We had a great conversation today at the weekly Clericus meeting. All the Episcopal clergy in the deanery are invited and who usually comes are pretty much the same every week. Three active priests (2 from St. John's and a third from Oakville), St. John's intern and 3 retired priests. Today our Episcopal/Buddhist clergy guy showed up too. And we talked about 'the Atonement' for over an hour. It was fascinating to us and showed a wide variety of interpretations of that central doctrine of the church and prompted not a little back and forth disagreement. Wonderful. It really was wonderful....
And I was all ready to detail some of the fine points of the conversation and outline the distinctions we made and the disagreements we had to prove that the Episcopal Church is the place, of all Christian churches, where you will find the most diversity and freedom to disagree.
Then I reconsidered.
My pondering is this: does anyone in the pews or, more importantly, outside the tight little clan we call the Episcopal Church really care. Do people pause over dinner or wake up in the dark of the night considering the doctrine of the Atonement? Driving to pick up your kids from school, running late because work took longer than you hoped or looking for a new job or shopping for groceries and comparing the contents of two kinds of chicken noodle soup or in the midst of a fight between two lovers--or a time of making up between two lovers...are people wondering which interpretation of the Atonement speaks to their lives and spirituality most vividly?
A former seminarian contacted me today to tell me she finally understood why I always said that a priest is "a nearly irrelevant functionary in a totally irrelevant institution".
Why did she come to that understanding? She read Henri Nowen and he said so to. Since a well known spiritual writer agreed with me, it might just be true. So much for both my authority and my irrelevance!
At any rate we enjoyed that hour of unabashed irrelevancy about a doctrine which matters not a fig to most people on the planet--or even most Episcopalians....
Being a priest, I tell people, is being the last 'generalist'. But even when we delve into stuff we know about and care about and worry about, we still probably show up irrelevant to the needs and moments and longings of our culture.
I don't think God is irrelevant. It's just the church and the church's theology....Alas and alack....
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Monday, January 25, 2010
in the moment...and this one....
No matter what else I read, hear, experience about 'spirituality'--which is what has replaced 'religion' in our time--there is this: it is about 'being in the moment'.
It really isn't hard.
Today it was raining in wind driven sheets in Waterbury and I was watching it from the front steps of the church. The flag on the Green and the two in front of the Rectory of Immaculate Conception were all blowing UP! And I stood there for a few moments, just watching--"only" watching--and until I said to myself, "some rain, some wind...", I was 'in the moment', simply there, no doing anything or even thinking, simply 'one' with the wind and rain and flags.
As far as I can tell, that's what spirituality and all the folks making money writing and talking about it are saying. Just 'being there'.
I'd invite you to begin by simply 'noticing' when you are 'present' and nothing else. (The problem is, when you 'notice' it, you aren't there any more....
The question seems to be, how to provide the opportunity and possibility to simply 'be present' more and more. That's what 'spirituality' is about. Everything else is what we 'say' about it.
Just notice those moments when you are present in such a way that, actually, "YOU"--like your conscious mind or your ego--aren't there at all....
Ponder that. More later, I promise.
Yours 'in the moment'....
It really isn't hard.
Today it was raining in wind driven sheets in Waterbury and I was watching it from the front steps of the church. The flag on the Green and the two in front of the Rectory of Immaculate Conception were all blowing UP! And I stood there for a few moments, just watching--"only" watching--and until I said to myself, "some rain, some wind...", I was 'in the moment', simply there, no doing anything or even thinking, simply 'one' with the wind and rain and flags.
As far as I can tell, that's what spirituality and all the folks making money writing and talking about it are saying. Just 'being there'.
I'd invite you to begin by simply 'noticing' when you are 'present' and nothing else. (The problem is, when you 'notice' it, you aren't there any more....
The question seems to be, how to provide the opportunity and possibility to simply 'be present' more and more. That's what 'spirituality' is about. Everything else is what we 'say' about it.
Just notice those moments when you are present in such a way that, actually, "YOU"--like your conscious mind or your ego--aren't there at all....
Ponder that. More later, I promise.
Yours 'in the moment'....
members of the Body
At the Annual meeting yesterday, I preached about Paul's long message to the church in Corinth about the many members of the body. It is in 1st Corinthians somewhere (chapter 14 I think) and points out that the 'members of the body' are equally important. That is something hard for parish churches to remember. Each of the 3 parishes I've served over 30 odd years have shared this one concept--there is 'the in-group', though they wouldn't call it that, I don't think, that does all the work that all the parish profits from. In all cases, the 'in group' feels overworked, beset upon and a tad resentful of the members who aren't 'doing' what they are doing.
