This morning is the next to last legislative day. (Only two more sleeps until I can start home!) We will probably have a session after dinner tonight so I expect to be in the house from 9:30-11:15, go to Eucharist (Wilfredo Ramos it the celebrant today) grab lunch, be in session from 2-6, grab dinner and be in session from 7:30-10.
It's little wonder that I feel about the other deputies the way you felt about your friends from summer camp. We've been isolated in the midst of a multitude for almost two weeks. We've spent more time together than we ever spend with our families in two weeks! I really like them all a great deal. But I probably won't be too melancholy about leaving them behind!
Time is a remarkable concept. It's been around since human beings could make a mark on a cave wall to record the rhythm of dawn and darkness and since they noticed the shadow of a rock moved from one side to the other during the day. But as helpful a concept as time is, it is an elusive experience. When I arrived here, it seemed like I would be in Anaheim practically indefinitely. Yet now, with only two days to stay, those few hours seem to stretch out indefinitely still...though the days and hours have seemingly sped by.
(the weather forcast was for 'partly cloudy'. It seems that means that the morning haze hangs on a bit longer on the horizon and the blue is perhaps half a shade less blue....Lord, I miss a cloudy day...)
I'm not sure when I'll be able to write here again. But I want you to know I've enjoyed it and even if it's not until I get home, I will try to wrap it up a bit before moving on to other things to ponder under my withered castor oil tree....Be well....
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The rocket's red glare...
It must be 9:30 because it sounds like a war zone outside. All the pyro-technicians must get their training as Disneyland.
About Disneyland, by the way, there have been workers from the Magic Kingdom outside the Conv. Center every day, handing out postcards and information about the labor practices of Disney. The workers--most of whom are paid just above minimum wage--are having their health care reduced if they don't take over the entire payment. Taking health care away at this time in history seems draconian to me. There was even a prayer vigil for the workers after the afternoon session yesterday. It was held among the pristine and beautiful grounds of the Hilton Hotel--a bit ironic that.
Today the budget was presented. Bishop Smith is vice-chair of the PB&F committee (Program, Budget and Funding) and helped present the budget. It is one of the very few times we hold a joint session of both houses and the bishops joined their deputations for the presentation. Not surprizingly, there is a great short fall and programs that mean a lot to some were either slashed or eliminated. Plus there will be layoffs at the Church Center in NYC. It is a painful process and PB&F is the hardest working committee in the GC. They have to deal with resolutions that ask for funding even as they are trying to finalize the budget. Both houses will debate and seek to pass the budget tomorrow and time is running low. Two more sleeps before the convention ends on Friday afternoon.
We also passed a historic resolution creating a church wide health plan. I've always wondered why we didn't have a plan for the whole church and now we do. Insurance issues though, are quite tangled and complicated. Quite a few spoke against it and against a required pension plan for lay employees. Harriet is the only lay employee we have who works enough hours and we, at St. John's, already contribute to her pension. However, there are apparently those around the church that do not. These two issues brought up a divide in the EC that is as significant, if not more so, than the progressive/orthodox divide--small churches vs. larger churches.
A recent report out of 815 that I gave to the vestry reveals some startling facts. Did you know only 10% of Episcopal Churches are in urban areas? When you think of the large number of urban areas in the country, that is a bit surprising to me. But here's what blew me away, nearly 80% of Episcopal Churches have a sunday attendance of less than 150. Just over half of them have a Sunday attendance of 70 or less. St. John's, which I don't think of as a 'large' congregation, is in the top 10% of ECs in total Sunday attendance and we are about 35 people per Sunday from being in the top 3.5% of Episcopal Churches. Those figures are stunning to me and give me much more pause about the health, indeed the existence of the EC through the next 100 years. The median Sunday attendance at an EC (line them all up and find the one dead in the middle with equal # of churches with lower attendance and higher attendance, is 69!!! Because it is an 'average', St. John's is over 300 in the three Sunday services. (We don't get that in August, obviously!) How can a church with such statistics long survive? So deputies from small churches are afraid the new required church-wide health insurance and the mandated pension payments for lay employees over 2000 hours a year (1500 hours from what was passed today!) will tip them over the edge.
Since I'm big on irony, it is ironic that this denomination of small churches holds a 10 day convention in expensiver places and spends millions of $ for it. They negotiate a real deal for housing (the room I'm in is $120 or so a night though it says on the door of my room it is $600 a night for one person. Each deputy from CT--10 of us with the first alternates--was given about $3500 for travel and expenses. $35,000 seems a lot more for small dioceses made up of small churches than it does for CT or LA or Chicago or DC or Mass and other dioceses like that. The greater Irony is that even though nearly 80% of EC have 150 or less on Sunday, more Episcopalians go to church in the other 20% than in the 80%! Even in CT with 180 parishes, there are probably at least as many people in church on Sunday in the churches of Fairfield County and New Haven as there are in the rest of the parishes combined. We are a denomination of 'small churches' that acts like a denomination of 'large churches'. The budget does cut the length of convention by 2 days in 2112, but that seems like pocket change savings to the dioceses. When I come to retire, I'd like to work part time in one of those small, family sized churches and figure out what that's about. The first church I served had about 75 on a Sunday, but at that time they could afford both a priest and a building. St. James, Charleston was over 90 years old and when I stayed 5 years I had the longest tenure of any vicar they ever had. St. John's is 276 years old and I've been there 20 years and, I think I'm still 4th or 5th in terms of longevity. I'm only the 18th Rector. St. James had had more vicars than that in less than 100 years.
Another Irony of the astonishing kind: since 1979 there have been resolutions to have only active bishops be able to vote at GC. In 2006 we passed a constitutional change (which must be passed by two consecutive conventions in the same language to take effect) which accomplished that. The move was instigated and supported by retired bishops who felt they should have seat and voice but no vote since they did not represent a constituency--they were accountable to no one. So, 30 years later, we are poised on the edge of passing what retired bishops requested. (Arthur Walmsley, one of our former bishops, was pit bull about this.) The bishops would approve and the deputies would give back the vote over and again. But last night I was talking to Jeffery Rowthorn, one of CT's retired bishops and discovered he DIDN'T favor it. And Bp Smith said most of the retired bishops were against it. It occurs to me that most of the retired bishops who have supported this over three decades are either dead or not here. So, it may be the hofb that defeats it this time! How wierd is that. 30 years to give the bishops what they wanted was time enough for them to probably not want it anymore....
I talked to a man from Ireland, a former RC priest, who is one of the people with a booth in the Exhibition hall. We were both outside having a cigarette. The conversation started when I asked him, "do you remember when we ruled the earth, when our tribe was much larger?" He laughed and introduced himself. He told me 'Bradley' is a common name in the county of Ireland where he comes from. I found out he lives in southern Cal and I asked him how he could stand the endlessness of the blue sky and the unending sunshine. He told me he played golf--'nuf said. I told him Ireland is the only place outside the US I think I could live--mostly for the fog and clouds and ubiquitous rain. People I talk to who start going on and on about the climate here are shaken and confused when I tell them I can't leave 'paradise' soon enough. I really think being in Anaheim much longer would make me long for snow and ice and the 15 hours of darkness in winter in CT. What my new Irish friend told me resonates with my psyche. I always thought Bradley was a British name, but since noone in my family has ever been able to trace us back across the Atlantic, maybe I'm a lot more Irish than I thought. I know Celtic music is my 'soul music' though
Bern--Italian and Hungarian to the core runs out of the room when I'm watching it on PBS! I kinda like thinking my half-Irish blood on my mother's side may be equaled by half-Irish DNA on my father's side. And I could live in Ireland.....
