My thanks to my co-blogger on Armadillo des Tropiques, Christopher Sheil, for inspiring the brilliant header.
If there’s a God, the evidence for Her existence is unconvincing. Nevertheless, if you have to have one, the traditional Anglican version has always had appeal. Sort of a benevolently distracted, rather accommodating God, with the faintly bewildered air of an Oxford Don. A kind of God by compromise presiding over a Church that would compose a hymn like “All Things Bright and Beautiful” in 1848 and then excise the stanza that reads,
?The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
He made them, high or lowly,
And ordered their estate,?
100 years later.
Did God truly “order their estate?” Or was it perhaps more your socioeconomic forces and the class paradigm? Can we be sure? Is there still marmalade for tea? Well-meaning, decent, salt-of-the-earth sort of people. Open to argument kind of people. Then there?s the diocese of Sydney.
Since Anglican Sydney fell into the hands of the Jensen clan, it?s been like the Reformation revisited. The hard won Tudor-Stuart compromise between Puritanism and Catholicism has been overturned in a headlong rush back in time to a simpler, more certain era when God was God and the likes of Archbishop Jensen was his one true prophet. Out go Papist practices like sung response, candles, in-situ altar tables and lamentable self-doubt. In comes fervent belief, religious rigour and a stripped back fundamentalism that makes the Salvo?s look like a bunch of agnostic hedonists. It?s all about the Bible and when it comes to interpreting the Good Book you need look no further than the correct Jensenite position for the definitive take. In fact they would insist upon you looking no further. And you’ll need a correct Jensenite interpreter standing by at all times it seems after listening to the recent extraordinary musings of Jensenite Bishop Glen Davies of North Sydney.
For instance, polygamy may be OK under certain circumstances ? particularly if it involves the customary practices of potential Jensenite growth areas like Nigeria. Bishop Davies generously conceded that while the Lord God Made Them all, the Good Book may not be exactly spot on in the whole thing happening in 6 days thingo. Nevertheless, he warned against just ?accepting? the theories of modern thinkers like Darwin. Indeed. Where might that sort of dangerous humanism lead? Woman priests and other horrors, no doubt. And speaking of other horrors, one thing he was definite about was that homosexuality was completely unacceptable under any circumstances and that those who had fallen from grace into that Dark Place needed to repent of their sins prior to be received in the plain and simple bosom of the church. And let there be no doubt: the wheels will be off the altar table in St Andrew?s Cathedral before they?re permitted to marry.
It was like a Monty Python sketch, particularly when the Bishop solemnly declared that those who did not accept the Jensenite Version, be they the Archbishop of Canterbury or, presumably, Madonna Ciccone, would not be permitted to preach to the Sydney faithful. Even the Great Archbishop balked at that and from England ? where he was at the time ? he reversed the Bishop?s all too fallible interpretation. I look forward to hearing from Madonna soon.
Sign of the times Geoff … sign of the times … oh, and good post, except where’s the nude bit?
Geoff
You’ve got to look at it from the Jensens’ point of view. Sure, they are convinced that they have got God on their side. But much more important, the old establishment churches like the Anglicans are losing market share to the new evangelical churches which have sprung up like magic mushrooms (with the same halucenigenic effects) everywhere, especially in Sydney’s northern beaches area.
Let me give you the tip, these new churches make the Jensens look like a bunch of diffident hand wringers. Apparently, fire and brimstone certainty is what the punters are looking for out there in bible land.
I say, if that’s what they want, let them have it. As long as the God botherers don’t bother the God non-botherers, that is, people like me, who cares what the Jensens and their acolytes think?
Yeah, I know, give them an inch and next thing you know they’ll be censoring a play at the Belvoir Street Theatre, but I think that kind of danger can be kept under control. These people are patently ridiculous, after all.
But as far as the intra-church battles go, let the two sides go after each other hammer and tongs. It would be like old style professional wrestling at the Hordern Pavilion. Peter Jensen could be the Brute Bernard of our times.
When I was at Uni, there was a pub band that called themselves “Nude Wrestling.” You can imagine the chalkboard outside the pub – ‘Nude Wrestling, Friday 10pm”
it’s a naked punt for the salacious surfer Chris.
I like the theological wrestle-off in the Hordern Pavilion idea Dave. It could be the main show at the Mardi Gras Party next year. I wonder how Phillip Jensen would wash-up in a leather jock?
When I was in politics, I tried to promote a nude sumo wrestling contest between Senators Bob Collins and Robert Ray (in a pit of jelly). It would have been utterly repulsive, of course, but strangely compelling in a sick sort of way, I still think, and a surefire money spinner. Bob was prepared to be in it, but Robert Ray’s office never returned my phone calls. I wonder why.
Obviously the jelly Ken. Like a horse and carriage, when you go nude, it’s mud mate … mud! Call yourself a Territorian …
You know how it is, Ken. Those Victorians just don’t have a sense of humour.
Ah, but Chris, it’s rather difficult to spot the omnipresent crocodiles in mud. The little buggers are masters of disguise (a little makeup, a fake moustache, and you’d never recognise them)!
Geoff, here’s the main event. A tag team match:
Jensen brothers versus Peter Carnley and Rowan Williams, in a cage. Losers must leave town.
Special guest referee, Mario Milano (no doubt, a good Catholic boy.)
Jensen does have a point, though. It’s hard to read the bible such that it’s okay being gay, no? I mean, it’s not really ambiguous on the point, is it? Sure, to the atheistic historian’s eye, it’s to be read as part and parcel of its time and place, but ain’t a Christian supposed to read it as The Timeless Word Of God?
I must admit, I find it passing strange that so many homosexuals evince the need to belong to what I see as a definitively homophobic institution. Women don’t do too well out of it, either, for mine …
Yes, well….I too find it strange Rob. But the Biblical writ thing is just dumb. The claim of some divinely inspired ability to deduce between what was Jewish tribal lore and social organisation in 5,000BC on the one hand – and God’s unutterable plan for 21st century living, on the other – is about as convincing to me as the case for Tarot Card prediction.
One things most writers who have attempted to talk on this topic have shown is trying to marry modern cultural values and biblical values is not possible.
The Jensens did not start the Sydney Diocese into being standard bearers for Reformed Theology. It has been there from the start. You either believe it or not. you can’t believe in it and be catholic as well or like Carnley believe nothing in the bible and say you a Christian as well.
If you are a christian then you believe in the bible. It is pretty simple. No-one is forced to believe in it.
By the way there are few if any creationists in the dioceses either. ( Look up where fundamentalisn originated and you might be surprised).
Homosexuality for example is shown as sinful practice in the Old Testament but also in the New Testament. The OT law has no bearing on us now but the NT teaching does.
You cannot hold office if you are a homosexual. adulterer, drunkard, gossip etc.
The problems of the Anglican denomination as I see it is that it is composed of christians who wish to live by what God said and non-christians who wish to live by today’s standards.
I think you are verballing Glen Davies. He never said polygamy was acceptable. Indeed all such marriages in the bible have unpleasant experiences.What he said was concerning people who became christians AFTER having several wives.
“You cannot hold office if you are a homosexual. adulterer, drunkard, gossip etc.”
It’s lucky these rules don’t apply to the Catholic Church. Close to a majority would fail on at least 2 counts, and quite a few on a third as well. Come to think of it, the Anglican Church has an even bigger problem: clergy can marry, so they get an opportunity to breach the adultery rule as well. Anyway, where does it say you’re not allowed to gossip?
Homer,
Have you seen Sue Creighton recently?
Homer, I couldn’t care less about the latest in an interminable line of self-appointed Bible interpretation bullies. It’s up to Anglicans ultimately to sort themselves out and I doubt that Jensen represents anything other than a minority faction in the Australian Anglican communion. You’d be better placed sharing your Biblical Writ interpretation tips with them.
