As the last hours of 2007 slip by, I find myself in a reflective mood. This happens often at the turn of the year, as my birthday quickly follows the New Year. I can easily talk myself into a depression thinking about all the "might have beens." Not this year. There are too many positive and hopeful things to think about as I approach my birthday.
One of them is the example of my high school classmate Allan Karl who is travelling around the world on his motorcycle. You can find take a look at his adventures by clicking on the Worldrider link to the right. After not having visited the blog for a couple of weeks, I checked in yesterday and was amazed to find him in Africa. I spent over an hour catching up with his travelogue. I do not particularly want to travel the world on a motorcycle, a bicycle, on foot, or any other way other than plane, train and ship, but if he can do that in his mid-forties, then I can certainly work toward doing some of the things on my "list." Hmmmm...that sounds like a New Year's Resolution.
I rarely make New Year's Resolutions. I have ever only kept one successfully in my life. When I was in eighth grade I resolved to stop biting my fingernails. I spent a lot of time sitting on my hands for the next three months, but I kept that resolution. And this year I must make a resolution and keep it, since my continued good health depends upon it.
So at the moment, I am looking at 2008 and feeling pretty optimistic. Here's to hoping it stays that way.
Peace,
Jeffri
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 30, 2007
GAFCON? What Were They Thinking?
Michael Poon, a priest in the Diocese of Singapore has raised some thoughtful questions and concerns about the planning and intentions of GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference). Both of the documents appear on the Global South Anglican site.
The Rev. Poon's first set of questions appeared on December 29th in response to the December 25th announcement of GAFCON and is generally addressed to the Primates involved in the planning of the conference. The questions are direct and appropriate no matter which side of the Anglican Tempest in a Teapot you find yourself. Being a Titanic buff, I could not help but be amused by the following comment on the post:
I was also particularly struck by two thoughts toward the end of the letter. First:
UPDATE
If David Virtue is to be believed, the Most Rev. Dr. Mouneer Anis, President Bishop of the Middle East, was not consulted about the location, or anything else for that matter, of GAFCON. Mr. Virtue quotes correspondence between President Bishop Anis and Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria in this article.
Also posted on VirtueOnline are the Rev. Dr. Peter Toon's response to the initial announcement of GAFCON and his response to Archbishop Jensen's statement (you have to look closely in a paragraph in the middle of the posting to find where Dr. Toon's comments begin). His response to Bishop Jensen is particularly critical of the so-called "orthodox" bishops of the Global South crossing provincial borders:
The Daily Episcopalian section of the Episcopal Cafe posted the Rev. Greg Jones' commentary on the...ummmmm...conversation taking place on some of the conservative blogs in the wake of the GAFCON announcement and the Rev. Poon's questions. In "Conservative Anglicanism Splitting" the Rev. Jones correctly points out:
Among those the Rev. Jones names as "extremist Separatist Powers" is StandFirm. If you want to see what these folks have to say, you can look at this post, this one, and the comments on both. Except for a couple of writers on the StandFirm blog, I have little to no respect for most of the folks who post there. In my opinion they are as mean spirited and as nasty as they often accuse their "worthy opponents" of being. If you decide to read further on their blog, you have been warned.
Peace,
Jeffri
The Rev. Poon's first set of questions appeared on December 29th in response to the December 25th announcement of GAFCON and is generally addressed to the Primates involved in the planning of the conference. The questions are direct and appropriate no matter which side of the Anglican Tempest in a Teapot you find yourself. Being a Titanic buff, I could not help but be amused by the following comment on the post:
Do people think we really need these life boats lowered?* How do we know that the people lowering them actually know what they are doing?* Does the Captain know and approve of the lifeboats being lowered?* Who will be in command of each boat when the boats are actually in the water?* *Questions asked by a concerned passenger immediately after the Titanic struck an iceberg. Said passenger not known to have survived.His second is an open letter addressed directly to Archbishop Jensen in response to his December 27th Statement on the proposed Global Anglican Future Conference, appearing both on the GAFCON web pages and the site run by Anglican Media Sydney (the media and communications arm of the Diocese of Sydney). His first question goes right to the heart of the "crisis" by asking Archbishop Jensen just what the issue is:
What is the particular nature of the crisis before the Communion today? You mentioned several times in your Statement that the issue is over “biblical standards”, especially “in the biblical view of sexual ethics”. I wonder if that depiction adequately reflects the crux of the matter. After all, some other churches and congregations from different traditions have also departed from the "biblical views”. I wonder if the issue before the Anglican Communion is rather this: How do we see ourselves keeping the faith and witnessing together as part of the “one, holy, catholic and apostolic church” across the ages and across the oceans? Perhaps at the heart is an ecclesiological issue. So the contention has never been simply on biblical view of sex, but on the particular issues of episcopal election of a candidate living in a committed same-sex relationship, and on the rites of blessing for same-sex unions. The process of discerning the Word and on keeping faith to what is revealed as a community go hand in hand. I suggest this interpretation may perhaps be fundamental, and determines how we respond and map the way forward.Basically, he is asking "is this about how we do things, or is it about sex?" In other words, are we dealing with the Gay Fear Condition here?
I was also particularly struck by two thoughts toward the end of the letter. First:
The “new” in the Communion is that for the first time we live as a worldwide Communion of autonomous churches, defined by geographical boundaries, and called to work together across the geopolitical and socioeconomic realities. We are no longer a church defined by party lines. We seek not the victory of a party.and second:
It would be a sad day if Anglican churches across the Communion are presented with the choice: between a particular understanding of biblical faithfulness, and allegiance to Canterbury. It is easy to be rebels with causes. It is a different matter, you would agree, to bring about a new world order.The Rev. Poon has offered the entire Anglican Communion much to think about with these questions and comments.
UPDATE
If David Virtue is to be believed, the Most Rev. Dr. Mouneer Anis, President Bishop of the Middle East, was not consulted about the location, or anything else for that matter, of GAFCON. Mr. Virtue quotes correspondence between President Bishop Anis and Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria in this article.
Also posted on VirtueOnline are the Rev. Dr. Peter Toon's response to the initial announcement of GAFCON and his response to Archbishop Jensen's statement (you have to look closely in a paragraph in the middle of the posting to find where Dr. Toon's comments begin). His response to Bishop Jensen is particularly critical of the so-called "orthodox" bishops of the Global South crossing provincial borders:
Dr. Toon has summed up very neatly why the self-named "orthodox" bishops have no grounds to hold the Windsor Report as legislative or even authoritative. He also notes the very real possibility of further fractures taking place after separation. Have these particular bishops and their (primarily) North American cohorts overplayed their hand? Perhaps. And even if they have, the damage they have already done to the Anglican Communion will be with us for a very long time.It seems that those Primates and assistants who planned this June 2008 Conference in Israel have lost the virtue of godly patience-after all it is one month from June to July! Tragically also they have exhibited a lack of both godly patience and a sense of unity in the Gospel in their own ranks in the way in which they have entered into the geographical space of the North American Provinces of the global Anglican Communion.
And this action Dr Jensen does not mention. Perhaps he supports it as being fine. Before the crisis brought on by the Robinson affair in 2002, there was working in the U.S.A. that which was known as "the Anglican Mission in America" [AMIA]which was promoted by the Province of Rwanda. In 2004 and the years following, the African Primates in Nigeria, Kenya, and Uganda knew well that this Mission was not approved by any of "the instruments of unity" of the Anglican Communion, because it involved the crossing of boundaries by invading missionaries without permission from the home Church/province. Nevertheless, they decided (a) to send their own missionaries (to function wholly separately from the AMIA) and in general to work separately from each other; and (b) to pay no attention to TEC locally or the "Instruments of Unity" globally. There are now effectively several separate Anglican denominations in the U.S.A. & Canada sponsored by Rwanda, Nigeria, Kenya, and Uganda, together with the Southern Cone of South America. By any reckoning this state of affairs-when one puts alongside them the many other Anglican denominations and groups-is a major denial of the doctrine of the Church held within the Anglican Way from its inception. It is nearly a free for all and this despite organizations like Common Cause. And there is a very real question as to whether this situation can ever be put right, for once in existence denominations in the U.S.A, as history shows, tend to solidify and spin off groups to add to the mix. Looking back, one can see how much wiser it would have been for the Primates involved in the invasions to have stayed off shore, offered succor and aid, and counseled patience until the matters could be thrashed out at Lambeth 08. At least, if they wanted to invade from 2004 they could have worked in and through the AMIA to keep the differences and missions in their own ranks to the very minimum.The impending facture [sic] of the global Communion is caused not only by the wicked innovations of the North Americans, and the lack of courage and conviction by the Archbishop of Canterbury, but the lack of patience and precipitate action of some of the Provinces of the Global South!
The Daily Episcopalian section of the Episcopal Cafe posted the Rev. Greg Jones' commentary on the...ummmmm...conversation taking place on some of the conservative blogs in the wake of the GAFCON announcement and the Rev. Poon's questions. In "Conservative Anglicanism Splitting" the Rev. Jones correctly points out:
What I wish more liberal Episcopalians would acknowledge is that many theologically conservative Anglicans/Episcopalians are taking a great deal of heat for standing up for unity, reconciliation and a comprehensive vision of Anglicanism -- and they are not getting much credit for standing against the extremist Separatist powers busily at work attempting to render the Communion. The good news, to my mind, is that there are many Communion minded people who seek comprehensiveness and unity for true -- and they are not all on the same theological page, as regards the inclusion of women, gays or on other questions challenging the wider body at present. They are not of one mind, but they are of one desire to remain in communion by virtue of baptism and a common identity as Anglicans.Among those named as "conservative Anglicans/Episcopalians are taking a great deal of heat" the Rev. Jones names "the Covenant blog collective." You can see what the writers on the Covenant blog have to say in this post, this one, and the comments on both. While I often disagree with the Covenant folks say, I have a great deal of respect for their writing. In particular I have an immense respect for Doug LeBlanc who has long been one of the most objective reporters of things Anglican--when I edited my Integrity chapter's newsletter I often included articles he had written covering various events. I have also been privileged to share a meal with Doug.
Among those the Rev. Jones names as "extremist Separatist Powers" is StandFirm. If you want to see what these folks have to say, you can look at this post, this one, and the comments on both. Except for a couple of writers on the StandFirm blog, I have little to no respect for most of the folks who post there. In my opinion they are as mean spirited and as nasty as they often accuse their "worthy opponents" of being. If you decide to read further on their blog, you have been warned.
Peace,
Jeffri
Saturday, December 29, 2007
GAFCON 3...2...1...
People really need to be more careful about their use of acronyms. Take, for example, the latest initiative coming from a recent meeting in Nairobi of conservative (for lack of a better term) bishops, many of whom are active in the "Global South Anglican" movement: The Global Anglican Future Conference, or GAFCON. GAFCON? The first thing I though of when I saw the acronym was how similar it is to the U.S. military's DEFCON (Defense Readiness Condition). GAFCON? Mark Harris' closing thought in his post on the conference is, "The gaffe in GAFCON is a growth industry."
Then I ltook a look at the conference's web site. Featured on the opening page is a two paragraph excerpt from Sydney (Australia) Archbishop Peter Jensen's article written for sydneyanglicans.net:
There it is in black and white. All of their cries to the contrary, it really is all about power with sex as the presenting issue.
GAFCON? Looks like "Gay Fear Condition" to me, and the fearful "biblical" bishops have just upped their "Fear" status.
Peace,
Jeffri
Then I ltook a look at the conference's web site. Featured on the opening page is a two paragraph excerpt from Sydney (Australia) Archbishop Peter Jensen's article written for sydneyanglicans.net:
A Global Anglican Future Conference is planned for June 2008. The aim of the Conference is to discuss the future of mission and relationships within the churches of Anglican Communion. Those who wish to retain biblical standards especially in the area of sexual ethics have spent much time and effort in negotiations on these issues in the last five years. They want to move on together with the gospel of Christ’s Lordship, a gospel which challenges us and changes lives. Israel is planned as a venue because it symbolises the biblical roots of our faith as Anglicans. I want those in the fellowship of our Diocese to know what this is about and why I am involved.
In 1998, the Lambeth Conference made it clear that the leaders of the overwhelming majority of Anglicans world-wide maintained the biblical view of sexual ethics – that sexual relationships are reserved for marriage between a man and a woman. Five years later, however, actions were taken in Anglican Churches both in Canada and the United States of America which officially transgressed these boundaries in defiance of the Bible’s authority.
There it is in black and white. All of their cries to the contrary, it really is all about power with sex as the presenting issue.
GAFCON? Looks like "Gay Fear Condition" to me, and the fearful "biblical" bishops have just upped their "Fear" status.
Peace,
Jeffri
Friday, December 21, 2007
Christmas Cards As A Look Into The Story
I don't send very many Christmas cards, but I do have a few friends that I like to send cards to. I try to find ones with religious themes. It is very difficult to find cards of the Nativity that do not portray Mary and Jesus as white, complete with blond hair and blue eyes. That goes for Joseph, shepherds, angels, and even the Wise Men. I finally settled on cards that depicted the Nativity in a "blue delft" silhouette. What I should have done was gone to the web site listed on the cards sent out by the Presiding Bishop this year and last year (http://www.bridgebuilding.com/index.htm).
Last year's card, shown to the right, shows three shepherds in distinctly Andean costume. I liked so much that I kept it. It is on the mantelpiece with my Nativities. It blends in nicely with the Peruvian Mother and Child with the two angels. I also like the way the baby Jesus is shown cuddled up with a lamb. I appreciate pictures that show the characters of the Nativity in different ways. One of my friends is an artist, and most years his Christmas cards are a "Joseph and Child." My favorite shows a laughing father and son at play.
This year's card from the Presiding Bishop, shown below, was even more thought provoking. It depicts three women visiting a mother and child. The child, sleeping on his mother's lap, looks to be about two--which fits the story of the wise men and the massacre of the innocents told in Matthew. The folks at StandFirm have taken exception to Katharine's and Richard's choice of the card. Greg Griffith, who posted the item, seems offended not only by the fact that the Magi are depicted as women, but also that the artwork is multicultural.
