Meanwhile, back at the ranch…

By -
…or, Something to keep you busy over the weekend…

…or, The Past Fortnight in the Theoblogosphere.

Hey, look at that – it really has been a fortnight this time! Sit back, relax, and prepare for some links worth visiting.

Perhaps you remember my post from just over a fortnight ago entitled “Roman Catholicism in the News, with some Protestant Reflections”. My first unit today will bring you an update on that whole situation.

  • All these links come from the NYTimes, so let’s begin with an editorial they published recently - The Politics of Religion. Here is a quote:
    The First Amendment also does not exempt religious entities or individuals claiming a sincere religious objection from neutral laws of general applicability, a category the new contraception rule plainly fits. In 1990, Justice Scalia reminded us that making “the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land” would mean allowing “every citizen to become a law unto himself.”
    By way of application, the present situation seems to have the RC hierarchy wishing that they were (again, as they were in the past) a law unto themselves. Of course, look at the RC scandals in Ireland from the last century for a vivid example of how well that works out.
  • The nuns are attempting to be “respectful” while also exercising some backbone. What does that mean? They’re going to Rome “on June 12 to open a dialogue with Vatican officials.”
  • It isn’t enough that the nuns are going to Rome; they’re also going on tour! That’s right, they are hopping on a bus and going cross country, stopping at various social and economic justice ministries with which they are involved to highlight the important work. All this has a nice political edge as well. Here are two examples:
    The sisters plan to use the tour also to protest cuts in programs for the poor and working families in the federal budget that was passed by the House of Representatives and proposed by Representative Paul D. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who cited his Catholic faith to justify the cuts.
    And again:
    Sister Simone, a lawyer who ran a legal clinic for the poor in Oakland, Calif., for 18 years, is not completely on board with the bishops’ religious liberty campaign. She said that financing for Catholic social services had increased significantly in the three years since President Obama took office: “We’re celebrating the religious freedom we have.”
  • Maureen Dowd never disappoints when it comes to biting sarcasm. One has to appreciate her mastery of the genre on display in her piece, “Is Pleasure a Sin?”, regardless of whether you agree with her positions on particular of the issues discussed. The particular topic is the CDF’s recent censuring of a book on sexuality by a Roman Catholic scholar (and professor emeritus at Yale…). Here is an excerpt:
    The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, which seems as hostile to women as the Saudi Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, spent years pondering it, then censured it on March 30 but didn’t publicly release the statement until Monday. The denunciation of Sister Farley’s book is based on the fact that she deals with the modern world as it is. She refuses to fall in line with a Vatican rigidly clinging to an inbred, illusory world where men rule with no backtalk from women, gays are deviants, the divorced can’t remarry, men and women can’t use contraception, masturbation is a grave disorder and celibacy is enshrined, even as a global pedophilia scandal rages. In old-fashioned prose steeped in historical and global perspective, Sister Farley’s main argument is that justice needs to govern relationships.
  • Finally (for today), we have a more positive note. Huffpo is reporting that leaders of the USA Franciscans are backing the nuns, calling the Vatican crackdown "excessive." The article has a great first line: "The brothers have come to the sisters' defense." Of course, the Franciscans have had their own run-ins with the Vatican over the centuries, and one hopes that their experience in such things will serve them well.

This stuff has once again ballooned to take up a lot of space, but here are a few other links just to balance things out for you.

  • For those of you who are interested in the Lord’s Supper or in Mercersburg theology, there is a new edition of Nevin’s Mystical Presence coming to print.
  • Darren Sumner posted some good work on Psalm 22 and Jesus’ cry of dereliction that is definitely worth a read.
  • Roger Olson threw up a brief post about how odd it is that churches do not make greater use of the (trained) theologians in their midst. He speaks from personal experience, and I would add my observation from various churches as well (note: observations are different than experiences). I’ve heard many Christians complain that academic theology has left the church, but I’ve always felt that it is equally true that the church chucked it out, or at least ignored it until it went away…
  • Bobby Grow, frequent commenter and longtime friend of the blog, posted about the state of evangelical exegesis and made application to folks like John MacArthur and David Jeremiah. It will probably come as no surprise to readers here at DET that these names were not lifted up as sterling examples...
  • Continuing with that theme, as it were, Jason Goroncy offers a lengthy quote from Bonhoeffer's prison fiction on bad sermons. Like Jason, I have heard far too many bad sermons, and Bonhoeffer's little vignette really gets to the heart of things. Go read it all, but here is the last line: "My dear Frau Direktor, did it escape you again that the pastor said what you wanted to hear; but didn’t preach the word of God?"
  • Jon Coutts posted a couple paragraphs from Barth on why religion is worse than theoretical atheism. The topic of atheism keeps popping up here at DET…
  • Speaking of which, here is a quote I found from Moltmann on the subject. There is more, but here is the best part, and I’ll leave you with this until next time:
    [O]nly an atheist who does not worship false religious and economic gods can be a good Christian. . . . [O]nly a Christian who believes in the crucified Jesus is free from the pressure to create gods and idols for himself.

