Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): I should have said that Spong is the most high-profile spokesperson for "modern, liberal Christianity". The members of the Jesus Seminar are not activists, for the most part--and people don't know Marcus Borg from Marcus Welby, but the popularity of Spong's message gets him on Crossfire and into TV debate with Bill O'Reilly, and column space in many publications is his for the asking.
His books enjoy great popularity among conscientious laypeople unwilling to divest themselves of the label "Christian"--but who cannot, in good conscience, affirm the various creeds. He makes things easy for them.
I think his influence may be greater than you realize.

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): I sometimes think that if I'd been exposed to Spong (or someone like him) earlier in life, I may still be a believer.
Hard to say.

HelenM

Oh, I realize his influence may be great.

But I'm not sure you're right that people who read/think about theology would know about Spong and not the other members of the Jesus Seminar who write books and do debates, and talks etc. Borg did a seminar in my village in the last couple of years. Funk gave a talk in the suburbs not far from here, last year. They're out there - so I'm not convinced they aren't 'activists'. I think some of the others get targeted more by conservatives, because of the extent to which they theorize alternate scenarios for what happened 2,000 or so years ago than exactly what the Bible says. Spong talks about that but he also talks more generally about how he would like the church and humanity to be. I don't see him as so central in the 3rd quest for the historical Jesus as some of the other Jesus Seminar members. And perhaps his focusing less on historical reconstruction and more on his future vision means he has wider appeal; meaning he gets more TV coverage and more people - in general - read his books. But I think you may be understating the influence of the others, who, even if their names are not known, have had their ideas promulgated regularly by articles in TIME and other such general distribution media.

Helen

HelenM

That's the easiest thing to do - just shift frameworks. So, I'm not surprised if that's all 'conversion' seems to comprise, in the lives of some people.

It's much harder to change. But I do believe people can change.

Helen

Scandal

emotional,

I agree that part of what Jesus did in his life was challenge the rabbinical establishment which was exclusive and judgmental.

I believe Jesus Christ manifested love, compassion, forgiveness, non judgmentalism and inclusiveness in his life; e.g. dining with sinners, taking time to converse with children, etc.

This is the Jesus that speaks to me....

emur

I have observed only one case where a person who was mean became kind after becoming a Christian. Only one. It was back in high school. One of the bullies had a born again experience, and afterwards he treated people with kindness and respect.

All the rest, even those who gave up drugs and alcohol, kept their base traits. If they were mean before Christ, they were mean after Christ. They simply justified it with serving God by attacking others who didn't agree with them. If they were narrow-minded before Christ, they were so after Christ. If they were strict before, they were strict after. The kind Christians I know were always kind people. Christianity didn't cause them to become kind.

The New Man? You are correct.

I believe that the best approach, if someone is going to be a theist, is Sabine's approach. Think for yourself. Develop a faith that is unique to you. Don't depend on those in authority. They will only teach you their faith and in many cases bind you with it. And that is sick, really sick.

Mel

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): I see Funk and Borg--and most of the Jesus Seminar, as scholars, foremost...while Spong, himself no slouch in the scholarship department, is primarily a reformer. Different priorities.
They hold "seminars" and give "lectures"...he "goes on tour".
So to speak.

What you said..."Spong talks about that [a realistic look at the Bible] but he also talks more generally about how he would like the church and humanity to be."
Spong believes that there is a future for Christianity, but it must seize the day.

Personally, I think that if Christianity has a future, it's in the direction that Spong wants to take it.

Fr.Andrew

(Fr Andrew): Bingo! Bingo! Bingo!
:notworthy

ohwilleke

I attended an ELCA Lutheran Church until I went to college, and then, despite having serious doubts, attended an Episcopal Church all through college. I also spent about a year attending a Korean Presbyterian Church, and about a year attending a church affiliated with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), before stopping church attendance all together.

There are, broadly speaking, two groups within what is sometimes called the "liberal Christian" movement. One is the group who are truly Christian and who practice Christianity in a way not marked by fundamentalism or the American evangelical movement. The other group, one might call, philosophical Christians, among whom you would find many Unitarian Christians, very liberal Quakers, radicals in their mainline churches (like the Lutheran pastor in Scandanavia who said God did not exist, or Sponge and a couple of other famous Episcopalians).

Mainline Christians

The first group is by far the larger one. They make up about half of non-Catholic Christians in the United States in predominantly white denominations. Outside the United States (Canada, Europe, Australia, etc.), liberal Christians grossly outnumber evangelicial or conservative Christians among non-Catholic Christians, except in South America, where Catholicism is dominant and the principal alternative is evangelical Christianity followed by a small but growing percentage of people. The several predominantly African-American Christian denominations in the U.S. don't fit neatly into the liberal-conservative Christian divide as many of these churches on their face share theology with conservative Christians, but interpret it in ways that reach conclusions similar to many liberal Christian churches.

