|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Back off Sydney
|
Cranmer's baggage*
Shipmate
# 4937
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard123:
quote:
Originally posted by Cranmer's baggage:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard123:
Sydney evangelicalism has grown up in a context of people attacking it all the time doctrinally, which probably explains why it is sometimes a little confrontationalist. They're human, and we all stuff up from time to time.
Custard,
Any chance of you providing some evidence to support that assertion? I've only got 30 years adult experience of the Anglican Church in Australia, so there may well be things you know about it which I don't.
However, I'll take my chances from my limited perspective:
<big snip to remove background stuff>
I'll repeat my point of some pages ago, on the off chance that it might eventually penetrate the veils of prejudice and prick the baloon of self-righteousness: This isn't an evangelical v. liberal brawl, or an irrenancy v. infallibility debate, or a difference about music or vestments... This is about a bunch of blokes setting out to systematically redefine what it means to be an Evangelical Anglican in such a way that many of us who have long held a deep commitment to Anglicanism and to the principles of Evangelicalism find ourselves confronted, threatened, abused and in peril of becoming theologicaly and ecclesiologicaly homeless. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
Thanks for this helpful background CB - my knowledge is very much more about Sydney evangelicals in England.
For what it's worth, Sydney Anglicanism seems to be largely being embraced by conservative evangelicals in England, and I haven't heard too many grumbling noises about it as opposed to about conservative evangelicalism in general, except on the Ship.
Custard
Custard,
I'm not sure how that comment actually answers my question. I realise you're very taken up at the moment with arguing the same old same old about the authority of scripture, but could you spare a moment to focus on the topic of the thread?
My understanding is that both Sydney style Evangelicalism here and the REPA/REFORM equivalents in the UK have caused considerable consternation among traditional evangelical Anglicans. They may well be less of a concern to other conservative evangelicals for whom the Anglican tradition is of no interest.
Nunc has already pointed to clergy whose attitude is thoroughly congregationalist, to the point of declining to bury people who weren't 'members' of the church. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I could cite examples of theologically trained lay-women who were preaching regularly 20 years ago, and rarely get offered a pulpit today, while guys with much less training spout forth their fundamentalist clap-trap for hours on end.
And women who are told by their clergy that it would be an act of disobedience if they pursued ordination, despite their strong sense of vocation.
Or those who are accused of lacking 'Gospel priorities' if they take liturgy seriously.
Or academics who leave Moore to teach in other places and find themselves accused of having 'gone soft' because they are willing to listen to others and engage in constructive dialogue.
Or traditional evangelical Anglican clergy who encourage the women (lay or ordained) to fully and freely explore the gifts for ministry which God has given them, and are given to understand that it would be a waste of time applying for a job in Sydney, unless they want to go to an Anglo-Catholic parish. Of course, if, for family or other reasons, they did take such a parish, they would then be seen to have sold out!
But of course, it's much easier to raise high the straw man of liberalism and set fire to his feet, than to accept that perhaps there is something unhealthy in this particular strand of Christian practice. Even if it is pure and right, I'm no way near convinced that it is Anglican.
--------------------
Eschew obfuscation!
Posts: 729 | From: the antipodes | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cranmer's baggage:
My understanding is that both Sydney style Evangelicalism here and the REPA/REFORM equivalents in the UK have caused considerable consternation among traditional evangelical Anglicans. They may well be less of a concern to other conservative evangelicals for whom the Anglican tradition is of no interest.
IRL, I haven't come across any opposition to Oak Hill from evangelicals. Though Pete Braodbent expressed something distinctly resembling it on here.
I think it's probably useful to distinguish between "Sydney evangelicals" and Reform here. Yes, there is a lot of overlap, but Reform is still dominiated by old-style British evangelicals, often ones who think the battle is about holiness rather than grace, which is a shame.
I think we mean something totally different by "traditional evangelical". In England, that would be the conservative evangelicals, many of whom would see "open evangelicals" as being too liberal.
quote:
Nunc has already pointed to clergy whose attitude is thoroughly congregationalist, to the point of declining to bury people who weren't 'members' of the church.
There's congregationalism and congregationalism though. It is true that many (but by no means all) of the Oak Hill people I know are probably congregationalist rather than episcopelian in their leanings wrt church governance. But most if not all would also agree strongly with the 39 articles and want to stay in the C of E as long as it would have them.
In terms of refusing to bury non congregants, I don't know anyone in the UK who would approve of that. It's just stupid for one thing. Even from a utilitarian view, it is a good way of making contact with those outside the church who need the reassurance that knowing Christ brings.
OTOH, I haven't spoken to Nunc about this so don't know if this was first hand knowledge or via the media. I know from personal experience how good the media are at getting the wrong end of stories and twisting them. If first hand, then I sincerely hope and expect that it was just a very small minority.
quote:
I could cite examples of theologically trained lay-women who were preaching regularly 20 years ago, and rarely get offered a pulpit today, while guys with much less training spout forth their fundamentalist clap-trap for hours on end.
Again, from my experience, Sydney evangelicals are much more likely to have women in leadership roles in the churches than old-style conservative evangelicals (some of whom didn't allow women to speak up front at all). Here in the UK anyway. OTOH, I know what you are saying here. I guess this boils down to whether they are right about women preaching or not rather than simply them being a negative influence.
quote:
And women who are told by their clergy that it would be an act of disobedience if they pursued ordination, despite their strong sense of vocation.
