I Believe in Larry, Moe and Curly Joe.
(Sidebar comment--the bluebonnets are back! I found it unsettling to see my face appear every time I left a comment on other blogger blogs, so I restored my bluebonnet picture. I'm planning to post my picture on the sidebar of the blog so it doesn't get picked up on comments I leave, but couldn't get that to work this morning. I'll get it back up eventually.)
8 comments:
I still like the cartoon with the "Rock, Paper, Scissors!" caption.
This is just another black eye for us in the Christian world. This is just one reason more for people who want real answers in life to go to another denomination.
If I was looking, I proably would...
I guess I don't get it. Why does expanding the list of words we use for God equal denial of the divinity of Christ? ("sorta-Lord" "artificial insemination")
I must be stupid, because this editorial doesn't make any sense to me. One is left with the distinct impression that the writer was not actually at GA, or doesn't know many actual Presbyterians.
Sorry, I just don't get it.
Dear Cheesehead,
The piece suffers from excessive hyperbole, it's true. But the writer makes two points that I think are important.
One is that most average Presbyterians believe the names we use for God, and the Trinity, are sacred and biblical. These folks are appalled at the news that a PCUSA Task Force is suggesting alternative terms such as Mother/Child/Womb. For them, this does not expand their understanding of God, but increases their discomfort with and distrust of the national denomination. And yes, to them, it seems to be the equivalent of the denial of the divinity of Christ and the soverignty of God. This is a prime example of the gap between the denominational leadership and the laity.
The second point she makes that I think is important is that if these folks become disaffected enough to leave the PCUSA, they are likely to migrate to the more conservative, fundamentalist churches and that will adversely affect the historic witness of the Presbyterian church which is not as literalist and more tolerant of diverse views. I would hate to see that happen.
This report may not be controversial with you and your church, but it is with my congregation (including the pastors who have addressed it in their sermons) and in many of the churches in my presbytery.
You are probably right. My congregation so far has not gotten upset with the report.
But still...I think the writer, in her use of hyperbole takes what is a potential learning curve for the *whole* church (people who are upset by the report *and* those who aren't) and makes a mockery of it. That ticked me off. I reacted.
There is a difference to me between people inside the church debating a theological issue, and journalists whose connections to the denomination are tenuous at best making mocking pronouncements about it.
Or there is still that argument that I'm stupid...that works, too.
I'd just be happy if ONE of snarky editorialists in the secular press who felt moved to comment on this paper had quoted the part of the paper that says: "The language of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit remains the indispensible anchor for our efforts to speak faithfully of God. If our lifeline to this anchor is frayed or severed, the historic faith of the one holy catholic and apostolic church risks being set adrift." But I guess including that part would interupt the snarkfest.
And why is it that many conservative Christians squeal like stuck pigs when the "liberal media" presents their cause in a biased, inaccurate way, but when that same press goes gunning for progressive Christians it's "WhhEEEEEEE Party Time!" (I don't think that's what you're doing, Grace, but I've definetly seen that attitude elsewhere.)
Yes, the article is not entirely fair. But nothing in the media is really--to liberals or conservatives!
Thankfully, our faithful bloggers of all persuasions can then take up the debate and show all sides of really complex issues.
These opinion writers in the papers want quick and easy answers for their headlines and soundbites, but theology is deep, rich and complex. Kind of like a good cup of gourmet cofee.
MMM....Cofee...
(Sorry about that seeming digression, I really do identify good coffee with good theology!)
So what's your poison, CP? French Roast? Fair Trade? Sumatra? Kona?
God help me, I'm a slave to Starbucks.....
Wish we could all have this discussion in person fueled by our favorite caffinated beverages!
I still think the best alternative triplet is "Me, myself, and I" as that is usually the focus of folks looking for alternative ways to think about God.
Post a Comment