It finally happened.. John Shelby Spong died

That's just not compatible with Anglican or even generally Christian history. It's a product of modern effeminacy. Here is how Christians of days past used to deal with such things:



https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Catalogue_of_Sects.GIF

 

If Spong was not a heretic, then the word has no meaning.

 

Actually, it is word-for-word the way it was presented to me during my catechesis in the Eastern Orthodox Church. It rings true with what I know of Church history, and I’ve never felt any need to revise it since then. I doubt any serious person would see any link between my emphasizing exclusive episcopal authority to determine heresy and “modern effeminacy”, LOL.

 

Would those be the same Eastern Orthodox who call St. Augustine a heretic, who call the entire Roman Catholic Church as heretics, consider utterly invalid the ordinations and the eucharist of Roman Catholics, and even re-baptize other Orthodox as potentially invalid & heretical?

That's the default Eastern Orthodox. For all their faults, I respect that.

Perhaps you went through the Orthodox Church of America though, which is known to be liberal, so I don't know your specific journey through the EO world. Everyone (outside the OCA) considers you a rank heretic right now, just for not being in communion with them.

 

I did not go through the OCA. No, they do not consider me a "heretic" (for the aforementioned reasons I've already covered). The word you're looking for is "lapsed". There are reasons I am no longer Eastern Orthodox, and they include some of the items you mentioned. The restrained understanding of heresy that I was taught in catechesis isn't one of them. But this isn't about me. The subject of the thread is the late J.S. Spong. I'm not defending Spong. He never seemed to me to be a particularly original or insightful thinker in his own right, his work struck me as amateurish, and I thus never took him seriously or paid much attention to him one way or the other. As a matter of ecclesiastical law, however, heresy is a juridical category, and without Spong ever having been tried for, or convicted of, heresy, I'm personally unwilling to apply that particular label to him, though I certainly recognize how starkly at variance his writings and public statements were with normative teaching.

 

I honestly think that the only reason why Spong is notable is that he was a Bishop in good standing, who held and promoted views that seemed at variance with the faith once delivered to the saints. Had he been a theologian, student or professor, or held some other role in the Church he would simply be a blip on the radar of little note. The story of Spong asks us to understand the role of the Bishop as defender of the faith, preserver of the sacred deposit of the faith, and leader of the faithful in our campaign against son, the world and the devil. In many ways Spong sought to promote a gospel that unbelievers could accept, and a Church that related to those people whom the Church had often forgotten. Some would suggest that he threw the baby out with the bathwater, and of course when it comes to a proper understanding of the incarnation, that is the last thing one should want to do.