The Pittsburgh Schism

Sunday Forum:

Conservative activist
JERRY BOWYER
takes issue with
the conservatives' split
from the Episcopal Church,
finding no support for it
in biblical or Christian tradition

Sunday, November 11, 2007

My wife is a reader at St. Stephen's Episcopal Church in McKeesport. This means that she sometimes leads the people in prayer, including a prayer "for Katharine, our presiding bishop; Robert and Henry, our bishops; and Jay, our priest." These are our leaders. Katharine Jefferts Schori is the elected head of the U.S. branch of the church. Robert Duncan along with his assistant, Henry Scriven, leads the diocese, and Jay Geisler is the priest at St. Stephen's in McKeesport.

This past summer, Bishop Duncan instructed my wife and hundreds of other readers in the diocese to omit the prayer for Katharine. Katharine Jefferts Schori has been a frequent target for conservatives in the U.S. church ever since she was elected presiding bishop in 2006. Coming on the heels of the installation of an active and outspoken homosexual bishop, the elevation of a woman of liberal sympathies seemed a bridge too far for many conservatives.

It appeared at the time that omitting the prayer for Katharine was a steppingstone to where the bishop was really trying to take us -- outside of the Episcopal Church. You see, to include Katharine in the prayers was to acknowledge her office, and to acknowledge her office was to acknowledge our obligation to her.

Our suspicions were confirmed on Nov. 2, when the Diocese of Pittsburgh voted overwhelmingly to change its constitution to permit separation from the Episcopal Church USA.

When my wife, Susan, asked me for advice about the prayer directive, I told her that Katharine was elected lawfully under the standards of the Episcopal Church. Robert was using his authority to tell her to disregard Katharine's authority. When there is a disruption in the chain of authority, I said, "look to the highest authority." He said, "Love your enemies, pray for those who despitefully use you." If you should pray for your enemies, should you not pray even more for friends with whom you disagree?

I am not a liberal. I think the Episcopal Church made a terrible mistake when it installed Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire in 2004. It did the church no favors when it trod the historic standards of Anglicanism under foot in a rush to make some sort of political point. It did Father Robinson no good to turn this deeply wounded man into a cause celebre with no thought to the pressure it would impose (driving him eventually into rehab). It did the world no favor to turn the church into an echo of the sexual revolution rather than a beacon out of it. Many commandments were broken, most notably that "they should be one, Father, even as You and I are one."

But the solution does not lie in breaking more commandments. The priests who voted overwhelmingly for secession this month had taken an oath of loyalty to the Episcopal Church at the time of their ordination. That oath holds whether our guys win every battle or not.

I know Republicans who simply refused to acknowledge Bill Clinton as president in the 1990s. I know Democrats who did the same regarding George W. Bush. But both presidents were elected under the rules laid out in our national Constitution.

The same thing has happened in our church. My side lost on the Gene Robinson issue. It was bitter, but it was fair.

Secession is not the biblical pattern of resistance to flawed authority. Young David served under a tyrannical and apostate King named Saul. David submitted to Saul's authority and he resisted the urge to revolt or secede. He remained faithful to Israel and Saul until the end, and then, because of his patience, became king himself.

David's great (28 times) grandson, Jesus, was a reader in the synagogue despite its shortcomings. He worshipped in the temple despite its corruption and oppression. King Herod was a murderous crook and the temple priesthood were his hired cronies and yet Mary and Joseph and Jesus were there year after year, making offerings, saying prayers, talking with rabbis.

When St. Paul was beaten by the high priest he showed him deference, not contempt. "You salute the rank," as they say in the military, "not the man."

That's because the authority of a priest or bishop doesn't come from him; it comes from God. The failings of the man, or woman, don't erase that authority. Saul would regularly try to murder David. He disregarded God and took on the responsibility to offer sacrifices himself. He murdered faithful priests. Through all of this, David saluted the office long after the man had outlived his merit.

On Oct. 31., the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church USA sent a letter to the bishop of Pittsburgh, directing him not to split the diocese from the denomination. Bishop Duncan replied by quoting Martin Luther, "Here I stand. I can do no other."

It's a powerful quote, but a misuse of history. Martin Luther didn't leave the Roman Catholic Church; he was kicked out. He decided to "stand" and fight. It's ironic that Bishop Duncan quoted Luther's pledge to "stand" in order to justify his intention to "walk."

Are my fellow conservatives fully aware of the biblical and patristic teachings on schism? How do they justify a break with the Episcopal Church to which they have literally sworn loyalty? How do they justify taking Episcopal property with them? Given Paul's command to the first-century Corinthian Church not to address church issues in secular courts, how do they justify the inevitable legal battles that accompany a schism? How much will the litigation cost? Will the money come from our offerings?

There are moral questions, too. If we break with the Episcopal Church in America over gay priests, how can we then align ourselves with African bishops who tolerate polygamist priests? Paul says that a church leader is to be "the husband of one wife." Do we think that the word "husband" is inerrant but the word "one" is not?

If the Episcopal Church really has become apostate and its current leaders really are enemies of God, then how can we justify leaving the church, its resources and its sheep in their care? If not, how can we justify this separation?

Yes, there are times when it's necessary to leave one authority for another. When the New Testament writers were forced to deal with this issue, they concluded that they were compelled to obey higher authority at all times, except when it commanded them to disobey God. Roman Emperors were monstrous beasts. The church preached against them and prayed for them to repent, but Christians still obeyed the law. It wasn't until Rome ordered them to stop preaching the gospel and to offer sacrifices to Caesar that the early church was forced to disobey.

By analogy, New Hampshire can install a whole pride of gay bishops, but we don't break our oath of loyalty to the Episcopal Church until they order us to start installing them here.

Until then, the pattern of David and Jesus holds: Be faithful. Be patient. Be active in good works. And be in prayer for all in authority ... "for Katharine, our presiding bishop; Robert and Henry, our bishops; and Jay, our priest, I pray. Lord, hear our prayer."


Jerry Bowyer is an Episcopal vestryman, a financial journalist and the chairman of Bowyer Media (www.jerrybowyer.com).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correction/Clarification: (Published Nov. 12, 2007) Part of the name of the Episcopal Church presiding bishop was misspelled in this essay, "The Pittsburgh Schism," as originally published Nov. 11, 2007. She is Katharine Jefferts Schori, not Jefferts. Also, she was elected presiding bishop in 2006, not two years ago.
First published on November 11, 2007 at 12:00 am

Dead Wood Splinters

I’ve told this story before. Maybe you haven’t heard it.

As a young child, I walked to early morning mass every day with my grandmother.

As we passed St. Jean Batiste, the Roman Catholic Church established by the French Canadians immigrants she would kiss her thumb and make the sign of the cross as a form of blessing.

When we passed St. Patrick’s, the Roman Catholic Church established by the Irish immigrants, she would also bless herself. Clearly, it was a sign of respect – a wee ‘arrow prayer’ in solidarity with all those who were praying there.

As we rounded the corner to attend mass at St. Elizabeth’s Roman Catholic Church which had been established by the Portuguese immigrants, we always ran into “the Protestant Church” at the top of the street.

My grandmother would bless herself several times, in rapid, furious succession, as if warding off the real presence of Evil itself.

I asked her, once, why she did that.

She spit on the ground and then hissed, “Dead wood splinters,” going on to explain that these were not part of God’s “one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. They are not connected to their original source,” she said.

“They broke away. They work harder to justify their existence than to pray to God. And, because of that, they can not sustain their faith. They argue among themselves. They break off from each other. They have no faith. Dead wood splinters.”

My grandmother was very big on faithfulness. She didn't believe in divorce, either, which she thought was a result of "intermarriage" - that is, marrying outside of what she called "the Portuguese race."

In my grandmother's world, you were faithful and loyal to your race/ethnicity, your family/tribe, your spouse AND your religion. You stayed "close to your original source" or you risked "drying up" and splintering off.

When my marriage failed, she was a bit more compassionate because I had married someone of German, French Canadian and Iroquois lineage. "What did I tell you?" she asked sadly, as she hugged me.

She never understood my relationship with Ms. Conroy but she was more perplexed and completely devastated when I left the Roman Catholic Church.

But, she loved me, and gave me her 'guitara' which had been a gift from her mother - the only thing, besides a small bag of clothing - which she brought with her from Portugal at age 13.

She had left her six brothers and her father shortly after her mother died. She left to escape the poverty, yes, but mostly the oppression she would have to endure as the only woman and the youngest daughter in a house filled with men.

I understood the gift her beloved guitara to me as a clear message that she understood my need to go on my own.

It also gave me a window on to her passion about faithfulness and loyalty. She had worked very hard and sacrificed for many years to save up the money to bring her brothers to this country. All but two of them eventually made the journey.

I have often reflected on my grandmother’s words whenever I consider the need for the so-called orthodox of The Episcopal Church to remain part of the Anglican Communion.

I understand.

As I consider the list provided by Common Cause of the organizations attending the September 25-28 meeting in Pittsburgh, I hear my grandmother’s words in a new way.

Here are the splinter groups of the so-called orthodox Episcopalians.

AAC: American Anglican Council
ACiC: Anglican Coalition in Canada
NACDP: Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes (also known as the Anglican Communion Network - ACN)
AEC: Anglican Essentials of Canada
AMiA: Anglican Mission in America
ANC Anglican Network in Canada (which may be why the ANC / USA changed to NACDP)
APA: Anglican Province in America
CANA: Convocation of Anglicans in North America
FiFNA: Forward in Faith – North America
REC: Reformed Episcopal Church

Participating guests:
FAC: Federation of Anglican Churches
The deposed bishop of Recife (Brazil)
The bishop of Bolivia (ICON)
The retired bishop of SE Asia and former chairman of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), and listed as being affiliated with the AMiA.

There may be others. There may be those yet to break off yet again. These are the ones who reportedly attended the Network meeting in Pittsburgh.

It is an astounding array of organizations which continue to be divided not so much by scriptural interpretation but by the application of scripture – especially with regards to the role and function of women in the councils of power and authority in the institutional church.

Did anyone else chuckle over Moderator Bob Duncan’s three-sentence response to the Presiding Bishop’s letter of concern and warning?

In one of the three lines total in the letter, he said something about “the faith first delivered to the saints.”

That takes a lot of cojones, as we say in North Jersey.

How many of his orthodox brothers would agree that the “faith first delivered” included the ordination of women?

Not too many, I'd wager.

It will be interesting to see what all comes of this. Will there be more splintering? Or, will there be a network of independent churches, all thriving and working to bring the gospel to the ends of the earth?

My grandmother would say that if they work harder to justify their existence than they pray to God, they don’t stand a chance. They will argue among themselves. They will break off from each other.

Then, she’d spit on the ground and hiss, “Dead wood splinters.”

One in Ten

Shortly after arriving home, having seen "Pebble in My Shoe" (see article below), I had the pleasure of being interviewed on the FNX Radio Program called "One in Ten."

I was interviewed by Keith Orr and Susan O'Connell who were curious about an article they had read concerning the Diocese of Pittsburgh voting to change their constitution and canons in order to disaffiliate from The Episcopal Church.

Susan asked, "Many lesbians and gay men are former Roman Catholics. This action is very confusing because that religion is so tightly controlled from Rome. The Episcopal Church is more democratic, isn't it? Can you help us understand how a diocese can leave the church?"

The interview was from 8:50 - 9 PM. I had ten minutes total. I could have spent 20 minutes just answering that question alone. But, I gave a one minute short hand version of the "democracy" of our theology, highlighting the point that no diocese can come into existence without General Convention and no diocese can declare itself separate from The Episcopal Church without General Convention.

Bishops Duncan, Iker and Schofield are either delusional or playing a risky game of "Texas Hold 'Em," gambling on the rest of the Anglican Communion in general and the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to be so alarmed as to put pressure on The Presiding Bishop and General Convention to reverse their course.

Not gonna happen, I said, because yes, our theology is democratic. In fact, said I, that's the nature of all good Christian theology. (Good soundbite, eh? Stand back, Ms. Russell, reigning Queen of the Soundbite, your observant student has learned a lesson or two and she has the mic!)

"This is because of Gene Robinson, right?" Keith asked. "I mean, all of this is because the Episcopal Church ordained a gay man as a bishop, right?"

Well, I said, that was the presenting issue, but many very conservative people have been very unhappy for a very long time with what they describe as "the direction" The Episcopal Church has been heading. I found myself very able to recount some of that history, having just had my memory vividly refreshed by "Pebble."

I was keenly aware that my audience was overwhelmingly young LGBT people, many of whom bear the deep, painful scars of rejection and betrayal from the institutional church. I didn't want to lie. Neither did I want to be 'relentlessly upbeat' as has been a fair-enough critique of some of the news from TEC bureaucracy. I wanted to offer a word of hope. Of truth. From my heart.

What I heard myself say at the end of my thumb-nail survey of recent history went something like this: "You know, for all the trouble and pain, this is still the best time to be a lesbian woman, gay male or Queer person. In fact, this is the best time to be a Queer Christian."

"We are seeing progress. Real progress. Progress that those fabulous Drag Queens at Stonewall could have never asked for or imagined in June of 1969. Yes. It's going more slowly than any of us want. But, impatience is always the constant companion of those who seek justice."

"As a giant in the Civil Rights movement once said, power never gives up power without a struggle. Those who want power without a struggle want crops without the hard work of plowing the field or the inconvenience of rain."

"Tracey Lind made a very, very strong showing in the Chicago election - against formidable, some would say, impossible odds, given the reality of Resolution B033. It's just a matter of time before a lesbian is elected to the House of Bishops. And, after her, another Queer priest. And then another. And another. Until there is the kind of perfect parity we will know when we all get to heaven."

"Even so, this is a great time to be a Queer. It is a great time to be Christian. It's a most wonderful time to be part of The Episcopal Church, which God seems to have chosen to lead the next phase of the Reformation and create a church which brings the Realm of God closer to reality in our time."

"I've never been more hopeful."

At least, that's most of what I remember saying. Ms. Conroy tells me I'm pretty close (We were both as nervous as long tail cats in a room full of rocking chairs).

Of course, I couldn't remember it at the time, but it was Frederick Douglas, who, in 1857 in Canandaigua, NY, said the following words, with I think we (well, more often than not, I) would do well to remember today:

"Let me give you a word of the philosophy of reform. The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims, have been born of earnest struggle."

"The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all-absorbing, and for the time being, putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it does nothing."

"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters."

"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle"

"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."

"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both."

"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."

"In the light of these ideas, Negroes will be hunted at the North, and held and flogged at the South so long as they submit to those devilish outrages, and make no resistance, either moral or physical."

"Men may not get all they pay for in this world; but they must certainly pay for all they get. If we ever get free from the oppressions and wrongs heaped upon us, we must pay for their removal. We must do this by labor, by suffering, by sacrifice, and if needs be, by our lives and the lives of others."

Frederick Douglass, 1857

A Pebble In My Shoe

Jack Spong with St. Paul's members Joan Fry (far left) and Ann Bennett (far right) and Christ Church, Ridgewood member Marge Christie (center).

Play at Bickford
depicts life of controversial bishop
'Pebble in My Shoe'
offers look at Episcopal cleric,
a resident of Morris Plains

BY TEHANI SCHNEIDER
DAILY RECORD
Monday, November 12, 2007


MORRIS TWP. -- John Shelby Spong was a polarizing figure who alienated many who steadfastly held to traditional values during the 24 years that he served as bishop of the Newark Diocese of the Episcopal Church.

But Spong, a Morris Plains resident who was the first Episcopal bishop to ordain a gay priest in 1989, also was loved by those who admired his ability to embrace tolerance and diversity in a church that was divided over those issues.

That dichotomy played out to a packed crowd at the Bickford Theatre on Sunday afternoon as "A Pebble In My Shoe: The Life and Times of John Shelby Spong," a theatrical version of Spong's autobiography, made its Morris Township debut.

"Pebble," which was conceived by a Los Angeles-based company, is a chronological adaptation of Spong's autobiography, "Here I Stand: My Struggle for a Christianity of Integrity, Love & Equality."

The first act follows Spong's life from his upbringing in the racist and homophobic South to his early years as a pastor in Virginia before he came to New Jersey in the late 1970s.

The second half of the two-hour play is devoted to the growing divisiveness of the church over Spong's practices and beliefs, which include the ordination of women and gays into the priesthood.

Three actors played Spong and various figures who had direct and indirect influences on him throughout his life. "Pebble" serves as both a professional and personal manifest of Spong, with scenes focusing on the death of his first wife, Joan, from cancer in 1988.

Spong, 76, who retired in 2001, said Sunday's showing was the sixth time he's seen the play, but it doesn't get any easier watching his life unfold on stage.

"It's not easy to watch, particularly scenes of the death of my first wife," admitted Spong, who attended the play with his wife, Christine. "I like to honor it, but I'd like not to relive it."

Nevertheless, Spong believes in spreading the "powerful" message of "Pebble."

"I'm really pleased that it's out and about," he said. "I think they've got three very talented actors and a wonderful playwright."

The Rev. Mark Beckwith, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Newark, said the story not only captures dimensions of Spong's life, but our lives as well.

"To see this window into Jack's life is really a window into our own lives," said Beckwith. "So many of us who are here today are here because of Jack Spong."

