Doctor Schori and Marcion

So as to not mask my position, to me the opening chapters of Holy Scripture are best described as lore. (Accumulated facts, traditions, or beliefs about a particular subject). I like that term albeit misunderstood by many. I posted much of this post as a comment over at Stand Firm to a post by Matt Kennedy, Do They Really “Take the Bible Seriously Not Literally”?. I am writing here in order to provide to revise and extend my remarks.

The parables of Christ are stories. Did the parable of the good Samaritans happen exactly as it got recorded in Holy Scripture and does it matter? I would contend that it matters nothing at all if the story of the good Samaritan happened exactly as recorded in Holy Scripture or not. Christ’s purpose was not to relate history.

With respect to the discussion about ECUSA, if the opening chapters of Holy Scripture are history or not are to me unimportant. Important moral and theological lessons are in those passages. It is important that God created. It is much less important, if important at all, how he created.

I have my problem with biblical literalism, especially with those who create pseudo-science to match a literal view of the creation story. There are several reasons for this, but for this discussion the important one is that they focus too much on the how and causes many people to miss the who.

We do not need to resolve if the creation story is history or lore, in order to understand that Holy Scripture says that homosexual acts are sin. I see the creation story as lore and should be read as such. If it is history or not is unimportant. The revisionists are using the discussion if the creation story is history or not to dismiss the clear condemnation of homosexual acts.

I like many was thinking the current problem in ECUSA was Gnostic until Father’s Matt’s piece on Pelagius and the Presiding Bishop. In reading that I started to think that there was also an element of Marcion.

The surface comparison that Schori and Marcion pick and choose scripture to match what they think God should be, is very valid. The “zinger question” on my canonical exam was to in effect, compare and contrast Marcion and Dispensationalism. If I had the time, such a paper on Schori would be interesting. Father Matt at Stand Firm has made a good start on the topic, anyone want to or think I should finish the paper?

Advertisement