It is time for Christians to accept that what was Orthodoxy a thousand years ago doesn’t help people experience Christ today.

Funny, it helps those of us who are Orthodox very much, thank you.

Yes, Peter, but “Orthodoxy a thousand years ago” is pretty much the same as it is today.

“Thomas Merton was seeking to integrate Buddhist meditation with Christian practice when he died, and nobody calls him a heretic.”

Ask, and ye shall receive! This doesn’t use the *word* ‘heretic’, but it doesn’t give much room to stand on, outside of heresy (save perhaps apostasy):

“The case of Thomas Merton comes immediately to mind: a sincere convert to Roman Catholicism and Catholic monasticism some forty years ago* (long before the radical reforms of Vatican II), he ended his days proclaiming the equality of Christian religious experiences and the experience of Zen Buddhism and other pagan religions.” (p.37/8)

from _Orthodoxy_and_the_Religion_of_the_Future_, by Father Seraphim Rose (St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, Platina, CA; ninth printing (fifth edition) 2004; ISBN 1-887904-00-X).

Father Seraphim goes on to explain at some length why and how such integration is impossible. I think it could be summarized as being similar to trying to rebuild your car’s engine to ‘burn’ water instead of gasoline: doomed to failure, because some presumptions were made that are actually contrary to the way things work.

Best sawbuck I’ve ever spent.

* first printing published 1975

LOL; Good comment, Peter.

The “holier than though” tone of Mr. Potter just comes across almost palbably, but perhaps he never had anyone explain to him what the words meant. It may be a failure of cathechesis.

I’m sorry, but as much as KTF probably loves to think of himself as “prophetic” (He think he hangs his hat on it) he is not a Christian, IMO. He is Unitarian/Universalist who thinks Jesus was a groovy guy. KTF took a lay ordination in the Buddhist faith.
What is it that people don’t get about the fact that a potential Bishop should not be taking vows in another religion?!!. This is not rocket science. Perhaps he should start his own church-”First Church Of The Whatever you want to call God, under the authority of the Right Reverend Prophet of said God, Kevin Thew Forrester.” Some idependent church sometimes have names like that. I think KTF may be ripe to be a cult leader with nobody to have to be accountable to.

Honestly, I pray for KTF. I wish him God’s blessings, but any person who isn’t a Unitarian Univesalist in all but name only and who actually thinks that creeds matter should not want him as their Bishop in the Episcopal Chuch. Heck, I’m not even Episcopal and I wouldn’t want him as my Bishop.

On second thought Mr. Potter might object to being called “holy”. and “thou”-eeks It’s so old fashioned. ;^) He’s much more “spiritual” then the poor benightened Episcoplains and others who like the tradtional liturgy.

Thomas Merton might not have been called a heretic-except by the person mentioned above, but he was Trappist monk. He was not being considered to be a Bishop in the RCC. Apples and oranges to the situation with KTF, IMO

Would Father Seraphim have cited the specific place where Father Merton proclaimed “the equality of Christian religious experiences and the experience of Zen Buddhism and other pagan religions”? I’m not a fan of the later Merton (as opposed to the early “pious” Merton and the middle “exploring” Merton), and I haven’t read the last works. I do know that Merton approached Zen Buddhism with the wide-eyed naivite he found ridiculous in pious Catholics approaching Christian monasticism. Would he have eventually awakened to his own gullibility?

Thomas Merton entered the monastery at 28 and was a monk 28 years. At 56, he was at a stage of life when for many folks, faith fails. Or rather, they question their faith and explore other options. As one monk put it, “I don’t know that God exists”. That seems sad to the young, but when you see these men continuing to live their lives faithfully, you begin to get the idea that “faith” is a life lived faithfully, that we “walk by faith, not by sight”. It’s the old monks you want to know: oaks of righteousness, serene and utterly at peace, waiting on God, filled with light and joy.

There were all sorts of rumors about what Merton would do: leave the monastery and devote himself to social justice issues, formally apostacize, marry the woman that was visiting him at his hermitage. Perhaps his death was God’s way of short-circuiting a destructive path. Who knows?

It’s equally possible that Merton would have pulled back from his fascination with eastern mysticism and renewed his monastic vocation. The man died: we don’t know what would have happened.

It’s possible Fr. Seraphim’s claim is completely valid. It’s also, possibly, completely false. Citations would help.

Yes, Peter, but “Orthodoxy a thousand years ago” is pretty much the same as it is today.

As, God willing, it will be a thousand years from now.

“What is it that people don’t get about the fact that a potential Bishop should not be taking vows in another religion?!!.”

For a TEO adherent, the only problem would be if the potential Bishop had taken vows of a Christian or Jewish nature.

