Comments on: Christianity & “Contamination” http://www.religiocity.org/2009/06/24/christianity-contamination/ political theology in the city Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:28:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: matt http://www.religiocity.org/2009/06/24/christianity-contamination/#comment-75472 matt Sat, 18 Jul 2009 23:22:15 +0000 http://www.religiocity.org/?p=860#comment-75472 Sweet and glorious indeed, Collins. Like Paul, though, I have seen it happen, if only in seedling form. (Yes, I refer to Emanuel.) I like your use of "dialogue," a concept crucially important in discussions of both liturgy and tradition. Indeed, liturgy and tradition are both forms of dialog. One could search this blog on "dialog" and find this to be the case. Sweet and glorious indeed, Collins. Like Paul, though, I have seen it happen, if only in seedling form. (Yes, I refer to Emanuel.)

I like your use of “dialogue,” a concept crucially important in discussions of both liturgy and tradition. Indeed, liturgy and tradition are both forms of dialog.

One could search this blog on “dialog” and find this to be the case.

]]> By: Collins Aki http://www.religiocity.org/2009/06/24/christianity-contamination/#comment-75471 Collins Aki Sat, 18 Jul 2009 19:19:43 +0000 http://www.religiocity.org/?p=860#comment-75471 I loved this post! Would it not be a sweet and glorious thing, if the church was more cosmopolitan! Embracing different "shades" and "forms" of what Paul called those things that are "pure...lovely [and] of a good report", in a few words, that which is "genuine" and "human". Pluralism, is not so much as accepting what is wrong and even "condoning it", as it is, accepting, allowing, and even embracing people's freedoms to "be", allowing for dialogue to take place, so as to see, if, the different "shade" and "form" of another, is actually acceptable, and if not, the freedom afforded to another to have dialogue, is a Godly thing. When the church is, as it has historically been seen to be, a totalitarian-like regime (and "like" is being nice) that, in the immortal words of Chief Justice Robert Jackson, a force of "elimination of dissent" then, as Justice Jackson concludes, the church "soon finds [herself] exterminating dissenters [which are people!]". To some people this is good (hmmn, why do I have Rod Parsly in mind?), but the Gospel accounts show little of this. Jesus, Paul and Peter welcomed dissenters, doubters, the fearful, the outsiders, and they rebuked those who tried to eliminate them (i.e., the Pharisees, the Romans, and even themselves). Dissent should be welcomed. Difference should be embraced. When we accept that, we allow dialogue to take place. I hate to use the phrase "all progress is a negotiation"--because it has a business ring to it, but I think we can see it in a creative sense. Understanding comes through communication, which will never happen without dialogue. Sorry for the long post, but this really resonates with me! I loved this post! Would it not be a sweet and glorious thing, if the church was more cosmopolitan! Embracing different “shades” and “forms” of what Paul called those things that are “pure…lovely [and] of a good report”, in a few words, that which is “genuine” and “human”. Pluralism, is not so much as accepting what is wrong and even “condoning it”, as it is, accepting, allowing, and even embracing people’s freedoms to “be”, allowing for dialogue to take place, so as to see, if, the different “shade” and “form” of another, is actually acceptable, and if not, the freedom afforded to another to have dialogue, is a Godly thing. When the church is, as it has historically been seen to be, a totalitarian-like regime (and “like” is being nice) that, in the immortal words of Chief Justice Robert Jackson, a force of “elimination of dissent” then, as Justice Jackson concludes, the church “soon finds [herself] exterminating dissenters [which are people!]“. To some people this is good (hmmn, why do I have Rod Parsly in mind?), but the Gospel accounts show little of this. Jesus, Paul and Peter welcomed dissenters, doubters, the fearful, the outsiders, and they rebuked those who tried to eliminate them (i.e., the Pharisees, the Romans, and even themselves). Dissent should be welcomed. Difference should be embraced. When we accept that, we allow dialogue to take place. I hate to use the phrase “all progress is a negotiation”–because it has a business ring to it, but I think we can see it in a creative sense. Understanding comes through communication, which will never happen without dialogue. Sorry for the long post, but this really resonates with me!

]]>