homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: So how liberal can you be and still call yourself an evangelical? (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: So how liberal can you be and still call yourself an evangelical?
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Whereas David Jenkins is much more reflective of liberal Anglicanism, in my view.

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
gbuchanan
Shipmate
# 415

 - Posted      Profile for gbuchanan   Email gbuchanan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Sure.

Your new avatar is - erm - interesting! Is that a Liberal tomato?

Even DJ's view has been polarised & simplified in its representation in the media and by his critics. To be honest, though, he is himself somewhat of an "extremist" in terms of CoE Liberalism - compared to (say) Harries, he is a veritable firebrand.

Posts: 683 | From: London, UK | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
daisymay

St Elmo's Fire
# 1480

 - Posted      Profile for daisymay     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GeordieDownSouth:
Can I test the waters here please?

Would the view that God saves people not just for there own sakes but for the sake of the world be considered evangelical or not?

Or to put it another way, God chose Israel to bless all the nations on the earth. When someone becomes a Christian that calling still applies, and not just through more "conversions." They start to live in a more Godly way which benefits those around them.

I think that might be both liberal and evangelical, but coming from differing angles.

Liberals might look on "being a christian" as very much living at the moment, in this world, now. So obviously affecting the world. And if they were universalists, they would expect everyone to be saved, not just christians, so they would expect God to affect the world positively through various faith groups and those who didn't believe anything in particular, but had morals and ethics that worked for the good of humanity.

Evangelicals might major on "the New Israel" as coming specifically from biblical teaching. They might say that God called Israel into being to spread good news and morality and knowledge of God, and to produce the Saviour of the world. And then also the above, but those who were regenerate would be totally aligned with God's will and so more effective.

These are my ideas, as I haven't heard much discussion about this.

--------------------
London
Flickr fotos

Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Orb

Eye eye Cap'n!
# 3256

 - Posted      Profile for Orb   Author's homepage   Email Orb   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Spong:
quote:
Originally posted by Rob - ID crisis InDiE KiD:
I think the Sea of Faith lot are a cross between liberal and radical myself. And on your continuum, that would make them evangelical Spong!

Er, no.. I think I made that mistake last time, but I can't see that I did this time! I said radical is on the OTHER side of liberal from evangelical. So it goes evangelical - liberal - radical.
I think it goes: liberal (sometimes radical)- evangelical (usually not, but sometimes radical).

Why is radical a separate group?

Can't we scrap the groups altogether? Wouldn't THAT be radical?! [Wink]

--------------------
“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.” Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed

Posts: 5032 | From: Easton, Bristol | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Kevin Iga
Shipmate
# 4396

 - Posted      Profile for Kevin Iga   Author's homepage   Email Kevin Iga   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think it's more like a landscape, myself, with different kinds of terrain in different areas. There is an area of "evangelical" terrain, with perhaps a vaguely-defined epicenter, a "liberal" terrain (I actually think there are several unrelated kinds of "liberals", ranging from scientific modernists to myth-loving postmodernists to gay rights activists and more), a terrain of people who think of their Christianity in terms of nationality, a terrain of "traditionalists" (by which I mean explicitly see their historic tradition, including in form of worship, to be crucial) and so on.

I'm not sure what people mean by "radical". I take it you don't mean the radical reformation, leading to the Anabaptists, do you? They, of course, belong on the map, though overlapping considerably with the evangelicals.

These all overlap each other in various ways, actually.

Kevin

--------------------
Presbyterian /prez.bi.ti'.ri.en/ n. One who believes the governing authorities of the church should be called "presbyters".

Posts: 521 | From: Pepperdine University | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
JimT

Ship'th Mythtic
# 142

 - Posted      Profile for JimT     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm in much better humor about this thread now.

First, Kevin, can you not see that Spong is using "radical" to mean "extremist?" But he has restricted it to liberal extremists, which allows him to be a centrist. Look again:

evangelical -- liberal -- radical

[Killing me]

Excellent way to define yourself into the middle, Spong!

And Rob, you have finally arrived! One label for all, reflecting our shared human values, all trying the very best we can to be the best we can under the difficult condition of being human. Let's see...what kind of "ist" or "ism" would link us together as humans? It's on the tip of my tongue...this is going to bug me. Let me get back to you, OK?

[Angel]

Posts: 2619 | From: Now On | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Orb

Eye eye Cap'n!
# 3256

 - Posted      Profile for Orb   Author's homepage   Email Orb   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JimT:
And Rob, you have finally arrived! One label for all, reflecting our shared human values, all trying the very best we can to be the best we can under the difficult condition of being human. Let's see...what kind of "ist" or "ism" would link us together as humans? It's on the tip of my tongue...this is going to bug me. Let me get back to you, OK?

Ok. I don't think it's humanism. I think that's intrinsically an ugly term because it deflects attention from God onto humans.

This is what keeps me from being a liberal and keeps me being an evangelical. In fact, it's probably the only thing - an attempt to respect God more than individual human readings of God (including my own). I think evangelicalism has the potential to be far more inclusive than liberalism. Only it has sadly never lived up to that potential.

--------------------
“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.” Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed

Posts: 5032 | From: Easton, Bristol | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Anselm
Shipmate
# 4499

 - Posted      Profile for Anselm   Email Anselm   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You can define a set of points two ways
One can define a set by overlaying a shape over the range of 'dots' and then seeing which points fall within the square. You define the set by the boundaries.
Another way is to examine the 'vectors' of the points, where are they heading? You define this set by the centre.

Although the intial question of this thread was stated in terms of boundaries, I wonder if it might be more helpful to consider the issue from the perspective of direction?

From this perspective I would say that an evangelical is defined by a focus on... scripture [tempted to say 'Jesus', just to raise a few hackles and fulfil a few sterotypes [Wink] ] as the source of understanding God and what it means to be a follower of Jesus.
A liberal christian's trajectory of belief is heavily influenced by what is 'reasonable' to the culture (as with F. Schleiermarcher - the Father of liberalism). The scriptures

Posts: 2544 | From: The Scriptorium | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Anselm
Shipmate
# 4499

 - Posted      Profile for Anselm   Email Anselm   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Good Lord!
There has been some sort of flood and my entire post has been washed away as I submitted it [Mad] . Too late to retype it in now, will have to wait till tomorrow.
And it was so well worded, rebuted the opposition flawlessly, compellingly stated an arguement... [Big Grin]

--------------------
carpe diem domini
...seize the day to play dominoes?

Posts: 2544 | From: The Scriptorium | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Anselm
Shipmate
# 4499

 - Posted      Profile for Anselm   Email Anselm   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah [Embarrassed] yes well [Embarrassed] . It appears that my post is here after all. [Embarrassed]
Hmm, yes definitely time for bed!
sorry for messing up this thread with so many posts! A triple post!! [Embarrassed]

you do understand that I was joking in my last post don't you?

[Embarrassed] [Embarrassed] [Embarrassed] [Embarrassed]

--------------------
carpe diem domini
...seize the day to play dominoes?

Posts: 2544 | From: The Scriptorium | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Orb

Eye eye Cap'n!
# 3256

 - Posted      Profile for Orb   Author's homepage   Email Orb   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Do you think if I use THIS [Embarrassed] smilie one more time it will break, Anselm? [Big Grin]

--------------------
“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.” Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed

Posts: 5032 | From: Easton, Bristol | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Anselm
Shipmate
# 4499

 - Posted      Profile for Anselm   Email Anselm   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes.
I tried one more time and was told that the limit was 8. [Smile]

--------------------
carpe diem domini
...seize the day to play dominoes?

Posts: 2544 | From: The Scriptorium | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
perceval
Shipmate
# 4742

 - Posted      Profile for perceval   Email perceval   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's been intriguing to read this discussion, because I had no real idea that there was such a range of opinions in Evangelicalism. Do you feel that media reporting gives both Evangelicals and Liberals a bad name? Because in the British press, evangelicals are portrayed as the nutters (Guardian) or vigilantes (Daily Telegraph) that prevented the ordination of Jeffrey John, but there's no space for the shades of grey I've seen on this thread.

percival

--------------------
Always look on the bright side of life.
***
It blogs
here

Posts: 272 | From: Edinburgh, Scotland | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
I would be seriously worried if Cupitt and Spong are viewed as typical of liberal Christianity. Though I liked Spong's demolition of fundamentalism and the bible, I would have thought both were mavericks and not representative of liberals.

They are, I assure you, the first two names that spring to mind when evangelical Anglicans try to think of well-known liberal Anglicans.

Maybe we'll promise not to mention them again if you promise not to mention Reform again - who, AFAIK represent even fewer Anglican clergy than See of Faith do.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by perceval:
Do you feel that media reporting gives both Evangelicals and Liberals a bad name? Because in the British press, evangelicals are portrayed as the nutters (Guardian) or vigilantes (Daily Telegraph) that prevented the ordination of Jeffrey John, but there's no space for the shades of grey I've seen on this thread.

It's not just the media. We sometimes do it to ourselves. And I don't just mean the tendancy of evangelicals to equate liberal with Spong and Sea of Faith, or liberals to equate evangelical with Falwell and Reform. Its the tendancy of the vast majority of evangelicals to keep quiet and not speak out when the more extreme end of the evangelical spectrum go and make idiots of themselves (and us in the process). No doubt there's a similar tendancy among liberals to not publically counteract the effect of their own extremists.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Spong

Ship's coffee grinder
# 1518

 - Posted      Profile for Spong     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
JimT is right, I have, of course, positioned myself neatly in the middle of the spectrum I set out - don't we all... [Wink] ?

I'm happy with my namesake Spong as a liberal, if you look behind the headlines of what he says he's actually a bit more orthodox than he appears. Certainly more nuanced. I DO see people like Cupitt, Hick, the whole Death of God school, as a different type of 'terrain' - I like Kevin's analogy, very useful. Those were the ones I was trying to label as radical, though yes of course there are all sorts of radical movements at different times.

The distinction I was trying to get at is that liberals seem to me to still 'stand on the shoulders of giants' that have gone before, whereas radicals say 'sod that for a game of soldiers' and cut them off at the knees.....

--------------------
Spong

The needs of our neighbours are the needs of the whole human family. Let's respond just as we do when our immediate family is in need or trouble. Rowan Williams

Posts: 2173 | From: South-East UK | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools