New Westminster has a conference coming up that, apparently, is about:
Church Depot (Diocese of New Westminster with the BC Synod Evangelical Church of Canada)-Ecumenical Multi-Faith Unit event. Spiritual But Not Religious!
Carriers of Memory, Crucibles of Commitment, Cultivators of Novelty—Possibilities for the Church in a Post-Religious Culture.
No, I have no idea what that means, either, but the second keynote speaker is keen on clarifying at least his part:
The Body as Church, the Church as Garden.
What might Creation, the Spirit of Gaia, our Living Dew-Hearted Mother Earth spinning in the Infinite Cosmic Mystery, be asking of the church today?
So there you have it.
David, you missed the bit where “Kolin” wanted people to prepare for his talk by “wondering into” the quesiton you posted.
Sorry – yes, that would have clarified things considerably.
It’s that whole business of “the Spirit is leading us to a new thing” again. It’s supposed to draw throngs of unbelievers into a new, up-to-date, reinvented church geared towards “post-religious” sensibilities. But I doubt it will succeed.
Anybody remember New Coke? It was the best thing that ever happened to Pepsi.
From Bill in Ottawa (who is my husband):
It’s obvious that these “dew hearted” folks have never lived in a place where the earth can kill you. I’d like to drop them off in Cambridge Bay for a few months and see how their attitude changes (substitute your local harsh environment – Northern Territory in Australia, etc)
At the risk of being nit-picky, isn’t Gaia the “inanimate lava-hearted mother planet”? I mean, unless you believe Edgar Rice Burroughs, the bulk of our planet is rock, either in a solid or liquid form.
Kate: right on. If Earth is our Mother, she should be reported to Children’s Aid.
It gets to be self parodying after a while, doesn’t it?
“What might Creation, the Spirit of Gaia, our Living Dew-Hearted Mother Earth spinning in the Infinite Cosmic Mystery, be asking of the church today?”
Romans 1:25 “they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” ESV
There is an interview with Wm. Young, author of the Shack, on CBC which some of you might be interested in. It is on “The Hour” with George Stroumboulopolis which you can find on the main CBC page on the bottom left hand side.
Matthew: actually the Earth’s core is composed of molten and solid iron. But “our Iron-hearted Mother Gaia” doesn’t quite have that touchy-feely sound to it. . .
Ichabod!
1Sam 4:21
And perhaps Lymworth is identifying the deity we are singing to in verse 3 of the “revised” (nay, scandalized) version of “Joyful Joyful We Adore Thee” (#425) in the 1998 Blue Common Praise Hymnal: “God our Father, and our Mother.” I guess there goes Rom 8:29!?! And I was so greatly comforted by “Christ our Brother.”
Does anyone out there make any connection to the above nonsense with the likes of Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Rockerfeller, and several other heavy hitters, not to mention the UN Millenium project?
Oh yea I forgot to mention the big Bishop’s parade in London during the last Lambeth.
“What might Creation, the Spirit of Gaia, our Living Dew-Hearted Mother Earth spinning in the Infinite Cosmic Mystery, be asking of the church today?”
Had the question been “what is Gaia saying to the Church”, I might have suggested:
I’m the Urban Spaceman, baby
(here comes the twist),
I don’t exist.
Gordon might be good poetry but way off the mark.
there was a man from Sarnia
who loved a queen from Narnia
He didn’t believe that gaia was she
Till the Lion roared throughout the region
do not forget, that one of his pets
was a pig loving meanie called legion.
Some of these people illustrate the problem with being too open-minded – you never know what kind of trash someone will put in an open mind. Alternately, you could say that there’s a line between an open mind and a hole in the head.
I agree with Charles in #8.
If there were such a thing as this Gaia or whatever, S/he/it would, laugh a scornful laugh, shake their head and say to the church, “He must increase, I must decrease.”
Stuck [#16], I was quoting a song by the Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band. It was written by Neil Innes, so I can’t claim any credit for it.
As to the rest, I would refer you to Paul’s comments in 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.
