It probably isn’t too productive to comment on the comments of “emergent” authors, as they have taken pains to make clear that they are no longer with us. As they might say, their centered set doesn’t overlap with our bounded set (which, of course, demonstrates that they too can’t avoid having a boundary).
But in case there was any doubt, read Tony Jones’ post on Dan Savage, the gay man who not only forever slurred the good name of Rick Santorum (see my post, “homosexual hate speech” below), but who also argues for open marriages. According to Savage, monogamy is an unrealistic expectation for many people. Rather than hold ourselves to such a harsh demand, we should allow ourselves and our partners to experiment with other lovers. If we have a “good, giving, and game” partner, then our adulterous flings will only enhance our marriages.
How does Tony Jones respond? He writes: “I don’t know if Savage’s ethic jibes with a biblical, Christian view of sexuality.” He adds that Savage’s view is more realistic than the puritanical view held by most Christians, and that “for the first time in my life I’ve met Christians who are in ‘open’ marriages or are practicing polyamory — and I’m committed that my theological/ethical response to them be both Christian and pragmatic/realistic.”
There was a time, not that long ago, when Jones would know whether “Savage’s ethic jibes with a biblical, Christian view of sexuality.” His current ignorance does not arise from his “realistic” view of sex, but from his obvious denial of the clear teaching of Scripture. This is where many of us warned the emergent “conversation” was headed. We just didn’t think it would arrive so soon.