|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Spong banned in Sydney
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
In the news today:
quote:
A ROW has erupted within the Anglican Church over a visit to Australia by an American cleric who has being accused of modernising Christ to the point of stripping him of all divinity.
Sydney Archbishop Peter Jensen has taken the extraordinary step of banning John Shelby Spong, a fellow member of the Anglican communion who arrives in Sydney this morning, from churches in his diocese.
By contrast, Anglican Primate Phillip Aspinall has invited Bishop Spong, a leader of the church's liberal wing, to deliver two sermons in Brisbane's St John's Cathedral.
The retired Episcopal bishop of Newark, New Jersey, Bishop Spong will also give a public lecture at St Aidan's Anglican Girls School in Brisbane.
At the direction of Dr Jensen, the current edition of the Sydney diocese's newspaper, Southern Cross, has devoted two pages to an attack on Bishop Spong and his new book, Jesus for the Non-Religious. The book questions biblical references to the nature of the birth of Jesus Christ, his ability to perform miracles and the Resurrection.
Speaking on behalf of Dr Jensen, Bishop of South Sydney Robert Forsyth said Dr Aspinall was wrong to welcome Bishop Spong to Brisbane.
"The judgment of the primate is, in our view, ill-advised," Bishop Forsyth said.
"It is a mistake. It is the wrong thing to do."
He said many in the church were distressed by Bishop Spong's latest book, the promotion of which was a major reason for his Australian visit.
"He is attempting to reconstruct Christ to make him acceptable to the modern community but it is disastrous," Bishop Forsyth said.
"Jesus ends up as a non-divine entity in this attempt to find a human Jesus. The result is a gutting of the Christian faith."
Dr Aspinall defended his decision to welcome the American bishop.
"Bishop Spong speaking at St John's Cathedral is not particularly extraordinary," he said.
"That Bishop Spong holds views which some Anglicans might find challenging is no reason to exclude him from speaking.
"Our church has thousands of members and widely diverse views on a wide variety of subjects. I am sure Anglicans willlisten respectfully to the bishop's views and make their own minds up."
I'm not a fan of Spong, but this is going a bit too far, isn't it?
[ 23. October 2007, 12:02: Message edited by: Duo Seraphim ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
I suppose that this is at least a consistent move by the Sydenites - in a way its good to know that the rows afflicting the Anglican Communion are about theology as well as poufs.
Just so long as Jensen doesn't mind being banned from England for his attempts to introduce lay presidency...
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
I assume that the Archbishop of Sydney has banned him from preaching within his diocese, rather than banned him from entering the churches?
If that's the case, it seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
Seems completely reasonable. I think it's a sad indictment of any dioceses that haven't banned Spong, and of TECUSA for electing him bishop. I sincerely hope my diocesan wouldn't let him preach in churches in my home diocese either.
And as I've pointed out before, ++Jensen was the one who stopped Sydney formally approving lay presidency.
[ 14. August 2007, 14:24: Message edited by: Custard. ]
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
Custard,
I wish you'd said "Once again, Thurible is right."
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
Seems completely reasonable. I think it's a sad indictment of any dioceses that haven't banned Spong, and of TECUSA for electing him bishop. I sincerely hope my diocesan wouldn't let him preach in churches in my home diocese either.
And as I've pointed out before, ++Jensen was the one who stopped Sydney formally approving lay presidency.
FYI, Spong was elected Bishop more than 30 years ago, long before he'd written any books. And actually, he's a good preacher. Again, I think what he says about Christian doctrine is not even worth listening to, but he is a good preacher on Bible.
Isn't banning him a bit of overkill that actually reflects weakness? Wouldn't it be better to actively and publicly refute what he says? It's a teaching opportunity that the church always lets go to waste.
[ 14. August 2007, 14:33: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175
|
Posted
My recollection is that Spong's heresies were well known in 1976 when he was elected, through books such as "This Hebrew Lord" and in his preaching. There was a desultory campaign to deny him consents to consecration, but it went nowhere because the Bishops and the Standing Committees, including some bishops (or predecessors) who are affiliated with FIF and the "Network" today, were circling the wagons against those who were quitting PECUSA over women priests, and weren't interested in waging a campaign that would have given people yet another legitimate reason to leave.
That's how Spong got to be Bishop. And, good for the Sydney Evangelicals, strange as it is to say such a thing!
