{"id":148298,"date":"2026-10-26T08:56:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-26T12:56:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=148298"},"modified":"2026-10-26T15:28:12","modified_gmt":"2026-10-26T19:28:12","slug":"first-things-bethel-mcgrew-the-trouble-with-elliotgate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=148298","title":{"rendered":"(First Things) Bethel McGrew–The Trouble with Elliotgate"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

For Christianity Today<\/em> to publish such a speculative piece, boosting material that was initially made public with a clear political agenda, seems in tension with the magazine\u2019s own editorial philosophy as of 1970 that it is wrong \u201cto gossip about things of which we are not certain.\u201d According to a new report<\/a> from Ruth Graham at the New York<\/em> Times<\/em>, the erstwhile flagship journal of American evangelicalism has been declining in more ways than one. To its critics, \u201cElliotgate\u201d is one more sign that the magazine has lost its way, against the chaotic backdrop of mass layoffs and a waning subscriber base. But former deputy editor Bonnie Kristian, who edited Austen\u2019s piece, has defended it<\/a> as important and conversation-driving. Whatever the article\u2019s merits, the magazine handled the backlash unprofessionally, leaving Austen unaware of the temporary choice to pull it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some of that backlash has itself been less than helpful. In a column<\/a> for WORLD<\/em>, Denny Burk, president of the Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, rightly noted how thin Austen\u2019s evidence is. But he has treated her claim that same-sex attraction isn\u2019t itself a sin as an endorsement of \u201cSide B<\/a>,\u201d the view that gay Christians should embrace their orientation in various problematic ways while remaining celibate. The two ideas are not the same. One can grant that same-sex attraction is itself not a sin while holding that it is \u201cobjectively disordered\u201d: something to be resisted, not adopted as a public \u201cidentity\u201d in the manner of modern sexual politics. This conflation has been a persistent blind spot in the evangelical approach to the issue, missing areas of concern for evangelicals and Catholics alike.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, Burk\u2019s instinct is not entirely misplaced. Austen says plainly that Elliot\u2019s story \u201cshould inform the church\u2019s treatment of Christians who experience same-sex attraction,\u201d and Side B proponent Wesley Hill\u2019s praise<\/a> for the piece suggests how it is likely to be read. Austen\u2019s remarks seem to gesture beyond simply separating temptation and sin, implying that double standards toward opposite-sex and same-sex attraction are automatically bigoted and normalizing a broader church culture of \u201ccoming out of the closet\u201d beyond a close circle of friends and counselors. This is not an especially helpful word for evangelicals, who if anything could benefit from more discretion and less \u201ctell-all\u201d culture when it comes to sexual temptations of any variety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read it all<\/a>.<\/p>

In The Trouble with Elliotgate, Bethel McGrew examines the controversy surrounding claims about Elisabeth Elliot\u2019s sexuality and Christianity Today\u2019s handling of the resulting article.\n\nMcGrew critiques the evidence behind the speculation, considers the broader tensions within evangelical debates over same-sex attraction and sexual identity, and questions whether publicizing such uncertain personal claims serves the Church or its readers. \n\nTo read the piece, visit https:\/\/t.co\/R5binXKe9Y<\/p>— First Things (@firstthingsmag) October 25, 2026<\/a><\/blockquote>\n