A Paper from Personal Experience
INTRODUCTION
This paper is being written with eight background themes and definitions in mind. These themes are being identified up front because they permeate this paper, and so they do not need to be re-addressed multiple times in the content of this paper. They are ‘givens’.
We write as Christian parents who have walked this journey with one of our adult children. There is no reference to name or gender in order to protect our child from those who would misuse this paper. Both parents contributed to this paper.
Our child was raised in an intact Christian home with parents committed to marriage and family life. Our child has heard the seeds of the gospel from childhood.
We love our child with a deep and affectionate “storge” love. C.S. Lewis describes this love as being bonded together. It feels like the most natural and emotive type of love. It is in fact, unconditional. True love motivates us to support the highest & best interest of our child no matter what.
We believe that God loves our child much more than we do (Romans 5:8).
Tolerance is not used in the classic sense (we agree to disagree with civility). Tolerance is used here as post-modern (truth is self-defined, mine is equal to yours).
This paper is intended for Christians who believe in the God of the Bible and Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. To the Christian reader, this essay will be relevant, but to a non- believer it may seem like foolishness. The Apostle Paul addresses this understanding in his letter to the Corinthian church by saying, “for the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). Paul is describing the “interpretive grid” of people.
We refer to the wedding ceremony as a “celebration” because it involves much more than a mere ceremony. The celebration may include bachelor/bachelorette parties, showers for each partner, rehearsal, rehearsal dinner, speeches, the wedding ceremony itself, post wedding dinner & dance, and professional photography sessions.
Before engaging our child’s same-sex behavior, we first went to our knees for confession and repentance. This is where we needed to go. Jesus said, “first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” (Matt 7:5). “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up” (James 4:2). Confession remains our “prayer posture” still today.
With these eight ‘givens’ in mind, let’s explore the main question:
Should Christian parents attend their child’s same-sex wedding ceremony?
It seems like a simple question requiring a one-dimensional ‘yes/no’ answer. The culture answers quickly by saying, “sure, why not?” But not so fast, the answer is not so simple.
This paper is dedicated to exploring the answer in detail, and it all fits together into a framework for the decision. For the curious readers, we give you our answer here, at the beginning of the paper: after months of prayerful study, we decided that “we cannot celebrate something that knowingly will hurt our child.” This answer cannot be understood unless you read the rest of the story.
Many Christian theologians and academics have tried to answer the headline question above with differing conclusions. However, few if any of these authors have personally walked this journey with their own adult child. Some prerequisite questions must be answered before answering the main question, such as, “what does God and culture say about all of this?” or “what criteria should we use?” We will take these prerequisite questions one at a time, and this paper will attempt to answer by blending a biblical perspective with the humble voice of personal experience.
What does God think about homosexual behavior, and what does the culture say about it?
THERE ARE TWO COMPETING NARRATIVES
Before deciding about a same-sex wedding celebration, you should first know how to “make sense” of same-sex attraction. There are two main narratives (or scripts) which interpret same-sex attraction and homosexual practice. These two narratives compete for the loyalty of the person who struggles with same-sex attraction. Educating yourself is key to understanding which narrative hurts or helps your child. You should know where someone is “coming from” by educating yourself and becoming conversant in both the cultural narrative and the biblical narrative. That’s how you can make sense of it all. The person struggling with same-sex attraction will eventually choose which narrative to adopt and which narrative will receive their loyalty. The choice of narrative will guide subsequent behavior and identity. A narrative is simply a “story” that connects and explains a selected set of events or experiences, intended to facilitate a life-thesis.
The following two narratives (or scripts) are abbreviated summaries; representing the center of the bell-curve. We know that there can be some variation on these narratives. Here is a condensed summary of the cultural narrative and the biblical narrative:
The Cultural Narrative:
“Same-sex attraction signals a naturally occurring or “intended by God” sexual distinction between types of people. Understanding the sexual-identity rubric can be helpful (L.G.B.T.Q.I.A.P.+). It is the way for you know “who you really are” at the core. Sexual behavior is a journey of discovery and learning to express your true center. Personal fulfillment occurs only when sexual behavior is self-actualized to conform to your same-sex attraction. “Coming out” is a final step in adopting and declaring a sexual self-identity. God made me this way, thus sexual behavior is morally okay, especially if I’m monogamous. Repentance for same-sex behavior is outdated. You shouldn’t try to change sexual orientation. Trying to change it is the same as denying your true self. God loves everyone with same-sex attraction, and the church should support today’s same-sex marriage equality.”