==================================

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

So, You Want To Read Karl Barth?

By -
Image
Every now and then I am asked for advice about studying Karl Barth. So, I thought that I would share some of my standard advice here. But, before I do that, let me just say that I am by no means a Barth expert as compared to the people whose books I will mention below. I would be thrilled to find myself in their league one day, but as of yet that remains a distant dream. Still, I have been reading Barth for long enough, and under the supervision of a number of the scholars that I will mention below, that I think I can provide a decent orientation. I have never read Karl Barth before. Which of his books should I read first? Barth’s most famous work is the monumental 13-volume Church Dogmatics . Reading the CD with understanding is not an easy thing, so you definitely do NOT want to start here. Luckily, there are two smaller works by Barth that serve as helpful introductions to his work. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction - Based on the lectures that Barth delivered duri
Keep reading

So You Want to Read….Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

By -
Image
"I fear that Christians who stand with only one leg upon earth also stand with only one leg in heaven." "The exclusion of the weak and insignificant, the seemingly useless people, from everyday Christian life in community…may actually mean the exclusion of Christ; for in the poor sister or brother, Christ is knocking at the door." "Since ethical thinking in terms of realms is overcome by faith in the revelation of the ultimate reality in Jesus Christ . . . there is no real Christian existence outside the reality of the world." "People who reject their bodies reject their existence before God the Creator." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer Prelude Andreas Steinhoff [Attribution], via Wikimedia Commons I envisioned having a lot of time for blogging this summer, but that simply has not been the case - the last month has been a crazy one, to say the least. For two weeks, I was working at a theology summer camp of sorts, the Duke Youth Academy, and s
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 1, Day 5

By -
“You Wonder Where the Spirit Went”: Jenson and Barth on the Hiddenness of God By Peter Kline I am entering into a conversation that Jenson has already begun with Barth. In a constructive essay on the hiddenness of God (Jenson 2000), Jenson considers Barth’s position on the matter only to find it lacking. I want to explore why Jenson has problems with Barth on this issue, as well think critically about his constructive alternative. I will suggest that Jenson is only partly right in his diagnosis of Barth; he in fact overlooks the heart of Barth’s teaching on divine hiddenness. The reason is that he looks in the wrong place for Barth’s pneumatology. Jenson can’t find the Spirit in Barth not because the Spirit isn’t there, but because the Spirit is hidden . These considerations will open out into a comparison of Barth and Jenson on the logic of revelation. By “logic” I mean: what is discourse about God’s revealedness and hiddenness supposed to accomplish? Part I Jenson focuses his a
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 3, Day 1

By -
On the Monstrosity of Christ : Karl Barth in Conversation with Slavoj Žižek & John Milbank By Paul Dafydd Jones For a while, I hoped to frame this conversation in terms of a dramatic interchange – something along the lines of “A Slovenian philosopher, a British theologian, and a Swiss dogmatician walk into a bar…” Alongside an eye-wateringly hip assemblage of cinematic references, literary allusions, and comedic scenes – my early favorites being when Barth imagines a young adult novel, entitled Are you there God? It’s me, Žižek , and when Milbank waxes poetic about the Twilight movies – I wanted to engage some topics that would likely receive attention, were the authors to meet for drinks. Primarily, I envisioned an intense discussion of the logos asarkos and the logos ensarkos , with Milbank talking up the former category, Barth emphasizing the latter, and Žižek asking whether recent debates are but symptoms of secret puzzle, embedded in the Church Dogmatics – a puzzle that
Keep reading

Karl Barth on Hell, the Devil, Demons, and Universalism – A Florilegium

By -
Image
You know, all the most interesting topics. Although Barth often confessed that he didn’t find these questions particularly interesting. At best they might draw sideways glances, as it were, as one travels the theological road. But I found a number of places in the records of Barth’s later conversations that I thought folks might find interesting, so I’ve collected them here. And if you aren’t familiar with the term “florilegium,” here you go ! All these texts are from the first volume of Barth in Conversation , with pages numbers given in parentheses along the way. As usual, italics are in the text and bold is mine. Hell “Now we come to hell. You shouldn’t laugh! There is nothing to laugh at! What does hell mean? I think hell means to be in the place where you are once fore all damned and lost without ceasing to exist, without losing the image of God, being what you are but being damned and lost, separated from God, whose creature you are, separated also from your neighbor, from
Keep reading