The more I read literature from Emergent “pastors”, the more I scratch my head — because I simply cannot understand what they mean and cannot figure out the point of what they are saying! It is like a veil is being pulled over my eyes, blinding me from comprehending what Scripture has actually said; I equate it to going back in history to a time where gnosticism and paganism has veiled Christ’s disciples from seeing His truth.
Thus, I find it necessary to post the following quote concerning spirituality and sexuality, from Doug Pagitt in Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging Churches, Chapter 4: The Emerging Church and Embodied Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007), page 140:
“The question of humanity is inexorably linked to sexuality and gender. Issues of sexuality can be among the most complex and convoluted we need to deal with. It seems to me that the theology of our history does not deal sufficiently with the issues of our day. I do not mean this as critique of past times, but as an acknowledgment that our times are different. I do not mean that we are a more or less sexual culture, but one that knows more about the genetic, social, and cultural issues surrounding sexuality and gender than any previous culture.
Christianity will be impotent to lead a conversation on sexuality and gender if we do not boldly integrate our current understanding of humanity with our theology. This will require us to not only draw new conclusions about sexuality, but will force us to consider new ways of being sexual. For sexuality is not separate from our spirituality. If we have a theology formed in a worldview that sees sexuality as sin, our means, intentions, and explanations of sexuality will be affected. We must engage our entire humanity in our spirituality; this includes our sexuality.”
Mark Driscoll (Pastor of Mars Hill Church - Seattle, WA), concerning the underlined quote responds at the SEBTS Convergent Conference with this stark but direct comment:
“I don’t know about you, I’ve been in ministry a while, I think we’ve tried all of it! I don’t think there’s anything new. I don’t know about your counseling load, I can’t possibly conceive of another way to have sex that someone hasn’t already tried!“
Ahhh :@ Amen, Mark, Amen 
Further, it is appears that Pagitt actually misunderstands the Bible’s theology about the kind of sexuality that’s formed by a Christian worldview. Scripture does not see all sexuality as sin, but simply any sexuality that is outside of God’s ordained use — for biblically, it is only within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman that any sexual behavior is biblically acceptable. Let us be clear where God’s Word has been clear: all homosexual sexual behavior is sin; all heterosexual sexual behavior outside of marriage is sin; all sexual lust is sin (Genesis 18-19; Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Matthew 5:28,15:19-20; Mark 7:20-23; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:9-10; Hebrews 13:4).
My heart breaks as Emergent cult leaders, like Doug Pagitt and friends, make Scripture out to be unclear and non-authoritative, when the Bible is explicitly and authoritatively clear about those ways of being sexual that are acceptable to God. Any new questions that may arise out of today’s postmodern contexts must find their answers in Scripture and nowhere else. We certainly need a theology that can not only answer questions produced in this world, but one that that is equipped to generate proper questions — a Christian theology, not a man-centered sex-crazed pagan theology.
And the questions generated by our Christian theology should not ever be, “Has God really said..?”
Brian L
Good post.
Sep 30, 2007 @ 10:43 am
nc
hmmmmm….
great point, just be careful you don’t paint with a broad brush.
One quote about a particular issue by a particular guy (even a “leader”) does not mean Emergent “pastors” would agree. Plus..there’s no such thing as an “emergent” pastor. There might be some pastors that have relationships within a network of people called “Emergent Village”, but my experience with them is that there is no where near a consensus with the specific views of people like Pagitt, McLaren, etc.
If we aren’t careful and circumspect with our words we will only perpetuate misunderstanding that undermines the mission of the Gospel.
Christ died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again!
Oct 01, 2007 @ 10:23 am
T.J.
The deception in the pulpits of America is frightening!!!
Oct 01, 2007 @ 10:27 am
Mrs. E.
Amen and Amen, my brutha.
