The first student to ever lead a Wednesday Chapel, A.J. Hawks spoke on the need for transparency among Christians, illustrated by his own story of being gay at Pepperdine.
Graphic: What was your journey of revealing what you’re going through in such a public way?
A.J. Hawks: I knew that I did not want to do that intense of a form of ministry with so much influence and then have people find out later and then feel like they were misled. It was just clearly necessary. It was the most honest thing to do, and it served the greater purpose of communicating the message.
G: As you were sharing with your friends, how were you received?
AH: Actually, I have been really blessed by my friend groups. I have friends that disagree with my position on it morally or disagree with this part or that part or have a hard time with it personally, but I’ve never had anyone be derogatory or offensive or even really upset. In my opinion, I’ve been really protected by God’s providence in that case because it’s not common to have such a smooth transition.
G: From where would you draw biblical support for the message that Christians ought to live transparently with each other?
AH: I think it’s an inherent requirement for what we see in Philippians 2, which is what I was advocating. Paul clearly radiates the idea that they lived transparent lives. In 2 Corinthians 6, he says, “We have been completely honest with you.” You see it consistently developing out the text, but not explicitly in the text. The early church’s concept of confession was communal confession, and we’ve moved away from that. It is clearly necessary to have that kind of community that is throughout the New Testament, and Paul serves as an example of that and says to imitate him as much as he imitates Christ.
G: What is your reaction to Reach OUT’s efforts?
AH: I think I frustrated a lot of the gay community at Pepperdine when I sat down with [Reach OUT co-president] Lindsay [Jakows] and told her that I did not support Reach OUT’s petition to become a group on campus. I think that Pepperdine needs an LGBT group, but I am of the opinion that the decision that was made by that board was not simply based on the grounds that it was an LGBT group or based on certain verses in the Bible. I don’t think the heart in any of it is “homosexuality is sinful, therefore we will not have a gay group.” I think it’s been wildly misconstrued, and I think that it’s sort of ironic and almost hypocritical that while pushing for transparency and authenticity we misconstrue what’s actually happening. And I think a lot of the information that’s out there is just false and is deceiving, coming from Reach OUT and how they’re reacting to the rejection. And I also think that it’s fair to recognize that Pepperdine does hold a certain position and that they have the right to that position. I think that there is a way for the to hold that position while also being respectful. But to make it sound like it’s a bunch of hateful, homophobic people doing this is, I think, one, to oversimplify a debate that, as the gay community should know, can’t afford to be oversimplified, and two, is just unfair and disrespectful to other people just like ourselves.
G: Do you think that the University an/or the church need to change their doctrine on homosexuality in order to care for LGBT members of their community?
AH: I don’t. I think on the one hand, I have experienced in my life, many of my friends who are more conservative Christians and believe that homosexuality is a sin have strong stances of a certain orientation and are very open about that, yet I’ve been very ministered to by them, and they clearly care about me and are interested in being a part of my life. It is possible, if it 
were a sin, just to love that person. And we do that every day. We call it grace. On the other hand, regardless of if it is a sin, I do think that the adjustment that needs to be made within the church is that we need to realize that the concept — as much as we dislike it — is that not all Bible verses are created equal. Jesus himself says to the Pharisees that they neglect the major matters of the law that they’re straining for gnats and let through a camel. That’s not to say that there isn’t a gnat and that it wouldn’t be better to get the gnat out of your meal, but it’s more important to get the camel.
G: This morning you talked to people who are the listeners in these exchanges. If someone is a listener, what is the way to bring scripture into a conversation without sounding condescending or minimizing their situation?
AH: Number one, people just need to listen and actually listen and shut their mouths. But then if you’re going to respond and try to share scripture in a way that will be impactful and not offensive … would be with explaining how you have seen that to be true in your life. Because I don’t think that you can expect them to accept your criticism unless you have illustrated that you are aware of your own failings.
G: Where would you draw the line between caring for someone who’s struggling and enabling a behavior that may be harmful?
AH: You cannot be responsible for enabling their sin, but you also need to care for somebody. What enabling looks like is different depending on what it is and depending on the person. And I also think if you actually want to make a difference, you need to speak with wisdom. What I mean by that is if you say the same thing over and over again, it’s going to be like the whir in the background. If you never say something, they’re never going to hear you. Part of our ministry is to look for the right time and the right place, and having the patience and forbearing to know how to wait for the right time and place.