Does Moore take women for ordination? Oak Hill does.
quote:
Or those who are accused of lacking 'Gospel priorities' if they take liturgy seriously.
depends how seriously they take it I guess!
Might be fair, might not, depends on the situation.
quote:
Or academics who leave Moore to teach in other places and find themselves accused of having 'gone soft' because they are willing to listen to others and engage in constructive dialogue.
I guess again it depends on the details (and to what extent the person had changed their views). But again, I don't know of anything like that happeneing in England.
quote:
Or traditional evangelical Anglican clergy who encourage the women (lay or ordained) to fully and freely explore the gifts for ministry which God has given them, and are given to understand that it would be a waste of time applying for a job in Sydney, unless they want to go to an Anglo-Catholic parish. Of course, if, for family or other reasons, they did take such a parish, they would then be seen to have sold out!
I am, as are all the Oak Hill types I know, fully in favour of women using their gifts for the building up of God's church - we'd just probably disagree with you over the context in which that should be expressed.
But again, I think this boils down to a question about what the Bible teaches about women's ministry. FWIW, all the cons evo women I know here who are thinking about using their gifts in a full time capacity agree that they shouldn't "have authority over a man".
So I think your disagreements with Jensen et al fall into 2 broad categories:
- The role of women in ministry, which is actually a Biblical interpretation thing
- Practical "anomalies", where I'd broadly agree with you, but suggest that the facts might be more complex than we know
Hope that helps,
Custard
[ 17. June 2004, 06:59: Message edited by: Custard123 ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
Morning, Wood.
Hush now - I'm talking to people who think Moses wote Deuteronomy.
Of course, if Job and the Psalms are prior to or contemporary with the compilation of the Torah then we are faced with scriptures that not only have to be read in their entirety, but also contained multiple, distinct and often contradicotry voices. Aiee!
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Philo25:
quote:
Nonetheless, while Callan is quite witty in couching con evo positions on the OT in terms of a 'Big Brother' God, his I would coin 'halfway-house' interpretation of the Bible rather diminishes its message. Callan apparently is comfortable with reading through the Bible, and only accepting those bits that are written in a style similar to Thucydides, and anything with any 'Harry Potter' in it he dismisses!
On the contrary, I accept both the 'Harry Potter' bits and the 'Thucydides' bits as Scripture. What I don't do is insist that they are the same kind of literature.
Imagine for a moment that God chose English culture rather than Jewish culture to be the bearer of His message. Over a period of over a thousand years a number of books which witnessed to His actions were put together into a compendium, rather like our Bible including Beowulf, Bede's History of the English Church and People, the Domesday Book, Geoffrey of Monmouth's History of the Kings of Britain, the Canterbury Tales, King Lear, the BCP, the poems of George Herbert, the Pilgrim's Progress, Locke's Two Treatises on Government, Bishop Burnet's History of His Times, the novels of Sir Walter Scott and Jane Austen and Macaulay's History of England.
Now it seems to me that if we were trying to work out what God was saying we would have to understand that Beowulf is a different kind of literature to Macaulay or Jane Austen. Which is what those of us who don't subscribe to your interpretation of the Bible are saying. You presumably have no difficulty with the concept that Beowulf didn't really slay Grendel, or that there was never a historical Mr Bennett. This doesn't invalidate Beowulf as poetry or myth. It isn't history in the sense that Macaulay is history because it isn't setting out to do that job (although it contains historical elements, of course).
Now it seems to me that the book of Joshua is much more like Beowulf than it is like Macaulay. Arguments about inerrancy seem to me to be unhelpful here. Joshua isn't invalidated by the fact that it is a myth about how God gave the land to our ancestors despite terrible odds and absolutely loathes foreign gods. The point of Joshua is to tell the Jews in exile that they are not to give up hope and not to worship the gods of Babylon. Insisting that it must have absolutely happened like that or we must lose faith in the Bible is like insisting that the Good Samaritan was a historical personage and if we find out that Jesus made the story up, then our faith is as naught.
I'm not rejecting Scripture - I'm trying to understand it in the light of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ and of modern scholarship. What you have done is taken a theory about scripture - inerrancy - and pushed it to a point where it ceases to make sense. People have said that if they were obliged to believe in the God inerrantists believe in they would cease to believe in God. I'd go further, I'd cease to believe in anything because for inerrantists reason doesn't work. You can't talk about right and wrong because for you genocide was quite acceptable in 1200 BC but utterly deplorable before or since. You can't talk about our shared humanity because it doesn't count outside the elect. You can't use concepts like love or justice because they mean whatever you need them to mean at any given time. You can't talk about logic and evidence because they are trumped by inerrancy every time.
In short you have taken Christianity, which was supposed to bring the liberation and healing of Christ to the world and turned it into a nihilistic and irrationalist doctrine in which only blind obedience and conformity matter and in which reason and love are subjugated to maintaining a literal understanding of a book which has become substituted for the God it was meant to reveal to us.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Goldfish Stew
Shipmate
# 5512
|
Posted
I prefer Hell as the "new heaven" to Hell as the "new dead horses."
--------------------
.
Posts: 2405 | From: Aotearoa/New Zealand | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
FatMac
Ship's Macintosh
# 2914
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard123:
For what it's worth, Sydney Anglicanism seems to be largely being embraced by conservative evangelicals in England, and I haven't heard too many grumbling noises about it as opposed to about conservative evangelicalism in general, except on the Ship.
