Skip to main content.
« Previous entry: Vestments | Main page | Next entry: Toothbrushes »

June 20th, 2006

Are you orthodox?

Note: I am fully expecting some of the conservative bloggers who have kindly linked to this site over the last few days to declare their blogs out of communion with mine following the publication of this cartoon. Some may even go as far as to request alternative episcopal cartoonage, I don’t know. But please at least have a read of what I’ve got to say.

unorthodox
[Click on the cartoon for the full sized version]

By ‘orthodox’ here I am referring to “Adhering to what is commonly accepted, customary, or traditional”, rather than the Orthodox church, which is different altogether. It seems to me (though I am just the guy who draws the funny pictures) that maintaining that because your position is ‘orthodox’ it is therefore right is a bit of a dangerous thing to do. What if there is the slightest possibility that the orthodox position is wrong? What if (to take a random example) it is ok for Gentiles to be Christians and for Christians to eat hooved animals? (Sorry, that will make no sense to people who are unfamiliar with the Bible and in particular Acts chapter 10)

Who knows, perhaps sometimes, just sometimes, God takes the unorthodox position. Perhaps we’d all do well to acknowledge that we can’t be 100% certain we are right.

I’d like to stress once more: I am only the guy who draws the funny pictures. I could very well be wrong.

To put this cartoon on your blog:
Copy and paste this code.

<img src="http://www.weblogcartoons.com/cartoonblog/god-is-unorthodox.gif" alt="cartoon from www.cartoonchurch.com" />
<p>Cartoon by <a href="http://www.cartoonchurch.com/blog/">Dave Walker</a>. </p>

Other bloggers I like writing about not-unrelated topics:
Preludium: “Send Lawyers, Guns and Money”
Barefoot in the wilderness: “There’s a lot of fuss and noise in the Church at the moment…”
Exigency In Specie: “Don’t you just love Christians…“



This is a single Cartoon Blog entry, posted by Dave on Tuesday, June 20th, 2006 at 2:58 pm.

If you enjoyed this post you might also enjoy these (possibly) related articles:

Know someone else who might enjoy this post? Click here to send this to a friend. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

The technologically advanced may like to trackback from another site, follow responses to this post via the RSS 2.0 feed, or bookmark this post on del.icio.us or digg.

11 Responses to “Are you orthodox?”


  1. Larry Day says:

    Well said Dave - I bet you don’t use this cartoon as the book cover as it might affect sales!

    Humility and tolerance seem to have a lot to do with this. Attempting to cover up or mask anomalies is a silly way to go about life. I think we all need to live with uncomfortableness. It is good for the soul.

    June 20th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
  2. Tiffer says:

    Forward in Figures?

    The point of being “orthodox” is just to avoid being swayed by trends and fashions and led astray by false prophets. Of course the orthodox position is not always right, but if an organisation doesn’t look back in order to learn from mistakes it will going barmy. If people stick to the orthodox position simply because it is orthodox, then they are being silly.

    June 20th, 2006 at 3:40 pm
  3. Dave says:

    Larry - indeed. I’m all for orthodoxy if it helps sell books.

    Tiffer - you are of course right. Looking back is good and highly important. I meant to put ‘if in doubt be orthodox’ in the post somewhere. Actually, that would make a good t-shirt slogan.

    June 20th, 2006 at 3:46 pm
  4. Tiffer says:

    Yes - I certainly didn’t disagree with what you wrote, although I can never resist qualifying which is why I am such an annoying person :)

    The cartoon is correct in that orthodoxy is attributed to mans (and womans these days) understanding of God and church life/behaviour. God is and never will be what we can pin him down as.

    Although in reference to himself, God is very orthodox. I don’t think His values change - any open theists in the house?

    June 20th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
  5. Karin says:

    There is also the fact that some people seem to define what is orthodox in narrower terms than others.

    I like Brian McLaren’s idea of a generous orthdoxy. I think it would go well with a wide orthodoxy, which, I think, the CoE has attempted to embrace, with more or less success, depending on how loud the voices for a narrow orthodoxy happen to be.

    June 20th, 2006 at 4:05 pm
  6. jim bonewald says:

    Well said, Jesus certainly challenged the ‘orthodoxy’ of the religious leaders of his day and age.

    June 20th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
  7. robert marshall says:

    God is Dix rather than Dox - as in Gregory?

    fx - Removes liturgists hat - /fx

    and no that’s not a French elaboration of the Trinity!

    Robert

    June 20th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
  8. Davo says:

    It can still be pretty amazing when you come across a new, revolutionary and exciting idea about God - only to find it sitting there right in the middle of ‘orthodox’ teaching (This is one of those times that is calling out for an example, but I just can’t think of one at the moment).

    But, I do agree with the sentiment - if you think you’ve got God all sorted out and nailed down (ummm.. that wasn’t actually meant to be a reference to the cross), then you’re looking at the wrong god.

    June 20th, 2006 at 6:13 pm
  9. St says:

    There’s a book I can’t be bothered to write called, ‘Searching for the new orthodoxy.’ Any suggestion that you have orthodoxy taped is just an illusion of permanence. It was once orthodox to have many wives. Paul told Timothy it was appropriate for church leaders only to have one. Now it is deemed orthodox to have a maximum of one (at a time).

    June 20th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
  10. augustus meriwether says:

    Orthary dixory dox
    God climbed out of the box
    Theologians cried “NO!”
    The clergy said “Blow,
    Now we’re all out of jobs.”

    June 21st, 2006 at 7:31 am
  11. ash says:

    I think that General Synod recently added a new clause to the Windsor Report, asking that people not seek alternative episcopal cartoonage. But I may be wrong.

    June 22nd, 2006 at 3:30 pm