San Jose Sharks goalie James Reimer bravely stood against the cultural tide recently when he refused to take part in the organization’s “Pride Night” by wearing a sex- and gender-themed jersey for warmup against the New York Islanders. He explained why in an official statement:
Under the umbrella of the NHL’s “hockey is for everyone” initiative, the San Jose Sharks have chosen to wear jerseys in support of the LGBTQIA+ community tonight. For all thirteen years of my NHL career, I have been a Christian—not just in title, but in how I choose to live my life daily. I have a personal faith in Jesus Christ who died on the cross for my sins and, in response, asks me to love everyone and follow him. I have no hate in my heart for anyone, and I have always strived to treat everyone that I encounter with respect and kindness. In this specific instance, I am choosing not to endorse something that is counter to my personal convictions which are based on the Bible, the highest authority in my life. I strongly believe that every person has value and worth, and the LGBTQIA+ community, like all others, should be welcomed in all aspects of the game of hockey.
As much as I applaud Reimer’s decision not to wear the jersey, those of us fighting the false gods of the Sexual Revolution and working to undermine the trans industrial complex will need stronger public explanations than this going forward. There are two issues with this statement.
First, it seems to grant that this “Pride” event is similar to other hockey events such as “Mexican Heritage Night,” and therefore, the “LGBTQIA+ community” is similar in nature to the “Hispanic community” . . . or the “bald community.” That is to say, the tone of the statement accepts that the alphabet coalition of “identities” constitutes a group of people with characteristics beyond moral judgement. This is false. Being part of the “LGBTQIA+ community” is to be a person who holds certain views about the nature of reality ( “I am a man trapped in a woman’s body”) and desires to act out sexually in certain ways. This is not the same type of thing as being Hispanic or bald. Ethnic and physical characteristics cannot be right or wrong; they just are.
However, beliefs and sexual desires can be right or wrong. Therefore, “communities” formed around these characteristics are of a different nature, and we treat them differently.
For example, because there is nothing right or wrong about being bald or Hispanic, we welcome bald and Hispanic people in all walks of life without discrimination. (Or at least we should.) If your child’s first-grade teacher is bald or Hispanic, that shouldn’t matter at all. On the other hand, like it or not, the Catholic Church condemns gender ideology as morally wrong. (Pope Francis repeated his denunciation of gender ideology as recently as two weeks ago.) So, it seems, does the form of Christianity James Reimer follows. And so it’s reasonable for Christians to keep their distance from gender ideology—and from displays of support for it—in a way that wouldn’t make any sense when we’re talking about an ethnicity.
The problem with Reimer’s language is that it does not distinguish between communities based on beliefs, desires, and actions that fall into a moral category and communities based on characteristics that have no moral component. This muddies the waters.
Secondly, Reimer’s statement does not have a strong enough moral foundation. He bases his decision on his “personal convictions which are based on the Bible, the highest authority in my life.” This is a typical American Protestantism. As a former sola scriptura evangelical, I appreciate where Reimer is coming from, and again, I congratulate him on standing firm against a movement that is doing immense harm. But unfortunately, the Bible Alone is not enough to stem the tide of this evil, or any other. Indeed, by not providing any authoritative interpretive framework for correctly understanding the Bible, Reimer’s sola scriptura position actually helps the gender ideology advocates by making his argument too easy to dismiss and by providing the other side with the tool to build their own Scripture-based argument.
For example, Michael Coren replied to the Sharks’ Pride Day Twitter post about Reimer with a link to his article explaining from Scripture that Jesus is “extraordinarily indifferent to the sex lives of those around him” and would certainly not be interested “in whom we love.” Who is to say that Coren is wrong? Within the Protestant framework of sola scriptura, nobody. Similarly, Seattle Times sportswriter Geoff Baker dismissed Reimer’s position by arguing that trying to interpret any religious text is “complicated” and that “anyone can comb through reams of religious documents and twist a handful of passages to justify seemingly any position on any modern subject.” That is simply true. The question is, who is doing the twisting—Coren or Reimer? Without any outside authority, that question is impossible to answer. As such, any “biblical” argument for a position can be explained away or ignored.
On top of that, sola scriptura allows any moral position to be supported from Scripture. Just as Coren suggested that Jesus would be pro-gender ideology, Christians around the globe jumped to condemn Reimer by claiming that “true” biblical Christianity supports the effort of Pride Day. Christian soccer player Bethany Balcer wrote, “Just a reminder, we are not all like this . . . God made queer people in his image, so to not celebrate them as a human being is to rid yourself of an opportunity to praise God.” According to former pro football player Doug Baldwin, Jr., “Jesus said ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ . . . Love does not demand its own way. This isn’t Love.” Baker’s article noted that many devout Christians in the NHL, including Ryan Donato and Philipp Grubauer, have worn Pride Night jerseys without complaining.
As I explain in my recent book, Twisted Unto Destruction: How Bible Alone Theology Made the World a Worse Place, this is what always happens. Throughout American history, from supporting slavery to selling consumerism to pushing the various evils of the Sexual Revolution, sola scriptura has been used to give sin a divine mandate, and thereby entrench it ever more securely in the culture. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, provides a solid foundation for doctrine and morality and has stood strong in the face of each attack. Whether our work is on the ice or in the office, we need to take refuge in it again.