poliphilo: (Default)
poliphilo ([personal profile] poliphilo) wrote2008-12-19 10:51 am

O Little Town Of Bethlehem

I have sympathy with the vicar who decided he didn't want to be singing "O, Little Town of Bethlehem" this year. He'd been to the real Bethlehem, seen what a shit-hole it is, got involved with the politics- and couldn't square his experience with the fantasy version in the carol. 

"How still we see thee lie"? Actually, no. 

It's the job of a priest to point this sort of thing out.

Christianity isn't just bubblebath for the soul.  There's also the social gospel.

Myth and ethics: a powerful- and volatile-  combination. 

Besides, there are plenty more carols to chose from.

[identity profile] sorenr.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 12:42 pm (UTC)(link)
There are differences between religions and their purposes, so I shan't make a sweeping generalisation, but:

Christianity - and especially non-orthodox Christianity such as Evangelical Lutheranism (e.g. Church of Denmark) and the Anglican Church - seems to have little justification if it does not engage with the current social issues at any given moment in time. It can't all be pretty and twee; some times a religion that bases itself on a social critic who ended up tried for his social and political AS WELL AS his religious beliefs, needs to step up to the plate and say "look, we have something to say about this!".

Of course, most of the time I personally disagree, and so be it. But if the C of E stops having opinions - even if they're fragmented and unruled by a central coordination - then it's just a bunch of pretty songs and impressive buildings. And in that case regular civil servants could do the job just as well as vicars and priests.

In short, I agree with you. I just took the long road in saying so...

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 12:55 pm (UTC)(link)
The Church of England seems to be in steady decline. There was a time when I thought this was a good thing. I don't any more.

[identity profile] jfs.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 12:55 pm (UTC)(link)
Just for clarity (and out of interest), do you mean non-Orthodox (ie non Russian / Greek) or non-orthodox (in which case I'm not sure how the Anglican church fits that description.)?

[identity profile] sorenr.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 01:08 pm (UTC)(link)
I suppose I meant any Protestant church, including the Anglican church even though I'm not sure it's theologically correct to refer to it as "Protestant". I can't help thinking that the Catholic church is somewhat orthodox, what with the apostolic succession and all, but that's just my personal non-dictionary definition. ;-)

[identity profile] jfs.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 01:11 pm (UTC)(link)
Ahh - my perception is that in Britain, the Anglican church is pretty much the definition of 'orthodox' :-)

(edited for mis-spelling)
Edited 2008-12-19 13:11 (UTC)

[identity profile] sorenr.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 01:21 pm (UTC)(link)
True, and I suppose the C of E actually upholds a claim to apostolic succession, and in part the belief in transubstantiation, both of which in my thoroughly Lutheran brain seem like emblems of orthodox Christianity.

Mind you, I never really grasped the tenets of the C of E so I might be completely off the mark.

[identity profile] poliphilo.livejournal.com 2008-12-19 02:13 pm (UTC)(link)
The Anglican church thinks of itself as both "Catholic" and Reformed". Or in other words, it's all you other guys who are marching out of step.