That priceless and laconic remark comes from Church of England Rev Pauline Scott, Vicar at St James’, Stretham, Cambridgeshire, in response to the news that Rev David Hart has converted to Hinduism while insisting he’s still a Christian. Rev Hart’s permission to officiate as a priest in the Diocese of Ely was recently renewed for three years. He neglected to inform his bishop that he had embraced Hinduism, although he did write about it in a book published three months before the licence renewal. An Anglican priest since 1984, Rev Hart is presently ministering (?) in a Hindu temple in southern India, but anticipates fulfilling the duties of an Anglican priest when he returns home to Stretham.
Mr Hart admitted on Tuesday that he had not told the Bishop of his conversion, but said that he would be “amazed” if his Hinduism “was treated with any suspicion by episcopal authority. I have neither explicitly nor implicitly renounced my Christian faith or priesthood.” His renewal of permission to officiate had been “sponsored” by the Rural Dean of Colombo in Sri Lanka, he said.
He believed his move “will rather be read in the spirit of open exploration and dialogue which is an essential feature of our shared modern spirituality”.He said on Monday that he felt he could still celebrate as an Anglican priest when he visited England, although he would continue to visit a Hindu temple.
I hope someone in the C of E comes to their senses and stops this nut case Rev Hart before he has a chance to celebrate anything as an Anglican priest.
Mr Hart, who has taken the Hindu name Ananda, blesses the daily congregation of about 60 with fire that has previously been offered to Nagar, the snake god. The ritual, he said, was normally performed only by Hindu priests.
A recent issue of The Hindu, India’s national newspaper, features a short profile of Rev Hart, compete with a picture and caption reading, “PIETY: David Hart, an Anglican priest, offers prayers to a Ganesha idol in front of his house at Karumam in the State capital”.
Meet David Hart, an Anglican priest, who recites Gayatri Mantram with the same devotion with which he celebrates the Eucharist or offers namaaz at Muslim prayer halls.
He is a "religious pluralist." His fascination for Lord Ganesha has prompted him to celebrate Vinayaka Chathurthi by consecrating an idol of Ganesha at a specially-erected podium in front of his rented house at Karumam on the outskirts of Thiruvananthapuram. Rev. Hart is an associate professor in Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Winchester in the U.K. He says his "pilgrimage to the ocean" on September 1 to immerse the idol will mark the culmination of a spiritual journey he had undertaken since his school years.
The image on the right of the Hindu deity Ganesha was downloaded from Wikipedia.
Someone who sees no contradiction between Christianity and Hinduism has no business teaching theology or religion. Here’s one rather basic contradiction: Christianity is monotheistic, Hinduism is polytheistic. HELLO! His bland assertion, “I have neither explicitly nor implicitly renounced my Christian faith or priesthood”, is patently ridiculous. Consecrating and offering prayers to an idol are clearly enacted renunciations of Christianity—and egregious violations of the first two commandments to boot.
Pauline Scott, the vicar quoted in the headline, isn’t afraid to call an apostate an apostate.
However, not everyone in the Church of England is impressed by Mr Hart’s passion for Hinduism. Pauline Scott, the team vicar of St James, in Stretham, said that she would oppose any attempts by Mr Hart to celebrate in the Ely Diocese.
“We do tend to use Christian priests, surprisingly enough,” she said.
Let’s hope the bishop of the diocese isn’t afraid to say the same, before this self-deluded twit is let loose in the pulpit of an Anglican church again.
This episode reminds me of what Mahatma Gandhi said when asked whether he was a Hindu:
"Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew."
When I heard Ben Kingsley say that in the 1982 film Gandhi, I had only been a Christian for a few months. Nonetheless, my immediate reaction was, “Only a Hindu could say that”. I'd say the same applies here.
h/t: Ruth Gledhill









Posts

I’ve actually met David a couple of times. He treated me to dinner when I was a grad student in Cambridge.
Let me say first of all that he is a really nice guy.
Secondly you have to know one other thing. David Hart is anti-realist, he does not believe in an object God, he believes that God only exists within religious dialogue. God, for David Hart is just a nice bit of me. His opinions are very much in the public domain as they are easily found in the books he has written.
