After joining the Progressive Christian Blog Network (which seems to be defunct), an old net friend left a comment, which enabled me to find her blog.
The Eagle's Nest
She has interesting comments on the privatisation of health care, and other things.
30 March 2006
27 March 2006
Evidence that demands a verdict?
Travis Stanley, who commented on an earlier posting in this blog, has an interesting blog himself, and one of his postings, on Asking questions in theology set me thinking, especially at the point where he mentions the "Evidentiary" aproach to Christian witness.
There's been a great deal of talk of "inculturation" and "contextualisation" in my field (missiology), but one of the things that few people comment on is how Western Christianity has been inculturated into the worldview and mindset of modernity, and I think that the "evidentialism" Travis Stanley speaks of is part of that.
John Ralston Saul in his book Voltaire's bastards: the dictatorship of Reason in the West makes the point that at the core of the dictatorship of Reason was the idea that to every question there must be an answer, and that this notion led directly to the totalitarianism of the 20th century. If there is an answer to every question, then torture is justified. Hitler's Gestapo, Stalin's KGB, and Vorster's Security Police were justified in torturing people when questioning them.
As an Orthodox Christian, I was interested in the comment of one Anglican who visited our parish: the problem with the Orthodox Church, she said, was that "it never experienced the Enlightenment." Well, there's something in that, though it wasn't for lack of "enlighteners" who sought to impose it -- from Peter the Great to the Bolsheviks.
Someone else commented that the Eastern Church was not influenced by Aquinas; its methodology is different from that of the West. Not only did it not experience the Enlightenment, it did not experience much of those other two pillars of modernity, the Renaissance and Reformation. So the Orthodox Church tends to have a premodern outlook.
But if culture, at least in places, is moving from modernity to postmodernity, however gradually, and in fits and starts, the "evidentiary" approach will not be of much use. And I have a suspicion that so-called "Islamic fundamentalism" is also a manifestation of modernity. Early modern Europe was characterised by witch hunts; nowadays people like to call witch hunts "medieval", but that is anachronistic. The witch hunts happened in a society that was on the cusp of modernity and premodernity. And it is in societies similarly caught between modernity and premodernity in Africa today that witch hunts ore common today.
And the same kind of mentality is emerging in Islam, as people in Islamic countries are really trying to come to grips with the worldview of modernity.
And one also sees the same kind of mentality emerging in Orthodoxy as well. At an Orthodox mission conference I attended about 10 years ago, Francis Schaeffer, a prominent convert to Orthodoxy from American evangelicalism, called for a kulturkampf. His paper was a sustained attack on certain aspects of contemporary American culture, though without much Orthodox theological backing. He called for "an Orthodoxy with teeth."
A Russian bishop who was present, speaking through an interpreter, responded, You call for an Orthodoxy with teeth, but are you sure that the people you want to bite will not grow bigger teeth and turn round and bite you? We have people in Russia who talk like you. They were in the KGB, and now that they have become Orthodox they think that they can use the same methods they used in the KGB to make people Orthodox. We call them "Orthodox Bolsheviks".
There's been a great deal of talk of "inculturation" and "contextualisation" in my field (missiology), but one of the things that few people comment on is how Western Christianity has been inculturated into the worldview and mindset of modernity, and I think that the "evidentialism" Travis Stanley speaks of is part of that.
John Ralston Saul in his book Voltaire's bastards: the dictatorship of Reason in the West makes the point that at the core of the dictatorship of Reason was the idea that to every question there must be an answer, and that this notion led directly to the totalitarianism of the 20th century. If there is an answer to every question, then torture is justified. Hitler's Gestapo, Stalin's KGB, and Vorster's Security Police were justified in torturing people when questioning them.
As an Orthodox Christian, I was interested in the comment of one Anglican who visited our parish: the problem with the Orthodox Church, she said, was that "it never experienced the Enlightenment." Well, there's something in that, though it wasn't for lack of "enlighteners" who sought to impose it -- from Peter the Great to the Bolsheviks.
Someone else commented that the Eastern Church was not influenced by Aquinas; its methodology is different from that of the West. Not only did it not experience the Enlightenment, it did not experience much of those other two pillars of modernity, the Renaissance and Reformation. So the Orthodox Church tends to have a premodern outlook.
