Thanks a lot, Kevin, for sending me this link. I can't look at anything else right now. Apologies to anyone who calls me on the phone, or knocks on the door. I'm spending all of my time learning the religious affiliations of all of my favorite comic book characters.
If you're a comic book geek, be sure not to click this link without at least an hour to spend.
[ENS, Philadelphia] John Paterson, bishop of Auckland and chair of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), told the Executive Council that he hopes General Convention will rigorously debate the Windsor Report while keeping in mind the communion that Anglicans share. (ENS Photo by Cynthia Black.)
Okay, so I must admit that this was completely unexpected. Of course, I have heard that Paterson is a beacon of hope in the ACC, but this confirms that. If you go to the link you can read the full text of his remarks.
Of special interest to me are a couple of points. First, and perhaps most poignant, his heartfelt apology for the actions of ACC's Nottingham meeting:
"I apologize and at the same time I commend your representatives for the manner in which they managed to somehow stay with the body that was treating them so badly," Paterson said.
Paterson also talks about how the ACC can serve as a central point for interfaith and ecumenical dialog. His point being that an international representative body is easier to approach than "43 independent member churches." I want to be open to this, and I do not want to question Paterson after such a profoundly healing moment, so it is difficult for me to express that I feel that members of other faiths are not necessarily served by a watered down presentation of our witness.
For TEC to continue with the ACC only serves the dialog that we have with other ACC members. We are climbing the ladder, and reaching down to pull them up. But, as we know, there are many churches who remain on the ground -- some of them digging holes into the stagnant status quo.
As an aside at this point, I would like to point out that there are many who accuse TEC of somehow bowing to culture in its approval of LGBT clergy, and not being counter-cultural. How can someone get away with a statement like this? How can anyone say that the full inclusion of our lesbian and gay sisters and brothers is a product of the greater culture? What are these people smoking? The greater culture is in the same place as the Network, the AAC, the ACC, and the Bush administration, the congress, and the Supreme Court. Namely, that there is no such thing as full inclusion or equal protection. Sure, Brokeback Mountain won some Academy Awards, but it was not a box office blockbuster. Simply take a look at this list of the top 150 box office winners of all time. How many gay themed movies do you see? ZERO! When you are confronted by the claim that TEC is bowing to the greater culture, remind the speaker that San Francisco has not yet tooled an army to take over the rest of the world -- not yet anyway.
[End of digression.]
Suffice it to say that when it comes to dialog on this or any other issue, we are not served by allowing the ACC to speak on behalf of TEC.
Paterson also very strongly states that TEC has acted in accordance with the Windsor Report in an exemplary fashion. His words:
My next word is one of commendation. Along with a number of others in the Communion, I take the view that the Episcopal Church thus far has been exemplary in the attention that you have given to the recommendations of The Windsor Report. Of course you have your General Convention soon, and that body will make up its own mind about these matters. The process of reception is moving along, and at considerable cost to your own ministry and mission the Episcopal Church has acted carefully and well. I hope that the call in The Windsor Report for all Provinces to exercise generosity and charity as the process gathers pace does not go unheeded. Those qualities are yet to be shown by some.
Any of the bishops who have acted within the province of TEC, and in disregard of DEPO, since Windsor have thumbed their nose at its recommendations. And many in the US who have sought such oversight have continually pointed to a need for TEC to repent of its actions at GC-2003. They tend to express that we have ignored the entirety of the document by not acting in a way that Windsor does not call us to act. Windsor does not call us to enter a special General Convention to respond to this one recommendation. The moratorium on confirmations of episcopal elections has proved sufficient to act accordingly. But the din is loud -- "Why have they not yet repented?"
It is my opinion, and I feel very strongly that TEC should not apologize for her actions in 2003 if we truly believe that God has called us to act. Now, people that I really respect have pointed out that there are instances where assemblies have acted prayerfully in a way that they felt truly called by God to act, and have erred. If that is true, then so be it. I would not expect them to apologize for their actions because all an assembly can do is pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. As people of faith, should we doubt that God is faithful?
***
Finally, I have been reading a wonderful little book called Understanding the Windsor Report. Actually, one of my favorite "Orthodox" Episcopalians, Paul Zahl, is a co-author of the book. (Sorry Paul, I hope you don't get in trouble because I openly display my fondness for you.) I'm struck how the other author, Ian Douglas, expresses disregard for those of us who want to add a fourth leg to the three-legged stool of Anglicanism -- the leg of "experience." There is, of course, the realm of religious experience, but that's not my concern here. I'm interested in an empirical argument here. There can be a philosophical debate about whether reason can exist without experience, and that might be fun to steer off into, but I simply feel it is necessary to state the necessity of experience so that we can enter dialog with those on the other side of the debate.
