Now We Are One

Well, this blog is, anyway. After 176 posts and some 7,000 visits, I have learned a few things.

• There will always be at least one blogger who publishes before you that piece of news you thought you would be the first to launch into the blogosphere.
• One sure way to significantly increase traffic on your blog is to tick off a blogger who holds significantly different views than you do.
• If you provide unique coverage of a meeting, news story, etc., the next time a similar event happens another blogger will manage to do it faster and more thoroughly, thus cutting down the number of visits to your blog.
• There is no rhyme or reason as to which of your posts people will respond to more than others.
• There are days where you simply hate your blog and come close to deleting it entirely.
• There are days when you feel you have nothing to say.
• There are days when you realize you should not post what you have written.
• It is easy to lose yourself in reading other people's blogs.

Fifteen people, more or less, read this blog regularly. Obviously, I am not making a big splash in the blogosphere--hardly even a ripple. While I sometimes long for the large readership of some of my blogging friends and acquaintances, my larger purpose of blogging was, and continues to be, making a practice of writing and publishing (so to speak) "public" pieces on a regular basis. So if no defining theme emerges, or no large following develops, so be it. I have enjoyed blogging this past year and look forward to the year ahead.

See you in the blogosphere.

Peace,
Jeffri

Incoming!

This evening I needed to check a reference, which meant visiting that place I try not to visit if I can help it. Imagine my surprise at seeing The Episcopal Church Website: “Anglican Approach to Scripture” (count the errors) listed on their "News Etc." section. It seems Matt Kennedy, Calvanist par excellence and one of the chief scribes of that place, must have been perusing the Episcopal Church website and stumbled across the "Lesson Plans for Small Congregations" section. Either that or someone pointed him to it, and he went to take a look. He posted an excerpt from the article "Anglican Approach to Scripture" (you can see it in its original context here), along with a link, without any comment of his own. As any one of us--conservative or liberal, reasserter or reappraiser--could have predicted, and as was probably Matt's intention, the usual horde of commentors have been having their say in their usual snide manner.

The reason that particular post caught my eye is that the Lesson Plans for Small Congregations are produced by the department in which I work at the Episcopal Church Center. The lesson plans have been part of the web site since before I started working there six years ago, and that particular page on "Anglican Approach to Scripture" has been part of that section of the web site for at least three years. In fact, the full text of the publication from which that article was taken, Called to Teach And Learn, has also been up on the web site for the same amount of time. You can take a look at it here. It is not like we have been hiding it.

The Lesson Plans for Small Congregations are used in many churches of all sizes, including several in other denominations. That section of the Episcopal Church web site is the sixth most visited section of the site. I have a feeling it may see an increase in traffic for the next week or so, and maybe some new folks will find it helpful. Thanks, Matt, every bit of publicity helps get the word out there about this resource.

Peace,
Jeffri

The Scotian Communion?

This afternoon my boss and I were working on an outline for a new project. I was editing her latest draft, and I found that about 80% of the time she referred to Province IX she typed "Province XI." As I made the corrections, I commented to her, "On the other hand, if things keep going the way they are, we might just have more provinces. Province X, Africa. Province XI, Asia."

A month and a half ago I wrote some thoughts about the potential partition of the Anglican Communion. If the Communion fractures along ideological lines, it is quite possible that the Episcopal Church could end up with congregations in Africa and Asia, just as Nigeria, Rwanda, and the Southern Cone now have congregations here in the United States and Brazil (in the case of Southern Cone). In that scenario, a tenth and eleventh province in the Episcopal Church are a definite possibility.

Another potential realignment of the Communion might result in two (or more) separate "communions." How would we self-identify? More than likely there would be a fight over who was truly entitled to the name "Anglican Communion." If it comes to that, perhaps those provinces that decide to remain in communion with the Episcopal Church should simply let the so-called "Global South" be the Anglican Communion and choose a new name for ourselves. Since the Communion's roots are in the separation of the American Colonies from the British Empire, and since the Episcopal Church's first bishop was consecrated by the Scots non-juror bishops, maybe we could call it the "Scotian Communion."

Or maybe we will end up like the Orthodox Churches: Anglican Communion-Nigerian Rite, Anglican Communion-American Rite, Anglican Communion-Rwandan Rite, Anglican Communion-Argentine Rite, etc.

If a fracture happens, no matter what form it takes, then we will all the poorer for it.

Just some thoughts on a rainy Tuesday night.

Peace,
Jeffri

Still Ticking

As of yesterday, a week has passed since the date the "Reorganization Team" originally set for the official announcement of where we will be placed in the new structure at the Episcopal Church Center. Those of us who interviewed on Monday and Tuesday of last week pretty much know whether or not we have jobs, but there are still many unknown factors. And we cannot yet say anything to those folks across the church with whom we work. It makes for very awkward phone conversations. So, yes, I have a job, and no, I cannot say anything more. Please continue to pray for those of us who work at the Episcopal Church Center.

Opening Prayer

You ask us to come to you with our burdens and so we begin with the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Scripture

Ask, and it will be given you/ search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you. (Matthew 7:7)

Petitions

Hearts filled with trust, we come to you with very special needs, we pray.

Response: Grant us your wisdom,Lord.

Send us your wisdom. Hear the prayer we offer in faith, we pray.

Open for us avenues of understanding, we pray.

Collect

As we ask, seek and knock, we are confident that we shall receive, it shall be opened and your will made clear.

-- Rock Travnikar, O.F.M., The Blessing Cup, p.36.

Lord, I will trust You,
help me to journey beyond the familiar
and into the unknown.

Give me the faith to leave old ways
and break fresh ground with You.

Christ of the mysteries, can I trust You
to be stronger than each storm in me?

Do I still yearn for Your glory to lighten on me?

I will show others the care You've given me.

I determine amidst all uncertainty
always to trust.

I choose to live beyond regret,
and let You recreate my life.

I believe You will make a way for me
and provide for me,
if only I trust You
and obey.

I will trust in the darkness and know
that my times are still in Your hand.

I will believe You for my future,
chapter by chapter, until the story is written.

Focus my mind and my heart upon You,
my attention always on You without alteration.

Strengthen me with Your blessing
and appoint to me the task.

Teach me to live with eternity in view.

Tune my spirit to the music of heaven.

Feed me,
and, somehow,
make my obedience count for You.

-- "Brendan - In Exploration Of A Vision," Part XVI, in Celtic Daily Prayer: Prayers And Readings From The Northumbria Community, pp. 191-193.

Peace,
Jeffri

GAFCON's Blinders

Friday Thinking Anglicans posted a link to Chris Sugden's article in the Church Times entitled "Why Hold A Conservative Anglican Conference." The tag line, which sparked my interest, reads "The gathering is vital to ensure that Churches are not overwhelmed by Western culture, argues Chris Sugden." Did he really say that?

Well, no, not exactly, but it makes a good tag line. Here is what he actually said:

This is one of God’s ways of ensuring that Churches in the West are not overwhelmed by the power of their surrounding culture, because they are in fellowship with and accountable to Christians in other cultures and contexts.

Since the "Churches in the West," i.e., the Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church in Canada, the Church of England, and a few others, have not followed the path their conservative minorities would like, they must be held accountable to "Christians in other cultures and contexts," i.e., the Anglican Church of Nigeria, the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, and a few others, egged on by those conservative minorities. It seems that fellowship and accountability only work in one direction for these folks.

For centuries the Church of the West--primarily the Roman Catholic Church--was responsible not only for enforcing the "surrounding culture," but spreading that culture across the globe, by force if necessary. Western culture has changed and continues to change. Christianity has changed and continues to change. What began as a small Judean cult spread to the Greco-Roman world where it took on aspects of Greek philosophy and Roman power structures. The Romans carried the "new faith" throughout their empire and converted subject tribes. In the process of conversion local deities became Christian saints and sacred sites became Christian wells and shrines.