“My own children will not baptize their children because of the outdated language, concepts, and theology of the baptismal service. I can hardly stand to hear it myself anymore.”

Well that sure as momma’s biscuits rising is not the Church’s fault alone. The fact that you ignored and sabatoged your own children’s introduction to and life in the faith lies at the root of that problem. Do you think your children would have such contempt for liturgy and the Truth it expresses if you had not been prattling on about the cosmic Christ and the importance of relevance to the modern age?

And once your realized just how outmoded this whole wash away our sins and join us as new creatures to Christ concept was why did you continue to live a lie? Oh let me guess church member looks good on the aint I grand page. So please do not continue with the self torture. Get that mail order ordination and have yourself a jolly old time.

But spare the rest of the world your ignorant self absorbed twaddle masquerading as righteous indignation. Honestly why God does not just piss on you is a mystery of the universe I think I should contemplate.

That was a beautiful phrase, FW Ken- about the old monks. Very poetic and striking; Thanks.

I agree with you. The Christian journey is often walking by sight. One of the things I really admired about Mother Teresa was that even if she apparently spent much time in the dark night of the soul in her latter years, she fulfilled her vows. The disciplines are important, A nun told me recently that a Trappist monk she knows (and I gather he’s a long time monk too) said “what helps to keep me together is the liturgies and the praying of the hours.” This is true for people who are not Catholic as well-that spirituals practices and discipline are important. I think it was John Wesley (the founder of Methodism) who was having a crisis of faith and he talked to a Moravian pastor who told him, “Preach faith until you have it.”

Grace and peace to you in the Lord Jesus Christ, my brother.

Whoops; The Typo Queen strikes again. I meant, “The Christian journey is often walking by faith.”

Paula,

I couldn’t get to Chris Potter’s letter. Is he an Episcopal priest?

Peter’s right; in fact we don’t use 1000 year old Orthodoxy. It’s 2000 and counting. Funny thing, it’s always *new*. “All that is not eternal is eternally out of date” — C.S. Lewis

Fenelonspokes I don’t know.

The Reader Response page says, “The Rev” when the writer is a priest - so since Chris Potter has no title there, he is not ordained.

If the essence of the Episcopal Church is that you can believe anything you want, H L Mencken (If I recall correctly) would be right at home: “A man’s got to believe something. I believe I’ll have another beer.”

So the lady thinks that if only the church was more Buddhist, it would thrive?

Er, wouldn’t it be more likely that people who are interested in Buddhism would become Buddhists and attend Buddhist centres? I mean, why go for a watered-down ceremony on Sunday when you could have the real thing, full-bore?

” believe that 30 years from now, Episcopalians — if any are left — will wonder why their parents were so pathetically naive and backward.”

Ah yes…forward into the past… to “The Powerhouse Church of the Presumptuous Blinding Light!”

Even though Stephen answered the question I posted in “From Each According to His Ability” I will ask again: Where does one learn to be so stupid?

“It is time for Christians to accept that what was Orthodoxy a thousand years ago doesn’t help people experience Christ today.”

I’m delighted to hear this straightforward rejection of “the faith as received from our fathers”. Surely, it means that the outdated, homophobic, misogynistic, sexist, racist thingy called “The Bible” will be cast aside for once and for all. A completely new “revelation” based on personal feelings and “life experiences” will take its place, attracting hundreds of millions of enlightened souls who have previously rejected Christianity because of its dependence on archaic revelations from God.

/sarcasm off……………….

And,I have to say something about:

“I wish this wise man could be my bishop. If there were more enlightened minds like his in the Episcopal Church, we wouldn’t be losing members at an astonishing rate.”

Can someone remind me about the statistics showing how the Diocese of New Hampshire has been growing like topsy ever since the consecration of Gene Robinson? How many gazillion people have flooded the TEC churches there now that an enlightened, progressive, prophetic individual is in charge of the Diocese?

Why does this man say “It doesn’t help people experince Christ today.”? He’s suddenly all people, or speaks for them? Why didn’t he just say, “It doesn’t speak for me?

But Gene Robinson is only prophetic in being openly gay and talking about gays full inclusion in the church. I get the idea that his Christology is fairly mainstream Episcopal with a bit of Evangelical thrown in. Bishop Robinson might not even re-write the baptismal liturgy and not have a problem with the atonement. It’s the Buddhism, Jesus is not divine and is one of many pathways to God, Unitarianism stuff that I think KTF believes makes him prophetic, although it didn’t sound like people were flooding into his church in the UP either.