The hofd is like driving a Packard on the I-5 in Southern California. We are two days behind in our work with 2 days to go! We keep shortening debate and putting more things on the consent calendar that can be voted all at once. Everyone is a little tired and a lot crabby. And there is much more to do.
last thing: today we approved continuing in the Anglican Communion's conversation about a Covenant for the AC. I'm dead against it. The Covenant is being designed to make us a much more hierarchical church and taking privilege from the 39 churches to consentrate it in a communion wide rule of bishops and archbishops. That is antithetical to our polity and, I would suggest, totally un-Anglican. The 'four instruments of unity' under the covenant in its present form are: the Archbishop of Canterbury, the gathering of the Primates of the 39 churches, the Lambeth Conference (all bishops) and the Anglican Consultative Council made up of a bishop a priest and a lay person from each of the 39 churches. We would begin to look like the RC church with the ABC as Pope and the Primates as the College of Cardinals and the Lambeth Conference as the College of Bishops. As bad an idea as I can imagine or conceive of in my mind. I was one of a dozen or so of 814 who voted 'no', but I was proud of my vote. The key thing is this--any 'covenant' of any form must be approved by a GC and I have come to trust the GC this year. Almost all the other 38 churches could agree to it if their archbishop agreed with it. We are one of the few Anglican churches who doesn't have an Archbishop. We have a 'Presiding
Bishop" and she 'presides' rather than 'rules'.
I miss all of you back in CT. I miss Bern and Bela (our dog) and Luke (the only one of our two still living cats I like) and the staff I love at St. John's and the people there and clouds and thunderstorms and crabby people of the East Coast. I miss a familiar ocean and the cultural agreement we have back east to maintain that what you see is what you get. Lots of people at GC have told me how impressed they are with how polite and friendly all the workers in the hotels and resturants are. I could stand a little rudeness right now. Three sleeps and I'll be in Houston and Cleveland and Hartford and then home...home sweet home....
About Disneyland, by the way, there have been workers from the Magic Kingdom outside the Conv. Center every day, handing out postcards and information about the labor practices of Disney. The workers--most of whom are paid just above minimum wage--are having their health care reduced if they don't take over the entire payment. Taking health care away at this time in history seems draconian to me. There was even a prayer vigil for the workers after the afternoon session yesterday. It was held among the pristine and beautiful grounds of the Hilton Hotel--a bit ironic that.
Today the budget was presented. Bishop Smith is vice-chair of the PB&F committee (Program, Budget and Funding) and helped present the budget. It is one of the very few times we hold a joint session of both houses and the bishops joined their deputations for the presentation. Not surprizingly, there is a great short fall and programs that mean a lot to some were either slashed or eliminated. Plus there will be layoffs at the Church Center in NYC. It is a painful process and PB&F is the hardest working committee in the GC. They have to deal with resolutions that ask for funding even as they are trying to finalize the budget. Both houses will debate and seek to pass the budget tomorrow and time is running low. Two more sleeps before the convention ends on Friday afternoon.
We also passed a historic resolution creating a church wide health plan. I've always wondered why we didn't have a plan for the whole church and now we do. Insurance issues though, are quite tangled and complicated. Quite a few spoke against it and against a required pension plan for lay employees. Harriet is the only lay employee we have who works enough hours and we, at St. John's, already contribute to her pension. However, there are apparently those around the church that do not. These two issues brought up a divide in the EC that is as significant, if not more so, than the progressive/orthodox divide--small churches vs. larger churches.
A recent report out of 815 that I gave to the vestry reveals some startling facts. Did you know only 10% of Episcopal Churches are in urban areas? When you think of the large number of urban areas in the country, that is a bit surprising to me. But here's what blew me away, nearly 80% of Episcopal Churches have a sunday attendance of less than 150. Just over half of them have a Sunday attendance of 70 or less. St. John's, which I don't think of as a 'large' congregation, is in the top 10% of ECs in total Sunday attendance and we are about 35 people per Sunday from being in the top 3.5% of Episcopal Churches. Those figures are stunning to me and give me much more pause about the health, indeed the existence of the EC through the next 100 years. The median Sunday attendance at an EC (line them all up and find the one dead in the middle with equal # of churches with lower attendance and higher attendance, is 69!!! Because it is an 'average', St. John's is over 300 in the three Sunday services. (We don't get that in August, obviously!) How can a church with such statistics long survive? So deputies from small churches are afraid the new required church-wide health insurance and the mandated pension payments for lay employees over 2000 hours a year (1500 hours from what was passed today!) will tip them over the edge.
Since I'm big on irony, it is ironic that this denomination of small churches holds a 10 day convention in expensiver places and spends millions of $ for it. They negotiate a real deal for housing (the room I'm in is $120 or so a night though it says on the door of my room it is $600 a night for one person. Each deputy from CT--10 of us with the first alternates--was given about $3500 for travel and expenses. $35,000 seems a lot more for small dioceses made up of small churches than it does for CT or LA or Chicago or DC or Mass and other dioceses like that. The greater Irony is that even though nearly 80% of EC have 150 or less on Sunday, more Episcopalians go to church in the other 20% than in the 80%! Even in CT with 180 parishes, there are probably at least as many people in church on Sunday in the churches of Fairfield County and New Haven as there are in the rest of the parishes combined. We are a denomination of 'small churches' that acts like a denomination of 'large churches'. The budget does cut the length of convention by 2 days in 2112, but that seems like pocket change savings to the dioceses. When I come to retire, I'd like to work part time in one of those small, family sized churches and figure out what that's about. The first church I served had about 75 on a Sunday, but at that time they could afford both a priest and a building. St. James, Charleston was over 90 years old and when I stayed 5 years I had the longest tenure of any vicar they ever had. St. John's is 276 years old and I've been there 20 years and, I think I'm still 4th or 5th in terms of longevity. I'm only the 18th Rector. St. James had had more vicars than that in less than 100 years.
Another Irony of the astonishing kind: since 1979 there have been resolutions to have only active bishops be able to vote at GC. In 2006 we passed a constitutional change (which must be passed by two consecutive conventions in the same language to take effect) which accomplished that. The move was instigated and supported by retired bishops who felt they should have seat and voice but no vote since they did not represent a constituency--they were accountable to no one. So, 30 years later, we are poised on the edge of passing what retired bishops requested. (Arthur Walmsley, one of our former bishops, was pit bull about this.) The bishops would approve and the deputies would give back the vote over and again. But last night I was talking to Jeffery Rowthorn, one of CT's retired bishops and discovered he DIDN'T favor it. And Bp Smith said most of the retired bishops were against it. It occurs to me that most of the retired bishops who have supported this over three decades are either dead or not here. So, it may be the hofb that defeats it this time! How wierd is that. 30 years to give the bishops what they wanted was time enough for them to probably not want it anymore....
I talked to a man from Ireland, a former RC priest, who is one of the people with a booth in the Exhibition hall. We were both outside having a cigarette. The conversation started when I asked him, "do you remember when we ruled the earth, when our tribe was much larger?" He laughed and introduced himself. He told me 'Bradley' is a common name in the county of Ireland where he comes from. I found out he lives in southern Cal and I asked him how he could stand the endlessness of the blue sky and the unending sunshine. He told me he played golf--'nuf said. I told him Ireland is the only place outside the US I think I could live--mostly for the fog and clouds and ubiquitous rain. People I talk to who start going on and on about the climate here are shaken and confused when I tell them I can't leave 'paradise' soon enough. I really think being in Anaheim much longer would make me long for snow and ice and the 15 hours of darkness in winter in CT. What my new Irish friend told me resonates with my psyche. I always thought Bradley was a British name, but since noone in my family has ever been able to trace us back across the Atlantic, maybe I'm a lot more Irish than I thought. I know Celtic music is my 'soul music' though
Bern--Italian and Hungarian to the core runs out of the room when I'm watching it on PBS! I kinda like thinking my half-Irish blood on my mother's side may be equaled by half-Irish DNA on my father's side. And I could live in Ireland.....
The hofd is like driving a Packard on the I-5 in Southern California. We are two days behind in our work with 2 days to go! We keep shortening debate and putting more things on the consent calendar that can be voted all at once. Everyone is a little tired and a lot crabby. And there is much more to do.
last thing: today we approved continuing in the Anglican Communion's conversation about a Covenant for the AC. I'm dead against it. The Covenant is being designed to make us a much more hierarchical church and taking privilege from the 39 churches to consentrate it in a communion wide rule of bishops and archbishops. That is antithetical to our polity and, I would suggest, totally un-Anglican. The 'four instruments of unity' under the covenant in its present form are: the Archbishop of Canterbury, the gathering of the Primates of the 39 churches, the Lambeth Conference (all bishops) and the Anglican Consultative Council made up of a bishop a priest and a lay person from each of the 39 churches. We would begin to look like the RC church with the ABC as Pope and the Primates as the College of Cardinals and the Lambeth Conference as the College of Bishops. As bad an idea as I can imagine or conceive of in my mind. I was one of a dozen or so of 814 who voted 'no', but I was proud of my vote. The key thing is this--any 'covenant' of any form must be approved by a GC and I have come to trust the GC this year. Almost all the other 38 churches could agree to it if their archbishop agreed with it. We are one of the few Anglican churches who doesn't have an Archbishop. We have a 'Presiding
Bishop" and she 'presides' rather than 'rules'.
I miss all of you back in CT. I miss Bern and Bela (our dog) and Luke (the only one of our two still living cats I like) and the staff I love at St. John's and the people there and clouds and thunderstorms and crabby people of the East Coast. I miss a familiar ocean and the cultural agreement we have back east to maintain that what you see is what you get. Lots of people at GC have told me how impressed they are with how polite and friendly all the workers in the hotels and resturants are. I could stand a little rudeness right now. Three sleeps and I'll be in Houston and Cleveland and Hartford and then home...home sweet home....
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
there's a new world a'comin'....
OK, I have to repent my last blog's lack of faith in the house of bishops. I got Jerry Caroon, our alternate, to sit in for me this afternoon so I could go to the Hof B and Listen to their conversation about D025 which I gave you in the last post and lamented how the bishops wouldn't pass it.
They did!!! 99-44 with two minor and insignificant amendments. The amendments means the resolution has to come back to the hofd, but, in my mind they don't matter and we should approve the amended version in a heartbeat.
The 'debate' they had for over an hour was remarkable for how cordial and moving it was. The highlight for me was after several bishops had spoken in opposition to the resolution, pointing out how it would so, so offend the Anglican Communion, Bishop Prince Singe of Rochester (I swear that's his name) got up and said something like this: I AM the Anglican Communion. I grew up in India and the Anglican Church in India was the only church who ministered to the 'untouchable' caste. They did so, starting churches and schools in the 'untouchable' castes villages knowing they would lose the upper castes who would not come to those churches and to those schools. 80% of the Anglicans in India are 'untouchables'. It is time the EC realized our ministry is to the 'untouchables' in our culture.
He had me from the first mention of 'untouchables'. Right now I have never felt so committed and connected and involved in our church as I am right now. All three of our bishops voted 'yes' and so did Bp. Ramos, formally one of our bishops who is now in Ecuador. I haven't yet fully appreciated what has happened and I am moved to tears when I try to imagine it. D025 has made true what is so.
One of the bishops in opposition to the resolution read a quote from the Archbishop of Canterbury, who told us in his sermon last week to 'tell the truth'. He lamented the action of the HofD and said the HofB had the opportunity to 'block' that action. Some bishops I talked with were, to put it mildly, pissed off that the ABCanterbury would 'dis our church in such a remarkably inappropriate way.
We may 'walk separately' for a season with some of our brothers and sisters in the AC. There will be a cost to what the AC does in reaction to D025. But, for the first time in my life as an Episcopalian, we have told the TRUTH about who we are. Such truth telling allows us to enter into dialog with the rest of the AC with nothing hidden.
I also realize that there are some in the EC that will be offended and pained by this resolution. I would direct them to the last 'resolve':
"Resolved, that the 76th GC acknowlege that members of the EC as of the AC, bases on careful study of the Holy Scriptures and in light of tradition and reason, are not of one mind, and Christians of good conscience disagree about some of these matters."
That is my understanding of Anglicanism. We need not agree on matters of the interpretation of Scripture or Doctrine so long as we are willing--in our disagreements--to worship as on Body.
After today I have to reassess and ponder my opinions of the House of
Bishops. A learning and transforming exercise to undertake. And, under the castor oil tree with Jonah, 'pondering is what I do...."
Talk with you tomorrow--day 7....Unlike the Creation story, the work is not done and we cannot say "it is good"....Love you all. JIM
They did!!! 99-44 with two minor and insignificant amendments. The amendments means the resolution has to come back to the hofd, but, in my mind they don't matter and we should approve the amended version in a heartbeat.
The 'debate' they had for over an hour was remarkable for how cordial and moving it was. The highlight for me was after several bishops had spoken in opposition to the resolution, pointing out how it would so, so offend the Anglican Communion, Bishop Prince Singe of Rochester (I swear that's his name) got up and said something like this: I AM the Anglican Communion. I grew up in India and the Anglican Church in India was the only church who ministered to the 'untouchable' caste. They did so, starting churches and schools in the 'untouchable' castes villages knowing they would lose the upper castes who would not come to those churches and to those schools. 80% of the Anglicans in India are 'untouchables'. It is time the EC realized our ministry is to the 'untouchables' in our culture.
He had me from the first mention of 'untouchables'. Right now I have never felt so committed and connected and involved in our church as I am right now. All three of our bishops voted 'yes' and so did Bp. Ramos, formally one of our bishops who is now in Ecuador. I haven't yet fully appreciated what has happened and I am moved to tears when I try to imagine it. D025 has made true what is so.
One of the bishops in opposition to the resolution read a quote from the Archbishop of Canterbury, who told us in his sermon last week to 'tell the truth'. He lamented the action of the HofD and said the HofB had the opportunity to 'block' that action. Some bishops I talked with were, to put it mildly, pissed off that the ABCanterbury would 'dis our church in such a remarkably inappropriate way.
We may 'walk separately' for a season with some of our brothers and sisters in the AC. There will be a cost to what the AC does in reaction to D025. But, for the first time in my life as an Episcopalian, we have told the TRUTH about who we are. Such truth telling allows us to enter into dialog with the rest of the AC with nothing hidden.
I also realize that there are some in the EC that will be offended and pained by this resolution. I would direct them to the last 'resolve':
"Resolved, that the 76th GC acknowlege that members of the EC as of the AC, bases on careful study of the Holy Scriptures and in light of tradition and reason, are not of one mind, and Christians of good conscience disagree about some of these matters."
That is my understanding of Anglicanism. We need not agree on matters of the interpretation of Scripture or Doctrine so long as we are willing--in our disagreements--to worship as on Body.
After today I have to reassess and ponder my opinions of the House of
Bishops. A learning and transforming exercise to undertake. And, under the castor oil tree with Jonah, 'pondering is what I do...."
Talk with you tomorrow--day 7....Unlike the Creation story, the work is not done and we cannot say "it is good"....Love you all. JIM
Sunday, July 12, 2009
D025 passes house of deputies
Perhaps more important than the passage of D025 to St. John's was the passage of a resolution on Hispanic/Latino ministry. The work that went into preparing a report on H/L ministry was superb. Pending what Program and Budget Committee has to do, $3.5 million was approved for work in the H/L community. I've talked to several people who work on the national level and they have heard of what we're doing at St. John's!!! Kudos to Armando Gonzalez and Mike Carroll. People know about your minisry at GC. Two people even said, "That's where Fr. Armando is," when I told them I was St. John's. Amazing--what a gift that ministry is to St. John's and the larger church.
I wrote earlier today about D025. It passed overwhelmingly. The vote--by orders--(after several attempts to change or weaken the resolution failed)was 77 yes, 22 no and 9 divided in the Lay Order and 74 yes, 20 no and 13 divided in the clerical order.
I probably explained 'voting by orders' in an earlier post, but a quick review is in order. In a vote by orders each diocese has 2 votes--one for the clergy and one for the laity. Since there are normally 4 lay and 4 clergy deputies in each diocese, the vote must be 4-0 or 3-1 to be either a yes or no. If the deputies in the lay or clergy order vote 2-2 it is recorded as 'divided' but counts as a 'no' vote...or 'not a yes' vote. CT, for example, had a 4-0 vote of the lay members and a 3-1 vote of the clergy members for yes. So Ct's 2 votes were both 'yes'. Confused yet?
At any rate it was over 70% 'yes'. That, it seems to me, can be considered a mandate. B033 was not explicitly overturned, but the obvious implication is that the 'urging' not to consecrate gay/lesbian nominees is made moot.
Now it goes to the bishops. The fear among progressives in the HofD is that the bishops might remove the 5th resolve and cause a standoff between the bishops and the deputies. Nobody I've talked to will dare 'give odds' on what might happen with the bishops. So the GC is holding it's breath until they act.
If I might express my opinion (something I obviously don't do much!!!) I would say the Bishops, as they deal with D025, hold not only the future of the Episcopal Church in their hands but the future of the Anglican Communion as well. But NOT in the way they might imagine. D025--go read it in the last blog--expresses a genuine desire to remain fully a part of the Anglican Communion AND to be true to the reality of the life of this particular and peculiar church. We are the only member of the AC who governs itself in a completely and transparently 'democratic' way. Most of the Primates of the AC, unlike our Presiding Bishop, have almost papal like power within their church. Whatever the Archbishop says, the church does. Someone today, in debate, said 22 of the other 38 churches in the AC are now, even with B033, in 'damaged communion' with the EC. I turned to Ellen Tillotson and said, "only 16 to go!" In a humorous and ironic way, I mean that. We have been duplicitous with the AC for years now--claiming we want to agree with them when absolutely everyone in the EC and the AC knows to what great extent we are already including gay/lesbian folks in our life and leadership. It is simply time to stop posing and tell the truth. This church is ready for the 'local option' about same sex blessings and election of bishops. We had 'local option' on women priests and bishops for two decades--no diocese HAD to accept it, but most would gladly. I pray the Hof B will relent their attempts at appeasement and coercion and 'speak the truth in love' to the rest of the AC. This is how we make decisions and this is who we are. We will not leave you but if you cannot walk with us, given our realities, then perhaps we must walk separately for a while.
The EC cannot be a strong and mission-driven church until we are honest about who we are. Our bishops were elected to LEAD. Instead, to much of the time, they hold back and give disinformation to the rest of the communion. Either we are a church where there are no outcasts, as PB Browning said at the last GC in Anaheim OR we are a church that betrays it's own members to the prejudices and often outright hatred of those far away. The best witness we can give to the AC is to be unashamedly and boldly "who we are" and call the AC to deal with us on that level.
Shame on the bishops if they emasculate or defeat D025. They have no reason to worry about my judgment. I only pray they fret and ponder the judgement of God--a God who includes all, with nobody left out.
The bishops are under the castor oil tree with Jonah. God chose to save Nineveh, to include those outcasts in the Kingdom. Our bishops can ponder where we are and who we are and claim our identity as followers of a God who includes all....Or they can hide behind demands on us from those who do not live under our constitution and canons and pretend to be a church willing to 'exclude' in order to be part of the flock.
(Last week was the 30th anniversary of the debute of Spike Lee's remarkable film "Do the Right Thing". How fast time flies...about the same time as Bp Browning's declaration of 'no outcasts' in this church.)
(a young lion was separated from his mother and raised by mountain goats. he became, as best he could, a mountain goat. he ate grass--though it tasted vile--and learned to say 'baa' and to run from any danger. one day, the goats were feeding on a mountain side and heard a dangerous and raucous noise from the valley below. The young lion bleeted and started to run, but something in that sound spoke to his heart. So, in fear and trembling, he crept to the edge of the hill and over it. There, by the side of a stream was a full grown lion, feeding on a his kill. He looked up and saw the young mountain-goat-lion. The mountain-goat-lion said "BAA" and ate a mouthful of grass.
"What are you doing?" the full grown lion asked him. "what was that strange noise and why are you eating grass? doesn't it taste vile?"
"Come over here," the lion said, "look in the stream with me." The cub who was a mountain lion went, though it took all his courage. In the mirror of the water he saw himself for the first time and saw the lion as well.
"I'm just like you!" the cub said. Then he took a bite of the lion's kill and roared his first roar.
"Never forget," the older lion said, "who you are and whose your are..."
For too long our bishops have been mountain goats when, in fact, they are lions. I pray that as they deliberate on D025, they will remember 'who they are and whose they are" and 'do the right thing'....
All is well and all is well and all manner of things will be well....
I wrote earlier today about D025. It passed overwhelmingly. The vote--by orders--(after several attempts to change or weaken the resolution failed)was 77 yes, 22 no and 9 divided in the Lay Order and 74 yes, 20 no and 13 divided in the clerical order.
I probably explained 'voting by orders' in an earlier post, but a quick review is in order. In a vote by orders each diocese has 2 votes--one for the clergy and one for the laity. Since there are normally 4 lay and 4 clergy deputies in each diocese, the vote must be 4-0 or 3-1 to be either a yes or no. If the deputies in the lay or clergy order vote 2-2 it is recorded as 'divided' but counts as a 'no' vote...or 'not a yes' vote. CT, for example, had a 4-0 vote of the lay members and a 3-1 vote of the clergy members for yes. So Ct's 2 votes were both 'yes'. Confused yet?
At any rate it was over 70% 'yes'. That, it seems to me, can be considered a mandate. B033 was not explicitly overturned, but the obvious implication is that the 'urging' not to consecrate gay/lesbian nominees is made moot.
Now it goes to the bishops. The fear among progressives in the HofD is that the bishops might remove the 5th resolve and cause a standoff between the bishops and the deputies. Nobody I've talked to will dare 'give odds' on what might happen with the bishops. So the GC is holding it's breath until they act.
If I might express my opinion (something I obviously don't do much!!!) I would say the Bishops, as they deal with D025, hold not only the future of the Episcopal Church in their hands but the future of the Anglican Communion as well. But NOT in the way they might imagine. D025--go read it in the last blog--expresses a genuine desire to remain fully a part of the Anglican Communion AND to be true to the reality of the life of this particular and peculiar church. We are the only member of the AC who governs itself in a completely and transparently 'democratic' way. Most of the Primates of the AC, unlike our Presiding Bishop, have almost papal like power within their church. Whatever the Archbishop says, the church does. Someone today, in debate, said 22 of the other 38 churches in the AC are now, even with B033, in 'damaged communion' with the EC. I turned to Ellen Tillotson and said, "only 16 to go!" In a humorous and ironic way, I mean that. We have been duplicitous with the AC for years now--claiming we want to agree with them when absolutely everyone in the EC and the AC knows to what great extent we are already including gay/lesbian folks in our life and leadership. It is simply time to stop posing and tell the truth. This church is ready for the 'local option' about same sex blessings and election of bishops. We had 'local option' on women priests and bishops for two decades--no diocese HAD to accept it, but most would gladly. I pray the Hof B will relent their attempts at appeasement and coercion and 'speak the truth in love' to the rest of the AC. This is how we make decisions and this is who we are. We will not leave you but if you cannot walk with us, given our realities, then perhaps we must walk separately for a while.
The EC cannot be a strong and mission-driven church until we are honest about who we are. Our bishops were elected to LEAD. Instead, to much of the time, they hold back and give disinformation to the rest of the communion. Either we are a church where there are no outcasts, as PB Browning said at the last GC in Anaheim OR we are a church that betrays it's own members to the prejudices and often outright hatred of those far away. The best witness we can give to the AC is to be unashamedly and boldly "who we are" and call the AC to deal with us on that level.
