Following on from my piece yesterday, I want to suggest that what is happening is that historic Christianity is being swiftly replaced in many churches by something which is more socially acceptable. Western secular society is very keen on the faith of equality, and the only arguments it understands for not agreeing with it are ones which impute bigotry to the dissentients: don’t agree with women ministers/priests? You’re a misogynist. Don’t agree with same-sex marriage? You’re a homophobe. Now I daresay there are those in these categories for whom the label would be tailor-made, but that is not why I, and many others, take a dissentient view. What is now a dissenting view was, until a few years back, a majority view, and it was soundly based on Biblical tradition. We’re being told not that tradition was wrong, but that it no longer applies. Thin end of wedge arguments are usually met with the objection that they are alarmists; I submit that anyone looking dispassionately at the history of these two issues would have to admit that they were not alarmist. Those of us arguing only a few years back that civil partnerships would not be the end of the issue but would lead to demands for gay marriage were told we were alarmists; now we’re told we’re bigots – which skilfully misses the point that we were right and our opponents were either liars or accidentally wrong. We’re being told that the reason Christianity is in decline is it is seen as homophobic. I’ve yet to see this argued through, and would be interested if anyone has any statistics. I can see why such allegations would make the Churches unpopular among those who took the view that same-sex marriage was fine, but how many of those go to church anyway? Is someone seriously suggesting that if we had gay marriages in church all would be well? Looking at the attendances at the American Episcopal Church. I see no evidence for what seems to me an entirely spurious argument.
But it appeals to the weak chink in the armour of the bigger churches – your attendances are falling – do something, be ‘relevant’. Ah, for those of us of a certain age, that brings it all back home: guitars would do it; getting rid of ‘archaic language’ would do it; stopping talking about sin would do it; lady vicars would do it; the Mass in English would do it; shorter sermons would so it; clown masses would do it. In the 1970s no one could mount the counter-argument that can now be mounted, as those things had not been tried for half a century and failed – well they have now, and they have failed. It is the mark of the ideologue that mere facts will not get in their way. Rather, they argue have all these things failed, well we have not gone far enough, let us do even more in this vein – and this time it will be different. Evidence? Who cares, these things are not really being demanded because they will bring people into the church, they are being demanded because bishops and archbishops and other senior clerics will feel much happier when meeting with secular leaders. It will bring the churches ‘into line’ with society – as though that were mandated in anything Jesus ever said. That’s the real agenda, and it should be resisted.
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Your point is well taken, though I disagree with a few of the items you mention. The most egregious one is shorter sermons. All sermons should be banned for two reasons: one, most preachers are lousy at it and deadly boring; second, they need to be trained to deliver short to the point homilies. The Franciscan dictum about homilies is, “If you can’t say it in 10 minutes—shut up!” Good examples are Fr. Joe and Fr. Bill Cieslak. Fr. Bill’s take on last Sunday’s Gospel of the Marriage at Cana is an outstanding example.
Protestants have never learned the old business axiom regarding seminars/workshops/meetings, “The mind can absorb only as much as the ass can stand.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Protestants preachers though have an excuse, other than singing and readings how do they fill an hour to an hour and a half. Still, shorter services and you could get two or three of them on a Sunday morning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
It depends on the preacher David – a bad one and five minutes feels like an eternity, a good one and an hour seems too little.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dave Smith said:
The best sermon I ever heard was one sentence. “What was said to the people then, has now been said to you.”
That was it. It was dramatic, short and made us feel that there was nothing needed in the way of embellishing or applying the gospel to our lives (so popular these days).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I find folk know so little that a good exposition of the Gospel – what it means and why and how it connects with other parts of Scripture, is almost necessary – no one gets taught any of this in school any more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dave Smith said:
Depends on the reading for the day I suppose. Sometimes there is nothing more that needs be said . . . as I say that dramatic moment made us sit back, take notice and apply the teaching to ourselves. It was self-explanatory.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Sounds good to me. What we like on a Sunday is a good exposition of either a Gospel passage or something from Paul.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jock McSporran said:
Dave Smith and Geoffrey –
I wonder if either of you have 47 and a half minutes to listen to the sort of thing that I used to listen to? Dave – you’ll find that even though he’s a Presbyterian, his position is remarkably close to your own.