It might just be that the in group are the brain and heart and alimentary canal of the Body and those further out in the concentric circles are things like finger-nails and hair and skin. Somebody has to be the vital organs of the Body, but that shouldn't mean the fingernails aren't important--like if you need to scratch an itch, for example, a fingernail becomes suddenly 'vital'.
Parish churches are NOT 'intensive communities'. There are 'intensive communities' of Christians--two I know of are The Church of the Savior and Sojourners--both in Washington, DC. In those gatherings of Christians 'everybody' is in the 'in group'. They are very efficient, effective and well oiled machines. But they cannot tolerate folks 'hanging around' or on the edges of their lives as a Christian community.
Parish churches not only invite those on the edges, those on the edges become the possibility for new members of the in-group if they can be moved, motivated and inspired...and most of all 'welcomed' into the inner circle.
One of the things I'm aware of, though I seldom say it outloud, is that people in the 'in group' in any community give lip service to wanting help, but the terrible truth is this: help in the 'in group' would involve the 'in group' in change--and one thing 'in groups' wherever you find them and you can find them in any business, organization, communion, clan, family--don't want to change. In-groups have pretty much worked out how to handle things and the last thing they want (unconsciously) is someone to tell them a different way to handle things. 'Consciously' and resolutely and honestly, they long for help and more folks to join them. The big problem is most in-groups I've ever observed are not hospitable to 'new thoughts' and 'new paradigms'. They do, sincerely and desperately, want others to join them...who are, it usually seems 'just like them...'
I'd have to think longer--though I have thought long and hard for years and years--about how to make 'in groups' truly welcoming to new folks with new insights and new agendas.
Perhaps it begins by convincing in-groups that the best way forward is to do things in different ways all the time. Go try to sell that concept to anybody--ice to Eskimos, warm breezes to Pacific Islanders...that would be easier.
I'll sit here under my withered Castor Oil Tree and ponder how to make the parish model accommodate itself to welcoming the 'new' into the inner circle. Give me a while...
It might just be that the in group are the brain and heart and alimentary canal of the Body and those further out in the concentric circles are things like finger-nails and hair and skin. Somebody has to be the vital organs of the Body, but that shouldn't mean the fingernails aren't important--like if you need to scratch an itch, for example, a fingernail becomes suddenly 'vital'.
Parish churches are NOT 'intensive communities'. There are 'intensive communities' of Christians--two I know of are The Church of the Savior and Sojourners--both in Washington, DC. In those gatherings of Christians 'everybody' is in the 'in group'. They are very efficient, effective and well oiled machines. But they cannot tolerate folks 'hanging around' or on the edges of their lives as a Christian community.
Parish churches not only invite those on the edges, those on the edges become the possibility for new members of the in-group if they can be moved, motivated and inspired...and most of all 'welcomed' into the inner circle.
One of the things I'm aware of, though I seldom say it outloud, is that people in the 'in group' in any community give lip service to wanting help, but the terrible truth is this: help in the 'in group' would involve the 'in group' in change--and one thing 'in groups' wherever you find them and you can find them in any business, organization, communion, clan, family--don't want to change. In-groups have pretty much worked out how to handle things and the last thing they want (unconsciously) is someone to tell them a different way to handle things. 'Consciously' and resolutely and honestly, they long for help and more folks to join them. The big problem is most in-groups I've ever observed are not hospitable to 'new thoughts' and 'new paradigms'. They do, sincerely and desperately, want others to join them...who are, it usually seems 'just like them...'
I'd have to think longer--though I have thought long and hard for years and years--about how to make 'in groups' truly welcoming to new folks with new insights and new agendas.
Perhaps it begins by convincing in-groups that the best way forward is to do things in different ways all the time. Go try to sell that concept to anybody--ice to Eskimos, warm breezes to Pacific Islanders...that would be easier.
I'll sit here under my withered Castor Oil Tree and ponder how to make the parish model accommodate itself to welcoming the 'new' into the inner circle. Give me a while...
Friday, January 22, 2010
Annual Meetings
Sunday is St. John's Annual Meeting. It will be my 22nd and last. It's only my 21st as Rector, but I was a supply priest at St. John's for 4 months back in Jan-April of 1988 before the parish called an interim Rector. That meeting will be a contrast to the one we'll have Sunday. There was a great deal of contention at the '88 Annual Meeting and since I just said the opening prayer I had no part in trying to calm it down.
Annual Meetings are fictions of canon law. The canons require that they happen. There is business to be transacted to meet the canons--elections and the presentation of the budget and other reports. Beyond that, Annual Meeting really don't have much to do. Those things are important, of course, but they are best done quickly and efficiently.
Some people expect too much of Annual Meetings. In that way an annual meeting of a parish is something like Christmas. People expect too much of Christmas too--things the holy day cannot deliver.