The Biblical Narrative:
“Same-sex attraction does not signal a categorical distinction among different types of people. It is simply one of many exigent human experiences stemming from our original fallen human nature. Attraction is an involuntary temptation, but sexual behavior is a choice. Repeated sexual practice makes the attraction grow stronger. Personal fulfillment occurs only when “self” is submissive to an identity in Jesus Christ. The Father delights in glorifying His Son, and any self-identity which competes with the Son is idolatry. God made me to glorify Him, not self. Jesus modeled a sinless, chaste, and fulfilling life. He offers grace to all who come to repentance. You should try and focus the struggle on behavior. Like alcohol attraction, abstinence is an essential first step. God loves everyone with same-sex attraction, and the church support God’s design for marriage.”
The above narratives are for the most part mutually-exclusive. Two competing narratives are said to be mutually-exclusive if they cannot both be true. A clear example is the set of outcomes of a single coin toss, which can result in either heads or tails, but not both. Therefore, one is true (hits-the-mark), and the other is false (misses-the-mark). Our child decided that the cultural narrative made sense and became loyal to its creeds. As parents, our initial idea was to ‘change’ our beliefs so there’s no tension between us and our child.
So which narrative is true?
We conducted years of personal study on this very question (but that is quite another story, requiring its own essay). We learned that the cultural narrative has no foundation in scripture, church tradition, personal experience, or science. Some will find the previous statement incompatible with modern assertions, but the cultural narrative is in fact, bankrupt. It is a deception snaring people into a paradigm of delusion. As we mentioned, our initial goal was to “change our beliefs” so no tension would exist between us and our child. But the more we learned, the more concerned we became for our child.
One of the world's leading New Testament scholars is Dr. Richard B. Hays. Hays's book Moral Vision of the New Testament was named one of the top 100 most important religious books of the 20th century. Hays says, “In view of the considerable uncertainty surrounding scientific and experiential evidence, in view of our culture’s present swirling confusion about gender roles, in view of our propensity for self-deception, I think it is prudent and necessary to let the unequivocal testimony of Scripture and Christian tradition order the life of the church on this painfully controversial matter. We must affirm that the New Testament tells us the truth about ourselves as sinners and as God’s sexual creatures: marriage between man and woman is the normative form for human sexual fulfillment, and homosexuality is one among many tragic signs that we are a broken people, alienated from God’s loving purpose.” [1]
Dr. Mark A. Yarhouse, Psy.D., is director of the Institute for the Study of Sexual Identity, and a Professor of Clinical Psychology. Yarhouse says, “In the end, the Bible speaks with one voice on the matter. When we add the weight of Scripture to the weight of Christian tradition; when we look carefully at the relevance of scientific research on matters of sexual ethics (science is able to describe what occurs in nature but not how we ought to live); and finally, when we reflect on the personal experiences of sexual minorities who integrate their attractions into a gay identity and those who choose not to because of their effort to live in conformity to God’s revealed will, the evidence points to a traditional understanding of how God sees homosexuality.” [2]
The cultural narrative misses-the-mark. Missing-the-mark derives from the Greek word hamartanō which was an archer’s term, and is also used to describe sin. Sin is described in the Bible as transgression of the law of God (1 John 3:4) and rebellion against God (Deuteronomy 9:7; Joshua 1:18). We came to realize that a same-sex marriage is a legal bond causing one to go deeper into a narrative that rebels against God’s design for sexuality. God hates sin for the simple reason that God loves us, and he wants relationship with us. Sin separates us from God; “But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2). In summary, the biblical narrative will help your child but the cultural narrative will hurt your child. Dr. Mary Healy explains, “God does not deny us what is good for us or what is conducive to our happiness. Rather, he calls us to let go of what will ultimately sabotage our happiness.” [3]
Is homosexual behavior better or worse than other sinful patterns?
We learned that same-sex coupling is not God’s will for human flourishing. Dr. Healy says it this way, “the intricate meaning of sexual union is to signify and enact the marital covenant between a man and a woman. Marriage is therefore the only appropriate context for sexual expression.” [4]
While same-sex coupling should be considered no worse than other sins, it is important to acknowledge that it is indeed a prodigal behavior. We know real parents who experienced the following situations. Consider the similarities of discernment and integrity:
How should I respond when my promiscuous daughter becomes pregnant and desires an abortion? What if she asks me to help her research abortion clinics and to provide assistance to pay for it? Would I have the courage to speak the truth-in-love regarding respect for life and adoption?
