P
Padrej
Guest
Rabbi White Is a neat man, he calls himself a “Jesuit rabbi,” he is a man of incredible knowledge and great sense of humor, the seminarians will learn a great deal from him.
- Status
J
jmcrae
Guest
Right, you learned it from a Rabbi - someone who is an expert on Judaism.
I would consider it very odd to be taught about Judaism by a Protestant pastor. (Or a Catholic priest, no disrespect intended.) I expect Protestants to know about Protestantism, and Catholics to know about Catholicism. For the Jewish point of view, I rely on the local Rabbi.
I have absolutely no problem with learning Judaism from the Jews. It is a wholesome and educational occupation. I have often dropped in at the Akiva Academy to hear the teachings.
What I was objecting to was a Protestant setting himself up as an authority in the matter.
P
Padrej
Guest
I don’t by any means claim to by an authority on the matter. I am fortunate to have a Jewish scribe who helps me with my teachings. I mentioned that in a previous post also; so I don’t know where you are getting that I am “setting my self up as authority.” This same scribe also instructed me in how to use the Jewish texts he uses so I am using what he uses. It would be as Larkin31 pointed out I would be telling what I learned.Right, you learned it from a Rabbi - someone who is an expert on Judaism.
I would consider it very odd to be taught about Judaism by a Protestant pastor. (Or a Catholic priest, no disrespect intended.) I expect Protestants to know about Protestantism, and Catholics to know about Catholicism. For the Jewish point of view, I rely on the local Rabbi.
I have absolutely no problem with learning Judaism from the Jews. It is a wholesome and educational occupation. I have often dropped in at the Akiva Academy to hear the teachings.
What I was objecting to was a Protestant setting himself up as an authority in the matter.
P
Padrej
Guest
May I also add jmcrae, my grandfather was Jewish, so I think I know a bit more on the culture than the average Protestant on the street.
Put it this way, if you are married, you would know how your spouse would think on quite a bit from living with her for some time so it would be fair to say, that you could educate a stranger about your wife because you have intimate knowledge of her. She could educate further because she is “her” and you are not. This is why I consult the scribe.
F
FrJohnB
Guest
I think if you read Padrej’s posts you would see that he was not setting himself up as an expert.Right, you learned it from a Rabbi - someone who is an expert on Judaism.
I would consider it very odd to be taught about Judaism by a Protestant pastor. (Or a Catholic priest, no disrespect intended.) I expect Protestants to know about Protestantism, and Catholics to know about Catholicism. For the Jewish point of view, I rely on the local Rabbi.
I have absolutely no problem with learning Judaism from the Jews. It is a wholesome and educational occupation. I have often dropped in at the Akiva Academy to hear the teachings.
What I was objecting to was a Protestant setting himself up as an authority in the matter.
I however could educate someone on the Pope but I by no means am the Pope so I hardly see your comparison as he was setting himself up as an authority. I can only educate up to a point on the Papacy as a Roman Catholic but that hardly makes me and authority because I am a Roman Catholic Priest. If I want to actually learn about the Pope I would have to go to the Vatican.
I think you need to use a bit of common sense here. By this I mean, you did not question Padrej as to his expertise or background before making the above highlighted passage. When I wanted to know about Padrej I sent him a personal message and got to know him. I think WE ALL need to do a bit more of this, myself included.
C
Contarini
Guest
On what do you base this claim? It’s completely alien to my experience as an Episcopalian, and I technically lived in Spong’s former diocese for three years. (I say “technically” because I lived near the county line, which was also the diocesan boundary, and attended a parish in the Diocese of New Jersey–I never actually joined the parish because during my entire time in New Jersey I was very much in doubt as to whether I would remain Episcopalian.) Since you say “the Episcopal church,” you need to point to some kind of official statement holding up Spong. I’m pretty confident there is no such statement. But even in a weaker form, your claim doesn’t match my experience. The most liberal Episcopal clergy of my acquaintance have never said more than that Spong has provided some important food for thought in an overly strident way. I have certainly known Episcopal laypeople who greatly admired Spong, but they have been a distinct minority.