Annual meetings are not like town meetings in a small new England village. The Episcopal Church is a representative democracy through and through--not a direct democracy. The real responsibility for decisions lies with the Vestry, not the A.M. In fact, Annual meetings don't even have the opportunity to 'pass' the budget. The budget is prepared, approved and presented by the vestry. People at the a.m. have an opportunity to ask questions and make comments, but the budget is a faite-comple (which neither my spell check or I can spell--you know what I means...something already complete). We do vote for officers and vestry members, but most often their is a 'slate' presented of the number needed to be elected and I never remember any one to nominate anyone from the floor, though it could happen.
So you see, Annual Meetings are not intended to be debating societies or policy setting forums. It is a requirement of canon law--simply that.
I like them short and sweet and I'm sure some people thing I ram them through, and they would be right. You want to argue policy or have input, come to vestry meetings where everyone in the parish has a voice.
The only time they can get out of hand is if they are not scripted closely enough. I remember one year shortly after I arrived, a committee had recommended interring ashes in the church Close (fancy Episcopal name for 'courtyard'). Everyone loved it and the vestry thought it would be a no brainer. Instead it was a donny-brook! A few people objected, others objected to the objections and people got testy. I finally asked for a motion to table and we went back and gave more information and had a special meeting to have the parish approve.
Luckily, I was so surprized by the turn of events that it didn't occur to me to say to the meeting what I told the Sr. Warden immediately afterwards: "that was a lot of argument over a few 'ash holes...."
Lucky indeed for me....
Annual Meetings are fictions of canon law. The canons require that they happen. There is business to be transacted to meet the canons--elections and the presentation of the budget and other reports. Beyond that, Annual Meeting really don't have much to do. Those things are important, of course, but they are best done quickly and efficiently.
Some people expect too much of Annual Meetings. In that way an annual meeting of a parish is something like Christmas. People expect too much of Christmas too--things the holy day cannot deliver.
Annual meetings are not like town meetings in a small new England village. The Episcopal Church is a representative democracy through and through--not a direct democracy. The real responsibility for decisions lies with the Vestry, not the A.M. In fact, Annual meetings don't even have the opportunity to 'pass' the budget. The budget is prepared, approved and presented by the vestry. People at the a.m. have an opportunity to ask questions and make comments, but the budget is a faite-comple (which neither my spell check or I can spell--you know what I means...something already complete). We do vote for officers and vestry members, but most often their is a 'slate' presented of the number needed to be elected and I never remember any one to nominate anyone from the floor, though it could happen.
So you see, Annual Meetings are not intended to be debating societies or policy setting forums. It is a requirement of canon law--simply that.
I like them short and sweet and I'm sure some people thing I ram them through, and they would be right. You want to argue policy or have input, come to vestry meetings where everyone in the parish has a voice.
The only time they can get out of hand is if they are not scripted closely enough. I remember one year shortly after I arrived, a committee had recommended interring ashes in the church Close (fancy Episcopal name for 'courtyard'). Everyone loved it and the vestry thought it would be a no brainer. Instead it was a donny-brook! A few people objected, others objected to the objections and people got testy. I finally asked for a motion to table and we went back and gave more information and had a special meeting to have the parish approve.
Luckily, I was so surprized by the turn of events that it didn't occur to me to say to the meeting what I told the Sr. Warden immediately afterwards: "that was a lot of argument over a few 'ash holes...."
Lucky indeed for me....
Thursday, January 21, 2010
90 minutes of fame
Andy Warhol said everyone would have 15 minutes of fame--hell, I had 90 today alone! I was on radio for an hour and TV for half an hour. It was easy--all I had to do was talk about things that were important to me and be encouraged by the one 2 liberal talk show hosts in Waterbury! Piece of Cake. Bring on Jay Leno--I'd like to get Conon O'Brian's separation pay. Hey, I'm retiring, where's the $33 million?
Seriously, It was fun for me. I love to talk. I once asked my beloved friend and mentor, Bill Penny, before he died, if he thought I talked too much at our weekly clergy meetings. I was driving him home since he had serious macular degeneration. We were going to stop at his favorite fish store in Watertown on the way to Litchfield.
"Yes," he said, in response to my inquiry. Then he added, "I think I'll get some salmon...."
I once described my job to someone as 'walking around and talking a lot'. I wish I had said, 'walking around and listening a lot'. And I wish that had been true. If there is anything I regret about my life as a priest, it is probably that--that I didn't 'listen' more and talk less. And if there were any advice I'd give to someone thinking about priesthood it would be 3 things: "listen...then listen...then listen a little more".
Silence, I have begun to truly believe, is the Heart of God. I wish I had been a little more silent over these years....listened more....
But I do like the sound of my own voice....