[audio src="http://jpaudio.s3.amazonaws.com/Edited%20Files/Sunday%20PM/JP85-86%20Genesis/Sermon/85pm027Gen3_s_e.mp3" /]
Recently, I indicated to Jessica exactly where my own understanding came from and I was delighted to find the sermons that I had heard from 86 – 88 up on the web, along with all the sermons he gave from 1964 – 97. I’ve now started listening to the series on Genesis from 85, just before I came along. It’s from Sunday evening, 29th September 1985.
Anyway, this is what inspired me and I’d like to know what you think of it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jock McSporran said:
By the way – I don’t really know how to do this – clicking on the link won’t work, because it seems to have put the [audio src= " "/] rubbish around it. Just use cut-and-paste, pull out the web address, paste it into the browser and it will work.
LikeLike
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I’ll have a go.
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Jock, the link doesn’t work.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
David – I don’t know how to do this. Curiously, in the email I got with your reply, the link was highlighted in blue, I clicked on it, and it worked.
As I said, don’t bother with the wrapping (all that audio scr rubbish, which I didn’t write and which somehow got added in) – just do a cut and paste job, copying from
http:// and finishing at .mp3 and it should work.
You may not enjoy it – I know that it isn’t everybody’s cup of tea – this ministry was of extreme importance for me and it is where I learned everything I know.
LikeLike
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Yes, Jock, you are right, it does work in the reply – thank you
[audio src="http://jpaudio.s3.amazonaws.com/Edited%20Files/Sunday%20PM/JP85-86%20Genesis/Sermon/85pm027Gen3_s_e.mp3" /]
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
I put the link in my answer, so I hope it will work for others too – I so like the accent I’m going to listen now 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Thanks C
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
David – here’s the link http://jpaudio.s3.amazonaws.com/Edited%20Files/Sunday%20PM/JP85-86%20Genesis/Sermon/85pm027Gen3_s_e.mp3
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Thanks Jock, I shall listen to it this evening in place of my usual sermon – and thank you for sharing it.
LikeLike
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Jock, that link isn’t working for me.
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Thanks, Jock, got it to work. Glad you enjoyed it. I woke up after 3 min and turned it off.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
…. are you sure you woke up? 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
If he didn’t, I decided to follow C’s link and have just finished. I need to listen again because it is full of really good points. This is a very fine sermon indeed, and one which will repay careful listening again and again – I’m in your debt for sharing it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dave Smith said:
Thank you for this Jock; and yes, it is remarkably similar to my own position.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jock McSporran said:
Dave – yes, I thought it would be. I get the impression that, by and large, we’re on the same ‘Spiritual’ wavelength.
LikeLiked by 2 people
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Jock, it was ponderous and soporific. i went to sleep between the pauses. If it takes 40+ min to make a point I’d walk out and get a drink at the nearest pub. It’s boooooooring.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
Yes, David – I thought you wouldn’t like it – and I posted it for Geoffrey Sales and Dave Smith, because I thought they would like it (which they did) – I didn’t post it for you.
With the Christian faith, I know (as well as anybody can know) that I’m on the same side as Geoffrey and Dave Smith (i.e. I confidently expect to find them in the heavenly kingdom), but just about everything you say indicates to me that I don’t expect to find you within the number of the Saviour’s family. The Christian faith, properly understood, is too boring for you – you have to supplement it with the wacky and weird. I haven’t forgotten what you wrote about Sister Faustina.
When he came to Holyrood Abbey in 1957, his style was (of course) met with real hostility from just about the whole congregation, who made remarks similar to yours. Most of them left – and they were replaced by Christians, who obtained a great deal of Spiritual nourishment from his ministry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I listened through again, and it is even richer than I had thought.
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
The preacher was like when Thomas Mann asked a friend whether he liked his new book said, “I don’t know I haven’t gotten to the verb yet.”
The Faith of my Church isn’t boring, your preacher is.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
David – you don’t have any faith – and you don’t have authority to speak of the faith of your Church, since you don’t share it. You are the RCC version of Bosco (that’s why you get on so well together).
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
To equate with St.Bisto is so funny. Sorry Jock, you have no idea about you speak. You nothing about the Catholic Faith. If you’re not sure ask Dave or Geoffrey.
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
To equate me with St.Bisto is hysterical. Sorry Jock, you know nothing about the Catholic Faith. If you’re not sure ask Dave or Geoffrey.
Had to re-write it as I left out too many words.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
David – on the contrary, I know exactly what I’m talking about and I do not need more information. This is an error you regularly make. There are those of us who have seen you (or rather what you write here) and, based on this, we know what you stand for. With full understanding of both you and Catholicism, we have concluded that what you stand for is rubbish – and not representative of the serious wing of the RCC.
You somehow assume that it is simply ignorance or lack of information – if we were sufficiently informed, we would see the light.
On this thread – and also on earlier threads, you have made it quite clear that the ‘high point’ for you is the ceremony of the bread and wine (we all consider that to be important) – in your case, you try to divorce it as much as you can from the Word.
You are exactly the same as Bosco – everything he is trying to do with his ‘ask Jesus to reveal himself to you’ (which seems to bypass any need for conviction of sin and repentance), you are trying to do with your Eucharist.
Just one tiny example – on this very thread you have announced that you would be quite happy to go to the pub for a pint or several on a Sunday evening (in the context: you’d rather do that than listen to a 45 minute sermon). I don’t know of any Christians who would approve of Sunday drinking. The serious Catholics whom I know (and there are a lot of them around me) would throw up their hands in horror at this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Since you’re not Catholic you only have the Word. The Word is important but the Eucharist is vital.
Yes, I’d go to a pub rather than be bored out my skull by a man who a. is so ponderous soporific in style
b. takes 40+ min. to make his point.
Thank God, in a Catholic Church the Altar is in the center and the pulpit or ambo is to the side.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
David – by profession, I lecture mathematics at a university. My lectures are 90 minutes long. On Tuesdays, I pick up the chalk at 8.30 am precisely and do not put it down again until after 10.00 am (by which time the students are, hopefully, thoroughly bamboozled).
We do get people like you trying to dumb down standards at universities – criticising us because we take 90 minutes over a lecture and thinking it deplorable that we can’t get the main points across in 10.
Those who are not Christian will find a serious exposition of The Word boring – in the same way as those who don’t enjoy maths will find my lectures a total bore.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Hey, Jock even the blue law Presbyterians in Toronto gave up the ban on drinking on a Sunday 20 years ago. Most of my non-Catholic and Catholic friends have no problem drinking on a Sunday. You really need to check your calander.
LikeLike
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I am partial to drop myself David, but am not sure that the Western world does not drink rather too much than is good for it.
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
I do live in the past – and proudly so. I do remember when pubs were closed on Sunday – and I don’t consider ‘oh they’re all doing it now’ as a valid argument for me to change my position.
If you don’t have a problem spending the Day of Rest in such a way, then you should have.
This is a creation ordinance, instituted for the good of mankind.
A day in the boozer hardly looks like the Sabbath rest as intended by God Most High.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Geoffrey, sadly there are far too too many AA and NA meetings and many more that should attend and seek counseling as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Yes, sadly very true. There were good prudential reasons behind the Temperance Movement.
LikeLike
NEO said:
Yep. I also seem to recall that when the KJV was adopted, one of the reasons it used so much of Tyndale’s translation was because the archaic language reflected that this was what had always been taught everywhere, and so was a considered positive.
David’s point on short homilies is counteracted by my sales training which quoted somebody or another on preaching, to make a point stick always tell people what you’re going to tell them, tell them what you’re going to tell them, tell them, tell them what you told them, and then finally tell them what you told them. In other words, you have to tell people something five times before it will sink into their consciousness. Boring to do, but it is what has always worked.
LikeLiked by 2 people
David B. Monier-Williams said:
that was the old way, one that both of us were brought up in, in those days people didn’t know anything else. The else is that people listen learn differently visually, auditorily and kinesthetically. all you need to do it use all three predicate systems.
The new way is KISS.
LikeLiked by 2 people
NEO said:
KISS is hardly new. I’m not advocating for restriction on the media used, you’re right many people learn better from multimedia sources, bit a sermon is pretty much an auditory process, and I personally don’t learn that well from them, I need the repetition to make it sink in. It does make for tedious reading though, sometimes. It helps if the preacher works with a fairly small piece of information, rather than trying to explain the whole ball of yarn, though. I think twenty minutes is about the maximum, and less is likely better.
LikeLike
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Neo, sermons and homilies are auditory, but depending on the predicates used e.g. ” you need to see…, listen to what the scripture says about…, this gives you the understanding that…” as to the effect on the people in the pews.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Could be, David, not my field, but experience makes me skeptical. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
And, what’s more, you can make even that interesting – if you’re good at it. I recall many years ago going to hear Billy Graham – never seemed too long.