Greg's reaction to the multicultural aspect is a bit puzzling, since the Magi have traditionally been depicted multiculturally--one of them is usually a black African. More than that, they were the only non-Judeans recorded as visiting Jesus and his family during their time in Bethlehem. Again, many traditional interpretations point to the visit of the Wise Men as recognition of Jesus as the Savior by Gentiles. The message is that Jesus came for ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE. There is nothing wrong with engaging in artistic interpretation to reinforce that message. The more we can visualize ourselves as part of The Story, the more integral it becomes in our lives.
This is particularly important when we remember that most of the world's Christians are, in fact, not Caucasian. When the missionaries went out with the colonizing armies, they took with them the predominant image of Jesus as a white man. This makes sense because European Christians depicted Jesus as a man, and as a child, like themselves--white. In spite of the fact that Jesus was definitely not white, the white Jesus remains the predominant image around the world. If the message is that Jesus became human, became one of us, then depicting him like ourselves, whatever our race or color, is
one way to hold onto and understand more deeply that truth. If, on the other hand, the Bible is to be taken literally, then all depictions of Jesus, and his family, should show them as Semitic people. But even that image is jarring for "traditionalists" raised with pictures of a white Jesus and all white (except for that single Magi "of color") Nativities. So perhaps Greg would have preferred that Katharine and Richard selected something like the card shown at left.
As for depicting the Magi as women, Mary, Joseph, and Jesus were in Bethlehem for a long time. They would have had many visitors, not just the handful documented in the Gospels. Who is to say that the three Wise Men in Matthew were the only ones to see the star, mark its importance, and make the journey to Bethlehem?
Quite frankly, the whole Nativity is layered in tradition and folklore, stories of everyday people who find the Christ child and his parents in the manger. Menotti's opera Amahl And The Night Visitors is just one example that comes to mind. Some of those everyday people would have been women. Some of those women would even have been Wise Women. So as we tell the story of Jesus and depict his life in our art, including images of people like us, no matter what race or gender, it only makes the story richer and more relevant to us and our lives. After all, isn't that the reason for season?
Peace,
Jeffri
Last year's card, shown to the right, shows three shepherds in distinctly Andean costume. I liked so much that I kept it. It is on the mantelpiece with my Nativities. It blends in nicely with the Peruvian Mother and Child with the two angels. I also like the way the baby Jesus is shown cuddled up with a lamb. I appreciate pictures that show the characters of the Nativity in different ways. One of my friends is an artist, and most years his Christmas cards are a "Joseph and Child." My favorite shows a laughing father and son at play.This year's card from the Presiding Bishop, shown below, was even more thought provoking. It depicts three women visiting a mother and child. The child, sleeping on his mother's lap, looks to be about two--which fits the story of the wise men and the massacre of the innocents told in Matthew. The folks at StandFirm have taken exception to Katharine's and Richard's choice of the card. Greg Griffith, who posted the item, seems offended not only by the fact that the Magi are depicted as women, but also that the artwork is multicultural.
Greg's reaction to the multicultural aspect is a bit puzzling, since the Magi have traditionally been depicted multiculturally--one of them is usually a black African. More than that, they were the only non-Judeans recorded as visiting Jesus and his family during their time in Bethlehem. Again, many traditional interpretations point to the visit of the Wise Men as recognition of Jesus as the Savior by Gentiles. The message is that Jesus came for ABSOLUTELY EVERYONE. There is nothing wrong with engaging in artistic interpretation to reinforce that message. The more we can visualize ourselves as part of The Story, the more integral it becomes in our lives.This is particularly important when we remember that most of the world's Christians are, in fact, not Caucasian. When the missionaries went out with the colonizing armies, they took with them the predominant image of Jesus as a white man. This makes sense because European Christians depicted Jesus as a man, and as a child, like themselves--white. In spite of the fact that Jesus was definitely not white, the white Jesus remains the predominant image around the world. If the message is that Jesus became human, became one of us, then depicting him like ourselves, whatever our race or color, is
one way to hold onto and understand more deeply that truth. If, on the other hand, the Bible is to be taken literally, then all depictions of Jesus, and his family, should show them as Semitic people. But even that image is jarring for "traditionalists" raised with pictures of a white Jesus and all white (except for that single Magi "of color") Nativities. So perhaps Greg would have preferred that Katharine and Richard selected something like the card shown at left.As for depicting the Magi as women, Mary, Joseph, and Jesus were in Bethlehem for a long time. They would have had many visitors, not just the handful documented in the Gospels. Who is to say that the three Wise Men in Matthew were the only ones to see the star, mark its importance, and make the journey to Bethlehem?
Quite frankly, the whole Nativity is layered in tradition and folklore, stories of everyday people who find the Christ child and his parents in the manger. Menotti's opera Amahl And The Night Visitors is just one example that comes to mind. Some of those everyday people would have been women. Some of those women would even have been Wise Women. So as we tell the story of Jesus and depict his life in our art, including images of people like us, no matter what race or gender, it only makes the story richer and more relevant to us and our lives. After all, isn't that the reason for season?
Peace,
Jeffri
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Why Stay
The Archbishop of Canterbury's Advent Letter to the Primates has generated a lot of discussion on a couple of my email lists (the Anglican-related ones, anyway). Louie Crew is a member of some of the same lists, and I was particularly struck by one of his responses in the ongoing conversation. He has since posted it on his website. He also gave me permission to share it here.
Peace,
Jeffri
Subject: Re: ABC's Advent Letter
From: Louie Crew <lcrew@ANDROMEDA.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:39:59 -0500
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: ABC's Advent Letter
> Let's at least not pay for the damn thing. [Lambeth Conference]
>
> I still think canon law to forbid Bishops gathering with
> extra-provincial bishops would be a good first step. Maybe let one or
> two non-TEC bishops come to them as guests, but that's it.
>
> Maybe GenCon can declare that the Councils of Lambeth have and do
> err, and that the Archbishop of Canterbury hath no jurisdiction in
> this Province of the Episcopal Church.
>
> Lambeth was thought a bad idea at the beginning, and it has proved to be so.
Some mornings I wake up agreeing with you, B*****. It certainly seems unhealthy to pay extensively to keep afloat an organization that batters people, an organization as filled with toxicity as the Anglican Communion appears to be right now.
However, by the time my coffee hits bottom and my prayers ascend, I usually come to the opposite conclusion: It is immature for me to play "I'm gonna pick up my paper dolls and go home" just because things are not going my way.
My commitment to the Communion is sealed by the fact that if The Episcopal Church (TEC) and the Anglican Church of Canada do not stay at the table thousands of lgbts (lesbians, gays, bisexual and trangendered) elsewhere in the Communion will not have a voice at all for a very long time, if ever.
I learned long ago that if you leave a body, you forfeit your ability to influence that body. (The Anglican Communion Network will learn that hard lesson very soon.) And for what, the pleasure of hearing the door we slammed shut?
I believe TEC should never voluntarily drop out of the Anglican Communion. If others must expel us, force them to violate the integrity of their own constitution and canons to do so. Don't do their dirty work for them. Does that mean TEC has to fund and support every thing demanded of us? Certainly not. I believe that Executive Council and General Convention need to look much more closely at how the ACC uses the money contributed by the General Convention, but we need to do that as members at the table, not as people who have left. (There are major other contributions from dioceses, from parishes, from individual Episcopalians over which GC and Executive Council have no influence and should not control.)
I feel strongly that no funds from GC should be used to fund primates' meetings. When I was a guest of the Anglican Consultative Council at their offices in London during the week before the last General Convention, I was told that most primates pay their way out of funds provided by their provinces, and some individual primates subsidize the travel of other primates from provinces too poor to pay the full bill. There are no line items for primates' travel in the ACC budget. There is no central accounting system for this network of support outside their budget; nor would I be comfortable giving to the ACC oversight of funds not within its jurisdiction.
Successful collaboration depends on trust. The Anglican Communion now has a crisis of trust. Many don't trust us, and there are many bishops in the Communion -- including the Archbishop of Canterbury -- whom I do not trust. I hope that the conversations that Dr. Dubya plans for Lambeth 2008 will allow candor. I hope that the trained facilitators won't duck either the economic or the spiritual bonds of affection.
Many outside North America see TEC as like the US government -- throwing our weight around, insisting on having our own way or threatening to leave.
Look at the way the US has refused to commit to many international agreements -- regarding the environment, regarding military weapons, regarding torture. Many in the Anglican Communion think that TEC manifested the same mindset in the consecration of +NH and in GC's resolution that those who bless relationships are within the range of Christian response, albeit not a canonically authorized response. "Those Americans are at it again! Throwing their power and their money around!"
But in several major particulars, TEC is not behaving like the USA -- ways which we should emphasize again and again.
1) TEC has not thrown money around to get its own way. GC has continued to pay TEC's assessments. ERD has been on the scene immediately to help with disaster, and long-term in development projects. Dioceses and bishops have continued to support mission financially and with increasingly more face-to-face encounters with disciples around the world.
2) TEC has not insisted that other provinces do as we do. We are insisting instead that they live into the promises they have made repeatedly, that they listen to the experiences of local lgbt Christians.
3) In its affirmations of lgbts, TEC is not standing on the side of the powerful, as the USA does, but on the side of the vulnerable and the weak.
4) TEC is not getting more power by its support of lgbts. It is giving up power. Others have reviled us, invaded us, crippled some of our vital ministries to the poor in their own countries, have said all manner of evil against us falsely because of our stance for Jesus' unbounding love for all.
Jesus wrote the script for what our response should be: Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for so persecuted they the prophets who were before you.
Some lgbts live with the mind-set we had before GC 2003. Many lgbts have not noticed that we are not alone, that a majority of TEC now stands with us -- in most instances not to patronize us, but to be faithful disciples of Jesus in solidarity with us as faithful disciples.
God loves absolutely everybody! I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor Primates, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate tblgs, or anyone else, from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Blessed are those who in spite of all have the courage to be joyous!
They also serve who sit in the corner and lick their wounds.
Peace,
Jeffri
Subject: Re: ABC's Advent Letter
From: Louie Crew <lcrew@ANDROMEDA.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:39:59 -0500
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: ABC's Advent Letter
> Let's at least not pay for the damn thing. [Lambeth Conference]
>
> I still think canon law to forbid Bishops gathering with
> extra-provincial bishops would be a good first step. Maybe let one or
> two non-TEC bishops come to them as guests, but that's it.
>
> Maybe GenCon can declare that the Councils of Lambeth have and do
> err, and that the Archbishop of Canterbury hath no jurisdiction in
> this Province of the Episcopal Church.
>
> Lambeth was thought a bad idea at the beginning, and it has proved to be so.
Some mornings I wake up agreeing with you, B*****. It certainly seems unhealthy to pay extensively to keep afloat an organization that batters people, an organization as filled with toxicity as the Anglican Communion appears to be right now.
However, by the time my coffee hits bottom and my prayers ascend, I usually come to the opposite conclusion: It is immature for me to play "I'm gonna pick up my paper dolls and go home" just because things are not going my way.
My commitment to the Communion is sealed by the fact that if The Episcopal Church (TEC) and the Anglican Church of Canada do not stay at the table thousands of lgbts (lesbians, gays, bisexual and trangendered) elsewhere in the Communion will not have a voice at all for a very long time, if ever.
I learned long ago that if you leave a body, you forfeit your ability to influence that body. (The Anglican Communion Network will learn that hard lesson very soon.) And for what, the pleasure of hearing the door we slammed shut?
I believe TEC should never voluntarily drop out of the Anglican Communion. If others must expel us, force them to violate the integrity of their own constitution and canons to do so. Don't do their dirty work for them. Does that mean TEC has to fund and support every thing demanded of us? Certainly not. I believe that Executive Council and General Convention need to look much more closely at how the ACC uses the money contributed by the General Convention, but we need to do that as members at the table, not as people who have left. (There are major other contributions from dioceses, from parishes, from individual Episcopalians over which GC and Executive Council have no influence and should not control.)
I feel strongly that no funds from GC should be used to fund primates' meetings. When I was a guest of the Anglican Consultative Council at their offices in London during the week before the last General Convention, I was told that most primates pay their way out of funds provided by their provinces, and some individual primates subsidize the travel of other primates from provinces too poor to pay the full bill. There are no line items for primates' travel in the ACC budget. There is no central accounting system for this network of support outside their budget; nor would I be comfortable giving to the ACC oversight of funds not within its jurisdiction.
Successful collaboration depends on trust. The Anglican Communion now has a crisis of trust. Many don't trust us, and there are many bishops in the Communion -- including the Archbishop of Canterbury -- whom I do not trust. I hope that the conversations that Dr. Dubya plans for Lambeth 2008 will allow candor. I hope that the trained facilitators won't duck either the economic or the spiritual bonds of affection.
Many outside North America see TEC as like the US government -- throwing our weight around, insisting on having our own way or threatening to leave.
Look at the way the US has refused to commit to many international agreements -- regarding the environment, regarding military weapons, regarding torture. Many in the Anglican Communion think that TEC manifested the same mindset in the consecration of +NH and in GC's resolution that those who bless relationships are within the range of Christian response, albeit not a canonically authorized response. "Those Americans are at it again! Throwing their power and their money around!"
But in several major particulars, TEC is not behaving like the USA -- ways which we should emphasize again and again.
1) TEC has not thrown money around to get its own way. GC has continued to pay TEC's assessments. ERD has been on the scene immediately to help with disaster, and long-term in development projects. Dioceses and bishops have continued to support mission financially and with increasingly more face-to-face encounters with disciples around the world.
2) TEC has not insisted that other provinces do as we do. We are insisting instead that they live into the promises they have made repeatedly, that they listen to the experiences of local lgbt Christians.
3) In its affirmations of lgbts, TEC is not standing on the side of the powerful, as the USA does, but on the side of the vulnerable and the weak.
4) TEC is not getting more power by its support of lgbts. It is giving up power. Others have reviled us, invaded us, crippled some of our vital ministries to the poor in their own countries, have said all manner of evil against us falsely because of our stance for Jesus' unbounding love for all.
Jesus wrote the script for what our response should be: Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for so persecuted they the prophets who were before you.
