselves upon the ruin of this Country."-John Adams
I know that I'm just some
July 27, 2009 - 11:16 ET by moderncommentaries83I know that I'm just some sexually-repressed, prudish social conservative, but I can't get my head around something:
Why would you engage in behavior - even supposedly "safe" behavior - that puts you at a risk (anywhere from 3-20%) for contracting an STD that is eventually fatal? Why are three, four, five minutes of pleasure worth throwing away days, weeks, months and years of your life treating an incurable illness that you could have avoided contracting in the first place?
AIDS is not like cancer. I've known non-smokers who've been diagnosed with lung cancer, religiously healthy people who develope breast cancer, etc. But I know very few people who spontaneously develop HIV/AIDS.
Now, that's not to say some innocent people don't get it through no fault of their own (i.e. blood transfusions) but - by and large - the biggest way HIV/AIDS is transmitted from person to person is through sexual contact. Including sexual contact with condoms that's supposedly "safe." The AIDS virus could have been dealt a fatal blow back in the 1980s and 1990s if people had encouraged the only surefire way to not spread AIDS: abstinence and fidelity.
If this is about love - real, true love - why is it we encourage people to expose the person they supposedly "love" to a fatal disease, rather than make a sacrifice of chastity and abstinence to keep the person you love healthy?
As for the theological aspects, I certainly think they are inaccurate, but the great thing about America is that these churches are 100% free to exist and preach what they wish. I just would like the same courtesy extended to those of us who believe otherwise.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam