|
2 members (melkman2, 1 invisible),
150
guests, and
20
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,295
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
'I believe in Larry, Moe and Curly Joe' Jun 30, 2006 by Kathleen Parker
Verily, I say unto you - Whatever.
No, wait, how about this: "Yo, Christ Buddy!"
Wait, wait: I believe in God the (blank) Almighty, maker of Heaven and Earth, and in Jesus Christ his only offspring, our sorta-Lord, who was conceived by artificial insemination, suffered under Pontius Pilate, etc., etc.
Sorry to offend, I'm just practicing my new Presbyterian catechism. The preceding was the modernized, gender-neutral version of the Apostles' Creed as it may read some day soon.
Before you call me blasphemous, take it up with the Presbyterian Church (USA), home to the "sometimes whatevers," previously known as the "eternal verities."
Ever attentive to the world's evolving feelings - I guess - delegates to the church's national assembly recently voted to "receive" a policy paper on gender that would allow a little flexibility on the Holy Trinity.
Make that the sorta-holy (lowercase) trinity.
The father-son-holy ghost triad, long a chafing point for feminists who prefer the good old days when goddesses ruled the Earth, has about played itself out, it seems. Under the improved sensibility, parishioners are now permitted a little flexibility with their liturgies, especially that pro-guy Trinity thingy.
Among acceptable alternatives to the dad-boy-ghost scenario are: "Mother, Child and Womb," or "Rock, Redeemer, Friend." No rock, paper, scissors. Yet.
I confess to some disappointment, as I was hoping for something a little closer to the bone, such as, say: Two moms, sperm baby, artificial womb. Those Presbyterians. Always so white bread and grape juice.
Before the church unleashes its version of hellfire and brimstone and cancels my magazine privileges, I confess to being a lapsed Presbie, a compromise between my Catholic father and Baptist mother. I joined the church at age 12 following weeks of catechism classes and tests on the Apostles' Creed, doxology, and so on.
When I wasn't in school, it seemed, I was in church: Sunday school, choir practice, piano lessons from the organist, Summer Bible School. The church was central to our lives, a home away from home, our hangout and recreational center. What can I say? We were nerds. More than a physical place, the church was - as the Catholic Church almost exceptionally remains - a reliably stable spiritual oasis that stood for something in a time that stands for nothing. The rules and players didn't change on a whim, which is something children love even if adults find it boring.
Or, as today, politically incorrect.
The USA Presbyterians have acknowledged with these new allowances that "Father, Son and Holy Ghost" are patriarchal leftovers that have been used "to support the idea that God is male and that men are superior to women," according to the panel that studied the issue.
None of these optional trilogies is etched in stone, but are offered as "an educational resource to enhance the spiritual life of our membership," according to Nancy Olthoff, an Iowa laywoman and legislative committee chair.
One can argue - as an editor/friend (and another Catholic-Baptist hybrid) did during a recent conversation - that religion can and should be flexible to accommodate changing times and people's needs. Different folks find different routes to salvation, after all, and adopt a variety of faiths to keep the wolf at bay.
As John Lennon put it: "Whatever gets you through the night." To which God responded: "Whatever is wrong with you people?"
What's wrong is that we live in anti-father, mad-at-daddy times. This is simply the Da Vinci Codification of the church, the dogma of which is "Women good, men bad." Matriarchy good, patriarchy bad. Womb good, oh never mind.
Irony seems to have gone missing as we worship our wombs and swoon over lost goddesses, however. The whole notion, advanced and commodified by Dan Brown (author of "The Da Vinci Code"), that the church sold out women ignores a couple of facts.
First, the Virgin Mary was hardly a bit player in the Catholic Church, which elevated her as the sacred feminine. Second, the Gospels were radically feminist in recognizing women as something more than property.
Gelding the trilogy may make a few new-age Presbies feel virtuous in the moment, but the likely effect longer term will be to animate the fundamentalists who often give religion a bad name. People who feel the Earth moving beneath their feet - their institutions and faith under siege - tend to seek out something more stable and less fluid.
And, ultimately, less tolerant. Article [ townhall.com] USA Today Article [ usatoday.com]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,930
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,930 |
Annie_SFO wrote I half wondered why the Presbyterians in question didn't add "Moe, Larry, and Curly" to their list. That would make for a fun litany. That was back on 6/22 humm, maybe this lady read her post  if you scan the page here they are hillarious in the discussion of Larry, Moe, and ? which one would it be https://www.byzcath.org/cgibin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003305;p=2
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
Hence from now on, all presbyterian baptisms are invalid. At least I would presume so. Stephanos I Or am I being presumptous?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,293 Likes: 17
Moderator Member
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,293 Likes: 17 |
You are being presumptuos. The PCUSA has a strong resistance movement: The Presbyterian Layman. http://www.layman.org The average Prebyterian, at least here in Pittsburgh, is fairly conservative and rejects all this nonsense. I would venture most pastors will continue with Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Before you start rebaptizing all your Presbyterian converts you better investigate what formula the pastor used. Fr. Deacon Lance
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,134
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,134 |
I haven't posted for a while, precisely because I didn't want to get into an argument, and I have a feeling that this may make some people upset. But here goes! While I think we should retain "Father, Son and Holy Spirit" in public worship, I don't see the slightest thing wrong with people imagining the Trinity in different ways. "Mother, Child, Womb" is actually rather lovely when you think about it. And many of the great mystics of the Church had no problem seeing, and describing, God as Mother as well as Father. And yes, I have often secretly imagined parallels between the Three Stooges and the Trinity, so there you go! My opinion is that God is so big that no box or definition we can come up with will ever quite fit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440 |
Dear Theist Gal you said: "Mother, Child, Womb" is actually rather lovely when you think about it. I say: It doesn't matter if it sounds lovely, it doesn't make sense. I think the Creator would be more in tune with a Father's role than a 'Mother's' one. 'Child' again could be anyone, and doesn't specify anything about Jesus. 'Word' (Logus), Saviour (Redeemer), would be much better, but then again, both Saviour and Word would have to be specified, and as far as Womb goes, it means nothing again. It has no relation to the Holy Spirit, so what have you? A trinity that could be anything but the 'Holy Trinity'. I think political correctness is being carried a little too far. :rolleyes: Zenovia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,134
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,134 |
Sure it makes sense. You're just letting the source blind you a little. Try this: forget that it came from the Presbyterians and imagine that it came from, say, Catherine of Siena or Hildegarde of Bingen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3 |
So how is the Holy Spirit "the Womb"? Wasn't the Theotokos' womb that carried the Christ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440 |
Dear Michael you said: So how is the Holy Spirit "the Womb"? Wasn't the Theotokos' womb that carried the Christ? I say: The Holy Spirit could be called the 'Comforter', or even 'Friend'. It could be a loving Force or Power, but never something that is created...and the womb of the Theotokos is created because our Theotokos is a creation. In order for anything to be part of the Holy Trinity, wouldn't it have to be uncreated, and part of God? Me thinks the Presbytarians are tending towards heresy. Oy vey! :rolleyes: We have the Muslims...now the Presbytarians? Zenovia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440 |
Dear Theist Gal you said: imagine that it came from, say, Catherine of Siena or Hildegarde of Bingen. I say: You're right! If it came from Catherine of Siena, she wouldn't have 'saint' in front of her name because it would be theologically incorrect. :rolleyes: Hey the Presbytarians can come up with something better than that. Eek! Zenovia P.S. Okay, okay, they can call it Moe, Larry and Curly and pretend they've created a new language where Moe will be another word for the Father Creator. Larry will be the new name for the Word made Flesh, and Curly will be the new name for the Holy Spirit Comforter. :p :p :p
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Originally posted by Theist Gal: And many of the great mystics of the Church had no problem seeing, and describing, God as Mother as well as Father.
My opinion is that God is so big that no box or definition we can come up with will ever quite fit. Theist Gal, You have stumbled upon one of my favorite topics - but I'll still be brief. The early Syrian tradition - which, if it must be known, is my favorite theological stream in the tradition of the Church - maintained "divine maternity" as a principle of Trinitarian theology. Aphraat, for instance, says that we should adore God as Father and the Holy Spirit as Mother, and even in some cases evidently uses poetically the personal pronoun "She"! And "ruah" or "spirit" is a feminine word in the Hebrew... For me, understanding the Holy Spirit as "Holy Mother" literally transformed my prayer life - as well as my thinking about Mariology. If Christ is the "icon" of the Father by nature could it not be said that Mary is the icon of the Holy Spirit by grace? Does it not also help us to more fully appreciate the ecclesia as a "Temple of the Holy Spirit" - both Bridal and Maternal? If man and woman are both in the image and likeness of God, does it not follow that all of the virtues and qualities found in both originate in God - including Fatherhood and Maternity? Ok - that should churn up the waters a bit... As to your second point, again returning to my favorite group - the Syrians, and in particular, St. Ephrem: Father, Son and Holy Spirit can be reached only by their names; do not look further to their Persons, just meditate upon their names.
