[Marxism] self-indulgence

C. G. Estabrook galliher at illinois.edu
Sat Aug 14 13:35:30 MDT 2010


  You must be speaking of a different Spong...!

On 8/14/10 2:10 PM, Shane Mage wrote:
>  On Aug 14, 2010, at 1:14 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> >
> >> Rowan Williams - an Anglican bishop, poet, and theologian (and
> >> the current Archbishop of Canterbury) does not regard the story
> >> of crucifixion "as an edifying fable" (and surely not that it
> >> "must be recaptured from the mass of Pauline falsification").
> >>
> >> John Shelby Spong  once accused Williams of being a "neo-
> >> medievalist," preaching orthodoxy to the people in the pew but
> >> knowing in private that it is not true ... Williams responded: "I
> >>  am genuinely a lot more conservative than he would like me to
> >> be. Take the Resurrection. I think he has said that of course I
> >> know what all the reputable scholars think on the subject and
> >> therefore when I talk about the risen body I must mean something
> >> other than the empty tomb. But I don't. I don't know how to
> >> persuade him, but I really don't."
> >
> > Whatever Williams's innermost secret thoughts might be,  Pullman
> > certainly treats the Gospel narrative as an edifying fable and
> > Williams fully accepts that as the basis for his criticism when he
> >  likewise treats questions of historical fact as irrelevant.  If
> > the narrative is not based on historical fact, what can it be if
> > not edifying fable?  That Williams is (by virtue of his job)
> > compelled to assert belief in "the Resurrection" is no surprise (do
> > bears shit in the woods?).  But if he had any remotely rational
> > grounds for belief that the "Resurrection" story is historically
> > accurate he would have found it easy to persuade Spong that he,
> > rightly or wrongly, actually believed it.



More information about the Marxism mailing list