Shame on the bishops if they emasculate or defeat D025. They have no reason to worry about my judgment. I only pray they fret and ponder the judgement of God--a God who includes all, with nobody left out.
The bishops are under the castor oil tree with Jonah. God chose to save Nineveh, to include those outcasts in the Kingdom. Our bishops can ponder where we are and who we are and claim our identity as followers of a God who includes all....Or they can hide behind demands on us from those who do not live under our constitution and canons and pretend to be a church willing to 'exclude' in order to be part of the flock.
(Last week was the 30th anniversary of the debute of Spike Lee's remarkable film "Do the Right Thing". How fast time flies...about the same time as Bp Browning's declaration of 'no outcasts' in this church.)
(a young lion was separated from his mother and raised by mountain goats. he became, as best he could, a mountain goat. he ate grass--though it tasted vile--and learned to say 'baa' and to run from any danger. one day, the goats were feeding on a mountain side and heard a dangerous and raucous noise from the valley below. The young lion bleeted and started to run, but something in that sound spoke to his heart. So, in fear and trembling, he crept to the edge of the hill and over it. There, by the side of a stream was a full grown lion, feeding on a his kill. He looked up and saw the young mountain-goat-lion. The mountain-goat-lion said "BAA" and ate a mouthful of grass.
"What are you doing?" the full grown lion asked him. "what was that strange noise and why are you eating grass? doesn't it taste vile?"
"Come over here," the lion said, "look in the stream with me." The cub who was a mountain lion went, though it took all his courage. In the mirror of the water he saw himself for the first time and saw the lion as well.
"I'm just like you!" the cub said. Then he took a bite of the lion's kill and roared his first roar.
"Never forget," the older lion said, "who you are and whose your are..."
For too long our bishops have been mountain goats when, in fact, they are lions. I pray that as they deliberate on D025, they will remember 'who they are and whose they are" and 'do the right thing'....
All is well and all is well and all manner of things will be well....
Sunday lull (before the storm?)
After the glorious eucharist this morning with all the bishops of the church processing and the two past presiding bishops (Edmund Browning and Frank Griswold) flanking Katharine Jefferts Schori at the altar and all the ECW's, each diocese called by name, personally handing their United Thank Offering to the Presiding Bishop--plus music and dance to die for--there was a blessed break in the convention.
Today is too warm for me so I've spent some time in my room reading and resting.
The House of Deputies meets again from 3-6 pm and there is a chance we may get to the first significant piece of legislation entitled D025 (D means the original resolution came from a diocese--in this case several--which were cobbled together by the Committee on World Missions. Each resolution is assigned to one of the 20+ committees and might be drastically rewritten in committee before coming to the floor of the houses. D025 is coming to the HD first and when we have fiddled with it and if we approve it, it will go to the HBishops. If they change it members from both houses will meet to try to reach a compromise. Whatever fails in one house or the other fails. Both houses must pass the identical resolution for it to be inacted. (Sound familiar? Just like the House and Senate work.)
D025, in its present form, both affirms the EC's commitment to the Anglican Communion and, by implication, voids B033-2006.
Committees have both Bishops and Deputies on them (more Deputies since there are 835 or so of us and not nearly that many Bishops. The Committee approved D025 26-5 (dep. 24-2, Bish. 2-3!) Here it is in its wonderful parliamentary language.
Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, that the 76th GC reaffirm the continued participation of the EP in the Anglican Communion, give thanks for the work of the bishops at the Lambeth Conference of 2008; reaffirm the abiding commitment of the EC to the fellowship of churches that constitute the Anglican Communion and seek to live into the highest degree of communion possible, and be it future
Resolved, that the 76th GC encourage dioceses, congregations and members of the EC to participate to the fullest extent possible in the many instruments, net works and relationships of the AC, and be it further
Resolved, that the 76th GC reaffirm its financial commitment to the AC and pledge to participate fully in the Inter-Anglican Budget, and be it further
Resolved, that the 76th GC affirm the value of 'listening to the experience of homosexual persons' as called for by the Lambeth Conferences of 1978, 1988 and 1998, and acknowledge that through our own listening the GC has come to recognize that the baptized membership of the EC includes same sex couples living in lifelong committed relationships 'characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, care, honest communication and the holy love which enable those in such relationships to see each other in the image of God' (D039-2000) and be it further
Resolved that the 76th GC recognize that gay and lesbian persons who are part of such relationships have responded to
God's call and have exercise various ministries in and on behalf of God's One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and are currently doing so in our midst; and be it further
Resolved that the 76th GC affirm that God has called and may call such individuals to any ordained ministry in the EC, which call is tested through our discernment processes acting in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the EC; and be it further
Resolved, that the 76th GC acknowledge that members of the EC as of the AC, based on careful study of the Holy Scriptures, and in light of tradition and reason, are not of one mind, and Christians of good conscience disagree about some of these matters.
It is, in my mind, a consummately "Anglican" statement, allowing for disagreement, pledging unity without uniformity, speaking boldly to the situation of our time and place. We shall see...perhaps today, surely Monday.
Got to go to the House now. (Well, it's not really a 'house', it's a huge room in an enormous Convention Center...but you know what I mean....)
Today is too warm for me so I've spent some time in my room reading and resting.
The House of Deputies meets again from 3-6 pm and there is a chance we may get to the first significant piece of legislation entitled D025 (D means the original resolution came from a diocese--in this case several--which were cobbled together by the Committee on World Missions. Each resolution is assigned to one of the 20+ committees and might be drastically rewritten in committee before coming to the floor of the houses. D025 is coming to the HD first and when we have fiddled with it and if we approve it, it will go to the HBishops. If they change it members from both houses will meet to try to reach a compromise. Whatever fails in one house or the other fails. Both houses must pass the identical resolution for it to be inacted. (Sound familiar? Just like the House and Senate work.)
D025, in its present form, both affirms the EC's commitment to the Anglican Communion and, by implication, voids B033-2006.
Committees have both Bishops and Deputies on them (more Deputies since there are 835 or so of us and not nearly that many Bishops. The Committee approved D025 26-5 (dep. 24-2, Bish. 2-3!) Here it is in its wonderful parliamentary language.
Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, that the 76th GC reaffirm the continued participation of the EP in the Anglican Communion, give thanks for the work of the bishops at the Lambeth Conference of 2008; reaffirm the abiding commitment of the EC to the fellowship of churches that constitute the Anglican Communion and seek to live into the highest degree of communion possible, and be it future
Resolved, that the 76th GC encourage dioceses, congregations and members of the EC to participate to the fullest extent possible in the many instruments, net works and relationships of the AC, and be it further
Resolved, that the 76th GC reaffirm its financial commitment to the AC and pledge to participate fully in the Inter-Anglican Budget, and be it further
Resolved, that the 76th GC affirm the value of 'listening to the experience of homosexual persons' as called for by the Lambeth Conferences of 1978, 1988 and 1998, and acknowledge that through our own listening the GC has come to recognize that the baptized membership of the EC includes same sex couples living in lifelong committed relationships 'characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, care, honest communication and the holy love which enable those in such relationships to see each other in the image of God' (D039-2000) and be it further
Resolved that the 76th GC recognize that gay and lesbian persons who are part of such relationships have responded to
God's call and have exercise various ministries in and on behalf of God's One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and are currently doing so in our midst; and be it further
Resolved that the 76th GC affirm that God has called and may call such individuals to any ordained ministry in the EC, which call is tested through our discernment processes acting in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the EC; and be it further
Resolved, that the 76th GC acknowledge that members of the EC as of the AC, based on careful study of the Holy Scriptures, and in light of tradition and reason, are not of one mind, and Christians of good conscience disagree about some of these matters.
It is, in my mind, a consummately "Anglican" statement, allowing for disagreement, pledging unity without uniformity, speaking boldly to the situation of our time and place. We shall see...perhaps today, surely Monday.