Some lgbts live with the mind-set we had before GC 2003. Many lgbts have not noticed that we are not alone, that a majority of TEC now stands with us -- in most instances not to patronize us, but to be faithful disciples of Jesus in solidarity with us as faithful disciples.
God loves absolutely everybody! I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor Primates, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate tblgs, or anyone else, from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Blessed are those who in spite of all have the courage to be joyous!
They also serve who sit in the corner and lick their wounds.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Partition
For a few weeks during my year of graduate work at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, I dated an Israeli medical student. One afternoon we went to see the movie Gandhi followed by dinner at his apartment. While we prepared our meal, we talked about the movie. The scenes of the refugee columns and the Hindu/Muslim violence affected him deeply. He asked over and over again how people could do that to each other. How could they force their neighbors from their homes? How could they kill each other in the name of God? I stared at him incredulously. "Joni, I have one word for you," I said. "Palestine." That was the beginning of the end of our relationship.
Memories of that evening came back to me this afternoon as I watched a couple of episodes of Mountbatten: The Last Viceroy. Like Gandhi, it has scenes of refugees and Muslim/Hindu violence. However, the Masterpiece Theatre production focuses on Mountbatten's years in India as Britain granted independence to India and Pakistan rather than being a biography of his entire life. As such, the miniseries looks at the personalities and forces that ultimately resulted in the partition of India into two separate nations. Watching the events play out on my computer screen I found myself thinking about the current situation in the Anglican Communion. Who is playing what role in our little drama? Is Rowan Williams Gandhi, doing everything he can think of to avoid partition at all costs? Or is he Mountbatten, coming to the realization that partition is inevitable? Perhaps Peter Akinola is Mountbatten, forcing everyone to face a harsh reality. Would that leave Katharine Jefferts Schori in the role of Gandhi? And who is Jinnah, insisting that there is no solution but to have a separate Pakistan? Robert Duncan? Matyn Minns? Gregory Venables?
No matter who plays who, it is clear that, similar to the situation in India, ideologies have hardened and partition is on the brink of becoming an unpleasant and unavoidable permanent reality. Brad Drell writes, "At GC2009, there will be blood on the floor over the leaving of whole Dioceses of the church." If all sides in this tempest in the Anglican teapot cannot find a way to live and work together in spite of their disagreements, the metaphorical blood will not be on the floor of the next General Convention, it will be shed long before that. As those who wish to disaffiliate themselves from the Episcopal Church take larger and larger steps to seek refuge with more conservative jurisdictions, the flow of refugees in the other direction will begin. At first it will probably be confined to liberal congregations looking to leave conservative dioceses such as San Joaquin, Pittsburgh and Fort Worth as they attempt to leave the Episcopal Church. That will be bloody enough. If, however, this trend transforms itself into an actual partition of the Anglican Communion into two or more separate entities (remember that Pakistan eventually split, with East Pakistan becoming Bangladesh), then the streams of refugees will no longer be confined to the Episcopal Church. They will spread across the Anglican Provinces around the world.
If partition is inevitable, and we are, in fact, creating two or more new Anglican entities out of the Communion, how do we avoid a violent and bloody one? What are those of us on all sides willing to give up in order to make the transition as peaceful and smooth as possible? Or are we all like Joni, unable to see the atrocities in our own provinces while weeping and gnashing our teeth at what goes on in others? And if compromise is not possible, what then? Do we truly understand the realities of partition? Are any of us really prepared to triage the survivors?
I don't know. The answer is I just don't know.
Peace,
Jeffri
Memories of that evening came back to me this afternoon as I watched a couple of episodes of Mountbatten: The Last Viceroy. Like Gandhi, it has scenes of refugees and Muslim/Hindu violence. However, the Masterpiece Theatre production focuses on Mountbatten's years in India as Britain granted independence to India and Pakistan rather than being a biography of his entire life. As such, the miniseries looks at the personalities and forces that ultimately resulted in the partition of India into two separate nations. Watching the events play out on my computer screen I found myself thinking about the current situation in the Anglican Communion. Who is playing what role in our little drama? Is Rowan Williams Gandhi, doing everything he can think of to avoid partition at all costs? Or is he Mountbatten, coming to the realization that partition is inevitable? Perhaps Peter Akinola is Mountbatten, forcing everyone to face a harsh reality. Would that leave Katharine Jefferts Schori in the role of Gandhi? And who is Jinnah, insisting that there is no solution but to have a separate Pakistan? Robert Duncan? Matyn Minns? Gregory Venables?
No matter who plays who, it is clear that, similar to the situation in India, ideologies have hardened and partition is on the brink of becoming an unpleasant and unavoidable permanent reality. Brad Drell writes, "At GC2009, there will be blood on the floor over the leaving of whole Dioceses of the church." If all sides in this tempest in the Anglican teapot cannot find a way to live and work together in spite of their disagreements, the metaphorical blood will not be on the floor of the next General Convention, it will be shed long before that. As those who wish to disaffiliate themselves from the Episcopal Church take larger and larger steps to seek refuge with more conservative jurisdictions, the flow of refugees in the other direction will begin. At first it will probably be confined to liberal congregations looking to leave conservative dioceses such as San Joaquin, Pittsburgh and Fort Worth as they attempt to leave the Episcopal Church. That will be bloody enough. If, however, this trend transforms itself into an actual partition of the Anglican Communion into two or more separate entities (remember that Pakistan eventually split, with East Pakistan becoming Bangladesh), then the streams of refugees will no longer be confined to the Episcopal Church. They will spread across the Anglican Provinces around the world.
If partition is inevitable, and we are, in fact, creating two or more new Anglican entities out of the Communion, how do we avoid a violent and bloody one? What are those of us on all sides willing to give up in order to make the transition as peaceful and smooth as possible? Or are we all like Joni, unable to see the atrocities in our own provinces while weeping and gnashing our teeth at what goes on in others? And if compromise is not possible, what then? Do we truly understand the realities of partition? Are any of us really prepared to triage the survivors?
I don't know. The answer is I just don't know.
Peace,
Jeffri
Friday, December 14, 2007
Also Sprach Rowan Williams
Today the Archbishop of Canterbury released both his Advent Letter to the Primates and his Christmas Message to the Anglican Communion. Reactions and conversations to the Advent Letter abound in the blogosphere. Check out Father Jake Stops The World, TitusOneNine, In a Godward Direction, Stand Firm, An Inch At A Time, and BabyBlueOnline, for just a few examples. You can find links to others on each of those, if you wish to read more. It is quite clear that neither "side" of the current Anglican Tempest in a Teapot is really happy with his letter to the Primates.
One of the few to address both letters is Mark Harris on his Preludium site. I think he hits the nail on the head when he writes:
Perhaps the Archbishop understands what swirls around him more than we give him credit for. Maybe that explains officially releasing to the wider Communion his Advent Letter to the Primates on the same day as his Christmas Message to the Communion. Or, maybe he is simply grasping at anything to keep the Communion from falling apart on his watch.
The jury is still out.
Peace,
Jeffri
One of the few to address both letters is Mark Harris on his Preludium site. I think he hits the nail on the head when he writes:
The message to the Communion is much the better letter. It soars. At its close he asks, "Let us ask ourselves honestly whose company we are ashamed to be seen in - and then ask where God would be. If he has embraced the failing and fragile world of human beings who know their needs, then we must be there with him." Meditations like this is [sic] why so many of us have had such hopes in the ABC.Having had time to digest the Advent Letter, however, I can understand why everyone is so upset--why I am upset. We wait for Rowan Williams to display our version of decisive leadership, and the Archbishop issues yet another tiptoe through the tulips. I see him trapped in the belief that the Windsor Report, the "Instruments of Communion," and the mythical Covenant will save the Anglican Communion, which itself has achieved mythical status in the eyes of many. The reality is that the Anglican Communion as we thought it was has ceased to exist, if it ever really did. What will emerge from this time of discernment, debate, and procedural maneuvering remains to be seen.
Perhaps the Archbishop understands what swirls around him more than we give him credit for. Maybe that explains officially releasing to the wider Communion his Advent Letter to the Primates on the same day as his Christmas Message to the Communion. Or, maybe he is simply grasping at anything to keep the Communion from falling apart on his watch.
The jury is still out.
Peace,
Jeffri
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Enough Already - Part 2
A couple of things happened this morning that have caused me to re-evaluate my "update" of last evening. I was having a conversation with a colleague this morning about Antiracism workshops she had conducted over the couple of weeks. People wanted to know what they could do to combat racism as individuals. She said the internet is one place where everyone can have an effect is the internet. Do not participate in racial jokes, or blond jokes, or fat jokes, or ethnic jokes. Call people to account. That set me to thinking.
Then I opened my email. While they are not many--not even five--derogatory comments about Bishop Schofield's weight have been popping up on a couple of my mail lists. One writer referred to the bishop as "his plumptitude." Even ONE such comment is too many. To me such jokes are as inappropriate as fag jokes aimed at Bishop Robinson--or anyone else, for that matter. They belong on the list with racial, ethnic, and yes, even blond jokes. NOT ACCEPTABLE.
So I say again, ENOUGH ALREADY. No more jokes about Bishop Schofield's weight--or his sexuality for that matter. They are inappropriate an unacceptable.
Peace,
Jeffri
Then I opened my email. While they are not many--not even five--derogatory comments about Bishop Schofield's weight have been popping up on a couple of my mail lists. One writer referred to the bishop as "his plumptitude." Even ONE such comment is too many. To me such jokes are as inappropriate as fag jokes aimed at Bishop Robinson--or anyone else, for that matter. They belong on the list with racial, ethnic, and yes, even blond jokes. NOT ACCEPTABLE.
So I say again, ENOUGH ALREADY. No more jokes about Bishop Schofield's weight--or his sexuality for that matter. They are inappropriate an unacceptable.
Peace,
Jeffri
Monday, December 10, 2007
Enough Already
The recent vote by the Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin to disassociate itself from the Episcopal Church and affiliate with the Province of Southern Cone has caused a lot of heated commentary on both sides of the issue. However, there is a disturbing trend I am observing in some of the liberal blogs. Several writers and commentators have made inappropriate, and in some cases nasty, remarks about Bishop Schofield's weight--sometimes using a now familiar media photo, which I refuse to show here, taken of the Bishop during the Convention.
Let me be clear here, Bishop Schofield is fat. He is not the only overweight bishop in the church. And there are plenty of overweight (okay, fat, and that goes for bishops, too) clergy and laity, as well--including me. But his weight has absolutely nothing to do with his political views, his theology, nor his ability to be a bishop. It does not make him a bad person, or a good one. It simply means that he has a health issue that he, and only he, can do something about.
By all means, take Bishop Schofield to task for his actions. Refute his statements and arguments. Disagree with his views. But knock off the jokes and insinuations about his weight. They are inappropriate and downright mean. I expected better of my colleagues.
Peace,
Jeffri
UPDATE: After a couple of conversations with others, I took this post down for a while. I went back and reread the blogs where I saw the comments I'd written about. Either some of the comments had been deleted, or I'd overreacted to what was there. Since there doesn't seem to be a rash of deletions in the comments sections, and in fact, I found comments of concern about Bishop Schofield's health, I can say I did overreact. Not that there weren't some rather derroguatory comments about Bishop Schofield's weight, they just were not as numerous as I perceived.
Two things happened yesterday that brought all of this to a head. First, as I was out getting lunch yesterday I happened to bump into someone by accident. Their response was "Watch where you're going fatso, you're taking up too much room!" Second, last evening I was talking to a friend who lives in the Midwest who'd been hospitalized last week. I'd heard from friends about it, and last night was the first chance we'd had to touch base. It turns out he was hospitalized for a mild stroke. This friend is my age, and by no stretch of the imagination is he overweight. He eats a fairly healthy diet--he has to for a number of other health reasons. And yet he had a stroke. Scary.
My overreaction brings another point I'd like us all to think about. In this day of electronic media, the web, blogs, etc., we have a tendency to react first and think later. We all need to be more mindful of our tendency to do that.
Enough said.
Peace,
Jeffri
Let me be clear here, Bishop Schofield is fat. He is not the only overweight bishop in the church. And there are plenty of overweight (okay, fat, and that goes for bishops, too) clergy and laity, as well--including me. But his weight has absolutely nothing to do with his political views, his theology, nor his ability to be a bishop. It does not make him a bad person, or a good one. It simply means that he has a health issue that he, and only he, can do something about.
By all means, take Bishop Schofield to task for his actions. Refute his statements and arguments. Disagree with his views. But knock off the jokes and insinuations about his weight. They are inappropriate and downright mean. I expected better of my colleagues.
Peace,
Jeffri
UPDATE: After a couple of conversations with others, I took this post down for a while. I went back and reread the blogs where I saw the comments I'd written about. Either some of the comments had been deleted, or I'd overreacted to what was there. Since there doesn't seem to be a rash of deletions in the comments sections, and in fact, I found comments of concern about Bishop Schofield's health, I can say I did overreact. Not that there weren't some rather derroguatory comments about Bishop Schofield's weight, they just were not as numerous as I perceived.
Two things happened yesterday that brought all of this to a head. First, as I was out getting lunch yesterday I happened to bump into someone by accident. Their response was "Watch where you're going fatso, you're taking up too much room!" Second, last evening I was talking to a friend who lives in the Midwest who'd been hospitalized last week. I'd heard from friends about it, and last night was the first chance we'd had to touch base. It turns out he was hospitalized for a mild stroke. This friend is my age, and by no stretch of the imagination is he overweight. He eats a fairly healthy diet--he has to for a number of other health reasons. And yet he had a stroke. Scary.
My overreaction brings another point I'd like us all to think about. In this day of electronic media, the web, blogs, etc., we have a tendency to react first and think later. We all need to be more mindful of our tendency to do that.
Enough said.
Peace,
Jeffri
Saturday, December 8, 2007
San Joaquin Departs
Today the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin officially changed its constitution, disaffiliated itself from the Episcopal Church, and moved itself into the Province of the Southern Cone under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Most Rev. Gregory Venables. You can check out the news stories by visiting both TitusOneNine and EpiScope for collections of news stories and commentary.