LikeLiked by 1 person
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Geoffrey, & NEO, if you haven’t, compare C’s comments about last Sunday’s Gospel and that of Fr. Cieslak. They’re all correct, yet which is more memorable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Nope, he never did, even on TV. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
David B. Monier-Williams said:
Geoffrey, that all maybe true, but you’d have a revolt in the pews if you had to sit that long every Sunday, unless you’re in the Bahamas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
We get 45 minutes from some inspirational preachers, and we pull folk in from elsewhere – everything depends on the quality of the sermon and the preacher in my experience.
LikeLike
shieldsheafson said:
In the West the struggle lies between Humanitarianism and Catholicism. I think Protestantism is dead; I’m not sure what will become of Islam or other eastern religions. The Catholic Church is the only church which logically claims supernatural authority and could potentially orientate itself to claim allegiance of all Christians who have any supernatural belief left.
However, the secular State has long recognised, as such, that a supernatural Religion must necessarily involve absolute authority and so feels it must restrict ‘freedom of religion’.
In the last century materialism and socialism, without religion, was too crude and rapidly descended into barbarism; the echoes of which remain.
The new humanitarianism is become an actual religion, although anti-supernatural. It is pantheism and its creed is; God is man, etc. Although It has a real food of a sort to offer to man’s religious craving; it idealises and makes no demand upon the spiritual faculties.
You could call the new religion, Sentimentalism.
At the rate we’re going, I think that the state will establish their ‘religion’ legally in the next ten years.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Interesting thoughts there. We are on the edge of an economic meltdown which could change how this is going to look in a few years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
shieldsheafson said:
Alasdair MacIntyre concludes his opus ‘After Virtue’ by noting that, despite the danger of drawing precise parallels between historical periods, there is one to be drawn between our modern period and that in which the Roman empire declined into the Dark Ages. One crucial turning point of that period was when people ceased to contribute to the good of the state and “ceased to identify the continuation of civility and moral community with the maintenance” of the state. They turned instead to constructing communities in which moral life could be sustained. MacIntyre asserts that we have reached this turning point, and that this construction will prove crucial if moral and intellectual life are to be “sustained through the new dark ages which are already upon us”. He maintains that the success of that effort through the Dark Ages teach us there is ground for hope, but that “this time however the barbarians are not waiting beyond the frontiers; they have already been governing us for quite some time. And it is our lack of consciousness of this that constitutes part of our predicament. We are waiting not for a Godot, but for another—doubtless very different—St. Benedict.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Yes, I found his work a compelling analysis, and you have summarised it excellently.
LikeLike
Philip Augustine said:
“The new humanitarianism is become an actual religion, although anti-supernatural. It is pantheism and its creed is; God is man, etc.”
This was promoted in the early 20th century by the Soviet Union, I think the term Russian historians use is “Prometheanism.” A good source to look at examples of this type of propaganda is a book called Mass Culture in Soviet Russia. The second poem is called “The Iron Messiah” in the book giving any indication of the philosophy. Also titles like Nine Girls promoting Soviet Realism is much like this new secular realism that is being promoted now.
There’s another title by the name of “The Stakhanove Movement Explained” which incorporates this idea of a god-like man of production. It’s interesting to take a look at some of these texts. I took a class on Soviet Russia taught by a Russian Orthodox so needless to say it was a lively class.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Philip Augustine said:
typo on title * “The Stakhanovite Movement Explained”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jock McSporran said:
Christianity is essentially anti-supernatural. Christianity takes the view that God created the natural order and works through his natural order.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dave Smith said:
Jock, I think that it is not so much that Christianity is anti-supernatural but supernatural in a way that is not inconsistent with natural reason and natural life. It can be far above what is known or understood in the natural world but not inconsistent with either. Otherwise, a Christian could only come to God as a to tyrant . . . instead of freely choosing Him Who is above all things and is the Mystery above all Mysteries made known through the Word; His only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jock McSporran said:
You are, of course, correct. The point, though, is that we have to be very careful about the ‘supernatural’ element, since we believe in a God who did (after all) create nature and who ordered the universe according to His natural laws. If we are looking for supernatural intervention the whole time, then there is something very wrong with our understanding.
The supernatural event was the once-for-all, crucified under Pontius Pilate, where God intervened at a precise point in history (in some sense the lowest point in history). There were sign miracles confirming that Jesus was exactly who he claimed to be.