So all this fuss is ridiculous. It might seem newsworthy but David’s conversion has not moved him any further from the ‘truth’.
The Church of England does not have a very effective discipline measure. It is only any good at getting rid of vicar’s misbehave in the trouser department.
Any doctrinal measure will just be used to sack Vicar’s for not being homophobic enough. Perhaps we have taken our eye of the ball there.
I agree that the C of E, like other Anglican churches, does not have effective discipline. Nevertheless, Rev Hart needed to have his licence renewed. If the bishop had failed to do that, I take it that Rev Hart would not be allowed to officiate in the Diocese of Ely.
I do appreciate the background info on Rev Hart, but I’m afraid that nothing you’ve said changes my opinion. It sounds like he shouldn’t have been ordained in the first place. Does the C of E not require prospective ordinands to affirm agreement with the Thirty-Nine Articles? (If not, evidently it should.)
It may well be that Rev Hart’s conversion to Hinduism has not moved him any farther from his “version of the truth” and that none of this is news to those who already knew of him. Now, however, the story has gone around the world via Church Times and The Times of London and created a public embarrassment and scandal for the Church. I still hope that the C of E will do what should have been done before: suspend his credentials.
What’s wrong in worshiping a ‘hindu’ god ? And who said Hart is a ‘christian’ in the first place? After all he is seeing a God in that stone and not a devil!!All religions preach for the good of man. And certainly thats what God intended. It is the way we intepret and the way we think, thats the problem. With age i believe you become wiser. I believe you come closer to God and not to one particular religion. You study scriptures for years, become ‘Rev’ and what not…but it seems you have missed the essence altogether.
I reallly wonder what you have achieved.
You are blind.
‘Whatever be one’s religion, its enough if man becomes good’ said the saint and social reformer, Sree Narayana Guru, a hundred years back.
Could’nt be more relevent in todays world!
Learn from Rev Hart.
ben
As it says in the post, worshipping false gods contravenes the Ten Commandments.
As it says in the post, Rev Hart said he’s a Christian.
What’s the source of your information concerning what “all religions preach”?
Thanks for your advice about God’s intentions and being relevant in the modern age, but I think I’ll stick with Jesus Christ, Holy Scripture, and the Christian Church.
Do you know that there are other religions in the world besides Christianity?
And there are Holy Scriptures other than the Bible saying almost the same teachings?
And that the teachings of those ‘false gods’ are the same basically, as that of Christ?
So you stick with Christ. Good for you.
I will stick with my God. Good for me.
Let Rev Hart stick with all the Gods. Good for him. After all they all lead to one God.
Read the other scriptures also along with the Bible.You will get over this tunnel vision of yours.
And for the question ‘What‚Äôs the source of your information concerning what ‚Äúall religions preach‚Äù?’
Common sense.
There is a very odd contradiction in what David Hart has done.
In all his books he takes a “radical” and therefore liberarian stance in theology. Being “Postmodern” and “Non-realist” he is able to view religion as very much a form of individualistic, self-expression. Thus his joining two religions simultaneously involves no self-contradiction (from his point of view) as he does not regard either as literally true.
This may seem a strange position to take but it is not as eccentric as it first seems. There is a long tradition of philosophers and theologians who take this stance including Wittgenstein and Don Cupitt.
No – the contradiction lies not in his philosophy but in the branch of Hinduism he has joined. It has not been mentioned in any of the reports I have read, but he states in his recent book “Trading Faiths” that he has joined ISKCON, the International Society for Krisha Consciousness, better known, to those of use old enough to remember the 60s, as Hari Krishna.
This is a very authoritarian branch of Hinduism which was involved throughout the 70s and 80s in some very nasty child abuse the result of which is up to 500 claims in court against the movement. I believe that the movement has cleaned up its act now but nowhere in his book does Rev Hart even nod towards this fact. He also, in the book, praises the Moonies, another loony-tune authoritarian cult.
Espousing such repressive organisations, for whom mind-control is a standard management technique, does no make any sense for anyone who believes in a liberarian position in theology. I think it is for this reason that we should not take the Rev Hart very seriously.
Links to ISKCON articles…
Cultic Studies Review
Hare Krishna at 40
[...] “We prefer our priests to be Christian” [...]
[...] “We prefer our priests to be Christian” [...]