Here is the distinction, Theo. Jesus befriended sinners in His everyday life, ministering to them, drawing them toward God and urging them to sin no more.
What Paul was talking about was having habitual/lifestyle sinners in good standing as regular members of the congregation. The example was a man living in sexual sin with his mother. Paul said this type of immorality cannot be tolerated by members of the body of Christ, *as* the body of Christ.
Iow, when you have a member of the congregation living in everyday, ongoing sin, you cannot simply tolerate and, by extension, condone the sin. You must confront the person in love in the Biblically prescribed manner, and if they repent & renounce their sin, great. If not, they must be separated from the assembly both for their own good and for the good of the congregation.
By that token the church can welcome celibate homosexuals into fellowship. It cannot—or at least should not—allow practicing homosexuals as members in good standing, any more than it can/should allow men & women living in sexual relationships sans the sacrament of marriage to be members in good standing.
Do you see the distinction?
Of course.
You wrote: “By that token the church can welcome celibate homosexuals into fellowship. It cannot—or at least should not—allow practicing homosexuals as members in good standing, any more than it can/should allow men & women living in sexual relationships sans the sacrament of marriage to be members in good standing.”
That is precisely my position. There is a dramatic difference between same-sex attraction and homosexual behavior.