Selective Holiness

Some questions are uncomfortable because they force us to examine not only what we believe, but whether we apply those beliefs consistently.

This is one of those questions.

If we believe someone’s ongoing sexual behavior can disqualify them from serving or leading in the local church, how should we think about the person who habitually gossips, creates division, manipulates others, lives greedily, or leads from pride?

The point of asking that question isn't to minimize sexual sin or argue that Scripture doesn't speak clearly about sexuality. It does. The question is whether the Church has sometimes developed an inconsistent approach to sin—responding strongly to certain behaviors while becoming surprisingly comfortable with others.

And if that's true, how did we get here?

Maybe part of the problem is that some sins are easier to identify from a distance. Others can become so familiar within church culture that we stop recognizing them for what they are.

We might quickly recognize sexual immorality while overlooking the gossip that circulates through a congregation. We may confront someone's relationship while tolerating an arrogant leader. We can become concerned about one person's lifestyle while continuing to platform someone who is divisive, manipulative, greedy, or consistently harmful to others.

That doesn't mean these situations are identical. Scripture gives us more nuance than simply saying, “All sin is exactly the same.”

Sin can have different consequences. Leadership carries additional responsibilities and biblical qualifications. Different situations require wisdom, discernment, accountability, and sometimes different responses.

But perhaps there is still a consistency problem worth talking about.

Scripture speaks seriously about sexual immorality, but it also speaks seriously about pride, greed, gossip, slander, division, hypocrisy, unforgiveness, and a lack of self-control. If we emphasize biblical teaching about one while overlooking biblical teaching about the others, are we allowing our culture to determine which parts of holiness receive the most attention?

I think an important distinction can help us here.

The issue cannot simply be whether someone struggles with sin.

If struggling with sin automatically disqualified someone from participating in the life of the Church, none of us would qualify.

The Christian life is one of ongoing surrender and transformation. So perhaps the better question is what we do with the sin in our lives. Are we acknowledging it? Are we willing to repent? Are we submitting it to Christ? Are we open to accountability? Is there a genuine desire for transformation?

And shouldn't that standard be applied consistently?

If ongoing, unrepentant sexual sin matters when considering ministry involvement or leadership, then ongoing, unrepentant pride, manipulation, greed, divisiveness, abusive behavior, and habitual gossip should matter too.

That includes the heterosexual person living outside biblical sexual boundaries.

It includes the person engaged in same-sex sexual behavior.

It includes the church member who continually gossips.

It includes the leader driven by pride.

It includes the pastor who manipulates people.

It includes me.

It includes you.

Perhaps that's where this conversation needs to move.

Instead of beginning with “Which sinners should we exclude?” maybe we should begin with “What does faithful submission to Christ look like for all of us?”

That doesn't eliminate biblical standards. If anything, it asks us to take those standards more seriously because we're no longer applying them selectively.

The Church should be a place where truth and grace meet—where sin isn't ignored, but neither are people reduced to their sin. A place where repentance is expected, accountability is healthy, restoration is possible, and transformation through Christ remains the goal.

Maybe the difficult question isn't simply why the Church draws a line around certain sins.

Maybe we need to ask:

Have we become comfortable with certain sins simply because they're more common inside our churches?

And if we have, what would it look like to recover a more consistent, gracious, and biblical understanding of holiness?

Let’s chat. Leave me a comment below—I’d genuinely love to hear your thoughts.