Albany Via Media

July 30, 2010

To the Editor:

I would like to commend Allison de Kamel for her thoughtful and faithful response to Bishop Spong's second thesis. Her comments go right to the heart of the matter and are well-stated. If she doesn't understand the terminology or substance, essence, personhood and so on, it is only because we don't think in those terms these days so that, as a result, they need a bit of translation. If she or anyone else wishes to explore these issues further the best single volume that I know of on the subject is the J.N.D. Kelly's “Early Christian Doctrines.” It is a classic, not hard to get hold of and not hard to understand.

I would also, after reading many of Allison's posts on this site and at “Openly Episcopal,” like to express my appreciation for her evident conciliatory and irenic spirit. I am generally wary of the term “moderate” and the way it is used in recent debates; the claim of moderation seems so often to include the implication that one's opponents are immoderate and extreme — and hence not worthy of serious consideration. But I have to say that Allison is a genuine moderate who sincerely tries to find her own way in a fairly polarized setting. And when it comes to primary matters of faith, she appears to be thoroughly orthodox.

I used to sell books to Bishop Spong when I worked for the General Seminary Book store in the mid-eighties, and I found him to be a friendly and engaging person — quite different from the often strident persona projected in many of his writings. Generally, John Spong's gifts and training are outstripped by his intellectual aspirations, and he tends to operate in a realm of theological cartoon characters, crude stereotypes and straw men. Allison is quite right about his second thesis. His first thesis, however, is interesting. I actually think that “theism” as a philosophical category might not be the best term to use in relation to the God of the Bible. Certain prominent theologians (one thinks of Luther, Kierkegaard, Barth, etc.) have questioned whether the abstract “God of the philosophers” — that is the God of classic “theism” — bears any relationship to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And then when we come to terms with the triune nature of God, this also raises interesting questions about how apt a term like “theism” is in this case. I am not sure that Bishop Spong was thinking along these lines — probably not — but I do think he opens up an interesting question with his first thesis.

Christopher Brown+