First Communion

I wish you could have seen his face. He was positively glowing. The way, I suspect, we all did. Once. The first time someone at the altar stood before us and offered “the Body of Christ, the Bread of Heaven.”

Adam has allergies. Terrible allergies. Life-threatening allergies to wheat and soy and dairy. So does Christian – to wheat. It was Christian’s mom who first brought the “problem” of communion bread or wafers to my attention. Christian was feeling rather badly that he was not able to take communion at the rail with his sister and the rest of his family. The time at the communion rail began to feel not only like an exercise in futility, but a sort of a cruel hoax.

Oh, he didn’t say that, but I saw it in his eyes every time he came to the communion rail. Why would anyone who talked about the abundant, all-inclusive love of God from the pulpit one minute then offer “the Bread of Heaven” at the Lord’s Table to everyone but him? If this really were “the Body of Christ” how could it possibly make him ill?

He was terribly confused and hurt, and it pained me to see it on his face every Sunday. “Don’t they make allergy-free communion wafers?” his mom asked one Sunday. I mean, we offer wheat-free and peanut-free snacks at Coffee Hour. We’ve even started to serve decent coffee. But, we can’t find something we can serve at the communion rail?” I promised to check.

The next Monday, Randy, our intrepid Parish Administrator, and I had a conversation. As we spoke, he revealed that his brother had terrible allergies – not only to wheat but also to all grains as well as soy and all dairy products. He hadn’t taken communion in years, he said. We agreed that someone must be doing something about this and Randy agreed to research it for me.

Within days, Randy appeared triumphant at my office door. “Guess what?’ he asked in quiet excitement, which is his way. “I found it! I found communion wafers that are wheat, all grain, all soy and all dairy-free! This is something even my brother can have!”

Excitedly, we looked at the information on the web site, which included the fact that the wafers must be stored separately from the other communion wafers and/or bread. Indeed, the website advised that hands which touched one ought not touch the other, as even that could set off a terrible allergic reaction in some people. In fact, a kiss on the cheek from someone who has just consumed the offending allergen will sometimes leave a welt on the person who is allergic.

We checked with our Parish Nurse and then ordered a box of the allergy-free wafers and excitedly awaited their arrival, which came before the week’s end. I found a small, plain wooden jewelry box with a cover which we labeled, “Consecrated Allergy-free Communion Wafers.” We notified all Eucharistic Ministers of the new procedure, carefully instructing them to allow the person or child to take their own wafer from the small wooden box.

We also called Christian’s mom and let her know that he could come to the communion rail and be fully included. She was thrilled. That Sunday, Christian was probably more curious than excited, but the look on his face told me that the wafer (which looks more like a small, round cracker or chip), didn’t taste half-bad.

I suspect, being all-boy, he still doesn’t like being “special and different” but he seems pleased not to be excluded. Not to mention the fact that his sister would love very much to be “special and different,” which makes communion for Christian sweeter somehow in the tension that will exist forever, no doubt, between siblings.

Adam is a bit different. The changes in his dietary regime have made a miraculous change in this young boy’s life. I have personally witnessed those changes over the past five and a half years. His allergies were affecting his ability to hear and focus and concentrate – very important components of speech, socialization and learning.

He now looks in my eyes and shakes my hand in the reception line, even allowing me an occasional (if not begrudging) hug. That would never have been even imaginable five years ago. He speaks in full, coherent sentences, is doing quite well in school, and has become quite the social butterfly.

Still, there was something missing. Things might have been well during the week, but on Sunday, when he came to the communion rail, his mom would pop a chip or a cracker in his mouth while the rest of the family took the bread and the wine. Adam would slink down below the altar rail, crouch down on the kneeler and munch on his chip, looking up at me between the upright bodies of his sister and parents, as if somehow he was doing something perhaps not wrong but not quite right.

You can imagine that, after all of this hard work, his mom was a little reluctant to introduce anything to his diet that might have even the potential for problems. So it was with the kind of skepticism that raised her eyebrow as she listened to me speak of the communion wafers. A few Sundays ago, she agreed to give it a try.

I wish you could have seen his face. I brought over the small, plain wooden box which contain the consecrated allergy-free wafers and invited him to take one. He looked up at his mom who smiled and nodded her consent. His eyes got very, very wide with excitement as he reverently took one in a delicate pinch of his fingers.

He examined the wafer briefly and, as he put it into his mouth, I said, “Adam, this is the Body of Christ, the Bread of Heaven.” And, Adam looked at me and gave me the brightest smile I have ever seen and said, softly, sweetly, with an unmistakable mixture of gratitude and satisfaction, “Amen.” I tell you, he positively glowed!

And, he didn't crouch down. He knelt upright at the altar. Confident and yet reverent. His "body language" told me he knew that his was right and good.

You won’t be surprised to learn that it brought tears to my eyes. This, THIS, I thought, is what Eucharist is all about. This is what it ought to be every time, for each and every one of us.

Perhaps, now hearing of these stories, it will be. Perhaps “a little child shall lead” you deeper into the sweet mystery of Holy Communion, where we are promised forgiveness and wholeness which places us on the path to salvation and holiness of life.

I know this will not convince our Roman or Anglo-Catholic sisters and brothers of the sacramental efficacy or appropriateness of anything but "real bread" at Communion.

I just wish you could have seen his face.

Mascara alert! A Star is Born!

Well, the grand debut has come and gone and I didn't even feel the earth move under my feet. Neither did the sky (nor the Anglican Communion) come tumbling down.

NOT THAT KIND OF CHRISTIAN made its world debut at 3 PM today at the Breckenridge Film Festival at the Speakeasy Theater in Colorado.

To quote from the website:


"This documentary explores queer Christians struggle for acceptance in the Episcopal Church, the schism their activism threatens to bring to worldwide Anglicanism, and the ways in which activists such as these shape our personal liberties at the highest institutional levels."

"While the film celebrates the achievements made by queer Anglicans as they transform an oppressive Christian tradition into a modern force of liberation, it doesn't excuse the prejudices and abuses of organized religion."

"On the contrary, the film's atheist director offers a skeptical critique of religion, particularly in an era when the word faith is often code for nationalism, homophobia, and sundry other forms of oppression."

"The film's crisscrossing interviews bring together major players in the Anglican sexuality debate, each representing a different place on the spectrum of sexuality, religion, and politics: Louie Crew, the creator of Integrity, the first Anglican LGBT rights organization, founded in 1974; Gene Robinson,the world's first openly gay bishop; John S. Spong, apro-gay bishop with agnostic, heretical views; and David Virtue, Anglicanism's most influential antigay spokesperson."

"Interspersed throughout the film are the diverse voices of Episcopalians across America whom Louie Crew has anonymously telephoned, giving us a spontaneous picture of how average parishioners perceive the film's issues of sexual inclusivity."

"Featuring comments from Ernest Clay, Crew's African-American husband of thirty-two years, and analysis of how this debate effects gay Anglicans in Africa, the film offers a far-reaching critique of how homophobia continues to operate in multiple cultural contexts."


Producer: Andrew Grossman

Director: Andrew Grossman

Cast: Louie Crew, V. Gene Robinson, John S. Spong

Running time: 80 minutes

Read a review of the film here.

"I love Paris every moment . . .every moment of the year."

Well, I don't know about where you live, but it's been "all Paris all the time" - on the television, on the radio, in the newspapers.

Everyone is asking, "Will she be returned to jail?"

The answer, apparently, is yes. She has been sent to the medical ward of the jail facility known as "Twin Towers" where she will spend the weekend while her lawyers file appeals.

My question is: "Why was she let out in the first place?"

No, actually, my question is: "Why is this news?"

Sam: 'Lest We Forget

Today is the first anniversary of the death of Sam, the world's ugliest dog.

His successor will be chosen on June 11th during the World's Ugliest Dog Competition in Petaluma California.

You can read more about the competition here.

There's also a wonderful story about Jake, in the competition for the title here.

Jake is a 14 year-old Chihuahua who is making his way to the World's Ugliest Dog Contest -- or at least trying! Adopted by JJ about four years ago, Jake survived many struggles, including a nine year stint as a stud dog at a puppy mill.

The top photo is of Jake in the arms of his human, J.J. - still looking like the fine older "stud" he is. Perhaps there is a "geriatric" division in the competition. Certainly, Jake deserves a win.

Black Gay Pride: June 11th, 9 AM, Newark City Hall

News from Laquetta C.Nelson, MSW, founder and former director, NEWARK PRIDE

May 11, 2003, Sakia Gunn (15 years old) was murdered on the streets of Newark because she identified herself as being a lesbian when she and some of her friends were waiting at a bus stop, trying to get home after a night out in NYC. Many lesbians, young and old, in Newark and around the country were deeply hurt by what happened to Sakia. As a matter of fact, the whole community grieved and mourned with her family and friends at their loss.

Sakia was young, Black, female, lesbian, and came from a working class family. All of the civil rights organizations and the majority of the Black Churches were silent. She was mentioned a few times in a few news articles - nowhere near as much press coverage as Matthew Shepard. She was not important enough for them. But she was very important to those of us in the lgbt community in Newark.

To address the concerns and needs of this community the Newark Pride Alliance (NPA) was created by some very courageous and compassionate lgbt community leaders. The mission, in short, was to organize this at risk community and to provide leadership that was visible, vocal, out, and unafraid to speak truth to power regarding equality and justice for this community. Please keep in mind that a young life was taken that brought all of this about.

One of the many things that were done on behalf of this community, a year after Sakia's murder(May, 2004), was that the lgbt flag was raised, along with the African American and the American Flags and carried down the middle of Broad Street in Newark, NJ for the very first time ever in the African American Heritage Day Parade.

Many had asked the organizers why they did not have their own parade and they answered, "We are not separate from the African American community. We are a part of it and we deserve, just as much as anyone else, to march in this parade. With all of the suffering that our community is enduring they need this more than you will ever know."

So, this small but brave group of lesbians, gays, and transgender folks walked proudly behind the Newark Pride Alliance banner carrying those flags. The marchers were afraid, not knowing how the people would respond to them. But they understood the importance and significance of what they were doing, so they marched on. To their surprise, they were well received by the onlookers at the parade (their fellow citizens).

Some of them even clapped and cheered for the marchers with the rainbow colored flag. People came to them and thanked them for the pride that was instilled in everyone who witnessed this historic event. Attempts were made to get the rainbow flag raised at Newark City Hall. But the organizers were given all sorts of reasons why it could not happen. The organizers kept moving forward with hopes that one day the rainbow flag would be raised at Newark City Hall.

This is the good news! THE RAINBOW FLAG WILL BE RAISED AT NEWARK CITY HALL on Monday (6/11/07) morning, following a press conference at 9 AM and will remain there for the entire Pride Week celebrations!

If you can, please come and witness this historical event. Encourage others to come. We are all in this together.

Ta Da!

I am pleased to report that the Power Point presentation I prepared for the
Standing Committee of the Diocese of Newark is now available in PDF format here on
the Web Page of The Episcopal Church of St. Paul, Chatham, NJ.

Click on "Communications" and scroll to the bottom of the page to "Duties and
Responsibilities of The Standing Committee."

This link should take you directly there.

Please note: This is not a complete, much less exhaustive presentation of the Canons. Rather, it is my sense of them, the way I have come to think about them, the way I presented examples of them as an orientation to members of the Standing Committee.

I take full responsibility for the content of the presentation, even as I am deeply grateful for the sharp editorial eye of our chancellor, Diane Sammons, Esq., as well as the assistance of Cheryl Brocking, Secretary of Standing Committee.

The presentation is arranged in four categories or organizing principles:

Organic Interdependence
Organizational Structure
Council of Advice
Realm of Authority: in conjunction with and in the absence of the bishop

Another important component to note is that all "local" or "diocesan" canons refer, of course, to those in the Diocese of Newark. You will need to check with your own diocesan canons to see how they have modified or adapted national canons to your local situation.

Finally - These are just the application of the canons in terms of the Standing Committee. There's much, much, much more to the canons than this presentation and in this one aspect of our corporate life.

Please don't hesitate to give me feedback - positive or negative. This is my first attempt at anything like this, and when I tried to put something together as an orientation, I came up empty handed. I hope this proves to be helpful - or at least a springboard for future, even more helpful tools of understanding.

The IRD on Same Sex Marriage

The IRD or Institute for Religion and Democracy is an extreme right-wing organization with deep ties to radical Right segment of the The Episcopal Church. The Rev. Dr. Ephraim Radner serves on their Board of Directors, the Rev'd Dr.Philip Turner is on the Board of Advisers.

Their latest press release is their most desperate attempt to discredit The Episcopal Church. You can find the entire article here.

It begins like this:

Washington, DC—New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signed a law on May 31 that makes civil unions for homosexual couples legal; it will take effect in January 2008. The governor stated his belief that the civil unions will not “threaten” marriage. The Episcopal Church’s bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire, the Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson, told the press that Episcopal priests in the diocese can bless civil unions: “Just like in marriages, every priest will have the option to bless or not to bless."

IRD Director of Anglican Action Ralph Webb commented,

Bishop Robinson’s allowance of blessing civil unions as a local option—even though such blessings are not required of priests—provides yet another illustration of how the Episcopal Church opposes the traditional definition of marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman.

Okay, so the gloves are off.

It's not enough that, to advance civil rights for LGBT people but so as not to scare the conservative horses, local governments like New Hampshire, Vermont, and New Jersey have engaged in an odious form of segregation, akin to the so-called "separate but equal" water fountains, schools and the back of public buses of another civil rights struggle.

The reasoning goes something like this: "Hey, we know some LGBT people. Heck, some of them are our best friends! One is even my doctor - and a damn fine one she is. Saved my father's life when he had a stroke last year.

Let's give them all the "local" rights of marriage, but let's just not call it "marriage." Oh, it won't fly in Alabama, but what self-respecting LGBT person is going to move to the Deep South anyway? Heh, heh, hey. We'll 'take care' of our own. Let others fend for themselves. That's the American way."

Don't get me wrong. I am grateful for civil unions. It's a good first step. But, a civil union is a civil union. It's not marriage. You would think that would make the folks on the Right happy.

So, why has the IRD got itself all in a lather about this?

Because they won't stop until LGBT people have no rights in the government and no rites in the church.

Perhaps someone ought to go over to D.C. and tell them that one of the founding principles of this country's government is a little thing we like to call, "separation of church and state."

On second thought, never mind.

Someone ought to go over there and tell them about what Jesus meant when he said, "A new commandment I give you; that you love one another as I love you."

Oh, and what you hear coming from the D.C. offices of the IRD is the distinctive sound of the desparate grasping at straws.

Good night, Ian and Jim

The newspaper headline in the carefully folded NY Times jumped out at me from where it had been placed on my desk for me by my former Senior Warden: "Rev. John Macquarrie, 87, Scottish Theologian, Dies".

I still can't get my head wrapped around it. John (or "Ian" as his family and friends called him) Macquarrie was one of those larger-than-life people you simply expect will live forever. Of course, you know he won't, but the double shock comes at his death and the reporting of his age.

It seems that he slipped gently into that good night, as soft as his Scottish burr.

The obituary in the Times reports that "One of his goals was to develop an accessible theology relevant to a world that after the Holocaust and World War II seemed to doubt divine guidance. . . . He went on to write evenhanded surveys of modern theology, address practical concerns like prayer, find similarities among great Eastern and Western thinkers and detail his own beliefs in his masterpiece, PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY (1966)."

That last book was the first I read of Macquarrie's work. It was given to me by John Beaven, then dean of the Cathedral of St. Luke in Portland, ME, the congregation that supported me for ordination. "Here," said Dean Beaven, "you'll need to have some of this under your belt before you go to seminary."

It still sits on my shelf, its pages yellow and dogeared from continual use all these years.

As the Episcopal Church also grieves the untimely death of Jim Kelsey, bishop of Northern Michigan, who died Sunday afternoon in an automobile crash on his way home from a parochial visitation, I am strangely comforted by the image of the good bishop and the brilliant theologian, having a chat together, and perhaps a wee bit of a laugh, with the Holy Trinity and the heavenly hosts of angels and archangels.

Good night, sweet princes of the church. We are less for your passing, but greater for the gifts you left behind.

May their souls and all the souls of the faithfully departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

Rhetorical Flamboyance

Well, the summer's fun has just begun at HOB/D. That's the listserv known as "House of Bishops/Deputies" sometimes also known as "Days of our Anglican Lives."

I can't imagine what it will be like as we get closer to the September 30th deadline imposed by the Primates when they met in Tanzania.

I got fed up with a posting about the seemingly phenomenal statistics of church growth in Nigeria from the peripatetic Kendall Harmon, Canon Theologian for the Diocese of South Carolina, and, as such, the leading voice for the Right side of the church and undisputed "Spin Master" for the conservative, neo-Puritan 'fungelicals' in The Episcopal Church.

I decided to take him on and challenge those numbers.

Well, it wasn't long before one of the boys from Dallas got all up in arms, calling my post "unhelpful" and an example of "rhetorical flamboyance" and, stepping up to his own style, added that, as far as he was concerned, it was part of the reason people just don't like to post any more on HOB/D.

Therein followed the usual onslaught of hand wringing - including those who protested that they didn't post because most often, others had posted their thoughts exactly and anything else would have been redundant.

Kendall picked up on this - taking special umbrage to the term I applied to him: "Spin Master," complaining that that "it is not only rhetorical flamboyance, it is unnecessary and communicates a lack of respect."

Well, that's all this uppity woman needed to respond:

Kendall,

Hang on a minute! Who is communicating lack of respect to whom?

First of all: We on the Left have our own “King and Queen of the Sound bite” – a coveted title which too many of us are too verbose to claim (mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima nisson stanza).

You, sir, ARE the hands-down, undisputed “Spin Master” for the voices on the Right. No question. And, no disrespect intended. Indeed, that title is well deserved and given with a modicum of begrudging admiration.

What is it you all call it over at Stand Firm? Oh, yes, “worthy opponent.”

When I was a young adult Roman Catholic, we had a term for the theological methodology of the priests and nuns who taught us. We called it, “truth by blatant assertion.”

Apparently, that methodology is not unknown to Protestant Evangelicals. The more modern description of your theological methodology is “spin mastering.” It’s truth by blatant assertion in the age of cyberspace, where the name of the game is getting your stuff out first on the information superhighway in order to “frame the issue.”

Neither term is disrespectful. Rather, both carry the sense with which I often sit and scratch my head in amazement (if not with said ‘begrudging admiration’) as I watch the effectiveness of both of these methodologies in the church catholic.

In the short term, at least, it sure beats the heck out of the slow, steady pace of liberation theology, relying as it does on the time consuming and sometimes tedious practice of the inclusion of personal witness and the process of praxis.

