|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Steve Chalke endorses SSM
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Summary article here, on Slacktivist
and full article in "Christianity Magazine"
quote from main article: quote:
I’m worried that the noise of the arguments around gay marriage will cloud and confuse the real question for the Church, which is about the nature of inclusion. I am convinced that it is only as the Christian community grapples with this issue that we will find wise answers, not only regarding gay marriage, but also to related questions around the Church’s wider attitude to gay people.
He goes on to say that he had done a service of blessing on a civil partnership to: quote:
to extend to these people what I would do to others: the love and support of our local church. Too often, those who seek to enter an exclusive, same-sex relationship have found themselves stigmatised and excluded by the Church. I have come to believe this is an injustice and out of step with God’s character as seen through Christ. I leave it to others to debate whether a Civil Partnership plus a dedication and blessing should equal a marriage or not. But I do believe that the Church has a God-given responsibility to include those who have for so long found themselves excluded.
Will this make a difference in "church" circles in the UK?
The magazine has circled the wagons to say that they really aren't dumping evangelical belief structures, no, really, they aren't. Except that they are actually discussing these beliefs in a more rational way, which will annoy the fundies.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Chalke has already been abandoned by many evangelicals because of his views on PSA, so no, I doubt this will make much difference other than giving the pro-lobby an ally. Considering that my previous con-evo Anglican church considered Christianity magazine dangerously liberal and went for The Briefing (Matthias Media aka Sydney Anglican friendly) instead, sadly I think many ears have already been closed to what Chalke has to say.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Except that they are actually discussing these beliefs in a more rational way...
Define rational.
1) We don't like what the bible says, so we will ignore it. Traditional liberal
2) We think the traditional interpretation is flawed. Evangelical in approach - however as Luther puts it 'Reason is a whore that will serve any master', evangelicals are traditionally sceptical when the new interpretations funnily newly conformist to the beliefs that make life easier, from a human perspective.
It's blindly obvious that Chalke is desperate to justify his new conformism, so it's hardly a surprise that he finds he can finesse the difficult passages. Funny that...
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Except that they are actually discussing these beliefs in a more rational way...
Define rational.
1) We don't like what the bible says, so we will ignore it. Traditional liberal
2) We think the traditional interpretation is flawed. Evangelical in approach - however as Luther puts it 'Reason is a whore that will serve any master', evangelicals are traditionally sceptical when the new interpretations funnily newly conformist to the beliefs that make life easier, from a human perspective.
It's blindly obvious that Chalke is desperate to justify his new conformism, so it's hardly a surprise that he finds he can finesse the difficult passages. Funny that...
Or 3) taking every part of the Bible literally and without the wisdom of Tradition and Reason to help flies in the face of historic, centuries-old Church tradition and is a very recent (in terms of Church history) thing.
It's not about 'making life easier', it's about recognising the shades of grey that exist in the first place instead of forcing them into a black-and-white perspective. It's the conservative evangelical perspective that's artificial, not reason.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
It's blindly obvious that Chalke is desperate to justify his new conformism, so it's hardly a surprise that he finds he can finesse the difficult passages. Funny that...
It's becoming increasingly clear that a vast majority of those who accuse people of "being wedded to the spirit of the age" are already "wedded to the spirit of the age of 50 years ago when we were young evangelicals and everything was so much better".
In another place, I've had to point out (to a lecturer at a Bible college, no less) that evangelicals used to be universal in their insistence that women couldn't be priests. His fulsome support of this dangerous innovation, while slamming Chalke for repeating the very strictest of interpretations struck me as wilfully blind.
Neither of us, I suspect, are old enough to remember the furore regarding artificial contraception (around 1958), where evangelicals were initially appalled by the idea. Now? Who knew we were ever against it?
You're just as conformed to the spirit of the age, just... slower.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
That is probably true of every social change - that social conservatives, whether religious or not, initially oppose them. If we could go back in time, and look at the debates over women's suffrage, the end of coverture, which removed women's legal existence in marriage, the relaxation of divorce laws, and so on, and so on, it is very likely that the same protestations were heard, and the same talk of the Zeitgeist. It also seems to suggest that we can get back to some pure state of being, which is not a Zeitgeist. Can we?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
You're just as conformed to the spirit of the age, just... slower.
Yes, there are a lot of evangelicals whose position is deeply flawed, but don't count me as being one of them; I'm one of those who, along with John Wesley regards the American rebellion of 1776 is a deeply flawed act, not least in that it extended slavery in the USA by 30 years compared with the British Empire. Contraception? Really don't know enough to have a clear view theologically. The fact that the controversy has faded suggests to me that the Evangelicals weren't reacting biblically, but I'm really don't know. And yes, on slavery, the biblical perspective is WAY more complex than the simplicity of saying 'the bible endorses it, but we now know that they were wrong'.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
You're just as conformed to the spirit of the age, just... slower.
Yes, there are a lot of evangelicals whose position is deeply flawed, but don't count me as being one of them
I fail to see how that can possibly be the case, bearing in mind how church teaching has, er, evolved, over the years.
Evangelicals need to acknowledge that their positions move, and importantly, examine when they moved and why they moved, rather than this blank-faced denial that it ever happens.
And if you were a proper, Bible-believing Christian, you'd want the continent of North America returned to its indigenous inhabitants, rather than insisting the colonies revert to the British Empire. For shame, you're caught up in the spirit of the age (1776, in this case).
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Trouble is, Enders Shadow can't see how the position he adopts rather undermines rather than strengthens what he sees as the pure, unadulterated evangelical approach which he fondly imagines to have been in place right from the outset ...
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
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
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Trouble is, Enders Shadow can't see how the position he adopts rather undermines rather than strengthens what he sees as the pure, unadulterated evangelical approach which he fondly imagines to have been in place right from the outset ...
You will doubtless be familiar with the local expression 'Can't see for looking'...
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
And if you were a proper, Bible-believing Christian, you'd want the continent of North America returned to its indigenous inhabitants, rather than insisting the colonies revert to the British Empire. For shame, you're caught up in the spirit of the age (1776, in this case).
No - the biblical approach seems to be that long term successful conquest is legitimation by God of the outcome. Which is why I wouldn't want to suggest that the UK should attempt to invade the US now (as if!) but AT THE TIME it was negative rebellion, and therefore Christians should be unwilling to celebrate July 4th as a 'good thing'.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Nice one, Abervicar - it's an expression I still use and very apt in this case I think.
--------------------
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
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
So, Enders Shadow, it would be wrong of Christians to celebrate the 4th July but not November 5th, the foiling of The Gunpowder Plot, say, or to celebrate the Glorious Revolution because the Catholics were effectively excluded from government ...
--------------------
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
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
There is the argument that contemporary conservative evangelicalism is a response to the uncertainties of the modern world, rather than somehow representing a time warp, or a lack of progress. I think I tend to agree. There's no time warp, just different responses to contemporary challenges.
You lot will be able to swop Bible verses back and forth with great erudition, but it seems to me that theology exists in response to circumstances. The congregation and outreach of Chalke's church in Waterloo may have developed in such a way as to make a decision in favour of SSM appear to be the most fruitful for them. Other Baptists in other circumstances probably haven't.
So, for most evangelicals it may seem more expedient to present a theological reading of sexuality that distinguishes them from the wider society. Other evangelicals, in different circumstances, may find another reading more helpful.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Very good point, Svitlana. But some conservatives talk about the Zeitgeist rather disparagingly, as if they are in contact with a Zeitgeist-free state of affairs, which seems odd to me. After all, the Jewish Bible presents us with a picture, or rather a group of pictures, of various Zeitgeists over a certain period in Jewish (and non-Jewish) history.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
queztalcoatl
'Zeitgeist-free'? Don't many evangelical congregations often claim to have a rather more acute sense of what appeals to the modern person than the mainstream congregations do?
What's often fascinated me is that the most theologically liberal congregations are often the most traditional in terms of worship, while the most theologically conservative congregations have been more enthusiastic about incorporating contemporary styles into their worship. This is a huge generalisation, of course, but perhaps this scenario undermines claims from both sides that the other is either too caught up in the zeitgeist, or not caught up enough!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, I've noticed that as well.