Director Colin Cox and the cast, comprised of Stephan Wolfert as Spong and Mike Peebler and Dawn Stern playing multiple roles, took questions and answers from the audience following the 3 p.m. show.

As Spong, Wolfert accomplished the demanding task of memorizing 75 pages of dialogue to portray the bishop throughout his life. But the former military man said the thought that terrified him was performing for Spong.

"I'm a combat veteran and I've never been more afraid," Wolfert said, drawing guffaws from the audience.

Cox, a British native who learned of Spong through his many best-selling books, said he was eager to tell his story through Will & Company, a non-profit he founded in Los Angeles.

"What he stands for is what our company stands for, which is diversity and acceptance," Cox said. "To me, he parallels the timeline of so much in the United States in regards to human rights."

The company hopes to bring "Pebble" to college campuses across the country to tell Spong's story of courage, said Peebler, who together with Stern, portrayed 32 characters and had 44 costume changes.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage

Do you believe in the Resurrection?

“In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife will the woman be?”Luke 20:27-38
XXIV Pentecost
November 11, 2007
The Episcopal Church of St. Paul
(the Rev’d) Elizabeth Kaeton
rector and pastor

Do you believe in the resurrection?

There is a story told about a certain bishop of England who once declared that he did not believe in the resurrection. When news of this spread to a certain seminary, the young men there were deeply troubled. The more they discussed this heresy, the more anxious they became.

Finally, a large group of them stormed the Dean’s office and implored of him, “Good sir, a bishop in the church has said he does not believe in the resurrection. Whatever will happen to the church?”

The seminary dean, a man made wise by years of careful study of the human enterprise of faith and belief, took a few puffs on his sweet-smelling pipe and said, “Not to worry, men. One day, that bishop, too, shall die.”

Do you believe in the resurrection?

This is the question behind the seemingly ridiculous question which lands offensively sexist on post modern ears.

Can you believe that religious men, men who have been given the sacred trust of the holy lives of the people of God should concern themselves with the minutia entangled in their question? Well, believe it. Religious men – and women – still do. Some are even in The Episcopal Church.

You can almost see a smile come across the lips of Jesus as he answers their question. Look, he seems to say, once you’re dead, everything is different. You don’t have to worry about whether or not people will marry once they die and are resurrected.

Well, the exact words of Jesus are: “Once your are dead, you cannot die anymore,” (Duh!), because, he says, “they are like angels and are children of God, being children of the resurrection.”

The idea of an afterlife has caught the imagination of countless generations of people. Poets and writers have written volumes about how they see life after death. Some have written with the same painstaking attention to detail as expressed in the question asked by the Sadducees.

That fascination continues today. There are lots and lots of television shows which feature people who are clairvoyant or ‘mediums’ who can communicate with the dead, and an entire section of this writing at Borders or Barnes and Nobel book stores.

As a pastor who has worked in a variety of settings, there is an amazing consistency to the questions I am asked, despite social or geographical location, race, ethnicity, or age. I have always gotten questions about what happens after we die. It makes no difference the age of the person asking the question. Grown men and women ask me the exact same question posed by a 5 year old: “Do you think there is a heaven? Is there a hell? What happens after we die?”

Do you believe in the resurrection?

Writer Robert Fulghum tells a humorous story about baptism and the afterlife in his book “What On Earth Have I Done?” A good Unitarian Universalist, he talks about both baptism and resurrection in terms of ‘metaphor.’

That’s okay. I think there’s much to be said about employing metaphor as the defense of the intellect against the depth of mystery. It’s the difference, I think, between faith and belief.

Fulghum has spent a great deal of time in Greece – in Crete, to be exact – a place he first discovered when his wife (who is a doctor) was doing a medical residency there. He has formed warm relationships with the people there, even being asked to weddings and funerals, and yes, to ooh and ah over the newest born citizens of Crete at their baptism in the Greek Orthodox church.

He writes of his observation of that very elaborate ritual: “I speak as an insider. Once upon a time, I was baptized. According to the rules of the church of my childhood. Not sprinkled like the Methodists as if you were going to be ironed. Not just dipped in an indoor pool for the sake of convenience. Baptized according to scripture – outdoors in a river, following the example of John the Baptist and Jesus.”

“My mother was a serious Southern Baptist. And her cousin from Muscle Shoals, Alabama, urged her to take no chances and do it right. The cousin, it seems, was a “Two-seed-in-the-spirit, Foot Washing, Flowing Water Baptist.” When she sang the old hymn, “Shall We Gather at the River,” it wasn’t about a picnic.”

“The summer I was twelve, dressed in white shirt and pants, I was properly baptized in the Brazos River – more formally named by the Mexicans, “Brazos de Dios” – the Arms of God. My mother was pleased. I was not."

"I was scared. My uncle Roscoe had told me to stay out of the river because there were alligators and poisonous snakes in it. But I lived. Was thereby “saved”. And was told I would therefore be going to heaven. When I tell the Greeks about my baptism, they are impressed. Like I’ve got a platinum membership card. An insurance policy that can’t be canceled.”

“I don’t’ believe one can save one’s soul. I don’t know what that means,” writes Fulghum. “I believe one can only live one’s life, saving nothing, spending it well. But it’s comforting to have my after-life contingencies covered."

"And. If it should prove to be the case that there is a heaven and I go, I imagine my mother pointing me out in the great golden hall. “Look, there’s my boy, Bobby Lee! He may have lost his mind when he grew up, but he was properly baptized and so he gets to sit very close to the front. The dippers and the sprinklers and child-washers are way back there – up in the bleachers.”

Fulghum has a belief about resurrection. And, that’s fine. What Jesus calls us to is faith in the resurrection. There’s a difference between being called into believing something particular about what we can’t know and the solace one receives from faith. Belief satisfies the mind. Faith comforts the soul. While they are distinct, I happen to believe that you don’t have to give up one in service of the other.

Ultimately, what I believe about what happens in life after death and the resurrection matters little to anyone else but me. My faith, however, matters a great deal to my soul and the souls of those whom God has given me to tend and feed. And, what I believe about the resurrection has everything to do with the faith I have about the resurrection.

Our Bread of Life Stewardship asks us to consider the question: What do you do with all that you have after you say, ‘I believe.’ Belief is what you do with your intellect. Faith is what you do with your life. We can talk about what you believe. I want to know about your faith.

I’ll let Fulghum have the last word, not because I believe what he believes, but because what he articulates about his belief is, well, universal enough to satisfy my faith. Our Eucharistic prayer reminds us that “life does not end, it changes.” Fulghum says, “The great Law of the Conservation of Matter and Energy says nothing is ever lost. Everything is saved. Everything comes and goes. It only changes form.”

Now, aren’t you glad that our Eucharistic theology can be proven by a law of science? While I believe it to be true, that fact has little or nothing to do with the faith I have in the Eucharist.

He writes: “Don’t get me wrong. Baptism is a serious spiritual ritual. No disrespect intended. As a metaphor for reawakening, it can be meaningful if it makes you think about keeping your path on this earth a righteous one. And that’s a good thing, no matter which religious club you join. There are many ways. Some wet. Some dry. Some lost. Some found. And if the Way works for you and for the common weal, then do it.”

Fulghum ends with these words: “Water is essential to life. As is earth, and energy. We exist in the flow of the mud and light. That I believe.”

Now, whether or not he wants to admit it, there is a man of faith.

Do you believe in the resurrection? Ah, but do you also have faith? Amen.

A New Bishop for the Church: An Impossible Vocation?

A new bishop was elected for The Episcopal Church today.

The Rev'd Jeffrey D. Lee, rector since 2000 of St. Thomas, Medina, Washington, was elected the bishop of Chicago on the second ballot.

He was elected on a slate which included one African American and two African males, three women, one of which was a lesbian, and two Caucasian males.

The results, reported on the Diocese of Chicago web site, is as follows:

Ballot One Results:

Clergy Laity
GOULD 36 43
JOHNSON 14 23
KOOMSON 3 9
LEE 96 146
LIND 39 31
ROSE 5 6
SABUNE 41 76
SAFFORD 9 10
Abstained 0 1

Needed for Election 129 147

Ballot Two Results: Jeffrey Lee is elected!

Clergy Laity
GOULD 22 29
JOHNSON 3 2
KOOMSON 0 0
LEE 134 203
LIND 7 9
ROSE 0 0
SABUNE 74 100
SAFFORD 1 2
Abstained 0 0

Needed for Election 129 179

I apologize for the formatting of this post. I can't seem to control it.

Some would triumph in the name of progress the diversity of the slate.

Some would rejoice in the name of diversity the ballot results.

I am delighted to be among the madding crowd that welcomes the 50 year old Bishop Lee to to the Councils of the Church - especially in these troubled times on the day when the 44 year old bishops of the Episcopal Diocese of Oregon, has resigned his post after only 4 years.

