Well, as I mentioned last week, I want to set aside our study in the Canons of Dort for two or three weeks to deal with some of the issues that are going on in our denomination that have to do with revoice and homosexuality. And what I want to do is provide some definitions and ultimately make sure we're thinking about all these different issues. in a way that's biblically consistent. I know words like revoice or side A and side B gay Christianity, those phrases, those words might not be on your radar, but unfortunately they need to be. And we need to understand why people feel the need in our culture, sometimes even folks in the church, leaders in the church, feel the need to tell people their preferred pronouns. And just how it is that we've gotten to a place where identifying as LGBTQ is something akin to being a hero. So here's what we're going to do. First, I want us to get a sense for why this has become an issue in confessional-leaning churches, and specifically the PCA. And then as we do that, I want to begin providing some definitions for those things I just mentioned, because I do know that language, side A, side B, that can be very dizzying. And then I want to step back and try to help us see how we got to this place and consider some of the cultural shifts. that opened the door for this. I'm not going to repeat or try to redo what Carl Truman did in those lessons because I don't have the intellectual wherewithal to do something that ambitious. It will be more about how moral changes open the door for greater moral changes that open the door for greater moral changes until we arrive at a place where conservative denominations allow men to serve in the pastorate who identify as gay Christians. And then I want to make sure we are biblically equipped to understand and respond to these things, and in particular, I want you to be aware of how people are misusing some Bible categories, how they're using Christian language and infusing non-Christian means. We're going to be doing this over the next, like I say, two or three weeks. This morning is mostly going to be for giving me some information about how this developed in the denomination and where we are. And then next week, start to look at this from a biblical and historical point of view and see how a lot of the trajectories are against the Bible, they're against what our confessions teach in terms of the doctrine of sanctification, and to make sure we're well-equipped as believers to understand this, because the onslaught is here. I mean, you're going to be hit with these things constantly. We need to be able to restomp on biblically. Now let's have a word of prayer and we'll get to work. Father, we do thank You for this morning hour, for the gorgeous weather. We thank You for the sun that shines, and even in the cool weather, we feel the warmth of it on our faces, and just what a delight it is. Chiefly, O God, we are men and women who delight to know the Son of God, to be united to God through Him, to have the free salvation that's offered to us through Him. We pray as we learn these things, it will be with an increasing and intense effort to promote the peace and purity of so great a Savior's church. So bless our time together. Give us wise and attentive minds and hearts. And we ask all this in Jesus' name. Amen. Well, I want to begin by explaining what Revoice is. It's an annual conference that was first held in 2018. And here's how they promote themselves. Revoice exists to support and encourage Christians who are sexual minorities so they can flourish in historic Christian traditions. And then here's their basic mission statement. This is from their website. It's to support and encourage gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other same-sex attracted Christians, as well as others who love them, so that all in the church might be empowered to live in gospel unity while observing the historic Christian doctrine of marriage and sexuality. Next week, we're going to be critiquing these kinds of statements, at least what they assert in these statements, in some detail. But I just want to go ahead and point out a couple of things. First, it's significant that they used the language of a sexual minority. And that language, sexual minority, likely harkens back to the 60s and a book written by Lars Ahlstrom called What is it? The Erotic Minorities, that's the name of the book. In the book, he basically tried to justify everything we would think of as perversions, to include things like bestiality, pedophilia. And he wanted to overcome the stigma of those things by adjusting the language. And he chose the word sexual minority because he wanted to create the same kind of sympathy that exists when you hear the term ethnic minorities. And if you remember this discussion five, six, eight years back or so, that was something you were hearing, gay is the new black, right? That was the language that was being promoted because they wanted, again, to have that identity as a subjected minority. And that's how it's used today. To speak of a sexual minority is to use the language of identity politics. It's grounded in cultural Marxism and critical theory. It's a way of saying this is a group of