How should I respond when my alcoholic adult son loses his driver’s license to DUI, and yet continues to drink? What if he asks me to drive him to the liquor store, and drop him off at a party? Would I have the courage to speak the truth-in-love regarding the freedom of sobriety and rehab?
How should I respond when my same-sex attracted child desires to “marry” their partner? What if the child asks me to help with wedding events and provide assistance or perhaps pay for it? Would I have the courage to speak the truth-in-love regarding God’s design for marriage?
Most Christian parents today would agree that we should speak-up about abortion and alcoholism and guide our child away from these behaviors. But many Christians are becoming okay with same-sex behavior. They view the first two scenarios as “troubled” while the third scenario is viewed as “natural” and therefore somehow different. We have been desensitized by a wily and deceitful cultural narrative that boldly claims same-sex relationships are virtuous, especially if they are monogamous. Dr. Rosaria Butterfield, a former lesbian, said, “During my time of struggle, others tried to help. A Methodist pastor, and the Dean of the Chapel at Syracuse University, believed that I did not have to give up everything to honor God. Indeed, he told me, since God made me a lesbian, I gave God honor by living an honorable lesbian life. He told me that I could have Jesus and my lesbian lover. This was a very appealing prospect. but I had been reading and rereading scripture, and there are no such marks of postmodern “both/and” in the Bible.” [5] Rosaria’s experience is an example of the amalgamation of today’s culture with theology. Some “affirming” apologists openly endorse the idea that same-sex practice is God ordained. However, author V. Philips Long points out that, “Biblical scholarship is seldom unaffected by the intellectual current and cross currents of its own day.” [6]
Christian parents should not argue that same-sex practice is comparatively worse than other sins. Neither should said parents be deceived that it is somehow less than sinful; or worse yet, not sinful at all. Many believers and Christian churches today are confused, and they can’t differentiate between “tolerance” and “grace”. Randy Alcorn, a New York Times best-selling author, speaks to this confusion by saying, “some churches try to make sinners feel comfortable. How? They never talk about sin. Never offend anyone. They replace truth with tolerance, lowering the bar so everyone can jump over it and we can all feel good about ourselves.” [7] Our culture is saturated with relativistic tolerance, and therefore young, new, and even some mature Christians struggle to understand that grace and tolerance are different things. We see a growing need for pastors to address and dissect the distinct differences between grace and tolerance. Those teachers who don’t (or can’t) may be in danger of placing the stumbling block of culture in the way of young believers and potential believers (Luke 17:1).
Satan is described in scripture as, “more crafty than any other beast of the field that the
Lord God had made” (Genesis 3:1). When speaking about Satan, Jesus Christ said, “there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44). Christian evangelist Billy Sunday (1862-1935) suggested dealing honestly with sin in our lives by saying, “one reason sin flourishes is that it is handled like a cream puff instead of a rattlesnake.”
What’s the most important criterion?
It is important to understand the same-sex wedding question from both a biblical and an experiential perspective. It is a relational journey with multiple relationship dimensions, multiple criteria, and unpredictable consequences. As one travels this journey, each relationship demands its own individual attention and the various relational dimensions may create priority quandaries. Sometimes the quandaries pop-up seemingly out of nowhere. In the end, the answer to the same-sex wedding-celebration question becomes a dilemma of thought-provoking conflicts and uninvited prioritizations.
It can be a difficult journey to walk for the devout Christian believer because cherished personal relationships are at stake and our culture has a distinct anti-biblical narrative that saturates the discussion. No one wants to be disliked, and our human avoidance mechanism (and situation ethics) can get in the way of clear thinking. In some ways, it is like walking through a minefield. However, the minefield can be navigated with integrity.
THE THREE RELATIONSHIP DIMENSIONS
Here we examine three important ‘relationship’ dimensions that every Christian will face when making a decision about whether to attend a same-sex wedding celebration. These three relationship dimensions include: 1) the upward, 2) the inward, and 3) the outward.
