|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: I spy strangers! Use of church space by other faiths.
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Perhaps. I would suggest it is more likely that it will encourage them in the practice of their own religion.
How important is that judgement to your position? For instance, if you became convinced that on average muslims were more likely to convert to Christianity as a result of encountering Christians who gave them shelter to pray rather than if they encouter Christians who clearly demonstrate they cannot allow them to pray in a church.... would that be enough to make you think you should change your stance?
I'd guess so. Bringing people to Christ is the important thing.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
once or twice every summer our church holds our main Sunday Eucharist in a local park, and that's not any less valid. (I don't enjoy it much, partly because I don't do well in the heat and partly because it brings out the kind of clappy guitar music that doesn't do much for me. These are problems with me, though, not problems with an outdoor Mass.)
Hey, you're describing our twice-a-summer "Mass on the Grass"
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
(btw the only time the word "mass" is used officially to describe one of our eucharists. Also that eccles favorite "Shine Jesus Shine" invariably makes an appearance.)
[ 20. March 2013, 20:43: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Hawk.
What path away from God? As opposed to yours?
Sorry, I don't understand the question. Some grammar might help.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Sylvander
Thanks for your post above. It was quite instructive.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
Hey, you're describing our twice-a-summer "Mass on the Grass"
I don't think, even for RCs, that you are only allowed to have masses in consecrated buildings.
quote:
(btw the only time the word "mass" is used officially to describe one of our eucharists...
What about Christmas and Candlemass?
quote:
...Also that eccles favorite "Shine Jesus Shine" invariably makes an appearance.)
I SOOOOOOOOOO wish I could be there! ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
In our set-up, we don't have an altar, and we don't have pews, which means it is actually much easier for the chapel to be rearranged for lots of other uses. The kind of separation between what you can do in a church hall and what you can do in a consecrated building doesn't work in our case. Just one multi-purpose hall.
Thanks for this post, Barnabas62. I share your viewpoint but you expressed it far more thoughtfully and sensitively!
Picking up the point about multi-purpose buildings, what about churches like mine that hire a venue? (A school hall, in our case.) These church services are clearly not taking place in a consecrated building, so would some people consider them to be, in some sense, not valid, not proper, not approved by God?
Quite interesting. For simplicity, I left out a part of the story of my local congo. We still use our chapel regularly for worship and prayer (Sunday evenings, midweek events), but not on Sunday mornings. The reason was that our Sunday morning worship was so well attended that we were pushing up against H & S limits (even after offering two consecutive services).
So we got involved with a local school in a collaborative project. They dearly wanted a larger and better equipped school hall than the local authority budget would provide for. We needed a larger worship area, but could not afford the cost of buying a larger chapel. So we fundraised to contribute to the larger school hall (which the school and local authority own) and as a quid pro quo got long term use of the hall at a peppercorn rent, plus our own storage cupboards for equipment, plus use of classrooms for children and Sunday school. Plus a baptistry in the stage (we practise believers' baptism by full immersion). So we have a permanent home and a Sunday morning home.
This win-win project was completed successfully in about 18 months. The school and parents (and local authority) were delighted with the enhanced facilities, the process generated immense local goodwill, and provided us with a worship area large enough to accommodate over 500 people. The setting is plain, but we use banners and wall hangings which proclaim the Christian faith in words and pictures. So the setting isn't stark.
As I've said, our ecclesiology does not include the notion of a specially consecrated place for worship, but like many other congregations we pray at the start of our meetings that the presence of God will become a present reality for all who gather there. I think that if you believe in the omnipresence of God, the most important feature is that God will open the eyes of our hearts so that His presence amongst us will be better known. We go to meet with Him and be changed by Him. We believe that worship is an encounter with the Divine presence. It's hard for me to appreciate that congregational worship (proskuneo = to come towards reverently to kiss) is anything else but that. Prayers with that in mind are a lot better than praying for God to "turn up", which I've heard folks in other places do. He's already there. The real issue is whether we have the heart to "tune in" - and even when we do not, recognising that His gift of grace can help us to do so.
Personally I have no problems in accepting the validity of beliefs and practises associated with traditions of consecrated buildings. The fact that we don't see it that way doesn't make me dismissive of other views. Why should it? It doesn't seem to me to the sort of thing which should divide people of goodwill.
