Friday, June 23, 2004
Okay, can I just say how WONDERFUL it is to be home again? To sleep in my own bed? To drink my own coffee in the morning (not the brown water in the hotel room) from my very own favorite mug? To have Lenny (Brisco) and CoCo (Channel) greet me with unrestrained excitement and unconditional love when I walk in the door and cuddle with me as I sit on my favorite chair?
Ah, these are the things that really matter.
Now that I'm home, it's fascinating to read the local 'take' on what we did during General Convention. Most folk here did not see it as a moratorium on LGBT bishops. They see it as an issue of consciousness - more of a loop hole than a barrier.
I'm absolutely amazed. Clearly, they don't know the subtlety of Anglican polity. When I tried to explain it, I got curious looks and the response, "Hmmm . . .That sounds like President Clinton saying, 'well, it depends on what 'is' is.'"
I now understand a bit better why the neo-Puritan/evangelical/charismatic folks on the Radical Right (not to be confused with conservatives)were so jump-up-and-down angry at the language of B033.
I suppose the ultimate reality of our deliberations and decisions in Columbus will be revealed after the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishops of the Southern Cone model what it means to "exercise restraint" - and simultaneously make us dangle in the breeze for a while.
I'm also amused by the buzz about our newly elected Presiding Bishop/Primate. The most frequently asked questions have to do with the spelling and pronunciation of her name.
To that end, I've written a little ode to Katharine Jefferts Schori.
(after "Liza with a "z - not Lisa with an "s"")
That's Katharine with an "a" not Katherine with an "e"
'Cuz Katherine with an "a" goes "ahhh" not "ehhhh".
Jefferts Schori stands alone
No hyphen in between
But it's "Bishop Katharine"
To the ABC.
On a less sanguine note - I was talking with a dear friend today, an almost
70 year old African American woman who is an Episcopal priest who has already
come "through many troubles, toils and snares," but would "give nothing for
her journey now."
She listened closely as I recounted my experience of General Convention.
I asked her what she thought of our newly elected woman Primate.
She sighed deeply and said,
"Listen, child, I have been around this church too long not to speak the
truth. When things are a mess, they always send in a woman to clean it up.
Then, if it all goes wrong, they can always blame her - and it will be all her
fault from the beginning."
She shook her head in a knowing sadness, held up one finger bent with
arthritis and added, "And, when things are absolutely beyond repair, they send in a
Black person."
"Now, she added," let me tell you about "exercising restraint."
She straightened herself up, looked at me dead in the eye and asked, "Do you
remember the language that was used in Brown v. Board of Education? They said
desegregation was to happen - are you ready for this? - with "all deliberate speed."
"All deliberate speed," she huffed.
"That was 1968. What year is it now? Huh, don't talk to me about
"all deliberate speed."
"When is Lambeth? Two years? When is General Convention? Three years?"
"Huh," she added, "And they say they're gonna 'exercise restraint'? Sounds
to me like they found a new way to say 'all deliberate speed.'"
She shook her head again and walked slowly to her car.
Just when I thought I had cried my last tear, I found myself weeping all
over again.
It's helped to be able to write this down and process it in my journal. I've decided to take a risk and post it here, feeling that some of y'all might be wondering if I've fallen off the end of the world.
I haven't.
I'm exhausted. Bruised. Broken hearted. It is still not well with my soul.
I was in class from 9:30 - 4 PM. I have not yet been to the office, but I have an Adult Education program tomorrow morning from 9:30 - 11 AM and a birthday party for my grand daughter, MacKenna Jane in the afternoon. I have a sermon to finish for Sunday and tons of books and articles to read for next week.
(Did I mention that I am still exhausted?)
I really don't know what I'm going to do about this Blog. It was only supposed to be for the folks at St. Paul in Chatham and only during General Convention.
However, as the newly elected national president of the Episcopal Women's Caucus, and with a newly elected woman as a Presiding Bishop and Primate, I'll be at Lambeth in 2008 and Anaheim in 2009 - which will come up really, really fast.
I suppose there will be a few things to write about.
Thanks to all of you who wrote me privately as well as left comments on my blog. Most of you were gracious and generous and more than kind. I do not know what I did to deserve such love and support but I won't question it and take it gratefully.