But if culture, at least in places, is moving from modernity to postmodernity, however gradually, and in fits and starts, the "evidentiary" approach will not be of much use. And I have a suspicion that so-called "Islamic fundamentalism" is also a manifestation of modernity. Early modern Europe was characterised by witch hunts; nowadays people like to call witch hunts "medieval", but that is anachronistic. The witch hunts happened in a society that was on the cusp of modernity and premodernity. And it is in societies similarly caught between modernity and premodernity in Africa today that witch hunts ore common today.
And the same kind of mentality is emerging in Islam, as people in Islamic countries are really trying to come to grips with the worldview of modernity.
And one also sees the same kind of mentality emerging in Orthodoxy as well. At an Orthodox mission conference I attended about 10 years ago, Francis Schaeffer, a prominent convert to Orthodoxy from American evangelicalism, called for a kulturkampf. His paper was a sustained attack on certain aspects of contemporary American culture, though without much Orthodox theological backing. He called for "an Orthodoxy with teeth."
A Russian bishop who was present, speaking through an interpreter, responded, You call for an Orthodoxy with teeth, but are you sure that the people you want to bite will not grow bigger teeth and turn round and bite you? We have people in Russia who talk like you. They were in the KGB, and now that they have become Orthodox they think that they can use the same methods they used in the KGB to make people Orthodox. We call them "Orthodox Bolsheviks".
Don't we need a new political language?
Katrina Vandenheuvel writes, in a piece entitled Don't we need a new political language? about the habit politicians have of likening their opponents to nasty dictators of the past.
But journalists are at least as much guilty of this kind of hyperbole, a recent example being the reports on the feath and funeral of Slobodan Milosevic, where he was described as "butcher of the Balkans", "mass murderer", and was said to have "orchestrated" the wars of the Yugoslav succession, and killed 250000 people.
Where do they get this stuff?
Is this sort of exaggeration particularly common in the USA, or does it happen in other places as well? IT's hard to tell, sometimes, because so much of waht we read here in South Africa is syndicated from US columnists and wire services. But the falsehoods seem to be getting bigger and more obvious.
But journalists are at least as much guilty of this kind of hyperbole, a recent example being the reports on the feath and funeral of Slobodan Milosevic, where he was described as "butcher of the Balkans", "mass murderer", and was said to have "orchestrated" the wars of the Yugoslav succession, and killed 250000 people.
Where do they get this stuff?
Is this sort of exaggeration particularly common in the USA, or does it happen in other places as well? IT's hard to tell, sometimes, because so much of waht we read here in South Africa is syndicated from US columnists and wire services. But the falsehoods seem to be getting bigger and more obvious.
The Progressive Christian Blogger Network
I've just joined the Progressive Christian Blogger Network in the hope of finding some kindred spirits, but I'm not very hopeful.
Much of the Internet, including the blogosphere, seems to be dominated by the USA, and US political, social and religious divisions make little sense to me. They're always on about the "Religious Right" over there, and when I've encountered it, I've found myself totally out of sympathy with their style, if not with all their causes. I generally agree with the "Pro-Life" position, but to me that means being opposed to war and capital punishment as well as to abortion, and especially to the recent US-led wars of aggression in Yugoslavia and Iraq.
And when it comes to wars of aggression, Bill Clinton doesn't seem to count as a member of the "Religious Right", but his warmongering doesn't seem to be any better than George Bush's.
But still I hope, and so, for what it's worth, there's now a "Progressive Christian Blogroll" here mainly to make it easy for me to look at some of the blogs listed, and blog them here if there's any good stuff on them.
Technorati tags: political theology, Christianity & culture,
Much of the Internet, including the blogosphere, seems to be dominated by the USA, and US political, social and religious divisions make little sense to me. They're always on about the "Religious Right" over there, and when I've encountered it, I've found myself totally out of sympathy with their style, if not with all their causes. I generally agree with the "Pro-Life" position, but to me that means being opposed to war and capital punishment as well as to abortion, and especially to the recent US-led wars of aggression in Yugoslavia and Iraq.
And when it comes to wars of aggression, Bill Clinton doesn't seem to count as a member of the "Religious Right", but his warmongering doesn't seem to be any better than George Bush's.