This is not the first time Bishop Venables has extended his "protection" to a diocese outside of his province. In September of 2005 the Diocese of Recife in Brazil--or at least its bishop and the majority of its clergy--was "recognized" by Bishop Venables. Nor will it likely be the last, given Bishop Venables offer to disaffected dioceses in the Episcopal Church. The dioceses of Fort Worth and Quincy are also considering affiliating with the Southern Cone.
Nor are the Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil and the Episcopal Church the only places where the Southern Cone has cast its nets. Bishop Venables and the leadership of the province extended the same invitation to dissenting dioceses in the Anglican Church of Canada. Two retired bishops from the Anglican Church of Canada have already moved to the Southern Cone.
And so the sundering begins in earnest. It started in dribs and drabs, congregation by congregation and bishop by bishop, but now begins the surge. I have no doubt that lawsuits will abound and that the lines drawn in the sand will become cast in concrete. The issues confronting San Joaquin have a greater significance than many folks on both sides of the issue realize just now. How much longer before some of the liberal and moderate dioceses in more conservative provinces follow in the footsteps of their sisters and brothers in San Joaquin, Forth Worth, Quincy, and Pittsburgh and seek to affiliate with provinces more in line with their way of doing things?
San Joaquin will be a test case in more ways than one. How will congregations who wish to remain in the Episcopal Church be treated? We did get one hint from Bishop Schofield during a break in this mornings prodeedings at the Diocesan Convention. The cameras and mikes of Anglcian TV were still on while the bishop had a conversation with one of his clergy who clearly disagreed with what the diocesan convention had just done. The bishop was promising the priest whatever support he needed, including the option of oversight by a bishop from another diocese. Someone must have realized that conversations were being overheard, because the camera and the mikes were soon shut off. If Bishop Schofield keeps that promise, the resulting model may prove beneficial throughout the Anglican Communion.
If the trend of dioceses leaving their current provinces and affiliating with other provinces along ideological lines, then we need to work out ways to make that happen with as much grace as possible. Perhaps that includes ceasing lawsuits and allowing parishes to take their property with them--for a payment to the province they are leaving. Otherwise, there may be many empty church buildings on both sides of the aisle, so to speak. Better to create goodwill and face reality than to drain our resources in rancorous fighting where no one really wins.
Peace,
Jeffri
This is not the first time Bishop Venables has extended his "protection" to a diocese outside of his province. In September of 2005 the Diocese of Recife in Brazil--or at least its bishop and the majority of its clergy--was "recognized" by Bishop Venables. Nor will it likely be the last, given Bishop Venables offer to disaffected dioceses in the Episcopal Church. The dioceses of Fort Worth and Quincy are also considering affiliating with the Southern Cone.
Nor are the Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil and the Episcopal Church the only places where the Southern Cone has cast its nets. Bishop Venables and the leadership of the province extended the same invitation to dissenting dioceses in the Anglican Church of Canada. Two retired bishops from the Anglican Church of Canada have already moved to the Southern Cone.
And so the sundering begins in earnest. It started in dribs and drabs, congregation by congregation and bishop by bishop, but now begins the surge. I have no doubt that lawsuits will abound and that the lines drawn in the sand will become cast in concrete. The issues confronting San Joaquin have a greater significance than many folks on both sides of the issue realize just now. How much longer before some of the liberal and moderate dioceses in more conservative provinces follow in the footsteps of their sisters and brothers in San Joaquin, Forth Worth, Quincy, and Pittsburgh and seek to affiliate with provinces more in line with their way of doing things?
San Joaquin will be a test case in more ways than one. How will congregations who wish to remain in the Episcopal Church be treated? We did get one hint from Bishop Schofield during a break in this mornings prodeedings at the Diocesan Convention. The cameras and mikes of Anglcian TV were still on while the bishop had a conversation with one of his clergy who clearly disagreed with what the diocesan convention had just done. The bishop was promising the priest whatever support he needed, including the option of oversight by a bishop from another diocese. Someone must have realized that conversations were being overheard, because the camera and the mikes were soon shut off. If Bishop Schofield keeps that promise, the resulting model may prove beneficial throughout the Anglican Communion.
If the trend of dioceses leaving their current provinces and affiliating with other provinces along ideological lines, then we need to work out ways to make that happen with as much grace as possible. Perhaps that includes ceasing lawsuits and allowing parishes to take their property with them--for a payment to the province they are leaving. Otherwise, there may be many empty church buildings on both sides of the aisle, so to speak. Better to create goodwill and face reality than to drain our resources in rancorous fighting where no one really wins.
Peace,
Jeffri
The Decorations Are Up
Last evening I pulled the Christmas boxes down from their shelf in my back closet and put up my small tree and the Nativity scenes. I also went shopping earlier in the day and bought a new tablecloth at Home Goods, along with a runner and napkins. Here's what the table looks like:
The stack of file drawers that served as a place to put the tree last year went to Goodwill, so I had to find a different place. The nice thing about having a small tree is that it fits in many different places. Here is this year's:
The stack of file drawers that served as a place to put the tree last year went to Goodwill, so I had to find a different place. The nice thing about having a small tree is that it fits in many different places. Here is this year's:
You can see a corner of the mantelpiece on the left. The room with the table is just past the bookshelves on the left. Here is a close-up of the tree:
My collection of Nativity scenes and figures is mostly on the mantelpiece, except for one that is sitting on the dining room table. I've been introduced to Picasa, and it seemed like an ideal way to show you the collection. So here's the slide show:
Peace,
Jeffri
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Saint Nicholas Day
When Brian and I were together he would usually take vacation at the beginning of December and go someplace warm. Most of the time, I was not able to get away at that time. Since Saint Nicholas Day usually fell during his vacation, I would pick a weekend afternoon and invite my friends to at tree-trimming Saint Nicholas celebration. I began celebrating Saint Nicholas Day in college, when the German Club would celebrate the festival every year. Even though Brian and I are no longer together, I have kept the tradition of putting up the tree and decorating the house on or near Saint Nicholas Day.
In my current apartment I have a small tinsel tree that I put up. Small being the key word when one lives in 450 square feet. For a number of years I would get a small live tree in a pot, which then would often be put out in the yard. Once I started going to Pennsylvania to spend Christmas with my brother, however, I lost a couple of them due to lack of water. The first year I lived in this apartment I had no tree at all but found I missed having one, even though I decorated the apartment. Two collections also vie for space when I decorate. One is various Saint Nicholas and Santa Claus figures, and the other consists of creches, nativity scenes, and nacimientos (really three different terms for the same thing) from around the world. Many of them were given to me by friends, and some of them I collected on my travels. Sometimes it seems like overkill, but I love to look at them and remember who gave them to me, or the trips during which I bought them. My parents gave me my very first nativity set--white ceramic with just Mary, Joseph, and the baby Jesus--when I was in college.
When my brother and I were little, Honey and Grandad, our maternal grandparents, would give us each an ornament every year. Our boxes would be brought out on Christmas Eve, and before going to bed, we would hang the ornaments around the living room. Christmas morning all of them would be on the tree that Santa set up when he came that night. When we outgrew Santa Claus, we would hang our own ornaments on the tree when the family set it up. For a number of years the family would exchange ornaments on that day. We no longer do, mostly because Mom and I each have more ornaments than we use on any given year. My brother and his wife still give their kids ornaments every year, so each of them, like my brother and me before them, will have ornaments of their own when they set out on their own.
Deciding when to put up the tree always resulted in a "discussion" once Scott and I were old enough and Santa Claus no longer brought the tree. My mother's family tended to put their tree up the day after Thanksgiving; my father's on Christmas Eve. Until my father died, it was rare that the tree was up more than a week before Christmas. When Brian and I were together the discussion was about what color lights. My family always had blue lights; his multi-colored ones. We compromised with white. After we separated, and I lived again with Mom for a few years, we put both blue and white lights on the tree, so some nights we lit the blue ones, some nights the white ones, and some nights both.
When we were kids, no matter when the tree was put up, my parents would pick a weekend in the middle of December to decorate the house. That included baking Christmas cookies. The highlight of that day was unpacking and setting up the creche. The rough wooden stable and ceramic figurines dated to my parents' first Christmas together. Once the stable was set up on its fabric "field," my father would hand my brother and I, in turn, a wrapped figure from the box. We would unwrap it and carry it carefully to Mom, who would place each one in the creche. It was a big deal to us who got the Baby Jesus to unwrap!
It is interesting to look back and see how our Christmas traditions have evolved over the years, with each family doing things a bit differently. But no matter how we celebrate those traditions, we have memories and stories that are shared every year. The traditions and the stories connect us as a family. So tomorrow, after I clean the apartment, I will unpack my Christmas boxes and remember the traditions and stories as I decorate.
Peace,
Jeffri
In my current apartment I have a small tinsel tree that I put up. Small being the key word when one lives in 450 square feet. For a number of years I would get a small live tree in a pot, which then would often be put out in the yard. Once I started going to Pennsylvania to spend Christmas with my brother, however, I lost a couple of them due to lack of water. The first year I lived in this apartment I had no tree at all but found I missed having one, even though I decorated the apartment. Two collections also vie for space when I decorate. One is various Saint Nicholas and Santa Claus figures, and the other consists of creches, nativity scenes, and nacimientos (really three different terms for the same thing) from around the world. Many of them were given to me by friends, and some of them I collected on my travels. Sometimes it seems like overkill, but I love to look at them and remember who gave them to me, or the trips during which I bought them. My parents gave me my very first nativity set--white ceramic with just Mary, Joseph, and the baby Jesus--when I was in college.
When my brother and I were little, Honey and Grandad, our maternal grandparents, would give us each an ornament every year. Our boxes would be brought out on Christmas Eve, and before going to bed, we would hang the ornaments around the living room. Christmas morning all of them would be on the tree that Santa set up when he came that night. When we outgrew Santa Claus, we would hang our own ornaments on the tree when the family set it up. For a number of years the family would exchange ornaments on that day. We no longer do, mostly because Mom and I each have more ornaments than we use on any given year. My brother and his wife still give their kids ornaments every year, so each of them, like my brother and me before them, will have ornaments of their own when they set out on their own.
Deciding when to put up the tree always resulted in a "discussion" once Scott and I were old enough and Santa Claus no longer brought the tree. My mother's family tended to put their tree up the day after Thanksgiving; my father's on Christmas Eve. Until my father died, it was rare that the tree was up more than a week before Christmas. When Brian and I were together the discussion was about what color lights. My family always had blue lights; his multi-colored ones. We compromised with white. After we separated, and I lived again with Mom for a few years, we put both blue and white lights on the tree, so some nights we lit the blue ones, some nights the white ones, and some nights both.
When we were kids, no matter when the tree was put up, my parents would pick a weekend in the middle of December to decorate the house. That included baking Christmas cookies. The highlight of that day was unpacking and setting up the creche. The rough wooden stable and ceramic figurines dated to my parents' first Christmas together. Once the stable was set up on its fabric "field," my father would hand my brother and I, in turn, a wrapped figure from the box. We would unwrap it and carry it carefully to Mom, who would place each one in the creche. It was a big deal to us who got the Baby Jesus to unwrap!
It is interesting to look back and see how our Christmas traditions have evolved over the years, with each family doing things a bit differently. But no matter how we celebrate those traditions, we have memories and stories that are shared every year. The traditions and the stories connect us as a family. So tomorrow, after I clean the apartment, I will unpack my Christmas boxes and remember the traditions and stories as I decorate.
Peace,
Jeffri
Sunday, December 2, 2007
Advent I
Last Sunday I wrote about plunging into the "holiday season," and how difficult it is to find the quiet to engage in Advent. Obviously, my body decided otherwise. This morning I woke up to find that the cold I have been fighting off since returning from the Dominican Republic had finally settled into a head cold. As a result, I spent most of the day in bed and did not even get to church. Of course, I was not totally without church. I checked Elizabeth Kaeton's Telling Secrets to read her sermon for today. As always, Elizabeth's sermon provided lots of food for thought.
And a day in bed provided lots of time for reflection. I found myself thinking about Advent, Christmas, and the furor they provoke. Calls for boycotts of stores where employees do not wish customers "Merry Christmas," or of those where "Happy Holidays" is the norm. Sermons and blogs about the "true meaning" of the season, as well as those on how to keep a "Holy Advent." Sometimes I am not sure which is worse, the rampant commercialism and consumerism or the strident sermonizing against them. Since most of our treasured Christmas traditions predate the celebrations of "Christ's Mass," and Christians appropriated the Solstice Holiday rather late in the game, one wonders how "true" any of it is anyway.
As for the stress of the season, churches are as responsible for it as the merchants. Holiday bazaars, Advent and Christmas Pageant, extra services, choir rehearsals only slightly less in number than those leading up to Easter, charity baskets, gift drives, and, and and... Enough already!
The dark days surrounding the Winter Solstice have prompted celebrations and gift giving for generations beyond historical memories. We can enjoy those aspects of the holiday, in whatever form we celebrate it, without letting ourselves get totally caught up in the frenzy. I will wish my Jewish Friends "Happy Hanukkah" and my pagan ones "Blessed Yule." When I decorate the house, I will display my creche collection complete with its baby Jesuses before Christmas and the Wise Men before Epiphany. I will go to parties. I will finish buying presents for family and friends. I will find my quiet time when I need it, and not when someone else says I should be having it. I will play Christmas music. I will not let the Advent Police dictate when and how I enjoy the traditions and celebrations of the season.
Now if you will excuse me, I feel the urge to go bake gingerbread for Thursday.
Peace,
Jeffri
And a day in bed provided lots of time for reflection. I found myself thinking about Advent, Christmas, and the furor they provoke. Calls for boycotts of stores where employees do not wish customers "Merry Christmas," or of those where "Happy Holidays" is the norm. Sermons and blogs about the "true meaning" of the season, as well as those on how to keep a "Holy Advent." Sometimes I am not sure which is worse, the rampant commercialism and consumerism or the strident sermonizing against them. Since most of our treasured Christmas traditions predate the celebrations of "Christ's Mass," and Christians appropriated the Solstice Holiday rather late in the game, one wonders how "true" any of it is anyway.
As for the stress of the season, churches are as responsible for it as the merchants. Holiday bazaars, Advent and Christmas Pageant, extra services, choir rehearsals only slightly less in number than those leading up to Easter, charity baskets, gift drives, and, and and... Enough already!