If you investigate the person of God you will perish, but if you believe in the name, you will live.
Let the name of the Father be a boundary to you, do not cross it and investigate His nature;
Let the name of the Son be a wall to you, do not cross it and investigate His birth from the Father;
Let the name of the Spirit be a fence for you, do not enter for the purpose of prying into Him.
Memra on Faith 4:129-40 taken from Sebatian Brock's The Luminous Eye: The Spiritual World Vision of Saint Ephrem the Syrian - well worth getting! Sooooooo...give me the "Father, Son and Holy Spirit"! These are the revealed names of God. I have no desire to "perish" in the wood, hay and stubble of PC (or PCA for that matter) trinitarian theology! It is also interesting to consider St. Ephrem's quote in light of the filioque controversy...do we not contravene this holy man's counsel by attempting to penetrate the mystery of the nature of God? Gordo, who's all about mending fences 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,440 |
Dear Gordo you said: The early Syrian tradition - which, if it must be known, is my favorite theological stream in the tradition of the Church - maintained "divine maternity" as a principle of Trinitarian theology. I say: Nothing wrong with that. It's a nice expression, 'divine maternity'. You said: Aphraat, for instance, says that we should adore God as Father and the Holy Spirit as Mother, and even in some cases evidently uses poetically the personal pronoun "She"! And "ruah" or "spirit" is a feminine word in the Hebrew... I say: Again I say, nothing wrong with adoring the Holy Spirit as a mother...mind you the key word is 'adoring' the Holy Spirit as one would a mother. You said: For me, understanding the Holy Spirit as "Holy Mother" literally transformed my prayer life - as well as my thinking about Mariology. If Christ is the "icon" of the Father by nature could it not be said that Mary is the icon of the Holy Spirit by grace? I say: Now here I have a problem...and thank heaven I have my book on Saint Gregory Palamas by Metropolitan HIerotheos. Saint Gregory said: "All spritual life is the result and fruit of the energy of the Holy Spirit." Now we can say that our spiritual life is transmitted through Mary by the Graces endowed her, but we cannot say she is the 'source' of those Graces. You said: Does it not also help us to more fully appreciate the ecclesia as a "Temple of the Holy Spirit" - both Bridal and Maternal? I say: No! (I think you have a 'mother' complex :p ) Actually you are being poetic. That's nice! You said: If man and woman are both in the image and likeness of God, does it not follow that all of the virtues and qualities found in both originate in God - including Fatherhood and Maternity? I say: Are you thinking in terms of our 'carnel' nature, and the attributes that come along with that carnel nature, because I don't think that's what's meant when the Bible say's we are made in the image of God. But then again, by calling God our Father, we are relating to Him sort of in a carnel sense...or so I think?  Maybe He should be called 'Creator'. Oops!  I'm a Presbytarian. You quoted St. Ephrem: Father, Son and Holy Spirit can be reached only by their names; do not look further to their Persons, just meditate upon their names. I say: Meditate on their names, and the Holy Spirit will enlighten you. Saint Ephren said: If you investigate the person of God you will perish, but if you believe in the name, you will live. I say: To believe we can attain a 'knowledge' of God is Agonostism. St. Ephrem said: Let the name of the Father be a boundary to you, do not cross it and investigate His nature; I say: We cannot comprehend the nature of God. St. Ephrem said: Let the name of the Son be a wall to you, do not cross it and investigate His birth from the Father; I say: We cannot comprehend His birth from the Father. St. Ephrem said: Let the name of the Spirit be a fence for you, do not enter for the purpose of prying into Him. I say: We cannot comprehend the Holy Spirit. I also say: We may not be able to comprehend the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, but they have been defined by the Fathers of the Church. If someone chooses to use a definition that might be more comprehensible of the nature of the Holy Trinity, than I cannot oppose it. Especially considering that a Muslim convert said that the definition of Father and Son, is considered by the Muslims as a belief in more than one God..and who am I to hinder the conversion of those 'heretics'. Oops!  There I go again; a Presbytarian. :rolleyes: Zenovia
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
I never RE baptize anyone! That would be wrong, what I do,do is to baptize them conditionally. Stephanos I
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070 |
At church social hour this morning someone mentioned that the Presbyterians in the U.S. are now outnumbered by Muslims. That puts their contemplations in a different perspective for me. Presbyterians may be fast becoming irrelevant in the grand scheme of American religious thought.
|
|
|
|
|