--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"
A.N. Wilson
Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JArthurCrank:
My recollection is that Spong's heresies were well known in 1976 when he was elected, through books such as "This Hebrew Lord" and in his preaching.
Which heresies, Crank?
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
Speaking as an outsider, it is this kind of thing that makes us all adore Christians. The infighting, backbiting, banning, fascist lawmaking, you know, the Christian Love™.
I jest. But only slightly.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Actually I have read that Spong speaks in mainly non-Anglican venues now such as Unitarian Churches and churches that tend to be more liberal (such as the United Church of Canada, and the United Church of Christ in the USA).
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Shadowhund
Shipmate
# 9175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by JArthurCrank:
My recollection is that Spong's heresies were well known in 1976 when he was elected, through books such as "This Hebrew Lord" and in his preaching.
Which heresies, Crank?
Denial of the divinity of Christ and the Virgin Birth, which entailed a denial of the Incarnation, as well as the Resurrection as anything more than a metaphor or some vague "Easter" experience by the disciples.
I could go back and look up old issues of the American Church News or Living Church to get more details, but this was all commented on at the time. The shock at Spong's books in the 1980s-1990s was really more than a day late and a dollar short.
--------------------
"Had the Dean's daughter worn a bra that afternoon, Norman Shotover might never have found out about the Church of England; still less about how to fly"
A.N. Wilson
Posts: 3788 | From: Your Disquieted Conscience | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
Speaking as an outsider, it is this kind of thing that makes us all adore Christians. The infighting, backbiting, banning, fascist lawmaking, you know, the Christian Love™.
I jest. But only slightly.
I'm too polite to mention how odd it is for an "outsider" to hang around on a Christian website, having racked up almost 10,000 posts....
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JArthurCrank:
I could go back and look up old issues of the American Church News or Living Church to get more details, but this was all commented on at the time. The shock at Spong's books in the 1980s-1990s was really more than a day late and a dollar short.
Well, you did bring it up. Details are important.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
To my mind, "good preacher" requires remaining within the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, as believed by the Church, and Spong quite simply doesn't do that.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rugasaw
Shipmate
# 7315
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
To my mind, "good preacher" requires remaining within the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, as believed by the Church, and Spong quite simply doesn't do that.
Personally I would leave out the "as believed by the Church" part and add in a whole slew of loving your neighbor type things. You know feeding the poor, tending the sick that type of thing. But that is just me and I do not know if Spong was or is good at those things.
Separately, I see that the Dr. Jensen either does not trust his churches or wants to make a toothless pronouncement against Spong. Or does a bishop usurp the priest of a church even when the bishop is from another country and is not invited by that church?
--------------------
Treat the earth well, It was not given to you by your parents. It was loaned to you by your children. -Unknown
Posts: 2716 | From: Houston | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
I find that if one wants the world to disregard the ravings of a loony, one does not draw attention to them and give them martyr status by denying them a venue to speak. Istead, one listens and discusses.
It's a forbidden fruit thing.
If Jensen wants his people to reject Spong's teachings, he would be better opening his diocese to the lectures, attending them, and then holding discussions afterwards where he can challenge what Spong says. Instead, by making Spong taboo, everyone wants to know what he has to say and it makes the papers.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
it drives me crazy that so few people get this dynamic. Jensen, et. al., are de facto giving Spong the credence they would rather deny him.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
To my mind, "good preacher" requires remaining within the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, as believed by the Church, and Spong quite simply doesn't do that.
Well, from what I know - not very much, I admit, because I find nothing interesting about what Spong writes so I've only read a couple of his books - Spong does "remain with the revelation of God in Jesus Christ." He just doesn't hold with the "as believed by the Church" clause (although I think he makes an absurd caricature of this anyway).
What I find weak, though, is the ban itself. What happens is that Spong is made a martyr - which he definitely isn't - and the Church looks ridiculous, which actually helps him in his cause. As bc_anglican notes, Spong speaks mostly to non-Anglican audiences - this is true in the U.S., too - so what's happening here is simply calling attention to something that nobody would notice otherwise.
I actually think Spong should have resigned as Bishop a long time ago; I don't have much respect for him because he wants his cake and to eat it, too. But that's neither here nor there.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
To my mind, "good preacher" requires remaining within the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, as believed by the Church, and Spong quite simply doesn't do that.
Well, from what I know - not very much, I admit, because I find nothing interesting about what Spong writes so I've only read a couple of his books - Spong does "remain with the revelation of God in Jesus Christ." He just doesn't hold with the "as believed by the Church" clause (although I think he makes an absurd caricature of this anyway).
