I do not have a "one size fits all" answer to the question of whether or not to allow sex offenders, or those with kinky predilections, to join and/or attend a local church. Such decisions are to be made within the congregation of each local church. However, I would suggest that when such decisions are made, they should take two factors into account.
(1) How do the current members of the church feel about it, and is there a possibility of losing current or prospective members of the church, if a questionable individual is allowed to join/attend. Is it worth it to lose a bunch of long-time faithful members, in order to take in one person who is controversial or possibly disruptive?
(2) How will sister churches, of the same denomination, association or unaffiliated fellowship, react to the decision. Is it worth it to damage our reputation with sister churches, and to endanger their reputation, over such a controversial decision?
For a discussion of a somewhat similar controversial situation within the Presbyterian Church in America, with regard to the ordination of an individual who admits to same-sex attraction, see this article:
"You could have used your rights to prevent this whole controversy by withholding ordination for the sake of the larger church’s peace and purity. People have already left over this and are likely to continue to do so. A few days ago I had a missive from someone who did so after 40 plus years of membership. Does that not bother you? . . . Should you not much more care for the opinions of those who are believers already? . . .
"I hear much talk of the church being a place of welcome, nurture, and inclusion for those who experience the temptations in view. I’ll not dispute that notion as such, for our Lord said 'come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest' (Matt. 11:28). But one can be welcomed and nurtured without being given leadership – as all novices, sinners, and children should – and there is something terribly awry when people talk about welcoming unbelieving outsiders while at the same time making brothers feel unwelcome. Driving out the existing sheep for the sake of attracting outsiders is a dubious measure, and I somehow doubt that is what our Lord desires.
"Whatever your intentions, the actual effect of your position and deeds has been such repulsion in the name of welcome and driving out in the name of inclusion. How is that loving? In this do you 'pay careful attention to yourselves and to ALL the flock' (Acts 20:28, emphasis mine)? Because it sure looks as though you are more concerned with prospective believers than actual ones, or with reaching one group (university students) that you forget the other sheep which you already have, not only there but throughout the denomination."
theaquilareport.com
great point. You actually made me laugh out loud. I even read what you said to my wife. Who is sitting next to me in our recliners.