[ 20. March 2013, 21:18: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Perhaps. I would suggest it is more likely that it will encourage them in the practice of their own religion.
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
How important is that judgement to your position? For instance, if you became convinced that on average muslims were more likely to convert to Christianity as a result of encountering Christians who gave them shelter to pray rather than if they encouter Christians who clearly demonstrate they cannot allow them to pray in a church.... would that be enough to make you think you should change your stance?
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
I'd guess so. Bringing people to Christ is the important thing.
Can I ask - if your stance rests on that judgement, then given how difficult it is to predict how humans will react (and even more difficult to predict in what way God may use their reactions) that it might do to be a little more agnostic (if you excuse the choice of word) regarding the correct course of action here?
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
Thanks for giving some more details of your church's story, Barnabas62.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
This win-win project was completed successfully in about 18 months. The school and parents (and local authority) were delighted with the enhanced facilities, the process generated immense local goodwill, and provided us with a worship area large enough to accommodate over 500 people.
Nice job! And all in 18 months - not bad at all, I'd say.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
...we pray at the start of our meetings that the presence of God will become a present reality for all who gather there... that His presence amongst us will be better known... Prayers with that in mind are a lot better than praying for God to "turn up", which I've heard folks in other places do. He's already there. The real issue is whether we have the heart to "tune in" - and even when we do not, recognising that His gift of grace can help us to do so.
Yeah, I totally agree. Avoiding language like 'Please show up, God' and 'Coming in to God's presence' is one of my hobby-horses. I know what people are getting at but wherever we are, God is already there!
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Personally I have no problems in accepting the validity of beliefs and practises associated with traditions of consecrated buildings. The fact that we don't see it that way doesn't make me dismissive of other views. Why should it? It doesn't seem to me to the sort of thing which should divide people of goodwill.
Again, I agree. While I think many churches (especially small rural C of E churches) are hamstrung by the burden of maintaining and heating big, often old buildings, it's not remotely something I'd want to fall out with people over. This thread just got me wondering whether some Christians would doubt the validity and authenticity of how churches like mine operate, simply in view of where the Sunday meetings are held.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Can I ask - if your stance rests on that judgement, then given how difficult it is to predict how humans will react (and even more difficult to predict in what way God may use their reactions) that it might do to be a little more agnostic (if you excuse the choice of word) regarding the correct course of action here?
No.
Your argument is flawed because it could just as easily be used to argue against offering them the church space as it could be used in support of it. You don't know that offering them the church space will exhibit to them the love of Christ, or whether it will show them that you support their rejection of Christ. If you chose an agnostic position and claim that you do not know whether good or evil will result from your actions, then surely the best thing to do is nothing. And then you are at least not personally culpable.
At the end of the day I do not believe in encouraging and providing assistance to actions which I believe to be wrong, just to be seen to be kind, in the vague hope that this is enough to bring them to Christ.
As an illustration of my position in this I will use, as an analogy, an example of people engaging in an activity that we can agree is physically dangerous (as opposed to spiritually). Imagine you came across a group of children playing with fireworks in a park, lighting them and throwing them at each other. Some of them run out of matches and can't continue joining in with their friends. Would you kindly offer them your matches so they could continue their fun. In the hope that your kindness would show them the love of Christ?
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
That's fine, so far as it goes, Hawk. But it points to the more intriguing question.
How do you know that they are playing with fireworks and you aren't?
To take the analogy a step further. In my close on 40 years as a Christian I have seen congos who espouse what appear to be sound (evangelically sound that is) beliefs and yet cause great damage to members and ministers. The righteousness seemed to me to co-exist with a lack of kindness. I've seen party spirit and factions within.
Oh sure, you and I can quote the scriptures which say that ought not to happen, that should not happen. Sometimes I have shuddered at the effect of the "hardening of the oughteries". Like hardening of the arteries, it has seemed to me that it can cause a heart attack. On the very heart of the good news.
The desire for doctrinal soundness is well intentioned, but it can easily degenerate into something which is quite un-Christ-like in its approach to the marginalised and different.
I think open-handed offers of friendship have a future, even with folks who we think are playing with fireworks.