I can not - will not - hide my deep, deep despoilment at the showings of The Marginalized - people of color, women and lesbians - in this election.

Oh, yes. Gould and Lind did well.

Oh, yes. Sabune did well.

But, the bottom line is this: a straight, white man won.

A good, straight, white man, to be sure. Even now, the Progressive and Liberal Angels are rejoicing in heaven.

Even so, the women, the men of color, the lesbian, lost.

Furthermore, the women, the men of color and the lesbian lost in a progressive, liberal diocese which has a rich legacy of justice.

If women, men of color and a lesbian or gay person can't win an election to the episcopacy in the Diocese of Chicago, where can they be elected?

I'm asking the question in the time of schism in The Episcopal Church when the issue of access to the corridors of power is the defining issue as to whether or not the people of God stay in the Episcopal Church or leave for greener, more orthodox, pastures.

I'm not answering the question.

I'll leave that to the polsters and the political analysts.

I'll leave that to those who know these things far better than I.

For now, I offer prayers for our sister Tracey who would not have kept her name in were in not for her absolute conviction of vocation to the episcopate in the Diocese of Chicago.

Or Sabune, former Dean of the Cathedral in Newark who also allowed his name to go forward because he has been persuaded that he is call to the vocation of the episcopacy.

Or any of the other candidates, including the new bishop of the Diocese of Chicago.

What an awesome, humbling, impossible vocation.

Read more at

www.episcopalnews.com

www.integrityusa.com

Episcopal Life Online
November 10, 2007

Chicago elects Jeffrey D. Lee as bishop

By Mary Frances Schjonberg and Matthew Davies

[Episcopal News Service] The Rev. Jeffrey D. Lee was elected November 10 to be the 12th bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago.

Lee, 50, rector of St. Thomas Church in Medina, Washington, was elected on the second ballot out of a field of eight nominees. He received 203 votes of 345 cast in the lay order and 134 of 241 cast in the clergy order. An election on that ballot required 179 in the lay order and 129 in the clergy order.

The election was held during the diocese's 170th annual convention at the Westin Chicago North Shore Hotel and Conference Center in Wheeling, Illinois.

Lee will succeed Bishop William Persell who is retiring with his wife, Nancy, to Cleveland in December.

Lee was ordained a deacon and priest in the Diocese of Northern Indiana in 1985, after earning the Master of Divinity degree from Nashotah House the same year. He served congregations in Indiana and Wisconsin before coming to St. Thomas in 2000. Lee and his wife, Lisa, are parents to two children.

Under the canons the Episcopal Church (III.16.4 (a)), a majority of bishops exercising jurisdiction and diocesan standing committees must consent to Lee's election and ordination as bishop within 120 days of receiving the consent request.

The consecration is due to take place February 2 at the House of Hope, a 10,000 seat multi-purpose entertainment complex in Chicago that was founded by Illinois State Senator and Baptist minister James T. Meeks.

The other nominees were:

* the Rev. Jane S. Gould, 51, rector, St. Stephen's Memorial Episcopal Church, Lynn, Massachusetts;
* the Rev. Alvin C. Johnson Jr., 54, rector of St. Michael's Episcopal Church in Barrington, Illinois;
* the Rev. Canon Robert K. Koomson, 66, pastor-in-residence at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois (in the Chicago diocese) and canon of St. Cyprian's Anglican Cathedral in the Diocese of Kumasi, Ghana;
* the Very Rev. Tracey Lind, 53, dean, Trinity Cathedral, Cleveland, Ohio; * the Rev. Margaret R. Rose, 53, director of women's ministries, the Episcopal Church;
* the Very Rev. Petero Sabune, 55, chaplain at Sing Sing Correctional Facility in Ossining, New York, and associate at Trinity Episcopal Church in Ossining; and
* the Rev. Timothy B. Safford, 48, rector, Christ Church, Philadelphia.

Biographical profiles and the nominees' answers to the search committee's essay questions are posted at http://www.bishopforchicago.org.

-- The Rev. Mary Frances Schjonberg is national correspondent for the
Episcopal News Service.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 10, 2007

Integrity congratulates Jeffrey Lee on his election as the next Bishop of Chicago. "We look forward to working with Bishop-elect Lee in continuing Chicago's long history of working for the full-inclusion of the LGBT faithful in the life and witness of the diocese," said the Rev. Susan Russell, President of Integrity.

"Integrity also commends the Search Committee of the Diocese of Chicago for including the Very Rev. Lind as a candidate despite the chilling effects of Resolution B033—and Dean Lind herself for standing for election in spite of the House of Bishops' recent statement in New Orleans," continued Russell. "We may never know how significant a factor Resolution B033 was in the outcome of the Chicago election. However, we do know that Resolution B033 is noncanonical and discriminatory. Two dioceses—California and Rochester—have already passed resolutions to General Convention 2009 that will nullify B033. We strongly urge all bishops and deputies to support such resolutions and their intent to end B033's inequity when we get to General Convention 2009 in Anaheim."

PRESS CONTACTS

The Rev. Susan Russell, President
president@integrityusa.org
714-356-5718 (mobile)
626-583-2741 (office)

Mr. John Gibson, Director of Communications
jhngb@aol.com
917-518-1120 (mobile)

Really?

OREGON: Bishop tells convention of plans to leave his position
By Mary Frances Schjonberg
November 09, 2007
[Episcopal News Service]

Itty, 44, issued his call during his address that was part of the convention's Eucharist. A text of his address is not yet available on the diocese's website. The diocese's communications director and others could not be reached for comment November 9 while the convention continued meeting.

The search, nomination, election and consent process for a diocesan normally takes about two years to complete. Assuming the person elected becomes bishop coadjutor, the Episcopal Church's Constitution in Article II, Section I requires Itty to resign his position no more than 36 months after the coadjutor's ordination and consecration.

Itty is the third-youngest member of the House of Bishops. He was 40 years old when he was elected May 17, 2003 to be the ninth bishop of Oregon. He received the canonically required consent to his ordination and consecration during 74th General Convention in Minneapolis in June 2003.

Prior to his election, Itty, who was born in India, was canon residentiary of the Cathedral of the Incarnation in Garden City, New York, in the Diocese of Long Island. Previously, Itty was the social justice officer for the Episcopal Church and served as the human rights officer in the Anglican Communion Office at the United Nations.

The Diocese of Oregon consists of more than 22,000 Episcopalians in 76 churches throughout Western Oregon.

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/81803_91757_ENG_HTM.htm

The Incarnation of Grief

Today would have been my daughter's birthday.

She died on December 2, 2004.

Too soon. Too young. Her life just really beginning to come into full bloom, cut short by an early frost.

This is strange, hard, tedious work, this business of grieving. I have found, in the three years I've been doing it, that it's not the anniversary of her death that is the difficult day to get through.

It is her birthday.

Perhaps that is because I've found that it is my body that misses her most on this day.

I tried all day to keep myself busy - my mind active - so I wouldn't have time to "think" too much about her. That worked fairly well, but my body would not let me forget the significance of the day.

My body missed her in that place in every woman's body where she first knows she's pregnant. Knows before the lab test. Before the trip to the doctor. Before the phone call. The days before post modern at-home-pregnancy tests rendered all of that a quaint old fashioned ritual of the modern heralding of new life.

In the moment it happened, my mind was not engaged in any particular thought, but out of nowhere, my body remembered the sensation like an old, long-lost friend.

I felt it again as if for the first time today and I embraced it fully. My heart remembered, too, and it leapt for joy just as it did when I first knew I was pregnant with her. Knew she was to be a girl-child. Knew her to be perfect and beautiful and amazing - even before she was.

And then I remembered where I was and where she was not and a sadness washed over me even as I offered a silent prayer for the gift of her life, and the absolute, unadulterated nine months of the joy of having had her tiny form molded and shaped within me.

My body missed her in the places a woman feels the first wave of the hard work of labor begin in her body - a tight twinge in the tippidy top of my now long barren uterus, and a deep ache in the place where the deepest part of the groin meets the lowest part of the tailbone.

And then my heart twinged and ached in the same way, and a wave of a few blessed tears washed over me which helped to soften the hard lump of grief that had settled itself in the back of my throat.

My arms missed holding her. Cradling her. Cuddling her. My fingers missed tickling her toddler belly. That spot under her infant double chin.

My breasts missed feeding her, missed being filled to discomfort with that which provided her both nourishment and solace.

My ears missed the sound of her laughter. All day, I kept thinking I had heard it just round the corner. There! Is Jaime here? Where? Oh, no. Of course not. Sorry.

I'm sorry she wasn't here today to enjoy the beautiful autumn day. She loved to walk. God, I think she walked every inch of every street in Boston - but especially in the South End where she lived. She loved to walk when most other people don't.

In the rain. In the cold. After midnight.