people who have been oppressed and because of that they deserve very special consideration. Now that language ought to peak our attention whenever we hear it used in the church. Sexual minority. Because whether they're doing it intentionally or not, they are using the language of critical theory. The language that breaks everyone up into two groups, oppressed and oppressor. And by the way, in this scenario, when it's used in the church, guess who the oppressor is? The church. The church. A second thing, and this is something I pointed out before, Is their mission statement asking the church to give a particular sin pattern a kind of status that we don't give to any other sin pattern? Let me give you an example. I provided their mission statement. Let me tweak it. Our mission is to support and encourage racists, white supremacists, and other white nationalists who are exclusively attracted to Anglo groups, as well as those who love them, so that all in the church might be empowered to live in gospel unity while observing the historic Christian doctrine of race and ethnicity. You could put any sin category in there. I put that one in there to emphasize how ridiculous it is what they're saying. And here's what you need to know. If you ever engage in these discussions, you have these kinds of conversations with people about some of these things that are moving into the church, inevitably somebody's going to say, why are you so fixated on the topic of homosexuality? What's up with you? Here's the problem. Most confessional guys in our denomination are not fixed on homosexuality. It's the Revoice crowd who are singling out a sin pattern and saying, we've got to treat this sin differently. That's, again, one of the rhetorical games they play. What's the matter with you? Why are you so fixed on this homosexual issue? So, as I said, Revoice held their first conference in 2018. And what Revoice is basically advocating is what's identified as side B gay Christianity over and against side A gay Christianity. Now, having said that, there are basically three ways the church is addressing the LGBTQIA issue. If they add any more letters, they might as well just go A, B, C, D, E. The first way that the Church addresses is, I'm going to say, just a simple, biblical, historic way. It confesses that the whole of Scripture teaches that all of these things are a perversion of God's order and design, and that all of these things are sins that need to be repented of and mortified. That's the view we would hold. A second way is being called side A gay Christianity. This is promoted mostly in super progressive and liberal churches. And side A gay Christianity, they make the argument that God makes gay people. and that gay love, same-sex love, is just as legitimate and appropriate as heterosexual love. And so, of course, the Lord blesses same-sex marriage. A Side A person will say, when Paul speaks of homosexuality, or it's recorded anywhere in the Bible, it wasn't the kind of situations and circumstances that we deal with today. We have two people of the same sex living in a lifelong monogamous relationship. Again, Side A, gay Christianity is going to say the apostles and the biblical writers didn't understand our cultural context. They were writing to a completely different situation and they weren't addressing the present issues. That's basically what's meant by side A gay Christianity. In a nutshell, let's just pretend the Bible doesn't say anything about it. One of the proponents of this would be a guy named Matthew Vines. Matthew Vines. And you probably, or you might be interested to know that in the CRC, Side A is being promoted by a group called All One Body. If you see those signs in town, All One Body outside of a church, that's what they promote. RCA has a similar group called Room for All. They want Side A to be the norm. And again, side A basically disregards the Bible and provides a full-throated support of homosexual transgender lifestyles. Any questions so far? Then there's side B. As I said, this is significant because this is what revoice promotes. Side B actually recognizes that side A is way off the biblical mark. So we can acknowledge they're right about that. And so generally what the Side B folks will say is that they do indeed hold to a biblical ethic of human sexuality and marriage. Likewise, they will say that their homosexual desires are a result of the fall. But here's the thing. They describe these fallen desires in the same way we might think of a person who's blind or deaf. or born with some other disability by virtue of being born in a fallen world. And so homosexual desires aren't necessarily sinful if they're not acted upon. Instead, those desires are just something normal for those who live in a broken world. Everybody tracking with me there? And so side B advocates for celibacy. and for a thing called spiritual friendships. Spiritual friendships are basically where two people with disordered sexual desires, two men who would be attracted to each other, decide they're going to live together and cultivate an intimate friendship and yet remains celibate. That's a spiritual friendship. That's the way they're defining it. And again, they look