tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post3850417192499594562..comments2024-03-28T11:33:16.271-05:00Comments on Adventus: Truth is SubjectiveUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-46273974179819940562012-04-30T22:35:28.168-05:002012-04-30T22:35:28.168-05:00RMJ: I'd like to drop you an email if you'...RMJ: I'd like to drop you an email if you're so inclined to share your address.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />windhorse1@gmail.comWindhorsenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-54416215378422672572012-04-30T16:03:17.796-05:002012-04-30T16:03:17.796-05:00Which, to bring it back around, is where I part wa...<i>Which, to bring it back around, is where I part ways with the Bishops, or anyone who insists abstract notions must, in any case, in even one case, trump the needs of any given individual. And yes, I know how radically unethical that statement sounds. But I say it as a pastor, and defy anyone to tell any individual in ethically complicated straits the dogmatic doctrinaire line to that person's face in the very moment of crisis.</i><br /><br />Interestingly, more people expect pastors to be plaster saints than they expect them to be human beings.<br /><br />Push comes to shove, I found almost every member of my congregations harbored a secret limit beyond which the pastor was not to go. Nothing explicit, like drunkenness or licentiousness, but some secret line that could not be crossed because an ethical system demanded it be honored. It was the hill each individual thought I should die on, rather than violate this precious tenet of their ethical system. Upon further reconsideration, I suppose that's what I was thinking of at the time I wrote.<br /><br />Not to say I disagree with the comments here; but as I re-read it, I realized the multiple meanings possible in it. Or multiple purposes, anyway.Rmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-18136182664824185312012-04-30T15:51:53.589-05:002012-04-30T15:51:53.589-05:00I fell compelled to clarify that my "parting ...I fell compelled to clarify that my "parting ways with the Bishops" has much more to do with their public stance on health care coverage or what Obama's policies are supposedly going to do to charities and hospitals than the controversy over the nuns.<br /><br />Rick was kind enough to supply a link (in comments below) giving more information on the latter contretemps. One thing it points out is how multi-vocal (and polyvalent, for that matter) the "Vatican" actually is. Which is a separating point from the pronouncements of the US Conference of Bishops (a presumably more monolithic group, especially when they make press releases) or even an individual Bishop (like Bp. Jenky).<br /><br />And I appreciate that I over egged the pudding with my reach to define an ethical stance. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and are in need of gentle correction; especially when they check their humility in favor of their rhetoric.Rmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-65426648735270814962012-04-30T14:24:38.858-05:002012-04-30T14:24:38.858-05:00Whoa, I'm very honored and humbled to have bee...Whoa, I'm very honored and humbled to have been quoted.<br /><br /><i>Which, to bring it back around, is where I part ways with the Bishops, or anyone who insists abstract notions must, in any case, in even one case, trump the needs of any given individual. And yes, I know how radically unethical that statement sounds.</i><br /><br />It is as radically unethical as the iconoclastic statements and actions of Jesus' ministry placed within the context of Jewish law and society. As Alberich points out - and as you have pointed out many times over the years on this blog very powerfully and persuasively - placing the needs of other persons above fealty to abstract ideas or material things...or ourselves...is the very basis of an ethical system. And further, it a necessary foundation for spiritual Love.<br /><br />When Christ performed healings on the Sabbath the Pharisees said, "See? He does not respect the Lord's Day." When he revealed that following him path demanded that one leave one's family (issues and entanglements) behind they accused him of violating the Commandment to honor one's father and mother - not the only Commandment of which he ran afoul, of course. Indeed the story of Christ's public ministry in the Gospels is woven together by a thread of episodes in which he runs up against the authorities and the strictures of the "Big Ideas" of his day and chooses to subsume their demands to the needs of individuals time and time again - whether those Ideas arose from the sacred tenets of Jewish orthodoxy; religiously sanctioned vengeance that was seen as essential to keep society from descending into choas; or simple polity and time-honored custom. <br /><br />So I'd say you're on the right track with your radical notions, or at least in good company.<br /><br />The conflict between Christ and the religious authorities of his day are no different in kind than the conflicts in our day between the demands of our "authorities" - whether they be Princes of this World or Princes of the Church - and the real needs of individuals: Randian Heirophant Paul Ryan and the sacred doctrine of national fiscal responsibility versus hungry and homeless children who have no pretty ideological objections to where their much-needed assistance comes from; the Vatican and the US Conference of Bishops' demands for "radical obedience" and doctrinal purity versus the pressing needs of the poor, the sick and dying who desperately need access to government-funded health care even if that system contains within it provisions for abortion or contraception. And on and on. <br /><br />Spiritual blindness is simply the refusal to see the pressing truths of the present moment because of ideological blinders. A sufficiently blind society is going to stumble around in the dark and cause untold suffering and destruction while never acknowledging it like some sort of drunken Goliath. In the past few months alone we've heard such proclamations from those in power that "no one is going hungry in America;" "that women make as much money as men for the same work;" "that there is no climate change, "the BP spill did not damage the Gulf," and any number of variations on the idea that "the poor are poor by their own fault" while imputing to them various degrees of criminality and/or responsibility for the current economic crisis. <br /><br />As you point out, the only reason people can make statements such as these that are at such odds with reality is that they are shielded from it, by wealth or status. Windhorsenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-41818548013729097692012-04-30T12:03:42.874-05:002012-04-30T12:03:42.874-05:00Which, to bring it back around, is where I part wa...<i>Which, to bring it back around, is where I part ways with the Bishops, or anyone who insists abstract notions must, in any case, in even one case, trump the needs of any given individual. And yes, I know how radically unethical that statement sounds. But I say it as a pastor, and defy anyone to tell any individual in ethically complicated straits the dogmatic doctrinaire line to that person's face in the very moment of crisis.</i><br /><br />Is it unethical? Some would argue it is the very core of ethics: after all the golden rule isn't about abstract principles but rather the very individual - do not do to others what you would not have them do to you.<br /><br />Anyway, a story: http://www.berdichev.org/stories_of_the_rabbi_a.htmlalberichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03852752646926946626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-82871733242128164112012-04-30T08:36:44.698-05:002012-04-30T08:36:44.698-05:00Anonymous--
If you can read all I have written as...Anonymous--<br /><br />If you can read all I have written as an apology for mainline Protestantism, you still aren't getting the message.<br /><br />And this place doesn't cost you any money at all.Rmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-35473339548236512732012-04-30T03:28:07.899-05:002012-04-30T03:28:07.899-05:00Your life is as isolated as Ryan's. Mainline ...Your life is as isolated as Ryan's. Mainline Protestantism is NPR at prayer. It's Lady Bountiful-syle paternalism with an iPhone. No wonder Mainline Protestantism is shrinking away. It hasn't had anything of value to say to anyone since the the sixties. Why bother with church when I can read "Mother Jones" with less trouble and for less money and get the same message?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-31268792244609528492012-04-29T19:48:16.144-05:002012-04-29T19:48:16.144-05:00To insist on pain for others that doesn't fall...<i>To insist on pain for others that doesn't fall on you and yours at all, is the root of sinfulness.</i><br /><br />Amen to that. Jesus said, 'Take up your cross....'. He said nothing about laying crosses on the shoulders of other people.<br /><br />All too often, I find myself referencing Jesus' words in my responses. You'd think I was a preacher, or something.June Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723016934182800437noreply@blogger.com