Do you recall Brother Andrew? God's smuggler. Mike Pilavaci (the Soul Survivor leader) told me a few years ago about a meeting he had with Brother Andrew (who was in his 70's at the time). The old boy was full of beans, according to Mike, because he felt God had given him a new mission in life. Befriending terrorists. Apparently he'd made friends with Yasser Arafat. Mike said he remonstrated with Brother Andrew, wondered whether Arafat was to be trusted. The old boy laughed. "Of course he's not to be trusted! But God is. Anyway, I think he quite likes me, is intrigued by my odd beliefs. I'm seeing him next week, why don't you come and join me? I'm sure he'll be interested in your story, what you do". Mike observed that he was pleased to discover he had a genuine prior engagement, so declined. But he was really challenged by the old boy, was thinking he should really follow it up, but felt more than a little chicken about it.
He's since told the story publicly, so I feel OK about repeating it, as best I recall it. It sure challenged me. The Psalmist says "With your help I can advance against a troop; with my God I can scale a wall." There are walls that divide us. Sometimes a risky bit of wall leaping may be in order. Things can go wrong of course. But not if God is in it.
Sometimes it really isn't so clear who is throwing the fireworks. Or the brickbats.
[ 21. March 2013, 06:00: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
Hey, you're describing our twice-a-summer "Mass on the Grass"
I don't think, even for RCs, that you are only allowed to have masses in consecrated buildings.
Certainly not the case, when the RCs had WYD in Sydney they had a huge mass celebrated at Randwick Racecourse - a den of thieves ripping off the poor if ever there was one.
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
At the end of the day I do not believe in encouraging and providing assistance to actions which I believe to be wrong, just to be seen to be kind, in the vague hope that this is enough to bring them to Christ.
OK I think I get you. It isn't so much your prediction of whether your actions lead them to Christ or encourage or discourage that is important... it is a point of principle that you think what they are doing is very wrong and you therefore don't want to be involved at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Would you kindly offer them your matches so they could continue their fun. In the hope that your kindness would show them the love of Christ?
Got it. And this is where a difference between us lies. Firstly I wouldn't liken Islam to playing with fireworks and Christianity to a walk in the park. Clearly Islam can lead to terrorism, extremism and brutal repression. But Christianity can lead to some bad stuff too.
One could speculate about whether Islam was closer or further from Christianity than atheism.
But if one considers it damaging, and considers the practioners of it to be adults rather than children, and set on continuing to practice, then I suppose a better analogy for me would be observing a group of adult smokers in the rain.
I think smoking is a bad idea, and I wouldn't want to provide them with cigarettes or a match if they asked. But I might provide them with shelter while they smoke and wait for a bus. If a conversation strikes up about smoking I would be honest and do my best to persuade them of my view.
But I'd regard stopping them smoking for a few minutes as a rather empty victory, and denying them shelter as pointless.
By the way, I'm personally not agnostic about the impact of acts of kindness. I feel quite certain that the most likely outcome of denying Muslims shelter is to convince them that we don't like them very much and feed into a view of Christians as modern-day crusaders. Offering them shelter is more likely to breakdown stereotypes of how Christians act.
But I suspect this isn't the source of the difference between us - it is more the former difference of children with fireworks vs adults smoking.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
How do you know that they are playing with fireworks and you aren't?
To take the analogy a step further. In my close on 40 years as a Christian I have seen congos who espouse what appear to be sound (evangelically sound that is) beliefs and yet cause great damage to members and ministers.
I agree. We should all make sure that we look first at the dynamite in our own hand before worrying about the fireworks in others'.
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
At the end of the day I do not believe in encouraging and providing assistance to actions which I believe to be wrong, just to be seen to be kind, in the vague hope that this is enough to bring them to Christ.
OK I think I get you. It isn't so much your prediction of whether your actions lead them to Christ or encourage or discourage that is important... it is a point of principle that you think what they are doing is very wrong and you therefore don't want to be involved at all.
A bit of both. But yes, mainly the second. I see this as a scripturally based approach.
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Would you kindly offer them your matches so they could continue their fun. In the hope that your kindness would show them the love of Christ?
Got it. And this is where a difference between us lies. Firstly I wouldn't liken Islam to playing with fireworks and Christianity to a walk in the park. Clearly Islam can lead to terrorism, extremism and brutal repression. But Christianity can lead to some bad stuff too.