Got to go to the House now. (Well, it's not really a 'house', it's a huge room in an enormous Convention Center...but you know what I mean....)
Saturday, July 11, 2009
more catching up
OK, I've gone almost two days without writing--mostly because I don't have time.
So you'll know, let me tell you about my last two days.
After I wrote stuff friday morning I was in the HofD from 9:30 to 11:45. Eucharist for about 1 1/4 hours, quick lunch, back to house from 2-6. no dinner, went to reception and eucharist of Integrity...1500 people or so in a huge ballroom in the Hilton. Barbara Curry did the set up and the sound and lights for what can only be described as a kick ass eucharist! talked to people for an hour and back to my room to eat a half-of-Ruben sandwich left over from lunch.
today: up at 7 to go to fitness center (I've done it every day and am getting prideful about finding the time) 9-12:30 House of D, 12:45 Eucharist, 1 CT caucus in the convention center, 2-3:45-Public Narrative conversation, 4-6 House of D, ran to room to change clothes for Virginia Seminary Dinner in the California Hotel in Disneyland and got back to the hotel at 10. The only time I left the con center was to come put on a jacket for the VTS dinner!
tomorrow--the day of rest--the eucharist and ingathering of the ECW will be at 10 but I'm a minister of communion (I actually volunteered!) and have to be there by 9 for orientation. There will be between 6 and 7,000 people at the service and about 90 folks to give out bread and wine. It is such a trip to be a part of that kind of liturgy. There is a 45 minuted prelude of music and visuals on the two 30'x20' screens. We will have a 3 hour session in the house of deputies from 3-6. Some day of rest....
Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the storm that ravaged much of New Haven County and did enormous damage to st john's. Judy McManis sent me a long email about it. If I knew how to do computer stuff I'd put the email in this blog...but I don't.
Random things:
*Bonnie Anderson, the President of the House of Deputies, a lay person from Michigan, invited 7 international people she has met in the last three years to speak to the House. There was the head of the House of Deputies in Canada, the Dean of the Cathedral in CapeTown, a seminary dean from somewhere else in Africa, an indiginous theologian from New Zealand (I heard her preach at a Gen Con and she is astonishing!), the archbishop of Brazil and a couple of others I can't give a title to right now. They were from three different continents and New Zealand and all assured us that whatever we do at this Convention, the Anglican Communion will still see the EC as a gift to the communion. Bonnie will catch hell for stacking the deck with people who support the progressive nature of the EC, but it was fun to hear. The Dean of Cape Town wore a tee shirt that I could read on the big screens. It showed two african men in profile and said "OUT IN AFRICA". The new zealand theologian who kept referring to herself as 'you indiginous sister' spent 15 minutes condeming the Anglican Communion for their treatment of the American Church. It was stunning. But even I must admit it was 'one sided' in the raging debate that is the Anglican Communion.
The Dean of Cape Town reminded us that there is a concept in African called 'curative rape'. Fathers whose daughters are lesbian will have them kidnapped and repeatedly raped to make them heterosexual. I think there are few people in the US--no matter what their thoughts about homosexuality--that would find that to be a sane solution. Is there any reason to wonder why the debate between "the Southern Hemisphere" of the church is at odds with the EC's somewhat open policy toward GLBT folks.
The House spent some 20 minutes today debating a resolution having to do with health care. A motion to 'divide' the resolution (vote on two parts separately) failed, two different amendments failed, a dozen or so people spoke before the question was mercifully called and in the end, the voice vote was practically unanimous! Tom Fuhr, who sits next to me at the Ct tables--a first time deputy--shook his head and wondered to me, 'why did we spend so much time on something we all agreed on?' A valid question. We really need to move quickly because we are almost a day behind on the calendar of resolutions already. It always happens in a legislative body of 800 people. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote in his parody of a hymn: "Like a mighty tortoise moves the Church of God, Brothers we are treading where we have always trod...."
The Integrity Eucharist--as usual--was one of the most exciting and moving moments of GC. Gene Robinson, bishop of New Hampshire and the center of the firestorm that has been burning the Anglican communion since 2003 because he was the first 'openly' gay bishop in a committed same sex relationship, was the celebrant. The preacher was Bishop Barbara Harris, retired Suffragan of Mass. and the first woman ever elected bishop in our church. Barbara is also black, so she was the first 'black woman' to be a bishop besides. She took no prisoners! She said that, according to the current stance of the EC, because of B033-2006, GLBT folks had, at best, a 'half-assed' baptism and suggested if gay/lesbian folks couldn't be elected bishops we should be honest and deny them baptism as well. She also said (and this is so clever I wish I'd thought of it!) that marriage, for most of human history, has already been same-sex--a contract between the bride's father and the groom!!! I saw bishop curry, who was there, afterwards and asked, "Why can Barbara Harris say those truths and sitting bishop's can't?' He smiled and shook his head--"she's FREE," he told me, "she can say whatever she wants...."
Barbara has a 'get out of jail free' card that active bishops don't have because they, like the EC, is so emmeshed in the tangled and confusing alliance with people who don't want to be in communion with us in the first place. We bend over backwards to appease and satisfy folks who don't want to be in our presence to begin with. B033 got the Presiding Bishop a ticket to attend the meetings of the Primates of the other Anglican Churches, but a significant number of them won't recieve communion with her....The cost for that 'half-assed' acceptance is Justice and True Inclusion. Don't tell me Irony is dead.....
At the end of the Integrity Eucharist, Gene Robinson invited all the gay/lesbian priests in the room to come up on the platform. That platform, about 30' by 20' couldn't hold them all. I know some of them. They are some of the most gifted, committed, devout priests and Christians in our church. And, at this point, they cannot be considered to be elected bishops. Irony...like I said, is alive and well in Anaheim.
Finally, something you might not know, the EC's clergy are divided into 'tribes'. Where you went to seminary really matters to us. It's about the first question asked when two priests meet. Each of our Seminaries has a distinct 'culture' and ambiance. Tonight was the night for Seminary dinners. I went to Virginia's dinner. Virginia is not only the largest Episcopal Seminary, it is the largest (and richest) seminary in the Anglican Communion. Many of the priests in CT went to Berkley/Yale (or simply Berkley before the merger) or EDS in Cambridge or General in New York. There were some 300 people at VTS' dinner and I brought back the menu just to compare with the other guys dinner.
I thought I'd share it with you.
*open bar and appetizers on tables and from waiters
*Roasted corn and seafood chowder
*Spinach and Belgian Endive/fresh California goat
cheese/apple bacon dressing
*Point reyes crusted filet mignon/melot-fig demi
*seasonal assorted vegtables
*cafe noir mocha mousse/pistachio biscotti
*assorted bread basket and sweet butter
*Redwood Creek Chardonnay and Melot
*Coffee and Tea
All that was missing was the cigars. I'm sure, in a less politically correct time, they would have been available....
Plus they gave everyone a really neat VTS tote bag with zipper.
For that, we paid $40. In the resturants I've been in here, $40 would have gotten you the soup and salad and a glass of wine. I bet some of the seminaries had cash bars....I can't wait to gloat....
I told you this stuff, for whatever reason, matters to us.
At the dinner I saw the bishop of Sudan (one of the most conservative of all african bishops) who was at my table, embrace the bishop of California, arguably the most liberal bishop in our church. Bishop Andres was right across the table from me. He shut his eyes, smiling, joyfully and authentically embracing a bishop as far from him on the spectrum as possible.They genuinely care for each other. Neither could have faked that embrace...Irony isn't dead...but neither is Hope. Praise God!
(There's a mirror above the desk where I am writing. I just looked up and realized I look like a negative of a photo of a raccoon. this california sun has turned my face brown except for where my sun glasses sit. I am white around my eyes....)
More tomorrow....
So you'll know, let me tell you about my last two days.
