If a man feels honestly compelled to describe himself as a homosexual Christian, and the description is accurate, we heartily commend his honesty and desire to help him overcome this sin, but he is not qualified to hold office in the Presbyterian Church in America. If, however, homosexual lust no longer dominates a man, he should gladly drop the shameful description and hate such a perverse label.

Some ordained officers in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) are publicly describing themselves as “gay Christians.” Is this acceptable? Should men who describe themselves as homosexuals hold office in the church? The answer is no, for the following reasons.

If the word ‘homosexual’ accurately describes a man, then he is not qualified for church office.
Homosexual sin is biblically akin to bestiality and incest.
If officers identify as homosexuals, then homosexual perversity will be further normalized in the PCA.

If the word ‘homosexual’ accurately describes a man, then he is not qualified for church office
Currently, all officers in the PCA publicly confess that homosexual acts are sinful, and the Scriptures clearly support this understanding. Leviticus 20:13 says, “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.”
God’s Word not only condemns homosexual acts but also condemns the desire for such acts. Romans 1:26-27 says, “For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.”
The desire for homosexual sex is a manifestation of an unnatural and vile passion, and if these perverse sexual desires characterize a man to such an extent that he thinks he should publicly identify with them, then he is not fit to hold office in the church.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says, “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”
If a man can be accurately described as a fornicator, idolater, adulterer, homosexual, etc., then he will not inherit the kingdom of God. If this is the case, then he obviously is not fit for office in Christ’s church.
One might object, “The homosexual Christian no longer practices these sins!” If so, then calling himself a “homosexual” is inaccurate and even insulting. If they say this description is justified because a desire for perverse sex still characterizes him, then this dominant lust would disqualify him for office, too. If perverse sexual desires characterize a man and the description of “homosexual” is accurate, then he should not hold office in the church. If, however, a man sometimes struggles with a sinful desire, which is not characteristic of his life, then it is wrong and even insulting to make that sin his self-description.
If a man who is an adulterer trusts in Christ and stops committing adultery, he should not describe himself as an adulterous Christian.” If the term adulterer still accurately describes the daily ongoing dominance of this lust, so that it honesty compels him to identify as an “adulterous Christian,” then he is not qualified for office. If, however, he sometimes struggles with lust for women who are not his wife, but it does not characterize him and he mortifies these lusts, then the description of “adulterous Christian” is no longer accurate and to call him such is an insult.
So, if a man feels honestly compelled to describe himself as a homosexual Christian, and the description is accurate, we heartily commend his honesty and desire to help him overcome this sin, but he is not qualified to hold office in the Presbyterian Church in America. If, however, homosexual lust no longer dominates a man, he should gladly drop the shameful description and hate such a perverse label.
And that brings us to a very important point that is lost on many who have been seduced by the LGBTQ+ juggernaut that has swept the nation: Homosexual desire is a shameful sexual perversion.
Homosexual sin is biblically akin to Bestiality and Incest