Indeed, I'm thinking that both terms are part of the task of classic theological methods – to claim a truth about an aspect of God and present that (spin it) in such a way as to make people believe it is true. You are “Canon Theologian” of your diocese, are you not? As such, you are a Spin Master of Theology where you rather blatantly assert “the truth.”

To your credit, you have been very, very effective at spin-mastering, Kendall. You have invented the polemic terms, “reasserter" and "reappraiser” as opposed to the more nuanced if not more cumbersome terms of “liberal, progressive, conservative and orthodox,” and applied them so consistently and well that, despite protests from folk like me who find these terms odious, they continue to be applied.

I have found comfort in standing in solidarity with Jesus who was, near as I can tell, both a reasserter and a reappraiser.

You have also gotten folk to talk about “the four instruments of unity” as if it had ever been thus in the Anglican Communion.

It has not.

You also framed the argument for General Convention 2006. “Clarity and Honesty!” were the words hot on everyone’s breath on the right side of the aisle. Actually, these words became a battle cry because the only clarity and honesty you saw were contained in the language of the Windsor Report, which, along with the Primates’ Statement from Tanzania have practically been elevated to the same authoritative status as Holy Scripture.

As the reaction from the Right to the March Statement from the House of Bishops indicates, statements are only deemed to have both clarity and honesty when they say what you want them to say.

Here’s my second point: Truth be told, Kendall, you must take some responsibility for inspiring some of the "rhetorical flamboyance" on this listserv. With rare exception, your posts are predominantly other people's articles. Indeed, you are famous (infamous?) on this list for signing off: "posted but not written by . . . ." - as if that absolves you of any responsibility for hurtful statements, inflammatory remarks or inaccurate reporting.

It doesn't.

Most of the articles you post are, in your words, "unnecessary and communicate a lack of respect." They consistently caricature and misrepresent LGBT people, liberals and progressives in particular and The Episcopal Church in general. Then, when someone like me takes issue with what you have posted, you either point us to another article or complain that you are the one being caricatured, misrepresented, maligned and disrespected.

You can't have it both ways, Kendall. You can't try to paint The Episcopal Church in a state of decline and ruin by comparing our statistics with someone else’s statistical spin about the ‘numbers’ in the Anglican Churches in Nigeria, and then, when someone pushes back and challenges those figures, complain that you are not being respected for being called on ‘spinning’.

You can't stoke the fire in the kitchen and then complain that it’s too hot to stay in there. A brilliant young upstart Rabbi once said something about “reaping what you sow.”

You know what? Forget "rhetorical flamboyance"! I've begun referring to this time in our church as "The Decade of Disrespect." In the last ten years or so, the "flaming rhetoric" coming out of the Religious Right in The Episcopal Church has been like listening to the voices of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell (of not-so blessed memory)!

Want proof? Just listen to Moderator Bob Duncan of the Anglican Network and erstwhile Bishop of Pittsburgh talk about my faith as being "inauthentic" because the Bible I read is a "counterfeit" (read: not his or your) version.

Gone, it seems, is the Anglican capacity for gracious accommodation and tolerance. I went to seminary with Anglo-Catholic men who really didn't like the “modern notion” of the ordination of women, but tolerated us because they saw this “innovation” as inevitable in the church – as long as they didn't have to have ordained women in the churches where they did their ministry.

The opposite of that seemed to work well from my side, too.

We respected and tolerated and accommodated for each other’s difference. That seems impossible now. I deeply lament that, even as I trust that it will change eventually.

Eventually, others will grow as weary as I am about this conversation. Eventually, more and more people will catch on to the rhetorical gamesmanship. Eventually, more and more people will say, “Hang on a minute. Who is communicating lack of respect to whom, here?”

And, Kendall, I don't think we'll have to wait for the Parousia for that to happen. Indeed, I think that’s one of the loud and clear messages of many of the silences on this listserv. Many people just sit back and watch the show – a sort of ecclesiastical voyeurism.

Or, they go over to Blogs like yours to catch the second act.

If the Decade of Disrespect can't be changed, well, might as well sit back and enjoy the show. It’s like ‘reality television’ for the church. It’s all the rage, I hear. Vulgar, in my estimation, but highly popular.

One last question: Isn't it interesting that when a man writes well, he has a ‘flair’ or has ‘a way with words,’ but when a woman does the same thing, she is engaging in ‘flamboyant rhetoric’?

No wait! Here’s the last, last question: How is it that in the year of our Lord 2007 some of you boys on the Right think that what you say and do is not absolutely transparent?

Didn't Jesus say, "Woe to you! for you are like graves which are not seen, and men walk over them without knowing it?" (Lk. 11:44)

Jesus did caution his disciples, “Nothing is covered up that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known.” (Lk 12:3)

I think those are great flamboyant rhetorical statements that are well worth a serious listen.

An Inefficient Trinity

Trinity Sunday, June 3, 2007
The Episcopal Church of St. Paul
Chatham NJ
Melissa Brandes

Efficiency. Our society no doubt values efficiency. How can we get the most done in the least amount of time? How can we use ever moment of the day to be productive? We run errands—we tell the children to “hurry up”—our minds race—we eat “fast food” or other food products strangely processed and packaged to be eaten in the car or on the train—we are bombarded with advertisements for products that “deliver results in just days!”.

The pressure is great to complete tasks in the fastest way possible and to shove non-essential work to the bottom of the To-Do list. And if we fail to do these things, we are labeled as “lazy” and “unreliable.” Faster is better. More is better.

And, of course, in moderation, efficiency is a good thing. Being able to finish tasks in a timely fashion is a skill. But I wonder if we don’t often go a little overboard. At some point, faster is too fast, and more is too much. But that line is hard to see, especially when so much is asked of us.

Lately, I’ve been questioning all this well-intentioned productivity and pondering the value of inefficiency. I began to do this when my dear friend Jon asked me if I’d like to sit on the porch with him.

And I couldn’t do it.

He poured me a glass of tea and we sat on the porch. And that was about all we did. There was a comment here or there, but mostly there was a lot of silence. We were just sitting on the porch.

Soon, I couldn’t stand it. My mind was racing. I had things to do! To simply let myself sit was downright irresponsible. Guilt began to creep in. I was wasting time. I wasn’t accomplishing anything. All of this time was going by and I had not produced a single thing.

After a few moments (precious wasted moments) I gulped my tea and abandoned Jon on the porch. I’m sure I did something useful with my time—I just can’t remember what.

Well, Jon didn’t give up on me. He invited me to sit on the porch again. I protested a bit, but filled my glass with tea and followed him out of the house.