I suppose claiming to stand outside the Zeitgeist is actually part of it! Or at any rate, part of a particular Zeitgeist, which wants to disown liberal conformity to social trends. It's a veritable hall of mirrors.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
What I feel that Evangelicals often get wrong is that (unless they are very Fundamentalist) they recognise that the Scriptures were written in a number of specific contexts, but still feel they read it objectively. But of course that's never true of any piece of literature: all our readings are shaped by cultural assumptions and personal backgrounds.
It is I think possible to Christians to still say, "It stands written" and then recognise that the conclusions they come to may be very different, while remaining in fellowship. Evangelicals may criticise more "liberal" Christians as succumbing to the Zeitgeist (and that may well be a good critique to make); however they do also need to recognise just how much they have been shaped by the Modern/Rational worldview, together with more localised influences.
[ 20. January 2013, 15:28: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, I would argue that there isn't a single Zeitgeist, but lots of mini ones, which may interlock to a degree, and also may be at odds with each other.
Thus, to say that there is a liberal Zeitgeist, is fine, but there is also a conservative one, and a New Age, and an anarchist one, and so on. They probably overlap to varying degrees.
But to be actually totally free of any Zeitgeist seems impossible to me - I speak of course, from within the postmodern Zeitgeist!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But to be actually totally free of any Zeitgeist seems impossible to me - I speak of course, from within the postmodern Zeitgeist!
However given that Jesus promises that the Spirit will lead us into all truth, your approach is one of despair, and a rejection of the possibility of being led by God. Whilst the rejection genuine revelation is a given in many liberal circles, it is not one that I accept. YMMV.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Nor do I. The answer is surely that the Spirit of truth will lead us into truth if we recognise our cultural conditioning, rather than unwittingly assuming that our vision is objective.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gill H
Shipmate
# 68
|
Posted
Am I the only one who keeps misreading the thread title as S&M?
--------------------
*sigh* We can’t all be Alan Cresswell.
- Lyda Rose
Posts: 9313 | From: London | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Imersge Canfield
Shipmate
# 17431
|
Posted
The Spirit and the Bride say Come !
--------------------
'You must not attribute my yielding, to sinister appetites'
"Preach the gospel and only use jewellry if necessary." (The Midge)
Posts: 419 | From: Sun Ship over Grand Fenwick Duchy | Registered: Nov 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dennis the Menace
Shipmate
# 11833
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gill H:
Am I the only one who keeps misreading the thread title as S&M?
No!!!!!!!
--------------------
"Till we cast our crowns before Him; Lost in wonder, love, and praise."
Posts: 853 | From: Newcastle NSW Australia | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
Me too - every time I see SSM...
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gill H:
Am I the only one who keeps misreading the thread title as S&M?
Are you channeling Chastmastr?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
You Anglicans clearly do not possess such innocent and holy minds as we Baptists - or else you are just more honest about yourselves!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
quote:
What's often fascinated me is that the most theologically liberal congregations are often the most traditional in terms of worship, while the most theologically conservative congregations have been more enthusiastic about incorporating contemporary styles into their worship. This is a huge generalisation, of course, but perhaps this scenario undermines claims from both sides that the other is either too caught up in the zeitgeist, or not caught up enough!
What it suggests to me is that the human mind can only cope with a certain amount of innovation before it starts panicking...
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
quote:
What's often fascinated me is that the most theologically liberal congregations are often the most traditional in terms of worship, while the most theologically conservative congregations have been more enthusiastic about incorporating contemporary styles into their worship. This is a huge generalisation, of course, but perhaps this scenario undermines claims from both sides that the other is either too caught up in the zeitgeist, or not caught up enough!
What it suggests to me is that the human mind can only cope with a certain amount of innovation before it starts panicking...