It's all definition of course - what is a 'conservative evangelical' Anglican church in the UK? FWIW I attended an evangelical Anglican church in Kent for 4 years (97-00) and during that time was also involved in the Diocesan Continuing Ministerial Education programme, so I got to know about 20 clergy from the Diocese reasonably well, of which about half a dozen self-identified as evangelical. I was also good friends with our own Rector and the two curates that were around in that time period. Of all of these UK evangelical anglicans, one was a gung-ho Sydney admirer, the rest had grave difficulties with Sydney's ethos and were seriously concerned about Sydney's affect on the Anglican Communion more widely.
--------------------
Do not beware the slippery slope - it is where faith resides.
Do not avoid the grey areas - they are where God works.
Posts: 1706 | From: Sydney | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Callan - I know this is Hell, but:
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
[Voice=Wayne]We are not worthy; we are not worthy[/Voice]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by linzc:
It's all definition of course - what is a 'conservative evangelical' Anglican church in the UK? FWIW I attended an evangelical Anglican church in Kent for 4 years (97-00) and during that time was also involved in the Diocesan Continuing Ministerial Education programme, so I got to know about 20 clergy from the Diocese reasonably well, of which about half a dozen self-identified as evangelical. I was also good friends with our own Rector and the two curates that were around in that time period. Of all of these UK evangelical anglicans, one was a gung-ho Sydney admirer, the rest had grave difficulties with Sydney's ethos and were seriously concerned about Sydney's affect on the Anglican Communion more widely.
ok. I don't know Kent well at all, being a Mancunian. In fact, I think I could count the number of Kentish churches I can name on the fingers of one hand. From what little I hear though, I'd class St Nick's Sevenoaks as conservative evangelical. Apologies to anyone involved if my impression is incorrect.
I don't think we accept everything coming from Sydney uncritically. For example, I think sometimes they come across as too brash. But on the whole, we would think that the Jensens et al are a Good Thing (though of course sinful and fallen, saved only by grace, etc).
Custard
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nunc Dimittis:
For instance, "ministers" refuse to bury people not connected with their immediate congregation; funeral parlours often have to call around people who are willing to minister to those who are grieving - regardless of religious faith. I would have thought that, far from turning such people away, here is a golden opportunity for Christ to shine through one and "witness" the gospel in a unique way (albeit obliquely). But noooo. I have direct evidence from this in the experience of at least two people whom the funeral parlours contact to fill in. And this is not isolated to one or two individual ministers.* It seems to be something that is directly related to the mindset produced by the present day Moore College, and it is such that I am at a complete loss to explain it, completely flabbergasted by an approach that lacks a basic care for other vulnerable people.
• And it covers a wide geographic area, from the north of Sydney through to the mid-southern suburbs of Sydney.
Nunc this is another one of your outrageous generalisations. You know two people who have been horribly treated by Anglican clergymen in Sydney in two geographically diverse suburbs. There are hundreds of Anglican clergy in Sydney and there is nothing in your post to suggest that the terrible thing you have described is, as you assert, ‘not isolated to one or two individual ministers’. Are there some less than perfect ministers in a diocese the size of Sydney? What a shocking surprise! I know dozens of clergy in Sydney and I can say with confidence that they would all be appalled at the alleged behaviour that you describe, goodness me and they’re Moore College trained and all!.
As a Moore College 4th year I find your assertion that:
quote:
It seems to be something that is directly related to the mindset produced by the present day Moore College
flabbergasting in the ignorance it displays of what actually goes on at Moore College. There is an open day coming up. Maybe you should attend before you add to the pile of gross inaccuracies you have created over the years on this board and others about college life and college training. I know this is Hell, but surely there is a limit to the number of crimes that one woman can attribute to a Theological College of which she knows almost nothing. Open days are normally attended by those who are thinking of going to college, but they are open to everyone. They’ll even give you lunch for free. August 28th 10am to 2pm. Phone 9577 9999 to book. John Woodhouse will be there, so will Narelle Jarrett, ask them any question you like. Ask Narelle about the subject she teaches on grief counselling. Just stop blaming Moore College for everything that gets up your nose. As I have come to know Barry Webb, Peter O’brien, Paul Williamson, Andrew Cameron, Narelle Jarrett, Mark Baddley, Brian Rosner, Richard Gibson, Wendy Colquhoun (for non-Sydneyites, a sample of the faculty who immediately spring to mind) I have found them to be gentle, humble, godly Christian leaders. Through the ups and downs of community life I have seen them deal with situations of grief and distress (including that in my own family) with compassion and empathy and Christian love. I thank God for the mindset they have encouraged us to adopt.
I understand that at a difficult time in your life you had a bad experience with an Anglican church, but even that does not justify your ongoing broad brush slander against people who you don’t know working hard in a college about which you know very little.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
Through the ups and downs of community life I have seen them deal with situations of grief and distress (including that in my own family) with compassion and empathy and Christian love. I thank God for the mindset they have encouraged us to adopt.
Interesting. I'm happy that there are caring people there. My experiences have been somewhat different.
I was told by one Moore College type that my depression must have been caused by me having sex (as sex is the major cause of depression). No wonder why everyone else in the church was happy to clap and sway -- they were untainted by acts of the horizontal tango.
And other MC graduates / students told me equally insane things. And the only solution was for me "to read my Bible". Perhaps I am a hard parishioner to handle, but every "Sydney evangelical" [as much as these things can be labelled] provided me no help in any matter. Thankfully we had a ex-Presbyterian Chinese minister who knew how to do pastoral care (and even gave me Catholic spiritality books!). And thanks also to God for my Anglo-Catholic minister who didn't just shout, "Read your Bible!" at me but took an interest.
(Aside)
Thanks to Cranmer's Baggage for the historical info. Very helpful and interesting.
(/Aside)
Ian.
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ian H:
I was told by one Moore College type that my depression must have been caused by me having sex (as sex is the major cause of depression).
Well, sin can cause depression. So if what you had done was sinful, perhaps (and just perhaps) it was a cause for your depression. A decent minister will not forever dodge the issue of sin. If they do, they are failing their calling as shepherds to their flock. Just how sensatively that's done can obviously vary greatly - but I'm sure insensativity (or bad reactions to perceived insensativity) is not the preserve of Moore college or Oak Hill graduates. I'm sure we can all tell our horror stories of insensativity.
CJS - thank you for confirming what I strongly suspected - and experienced for the teachers I've heard - Moore College is packed with Godly people trying to teach what they underderstand the Bible to be teaching. They do so with humility, but with conviction. People don't like them because they don't like what the Bible says, and try to dodge it or reinterpret it (water it down?). May Moore College and its graduates continue to speak the truth in love.
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Are you for real, Fish Fish? Do actually believe this nonsense you sprout?
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ian H:
I was told by one Moore College type...
quote:
And other MC graduates / students told me equally insane things.
Ahhhhhhhh! This is the very thing that gets me hellish!
There are good clergy and less than good clergy. There are some who make the most of their college experience and some who don’t. There are some who look like they have potential and then don’t. There are some who have developed good pastoral skills and some who aren’t there yet. Some I click with, some I don’t. That’s the way it is everywhere, always has been and always will be. Why do we have to blame every weakness, mistake, insensitivity and sin committed by (or at least attributed to) a graduate of Moore College on their 4 years spent at College?
Do we blame Archbishop George’s recent shameful behaviour on his time at General Theological Seminary in New York?
Having heard Peter Carnley say insensitive things in various forums do I blame them on his time at Trinity College or maybe his time at Cambidge?
Moore College does what it can in the four years that it has people for. It is always looking to do better. It has just employed someone full time to revamp the ‘four year pastoral training’ program (the Dip Min that all ordinands do alongside their BD)’, although realistically pastoral training is best delivered at ‘point of experience’ in a curates first few years in parish and so College is working hard with the diocese to integrate with post-college training.
There are hundreds of godly clergy in Sydney who provide much appreciated pastor care every week.
I have benefited from some of it. Most of them have trained at Moore College.
I'm sorry that your experience of a small minority of them has been different.
Glad I got that off my chest.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
Thanks for turning up CJS - it is good to have my guesses about what is going on in Sydney braodly confirmed by someone with first hand knowledge of Moore. Oh, and congrats (?? if that is the right term) on attaining Shipmate status.
I'd say the situation with conservative evangelical clergy in the UK is broadly similar, with most doing a good job. But I also know of quite a few pastorally weak anglo clergy (I don't know many liberal clergy, pastorally excellent or otherwise).
Oh - LATA, isn't "sin causes depression" a reasonable three word summary of Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment?
Custard
[ 19. June 2004, 08:47: Message edited by: Custard123 ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cusanus
Ship's Schoolmaster
# 692
|
Posted
Well, fuck me. I never thought to use 19th century Russian literature as psychological textbook. I hope to God that you and fish have spouted that garbage because you've been backed into a corner. The only other explanation is that you are fuckwits of the highest order. In which case get your heads out of your fundamentalist arses.
--------------------
"You are qualified," sa fotherington-tomas, "becos you can frankly never pass an exam and have 0 branes. Obviously you will be a skoolmaster - there is no other choice."
Posts: 3120 | From: The Peninsula | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
I should add - I know nothing of the pastoral situation described. I suspect that the minister's recorded response was probably too insensitve and possibly factually wrong too.
I am merely commenting that in some situations, mainly from my own limited experience, sin can cause depression. I am quite proficient at sinning, and used to be quite proficient at depression too. All comments are purely from my own experience and are not intended to bear any resemblance to the situation Ian H described.
I was merely addressing the question "Does sin cause depression?", to which the answer is "In my experience, it definitely can, oh and look - here's a famous Russian novellist who would seem to agree that sin can indeed sometimes cause depression."
Now why is that garbage?
Oh, and Cusanus, thanks for the offer of sex. I'm probably flattered, but I'd really rather not right now (or at any point in the future). Hope that's ok with you.
Custard
[ 19. June 2004, 09:40: Message edited by: Custard123 ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Custard said
quote:
Oh - LATA, isn't "sin causes depression" a reasonable three word summary of Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment?
Yes, it's called Fiction.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Left at the Altar:
Are you for real, Fish Fish? Do actually believe this nonsense you sprout?
But of course.
But which bit is nonsense - that sin can lead to depression. What's nonsensicle about that? Isn't a byproduct of sin guilt? And can't guilt lead to depression? Or do you disagree that there is such a thing as sin? If so, then I'll defer to the higher authority of Jesus, cos he certainly taught about sin.
Or is it the idea that sex may sometimes be sinful? Well if you think that's nonsense, then I'll defer to the higher authority of Jesus, cos that's what he taught.
Or is it the idea that sometimes ministers should point out sin? Well, again I'll defer to the higher authority of Jesus, cos that's what he taught.
Or is it the idea that ministers from every theological position can be insensitive? Is that really nonsense?