But still I hope, and so, for what it's worth, there's now a "Progressive Christian Blogroll" here mainly to make it easy for me to look at some of the blogs listed, and blog them here if there's any good stuff on them.
Technorati tags: political theology, Christianity & culture,
26 March 2006
PunkMonk San Francisco
If the Orthodox have Punx to monks, the Anglicans have this.
PunkMonk San Francisco
I'm not quite sure how similar it is, though.
Technorati tags: Anglican Church, punkmonksf, punx to monks
PunkMonk San Francisco
I'm not quite sure how similar it is, though.
Technorati tags: Anglican Church, punkmonksf, punx to monks
21 March 2006
Balkan outlooks: In memoriam: Slobodan Milosevic
Now here is a thoughtful comment on the life and death of Slobodan Milosevic.
Balkan outlooks: In memoriam: Slobodan Milosevic
Not that I agree with everything the author says, but at least he does not swallow the media lie that Milosevic "orchestrated" the wars of the Yugoslav succession, and shows that Milosevic was as much a victim of circumstances as an "orchestrator".
I've dealt with this more fully in my other blog, but it is interesting that at the time South Africa was moving away from apartheid, and udoing the "Balkanisation" of the apartheid years, Yugoslavia was moving in the opposite direction.
So why was apartheid bad for South Africa and good for Yugoslavia, not merely fro the nationalistic leaders of Yugoslavia, but also for the Nato powers that recommended and imposed solutions from outside?
And why was a Truth and Reconciliation Commission good for South Africa, but Yugoslavia had to have war crimes tribunals?
It has been estimated that about 3-4 million people were thenically cleansed in South Africa during the apartheid years -- far more than in Yugoslavia. So why the schizophrenic view from the West?
Technorati tags: Balkan politics, disinformation, apartheid
Balkan outlooks: In memoriam: Slobodan Milosevic
Not that I agree with everything the author says, but at least he does not swallow the media lie that Milosevic "orchestrated" the wars of the Yugoslav succession, and shows that Milosevic was as much a victim of circumstances as an "orchestrator".
I've dealt with this more fully in my other blog, but it is interesting that at the time South Africa was moving away from apartheid, and udoing the "Balkanisation" of the apartheid years, Yugoslavia was moving in the opposite direction.
So why was apartheid bad for South Africa and good for Yugoslavia, not merely fro the nationalistic leaders of Yugoslavia, but also for the Nato powers that recommended and imposed solutions from outside?
And why was a Truth and Reconciliation Commission good for South Africa, but Yugoslavia had to have war crimes tribunals?
It has been estimated that about 3-4 million people were thenically cleansed in South Africa during the apartheid years -- far more than in Yugoslavia. So why the schizophrenic view from the West?
Technorati tags: Balkan politics, disinformation, apartheid
no contact politics: Milosevic
Someone else has noticed the media lies that seemed to reach a crescendo on the deaoth of Milosevic.
no contact politics: Milosevic
But it's rather sad that the word "liberal" can be used to mean just about anything, and so ends up meaning nothing at all.
no contact politics: Milosevic
But it's rather sad that the word "liberal" can be used to mean just about anything, and so ends up meaning nothing at all.
20 March 2006
The Left End of the Dial
Who's to blame for the wars of the last decade and a half?
The Left End of the Dial
and who's getting the blame?
Scapegoat RIP
The Left End of the Dial
and who's getting the blame?
Scapegoat RIP
18 March 2006
Holy Archangels' Monastery near Prizren, Serbia
Why is the bombing of a mosque major news, while bombing of churches is ignored by the media?
Holy Archangels' Monastery near Prizren, Serbia
Technorati tags: religious persecution, Orthodox theology, Balkan politics
Holy Archangels' Monastery near Prizren, Serbia
Technorati tags: religious persecution, Orthodox theology, Balkan politics
14 March 2006
Mail problems
There seem to be problems with the mail server at Durham University, and e-mail sent to my address at shayes@dunelm.org.uk does not seem to be getting through.
If you have sent mail to me recently and have not had a reply, please resend to one of my alternative e-mail addresses:
* hayesstw@telkomsa.net
* hayesstw@yahoo.com
* hayesstw@gmail.com
I have been unable to contact the Durham University servers at www.dur.ac.uk or www.dunelm.org.uk, but I don't think they will be down permanently, but in the meantime please send copies of important mail to one or other of the alternative addresses.
