The Religion of the Future? Or not.

40 Years ago, and more, "Liberal Protestantism" was confident that its modernity-accomodating theological program was the future of American Christianity. But that's not the way it has turned out. It seems that God-fearing, Bible-believing, Gospel-spreading theologies are the future. Imagine that.

Ok, it is pretty easy to find critiques of Mainline Protestantism from conservatives, evangelicals, and traditionalists within those denominations and from other evangelical Protestants. But here is one from a Catholic perspective, and it is pretty funny, and pretty much on target too. Here is an exerpt:

It is not entirely coincidental that at about the same time that Episcopalians, at their general convention in Columbus, Ohio, were thumbing their noses at a directive from the worldwide Anglican Communion that they "repent" of confirming the openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire three years ago, the Presbyterian Church USA, at its general assembly in Birmingham, Ala., was turning itself into the laughingstock of the blogosphere by tacitly approving alternative designations for the supposedly sexist Christian Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Among the suggested names were "Mother, Child and Womb" and "Rock, Redeemer and Friend." Moved by the spirit of the Presbyterian revisionists, Beliefnet blogger Rod Dreher held a "Name That Trinity" contest. Entries included "Rock, Scissors and Paper" and "Larry, Curly and Moe."

Go Presbyterians! Way to be "relevant."
It should also be pointed out, as the brilliant Dr. Bruce Marshall (former Lutheran, now Roman Catholic scholar at Perkins School of Theology, SMU) has consistently argued, alternative names for the Trinity such as "Source, Spring, Stream" or "Mother, Child, Womb" do not actually convey the same relationshp-idea as the traditional understanding of Father, Son, and Spirit (especially as articulated by St. Augustine in "The Trinity").



Blogger Stephen said...

One thing I never got the chance to ask Dr. Marshall was how Spirit showed relationship. I understood Father and Son, but someone new to the understanding of the Trinity might not figure out the Spirit's relationship to the other two. I believe the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox church split over this very issue

2:13 PM, July 20, 2006  
Blogger Daniel McLain Hixon said...

Stephen, I am reading Dr. Marshall's defense of the filioque right now. If you want I can email it to you?

6:30 PM, August 02, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home