When the superpowers of Europe conquered and settled other parts of the globe, the Church went with them. Often the Church spurred them on. As Western Europeans came in contact with other cultures and contexts they ruthlessly subjugated or exterminated them. In many places the native peoples were forced to convert to Christianity or die. Sometimes it was a case of convert and die.

Even so, Christianity did not remain static. Wherever it went, it both influenced and was influenced by the cultures and contexts it encountered. The Celtic churches had many distinct differences from the Roman church, differences that lingered even after the Synod of Whitby in 664. Liberation Theology arose out of cultural contexts in South America in the middle of the last century.

Nor did Christianity remain unchanged in Europe. The Reformation brought new understandings of the sacred texts and what it meant to live a Christian life. Often those new understandings grew out of the contexts of the culture where they originated.

And so here we are in the 21st Century, still struggling with what it means to be Christian, let alone Anglican. The church in all its messy variety is very different from the small Judean cult from which it sprang. Yet some conservative Anglican bishops have called for GAFCON to meet in the modern successor to Judea in order "to affirm the basis of the apostolic and biblical faith." They continue to ignore the fact that "the accepted teaching of the Bible,...the Church throughout the ages, and...the Anglican Communion" have not remained unchanged through the centuries.

If there is any hope of salvaging the Anglican Communion, these bishops and those who surround them must understand that their version of Christianity is as far removed its roots as that of those they label unorthodox and heretical. The oak tree cannot be pushed back into the acorn from which it sprang.

Peace,
Jeffri

Jesus The Teenager

Today we mark the Confession of Peter. However, when I follow the Daily Office for my personal devotions, I rarely, if ever, do the commemorations on the church calendar. This year I have been reading the Gospel for the day. Mom, on the other hand, is working through the Old Testament readings, and she has blogged about her reactions to the Genesis readings.

The appointed Gospel for today's Daily Office is John 2:1-12, which is the story of the Wedding at Cana. The wine runs out, which Mary points out to Jesus. His response sounds a lot like, "Mother, it's not my job!" Can you hear that teenage drawn out "mooootherrrr?"

Please don't embarrass me in front of these people, Mom. Can't you just go away and leave me alone? Geeez, Mom!

But Mary keeps after him and sets up a situation he cannot avoid by instructing the servants to do whatever her son tells them.

Okay, fine. I'll do it. Just quit nagging, okay, Mom?

So he turns the water into wine, and what happens? The steward comments to the bridegroom about the wine. Just what any teenager wants in this kind of situation--attention, to stand out from the crowd.

Can the ground open up and swallow me now? Why does she always do this to me? I wish she'd just leave me alone.

Of course, you know how things go in families. This kind of event becomes part of the family history, a story told at successive family gatherings down through the years. Like the Christmas my niece dropped a large stack of the good china. Or the day I learned I needed glasses because a sailing ship on the horizon looked like a big square.

Geez, Mom, can you please talk about something else?

Yet life goes on. We grow up. We learn to live with the embarrassing stories of our lives. We begin to tell the stories ourselves. Perhaps years later during supper with his friends, Jesus said to them, "Remember when we were at that wedding..."

Peace,
Jeffri

No News Is...

...no news.

I know that there are a lot of factors at play, and I knew that the odds were against actually hearing today. But the reorganization team did put that date out there, so it is a bit frustrating to have to wait through the three-day weekend.

Reorganizations are always messy, no matter how well planned. So we will just have to live with the uncertainty for a few more days.

Peace,
Jeffri

Tick...Tick...Tick...Tick...

The reorganization at work has been going on since September, and it will be March at the earliest before the transition is complete. Today is the scheduled day for the official announcements of where those of us who had to reapply for jobs will be placed. Because I was in California at a meeting for a project I am involved in, and did not arrive home until 2:00 this morning, I have today off and will be waiting at a distance.

Will we actually hear today? See us not holding our breath.

However, hope springs eternal.

Peace,
Jeffri

Look Fast

Today several of us at work had interviews for positions in the new organization. Interviews continue tomorrow. I had mine this afternoon, since tomorrow at the time they originally scheduled my interview I will be on a plane halfway to California for a meeting.