back at different kind of monastic movements to try to support this. The problem is, if you're a Presbyterian, the Confessions specifically tell us, no, we can't go back to monastic movements. So it's a problem for Presbyterians. A couple of the major thought leaders of the Side B movement One's Grant Hartley. He's probably the most popular speaker at Revoice. I think he definitely was one of the founders of the movement. Hartley was a student at Covenant Seminary, and he was a student there when they had Revoice. And that's significant because Covenant Seminary is the PCA denominational seminary. And Hartley since left the PCA and joined the Roman Catholic Church. Another thought leader in this movement, side B gay Christianity, is Wes Hill. I mention him because he's very prominent online, in his books, speaking engagements. He's an Anglican, and he's a New Testament professor here at Western Seminary at Hahn. Again, among the many problems with this view is that they believe their gay orientation is part of who they are, that that's a valid category of personhood. I looked at your handout. This is a super helpful article from Dr. Rosaria Butterfield. I highlighted the part I want to touch on here. While Psyche seeks to uphold biblical sexual standards because it sees sexual orientation as an accurate category of personhood, i.e. there is such a thing as a gay person, that gayness describes who someone essentially is, Their theology in no way allows for an understanding of why homosexuality, even at the level of desire, is sinful and needing the grace of repentance. To the side-beat Christian, homosexuality is a sexuality one of many. Side A and side B both support the idea that sexual orientation is an accurate category of personality. That's so important to get. And therefore, they're both outside the bounds of biblical teaching. Dr. Butterfield is spot on, and you probably know I would say this, but I can recommend anything she writes. She is just so solid. Yeah. I just can't encourage her too highly. So here's where you end up. Side A says, I was born this way. It's who I am, and God loves me exactly the way I am. I don't need to repent. This is just who I am. Side B says, I'm fallen, and now this is who I am. It's part of my identity. You see the difference? I was born this way. I'm fallen, and I'm this way. It's just who I am. Now, we're going to unpack, as I said, Side B in a future lesson. Because as I said, they use all kinds of clever rhetorical tricks to make it sound appealing and biblical and loving. And I want you to be equipped to deal with those. But what I want you to understand is that we always promote Side B. This is what they promote. It's what they're all about. And frankly, it's what's being pushed into the PCA. So Revoice had their first conference in 2018, and the reason this is such a big deal for us is that it was held at Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis, Missouri, which is a PCA church. And here's the thing, St. Louis is where, as I mentioned a moment ago, where the denominational seminary is. It's like the Grand Rapids for the CRC. And Memorial Press is a flagship church in St. Louis and really the whole of our denomination. Incredible building, gorgeous. So this church held revoice Now when the conference was first announced, the Pastora Memorial, Greg Johnson, he downplayed the whole thing, as did their elders and ultimately the whole presbytery. Johnson basically said, you know what, we're really just letting them use the space, but it's really not a church thing or a denominational thing. And that was 2018. But I want to mention a couple of the workshops. Just to kind of give you a heads up as to why this group, so many confessional and biblically faithful guys in the denomination. One of the workshops was entitled, Redeeming Queer Culture and Adventure. This was led by Grant Hartley. And here's the blurb for the talk. I put this on your sheet. Christians have often discarded the virtues of queer culture along with the vices, which leaves culturally connected Christian sexual minorities torn between two cultures, two histories, and two communities. So questions that have until now been largely unanswered remain. What does queer culture, and specifically queer literature and theory, have to offer us who follow Christ. What queer treasure, honor, and glory will be brought into the New Jerusalem at the end of time? And the point of the talk was to say there are some good and noble aspects of gay culture that will ultimately be brought into heaven. That's troubling, isn't it? It is. Another of the astounding moments of Revoice 2018 was a talk by Dr. Nate Collins. He read from Jeremiah 15 and then he asked this question. Is it possible that gay people today are being sent by God, like Jeremiah, to find God's words for the church, to eat them and make them our own? to shed light on contemporary false teachings and even idolatries? Not just the false teaching of the progressive sexual ethic, but other more subtle forms of false teaching. Is it possible that gender and sexual minorities who have lived lives of costly obedience are themselves a prophetic call to the church to abandon idolatrous attitudes