A thesis from experience might be: Have you ever known someone who was a partnered lesbian or gay person that lived their life in every way -- other than sexually of course -- in accordance with the scriptures? (I add the portion between the dashes because we all know that the so-called orthodox point of view is that sex with someone of the same biological sex is not in accord with scripture and I don't want to alienate my dialog partner from the outset.) The fact is that many people I know must answer that they do know such people. If Jesus is faithful to his words in Matthew 25, and you know someone who is gay or lesbian who visits the sick and imprisoned, feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, and even loves God with all their heart, mind, and soul -- what are we to do with this experience? Shall we deny it? And, as Jesus is addressing panta ta ethne (all of the nations), does this mean that they still have to follow the strictures of Jewish Law? I believe that he is addressing those who fall outside of the confines of The Law, and will gladly discuss why if need be.
We cannot witness without our experience. Such a witness would be empty to say the least. That's it for this blast. I just got some of the best news I've had in a long time and will share that here soon.
Time for ‘Columbus Tea Party’?ACC must allow our representation if it wants more of our money
by Winnie Varghese
Democracy is about voice and vote, one to one. Communion is about the body of Christ broken and shared and revealed among us. We can choose, as citizens, not to participate in the democratic process, but we cannot be denied access unless we have shown flagrant disregard for the rule of law.
Read the rest in Episcopal Life - Active Voice
When I heard about that the Executive Council had recommended paying the raised fees to the ACC, an organization who has excused our presence, I was aghast. And or course, they are under pressure from the primates to become a curia -- our absence is essentially allowing this takeover.
Whinnie Varghese has done a great job telling the ACC to put their money where there mouth is. I definitely could not have said it better, and haven't heard it better said. Way to go Winnie.
Okay, I knew it would be a lot of work, but announcing a slate of candidates for bishop in the diocese of california has turned me into a sniveling whiner. Wah, there's so much to do.
Breathe.
Pray.
Listen.
Well, it's not so bad I guess. I'm also trying to figure out what it means to be a Christian after you read stuff like this. It is really fascinating that there is so much punditry. Fascinating comments about Integrity, the ABC, the Queen of England, sodomites, orthodox Anglicans, are all par for the course. But a more bitter -- nay vitriolic -- tone I've never read. I can see why the liberal episco-geeks keep saying things like "don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out." But, of course, they're wrong too.
For me, keeping the conservatives in the diocese of California here and loved is the most important part of this transitioning process. We have St. Columba's in Inverness; a wonderful community that really just can't fathom how anyone in their right minds might vote for a gay bishop. The question I would like to ask every nominee is "What are you going to do to keep St. Columba's in the diocese?" Most of the clergy in the diocese could give a shit about St. Columba's. They see them as nothing more than an oddity out in the furthest reaches of the diocese. I see them as the ultimate challenge for us to live our baptismal faith. As soon as any person is elected bishop in this diocese, they need to strap a towel around their waste, grab a basin and a pitcher of warm water, and go wash the feet of every member of that little church in Inverness. In my mind, a gay or lesbian bishop might be able to pull this off, if they do it with honesty and true humility.
Because, as we all know, none of this is about sexuality -- although the commentators on David Virtue's site can't seem to think about anything but two men having anal intercourse. This is really about power. There are many on both sides who seek power over others. What we need now, more than ever, is the model of Jesus' final commandment. It is in humble service that we truly express the power of the Gospel. It is in stooping to the feet of the other that we bring the Kingdom of God closer.
A bishop search is an interesting process, really. I didn't know any of the nominees until about one hour before they were named. I still don't know much, but I will. So now, I get to remain journalistically detached from the process while finding out everything I can about the candidates. I do plan to speak up about the process, though. Maybe even here.
peace,
s
Bono pushes U.S. to increase aid to poor
WASHINGTON (AP) — Quoting from Islamic, Jewish and Christian texts, rock star Bono called Thursday for the U.S. government to give an additional 1% of the federal budget to the world's poor.
Of course, Bono keeps speaking to those who smile and nod and talk about how important Bono's work is, but then, what we get from those who have audience with Bono is more lip-service.
I understand why Bono feels that it's so important to speak to these leaders, and some of his words do sound brave, but when is he going to point out their hypocrisy. Bush talks a big game when it comes to his State of the Union addresses, but has he really stepped-up service to the world's poor? Actually, what he does is call those who fight to end unlawful occupation of their lands "terrorists" and he kills more innocent civilians than the evil dictators he uses as patsies for his wars.
Bono did up the ante in his speech from this morning, raising the requested commitment from .7% to 1% of the government's budget, but why didn't he point out that the wealthy West hasn't even come close to achieving the .7 requested for the Millennium Development Goals?
Speaking to President Bush and members of Congress at the National Prayer Breakfast, the U2 front man said it's unjust to keep poor people from selling their goods while singing the virtues of the free market, to hold children to ransom for the debts of their grandparents and to withhold medicines that would save lives.