The dark days surrounding the Winter Solstice have prompted celebrations and gift giving for generations beyond historical memories. We can enjoy those aspects of the holiday, in whatever form we celebrate it, without letting ourselves get totally caught up in the frenzy. I will wish my Jewish Friends "Happy Hanukkah" and my pagan ones "Blessed Yule." When I decorate the house, I will display my creche collection complete with its baby Jesuses before Christmas and the Wise Men before Epiphany. I will go to parties. I will finish buying presents for family and friends. I will find my quiet time when I need it, and not when someone else says I should be having it. I will play Christmas music. I will not let the Advent Police dictate when and how I enjoy the traditions and celebrations of the season.
Now if you will excuse me, I feel the urge to go bake gingerbread for Thursday.
Peace,
Jeffri
Monday, November 26, 2007
The Times They Are A Changing
The weekend before I left for the Dominican Republic we changed our clocks back to "Standard Time." Of course, "Standard Time" is now in effect for fewer weeks in the year than "Daylight Saving Time." So obviously, it is not the standard time any more. But I digress.
We set the clocks back in the wee hours of Sunday morning November 4th. Monday night, the 5th, I stayed at a hotel near JFK, and Tuesday morning, the 6th, I flew to Santo Domingo. The Dominican Republic is on "Atlantic Time," which is an hour ahead of "Eastern Time." I came home this past Monday, and my body clock is totally confused. It always takes time for me to adjust to the time change, but to go to another time zone immediately after changing the clocks and then returning two weeks later...
Since I was off last week, this evening was the first time I came home from the office in the dark. In fact, it was nearly dark when I left the office. In another week or so it will be completely dark when I leave the office. It is just dawn when I left for work this morning.
Dark. Dark. Dark. My mother combats the darkness by setting timers on several lamps, which she calls her "dawn lights." Her room gets gradually brighter until her alarm goes off, and she gets up in light. I just get up with the alarm clock and curse the darkness. I cannot imagine what it would be like living any further north.
Yet in less than a month we will mark the Winter Solstice, and the days will start getting longer. By that time my body will have reset itself to the artificial time change we mark on our clocks. At least until we change them again in the Spring...
Peace,
Jeffri
We set the clocks back in the wee hours of Sunday morning November 4th. Monday night, the 5th, I stayed at a hotel near JFK, and Tuesday morning, the 6th, I flew to Santo Domingo. The Dominican Republic is on "Atlantic Time," which is an hour ahead of "Eastern Time." I came home this past Monday, and my body clock is totally confused. It always takes time for me to adjust to the time change, but to go to another time zone immediately after changing the clocks and then returning two weeks later...
Since I was off last week, this evening was the first time I came home from the office in the dark. In fact, it was nearly dark when I left the office. In another week or so it will be completely dark when I leave the office. It is just dawn when I left for work this morning.
Dark. Dark. Dark. My mother combats the darkness by setting timers on several lamps, which she calls her "dawn lights." Her room gets gradually brighter until her alarm goes off, and she gets up in light. I just get up with the alarm clock and curse the darkness. I cannot imagine what it would be like living any further north.
Yet in less than a month we will mark the Winter Solstice, and the days will start getting longer. By that time my body will have reset itself to the artificial time change we mark on our clocks. At least until we change them again in the Spring...
Peace,
Jeffri
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Headlong Into Advent
Thanksgiving has passed, and we are now fully into the Holiday Frenzy. We embraced the frenzy fully on "Black Friday" when my brother and I took his family into New York City to see some of the sights, have dinner, and see 9:00 p.m. showing of the Radio City Music Hall Christmas Spectacular. I generally try to avoid the City the day after Thanksgiving, but this was one of the few times the whole family was here, and my brother really wanted to make the trip and see the show with his wife and kids. We had a good time.
Saturday we celebrated my mother's birthday early, which was the whole point of this family reunion. I would say "just a quiet dinner at home," but that just is not possible with four kids ranging in age from 9 to 19 and my brother and me. Two generations of sibling bantering--not to mention three generations of parent-child bantering. And, of course, we took some family pictures, including a couple of just me and my brother. After 45 years, now that I've lost enough hair to match his hairline and his hair has become as gray as mine, we finally look like brothers.
Late Saturday afternoon they left to return to Pennsylvania. Mom and Bill can reclaim their house, and I have my apartment back. The two youngest slept on air mattresses on my floor, which makes things pretty crowded in a 450 square foot apartment. Especially with the 14-year-old being taller than everyone in the family! Fortunately, we did not spend a lot of time there. When we were not sleeping we played Carcassonne together, or the youngest played computer games while the 14-year-old and I did crossword puzzles. Then we would pile into the car and drive over to Mom's.
I have completed about half of my Christmas shopping, but only because I bought some things while on my various trips around and out of the country. That does not mean I will have a calm prayerful Advent, however. Work promises to be especially stressful over the next few months, between various ongoing projects, a major conference, and the reorganization. I have some projects for church to work on. The first big cluster of family birthdays falls around this time. And I have friends that need my attention.
Generally, this means that, no matter how intentionally I start out, Advent is over before I have a chance to breathe and sit quietly. Sometimes, if I am lucky, God sneaks up on me, and I have a few quiet moments of calm in the midst of the frenzy.
Peace,
Jeffri
Saturday we celebrated my mother's birthday early, which was the whole point of this family reunion. I would say "just a quiet dinner at home," but that just is not possible with four kids ranging in age from 9 to 19 and my brother and me. Two generations of sibling bantering--not to mention three generations of parent-child bantering. And, of course, we took some family pictures, including a couple of just me and my brother. After 45 years, now that I've lost enough hair to match his hairline and his hair has become as gray as mine, we finally look like brothers.
Late Saturday afternoon they left to return to Pennsylvania. Mom and Bill can reclaim their house, and I have my apartment back. The two youngest slept on air mattresses on my floor, which makes things pretty crowded in a 450 square foot apartment. Especially with the 14-year-old being taller than everyone in the family! Fortunately, we did not spend a lot of time there. When we were not sleeping we played Carcassonne together, or the youngest played computer games while the 14-year-old and I did crossword puzzles. Then we would pile into the car and drive over to Mom's.
I have completed about half of my Christmas shopping, but only because I bought some things while on my various trips around and out of the country. That does not mean I will have a calm prayerful Advent, however. Work promises to be especially stressful over the next few months, between various ongoing projects, a major conference, and the reorganization. I have some projects for church to work on. The first big cluster of family birthdays falls around this time. And I have friends that need my attention.
Generally, this means that, no matter how intentionally I start out, Advent is over before I have a chance to breathe and sit quietly. Sometimes, if I am lucky, God sneaks up on me, and I have a few quiet moments of calm in the midst of the frenzy.
Peace,
Jeffri
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Late Night (Early Morning?) Pastime
A friend pointed me to this, and having nothing better to do...
Why am I not surprised?
Peace,
Jeffri
Why am I not surprised?
Peace,
Jeffri
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Before The Horde Descends
I am enjoying the last few minutes of calm before Thanksgiving weekend. The shopping is done. The laundry is half done. The apartment is clean. In a short bit I will go to Mom's for dinner, and we will await the arrival of my brother and his family.
This will be the first holiday we have all been together in about three years, and it will be the first time my brother's entire family will be up here for a visit in many years. I decided that we ought to make the effort to all be together this year, as Mom's 70th birthday is just after the holiday. No big fuss, which Mom would hate, but some time together. Things sort of spiraled from that decision. You can read some of Mom's thoughts here. Fortunately, given the number of people involved, my stepsister is hosting Thanksgiving dinner.
There was some talk of going into the City Friday morning. I put a stop to that right off. New York City the day after Thanksgiving? Are you nuts? With three teenagers and a nine-year-old?
And I don't even want to begin thinking about Christmas!!
Peace,
Jeffri
This will be the first holiday we have all been together in about three years, and it will be the first time my brother's entire family will be up here for a visit in many years. I decided that we ought to make the effort to all be together this year, as Mom's 70th birthday is just after the holiday. No big fuss, which Mom would hate, but some time together. Things sort of spiraled from that decision. You can read some of Mom's thoughts here. Fortunately, given the number of people involved, my stepsister is hosting Thanksgiving dinner.
There was some talk of going into the City Friday morning. I put a stop to that right off. New York City the day after Thanksgiving? Are you nuts? With three teenagers and a nine-year-old?
And I don't even want to begin thinking about Christmas!!
Peace,
Jeffri
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
As The Anglican Tempest...Ummm...Whatever
When I was little I would watch the afternoon soaps with my mother. I continued to watch a couple of them after school well into my junior high school days. I remember one character who started junior high at the same time I did, but by the time I finished junior high, he had graduated from college. Children, it seems, do not make for good plot lines on soaps, unless they are the focus of a custody battle or paternity suit. Their time lines are sped up while those of adults are slowed down. This is particularly noticeable on the occasional sick day when there is nothing on afternoon television, but I need noise as I drowse. Or when I visit my brother's family, and my sister-in-law is catching up on her tapes of her favorite soap. Within the course of one episode, I find I have caught up on every character I once knew and learned almost as much about any new characters.
These thoughts came to mind this morning as I caught up on news, checked my favorite (and not-so-favorite) blogs, and generally re-entered the life in the Northeast after two weeks of meetings in the Dominican Republic. In less than an hour I was fully caught up with the latest in the Anglican brouhaha. A retired bishop leaves a "liberal" province for a more "conservative" one. Self proclaimed "orthodox" bishops cross provincial lines to "rescue" so called "orthodox" parishes and dioceses in "heretical" provinces. Lawsuits. Posturing. Nasty comments. Witch hunts. Threats. From both sides of the aisle, so to speak. In other words, nothing new has happened. Not that I really expected it to, but the the sameness of it all truly reminded me of the soap operas.
This may be in part because most of my two weeks were spent with writers, lay and clergy, from the dioceses of Province IX of the Episcopal Church. In spite of cultural, language (think British English vs. U.S. English and multiply by eight or nine), and theological differences, these writers came together, formed a community, and began producing a Spanish language curriculum for Province IX. We talked together, worshipped together, worked together, ate together, and even played together. And yes, we argued together. Passionately. We argued over things seemingly as small as the meaning of a single word to things seemingly as large as the meaning of what it means to be a church. Sometimes we came to agreement. Sometimes we did not. No one stalked off because they disagreed with the outcome of these discussions. No one stopped talking to anyone else. No one went off to write their own curriculum. And no one removed themselves from the community. Always we remained a loving, caring community.
So coming back to the ongoing series of snit fits that seem to dominate the blogs and the news has been a little jarring. Having experienced, even for a brief moment in time, a caring community that did not require uniformity to belong, that respected its own diversity, the mean spiritedness and the calls for separation and "purity" are difficult to process.
Much to mull over in the coming days, weeks, months, and years.
Peace,
Jeffri
These thoughts came to mind this morning as I caught up on news, checked my favorite (and not-so-favorite) blogs, and generally re-entered the life in the Northeast after two weeks of meetings in the Dominican Republic. In less than an hour I was fully caught up with the latest in the Anglican brouhaha. A retired bishop leaves a "liberal" province for a more "conservative" one. Self proclaimed "orthodox" bishops cross provincial lines to "rescue" so called "orthodox" parishes and dioceses in "heretical" provinces. Lawsuits. Posturing. Nasty comments. Witch hunts. Threats. From both sides of the aisle, so to speak. In other words, nothing new has happened. Not that I really expected it to, but the the sameness of it all truly reminded me of the soap operas.
This may be in part because most of my two weeks were spent with writers, lay and clergy, from the dioceses of Province IX of the Episcopal Church. In spite of cultural, language (think British English vs. U.S. English and multiply by eight or nine), and theological differences, these writers came together, formed a community, and began producing a Spanish language curriculum for Province IX. We talked together, worshipped together, worked together, ate together, and even played together. And yes, we argued together. Passionately. We argued over things seemingly as small as the meaning of a single word to things seemingly as large as the meaning of what it means to be a church. Sometimes we came to agreement. Sometimes we did not. No one stalked off because they disagreed with the outcome of these discussions. No one stopped talking to anyone else. No one went off to write their own curriculum. And no one removed themselves from the community. Always we remained a loving, caring community.
So coming back to the ongoing series of snit fits that seem to dominate the blogs and the news has been a little jarring. Having experienced, even for a brief moment in time, a caring community that did not require uniformity to belong, that respected its own diversity, the mean spiritedness and the calls for separation and "purity" are difficult to process.
Much to mull over in the coming days, weeks, months, and years.
Peace,
Jeffri
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Quick Report From The Dominican Republic
I'm in the Dominican Republic to provide logistical and technical support for a workshop for writers from around Province IX of the Episcopal Church. They are writing a Spanish language Christian Education/Formation curriculum for all age levels for the province that comes from their own context rather than being a translation of something put together in the United States. We are meeting in the Dominican Republic because it is fairly easy to get to from the other eight dioceses of the province.
It has been an interesting experience for me because I have been operating in three languages: English, Spanish, and German. German is my second language, so when I start to struggle with my limited Spanish, my brain reverts to thinking in German. At that point I have to translate for myself back into English and then into Spanish. Generally I understand what I hear and read in Spanish, but I still have a lot of trouble speaking the language. Fortunately, we have three people who can translate.
Because our internet connection here has been unstable, I have not had much news of the tempest in a teapot that seems to be the Anglican Communion these days. Instead, in this meeting room we have been steeped in the work of the Church.
If I get a chance, I will write more before we leave. Otherwise, I'll be back in the States next week.
Peace,
Jeffri
It has been an interesting experience for me because I have been operating in three languages: English, Spanish, and German. German is my second language, so when I start to struggle with my limited Spanish, my brain reverts to thinking in German. At that point I have to translate for myself back into English and then into Spanish. Generally I understand what I hear and read in Spanish, but I still have a lot of trouble speaking the language. Fortunately, we have three people who can translate.
Because our internet connection here has been unstable, I have not had much news of the tempest in a teapot that seems to be the Anglican Communion these days. Instead, in this meeting room we have been steeped in the work of the Church.
If I get a chance, I will write more before we leave. Otherwise, I'll be back in the States next week.