VGR’s Christology is “mainstream?” Didn’t Christ speak about one man and one woman becoming one flesh? I know VGR considers himself a “bride,” but to openly flaunt Christ’s teaching on marriage and engage in conduct which both the Old Testament and the New Testament clearly and unequivocally condemn as an “abomination” is hardly what I would call “mainstream Christology,” at least not from where I’m at in the “stream.” VGR can “argue for inclusion” all he wants, but it will not change the fact that his behavior is not in accord with Scripture and the explicit words of Christ.

Fuinseoig,

“So the lady thinks that if only the church was more Buddhist, it would thrive?” If TEC were more Buddhist it could be both “Catholic Light” and “Buddhist Light” Such a deal!

“I believe that 30 years from now, Episcopalians — if any are left — will wonder why their parents were so pathetically naive and backward.”

They will not say that because they will be the only Episcopalians left. Rather they will be thankful THAT their parents remained faithful to “the faith of their fathers”.

Mr Janousek-

I was not talking about anything to do with VGR’s sexuality, his behavior, his view of marriage or homosexuality as a sin. I was strictlly talking about whether he views Christ as fully human and fully divine and Lord of creation, and accepts the the traditional idea of the atonement-which unless I misunderstood from people on SFIF- he does. That’s why I said “Christology” as fairly mainstream, not “theology” as a whole.

Sorry, Fenelonspoke, can’t accept your reasoning. If VGR “accepts” Christ as “fully divine,” then by what authority does he obviously reject His teaching on marriage being a man and a woman? And if that is the case, the homosexual acts outside of marriage are by definition sinful and contrary to the teaching of Christ. I cannot get my mind around a proposition that says that Christ is the “Lord of Creation,” yet at the same time His teachings can be ignored by the likes of VGR. Pray tell, how do you do it, Fenelonspoke? How do you reconcile VGR’s abominable acts with the idea that he views Christ as divine?

Please take it up with VGR. :^) I cannot answer those questions for him. I was simply responding to the concepts related to the nature of Christ and the atonement, ie. Christology. I am not a gay Christian; I am not VGR. I can’t answer how he reconciles it. If you’re asking me whether I think homsexuality is a sin, I think Paul defines it as such and Jesus believed in marital faithfulness between a man and a woman, and no sex outside marriage.

Good evening and peace be with you.

Yes, Peter, but “Orthodoxy a thousand years ago” is pretty much the same as it is today.

As my husband said once, ‘The Orthodox are STILL arguing over the ‘28 Prayer Book - 1028, that is.’

Fenelonspoke,
Again, there is no such thing as ‘gay’ - the whole ‘gay/straight’ paradigm is false invented by the sexual agendites to propagandize the world.

Same-sex desires are a symptom of disorientated identity, and the result of disrupted attachment and identification processes.

Dr. Joseph Nicolosi’s articles at NARTH and his new book, Shame and Attachment Loss, might be helpful. After the Ball and Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth by Dr. Jeffrey Satinover are two other enlightening books.

Janelle Hallman has written a helpful book about disoriented identity and desires in women. Diane Langberg’s books on sexual abuse show how disorientation occurs due to attachment loss and trauma and the effects on spirit, soul and body as well as the healing process.

People can change if they surrender to God’s word and will…and if they find a good therapist who has not bitten the poison apple of agenda deception and propaganda.

“So that’s what’s killing TEO. It isn’t goofy enough. Sumbitch.”

Hilarious. That about sums it up.

Todd V

FenelonSpoke, I’d made a distinction between homosex and sexuality. Homosex is rebellion against the created order and therefore rebellion against the Creator. Sexuality is part of the created order. You might be interested in this:
http://college-ethics.blogspot.com/2009/06/why-does-bible-prohibit-homosex.html

Christopher: spot-on.

I agree that VGR’s christology sounds good, in an evangelical/bapticostal sort of way, but it’s always good to remember that he is known to have had “issues” with the Nicene Creed in seminary. Has he ever affirmed the Creeds publicly and unconditionally? Or even acknowledged which creedal articles gave him trouble? Were they about Jesus?

I recognize I am speculating here, possibly sinfully. However, I have heard too much god-talk over the years to assume sound theology underneath the verbiage. And that’s true of conservatives as well as liberals.

VGR is screwed up in many regards (so am I, although our Venn diagrams of screwed-upedness don’t fully match), but AFAIK he says that Jesus is …the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages: God of God, Light of Light, True God of True God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the the Father, through Him all things were made…

So as far as that goes VGR is not off the reservation.

FS, Ed, I believe FW Ken is right. It always boggles my mind why liberals continue on at seminary even after coming to a point like this. Even from a pragmatic point of view, it must be depressing to spend your whole life doing what you don’t really believe in.

My own children will not baptize their children because of the outdated language, concepts, and theology of the baptismal service.