Spong is an extremist and is recognized as such even by most liberal Episcopalians. I can’t see how you can justify your statement that he is held up as the “end all beat all theologian.” Generally I hear conservatives talk about him a lot more than liberals. Liberals for the most part find him an embarrassment (though as I said, there are certainly those who admire him). Conservatives, inside and outside the Episcopal Church, are unfortunately obsessed by him in my opinion. (This includes me to some extent, though it’s an obsession I try to resist. If I’m going to read liberal theology, there are a lot more interesting folks out there!)
I don’t think all conservatives hold up Peter Toon either. If Spong is the equivalent of Peter Toon, then your statement about his importance in the Episcopal Church is certainly not justified.
I understand that his conscience didn’t give him much choice. But his conscience impelled him to break with the Episcopal Church, not simply to teach things that the Episcopal Church found distasteful. Iker very clearly chose to break communion with the Episcopal Church as a whole. Certainly there was increasing pressure on the dioceses that did not ordain women, which may be what you have in mind.
[QUTE]I will admit that I digressed at that point. One of my pet peeves is to claim to be “inclusive” and not be.
I understand that. My annoyance at some of your posts stemmed from my sense that you were taking out your “pet peeves” on me, assuming that because I’m Episcopalian I must share the views of the currently dominant faction. I thought this was unfair and didn’t want to legitimize it. But we seem to be past that and I won’t rake it up further! I appreciate the gracious tone of your most recent post.
No one is entirely inclusive, which is why “inclusive” is a bad slogan to use.
I don’t think I said it was a misquote. I disagreed with how Fr. John was using the quote. I did wonder why he was quoting the KJV, but that didn’t seem very odd to me because I know Scripture passages best in the KJV myself, having grown up on it and done a lot of Scripture memorization.
But again, let’s put that behind us. I understand why you treat Episcopalians with some suspicion. And my own reactions to you are shaped by the frustrations of living in a relatively conservative diocese and seeing non-Episcopal Anglicans compete with us rather than trying to work with us.
In Christ,
Edwin
I
izoid
Guest
I find it dangerous to learn about a people group from someone that does not represnt that group. Most of the misunderstanding about Catholic teaching and practice within protestantism is a direct result of this behavior. They teach each other what they think we believe yet have a very limited and incomplete understanding of what we actually believe. I think this is the point that is being made. A protestant is not the best source to learn about Judaism just as a Catholic is not the best source to learn about Baptists. This is only common sense.
As a Catholic, you should certainly know about the pope and be qualified to teach on the Churches beliefs and practices regarding him. It is not necessary to go to Rome to learn about the pope. However, I would question your ability to fully represent the teachings and beliefs of The Mormon Church.
P
Padrej
Guest
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
yes, and as Catholics we have our roots in Judaism. it is already included in the teachings of the Church.
father Corapi one time criticized the Church for allowing people of other faiths teaching in Catholic schools. he said we should be ashamed and no wonder we are in mess today.
he also said that Jews would not allow a Catholic to teach in their schools or for that matter any other faiths does.
T
tweetymom
Guest
Padrej and FrJohn:thumbsup:
. Let me say that I have enjoyed both of your posts. It is really cool to read them both. God Bless you as you continue on your journey with our Savior.
F
FrJohnB
Guest
Iziod
Did you even read Padrej’s comments on how he teaches and who his relations were? The point that was being made was that Padrej was setting himself up as an expert on Jewish thought/theology when he had already posted that he uses a Jewish scribe to assist him and that his grandfather was Jewish. No more no less. You are making this into an argument that attacks him and others of his kind and that is not the point of my post or his.
Under NORMAL circumstances you would be correct that a Protestant or Catholic would not be the best source to come to to learn about Jewish thought. If I wanted to hold a Passover Seder, I would certainly consult a Jewish Rabbi FIRST. That is only common sense. However, lets take this a step further; you drive a car or I drive a car, can’t we teach another to drive the car even though we did not make the car. I am not going to get the president of Ford motors to come and teach my nephew how to drive when I have the knowledge to do so from my own training. If you have been properly trained by a Rabbi to teach a certain subject why would you need the Rabbi to come back and teach it every time?
Yes I can teach a person about the Papacy to a certain degree, but I am not the Holy Father so I do not have intimate knowledge of what makes him “tick” so to speak so I could not FULLY tell about him. I am not going to invite him to a RCIA class just so that he can tell them about the papacy either. I am going to use what knowledge I have to teach what I know. You point out that you would question my ability to teach the beliefs of the Mormon church; fine, I may not be able to FULLY teach them but from their own literature and teachings and from speaking to Mormons one could give a good overview of what a Mormon would believe. Do we not also teach in our basic apologetic classes geared towards the laity what other Protestants believe on things? Watch EWTN and periodically you will hear something about the Protestants think thus and such; who made them the experts? I have seem many posts on this thread about the Lutherans believe “x” but this is not what the Lutherans currently believe, but yet we Catholics continue to think that what Martin Luther thought is what today’s Lutheran thinks. So my question is where do you propose that this stops?
I
izoid
Guest
I can’t tell you where it stops but I can say that for me it starts by knowing the credentials of the one speaking. If I want to learn true Jewish thought I am not going to go to a protestant, I am going to go to a Rabbi. I think that is what JMcrae was saying and I agree with him.
I think we can all know the basics of other groups but to understand their thought we need to go to the source. Knowing Jewish thought, or Catholic thought, is much different than teaching basic theology. With that said, I do think that Padrej’s posts are balanced and fair. In fact, I find him to be very honest and open and appreciate him and his style.
Please understand, I was a protestant for 20 years. Involved in leadership in many churches and on the pastoral staff of one. I taught classes and attended a conservative protestant university. I used to dislike, very strongly, the Catholic Church. Not because of what she taught but because of what I was taught that she believes. You see, it was wrong and false. It was taught by very learned men who committed their lives to apologetics and outreach, yet they were dead wrong. If I had taken the time to speak with a priest I would have learned the truth 20 years ago.
J
jmcrae
Guest
My grandfather was a Mason, but I have to admit that I know almost nothing about the Masons - he didn’t discuss it with me. I knew that he participated in circuses at least once a year, and attended weekly meetings, and I saw him wearing his Masonic regalia, but what he believed in, or how he applied it to his decision-making was never revealed to me.
So, even claiming that your grandfather was Jewish raises questions. Were you raised in his home for a significant part of your childhood, so as to experience a full immersion into the Jewish way of life? Did he sit down with you and discuss his beliefs with you? Or, as it was in my case, was it just a matter of, Grandpa does this, it is his own peculiar habit, and you shall mind your own business without criticizing or questioning him; you have homework to do and friends to visit with, and Grandma has cookies in the kitchen for you, so hush your mouth and run along and play.
Right.
In our Diocese, Seders are forbidden, because the Rabbi has asked that Christians please not attempt to imitate what Jews do. We respect his wishes.You are a 'car driver" and you are teaching your nephew to drive a car. What you do and what you are teaching your nephew to do are the same thing. (Although, having attempted it once or twice, I think there is more to teaching driving than just knowing how to drive.)
Because I don’t believe in it, and I don’t have any practical experience in it. He does.
In this case, you know what Catholics are supposed to know about the subject. You have probably at some point in your life been on a pilgrimage to Rome and have participated in a Papal audience, or else you have been to a World Youth Day and participated in a Papal Mass, and you can describe the experience to the RCIA participants.
Actually, I have issues with that sort of thing, too. If someone wants to learn what Protestants believe, the best people to ask are the Protestants.
D
Deconi
Guest
Two probs;
Masons aren’t in the habit of discussing their ‘secret handshakes’…
100 Protestants will give you 100 varieties of ‘thought’ BUT cite the same Book as the source!
With respects…
Masons aren’t in the habit of discussing their ‘secret handshakes’…
100 Protestants will give you 100 varieties of ‘thought’ BUT cite the same Book as the source!
With respects…
C
Contarini
Guest
But authoritative voice for what? Not for Episcopalians, by his own admission. Never mind that he could claim to be an authoritative voice for Episcopalians all day long and it wouldn’t be true. By using the phrase “believers in exile” he makes it clear that in his judgment *no *expression of institutional Christianity currently existing teaches the doctrines he favors. And the parts of Why Christianity Must Change or Die that I’ve managed to get through bear out my interpretation.
I have no idea how any of this is supposed to show that he’s a mainstream or representative Episcopal theologian.