I'll leave you with this thought: One of the meditations given at General Convention included a scene from the film GETTYSBURG. I've been haunted by it ever since. I plan to rent the movie while I'm on vacation this August.
A colonel is addressing his troops, which include a number of captured soldiers who are told that if they try to escape, the orders are to "shoot to kill."
The colonel encourages them not to do that. Further, the prisoners of war are being asked to join the fight because, the colonel says, "What we are fighting for, in the end, is each other."
What we are fighting for, in the end, is each other.
Now, there's a sobering thought.
"Finally, I suspect that it is by entering that deep place inside us where our secrets are kept that we come perhaps closer than we do anywhere else to the One who, whether we realize it or not, is of all our secrets the most telling and the most precious we have to tell." Frederick Buechner
Friday, June 23, 2006
9 comments:
Comment Code of Conduct
I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of this online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)
I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)
I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)
I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by the Blog Owner and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)
(With thanks to Sojourners)
"Difference of opinion"
ReplyDeleteAnd here come the attempts at trivialization of the outrage that has just occurred.
I don't see where Elizabeth is concerned about a "difference of opinion." What I see is how Elizabeth has been damaged and outraged by an act of injustice sanctioned by the ECUSA at the bidding of outsiders.
I posted this quote earlier in another thread. I think it is appropriate to so do again.
Martin Luther King's Letter from Birmingham Jail
[...]
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
[...]
I'm not sure everyone who reads and posts in here is aware of the background behind this manipulation of the ECUSA by outside forces. Perhaps a bit of updating is in order.
ReplyDeletePartners in prejudice
Peter Tatchell
Guardian UK | May 19, 2006
With the full blessing of the Anglican Church of Nigeria and its leader, Archbishop Peter Akinola, the Nigerian government has begun legislating one of the world's most repressive anti-gay laws.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, leader of the global Anglican communion, has declined to criticise this church-endorsed homophobic persecution. Instead he embraces Akinola and the Nigerian church, appeasing their prejudice in the name of Anglican unity.
[...]
The new legislation bans same-sex marriages and blessing ceremonies and criminalises anyone who attends or witnesses them. And it goes much further: it also proscribes any "public or private" affirmation of same-sex love and gay human rights.
This will criminalise gay organisations, gay churches, gay bars, gay blessings, gay safer sex education, gay newspapers, gay human rights advocacy and sympathetic advice and welfare support for vulnerable lesbians and gay men.
Newspaper, television, radio and internet discussions supportive of gay equality will become a criminal offence.
The catch-all nature of the new statute means, for example, that it will become a crime to attend a same-sex commitment ceremony, urge understanding and acceptance of lesbians and gays, impart information on HIV prevention to gay people or broadcast a radio interview with a gay person talking about his or her life.
Violations of the new legislation will be punished with an automatic five-year jail sentence.
In contrast to the silence of Church of England, Canada's Anglican bishops have expressed grave concerns about the bill, which they note will "prohibit or severely restrict the freedom of speech, association, expression and assembly of gay and lesbian persons".
[...]
Responding to the publication of the bill, Akinola said: "The church commends the lawmakers ... and calls for the bill to be passed since the idea expressed in the bill is the moral position of all Nigerians regarding human sexuality."
In the name of Christianity, Akinola and his Anglican hierarchy are endorsing the state oppression of their gay countrymen and women.
[...]
To many people's dismay, Dr Williams, has remained silent about this attack on the human rights of gay Nigerians, many of whom are members of his Anglican Communion.
Although the new law will criminalise gay Christian gatherings, blessings and celebrations, the archbishop has refused to condemn this repressive legislation or to support gay Christians in Nigeria. Rejecting the parable of the Good Samaritan, he has chosen to walk by on the other side of the street, ignoring the suffering of Nigerian lesbians and gays.
Dr Williams would not appease a racist or anti-semitic cleric. Why is he appeasing a boastful homophobe like Archbishop Akinola?
The leader of the Anglican communion wants church unity at any price, apparently even at the price of betraying gay people. He would, it seems, rather unite with a self-proclaimed persecutor than with the victims of homophobic persecution.
[...]