What I find weak, though, is the ban itself. What happens is that Spong is made a martyr - which he definitely isn't - and the Church looks ridiculous, which actually helps him in his cause. As bc_anglican notes, Spong speaks mostly to non-Anglican audiences - this is true in the U.S., too - so what's happening here is simply calling attention to something that nobody would notice otherwise.
I actually think Spong should have resigned as Bishop a long time ago; I don't have much respect for him because he wants his cake and to eat it, too. But that's neither here nor there.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I actually think Spong should have resigned as Bishop a long time ago; I don't have much respect for him because he wants his cake and to eat it, too. But that's neither here nor there.
Well, we agree on that.
I think the Church should have and exercise a role of discipline and discernment, particularly over what is taught. That is part of the job of parish clergy, and part of the job of bishops.
It's also probably one of the key factors behind the TECUSA / Anglican split.
What I see as in this case the failure of TECUSA to exercise discipline and discernment correctly does not remove ++Sydney's responsibility for the pastoral care of the Christians there, including that of discipline and discernment, including restricting who can preach in churches. I very much doubt he'd ban Rowan Williams, for example.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
I actually think Spong should have resigned as Bishop a long time ago; I don't have much respect for him because he wants his cake and to eat it, too. But that's neither here nor there.
Well, we agree on that.
I think the Church should have and exercise a role of discipline and discernment, particularly over what is taught. That is part of the job of parish clergy, and part of the job of bishops.
It's also probably one of the key factors behind the TECUSA / Anglican split.
What I see as in this case the failure of TECUSA to exercise discipline and discernment correctly does not remove ++Sydney's responsibility for the pastoral care of the Christians there, including that of discipline and discernment, including restricting who can preach in churches. I very much doubt he'd ban Rowan Williams, for example.
Well, it's within Sydney's power to do so - but is it a good idea? That's the question. Is it wise to attempt to limit access to ideas, rather than to debate them openly? Christians aren't babies who need to be coddled, after all.
And don't we think that we should come up with some better tactic than yelling "Heresy!" at this point? Not that that's what Jensen did, but Crank did it above. It's medieval and has associations with Inquisitions, etc.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I think it's time somebody in the Anglican community had the backbone to stand up to him and tell him what he preaches isn't (Anglican) Christianity.
That it should be +*-/Jensen is predictable, and perhaps unfortunate in some ways, but somebody had to be first.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Geo:
Speaking as an outsider, it is this kind of thing that makes us all adore Christians. The infighting, backbiting, banning, fascist lawmaking, you know, the Christian Love™.
I love people. Perhaps the only reason sometimes is that I know I'm still one of them, with the same shitty inclinations.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
As I said above, if the Archbishop has banned him from preaching that's fine. If, on the other hand, he has banned him from speaking in churches, as lectures/seminars, that's another. I'd feel happy with a "Resurrection-denier" giving a talk. But a sermon?
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MouseThief:
I think it's time somebody in the Anglican community had the backbone to stand up to him and tell him what he preaches isn't (Anglican) Christianity.
That it should be +*-/Jensen is predictable, and perhaps unfortunate in some ways, but somebody had to be first.
You know, I'm really fine with that. A debate with and about Spong would be an excellent thing - but that never seems to happen.
I really wish somebody would simply and calmly point out that what Spong teaches isn't what the Church teaches, and why it isn't. Wouldn't it lead to a much better result? People outside the Church don't know what Christianity is anymore; isn't this the perfect opportunity to teach it?
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
Speaking as an outsider, it is this kind of thing that makes us all adore Christians. The infighting, backbiting, banning, fascist lawmaking, you know, the Christian Love™.
I jest. But only slightly.
I'm too polite to mention how odd it is for an "outsider" to hang around on a Christian website, having racked up almost 10,000 posts....
In answer to the question, I was a Christian when I started here. I'll avoid the obvious joke that some of the people here drove me away, although it is partly true. They were part of a much larger process.
The reason I "Hang around" is that I didn't turn my opinions off with Christianity. There is also something to be gained by having different and/or dissenting opinions in any forum. Unless of course one is prone to thinking that only people of the same opinion are somehow relevant, which would of course be close-minded and stupid, but very few here are like that.