If you have sent mail to me recently and have not had a reply, please resend to one of my alternative e-mail addresses:
* hayesstw@telkomsa.net
* hayesstw@yahoo.com
* hayesstw@gmail.com
I have been unable to contact the Durham University servers at www.dur.ac.uk or www.dunelm.org.uk, but I don't think they will be down permanently, but in the meantime please send copies of important mail to one or other of the alternative addresses.
13 March 2006
Mystery Achievement: Northern Cyprus Is Christianrein
There was ethnic cleansing, and there is religious cleansing, and sometimes there is both.
Mystery Achievement: Northern Cyprus Is Christianrein
Mystery Achievement: Northern Cyprus Is Christianrein
Butcher of the Balkans?
Interesting contrast in news media reporting on a couple of today's top stories:
The BBC
Milosevic found dead in his cell - news.bbc.co.uk
“Excerpts : Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has been found dead in the detention centre at The Hague tribunal. The tribunal said an autopsy will be conducted to establish cause of death, but there was no indication of suicide.”
CNN
'Butcher of the Balkans' found dead - cnn.com
“While some may rue that he was not found guilty at the court in the Hague the fact that the 'Butcher of the Balkans' Milosevic found dead in cell is probably the best outcome for all concerned because it prevents his being considered a martyr to the West. Slobodan Milosevic was a lawyer, gas company executive, and party apparatchik who used nationalism and the media to murder hundreds of”
The first, at least to begin with, seems objective, and sticks to the facts. But CNN comes up with the tendentious epithet "Butcher of the Balkans". Where does that come from, I wonder?
And in almost everything I've read in the media about this story, there is the same exaggeration and spin. One obituary said he was the one who "orchestrated" the Balkan wars of the 1990s -- as if nobody else had any responsibility at all. He did it all, single-handed.
And most people seem to parrot this, and accept it unquestioningly, unthinkingly. Are the Western media propagating these twists and exxagerations unthinkingly, or is someone "orchestrating" them? Almost they persuade me to believe in conspiracy theories.
Undoubtedly Slobodan Milosevic played a major role in the wars of the Yugoslav succession, in fanning the flames of nationalism. But were people like Tudjman and Izetbegovic simply puppets, dancing to his tune? Were Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Madeleine Albright simply obeying his bidding, playing the tunes that Milosevic had "orchestrated" for them?
It seems that there is a massive attempt to make Milosevic the scapegoat for all the ills of the Balkans, so that others can deny responsibility for the part they played.
The BBC
Milosevic found dead in his cell - news.bbc.co.uk
“Excerpts : Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has been found dead in the detention centre at The Hague tribunal. The tribunal said an autopsy will be conducted to establish cause of death, but there was no indication of suicide.”
CNN
'Butcher of the Balkans' found dead - cnn.com
“While some may rue that he was not found guilty at the court in the Hague the fact that the 'Butcher of the Balkans' Milosevic found dead in cell is probably the best outcome for all concerned because it prevents his being considered a martyr to the West. Slobodan Milosevic was a lawyer, gas company executive, and party apparatchik who used nationalism and the media to murder hundreds of”
The first, at least to begin with, seems objective, and sticks to the facts. But CNN comes up with the tendentious epithet "Butcher of the Balkans". Where does that come from, I wonder?
And in almost everything I've read in the media about this story, there is the same exaggeration and spin. One obituary said he was the one who "orchestrated" the Balkan wars of the 1990s -- as if nobody else had any responsibility at all. He did it all, single-handed.
And most people seem to parrot this, and accept it unquestioningly, unthinkingly. Are the Western media propagating these twists and exxagerations unthinkingly, or is someone "orchestrating" them? Almost they persuade me to believe in conspiracy theories.
Undoubtedly Slobodan Milosevic played a major role in the wars of the Yugoslav succession, in fanning the flames of nationalism. But were people like Tudjman and Izetbegovic simply puppets, dancing to his tune? Were Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Madeleine Albright simply obeying his bidding, playing the tunes that Milosevic had "orchestrated" for them?
It seems that there is a massive attempt to make Milosevic the scapegoat for all the ills of the Balkans, so that others can deny responsibility for the part they played.