toward the nuclear family, toward sexual pleasure? If so, we're prophets! Again, these are all ministers. They're all leaders in the evangelical world. This is at a PCA church. He's a big, big named evangelical guy, but he's not PCA. Grant Hartley? Yeah. Well, it's not just monastic, it's also a view of desires. Because a Roman Catholic does not see sinful desires the same way Protestants do. I'll touch on that next week, but that kind of gets at some of the heart of the distinction. So in other words, if my denomination doesn't meet my sexual ethic, I'll find one that does. That's exactly what happened. Not to mention, can we be honest? Let's imagine your daughter comes home and says, you know, my boyfriend and I decided we want to be celibate and live together. Is that all right, Mom and Dad? I've got you. That's not going to fly, right? Why? Because that impulse will be too strong. And just so you know, I mentioned side A and side B. Side B is most definitely a gateway drug and almost inevitably leads to Side A. Because once you move in that direction, you put yourself in that proximity. See, here's the problem with Side B, they're feeding their sin. They're feeding their sin and they almost inevitably end up with Side A because they have to. So the argument is lust for a man from lust after a woman, how do they get away with it? Right. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, that'll be sort of the biblical theological point. We will delve into that more next week. But that's exactly right. And part of what's missing from the discussion is simply acknowledging a man not lusting, a man desiring a wife, is not the same thing as a man desiring another man. I mean, sorry Mike, you're the only young man here and I don't want to pick on Tori, because she's a young woman, but if Mike said, I want to get married, or Tori said, I want to get married, I want a husband, that's a perfectly proper desire and doesn't at all indicate that there's lust. If I look at a man and I'm desiring something, that's sinful, by definition. That's the difference. I'm always bringing that out, and I'll do it next week, because that's a major point that they just kind of gloss over. Because here's the language they use. Well, everybody struggles with temptation, and everybody struggles with sin, but not all sins are the same, and not all desires are the same. Anyway, I find Dr. Collins, he's a very eloquent speaker and a very winsome writer, but I find his His talk, it was just overwhelming. I mean, the blurb really captures the danger of the movement. We're living in a time when the nuclear family, as he describes it, is constantly under attack. And while it's definitely possible to make our human families an idol, promoting, encouraging, urging, and supporting the biblical model for a family is good and true and just and moral, not an idol. Right? Dr. Rick Phillips captured this well in an article he wrote just after 2018. There are many reasons to have sympathy with the aims expressed by the Revoice Conference, especially the genuine sorrows of those who experience same-sex attraction. Let me pause there. We do, right? If somebody's got a disordered desire and they're fighting against sin, we do have sympathy for them. We don't scorn them because of that. But the doctrine of re-voice is not one that biblically faithful Christians can afford to view with sympathy. Either the biblical view of humanity, sex, marriage, and society is right, or else it's wrong. Likewise, if gays represent a prophetic voice challenging the church to conform, then it's the traditionally understood Christian view of sex and marriage that comes under rebuke. It's for this reason that the PCA cannot afford either to endorse the revoice message or even to stand by inactive. as conferences like these are held in our churches. If the Bible is true, right, wholesome, and good, then the doctrine of revoice must not be embraced, nor permitted in the councils of the Church. What is at stake in this controversy is nothing less than the commitment of our denomination to the truth of God's Word and our embrace of the Scripture's view of life and godliness. The Revoice Conference It was held at a PCA church, and as you might imagine, that caused some pretty massive waves. Lots of leaders in the PCA began to speak out immediately. In 2019, at that General Assembly, the PCA created a study committee to speak directly to the ideology promoted by REVOICE. And it was a good study committee. In the meantime, Memorial Presbyterian Church allowed the smaller chapel that's on their premise to host a production entitled Transluminate, a celebration of transgender, agender, non-binary, genderqueer, and genderfluid artists. So they had that on the property of the church, Memorial Church, Pastor Johnson's church. And when Memorial Prez was called on this, they said, oh, we often provide this space for secular venues. So that's an excuse. Probably not. If that's the thing that they like, just say, we support this stuff. Well, that's something that's really trying to be done, is to put out the kind of information that forces people to simply admit what they believe and acknowledge it. So they had that event in 