Well, as a matter of fact Williams was the bishop of Monmouth at the time. But if anyone as learned and well-respected as Williams said the sorts of things about me that Williams says in that piece I would want to hide under a rock and not come out for a thousand years. Did you miss the bit where he said that Spong’s questions were the sorts of questions asked by an intelligent high-school student?
I’m flabbergasted that you would cite this devastating critique as an endorsement of Spong. Of course he maintains a level of courtesy, but saying that he finds Spong’s theses full of an “astonishing” level of “confusion and misinterpretation” is pretty strong language. In fact, if Spong didn’t so thoroughly deserve the chastisement I’d say he was straining the bounds of courtesy. As it is, I admire his restraint and pungency!
I agree with Williams entirely that Spong raises questions that need to be addressed. But I also agree with him entirely that Spong’s way of raising these questions is quite the reverse of helpful and that his naive, simplistic treatment of them is astonishing coming from someone with his credentials.
I don’t know how to respond to this, because to me you seem to have completely reversed the meaning of Williams’ critique. I’m not quite sure I want to see what you would consider a negative evaluation, if you think “astonishing level of confusion and misinterpretation” is “all but standing behind” Spong.
Williams’ piece is clear evidence that Spong is not taken seriously by most folks in the theological world. He’s a lightweight, and so regarded by nearly everyone I’ve heard talk about him. Only diehard ideologues are willing to say anything nicer about him than that he raises provocative questions.
Actually, I would say rather that you have located yourself within a very particular kind of conservative low-church Anglicanism.
I admit that I have not followed the details of this very well, but this would not surprise me. The Presiding Bishop’s methods are deplorably high-handed even without considering the merits of the theology (or ideology) she represents.
It’s certainly a confusing situation. I admit that I have some frustration on the other side–one of my students was told that ACNA would be in communion with Canterbury in three years, which I consider to be absurdly optimistic at best.
In Christ,
Edwin
P
Padrej
Guest
I find it interesting you would label me as such when every Anglican church that I ever served has been middle of the road to high, and I never have had much use for the morning and evening prayer services. Is it because I respect Peter Toon that you make this comment? You may be surprised that I prefer benediction of the Blessed sacrament to an evening prayer service. My private altar has a monstrance on it and I pray the rosary and the Divine Mercy chaplet. I also am a devotee of Padre Pio and have a couple of his relics. How does this make me a “low church Anglican”???
P
Padrej
Guest
Izoid
I do not teach of my own authority of what it means to be “Jewish.” I leave that up to the Jewish scribe that I have that from time to time I have to assist my work. There are things that he has taught to me to teach the class and I pass that information on to them.
My grandfather being Jewish was a blessing in that area as well so I can speak with somewhat more authority as I had a member of the family who spoke about. I can also speak with authority what I also learned from the time that heave spoken with Rabbi White who is now at Georgetown U. The Basics of The Christian stuff I do not allow the Jewish person to teach; that is my job. As you point out we can ll know the basics of the other groups. as Fr. John points out, if one studies enough of say Mormon literature you may be able to go a bit further. The problem comes in, as I see it, when our seminary texts point out, “this group believes thus” so how else am I supposed to teach unless I go to investigate for myself, which I DO. I encourage my students NOT to just experience their own faith but to experience the faith of others; that way they can better defend theirs and appreciate what the other person believes and know when someone is speaking a falsehood against the other.
I hope that this makes my point on this matter clearer and hopefully we all can move on and not fuss over “who is best qualified to teach whom.”
L
larkin31
Guest
labels, labels
F
FrJohnB
Guest
I think part of the problem is that we do tend as human being to label things so that we can compartmentalize them. Even in church hierarchy we have “deacon” “priest” “bishop” “monsignor” “cardinal” so even there we label people in one sort of way or another. We label them traditional or liberal or middle of the road. Think is, we are all part of the Body of Christ. Just as an eye is labeled differently from a mouth and leg. I don’t think this is a problem or significant contribution that can be claimed by either Protestant or Catholic but rather “Human beings.”
C
Contarini
Guest
Fair enough. I misjudged you, and I apologize.
Not that I consider calling someone a low-church Anglican an insult. I don’t agree with low-church Anglicanism on a number of points, but I have my differences with Anglo-Catholicism too (though relatively fewer and less significant from a theological perspective, many of them being historical objections), and I respect both traditions.
But I should not jump to conclusions about people.
Edwin
- Status