By and large, as Christians, we take the view that the laws of nature are God’s laws of nature and that He works through them. There is something very wrong when people are expecting the supernatural (which then, by its very repetition, becomes part of the natural order).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jock McSporran said:
Did you notice that the ‘City of Destruction’, from which Pilgrim wants to escape, contains a fancy cathedral?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I did – probably full of bishops. I’m all in favour of the NT church – worked well for them and it does for us – where we have it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dave Smith said:
An excellent post my friend. I would add that the techniques used against religion are being used in politics, economics, social justice, animal rights, human behaviors, immigration, redistribution of wealth, animal rights . . . you name it. It is all part of the Modernist or Progressive move to dismantle the Western Eurpean model of civilization and replace with it with either a pure Socialism, Marxism or Communism (though defeated in history where these were tried). It has come back with a vengeance and being fought on so many fronts today that we are too overcome with the bombardment that we cannot focus our arguments or our talents to win even one of these battles . . . we are only slowing their charge . . . a liitle in this arena, then a little in another arena. But once we turn our attention from one to another the one we left comes roaring back to life. Religion is merely the soul of the resistance that has never been adequately eliminated: now it appears that this is their target to ensure a long lasting victory to their idealism. It will not end well, I think. Anarchy being supplanted by a despot is more likely in most countries than any improvement that we might envisage. Utopia will look more like Brave New World than Paradise. Indeed these small ‘wedge issues’ seemingly of little consequence have immense value when little by little they ensnare a whole world in a tangle of disordered thought. We have sold our birthrights for a bowl of pottage and our freedom for a licentious lifestyle and a few bread and circuses. We have a created such a tangle that we all stand in need of Him who can can cut the Gordian Knot so that we might see things for what they really are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I agree – and I say it with a heavy heart, as I am sure you do, as we neither of us want this.
I am afraid, though, that the real enemy is capitalism – all that matters is making a buck. In the cause of the almighty dollar we have dismantled most of our taboos. We need more labour in the marketplace to consume more stuff, so get women out of the home. Tell ’em it’s liberation, stuff ’em full of chemicals (big pharma makes a lot of bucks too), offer ’em abortions if the chems fail (abortion clinics make a fortune too – and provide jobs). That gives you a bigger workforce to spend more, so folk who make stuff can make more money, and folk who persuade the rest of us to can also do so.
Let’s get rid of prudery and decency – you can make megabucks from porn and its offshoots.
Let’s get rid of making Sunday a day of rest, that gets in the way of someone making a fast buck.
What’s that, women want to stay and home and rear kids? Tell ’em they’re not liberated and get them back to work – you can then create more jobs with child-minders looking after kids.
None of this is in the name of cultural Marxism (which exists and I have spent many years fighting in education).
Capitalism has no morals, it wants everyone out there earning and spending, the cultural marxists and the feminists have given them good excuse – which is why our rulers have never bothered fighting those things which are just ‘useful idiots’.
What happens when the merry-go round stops, we may be about to discover.
But it was not the cultural Marxists who created this, but capitalism, which cast off the restraints imposed by religion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dave Smith said:
There is much to that my friend . . . though I think it was only a way to destroy capitalism, by making it morality free. The same denigratin is happening in every facet of our lives. Evil now hides behind pretty faces and pretty words. We have gone back to a time at the beginning of our journey as stated in Deuteronomy 28: “but to this day the Lord has not given you a mind to understand, or eyes to see, or ears to hear.” Evil seems much more evil when it disguises itself as a good and we have no mind to understand it, ears to hear it or eyes to see it. We truly are living in a dark age as our friend Shields has said.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
We are indeed, my friend. The making of money is all that matters to some people. We are fed a diet of ‘do what you want’, ‘have what you want’ with the promise that the only price is monetary – it isn’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
I can’t say I disagree, in practice, at least. It should be remembered that classical capitalism though, as discussed by Adam Smith, was a construct of individual (or family) interest, devised for a moral people. [see also Smith’s The “Theory of Moral Sentiments” predating “Wealth of Nations”] Seems to me that even more of our problems stem from the unchecked rise of consumerism, dating back, at least, to the Victorians and their substituting material possessions for everything else.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Yes, among a moral people and properly regulated by religion, it is the best of all systems of economics, but it has lost those restraints and is eating itself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