My engagement is solely on the grounds that he and his acolytes keep attacking me and mine. Every time they pompously pronounce on the ‘evil of homosexuality’ they empower the less articulate amongst us to express their similar revulsion with fists, boots and the odd busted bottle; particularly when it’s dark, there’s a lot of them and one lone poof.
I’m sure Jensen would be shocked to hear that he’s a common old hatemonger, and way too gutless to ever confront it. I kind of prefer the fagbashers. At least they can honestly identify cause and effect.
Geoff,
clearly you are writing and commenting on a topic that you don’t understand.
Sue Creighton is in Queensland last time I heard so no I haven’t seen her.
If people in the Catholic church read the bible they wouldn’t be catholics!
I am too lazy to check ( sinful practice!) but gossiping is put as a nono in both Timothy and Titus
There’s nothing like good old fashioned sectarian bigotry combined with homophobic bigotry combined with pure, willful, ignorance.
Homer, you are a fool.
“If people in the Catholic church read the bible they wouldn’t be catholics!”
For fuck’s sake, Homer, either explain yourself or stop bashing Catholics. We’re all sick of unsupported “Catholics are this”, “Catholics are that”, “Catholics aren’t anything like *them*” type bullshit. I mean, you’re speaking to more than one Catholic in this very thread, and you probably don’t even know it!
Yes indeed Mark. I’m a cradle Catholic and a poof. I’m picking that a date with Homer is probably out of the question…..
I am sorry I have upset some people. Please accept my apologies that was not my intention.
Homosexuality is a sin as is adultery, drunkeness etc. If that is homophobia then so be it.
two examples of what Catholics believe or supposed to believe:
1) Works can get you into heaven as well as faith. If this was the case then there would be no need for Christ dying on the cross.
2) They also believe Mary was without sin. If this was the case then she would have been ressurrected , having fulfilled the ten commandments. She didn’t and wasn’t.
Jesus did and was.
If that is sectarian then so be it.
Dave you were right at the end. Christians are made up of the weak, base and foolish.
Dunno about Homer’s point 2, but point 1 has me wondering what all those virtuous pagans were doing in the First Circle of Dante’s Inferno. Then there’s the poor buggers stuck at the bottom of Mount Purgatory because they got topped before they could renounce their sins or something. Still, they all ended up better off than the poofs, who, as I recall, get to spend eternity in that desert with the eternal rain of fire.
If I can be allowed to interrupt all you good God-bothering bedroom snoopers to go back to the headline of this post, in case anyone thinks this thread might be a tad heated, check out the temperature reached by the numnuts in the rec.sport.pro-wrestling (RSPW) newsgroup when someone has the temerity to suggest that the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) doesn’t take any notice of them here. I quite enjoyed the irony in the last line, but what exactly was it that Tim Dunlop saying about the new intellectuals?
LOL! The final line is almost Shakespearean in fact…..
If you poke around the thousands sects which call themselves Christian – and they all rely on the same, inerrant, divinely-inspired Bible in one way or another – you will find that they cannot agree on even the most fundamental point – the nature of Christ. Is he God, or Man, or God-Man, or the archangel Michael?
They cannot agree whether it’s faith or works or predestination that determines our ultimate fate.
They cannot even agree on that ultimate fate!
If the Mormons are right, we can relax. Even after you die, you get a chance to repent, provided someone has been baptised in your name on earth. So, as insurance, lodge your family tree with LDS, and they will do the rest.
If you look at the thousands of sects which call themselves Christian – all relying on the same inerrant, divinely-inspired Bible – you will find that they cannot agree on the most fundamental point – the nature of Christ. Is he Man, God, God-Man or the archangel Michael?
They cannot agree on whether predetermination, works or faith will get us to our ultimate destination – and naturally, they cannot agree on what that ultimate destination is.
Mormon theology allows for after-death conversion, provided there was a proxy baptism on earth. As insurance, get your family tree down to the LDS, and they will do the rest.
I presume, to raise a hate crime you will all agree with, that the post from Rosenbloom Phil is actually a horrible spam, which has stolen both a name from an ancient faith and a philosophical line from some internet source it is mining..
I’ve been getting a few like that.
They are bastards.