Jump to content

gerard

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gerard

  • Birthday 02/12/1947

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    england (after living on continent)
  • Interests
    Work in publishing.<br>Practising (Roman) Catholic.<br>Left church (doctrine), returned after many years (sprituality). Formerly politically active, now reckon it was mostly futile. Campaigned actively against Iraq war.<br><br>Interests: liturgy, German theology,<br>football (soccer), music.<br>

gerard's Achievements

New Member

New Member (3/9)

0

Reputation

  1. Dear Monica & Co I wasn't being dismissive. love G
  2. Dear Friends It's so stimulating visiting this site but culturally so ... unlike anything i'm familiar with. (It's the old delusion that just because we in GB/IRL this side of the atlantic share a language with you US/CDN-ites we can expect to think the same!) I'm still amazed at the individualism/isolation; the power of literalism and fundamentalism; the cheerful eclecticism and consumerism (denomination-hopping) and the totemic status of bishop spong. It's livelier than Europe and more generous but, as a gifted but not too bright Welsh football hero of mine put it when he moved fom Liverpool FC to Juventus of Turin ,'it was like a different country'! The north American debate is simply different. ... I'll look in now and then to see how you are getting on but i'm handing in my card as a tcpc person. Yours in Christ Gerard Kiely
  3. Why the hesitation and tortuous argument to justify our position: myth is a recognised way for humans to express their truths. We don't need Bishop Spong's permission to use it. After all, a poem or a song can be true, so can a novel. Even fundamentalists use metaphors ... Gerard
  4. We are too kind to them when we use the word fundamentalist : no-one can claim that, for example, St Paul's views on women in the church belong to the fundamental core of the christian message. This lack of distinction between core and peripheral questions, between the significance of Jesus' actions and words and their cultural context is an imaginative, intellectual and spiritual weakness. It is 'progressives' who are able to make the distinctions and work within a living tradition. Defining what is central to the christian message and expressing it for our age is an exciting task. (In practice even the most conservative are selective: When catholic traditionalists argue that women cannot be priests because none of the 12 were women, we can answer that none were gentiles ... !) Gerard
  5. I was discussing this forum with friends in Manchester at the weekend. What had struck us was how open people were, and the marked individualism of most contributors. But Christianity is always collectivist in some sense (I find the meditation group I attend more effective than when meditate on my own). Certainly the catholic tradition (Roman Catholic or within Anglicanism) seems able to sustain many 'progressives'. I agree that means not explicitly forcing issues within the parish, but the tradition and its liturgy and social action wouldn't exist without coexsitence. Perhaps it has to do with our (Roman Catholic's) minority status (10% of the population in England) and ethnic origins (in this part of the world we are overwhelmingly2nd and 3rd generation irish); we are culturally and socially Catholic, despite what we think of the church's teaching or actions on any particular point. As to being liberal/progressive, catholics of my generation and background are overwhelmingly Labour - but decreasingly New Labour! Most of us opposed the iraq war. Can we have our cake and eat it?! Gerard (after discussion with Neil and Nora)
  6. Lindalou I''m a bit puzzled by what Spong says here. In fact, the more I think about it, the fuzzier it becomes('finally never'?). I can sort of see what he's getting at, but even then I don't think it's self-evidently true. You ask a concrete question which has made me think hard about what I really believe I'm doing. I think there are concepts/doctrines and stories which are (or can be) helpful to our spiritual life (eg the the Incarnation or the episode with blind man Bartimaeus in Mark 10), there are some which don't have much resonance and there are some we may feel unhappy about. I find I can pick and choose (and things change over time - prayer and meditation yield insights you hadn't had before, your own ideas develop etc). I realise many would feel unbale to do that and i respect their view. The things I don't personally agree with and which matter to me are not in those areas but in what we may call the everyday life of the church: a prime example is the place of women.I think it's vital to argue for women priests whenever the opportunity arises. To leave the church would guarantee the that there would be no change. i do appreciate that the context is important. I don't feel isolated, I live in a city where there are several parishes and two universities. Not that I often discuss these matters (that's why this forum is so valuable) but I suspect a lot of the christians I know are similarly pick 'n mix. I'm rambling so I'll stop! Thaks for making think out my position! Gerard
  7. Lindalou, I meant was Spong right about not worshipping something we don't understand intellectually. The other things you mention are doctrines and practices: if you can ignore them then fine, but if you feel oppressed by them, you are certainly right to go elsewhere. Yours in Christ, Gerard
  8. In reply to Transcendentalist and Ford MB: I agree: it's vital to assert our right to the tradition that has nourished us. It also gives us a framework in which to develop progressive christianity, otherwise we risk getting lost in an eclectic maze. I think those ignorant of Christianity in the way I described have usually never addressed it intellectually or even culturally, they therefore haven't rejected it. I hope transcendentalist remains a christian: I turned away from the church for 20 years: I regret I did not return earlier. We should sustain one another. Gerard
  9. This is a fascinating discussion. I don't know the American context very well and am a bit bemused by some of the beliefs/phenomena described here. They seem so exotic. What continues to strike me is the need to label oneself/others. In Europe, including Britain and Ireland, I feel that there are many people (a large minority?) who could be described as progressive but that there's a sort of complicity not to be divisive, so you sort of have to work it out in the groups you are member of. I'm a Catholic and also have a lot to do with Anglicans, so that may skew the sample. In private, most of the people I mix with (publishing, academia) are post-Christian and stunningly ignorant* of Christian history and doctrine (another way in which the two sides of the Atlantic differ?) so it doesn't arise. Gerard *e.g. I realised in a discussion at a conference last summer that the person I was talking to was confusing Martin Luther and Martin Luther King!
  10. Dear All What this discussion demonstrates is that 'sola scriptura' is a dead end. Even to enagage in discussion on that basis seems to me to encourage the delusion that there are prescribed answers to everything. (Tradition-based approaches can be similarly infantilising, but that's another question). Gerard
  11. Dear Christina I've had parkinson's for 6 years - it made me reassess everything. Gerard
  12. I'm delighted to have found this site. It's difficult to describe positions as the vocabulary used seem mostly derived from secular (American) politics. In particular, I find the word 'progressive' problematic: it smacks of self-satisfaction and an old-fashioned secular optimism. What do you think? I'm a (Roman) Catholic, by the way, as that is the tradition in which my spiritual life has developed:wherever possible we should maintain 'progressive' presences in our churches. I look forward to attending a sung Latin Mass celebrated by a woman ... Gerard
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service