You know, like the Bishop that banned Spong.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by comet:
If Jensen wants his people to reject Spong's teachings, he would be better opening his diocese to the lectures, attending them, and then holding discussions afterwards where he can challenge what Spong says. Instead, by making Spong taboo, everyone wants to know what he has to say and it makes the papers.
Just wanted to second that. Silencing someone just makes you look bad, no matter what it is you're silencing. It's like trying to throw a scandal under the rug. The mere presence of the rug will make the scandal look ten times bigger than it really is.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
The reason I "Hang around" is that I didn't turn my opinions off with Christianity. There is also something to be gained by having different and/or dissenting opinions in any forum. Unless of course one is prone to thinking that only people of the same opinion are somehow relevant, which would of course be close-minded and stupid, but very few here are like that.
You know, like the Bishop that banned Spong.
Actually, Spong is exactly like that, too.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by TubaMirum:
Actually, Spong is exactly like that, too.
So if he didn't run around saying "Everything the Traditional Church has been doing for the past X years was a mistake and we need a revolution!," then his apparent theological heresies would be more palatable? The problem isn't that he has newfangled ideas, but that he also wishes to destroy the old in order to ring in the new?
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
(Furthermore, MadGeo, one would think if you found "Christians" in general to be all those negative things, you'd have left Ship of Fools a long time ago, since the vast majority of us are Christians.
So how about cutting out the generalized slander? You don't like it, you say, when people make value judgments about atheists in general; how about returning the favor?)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
quote:
Originally Posted by TubaMirum:
Actually, Spong is exactly like that, too.
So if he didn't run around saying "Everything the Traditional Church has been doing for the past X years was a mistake and we need a revolution!," then his apparent theological heresies would be more palatable? The problem isn't that he has newfangled ideas, but that he also wishes to destroy the old in order to ring in the new?
Well, yes, I think if he were less arrogant towards those who disagreed with him, things might be a little different.
The problem for me is that he's not interesting. He doesn't say anything; he doesn't really have anything "new" to offer. He's completely about destroying the old, without offering anything to take its place. So if it weren't for his superciliousness and anti-fundamentalism, there wouldn't really be anything there, IMO.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
To my mind, "good preacher" requires remaining within the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, as believed by the Church, and Spong quite simply doesn't do that.
Well, from what I know - not very much, I admit, because I find nothing interesting about what Spong writes so I've only read a couple of his books - Spong does "remain with the revelation of God in Jesus Christ." He just doesn't hold with the "as believed by the Church" clause (although I think he makes an absurd caricature of this anyway).
What I find weak, though, is the ban itself. What happens is that Spong is made a martyr - which he definitely isn't - and the Church looks ridiculous, which actually helps him in his cause.
.
Did the Church look ridiculous when it condemned Arius as a heretic in Council?
A Church looks more ridiculous when it tends to say "let us all get along" and does not take a stand on anything even dealing with pretty fundamental teachings of the Christian Faith.
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
TM
Generalized slander? Or constructive criticism? If the shoe fits.....
The biggest standing joke around here is the statement from newbies: "I thought this was a Christian website!".
I find it horribly ironic on a thread where you and others are defending Spong's right to speak, even if partially defending, you are questioning my presence as a nontheistic Buddhist on a "Christian Website". Ironic as hell.
Don't worry TM, I will keep posting past your protestations and sensitivities, so don't waste your keystrokes. I figure it's my duty to
(wo)mankind.
[ 14. August 2007, 16:30: Message edited by: Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
Did the Church look ridiculous when it condemned Arius as a heretic in Council?
That was a totally different time, with a totally different church in a totally different situation. I vaguely remember Arius being a first century heretic. Could you explain how this analogy works in historical context? Who was Arius, how and why did they condemn him (and to what), and how is that like telling Spong he can't preach in a particular church?
As stated above, I think, people no longer take "this institution says so!" as sufficient grounds for rejection of an belief. You have to be able to demonstrate what it is about his ideas that are so harmful before you can safely say he's contraband.
And "well, his message is bad for our church institution" doesn't really cut it, because to most people these days, institutions aren't God. I'm sure a lot of Christians, including Spong's audience, are very wary of trusting the church as an authority in and of itself.
[Edited to remove a potential can of worms.]
[ 14. August 2007, 16:33: Message edited by: mirrizin ]
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Spong isn't a fan of the Diocese of Sydney either. Like all church disputes, it is a relationship of mutual dislike and hate.
