Thanks to my brother's comment on my The Three R's of Emergent rant, I found out about Christianity Today's article, Brian McLaren on the Homosexual Question: Finding a Pastoral Response.

I wasn't exactly shocked by what I read, but it was still interesting to see McLaren's approach, followed by the even more interesting comments from readers. I believe homosexuality is wrong because the Bible teaches all sex outside of male-female marriage is sin, but it doesn't fit too well into a Darwinian paradigm, either. I don't hate homosexuals or immoral heterosexuals, and I've had friends in both categories.

I hesitate in answering "the homosexual question" not because I'm a cowardly flip-flopper who wants to tickle ears, but because I am a pastor, and pastors have learned from Jesus that there is more to answering a question than being right or even honest: we must also be . . . pastoral. That means understanding the question beneath the question, the need or fear or hope or assumption that motivates the question.

Being pastoral may be helpful, but if you're dishonest or wrong, being pastoral won't solve anything. Might Brian point us to any helpful resource, even if thousands of years old, that might address the topic from a Christian perspective? Apparently not.

He then goes on to indict his fellow emergent leaders:

Most of the emerging leaders I know share my agony over this question. We fear that the whole issue has been manipulated far more than we realize by political parties seeking to shave percentage points off their opponent's constituency. We see whatever we say get sucked into a vortex of politicized culture-wars rhetoric--and we're pastors, evangelists, church-planters, and disciple-makers, not political culture warriors. Those who bring us honest questions are people we are trying to care for in Christ's name, not cultural enemies we're trying to vanquish.

In McLaren's world, it's apparently all about culture and politics, not Biblical truth. Of course, any true Christian knows that homosexuals are not enemies to be vanquished, but lost souls to be won--however, the emergent conversation is all about setting up false dichotomies that would cause all but the irrational and heartless to come down on the emergent side if the dichotomy was actually valid.

Frankly, many of us don't know what we should think about homosexuality. We've heard all sides but no position has yet won our confidence so that we can say "it seems good to the Holy Spirit and us."

Perhaps less agonizing and more Bible study could prove to be beneficial. After all, the only written account of what the Holy Spirit thinks is pretty clear, and what we think is good doesn't really count for much compared to God's view. I'd recommend to all of the agonizing emergent leaders that they read Romans 1 for a start.

Perhaps we need a five-year moratorium on making pronouncements. In the meantime, we'll practice prayerful Christian dialogue, listening respectfully, disagreeing agreeably. When decisions need to be made, they'll be admittedly provisional. We'll keep our ears attuned to scholars in biblical studies, theology, ethics, psychology, genetics, sociology, and related fields. Then in five years, if we have clarity, we'll speak; if not, we'll set another five years for ongoing reflection.

Is it just me, or does this almost sound like someone writing a parody of what the emergent viewpoint might be on the topic? It's hard to believe that McLaren is serious. As always, he mixes the indisputable (be prayerful and respectful) with the absurd (provisional decisions only, turning to psychs and sociologists to help us muddle through half a decade until we decide to continue muddling). This is the result when God's Word loses its power and authority. If it's not inspired, why, sociologists can enlighten us and get us past that dusty document's culturally biased condemnation of homosexuality!

Some of the comments following the article were insightful, while others were just funny:

How about a moratoriaum on your lack of clarity? Sign me up for that one.

Nothing like getting to the point. Then there are those who gush with praise for their non-macho hero willing to delay gratification for five more years:

Beautifully expressed! In this age of instant gratification and macho posturing, how refreshing to be lovingly invited to take time -- whatever time is needed -- to just listen... listen to others, and listen to the Holy Spirit. Yes, we're more comfortable when we think we have everything nailed down. But is this life really about our comfort? More than a few atrocities have been committed or condoned by "good Christians" through the ages who were so sure they knew the mind of God. And speaking from experience, it is amazing how quickly we can be humbled, turned upside down and brought to our knees when seeking God's truth is more important to us than "being right." Thank you Brian, for your wise counsel.

Let's see, if we just set aside our Bibles and listen for five years, and five more years, and continue our patient listening for five more after that, we can do what's right in our own eyes forever. How convenient. Again, it's a false dichotomy of wait patiently with no clue, or commit atrocities because we're sure of the mind of God. In the interest of being gracious, I can't say what I'm thinking...

Then there are those who want to leap from agonizing over homosexuality to attacking capitalism:

I wonder how many of us have preached a good sermon on the "evils of capitalism" lately and how it feeds our christian soul with lust for wealth and greed.

I'm curious just what our friend might propose as a substitute--a return to the glory days of feudalism? Great if you're not a serf. A socialist economy in which a confiscatory government hands my property to him? We've seen what miracles communism wrought behind the Iron Curtain. Perhaps our "down with capitalism" agitator requires five years of agonizing while various experts are consulted to augment the conversation. After all, capitalists shouldn't be cultural enemies we're trying to vanquish.

And finally, a non-prejudicial, humble voice of reason:

The majority of commenter's I've read certainly would be condemning gay people to hell whether or not they had ever read even a single word of the Bible. Thats because the Bible is not the source of their prejudice about gay people. That source is something dark and has nothing to do with redemption or compassion.

Quit blaming the Bible for a sin of prejudice, arrogance and willfulness that is yours alone.

Fascinating stuff. There are many dozens more for your reading pleasure if you're so inclined. Perhaps that sounded too flippant. Well, it's certainly educational to see just how people "agonize" over issues like this--I don't see much real agony on either side, but I would like to see the Bible used as a standard.

---