Why say gay? Expanded 4-Part Series
This 4-part series explaining why EQUIP uses “gay” and “gay Christian.”
Part 1: Basics
In Part 1, we’ll describe foundational concepts of desire, temptation, and sin. Then, we’ll use those understandings to define what EQUIP means when we use the phrase “same-sex attraction.” (Note: this post does not attempt to explain why EQUIP holds a traditional sexual ethic.)
I am a Christian. I am gay. I believe that God’s best for every Christian, including me, is either a lifetime vocation of abstinent singleness for the sake of doing kingdom work with undivided attention or a lifetime vocation of opposite-sex marriage with an openness to raising children for the sake of the kingdom.
Faithful Christians disagree about the wisest terminology a Christian who is primarily attracted to the same sex and committed to a traditional sexual ethic should use. Over the past five years, concerned Christians have asked intellectually honest questions about my choice of language and the terminology EQUIP uses. This series will provide a thorough explanation for why EQUIP uses the word “gay” and the phrase “gay Christian.”
But before we jump into that primary question, we must first establish some more fundamental concepts and definitions.
Healthy desire and sexual temptation
In short, I use the phrase “same-sex attraction” to mean a temptation and a result of original sin. But same-sex attraction is not concupiscence, it is not a sin, and gay Christians are not guilty merely by experiencing temptation. To explain this definition, we must first define attraction, sin, temptation, original sin, and guilt more generally.
Augustine of Hippo’s discussion of desire and Thomas Aquinas’s discussion of passions provide the foundation for our understanding of attraction. Augustine and Aquinas argue that healthy desires/passions are God-given impulses toward good things God created. Healthy sexual attraction is a God-given desire to unite with an opposite-sex spouse in a self-giving way that is open to children. Healthy physical attraction is a God-given capacity to recognize physical beauty. Healthy relational attraction is a God-given desire for platonic friendship with another person.
Nothing exists that God has not created, and everything that God creates is good; therefore, evil has no positive existence in itself, but must always be a privation or perversion of something good. We sin when we choose a lesser good over a greater good or misuse some created good in a self-serving way.
Temptation, then, is an invitation to choose a lesser good over a greater good or misuse a created good in a selfish way. Sexual attractions become temptation when they are directed toward an improper object (a person with whom one cannot enter into a legitimate sexual union). Physical attractions can become temptation when the beauty of another is selfishly misused as an object of lust. Relational attractions can become temptation when a desire for friendship is sexualized.
Why is this important? If temptation and sin are always misuses or corruptions of something good God created, then our response cannot be just to say no. We must identify the good, God-given desire that is being corrupted and meet that good desire in healthy ways.
Original sin and saying yes to temptation (sin)
Original sin refers to the fallen state of all humanity. Because of Adam’s sin, we have lost our original righteousness and, apart from God’s grace, our choices tend toward sin. On an individual level, original sin is a corruption and imperfection starting at our formation in the womb on a physical and spiritual level, inclining us to volitionally commit sins.
Free will has been weakened by original sin, but not destroyed. We do not have the capacity to choose or live perfectly, but a desire for good and a capacity to make good decisions remains inherent to the bent-but-not-destroyed image of God in each of us. When a person willfully sins, the person has fallen short of God’s standard of perfection and deserves punishment, referred to as guilt. A healthy response to this guilt is a feeling of inner turmoil, often referred to as “feeling guilty.”
However, a person is not guilty and does not need to feel guilty for being tempted. We are not committing actual sin when we are tempted. We are not responsible for our involuntary thoughts. While we need to recognize daily that we are fallen and need a savior, we do not need to confess or repent of specific temptations.
When we say “yes” to a temptation in thought, word, or deed, we have sinned. When we participate in the temptation, when we step toward the temptation in any way, we have crossed the line from temptation to sin. We have done something for which it would be healthy to feel inner turmoil. We have done something that we need to confess and repent of.
Why is this important? The Enemy often cultivates unhealthy shame in the Christian by falsely accusing him of already having sinned after merely experiencing temptation. This shame can then make it easier for the Christian to commit actual sin. Clearly distinguishing temptation from sin allows the Christian to accept culpability for actual sin while rejecting the Enemy’s messages of shame when a Christian has merely experienced (but resisted) temptation.
Sinful and concupiscence
“Sinful” can be used to modify an action to describe an evil deed. When a person performs a sinful action, the individual is guilty of sin. “Sinful” can also be used to modify a temptation or desire connected to a sinful action. When a person experiences a sinful desire or temptation but resists, the individual has not sinned. But when the person capitulates to a sinful desire or temptation, the individual has sinned.
Christians often use “sinful” in ways that are unclear to the hearer. Is the Christian saying something is related to something broken or sin in itself? To avoid this confusion, EQUIP refrains from using the word “sinful.”
Specifically, when we say yes to a sexual temptation in thought, this is frequently called lust. Lust is a sin. For some, if they have been in the habit of indulging sexual temptations by lusting, moving from temptation to lust may become seemingly automatic such that it is difficult to distinguish between the sexual temptation and the sin of lust.
The Greek word epithumia, most directly translated as “concupiscence,” is used in the Bible generally to refer to healthy desire and more narrowly to refer to lustful desire. In contexts when epithumia describes something illicit, it is consistently contained in a list of actions or contextualized in a way that assumes the individual is actively participating in a temptation (for example, Galatians 5:16-24 and James 1:14-15). Such lustful concupiscence is sin.
Applying these concepts to same-sex attraction
Same-sex attractions, as we define them, are primarily desires for healthy same-sex friendship that have been sexualized. They are a temptation to selfishly objectify the beauty of someone of the same sex, engage in same-sex sexual activity, or lust after someone of the same sex. Same-sex attractions are the result of original sin, an inborn distortion of healthy desires for same-sex friendship.
Clearly identifying the healthy desires that same-sex attraction are a distortion of can provide clarity for the most effective ways to respond to these temptations, because satisfying the true need can temporarily reduce the broken desire. Same-sex attractions are not a perversion of healthy sexual desire to unite with an opposite-sex spouse in a self-giving way that is open to children. Nor are same-sex attractions a sexualization of a pre-fall desire for same-sex romance unique to gay people. Instead, same-sex attractions are healthy desires for same-sex friendship that have been sexualized. In light of this distinction, what healthy desires should the gay Christian seek to fulfill to most faithfully resist same-sex attractions? Ardently pursuing opposite-sex marriage or seeking same-sex romantic companionship are unlikely to provide escape from the temptations of same-sex attraction. Instead, pursuing healthy same-sex friendship will satisfy the healthy desires distorted by same-sex attraction and will most effectively aid the gay Christian in resisting temptation.
Those who experience the temptation of same-sex attractions are not responsible for this brokenness nor do they need to feel inner turmoil or guilt. They are not sinning merely by being tempted with same-sex attraction. They do not need to confess or repent of same-sex attractions. God does not condemn a person to Hell merely for experiencing same-sex attraction.
But when a person says yes to same-sex attractions in thought, word, or deed, they have sinned. When an individual engages in same-sex sexual activity or lusts after a person of the same-sex, they ought to feel inner turmoil and understand that they have done something that they need to confess and repent of.
As same-sex attraction relates to the word “sinful,” if a person engages in same-sex sexual activity or commits same-sex lust, the individual has sinned. These actions are sinful. Additionally, the temptation of same-sex attraction is sinful, in the sense that it is related to a sinful action. But if a person experiences sinful same-sex attractions and yet resists these temptations, the individual is not guilty of sin.
The words desire, lust, temptation, and attraction are often used inexactly as they relate to same-sex attractions. Some use the word desire interchangeably with lust. Others use desire to mean both temptation and lust. Because of this confusion, we tend to avoid the word desire and more clearly speak same-sex attractions as temptation and lust as sin.
As same-sex attraction relates to concupiscence, the temptation of same-sex attraction is not concupiscence because it is not yet lust. But when those tempted with same-sex attraction willfully choose to lust after someone of the same sex, that lust is concupiscence. For a majority of Christians who believe free will has been weakened but not destroyed, who believe original sin and concupiscence are related but not identical, this distinction is important.
