on Saturday, 10 January 2015 at 11.22 am by Peter Owen
categorised as Opinion
The Guardian Epiphany around the world – in pictures
Huffington Post Epiphany 2015: Dates, Customs, Scripture And History Of ‘Three Kings Day’ Explained (PHOTOS)
Paul Handley Church Times leader Fundamentalism
Christopher Howse writes about St Hilary in his Sacred Mysteries column in The Telegraph Troglodytes, topazes and the spring term.
Mr. Handley’s column feels like it ends mid-stream. My own take is: People discover what they believe to be “The Truth” (64-pt. Gothic Bold). They become “born again”, or they “submit”, or, etc., and suddenly everything falls into place, everything is revealed, and their life and future fall into place. That’s fine. Good for them. But then, some of these people want EVERYONE ELSE to believe that same truth. They can’t believe that what is true for them isn’t true for everyone else. And a few get very, very angry. And that’s when the trouble occurs. Reformations and Counter-Reformations. Accusations… Read more »
It seems the Church Fathers had just as much disagreement in their ranks as today. And I agree with Christopher Howse that Lucifer of Cagliari is a magnificent name. Perhaps another column could be devoted to revealing why he is considered a Saint in Sardinia.
An excellent article by Paul Handley in the church Times. Religious fundamentalism is the great enemy of faith in the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; whose mission was of redemption rather than vengeance
peterpi is exactly right. I’d add that the same phenomenon (in less virulent form)occurs within Christian denominations and that the anger often stems from anxiety: they don’t really believe what they say they believe, so the ‘liberalism’ of others constitutes an existential challenge. That’s one of the reasons why Evangelical Christians of that persuasion get so worked up about homosexuality and so annoyed with straight Christians who find no problem with it. Nor of course do they understand the attitude of ‘that’s fine. Good for them’. And they can’t reciprocate it.
“But then, some of these people want EVERYONE ELSE to believe that same truth.” The “then” probably being right around the time the Conversion High wears off. Combined w/ the paranoia that that the “EVERYONE ELSE” is “out to deny/destroy My One True Religion.” After that comes (unacknowledged to the believer) DOUBT: John’s “they don’t really believe what they say they believe, so the ‘liberalism’ of others constitutes an existential challenge” (except for “liberalism”, I’d insert “ANY belief-system differing from the fundamentalist’s) “Faith of our fathers, holy faith: we will be true to thee till [someone’s] death”: that’s Roman Catholic,… Read more »
Christopher Howse’s description of the rival claims of orthodox and arian leaning bishops is a timely warning about the factional and fractional nature of the Church. Rival claims over true doctrine and practice are best worked out within a sense of the deepest possible shared Communion. General Synod of the CofE in legislating for the possibility of women to be bishops in the Church of England sought that provision for those who in conscience could not accept women as bishops should still express the highest degree of shared communion. The language of impaired communion that had been part of the… Read more »
I must be going senile but I also entirely agree with the post of paul richardson.
“The one who had the greatest claim to a special relationship with the deity chose to consort with outcasts and those judged to be unclean by the religious authorities.”
Yes, thank you, Paul Handley. After Jesus was asked the question “who is my neighbour,” he told the parable of the Good Samaritan. Samaritans were hated outcasts in the view of Judeans. They would not want to hear a story where their priests and pious folks are indifferent but the Samaritan is good.
Conclusion: Jesus was 180 degrees opposite fundamentalism.
The point made in the article is one commonly made: “Jesus consorted/was friends with/hung out with outcast, the lepers, the drunks, the tax colelctors, the Samaritans!!” etc. Yes, very true. But then the question is, and why did He do this? What did the Lord do and speak of while so engaged? Typically, we are invited by articles such as these (and this is apparent by how the article ends midstream as it were, on this very point) to conclude, whatever we wish from the image thus presented of the Lord. The fact that He spoke to and sought out… Read more »
“The fact that He spoke to and sought out the outcast, is the beginning of the discussion, not the end in and of itself.”
Well, speaking of “ending midstream”, RMF, so does your comment. What do YOU think the “end” of Jesus’s encounters were? Serious question.
Hello JCF, Well, I think He is extending us an invitation. And the invitation applies to all, of course. He makes this very clear.
Then the question becomes, an invitation to what??
Ahh, that’s the rub!!
I don’t fault the journalist for focusing on the invitees. I simply hoped to highlight that the point he’s making is rather incomplete.
I’ll answer your question, JCF. The beginning – and the end – is love. Which is far more important than ‘do this, don’t do that’. Some will say here: ‘go and sin no more’, but a great majority of NT scholars agree that that episode isn’t in the original text.
The worst consequences of fundamentalism are not limited to the religious.
Paranoia, antisemitism, islamaphobia, fanatical belief in conspiracy theories combined with racism is the basis for the manifesto of many political parties and some nation states.
I am constantly amazed by the conversations amongst my son’s Hungarian friends, secular to a man, old and new hatreds ring out with absolute conviction.