The upward dimension is defined as the relationship between me and God. Jesus said the greatest commandment is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” (Mt 22:37). After Jesus tells us what is most important, he also taught us how to do it by saying, “If you love me, you will keep my commands” (John 14:15). This illumination from Jesus helps provide a framework for defining the upward relationship as a love relationship between a human and God. Some people today understand “love of God” as merely a warm or happy feeling toward God. They think that, provided they feel good about the idea of God, they may originate their own moral guidelines if they are trying to be a good person. Indeed, Joseph Fletcher, an Episcopal priest, formed a philosophical approach called “situation ethics” which claimed that any of God’s commands may be broken in good conscience if “love” is one's intention. In contrast, the Bible teaches that the keeping of God's commandments is loving God. Love therefore does not replace God’s commands, but rather love gives us the right motive so that we genuinely love God first, and others by obeying his commands. In scripture we read, “Let us not love with words or tongue, but with actions and in truth” (1 John 3:18). Truly loving God means honoring Him, revering Him, and paying close attention to His will as expressed in scripture. And not only are we to pay attention, but we are to obey. The Bible cautions, “Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says” (James 1:22). Therefore, the upward relationship is one between human and God, and God requests this relationship to come first in our priority. Can I honestly say, “Jesus is my Lord, my commander, my priority, my master, my mentor, and my rule of faith?” Amen, come Lord Jesus (Rev 22:20).
The inward dimension is defined as the relationship between me and my conscience. When I look at my reflection in the mirror, can I say, “you are a person of integrity” or, “you are a hypocrite?” Hypocrisy refers to the act of claiming to believe something but acting in a different manner. The word is derived from the Greek term for “actor”— literally, “one who wears a mask”—in other words, someone who pretends to be what he is not. What we are on the outside is meaningless, if our hearts are unconverted (Mt 23:27-28). In contrast, integrity is the inward sense of "wholeness" deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character. Having inner integrity means doing the right thing in a reliable way. It's a personality trait that we admire, since it means a person has a clear conscience and a moral compass that doesn't waiver. Scripture encourages us to, “keep a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander (1 Peter 3:16). The inward guilt of hypocrisy will keep us awake at night, but integrity will allow us to sleep peacefully. “The integrity of the upright guides them, but the unfaithful are destroyed by their duplicity” (Proverbs 11:3).
The outward dimension is defined as relationships between me and my family & friends. This is easily the most complicated relational dimension because of the vast plurality of relationships and personal beliefs. Because of this complexity, more space will be devoted to explaining this relational dimension and identifying its various tiers.
In some ways, the outward becomes like a theatrical cast of characters. The child who initiated the same-sex wedding ceremony will rightly take center stage, but the other outward relationships will round out the cast of characters in this play. This is where your Christian witness and integrity can thrive or shrivel depending on your voice. The Apostle Paul wrote, “if it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with
everyone” (Rom 12:18). It is important to note that this peace comes with two caveats; perhaps because it might not be possible, and also because it does not always depend on you alone. Even so, peace is a good “ideal” to pursue if truth is not ditched in the process. Be aware that communication is key. If you don’t communicate, then others will “invent” motives for you behind your back. We know this from experience.
Now, let’s look at the six different “tiers” of outward relationships:
Tier 1:
The most important outward relationship is the one with your spouse. It is strongly recommended that mom and dad act as one unit. It can be explosive if mom and dad are not on the same page, and marriages have fallen apart over much less. Privately working it out in advance (perhaps through Christian counseling) is very important. We did this. Family begins with mom and dad believing that they are the most important person in the world to each other. As children come along they need to be cherished and loved, but never more than your spouse. If you push your spouse down your list of priorities, then your spouse will resent it, and your children will believe that your marriage isn't all that important. So, outward principle #1 is: “your spouse must come first” before any of the children. Your own marriage will be part of your Christian witness.
Tier 2:
The next most important outward relationship is with your children. Former lesbian, Dr. Rosaria Butterfield says, “The integrity of our relationships matters more than the boldness of our words.” [8] In this tier, relationship is paramount. The one child who initiates the same-sex wedding is obviously center stage, and that is the relationship that everyone tends to focus on, but your other children are no less important. All of your children will want parents to lead with integrity. Dr. Butterfield adds, “Compassion means entering the suffering of another in order to lead the way out.” [9] Emotions can run high as your other children try sorting out issues for themselves. Your adult children may reach different conclusions about whether to attend the celebration. In our case, our children were adults over the age of 18, so we provided our children with liberty to make their own choice. We lovingly and carefully explained our decision in detail, complete with supporting reasoning, but we said their decision was theirs to make. This one-on-one discussion with each of your children will be an important part of your witness.