Just wondering what exactly was nonsense about what I said?
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
Fair point CJS re my "picking on" MC - I do not deny I have a lot of issues with how I was treated by certain graduates / students there. I will be more careful in the future.
I was quite unclear in the context. In the interests of the whole story, I have never had sex and, given "Have you had sex?" was the first question he asked after I said I was feeling down, I was taken a bit aback.
Thankfully a friend suggested I see a doctor afterwards...which was a help.
quote:
Fish Fish shat the following:
People don't like them [Moore College] because they don't like what the Bible says, and try to dodge it or reinterpret it (water it down?).
WTF is this? Have you actually read any of the posts? I don't like some of the MC types who believe that their way is the only way and the rest of us are "at best sub-Christian". I am fed up with a supposedly Anglican diocese wanting to be Baptist / Reformed (which are both wonderful and valid expressions of Christianity) yet holding on to the name "Anglican". Piss off!
Ian.
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cusanus
Ship's Schoolmaster
# 692
|
Posted
Depression, you idiots is a disease. It is a chemical imbalance in the brain. It needs treatment by a doctor. It is NOT feeling sad, or guilty, and it is NOT caused by sin. Got that? Now shut the fuck up about it.
--------------------
"You are qualified," sa fotherington-tomas, "becos you can frankly never pass an exam and have 0 branes. Obviously you will be a skoolmaster - there is no other choice."
Posts: 3120 | From: The Peninsula | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cusanus:
Depression, you idiots is a disease. It is a chemical imbalance in the brain. It needs treatment by a doctor. It is NOT feeling sad, or guilty, and it is NOT caused by sin. Got that? Now shut the fuck up about it.
I beg to disagree. Some depression is a result of sin and guilt, just as some illness is a result of sin and guilt. Sometimes Jesus heals people where sin has caused their illness (e.g. Mark 2:1-12) and sometimes he heals where sin is not the cause (e.g. John 9:3).
So while the minister may have been grossly insensitive in the way he asked the question, the question is far from invalid or inapropriate.
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Sometimes Jesus heals people where sin has caused their illness (e.g. Mark 2:1-12) and sometimes he heals where sin is not the cause (e.g. John 9:3).
FF, in basic theology we agree on much. However, aside from some of the stuff you have written here being quite insulting to people who have depression, this is a completely bonkers reading of Mark 2.
This thread is doing my head in. Its just turned into "Inerrancy II - this time with insults". And now, it seems vast generalisations about people's illnesses.
CJS, thanks for your educated input.
However, this is certainly the end for me for this thread - some of the things said here are doing the cause of conservative evangelicalism no good whatsover.
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
FF, in basic theology we agree on much. However, aside from some of the stuff you have written here being quite insulting to people who have depression, this is a completely bonkers reading of Mark 2.
Wow - sorry you disagree - and sorry if I've been insensative.
I myself have suffered from depression. So I know that depression can be caused by a chemical imballance in the brain. But it seems to me to say that all depression has a chemical cause and to dismiss the notion that some depression may have a spiritual cause is wrong.
But, if saying that causes offence to anyone else who has or does suffer from depression, then I'm truly sorry.
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cusanus:
Depression, you idiots is a disease. It is a chemical imbalance in the brain. It needs treatment by a doctor. It is NOT feeling sad, or guilty, and it is NOT caused by sin. Got that? Now shut the fuck up about it.
Cusanus - I apologise if I have offended you.
There's a problem in English here - the word "depression" can be ambiguous. I hear the French have a distinction something like "avoir un depression" and "etre depresse".
Custard
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Some depression is a result of sin and guilt, just as some illness is a result of sin and guilt. Sometimes Jesus heals people where sin has caused their illness (e.g. Mark 2:1-12) and sometimes he heals where sin is not the cause (e.g. John 9:3).
So while the minister may have been grossly insensitive in the way he asked the question, the question is far from invalid or inapropriate.
The question is inappropriate as long as the person has not been checked by a doctor for chemical imbalance. Such a person is already in the depths of despair, and such a question will make things much worse.
If it has been established that the problem is not medical, it is still a mistake to start making suggestions about which sins the depressed person may have committed. He should be encouraged to talk about what was happening in his life before he became depressed. It's possible that he suffered some bereavement or major reversal in his career plans which devastated him.
If a person is depressed because of sin, this fact should be uncovered by quiet conversation, not judgmental questioning.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
The question is inappropriate as long as the person has not been checked by a doctor for chemical imbalance. Such a person is already in the depths of despair, and such a question will make things much worse.
If it has been established that the problem is not medical, it is still a mistake to start making suggestions about which sins the depressed person may have committed. He should be encouraged to talk about what was happening in his life before he became depressed. It's possible that he suffered some bereavement or major reversal in his career plans which devastated him.
If a person is depressed because of sin, this fact should be uncovered by quiet conversation, not judgmental questioning.
Moo
Moo - I completely agree - that would be my aproach as well.
However, to quote IanH's origonal post
quote:
Originally posted by Ian H:
I was told by one Moore College type that my depression must have been caused by me having sex (as sex is the major cause of depression).
My assumption was that IanH told the "Morre College Type" that he had had sex and now felt depressed. If this was the case, then it was entirely reasonable to ask "is your depression a consequence of having sex".
However, IanH has updated the story with this
quote:
Originally posted by Ian H:
In the interests of the whole story, I have never had sex and, given "Have you had sex?" was the first question he asked after I said I was feeling down, I was taken a bit aback.