As we chatted, I began to realize that Jon knew some things the rest of us in the house did not. He knew our neighbor, Ms. Percy and he knew how much Ms. Percy loves the bamboo that grows between our houses. He knew that sparrows had built a nest on top of one of the porch columns and that the babies had just hatched. And, he waved to everyone who passed by. Some waved back, some said “Hello,” some crossed to the other side of the street.

I know that if any of them had stopped, Jon would have filled a glass of tea for them too and engaged them in conversation. But this only happens on rare occasions.

My guess is that the minds of those walking by are as full as mine. Full of things to do and things to worry about—full of guilt and perhaps wondering if taking a walk is wasting time. Many seem in quite a hurry to get to wherever they are going. Certainly there is no time to stop and talk to the strange man waving at them from the porch.

But, where are we going in such a hurry? And why is it that we value getting there over meeting a neighbor?

What struck me about the gospel passage this week—and indeed about the Trinity it describes—is the tremendous inefficiency. Presumably, the God who said, “Let there be light” and there was light could say, “Let there be light again. Let the truth be known” and God’s truth would be known.

But that is not the way it is described to us. Instead, it’s something more like this: God creates the world and sends the Son to teach and redeem and the Son does his part but then has to return to the Father. But the Son will send from the Father the Advocate—the Spirit of Truth—who will continue to teach and reveal the truth of the Son and the Father by declaring to the world what is the Son’s which is also the Father’s.

There had to be an easier way.

And, if there weren’t enough parties involved already, Jesus adds to the group by saying to the disciples a few verses before the passage today, “You also are to testify because you have been with me from the beginning.” If God had acted efficiently, all of this redeeming work would be done already.

But what is God doing instead?

I think God is sitting on the porch trying to meet the neighbors. God is inviting more and more of us to join in the redeeming work—and God’s example to us is an inefficient Trinity in which it is more important to involve all of the parts than it is to get the job done in a timely fashion. Everyone is invited. Everyone is important. Even if that means it takes longer.

All of this reminds me of the words of a very wise woman named Betsy. Betsy is 19 years old and I used to help take care of her when she and her sister were younger. I saw her not too long ago and tried to jump back into my old role of caretaker. But it was soon clear that this time, Betsy was going to take care of me.

We talked for a long time about life and the struggles we had both been through. Then she said, “I think what really matters in life is being part of a community that you love, that also loves you back.”

And Betsy knows. There have been times in her life when she has not had such a community—so when she finds one, she knows just how valuable it is. Betsy understands the importance of relationship and community. She know that the work of nurturing relationships and building community is vital.

I remembered Betsy’s words this week—I just couldn’t manage to live them. It was a very busy week. There was work to be done here at St. Paul’s, extra hours at my job at Drew, a favor for a friend (that only took 8 hours), out of town guests, a sermon to write, and…well, indulging in some Memorial Day fun.

I ended up feeling stressed and anxious. I was not truly present with anyone or in any of my work this week, because my mind was always thinking about all that was left to do. When a friend came home from a long trip, I couldn’t get myself to stop long enough to greet him. And when another friend told me that her grandmother had just died after a long and painful stay in the hospital, I had to run.

I did get a lot of work done—all the while stressed that I hadn’t gotten more done. And in the end, I was standing there all alone with my accomplishments. I had crossed to the other side of the street, put my head down, and hurried past. I failed to notice all the people waving at me. Relationships that are important to me were not nurtured, but neglected and devalued. I considered time spent with my friends—time loving my neighbor—to be wasted time. I got a lot done, but when I finally looked up, I had no one to share it with.

I not only neglected my friends, but myself as well. The things I would normally do to keep myself healthy and to relieve stress were put on the back burner. In all of my juggling of tasks, I didn’t ask anyone for help—help my friend would have gladly given. I failed to love my neighbors, I failed to love myself, and I failed to love my work. Work that I do genuinely love was done with anxiety instead of joy. Everything was just one more thing to check off on the To-Do list.

It’s not likely that I’m going to stop having busy weeks—and that’s not the point. The problem was my attitude—my posture—toward the world. My anxiety overwhelmed the things that I value. I sacrificed the things that I love. God does not do this.

We are each created uniquely and differently with our own gifts, skills, and talents. Just as the persons of the Trinity are different and yet part of the same whole—we are different and part of a whole community. Whoever we are, and whatever we have to offer is of importance to the community, but none of us will offer exactly the same thing.

Nurturing this diverse unity in all that we do is of primary importance. Finding ways to get our work done that cultivate love for one another, instead of neglecting relationships is essential. “[T]he purpose of living,” writes theologian and author Jay McDaniel, “is not to be hurried and frantic. It is to be fully present to where we are in ways that are wise, compassionate, and free” (Living From the Center, 12).

This is not the efficient or easy way to do things. It is messy, and sometimes painful. It can be frustrating and slow. But, if God was efficient? If God put his head down and plowed through the work of redeeming the world and revealing the truth and was done with it? I wonder… would anyone even notice?


Amen.

"Happy Birthday, Dr. Strangelove . . ." (or, How I stopped worring and learned to love The Blog)

I just realized that an important milestone has passed unnoticed.

Well, it's important to me, anyway. Amazing, actually.

On June 1, 2006, I posted my first entry on this blog.

A year ago, I thought a blog was something only a politician or bone fide celebrity or journalist kept. I mean who would be interested in anything I had to say - except, perhaps, some of my friends and parishoners?

This blog actually came into being at the suggestion of my Parish Administrator. General Convention in Columbus, OH was fast approaching. Randy thought it would be a great to share my daily journal entries with my Wardens, Vestry and congregational members as I had done in Minneapolis three years earlier.

At that time, I would send my entry to my Wardens who would send it to the Vestry, who would send it to various members. By the time I got back home, copies of my journal entries were flying all over Chatham. I was fascinated at the real hunger there was for "on the ground" information about the goings-on of General Convention.

A blog seemed like a great idea. I just had to log on, post my entry, and anyone from my congregation could check in. Randy set it up for me, gave me a few basic instructions and I was off and running.

This sounds ridiculous now, but then, I had absolutely no idea - no idea whatsoever -what I was getting into.

The first time someone from outside my congregation responded to something I wrote, I sat there, staring at my computer in stunned silence for a full minute. How did that happen, I wondered? What was someone in Australia doing reading the blog I was writing for people in Chatham?

I had no idea how it all worked.

There have been some interesting moments, some memorable ones, and some I'd just as soon forget - but can't, because, well, there they are - out in the open for everyone to read.

I've made some wonderful friends I've never met but know more about than some people I've seen on a daily basis for years.

It's still all a mystery to me - about as deep a mystery as The Trinity.

So, on that note, I'll close this entry with a story, apocryphal, no doubt, about the shortest sermon about the Trinity ever preached:

Seems the tired, old Anglican preacher got into the pulpit, pulled out the Book of Common Prayer and turned to the Historical Documents section and read this from the Creed of Athanasius:

"The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The whole damn thing, incomprehensible. Amen."

My feelings on The blog, exactly.

I have no idea how it started and no idea when it will end. As long as I keep having a good time and no one gets hurt, how long this will go on is, well, incomprehensible.

Amen.

My Girls

The latest picture of Abigayle Sophia (nine months and 3/4) and MacKenna Jane (five and 3/4).

Here, Mackie explains to Abby everything about the Mermaid Ariel who graces her new pillow.

It's just something Big Sisters do for their Little Sisters.

Ariel is Mackie's hero even though her Nana really, really does not like the fact that Ariel has to lose her voice to a jealous old Hag in order to gain her Prince.

Deep sigh!

The Disney studio IS making some progress on feminist issues. I mean, even the Beast discovered that the way to win the Beauty Belle's heart was through her love of books.

I know. I know. There's still the whole "Beauty and the Beast" thing. Hey, in today's world, a girl's gotta take progress wherever she can get it.

You know, sometimes the only thing left for a self-respecting and very proud Nana to do is sing . . . (one of the songs I sing to them as a lullaby).

I've got sunshine on a cloudy day.
When it's cold outside I've got the month of May.
I guess you'd say
What can make me feel this way?
My girls (my girls, my girls)
Talkin' 'bout my girl (my girls).

I've got so much honey the bees envy me.
I've got a sweeter song than the birds in the trees.
I guess you'd say
What can make me feel this way?
My girls (my girls, my girls)
Talkin' 'bout my girl (my girls).

Hey hey hey
Hey hey hey
Ooooh.

I don't need no money, fortune, or fame.
I've got all the riches baby anyone can claim.
I guess you'd say
What can make me feel this way?
My girls (my girls, my girls)
Talkin' 'bout my girl (my girls).

I've got sunshine on a cloudy day
with my girls.
I've even got the month of May
with my girls . . .

Rocky Mountain High

Well, it's been a time!

I did take a wee bit of a holiday with our daughter, Julie. We spent some "Mommy and Me" time in Boulder, CO over the Memorial Day Weekend. We drove to the Rocky Mountain State Park in Estes Park, hiked one of the trails and then drove to the top of the mountain.

It was, in a word, breathtaking.

Well, here, have another look.

This was one of the stopping points on the ride to the top of the mountain. We pulled over to the side of the road to take a "comfort break" and drink lots and lots of water - one of the ways, we were told, to avoid "altitude sickness."

Well, it didn't exactly work. I had to sit down, the dizziness was so profound. Here we are at the top where, just five minutes before this picture was taken, it SNOWED. Honest to God! BIG FAT snow flakes. On Memorial Day!

I finally approached a Park Ranger for some advice. "I've been drinking tons of water," I said, "and yet I'm still very woozy. What else can I do?" "He looked at me with great seriousness and intoned, "Miss, there's only one thing you can do for altitude sickness.

"Really?" I asked expectantly, "what's that?"

Without missing a beat or cracking a smile, he said, "Go down."

How many times to do you think he's used that line?


We returned to our hotel room completely exhausted, but completely jazzed and ready to shower, get some supper to go and make the 45 minute drive to Red Rock Outdoor Amphitheater in Morrison, CO.

What an amazing place!

The theater is carved into the midst of a huge formation of red boulders

There wasn't a bad seat in the house - and every seat was in the "nosebleed" section.

We got there about 45 minutes before the opening act and sat in our seats and ate a delicious Cobb Salad and sipped on our wine under a beautiful evening sky. The sun was setting a vibrant red which made the red rocks turn lovely warm colors of salmon.

As the sun set, you could begin to see the city lights in the distance.

An almost full moon began to rise high in the sky, setting a perfect stage for the performer my daughter and I had come to see.


That's right. That's her. The one, the only, the incomparable, Stephanie Lynn "Stevie" Nicks who sang out her heart and soul - twirling and hovering around her musicians with her shawl - for over 90 minutes in front of thousands of her fans.

She sang all of her best stuff - including some of my very favorites: "Leather and Lace," "Rhiannon," "Stand Back," "Sorcerer," "Landslide," and "Stop Draggin' My Heart Around."

She introduced my all-time favorite "On the Edge of Seventeen (White Winged Dove)" with a story about how the song came into being. She had written it, she said, right after John Lennon's death as a tribute to him, and her uncle John, with whom she had been present as he died.

It would have ended up being just another 'piano song', she said, if Waddy Wachtel (her guitarist and musical director), hadn't listened to it and began playing that incredible opening guitar lick, probably the most famous in the history of Rock 'n Roll.

When she dedicated the song to all the soldiers in Iraq, well, the energy in the place was positively electric. But, when Waddy Watchel started to play that opening guitar lick, the place practically exploded.

It was an incredible night.

No good deed goes unpunished, however. I got home, put on my roller blades, and haven't stopped since. The parish is just absolutely on fire coming to the end of the program year. There are pastoral concerns to tend to, as well, and a Youth Mission Trip to Belize in just about a month's time. Which is why I haven't been blogging. Or, reading anyone else's for that matter.

Turns out, there is life beyond the blog. And, it's pretty good. Amazing, in fact.

Thanks for all of your notes of inquiry and concern.

It's been a nice respite, but I'm back. And, happily so.

Well, mostly.

All things considered, I'd rather be back on top of the Rocky Mountain, altitude sickness and all, and sing my heart and soul out:

"And the days go by
Like a strand in the wind
In the web that is my own
I begin again
Said to my friend, baby
Nothin' else mattered
Just like a white winged dove
sings a song sounds like she's singin'
Whoo, baby, whoo, said whoo."

