|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The Boston Declaration
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
Have shipmates come across the Boston Declaration? Given the general despair over American evangelicalism, I would guess most are sympathetic to the cause.
I wonder how effective such a move may be in addressing those to whom it is directed.
At the same time, I've been thinking for some time that we might need to talk of evangelicalisms rather than evangelicalism. Even though there might be good reason to celebrate the rich breadth of expressions, when I look at what Americans refer to as evangelicalism, I see scant all relation to the various streams of British evangelicalism that I am much more familiar with; some of which I have a better relationship with than others. Is the time right to acknowledge that we are using the same word to describe vastly different things?
I also think of 1 Corinthians 12 , and while many here may regard the American evangelical church as the weaker part of the body, how can we treat them both with the special honour that is called for while also critiquing those points of theology and practice that are so at odds with what might be regarded as a more liberal orthodoxy? To paraphrase: quote:
The Baptist eye cannot say to the Methodist hand, ‘I have no need of you’, nor again the Anglican head to the Evangelical feet, ‘I have no need of you.’
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
D'oh! Missed the edit window. First link is to a Huffpost article (whose link purporting to be the declaration is a dud). Link to the actual declaration is here.
Could a kindly host please amend my blunder? ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sipech:
I wonder how effective such a move may be in addressing those to whom it is directed.
My hunch, I’m afraid, is not effective at all. My quick read of the Declaration gave me the impression that the writers were talking “at” those with whom they disagree rather than trying to talk “with” them. They seem to be preaching to the choir.
I suspect those to whom it is directed will dismiss it as unscriptural liberalism.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
I suspect those to whom it is directed will dismiss it as unscriptural liberalism.
The symbolism attached to the host city would be enough of a red-cape for people eager to lamabaste the statement.
(And no, I'm not talking about red-blooded patriots tossing tea into the harbour.)
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
This may puzzle some shipmates, but isn't this Declaration as driven by broadly the same assumptions that underlie what they reject in the statement
quote:
"We reject the false ideology of American exceptionalism"
as everything they are speaking against? It's posited on the same belief in "manifest destiny" but seeing its outworking in a different ethos.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
This may puzzle some shipmates, but isn't this Declaration as driven by broadly the same assumptions that underlie what they reject in the statement
quote:
"We reject the false ideology of American exceptionalism"
as everything they are speaking against? It's posited on the same belief in "manifest destiny" but seeing its outworking in a different ethos.
So, if I'm reading this correctly, you're saying that they themselves are guilty of some form of American Exceptionalism? I'm not sure I see that in their statement.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
If it does embody a form of 'manifest destiny' then surely it does so in a more positive way than the alternatives?
One might argue that the shadow of US exceptionalism is bound to be there, however implicitly, if not as a position to embrace but as one to react against.
If a parallel declaration were to emerge from evangelical voices here in the UK then the whole issue of Britain's former colonial history, its sense of identity and 'role' as the Brexit mess unfolds etc etc would be some kind of subtext there.
Whatever the case, I did find myself wondering why anti-RC feeling wasn't identified in the Boston Declaration as that has certainly played a big role in the more WASP-ish aspects of US conversatism in the past.
But then, from what I've seen online the more right-wing ends of the RC and Orthodox spectrums are just as Trumpish, Islamophobic and white supremacist as some elements within US evangelicalism.
But then, no branches of Christianity are homogeneous and there ranges and varieties of expressions of evangelicalism just as there are ranges and varieties elsewhere.
As far as the differences between UK and US evangelicalism go, I suspect it's more a question of scale than anything else. I'm sure we could find UK examples of the most egregious forms of evangelicalism, only on a far smaller scale as the evangelical constituency is a lot smaller here.
It's easy to point fingers across the Pond, a lot harder to put our own houses in order.
As to what the Boston Declaration can achieve: not a great deal I would submit, other than for one section of US evangelicalism to signal that it isn't like that other section over there.
One could be cynical and argue that there's something a bit 'virtue-signalling' and Pharisaical about the whole thing: I thank God I'm not like those rascist, homophobic, Islamophobic conservative bastards over there ...
Rather than make declarations and sign manifestoes, I'd rather people pursued a more excellent way by example and simply getting on and loving their neighbours as themselves.
However, I can certainly see why they would want to publicly distance themselves from the more right-wing elements of their own tradition/s.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Whatever the case, I did find myself wondering why anti-RC feeling wasn't identified in the Boston Declaration as that has certainly played a big role in the more WASP-ish aspects of US conversatism in the past.
But then, from what I've seen online the more right-wing ends of the RC and Orthodox spectrums are just as Trumpish, Islamophobic and white supremacist as some elements within US evangelicalism.
From what I've been able to observe these days, Know-Nothing anti-Catholicsm of the type that took down Al Smith in 1928 is now pretty much a dead force among conservative protestants.
I remember when GHW Bush was lib-baiting Mike Dukakis in '88, he criticized him for being a member of the ACLU, saying in one of the debates "I don't want to deny tax-exempt status to Catholic schools"(an ACLU position at the time).
That would not have been a wise move on Bush's part had there been a signficant number of evangelicals who still subscribed to stuff like this. He would have been better advised to say "religious schools", had that been the case.
[ 23. November 2017, 13:12: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I am glad that somewhere in the church there is the sense that we have to pull back from the brink. The believers who insist on tying themselves to Crooked Don and all his works must be clearly distinguished from people who are actually interested in Jesus Christ.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