Why is this important? Some have argued that temptations of same-sex attraction are sin in themselves. Then they argue that in order to faithfully mortify sin, gay Christians must daily seek sexual orientation change and cannot use the word “gay,” because using the word suggests a recognition that attractions will likely endure (a capitulation to temptations that are sins in themselves, in their eyes). However, if merely experiencing same-sex attraction is not a sin, gay Christians are not obligated to seek sexual orientation change or avoid words like “gay.”
The TL;DR
Ultimately, we are most frequently asked these questions: “Do I need to feel guilty for experiencing same-sex attraction? Should I feel responsible for my same-sex attractions? Should I feel inner turmoil for my same-sex attractions? Am I sinning merely by being tempted with those attractions? Do I need to confess those temptations specifically or repent of those temptations specifically?”
To all of these questions, the answer is no.
Part 2: In Christ
In Part 2, we’ll explore what it means for gay people to have their identities in Christ and whether calling oneself gay compromises one’s faith and baptism.
Many have asked whether use of the phrase “gay Christian” compromises a believer’s “identity in Christ” (note: “identity in Christ” is a theological concept developed in the 20th century). To evaluate this concern, we must first explore what the Bible has to say about one’s “identity in Christ.”
While no reputable English translations of the Bible use the phrase “identity in Christ,” many believers point to Galatians 3:26-29 as the central text exploring cultural identity in light of Christ’s saving work.
26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise.
In verses 26, 27, and 29 Paul describes our identity as “sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus,” who were “baptized into Christ” and now “belong to Christ” (I will focus specifically on verse 28 later). According to this passage, faith and baptism are all that are required to be in Christ. Similarly, in Acts 2:38, Peter testifies, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
What does it mean to have faith in Christ Jesus? Why should we be baptized?
According to the ACNA Catechism Question 12, having faith “means that I believe the Gospel is the truth: that Jesus died for my sins, rose from the dead, and rules over my life. Therefore, I entrust myself to him as my Savior, and I obey him as my Lord. (Psalm 40:1–10; Proverbs 3:5–8; John 1:9–13; Romans 10:9–10; Hebrews 11:1, 6)” (page 25). Note: I’ll provide references throughout this series to the Anglican catechism and prayer book as examples of theological statements that can be found across denominations.
What more is required beyond faith? How do we signal our identity in Christ? Question 14 of the ACNA Catechism asks, “What should you do as the sign of your repentance and faith?” and answers, “After receiving instruction in the faith, I should be baptized into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, thus joining his Body, the Church. If I have already been baptized, I should confess my sins, seek the guidance of a minister, affirm the promises made at my Baptism, and take my place as a member of the Church. (Psalm 51:5–7; Ezekiel 36:25–27; Matthew 28:19–20; 1 Corinthians 12:13; 1 Peter 3:18–22)” (page 26).
Beyond faith in Christ and baptism to signal our identity in Christ, must a Christian do or say anything else?
By no means!
Ephesians 2:8-10 reminds us that “it is by grace [we] have been saved, through faith—and this is not from [ourselves], it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” To be in Christ is to have faith that Jesus will save us, nothing more. Having our identity in Christ is accomplished through Christ’s death and resurrection followed by our faith and baptism. The only words required at our confirmation to secure our identity in Christ are “I do,” “I renounce them,” and “I will, the Lord being my helper” (BCP 2019, pg 177).
God may invite the Christian to much more than just faith and baptism to work out their sanctification, but all that is necessary to be securely “in Christ” and to have one’s “identity in Christ” is faith in Christ and baptism.
Yet some point out Galatians 3:28 as a further requirement of true identity in Christ, claiming that Paul is commanding Christians to erase any cultural identity:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
However, male and female Christians, Jewish and Greek Christians, and enslaved and free Christians continued to live in cultural spaces where each of these statuses mattered. Society observed whether these Christians were male or female, Jewish or Greek, enslaved or free and treated those Christians differently based on their status. These observed cultural identities impacted how they worshiped, who they worshiped with, who could lead, and ultimately how they experienced Jesus.
Paul did not expect these cultural realities to disappear before one could properly identify in Christ. These Christians did not stop being male and female, Jewish and Greek, or enslaved and free. Paul did not command them to pretend they were not female, not enslaved, or not Greek. Instead Paul reaffirmed that identity in Christ is accomplished solely through faith in Jesus and baptism. He was not concerned with persisting cultural identities and never indicated that they are incompatible with or challenge the supremacy of Christ in the hearts of believers.