Pentecost

"If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” John 14:8-27
Pentecost - May 27, 2007
The Episcopal Church of St. Paul, Chatham, NJ
(the Rev’d) Elizabeth Kaeton, rector and pastor

It’s a pretty amazing scene, isn’t it? I can’t even imagine what it must have been like to have been there, on the day of Pentecost. Was it an act of nature? Might it have been a tornado or a very strong whirlwind? Perhaps. But, how would that have explained the fact that “devout Jews from every nation under heaven who were living in Jerusalem” were speaking their own language and yet, everyone understood? That makes no sense, no sense at all.

A similar thing happens in the gospel. Philip said to Jesus, "Lord, show us the Father, and we will be satisfied." Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, `Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?”

Jesus is saying clearly that if you want to see God, look at him, for Jesus and God are one. That same unity would be seen on the Day of Pentecost, except this time, all the people are one, all speaking their own language and yet everyone understanding.

Everything is one, every person of every nation and tongue are one, just as God and Jesus are one. Everything has been redeemed. Eden has been redeemed by Calvary, and the Tower of Babel has been redeemed by the Pentecostal spirit that day in Jerusalem. The circle is complete and the earth has been made whole again. There is peace on earth and good will toward humankind.

It’s almost tempting to say, “And they lived happily ever after.” Except, of course, they didn’t. We didn’t. Indeed, this is Memorial Day Weekend. This is the time when most folk are having a lovely holiday – the first of the summer season – at the Shore or in backyard barbecues. In some communities there will be a parade. Old soldiers will put on their tired, tattered ill-fitting uniforms and march in memory of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice and have given their lives for their countries.

If you peek under the nationalistic bunting and red, white and blue decorations on the parade floats, you will find the reason for that “ultimate sacrifice.” Several reasons, actually. Wars – previous “foreign” wars and wars which claim the lives of American soldiers as well as the lives of innocent men, women and children in their own homes – continue to rage even as we speak. Wars, centuries of wars, are damning evidence that we are far from united as a people “of every nation and tongue.”

So, here’s my question: What, do you suppose, happened the day AFTER the of Pentecost? Why didn’t the miracle that was Pentecost last beyond that day? Why didn’t the healing and wholeness of redemption last forever? Was it a matter of belief – or, rather, lack thereof?

We know from the story in ACTS that not everyone believed: All were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, "What does this mean?" But others sneered and said, "They are filled with new wine." Do you suppose their disbelief spoiled it for the rest of us? Can the miracles of God be that fragile? I don’t think so. However, miracles have their greatest power when they are believed.

Which is precisely the point Jesus makes to Phillip. Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? Even Phillip, who has been with Jesus – broken bread with him, walked with him, talked with him – even after all that, Phillip still misses the miracle of God incarnate in Christ Jesus. So, if Phillip has missed the miracle, I suppose we can be forgiven for missing it too.

Which is why there are still wars and rumors of wars, and why we have national holidays to memorialize those whose lives have been claimed by war. Because we have a hard time believing in the miracle that was – is! – Pentecost. Indeed, I don’t think we much believe it at all.

Oh, we talk a good line about The Holy Spirit, but if our hymnal is any indication of our theology, we like our Holy Spirit pretty tame. If you listen to the hymnal music, you might think you were listening to a Memorial Day Parade – all victorious and triumphant. Other Holy Spirit hymns sound like sweet lullabies – “like the murmur of a dove’s song,” indeed! None of these hymns come close to revealing what it is we witness in the gospel account of the earth-shattering Day of Pentecost.

So, what happened? What happened the day AFTER the Day of Pentecost that got lost in sweet hymns? I think these words of Jesus to Phillip give us a big clue. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” And, what are those commandments? Jesus said, “Love one another.” Indeed, he said, “Love one another as I have loved you.”

Memorial Day is all the evidence anyone needs to know that we fail miserably at that commandment. And, Jesus makes it pretty clear that this is what is needed for us to be one, as he and God are one. Jesus also understands that we can not do this alone. Listen to what he says to the disciples: "I have said these things to you while I am still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you.”

The gift of the Day of Pentecost – the Holy Spirit, the Advocate – is with us, still, to teach us how it is that we are to love one another. We have everything we need to be one, to end wars, to be at peace. All we need to do is get up off our excuses and love Jesus enough to keep his commandments. That’s all. It’s just that easy. And, that incredibly impossible. We’d have to believe the miracle of Pentecost in order for the miracle of the Holy Spirit to take hold in our lives.

That takes enormous courage. Oh, I get glimpses of that power in my life from time to time, and I see it in the lives of others, but it’s pretty scary. It’s an awesome thing to behold the miraculous power of God. You find yourself ‘amazed and perplexed’.

It’s a bit like drinking too much wine. It makes you tipsy and you begin to lose your sense of equilibrium. So, you step outside and get some fresh air. You back away and seek a bit of shelter from what might really happen if you let the winds of the Holy Spirit blow through your life. What you’d have to give up. What you’d lose. What you might gain. What that might cost you.

Jesus knows our fear. I believe this is why he says, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid."

Be not afraid. These three words are always spoken just before an incredible, miraculous event is about to take place. Angels have whispered these words to Abraham and David, to Mary and Joseph. Jesus gives these words to us today. Jesus said: "If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” And then, knowing full well what those words meant, he said, “Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid.” And then, he promised to send the Advocate, the Holy Spirit . . . who will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you.”

It’s all pretty amazing, isn’t it? Miraculous. Unbelievable. And yet, the power of Pentecost is the essence of our faith. It is the power to stand with the ancient church and say the only creed you ever needed to say: “Jesus is Lord, we are the body of Christ.” Saying those words were enough to put your life in peril. Not Caesar is Lord, but Jesus is Lord. Saying ‘we are the body of Christ’ means that death has lost its sting and Jesus lives because Jesus lives in us. Everything else is just details.

Today is the Day of Pentecost. Today, we will sing the ancient creedal words of our faith. Today, we will receive again the gift of the Holy Spirit. Of this, there is no question. The only question for our lives of faith is, what will we do the day AFTER the Day of Pentecost?

Amen.

Dave Walker's Take on Lambeth Disinvitations

For the record (like you don't have other sources of the news)

The text of the Archbishop’s invitation is below:

‘Dear Bishop,

I am delighted to invite you to the Lambeth Conference of 2008 and I very much look forward to our gathering together as bishops of the Anglican Communion.

The dates of the Conference are 16 July-4 August 2008 and I trust you will already have heard something of the vision for the Conference as it has been unfolding. It will focus on our equipping as bishops for leadership in mission and teaching, and it will also be an opportunity for all of us to strengthen our commitment to God’s mission and to our common life as a Communion. In connection with this latter point, we shall be devoting some time to thinking about the proposals for an Anglican Covenant, and about other ways in which we can deepen our sense of a common calling for us as interdependent members of the body of Christ.