#9 Charles I finally found the interview you mentioned. Thanks! When I read the shack it was like being washed all over again the theme of relationship came through to me loud and clear. I have since read (in Anglican Planet) heard from my Anglican Priest and several other “learned” critics how bad this book is. So I read it again this time I was not free to enjoy and revel in the joy. I had to put on the eyeglasses of critique. I still enjoyed the book but did not get the same sense of relationship. and found it a sad read. Thanks to you I have just listen to the author speak about it being about relationship “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and me,” and me and thee, then three, then thirty, It all came back especially Jesus’ prayer wich I have mentioned before “That they all may be one, as we are one.” No wonder Loosofar is shifting tactics and becoming transparent. Relationship and its attendent understandings is lost in the church and needs to be found ….desperately.
Yes ANiC and ACNA I’m talking to you
Perhaps they have not learned from the past:
Young man, the secret of my success is that an early age I discovered that I was not God.
– Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Thanks for posting about us Lutherans. We share in the challenges of these times. At first I was excited about a Lutheran Synod exploring renewal (cool!) – and then I found out that we were turning to Gaia for moral support. Kyrie Eleison.
Stuck in Toronto #20:
It may interest you to know that “The Shack” was highly recommended by Eugene Peterson, author of The Message – Version of the Bible.
The Message Version is for the most part, so far off base when compared to the King James and other ‘older’ versions that I can only consider it to be another way that loosafur is attacking the Holy Scriptures.
These people that are writing this “stuff” are all in the same boat..the boat of “New Age Religion”….
I have had it said to me by a member of the Bible Society that it is alright to have these ‘different’ versions because if even one person reads one of the ‘different’ versions and comes to know Jesus Christ, then the book has done its’ work….. Really!!!
Is that really correct? What about the countless numbers that read these watered down versions and become watered down themselves?
I have sat in a Pentecostal Church and listened to the Pastor refer to God – He or She! I thought I had misunderstood the words until five minutes later when the same words were repeated. This false doctrine and teaching is coming out all around us and we must be on guard always and we must become more bold to speak out against it when it happens.
I think that it is fine to read The Message, as long you read it with the understanding that it is a paraphrase, and not a translation. I like Peterson’s writing, especially “Eat this Book” and the other books subtitled “A conversation in Spiritual Theology”
# 19 Gordon I have read you requested reference and I fear that once again I have caused confusion
My counter #16 to your (Now Quoted) poetry was a quick stab without sufficient thought, allow me to explain.
your poem indicated that gaia did not exist
mine was (now that I have read it again) a pretty silly attemt to use Lewis’s allegory to establish that there are spirits by many names. In case you are not familiar with the Lion witch and wardrobe -the queen is evil, the lion is god and His statement (the last two lines) refers to loosafur, and his minion “legion” whom Our Lord dispatched into the pigs. If this was understoon by you than I’ll have to have further direction regading your reference.
#23 … Sorry Gerry I love “The Message” I normally use it to make quotes with but always from reference of my dog eared ol KJ.
Again with apologies, I have never found a single contradictory or inflamatory translation while reading it. As a matter of fact I just last week picked up a parallel NIV/Message published by Zondervan. It is hugely fun.
Brother please read this next in the loving context that it is sent – “perhaps you are holding the reigns just a little to tight.”
My horse-back instructor the first time I attempted to ride, and ride I did, through the air with the greatest of ease.
PS Gerry, If you have not read the Shack I beg you to do so. My Experience was first in trying to read Dr. Packers “Knowing God” it was hard going took me almost four months. In the end I still wasn’t sure if I understood. (limited Education) I than came across “The Shack” read it in two nights -laughed, cried, prayed and shivered. But guess what, I felt I knew God. So back I go to Dr. Packer’s book, read it again and I thought they were talking the same, the only difference I found was one was a scholarly work the other was a magnificent Grace inspired comic book.
Dr. Packer – Any comment?