The principal denominations in this category in the United States are:

• United Methodist Church
  ELCA
  Presbyterian Church USA
  Episcopal
  The American Baptist Church (Northern Baptists)
  United Church of Christ
  Church of Christ (Disciples)
  Reformed Church in America
  Christian Reformed Church
  Church of Brethren
  Mennonite USA
  Friends –USA
  Cumberland Presbyterian

Much of the Roman Catholic church also falls within this description.

Christians in the mainline category generally, accept a "historical-critical" method of Biblical interpretation of the Bible which started to gain widespread credibility in 19th century Germany. This way of looking at the Bible recognizes that the authors of the Bible were human beings, that they were subject to the biases and limtations of their time, that they were capable of exagerrating or shading the truth, and they the means by which their writings were selected, copied and edited to comprise the Biblical canon involved both human imperfection and church politics.

These Christians also generally place significant emphasis on the notion that a "new covenant" between God and man was made through Jesus, which superceded the legalistic and often harsh prouncements of the Old Testament, at least for non-Jews. (The originals covenants were between God and the Jewish people, not mankind as a whole). Thus, these Christians place emphasis on the Gospels, which set forth this new covenant. The message of Jesus, in the Gospels themselves, was largely that respect for your fellow man, compassion, charity, healing care for others, and anti-materialism are at the core of the good life. These Christians do believe that God exists, and do believe that Jesus walked on the Earth and proclaimed God's word (basically on a "how else did this ball get rolling" theory), and do believe in the essential "Good News", i.e. that as a consequence of the life of Jesus that even sinful people can attain eternal life in Heaven with God.

Many sophisticated liberal Christians are skeptical of the Christmas story as literal truth and not after the fact interpolation, even though they honor it in their daily lives. But, they recognize that the Easter story and the ministry of Jesus, and not the Christmas story, is the essential part of the Christian message.

These Christians believe in the notion of God as a creator, but see the early chapters of Genesis as a poetic tribute to God's work, rather than a history, or even a meaningful outline as to how that process came about. It is the work of man and the assembly of the pre-monotheistic myths of the Jewish people, who now recognize God, rather than "superstitious spirits" and minor gods, as the spiritual force behind the Universe. They cast doubt about whether Genesis was ever even intended to serve as anything more than poetic praise.

These Christians do not place strong emphasis on the hellfire and brimstone message, or the regressive moral pronouncements of Paul, the Biblical letter writer who describes the early church who is the central figure of evanglical Christian efforts to return to that "early church". Many mainline Christians would say that Paul, while attempting to follow Jesus, imperfectedly understood the message, and while he improved on the moral code of the time, he was unable to appreciate the radical implications of the Christian message and hence some of Paul's writings are Paul speaking and getting it wrong, rather than inspired doctrine.

These Christians do not focus on obvious miracles, but instead look for God in what might otherwise be called coincidence, chance and good luck. A favorite modern parable of these Christians is of the man on his roof in a flood, who refuses the help of a canoe, a motor boat and a helicopter, because "God will save him." When he dies from the flood, he asks God why he didn't save him. God replies "I send a canoe, a motor boat and a helicopter to save you. What more could you have asked for?" They believe in prayer, but also believe that they cannot be passive, but must act in the world to help their prayers answer themselves. Their God is more likely to nudge the world along than to send lightening bolts and obvious miracles.

These Christians, in their prayer, are more likely to direct their prayers to "God", and don't place emphasis on a "personal relationship with Jesus Christ" or on being "born again". The emphasis is more on not sinning in the first place, than on redemption. Some "liberal Christians" believe that good works and how you live have something to do with salvation (especially "liberal" Catholics), but even those who don't feel that believe that being a Christian should inspire you to good works whether or not it impacts your salvation. The salvation of non-Christians is for the most part a matter that is never discussed.

Mainline Christian churches, with some exceptions, have their roots in the notion that everyone in "the community" is Christian (often as an established Church in Europe), and has been so from shortly after birth, as did their parents, grandparents, great-grandparents and so on before them. Having evolved in contexts where almost everyone is Christian, evanglism and bringing people to salvation, has never been a major issue. Since everyone is in the church, it is assumed that everyone will be saved.

The ability to "pick and choose" comes from a recognition that the Bible writers were human, and from the view of Jesus as a person who created a new covenant with man. The Old Testament rules, where they do apply, apply because they are illustratations of the general ideas proclaimed by Jesus, not simply because they were uttered. Sodom and Gomorrah no more binds new covenant people, than the Kosher rules of Leviticus.