In contrast to Dr Williams's sad abandonment of gay people, Episcopal Bishop John Bryson Chane of Washington DC has courageously spoken out against the victimisation of lesbians and gay men by the Nigerian government and condemned the cruel sermonising of Akinola and the Anglican Church of Nigeria.
Bishop Chane's support for the human rights of gay Nigerians accords with a gospel of love and compassion, while Akinola's homophobia embodies only hatred and ignorance.
Writing in The Washington Post, Bishop Chane said: "Archbishop Peter Akinola, primate of the Church of Nigeria and leader of the conservative wing of the communion, recently threw his prestige and resources behind a new law that criminalises same-sex marriage in his country and denies gay citizens the freedoms to assemble and petition their government.
"The law also infringes upon press and religious freedom by authorising Nigeria's government to prosecute newspapers that publicise same-sex associations and religious organisations that permit same-sex unions ...
[...]
"Surprisingly few voices - Anglican or otherwise - have been raised in opposition to the archbishop. When I compare this silence with the cacophony that followed the Episcopal Church's decision to consecrate the Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson, a gay man who lives openly with his partner, as the bishop of New Hampshire, I am compelled to ask whether the global Christian community has lost not only its backbone but its moral bearings. Have we become so cowed by the periodic eruptions of Archbishop Akinola...that we are no longer willing to name an injustice when we see one?"
Amen to that! I may be an atheist, but I know a good Christian when I hear one, and Bishop Chane, unlike the Archbishop of Canterbury, is on the side of the angels. Bless him.
Akinola Calls for Church of England to be Suspended from Anglican Communion
ReplyDeleteThe Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, one of the most powerful leaders in the Anglican Communion worldwide, has called upon the Church of England to be suspended from the Communion for backing civil partnerships.
Daniel Blake, Christian Today | August 1, 2005
The Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, one of the most powerful leaders in the Anglican Communion worldwide, has called upon the Church of England to be suspended from the Communion for backing civil partnerships, says Alex Delmar-Morgan for the Sunday Times.
The comments come after a pastoral statement was released last week from English bishops saying that they would allow gay clergy to register their civil partnership as long as they agreed to abstain from sex.
In December 2005 the Civil Partnerships Act will come into force in the UK and will provide legal recognition of homosexual partners.
In response to the latest announcements by the Church of England, Peter Akinola, who leads the largest Anglican province in the world rebuked the new policies promoted in England. The condemnation continued as he called for the head of the Church of England, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and his Church to face disciplinary action.
According to Virtue Online, Alex Delmar-Morgan states that Akinola demanded, “I believe that the temporary suspension of the Church of England is the right course of action to take. The church will be subjected to the same procedures and discipline that America and Canada faced.”
The Nigerian archbishop seemed to be hugely disappointed with the example that Archbishop Rowan Williams is setting for the 70-million member worldwide denomination, which Williams leads. Akinola also seemed to demand that the Anglican Communion continue away from the path laid down by Lambeth Palace.
Archbishop Akinola continued, “Lambeth Palace upholds our common historic faith. It will now lose that place of honour in the world. Must I come to Lambeth Palace in order to go to heaven. The answer is no!”
If Akinola’s demands are met then the Church of England would be suspended, and therefore removed from the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), which is the governing body of the worldwide Anglican Communion. The Church of England would therefore lose its say in the Church’s worldwide policies.
[...]
A Gospel of Intolerance
ReplyDeleteBy John Bryson Chane, (Episcopal Bishop of Washington)
Washington Post, Sunday, February 26, 2006
[...]
Meeting last February, the primates who lead our 38 member provinces issued a unanimous statement that said in part: "The victimization or diminishment of human beings whose affections happen to be ordered towards people of the same sex is anathema to us."
We now have reason to doubt those words.
Archbishop Peter J. Akinola, primate of the Church of Nigeria and leader of the conservative wing of the communion, recently threw his prestige and resources behind a new law that criminalizes same-sex marriage in his country and denies gay citizens the freedoms to assemble and petition their government. The law also infringes upon press and religious freedom by authorizing Nigeria's government to prosecute newspapers that publicize same-sex associations and religious organizations that permit same-sex unions.
