Bishops, politics and communications

[methodius]

For the last 15 years or so, I've communicated quite a bit on newsgroups, and more so recently, because with the declne in popularity of BBSs following the introduction of Windows 95. Two newsgroups I've participated in quite a bit have been alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox and alt.religion.christian.episcopal

Comments

Not sure what it is

[methodius]

When I stopped being an Anglican, it was with the recognition that there was no longer any room for the kind of theology I believed within the Anglican Communion. Perhaps there never was, and perhaps I was deluded in ever thinking that it was possible. I did not leave with a sense of bitterness or rancour, of a theological battle won or lost. Perhaps I left out of cowardice, because I did not want to face the battle, or to take part in it at all.

For me, the biggest and most important battle has always been how to live the Christian faith in a broken and sinful world. I really did not feel up to spending the rest of my life arguing about what the Christian fath actually is.

In this I was influenced by two writers, G.K. Chesterton and Colin Morris. At the time Chesterton wrote his Orthodoxy he was still an Anglican, though he later became a Roman Catholic.

He gave the example of someone who wanted a blue world, and said that even if he painted only one blade of grass blue he would get on slowly, but if he changed his favourite colour every day, he would not get on at all. As long as the vision of heaven is always changing, the vision of earth will always remain the same. No ideal will remain long enough to be realised: the modern young man will never change the world, for he will always change his mind.

Colin Morris, a Methodist, writing some 60 years later, said something fairly similar. The church is on the march -- down to the nearest theological bookshop. Again, the same theme. The church of his day was so preoccupied with changing its theology that it would never change the world. The title of his book was Include me out: confessions of an ecclesiastical coward. And like him, I was an ecclesiastical coward. I just did not want to spend the rest of my life fighting those battles.

He quoted one book of theological essays, called Soundings where the authors said that the time was not ripe for major theological construction or reconstruction, but just a time for making soundings. And he asked whether the rest of us were to adopt a position of frozen immobility until the theologians had got the show on the road again. When would the time be ripe?

He began his book with a description of a Zambian who had dropped dead outside his front door, whose possesions were a frayed khaki shirt and shorts, and an empty ballpoint pen. The police pathologist said that the contents of his stomach were some dried leaves. And the main thrust of his book was that the academic theologians were engaged in a monstrous conspiracy against that little man. Why should we always be changing our theology when we haven't even begun to apply the theology we already have?

And so taking his advice, I opted out of that battle. It'll take me the rest of my life to read the Fathers of the Church, never mind the latest theological book of the month. I've hardly begon to scratch the surface of Orthodox theology, and it's enough of a battle trying to apply it to my own life, never mind the world.

Re: Not sure what it is

[jmoor]

This is so eriee. I just bought G.K. Chesterton's book on St Francis. So many talk about him I thought I would begin reading his books. I like orthodoxy because it leaves me little time to argue about theology. The ever progressing church calendar and daily office seems to drag Christians out of being stuck in a pet doctrine. There isn't enough time for feasts of Pentecost, Transfiguration, Advent, Anna, BVM, daily prayers, etc to fight for long.