Since this was an interview with a selection committee of five, even though I know all five members of the committee, I dressed for an interview. So did some of the others. As I told people in the office, look fast, this is one of the very rare instances when you will see me in a suit and tie!


Here I am with Tina, who also had her interview today.

Look fast!

Peace,
Jeffri

Now We Are Eight And Forty

Today is my 48th birthday.

On my bookshelves are four volumes by A. A. Milne, including a book of poems titled Now We Are Six. The last poem in the volume is, appropriately, "The End":

When I was One,
I had just begun.

When I was Two,
I was nearly new.

When I was Three,
I was hardly Me.

When I was Four,
I was not much more.

When I was Five,
I was just alive.

But now I am Six, I'm as clever as clever.
So I think I'll be six now for ever and ever.

On this birthday, barring any great strides in medicine, I am most likely more than halfway through my life. And my life is nothing like I imagined it would be at six, sixteen, or even twenty six. In another twenty years my life will probably not be anything like I imagine now. The best I can do is focus on the moment, on being forty-eight. And you know what? Life is pretty good.

Peace,
Jeffri

Sweet--And Not So Sweet--Temptation

I walked into work last Wednesday two days into the New Year and a New Year's Resolution. I sat at my desk, fired up my computer, and started going through the backlog of email. After about an hour and a half, one of my coworkers arrived and put out a box of chocolate for folks in the office to share. And where did he put it? On the edge of the cubicle walls between me and another coworker. Not fair!

The following day, someone else brought in a box of chocolate, which got placed on another corner of my cubicle. Sheesh! Fortunately, I made it through the end of the week without eating any chocolate from either box. I have even made it through the first three days of this week without eating any.

Last night my Education for Ministry (EfM) seminar group celebrated my birthday, complete with a birthday cake. I had none, not even a small taste. Not fair!

Ordinarily, this would require only a moderate amount of willpower. The problem is that the stress level throughout the office is high, and climbing higher, because of the ongoing reorganization. It will continue to grow, because we have at least a week and a half before they announce the selections of candidates for positions in the new structure. We all have different ways of dealing with stress, and let's face it, sugar is my drug of choice when it comes to coping. However, I have finally come to terms with the fact that sugar is not my friend. That I have not touched the candy and did not have a piece of cake is therefore a very big deal.

Other unhealthy temptations I am not doing so well avoiding. For instance, I find myself going over to StandFirm on a regular basis and reading posts and comments there. I tell myself that there are a couple of reasonable posters there, or that they are a good source of news about what the so called reasserters are up to. Or I resolve that I will only read the posts and not the comments. As if! And almost every time I go read something there, I come away feeling angry, defensive, and wanting to lash out at them the way they do at others. So why do I go over there and let my buttons get pushed? Maybe it is my drug of choice on the blogosphere. Maybe I need to go cold turkey with it, too...

Peace,
Jeffri

Just How Many Wise Men Were There?

Today was one of the rare years where Epiphany actually falls on Sunday. At church we had the "Three Kings" bearing gifts in the processional, the postponed Christmas Pageant with Sound Effects, and two baptisms. All in all it was a joyous occasion.

As we went through the service, starting with the reading of the Collect, I could not help but be reminded of the small brouhaha over Katharine's choice of a Christmas card. Here is the Collect for Epiphany, Contemporary version from the 1979 BCP of the Episcopal Church:

O God, by the leading of a star you manifested your only Son to the peoples of the earth: Lead us, who know you now by faith, to your presence, where we may see your glory face to face; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

No mention of manifesting God's only Son to only three men, be they wise men, kings, astrologers, or whatever. And for those who find the 1979 BCP to be a departure from the "classic" BCP, here is the collect from the 1928 BCP of the Episcopal Church:

O God, who by the leading of a star didst manifest thy only-begotten Son to the Gentiles: Mercifully grant, that we, which know thee now by faith, may after this life have the fruition of thy glorious Godhead; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Nope, no mention of the manifestation being just to men there, either. But let's take a look at the 1662 BCP, which seems to be the favorite of those who wrote the first draft of the proposed Anglican Covenant. Oops, identical to the 1928 version. Just to be safe, why not check out the very first BCP, which appeared in 1549 and contains Cranmer's original Collects:

O GOD, which by the leading of a starre diddest manifest thy onelye begotten sonne to the Gentiles; Mercifully graunt, that we, which know thee now by faith, may after this life have the fruicion of thy glorious Godhead; through Christe our Lorde.

