Testing the Christians

Homosexuality, The Bible, and Christian Love

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

My region is still devastated by the aftermath of Helene, and my life is still upside down from the catastrophe. However, I am returning to regular writing because routine is good and Substack is my only source of income for the time being. If you are able, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

As always, half of my work is behind a paywall. If you are truly unable to afford a subscription, please DM me on Substack or reply to this email requesting a free comp, and I will give you 6 months free, no questions asked.

My previous article Homosexuality and the Poverty of Christian Imagination provoked a big response. It seems that, for a good portion of my audience, I accomplished what I set out to do.

John Krimitsas

, a Christian, wrote,

This was tough to read, Stephen. Not because my faith is wounded or my ego is hurt. Far from it. It just made me realize I have no answer to your questions and absolutely no serious rebuttal. Do I completely agree? No. But I fully comprehend the frustration and "complaint" that someone might feel when coming across Biblical morality.

I appreciate this comment. I cannot demand that people agree with me on the morality of gay sex and marriage. It is my responsibility to live in deep pluralism with those who think I am living in sin, and vice versa (yes, I do believe that upholding the traditional sexual ethic is a moral failing.) All I ask — and all we can ever ask of each other, I think — is pause, compassion, and consideration.

My article was, admittedly, a test. I wanted to see if my audience, especially the Christians, would be moved by a story of love, agony, and struggle with faith. Those whose hearts were not moved by the piece failed the test.

I am not asking Christians to engage me in debate about theology or apologetics. I am laying down a more fundamental challenge and making an appeal to a deeper magic: where is your compassion? Where is your humanity? So, my sincerest thanks to John and other Christians like him who read my article and took its message seriously.

Sadly, not all Christians who disagreed with me passed the test.  Many regurgitated, word for word, the same old arguments that I already knew, just a little more forcefully and verbosely, as if I hadn’t spent decades in the faith reciting those same words. They met a story of humanity and suffering with, as Hamlet bemoaned, “words, words, words.”

Some of the words were outright vicious. I was called fag and faggot (which is fine — it’s hard to get offended by a true accusation) and homosexual acts were described to me in bloody, violent detail to dehumanize or goad me. All these words came, sadly, from Christians. I take them in stride because I’ve been writing about homosexuality for a long time and I know that bigotry is just the cost of being a gay man discussing sacred subjects.

I only bring this up because my article was a test in another way: I am giving serious thought to returning to Christianity. I wanted to see how Christians in my orbit would respond to the embodied facts of my life. Would they be known for their love? Would they make the gospel known to me? Would they love me as Jesus loves me? Would they treat the stranger with compassion? I didn’t emphasize any of this in the article because I wanted to test the waters. They didn’t disappoint: those waters are full of sharks.

This is not evidence for or against the truth of Christianity, but it is a good barometer of who to trust. The viciousness of Substack Christians has been duly noted. They will no doubt defend their ugliness by arguing that they are speaking the truth in love and that it does no good to shield me from the consequences of my sin. I appreciate their forthrightness because I prefer to know who the wolves are.

Let me now turn my attention to the progressive Christians. In the article, I stated that I believe the traditional ethic has the stronger Biblical case over the affirming case. This ruffled some feathers, and I did admittedly glide past this point quickly. Allow me to unpack what I meant.