[Dialogue] Recent discussions about identity and institutions

[Thomas Morrison]

Dear Everybody,

I agree.

Tom Morrison


----- Original Message ----- 
From: W. J. 
To: Colleague Dialogue
Sent: 8/20/2007 11:47:49 PM 
Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Recent discussions about identity and institutions


A fascinating story, Margaret. I'm curious to know who the "usual suspects" are, and where you are taking these courses. Sounds like their institutional vision (such as it is) is still biased by what Peter Berger called "the suburban captivity of the churches" over 40 years ago.

Margaret, you should be teaching this class!

At least the prof hit the nail on the head about E. I., even if he didn't approve of "radically calling the church to be the church in any and all of its circumstances." As though that had nothing to do with institutional arguments about having ecumenical tea parties.

Maybe it's time to work on deconstructing the hidden premises of seminary education. Is it really about institutional survival and maintenance?

Marshall Jones

Margaret Helen Aiseayew <aiseayew at netins.net> wrote:
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "frank bremner" 
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Dialogue] Recent discussions about identity and institutions
> I'm grateful that this discussion is proceeding.

Frank,
I glad someone is grateful the discussion is proceeding. I promised myself 
that I would not intrude upon it again, but the very day you sent this post 
I had a conversation with one of the professors of a seminary course I was 
taking. I guess I was rather hard on them and this particular professor had 
knocked everything ecumenical that anyone had mentioned for two weeks. I 
decided to corner him with the suggestion that his negativity in this regard 
could discourage other students in efforts that might prove very beneficial 
to their communities and eventually their congregations, quite apart from 
his continual push for the immediate result of increased numbers within the 
congregation which was always his push. We had a lively disagreement. He 
finally turned to me and asked what was my experience with Ecumenism that 
made me such ardent advocate?

I said that I was a staff member of the Ecumenical Institute. His eyes 
turned into saucers and he said, "E. I.?" I said many people had referred to 
us as EI. He sputtered and stuttered and sputtered through some half 
questions to make sure that I wasn't taking about some other EI and then 
declared, "Well, the Ecumenical Institute didn't have anything to do with 
ecumenism. I mean it didn't have anything to do with anything that I have 
been calling ecumenical in class. It only had to do with radically calling 
the church to be the church in any and all of its circumstances."

I can only say that the conversation did not accomplish anything for which I 
had hoped. Over the remainder of the courses I became clear that this was 
someone who had encountered us long ago and never gotten beyond the offense 
(or guilt?). He basically dismissed anything I had to say in the remainder 
of the classes as either being too radical for the average local 
congregation or as setting myself apart from normal people by sharing my 
experience.

Some institutional images don't fade.
Sometimes your identity is someone else's projection (or defense). 


_______________________________________________
Dialogue mailing list
Dialogue at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/dialogue_wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/dialogue_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20070821/612fe367/attachment-0001.html