My article last week in the NZ Herald [copied in full on my posting below] has elicited some extraordinary responses and name calling. One fellow Anglican priest, Michael Hewat, wrote a feature article in the same newspaper giving his understanding of Christmas. I note that like my article his piece has little to do with the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke. In other words he too is elaborating upon and interpreting the original story. I've re-printed the first part of his article and given the link if you wish to read it all.
Another critic was Garth George, a conservative regular columnist for the paper. Garth's black and white theology is well known and makes most Christians I know cringe. I have also reprinted part of his article and given the link.
Michael Hewat writes:
Christians have got used to the Christ being squeezed out of Christmas by secularism, consumerism and more recently inter-faith PC-ism, but now we are told by the Anglican Archdeacon of Auckland, no less, that Christians must accept that like it or not, Christmas is about more than Jesus.
Glynn Cardy avers approvingly that Jesus is now displaced as the reason for the season. He concludes his Herald Advent message by calling upon all people to celebrate the values of generosity, caring, togetherness and hospitality, values which reflect Christianity but also transcend it, embracing a borderless spirituality.
It's not that I have any quibble with the values he upholds, but I do not like the idea that Jesus is no longer the primary reason, or reason enough, for celebrating Christmas.
I like the idea even less when it is peddled by a senior cleric. My only consolation is that the same cleric argued in the same column last year that Jesus was conceived when Mary, his mother, was raped. He's not to be taken too seriously.
Jesus' place in the Christmas story, however, cannot be taken too seriously - and not only for reasons of faith. Reason itself requires it. As Mr Cardy himself admits, the supposedly universal values which he extols are seldom - if at all - found unadulterated in our society, even at Christmas time.
Generosity is marred by greed, guilt and debt. Hospitality falls prey to inter-family conflict and alcoholic excess. Feasting can be an occasion for calorie overload, and the goodwill of the Christmas season simply underscores for many their grief, isolation or purposelessness in life. Simply calling upon people of whatever faith, culture, or background to celebrate these values does absolutely nothing to empower them to do so.
On the contrary, it highlights their inability to do so, even once a year. It was precisely to address this problem that God sent his Son Jesus into the world.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=500818&objectid=10482893
Garth George writes:
I have written often at this time of the year of the reason for the season - the birth of Jesus Christ, Son of Man and Son of God - whose arrival among mankind was the beginning of the greatest story ever told.
This year I have read on this page with amusement and a measure of perplexity the ramblings of that troublesome priest Glynn Cardy, and go along with Hamilton vicar Michael Hewat that Mr Cardy is not to be taken seriously.
The Cardys of this world invariably poke their heads above the parapet at this time of the year (and again at Easter) to reveal how their Christian beliefs have been derailed somewhere along the line.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/466/story.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10483333
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your having gotten those letter writers riled up just proves in my mind that you must be doing something right.
ReplyDeleteI agree with mystical seeker.
ReplyDeleteIn my view, it never ceases to amaze me when critics like these discuss their own rigid interpretation of the world as if everything they believe is a cold hard fact that everybody else should swallow whole.
If anything, their absolute unquestioning certainty about a particular belief leads me to automatically question the validity of everything they say. What I see here is the act of blindly accepting and obeying the dogma of one's choosing, versus formulating one's own independent conclusions. This may be fine for some, but is hardly a trait worthy of a true thinking critic.
The best advice I could give the Garth Georges and the Michael Hewats of the world is to insert a few extra little words in their sentences, like "in my view" or "as I believe." Not that they would likely listen to such reason anyway.
Interesting isn't it that at least Michael Hewat has read quite a bit of your writing judging by his knowledge of your Easter thoughts. I wonder why he keeps coming back if it is so objectionable? Does he find it challenging despite his protests and maybe something inside of him is listening?
ReplyDelete