Were Archbishop Akinola a solitary figure and Nigeria an isolated church, his support for institutionalized bigotry would be significant only within his own country. But the archbishop is perhaps the most powerful member of a global alliance of conservative bishops and theologians, generously supported by foundations and individual donors in the United States, who seek to dominate the Anglican Communion and expel those who oppose them, particularly the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. Failing that, the archbishop and his allies have talked of forming their own purified communion -- possibly with Archbishop Akinola at its head.
Because the conflict over homosexuality is not unique to Anglicanism, civil libertarians in this country, and other people as well, should also be aware of the archbishop and his movement. Gifts from such wealthy donors as Howard Ahmanson Jr. and the Bradley, Coors and Scaife families, or their foundations, allow the Washington-based Institute on Religion and Democracy to sponsor so-called "renewal" movements that fight the inclusion of gays and lesbians within the Episcopal, Methodist, Presbyterian and Lutheran churches and in the United Church of Christ. Should the institute succeed in "renewing" these churches, what we see in Nigeria today may well be on the agenda of the Christian right tomorrow.
[...]
But the Nigerian law has crossed the line in several important respects. Its most outrageous provision deals not with marriage but with "same-sex relationships" and prohibits essentially any public or private activity in any way related to homosexuality. It reads in part: "Publicity, procession and public show of same sex amorous relationship through the electronic or print media physically, directly, indirectly or otherwise are prohibited in Nigeria."
Any person involved in the "sustenance, procession or meetings, publicity and public show of same sex amorous relationship directly or indirectly" is subject to five years' imprisonment.
The archbishop's support for this law violates numerous Anglican Communion documents that call for a "listening process" involving gay Christians and their leaders. But his contempt for international agreements also extends to Articles 18-20 of the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights, which articulates the rights to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, association and assembly.
[...]
Have we become so cowed by the periodic eruptions about the decadent West that Archbishop Akinola and his allies issue that we are no longer willing to name an injustice when we see one?
I also feel compelled to ask the archbishop's many high-profile supporters in this country why they have not publicly dissociated themselves from his attack on the human rights of a vulnerable population. Is it because they support this sort of legislation, or because the rights of gay men and women are not worth the risk of tangling with an important alliance?
As a matter of logic, it must be one or the other, and it is urgent that members of our church, and citizens of our country, know your mind.
The writer is Episcopal bishop of Washington.
So what does all of that tell us?
ReplyDelete1. Akinola wants any part of the Anglican Communion that acknowledges the humans rights of G/L people thrown out.
2. Akinola is being funded by wealthy American neoconservatives.
3. Akinola has Rowan Williams running scared.
4. Rowan Williams is so afraid of Akinola that he refuses to take a stand against human rights violations.
5. Rowan Williams is afraid of Akinola's call to have the CofE removed from the Anglican Communion.
6. Rowan Williams' strongarm tactics during the recent GC are motivated by fear and self-preservation. He is afraid to take the high road against Akinola and the powerful US neoconservatives who fund Akinola.
7. The ECUSA has just bought into being manipulated by the extremist US neoconservative by way of a notorious human rights violator named Peter Akinola.
I just realized there is an error in my link to the Christianity Today article.
ReplyDeleteHere's one that should work.
Akinola Calls for Church of England to be Suspended from Anglican Communion
Brown v. Board of Education was in 1954, not 1968.
ReplyDeletepilgrim presbyter & ew-3, please note that Elizabeth did not call all of those on the "other side" "neo-Puritan/ evangelical/ charismatic folks on the Radical Right." She clearly, in the very next phrase, said they were "not to be confused with conservatives." She is not painting them all with the broad brush. But surely even you two will acknowledge there is a scary "radical right" operating within (or against) TEC.
ReplyDeleteElizabeth, I had not heard of your election in EWC. Congratulations! Now ... the mental image of you at Lambeth is just too funny for words. Just wait til those guys see what a real "Uppity Woman" looks like. I can scarcely wait.
ReplyDeleteAnd on my own less sanguine note: I, too, apparently have not finished weeping about B033. Thank you for sharing the conversation with your African American friend. I think Mike in Texas is correct: MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail is right on target in this situation.
Finally, you know I'm one of those who does indeed hope you'll continue blogging. I'm grateful for your voice.