Today would have been my daughter's birthday. So, I did what every mother does on the anniversary of her child's birth. I lit a candle and sang "Happy Birthday to you." Softly. All by myself. Just the two pups, CoCo and Lenny, listening with sweet attentiveness, the way they do when they know something Very Important is happening.

I sang it as memory. I sang it as hymn. I sang it as lullaby. I sang it as hope.

Happy birthday to you, Jaime.

I miss you.

You will always be with me until we are together again.

The Anglican Jihad: Christianity and Violence

This is a continuation of a conversation begun by those who were commenting on the post "Bullies and Thugs for Jesus."

It's about the growing awareness and concern about the increasing level of violence in the language employed by the Religious Right in the Episcopal Church and World Wide Anglican Communion.

It's about the alarming and increasingly visible involvement of women in the violent language and imagery of religious conversation.

It began, for me at least, with the observation by our Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, that the language we use in our conversations about God are framed by an understanding of our identity.

Simply stated, if we believe that we are wretched sinful creatures because of The Fall in the Garden, we are bound to have a very different conversation than if we believe that we are beloved of God because we read the Creations Story and know that God blessed everything with the words, "it is very good."

That last position does not negate that fact that there is sin in the world and that we are capable of making bad choices and wrong decisions and need to confess and repent; neither does that negate the fact that we are inherently good and beloved of God and need to celebrate God's redemption of the world through Christ Jesus, "once, and for all."

It has become very clear to me that the hour of schism has come and now is. It began with the vote in The Diocese of San Joaquin to remove from its constitution and canons language that connects it with The Episcopal Church. The Diocese of Pittsburgh did the same thing last week end. The Diocese of Ft. Worth will, no doubt, follow in a few short weeks.

Like a tennis match where there is no love, the ball will be back the court of the Diocese of San Joaquin, for the second and definitive vote to change their constitution and canons.

There is no doubt. We are on the Road to Schism. There's no turning back.

One would think that there would be great rejoicing. Celebration. Come thou long expected schism.

Instead, there is this rhetorical bravado and ecclesiastical machismo.

The word "submission" is often used by those on the Right. The Episcopal Church was asked to "submit" to requests of The Windsor Report or demands of The Primates. I experienced this as the first hint of violence.

When we did not "submit" we were considered "rebellious" and "apostate" and needed to be "disciplined." It's been a slippery slope, in my estimation, ever since.

Moderator Duncan has been preaching about 'Good Friday' and 'worthy deaths'.

A conservative priest characterized a fellow conservative bishop's response to the Presiding Bishop as having "riped" into her. This reminded me of the remark made by President George Bush, Sr.'s remark after debating Geraldine Ferraro. He said, as I recall, "I think we kicked a little ass."

A conservative blog manager couldn't resist using an image he thought (I'm quite sure I don't know how) to be Bishop Barbara Harris to blast away at the movement for peace in general and the Israeli-Palestinian war in particular, which generated more violent comments about women in general and the progressives and liberals in The Episcopal Church in particular.

Meanwhile, after said blog manager repented of his egregious sin and apologized (well, sorta kinda, violating his own rules of apology), two women sat as vigilant sentinels at the gates of the comment area of his statement of apology, giving warnings for comments they thought off topic or out of bounds with more passion than a referee at a European soccer match.

Any day now, I fully expect one of the women will treat us to another looooonnnnnnggggg passage from Lord of the Rings, and everyone will have a turn explaining why this particular primate or priest is like that particular character at that particular juncture of the story. It's just what she does. Every time.

I'm confused. I don't understand the violence in general, but I thought there would be rejoicing and celebration. Instead, it sounds to me like the beginning of an Anglican Jihad.

So, we've been having this chat about these events down at the other post below about 'Bullies and Thugs for Jesus' and, unfortunately, it began to get personal for some of the commenters. So, I've decided to start this new thread.

I want to keep this out of particular personalities, but I know that's going to be very difficult since some of our best examples are given by our. . . (What is the term they like to use? Ah, yes) . . . worthy opponents.

I'm asking these questions and soliciting your thoughts, but here's the deal: No ad hominum attacks. You may ask questions. You may post your wonderings. You may frame your comments with statements such as: "It seems to me . . ." and "I can't say for certain, but I get the impression that . . ."

But, no personal attacks. I simply won't print them.

So, here are my questions. I have lots of them, but I've limited myself to the confines of this space, and quite frankly, to those that interest me. You may have some of your own. Don't hesitate to ask.

There are five. The first two are about violence in the church in general and the last three are about women in the church in particular.

1. What is the connection (or connections) between Christianity and Violence? Is it sort of in our religious DNA, as the cartoon above hints?

2. Why now? Why are we seeing an increase in the level of violence of the language of those on the Right?

3. What is it with women - obviously intelligent, well educated women - and their participation in oppression? Why do they do it?

4. Why do you think a woman who is a priest would surrender her ordination if the more orthodox Anglican Church to which they moved did not recognize the status of her ordination?

5. Whatever would possess a woman who is a priest to surrender her ordination in deference to her husband's ordination? (Okay, so my bias is showing. This is my blog. These are my questions. Deal with it.)

You may choose to respond to one or all five. I thank you in advance for your willingness to share your thoughts and feelings here in this space.

I promise to return the respect you give these questions with an equal measure of respectful consideration - especially if I disagree with you. However, if you get ugly or violent or make a personal attack, you're outta here.

All Saints Sunday

"Do to others as you would have them do to you . . .”
Luke 6:20-31
All Saints’ Sunday
November 4, 2007
The Episcopal Church of St. Paul
(the Rev’d) Elizabeth Kaeton, rector and pastor

Today is a very emotional day for many people. It is All Saints’ Sunday – the day we remember, in the words of that great hymn, “all the saints, who from their labors rest.” For us as Episcopalians, that means not only the saints who are remembered on the calendar for their great works of mercy or courage, but also for those who have been beloved saints and blessings in our lives: grandparents, parents, spouses, children, aunts, uncles, siblings, cousins, friends.

It is a day that causes us to remember – even as we recall those we have loved who are no longer with us – our own mortality, the fragility of our mortal existence. We are here but for the passing of a couplet of seasons and then gone. We know this most acutely when we ponder the shortness of the gift of life given to those whom we have loved who now rest in Light Eternal.

So, these words of Jesus, buried as they are under the goodness of the words of his first sermon, the Beatitudes, strike me deeply today: “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” You may know this as “The Golden Rule.”

This ethic of reciprocity is not strictly a Christian thought. The Dali Lama is quoted as saying, “If you want others to be happy, practice compassion; if you want to be happy, practice compassion.” Confucius once said, “Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.” One of the tenants of Islam is: “That which you want for yourself, seek for mankind.” And, Judaism, as taught by Rabbi Hillel, holds, “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.”

Sounds simple enough, doesn’t it? And yet, the Golden Rule gets some of its polish, I think, precisely because we rub up against it so often. It’s not easy to do. Some of you know that I was away on Annual Clergy Retreat for part of this week. About one hundred and twenty clergy came away to the Pocono Mountains in PA for two days to be with our bishop and to hear his emerging vision for our diocese.

We also got to spend some time with Katherine Jefferts Schori, our Presiding Bishop. Bishop Mark had sent a copy of some of his thoughts on his vision for the diocese and asked her to respond, which she did. We’ll be talking about that emerging vision soon enough. For now, I want to concentrate on her remarks about being ‘beloved.’

Bishop Katharine made a brilliant connection with the three stories in Genesis and the baptism of Jesus. God said, "This is my beloved, with him I am well pleased," which is an echo, she reminded us, of God saying at creation, "It is very good." Further, she connected the story in The Garden with The Temptation of Jesus in the Wilderness, reminding us that Jesus was able to resist Satan because he had just been baptized and had a very clear sense of his identity and the fact that he was 'beloved' of God.

I absolutely resonated with her point that our understanding of our identity frames the way in which we view the world and the language we employ in our conversations about God and religion and the human enterprise. If we believe ourselves to be wretched and fallen human beings, that sin came into us in the Garden by the temptation of Satan in the guise of a snake, we have a very different understanding of ourselves and the world than if we believe ourselves beloved of God - sons and daughters who claim our inheritance of eternal life through Christ Jesus because we, like the rest of creation, are worthy and, indeed, "very good."

The Evangelical, more Calvinist position begins with the wretchedness of humankind, and pretty much stays there, being eternally if not daily thankful for the salvation and redemption of the human condition by the suffering (emphasis on suffering) and death of Christ Jesus. The traditional Anglican position has been to hold all three chapters of the Genesis account in tension - the fact that we are beloved of God and the fact that sin is in the world.

