... it doesn't appear you understand traditional/orthodox/mere Christianity (the type CS Lewis wrote about and is accepted as the "core" or "great hall" of Christianity) because heralding Bess's statement ...

'In his book, Bess suggests that gays have a divine mission. "Look back at the life of our Lord Jesus. He was misunderstood, deserted, unjustly accused, and cruelly killed. Yet we all confess that it was the will of God, for by his wounds we are healed ... Could it be that the homosexual, obedient to the will of God, might be the church's modern day healer-messiah?"'

... show's profound ignorance. According to the Christianity that's been taught for 2000 years, there is one Savior, Jesus Christ. Suggesting that anyone, particularly those who practice traditionally identified sexual immorality (Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I didn't come to destroy them, but to fulfill them) are modern day healer-messiahs is not Christianity but the sign of some "new" religion (and I'll not talk here about which religion is more truthful; the point is that this new religion is NOT Christianity).

The ignorance on this point stems, I believe, from a flattering misinterpretation of Matthew 18:12 "What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them strays, he leaves the ninety-nine in the hills and goes to look for the one that has strayed, doesn't he?" Advocates of the new religion believe this means that Jesus values the downtrodden, poor, persecuted more than others (the rich in particular). The transgender priest at my Episcopal Church said so a couple of months ago in her sermon (and yes, I'm looking at other churches; t'was a new religion believer til I actually read the whole Bible). But this is a gross misinterpretation. Jesus doesn't value the poor/etc. more than others (He loves all the same), he just recognizes that it is easier for these folks, being in positions that so obviously point out their deficiencies/lack of success, are more likely to listen to his message than those who are "successful," i.e., "rich" in whatever form because such richness can diminish one's recognition of one's foundational dependence upon God.

Anyway, I write this with good wishes for you because I can see how passionate many are for this new version of Christianity (or new religion I would argue). But you are shooting yourself in the foot that's in your mouths if your trying to argue that traditional Christianity shouldn't have a problem with the idea of homosexuals as healer-messiahs. Traditional Christianity is absolutely opposed to such an idea. If you want to argue for a "New" Christianity, go ahead and argue for it, but don't castigate those who are trying to be good traditional Christians by upholding long held doctrine and understanding.

Fare Thee Well