I agree, and would add that it no longer looks to any term beyond the quarter, which makes it all worse. Because in that time-frame it hardly matters if you kill your customer, while in a longer term, the quality of product matters more, often much more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Yes, mass-production, originally a good idea,seems to have become an excuse to make disposable rubbish.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Indeed it has, and at the lowest possible cost. Wish I had the answer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Here we begin to see what one answer might look like. Nearby we have things called ‘artisanal’ bakeries and also workshops for furniture, all of which are craftsman made – they cost more, but those who want to spend their money there than on more transitory things seem happy to purchase. We recently got a new set of covers for our three piece suite, which was an expensive one fifteen years ago. We’d thought of getting rid because it was getting shabby, but didn’t like the new ones which seemed very inferior – so we went to a young woman who does hand-crafted covers – cost us less than a new suite – just about, but has made the old one look better than new. The young lass told us she’s doing decent business, which is good to hear. I hope this is a way forward.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Outstanding! We have some of it, as well, but far to often it ends up being inferior materials made cheaply, but not always, and when one finds a good one, one should support it, if one can.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
It seems to me an organic development of later stage capitalism. Everyone can have something cheap and cheerful, but pay a bit more and you get individuality. As you say, the thing is to look at the product and make sure it is worth it. Mrs S, who once upon a time would have done this herself, has pronounced herself satisfied with the young lass and her work – so if my quality controller says yes, yes it is 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Indeed so, that is the toughest quality control there is! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Philip Augustine said:
I use to stay quiet a lot during discussions. I was afraid of being called a bigot or that my Christian values were of no longer any use. However, the product that is being peddled around is secular materialism and as I’ve said before their word for heretic is bigot. Yes, I am a heretic to their beliefs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
And how right you are – we’re all that sort of bigot here 🙂
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
Geoffrey – a few remarks on the post. While the manifestation may have changed, the general principle is a timeless one. Two or three situations off the top of my head:
1) Bishop J.C. Ryle (1816 – 1900) in his book ‘Holiness’ – I recall that he was lamenting the terrible state of the Church of England, how everything had gone down hill, how society was, spiritually speaking, degenerating.
2) C.H. Spurgeon: we enjoy his works today and we’re tempted to think of his ministry as representative of what was going on in the Baptist church in 19th century England. Yet the Baptist Union overwhelmingly rejected his view; he was an ‘experimental error’. (‘The Forgotten Spurgeon’ by Iain Murray).
3) When James Philip started his ministry at Holyrood in the 1950’s, he was deeply conscious of just how much the Church of Scotland had degenerated and fallen from its former glory, how there was very little left of The Word and his whole ministry was an attempt to work towards revival within the C. of S.
The specific issues may change, but the general principle remains the same. On the one hand, the various churches seem to be degenerating – on the other hand, Her Majesty gave an address to the Commonwealth which was much more explicitly Christian than anything you may have expected from her during the 60’s, 70’s or 80’s.
The specific issues you mention – gay marriage, short-and-content-free sermons, etc … they do all fall under the umbrella of what James Philip was on about at some point during the sermon I posted; when Satan comes to tempt us, he does not say ‘hello, I’m Satan and I want you to do such and such’ – it’s quite the opposite. He presents himself as the good, rational, reasonable, humane fellow, suggesting something very reasonable – and presents God as being unreasonable for suggesting the opposite.
So some things never change. It isn’t clear to me that things are worse and more degenerate than before, since what you write (change the specific issues) could have been written at any time within the last 200 years.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
I agree here Jock. What is different is the context. We could, until recently, assume that Governments would not be hostile to Christianity and its values, now that is no longer the case. The fact that their tolerance was not much help, may mean their intolerance will be!
LikeLike
Jock McSporran said:
Geoffrey – I think it’s ‘social norms’ rather than governments that are the problem. Before people sinned while hypocritically keeping a nice face and pretending to be good Christians; now they sin blatantly – and argue that sin is ‘good’ and that Christian norms are unreasonable. Christianity is all about living for God in a pagan world and I think I prefer the current honest approach to the previous hypocritical one.
Here in Poland, I was delighted when the PiS-artists won both the presidential elections and then got a majority in parliament. They are the ultra-Catholic party and I thought that this would bring a good dose of moral sense to the political scene. But since coming to power, they revealed themselves in their true colours and the general trend is dangerously close to the definition of fascism that one finds in Wikipedia – so I’m a bit worried about the sort of government one gets from an explicitly ‘Christian’ political party.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Geoffrey RS Sales said:
Agreed, but I’m not sure why, after the experience of Europe in the 30s and 40s, it would surprise you that old-fashioned Catholicism allied to politics leads towards the extreme Right – Salazar, Franco and Petain, as well as numerous Latin American madmen all suggest, alas, there is an alliance of ways of thinking.
LikeLike
Pingback: Being a Christian | All Along the Watchtower