Shawn Mathis
Puritan Board Sophomore
Hello,
I hope I have the correct place to post this. I have been studying the growth of homosexuality in the American conservative churches for a bit and with the new revelation about pastor Johnson being gay, I thought it important to discuss public confessions of such sins intersecting with the nature of that particular sin.
My opinion (posted here) is that publicly confessing such a sin makes the sin more heinous. That's how I read the Larger Catechism--even if there was no physical enactment of said sin LCQ 139: "and all unnatural lusts; [783] all unclean imaginations, thoughts, purposes, and affections..."
As a reminder, the Westminster Larger Catechism 151 states, in part,
“From the persons offending, if they be of riper age, greater experience or grace, eminent for profession, gifts, place, office, guides to others, and whose example is likely to be followed by others...the nature and quality of the offense.”
Besides, homosexuality is already a heinous sin. And, I fear, much of the church does not look at it that way. I have encountered this in conservative Reformed churches.
And publicly confessing this sin (in this manner in particular), I think, will exacerbate the problem. Matthew Henry's commentary reminded me of this fact. He wrote:
"Christians may and ought to testify more respect to loose worldlings than to loose Christians...The reason of this limitation is here assigned. It is impossible the one should be avoided. Christians must have gone out of the world to avoid the company of loose heathens. But this was impossible, as long as they had business in the world. While they are minding their duty, and doing their proper business, God can and will preserve them from contagion. Besides, they carry an antidote against the infection of their bad example, and are naturally upon their guard. They are apt to have a horror at their wicked practices. But the dread of sin wears off by familiar converse with wicked Christians. Our own safety and preservation are a reason of this difference."
[Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and
Unabridged in One Volume (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 2253.]
Note well: "But the dread of sin wears off by familiar converse with wicked Christians. Our own safety and preservation are a reason of this difference."
This is bad precedent, in my humble opinion.
I hope I have the correct place to post this. I have been studying the growth of homosexuality in the American conservative churches for a bit and with the new revelation about pastor Johnson being gay, I thought it important to discuss public confessions of such sins intersecting with the nature of that particular sin.
My opinion (posted here) is that publicly confessing such a sin makes the sin more heinous. That's how I read the Larger Catechism--even if there was no physical enactment of said sin LCQ 139: "and all unnatural lusts; [783] all unclean imaginations, thoughts, purposes, and affections..."
As a reminder, the Westminster Larger Catechism 151 states, in part,
“From the persons offending, if they be of riper age, greater experience or grace, eminent for profession, gifts, place, office, guides to others, and whose example is likely to be followed by others...the nature and quality of the offense.”
Besides, homosexuality is already a heinous sin. And, I fear, much of the church does not look at it that way. I have encountered this in conservative Reformed churches.
And publicly confessing this sin (in this manner in particular), I think, will exacerbate the problem. Matthew Henry's commentary reminded me of this fact. He wrote:
"Christians may and ought to testify more respect to loose worldlings than to loose Christians...The reason of this limitation is here assigned. It is impossible the one should be avoided. Christians must have gone out of the world to avoid the company of loose heathens. But this was impossible, as long as they had business in the world. While they are minding their duty, and doing their proper business, God can and will preserve them from contagion. Besides, they carry an antidote against the infection of their bad example, and are naturally upon their guard. They are apt to have a horror at their wicked practices. But the dread of sin wears off by familiar converse with wicked Christians. Our own safety and preservation are a reason of this difference."
[Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and
Unabridged in One Volume (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 2253.]
Note well: "But the dread of sin wears off by familiar converse with wicked Christians. Our own safety and preservation are a reason of this difference."
This is bad precedent, in my humble opinion.