Stuck (#27), I read The Shack. I’m not as negative about it as some, but haven’t been impressed by William Young’s (the author) answers to theological questions in interviews. If I was going to “beg” someone to read a book, there are many I would choose before The Shack; including Packer’s. I suspect The Shack will be largely forgotten in a few years. Even as a comic book, it will be long outlasted by Batman, Superman and Watchmen.
#28 I doubt very much that Dr. Packer reads the blog.
Kate – O ye of little faith
Gerry – Different strokes for different folks
“What might Creation, the Spirit of Gaia, our Living Dew-Hearted Mother Earth spinning in the Infinite Cosmic Mystery, be asking of the church today?”
Well, here’s one answer, courtesy of the World Wildlife Fund:
http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/images/misc/2/911tsunami-large.jpg
The tagline to this poster reads: “The tsunami killed 100 times more people than 9/11. The planet is brutally powerful. Respect it. Preserve it.”
Nice, eh?
Stuck-
I have read the shack and my opinion remains unchanged.
If you were to get right into the nitty-gritty of the different versions, using perhaps the KJV as your “base” and then comparing, verse by verse (which would take forever) you would see where I am in my statements.
Paraphrasing and changing a little bit here and a little bit there are the basis for some of the challenges that the Christian Church is facing today and some, some indeed, even lead to false doctrine.
STUCK: I don’t have time right now to give you examples, however, will sit down over the next few days and do up a list of Scriptures that you can make comparisons with and then maybe you will see where I am and why I am there.
No anger here, just the straight way.
Blessings.
ps: I only fell (or got thrown) twice by a horse or horses, but in my 9 months of riding school, I learned that if you get thrown, you get right back on the horse and continue on. The Shack “threw me” when I read it and when I checked some of his statements against Scripture, it threw me even more. Maybe, as you say, the reins are a bit tight, however, if both are tight equally in length, it will keep you on a straight course.
Stuck [#25], Paul is not entirely consistent on whether idols have real existence or not. I would suspect some do, and are demonic, while others (e.g. Gaia), are fictions. Our positions therefore seem compatible within their proper contexts.
By the way, the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is not entirely orthodox, unlike much of Lewis’s work. The witch’s demand for Edmund’s blood and Aslan’s offer of himself as a substitute strongly suggests that Lewis saw the Atonement as God offering a ransom to the devil.
Gordon, I argue not. I have always thought that idols were man made, as in “Thou shalt create unto thyself any graven image”
when man takes these idols and begins worshiping them idols such as mammon, eros, mars etc. they become false God’s as in “Thou shalt have no other god’s before Me” I believe the Hand of Satan is at work.
As for Mr. Lewis, could it not be equally said that God offered a ransom for Edmond as in Matthew 20:28
just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
1 Timothy 2:5-6 (New King James Version)
5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,
I respect your comments and seek clarification if I am wrong
#33 Gerry,
I look forward to your dispatch of incorrect translation in The Message. I also would dearly love to have a quote or two from The Shack that threw you, meaning, that contradicted scripture.
Perhaps you should get my E-mail from Kate and send it directly as we shouldn’t tie up the thread, so to speak.
Stuck (#36), I know the question was not directed to me, but when has that ever stopped me from responding. As you doubtlessly know, the major objection to The Shack comes from its presentation of God as a woman/mother; which then cuts the author off from all of the biblical imagery of God as a father. Most of the critics are well aware that God as father is an anthropomorphism (in some senses at least), but, nevertheless, that is how He presents himself to man in His Word. I had occasion to bring up The Shack earlier this evening in the OT Intro class that my wife and I are auditing (the other students are working towards ordination) and the book definitely isn’t popular with that crowd.
Stuck [#35], the problem with LWW is not that Aslan offered Himself in place of Edmund, it’s that the witch claimed Edmund’s blood as of right, and Aslan accepted this.
This is unorthodox. Satan has no rights before God, however much he might claim them.