After I wrote stuff friday morning I was in the HofD from 9:30 to 11:45. Eucharist for about 1 1/4 hours, quick lunch, back to house from 2-6. no dinner, went to reception and eucharist of Integrity...1500 people or so in a huge ballroom in the Hilton. Barbara Curry did the set up and the sound and lights for what can only be described as a kick ass eucharist! talked to people for an hour and back to my room to eat a half-of-Ruben sandwich left over from lunch.
today: up at 7 to go to fitness center (I've done it every day and am getting prideful about finding the time) 9-12:30 House of D, 12:45 Eucharist, 1 CT caucus in the convention center, 2-3:45-Public Narrative conversation, 4-6 House of D, ran to room to change clothes for Virginia Seminary Dinner in the California Hotel in Disneyland and got back to the hotel at 10. The only time I left the con center was to come put on a jacket for the VTS dinner!
tomorrow--the day of rest--the eucharist and ingathering of the ECW will be at 10 but I'm a minister of communion (I actually volunteered!) and have to be there by 9 for orientation. There will be between 6 and 7,000 people at the service and about 90 folks to give out bread and wine. It is such a trip to be a part of that kind of liturgy. There is a 45 minuted prelude of music and visuals on the two 30'x20' screens. We will have a 3 hour session in the house of deputies from 3-6. Some day of rest....
Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the storm that ravaged much of New Haven County and did enormous damage to st john's. Judy McManis sent me a long email about it. If I knew how to do computer stuff I'd put the email in this blog...but I don't.
Random things:
*Bonnie Anderson, the President of the House of Deputies, a lay person from Michigan, invited 7 international people she has met in the last three years to speak to the House. There was the head of the House of Deputies in Canada, the Dean of the Cathedral in CapeTown, a seminary dean from somewhere else in Africa, an indiginous theologian from New Zealand (I heard her preach at a Gen Con and she is astonishing!), the archbishop of Brazil and a couple of others I can't give a title to right now. They were from three different continents and New Zealand and all assured us that whatever we do at this Convention, the Anglican Communion will still see the EC as a gift to the communion. Bonnie will catch hell for stacking the deck with people who support the progressive nature of the EC, but it was fun to hear. The Dean of Cape Town wore a tee shirt that I could read on the big screens. It showed two african men in profile and said "OUT IN AFRICA". The new zealand theologian who kept referring to herself as 'you indiginous sister' spent 15 minutes condeming the Anglican Communion for their treatment of the American Church. It was stunning. But even I must admit it was 'one sided' in the raging debate that is the Anglican Communion.
The Dean of Cape Town reminded us that there is a concept in African called 'curative rape'. Fathers whose daughters are lesbian will have them kidnapped and repeatedly raped to make them heterosexual. I think there are few people in the US--no matter what their thoughts about homosexuality--that would find that to be a sane solution. Is there any reason to wonder why the debate between "the Southern Hemisphere" of the church is at odds with the EC's somewhat open policy toward GLBT folks.
The House spent some 20 minutes today debating a resolution having to do with health care. A motion to 'divide' the resolution (vote on two parts separately) failed, two different amendments failed, a dozen or so people spoke before the question was mercifully called and in the end, the voice vote was practically unanimous! Tom Fuhr, who sits next to me at the Ct tables--a first time deputy--shook his head and wondered to me, 'why did we spend so much time on something we all agreed on?' A valid question. We really need to move quickly because we are almost a day behind on the calendar of resolutions already. It always happens in a legislative body of 800 people. As Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote in his parody of a hymn: "Like a mighty tortoise moves the Church of God, Brothers we are treading where we have always trod...."
The Integrity Eucharist--as usual--was one of the most exciting and moving moments of GC. Gene Robinson, bishop of New Hampshire and the center of the firestorm that has been burning the Anglican communion since 2003 because he was the first 'openly' gay bishop in a committed same sex relationship, was the celebrant. The preacher was Bishop Barbara Harris, retired Suffragan of Mass. and the first woman ever elected bishop in our church. Barbara is also black, so she was the first 'black woman' to be a bishop besides. She took no prisoners! She said that, according to the current stance of the EC, because of B033-2006, GLBT folks had, at best, a 'half-assed' baptism and suggested if gay/lesbian folks couldn't be elected bishops we should be honest and deny them baptism as well. She also said (and this is so clever I wish I'd thought of it!) that marriage, for most of human history, has already been same-sex--a contract between the bride's father and the groom!!! I saw bishop curry, who was there, afterwards and asked, "Why can Barbara Harris say those truths and sitting bishop's can't?' He smiled and shook his head--"she's FREE," he told me, "she can say whatever she wants...."
Barbara has a 'get out of jail free' card that active bishops don't have because they, like the EC, is so emmeshed in the tangled and confusing alliance with people who don't want to be in communion with us in the first place. We bend over backwards to appease and satisfy folks who don't want to be in our presence to begin with. B033 got the Presiding Bishop a ticket to attend the meetings of the Primates of the other Anglican Churches, but a significant number of them won't recieve communion with her....The cost for that 'half-assed' acceptance is Justice and True Inclusion. Don't tell me Irony is dead.....
At the end of the Integrity Eucharist, Gene Robinson invited all the gay/lesbian priests in the room to come up on the platform. That platform, about 30' by 20' couldn't hold them all. I know some of them. They are some of the most gifted, committed, devout priests and Christians in our church. And, at this point, they cannot be considered to be elected bishops. Irony...like I said, is alive and well in Anaheim.
Finally, something you might not know, the EC's clergy are divided into 'tribes'. Where you went to seminary really matters to us. It's about the first question asked when two priests meet. Each of our Seminaries has a distinct 'culture' and ambiance. Tonight was the night for Seminary dinners. I went to Virginia's dinner. Virginia is not only the largest Episcopal Seminary, it is the largest (and richest) seminary in the Anglican Communion. Many of the priests in CT went to Berkley/Yale (or simply Berkley before the merger) or EDS in Cambridge or General in New York. There were some 300 people at VTS' dinner and I brought back the menu just to compare with the other guys dinner.
I thought I'd share it with you.
*open bar and appetizers on tables and from waiters
*Roasted corn and seafood chowder
*Spinach and Belgian Endive/fresh California goat
cheese/apple bacon dressing
*Point reyes crusted filet mignon/melot-fig demi
*seasonal assorted vegtables
*cafe noir mocha mousse/pistachio biscotti
*assorted bread basket and sweet butter
*Redwood Creek Chardonnay and Melot
*Coffee and Tea
All that was missing was the cigars. I'm sure, in a less politically correct time, they would have been available....
Plus they gave everyone a really neat VTS tote bag with zipper.
For that, we paid $40. In the resturants I've been in here, $40 would have gotten you the soup and salad and a glass of wine. I bet some of the seminaries had cash bars....I can't wait to gloat....
I told you this stuff, for whatever reason, matters to us.
At the dinner I saw the bishop of Sudan (one of the most conservative of all african bishops) who was at my table, embrace the bishop of California, arguably the most liberal bishop in our church. Bishop Andres was right across the table from me. He shut his eyes, smiling, joyfully and authentically embracing a bishop as far from him on the spectrum as possible.They genuinely care for each other. Neither could have faked that embrace...Irony isn't dead...but neither is Hope. Praise God!
(There's a mirror above the desk where I am writing. I just looked up and realized I look like a negative of a photo of a raccoon. this california sun has turned my face brown except for where my sun glasses sit. I am white around my eyes....)
More tomorrow....
Thursday, July 9, 2009
The wheels of legislation....
This afternoon the HofD began a committee of the whole conversation regarding numerous resolutions, all of which ended up in the
Committee for World Mission, which seek to, in one way or another, deal with B033 from 2006. B033, to remind you, was the resolutions from the house of bishops that was (my description) forced down the throats of the H of D on the last day of the GC in Columbus. It said that bishops and standing committees--a majority of which are required to approve the election of a bishop--should 'exercise restraint" in approving any bishop-elect whose 'manner of life' would strain the 'bonds of affection' with other churches in the Anglican Communion. Translation: don't approve any gay or lesbian candidate for bishop who is in a committed relationship. The irony and hypocrisy of that is that the House of Bishops has always had gay members. I talked to a priest from Nevada today who told me he has served under 5 bishops and 3 of them were known to be gay.