Note the typical liberal vagueness which is used as a prelude to a bait-and-switch. Of course external forms (such as language) should not be allowed to alienate people from the church (1 Cor 9:19-23), but then she has to tack on ‘concepts’ and ‘theology’.

Well, in that case I may not know very far.

Ed the Roman: VGR is not just down the road from the reservation, he is clear over in the next county. I cannot but suffer severe cognitive dissonance when trying to comprehend how one can confess that Christ is God, per the Creed, yet flaunt what He said about sex and marriage as flagrantly as VGR does with his homosex. Either he is saying the Creed with his fingers crossed or he believes Christ is God, but that his commandments and teachings can be violated without consequences. In other words, he sets up an idol, homosex, and bows to both that and Christ. Produces a severe migraine on my end.

From what I have gathered reading some of VGR’s statements on the web, he does affirm the reality of Jesus Christ being both divine and human, per the Creeds. However, I think that his view of the atonement leaves quite a bit to be desired.

It is inconsistent to affirm Jesus as Lord and then to ignore his teachings - but once you have decided that theology is multiple choice and not systematic, consistency becomes the hobgoblin of little minds.

Let’s just face it, folks! The people who make the sort of statements that our gentle host has quoted for us are totally ignorant about what the church they belong to actually teaches.

With a few exceptions, catechesis has not been one of TEC’s strong points. That is because the leadership has made such a big deal about being the “Big Tent”, where just about any belief is acceptable, as long as you don’t insist that your belief is the absolute truth. This means that people no longer understand what it means to be a Christian, much less and Episcopalian.

As Chris has said before, these sorts of people seem to be worshiping - if they can be said to worship anything other than themselves - some Vague Deity Concept that does not impinge upon their chosen lifestyles. What’s not to love about that?

I don’t think so, M. They’ll grow a pair, they’ll all be atheists, Unitarians or both and they won’t care one way or the other.

Bingo.

Don, what about people who confess Jesus as Lord but glorify avarice? What about churchmen who cheat in business and justify it as “not personal, just business”?

The problem with VGR isn’t his sexual proclivities, but claiming that they are normal, natural variants of our humanity. He claims that what he does with his boyfriend isn’t sin, when God clearly says it is. In that, he is not alone.

Avarice is a sin as deadly as lust. So are
Pride
Envy
Gluttony
Anger/Wrath.
and
Sloth

You know, I wouldn’t even say that VGR makes a virtue of “lust”; he is simply a false teacher making false claims about our human condition. There are, however, those who make a virtue of avarice. The health and wealth prosperity preachers come to mind and they all claim Jesus as Lord.

Don, I think the point is that, as far as the views of Christ that are acceptable go in TEC, Gene’s view is traditional and orthodox

Granted, he does ignore the parts that don’t suit him, but then again, he is not the first to read the Bible to say what he wants it to say, or ignore the awkward bits.

And can’t the lady with the problem about the theology and liturgy of Baptism go to the Baptists? Or at least send her grandchildren there? They don’t baptise children, they see baptism as an ordinance not a sacrament, and they don’t believe it saves from sin but rather that one is signifying one’s status as a believer. She doesn’t need to go Southern Baptist, either; there are liberal Baptist denominations/churches.

VGR’s “sexual proclivities” are, in fact, the source of his problems because he has made of them a “god” in opposition to God. By that I mean that he has taken that which Scripture clearly condemns and has made it his own “golden calf.” Of course Christians both profess Christ’s divinity and sin. But the key factor there is recognition of that sin and repentance. In VGR’s case, the recognition and repentance are non-existent. As to the prosperity gospel clique - Joyce Meyer, from our host’s home city, is a prime example. A $3 million dollar house in south St. Louis because God likes her so much. Total bogus nonsense.

“And can’t the lady with the problem about the theology and liturgy of Baptism go to the Baptists? Or at least send her grandchildren there?”

I should say not. Baptists have been known to drink blended scotch and use the wrong fork.

Surely not blended scotch. Talk about gouche.

Uh-huh. Blended. And I’ve been told some of them put ice in it. One Baptist minister thought I was talking about the left side of my yacht when I ordered “port”. Can you believe it? Mr. Howe and I had such a laugh over it! Such uncultured personages.

If they went to the Baptists they would be excluded from the TEO for “abandonment of religion” or whatever the phrase is. However making a vow to the Buddhists is called “enlightenment”, broadening of “diversity” and “bringing Christianity into the 21st Century”

In this general context, do any of you re-read “A Canticle for Leibowitz” with the same sense of ashamed bemusement (and a little bit of wistful/monastic intellectual longing) that I do?

jimmy, at least once a decade. The sequel was an error which I only read once.

In the same vein:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMIBf_N0H9I