Which is clearly totally inappropriate.
Mind you, he wasn't actually from Moore College was he? So I'm not sure how that's relevant to the OP!
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cranmer's baggage*
Shipmate
# 4937
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Mind you, he wasn't actually from Moore College was he? So I'm not sure how that's relevant to the OP!
Fish Fish, I've tried to engage rationally with this discussion, and have clearly failed to make any impact on the people who need to hear what life is really like on this side of the world.
But this is Hell, and you're posts have been of such excremental standard that I no longer feel obliged to be nice. And the whole debate has left me unable to be rational.
So - noting that the approx. 95% of evangelical clergy in the Diocese of Sydney all but a handful are trained at Moore, because Moore is the only college used by the Diocese (a very cosy relationship - I'm sure there's a word for it, can't quite put my finger on it right now... ![[Biased]](wink.gif) )
- your smugness has absolutely no foundation.
That, however, is consistent with the rest of the batshit you've posted on this thread. It is my fervent prayer that if I ever find myself in need of pastoral care or intelligent advice I do so a very long way from you, and anyone else who shares your perspective. You are an arrogant fuckwit.
Life experience has not left me in need of further examples of the small-minded, self-important idiocy that passes for argument in some conservative circles. Please take your assinine remarks and shove them back in the orifice from which they emanated. Don't forget to pull your pants up when your done.
--------------------
Eschew obfuscation!
Posts: 729 | From: the antipodes | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
I beg to disagree. Some depression is a result of sin and guilt, just as some illness is a result of sin and guilt.
I can see the guilt part, but the sin connection is totally pulled from your own ass. If someone believes that something is really a sin, and develop guilt about it, I can see that contributing to depression - but the "sin" part is utterly superfluous.
Personally, most of the things I do that make a big happy grin spread across my face would be considered "sins" by many. Explain how that works with your moronic assertion.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Mind you, he wasn't actually from Moore College was he? So I'm not sure how that's relevant to the OP!
For what it's worth, he was a graduate of Moore. I meant "Moore College graduate" not "Moore College type" -- I must learn to use Preview Post. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Ian.
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Donne
Renaissance Man
# 220
|
Posted
Unfortunately, Fish Fish and Custard: Experiencing a diagnosed depressive illness is not necessarily protective against talking out of your arse about depressive illnesses.
How lucky for us, that you choose to share your insights.
Say it: "Some depressive illnesses or depressive disorders are the result of sin" Go on, make my day. You know you want to. Let me hear it: no wheedling out and hiding behind what 'depression' actually means. Yeah! I want to know about the aetiology of depressive disorders in relation to sin. Pay special attention to chicken and egg arguments. And tell us how much some is while you're at it.
Posts: 13667 | From: Perth, W.A. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Fish Fish asked:
quote:
Just wondering what exactly was nonsense about what I said?
Fishy dear, much of what you say strikes me as nonsense. Usually I get a good belly-laugh out of it. But when you start on your Fundy-Pop Psychology and class a good deal of shipmates, who have been quite open about the depression that they suffer, as sinners now paying for those sins (forgive me if I have your diagnosis wrong, but that's pretty much how it sounds), I feel the need to point out to you that you are talking drivel.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cusanus
Ship's Schoolmaster
# 692
|
Posted
Thanks Custard. Anyone who can pick my 'Master and Commander' quote in The Circus can't be all bad.
--------------------
"You are qualified," sa fotherington-tomas, "becos you can frankly never pass an exam and have 0 branes. Obviously you will be a skoolmaster - there is no other choice."
Posts: 3120 | From: The Peninsula | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard123:
Thanks for turning up CJS - it is good to have my guesses about what is going on in Sydney braodly confirmed by someone with first hand knowledge of Moore. Oh, and congrats (?? if that is the right term) on attaining Shipmate status.
Custard
I made shipmate?!?!?!? ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif)
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ian H:
Fair point CJS re my "picking on" MC - I do not deny I have a lot of issues with how I was treated by certain graduates / students there. I will be more careful in the future.
I was quite unclear in the context. In the interests of the whole story, I have never had sex and, given "Have you had sex?" was the first question he asked after I said I was feeling down, I was taken a bit aback.
Thankfully a friend suggested I see a doctor afterwards...which was a help.
Ian I don't know how long ago all this depression thing was for you, but are you doing OK now?
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nunc Dimittis
Seamstress of Sound
# 848
|
Posted
Fortunately for Ian, he has met Anglican clergy from other dioceses, and good quality Uniting Church clergy who have brought him back to Jesus, so keep your Moore College mits off him! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
quote:
OTOH, I haven't spoken to Nunc about this so don't know if this was first hand knowledge or via the media. I know from personal experience how good the media are at getting the wrong end of stories and twisting them. If first hand, then I sincerely hope and expect that it was just a very small minority.
*snort* Thankyou for writing off my posts as just cranked up media garbage.
Oh, and CJS, it wasn't two people who had had bad experiences at the hands of unsympathetic Moore trained clergy; you misread my post.
What I was actually saying, is that at least two people I know are being asked to take funerals/crematorium/graveside committals - because your buddies refuse to have anything to do with the families and loved ones left behind. It's not just once or twice: it's a veritable drought of Sydney Anglican clergy - and the funeral parlours are complaining about it.
Actually, your suggestion I pop along to the Moore Open Day is a good one: it would give me pleasure to speak to people about the ordination selection process here, and compare it with other places... especially seeing as I am a woman.