Despite a decade of prayer ministry and conversation therapy, my same-sex attractions persist. I need some word or phrase to efficiently name or describe or refer to this part of my story. Ultimately, I’ve chosen to use the phrase “gay Christian.” Why?
1. Those we minister to use the word “gay” in a limited way.
Modern teenagers and young adults use “gay” differently than previous generations. I’ll speak more in Part 4: Heavy Burdens about the evangelical advantage of using the words I do, but if you ask an 8-year-old today what the word “gay” means, you will most consistently hear “a boy who likes a boy” or “a girl who likes a girl.” Teens and young adults today do not assume anything about an individual's theological beliefs or relationship choices when using that word. In the same way, I use “gay” knowing that those I minister to will not assume my theological beliefs or relationship choices based on that word.
2. We use “gay” phenomenologically, not ontologically.
When we define something phenomenologically, we are naming something based on one’s experience or what it appears to be. In contrast, when we ask who a person is ontologically, we are asking who they are innately, by design. When God first imagined me in a perfect world, He did not intend for me to experience same-sex attraction. I believe that same-sex attraction is a result of the Fall, a brokenness, a temptation. When I use gay, I am merely noticing that I am attracted to other people of the same-sex and using (in my opinion) the best word to describe that experience.
3. I identify with people of shared experience, not with brokenness or sin.
I use the phrase “gay Christian” particularly to identify with other Christians who experienced the same shame and loneliness as a kid. I identify with other Christians who have endured the same pain and fearfully offered their whole selves to God. I identify with people of shared experience because more often than not, they are able to empathize with me and care for me best. I am not identifying with a temptation or sin.
4. I use “gay Christian” to testify to Christ’s worthiness.
Recognizing my same-sex attractions, submitting that brokenness to God, and collaborating with Him to steward my sexuality in redemptive ways has been the greatest source of blessing and God’s glory in my life. It has been particularly in contrast to the brokenness of my sexuality that the reality and goodness of God is apparent for me. I cannot tell of the fullness of God’s grace and power in my life without mentioning that I am gay. Might some inaccurately assume that gay people are more sexually active than the average straight person? Sure. But then the power of my testimony only grows. When I share that despite my sexual orientation, Jesus is Lord and I submit to His wisdom for my sexual stewardship because I am convinced His love and wisdom are the source of the truest joy, pleasure, and meaning—when I share all of these while confidently using the word “gay,” my testimony strengthens.
I am a child of God, first and foremost. Jesus and Jesus alone sits on the throne of my life. Every decision I make must be submitted to His Lordship. Christ demands and deserves my whole life.
And I am gay.
I must use some word to describe and refer to my experience of same-sex attraction. No language or terminology communicates with absolute clarity. I accept the responsibility to ensure I am accurately understood. Whenever EQUIP teaches, we offer a synopsis of this document. For these reasons, we use the phrase “gay Christian.”
Part 3: Weaker Siblings
In Par 3 post, we will consider where gay people should refrain from calling themselves “gay” to accommodate weaker siblings in Christ.
Many have offered reasonable objections to my testimony in Part 2. As a minister committed to ensuring that I am accurately understood, these objections must be charitably addressed. Moreover, how should brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree about matters of wisdom seek unity?
Answering Reasonable Objections
1. Won’t hearers assume that I am seeking out same-sex romantic and sexual activity if I call myself a gay Christian?
It’s true, the average American probably assumes that the average gay person will seek out romantic, and eventually sexual, relationships with people they are drawn to. But they also assume the same of every American, regardless of their sexual orientation. It is assumed that all Americans are seeking out romantic relationships with those they are drawn to with a hope of sexual intimacy, regardless of marital status. Plus, calling oneself a Christian invites the same misunderstanding. It is well documented that Christians have sex outside of marriage and get divorced at the same rates as non-Christians. Unfortunately, the phrase gay Christian is no less clear than the phrase straight Christian or merely using the word Christian. Without specifically stating one’s theological beliefs and commitments (which EQUIP does every time we teach), a Christian using any one of those phrases or words would be presumed to be just as sexually immoral as the average American.