Tier 3:
This outward tier includes your extended family members. In addition to being a parent, you will likely have parents of your own (your child’s grandparents) plus you are also an aunt or uncle, a brother or sister, a niece or nephew, a 1st or 2nd cousin, etc. Those extended family members will likely receive a “save-the-date” announcement, perhaps a shower announcement, and a wedding invitation. They will be pulled into the drama as cast members. They will grapple with their own decision criteria regarding whether to attend or not. Some of these extended family members will contact you for advice, and some won’t. Some will engage on social media, and some won’t. Some of these family members may be Christians and some will be non-believers. This extended family “soup” will have differing ages, maturities, ideas, beliefs, and relationship histories. They will watch closely for your Christian principles and integrity. No matter what your decision, someone in this tier will disagree with you, count on it.
Tier 4:
This outward tier includes your church family, your friends, work associates, and neighbors. This group may also include a plurality of differing ages, maturities, ideas, and faiths. Many in this tier will monitor from afar, safely removed on social media.
Tier 5:
This outward tier includes the family members and friends of your child’s same-sex partner. You’re likely meeting these folks for the first time in the context of the “engagement.” Relational unfamiliarity will make this outward tier challenging. This group may or may not include a plurality differing ages, maturities, ideas, and faiths. They will all be watching for your Christian ethics in your decision making.
Tier 6:
Outwardly, every person above is connected to other people via social media networks. As the wedding ceremony nears, the social networks will light up with likes, loves, photos, friending, and unfriending. This becomes part of the outward soup. Social media will extend the circle of influence well beyond the above tiers, and it is recommended that parents refrain from engaging social media. Social media is efficient but impersonal.
In summary, the upward dimension is defined as the relationship between you and God (Matt 22:37). The inward dimension is defined as the relationship between you and your conscience (Prov 11:3). The outward dimension is defined as relationships between you and your family & friends (Rom 12:18). These three dimensions each demand attention.
How should we handle conflicts between these relational dimensions?
The upward, the inward, and the outward are rarely in harmony for Christians, and therefore some resolution (in the form of prioritization) will be required. This is what we call the “uninvited prioritization.” Think of it like a totem pole. Some people will tell you that the relationship with your same-sex attracted child is the top consideration. Others will say that honoring the teachings of Jesus and His word is the main thing. Finally, some will tell you that the only consideration is being true to your heart and core-self.
Everyone has an opinion! Because of conflicting moral dilemmas, you will be forced to prioritize. Once you decide what is the most critical relationship dimension on your totem pole, place that in the first position, and then other dimensions fall more easily into place. It sounds simple, but it is hard to do because the lower priorities will need some surgical compromises depending on what you place in the first priority position. This conflicting dilemma is why we see some people change or deny their Christian beliefs. If you place the outward in first position, then the upward and inward will need to be forsaken.
Scripture does provide some insight regarding family relationships and loyalties. We attended a sermon from a pastor who addressed familial relationships and the cross of Christ. He told the congregation he “reluctantly” taught the words of Jesus from Matthew 10. Jesus said, “For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -- a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” (Matt 10:35-37). Jesus’ words may sound odd to modern sensibilities, but the pastor carefully explained that family dissention may occur if one is loyal to Jesus and his teachings. This is the price of the cross. Eventually there will be peace on earth, but in the meantime the cross of Jesus can cause family members to be at odds with one another. Jesus wants us to place him in the first position; and he expects us to deny ourselves and take up our cross and follow him (Matt 10:37, 16:24). Whenever possible, while we were walking this personal journey carefully, we tried to keep our upward relationship in first place. And yes, in our case, placing God in first position did contribute to some relational dissention, just like that described by Jesus in the book of Matthew.
Jesus also taught that the Father’s creative intent for male-female marriage was valid. Jesus said, “haven’t you read, that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’ (Mt 19:4-5). Because of Jesus’ teaching, we felt we should gently speak the truth-in-love to the six tiers of outward relationships. By doing this, we were placing our upward relationship with Jesus Christ in the first position, and deciding to minister grace & truth to all tiers of the outward dimension.
In summary, the cast of characters in the same-sex wedding celebration included children, young Christians, mature Christians, weak Christians, new Christians, people on-the-fence, people of other faiths, agnostics, atheist, unitarians, and a variety of non- believers. All eyes were upon us. As mature Christians, we felt we had the right to attend or not attend. But this decision could not be made without sending a message to the plurality of people and the varying levels of ages and maturity. We felt called to personal responsibility, especially regarding our actions in front of weaker believers, new believers, and those on the fence. We asked ourselves the following question:
Does having the “right” to do something mean we are free to do it in every circumstance, regardless of its effects on others?
