It's a sin...

I've managed to go and get Jason Clark's blog on a watch list with this little heretical number... A few people have shown up to denounce the post and the emerging church and demand repetence (for intellectual pride, leading souls astray and preaching a false gospel etc) and a return at once (do not pass go) to the one true faith (theirs).

It sort of reminded me of the Pet Shops Boy's lyrics:

When I look back upon my life
It's always with a sense of shame
I've always been the one to blame
For everything I long to do
No matter when or where or who
Has one thing in common, too

It's a, it's a, it's a, it's a sin
It's a sin
Everything I've ever done
Everything I ever do
Every place I've ever been
Everywhere I'm going to
It's a sin

I'm the first to admit i am flawed, sinful human being who needs to do a lot of repenting/rethinking - i've got a lot of things wrong and will continue to do so - i'm a cracked pot who leaks goodness but somehow manages to abound with selfishness.  Then again that always struck me as one of the main reasons that I grateful for the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit - for changing me and continuing to change me, to help me be more loving, kind and generous.

But what I find equally as arrogant as anything i would write is that folk will turn up and label a whole group of people without a single question or attempt to engage in conversation - it's either  there way or the highway to hell.  It's all a sin. 

I can see the irony of writing a post about encouraging conversation with faith grps and being denounced by some of my fellow christian brothers and sisters, who want less conversations and more conversions.

Of course i've been there, got the shirt and tie set myself so i can understand where they are coming from and now i can't say that at least i (and you if you go look) was warned...

Comments

[Isaac]

Paul, why don’t you just be a mensch and admit it: you don’t want to have a real conversation, you want a docile audience so you can have a free hand to introduce whatever theological novelties strike your fancy.

It looks very silly, you know. It’s not that I mind your being silly, but you seem to think you should be taken seriously at the same time.

Will emergents ever grow up and do the hard work of theology?

Let me ask you what you would constitute heterodox and what would be the proper response to it? Dialogue? Correction? Reproof? Rebuke?

I really want to know.

[Paul]

Thanks Isaac, i would really love to have a converation but it is hard to do so when you leave a fake email address so I can't respond to you.

In the meantime I'll continue being silly :)

[Isaac]

You can't answer the question, but you can complain about my e-mail address.

Pathetic.

[Pistol Pete]

While we can affirm the total depravity of all humanity (no good apart from God), it's best we stay focused on our own sin (the log instead of the speck).

[Steve K.]

Hey Paul,

Hang in there. Keep fighting the good fight. Your critics embarrass themselves.

Shalom,
Steve K.

[Gary Manders]

Paul, You have the patience of a saint! I for one will be signing up for the consultation request for feedback, heretic that I am. Thanks for the link. Here's wishing you and yours a Happy New Year and keep up the good work. 2008- time to get back on the grid.

[Joshua Case]

Hi Issac-

Thanks for taking the time to post here on Paul's blog. Good to see the conversation happening here of all places!

I was just wondering what you consider the hard work of theology that 'emergents' need to be doing? Can you give other examples of where people have done the hard work of theology? Are there people you admire for doing this hard work that we could look to as a model to follow?

Finally, I am confused by your question about 'heterodox'. Are you asking what a proper response to a specific belief that seems to be heretical compared to a specific doctrine that is denominationally accepted? Or something else?

thanks for clarifying...
joshua

[Isaac Roth]

Well, Joshua, I could tell you what I consider the hard work of theology, but it would be beside the point. I’m not asking anyone to consider what I think, and I’m certainly not inviting Paul to take up thinking at this late stage of his development.

Reread the post and then read Paul’s reaction to criticism on Clark’s blog. There is this feckless, imaginary “dialogue” emergents pretend to engage in, but when others [Jorge, Orlando] denounce it, notice the sort of response they get from Paul. Paul is not interested in dialogue at all; this “conversation” is a ruse, a ham-handed way of insinuating challenges to orthodoxy without having to respond intelligently. If Paul really wanted a conversation, he would consider other points of view without dismissing them with these nitwit, irrelevant lyrics. What does “it’s a sin” have to do with the comments of Jorge and Orlando? They weren’t wildly accusing anyone of sin at all, their words were “utter foolishness” and “madness” followed by what they understand to be orthodox. Jorge doesn’t want what Paul is offering, he wants error exposed. Whether Jorge is right or wrong, Paul doesn’t deal with it: he mischaracterizes it as an accusation of sin and dismisses it with a stupid lyric.

