Welcome to Stand Firm!

The Natural: You just can’t teach that in seminary

Wednesday, July 23, 2008 • 8:52 am


After the press conference some reporters persuaded Bishop Beetge to stay and converse a bit. There were a variety of questions. The most telling came toward the end of the session when a reporter who said he was shooting a documentary for “American television” tried to nail the bishop down on the question of homosexual behavior.

It was very difficult.

Bishop Beetge served on the Windsor Commission. He was loath to speak of his own opinion on the matter. He said, over and over again, in several different ways that the most important thing we can do is, and I am sure you can fill in the blank here, “sit down together”. He mentioned that the bible study group he attended that morning was very difficult. The sides are “hardening” he said. We must, he said, hold together in the midst of our tensions.

The reporter was not to be put off that easily. “What do you think personally though?”

The bishop continued to dissemble until he finally said that he was in the middle. He said that he can see the argument from both sides. He certainly sympathizes with those who feel they are not being included in the life of the church and he also can understand those who take a more conservative viewpoint. I cannot take a public position on either side of this.

“Is that what Jesus would do?” asked the reporter.

A good question, I thought, although the reporter seemed to be more sympathetic to Gene Robinson and Integrity

The bishop’s answer, however, displayed obfuscation of such practiced elegance that it could have only escaped the lips and originated in the mind of Anglican bishop.

“On the cross Jesus hung in the middle, between the earth and the sky, between humanity and God. In the same way, sometimes, the body of Christ must sometimes stand between two extremes for the sake of reconciliation.”

It just slipped out, effortlessly.

Notice how the bishop draws a parallel between his own unwillingness to go on record saying anything controversial and the atoning death of Jesus on the cross. Notice the subtle use of the word “reconciliation”. Just like Jesus reconciled God and humanity on the cross so this Anglican bishop stands for reconciliation by, well, standing for nothing.

You just can’t teach that.


27 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

Knuckleball.

[1] Posted by Greg Griffith on 07-23-2008 at 08:46 AM • top

I’d say, “smooth.”  But the better word is “oily.”

[2] Posted by Ann McCarthy on 07-23-2008 at 08:50 AM • top

WHAT A TOTAL WIMP!!!  God will spit you out of His mouth if you are lukewarm like that.  Why do you think all this is happening in the first place?  God wants us HOT or COLD.  Either be for Jesus, or be against Him.  Either teach and believe the Bible AS IS, or believe in something else.  But don’t go around “fence riding” - what a SISSY!!

[3] Posted by B. Hunter on 07-23-2008 at 08:52 AM • top

Matt:

You are making this up - because no one who is a Christian would make such a stupid statement about Jesus.  Right?  Right?  Please tell me that, Right?

Yes, Jesus never stood for extremes - when asked if he were the Son of God He never gave a definitive statement - he always was the middle of two extremes - which is why they never had to crucify him for his moderate stance on that.

I am sorry, but is this guy even a Christian?  Why in the world are we wasting time talking to people who don’t even know their own Faith? 

The more I read about Lambeth - the more I realize what Jesus was dealing with when he dealt with the Pharisees “The Blind Leading the Blind into the Ditch” “Whitewashed Tombs”  “These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me”...

[4] Posted by Eclipse on 07-23-2008 at 08:53 AM • top

Greg, there is no cricket equivalent of a knuckleball. Perhaps, the bishop is throwing a “googly”. tongue wink

[5] Posted by robroy on 07-23-2008 at 08:57 AM • top

Such Laodicean linguistic acrobatic gyration needs to be dispensed with.  In my 32 years in PECUSA/ECUSA/TEC I have lost count of the number of bishops I have actually spoken with who have all exercised similar verbal sophistry to avoid ruffling anyone’s feathers.  It’s well past high time for this.

[6] Posted by Athanasius Returns on 07-23-2008 at 09:10 AM • top

I would hope that he is bowling a googly rather than throwing it.

[7] Posted by Boring Bloke on 07-23-2008 at 09:11 AM • top

Bp Neil Alexander’s words and these made me think of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

Cheap grace means . . . forgiveness of sins proclaimed as a general truth, the love of God taught as the Christian “conception” of God.  An intellectual assent to that idea is held to be of itself sufficient to secure remission of sins. . . . the world finds a cheap covering for its sins; no contrition is required, still less any real desire to be delivered from sin.  Cheap grace therefore amounts to a denial of the living Word of God, in fact, a denial of the Incarnation of the Word of God.
Cheap grace means the justification of sin without the justification of the sinner.  Grace alone does everything, they say, and so everything can remain as it was before. . . .
Costly grace is the gospel which must be sought again and again, the gift which must be asked for, the door at which a man must knock. 
Such grace is costly because it calls us to follow, and it is grace because it calls us to follow Jesus Christ.  It is costly because it costs a man his life, and it is grace because it gives a man the only true life.  It is costly because it condemns sin, and grace because it justifies the sinner.  Above all, it is costly because it cost God the life of his Son: “ye were bought at a price,” and what has cost God much cannot be cheap for us.  Above all, it is grace because God did not reckon his Son to dear a price to pay for our life, but delivered him up for us.  Costly grace is the Incarnation of God.

[8] Posted by Jill Woodliff on 07-23-2008 at 09:11 AM • top

WOW is the only word that comes to mind on that expression of “in the middle”!

