Why Am I Going to Revoice?

I am wary of the politics of sexual liberation and gender identity, but my reaction to Revoice should reflect its ministry to Christians experiencing same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria.

Revoice is a yearly conference for Christians who are same-sex attracted or have gender dysphoria. Since 2018, it has been hosted at or associated with Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis, until recently a congregation of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). It has attracted controversy in the PCA for adopting the common usage of “lesbian,” “gay,” “bisexual,” “transgender,” “queer,” “LGBTQ+,” and so on. Critics also accuse it of adopting progressive and “woke” politics, in spite of its continued adherence to a traditional Christian sexual ethic. They often point to Revoice as the marker that the PCA is trending liberal.

So why am I, a staunch theological and political conservative, and (last I checked) “straight” man, going to Revoice this week? I am not going because I expect to feel comfortable there. Many same-sex attracted Christians view Revoice as a place where they can be themselves, not hide important things about themselves, and feel free from shame. I expect to feel discomfort in many ways a theological and political conservative would at Revoice.

But the discomfort I expect to feel is emblematic of the first reason why I am going to Revoice: I think it will help to avoid partisan thinking. Many of the theological conservatives in the churches I have attended recently are very wary of Revoice and do not distinguish it from the progressive and sexually libertine secular movement in our culture. However, I think this stems largely from its political symbolism, rather than the actual content and function of the ministry of Revoice. As a political and especially social conservative, I am very wary of the politics of sexual liberation and gender identity. However, the content of Revoice is the traditional Christian sexual ethic, and its function is to minister and support Christians who find themselves experiencing same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria. I want my own reaction to Revoice to be reflective of this ministerial function it serves, rather than the political connotations I associate with elements of its language and symbolism.

Similarly, a second reason for attending Revoice is that I think that the controversy around the descriptor “celibate, gay Christian” is a theological controversy that can be bridged by careful philosophy. That was one of my original inspirations for branching out from theology into philosophy. I saw certain theological divides as less a matter of biblical exegesis than a philosophical principle. In this case, theological conservatives try to settle the debate by appealing to certain verses about sin and temptation, while the Revoice crew appeals to other scriptures and personal experience.

Notice the sources of theological input here: Purportedly objective biblical evidence and purportedly subjective experience. The question, however, is whether there is any place outside of Scripture to argue objectively, given that purely subjective experience would not be sufficient evidence of anything and that biblical interpretation can be skewed by the thinking we bring to the text. I think that philosophy and empirical evidence can both play a part in settling this dispute. In philosophy, my study of moral psychology has helped me to distinguish between occurrent desire (a desire that occurs at a particular time), patterns of attraction, and sexual orientation. I have also learned to relate theological categories and psychological ones in an interdisciplinary way. I recommend reading my piece, “Same-Sex Attraction and the Misery of Our Condition” for my attempt to intervene philosophically.

Relatedly, another reason I appreciate thinking about the question of same-sex attraction and Christian faithfulness is that it is a place where Christian theology has to deal with empirical input. As I have critiqued elsewhere, the attempt to do theology from the Bible alone leads to Christian coherentism, a theological epistemology according to which Christian theology is an enclosed circle that has no input from outside the propositions of Scripture. This theology cannot be checked or verified in any way and has no ability to persuade those outside its circle, not to mention to articulate why someone finds that circle appealing in the first place.

But the fact of same-sex attraction comes from experience. Perhaps it is attested in the Bible by the fact that homosexuality is briefly discussed. But the experience of a contemporary Christian finding him or herself with this pattern of attraction forces reflection on what Christian faithfulness looks like in this situation. Repetition of biblical verses does not settle how the Christian life looks for such a person nor fully describe what the nature of their challenge is. A fully biblical answer cannot be an exclusively biblical answer but must deal with facts on the ground, especially the fact that the majority of individuals who experience same-sex attraction do not experience any change in this pattern of attraction even as they strive for Christian faithfulness.

Perhaps the most important reason I want to attend Revoice is that I want to know that the law of God and the gospel of Christ have an application to the life of people with same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria. Because, if it does not, I cannot see how the gospel is good news for all people, nor can I believe that it really offers salvation to any of us. All of us have original sin, sinful desires and temptations, in-built personality temperaments, and so on that provide us with particular crosses to bear in this life. If there are sins and struggles that would place a person beyond the reach of the grace of God, then the gospel does not offer the kind of grace that I thought it offered and that I believe I need.

This is why I am willing to risk the discomfort of political ideology, gender non-conforming dress, and kinds of language that I do not prefer to use. I might think that the folks at Revoice are drawing the wrong political and ideological conclusions from their own experience, but nevertheless, their experiences must be accounted for in Christian theology, and they must be treated as the brothers and sisters in Christ that they are. That is why I am attending Revoice, and I’ll tell you what I find when I return.