*Now taking bets on which of the lovely people CJS mentions above will be the first to suggest that it's impossible for women to be called to be deacons or priests, and say something along the lines of "Now, dear, can we interest you in some quality children's ministry?"*
[ 20. June 2004, 12:20: Message edited by: Nunc Dimittis ]
Posts: 9515 | From: Delta Quadrant | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nunc Dimittis:
Fortunately for Ian, he has met Anglican clergy from other dioceses, and good quality Uniting Church clergy who have brought him back to Jesus, so keep your Moore College mits off him!
quote:
OTOH, I haven't spoken to Nunc about this so don't know if this was first hand knowledge or via the media. I know from personal experience how good the media are at getting the wrong end of stories and twisting them. If first hand, then I sincerely hope and expect that it was just a very small minority.
*snort* Thankyou for writing off my posts as just cranked up media garbage.
Oh, and CJS, it wasn't two people who had had bad experiences at the hands of unsympathetic Moore trained clergy; you misread my post.
What I was actually saying, is that at least two people I know are being asked to take funerals/crematorium/graveside committals - because your buddies refuse to have anything to do with the families and loved ones left behind. It's not just once or twice: it's a veritable drought of Sydney Anglican clergy - and the funeral parlours are complaining about it.
Actually, your suggestion I pop along to the Moore Open Day is a good one: it would give me pleasure to speak to people about the ordination selection process here, and compare it with other places... especially seeing as I am a woman.
*Now taking bets on which of the lovely people CJS mentions above will be the first to suggest that it's impossible for women to be called to be deacons or priests, and say something along the lines of "Now, dear, can we interest you in some quality children's ministry?"*
Your’re right I misread, but again, your suggestion that Anglican clergy in Sydney have a general principle of not taking the funeral’s of ‘outsiders’ is simply wrong.
That you could make such a false assertion does not surprise given that this very post demonstrates two misunderstandings of how things work in your diocese. Firstly, there would be little point consulting any of the college faculty about the ordination selection process because Moore College does not and has never run the ordination selection process, the Archbishop, in consultation with his Department of Ministry Training and Development does that. Secondly, I find it astonishing that someone who claims to be an expert on the machinations of her diocese does not realize that women are deaconed in Sydney. Indeed I have female friends who I expect will be made deacons on the same day that I am. I know that most on this board will consider the policies of Sydney diocese on women's ministry inadequate and if you want to have that argument I’m sure that there is something in the dead horse section. Flog away.
My point is only to reiterate that Nunc’s periodic sweeping assertions about ‘the way it is’ in Sydney diocese need to be taken with an artery clogging amount of salt.
Nunc, don’t forget the free lunch. We stole SMBC's chef and he's good.
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
Kiwithingy:
You do not have to read every thread. If this thread is boring you, then do not read it. If you feel it has gone off track, or otherwise moved outside of Hell's remit, give the hosts the benefit of the doubt, and assume they know what they're doing. Or PM them. Do not presume to try and make hostly decisions from the sidelines.
Unless, of course, you have recently been made a host, and I missed it.
Sarkycow, hellhost
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cranmer's baggage:
That, however, is consistent with the rest of the batshit you've posted on this thread. It is my fervent prayer that if I ever find myself in need of pastoral care or intelligent advice I do so a very long way from you, and anyone else who shares your perspective. You are an arrogant fuckwit.
I find it ironic that I'm called an arrogant fuckwit by someone who accuses me of pastoral insensitivity. Thanks for the practical illustration of what I am lacking.
I am still interested in the possibility that sin can effect our health. I am NOT saying all illhealth is the result of sin, or pointing the finger at anyone, or anything like that. I am simply asking if it is possible. I am sorry if raising the question offends you. I've started a new thread to discuss this.
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
I find it ironic that I'm called an arrogant fuckwit by someone who accuses me of pastoral insensitivity. Thanks for the practical illustration of what I am lacking.
I find it mind-numbingly stupid that you could be such a fuckwit as to even consider that pastoral care is to be expected in Hell. Thanks for the practical illustration of what you are lacking.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
Ian I don't know how long ago all this depression thing was for you, but are you doing OK now?
Niceness in Hell!?!?! What is happening!?!!? Thanks - drugs are keeping me happy. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by CJS:
Firstly, there would be little point consulting any of the college faculty about the ordination selection process because Moore College does not and has never run the ordination selection process, the Archbishop, in consultation with his Department of Ministry Training and Development does that.
Having spoken to Nunc about vocations and such, I can be 1000% sure she does understand how things work. Whether she was having a laugh [I can just imagine her kitted up in a cloak and swinging a thurible through Moore College] or was serious [if I was considering a vocation I think I'd take the chance to go to an Open Day and at least get started on the process...] I am unsure of, but I do know she is quite knowledgable in terms of ordination / vocation processes.
Ian.
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Goldfish Stew
Shipmate
# 5512
|
Posted
The golden fishy Kiwi one grovels out of the room in search of the required manual "How to Write Throwaway Comments that Don't Piss Off the Hosts." He also intends to be less of a fuckwit in future.
--------------------
.
Posts: 2405 | From: Aotearoa/New Zealand | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nunc Dimittis
Seamstress of Sound
# 848
|
Posted
yawn
CJS said:
quote:
Your’re right I misread, but again, your suggestion that Anglican clergy in Sydney have a general principle of not taking the funeral’s of ‘outsiders’ is simply wrong.