Oct 01, 2007 @ 11:12 am
Paula
That gels with the lamenting I heard in the E Covenant’s group “the young pietists” when the Covenant’s stance against homosexuality and abortion was upheld in 2004.
http://www.pietisten.org/misc/redefining.html
They brought the issue up again for discussion at the annual meeting in 2006.
The Evangelical Covenant (which is who Pagitt is affiliated with and they seem to adore the guy) is going downhill REALLY fast. Everything is coming in under the guise of ‘Christian liberty.’ No one knows doctrine anymore.
Oct 01, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
Paula
>One quote about a particular issue by a particular guy (even a “leader”) does not mean Emergent “pastors” would agree.
Actually Pagitt is a latecomer to this vein of comment.
Oct 01, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Alex S. Leung
I hope I’ve done the conversation generosity in painting a very thin stroke over what Pagitt has written. I do not know if any others like McLaren, Kimball, or Bell would agree with what Pagitt has said here regarding sexuality — nor would the Emergent conversation allow such an inference ever!
However, for the large readership and following that Pagitt does have, this is of significant concern for it is certainly deceiving in comparison to what God says about sex in Scripture.
Oct 01, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
Joe Martino
Then why not just deal with Pagitt and leave Bell out of it?
Oct 01, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
nc
I don’t know if we can say that Doug Pagitt “has a following” or a large one at that.
Of all the people within the network of relationships called Emergent Village that I have been exposed to I’ve yet to hear a call for the “normalizing of homosexuality”. I HAVE heard a call to compassionately minister to homosexuals and to recognize that they are in our midst and need to be loved, cared for and discipled with gospel-filled relationships.
Oct 01, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Paula
>I do not know if any others like McLaren,
Mclaren has declared a five year ‘moratorium’ on taking a stand against homosexuality while we ‘reevaluate.’ or something along those lines.
nc I think you must be living in a cave someplace if you don’t think Pagitt has a following. He’sa darling of the E Cov for one thing which while not a huge denomination, is not terribly tiny either. They are pushing every kind of popular heresy right now. Why do you suppose CNN called him up to do the thing on Yoga? Because he’s obscure?
Oct 01, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Tyler
11You will recall brethren, how I wrote to you in a previous epistle, that you must not break fellowship with a fornicator who is called a brother, 12nor refuse to associate with the one who is trying to follow Jesus but has a different understanding of sexuality than you do, 13nor must you entertain the thought of not eating with the sexually immoral man who is not of that tradition; namely that marriage is between only one man and one woman. 14For what have I to do with judging those who are within the church? For where did our Lord Jesus ever teach that we are to judge righteously? 15Did he not instruct us to keep quiet and never pass judgment on anything, especially upon matters pertaining to sexual practices? 16For God has never taught us that we should put away those who have a different understanding of sexuality than us from among ourselves, but that we ought to include them in all manners of fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers; 17no matter their practice, lest we offend many and hurt their feelings.
4.1 Don’t you know that adequate theological and moral categories will not exist in the Kingdom of God? 2Do not be deceived: neither the monogamous, nor teachings of God’s wrath, nor penal substitutionary atonement, nor kenosis, 3nor propositions, nor any hypostatic unions, nor propitiation, nor Calvinists nor Arminians shall inherit the kingdom of God. 4And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were cleansed of your former modernistic categories, and you were vindicated in the pooling of ignorance and the appreciation of mystery and absurdity.
5I marvel that you are so quickly being led astray by those who feign holiness on the surface, but underneath are miserable ascetics, 6who make audacious claims such as “not all things are expedient,” and “the body is not for sexual immorality, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.” 7Don’t you know that your sexuality and your free expression of it, however you desire, is not only your right as an image-bearer of humanity but an intrinsic part of who you are as a human being? 8Don’t you know that your bodies are members of the entire human race? Shall I then take the members of Humanity, and have them divided amongst themselves? May it never be! 9Flee restrictive sexual categories! Do you not know that your body belongs to yourself alone, and not to God? 10For you were purchased through your own power of self-determination; therefore express freely your own unique sexuality in your own body, which belongs to no one else.