This is not how serious people converse, trust me.

In other words, this issue is not the difference between Paul and me, this is about why Paul cannot treat Jorge and Orlando with dignity and extend a modicum of respect to their views. Paul will not extend to fellow-Christians the deference he wants us to extend to infidels.

And of course Jorge and Orlando want others to accept what they hold to be the truth! This is not scandalous; every good man who believes a thing is true wants it to be regarded as true by all. This is certainly the attitude struck by St. Paul and St. John. This is not a flaw in them, yet this is the belief Paul caricatures with his nonsensical lyrics.

All I want to know is, if emergents cannot field objections raised by their opponents, and if the response that is offered is some feeble ad hominem, why bother with this silly game? If Tom preaches heresy, why can’t Dick and Harry object without their positions being misrepresented in such a goofball way?

[Paul]

Thanks Pete, great advice :)

[Paul]

Thanks Steve, this seems a fight not worth having. I'd much rather people turned up and asked me a question rather than came along with their sweeping views and denounced a diffuse group of people like those involved with the emerging conversation.

I much prefer the joint peace efforts and the time it takes on and off-line to talk with people like Jean and Orlando and find out from them what they are really concerned about and vice versa. It makes for a much more worthwhile conversation then making assumptions that anything emerging related is sinful, that we're preaching a false gospel, that we aren't brothers and sisters in Christ.

It's also good for me too, i'm sure i get defensive and pricly at times, the written medium is hard to work through emotions in but the conversation continues, i'm tryin to learn to ask questions rather than make assumptions too - it's a learning process, like all learning processes that is a messy imperfect one :).

[Paul]

Thanks Gary, good to hear from you. I think it will be interesting to read what comes out of the consultation, i think it would be great for christians to engage with it but they also have the freedom not too :).

Happy new year to you, will be good to have you back on the grid :)

[Paul]

Thanks Joshua for trying to engage Isaac in conversation, great questions...

[Toni]

Isaac - using a fake email address is like being caught lying barefaced in public.

Paul - I have to confess I can see little useful conversation taking place between inter-faith groups really. You could talk about all kinds of things, but would it be any more effective that talking with all the flamers these posts have dragged from the woodwork? Now if conversation meant that Christian could live their lives more clearly in front of people of other faiths then that's great, however my suspicion is it would turn into a series of carefully worded discussions by faith 'diplomats'. Just a hunch.

As for God being too big for 'one religion' (which in a way is another part of this discussion) this is a weensie bit naughty. You might mean He encompasses Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Baptists AND Emergents etc. Or you might mean He really is the source of all world faiths and that all paths lead to God. TBH I'm not sure if you're looking for discussion, exploring ideas or just plain trolling. I think I'd probably enjoy sitting down with a coffee and discussing these things with you, although I think much more clearly sat in front of a keyboard than I do FtF.

I'd looked at these posts more than once, ended up shaking my head and 'walking' away, having nothing useful to say. It seems I was not alone in that.

[Kamsin]

Interesting debate...it seems sad that we (whoever "we" may be!) can't get beyond the kind of thinking which seems to insist people are only listening to us and showing us respect when they agree with our point of view.
Anyway, always did like that Pet Shop Boys song;)!

[Toni]

Paul - I need to apologise a little. I've been back to re-read your Deep Faith' post, and realised I'd mis-remembered it. That may not have been the most helpful image to link with it....... certainly memorable, but inclined to overwhelm the actual post.

[Paul]

Thanks Toni, no worries, you're right the image was provocative and almost certainly overwhelming, so my bad!

I was thinking of it in terms of anyone having a universal grasp on God other than God so therefore our revelation of God comes from God and not from religion - my belief and why I am a christian is that i believe in Jesus as the revelation of God and the revelation of what humanity that believes in and follows Jesus can and will be.

[Paul]

Thanks Kamsin - trying to minimise 3rd party conversations in the plural of "we" and "them" is unhelpful. I have to hold my hand up to that and say i am guilty in this post of projecting a bit, so my bad as well.

I was tryin to express a feeling that the people who turned up to critique at Jason's would rather make statements in general about what emergents do/don't believe rather than asking those in the conversation on the post what they do/don't believe.

Saying that it is a great ongoing conversation to try and get beyond the "it's a sin" mentality, so i am appreciating the generousity of conversation.