Surely I've mentioned before the concept of the Traditionalist Quotient - found by multiplying the traditionalness of theology by the traditionalness of liturgy. Very few people can cope with it dropping below a certain value.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sergius-Melli
Shipmate
# 17462
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But to be actually totally free of any Zeitgeist seems impossible to me - I speak of course, from within the postmodern Zeitgeist!
However given that Jesus promises that the Spirit will lead us into all truth, your approach is one of despair, and a rejection of the possibility of being led by God. Whilst the rejection genuine revelation is a given in many liberal circles, it is not one that I accept. YMMV.
However, you seem as intent not to be open to the possibility of following the Spirit into truth as those you are arguing against.
You have chained God and His continuing revelation to the world into a set of limitations, based on your own opinions and acceptable conformities.
Maybe the Anglican Church, Chalke and others are way of mark and not being led by the Spirit, but they are at least open to the possibility of being and they are, in the age old fashion, instead of saying it can't be the Spirit actually testing what they perceive they are being led by the Spirit to do rather than shutting God up into a tickbox list of conformity to our standards:
Your position is, it can only be God leading if the lead fits into certain criteria.
The minute we strict the possibility of God to act we stop being led by the Spirit and stop listening to the Spirit.
Posts: 722 | From: Sneaking across Welsh hill and dale with a thurible in hand | Registered: Dec 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
This hymn has been in British Baptists' hymnbooks for many years (certainly since the 1962 edition) ... yet there are many Baptists who do not act as if they believe it. (They don't use hymnbooks either these days, but that's another story!)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But to be actually totally free of any Zeitgeist seems impossible to me - I speak of course, from within the postmodern Zeitgeist!
However given that Jesus promises that the Spirit will lead us into all truth, your approach is one of despair, and a rejection of the possibility of being led by God. Whilst the rejection genuine revelation is a given in many liberal circles, it is not one that I accept. YMMV.
Well, I don't feel in despair at all. I suppose from within a postmodern mini-Zeitgeist, one might say that human beings have always had revelations, and they have been couched within their own cultural language. Thus, the Amazonian shaman has a very different language and set of images from the Jewish prophet, but does that mean that one is a genuine revelation, and one is not? I suppose, within your m-Z, this is so. That would make me despair, as it suggests that many humans are fooled.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal
quote:
Surely I've mentioned before the concept of the Traditionalist Quotient - found by multiplying the traditionalness of theology by the traditionalness of liturgy. Very few people can cope with it dropping below a certain value.
You have mentioned it, but you haven't explained why it should be so.....
Perhaps Steve Chalke's church represents a new departure in being able to scale the divide.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Oh, I've no idea why. It's just an observation.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
This hymn has been in British Baptists' hymnbooks for many years (certainly since the 1962 edition) ... yet there are many Baptists who do not act as if they believe it. (They don't use hymnbooks either these days, but that's another story!)
We have a set of Baptist Praise & Worship which we use from time to time (alongside New English Hymnal, since you ask) and this is one the hymns we use it for.
Of course, good old Father Faber's often-maligned hymn 'Souls of Men' includes:
But we make his love too narrow
By false limits of our own;
And we magnify his strictness
With a zeal he will not own.
Hmmm....
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AberVicar:
Of course, good old Father Faber's often-maligned hymn 'Souls of Men' includes:
But we make his love too narrow
By false limits of our own;
And we magnify his strictness
With a zeal he will not own.
Hmmm....
Who maligns it and why? It's one of my favourites. (Though usually in the version beginning 'There's a wideness in God's mercy')
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Who maligns it and why? It's one of my favourites. (Though usually in the version beginning 'There's a wideness in God's mercy')
There's a wideness in God's mercy is in fact the start of the second verse of his quite lengthy poem.
Faber is often criticised as being too soft and emotional, yet IMNVHO his work contains the very best in Catholic devotional theology. Compared with much of the drivel that makes it into contemporary hymnals, it stands out for sheer insight and theology.
But that is probably enough of a tangent for now...
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
Do you think we've killed this thread, Angloid?