Oh definitely. Please don't take the analogy too far. Christinaity has it's own problems and is certainly not a walk in the park. More like a marathon through an obstacle course. But on a spiritual level, I do see Islam as dangerous, as it takes people away from God.
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
But if one considers it damaging, and considers the practioners of it to be adults rather than children, and set on continuing to practice, then I suppose a better analogy for me would be observing a group of adult smokers in the rain.
I think smoking is a bad idea, and I wouldn't want to provide them with cigarettes or a match if they asked. But I might provide them with shelter while they smoke and wait for a bus. If a conversation strikes up about smoking I would be honest and do my best to persuade them of my view.
But I'd regard stopping them smoking for a few minutes as a rather empty victory, and denying them shelter as pointless.
Point taken. I like your analogy. Perhaps different cases may be more like yours, and others more like mine.
I think we understand each other now. Thank you for your considered input. It's been very interesting and helpful - remarkable on such a heated thread!
[ 21. March 2013, 10:52: Message edited by: Hawk ]
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
I think we understand each other now. Thank you for your considered input. It's been very interesting and helpful - remarkable on such a heated thread!
Indeed. And likewise.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
A few assorted comments.
1. Jews are not apostate Christians. I hesitate to go as far as to accuse anyone of trolling but that statement is both offensive and deeply misguided. An apostate is a person who has given up their faith. Jews are descended from those who never became Christians in the first place.
2. Chrisitanity grows out of Judaism. Jesus was Jewish. We have received the Old Testament and a lot more of C1 Judaism than some Christians would like to recognise. We should be grateful for this.
3. The first Christians were Jewish and worshipped in the temple, sacrifices and all, until they were thrown out.
4. Islam is more of a problem. Allah is the same God as ours, but we would regard Islam's vision of him as inadequate/misled. Because of the tensions and the risk aired above of its being subsequently used to claim a land-grab, I think I'd be uneasy about letting Moslems worship in a church. However, I do not think it would pollute a church if they did.
5. The position becomes very different once one gets to the other religions of the world, with the slight possible exception of Buddhism which I know very little about. If you ask yourself, 'what would Moses, Elijah or St Paul have thought?', the answer becomes immediately obvious. Any sort of sharing agreement with any of them would be dangerous and polluting, be it the worship of Diana of the Ephesians, Ganesh, Ashtoresh, Thor, Lug, the white goddess, Tongasoak or whoever. The installation of an idol of any of them would be even worse.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Muslims may not have any physical or visual representations of men or gods in their worship, but they do revere and treat as sacred a giant black rock, making sure that they pray towards it five times every day. That’s an idol in my book.
No. The Kaaba is not an idol to any orthodox Muslim, Sunni or Shia. It is a sacred place, worthy of great veneration, because the Qur'an states that it was the first house that was built for humanity to worship God. The worship is directed to the One True God alone.
And it is worth pointing out that the ka'aba is empty - Muhammad (pbuh) cleared out all the idols.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
There's sufficient there I'd OF thought Hawk.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
I'm beginning to wonder how many people who call themselves Christians Ad Orientem would refuse to pray with on the grounds that they aren't "real" Christians....
I have not and do not get into arguments about who is or who is not a "real" Christians. As far as I'm concerned anyone who has been baptised with water in the name of the Father and of the Son aned of the Holy Spirit has the right to refer to themselves as a Christian. That, of course, says nothing of orthodoxy though, and it is orthodoxy I'm concerned with and endeavour to present.
Well, that puts Quakers safely on the outside. Of course, it's very hard to tell when we're praying, 'cause we look like we're just sitting there. We could sneak into a church and contaminate it with stealth prayers....
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vulpior
Foxier than Thou
# 12744
|
Posted
I do have some sympathies with those who are coming from a exclusivist point of view; is that OK as shorthand for Ad Orientem's and Hawk's approaches? It is a logical conclusion from taking a stance about the uniqueness of the claims of Christianity; if you believe people who are worshipping God without accepting Jesus are in peril of eternal hell, then you are doing them a disservice by encouraging them to perpetuate their mistake.
