Throughout this time many in the PCA have publicly promoted Revoice while at the same time claiming that Side B does not exist within the denomination. They have said that rather than change our Constitution to address a non-existent issue that we should make use of the AIC Report on Human Sexuality because it gives us the tools to rightly address the issues we are facing.

It has been almost 5 years since the Revoice Side B Conference was born in the PCA. That first Revoice Conference (July 2018) featured speakers promoting the beauty of “queer treasure” and attendees cuddling, petting, and at least one walking around with a portion of his genitals hanging out of his shorts.  The PCA has been debating and seeking to deal with Side B (Gay) Christianity within the denomination ever since. Thankfully the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC) of the PCA has denounced many of the teachings of Revoice. Still the debate persists.

Throughout this time many in the PCA have publicly promoted Revoice while at the same time claiming that Side B does not exist within the denomination. They have said that rather than change our Constitution to address a non-existent issue that we should make use of the AIC Report on Human Sexuality because it gives us the tools to rightly address the issues we are facing.

I agree that the AIC Report is a fine work on Biblical Sexuality with some great tools.  I taught a 12 week class with it that I commend to you.  However, the AIC Report has no Constitutional Authority and men have (not surprisingly) disagreed with what it allows and forbids.  Additionally, since it does not use the term Side B, how do we know what the AIC Report on Human Sexuality thinks about Side B Gay Christianity?

Dr. Tim Keller, one of the main authors of the AIC report explains that “the PCA’s Ad-Interim Committee on Human Sexuality considered this Side B view and clearly rejected it.”

The problem is in how one defines Side B.  One PCA Pastor on Twitter, based on a decades old conception of Side B, boldly states that “they agree same-sex sexual unions are out of bounds.  Under these terms, the PCA is & always has been Side B.”

Is that all that Side B is? Let’s attempt to define Side B and in so doing show that the least common denominator for Side B is more than abstaining from same-sex sexual unions.  Secondly, we’ll show evidence for how this definition is occurring in the PCA and has been allowed to occur. 

DEFINING SIDE B

I have defined Side-B in this way:

“Side B Gay Christianity… says that while

• • “being gay” or having a “gay orientation” is a valid category of personhood and identity,
  • Scripture clearly forbids the acting out of those desires.
  • They advocate for a “gay but celibate” way of life.”

*I was attacked for this definition and article until

Tim Keller offered his own definition:

• • “People attracted to the same sex, though remaining celibate
  • in obedience to the Bible,
  • still can call themselves ‘gay Christians’ and see their attraction as a part of their identity which should be acknowledged like one’s race or nationality….”

*This is the view that Keller says is rejected in the PCA AIC Report on Human Sexuality.

Dr. Greg Johnson, PCA Pastor and Side-B proponent in the PCA defines Side B this way:

“What makes someone Side B is simply

• • The rejection of homoerotic desire and practice
  • as sin, coupled with
  • The acknowledgement that a homosexual orientation is deeply rooted and unlikely to go away in this lifetime.”

Religion News, reporting on these issues, defines Side B this way:

(Side B is) “openly LGBTQ Christians who,

• • while embracing their sexual orientation,
  • also believe God designs sex and marriage
  • to occur exclusively between a man and a woman.”

Q Christian Fellowship, which took over the Organization that created the term Side B, defines it this way:

“Any theology which

• • affirm LGBTQ+ identities,
  • yet maintains that Christians should refrain from same-gender sex
  • for a variety of personal and/or theological reasons.”

You’ll notice how all of these definitions include MORE than simply “being attracted to the same-sex but being celibate because the Bible forbids it.” There is an identity component included in Side-B that in some sense is more than descriptive of the person’s experience.

This was an education for some in the PCA who thought Side B just meant that “same-sex sexual unions are out of bounds.”  As a matter of fact, it seems that PCA pastors are the only people who still affirm that limiting definition of Side B.  Perhaps they aren’t up on the debate or the community even as some of them exist within the community.

What About Rosaria and Becket?

Rosaria Butterfield and Becket Cook are both Reformed Christians who formerly lived as practicing homosexuals but have left that lifestyle and identification to follow Christ. Rosaria has been married for many years now to an RPCNA Pastor and Becket lives a single and chaste life.  They have both written and spoken extensively on their journey and the dangers of the Side B position.

They both claim that this Side B ontological and anthropological error is what is going on in the PCA, Revoice, and Greg Johnson’s teaching.

• I reject the False Teaching of Revoice/Side B Theology by Rosaria Butterfield
• What is Side A and Side B Anyway? by Rosaria Butterfield
• Side B Retraction by Becket Cook
• The Threat of Gay Christianity by Becket Cook

Would we be so arrogant to think we know better than this sister and brother in Christ as to what Side B is and how that relates to the PCA?

When in an online dialogue with Greg Johnson about Side B, I asked him if Side B is simply that “same-sex sexual activity is immoral” why does Rosaria Butterfield reject it.  He responded:

“Rosaria rejects sexual orientation as a category. That’s what makes her different from Side B.”- Greg Johnson, November 30, 2021

By this statement alone we must reject the assertion by the uninformed that “Side B is just same-sex attracted but a commitment to the Biblical Sexual ethic.”  By Johnson’s own admission, a rejection of orientation as a category puts one outside of the Side B camp.  One thing to note is that Johnson doesn’t say what type of category it is.  Is it a category of experience? Personhood?  Being? Identity? He doesn’t say.

Thankfully, Rosaria tells us.  She explains the Side B that she Rejects:

“Sees sexual orientation as an accurate category of personhood (i.e., there is such a thing as a gay person – that gayness describes who someone actually is)…To the Side B Christian homosexuality is a sexuality – one of many.”

So, there you have it. Greg admits the difference is that Rosaria rejects sexual orientation as a category and Rosaria tells us that she rejects orientation as a category of personhood.

The issue here is one’s view of anthropology and is therefore theological in nature and not simply one’s use of language.

SIDE B IN THE PCA

Even though some claim “The PCA has always been Side B,” there are some who say that Side B isn’t happening in the PCA.  If that’s the case, why would Becket Cook and Rosaria Butterfield say it is?  According to  Keller, “there is not One PCA court– not one session, presbytery, or agency– that has ever endorsed Side B Christianity.” Those are carefully chosen words, but what type of “endorsement” is Keller asking for? Is he implying that Side B can’t be allowed to exist in the PCA unless an official body makes a public declaration they are on board with Side B? Let’s see if there is any evidence of the Side B that should be rejected in the PCA.

Members of Memorial Presbyterian Church Tell Us

Why would Dr. Nate Collins, a Member at Memorial PCA (the Church that Greg Johnson Pastors) and cofounder of Revoice, identify as “A Gay Man” while he is married to a woman and why would his Wife (Sara Collins) claim that what Keller says is rejected by the AIC Report regarding Side B is precisely what is going on at their Church?

Read More