Brian McLaren is taking a lot of flack for his stance (or lack of a stance) in regards to the homosexuality issue. I hope he doesn't give one.
I think he does this for several reasons:
1. He is not going to be pigeon-holed because of a theological stance. If he makes a stand then people on the "other" side can discount what he has to say. As it is, they both engage him and his writing.
2. It is not the point. I think Brian wants to create dialogue, challenge the traditional (read pat, Sunday school) answers that are normally given, and challenge our actions and attitudes. His purpose is not to say whether homosexuality is right or wrong. His purpose is to say are we being loving, gracious, and kind.
3. It kills the discussion. As long as he is vague, discussion keeps going. Besides, many of Jesus' answers were redirections. Jesus rarely answered the questioner directly, but rather redirected the question to get to the heart of the matter.
Here are three articles. I posted one of them earlier, but the discussion has snowballed. The first article is the original article by Brian McLaren about the pastoral issues around homosexaulity questions. The second is a response from Mark Driscoll. Mark is the pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. The third article is Brian McLaren's response to the responses. If you have a year and a half to spare you can read the responses to each article at the bottom of each article. You may want to read a few, but they will all fall into one of two catagories: I like it! or I hate it!
Leadership Blog: Out of Ur: Brian McLaren on the Homosexual Question: Finding a Pastoral Response
Leadership Blog: Out of Ur: Brian McLaren on the Homosexual Question 3: A Prologue and Rant by Mark Driscoll
Leadership Blog: Out of Ur: Brian McLaren on the Homosexual Question 4: McLaren's Response