Peace,
Jeffri
Monday, November 5, 2007
This Is Not An Apology
Recently Greg Griffith of StandFirm misidentified as Bishop Barbara Harris a woman in clerical dress in a photo taken at an October 27th Anti-War demonstration in San Francisco. The original post and the resulting nasty comments (another example of the site's "witch hunt" mentality) can be found archived by Jake here. When it turned out that the woman was not Bishop Harris, Greg posted an apology in which he wrote:
I seriously thought about titling this post "Apology Not Accepted," but then Greg was not apologizing to me. Just as Elizabeth was not apologizing to him but to Anne. However, I do not think it is too much to expect that Greg follow his own guidelines for an apology.
Peace,
Jeffri
Now compare this to what Greg wrote in response to another comment in the thread about Elizabeth Kaeton's comments regarding Anne Kennedy:, addressing another commentor, in regards to Elizabeth's apology:Well, I really stepped in it this time, accusing Bishop Barbara Harris in another thread (now removed out of respect for her) of marching in an anti-war march in San Francisco wearing a Palestinian kaffiyeh as a stole. Turns out it's not her.
I allowed past shows of support of Yassir Arafat and the Palestinians by Bishop Harris, like this, to influence my thinking, so when I happened across a photo of a woman in vestments bearing more than a striking resemblance to The Rev. Harris, I leaped to a conclusion I shouldn't have.
I apologize and ask for her forgiveness. This was an instance of my bearing false witness, albeit inadvertently, and I am sorry. My apologies to Bishop Harris are offered without qualification.
By Greg's own definition, his apology is not an apology.d---------,
Kaeton’s ‘apology’ is not an apology, plain and simple. An apology is not “I’m sorry that what I wrote hurt you, but I was completely justified in writing it because blah blah blah...”
I seriously thought about titling this post "Apology Not Accepted," but then Greg was not apologizing to me. Just as Elizabeth was not apologizing to him but to Anne. However, I do not think it is too much to expect that Greg follow his own guidelines for an apology.
Peace,
Jeffri
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Hymns I'd Rather Not Sing
This morning at Grace Church we celebrated All Saints Day. And, of course, we sang A Song of the Saints of God, possibly one of the most insipid and trite hymns in the 1982 Hymnal. The tune isn't bad, but the text is just awful. Even though it was written in the 1920's, it is full of Victorian English imagery (meeting saints at tea...). Ick.
Victorian imagery haunts us in many of our hymns. "All Things Bright and Beautiful," for instance, where Cecil Alexander's words were set to a melody lifted from a book of dance tunes. Alexander is also responsible for the text of "Once In Royal David's City." It is a popular hymn for Christmas services. I love the stateliness of it, but it romanticizes the conditions in which Jesus was born.
Nor are more modern hymns exempt from odd imagery. It's almost impossible to get through "Earth and All Stars" without giggling, especially when you reach the line about the loud boiling test tubes!
There's a reason I don't write hymns!
Peace,
Jeffri
Victorian imagery haunts us in many of our hymns. "All Things Bright and Beautiful," for instance, where Cecil Alexander's words were set to a melody lifted from a book of dance tunes. Alexander is also responsible for the text of "Once In Royal David's City." It is a popular hymn for Christmas services. I love the stateliness of it, but it romanticizes the conditions in which Jesus was born.
Nor are more modern hymns exempt from odd imagery. It's almost impossible to get through "Earth and All Stars" without giggling, especially when you reach the line about the loud boiling test tubes!
There's a reason I don't write hymns!
Peace,
Jeffri
Thursday, November 1, 2007
In Nature's Way
In November a couple of years ago I attended a conference in the Phoenix, Arizona, area. The weather was a little cool, even for November, and cloudy. It even rained a couple of times. At the Sunday worship service for the conference, the local pastor who led the service started off his greetings to conference attendees by apologizing if the locals were joyful about the weather. They needed the rain, he said.
My immediate thought was, "I have no sympathy for people who move to the desert, plant grass, and then complain about the lack of rain." I'm having a similar reaction after watching news reports from the Florida coast as it was lashed by Hurricane Noel.
I grew up in a coastal community, so I know first hand what storms can do to beaches and other shoreline geography. I also understand the allure of shore front homes. However, if you are going to build on the shore and then complain about the natural effects of wind and water on the shoreline (both erosion and build-up), then you are not going to get a lot of sympathy from me. The same goes for those who decide to build in the mountains, destroy the hillside ecosystem, and then complain about the mudslides. And it even applies to those who build in the woods, refuse to let smaller, controlled fires burn as part of the forest's natural life cycle, and then complain about wildfires.
There are ways to live near the shore, on the hills and in the woods that are less disruptive to the ecosystem. There are even ways to build our homes in ways that lessen the impact of storms. I remember watching news reports a couple of years ago after a fairly severe hurricane passed through central Florida. It was interesting to note that the houses that survived with minimal damage were those built either before 1940 or after the new building codes were implemented in the wake of Hurricane Andrew.
We can never totally eliminate the results of natural "disasters." Sometimes we cannot avoid the destruction, no matter how carefully we plan and build. Nor do I want to belittle the losses of those who have endured the fires in California and Tropical Storm, now Hurricane, Noel. However, if you continue to disregard nature and build in places and ways where you know it is probable that your house will be destroyed, how many times do you honestly expect to be bailed out by insurance companies or the government?
Peace,
Jeffri
My immediate thought was, "I have no sympathy for people who move to the desert, plant grass, and then complain about the lack of rain." I'm having a similar reaction after watching news reports from the Florida coast as it was lashed by Hurricane Noel.
I grew up in a coastal community, so I know first hand what storms can do to beaches and other shoreline geography. I also understand the allure of shore front homes. However, if you are going to build on the shore and then complain about the natural effects of wind and water on the shoreline (both erosion and build-up), then you are not going to get a lot of sympathy from me. The same goes for those who decide to build in the mountains, destroy the hillside ecosystem, and then complain about the mudslides. And it even applies to those who build in the woods, refuse to let smaller, controlled fires burn as part of the forest's natural life cycle, and then complain about wildfires.
There are ways to live near the shore, on the hills and in the woods that are less disruptive to the ecosystem. There are even ways to build our homes in ways that lessen the impact of storms. I remember watching news reports a couple of years ago after a fairly severe hurricane passed through central Florida. It was interesting to note that the houses that survived with minimal damage were those built either before 1940 or after the new building codes were implemented in the wake of Hurricane Andrew.
We can never totally eliminate the results of natural "disasters." Sometimes we cannot avoid the destruction, no matter how carefully we plan and build. Nor do I want to belittle the losses of those who have endured the fires in California and Tropical Storm, now Hurricane, Noel. However, if you continue to disregard nature and build in places and ways where you know it is probable that your house will be destroyed, how many times do you honestly expect to be bailed out by insurance companies or the government?
Peace,
Jeffri
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Exile And Return
Twenty-Second Sunday after Pentecost, October 28, 2007
Year C, Proper 25: Jeremiah 14: (1-6) 7-10, 19-22
Grace Episcopal Church, Norwalk, CT
by Jeffri Harre
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in your sight, O God, our strength and our redeemer. Amen.
It has been a few years since I last stood before you in this place. Although I made the painful decision to leave Grace Church, you were often on my mind and always in my prayers. I kept up with the goings on of the parish through my mother and a handful of friends. Over and over again I was asked, most often relayed by Mom, “When are you coming back?”
Again and again I would say, “This was an Exodus and not a Babylonian Exile.” I guess I was wrong, wasn’t I. And so, like a handful of others, the exile has returned. It seems appropriate that Jeremiah, who lived through the time of the Babylonian Exile, is one of the lectionary readings for my first sermon after my return.
When I first read the passage from Jeremiah in preparation for this morning, one of the first things that popped into my head was the demented Greek chorus from Edward Gorey’s “Inanimate Tragedy:”
"Death and Distraction!" said the Pins and Needles. "Destruction and Debauchery!"
"Duplicity and Desolation!" said the Needles and Pins. "Dissolution and Despair!"
Well, you get the idea. They go on like this throughout the entire poem. Jeremiah’s lamentations, judgments against the nations of the region, and oracles of destruction run through most of his book. As with the pins and needles, I find myself wanting to shout at Jeremiah, “Enough already! Shut up!”
Yet there are days when I walk into this church and feel like those who went to the well and found it dry. There are days when I gather with others of this parish and hear that many of us feel like those who covered their heads because the ground was parched and cracked. It is easy to fall into despair, to wail and gnash our teeth.
Which brings me to the second thing that came to mind as I read the lectionary for today—a verse from the 31st chapter of Jeremiah that was one of two scripture passages used as the foundation for the work of a conference I helped plan and implement not long after I began working in the Office of Children’s Ministries and Christian Education at the Episcopal Church Center:
Thus says the Lord:
A voice is heard in Ramah,
lamentation and bitter weeping.
Rachel is weeping for her children;
she refuses to be comforted for her children,
because they are no more.
(Jeremiah 31:15)
More lamentations from the exiles and those left behind. At which point not only do I want to tell Jeremiah, “Enough already!” but myself as well. Weeping and mourning are necessary, and even healthy, but at some point we have to move on. In Education for Ministry we use a call and response after each person has shared their Spiritual Autobiography:
For what has been,
Thanks be to God.
For what is,
Thanks be to God.
And for what will be,
Thanks be to God.
Remember where we have been, acknowledge where we are, and look forward to where we are going. For us here at Grace Church, we need to remember where we have been, because our experiences have changed us. And all of us have been changed—those who went into exile and returned and those who remained. We must acknowledge where we are, because if we do not, we cannot move forward, we will get mired in our lamentations over what has been. We absolutely must look forward to where we are going, because without a vision, we cannot build something new and different.
Jeremiah, for all his ranting and mourning, knows this. He works on the assumption that things will get better—he even buys a field while the Babylonians are besieging Jerusalem. If that isn’t optimism in the face of destruction, I don’t know what is! You can also see this hope if you continue reading past Rachel weeping for her children in Chapter 31. In the next verses God, through Jeremiah, offers hope to the people:
Thus says the Lord:
Keep your voice from weeping,
and your eyes from tears;
for there is reward for your work,
says the Lord:
they shall come back from the land of the enemy;
there is hope for your future,
says the Lord;
your children shall come back to their own country.
(Jeremiah 31:16-17)
And some of us have returned. This is just one of the first steps in building something new. If we want Grace Church not only to survive, but to flourish, then we need a vision. I know some of you have been working diligently with Lois on a new vision. I want to encourage all of us to participate in that work. Part of my own vision for the church, and not just Grace Church, but the whole church, comes from the second piece of scripture that we used at the “Will Our Faith Have Children?” conference--the opening of the 54th chapter of Isaiah, which is also addressed to the people at the time of the Exile:
Sing, O barren one, who did not bear;
break forth into singing and cry aloud,
you who have not been in travail:
For the children of the desolate one will be more
than the children of her that is married, says the Lord.
Enlarge the place of your tent,
and let the curtains of your habitations be stretched out;
hold not back, lengthen your cords
and strengthen your stakes.
For you will spread abroad to the right and to the left,
and your descendants will posses the nations
and will people the desolate cities.
(Isaiah 54:1-3)
Enlarge the place of your tent. What an image. Make room for those who are coming and be ready to welcome them when they arrive.
Enlarging the tent takes resources. (You didn’t think I was going to get to Stewardship, did you?) You need to be able to buy new canvas, ropes, poles and tent pegs. You need to make a pattern for the new sections of the tent, cut them from the canvas and sew them to the existing tent. You need to erect the new poles, pound in the new pegs and make sure the original pegs are firmly in place, and you need to string and tighten the ropes to hold the tent up. That’s not just money, but people power as well. And as hard as that may be to envision given our financial situation, that’s the easy part.
We must be ready, willing, and able to welcome folks when they arrive. As much as possible, treat them as if they are already members of our community. Greet them, sit with them, make sure they have everything they need to participate in the service, share the peace with them, and let them know you look forward to seeing them again. When they come a second time, treat them the same way. If fact, treat them, and each other, that way every time they come. Those who decide to join us will bring new gifts to the community, and we must be open and willing to accept those new gifts. Just as all of us have been changed by our experiences together and apart, so will we and they be changed by our experiences together.
Change is not easy, and we will often find ourselves turning to Jeremiah and his lamentations. But I hope that we will also turn to the words of hope and encouragement found in Jeremiah. Remember where we have been, acknowledge where we are, and look forward to where we are going.
For what has been,
Thanks be to God.
For what is,
Thanks be to God.
And for what will be,
Thanks be to God.
Let all God’s people say, “Amen!”
Year C, Proper 25: Jeremiah 14: (1-6) 7-10, 19-22
Grace Episcopal Church, Norwalk, CT
by Jeffri Harre
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in your sight, O God, our strength and our redeemer. Amen.
It has been a few years since I last stood before you in this place. Although I made the painful decision to leave Grace Church, you were often on my mind and always in my prayers. I kept up with the goings on of the parish through my mother and a handful of friends. Over and over again I was asked, most often relayed by Mom, “When are you coming back?”
Again and again I would say, “This was an Exodus and not a Babylonian Exile.” I guess I was wrong, wasn’t I. And so, like a handful of others, the exile has returned. It seems appropriate that Jeremiah, who lived through the time of the Babylonian Exile, is one of the lectionary readings for my first sermon after my return.
When I first read the passage from Jeremiah in preparation for this morning, one of the first things that popped into my head was the demented Greek chorus from Edward Gorey’s “Inanimate Tragedy:”
"Death and Distraction!" said the Pins and Needles. "Destruction and Debauchery!"
"Duplicity and Desolation!" said the Needles and Pins. "Dissolution and Despair!"
Well, you get the idea. They go on like this throughout the entire poem. Jeremiah’s lamentations, judgments against the nations of the region, and oracles of destruction run through most of his book. As with the pins and needles, I find myself wanting to shout at Jeremiah, “Enough already! Shut up!”
Yet there are days when I walk into this church and feel like those who went to the well and found it dry. There are days when I gather with others of this parish and hear that many of us feel like those who covered their heads because the ground was parched and cracked. It is easy to fall into despair, to wail and gnash our teeth.