2. Couldn’t some conclude that you believe God intended for you to be gay?
When God first imagined me in a perfect world, He did not imagine me with same-sex attraction. He did not intend for me to be gay. I believe that same-sex attraction is a result of the Fall. Same-sex attraction is a brokenness. Additionally, I do not believe there is anything uniquely inherent to being gay other than experiencing same-sex attraction. But God reassures us in Genesis 50:20 that “you intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” As God has redeemed my brokenness for my good and His glory, I have gained spiritual gifts I might not have otherwise, including developing a deeper appreciation and capacity for healthy friendship.
3. Why identify with something that won’t continue in the next life?
Perhaps it will, in some form. The scars from Christ’s wounds on the cross could still be seen on His resurrected body. Those physical signs of our sin that Christ took on, those physical signs of our redemption through Christ’s sacrifice, remained because they are a sign of God’s glory, not shame. In the same way, gay Christians may continue to have awareness of that differentness even in the New Heavens and New Earth because it is through that experience that God was most glorified and the most good came into their lives.
4. What do you think about people who prefer to use same-sex attraction?
EQUIP respects those who prefer the phrase same-sex attraction. By none of the above do we mean to communicate that every Christian who experiences same-sex attraction should exclusively use the word gay. At the very least, we think there should be space for Christians to call themselves gay. And as I will contend in Part 4, it is my opinion that the most effective term for ministry is the word gay. That being said, language and culture are always changing. The meanings of words and their cultural impact shift. If we are committed to reaching the lost, we have accepted a responsibility to adapt our strategies and hold firm to the truth as the world around us shifts. As a result, EQUIP frequently code-switches, using different language in different contexts to accommodate our audience.
5. Isn’t merely experiencing same-sex attraction sin in itself? Should that be reason enough not to call yourself gay?
If you’ve not already read the discussion in Part 1: Basics of our definition of the phrase same-sex attraction and questions of sinfulness and concupiscence, please take the time to do so. Thankfully, the oldest Christian traditions that represent a majority of Christians both in the United States and globally do not teach that Christians sin merely by being tempted. When I experience same-sex attractions yet resist these temptations, I am not guilty of sin.
6. Why are you identifying as anything other than Christian?
As the discussion in Part 2 made clear, all that is required to accomplish and sustain a Christian’s identity in Christ is to have faith in Christ and signal that identity with baptism. The Scriptures do not teach that a Christian’s identity in Christ is compromised by using a noun other than Christian to refer to oneself or using an adjective or clause in a sentence where the person refers to themselves as a Christian. As I have already made clear, Jesus is my only Lord, I submit everything to the Lordship of Christ, and my sexuality is secondary to my primary identity as a Christian. Some have objected to my use of the phrase gay Christian because they believe the word Christian should never be modified. Yet these objectors selectively apply this standard to the word gay while refusing to apply this standard to other cultural identity labels. Objections to modifying the word Christian will be perceived as disingenuous until they are applied consistently to all modifiers.
Author Greg Coles, who earned his PhD in English studying the rhetoric of marginality, has said the following:
“English scholars consistently treat adjectives and relative clauses as interchangeable syntactic formations for modifying a noun. Thus, same-sex-attracted Christian (an adjectival modifier of the noun) and Christian who experiences same-sex attraction (a relative clause modifier of the noun) have no meaningful denotative difference. As for gay, most leading English dictionaries (including the Oxford English Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, the American Heritage Dictionary, and Google Dictionary) treat this word as a denotative synonym of attracted to the same sex. There is thus no inherent difference in grammatical meaning between the phrases gay Christian, same-sex-attracted Christian, and Christian who experiences same-sex attraction.”
They are a distinction without a difference.
1 Corinthians 8 on wisdom & disagreement
Yet, in light of these numerous objections, some might conclude that the phrase gay Christian is too fraught. Some would assess that too much clarification is necessary. How should brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree about matters of wisdom seek unity? 1 Corinthians 8 provides the following:
1 Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. 2 Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. 3 But whoever loves God is known by God.
4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
7 But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.
9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols? 11 So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12 When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall.
