On Monday July 30, on the Times Colonist “Spiritually Speaking” blog, I responded to Marget Wente’s July 28 Globe and Mail Op-Ed piece “The collapse of the liberal church”: http://blogs.timescolonist.com/2012/07/30/predicting-the-death-of-liberal-churches/
It is sad that, Wente’s article will be viewed so many more times than the thoughtful and gracious response of United Church Moderator Mardi Tindal which can be viewed here: http://united-church.ca/communications/news/moderator/120730
13 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 4, 2012 at 9:48 am
Tress
One thing confuses me a little. Margaret Wente apears to be saying that the United church had an opinion about israeli settlements in Palestinian territory.
Mardi Tindal says only that the United church accepts the validity of an israel state. Which is it ?
Possibly , one cannot be considered without the other. This is a subject for a whole blog , or more!
We tend to see problems form one perspective. The problem will never be solved until all peoples needs are considered. Also we make judgments of people without having any understanding of their lives , or maybe that is the same thing.
August 4, 2012 at 9:57 am
jaqueline
accusing those who support Israel as a state as approving the abuses of that state toward the palestinians is like saying that those who approve of Canada accepting refugees are supporting terrorists.
August 5, 2012 at 5:20 pm
jaqueline
ooops Tress
just realised that it might look as though I was addressing you directly…sorry I should have posted as a general comment , not a reply…it was just that your post made me think of my response to the article.
August 4, 2012 at 1:27 pm
lindsay
This article by Mardi Tindal is thought-provoking … thanks for posting the link Christopher …
Since yesterday, triggered by a comment of Steve’s, I’ve been thinking about what it means to say “I am a non-practicing _______” (insert any faith group in here) …. What does that mean? I’ve heard people say “I am a non-practicing Catholic” or “a non-practicing Muslim” or “a non-practicing Jew” but it occurs to me I don’t recall hearing anyone say “I am a non-practicing Anglican” or Baptist or Methodist …. Why is that?
Now if someone said to me “I’m a non-practicing Christian” that would be a rather stunning admission … because it would mean something different than saying “I’m a non-practicing Catholic” for instance …. If I say I’m a non-practicing Catholic it means I don’t go to mass, do confession, participate in the sacrament or take part in the institutional life of the church, but I still identify myself as Catholic. Similarly with being a non-practicing Muslim … I don’t attend mosque, prayer 6 times a day, I might eat bacon or drink a glass of wine …
It’s a funny sort of thing, this distinction between belief and practice …
It seems perhaps Mardi Tindal’s article has some parts of the answers … and raises more questions …
Doing a search on google I came across this question on Yahoo answers “Is the term “non-practicing” Christian an oxymoron?”
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090528020523AA1X8pV
Could I say I am a “non-practicing Christian” ?
Or is it like el nombre wrote… “kinda like a non practicing virgin”?
August 4, 2012 at 9:56 pm
Steve
Lindsay, now this one has given me a chuckle. I’ve never heard the term non-practicing Christian, in the south we just call them backsliders but I think I prefer to call them non-believers. I think el nombre has it right. I rather think most people calling themselves Christian (myself included) are non-practicing in that we don’t practice what we preach. Or judging from the behavior of some it is obvious they haven’t been practicing and the guy that answered the question on Yahoo definitely needs more practice. Seriously speaking, I would say the word practicing belongs in context with the word religion, not Christianity but there is one context in which it is appropriate as in the case of the Christian classic “The Practice of the Presence of God” by Brother Lawrence.
One final thought on the subject comes from James 1:22 “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.”
August 5, 2012 at 4:52 pm
jaqueline
works are the evidence of salvation; not the guarantee, nor the condition for it.
August 8, 2012 at 9:38 am
lindsay
Hey, Steve, I’ve been thinking about what you’ve been saying here and elsewhere in Christopher’s blog … I must admit I haven’t read Brother Lawrence’s book … It sounds like it is a tough place to live down where you are … so much harsh judgement and pointing fingers at people and telling people what they should or shouldn’t believe.
This is kinda of what I’ve been thinking about these ;last few days … is why do I try so hard to convince others to believe what I believe? Why do I automatically assume that what makes sense to me ought to make sense to anyone else? It just seems so natural to do that … and to try to brow-beat people into thinking the same way I do … yet I myself definitely and in no uncertain terms don’t like to be told what I should or shouldn’t believe.
I don’t like being told what to do – period – and get all stroppy and stubborn and push back hard, which is, I’ve been told often enough, not a particularly endearing quality. It causes arguments. Yet for some reason I automatically assume it’s okay to do exactly the same thing to other people … I mean telling other people what they should or shouldn’t do.