11 March 2006
An image of repentance
Yesterday the news media were reporting the death of John Profumo at the age of 91. For those under the age of 50 or so, who probably won't remember it, John Profumo was the British Minister of War who was forced to resign in 1963 after the biggest political sex scandal of the 20th century. He was sleeping with a prostitute who was also sleeping with a Russian spy, and that was a big no-no in the days of the Cold War.
I remember some of the jokes that went around at the time, when rumours of the scandal first started circulating, and Profumo was denying them. "Nil combustibus Profumo -- there's no smoke without fire" was one of the wittier ones.
Unlike the present day, politicians who resigned in those days could not easily return to a political career through the back door. Profumo did not return to politics, but spent the next 40 years working among the poor in the East End of London, supported by his wife, who was willing to forgive his adultery.
In reporting his death, the news media dwelt mainly on the juicier aspects of the scandal that led to his downfall, and mentioned his good works only in passing. As Shakespeare said, "The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones."
Nevertheless, Profumo's later life was an image of repentance, and an example that some of our present-day politicians would do well to follow. Perhaps our own ex-Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, could profit by the example, considering that the media are making as big a fuss over his sex life as they did over Profumo's.
For those who might like to know more about the more important part of his life, his work at Toynbee Hall can truly be said to be an image of repentance.
Technorati tags: sex scandals, politics, repentance
I remember some of the jokes that went around at the time, when rumours of the scandal first started circulating, and Profumo was denying them. "Nil combustibus Profumo -- there's no smoke without fire" was one of the wittier ones.
Unlike the present day, politicians who resigned in those days could not easily return to a political career through the back door. Profumo did not return to politics, but spent the next 40 years working among the poor in the East End of London, supported by his wife, who was willing to forgive his adultery.
In reporting his death, the news media dwelt mainly on the juicier aspects of the scandal that led to his downfall, and mentioned his good works only in passing. As Shakespeare said, "The evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones."
Nevertheless, Profumo's later life was an image of repentance, and an example that some of our present-day politicians would do well to follow. Perhaps our own ex-Deputy President, Jacob Zuma, could profit by the example, considering that the media are making as big a fuss over his sex life as they did over Profumo's.
For those who might like to know more about the more important part of his life, his work at Toynbee Hall can truly be said to be an image of repentance.
Technorati tags: sex scandals, politics, repentance
05 March 2006
What advanced degree should I have got?
What advanced degree should I have got?
Wot, no theology?
| You Should Get a PhD in Liberal Arts (like political science, literature, or philosophy) |
 You're a great thinker and a true philosopher. You'd make a talented professor or writer. |
Wot, no theology?
Western Orthodoxy: Continuing Anglican Bishop Converts to Western Rite Orthodoxy
While I'm not too keen on "Western Rite" Orthodoxy (which Western Rite do they use?) I nevertheless found this quite interesting.
Western Orthodoxy: Continuing Anglican Bishop Converts to Western Rite Orthodoxy
When I was leaving the Anglican Church (over 20 years ago now), I was visited by a continuing Anglican, Louis Traycik, who put me in touch with his bishop, Anthony Clavier, and sent me the paper he edited, and I got quite a lot of literature. Anthony Clavier seemed to be one of the saner continuing Anglican bishops. My impression that most of them were very clear about what they were against, but they were very vague about what they were for. They disliked trends in ECUSA, and united to oppose them, but once they had split off, they squabbled among themselves and could hardly agree on anything.
Orthodoxy had problems, and big ones, but there was something in Orthodoxy that was bigger than all the problems. So a move in the right direction, I think.
Western Orthodoxy: Continuing Anglican Bishop Converts to Western Rite Orthodoxy
When I was leaving the Anglican Church (over 20 years ago now), I was visited by a continuing Anglican, Louis Traycik, who put me in touch with his bishop, Anthony Clavier, and sent me the paper he edited, and I got quite a lot of literature. Anthony Clavier seemed to be one of the saner continuing Anglican bishops. My impression that most of them were very clear about what they were against, but they were very vague about what they were for. They disliked trends in ECUSA, and united to oppose them, but once they had split off, they squabbled among themselves and could hardly agree on anything.
Orthodoxy had problems, and big ones, but there was something in Orthodoxy that was bigger than all the problems. So a move in the right direction, I think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