Paul adjudicates a dispute about eating meat offered to idols. Some objected merely on the grounds that consuming the meat would be a form of idol worship. Others objected because any activities related to pagan temples tempted them to return to sinful practices from their past life, including temple prostitution.
The Apostle first recognizes that most Christians in Corinth “possess knowledge” that “there is but one God” and that “an idol is nothing.” As a result, eating meat sacrificed to idols was, in itself, inconsequential. If all Christians possessed this knowledge, they might have eaten the idol meat with impunity.
But some weaker brothers lacked the spiritual maturity to grasp this knowledge or the strength to resist reminders of a past life. Paul recognizes that meat offered to idols is morally neutral. Yet powerful cultural messages were causing some to be unnecessarily scandalized by idol meat. These weaker brothers lacked the spiritual maturity to distinguish the cultural meaning of idol meat from the meaninglessness of idol meat in the eyes of God.
To God, it was just meat. But to some Christians deeply embedded in their culture, it was idol worship.
Yet Paul did not condemn the weaker brothers. Instead he invited stronger brothers to love. He cautioned stronger brothers not to exercise their freedom to eat idol meat in ways that caused weaker brothers to be “destroyed.” Paul invites the stronger brothers to accommodate the weaker brother and temporarily give up their freedom to eat idol meat until the weaker brother is able to disentangle cultural meanings from their faith in Jesus.
How might 1 Corinthians 8 give the Church better understanding of the disagreement about sexual identity language?
When I was growing up, the word gay was used in a very particular way in my church and wider community. Over time, I learned that when most people used this word, they intended for me to imagine group sex parties where all of the attendees had AIDS, were addicted to drugs, and wanted nothing to do with God. That word has a very powerful cultural meaning for many older Christians.
I have already shared that most Americans today use that word as a mere recognition of same-sex attractions and nothing more. Perhaps if every evangelical Christian possessed this knowledge, I could use the phrase gay Christian without scandal.
But there are many Christians in our churches who retain that problematic image of gay people that I was taught growing up. When they hear me using the word gay, they cannot help but assume that I am indulging in sexual immorality.
Unfortunately these Christians have been thoroughly catechized by a particular cultural space to interpret the words I use as idol worship.
Yet Paul’s words convict me. He invites me to accommodate those enamored by the culture war. He invites me to give up my freedom to use the phrase gay Christian for the sake of those scandalized by the wokeism, identity politics, and political correctness of the cultural right.
Perhaps I should temporarily cease using gay Christian around some of my Christian brothers and sisters until they are able to disentangle cultural meanings from their faith in Jesus. Or perhaps there are greater burdens that outweigh the scandal of the weaker brother.
Part 4: Heavy Burdens
In Part 4, we will consider the heavy burdens of gay people for generations and how that awareness should inform ministry efforts.
While recognizing Paul’s call to accommodate my weaker brothers by not using the phrase gay Christian, I must also consider what heavy burdens gay people carry. In Luke 11: 37-53, Jesus offers wisdom about these heavy burdens:
37 When Jesus had finished speaking, a Pharisee invited him to eat with him; so he went in and reclined at the table. 38 But the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal.
39 Then the Lord said to him, “Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. 40 You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also? 41 But now as for what is inside you—be generous to the poor, and everything will be clean for you.
42 “Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.
43 “Woe to you Pharisees, because you love the most important seats in the synagogues and respectful greetings in the marketplaces.
44 “Woe to you, because you are like unmarked graves, which people walk over without knowing it.”
45 One of the experts in the law answered him, “Teacher, when you say these things, you insult us also.”
46 Jesus replied, “And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.
47 “Woe to you, because you build tombs for the prophets, and it was your ancestors who killed them. 48 So you testify that you approve of what your ancestors did; they killed the prophets, and you build their tombs. 49 Because of this, God in his wisdom said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and others they will persecute.’50 Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all.
52 “Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.”
53 When Jesus went outside, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely and to besiege him with questions, 54 waiting to catch him in something he might say.
Jesus joins the Pharisees for dinner but chooses not to engage in the ritual washing before the meal. The Pharisees are surprised enough for the author to note their concern and for Jesus to respond.
