Of course not, and I think that paradox is actually a very important part of faith.
My quibble is really about Spong's language as I cannot see how you can have a non-theistic God.
That's more of less what I understand many indigenous people here hold. Which is frequently criticised without properly understanding it. "The problem with you <white> people is that you think everything is dead, and all you do is talk as if you know everything."
Of course not, and I think that paradox is actually a very important part of faith.
My quibble is really about Spong's language as I cannot see how you can have a non-theistic God.
I think this is where Spong as a theologian fails. Among orthodoxy, there is the notion of via negativa, that all language about the divine ultimately fails at fully grasping the complexity of the divine, the old quote from St Auggie, "If you can fully explain God, then you don't really know God."
While I very much agree with many of the criticisms of Spong’s writings expressed here and elsewhere in this thread, I think it’s worth passing along this 2013 quote from Spong as reported in the story Religion News Service ran when he died:
“The older I get, the more deeply I believe but the fewer beliefs I have,” he said, citing an adage once relayed to him by an older bishop. “And I think that’s probably where I am. I have a sort of mystical awareness (of God) that’s indescribable, but I can’t avoid it. When I’m asked to define God I’m almost wordless.”
Of course, he spilled a lot of ink on a lot of words about a subject on which he, toward the end, found himself “almost wordless.”
“The reason I’m not a Unitarian is not that I don’t admire their freedom to engage in theological discussion on all issues. But I think it’s too easy to be a Unitarian. Part of what it means to be a Christian is that you’ve got to wrestle with your own tradition.”
Spong unquestionably did lots of wresting with his own tradition, as have many others, including many on the Ship. But he did it as a bishop, and he did it very publicly (and many would say lucratively), and I think he often did it as though he had the final answers rather than as one who is still exploring and wrestling.
.....and then I put a toe into Kerygmania and want to shout in my best Spongist tones "it's not a ******* biography!!!" Spong may not have been right about everything but anyone trying to kill off that sort of crap gets my unequivocal support.
Although there are many disparaging comments about JSS in this thread, I find myself in accord with his mantra.
One comment was that he was not original. From his books that I have read, originality was not his claim. I think that he sought to bring scholarship out of academia. The mantra clearly refers to the ideas of Tillich and IIRC he claimed to have used Tillich.
Comments
That's more of less what I understand many indigenous people here hold. Which is frequently criticised without properly understanding it. "The problem with you <white> people is that you think everything is dead, and all you do is talk as if you know everything."
In another RNS article written in 2000, when he retired as Bishop of Newark, Spong said: Spong unquestionably did lots of wresting with his own tradition, as have many others, including many on the Ship. But he did it as a bishop, and he did it very publicly (and many would say lucratively), and I think he often did it as though he had the final answers rather than as one who is still exploring and wrestling.
It can be found on page 5 of his Memorial Service sheet
Although there are many disparaging comments about JSS in this thread, I find myself in accord with his mantra.
One comment was that he was not original. From his books that I have read, originality was not his claim. I think that he sought to bring scholarship out of academia. The mantra clearly refers to the ideas of Tillich and IIRC he claimed to have used Tillich.