[9] Posted by TLDillon on 07-23-2008 at 09:13 AM • top

#6, Athanasius Returns, alas, the majority of our bishops have outgrown such historical documents. I’m afraid the current role model of modern Episcopal bishops is not Jesus, but ‘Soapy Sam’ Wilberforce. Unfortunately they esteem his rhetoric and political skills, not his devotion.

The Episcopal Church: Where vox populi is always received as Vox Dei.

[10] Posted by Matthew A (formerly mousestalker) on 07-23-2008 at 09:15 AM • top

This bishop is from South Africa, is that right?

[11] Posted by Katherine on 07-23-2008 at 09:30 AM • top

Heh-heh! One knows the vine by the fruit that it bears. Not all of the other bishops at Lambeth are spin doctors. This really needs to be disseminated - let the revisionist vine reveal its fruits for all to see and taste. The intelligent, orthodox bishops need to challenge words and actions like this. It would seem that they are well-prepared to do just that.

[12] Posted by Ralph on 07-23-2008 at 09:31 AM • top

It’s right up there with KJS’s “We stand where we have always stood.  At the foot of the cross.”

[13] Posted by Nasty, Brutish & Short on 07-23-2008 at 09:45 AM • top

I get really tired of the revisionists being so disengenous.  Twisting the meaning of words (“it all depends on what the definition of is is” - Bill Clinton) is cowardly and disgraceful.  What ARROGANCE!!

[14] Posted by B. Hunter on 07-23-2008 at 10:16 AM • top

The image that comes to my mind is that of Pontius Pilate washing his hands.

[15] Posted by Betty See on 07-23-2008 at 10:35 AM • top

Before the cock crowed, he denied Him three times.

[16] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 07-23-2008 at 10:46 AM • top

I am re-reading The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis. This morning I read the conversation with the Episcopal priest in that story. I am amazed to see how close this bishop has come to fictional conversation created by Lewis. The sentiment this bishop has expressed is spot-on with the book!

[17] Posted by Margaret on 07-23-2008 at 11:09 AM • top

[5] robroy,

I believe that the googly, although not exactly equivalent to a knuckleball, is probably the correct analogue. That is, it moves in an unexpected direction, although the knuckleball does that in flight, the googly does it when bouncing off the pitch.

Blessings and regards,
Martial Artist

[18] Posted by H. Potter (aka Martial Artist) on 07-23-2008 at 11:13 AM • top

“Hanging in the middle!?”

For some reason, I don’t equate going to your death for the sake of the world with trying to take the “via media.”

[19] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 07-23-2008 at 11:20 AM • top

My old rancher granddad used to say, “Slicker than snot on a doorknob.”

[20] Posted by hookemhooker on 07-23-2008 at 11:37 AM • top

Thank you Jill #8!!

[21] Posted by r3ussell on 07-23-2008 at 11:46 AM • top

Oh, I don’t know:

(1) Having a mind that is so open it is incapable of holding a conviction,
(2) Having a weak view of the atonement,
(3) Making the reconciling work of Christ a metaphor for “halting between two opinions” (1 Kings 18:21),
(4) Considering it more important to “hold together in the midst of our tensions” than to be clear about the Gospel and the teaching of Scripture.

I think that is precisely what it being taught in most seminaries (though not in the one I happen to be looking at out my window wink ).

Clear convictions, particularly about the nature of the Gospel and theological truth are being selected out when looking at candidates for ordination (and especially when candidates for bishop are being chosen) the way a livestock breeder seeks to eliminate certain traits from the herd.  And, unfortunately, bishops like Bishop Beetge are what you get as a result.

Robert S. Munday+
Nashotah House

[22] Posted by ToAllTheWorld on 07-23-2008 at 12:17 PM • top

I believe that Chesterton said that the purpose of an “open mind” is the same as an open mouth - to close it upon something.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

[23] Posted by Philip Snyder on 07-23-2008 at 01:21 PM • top

Nice to see what the contagion has produced, isn’t it?  Make no doubt, heresy is contagious and contaminating and destructive, first of belief and then of thought itself.  The is exempla gratia maxima.

[24] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 07-23-2008 at 04:54 PM • top

Bishop Beetge stopped short.  What he failed to do, was to go on and SPEAK THE WHOLE TRUTH, saying,

“The Way of Reconciliation that Jesus died for is the Way of the Cross.  Those who would be reconciled to God must also crucify of their sinful habits and desires… Repentance (abandonment of sin and bringing one’s life and deeds, even thoughts into agreement with God’s Word, Holy Scripture.  The Cross of Jesus Christ is the only way to be reconciled to God.”

[25] Posted by Theodora on 07-24-2008 at 11:00 AM • top

Why Bishop Beetge stopped short is another matter…
Did he attend a liberal seminary?  Have political ties, financial exigencies, power, perks and unscriptural idealogies grown like thorns over his regard of Jesus Christ and His Gospel of Redemption?  Has he lost his first love?  Does he need a revival in his diocese and his own heart?

[26] Posted by Theodora on 07-24-2008 at 11:08 AM • top

Matt,
  I think the problem is that they HAVE been teaching thaat in seminary!

[27] Posted by hopefull on 07-26-2008 at 12:11 PM • top

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.


Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere about the crisis in our church. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.