![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Well, I think most people clicked on it through misreading the title and thought [Voice=MontyPythonHolyGrailZootAndZootsTwinSisterDingo]A spanking! A spanking![/Voidce] and got disappointed when it wasn't about S&M.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ender's Shadow:
It's blindly obvious that Chalke is desperate to justify his new conformism, so it's hardly a surprise that he finds he can finesse the difficult passages. Funny that...
Blindingly obvious is what you meant.
What is blindingly obvious is that you discount the possibility that Steve Chalke is being sincere. Do you know him sufficiently well to be sure of his insincerity?
Why not address the arguments, rather than demean the man? Pointing to hermeneutical inconsistency is a perfectly legitimate argument. The traditional biblical understanding towards homosexuals can indeed be criticised on hermeneutical grounds. Here's a rather good quote from the article.
quote:
A key challenge the Church faces – which often goes unrecognised – is that the Bible does not provide the final answer to a whole number of issues to do with inclusion with which Christians have subsequently wrestled.At the heart of the matter is the growing sense amongst many evangelicals that it is, and has always been, unfair.
If Steve Chalke wants to get a discussion going on that issue, more power to his elbow. Unlike your post, his article does not debunk the sincerity of those who see things differently.
And that is blindingly obvious.
[ 22. January 2013, 09:15: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Sorry, an error. The sentence "At the heart of the matter is the growing sense amongst many evangelicals that it is, and has always been, unfair." is mine, not Steve Chalke's, and got included erroneously in the quote from his article.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
[QUOTE]What is blindingly obvious is that you discount the possibility that Steve Chalke is being sincere. Do you know him sufficiently well to be sure of his insincerity?
I'm sure he's sincere but what doesn't help his cause is his admission in the Church Times article that he failed to sign the necessary papers that all accredited ministers are supposed to sign, confirming one's agreement to the BUGB's stance on Human Sexuality.
".....Mr Chalke said that the Baptist Union of Great Britain had "imposed a ban on Baptist ministers' blessing civil partnerships", but that he had "never signed anything".
[http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2013/18-january/news/uk/steve-chalke-backs-gay-relationships]
A Giles Fraser moment perhaps?
Chalky's default mode when wanting to wind up "authority", is a bit like a naughty boy sticking out his tongue and saying "Bum." Sometimes he goes too far to make a point, rather as he did with his arguments against PSA.
He might still want to "... cling to the term Evangelical; I don't see why I should give it up" but we can all be rather self deluded. I'm more saddened by this attempt at special pleading that I am by his actions. I can call myself lots of things but that doesn't make me them unless it's affirmed by a wider body. Steve not only seems to want his cake but to keep the 3 tier cake stand too.
If I had to bet on which Baptist Minister would do such a thing then Chalky would be odds on favourite, top of the list, if only for the shock value.
Such a pity, a nice boy and from Tonbridge and Spurgeons too ...right sort of chap and all that.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Makes it sound like the RC position that if The Boss doesn't want to make a change, then the mere peasant should try not to think.
I had understood that the whole point of the Baptist thing was to allow for individual and congregational conscience, rather than mere loyalty tests.
But carry on being dismissive. That will allow you to miss the point.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
My journey continues with Steve Chalke and Brian McLaren against my will, against my conservative 'yeah-buts' and with my shame and confusion and enlightenment and yearning for inclusion.
"In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God" (Robert Kennedy's paraphrase from Edith Hamilton's translation of Aeschylus' Agamemnon.)
Enders Shadow, your rhetoric is second rate compared with Steve's. He persuades me as never before and you - and I have been you - don't. And I want to embrace you and feel sympathy for you, but your inadequate defensiveness is an obstacle for me. I'm sorry.
Tony Campolo is the best apologist for conservatism I've come across so far, are there any others? Evangelicalism is intellectually, rhetorically, spiritually bankrupt. Has NOTHING to say. And I want to embrace, include all evangelicals. In truth I have no choice as they are the only show in town. Nothing can be done from or in the liberal High CHurch.
I can't believe I've got here. And it isn't comfortable. I couldn't quite embrace Steve Chalke on PSA at the time - I tried to include PSA and CV etc - but the failed rhetoric of conservatism on that, on sexuality, on divorce and remarriage, intelligent design, God's violence and above ALL on damnationism which is the elephant on which they all share a howdah, drives me ever postmodern, ever liberal yet not to exclusive liberalism.