I think that many who take issue with the conclusion do so because they take issue with the starting point. I don't share that starting point, but I don't think it is uncommon; in those circumstances not extending access to your worship space because you believe people are practising a false religion is not inhospitable, but honest.
In interfaith dialogue we have to be honest about our differences, rather than seek to mash them into one shared soggy goo of nothingness. As long as you are honest (but polite) in expressing what and why, fair enough.
Having given that apologia for the stance of others, I repeat that I don't share it. I don't have concerns about sharing my own worship space (consecrated or not), but I would have concerns about using some other worship spaces for formal worship, and about the sensitivities of those to whom my faith might extend hospitality.
It's more about the decoration than the dedication/consecration of the space. I can recognise the holiness of a space and would have no concerns about praying quietly in any house of prayer. But to bring the symbols of my faith into the worship space of another faith, and to conduct our rituals there, would sometimes seem disrespectful. And how do those of other faiths cope using Christian worship spaces with those symbols prominently displayed?
The cross and the Eucharist are classic examples. If we invite Jews to use our church, we might be able to lift down the altar cross. But there's a crucifix above the pulpit, and another 'dying-Jew-on-a-stick' in the East window, that one with INRI indelibly displayed. Over in the corner there's the special leftovers from our 'new-and-better' version of the Passover meal.
Or maybe we have their Ten Commandments on the wall, paired with the Lord's Prayer, or a depiction of the Last Supper.
You'd have to be quite thick skinned to be able to shut all the Christian symbols out. Maybe it doesn't matter, if you're so grateful to be out of the rain.
By the same token, I'd feel uncomfortable placing a cross in another faith's worship space, or taking icons or statues into a mosque, or conducting formal Christian worship in sight of statues of another faith's god(s).
For me, any sharing agreement would have to be based on mutual respect. I would be happier offering our church hall than our church, because it is quite clearly a Christian space and you'd be implying that people have to put up with that and block it from their mind.
But I wouldn't feel the same way about some other worship spaces. I remember a church in my home town where the sanctuary was screened off when the space wasn't being used for worship, and similar multi-use church/school hall in my university town.
I stress that if it doesn't matter to the 'tenants', then it doesn't matter to me. But it feels to me that it should matter. Unless you are actively syncretic in your belief system, then we believe different and often contradictory things, and trying to express one set of beliefs while surrounded by objects intended to reinforce another set of beliefs would be difficult for me.
--------------------
I've started blogging. I don't promise you'll find anything to interest you at uncleconrad
Posts: 946 | From: Mount Fairy, NSW | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
the risk aired above of its being subsequently used to claim a land-grab
Which seems a weird thing to worry about. Radical Muslims may believe that the church in Aberdeen is now 'theirs' but Scottish law is hardly going to let them exercise this 'right'. Sylvander cites Cologne cathedral which, I note, is still Catholic nearly 50 years after the event.
If radical Islam ever became so powerful in Scotland that radical Muslims were able to occupy the church, then Christians are pretty screwed anyway regardless of the situation in this particular church. And if radical Muslims decide they can act extra-judicially then, again, they're a threat regardless of this church.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Originally posted by Vulpior:
quote:
For me, any sharing agreement would have to be based on mutual respect. I would be happier offering our church hall than our church, because it is quite clearly a Christian space and you'd be implying that people have to put up with that and block it from their mind.
My understanding, which could be wrong, is that this is what has happened; the Muslims primarily use the church hall, but use the church itself for "overspill" once the hall is full. The church itself is full of pews, which presumably create a practical difficulty in terms of prostrate prayer.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
This might also be of interest to those following this thread.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vulpior:
The cross and the Eucharist are classic examples. If we invite Jews to use our church, we might be able to lift down the altar cross. But there's a crucifix above the pulpit, and another 'dying-Jew-on-a-stick' in the East window, that one with INRI indelibly displayed. Over in the corner there's the special leftovers from our 'new-and-better' version of the Passover meal.
It is always embarrassing, especially for the British, to declare that 'my way is better than your way'. It goes against all our deeply inbuilt notions of self-effacement. But it is important, I feel, to get past these feelings of embarrasment and preach 'the Way the Truth and the Life'. We should never be embarrassed about who we are and what we beleive. And we should certainly not be embarrased about displaying the symbols of our Lord proudly and clearly before all others, whatever their religion or creed.
Luke 9:26: "Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory"
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Personally, I'm painfully aware that there are hundreds of religious beliefs in the world and the fact that I ended up with Christianity when I "got religion" is almost entirely down to the fact that Christianity was the dominant religious belief in the society in which I grew up. Had I been born in Tunisia it's odds on I'd be a muslim.
I therefore find believing with any certainty that I've managed to pick the "right one", which it's so contingent, quite problematic.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ButchCassidy
Shipmate
# 11147
|
Posted
Yes to Hawk. And were I to even mentally consider taking down a cross in order to avoid 'offending' Jews (its a church, what do they expect), I think I would have Peter's sermons to the Jews in Acts 3-4 screaming in my head. Peter loved the Jews, his own people, and part of that love was to explain the truth to them. Doesn't mean I would do all his 'you killed the author of life' stuff (he could get away with it, being one of the family himself)! But wouldnt want to hide what we in the church believe.
[ 22. March 2013, 11:13: Message edited by: ButchCassidy ]
Posts: 104 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Personally, I'm painfully aware that there are hundreds of religious beliefs in the world and the fact that I ended up with Christianity when I "got religion" is almost entirely down to the fact that Christianity was the dominant religious belief in the society in which I grew up. Had I been born in Tunisia it's odds on I'd be a muslim.
I'd probably be the same. I would hope that the Holy Spirit would have still revealed Jesus to me, but would I have had the courage to go against my culture and follow Jesus in response? I have little courage at the best of times. So I thank God for his grace, that I have been blessed by being born in a country where Christianity is dominent. In the same way as I am grateful that I was born in a time and place where democracy, freedom, rule of law, a national health service, a welfare system, and a good standard of income are the norm. Most people in the world do not have these blessings. And I certainly will not spurn these benefits by considering them of little worth. Being brought up in a Christian household is a pearl of great worth.
[ 22. March 2013, 12:23: Message edited by: Hawk ]
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I wasn't.
That's not my point though; my point is that we really, really don't know that we've got the "right one". It's perfectly possibly that the Muslims are right. Or the Jews. Or the Hindus. Or the Sikhs. Or none of 'em. Or all of 'em, a bit.
Definitive statements to the contrary just seem hubristic to me.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Definitive statements to the contrary just seem hubristic to me.
Seems like a statement of faith to me
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
If your definition of faith is "things I want to be true so am going to believe in even though I've got no solid reason for believing they are."
At least that's what it would mean if I said it.
Perhaps I don't do this "faith" thing very well.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
I would hope that the Holy Spirit would have still revealed Jesus to me, but would I have had the courage to go against my culture and follow Jesus in response? I have little courage at the best of times.
I'm disturbed, though finding it hard to explain why, by this. I think it might suggest that you believe that of the millions of muslims in the world, there are some (many?) to whom the HOly Spirit has revealed Jesus, but they do not "have the courage" to follow him.
I would refer to, rather than repeat, my post above in which I note that the Gospels show that there are many ways for the Holy Spirit to reveal Jesus to us. Of the ways told in the Gospels, not all result in explicit recognition of Jesus as Son of God, yet we are left in no doubt as to their saving grace.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Originally posted by Vulpior:
quote:
For me, any sharing agreement would have to be based on mutual respect. I would be happier offering our church hall than our church, because it is quite clearly a Christian space and you'd be implying that people have to put up with that and block it from their mind.
My understanding, which could be wrong, is that this is what has happened; the Muslims primarily use the church hall, but use the church itself for "overspill" once the hall is full. The church itself is full of pews, which presumably create a practical difficulty in terms of prostrate prayer.
That's how I read the original press release, in which case most of the debate on this thread is irrelevant.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
I would rather say "something I believe to be true, even though I cannot be sure, so I will act as though I am sure, rather than according to my uncertainty."
Faith is a choice, not forced on us by overwhelming evidence, but encouraged by the slow revelation of the Spirit. We can never know anything for sure, but we cannot move forward if we are constantly undecided as to the direction. We cannot win any victories for Christ if we have a foot in both camps, forever hesitating. At some point in our life we must decide once and for all what we believe. We must nail our colours to the mast.
Because faith is vital. Without faith, we have no sure hope of resurrection, no clear idea of God's will, no relationship with Jesus. Without it Christianity is just another religion, trying to find God by stumbling in the dark, no better or worse than any other way. With faith, we can move mountains.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I'm not built that way. If I'm uncertain, I'm uncertain. No amount of determination to pretend otherwise changes that.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
there are some (many?) to whom the HOly Spirit has revealed Jesus, but they do not "have the courage" to follow him.
Probably. It takes great courage to convert. I doubt that everyone who hears the name of Jesus responds with faith in Him. I think its likely that the minority do, many being like the rich man who was told by Jesus to give away all his money and follow him, but went away sad, because he couldn't do it. It is a painful sacrifice for many to follow Jesus, we should never claim it is easy.
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Of the ways told in the Gospels, not all result in explicit recognition of Jesus as Son of God, yet we are left in no doubt as to their saving grace.
I don't think there are any times in the gospels when someone is declared as saved even though they explicitly reject Jesus as the Son of God. There are times when we are not given the end of the story, when people are healed and Jesus moves on, and we don't know whether they came to believe in Him or not. What are you referring to.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm not built that way. If I'm uncertain, I'm uncertain. No amount of determination to pretend otherwise changes that.
It's not pretence. That's why it's called 'faith' instead of 'proof'. That's why the Jews were called 'Israel' (struggles with God). Doubt and uncertainty are a major part of faith, otherwise it wouldn't be faith.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
there are some (many?) to whom the HOly Spirit has revealed Jesus, but they do not "have the courage" to follow him.
Probably. It takes great courage to convert. I doubt that everyone who hears the name of Jesus responds with faith in Him. I think its likely that the minority do, many being like the rich man who was told by Jesus to give away all his money and follow him, but went away sad, because he couldn't do it. It is a painful sacrifice for many to follow Jesus, we should never claim it is easy.
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
Of the ways told in the Gospels, not all result in explicit recognition of Jesus as Son of God, yet we are left in no doubt as to their saving grace.
I don't think there are any times in the gospels when someone is declared as saved even though they explicitly reject Jesus as the Son of God. There are times when we are not given the end of the story, when people are healed and Jesus moves on, and we don't know whether they came to believe in Him or not. What are you referring to.
This
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
This
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying now. Salvation is not based on intellectual assent to a precise theological position. Just that we put our recognition and trust in Jesus that He has the divine power and authority necessary to save us. All the people in your examples exhibited such faith. Is that a good summary?
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm not built that way. If I'm uncertain, I'm uncertain. No amount of determination to pretend otherwise changes that.
It's not pretence. That's why it's called 'faith' instead of 'proof'. That's why the Jews were called 'Israel' (struggles with God). Doubt and uncertainty are a major part of faith, otherwise it wouldn't be faith.
if I told someone of another faith that I thought that I was right and they were wrong, giving any indication that I had any significant confidence in that statement, I'd be pretending. YMMV, naturally.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
I could say with perfect integrity "I have committed myself to this tradition, in which I have found strength and meaning to cope with life."
The wisest words I ever heard in a sermon were "faith is not the opposite of doubt".
The opposite of faith is certainty. Faith isn't a theory to believe, it is a way of life to follow, and if there isn't doubt, there's no moving forward or following.
Faith is moving forward into the darkness?
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm not built that way. If I'm uncertain, I'm uncertain. No amount of determination to pretend otherwise changes that.
It's not pretence. That's why it's called 'faith' instead of 'proof'. That's why the Jews were called 'Israel' (struggles with God). Doubt and uncertainty are a major part of faith, otherwise it wouldn't be faith.
if I told someone of another faith that I thought that I was right and they were wrong, giving any indication that I had any significant confidence in that statement, I'd be pretending. YMMV, naturally.
The operative words are 'significant confidence'. This does not equal 'certainty'.
I have significant confidence in Jesus Christ.
I appreciate YMMV
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
This
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying now. Salvation is not based on intellectual assent to a precise theological position. Just that we put our recognition and trust in Jesus that He has the divine power and authority necessary to save us. All the people in your examples exhibited such faith. Is that a good summary?
