Katy Nolan/Staff Writer, PNW News Agency
There are moments when a single church service captures just how dramatically some denominations have drifted from historic Christianity. A recent sermon delivered by Anglican Bishop Susan Bell appears to be one of those moments.
For many Christians watching clips and photos from the service, the first thing that stood out was not the sermon itself but the overwhelming symbolism on display. Rainbow imagery dominated the sanctuary. A massive rainbow arch framed the stage. Rainbow banners were prominently displayed. Even Bishop Bell’s ceremonial bishop’s hat—known as a mitre—featured rainbow colors.
The symbolism was unmistakable.
What was once God’s covenant sign to humanity following the flood has increasingly been transformed into the primary symbol of the modern LGBTQ movement. While many Christians disagree with that cultural appropriation, what made this service particularly striking was not merely the presence of rainbow imagery. It was the message being proclaimed beneath it.
During the service, congregants were led in prayers of repentance for excluding LGBTQ individuals from spiritual leadership positions, for what was described as transphobia, and for conversion therapy. In effect, the church was calling people to repent for upholding biblical teachings that Christians have affirmed for nearly two thousand years.
Think about how extraordinary that is.
Historically, Christian repentance has involved turning away from sin and returning to obedience to God. The biblical pattern is consistent from Genesis to Revelation. Whether the issue was idolatry, sexual immorality, greed, pride, or unbelief, God’s people were called to repent when they departed from His commands.
In this service, however, the concept of repentance appeared to be turned upside down.
Instead of calling people to repent for violating God’s standards, worshippers were encouraged to repent for maintaining them.
That reversal reveals one of the central conflicts facing many Western churches today. The debate is no longer simply about how to minister to people struggling with sexual identity issues. The debate is increasingly about whether Scripture itself should retain authority when its teachings conflict with contemporary cultural values.
For centuries, Christians understood that love and affirmation were not synonymous. Parents love their children without affirming every choice they make. Pastors love their congregations while still warning them about sin. Jesus Himself perfectly embodied both grace and truth.
When Jesus encountered sinners, He welcomed them. He ate with them. He showed compassion toward them. But He never redefined sin in order to make people feel accepted.
His message repeatedly included the call to “repent.”
That is why many Bible-believing Christians find services like this deeply troubling. They do not object because they hate LGBTQ individuals. They object because they believe the church is abandoning its responsibility to proclaim biblical truth.
Every person should be welcomed into a church.
The church should welcome those struggling with pride, greed, adultery, pornography, drunkenness, same-sex attraction, gender confusion, anger, or any other sin. No one is beyond the reach of God’s grace.
But welcoming someone into a church is not the same as affirming every belief or behavior they bring with them.
A hospital welcomes sick people because they need healing. It would be absurd for a hospital to celebrate disease rather than treat it. Likewise, Christians have historically understood the church as a place where people encounter God’s transforming power.
The goal is not affirmation. The goal is transformation.
The issue of so-called conversion therapy illustrates this distinction.
There have undoubtedly been cases where harmful or coercive practices were carried out under that label. Christians should reject any abusive methods that violate human dignity. Yet much of what critics now classify as conversion therapy simply involves biblical counseling, prayer, discipleship, and encouraging believers to bring their desires and behavior into submission to Christ.
At its core, Christianity has always taught that all believers are called to change.
The drunkard must change.
The thief must change.
The adulterer must change.
The liar must change.
And yes, every person struggling with sexual sin is called to change as well.
The Christian message has never been, “Come as you are and stay as you are.”
It has always been, “Come as you are and allow Christ to transform you.”
Perhaps the most tragic aspect of services like this is that they leave people with the impression that God has changed His mind. Yet Scripture repeatedly declares that God does not change. Human culture changes. Political movements change. Social trends change. Public opinion changes.
God’s Word does not.
The irony is difficult to miss. Christians who continue to uphold historic biblical teachings are increasingly being portrayed as the ones who need to repent. Yet from a traditional Christian perspective, the greater danger lies in repenting of obedience itself.
When churches begin apologizing for proclaiming what Scripture teaches, they cease functioning as prophetic voices to the culture and instead become echoes of it.
The church’s mission is not to mirror society’s latest moral revolution. Its mission is to faithfully proclaim the truth of God’s Word, whether that message is popular or unpopular.
The rainbow in Scripture was never a symbol of human pride. It was a symbol of God’s mercy.
Perhaps that is the rainbow the church should be pointing people toward once again.