Just another day in the reign of God:)
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
TM
Generalized slander? Or constructive criticism? If the shoe fits.....
The biggest standing joke around here is the statement from newbies: "I thought this was a Christian website!".
I find it horribly ironic on a thread where you and others are defending Spong's right to speak, even if partially defending, you are questioning my presence as a nontheistic Buddhist on a "Christian Website". Ironic as hell.
Don't worry TM, I will keep posting past your protestations and sensitivities, so don't waste your keystrokes. I figure it's my duty to
(wo)mankind.
No, Geo: I'm questioning your right to slam "Christians" as a group, when you wouldn't put up with such statements yourself for a second. That's what you do, and that's what you've been doing ever since I first read one of your posts.
If you think Christians are such terrible human beings in general, then the only possible conclusion one can draw is that you hang out here to feel superior. Which is something to do, I guess....
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raspberry Rabbit
Will preach for food
# 3080
|
Posted
Banning the Spongs of this world merely encourages them. Anything he's said (or written) has been said better by others before him. He's a lightweight who's been kept afloat by opposition.
I do, however, think that Anglicans need to compete in more of a marketplace of ideas than the Jensenites would likely be comfortable with. ++Jensen needs some more decent opposition within his fold. I gather that Sydney is a happening place in civic terms. It's too bad they don't have an Anglican Diocese that's up to the challenge.
RR
[ 14. August 2007, 16:45: Message edited by: Raspberry Rabbit ]
--------------------
...naked pirates not respecting boundaries...
(((BLOG)))
Posts: 2215 | From: In the middle of France | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
A Church looks more ridiculous when it tends to say "let us all get along" and does not take a stand on anything even dealing with pretty fundamental teachings of the Christian Faith.
Well, that's an interesting straw man, but it doesn't bear much resemblance to what I've said on this thread. Which was (several times) that the Church should debate and refute Spong, rather than banning him.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
The biggest standing joke around here is the statement from newbies: "I thought this was a Christian website!".
MG & TM - wouldn't the best way to uphold the ideals of the ship be to forgive previous hurts and return to the OP of the thread in front of us?
Right. Now you can both unite in slagging me off and then my job is done! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
++Jensen did the right thing. Good on him.
As for --Aspinall, what part of 2 John 9-11 does he not get?
Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds.
His rolling out the red carpet, cathedral pulpits, and even the school girls for Spong is an outrage for a supposedly Christian bishop. This goes straight to the issue of the responsibility of the church to defend the Faith and the flock.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
I don't think it is a question of "banning" Spong. Spong has every right to preach his message in the secular sphere, in more liberal churches, and so on.
No one has the right to the pulpit. I as a lay person can't suddenly call up my priest and say "I want to preach on Sunday, God spoke to me in a dream." Well I can, but he will probably say No.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raspberry Rabbit:
Banning the Spongs of this world merely encourages them. Anything he's said (or written) has been said better by others before him. He's a lightweight who's been kept afloat by opposition.
I do, however, think that Anglicans need to compete in more of a marketplace of ideas than the Jensenites would likely be comfortable with. ++Jensen needs some more decent opposition within his fold. I gather that Sydney is a happening place in civic terms. It's too bad they don't have an Anglican Diocese that's up to the challenge.
RR
It's so true about Spong; he's got nuthin'. Really.
So why can't somebody articulate the loveliness of Christian faith? Why is it Spong v. Fundamentalism all the time? There's a vast array of other possible choices, yet we never hear from them. And aren't we past the bad old days of heretic-hunting by now? The problem with Spong isn't that he's a heretic; it's that he's dull, and seems to have little to no idea what Christian faith actually consists of.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I think that stating that Christians CAN BE " backbiting, banning, fascist lawmaking" is simply a FACT. The banning of Spong, amongst other things I could source easily, makes it so.
Christians have to answer for their shortcomings, just like anyone/thing else. Including you and me. Pointing out the shortcomings of Christianity and even "Christians as a group" is mandatory. If I didn't do it, I would hope 10 other people would (and they do, including some self-policing, so I am not worried to join in).
If Christianity can't take intense criticism of how it treats people, it is pathetic. But since NONE of us think that is the case.....
P.S. Johnny S.: I actually edited out the tangential comments to TM before i saw your post. Merry Xmas ![[Smile]](smile.gif) .
[ 14. August 2007, 16:52: Message edited by: Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Here in Canada, we have Tom Harpur who is a former Anglican priest who writes books where he declares that Jesus did not exist, and that Christianity is nothing more than plagiarized Egyptian paganism. He makes good money, publishing books in the secular world.