(cf.1 Cor 5.9-13, John 7.24, 1 Cor 6.9-20, Gal 1.6)
Oct 01, 2007 @ 8:24 pm
Alex S. Leung
> Mclaren has declared a five year ‘moratorium’ on taking a stand against homosexuality while we ‘reevaluate.’
Yes, Paula, I am very much of aware of McLaren’s position there. I just meant that I have not read/heard of any affirmation / denial of Pagitt’s theology of sexuality as published the book in question. It would seem, thus, that McLaren’s position here would be very similar to Pagitt’s.
For reference, McLaren’s statement is fond here:
From Tyler’s quotes, as well as the Scriptural references I’ve posted, I think we have a sufficient evaluation to come to a conclusion about what God thinks about human sexuality. I do agree that all Christians and churches need to be diligent in caring for those in such sin with truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). Any failure here cannot be strictly put on the Reformed / conservatives alone but all of us Christians who have failed to love all people who are made in God’s image in spite of their sin.
Joe: I have left Bell out of this, and I’ve tried my best to stay on the issue as per Pagitt’s own words.
SDG
Oct 01, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
Eugene J. Kim
Does coming from a broken home have anything to do with postmodernism? I thought about that today as I was categorically putting my friends and people in the media in this squaring. The less stable the home is, the more willing you are to “venture out.” With my generation turning 30+ and looking at the disheaval of emotional baggage and the carrion of their father’s lack of spiritual guidance by all means and through their father’s inbred notions of family and values, sociologically this is becoming evidentiary that maybe we need to raise our children in the LIGHT OF THE TRUTH WHICH IS THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST JESUS and not on beer commercials, matinees, and pornography, and beating our children for the sake of it. Just a streamer thought turned up a bit.
eugene
Oct 02, 2007 @ 2:14 am
Cheryl
Ever read the book “Real Sex” by Lauren Winner ? Truth be told people have sex 30 million different ways because they have a addiction. Sex doesn’t satisfy anymore and sadly even after conversion it still doesn’t.. Too much information locked into that frontal lobe for those who aren’t virgins.
I realize this isn’t easy to talk about but its a huge problem. Few have the courage to say it or talk about it.
Oct 02, 2007 @ 5:41 am
Paula
Cheryl — I don’t think that is what Pagitt is talking about! I’ve never found that adults are shy about talking about sex in ‘traditional’ Christian circles. They just aren’t into titillation and making crass jokes about something so sacred and beautiful… nor about ‘reimagining’ sex in some form other than what is consecrated by God in marriage.
Oct 02, 2007 @ 9:17 am
Paula
BTW Cheryl — after REAL conversion — no, sex doesn’t satisfy in and of itself either. But since Christ has already satisfied that individual (This is not to say that Christ is EVER to be preached as a form of ‘life enhancement’ but rather our Lord and Savior who gave his life to save us from the wrath to come, to whom we must repent and in whom we must put our complete trust.)
Oct 02, 2007 @ 9:20 am
Paula
… forgot to finish my sentence….
Since Christ has already satisfied the individual, they remain satisfied in all things. Philippians 4:11 “Not that I speak from want, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am.”
Oct 02, 2007 @ 9:22 am
Paula
Tyler — I love your parody. Very apropo.
Oct 02, 2007 @ 9:23 am
eugene j. kim
Hey, one more thing: I’ve actually got a live postmodern LEADING my small group. I never really looked at a ceiling fan until tonight. BTW, let’s change my word disheaval(?) to upheaval in my previous post; enought about me. Guess what guys? Just because you’re POMO doesn’t make you the coody girl you knew in elementary school. In fact, she got married several years ago. Huh. How do I make sense of the POMO and coody girl in light of what the purpose-driven design of the ceiling fan means to me tonight because tomorrow it’s a different ‘feeling’?
Lead on Spirit of Truth,
Eugene
Oct 06, 2007 @ 1:09 am