LGBTQ and the Rural Church: Developing a Biblical/Theological Response

Some time ago, a coupled called me with a dilemma.  Their child, who grew up in a small rural church and struggled with an LGBTQ identity, was getting married to his partner of the same sex. The news was devastating to them, and they struggled with how they were to respond to their child, the upcoming wedding, and the new member of the family.  Should they attend or not?  But it also raises a more vital question, and that is, how do we as Christians and a church respond to those who embrace an LGBTQ lifestyle?

For rural communities and churches, the LGBTQ issue can be especially difficult. For those who struggle with sexual identity they can find themselves alienated from the church because of people’s strong negative reaction.  For the family members, instead of understanding and compassion, they can experience a feeling of isolation as they are torn between their family member who has embraced the LGBTQ lifestyle and the strong disapproval from members of the church and community.  The issue is further complicated by the intricate web of relationships that exists within a close-knit rural community, where the fear of what others may think prevails.  What if my neighbors and friends disagree with our response? How will they respond to us? Will they ostracize us because of the choices of our children?

As we face the LGBTQ movement and our response to it, we need to recognize that this is a challenge that is not going away.  We cannot ignore the issue in the hope that it will fade away.  It is not just an urban problem, but also a rural issue.  Rural churches will increasingly face the reality of their presence both in the community and with family members within the church. Regarding the question of the legitimacy of the LGBTQ lifestyle, the Bible is clear that it is a sinful lifestyle that contradicts the moral purity of God.  However, it is far more challenging to answer the question, “How do we respond to those who have embraced this lifestyle and to family members whose children have identified as LGBTQ?”  It is this question that is the focus of this article, not in the hopes of answering all the questions, but in challenging the rural church to develop a theological vision that will guide us as we seek respond pastorally to families whose children have embraced a LGBTQ lifestyle and how the church responds redemptively to those who live this lifestyle in the community.

In our politically divided world, the issue of LGBTQ has become another political football that serves to divide our country.  As a result, we often fail to distinguish between the politics of the LGBTQ movement and the individual who has embraced this lifestyle.  If the church is to develop a proper response, we must move beyond the political rhetoric and develop a theological vision that brings salvation and redemption to those caught in the snare of the LGBTQ sin (as well as any other sin).  In the political vision, we see the LGBTQ as a movement to oppose and condemn, as we seek to prevent their agenda from infiltrating the schools and children’s programming (and rightfully so).  However, in a theological vision, we are reminded that our ultimate purpose and goals are redemptive, not judgmental.  Our ultimate goal is not to isolate those in the LGBTQ community by pushing them back into the closet; it is to reach these individuals with the transformation of Christ so that they might embrace the identity and lifestyle that God intends.         

First, a theological vision begins with placing the sin of LGBTQ in the context of a Biblical doctrine of sin. God is a holy God in whose presence all sin (and sinners) are equally offensive. We often minimize the sins we struggle with in our personal lives while demonizing the sins that we easily avoid. However, in the sight of God, all sin is equally offensive.  The greatest sin in our eyes (such as the sin of LGBTQ) is just as offensive as the sin we deem minor (such as someone merely eating the proverbial apple when told not to eat of it).  In the sight of God, there are no degrees of severity of sin, for all sin is equally offensive, for it seeks to usurp God as the creator and ruler of our lives. As Stephen Charnock points out, “All wicked inclinations in the heart, and struggling motions, secret repining, self-applauding confidence in our own wisdom, strength, etc., envy, ambition, revenge, are sparks from this ancient fire.  The language of every one of these is, “I would be a lord to myself and would not have God superior to me” (Steven Charnock, Attributes of God, Crossway, 2022, p. 142).

Second, a theological vision requires a proper understanding of anthropology.  All humanity was created in God’s image to reflect him.  It is this image that defines our identity.  Furthermore, all sin is ultimately an identity crisis and a denial of God’s image implanted in us, for we seek to find our identity and worth in something other than God.  For those in the LGBTQ community, they find their identity in their sexuality.  For those who are pursuing wealth and success, these become their identity.  Any identity that is not grounded in the image of God is a corrupted identity and a distortion. We rightfully condemn the identity theology of LGBTQ, but are tolerant and even accepting of an identity theology grounded in material, success, and prosperity. All are a distortion of the image of God implanted within us (Genesis 1:27; 2 Corinthians 5:17; 1 Peter 2:9, etc)..