Well, the book of Acts documents the amazing growth of the early church and we are provided examples of their issues and struggles that speak to our culture today. One of the struggles in the early church concerned meat which had been sacrificed to idols. Debates over what to eat may seem strange to most of us today, but to the first-century believers, it was a subject of great consequence. As the apostles dealt with the issue, they gave instructions in scripture on several broader topics with application for today: 1) Unity within the church, 2) causing a weaker brother to sin, 3) maintaining a pure testimony, and 4) compromise with the world.
Unity within the church: In the early years of the church, as Gentile converts began joining Jewish believers in local fellowships, an issue arose concerning the eating of meat sacrificed to idols. Greco-Roman society was saturated with idol worship, and it was common for meat sold in the marketplace to have been consecrated as a sacrifice to false gods prior to its sale. The Jewish believers would have nothing to do with such meat, wary of “unclean” food-handling practices and believing that to partake of consecrated meat was to give tacit approval of idol worship—kind of a “second-hand” idolatry. The Gentiles rejected the notion that such meat was tainted and held that they could eat meat sacrificed to idols without endorsing idolatry—they had not actually offered the sacrifice, after all. The matter was becoming a point of contention within the church. [10] In this first century example, we can see a parallel to attending a modern same-sex celebration. The church in Syrian Antioch, comprised of both Jews and Gentiles, struggled with this issue (Acts 15). The Jerusalem Council settled the matter by urging Gentile converts to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols (Acts 15:29). This decision was made not to promote legalism but to keep unity within the church. Since eating meat offered to idols was a divisive issue—abstinence was rightly expedient. With its ruling, the Jerusalem Council affirmed the need for deference, or consideration for the consciences of others. The principle is one of self-denial; we should willingly lay down our personal rights for the sake of maintaining unity in the body of Christ.
Causing a weaker brother to sin: In 1 Corinthians 8:4-13, Paul clarifies the teaching on this subject. Under no circumstances, Paul says, should a believer encourage another believer to violate his conscience. To the pure, all things are pure (Titus 1:15), but to one with a weak conscience, meat taken from pagan temples was spiritually defiled. It would be better never to eat meat again than to cause a believer to sin against his conscience. Today, people confuse tolerance for grace, which can lead to specious moral messages being sent by participation in the celebration. Luke 17:1-2 tells us we should avoid the millstone around our neck and not cause anyone to stumble. The principle here is that the conscience of a weaker Christian is more important than my individual freedom. Doing something “permitted” should never hinder the spiritual health of someone else. In this context, we should refrain from celebrating same-sex relationships that lead deeper into homosexuality. This is most important for elders, pastors, and teachers (James 3:1).
Maintaining a pure testimony. In 1 Corinthians 10:25-32, Paul emphasizes the believer’s liberty and what should limit that liberty. If you buy meat for your own use, don’t inquire where it came from; it doesn’t really matter whether it was sacrificed to an idol or not. “The earth is the LORD’s, and everything in it” (Psalm 24:1). However, if you are invited to dinner and someone there says, “This meat was offered to idols,” then graciously refrain from eating. Since your associate obviously considers the meat to be “tainted” by the idols, do not eat it for his conscience’s sake—even though your conscience is fine. The Christian glorifies God when he limits his freedom for the spiritual benefit of others.
Compromise with the world. In the letter to the church of Thyatira, Jesus rebukes them for tolerating a prophetess who “misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols” (Rev 2:20). This is a different situation from what Paul was dealing with in Corinth. It seems that members of the church of Thyatira were partaking of the pagan “love feasts,” celebrated with gross immorality and feasting. These believers were not simply buying meat in the marketplace; they were attending idolatrous festivals and joining in the sin of the idolaters. (See v.14 for similar rebuke).
In the Gospels, Jesus ate with sinners but he never celebrated their sin. Jesus is not willing that any should perish (2 Peter 3:9) and this is “why” he reached out to sinners. In Matthew 9 we read, “While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and sinners came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and
sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick… for I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” [11] Jesus beautifully called Matthew to leave his life is sin and tax collecting and follow him (Matt 9:9).