The idea of free will celebrates the gift of our God-given gifts of intelligence and reason, but does not negate the presence of evil in the world, nor our capacity to make wrong decisions and choices. But, neither does the capacity to make bad choices negate the inherent goodness of our humanity. The truth is that God is a mystery, and we do well to understand that the deepest spirituality is one that invites others into a deeper experience of this mystery - not the certainty of answers set in cement tablets.

Bishop Katharine then did just that and had us meditate on the image of God coming to us and saying, "YOU are my beloved, with YOU I am well pleased." After a time of silence, she invited us to share our insights. It was so much easier for many of us to concentrate on how others were beloved of God and how God might be pleased with someone else. Anyone but us.

That was such a powerful exercise I want to take risk and do the same thing in church with you this morning. Yes. Right here. Right now. Find a place of quiet and comfort. I know. These pews are not exactly the most comfortable places to sit, but this won’t take long, I promise. Take a few deep breaths. Try to let your body relax. Now, think of a place where you feel absolutely safe. It may be the room you had as a child, or a place at the ocean or in the mountains or in the forest. It may be in someone’s arms. Find that place where you feel absolutely safe. Now, close your eyes and imagine that you are there.

Now, imagine yourself surrounded by all those saints who have gone before you. People you know and love who have passed on from this life. They are perfect now – perfectly restored to health and wholeness in their body, their mind, and their spirit. It is just as has been promised. They dwell in light inaccessible and are deeply bathed in the unconditional love of God. You can just feel it surrounding them.

As they surround you, feel yourself surrounded by that same unconditional love. Now, hear the voice of God say to you, “You are my beloved. With you I am well pleased.” Hear those words as if they were meant for your ears only, because God means for you to hear them today. “You are my beloved. With you I am well pleased.” Then, when you are ready, open your eyes again and be in this church again.

What was that like for you? Let’s talk about that at coffee hour or later in the week.

I think it neigh unto impossible to follow the Golden Rule unless you begin by knowing yourself to be beloved of God. You can not know yourself beloved of God unless you know yourself to be blessed of God. Yes, that old song is true: Count your blessings, name them one by one. Jesus says, “Blessed are the poor.” Begin with gratitude for the blessing of what you don’t have. Yes, thank God for that which you need. That hunger and thirst will give you the very inspiration and ambition to succeed beyond your wildest dreams.

Jesus says, “Blessed are those who weep”. Thank God for the blessing of tears, for it is only those who have lost something precious who can weep. Imagine those who have lost no one precious to them. They are even poorer for never having had anyone in their lives valuable enough for which to weep.

Jesus says, “Blessed are those who hate you.” Thank God for those who do not like you or criticize you or even those who mean to do you harm. Yes, do not curse them but thank God for them. If you are not annoying to someone, somewhere you are not being fully human. A saint of the church, a man named Irenaeus, once said, “The glory of God is (hu)man(kind) fully alive.” The truth is this: If you are fully human, fully and truly and uniquely yourself, you are bound to annoy someone. And remember: when you are fully alive, God is well pleased.

If you think about it, the very reason you miss those who have died has a great deal to do with their full humanity. Now, you can laugh at their foibles. Now, their annoying habits or peccadilloes are the source of great stories and memories. Fear not. The same shall be done unto you when you pass from this life.

“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you’. It’s still a very golden rule. Following it may not make us saints who will be remembered on a church calendar, but not to worry. Golden or not, we are beloved of God, and with us, God is well pleased. Amen.

Bullies and Thugs for Jesus

Well, it's been quite a time of late in the Blogosphere - especially for one of the managers of my favorite ultra conservative web page (Not!).

My sisters and brothers in Christian Blog Nation have done an excellent job of reporting the story.

You can begin with Jim Naughton at Episcopal Cafe

Then, head over to Fr. Jake Stops the World and sample his fine, measured, articulate writing.

Mark Harris at Preludium, gives a fine analysis, as always.

But please do not miss Katie Sherrod over at Wilderness Garden. Her opening line just about did me in when I read it.

"Mr. Melanie" as Maddy refers to him, well . . ."apologized" in his not-so-charming, but clearly swashbuckling way.

Here's the thing I want to say: There is an alarming increase in the violence of the language coming from the Radical Right. The violence is not just the typical male Calvinist bravado, or the Christian machismo found in "Onward Christian Soldiers" or "Stand up! Stand up for Jesus!"

That's pretty amazing to me, since they - the Calvinist, Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Conservative, Orthodox, neo-Puritan uber-Christians - seem to be moving on and "doin' they thang" as the boys and girls on the streets of Newark say.

I mean, they are doing what they feel called to do - breaking away from The Episcopal Church and calling the church catholic to a reformation within The World Wide Anglican Communion.

They are doing what they are called by God to do with integrity and authenticity and singleness of purpose, right?

Even "their women" (and I use the term advisedly) have acquiesced to the violence. All afternoon long, two women - Sarah and Jackie - have sat as fierce sentinels at the gates of Mr. 'pistol-packing' Griffith's apology, monitoring the content and tone of those who choose to respond, proclaiming first and second and final warnings like goalies at a fierce European soccer match, and finally banishing to exclusion those who have "crossed the line" of their feminine, decidedly Victorian sensibilities of judgement about their brother.

It's all deeply disturbing, mostly because of the portent it holds for the days ahead.

So, why the bravado? Why the increase in the violence of their language?

I have some ideas. A few initial thoughts. Truth is, I don't know for certain, except that I know without a doubt that the Anglican Jihad has officially begun.

Okay, go ahead. Snicker. Snicker all you want.

Ah, there she goes - never at a loss for an opinion. So emotional. So raw.

"The Swan of Newark" overstating the case.

But, in the days to come, expect the violence to increase.

And, don't say I didn't tell you so.

Missa Sancta Elizabetha

Okay, I'll admit it. I'm pretty excited.

Tomorrow, All Saints' Sunday, is the debut of the Missa Sancta Elizabetha.

It is a special mass setting which was written by David Charles Walker, an Episcopal Priest and composer, two of whose hymns tunes are published in THE HYMNAL 1982.

He wrote this Rite II setting in 1982 for a small parish near San Diego - St. Elizabeth's Chula Vista. It was written with congregational ease and accessibility in mind, and the organ accompaniment adds interest to the simplicity of the voice part.

Of the six fixed parts of the Mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Benedictus and Agnus Dei), we will be singing the Kyrie and the Sanctus/Benedictus movements from this work. The choir will sing the Agnus Dei during communion.

David and I have never met in person. In the mystical sweet communion of the saints and the miracle of the Internet, we know each other only in baptism and through the correspondence we have have had mostly through this 'blog'.

He has recently revised the score and dedicated it to The Episcopal Church of St. Paul in thanksgiving for the ministry I am privileged to perform in Christ's most holy name.

I am simply awash with deep, profound gratitude and honor. And, I'll admit to some real excitement to hear it performed tomorrow, All Saints' Sunday.

David is perhaps best known for his work on poet George Herbert's beautiful piece KING OF GLORY, KING OF PEACE. The tune: General Seminary, is David's original work and its soaring, lyrical beauty remains an inspiration to all who sing it or hear it.

I have always loved having been named for St. Elizabeth of Portugal. Queen Elizabeth was named for her great aunt, Queen Elizabeth of Hungry. She was called "Isabel" - which is exactly what my grandmother insisted I be called as a young child.

Isabel was known for her many works among the poor, and for the peacemaking she made between her husband, King Deniz and her son Affonso.

One of the stories my grandmother loved to tell was the story she called "Isabel and the Miracle of Bread and Roses."

Isabel is said to have been forbidden by her unfaithful husband to give to the poor. Having hid bread to give away in her apron, she encountered King Diniz, who asked her what she was carrying.

Not wanting to let on that the contents of her apron were meant for the poor, she responded that they were roses. The bread was transformed into roses, and King Diniz, who could not understand how she could have possession of fresh roses in January, did not punish his wife.

The term "bread and roses" has many associations, particularly with the early Irish resistance, but it originated in a poem published by James Oppenheim in 1911. It is commonly associated with a textile strike by the 'Mill Girls' in Lawrence, MA during the period of January - March, 1912.

I suppose, since my grandmother, mother and aunts were all "Mill Girls" in Fall River, this term and its association with Queen Elizabeth (Isabel) had special meaning for my grandmother.

The words of that Oppenheim poem are as follows:

As we go marching, marching, in the beauty of the day,
A million darkened kitchens, a thousand mill lofts gray,
Are touched with all the radiance that a sudden sun discloses,
For the people hear us singing: Bread and Roses! Bread and Roses!

As we go marching, marching, we battle too for men,
For they are women's children, and we mother them again.
Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; give us bread, but give us roses.

As we go marching, marching, unnumbered women dead
Go crying through our singing their ancient call for bread.
Small art and love and beauty their drudging spirits knew.
Yes, it is bread we fight for, but we fight for roses too.