Gordon, Scripture says (from memory) that Satan will be loosed for a short time. Satan was given the title of Prince of this World this speaks of some rights. Jesus acknowledges that He cannot remain were the devil resides. To Both you and Warren I suggest that LWW and The Shack are both allegorically intended and should be looked at in that context. The fact that criticizism of both these works invariably stems from learned theological thought leads me to my now familiar phrase “You may be holding the reigns to tight” Finally your critiques seem to dismiss this (allegorical) circumstance. Do you believe that there will be a wedding Feast? that in fact A WF follows an actual wedding ceremony? Which is proceeded By Jesus walking up the aisle with His Bride. Of course not. Why be so heavy handed with two of my favorite reads?
Stuck (#39), it is because I accept The Shack as an allegorical work than I am not a vigorous critic of it (and am not one who warns others not to read it). If I saw it as other than allegory, I would have greatly regretted the time I spent reading it. If you want see a “heavy handed” treatments of the book, there are many URLs I can point you to. As I said earlier, I am more concerned with some of the things I have heard the author say (or not say) in interviews.
Warren you jumped in with quotes including “which then cuts the author off from all of the biblical imagery of God as a father.” I presume you meant reader instead of author, in any case “The Father has been allegorically depicted in many ways Michaelangelo, as a storm, CS Lewis as a Lion, Holy Scripture as a sheep herder, Bride groom, burning bush etc. and etc. all for the purpose of edifying the theme of the narrative. I personally loved Papa/Abba
and very much enjoyed the picture of God that the author painted. Far and away beyond His experience and Skill level therefore I believe that Grace abounded with this man as he produced this work.
I am aware of some very “Heavy handed, ignorant, and sometimes laughable negative comments. I am pleased the term does not apply to you personally. However you and Mr. Arthur did not come across as defending fans of the books. Which as I said are two of my favourites therefore you called upon my natural defence mechanisms, which, thanks be to God for this BLOG, I am learning to control a little more each day.
BTW gentlemen if you were writing an allegory describing God to the young people of today knowing that the educated have deemed this generation as the first without any moral absolutes. How would you describe Him?
Stuck (#41), I meant author.
Stuck (#42), I’m currently reading a five-book series that doesn’t do a bad job; The Binding Blade by L.B. Graham. I liked C.S. Lewis’s Space Trilogy as well. In addition to raising my own children, I have often taught Sunday School and worked in kid’s clubs, and never saw a need to allegorize.
I really like Lewis, but I never finished reading the Space Trilogy. Maybe I should try again…
Stuck (#42), since I brought up C.S. Lewis (#43), I should have mentioned two of his other works: Till We Have Faces and The Pilgrim’s Regress. Pilgrim’s Progress is still a good read as well.
Why go to such a workshop if some are led by non-Christians? You can find new age stuff in the stores. Can you call someone who doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ a Christian? Lots of pagans and heathens in Canada then.
Warren #43 I have often taught Sunday School and worked in kid’s clubs, and never saw a need to allegorize.”
Perhaps that is why you were less than enthused by “The Shack” Personally I love allegory (see the new Orphans Blog “Anglican Orphans”) especially the ones Jesus told.
Stuck (#47), TitusOneNine just put up a post about The Shack. As I haven’t seen it discussed elsewhere on an Anglican website, I thought you might be interested:
http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/25208/#more
Hi Warren your Reference left me with more questions than answers.
“One can hardly imagine Young’s “Papa” eliciting the same kind of response” Obviously Mr. Wax is not familiar with the thousands of profound responses and claims of changed lives etc.
“The God of the Bible cares deeply how he is portrayed” I would like to see a reference to this one.
“God speaks of there being no roles of hierarchy in the Trinity. God even submits to humans.” part A “For we are one” -Jesus. part B.-John 3:16
“One can hardly imagine Young’s “Papa” Mr Wax doesn’t seem to know what “Abba” means.
As I have alluded to in the past some people have the bow drawn to far.
Stuck (#49), I think God created you with an extra share of question genes. Why don’t you post your questions on TitueOneNine or Trevor Wax’s blog site?