Which brings me to the second thing that came to mind as I read the lectionary for today—a verse from the 31st chapter of Jeremiah that was one of two scripture passages used as the foundation for the work of a conference I helped plan and implement not long after I began working in the Office of Children’s Ministries and Christian Education at the Episcopal Church Center:
Thus says the Lord:
A voice is heard in Ramah,
lamentation and bitter weeping.
Rachel is weeping for her children;
she refuses to be comforted for her children,
because they are no more.
(Jeremiah 31:15)
More lamentations from the exiles and those left behind. At which point not only do I want to tell Jeremiah, “Enough already!” but myself as well. Weeping and mourning are necessary, and even healthy, but at some point we have to move on. In Education for Ministry we use a call and response after each person has shared their Spiritual Autobiography:
For what has been,
Thanks be to God.
For what is,
Thanks be to God.
And for what will be,
Thanks be to God.
Remember where we have been, acknowledge where we are, and look forward to where we are going. For us here at Grace Church, we need to remember where we have been, because our experiences have changed us. And all of us have been changed—those who went into exile and returned and those who remained. We must acknowledge where we are, because if we do not, we cannot move forward, we will get mired in our lamentations over what has been. We absolutely must look forward to where we are going, because without a vision, we cannot build something new and different.
Jeremiah, for all his ranting and mourning, knows this. He works on the assumption that things will get better—he even buys a field while the Babylonians are besieging Jerusalem. If that isn’t optimism in the face of destruction, I don’t know what is! You can also see this hope if you continue reading past Rachel weeping for her children in Chapter 31. In the next verses God, through Jeremiah, offers hope to the people:
Thus says the Lord:
Keep your voice from weeping,
and your eyes from tears;
for there is reward for your work,
says the Lord:
they shall come back from the land of the enemy;
there is hope for your future,
says the Lord;
your children shall come back to their own country.
(Jeremiah 31:16-17)
And some of us have returned. This is just one of the first steps in building something new. If we want Grace Church not only to survive, but to flourish, then we need a vision. I know some of you have been working diligently with Lois on a new vision. I want to encourage all of us to participate in that work. Part of my own vision for the church, and not just Grace Church, but the whole church, comes from the second piece of scripture that we used at the “Will Our Faith Have Children?” conference--the opening of the 54th chapter of Isaiah, which is also addressed to the people at the time of the Exile:
Sing, O barren one, who did not bear;
break forth into singing and cry aloud,
you who have not been in travail:
For the children of the desolate one will be more
than the children of her that is married, says the Lord.
Enlarge the place of your tent,
and let the curtains of your habitations be stretched out;
hold not back, lengthen your cords
and strengthen your stakes.
For you will spread abroad to the right and to the left,
and your descendants will posses the nations
and will people the desolate cities.
(Isaiah 54:1-3)
Enlarge the place of your tent. What an image. Make room for those who are coming and be ready to welcome them when they arrive.
Enlarging the tent takes resources. (You didn’t think I was going to get to Stewardship, did you?) You need to be able to buy new canvas, ropes, poles and tent pegs. You need to make a pattern for the new sections of the tent, cut them from the canvas and sew them to the existing tent. You need to erect the new poles, pound in the new pegs and make sure the original pegs are firmly in place, and you need to string and tighten the ropes to hold the tent up. That’s not just money, but people power as well. And as hard as that may be to envision given our financial situation, that’s the easy part.
We must be ready, willing, and able to welcome folks when they arrive. As much as possible, treat them as if they are already members of our community. Greet them, sit with them, make sure they have everything they need to participate in the service, share the peace with them, and let them know you look forward to seeing them again. When they come a second time, treat them the same way. If fact, treat them, and each other, that way every time they come. Those who decide to join us will bring new gifts to the community, and we must be open and willing to accept those new gifts. Just as all of us have been changed by our experiences together and apart, so will we and they be changed by our experiences together.
Change is not easy, and we will often find ourselves turning to Jeremiah and his lamentations. But I hope that we will also turn to the words of hope and encouragement found in Jeremiah. Remember where we have been, acknowledge where we are, and look forward to where we are going.
For what has been,
Thanks be to God.
For what is,
Thanks be to God.
And for what will be,
Thanks be to God.
Let all God’s people say, “Amen!”
Friday, October 26, 2007
The Bishops Talk About Their September Meeting
This post consists primarily of statements made by bishops of the Epsicopal Church reflecting on their September meeting in New Orleans. I have also included some statements from other bishops around the Anglican Communion. I have moved all of my comments and update notices to the bottom.
Peace,
Jeffri
Province I
Andrew Smith, Connecticut, in his Convention Address (see pages 5-6)
Childton Knudson, Maine
Gene Robinson, New Hampshire, posted on Susan Russell's An Inch At A Time
Geralyn Wolf, Rhode Island
Thomas Ely, Vermont
Province II
William Love, Albany
Mark Sisk, New York, has sent an email to his clergy, but it has not yet appeared on the diocesan web site (as of 6:30 p.m. October 3)
Mark Beckwith, Newark
Jack McKelvey, Rochester, posted on Walking with Integrity
Michael Garrison, Western New York
Province III
Paul Marshall, Bethlehem (see Section II, pages 5-7)
Nathan Baxter, Central Pennsylvania, and in this article on Pennlive.com
Wayne Wright, Delaware
James Shand, Easton
John Rabb, Maryland
Charles Bennison, Pennsylvania
Neff Powell, Southwestern Virginia
Peter Lee (Diocesan), Shannon Johnston (Coadjutor) and David Jones (Suffragan), Virginia
Province IV
Henry Parsley, Alabama; the link on the diocesan web site is broken, but as of now (9/30), it is the first thing on the bishop's pages
Neil Alexander, Atlanta
John Howe, Central Florida; Bishop Howe revised his letter, and both versions are posted on Stand Firm
Philip Duncan, Central Gulf Coast
Clifton Daniel, East Carolina
Charles vonRosenberg, East Tennessee, has posted nothing, but the diocesan web site has a "Windsor Process" page that gives a good overview--with links--of what has transpired since the release of the Windsor Report
John Howard, Florida
Ted Gulick and David Reed (retired), Kentucky
Charles Jenkins, Louisiana, coming soon, but in the meantime, his Canon to the Ordinary has posted his refelctions on The Bishop's Blog
Duncan Gray, Mississippi
Michael Curry, North Carolina,
Edward Salmon, Acting South Carolina, posted on TitusOneNine
Leo Frade, Southeast Florida
Dabney Smith, Southwest Florida
John Bauerscmidt, Tennessee
Dorsey Henderson, Upper South Carolina
Province V
William Persell, Chicago
Todd Ousley, Eastern Michigan
Cate Waynick, Indianaoplis, posted her response on the House of Bishops & Deputies listserv with permission to share. I've added it below under "October 5." There is also a Pastoral Letter posted on the diocesan website (for reading on Sunday October 20 [sic])--you may have to page down to find the link.
George Wayne Smith, Missouri
Edward Little, Northern Indiana
Mark Hollingsworth, Ohio
Thomas Breidenthal, Southern Ohio
Robert Gepert, Western Michigan
Province VI
Alan Scarfe, Iowa, posted on TitusOneNine
James Jelinek, Minnesota
Joe Burnett, Nebraska, posted on TitusOneNine
Michael Smith, North Dakota
Province VII
Larry Benfield, Arkansas, posted on Stand Firm
James Stanton, Dallas
Jack Iker, Fort Worth, posted on Katie Sherwood's Desert's Child
Dean Wolfe, Kansas
Edward Konieczny, Oklahoma
Don Wimberely, Texas
Barry Howe, West Missouri
Gary Lillibridge (Diocesan) and David Reed (Suffragan),West Texas; Bishop Lillibridge has a series of reports from the bishops' meeting here
Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana
Province VIII
Kirk Smith, Arizona, in an email posted on Nick Knisely's Entangled States
Robert Fitzpatrick, Hawaii
Barry Beisner, Northern California
Edward Konieczny, Oklahoma, click on the "News and Ministry" link
Greg Rickel, Olympia
Johncy Itty, Oregon
San Joaquin (the "Diocese" responds)
Carolyn Tanner Irish, Utah, in the Desert Morning News
Other TEC Bishops
Chris Epting, Eccumenical Officer for The Episcopal Church
Other "Interested Parties"
Statement by the Secretary General on behalf of the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council
Report of the Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates of the Anglican Communion to the Archbishop of Canterbury
Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), posted on Global South Anglican, see particularly items #4 - 7
Phillip Aspinall, Archbishop of Brisbane, Primate of Australia
Susan Russell, President of Integrity, posted on Walking with Integrity
Alan Harper, Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of Ireland
Robin Eames, Retired Archbishop of Armagh, chair of the Eames Commission, which authored the Windsor Report, posted on The Episcopal Cafe
Mouneer Anis, Primate of Jerusalem and the Middle East, posted on Global South Anglican and as reported in Ruth Gledhill's blog
Benjamin Nzimbi, Archbishop of Kenya, reported in BBC News
Peter Akinola, Archbishop of Nigeria, posted on TitusOneNine
Benjamin Kwashi, archbishop-elect of Jos province in Nigeria, orgininally reported on IC Publications, but only an excerpt of the report is now posted on Stand Firm
Njongonkulu Ndungane, South Africa, in The Christian Post online, and in a statment posted by ENS on Episcopal Life Online
Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney
Henry Orombi, Primate of the Anglican Church of Uganda, posted on TitusOneNine, and also in an article posted on The Living Church's website
David Zac Niringiye, Kampala, Uganda, reported in BBC News
Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales, in the Church Times
The American Anglican Council, The Anglican Communion Network, and Forward in Faith North America, in a joint statement posted on the Anglican Communion Network site
October 26
Added links to: Andrew Smith's comments,
October 24
Added links to: Dean Wolfe's reflections.
October 23
Added links to: interview with Ted Gulik and David Reed, Peter Jensen's response, Catherine Waynick's pastoral letter, James Shand's pastoral letter, Philip Duncan's notes, Clifton Daniel's reflections, Diocese of East Tennessee's "Windsor Process" page.
October 17
Added links to: Njongonkulu Ndungane's interview
October 15
Added links to: Paul Marshall's Convention Address, an interview with Nathan Baxter
October 12 (From San Diego, where I am visiting friends)
Added links to: William Love's letter, Gene Robinson's "Open Letter to the Letter to the LGBT Community," Joe Burnett's reflection, Alan Scarfe's comments, John Howard's letter, Chilton Knudson's letter, William Persell's letter.
October 7
Added links to: Leo Frade's reflection.
October 6
Added links to: CAPA Statement, Susan Russell's statement on behalf of Integrity
October 5
Added links to: George Wayne Smith's impressions (thanks, Lisa!) , Henry Orombi's response, Charles Bennison's column, Barry Morgan's report. Posted Cate Waynick's letter, (below--thanks, Ann!).
==========
Dear Friends,
What an amazing turn of events!
The overall response of the Joint Committee to the House of Bishops message is positive – yet the Evangelicals in theChurch of England demand that the ABC denounce the church in the US over thepossibility of consecrating a partnered gay to the episcopate - and ourblessing of same sex unions! They threaten to divide the English church overthis - just as TEC is threatened.We simply have to be more vocal about this....the C of E blesses same-sexunions. The partnered homosexual clergy in the C of E are entitled, underBritish law, to register their relationships in order to gain the legal benefits accorded them. The C or E House of Bishops issued a statement to that effect in November or December of 2005. Following that C of E HOB statement a condemnatory letter issued fromNigeria - reminding the English church that TEC and others were being ostracized for that sort of thing. But outrage at the C of E does not seem to have anystaying power -- either in other parts of the Communion or in TEC. When Bishop Mark Sisk and I asked the ABC about same-sex blessings - aboutwhat the difference is between what happens in the Cof E and what happens insome places here he answered, "They ( in England) are not public."
They may not be public events, but they are certainly not secret. Our own Bp. Duncan was recently interviewed about the tensions within TEC and was asked if his decision to urge separation from TEC was a new thing. He said it was not - that during the Civil War several dioceses separated for atime over the issue of slavery - which he described as a social issue, not asalvation issue!!But the very fact that he would urge separation from TEC but not from the Cof E - where same sex blessings (non-public as they may be in nature) also take place - certainly raises questions. That C of E evangelicals wouldthreaten a split in their own church over what is happening here rather than overwhat is happening there -- again raises questions.
I can only say what I have said before. The issue is not really homosexuality. It is not about what is "repugnant to Scripture." If it were, Bp Duncan would be calling for his followers to disassociate themselves from the C of E because of its permissive stance about same sex blessings even among their ownclergy! It is rather about what has become repugnant to some of the clergy and members of this church who have become willing to use sex as a wedge to gain support from others around the Communion. The issue is about the dramatic shift in power and authority over the lastforty years within TEC. We have a catechism which clearly states that theministers of the church are lay persons, bishops, priests and deacons. We began admitting all baptised persons to the sacred eucharistic meal - including children. Women began serving on Vestries and Bishop's Committees, as chalice bearers, as convention delegates and Deputies. And we began ordaining women as priests and bishops. The C of E has gone through similar changes, and with new conversations about women in the episcopate...well, something must be done.
The list of offenses has become intolerable, but none of those issues would provide the frenzy of support our dissenters require to gain their ends. But for churches in places where there are very few cracks in the solid patriarchy of social, political or religious life, homosexuality provides the wedge. Even the notion of homosexuality is emasculating in some cultures - we heardthis very clearly from the Chancellor of Ghana - a woman who described herself as having learned to work within their system, and who has no intention of making the waves required to push her province into a "listening process" about homosexuality.
As a member of the writing group I will confess that I am not satisfied with the statement from the House of Bishops. I was also not satisfied with B033. We said nothing new in that portion of our NOLA statement. There simply cannot have been anyone in this church who didn't already know that B033 includes non-celibate gay and lesbian persons. About the blessing of same sex unions we repeated ourselves. They keep asking for a guarantee that we will not provide public liturgies, and we keep telling them that we have no public liturgies. We have agreed not to produce them until a "consensus emerges around the Communion" OR until the GC acts. One might happen far sooner than the other.....and we remain adamant that responses to individual pastoral situations is a local matter. Of course the last paragraph of our statement speaks of where our hearts arer ather than the reality of our common life. I can only imagine what St.Paul was thinking when he wrote that "when anyone is in Christ there is a newcreation...." clearly not completely true, but certainly the hope of faithful hearts. We included it because we simply had to reiterate our desire to come to that place, and to make it clear to others that it is where we know we ought to be.