2020. Also in 2020, the study committee report was supposed to be released at the 2020 General Assembly, but because of COVID, that didn't happen, right? So it was delayed until June of 2021, and it was published. And while it's a good report that speaks clearly about homosexuality and homosexual desires, during the same time, Pastor Greg Johnson was featured on the cover of Christianity Today, in USA Today. He published a book, and basically at every possible turn he demonstrated himself to be at odds with that report. Again, if you go back to 2018, he would say, and I actually have heard him say this, of course I don't identify as gay. But with each passing month, it's gotten bolder and bolder and bolder. And when the USA Today article came out a few months back, the headline of the article was, I'm a gay celibate pastor of a conservative church. It's not a conservative church. No. No. But again, well, that's part of the trick, right? Exactly. All I've got to do is say I'm conservative, say I'm confessional, say I'm evangelical, and it must be so. And it's worth pointing out, in October this past year, Pastor Johnson has been encouraging the PCA, and at this point, to recruit and ordain non-practicing gay believers to ministry. Again, it's amazing to see the trajectory. I'm always a little hesitant to say this, because I am hesitant. But his views have substantially changed from 2018 to 2021, or he lied. If his views changed, it was incumbent upon him to go to the presbytery and say, my views changed. I no longer hold to XYZ. And that's not an option. You take a vow before the Lord. that if your views change, you will declare them to your presbytery. And one of those two things have happened. He's either lied or his views have changed, and he's not reported it to his presbytery. They probably wouldn't. Yeah. In fact, here's a little back history, and I don't want to get too lost in this, but a number of years ago, The PCA was embroiled in a theological issue known as Federal Vision, where basically the doctrine of justification by faith alone came under attack. And we produced, again, a great report, but the guys who promoted Federal Vision were in St. Louis, in the Missouri Presbytery, and you could not prosecute them, because the Missouri Presbytery basically circled around them and protected them. So what that means in terms of this free voice issue is in the span of about three and a half years, you have elders in the church saying, this movement's a big nothing burger. It's not in the PCA. It's got nothing to do with us. Sure, it's concerning, but it's not a PCA ministry to now saying we support them. And again, it's not just Johnson. It's a great many elders who initially pretended to voice concerns over re-voice who are now saying the church needs this voice. We need re-voice doctrine if we're going to minister in our present cultural context. And this is one of the arguments. Look, if you minister in an urban environment and you speak strongly and faithfully to this issue of homosexuality, you won't be able to get any traction. You're going to hear that language everywhere. So, with all this brewing, there were a pair of overtures brought to the General Assembly in 2021. The first would be added to chapter 16 of our Book of Church Order that has to do generally with the doctrine of the vocation of ordination. And the overture was to add a new paragraph which would have been Book of Church Order or BCO 16-4. And here's what the overture suggested we put in our Book of Church Order. Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who profess an identity such as, but not limited to, gay Christian, same-sex attracted Christian, homosexual Christian, or like terms, that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires, such as, but not limited to, same-sex attraction, or by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or by failing to pursue spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations and commissions and actions, are not qualified for ordained office. And then there was another overture to make changes in two other places in the Book of Church Order. One was to Chapter 21 that deals with the ordination and installation of a minister. And then the other was Chapter 24 that has to do with the election ordination of ruling elders. I'm only going to read the proposed change to BCO 21-4-E, so basically if you were to get a book of church order online, which you can get, you go to the 21st chapter, scroll down to paragraph 4, and then there are basically subset letters. This would have been E. No, this is what we wanted to put in. This is the other. In the examination of the candidate's personal character, the presbyterian shall give specific attention to potentially notorious concerns, such as, but not limited to, relational sins, sexual immorality, including homosexuality, child sexual abuse, fornication, and pornography, additions, abusive behavior, racism, and financial mismanagement. Careful attention. must be given to his practical struggle against sinful actions as well as to persistent sinful desires. The candidate must give clear testimony of reliance upon his union with Christ and the benefits thereof by the