Dr. Gerald Neuberg via the Internet writes:
"I think you could be a tremendous bridge builder, bringing a diverse people together under your "call to become more fully human." Your critique of Christianity, however, begs the question, where are you headed with this? Your views seem almost secular, more rational than even the Unitarians but more spiritual than Ethical Culture (which from my experience seems a bit lifeless). Your ministry is so inclusive that I'm sure you could build a global following of people who want a spiritual home free from the divisive myths of the past, who might agree that Jesus was a great, if not the greatest, philosopher and example, but not the only one worth building a way of life around. So it seems you're pointing to a global movement or alliance distinct from Christianity that is too exclusive. Will it have a name? "
Dear Dr. Neuberg,
What you suggest I am doing sounds very impressive. So much so that I have a hard time embracing it. However, I have no ambitions to begin a new movement that needs a name, though I appreciate your attribution to me of that and other noble goals.
I simply try to combine two things. First, my identity as a Christian who finds Jesus a doorway into the transcendence and wonder of God and second, my citizenship in the 21st century which means that I cannot think as a 1st century Christian, the time in which the Bible was written; a 4th century Christian, the time in which the creeds were formed; a13th century Christian, the time in which current liturgies took shape or a 16th century Christian, the time in which the Reformation occurred. I must be a 21st century Christian. That means I have to force my Christian faith into the thought forms dictated by the 21st century. In the process much of the traditional understanding of Christianity, shaped as it was by the mindset of the 1st Century must inevitably be sacrificed as no longer either relevant or possible.
I draw a distinction between the experience of God and the explanation of that experience. The experience of God is, I believe, both real and timeless. The explanation of that experience, however, is always time bound and time warped. Explanations, because they are always wedded to their time will also and inevitably die. That should be expected.
I see nothing in history that causes me to believe that anyone can start a new religion. I see much that indicates that new religious forms always emerge out of old concepts. The tendency of religious institutions is to suppress all change. This will be the death knell of the Christian faith.
The Christianity I profess is radically inclusive. There are no barriers, no boundaries. It is a journey into the mystery of God without a road map.
I'm glad to have you as a fellow traveler.
-- John Shelby Spong
"I think you could be a tremendous bridge builder, bringing a diverse people together under your "call to become more fully human." Your critique of Christianity, however, begs the question, where are you headed with this? Your views seem almost secular, more rational than even the Unitarians but more spiritual than Ethical Culture (which from my experience seems a bit lifeless). Your ministry is so inclusive that I'm sure you could build a global following of people who want a spiritual home free from the divisive myths of the past, who might agree that Jesus was a great, if not the greatest, philosopher and example, but not the only one worth building a way of life around. So it seems you're pointing to a global movement or alliance distinct from Christianity that is too exclusive. Will it have a name? "
Dear Dr. Neuberg,
What you suggest I am doing sounds very impressive. So much so that I have a hard time embracing it. However, I have no ambitions to begin a new movement that needs a name, though I appreciate your attribution to me of that and other noble goals.
I simply try to combine two things. First, my identity as a Christian who finds Jesus a doorway into the transcendence and wonder of God and second, my citizenship in the 21st century which means that I cannot think as a 1st century Christian, the time in which the Bible was written; a 4th century Christian, the time in which the creeds were formed; a13th century Christian, the time in which current liturgies took shape or a 16th century Christian, the time in which the Reformation occurred. I must be a 21st century Christian. That means I have to force my Christian faith into the thought forms dictated by the 21st century. In the process much of the traditional understanding of Christianity, shaped as it was by the mindset of the 1st Century must inevitably be sacrificed as no longer either relevant or possible.
I draw a distinction between the experience of God and the explanation of that experience. The experience of God is, I believe, both real and timeless. The explanation of that experience, however, is always time bound and time warped. Explanations, because they are always wedded to their time will also and inevitably die. That should be expected.
I see nothing in history that causes me to believe that anyone can start a new religion. I see much that indicates that new religious forms always emerge out of old concepts. The tendency of religious institutions is to suppress all change. This will be the death knell of the Christian faith.
The Christianity I profess is radically inclusive. There are no barriers, no boundaries. It is a journey into the mystery of God without a road map.
I'm glad to have you as a fellow traveler.
-- John Shelby Spong
posted by lbutler1 at
5:16 PM
|
0 comments