When I think about it, it doesn’t make much sense to me … if I genuinely wanted to have any positive effect on the world or bring about any modicum of peace in my own family or my small part of the world, then it seems maybe I’m going about it the wrong way …
The thing is, my son told me something a few weeks ago out of the blue which has kinda got me thinking about all this too… It kinda went like this …
He said: “Mom, you know, if you lived before the Middle Ages, you probably wouldn’t live long”.
I said: “What do you mean? Do you mean high mortality rates in the pre-Middle Ages?” and thinking I was about to get a history lesson …
I said: “Yea, people didn’t live that long in those days … I guess chances are I wouldn’t live long”
He said: “That’s true, that’s part of it … what I mean is you probably wouldn’t live long … because you speak loud”
Then thinking he was making a comment on the way it was for women not having a voice in those days …
I said: “Oh, you mean because I’m a woman? Yea, I probably would have been burned at the stake a long time ago … Do you mean because I’m outspoken?”
He said: “That’s part of it … what I mean is you probably wouldn’t live long … because you speak loud … you say what you think is right …”
I said: “Oh, isn’t that a good thing? Doesn’t everyone say what they think is right? Do you think I should be saying only what other people think is right?”
He said: “No, I’m not saying that. I’m saying that most people don’t talk about it as much as you do” …
I love my son, he is one of the few people I actually listen to … and I’ve been thinking since about what he said and why is it I listen to my son … what does he do that different from what other people do?
and more than that … why do I judge harshly, but more than that … why do I respond harshly to criticism?
I guess, for me, that’s why I like Mardi Tindal’s response so much … because of how she responds … it’s kinda like a lesson in how to respond to criticism … learning from criticism rather than automatically going on the offensive … it’s just kinda hard not to automatically go into knee-jerk count-attack mode … which really is a lesson I need … I know the theory, it’s just hard to put into practice sometimes and some situations are harder than others …
August 8, 2012 at 11:38 am
Steve
Thank you Lindsay for being a voice of moderation. I do the same thing you do and I think most of us do, it’s just human nature and it takes a special kind of person to be self examining like that. And you are right, I feel like I live in a war zone.
I have gone through the same line of thinking and come to the same conclusion, it must be maddening for the other person when we operate from the position of I’m right and you’re wrong. I have done that without even realizing what I’m doing and even having realized it I still find myself doing it. Going one level deeper, does it matter who is right and who is wrong in a religious, political, or philosophical debate? In the very process of engaging in a disagreement we are objectifying each other, we aren’t being human with each other, and neither party has love as a motive because love would say this person is more important to me than my beliefs. My beliefs are very different from others in this group but when I have managed to keep my mouth shut long enough I have learned much here, not least of which is what I just mentioned. It’s not that I have changed any of my core beliefs but it helps me to have them challenged because it helps me to see the blind spots in my own thinking.
Coincidentally I have a similar relationship with my son. He and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum but he is very intelligent and informed and I respect him for that. We can debate these things without either getting emotional, like it’s just a good healthy debate. When I Challenge him on any given subject he can tell me what he believes and why he believes it with clear reasoning and factual information. There are not a whole lot of people that can do that. He’s still wrong
but I respect him for at least not blindly accepting someones else’s beliefs.
August 8, 2012 at 6:27 pm
jaqueline
love does not negate right and wrong…however right and wrong often negate love.
it is a mistake to avoid disagreement, hiding behind ‘it’s not loving’ …rather, it is about disagreeing and loving anyway.
August 8, 2012 at 6:30 pm
jaqueline
in other words engaging in a disagreement does not automatically mean objectifying the other.
August 8, 2012 at 6:54 pm
jaqueline
…describing disagreement being the next step to objectifying another or not being human with another.
I think you pretty much contradicted that fallacy by relating the story of your disagreement with your son.
August 8, 2012 at 9:43 pm
lindsay
Hey Jaqueline, I must admit I can’t think of a single person who doesn’t contradict themselves at least some of the time … I guess it’s part of being human and not knowing all the answers …
Can you imagine how insufferable we’d all be if we were always all perfect … no, show me a person who is quirky and flawed and passionately mistaken and seeking … and I’ll show you a person who has a tremendous capacity to love and be loved …
August 8, 2012 at 9:51 pm
jaqueline
It is when those blind spots and contradictions become standards and fondly held ‘truths’ that are applied to others, but not to those whom you ‘love’, that is the trouble.