We’ve heard people say, “Jesus just hung out with sinners” which can loosely be used to imply Jesus was indifferent toward sinful behavior. But this is inconsistent with the soteriological reason Jesus came to earth. For us and for our salvation, Jesus came to die sacrificially for all sinners (Matt 27:28-29) (Heb 9:28). We should love people like Jesus did, but not disrespect the sacrifice of Jesus by attributing indifference to his actions. A same-sex wedding ceremony disregards God’s purpose & design for marriage and sexuality. We are convinced that Jesus would not approve of anything that disrespects His Father’s design. We see this fact in scripture. Jesus overturned the tables of the moneychangers because they disrespected the Father’s design. Jesus said, “It is written, God’s house will be called a house of prayer, but you are making it a den of robbers.” [12]
From New Testament teaching, we see four principles which contributed to our decision:
Having the “right” to do something does not mean we are always free to do it.
The believer’s liberty in Christ should be voluntarily limited in order not to cause a weaker brother to sin by violating his conscience.
Maintaining the unity of the Spirit may require a believer to give up his “rights.” “How good and pleasant it is when brothers live together in unity!” (Psalm 133:1).
We should avoid anything that would cause a Christian to stumble (Luke 17:1-2).
Is it even possible to respond with a Christlike balance of grace and truth?
Christian author Randy Alcorn, in his book titled The Grace and Truth Paradox says, “Grace without truth breeds moral indifference and keeps people from seeing their need for Christ. Attempts to soften the gospel by minimizing truth keep people away from Jesus. Attempts to toughen the gospel by minimizing grace keep people away from Jesus. It’s not enough for us to offer grace or truth. We must offer both.” [13]
Caleb Kaltenback is a man who was raised by a gay father and a lesbian mother. In his older teen years Caleb gave his heart to the Lord and, amazingly, grew up to become a pastor. He titles his story “Messy Grace”. Caleb has watched many people hurriedly change their views on homosexuality. He writes, “Why do people change their view on same-sex relationships? In most cases, it’s because someone they love has come out to them and it no longer fits their worldview. When people we love come to us and tell us about a part of their life that is out of line with Scripture, we have some choices: We can kick them out of our life. We can ignore it. We can change our beliefs so there’s no tension between us. Or we can keep loving them and hold our beliefs firm. For me, the last option has always worked the best.” [14] Caleb’s decision likewise became ours.
Throughout the years leading up to our child’s same-sex wedding ceremony, we had many opportunities to demonstrate Christlike balance of grace and truth. This has been our calling and our roadmap for sanity. We have referred to our approach in several different ways such as: “grace and truth,” or “conviction with civility,” or “compassion without compromise.” Here is a brief excerpt from the love-letter we personally read to our child about our heartfelt decision:
“We love you, and we want a good relationship with you. We also seek inward honesty to ourselves, and upward faithfulness to our Lord. You have always been a caring person, and we’re persuaded that you would want us to avoid compromising our faith. You know about our love for God, and we hope you respect our prayerful meditations and understand that for us to join in a public celebration like this would lack inward integrity for us. We believe relationship is possible even if we don’t agree on everything. You are important to us, and we hope you will say ‘yes’ to relationship. There is nothing that will cause us to stop loving you. Both you and your partner are welcome in our home and invited to our table… always. We love you forever… mom and dad.”
So, what about our image and reputation?
Even though ‘love’ was our default, we found ourselves mired in the tension between grace and truth. Caleb Kaltenbach said, “I finally figured it out: love is the tension of grace and truth. When you have a person in your life involved in activities or life choices that aren’t healthy, you feel the tension. On the one hand, you feel extreme love for them, but on the other hand, you know that somehow you need to speak truth into their life.” [15]
Sadly, some people involved in the wedding celebration did not want to see or understand the depth of our study, prayer, love, and compassion that we brought to the table. For some, they demanded an over-simplified “yes or no”. Are you “in or out?” We learned that some people demanded “grace only” from us or we might be soundly criticized. Most outward relationships (especially non-believers) in tiers 3-6 parroted the cultural narrative and branded labels on us that were imparted by the culture. Those labels include “hater” or “discriminator”. This was to be expected from non-believers, but what hurt much more were some Christians joining with non-believers in stirring criticism.