Seriously, It was fun for me. I love to talk. I once asked my beloved friend and mentor, Bill Penny, before he died, if he thought I talked too much at our weekly clergy meetings. I was driving him home since he had serious macular degeneration. We were going to stop at his favorite fish store in Watertown on the way to Litchfield.
"Yes," he said, in response to my inquiry. Then he added, "I think I'll get some salmon...."
I once described my job to someone as 'walking around and talking a lot'. I wish I had said, 'walking around and listening a lot'. And I wish that had been true. If there is anything I regret about my life as a priest, it is probably that--that I didn't 'listen' more and talk less. And if there were any advice I'd give to someone thinking about priesthood it would be 3 things: "listen...then listen...then listen a little more".
Silence, I have begun to truly believe, is the Heart of God. I wish I had been a little more silent over these years....listened more....
But I do like the sound of my own voice....
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
dogs with lights
I was walking my dog about 9:30 and we encountered a huge yellow dog with a red light around his neck. I was so shocked I didn't think to ask the dog's walker who it was for--the dog or him. The light was about the size of the little keg or brandy or whatever that St. Bernards are sometimes pictured with. It was red, not clear. I don't have a clue what that was about.
I'm really not up to writing more tonight but this keeps my promise to post each day and gives you something to ponder--dogs with lights, what's next? cats with windshield washers?
I'm really not up to writing more tonight but this keeps my promise to post each day and gives you something to ponder--dogs with lights, what's next? cats with windshield washers?
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
preaching
I had a long talk this afternoon with a trusted friend about preaching. I don't often get to talk about preaching so it was a welcomed and wonderful conversation.
I love the preach--JUST LOVE IT....
I often meet priests who don't 'love' to preach. Some of them actually hate it. And I say to myself, "self, why did they choose this vocation?"
Preaching, for me, is the most fun part of being a priest.
Mostly I preach to myself--whenever I don't, it doesn't feel good or right. I have very little right to 'preach' at other people. I do know stuff about scripture and theology that they might not know--though some do!--but that doesn't give me the right to 'be preachy'.
I read the gospel well ahead...and sometimes the other lessons, though mostly I preach about the gospel lesson. And I just sit with it...or drive with it...or move around with it...or sleep with it and then, at some point, start writing things down I've been thinking.
Often I write a sermon in one draft. I haven't always done that--I used to agonize over the whole process--but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
Yes, you read that right. The more I preach, the younger and more child-like I become about it all. I listen 'for me' to what the gospel might be saying. Often it says lots of things and I have to trust my intuition to choose the one that speaks to me.
Then I write. And read it and read it (outloud several times) and then leave the text in the vesting room if I use the pulpit or on the pulpit if I preach walking around. (You've got to leave room for the Spirit--bless her heart--and read the faces of the poor, stranded, undefended listeners.
Preaching IS what a priest does--spoken or unspoken. Figuring out a new way or an old way spoken new to tell the timeless Truth of the Gospel.
I hope I will be able to preach much during my retirement. But it won't be the same, talking to myself in front of mostly strangers as it has been at St. John's--talking to myself in front of people I know so well and who have figured me out and who matter so much. It will be different, that I know--and I will miss preaching at St. John's...that I know fair well....
I love the preach--JUST LOVE IT....
I often meet priests who don't 'love' to preach. Some of them actually hate it. And I say to myself, "self, why did they choose this vocation?"
Preaching, for me, is the most fun part of being a priest.
Mostly I preach to myself--whenever I don't, it doesn't feel good or right. I have very little right to 'preach' at other people. I do know stuff about scripture and theology that they might not know--though some do!--but that doesn't give me the right to 'be preachy'.
I read the gospel well ahead...and sometimes the other lessons, though mostly I preach about the gospel lesson. And I just sit with it...or drive with it...or move around with it...or sleep with it and then, at some point, start writing things down I've been thinking.
Often I write a sermon in one draft. I haven't always done that--I used to agonize over the whole process--but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
Yes, you read that right. The more I preach, the younger and more child-like I become about it all. I listen 'for me' to what the gospel might be saying. Often it says lots of things and I have to trust my intuition to choose the one that speaks to me.
Then I write. And read it and read it (outloud several times) and then leave the text in the vesting room if I use the pulpit or on the pulpit if I preach walking around. (You've got to leave room for the Spirit--bless her heart--and read the faces of the poor, stranded, undefended listeners.
Preaching IS what a priest does--spoken or unspoken. Figuring out a new way or an old way spoken new to tell the timeless Truth of the Gospel.
I hope I will be able to preach much during my retirement. But it won't be the same, talking to myself in front of mostly strangers as it has been at St. John's--talking to myself in front of people I know so well and who have figured me out and who matter so much. It will be different, that I know--and I will miss preaching at St. John's...that I know fair well....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)