Holy Spirit, depending on this work of grace to make progress over sin and to bear fruit While imperfection will remain, he will not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulness, but rather by the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus. In order to maintain discretion and protect the honor of the pastoral office, presbyteries are encouraged to appoint a committee to conduct detailed examinations of these matters and to give prayerful support to candidates. So these were a pair of overtures that were offered to put up a wall against this and to be able to produce these things. So here's the way it works in our church polity. The overtures were brought before the General Assembly. in 2021, and the first overture we read, Overture 23, was passed with 71% of the vote. The second overture, those two, were passed with 66, so definitely passed. But the way our Book of Church Order works is because we're changing the Book of Church Order, which is sort of like our Constitution, it meant this now had to go to the presbyteries, and two-thirds of the presbyteries had to ratify the changes, and then it would go back to the General Assembly, where again a simple majority would approve it. and the changes would be made. So throughout this past year, Presbyterians have been voting on this issue and just about a week and a half ago now, it was determined that we're not going to win the vote, so these won't be brought back to the General Assembly. So that's where they are. Both overtures failed. Well, 71% and 66%. But they very quickly mobilize, right? And all presbyteries do their thing differently in terms of how they meet. So for example, our presbytery always meets on a Friday and Saturday. And you know how many ministers like that? None. You know why we meet on Fridays and Saturdays? So ruler and elders can go. A lot of presbyteries have their presbytery in the middle of the week. What's the problem with that? Man, the guy's got to take off work to go to it. So they're going to be most populated by teaching elders. I only say this because Brad Isbell went through, did a lot of statistical work on this. And if you look at the General Assembly vote, I forget how he did this. It doesn't matter. Overwhelmingly, ruling elders voted for the arbiters. And overwhelmingly, the supporting rate teaching elders. So, this is all this morning to sort of get you to a place where you understand why it's a big deal, why it's being talked about, why it's significant. And while it's happening in the PCA, it's not incidental, or excuse me, it's not exclusively happening here. It's happening all around us. In our presbytery, it was almost unanimous. There was one vote against him. Interestingly enough, I won't say who voted against him, but he came from the Missouri Presbytery about 10 years ago, having said that. And there was one who abstained. And the reason, this was a young guy who abstained because he was just coming into the presbytery and being ordained. And he abstained from all the votes that day because he didn't know the issues. So he abstained for that reason. Again, one abstained and one negative. I think our Presbyterian had the highest percentage of any Presbyterian in the country. Yeah, only one. And 37-4. So it wasn't like one to three. no but but but but it kind of shows that some of these guys are pretty disingenuous one of the guys on what what paul's talking about and again i'm not speaking out of school here this is all matter of public fact one of the guys on the uh... uh... committee was sent out he came out totally endorsed the report on the AIC report on human sexuality, totally supported it, said it's absolutely awesome, and he was one of the authors on the committee that framed it. And then when it came, when we started voting on it, in other words, when we were going to put this in the book of church order, and the report would actually have some teeth, he backtracked and said, well, you know what, we should probably do a whole study committee on the language of identity, because that's kind of I think the guys preached so many sermons over the years on your identity being in Christ. It was disingenuous, right? So I think that's what you're getting at, Paul? So yeah, so that's where we are. I mean, everybody knows exactly what we mean when we say your identity's in Christ, first and foremost. It's not slippery language. And everybody loved it in the study report until we said, okay, the study report's good and we want to enforce it. And it was no longer quite so good. Any questions? We have a couple minutes. Do you think that, in your opinion, the infection color backpedaling of that is why it didn't pass two thirds? No, probably not. I think it was a more concerted effort. There's a whole progressive wing in the PCA known as the National Partnership, and they kind of function under the radar. And they seek to manipulate votes. They are. They are. They have a secret email listed. Again, their email list got leaked, interestingly enough, about four months ago. And they talked about how, look, we've got all these progressives in our pocket. We can sort of sway the votes any way we want, dah, dah, dah. James O'Keefe. Oh, I'm