Leviticus 20:12-15 says, “If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death. They have committed perversion. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is wickedness. They shall be burned with fire, both he and they, that there may be no wickedness among you. If a man mates with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal.”
In this passage where God condemns homosexuality, note the two other sexual sins that are akin to it: bestiality and incest. Some people in the world have bestial or incestuous sexual attractions. They may even have had these attractions from an early age. According to the new philosophy infiltrating the PCA, the man who experiences such sinful sexual attractions should be encouraged (or at least permitted) to describe himself by that attraction. If this is true, then a Christian should be permitted the self-description of “Incestuously Attracted Christian” or “Bestially Attracted Christian.” Currently, I know of no officer in the PCA who thinks officers should be permitted to use either of these self-descriptions.
This raises an important question. Why is it acceptable for an ordained officer to describe himself as homosexual, but not acceptable to describe himself as “beasto-sexual” or “incestuo-sexual”? The answer lies in a 40-year long publicity campaign that has successfully normalized homosexuality in American culture. Sadly, this campaign to normalize homosexual perversion has influenced some PCA officers and members, who now believe officers should be permitted to describe themselves as homosexuals. If these men have their way, they will win a great victory for the homosexual movement and further corrupt Christ’s church.
If officers identify as homosexuals, then homosexual perversity will be further normalized in the PCA
The most obvious thing about homosexuality is that it is all about perverse sexual desires and acts. In order to normalize homosexuality, homosexual activists have long recognized the necessity of downplaying the perversity of what homosexual men want to do to one another.
Two homosexual activists named Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen openly acknowledged this strategy in their 1987 article, The Overhauling of Straight America, in which they state: “At least in the beginning, we are seeking public desensitization and nothing more… As far as desensitization is concerned, the medium is the message—of normalcy… In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent–only later his unsightly derriere!”
The first two points of this essay have been attempts to uncover the “unsightly derriere” of homosexuality and awaken God’s people to the perversity of homosexual sin. I fear that some in the PCA have been seduced by the propaganda of homosexual activists. They think homosexuality is about civil rights for oppressed sexual minorities, or simply a different way of looking at the world—maybe an appreciation of masculine beauty and aesthetics or a desire for male friendship. That is not what it is about. Homosexuality is about a vile and shameful desire to have sex with someone of the same sex. This desire is biblically akin to incestuous and bestial sexual desires. This is the unsightly derriere of the homosexual camel.
If officers in the PCA are permitted to identify as homosexuals it will have the effect of “Overhauling the Straight PCA.” God’s people will be further desensitized to sexual perversity and the enemies of God will gain another foothold in the church of Christ.
Therefore, the addition of 7-4 to the Book of Church Order is needed to make clear to the church that: “Men who describe themselves as homosexual, even those who describe themselves as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy by refraining from homosexual conduct, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America.”
Steven Warhurst is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is pastor of Westminster PCA in Kingsport, Tenn.
Related Posts:

The epistolary exchange between Helmuth and Freya is one of the most moving in history. Studded with Scriptures and with honest reflections on God’s work in their lives, they are also an invaluable testimony of how Christians can come to grips with the prospect of imminent death. Most of the time, Helmuth found it impossible to focus entirely on either death or life. As long as there was a possibility for him to present his side of the story, he kept developing his line of defense. At the same time, both he and Freya learned to say, “Not my will, but yours be done” (Luke 22:42). 

“One thing Christianity and we National Socialists have in common, and only one: we demand the whole man.” These words, pronounced by Roland Freisler, State Secretary of the Reich, at the time of the trial of Helmuth von Moltke, were jarring.
“I wonder if he realized what he was saying?” Moltke wrote later. “This was grim earnest. ‘From whom do you take your orders? From the Beyond or from Adolf Hitler?’ ‘Who commands your loyalty and your faith?’ All rhetorical questions, of course. Anyhow, Freisler is the first National Socialist who has grasped who I am.”[1]
Every political accusation the party had leveled against Moltke – accusations he was well-prepared to disprove – were suddenly brushed aside to reveal the crux of the matter: Moltke’s loyalty to Christ.
Now, with the cards laid clearly on the table, Moltke felt thankful and energized. “Just think how wonderfully God prepared this, his unworthy vessel,” he wrote to his wife Freya.
He then went on to list many instances of God’s providence in his life.
Chosen and Molded
Born in March 1907 in Kreisau (now Krzyżowa, Poland) to a reputable Prussian family, at age 14 he left the Christian Science his parents had firmly embraced and became confirmed in the Evangelical Church of Prussia.
He later studied law and political sciences in Breslau, Vienna, Heidelberg, and Berlin. In 1931, he married Freya Deichman, who became his greatest earthly source of strength in this life. Four years later, he declined the chance to become a judge because the position would require him to join a party which had already reared its ugly head: the National Socialist German Party. Instead, he opened a law practice in Berlin, where he helped victims of Hitler’s régime t.
In spite of this, he was drafted in 1939 by the German military intelligence – an experience that confirmed in his mind the horrors of war. He learned of villages destroyed and thousands of people executed in senseless revenge. “Certainly more than a thousand people are murdered in this way every day, and another thousand German men are habituated to murder,” he wrote in 1941. “May I know this and yet sit at my table in my heated flat and have tea? Don’t I thereby become guilty too? What shall I say when I am asked: And what did you do during that time?”[2]
He joined a group of friends equally opposed to Nazism. Their three meetings in Kreisau led them to be known as the “Kreisau Circle.” Believing that Germany would be defeated in the war, they focused on post-war reconstruction.
Moltke opposed the assassination of Hitler. Regardless, he was arrested on the evening of January 19, 1944. Looking back, he recognized God’s hand in taking him out of the picture just as he was in danger of “being drawn into active participation for a putsch” – a violent attempt, which was actually brought to action in July of the same year. “I was pulled away,” he said, “and thus I am, and remain, free of any connection to the use of violence.”[3]
He gratefully recognized God’s hand in bringing him to Himself, after years of nominal Christianity. “He humbled me as I have never been humbled before, so that I had to lose all pride, so that at last I understand my sinfulness after 38 years, so that I learn to beg for his forgiveness and to trust to his mercy.”[4]
He recounted all of God’s mercies since he had been in prison: God had allowed him to communicate with Freya and prepare for his death; he had let him “experience to their utmost depth the pain of parting and the terror of death and the fear of hell, so that all that should be over too;” and had endowed him “with faith, hope, and love, with a wealth of these that is truly overwhelming.”[5]
The last realization was the cherry on the cake, as he stood before Freisler “as a Christian and nothing else.” To him, this was the greatest honor. “For what a mighty task your husband was chosen,” he wrote to Freya, “all the trouble the Lord took with him, the infinite detours, the intricate zigzag curves, all suddenly find their explanation in one hour on the 10th of January 1945. Everything acquires its meaning in retrospect, which was hidden.”
Read More
Related Posts:

Based on the text of the [proposed] ordinance, counseling teenagers by telling them what God says about sexuality is a form of punishable heresy since it violates the sacred texts (e.g., statements by the American Psychoanalytic Association) of some West Lafayette city council members.

The Story
A proposed city ordinance in Indiana highlights why bans on “conversion therapy” can be a threat to the gospel.
The Background
The city council of West Lafayette, Indiana is considering an ordinance that would make it illegal for “unlicensed” counselors to counsel minors on human sexuality in a way that conflicts with LGBT+ orthodoxy. For example, if a teenager goes to a Christian counseling center about unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria, it would be breaking the law to give them answers based on biblical sexual ethics. The penalty for violating the ban on so-called “conversion therapy” is a fine of $1,000 per day.*
The proposed ordinance defines “conversion therapy” as any practices or treatments that seek to “change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including efforts to change gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same gender.”
The law makes an exception, though, for counseling that affirms a minor’s embrace of homosexuality or gender identity. According to the ordinance, “Conversion therapy shall not include counseling that provides assistance to a person undergoing gender transition, or counseling that provides acceptance, support, and understanding of a person or facilitates a person’s coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, including sexual-orientation-neutral interventions to prevent or address unlawful conduct or unsafe sexual practices, as long as such counseling does not seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.”
“Counseling,” as defined by the proposal, refers to “techniques used to help individuals learn how to solve problems and make decisions related to personal growth, vocational, family, and other interpersonal concerns.” “Unlicensed person” is defined as any person not licensed or governed by Ind. Code § 25-1-1-1 et seq. and the State of Indiana’s Professional Licensing Agency who provides counseling and/or psychotherapy. The ordinance makes no exception for pastors or other religious counselors.
Read More