"God will not accept that," he said. "Mine won't. Will yours?"
This radio spot from St. Andrew's Episcopal Church, Birmingham, AL, is starting to make the rounds among episco-geeks. I'll give you a second to go listen to it...
Okay, so what was your reaction? I'll say up front that I absolutely love it. And many of my friends are having a great time with it as well.
There are, however, some negative reactions to it. My friend JJ says the following:
"First, if I understand the "where" of this piece, it's in Birmingham, Alabama. If so, then this could very well be a wonderful example of "contextualizing and inculturating theology." To invite people to church by using the style of monster truck events -- with which presumably the audience is very well familiar -- is an interesting way to get their attention and it might even persuade them to make some better connections between their life of faith and their daily grind at work.
"Second, well, I'm appalled. Phrases like "see sin crushed beneath monster loaves of bread" or whatever that phrase was, and "giant vats of wine" just strikes me as over the top in some way that I can't quite put my finger on. I do, however, have a fairly negative gut reaction to it. I'm not so sure that caricaturing the Holy Mysteries is the best way to get people to take them more seriously. In fact, it may do just the opposite by simply strengthening the idea that going to church is not so different from going to a monster truck rally -- both are just two possible options on a menu of activities from which one might choose to pass the time. And really, if that's all they are, then why in the world would anyone choose to go to a liturgy rather than a sporting event? But if they are fundamentally different types of activity then it's not a matter of choosing between two similar thing but fixing one's priorities. I fear this ad does not help anyone see the important distinction between the kinds of activity."
Okay, so I don't think that this ad is meant as catechesis, it is a way to catch people's attention. I bet it does just that. I'd love to hear the anecdotal observations from the folks at St. Andrew's whether this actually brings people in the doors or not. As to whether or not it confuses people's concept of the Holy Mysteries, well that's depends on how well the follow-up goes. In my mind, this is not very different than the ads develped by the Minnesota Ad Project back in the '80s. They were funny ways to get people to question their assumptions. One of the assumptions that I think people have about TEC is that we are stuffy and take ourselves way too seriously. Well, maybe this radio ad will help people think that at least some episcopalians have a sense of humor.
Then there's the point that Jesus used some pretty over-the-top ways to get people's attention. "The Kingdom of God is like a what???!!!"
According to Nan Ross at the Episcopal Media Center, the ad has not yet run, but is planned for local radio soon. I'll try to follow up and keep you posted.
The slate of candidates for Presiding Bishop of TEC have been named, and first glance is that we have three white southern men (like me), and one woman. I know a little about two of the men (Parsley & Alexander), and a lot more about the woman. Suffice it to say that even though I think Katherine Jefferts Schori is a great bishop, I don't think that she is at all what TEC needs right now. My guess is that her selection is -- dare I say it -- a token selection.
What TEC needs right now is someone who can lead us away from the centralizing forces of the AMiA/Network/Global South folks, and toward a new understanding of what it means to be a contextualized, autonomous church. This person should help us to re-focus that our mission is toward the poor, and in striving for peace, and to demand that we stop playing the power struggle games that the so-called "orthodox," keep trying to force us in to. The new PB should have an understanding of what it means to lead a counter-cultural, historically focused church that was born out of disestablishment, and that must shine light on the steady erosion of the Establishment Clause in current American politics.
Thanks to ChrisT for turning me on to this "Are you a heretic" test. Warning: For Religious Geeks Only!!!
You scored as Chalcedon compliant. You are Chalcedon compliant. Congratulations, you're not a heretic. You believe that Jesus is truly God and truly man and like us in every respect, apart from sin. Officially approved in 451.
Are you a heretic? created with QuizFarm.com |
I never did give a follow-up to the "Book of Daniel" blog. Suffice it to say that Bill Tammeus speaks for me.
Toss TV's 'Book of Daniel' to the lions
By Bill TammeusAt the request of a friend, I watched the first episode of "The Book of Daniel," NBC's controversial new prime-time Friday drama. At least I tried to. I lasted 17 minutes -- the last 15 only by forcing myself to stay put in my recliner.
Centre Daily Times | 01/20/2006 | Toss TV's 'Book of Daniel' to the lions
Since my college days, most of my friends have been what are sometimes pejoratively referred to as "unchurched." These are the deeply spiritual people who claim not to be "religious." Some folks think that they are consumers of spirituality and that they go where the winds blow -- but when it comes to my friends, these are intelligent people who have done their homework, and in many cases been exposed to the most despicable parts of religion. One of my friends in this category is more biblically literate than some of the people I went to seminary with. When it comes to the type of consumers these people are, I find them to be more closely related to the sheep than the goats of Matthew 25. The following article might be a bit disparaging, but I will take the title offered for my friends with the level of playfulness implied.