As we go marching, marching, we bring the greater days,
The rising of the women means the rising of the race.
No more the drudge and idler, ten that toil where one reposes,
But a sharing of life's glories: Bread and roses, bread and roses.

Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes;
Hearts starve as well as bodies; bread and roses, bread and roses.

Isabel was buried in Coimbra, the location of the University of Portugal. She was canonized in 1625 by Urban VIII, and her feast day is July 8.

I think both David and I and, perhaps even Queen Isabel and James Oppenheim themselves would be amply honored to leave you with the words of George Herbert as we prepare ourselves for worship on All Saints' Sunday.

Go fetch your Hymnals and find Hymn #382 and see if you don't agree that David Charles Walker has written a beautiful hymn to match the beauty of the words of George Herbert.

Can there be a better way than this hymn to capture the Spirit of All the Anglican Saints who have come before us and hover over us to guide us from glory into glory?

.Indeed, I think this is precisely what James Oppenheim was thinking when he wrote "Our lives shall not be sweated from birth until life closes; Hearts starve as well as bodies; bread and roses, bread and roses."

King of glory, King of peace, I will love thee;
And that love may never cease, I will move thee.
Thou hast granted my request, thou hast heard me;
thou didst note my working breast, thou hast spared me.

Wherefore with my utmost art, I will sing thee;
and the cream of all my heart, I will bring thee.
Though my sins against me cried, thou didst clear me;
and alone, when they replied, thou didst hear me.

Seven whole days, not one in sev'n, I will praise thee,
In my heart, though not in heav'n I can raise thee.
Small it is in this poor sort to enroll thee;
e'en eternity's too short to extol thee.

-George Herbert

Jesus weeps!

This is a picture of the statue that now stands where the Rectory of St. Joseph's RC Church once stood, directly across from the Oklahoma City Federal Building Bombing Memorial.

I can't think of a more powerful, more fitting image to describe the second lob of the 'heat-seeking missile' which was just launched by the Diocese of Pittsburgh at 815 Second Avenue in NYC.

If you haven't heard, Pittsburgh has become the second diocese in The Episcopal Church to remove required language stating that the diocese agrees to accede to the Episcopal Church's Constitution and Canons as the constitution requires.

As ENS reports: "If that resolution passes a second reading, presumably at the 2008 diocesan convention, it effectively would violate the requirements of the Episcopal Church's Constitution and Canons. Article V, Section 1 says that a diocese's constitution must include "an unqualified accession" to the constitution and canons of the Episcopal Church."

The ENS story is below.

There is, of course more to the story. Jeremy at "Catholic and Reformed" gives us an eye-witness account from "ground zero" at the Pittsburgh convention.

The convention actually needed to pass Resolution 1 by a 2/3 majority, not a simple majority. So, in fact, the whole process passed by only one (lay) vote!

Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh have also posted their account here.

Not exactly the "decisive win" Moderator Bob was looking for, but enough ammunition to get him into the next round of the offensive in this Anglican Jihad. It appears that they will soon be joined by the Diocese of Ft. Worth.

The Diocese of San Joaquin has already voted to remove language requiring them to accede from the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church.

They will have the opportunity to vote on that resolution a second time next fall, which would fulfill the requirement that all canonical changes must obtain the affirmative vote of two consecutive conventions before being permanently changed.

At that point, I would imagine, "the powers that be" on all sides would declare the schism "official". Okay. I've been saying since San Joaquin that the hour of schism has come and now is. Does anyone really see John-David Schofield, Bob Duncan or Jack Leo Iker turning back?

Does anyone NOT see Mark Lawrence, newly elected bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina not joining them? Or, Peter Beckwith of Springfield?

Does anyone see anyone at 815 saying, "Oops, we're sorry. We'll ask the Diocese of New Hampshire straightaway to rescind the election of Gene Robinson as their bishop? And then, we'll ask +Gene himself to 'stand down' before we ask all the consecrating bishops to rescind their sacramental act."

No, I don't think so.

Retired but still very active Bishop Walter Righter, and heretic extraordinaire, has made the difference between 'faith' and 'belief'. He writes: "Faith is a given almost from the time we are born. The faith development people have given us more than adequate information about that."

"What Duncan and others call faith," says Righter, "is really belief - the encoding of faith in such things creeds, and statements like Tertullian's "Trinity"."

That's a very helpful articulation of difference for me. I think he's absolutely right. It's the "choose ye this day," and all that other triumphalist rhetoric we've always gotten from Pittsburgh. It's about 'belief' not 'faith' - and certainly not the Faith-with-a-capitol-'F'' which was "first delivered to the Saints". That WAS faith and not 'belief'.

I suppose what is most striking for me about all of this is that it is unnecessary and, indeed, absolutely un-Anglican! That makes me both angry and sad.

The only thing that has been accomplished is that this will be dragged out for years in courts secular and ecclesiastical, running up hundreds of thousands of dollars which could be spent on mission and ministry in this church and around the Anglican Communion - especially in the Global South.

Which is why, I believe, the only accurate image for this time in our church is the one with which I began this post: Jesus weeps! And, not just only over "the sheep that elected" Duncan - but over the entire church.

Indeed, I think the very heart of God is broken whenever we break the tie that binds us to each other and God through the Body of Christ.

Pittsburgh bishop declines Presiding Bishop's offer of reconciliation
By Mary Frances Schjonberg
November 02, 2007

[Episcopal News Service] On the eve of the November 2-3 annual convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, Bishop Robert Duncan rejected Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori's request that he lead the diocese away from efforts to disaffiliate from the Episcopal Church.

The three-sentence letter, dated November 1, said in full: "Here I stand. I can do no other. I will neither compromise the Faith once delivered to the saints, nor will I abandon the sheep who elected me to protect them."

The first two sentences echo the conclusion of Martin Luther's speech to the Diet of Worms in 1521, during which Luther refused to recant the stance he took against the Roman Catholic Church. Duncan signed his letter, "Pax et bonum in Christ Jesus our Lord, +Bob Pittsburgh."

Jefferts Schori had written to Duncan on October 31 asking him "to recede from this direction and to lead your diocese on a new course that recognizes the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes."

The Presiding Bishop wrote that "it grieves me that any bishop of this Church would seek to lead any of its members out of it," reminding Duncan of her "open offer of an Episcopal Visitor if you wish to receive pastoral care from another bishop" and expressing hope of reconciliation.

The Pittsburgh convention began meeting November 2 and gave the first of two approvals needed to enact a series of constitutional amendments which would essentially eliminate all references to the diocese's connection with the Episcopal Church.

Most significantly, Resolution One -- which passed by 118 to 58 votes in the lay order, with one abstention, and 109 to 24 in the clergy order -- would remove required language stating that the diocese agrees to accede to the Episcopal Church's Constitution and Canons as the constitution requires. If that resolution passes a second reading, presumably at the 2008 diocesan convention, it effectively would violate the requirements of the Episcopal Church's Constitution and Canons. Article V, Section 1 says that a diocese's constitution must include "an unqualified accession" to the constitution and canons of the Episcopal Church.

In his address to the convention November 2, Duncan said that the first reading of a constitutional change "announces an intention without actually making a change" and changes nothing.

"Of course, in another sense, adoption signifies an intention, gives warning, opens a possibility, introduces a period of preparation for anticipated consequences," he said.

If Resolution One passes, Duncan told the convention, "our work in the year ahead would likely include determination of the Province with which the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh might re-align, development of acceptable options available to minority congregations, and negotiation, both nationally and with plaintiffs locally, about a mediated alternative to continuing or escalating litigation."

Jefferts Schori had asked Duncan in her letter to change his position and "urge your diocese at its forthcoming convention not to adopt the resolutions that you have until now supported."

Jefferts Schori told Duncan that if his course did not change, "I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church -- by actions and substantive statements, however they may be phrased -- and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action."

In June, the Executive Council, the governing body of the Episcopal Church between meetings of General Convention, warned that actions by Episcopal Church dioceses that change their constitutions in an attempt to bypass the Church's Constitution and Canons are "null and void."

Via Resolution NAC023, the Council reminded dioceses that they are required to "accede" to the Constitution and Canons, and declaring that any diocesan action that removes that accession from its constitution is "null and void." That declaration, the resolution said, means that their constitutions "shall be as they were as if such amendments had not been passed."

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_91549_ENG_HTM.htm

http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com/2007/11/diocese-of-pittsburgh-
convention.html

Letters, we get letters

For those of you who do not regularly read other sources of information on the Internet about the 'sturm und drang' of The Anglican Church in general and The Episcopal Church in particular, you may not know that our Presiding Bishop has been very busy of late.

In the past two days, she has issued two Very Important Letters (which can be found here); one to bishops who are attempting to withdraw diocese from The Episcopal Church and another directly to Bob Duncan, bishop of the Episcopal (well, until General Convention says it ain't) Diocese of Pittsburgh.