trying to think, I don't even know where he's a pastor. No, I know, I get you now. This here, these overtures can't be brought up because i will tell you something up posted i'd i've had an administrator on a face book group is it basically conservative face book group for concert mostly it's open to any pcc are really hard right now i think we're about six hundred seventy five six hundred eighty people on the list publish something just just shortly after the votes failed myself if we don't have some of the leaders in the confessional movement, step up and say, we've got a tenable plan forward, and we're going to do this. After this General Assembly, churches are going to start leaking out of the PCA. And when I say leaders, I mean Rick Phillips, who will. Ligon Duncan, Kevin DeYoung, Harry Reeder. John Payne, you know. And I have every confidence these guys will. Especially Harry and Rick Phillips, no doubt about it, they will. And Kevin DeYoung too, by the way. He's, you know. Yes. Yes. Yeah. So I suspect there are going to be some new overtures with some new language. But I don't know. Anyway, what I was going to say is I put this out there basically saying, if you guys don't make some kind of decision and offer some kind of leadership, you're going to see churches start to drip out and drip out until they start to pour out. And John Payne responded, you know, they're actually having a council meeting, I think, in two weeks. It is possible, but not practically possible. Is there a provision for it? Yes, but not realistically. Yeah, well I'm assuming it was, so. Well, it's interesting. What the article was basically saying is he was trying to get at how do you deal with the holidays, right? Christmas is coming. People are going to be going home. They're going to be gathering with their families, and there are going to be difficult issues that you deal with. So like one of the examples is you're going to have family members who actually supported, again, I hate to make this political, but who supported Trump. How can you deal with those evil people? And so he's saying, I know how to do de-escalation because I belong to this big church family. And at one point in the article he says something to the effect, can you imagine what it's like for me? I go to this General Assembly, he didn't call it that, he called it a big meeting, and around me are all these white Because that matters. White, middle-aged men in seersucker suits. By the way, there's like four seersucker suits at General Assembly. There's all these white, middle-aged men in seersucker suits with children and grandchildren, and there's one who doesn't fit in. Guess who that is? I was like, yeah, you don't fit in, but it's not because you don't wear a seersucker suit. Maybe it's because he's a racist. He's got white people all over him. So anyway, yeah, to your point, Todd, it was a, the whole thing was kind of disingenuous. You keep using that word, disingenuous, disingenuous, but. Yeah, well. Todd, were you going with something else? Did I kind of miss your point? You know what, here's something to keep in mind because I've kind of, not altogether, but I've kind of gotten past the issue where it offends me. That people say, you know, you're just a cranky, you know, confessional guy. Well, you're just a cranky confessional guy. But it is frustrating. Because they're not honest. They're not forthright. They don't say what they mean. I think I may have mentioned this to Jeff or Paul, somebody a week or two ago. One of the problems is conservative guys aren't willing to play dirty because we're not going to violate God's law to advance God's law. If that means you leave, you leave. And they kind of know that. and use it against you. So I've kind of gotten past that you're just a mean person. But the progressives are the one who are introducing new ideas and then saying, you should accept them. It's not only this, it's critical theory. I mean, we've had two prominent PCA people on the cover of Christianity today in the past year. One was Greg Johnson and the other was Christina Edmondson. the wife of a pastor who said, yeah, of course it's perfectly justified in certain situations to burn down cities because black lives matter. So those are the two PCA people who made the cover of Christianity Today. So a lot of the conservative guys are saying, well, that's not really us, so why are you promoting that as though that's who we are? Anyway. So, any questions, or we better get cracking, I guess. Let's pray. Father, we thank You for Your goodness to us this day. We thank You for the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. We thank You that He loved her and gave Himself for her to wash her and make the Church His spotless bride. And we just pray that You would raise up man who would be diligent to contend for both the purity and the peace of the church, for the glory and honor of the Lord Jesus Christ. And thankful for these brothers and sisters we can now gather together around the throne of grace to worship you. So enable us, equip us, and bless us that all that's said and done in this next hour might be to the praise of the glory of your grace. And we ask these things in Jesus' name.