They’re sexist. Among others quoted in the article, our neighbor down the street, Annie Laurie Gaylor.
Another Reason to Oppose the “New Atheists”
4
“Episcopal, but not religious”
From the Episcopal Church’s latest branding guidelines:
For those looking for more meaning and deepened spirituality, The Episcopal Church offers honest and unconditional acceptance, which removes barriers to Jesus Christ and permits belonging to an authentic church community.
I’m not sure what I don’t like about it, but my reaction is visceral. Perhaps it’s because I’ve been thinking about Philippians 2:
“Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus
- who, though he was in the form of God,
- did not regard equality with God
- as something to be exploited,
- but emptied himself,
- taking the form of a slave,
- being born in human likeness.
- And being found in human form,
- he humbled himself
- and became obedient to the point of death–
- even death on a cross.”
To translate that into “honest and unconditional acceptance that removes barriers to Jesus Christ” seems empty of theological content or the possibility of personal transformation. But perhaps that’s just me.
I’m reminded of the “spiritual but not religious” debate I’ve been linking to.
More on the “Spiritual but not religious” dust-up
Jim Burklo: http://tcpc.blogs.com/musings/2011/09/celebrating-sbnr-remembering-jim-adams.html
Here’s another way to view the SBNR phenomenon: religiously unaffiliated but spiritually engaged people are in fact encountering God in real human communities that don’t look like traditional congregations, so why not celebrate that?
Maybe the SBNR are pointing the way toward a different kind of church or a new kind of Christianity, if only those of us who still care about old denominations and traditions can receive the criticism of their absence and learn from it, even as it comes with a sting.
Kate Blanchard, who teaches religious studies, on the airplane conversation (and her own journey):
If all of this makes me boring to the confidently religious, I guess I can live with that. But I am actually quite fascinated by someone who takes the time to say, “I’m spiritual but not religious,” when they could simply have said, “Hmmm, interesting,” and put in their ear buds. It makes me feel less alone as I wander in my current religious wilderness. I am actually energized and encouraged by the quests of those who are seeking something true, even if they don’t know anything other than that it’s not religion.
Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus: A Sermon for Proper 21, Year A
September 25, 2011
I wonder when, if ever, there were that many clergy in clerical collars, at a meeting of Madison’s City Council. I didn’t count the total Tuesday night, but I’m guessing there were at least ten. Why were we wearing collars? As a show of piety? No, of course not. We were wearing them to identify our selves and also to make clear what our offices were and what the nature of our authority was. Clergy aren’t the only ones who do that sort of thing, even if we are particularly prone to it. Most of us on occasion like to assert our authority, to make clear that we have power, and that we deserve to be heard. Continue reading
Atheism, Belief, and Intuition
Brad Hirschfeld, “When Atheism turns Ugly”
Fanatical atheism is no worse and no better than fanatical religion, though it may be more bitterly ironic. There is something pretty odd, dare I say hypocritical, about a bunch of people who call themselves “freethinkers” and “humanists” not only verbally abusing people of faith, but actually tearing up verses from the Bible as an act of protest, as they did on a pier in Huntington Beach, California Saturday morning.
Evidence of a more measured approach:
Jonathan Ree on the “varieties of irreligious experience”
Opponents of religion – anti-clericals, humanists, rationalists or whatever we want to call ourselves – ought to recognise that religion is a complicated box of tricks, containing much wisdom as well as folly, along with diversity, dynamism and disagreement. And we need to realise that many modern believers have moved a long way from the positions of their predecessors
Gary Gutting on Phillip Kutcher’s analysis of the spiritual experiences underlying belief:
Your religious beliefs typically depend on the community in which you were raised or live. The spiritual experiences of people in ancient Greece, medieval Japan or 21st-century Saudi Arabia do not lead to belief in Christianity. It seems, therefore, that religious belief very likely tracks not truth but social conditioning. This “cultural relativism” argument is an old one, but Kitcher shows that it is still a serious challenge.
Finally, “Why are intuitive thinkers more likely to believe in God than reflective thinkers?“
The Communion of Saints
Finding one’s way back to church after serving on vestry (via the Produce Junction). An essay by Jeanne Murray Walker.
Who knew we were hip? Wisconsin envy in the Big Apple
PBR, of course, cheese curds, and deer hunting http://bit.ly/ofdMm8
Remember the “Ground Zero Mosque?” It opened
No one noticed. The American way of life didn’t come to an end.
Details here. PBS Frontline will cover the controversy next week. Comment from America’s “In All Things”
Change coming to the structures of the Episcopal Church?
Bishop Stacy Sauls made a presentation to the recent meeting of the House of Bishops meeting proposing a radical restructuring of the Episcopal Church, beginning with the calling of a Special Convention. The ENS article is here.
Mark Harris has comments here and here. Much of Sauls’ proposal has to do with General Convention, but there are large points, as well. For example, he observes that the Episcopal Church spends about 47% of its budget on administration and governance; 53% on mission. The Better Business Bureau suggests a non-profit should spend no more than 35% on overhead expenses.
Elizabeth Kaeton welcomes the conversation but worries that it is beginning in the wrong place. We should start with clarity about mission, and then talk about funding priorities.
Conversations like these are of crucial importance, but they can’t be driven solely by concerns about cost-cutting. The structures of the Episcopal Church that were built up in the twentieth century were an attempt to live out a vision of the church and that they did. They also reflected the cultural values of the time. On this, Derek Penwell is correct. But what should the church look like in the twenty-first century? What should it be? These are questions that need careful, thoughtful discussion, and not just by those who are invested in the church as it is (Bishops, national church and diocesan staff, and General Convention deputies). That is a self-selected (occasionally appointed or elected) group. Centering the conversations among this group leaves important voices out, especially those whose experience of church is primarily, perhaps only, in the parish or a local ministry.
Most of us working in the trenches have little time or energy to waste on conversations at the national level, or even the diocesan, for that matter. We are too busy doing ministry and often too busy even to think about how we need to change and adapt in the twenty-first century. We know the old models and structures don’t work, but can’t think our way into a future.
But it’s not just us. It’s also all those who come to us for spiritual renewal, for hope and strength, for ways to reach out to those in need, and could care less about the larger church. They ought to be in the conversation as well, for it is they who will shape the twenty-first century church. If they are not part of the conversation, perhaps guiding it, we will just be rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
The necessity of change
Change as spiritual:
If change and growth are not programmed into your spirituality, if there are not serious warnings about the blinding nature of fear and fanaticism, your religion will always end up worshiping the status quo and protecting your present ego position and personal advantage–as if it were God! Although Jesus’ first preached message is clearly “change!” (as in Mark 1:15 and Matthew 4:17), where he told his listeners to ‘repent,’ which literally means to ‘change your mind,’ it did not strongly influence Christian history. This resistance to change is so common, in fact, that it is almost what we expect from religious peope, who tend to love the past more than the future or the present.
Richard Rohr, Falling Upward (H/t Shannon Ferguson Kelly)
Carol Howard Merritt on 5 cultural shifts that will affect the way we do church.
Derek Penwell reflects on how churches are organized, specifically committees, and the effects of cultural change on that traditional organizational model. The title of his post? “Killing Church Committees.”
Preaching Grace on the Square 