Yes. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Salvation is not based on intellectual assent to a precise theological position. Just that we put our recognition and trust in Jesus that He has the divine power and authority necessary to save us. All the people in your examples exhibited such faith. Is that a good summary?
Yes.
Amen!
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Strictly speaking, Erroneous Monk and Malik, Protestant doctrine has it that we are 'saved by grace through faith'. It's the grace that saves. Faith is not a work.
But I'll let wiser minds than mine tussle with that one.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Strictly speaking, Erroneous Monk and Malik, Protestant doctrine has it that we are 'saved by grace through faith'. It's the grace that saves. Faith is not a work.
But I'll let wiser minds than mine tussle with that one.
Gamaliel, I 100% agree with that also -- I wasn't interpreting the statement that I "Amen"ed above to mean that our trusting in Jesus is a work we do that saves us. I believe it truly is all Jesus' work.
If i am not mistaken (and i am open to correction if i am mistaken) i seem to remember a joint 1960s or 1970s Lutheran-Roman Catholic declaration that agreed with the above.
Actually i would add that, it all being Jesus' work, Jesus can save whomever he wants, including people who, in this life, are non-Christians. Jesus does the saving, not us. But i guess that viewpoint is part of what has helped generate some of the fireworks in this thread.
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hawk
Semi-social raptor
# 14289
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Strictly speaking, Erroneous Monk and Malik, Protestant doctrine has it that we are 'saved by grace through faith'. It's the grace that saves. Faith is not a work.
But I'll let wiser minds than mine tussle with that one.
I see it as a little analogous to Indiana Jones at the end of the Last Crusade. He is hanging off the edge of the precipice struggling to grab hold of the Grail by himself when his father says "Indy, let it go". So Indy stops trying to grab the grail and lets his father lift him to safety.
Admittedly it takes no 'work' to allow our father to lift us to safety, but it does take a conscious decision and even an effort, to turn away from trying to grasp the things we are so desperate for, and submit to God's will.
--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts
Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
Perhaps. I would suggest it is more likely that it will encourage them in the practice of their own religion.
How important is that judgement to your position? For instance, if you became convinced that on average muslims were more likely to convert to Christianity as a result of encountering Christians who gave them shelter to pray rather than if they encouter Christians who clearly demonstrate they cannot allow them to pray in a church.... would that be enough to make you think you should change your stance?
I am confused as to how, following Hawk's argument, having some Muslims decide "blow this for a lark, I'm not praying in the rain" and staying home is a good thing for anyone.
They're not coming closer to God by being "bad" Muslims - they're moving from faithfully following the rules of Islam towards laissez-faire secularism. I don't see how that brings them closer to Christ.
And you think being in a religion that explicitly teaches Jesus is not the Christ will bring them closer to Christ? And you think ritual practices of any religion would bring them closer to Christ????
The problem is not about the use of the space itself. It´s about a christian church helping to promote a religion that explicitly denies Christ.
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
And you think being in a religion that explicitly teaches Jesus is not the Christ will bring them closer to Christ? And you think ritual practices of any religion would bring them closer to Christ????
No, but the experience of Christian kindness might.
[ 23. March 2013, 09:48: Message edited by: Ricardus ]
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
What I imagine is that these two neighbouring groups of worshippers had a fairly good and respectful relationship already, and it didn't seem like too much of a stretch for them to help each other out.
Maybe it also helped that the priest is Asian, and perhaps has positive personal connections with Islam. I know some Asian British clergy who are very into interfaith work and the liberation paradigm, and they'd surely applaud this gesture. It arises out of a particular theology, and that can be respected. (We should remember, though, that other Asian Christians have more negative experiences of Islam.)
What I find harder to except is the implication that Christianity has to be gutted in order to be 'kind'. It doesn't seem theological, and it doesn't seem to be honest about Christianity or about other religions. There's a point at which the cuddly approach to other religions actually seems quite disrespectful. It certainly doesn't elicit much respect in return; in the UK Muslims occasionally reproach Christians for being wishy-washy, and I can see why they would, to be honest. Something's missing somewhere.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Brian McLaren explores this brilliantly in Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road? Christian Identity in a Multi-faith World.
Christianity is either strong and hostile or weak and benevolent. The third way - Jesus' way - is strong and benevolent.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