Steve's true mostmodern intellectual honesty and courage are unprecedented, especially exposing the modern myth of "Paul was a modern liberal on women really". Myths on slavery. Myths on sexuality.
We have NEVER been here before as a society, as a culture. Conservatism is a MODERN phenomenon which I have been caught up in - and STILL am - for 45 years. It has NO Biblical precedent, there is NOTHING Biblically normative about it as Steve (and Brian and generations of cradle Liberals, hi guys) have brilliantly EXPOSED.
There ARE no biblical difficulties on this issue as on so many others. It doesn't TOUCH them. Except in deep implicit spirit.
It's that realisation that now separates me from conservatism. BUT I do not want to be separated from conservatives.
I want the IMPOSSIBLE reconciliation DESPITE our irreconcilable thinking.
How about it Ender's Shadow ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
It's that realisation that now separates me from conservatism. BUT I do not want to be separated from conservatives.
I want the IMPOSSIBLE reconciliation DESPITE our irreconcilable thinking.
How about it Ender's Shadow ?
Same here Martin. I still go to my con-evo Church, and I love them all.
(PS - Ender's has been permanently planked, so it's no use asking him for an answer - see the Styx for the reasons)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that's my position too, Martin.
I've been clinging onto a certain amount of evangelical conservatism, partly out of loyalty and partly because I've had it at the back of my mind that to walk away from evangelicalism would be to walk away from the Gospel ... that the Gospel and evangelicalism are somehow synonymous.
At the root of it - for all the Dead Horses - I do think that there's still a kernal of truth in evangelicalism which can be overlooked in other traditions - 'Repent and believe the Gospel.'
But the worry I have - and it's not confined to evangelicalism by any stretch of the imagination - is that if we're not careful we can use dogma rather than love and dogma excludes ...
I'm all for a 'generous orthodoxy' - but still with an orthodoxy there - and not for a wishy-washy no boundaries, no holds-barred everything's relative thing ... and yet ... and yet ...
--------------------
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
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
At the root of it - for all the Dead Horses - I do think that there's still a kernel of truth in evangelicalism which can be overlooked in other traditions - 'Repent and believe the Gospel.'
Been to Mass on Ash Wednesday recently?
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Evangelicalism is intellectually, rhetorically, spiritually bankrupt. Has NOTHING to say. And I want to embrace, include all evangelicals. In truth I have no choice as they are the only show in town. Nothing can be done from or in the liberal High CHurch.
I can't believe I've got here. And it isn't comfortable. [...]
BUT I do not want to be separated from conservatives.
I want the IMPOSSIBLE reconciliation DESPITE our irreconcilable thinking.
Isn't this a profoundly shocking - if not contradictory - statement to make? That evangelicalism has absolutely nothing to offer, yet it's the only show in town? That you want to be reconcilled with people whose thinking is worthless to you? Isn't that an appalling state of affairs?
One could be utterly cynical and say it just shows how parasitical liberal Christianity is - it relies on an apparently worthless evangelicalism to get the punters in (or at least to keep them in) and then hopes to 'de-evangelicalise' them once they're settled, so to speak! But perhaps it would be more constructive and less confrontational to see it as a spectrum. Steve Chalke isn't at the same place on the spectrum as another evangelical might be. There are various types of evangelicalism; Methodist evangelicals, for example, are different from Anglican ones.
It also occurs to me that if more liberal Christians are now beginning to 'infiltrate' evangelical churches simply because that's where all the action is, then those churches may become less evangelical over time. After all, Steve Chalke's church attracted gay couples even though they presumably knew that Baptist churches aren't usually the most gay-friendly. Those gay couples then managed to change their pastor's views on homosexuality. On the other hand, the number of more liberal churchgoers is decreasing, which would undermine their impact.
(But all this begs the question as to why 'nothing can be done from or in the liberal High CHurch.')
[ 26. January 2013, 12:44: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