He urges the Pharisees to show more concern for the inside of their bodies (their souls) instead of obsessively washing the outside of their bodies. Jesus accuses the Pharisees of not being generous to the poor and being too distracted by practicing ritual laws to address injustice. He accuses them of enjoying the highest seats of power and respect but bringing destruction to their community through their pride.
Jesus continues by accusing the Pharisees of adding so many new laws to the covenant that the burden of following the laws has become too heavy. These heavy burdens have kept people away from the love and knowledge of God. The legalism of the Pharisees has made it difficult for people to accurately perceive or experience God’s love. Moreover, the Pharisees are unwilling to take practical steps to address the suffering of these same people.
He accuses the Pharisees of selectively using the stories and images of prophets when convenient but then hypocritically approving of the murder of these same prophets.
Jesus warns the Pharisees that they will be punished for persecuting innocent men serving God. He concludes that not only have the Pharisees misled themselves, but also their legalism and hypocrisy have blocked others from knowing God.
The gospel author reports that after being challenged the Pharisees , instead of allowing Christ’s wisdom to convict and reform them, only questioned him more fiercely, picking apart his every word and “waiting to catch him in something he might say.”
The heavy burdens of gay people
Similarly, previous generations of gay people were given heavy burdens too great to bear, leading many to lose their faith. Presently, we risk hindering future generations of gay people from knowing Jesus in the same ways. Instead, we must commit to a strategy of ministry that will most effectively hand to gay teens the key to the knowledge of God’s love.
In the mid-20th century Freudian psychoanalysts popularized the notion of being gay as a mental disorder. From this pseudo-science grew conversion therapies and reparative therapies that promised to change an individual’s sexual orientation by addressing psychological wounds.
Christian ministries then combined the pseudo-science of Freudian psychoanalysts with charismatic elements, promising to make gay Christians straight if they prayed hard enough. At first promoting ex-gay terminology, reparative therapists later developed the language of same-sex attraction as part of their sexual conversion process. If a person failed to become straight, they were shamed for resisting the work of the Holy Spirit. Then while churches continued to hold gay people to a traditional sexual ethic, they abandoned historical biblical teachings about procreation, celibacy, divorce, and remarriage for straight people.
Studies have consistently shown that despite intense effort, a person's attractions are unlikely to change. Limited but high-quality research demonstrates that only 3-4% of people who participated in sexual orientation change efforts experienced any change in their same-sex attractions, and even these results were from self-reports that cannot be verified. Moreover, scientific studies have demonstrated that sexual orientation changes efforts increase the risk of suicide attempts by an alarming 92%.
Other results of these practices are more substantial. In the most extensive study of LGBT+ people and the Church, Andrew Marin’s Us Versus Us reveals that of the 22.4 million LGBT+ people in the US, 19.3 million (86%) grew up in church. Perhaps surprisingly, LGBT+ people are actually more likely than the average American to grow up in a religious family. Of those, 10.4 million LGBT+ people have left the faith—that’s 54% of LGBT+ people who grew up in the Church—and their top reasons for leaving included negative personal experiences such as ex-gay programs.
Generations of gay people have been burdened by the Church with a false promise of change using the language same-sex attraction. When older generations of gay people hear a Christian using the phrase same-sex attraction, they assume that the Christian seeks to offer these same destructive ex-gay practices and are hindered from seeing or experiencing the love of God.
For some, same-sex attraction carried baggage that contradicts the love of Jesus. For younger generations, this phrase carries the same baggage at worst or is out of touch at best.
Unfortunately, studies show that gay teens today are at great risk. Gay teens are 5 times more likely to attempt suicide than their peers. LGBT+ youth who say religion is important to them are 38% more likely to be suicidal than their non-religious LGBT+ peers, suggesting that homophobic religious beliefs increase teens’ vulnerability to depression. This is staggering, particularly when we notice that religiosity reduces suicidality for every other demographic in the United States except for LGBT+ people. Gay teens who come from highly rejecting families are 8.4 times more likely to attempt suicide than other gay teens. We cannot undo the harm to gay people in the past, but we can prevent future loss of faith and life in gay teens by adopting more effective strategies, including using language that is most likely to reach the kids in our church pews.
In particular, we must eliminate the (on average) 5-year gap between when gay teens recognize their same-sex attractions versus when they share with a parent or pastor, left to make sense of their sexuality alone with the lies of culture and the Enemy. This leads to loneliness, anxiety, shame, depression, sexual sin, addiction, suicidality, and loss of faith. Instead, we must talk to every child about God’s love and wisdom for gay people so that as soon as kids recognize same-sex attractions, they share with a parent or pastor because they have heard those parents and pastors demonstrate safety, in part, by using the terminology they are familiar with.
For these reasons, I use the word gay. If you ask an 8-year-old today what the word gay means, you will most consistently hear, “a boy who likes a boy” or “a girl who likes a girl.” Modern kids and teens do not assume anything about an individual’s theological beliefs or relationship choices when using that word. But if instead I exclusively use same-sex attraction and forbid teens from using the language of their peers, I risk setting up a false dichotomy that they can either recognize their same-sex attractions or be a Christian. If I force gay teens to use terms that no one in their generation uses, instead of using language that is definitionally neutral, I will be less effective.
This attention to strategy is not foreign to the Christian. In 1 Corinthians 9:20-22 Paul says the following:
20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some.
While Paul no longer lived according to Jewish Law, when he hoped to most effectively reach Jews, he became like a Jew. He followed their customs and used their language. In the same way, I mirror the language of gay teens and young adults so that I can most effectively reach them.
I’ve provided references throughout this series to the Anglican catechism and prayer book as examples of theological statements that can be found across denominations. The 24th Article of the 39 Articles of Religion establishing the Anglican Church says this:
Of Speaking in the Congregation in such a Tongue as the people understandeth. It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the Primitive Church to have public Prayer in the Church, or to minister the Sacraments, in a tongue not understanded of the people.
A core principle of the Anglican Church has been to contextualize the gospel for each culture, instead of letting language and culture be a barrier to Christ’s love. We have committed to using terminology that will be readily understood by our audience. I mirror the language of gay teens and young adults so that I can most effectively reach them.
Weaker brothers vs. heavy burdens
After considering the call to accommodate my weaker brothers by not using the phrase gay Christian and the heavy burdens of gay people, it seems clear that the heavy burdens of gay teens outweighs the scandal of weaker brothers.
Like the hypocrisy of the Pharisees in Luke 11, Christians have inconsistently applied God’s wisdom for sexual stewardship. Churches have held gay people to a traditional sexual ethic while abandoning historical biblical teachings about celibacy, openness to children in marriage, divorce, and remarriage for straight people. Simultaneously, Christians have perpetrated destructive sexual orientation change efforts in their own churches, leading to 54% of gay Christians losing their faith. Even today, Christian leaders follow the example of the Pharisees of Luke 11 by selectively lifting up the voices of gay celibate Christians when it furthers their agenda, but they refuse to condemn the reparative therapy and conversion therapy practiced in our churches.
Despite these challenges, some gay Christians have continued to steward our sexualities according to a traditional sexual ethic. Yet we have struggled to thrive in our churches where this discriminatory application of a traditional sexual ethic continues, where pastors fail to teach clearly and compassionately about God’s love and wisdom for gay people, where silence forces gay teens to make sense of their sexuality alone, where pastoral care is outsourced to therapists and parachurch ministries, and where celibate people fail to experience permanent, lived-in family—regardless of sexual orientation. Like the Pharisees of Luke 11, Christian leaders fail to take practical steps to alleviate these heavy burdens.
Instead, religious elites heap on the burden of additional language policing. Gay Christians have been given complex and inconsistent rules for what terminology can be used. Many have been cautioned against fellowshipping with other gay celibate Christians. Gay Christians have been discouraged from sharing their full testimony. Many have been barred from speaking and teaching unless they comply with this legalistic standard.
I fear these heavy burdens will make it difficult for gay Christians to believe that God exists and loves them because of their painful experience of the Body of Christ. I fear that gay people outside of conservative churches will see how gay celibate Christians are treated, and wonder, “If that’s how they treat the celibate ones, then I’m certainly not welcome,” hindering them from knowing God.
I pray that leaders across denominations would recognize the biblical orthodoxy of this strategy and join the missiological effort to help churches becomes places where gay people can thrive according to a traditional sexual ethic, including trusting gay people and their local family of God to discern the wisest ways to describe their sexualities.