I am not asserting that it is a "general policy". I am merely pointing out that the fact that what seems a significant number of Sydney Anglican clergy are doing in refusing to deal with "outsiders" illustrates a breathtakingly insular view of pastoral care - which in my opinion is appalling. I don't know the numbers who are actually refusing to do this, but it must be quite some, for two notable and well frequented crematoria to be concerned...
quote:
That you could make such a false assertion does not surprise given that this very post demonstrates two misunderstandings of how things work in your diocese. Firstly, there would be little point consulting any of the college faculty about the ordination selection process because Moore College does not and has never run the ordination selection process, the Archbishop, in consultation with his Department of Ministry Training and Development does that.
Darling Sweet, if I decided to pursue vocation in Sydney, I know where I would go and what I would do. However, you can't tell me that the staff at Moore are completely ignorant about such things - and if I didn't know, I am confident they would point me in the right direction. Besides, I would've thought they would be experienced in handling ordinands, and know enough about the process to align what they teach with the candidature process.
Sheesh. Think I'm somehow stupid or something? No need to be so frigging defensive.
quote:
Secondly, I find it astonishing that someone who claims to be an expert on the machinations of her diocese does not realize that women are deaconed in Sydney. Indeed I have female friends who I expect will be made deacons on the same day that I am. I know that most on this board will consider the policies of Sydney diocese on women's ministry inadequate and if you want to have that argument I’m sure that there is something in the dead horse section. Flog away.
Mate, I used to attend the Cathedral, I was an assistant verger there and enthusiastic congregant. I've witnessed women being deaconed. I have spoken with several Sydney women deacons. It is my understanding, however, that there are increasingly fewer women going along the diaconal path in Sydney, precisely because they do not see the diaconate as the end of their call; in Anglican circles the diaconate is still the stepping stone to the priesthood... And the other aspect of this of course is that women are discouraged from preaching, and as deacons are supposed to do at least some of this (in addition to other things), People In Charge in the diocese are quietly discouraging women from being ordained at all...
quote:
My point is only to reiterate that Nunc’s periodic sweeping assertions about ‘the way it is’ in Sydney diocese need to be taken with an artery clogging amount of salt.
That's right, I know nothing whatsoever and am just an aggro liberal with an axe to grind. My experience and the experience of many people I know is nothing to be taken seriously... (Remind me not to come anywhere near you if I ever need pastoral care. )
quote:
Nunc, don’t forget the free lunch. We stole SMBC's chef and he's good.
Riiiiight.
Posts: 9515 | From: Delta Quadrant | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CJS
Shipmate
# 3503
|
Posted
yawn.
quote:
Originally posted by Nunc Dimittis:
That's right, I know nothing whatsoever and am just an aggro liberal with an axe to grind. My experience and the experience of many people I know is nothing to be taken seriously... (Remind me not to come anywhere near you if I ever need pastoral care. )
That’s right, you can make sweeping unsubstantiated and inaccurate generalisations about the clergy in Sydney on the basis of heresay, slander people on the faculty of Moore College and misrepresent the details of Sydney’s policies on women’s ministry because you’re not an insensitive Jensenite. The experience of you and ‘many people you knowTM' must become the lens through which all reality in Sydney is viewed and anyone who suggests that you’ve got it wrong (in hell no less) is incapable of pastoral care. Now I understand Darling Sweet
Posts: 665 | From: Sydney | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nunc Dimittis
Seamstress of Sound
# 848
|
Posted
In all seriousness, what would you describe as the "reality in Sydney" if it is not predicated on the experience of different people? Remember, that your experience of people at Moore etc etc etc is just that: experience, as much as my experience is peculiarly my own...
Posts: 9515 | From: Delta Quadrant | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rebekah
Shipmate
# 2748
|
Posted
If we can't talk in generalisations OR give specific examples, it's hard to say anything. Maybe my comment is not red hot enough for hell, but I see it this way.
MTC graduates have developed a reputation for arrogance and insensitivity; I know quite a few (some 'exiled' here in the West, or in Melbourne, some in Sydney still) and some deserve the reputation and some don't. There is at least one in Perth who won't baptise, marry or bury anyone who isn't a regular attender. This turns people off the church, AND looses great opportunities for evangelism.
The question maybe is, what is (or was)happening in MTC that it seemed to turn out a significant number of clergy who are breathtakingly sure that they are right and everyone in their congregation MUST agree with them or keep quiet.
If any college finds that it has this reputation, then perhaps they should not shoot the messenger, or get all defensive, but have an honest look at whether their ethos may not be encouraging a genuine humility and openness, which may have nothing to do with theological position at all.
About a decade or so ago, Trinity in Melbourne was turning out quite a few self-satisfied and arrogant men; something to do with the ethos and culture at that time.
The ethos and culture of a place may exacerbate the weaknesses and failings of some students, and may not so much affect those whose character is stronger in that direction.
It's a thought.
--------------------
grow in grace
Posts: 117 | From: rural Western Australia | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Left at the Altar
Ship's Siren
# 5077
|
Posted
Just bumping this up to say that, after reading and considering Fish Fish's pathetic attempt to validate his totally idiotic statement that sin causes depression by starting a thread in Purgatory, where he can't be savaged .....
Fish Fish, your premise is crap. You have no fucking idea. You are talking complete bullshit.
Nice try. I sincerely hope that you are not in a position where you presume to counsel those who suffer from depression. Or anything for that matter.
--------------------
Still pretty Amazing, but no longer Mavis.
Posts: 9111 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
