PCA Passes Overture Condeming Sex-Changes For Children by 58% to 42% Vote
The theologically conservative Presbyterian Church in America had its General Assembly last week where they passed Overture 12: Petition Government to End Sex-change Procedures for Minors. The script calls for the denomination to petition the Biden administration to “renounce the sin” of encouraging and entrenching ‘gender-affirming care’ like puberty blockers and surgical intervention in minors.
The overture states that the PCA is “joyfully and confessionally committed to the Bible’s teaching on the complementarity of men and women” and that “medical and social interventions related to so-called sex change procedures are a rejection of God’s design that will prevent his blessing, grace, and joy to be experienced.”
It further calls sex-changes a rejection of science, argues that most minors with body dysphoria will grow out of it once they reach adulthood, condemns the government for removing children from parents who will not affirm their child transitioning, and says that the PCA must “make a stand” against doctors when they violate the Hippocratic Oath by transitioning children.
The Overture concludes with the promise of sending a petition to the Biden government and to elected officials in 50 states, which reads:
The vote was 1089-793, with the affirming side winning 58%-42%
Though that sounds very close, many Presbyterians opposed it not because they supported sex changes for children, but because they disagreed that it was the church’s role to petition the government over matters of public policy.
The Westminster Confession of Faith 31.4 says that “Synods and councils …are not to intermeddle with civil affairs which concern the commonwealth, unless by way of humble petition in cases extraordinary; or, by way of advice, for satisfaction of conscience, if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate.”
The winning side argued that this petition qualified as an ‘extraordinary case’ while many opposed did not believe it rose to the occasion.
About Author
The PCA’s response perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with modern “conservatism”. First of all, have you ever noticed how conservatives (even if they identify with Christianity) will never actually fight against something that should be a matter of principle unless they can prove that it negatively affects certain victimhood groups (in this case children)? Why qualify the wrongness of transgenderism by limiting it to children? The morality of the transgenderism doesn’t magically change once someone becomes 6575 days old does it? It’s wrong period, full-stop, no qualifiers. This is the same problem with Matt Walsh and his “What is a Woman” video. You notice how it’s not titled “What is a Man” or “What is a Trannie”? That’s because, much like with the PCA and children, it’s not enough for Matt to simply call out the insanity of transgenderism for it’s own sake, it has to negatively affect women in order for him to feel like he has license to attack it. That’s the same reason why the only anti-trans legislation conservatives are willing to pass is the “men can’t compete in women’s sports because it’s unfair to women” laws.
This “overture” is fundamentally corrupt because whether or not it intends to, it takes on the world’s notion that morality, especially sexual morality, is determined by “consent” and not by God through His word. This mentality is becoming more and more common and is why even “Christian” politicians like Mike Pence refuse to take a stand against sin unless he can cry “but think of the children!”
This leads me to the second big problem with modern “conservatism”. People never ask “how does this affect God?” much less prioritize that question over “how does this affect us?” They sanctimoniously say that “sex change procedures are a rejection of God’s design” which is true, but then then say that the reason it’s bad is because it “will prevent his blessing, grace, and joy to be experienced” as if the real reason transgenderism is bad is because we won’t be blessed and will be unhappy. The people of Sodom and Gomorra didn’t have problems with a lack of blessing and happiness, they had problems with flaming balls of sulfur raining down on them. The only reason the rainbow flag is fitting for the LGBT movement is because it signifies that the next time God destroys the world it will be with fire.
Well said, The_Peter. It is derived from secular ethics which says anything and everything is ok as long as it doesn’t infringe or encroach on anyone else’s rights. But even from the standpoint of secular ethics, it does infringe, because it demands something from others which is contrary to scripture. The Bible says not to associate with the sexually immoral at all, much less give them any acceptance, affirmation, promotion, or inclusion. To support, endorse, or promote sexual immorality is itself to be sexually immoral.
The rainbow ultimately represents the fact that God will keep His word. Ultimately, it represents the fact that God will cast the unrepentant sexually immoral into the lake of fire, just as He said that He will do (Rev 21:8). Jesus said they will not be welcome in His kingdom (Rev. 9:15).
The PCA is not very conservative if only 58% are opposed to this.
If this doesn’t qualify as a “extraordinary case“ then what does? I’d like to know how the session members of my church voted about Overture 12 as that may tell me a lot about whether I should stay or not.
There are very few times in the history of mankind, since Sodom and Gomorrah, where a government made it illegal to oppose, reject, to refuse to condone and promote sin, and to not associate with those who do otherwise. Very few times in history has a government essentially said you must support it, you must promote it, and you must include and associate with those given to it.
What’s going on these days unquestionably qualifies as an extraordinary case.