Did Ed Welch Change His Mind on Homosexuality?
In 1998, the first edition of Edward T. Welch’s Blame It on the Brain? was published by P & R Publishing. I read it soon after it was released. I thought it was a helpful and balanced approach to distinguishing “chemical imbalances, brain disorders, and disobedience” (as the subtitle intimates).
This year (2024), P & R has published a second edition. Much of it is essentially the same as the first. The writing is tidied up in places and the research has been updated. There are, however, a couple of chapters that have been almost completely rewritten. One of them is on homosexuality.
In the first edition, he wrote this about sexual orientation/same-sex attraction:
An artificial distinction between (sinful) homosexual practice and (justifiable) homosexual orientation contradicts the Scripture’s constant connection of desire, orientation, and deed. If the deed was prohibited in Scripture, the desire was too.
For homosexuals who are committed to thinking biblically, this may begin to challenge their ideas on homosexual orientation. But a very significant question remains: Why does it feel natural? The biblical answer is relatively straightforward. Like many other sins, homosexuality does not have to be learned. The child who never witnessed a temper tantrum can be proficient at throwing them; it is an instinctive ability of the human heart. Homosexuality is natural in the same way that anger or selfishness is natural. They are embedded in our fallen humanness. Indeed, homosexuality is “natural,” but only in the sense that it is an expression of the sinful nature.
The fact that most homosexuals cannot remember consciously choosing homosexuality is also readily explained by Scripture. Most sin works on a level where we do not self-consciously choose it. To use Old Testament language, our sin can be “unintentional,” but that does not make us less responsible for our violation of God’s will (Lev. 5:14-19; Num. 15:22-30). Sin is more than mature, rational, conscious decisions. It is our moral inclination from birth. (pp.160-161)
And a little further in the same chapter:
Does the person have questions about homosexual orientation? Does he (or she) have a sense that he was always more interested in same-sex relationships? If so, stick with the issue until the person can think biblically about it. It is too easy to settle for the absence of homosexual behaviour and not worry about attitudes. Remember that it is on the question of homosexual orientation that the world, the flesh, and the Devil converge…The deception of homosexual orientation must be exposed and corrected. It is a false teaching that will eventually lead to bad fruit. (pp.175-176)
Welch’s 1998 approach to these questions lines up with what other writers have said in more recent times. Sam Allberry, who himself struggles with same-sex attraction, wrote in his 2013 book Is God Anti-Gay?, “…the presence of homosexual feelings in me reminds me that my desires are not right because the world is not right” (p.34).
Now let’s listen to the 2024 second edition of Blame It on the Brain? on this issue:
…the biblical command against covetousness does not immediately speak to attraction. If attraction is equal to lust, then the discussion is over. But I propose that attraction is not the same as lust or nonstop fantasies of a sexual event.
An orientation may be defined as a “lasting direction of thought, inclination, or interest.” We do not think of heterosexual orientation or attraction always as lust. We have no reason to think differently with homosexual orientation.
[…]
If same-sex orientation were the same as lust, it would be sinful and treated by confession and repentance. Such a life would be complicated, however. You would need to confess constantly and would never be quite right with God, as if you were repenting of a preference for left-handedness or for bearing the name that your parents gave you. You would repent, and nothing would change. (pp.155-156)
Do you notice the difference between the two editions? Previously, same-sex attraction (SSA) was a “moral inclination” or “an expression of the sinful nature.” But in 2024, Welch writes that SSA is akin to being left-handed, which is a natural occurrence. Astoundingly, in 1998 he wrote, “Current [pro-gay] arguments rely heavily on the idea that modern homosexuality is ‘natural.’ It is a God-given orientation, not unlike left-handedness” (p.157). Then he critiqued that idea from the Bible.
When it comes to arguing in 2024 that there is no moral value attached to SSA in itself, Welch doesn’t base that on the Bible. He took over the arguments he criticized in 1998 as relying on “neither biblical data nor medical research. Instead, it is a political premise for gaining homosexual rights and is rooted in personal experience” (p.158). Moreover, 1998 Welch argued that “The church cannot live with the idea of a natural homosexual orientation without, at some point, altering Scripture to fit our sense of God’s character” (p.158). I don’t think 2024 Welch has altered Scripture, but he has certainly ignored it on this point.
Scripture tells us that there is such a thing as unnatural desire (Jude 7). There are relations that are “contrary to nature” (Rom.1:26). It is natural for people to be attracted to the opposite sex. SSA is against nature, against how God created human beings to be. That means SSA per se carries a moral value, regardless of whether sexual lust is involved. As Mark Jones argues in this article, “It is a temptation towards that which is evil. So not just the act itself, but also the ‘deliberation’ that arises from the ‘inclination and propensity’ is sinful and needs to be mortified (Rom. 8:13).” That is the historic Protestant view. What Welch is asserting today has more affinity with the Roman Catholic view of concupiscence, namely that inclinations or attractions to sin are not properly considered sinful (see Session 5.5 of the Council of Trent).
I don’t know why Ed Welch changed his mind and I won’t speculate. I do know that it’s a pastorally sensitive issue. I don’t struggle with SSA and I can’t imagine how difficult such a struggle must be. But the Bible tells us there is grace for everyone who turns to Christ, hates all forms of sin in their life, and is determined to battle it. As the Reformed Lord’s Supper Form puts it so beautifully, Christians “may be fully assured that no sin or weakness which still remains in us against our will can prevent us from being received by God in grace….” That includes SSA. Moreover, there are testimonies from many Christians that, over time, with Spirit-empowered resistance, SSA can wane and even disappear – you can find some of them here.