At any rate, the committee outlined the options facing the 76th GC and B033;
1, do nothing (allowing B033 to remain in place)
2. reaffirm B033
3. overturn B033
4. pass a resolution affirming the Canons as the only
guidelines for approving Bishops (B033 violates the
non-discriminatory canons of the church)
5. pass a resolution affirming inclusion of all the baptized
in every aspect of the life of the church.
You see, a resolution only loses it's authority if a) expiration is built into the resolution (B033 has none) b) it is specifically overturned by another resolution or c)a resolution that obviously negates it is passed.
I'm relatively sure the HofD will pass something like 3, 4 or 5. My bet is #5, so we'll see how prophetic I am in several days. The House of Bishops is another matter. I believe the bishops have a majority that would like to void B033 but I'm not sure the 'will' is there to challenge the rest of the Anglican Communion by doing so.
The AC came into being in the 20th century (I'll look up the date for you) and it was established with worship as our defining characteristic, not doctrine and in face encouraged varieties of doctrinal stances within a worshiping communion. That's why it's the Angilcan COMMUNION rather than the Anglican CONFESSION or Anglican THEOLOGICAL UNION.
Certainly more on that issue. I know lots of people wish we could get beyond this issue. But this is the issue that we must first 'get beyond'. Passing either 3, 4,or 5 above would do that--if we have the courage.
There are lots of other things we need to deal with and I will report on them in the days ahead.
My postings aside: There is lots of stuff to carry around if you choose to carry it around. The 'blue book' of reports weighs about 5 pounds and our note book is about 20 inches by inches and 4 inches thick. Then there is all the stuff you pick up every day--reports, at least 5 daily news reports, position papers, handouts from church groups, etc, etc. I leave the big stuff on the table where I sit overnight. Many people take them with them and carry their laptops everywhere. So a considerable # of people are wheeling around carry on size suitcases to carry their stuff. These are remarkably dangerous. I trip over them several times a day and the collective noise of all those wheels on marble floors and sidewalks is almost deafening. I considered proposing a resolution forbidding them from the GC. But given how many people do that, it would surely have failed.
I was minding my own business today at Eucharist when a deacon came up and shoved a pitcher of wine in my hand. "Carry this and follow me", she said. So I found myself up at the altar where 4 dozen or so pitchers of wine were placed along with a dozen huge baskets of fresh baked bread. (It's a big altar!) I got to stay down off the podium with a good view of the consecration and then went up again to carry the wine to one of the communion stations. I never volunteer for such things but someone didn't show up and when she handed me the pitcher I gladly carried it.
This taught me a lesson I 'know' but don't live into much. When the church 'asks' for volunteers for something in a newsletter or bulletin or even an announcements you may get some. But if you hand it personally to someone, they'll almost always carry the pitcher to the altar. We need to do more 'asking personally' at St. John's. I'm always amazed at the people who bring up the bread and wine and pray the earth prayer--it's not because we asked for volunteers but because the ushers and Lucille Ladden simply ask them personally to do so--or in Lucille's case, she says, ' you'll be doing the earth prayer next week...' And they do. "Ask and you shall receive" sounds familiar. We need to do that more and more.
I saw Bp. Smith right after the Eucharist. He was astounded to see me up at the altar. He told me he said to himself, "Shoot," (or something to that effect) "that's Bradley up there...." He may have been concerned that I was in such close proximity to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who was at the altar, knowing I'm not a big fan of the ABC. But I DO believe we are made "one" in breaking bread and not in our opinions, so Rowan Williams was safe.....
Committee for World Mission, which seek to, in one way or another, deal with B033 from 2006. B033, to remind you, was the resolutions from the house of bishops that was (my description) forced down the throats of the H of D on the last day of the GC in Columbus. It said that bishops and standing committees--a majority of which are required to approve the election of a bishop--should 'exercise restraint" in approving any bishop-elect whose 'manner of life' would strain the 'bonds of affection' with other churches in the Anglican Communion. Translation: don't approve any gay or lesbian candidate for bishop who is in a committed relationship. The irony and hypocrisy of that is that the House of Bishops has always had gay members. I talked to a priest from Nevada today who told me he has served under 5 bishops and 3 of them were known to be gay.
At any rate, the committee outlined the options facing the 76th GC and B033;
1, do nothing (allowing B033 to remain in place)
2. reaffirm B033
3. overturn B033
4. pass a resolution affirming the Canons as the only
guidelines for approving Bishops (B033 violates the
non-discriminatory canons of the church)
5. pass a resolution affirming inclusion of all the baptized
in every aspect of the life of the church.
You see, a resolution only loses it's authority if a) expiration is built into the resolution (B033 has none) b) it is specifically overturned by another resolution or c)a resolution that obviously negates it is passed.
I'm relatively sure the HofD will pass something like 3, 4 or 5. My bet is #5, so we'll see how prophetic I am in several days. The House of Bishops is another matter. I believe the bishops have a majority that would like to void B033 but I'm not sure the 'will' is there to challenge the rest of the Anglican Communion by doing so.
The AC came into being in the 20th century (I'll look up the date for you) and it was established with worship as our defining characteristic, not doctrine and in face encouraged varieties of doctrinal stances within a worshiping communion. That's why it's the Angilcan COMMUNION rather than the Anglican CONFESSION or Anglican THEOLOGICAL UNION.
Certainly more on that issue. I know lots of people wish we could get beyond this issue. But this is the issue that we must first 'get beyond'. Passing either 3, 4,or 5 above would do that--if we have the courage.
There are lots of other things we need to deal with and I will report on them in the days ahead.
My postings aside: There is lots of stuff to carry around if you choose to carry it around. The 'blue book' of reports weighs about 5 pounds and our note book is about 20 inches by inches and 4 inches thick. Then there is all the stuff you pick up every day--reports, at least 5 daily news reports, position papers, handouts from church groups, etc, etc. I leave the big stuff on the table where I sit overnight. Many people take them with them and carry their laptops everywhere. So a considerable # of people are wheeling around carry on size suitcases to carry their stuff. These are remarkably dangerous. I trip over them several times a day and the collective noise of all those wheels on marble floors and sidewalks is almost deafening. I considered proposing a resolution forbidding them from the GC. But given how many people do that, it would surely have failed.
I was minding my own business today at Eucharist when a deacon came up and shoved a pitcher of wine in my hand. "Carry this and follow me", she said. So I found myself up at the altar where 4 dozen or so pitchers of wine were placed along with a dozen huge baskets of fresh baked bread. (It's a big altar!) I got to stay down off the podium with a good view of the consecration and then went up again to carry the wine to one of the communion stations. I never volunteer for such things but someone didn't show up and when she handed me the pitcher I gladly carried it.
This taught me a lesson I 'know' but don't live into much. When the church 'asks' for volunteers for something in a newsletter or bulletin or even an announcements you may get some. But if you hand it personally to someone, they'll almost always carry the pitcher to the altar. We need to do more 'asking personally' at St. John's. I'm always amazed at the people who bring up the bread and wine and pray the earth prayer--it's not because we asked for volunteers but because the ushers and Lucille Ladden simply ask them personally to do so--or in Lucille's case, she says, ' you'll be doing the earth prayer next week...' And they do. "Ask and you shall receive" sounds familiar. We need to do that more and more.
I saw Bp. Smith right after the Eucharist. He was astounded to see me up at the altar. He told me he said to himself, "Shoot," (or something to that effect) "that's Bradley up there...." He may have been concerned that I was in such close proximity to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who was at the altar, knowing I'm not a big fan of the ABC. But I DO believe we are made "one" in breaking bread and not in our opinions, so Rowan Williams was safe.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)