Talk:Don Cupitt

message: Is it really appropriate to categorise Cupitt as one of the "English atheists", along with names such as Richard Dawkins or Anthony Grayling? When, in 1984, the Radio Times wrote a review about his series Sea of Faith, it was pointed out that a previous source describing Cupitt as church-goer turned atheist "made the atheists very indignant", adding that "Cupitt is,after all, a Christian who very much believes in God". The article then tried to clarify what Cupitt meant by the word God. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you have a fair point - the category of Atheist Theologians is more apt - but perhaps the Atheists category is intrinsically broad. Stumps (talk) 10:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Query over categorisation

message: Some of the wikilinks in this article are red wikilinks,so could some one please start articles for those entries in red? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikilinks

message: Given the veracity of the last paragraph in this article, I don't understand how Cupitt can be considered an Anglican (and hence a Christian) except that he was probably baptized at some point and hasn't been excommunicated (though doubtless this is because the Anglican church rarely excommunicates anyone).  Corbmobile (talk) 05:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The game analogy is perhaps not appropriate when it comes to considering philosophy and beliefs about reality, which have always been subject to considerable change. Quite a lot of ministers of various denominations would express scepticism about literal interpretations of miracles and other events that are represented as historical, but perhaps weren't. In earlier generations, this degree of scepticism would have seen those ministers exluded from their churches, whereas nowadays non-literal interpretations would be widely seen as acceptable and a reasonable approach to an understanding of ancient literature, effectively part of the process of translation. The idea that "God" might not be an invisible being but, say, a representation of a set of principles or set of ideals is not quite so radical in this context. The rules of bowls are perhaps less turbulent than those of theology - hence the "sea of faith", perhaps?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.94.248 (talk) 10:46, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: An Anglican priest officially ceases to be a priest if he renounces his holy orders or is defrocked by the church authorities. AFAIK the latter has not happened but I do not know if he has renounced priesthood himself. There are also non-practicing priests past retirement age who have not sought permission to officiate (PTO) from their home diocese. The best way to establish the issue is to see if he is currently listed in Crockford's, the directory to the Anglican priesthood.Cloptonson (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglican? 

message: Hahaha, an article about a theologian that says virtually nothing about his theology. get a brain morans
:::"get a brain morans" - if that's a UserName, it seems appropriate. Hundovir (talk) 06:57, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Theology

message: An image used in this article, File:Don cupitt.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Don cupitt.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Being a priest is defined in theological and legal terms. Theologically, the Church maintains that ordination has indelible effects on the soul, so once a priest a person is a priest forever, no matter what. As for his status as a priest in the Church of England, legally defined, unless he has been deposed from Holy Orders (rare) or has renounced Holy Orders (a complex procedure) then he remains a priest. I am not quite sure what the situation is if he has left the Church of England. I think there is a question of *how* he would have left. I believe that reception into another Christian denomination would remove the legal effects of his ordination, if not the theological effects. However, Cupitt has not joined another Christian denomination, or even another non-Christian religion. I do not know whether he has petitioned to have his baptism erased from records, which I know some people do attempt. Anyway, I suspect that if he has not been deposed from/renounced his Orders then he legally is still a priest. Theologically he would still be a priest.--90.206.67.185 (talk) 03:37, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Echoing a comment I made earlier on this page, is Cupitt currently listed in Crockford's, the Anglican Church's directory of its clergy?Cloptonson (talk) 19:37, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status as priest 

message: :Cupitt is married with three children,
I.e. polygamist and paedo... ??
:who all now live and work in London, and two grandchildren.
They work in London and in two grandchildren... ??
Bewildered I am. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 16:42, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Funny English language!