As MadPriest would say, "Good on 'er". Although, those of the conservative, evangelical, fundamentalist, orthodox, ultra Calvinist persuasion are having hissy fits (Can there be a more descriptive term? "Hisssssss!").

The name of their game is "No matter what you do, you can't win."

They ask for 'clarity'. They get it. They hiss.

Oh, well.

Here's the link two both letters, but I've included the ENS story about this below.

One thing is of absolute clarity: The Lady is NOT amused.

Good on 'er!


Presiding Bishop reaches out to bishops
attempting to withdraw dioceses
By Jan Nunley October 31, 2007

[Episcopal News Service] Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori is making public a letter of warning that is being sent to a bishop who is actively seeking to withdraw his diocese from the Episcopal Church, and has stated that letters to other bishops will follow.

"In this way the Presiding Bishop is reaching out with open arms once more to those bishops contemplating realignments for their dioceses, while also warning them of the consequences should they choose to follow through with their proposed actions," said the Rev. Dr. Charles Robertson, Canon to the Presiding Bishop.

The full text of the first of these letters, addressed to Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, is included below.

In a private session of the Executive Council, meeting in Dearborn, Michigan, October 26-28, the Presiding Bishop's Chancellor, David Booth Beers, gave an extensive review of the state of property litigation and other legal issues and related disciplinary considerations confronting the Episcopal Church and articulated the policies of Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori regarding those issues.

"This is hard. The concepts are hard," said Beers. "It is costly. And it requires a lot of pastoral care of those involved."

Beers talked about three types of situations confronting the church:

When a group of congregants decides it no longer wants to be part of the Episcopal Church but intend to retain the church building and other parish assets;

When a bishop and diocesan leadership determine to allow such a group to retain Episcopal Church property under certain circumstances;

When a bishop and other diocesan leadership decide they no longer want to be part of the Episcopal Church.

In the first group of cases, Beers said, litigation has recently been successfully concluded in the dioceses of Missouri, East Carolina, and Rochester, while other court decisions in recent years favoring the Episcopal Church have been made in Colorado, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Virginia, New York, and several other dioceses.

Favorable lower court decisions have been issued by a trial court in the Diocese of South Carolina and by an intermediate appeals court in three cases from the Diocese of Los Angeles. All of those decisions are being appealed. In Long Island, a decision is expected within a month in the case of a parish that sued the Episcopal Church and the diocese. Lawsuits are also pending in the Dioceses of Colorado, Connecticut, Northwest Texas, San Diego, and Virginia.

The Presiding Bishop has been asked to file an amicus brief in a lawsuit involving the Diocese of Colorado, where the dispute is complicated by the fact that the congregation's rector has been accused and found guilty by a diocesan court of embezzlement.

The lawsuit against a group of 11 breakaway Virginia groups is "robust" litigation, said Beers, which has raised interesting questions about the nature of the Anglican Communion itself.

Lawsuits could conceivably be forthcoming in Georgia, Nebraska, Northern California, Ohio, South Dakota, Southern Virginia and a few other dioceses, Beers said.

There have been several settlements, including one in Central New York, where the departing group promised not to invite a bishop from another Anglican jurisdiction until it had secured its own space.

Another settlement in the Diocese of Olympia is being revisited by the incoming bishop.

"What we do for the dioceses in these cases is to provide legal research and other materials such as expert statements, briefs, and advice on litigation strategy. Then we hold a conference with the bishop and other leaders of the diocese such as the chancellor and standing committee officers," said Beers. "We talk to them about what to do about the departing group, how to help those who remain with the Episcopal Church, what to do about the clergy involved, what to do if another Anglican bishop is involved, when it's best to settle, when to pursue litigation, and what works and what doesn't in litigation."

The costs are "heavy," said Beers, but national expenses generally have not exceeded those of some single dioceses in the church. By contrast, he said, it has been reported that the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) congregations in Virginia have spent at least $1 million to date on the pending litigation.

Beers predicted another year or so of lawsuits.

"The total number of parishes in active litigation is probably 20-25, at the outside," he said.

The second category of cases involves diocesan leadership negotiating with congregants who wish to leave with Episcopal Church property. Agreements have been made with congregations in Dallas, Kansas, Olympia, Quincy, Rhode Island, and Virginia.

Critical to these negotiations, in the Presiding Bishop's estimation, are the requirements that congregations not invite a primate or bishop from another province of the Anglican Communion to assume jurisdiction over the departing group and that the diocese be fairly compensated for the value of the real and personal property to be retained by the group of departing members.

And then there are the dioceses seeking to disaffiliate.

Beers stated that it is important for "the disciplinary process of the church to speak to the issues." Something like that has already been attempted with respect to Bishop John-David Schofield of San Joaquin, after a group of California bishops claimed canonical violations when the diocese voted to take the first step to change its constitution in 2006 to qualify its agreement to submit to the Episcopal Church's Constitution and Canons. Article V, Section 1, of the Constitution says that a diocese's constitution must contain an “unqualified accession" to the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.

If approved at its second reading slated for the upcoming December 7-8 convention, the diocesan constitution would delete all references to The Episcopal Church and state that the diocese is "a constituent member of the Anglican Communion and in full communion with the See of Canterbury."

If the Title IV Review Committee, which serves as a kind of "grand jury" in such cases, had determined that Schofield had abandoned the Communion of the Church under the terms of Canon IV.9, its decision would have begun a process that could have resulted in Schofield being liable to deposition and removal from office. But the committee agreed that the actions of the bishop at that time "did not constitute abandonment of the communion, as it is defined in the canon."

Appointed to the 2007-2009 Title IV Review Committee are Bishop Dorsey Henderson of Upper South Carolina (president), Bishop Suffragan Bavi E. Rivera of Olympia, Bishop Suffragan David C. Jones of Virginia, Bishop C. Wallis Ohl Jr. of Northwest Texas, the Rev. Carolyn Kuhr of Montana, the Very Rev. Scott Kirby of Eau Claire, J.P. Causey Jr. of Virginia and Deborah J. Stokes of Southern Ohio. Causey, Henderson, Kirby, Kuhr and Stokes served on the 2003-2006 Review Committee.

A charge of abandonment of the communion of the Episcopal Church is determined by vote in the House of Bishops. There is no appeal and no right of formal trial outside of a hearing before the House of Bishops. A proposed revision of Title IV would have changed that, but those provisions were not passed by General Convention 2006.

Of those dioceses considering "realignment," Springfield appears not to have yet acted, and Quincy declined in its recent diocesan convention to pass a proposed canonical revision.

Fort Worth's convention, meeting November 14-15,is set to consider the first reading of a constitutional amendment that would remove accession to the Constitution and Canons of the church, as well several canonical amendments that eliminate mention of the name of the Episcopal Church. Jefferts Schori intends to send a letter to Bishop Jack Iker, who advocates these changes, before the convention notifying him that such a step would force her to take action to bring the diocese and its leadership into line with the mandates of the national Church.

A similar canonical change is set to come before the Diocese of Pittsburgh's convention November 2-3, and Jefferts Schori has written to Pittsburgh's bishop in this regard (see link to letter cited above).

In December the Diocese of San Joaquin is scheduled to hear the second and final reading of its constitutional accession amendment, a proposed act that may prompt "more dramatic action" beforehand.

At some point, assuming that all these and other constitutional changes go forward, the Presiding Bishop could ask the Title IV Review Committee to consider whether the three diocesan bishops who have proposed and supported these changes have abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church.

Presentment charges were filed in 2005 against Connecticut Bishop Drew Smith, because he deposed a priest on the ground that he had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church in rejecting the bishop's authority. The Title IV Review Committee upheld Smith's action, and Beers said the decision is "an important road map to where we are going."

If the Presiding Bishop were to present materials to the Review Committee regarding potential abandonment by the bishops in question, and if the Committee were to agree that abandonment had taken place, the bishops would have two months to recant their positions. If they failed to do so, the matter would go to the full House of Bishops.

If the House concurred, the Presiding Bishop would depose the bishops and declare the episcopates of those dioceses vacant. Those remaining in the Episcopal Church would be gathered to organize a new diocesan convention and elect a replacement Standing Committee, if necessary.

An assisting bishop would be appointed to provide episcopal ministry until a new diocesan bishop search process could be initiated and a new bishop elected and consecrated.

A lawsuit would be filed against the departed leadership and a representative sample of departing congregations if they attempted to retain Episcopal Church property.

"These are consequences, not punishments," Robertson said, "consequences that have long been clear, and are now being reiterated by the Presiding Bishop in the letters of warning. The goal is reconciliation, but also accountability."

Beers added, "The consequences can easily be avoided. But the Episcopal Church has the obligation to discipline its leaders under circumstances like this."