This is the spin from the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan’s newsletter (note that the Buddhist bishop-elect is in the diocese of Upper Michigan, not Michigan proper):
Thew Forrester’s understanding of and engagement with a broad spectrum of religious traditions generated some conversation even before his election. Thew Forrester was involved for several years in active Buddhist meditation and founded the Healing Arts Center at St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Marquette where he serves as rector. But those most closely involved with the process of his nomination are not concerned by the speculation.
“Buddhism is a set of practices similar to Christian practices that became the property of monastics in the Middle Ages,” said Thompsett. “They are practices about meditation and awareness and compassionate living. They can be practiced without detriment to doctrine, and they are being restored today in all sorts of Christians. There are a number of bishops in the current House who engage in and have experience of Buddhist practices of mediation. This is not new.
“The question is ‘Is meditation a bad thing for bishops?’” asked Thompsett. “I think not. I think being spiritually grounded is essential for every leader in the church.”
This is such a juicy example of logical chaos that I’m tempted to skip lunch just to post on it.
Oh OK - I’ll just postpone lunch.
First: “...engagement with a broad spectrum of religious traditions…”
No, teaching comparative religion courses, or writing books on the histories of different faiths… THAT is “engagement with a broad spectrum of religious traditions.” Certainly nothing wrong with “engagement with a broad spectrum of religious traditions” if that’s what we’re talking about. But that’s not what we’re talking about. Forrester is an ordained Buddhist. He is not merely an observer of - a commenter on - a faith that is irreconcilable with Christianity; he is an active adherent and practitioner of one.
Second: “...generated some conversation…”
Well, yes and no. It certainly generated some conversation… but much of it was in the process of mocking the Episcopal Church’s latest episode of heresy and false teaching, and one centered around the election of a bishop, no less.
Third: “...those most closely involved with the process of his nomination are not concerned by the speculation.”
Well of course they aren’t, but this is like saying that those most closely involved with the electoral process in Venezuela are “not concerned by the speculation” that Hugo Chavez is running a dictatorship. It’s like saying that the folks who run NAMBLA are “not concerned by the speculation” that what they are engaging in is not “man-boy love,” but child molestation.
Fourth: “Buddhism is a set of practices similar to Christian practices that became the property of monastics in the Middle Ages.”
Are there some surface similarities in the meditative nature of the Christian monastic tradition, and Buddhism? Certainly. There are also some surface similarities in the theistic nature of Christianity as compared to Islam, but that doesn’t mean Christianity and Islam are, beneath the most superficial level, compatible in the least. Islam and Christianity are antithetical to each other. So are Buddhism and Christianity. THAT is the issue here.
Fifth: “They can be practiced without detriment to doctrine.”
This is weapons-grade idiocy. Buddhism denies Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and it only goes downhill from there. Please explain how one can practice Buddhism and with a straight face lay any claim to being a Christian.
Sixth: “There are a number of bishops in the current House who engage in and have experience of Buddhist practices of mediation. This is not new.”
Well certainly not, but that’s what we call begging the question: The issue is not whether there are some bishops in the HoB who are “extra-Christian” and even non-Christian in their beliefs and practices. That has been clear since the sixties during the Pike controversy, continued in the seventies with the Spong controversy, and has mushroomed ever since. I’d wager that fully a third of the HoB are either outright heretical in their beliefs and practices, or can have legitimate and serious questions raised as to whether their beliefs and statements can be defined as Christian.
That is not the question.
Neither is: “Is meditation a bad thing for bishops?”
The question is what we are to do about a House of Bishops, which purports to be a Christian body, that will no doubt add yet another non-Christian to its ranks; and not what we as individuals are to do about it, but what “we” as a communion and a global church are to do about it.
44 Comments •
Your responses are very good Greg, thank you. Hopefully, we can stay on topic as we deal with revisionists on this.