When I see someone in the church who is beginning to develop
a critical view of church,... I know I am looking at a «terminal Christian.»
Not exact matches
I was struck by the resemblances between our growing
church and bonding features I had earlier seen in African villages: the
critical importance
of narrative, a coalescence
of world
view, the link
of myth and ethos.
Did you erase your previous blog in which you might have been
critical of the tradition / institutional
church, or did you just tell them that your
views changed, or how did you go about «reversing course» so to speak?
Given the form -
critical view of the tradition, it is evident that the way back from the tradition as we have it to the historical Jesus will be a long and arduous way, and there will be many instances where it will simply not exist, since much
of the tradition will have been created in the early
Church and will lead us at most to an aspect
of the
Church's understanding
of the risen Lord.
I suppose these
critical remarks boil down to the following questions: Can the sola Scriptura principle coexist with a
view of the
Church that is truly anchored «deep in history»?
In the past, I've been
critical of his bullying tactics and his
views on sex and gender, but lately it seems the influential Seattle mega-
church pastor has made plenty
of news on his own, as it was recently revealed he plagiarized, used
church funds to buy a spot on the New York Times bestseller list, and engaged in other alleged misappropriation
of funds.
It was a far more
critical response than the circumspect reaction offered by archbishop Diarmuid Martin
of Dublin, who said: «It is very clear that if this referendum is an affirmation
of the
views of young people... [then the
church needs] a reality check.»