Interesting. Except for some archaic spelling and a missing "Amen," it looks like the same collect to me. Hmmmm..."diddest manifest they onelye begotten sonne to the Gentiles." No mention of it being just three men from outside of Judea. I may not be the most educated theologian in the world, but I do know that the Collect, in whatever version you choose, makes an interpretation of the Biblical text, because Matthew specifically mentions "wise men," not "the Gentiles:"

In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, asking, ‘Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews? For we observed his star at its rising, and have come to pay him homage.’ When King Herod heard this, he was frightened, and all Jerusalem with him; and calling together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. They told him, ‘In Bethlehem of Judea; for so it has been written by the prophet:
“And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for from you shall come a ruler
who is to shepherd my people Israel.” ’

Then Herod secretly called for the wise men and learned from them the exact time when the star had appeared. Then he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, ‘Go and search diligently for the child; and when you have found him, bring me word so that I may also go and pay him homage.’ When they had heard the king, they set out; and there, ahead of them, went the star that they had seen at its rising, until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw that the star had stopped, they were overwhelmed with joy. On entering the house, they saw the child with Mary his mother; and they knelt down and paid him homage. Then, opening their treasure-chests, they offered him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they left for their own country by another road. (Matthew 2:1-12, NRSV)

The Collect interprets the visit of the wise men as a sign that Jesus came for the Gentiles as well as the Jews.

Now look at the passage again. Something struck me as our priest read the Gospel this morning. Do you see it? Or more specifically, do you see what isn't there? What I do not see is a clear enumeration of how many wise men came. We assume three because there were three gifts, but there could have been two or twenty for all we know. In other words, our traditions have interpreted the story as being about three wise men, and many of our visual interpretations of the Nativity depict one of the three as being black, in spite of the fact that Africa is WEST of Judea.

Matthew does not give us any specific place from which these wise men traveled; the Gospel says only that "wise men from the East came to Jerusalem." There is a whole lot of world east of Jerusalem. The wise men might could have come from the Indian subcontinent, China, or even the Americas. So the "multicultural" part of Greg Griffith's jibe is pretty silly. What really irks him, and many of the so-called "orthodox" folks is that the card depicted wise women. The Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth was not specific about their objections to the card, but given the diocese's stand on women's ordination, we can guess that it probably also had to do with the depiction of wise women.

Even if we stick strictly to Matthew's telling of the story of the "wise men," there is plenty of leeway for interpretation, midrash, and storytelling. When we consider both Gospel accounts of the Nativity, there is space to imagine women--even wise women--visiting Jesus in Bethlehem. There is space to imagine people just like us--ALL OF US--visiting God's Son in the stable in Bethlehem.

Peace,
Jeffri

If At First...

Back on December 21 I ran across a post by Greg Griffith on StandFirm lambasting the Presiding Bishop's choice of a Christmas card for this year. I wrote some of my own thoughts later that same day. At the time I wondered who the "at least one bishop" Greg referred to was. It looks like we have at least one possible answer: Jack Iker, the Bishop of Forth Worth.

Checking out my usual round of blogs this morning, I ran across this post by Susan Russell. Shortly after that an email from one of my listservs had a link to yesterday's post by Katie Sherrod. Both contain the text of a letter sent to the clergy and 2007 convention delegates of the Diocese of Fort Worth by the diocesan Standing Committee. The first paragraph reads:

The members of your Standing Committee thought you should be aware of this. The Presiding Bishop has done something which defies explanation. This is the Christmas card she sent to Bishop Iker and presumably other TEC bishops. Given the increasing polarization in TEC (and the Anglican Communion) today, the only reason we can see for her to make this choice is that she is only interested in pushing the polarization just that much further.