Apparently, even the hint of truth on your breath is cause for condemnation from some ‘progressive’ Christians. We had previously heard the idiom “grace pharisee” but never personally experienced what that could even look like. We experienced what can only be described as “looked down upon” by some progressive Christians who say things like, “I thank God that I’m not like the judgmental and legalistic Pharisee.” Some of these folks blog, tweet, and officiously express how historical Christians get it wrong by speaking truth. We saw pride among these progressive Christians who expressed that their superior spirituality is on a higher plane than “non-enlightened” Christians. This is sad because the body of Christ is called to unity. It is disheartening to experience, especially when you know that you’ve loved your child well with a Christlike balance of grace and truth.
We are told in scripture that, “everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Timothy 3:12). By our experience, we caught a glimpse of what this might mean for the future. Even so, once you become conversant in the cultural narrative, it is easier to understand the criticizer’s perspective. The cultural narrative has infiltrated the church, and by recognizing the narrative’s language, it is easier to show empathy for progressives because you can grasp the message that trips them. It’s worth repeating author Philips Long who points out that, “Biblical scholarship is seldom unaffected by the intellectual current and cross currents of its own day.” [16] But, we can know with certainty that God never changes with evolving and divergent societies (James 1:17).
Our best advice is to first do right by your Lord and do right by your conscience, and then do right by your child (the very best you can). Do not worry about your reputation.
Regarding our testimony, we had a clear conscious knowing that we were being watched closely by young children, new Christians, immature Christians, and people on-the-fence who saw our witness for Christ and our tension of grace and truth in Christlike balance. Watchful eyes were also trained on social networks and photography tied to the wedding celebration. The main principle we followed is that the conscience of a weaker Christian is more important than our individual freedom. Doing something “permitted” should never hinder the spiritual health of someone else. To that end, we view this principle as most important for elders, pastors, ministry leaders, and teachers. Our hope is that our children view us as people of “honest conviction and caring civility”. Psalms 1:3 says,
That person is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season and whose leaf does not wither – whatever they do prospers.
In the end, we chose not to attend our child’s same-sex wedding celebration, but our every thought and action was motivated by a storge and agape love that “acts in the highest and best interest of another person no matter what.” CS Lewis said, “Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved person’s ultimate good.” A same-sex wedding ceremony legally solidifies homosexuality in the life of your child. After many agonizing months of prayer, we decided that we should not celebrate something that knowingly will hurt our child. We could not pretend that the cultural narrative is harmless or without deception. Our child would be hurt by mere sentimentality playing- along with a deceptive cultural narrative. “Love rejoices with the truth” (1 Cor 13:6).
We are certain that our children and family members would have lost all respect for us if we ditched our inward integrity. The child who initiated the ceremony did not approve of our decision, but we trust they silently respect it. We are taking the long view and understanding that God’s timeline is not ours. We pray diligently for our own humility, and for full restoration of our child’s love for Jesus Christ.
We do not know how the Holy Spirit is working, but we do know this…
"'My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,' declares the Lord. 'As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.'"
[1] Hays, Richard B. The Moral Vision of the New Testament: A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics. New York, NY. HarperCollins Publishers, 1996. P.399-400
[2] Yarhouse, Mark A. Homosexuality and the Christian: A Guide for Parents, Pastors, and Friends. Bloomington MN: Bethany House Publishers. 2010. P.35
[3] Healy, Dr. Mary. Scripture, Mercy, and Homosexuality. El Cajon, CA: Catholic Answers, 2016. P.61
[4] Ibid P.20
[5] Rosaria Champagne Butterfield, The Secret Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert: An English Professor’s Journey into Christian Faith (Pittsburgh: Crown and Covenant, 2012), 16.
[6] Long, V. Philips. The Art of Biblical History: Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. 1994. P.99
[7] Alciorn, Randy. The Grace and Truth Paradox: Responding with Christlike Balance. Colorado Springs, CO: Multnomah Book Publishing. 2003. P.20
[8] Dr. Rosaria Champagne Butterfield, quote: https://www.goodreads.com
[9] Ibid
[11] The Holy Bible, New International Version, Matthew 9:9-13
[12] Ibid, Matthew 21:13
[13] Alciorn, Randy. The Grace and Truth Paradox: Responding with Christlike Balance. Colorado Springs, CO: Multnomah Book Publishing. 2003. P.18
[14] Kaltenbach, Caleb. Messy Grace: How a Pastor with Gay Parents Learned to Love Others Without Sacrificing Conviction. Colorado Spring, CO: Waterbrook Press. 2015. P95.
[15] Ibid. P30.
[16] Long, V. Philips. The Art of Biblical History: Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. 1994. P.99