I sincerely hope that someone will call the evangelicals in the C of E on their hypocrisy, and that many more of us here at home will start calling our own struggle what it is - a fight to regain power and control in order to return TEC to its even more deeply flawed past..... though even “back in the day” we came to recognize slavery as a moral evil.
Sorry this posting is so long -- I don't chime in that often.
A bit of good news; I look forward to a diocesan convention at which a group of folks are petitioning to become a mission congregation of this diocese. They want to be Episcopalians!
Peace to you,
+Cate Waynick
==========
October 4
Added the following links: Mouneer Anis' response, Edward Konieczny's reflections, Neff Powell's update, reflections by Louisiana's Canon to the Ordinary
October 3
Added the following links: Report of the Joint Standing Committee, Ruth Gledhill's report on reactions to the Committee's report
October 2
Added links to statements by the following: Robin Eames, Michael Garrison, and Nathan Baxter.
October 1
Updates Added links to new statements.
September 30
I spent four days at a conference with no internet access, and I return to find not much has really happened. Well, other than that the "usual suspects" took one step closer to attempting to move their shadow church forward--like we didn't know that was coming! My favorite comment on the ongoing reactions to and spin of the bishops' statement is this one, which appeared on epiScope:
Peace,
Jeffri
September 26
Well, it did not take long. Statements started appearing yesterday when Gene Robinson and Bruce McPherson were quoted in this Reuters article. As I did with their March meeting, I'll try and find as many of their statements and reports as I can. They will be listed by province. After tonight, I will not have computer access until Sunday evening, so there will be no updates until then. By then I also hope to have been able to gather my own thoughts and put them in some sort of coherent form for a separate post. Until then, pray for the Church.
Peace,
Jeffri
Peace,
Jeffri
Province I
Andrew Smith, Connecticut, in his Convention Address (see pages 5-6)
Childton Knudson, Maine
Gene Robinson, New Hampshire, posted on Susan Russell's An Inch At A Time
Geralyn Wolf, Rhode Island
Thomas Ely, Vermont
Province II
William Love, Albany
Mark Sisk, New York, has sent an email to his clergy, but it has not yet appeared on the diocesan web site (as of 6:30 p.m. October 3)
Mark Beckwith, Newark
Jack McKelvey, Rochester, posted on Walking with Integrity
Michael Garrison, Western New York
Province III
Paul Marshall, Bethlehem (see Section II, pages 5-7)
Nathan Baxter, Central Pennsylvania, and in this article on Pennlive.com
Wayne Wright, Delaware
James Shand, Easton
John Rabb, Maryland
Charles Bennison, Pennsylvania
Neff Powell, Southwestern Virginia
Peter Lee (Diocesan), Shannon Johnston (Coadjutor) and David Jones (Suffragan), Virginia
Province IV
Henry Parsley, Alabama; the link on the diocesan web site is broken, but as of now (9/30), it is the first thing on the bishop's pages
Neil Alexander, Atlanta
John Howe, Central Florida; Bishop Howe revised his letter, and both versions are posted on Stand Firm
Philip Duncan, Central Gulf Coast
Clifton Daniel, East Carolina
Charles vonRosenberg, East Tennessee, has posted nothing, but the diocesan web site has a "Windsor Process" page that gives a good overview--with links--of what has transpired since the release of the Windsor Report
John Howard, Florida
Ted Gulick and David Reed (retired), Kentucky
Charles Jenkins, Louisiana, coming soon, but in the meantime, his Canon to the Ordinary has posted his refelctions on The Bishop's Blog
Duncan Gray, Mississippi
Michael Curry, North Carolina,
Edward Salmon, Acting South Carolina, posted on TitusOneNine
Leo Frade, Southeast Florida
Dabney Smith, Southwest Florida
John Bauerscmidt, Tennessee
Dorsey Henderson, Upper South Carolina
Province V
William Persell, Chicago
Todd Ousley, Eastern Michigan
Cate Waynick, Indianaoplis, posted her response on the House of Bishops & Deputies listserv with permission to share. I've added it below under "October 5." There is also a Pastoral Letter posted on the diocesan website (for reading on Sunday October 20 [sic])--you may have to page down to find the link.
George Wayne Smith, Missouri
Edward Little, Northern Indiana
Mark Hollingsworth, Ohio
Thomas Breidenthal, Southern Ohio
Robert Gepert, Western Michigan
Province VI
Alan Scarfe, Iowa, posted on TitusOneNine
James Jelinek, Minnesota
Joe Burnett, Nebraska, posted on TitusOneNine
Michael Smith, North Dakota
Province VII
Larry Benfield, Arkansas, posted on Stand Firm
James Stanton, Dallas
Jack Iker, Fort Worth, posted on Katie Sherwood's Desert's Child
Dean Wolfe, Kansas
Edward Konieczny, Oklahoma
Don Wimberely, Texas
Barry Howe, West Missouri
Gary Lillibridge (Diocesan) and David Reed (Suffragan),West Texas; Bishop Lillibridge has a series of reports from the bishops' meeting here
Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana
Province VIII
Kirk Smith, Arizona, in an email posted on Nick Knisely's Entangled States
Robert Fitzpatrick, Hawaii
Barry Beisner, Northern California
Edward Konieczny, Oklahoma, click on the "News and Ministry" link
Greg Rickel, Olympia
Johncy Itty, Oregon
San Joaquin (the "Diocese" responds)
Carolyn Tanner Irish, Utah, in the Desert Morning News
Other TEC Bishops
Chris Epting, Eccumenical Officer for The Episcopal Church
Other "Interested Parties"
Statement by the Secretary General on behalf of the Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council
Report of the Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates of the Anglican Communion to the Archbishop of Canterbury
Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), posted on Global South Anglican, see particularly items #4 - 7
Phillip Aspinall, Archbishop of Brisbane, Primate of Australia
Susan Russell, President of Integrity, posted on Walking with Integrity
Alan Harper, Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of Ireland
Robin Eames, Retired Archbishop of Armagh, chair of the Eames Commission, which authored the Windsor Report, posted on The Episcopal Cafe
Mouneer Anis, Primate of Jerusalem and the Middle East, posted on Global South Anglican and as reported in Ruth Gledhill's blog
Benjamin Nzimbi, Archbishop of Kenya, reported in BBC News
Peter Akinola, Archbishop of Nigeria, posted on TitusOneNine
Benjamin Kwashi, archbishop-elect of Jos province in Nigeria, orgininally reported on IC Publications, but only an excerpt of the report is now posted on Stand Firm
Njongonkulu Ndungane, South Africa, in The Christian Post online, and in a statment posted by ENS on Episcopal Life Online
Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney
Henry Orombi, Primate of the Anglican Church of Uganda, posted on TitusOneNine, and also in an article posted on The Living Church's website
David Zac Niringiye, Kampala, Uganda, reported in BBC News
Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales, in the Church Times
The American Anglican Council, The Anglican Communion Network, and Forward in Faith North America, in a joint statement posted on the Anglican Communion Network site
October 26
Added links to: Andrew Smith's comments,
October 24
Added links to: Dean Wolfe's reflections.
October 23
Added links to: interview with Ted Gulik and David Reed, Peter Jensen's response, Catherine Waynick's pastoral letter, James Shand's pastoral letter, Philip Duncan's notes, Clifton Daniel's reflections, Diocese of East Tennessee's "Windsor Process" page.
October 17
Added links to: Njongonkulu Ndungane's interview
October 15
Added links to: Paul Marshall's Convention Address, an interview with Nathan Baxter
October 12 (From San Diego, where I am visiting friends)
Added links to: William Love's letter, Gene Robinson's "Open Letter to the Letter to the LGBT Community," Joe Burnett's reflection, Alan Scarfe's comments, John Howard's letter, Chilton Knudson's letter, William Persell's letter.
October 7
Added links to: Leo Frade's reflection.
October 6
Added links to: CAPA Statement, Susan Russell's statement on behalf of Integrity
October 5
Added links to: George Wayne Smith's impressions (thanks, Lisa!) , Henry Orombi's response, Charles Bennison's column, Barry Morgan's report. Posted Cate Waynick's letter, (below--thanks, Ann!).
==========
Dear Friends,
What an amazing turn of events!
The overall response of the Joint Committee to the House of Bishops message is positive – yet the Evangelicals in theChurch of England demand that the ABC denounce the church in the US over thepossibility of consecrating a partnered gay to the episcopate - and ourblessing of same sex unions! They threaten to divide the English church overthis - just as TEC is threatened.We simply have to be more vocal about this....the C of E blesses same-sexunions. The partnered homosexual clergy in the C of E are entitled, underBritish law, to register their relationships in order to gain the legal benefits accorded them. The C or E House of Bishops issued a statement to that effect in November or December of 2005. Following that C of E HOB statement a condemnatory letter issued fromNigeria - reminding the English church that TEC and others were being ostracized for that sort of thing. But outrage at the C of E does not seem to have anystaying power -- either in other parts of the Communion or in TEC. When Bishop Mark Sisk and I asked the ABC about same-sex blessings - aboutwhat the difference is between what happens in the Cof E and what happens insome places here he answered, "They ( in England) are not public."
They may not be public events, but they are certainly not secret. Our own Bp. Duncan was recently interviewed about the tensions within TEC and was asked if his decision to urge separation from TEC was a new thing. He said it was not - that during the Civil War several dioceses separated for atime over the issue of slavery - which he described as a social issue, not asalvation issue!!But the very fact that he would urge separation from TEC but not from the Cof E - where same sex blessings (non-public as they may be in nature) also take place - certainly raises questions. That C of E evangelicals wouldthreaten a split in their own church over what is happening here rather than overwhat is happening there -- again raises questions.
I can only say what I have said before. The issue is not really homosexuality. It is not about what is "repugnant to Scripture." If it were, Bp Duncan would be calling for his followers to disassociate themselves from the C of E because of its permissive stance about same sex blessings even among their ownclergy! It is rather about what has become repugnant to some of the clergy and members of this church who have become willing to use sex as a wedge to gain support from others around the Communion. The issue is about the dramatic shift in power and authority over the lastforty years within TEC. We have a catechism which clearly states that theministers of the church are lay persons, bishops, priests and deacons. We began admitting all baptised persons to the sacred eucharistic meal - including children. Women began serving on Vestries and Bishop's Committees, as chalice bearers, as convention delegates and Deputies. And we began ordaining women as priests and bishops. The C of E has gone through similar changes, and with new conversations about women in the episcopate...well, something must be done.
The list of offenses has become intolerable, but none of those issues would provide the frenzy of support our dissenters require to gain their ends. But for churches in places where there are very few cracks in the solid patriarchy of social, political or religious life, homosexuality provides the wedge. Even the notion of homosexuality is emasculating in some cultures - we heardthis very clearly from the Chancellor of Ghana - a woman who described herself as having learned to work within their system, and who has no intention of making the waves required to push her province into a "listening process" about homosexuality.
As a member of the writing group I will confess that I am not satisfied with the statement from the House of Bishops. I was also not satisfied with B033. We said nothing new in that portion of our NOLA statement. There simply cannot have been anyone in this church who didn't already know that B033 includes non-celibate gay and lesbian persons. About the blessing of same sex unions we repeated ourselves. They keep asking for a guarantee that we will not provide public liturgies, and we keep telling them that we have no public liturgies. We have agreed not to produce them until a "consensus emerges around the Communion" OR until the GC acts. One might happen far sooner than the other.....and we remain adamant that responses to individual pastoral situations is a local matter. Of course the last paragraph of our statement speaks of where our hearts arer ather than the reality of our common life. I can only imagine what St.Paul was thinking when he wrote that "when anyone is in Christ there is a newcreation...." clearly not completely true, but certainly the hope of faithful hearts. We included it because we simply had to reiterate our desire to come to that place, and to make it clear to others that it is where we know we ought to be.
I sincerely hope that someone will call the evangelicals in the C of E on their hypocrisy, and that many more of us here at home will start calling our own struggle what it is - a fight to regain power and control in order to return TEC to its even more deeply flawed past..... though even “back in the day” we came to recognize slavery as a moral evil.
Sorry this posting is so long -- I don't chime in that often.
A bit of good news; I look forward to a diocesan convention at which a group of folks are petitioning to become a mission congregation of this diocese. They want to be Episcopalians!
Peace to you,
+Cate Waynick
==========
October 4
Added the following links: Mouneer Anis' response, Edward Konieczny's reflections, Neff Powell's update, reflections by Louisiana's Canon to the Ordinary
October 3
Added the following links: Report of the Joint Standing Committee, Ruth Gledhill's report on reactions to the Committee's report
October 2
Added links to statements by the following: Robin Eames, Michael Garrison, and Nathan Baxter.
October 1
Updates Added links to new statements.
September 30
I spent four days at a conference with no internet access, and I return to find not much has really happened. Well, other than that the "usual suspects" took one step closer to attempting to move their shadow church forward--like we didn't know that was coming! My favorite comment on the ongoing reactions to and spin of the bishops' statement is this one, which appeared on epiScope:
...and behold, how many competing interpretations can be made of one document that is only one day old and written in the contemporary language of those reporting on it, with the authors nearby for clarification! Now do you see why the interpretation of a set of 66 books in several different languages at several thousand years' remove is such a challenge for mere human beings?I have added a few more statements from bishops. Now I think I will go finish my mystery novel.
Peace,
Jeffri
September 26
Well, it did not take long. Statements started appearing yesterday when Gene Robinson and Bruce McPherson were quoted in this Reuters article. As I did with their March meeting, I'll try and find as many of their statements and reports as I can. They will be listed by province. After tonight, I will not have computer access until Sunday evening, so there will be no updates until then. By then I also hope to have been able to gather my own thoughts and put them in some sort of coherent form for a separate post. Until then, pray for the Church.
Peace,
Jeffri
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)