Hmmmmm....The only reason for her choice is "pushing the polarization just that much further?" And here I thought Katharine's card was a nice way of further exploring the Story and what it means to us. "At least one bishop" showed the card to Greg Griffith. Evidently, the StandFirm lambasting did not stir up enough of a reaction, so now we have Bishop Iker showing the card to his Standing Commission. So who is it that is trying to "[push] the polarization just that much further?"

Obviously, this is a case of "if at first you don't succeed, try, try again."

Peace,
Jeffri

It's The End Of The World As We Know It

Most of my recreational reading consists of mysteries, science fiction, and fantasy. One of my favorite genres of science fiction falls under the category of apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic. Many might find this a rather macabre and depressing subject to read for pleasure, especially given that most of the scenarios fall into categories such as nuclear war (Pat Frank's Alas, Babylon), some object from space striking Earth (Larry Niven's and Jerry Pournelle's Lucifer's Hammer), plague (Stephen King's The Stand), and even the Rapture (Tim LaHaye's & Jerry B. Jenkin's Left Behind series). While the way authors describe whatever the particular apocalypse they choose for their novels intrigues me, I am much more interested in seeing how they treat the post-apocalyptic period. Once the survivors make it through the event, how do they rebuild or recreate a workable society--or even how they are not capable of doing so.

I recently finished a trilogy, which presents the most comprehensive and realistic post-apocalyptic scenarios I've read: S. M. Stirling's Dies The Fire (2004), The Protector's War (2005), and A Meeting At Corvallis (2006). The series begins with "the Change" on St. Patrick's Day 1998, an event which essentially disables all modern technology, including gunpowder. What causes the Change is never explained, although some characters, only half-jokingly, blame "Alien Space Bats." The first book follows two groups of survivors in Oregon through the first year or so after the Change. The first group consists of pilot Mike Havel and the Larsson family who were flying to the Larson's Idaho ranch when the Change hit. They form the nucleus of what becomes The Bearkillers. The second is made up of Juniper Mackenzie and her coven who take refuge at Juniper's "cabin in the woods," and evolve into the Clan Mackenzie. Both groups struggle with feeding themselves, protecting themselves from the Bubonic Plague that sweeps through Oregon when the medical infrastructure collapses, integrating other survivors, defending themselves against bandits, and dealing with other organized (or not so organized) groups of survivors.

Two of the other societies that Stirling develops with a fair amount of detail through the course of the series are The Portland Protective Association and Oregon State University in Corvallis. The PPA comes into being when history professor Norman Arminger integrates a large group of former members of the Society for Creative Anachronism, local gangs, and Russian mob types into a neo-Norman (think William the Conqueror) empire. His first move, within days of the Change, is to forcibly remove most of the population of Portland from the city. Oregon State University, on the other hand, develops into a democratic city state ruled by "The Faculty Senate." While Corvallis becomes a technological and industrial center--as far as the aftermath of the Change allows--there are some amusing moments as Stirling describes academia run amok.

Religion plays a role in the story, primarily because the Clan Mackenzie has a coven at its center. The Bearkillers seem not to have any formal religion, and both groups incorporate Christian believers. There are some "evil Christian" types portrayed in an "official" Roman Catholic Church in the Portland Protective Association, but these are balanced by the small theocracy that grows up around the Priory of Mount Angel situated between Association and Mackenzie territories. Mythic themes form a subtext, but they are not intrusive or out of place in the context of the world Stirling creates.

Part of that context is the struggle between good and evil as the survivors build their new world. And that struggle is portrayed with bloody detail as the protagonists face from outlaws in the immediate wake of the Change to the final battle against the Portland Protective Association. Again, it is not out of place or over the top, just a fairly realistic portrayal of combat without guns and artillery.

All in all, I really enjoyed this trilogy, and I look forward to reading The Sunrise Lands, which was recently published and picks up 22 years after the Change.

Peace,
Jeffri