         Third, developing a theological vision for those living a LGBTQ lifestyle must be grounded in the Gospel of Christ. Christ’s death and resurrection provided the means and basis for the forgiveness of all sin, no matter how severe the sin might appear from our perspective.  In the sight of God,  the LGBTQ is no more sinful than any other person apart from Christ (1 Timothy 1:12-14; Romans 3). Christ came to offer salvation to all people (John 3:16). Although the application of the Gospel is limited to those who respond in faith, the scope and appeal of the Gospel extend to all humanity.  He died to demonstrate his love by redeeming people captured by all kinds of sin, including those captured within the LGBTQ lifestyle.  If Christ died to save sinners and to prove his love to them, including those who embrace LGBTQ, how much more should we love them and desire to see them come to the cross for cleansing and forgiveness? The ultimate message of the Gospel is not condemnatory but redemptive (John 3:17). 

Fourth, developing a theological vision for the LGBTQ is grounded in our ecclesiology, for it goes to the heart of the purpose and mission of the church.  The great commission is not just a call to take the Gospel to the most remote rural communities in America; it is not just a call to reach all cultural groups within our country; it is also a call to take the Gospel to every sinner. The mandate of our mission is to communicate the Gospel to our neighbors, whether they are LGBTQ individuals or respected community leaders who live next door.

Fifth, a theological vision involves recognizing the difference between the temptation of sin and the act of sin.  When we accept Christ as our savior, we realize that we are freed from the bondage of sin and its guilt; however, we also recognize that justification does not result in complete glorification.  Even though we are saved from sin, we are still in the process of gaining victory over sin’s temptation.  Just because we are saved does not mean that we are no longer tempted by sin.  Paul understood the ongoing struggle with temptation in his own life (1 Cor. 9:27).  The failure of the church is that in our response to the LGBTQ community, we did not recognize the struggle and the temptation.  Instead of coming alongside the person who struggles with sexual identity, we condemn them for the temptation itself.  As a result, we isolated them from the very community that is called to help and support them so that they can have victory over sin.

Last, a theological vision involves developing relationships with LGBTQ individuals to demonstrate love and compassion so that we might reach them with the Gospel.  Instead of isolating ourselves from them, we need to follow the path of Jesus, who “felt compassion for them, because they were distressed and dispirited like sheep without a shepherd (Mt. 9:36). The Gospel is relational.  It involves inviting people into a relationship with Christ by demonstrating His love through our actions and attitudes.  Love is at the heart of evangelism.  It consists of developing connections with people so that they can observe our lives and be drawn to the Gospel (1 Peter 3:15). This is true whether it be the businessman who operates the local hardware store, the person struggling with addiction, or the individual grappling with sexual temptation and identity issues. We do not overlook or condone their sin, but neither do we avoid them because of it.  Instead, we point them to the cross that gives hope for their sin. 

When confronted with the issue of attending their son’s gay wedding,  how should we respond in light of our theology? We often only ask the question, “Will my attendance communicate that I (and God) am accepting the sin?”  But we must also ask another question, “Will my attendance communicate my (and God’s) love and acceptance of the individual, so that I can demonstrate God’s love to them to lead them to the cross?”  We need to ask both questions if we are going to respond correctly.  The challenge we face in the rural church regarding the LGBTQ lifestyle is a challenge we face regarding all sin and all sinners.  While we cannot approve of the sin, we must consistently demonstrate love for the sinner.  The first question is necessary in light of the holiness of God; the second is essential to reflect the love and grace of God.  Too often, we emphasize one to the exclusion of the other and, as a result, distort the character of God.

In my discussion with the parents of a child who had embraced the LGBTQ identity, they had communicated to their child that they would never be able to accept the lifestyle their child was embracing (affirming God’s holiness).  In light of this, I recommended that they attend, as their attendance will not convey their acceptance of the union, for they had made that clear to them.  However, by attending, it would communicate that they still loved their child and his partner as sinners in need of God’s grace (thus affirming God’s grace and love for the sinner).  As the reader, you may not agree with my answer (I, too, struggle with whether it is the correct answer).  However, I do believe that we were at least asking the right question: “How do we communicate God’s grace and his holiness to people caught in sin?”  This is the question we must be continually asking as we struggle to help families deal with the pain and hurt of children who abandon their faith and embrace a lifestyle that contradicts God’s message, whether that be LGBTQ or any other sinful lifestyle. The starting point for developing a biblical response to the reality of the LGBTQ presence in the community is to ensure that we ask the right questions and then seek answers grounded in and governed by our biblical theology of God’s holiness and righteousness, as well as His compassion, grace, and forgiveness of sinners.  By striving to respond biblically to the questions, we not only represent Christ to those who embrace and/or affirm the LGBTQ lifestyle, but we also represent Christ and His love, grace, and righteousness to the community in which we live and to those who observe our response.