I would be furious if my liberal diocese would give him the pulpit on a Sunday morning. What exactly would be the point? For him to say that what we believe is stupid and pointless? I highly doubt that either Harpur and Spong would be willing to give a homily that doesn't offend, that doesn't inflame the passions of the people. They have every right to do that in the secular world. They have every right to preach their beliefs on their own time. They have NO right to preach it in a church.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
MG & TM - wouldn't the best way to uphold the ideals of the ship be to forgive previous hurts and return to the OP of the thread in front of us?
Right. Now you can both unite in slagging me off and then my job is done!
Well, I'm done with previous hurts. At this point I'm into present offenses. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
I really do think such comments deserve to be taken for what they are and argued with. There's not likely to be any sort of positive outcome, though, so I probably shouldn't. Still.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
Re the OP. In my view, both men are equally damaging to the Christian faith. There is a certain amount of Schadenfreude. Trying to decide if I'm otherwise entertained or just sick at the tragic state of Christian theology.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
St. Punk the Pious
Biblical™ Punk
# 683
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
I think that stating that Christians CAN BE " backbiting, banning, fascist lawmaking" is simply a FACT. The banning of Spong, amongst other things I could source easily, makes it so. etc.
Praytell, who would you not allow into the pulpit? Hindus, Muslem, Satanists?
And don't say Spong is a Christian. Unless you use a definition so broad as to be almost meaningless, he's not.
--------------------
The Society of St. Pius *
Wannabe Anglican, Reader
My reely gud book.
Posts: 4161 | From: Choral Evensong | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bc_anglican:
I don't think it is a question of "banning" Spong. Spong has every right to preach his message in the secular sphere, in more liberal churches, and so on.
No one has the right to the pulpit. I as a lay person can't suddenly call up my priest and say "I want to preach on Sunday, God spoke to me in a dream." Well I can, but he will probably say No.
I can't exactly tell from the article whether he's "banned" from going into a church to give a talk, say. That would be questionable, and I wonder if that was the intent; hope not.
But you're right: nobody has the right to preach anywhere, and a Bishop can definitely call the shots in his own diocese. That's his or her job, in fact. I'm just questioning whether it's counterproductive or not.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Geo:
If Christianity can't take intense criticism of how it treats people, it is pathetic. But since NONE of us think that is the case...
Honestly, I just think people in general are pathetic. What a piece of work is man...
Though it must be nice to have a group to project all the pathos of humanity onto.
I don't know many people who would be able to answer for every single thing they ever did. I know I couldn't. And honestly, I don't think I'd want to live with such a big brother looking at my every deed.
ETA: And FWIW, I'm happy to admit that the church has fucked things up. I just don't think that that makes the church uniquely different than any other human institution.
[ 14. August 2007, 16:59: Message edited by: mirrizin ]
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Geo:
P.S. Johnny S.: I actually edited out the tangential comments to TM before i saw your post. Merry Xmas .
Happy Vesak / Visakah Puja
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
Did the Church look ridiculous when it condemned Arius as a heretic in Council?
That was a totally different time, with a totally different church in a totally different situation. I vaguely remember Arius being a first century heretic. Could you explain how this analogy works in historical context? Who was Arius, how and why did they condemn him (and to what), and how is that like telling Spong he can't preach in a particular church?
As stated above, I think, people no longer take "this institution says so!" as sufficient grounds for rejection of an belief. You have to be able to demonstrate what it is about his ideas that are so harmful before you can safely say he's contraband.
And "well, his message is bad for our church institution" doesn't really cut it, because to most people these days, institutions aren't God. I'm sure a lot of Christians, including Spong's audience, are very wary of trusting the church as an authority in and of itself.
[Edited to remove a potential can of worms.]
A bishop has a responsibility to maintain the Faith and not giving approval for those who are teaching heresy (denying Christ's Divinity, Resuurection, the Virgin Birth) to preach in the Churches of his diocese. It seems a pretty acceptable principle. I believe there are plenty of bookstores and public meeting halls in Sydney for Spong to give his "lecture"
It is not a matter of the "institution" but of defending the truth of Christian Faith which a bishop is called upon to defend.
I believe you know who Arius was and what the Arian heresy involved.
[ 14. August 2007, 17:07: Message edited by: SeraphimSarov ]
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