Liberal Christianity pre-dates the reformation. In the 1300 years between the end of the Bible and the Reformation, there were both conservative and liberal movements within the Western Christian church that evolved into the Roman Catholic church. Some of the liberal writers (including, for example, Unitarian figures who said that the Biblical evidence for Jesus being divine was manufactured much later) were killed or punished. Others, like Saint Francsis, who could stay orthodox in his beliefs, while preaching a radical message, were revered in the pre-reformation church. Luther himself, sought to be just one of those liberal thinkers who would better the church itself, rather than causing a schism. The Reformation, with its abandonment of the weight of 1800 years of Catholic doctrine took away institutional barriers to a liberal view of Christianity (and Vatican II within the Catholic church rolled back much of the conservative impacts of the counter-reformation).

Much of liberal Christianity's development can be attributed to the institutionalisation of the church as well. As the church evolved, it went from being a rebel force, to the establishment guardian of the universal faith where it presided. It formed bureacracies and institutions, accommodated itself to the compromises that come with having to serve an entire population instead of an engerized religious vanguard, and educated generation after generation of clergy in the Greco-Roman and Rennaisance classics indoctinating the entire "management" of the movement in a pre-Christian humanist ethic which colored how the Bible was interpreted.

Modern science gave those educated leaders confirmation that their humanistic, historical view of Christianity, rather than the literalist, harsh yokel version, was the correct one.

Many of these Christians recognize a place in Christian life for a Christian tradition that continues beyond the Bible (which concluded about 200 AD) and gives meaning and weight to the developments within the church and Christian life in the next 1800 years. Saints like Francis of Assisi are viewed as having continued the drama of God acting in the world which the Bible chronicles. Founders of the various denominations are similarly viewed as having continued the process.

Within the Protestant branch of mainline belief, the rejection of Catholic formalism and rules, is seen as a parallel to the rejection by Jesus Christ of then existing Jewish formalism and rules. These Protestants see doctrines like purgatory, priestly celebacy, a rigid church hierarchy, absolute opposition to abortion, and the like, as contrary to the Christian message.

Liberal Christians are by and large modest in their expectations, not expecting everyone to be a saint. Belief and a good heart are good enough. The clergy manages the faith, and most members are just spear carriers.

Evangelical Christianity

It is useful to recognize that modern evangelical Christianity has its roots in the denominations that are now more liberal, and not visa versa. While there are thin links between the Anabaptist, and American Baptists, the Anabaptists most direct perogeny in the U.S. are the Quakers and Mennonites and Brethern.

The Puritans, who sought to make the half-Catholic Anglican church more thoroughly Protestant, were a more important influence.

Evangelical Christianity, while sometimes incubating briefly outside the U.S. (the founder of the Methodists, for example, was British), has seen explosive growth mostly in the U.S.

The U.S. has seen a series of conservative religious revivals on evangelical lines. The first was the Methodist movement, mostly shortly after the American revolution which has now lost so much steam that Methodists are considered mainline. The next was the Baptist movement, which in a couple of decades in the vicinity of the 1830s turned the South from being the most secular to the most religious region in the United States and has retained much of its cutting edge. The Holiness movement was next, and is best known now for spawning the Christian Missionary Church denomination. The Pentecostal Movement arose out of revivalist impulses around 1900. Similar movements gave rise to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormon Church, Church of Christ, and the Church of Christ Scientist. Most of these movements started as fervant conservative movements and gradually mellow over time.

The revivals take place largely in response to the "liberalization" of the older churches. Once churches get big and denominations get old, the mostly get more liberal, and slowly loose members, in part to secularism, and in part to conservative movements. Almost every mainline Christian denomination in the U.S. is shrinking, often dramatically (as is the hard to classify Church of Christ Scientist). Almost every conservative Christian denomination in the U.S. is growing. The Catholic church is growing, but only very modestly; actually white Catholics are shrinking like most liberal churches, while Hispanic Catholics are growing dramatically through immigration and higher birth rates.

Philosophical Christians.

The notion of philosophical Christians who follow the Christian ethics system and give meaning to the Christian tradition while remaining deistic, agnostic or atheistic, is a much newer development. It is a tiny minority of Christians (probably fewer than 1-2% of the total, i.e. a million or two people at most, if not less). It is born of attachment to the good things that Christianity accomplishes. "Sea of Faith" is one of the major movements in this area. People in the Unitarian Church who identify as Christian, but are exposed to the churches agnostic bent, are another.

Since the basis of faith for these Christians is rational and emotional acceptance of the philosophy, rather than a divine mandate, the imperative of not "picking and choosing" is much less. They try to be good first, and Christian second.

Sabine Grant

That is one of the most honest statements I have read in this forum.......I think reading Spong has allowed me to not feel so isolated in my faith. It is as if he put into words what I had been thinking and feeling for a long while. His investing his faith into promoting a constructive life radiating God's intent for mankind has been so encouraging to my faith. I can see now that I need not to choose between extremes to be whole and content spiritualy. I do not have to belong to a group or conform to a practise to nurture my faith. I only need to invest my faith into how I live my life and how I interact with others.
Reading his works was both liberating and reassuring.