This will be my third Lambeth Conference and I am very confident of the quality of the programme being developed for it. I want to offer my warm public thanks to all those from across the world who have worked so hard at planning this – especially the devoted Design Group under the Archbishop of Melanesia, those who attended the St Augustine’s Seminar last year, and our Conference Manager, Sue Parks. Their vision and their advice has been an inspiration at every stage so far. I am hugely excited by the possibilities the programme offers for a new and more effective style of meeting and learning, and for greater participation, which will help us grow together locally and internationally.

Because there has been quite a bit of speculation about invitations and the conditions that might be attached to them, I want to set out briefly what I think the Conference is and is not.

The Conference is a place where our experience of living out God’s mission can be shared. It is a place where we may be renewed for effective ministry. And it is a place where we can try and get more clarity about the limits of our diversity and the means of deepening our Communion, so we can speak together with conviction and clarity to the world. It is an occasion when the Archbishop of Canterbury exercises his privilege of calling his colleagues together, not to legislate but to discover and define something more about our common identity through prayer, listening to God’s Word and shared reflection. It is an occasion to rediscover the reality of the Church itself as a worldwide community united by the call and grace of Christ.

But the Lambeth Conference has no ‘constitution’ or formal powers; it is not a formal Synod or Council of the bishops of the Communion, which would require us to be absolutely clear about the standing of all the participants. An invitation to participate in the Conference has not in the past been a certificate of doctrinal orthodoxy. Coming to the Lambeth Conference does not commit you to accepting the position of others as necessarily a legitimate expression of Anglican doctrine and discipline, or to any action that would compromise your conscience or the integrity of your local church.

At a time when our common identity seems less clear that it once did, the temptation is to move further away from each other into those circles where we only related to those who completely agree with us. But the depth and seriousness of the issues that face us require us to discuss as fully and freely as we can, and no other forum offers the same opportunities for all to hear and consider, in the context of a common waiting on the Holy Spirit.

I have said, and repeat here, that coming to the Conference does not commit you to accepting every position held by other bishops as equally legitimate or true. But I hope it does commit us all to striving together for a more effective and coherent worldwide body, working for God’s glory and Christ’s Kingdom. The Instruments of Communion have offered for this purpose a set of resources and processes, focused on the Windsor Report and the Covenant proposals. My hope is that as we gather we can trust that your acceptance of the invitation carries a willingness to work with these tools to shape our future. I urge you all most strongly to strive during the intervening period to strengthen confidence and understanding between our provinces and not to undermine it.

At this point, and with the recommendations of the Windsor Report particularly in mind, I have to reserve the right to withhold or withdraw invitations from bishops whose appointment, actions or manner of life have caused exceptionally serious division or scandal within the Communion. Indeed there are currently one or two cases on which I am seeking further advice. I do not say this lightly, but I believe that we need to know as we meet that each participant recognises and honours the task set before us and that there is an adequate level of mutual trust between us about this. Such trust is a great deal harder to sustain if there are some involved who are generally seen as fundamentally compromising the efforts towards a credible and cohesive resolution.

I look forward with enthusiasm to the Conference and hope you will be able to attend, or your successor in the event that you retire in the meantime. My wife Jane will be writing with an invitation to the Spouses Conference which will run in parallel to the Lambeth Conference. Further communication to bishops will follow soon from the Lambeth Conference Office, including details of the costs and a reply slip on which you can respond formally to this invitation. It would be a great help if these replies were received by 31 July 2007. In the meantime, should you have any queries about the Lambeth Conference itself, or if you will be retiring before the Conference, please contact the Lambeth Conference Manager at the supplied email address or consult the Lambeth Conference website www.lambethconference.org.

I trust you and your diocese will join with me in praying for God’s gracious blessing of our time together.

Yours in Christ,

Rowan CANTUAR


Statement from The Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson
A Statement from The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson
Bishop of New Hampshire
By The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson
May 22, 2007, 08:52

With regard to the Issuance of Invitations to the Lambeth Conference, 2008
May 22, 2007


It is with great disappointment that I receive word from the Archbishop of Canterbury that I will not be included in the invitation list for the Lambeth Conference, 2008. At a time when the Anglican Communion is calling for a “listening process” on the issue of homosexuality, how does it make sense to exclude gay and lesbian people from the discussion? Isn’t it time that the Bishops of the Church stop talking about us and start talking with us?!

While I appreciate the acknowledgement that I am a duly elected and consecrated Bishop of the Church, the refusal to include me among all the other duly elected and consecrated Bishops of the Church is an affront to the entire Episcopal Church. This is not about Gene Robinson, nor the Diocese of New Hampshire. It is about the American Church. It is for The Episcopal Church to respond to this divide-and-conquer challenge to our polity, and in due time, I assume we will do so. In the meantime, I will pray for Archbishop Rowan and our beloved Anglican Communion.


Bishop Robinson is currently flying to the West Coast and has no further comment at this time.

© Copyright 2005 by nhepiscopal.org

Integrity Outraged At Canterbury’s Choice Of Bigotry And Discrimination Rather Than Inclusion Of Bishop Gene Robinson

620 Park Avenue #311 Rochester, NY 14607-2943
800-462-9498 info@integrityusa.org http://www.integrityusa.org/

May 22, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

"Integrity is outraged and appalled," said Integrity President Susan Russell. "This is not only a snub of Bishop Gene Robinson but an affront to the entire U.S. Episcopal Church. The Archbishop of Canterbury has allowed himself to be blackmailed by forces promoting bigotry and exclusion in the Anglican Communion. This action shows a disgraceful lack of leadership on Williams’ part."

"Integrity calls on all the bishops and the leadership of the Episcopal Church to think long and hard about whether they are willing to participate in the continued scapegoating of the gay and lesbian faithful as the price for going to the Lambeth Conference. It is purported to be a conference representing bishops from the whole Anglican Communion. That can’t happen when Rowan Williams aligns himself with those in the Communion such as Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria who violate human rights while explicitly excluding gay and lesbian voices from their midst," Russell said. "Our bishops must ask themselves this question: 'Is complicity in discrimination a price they are willing to pay for a two-week trip to Canterbury?'"

Integrity is currently contacting the leadership of the Episcopal Church and consulting with our progressive allies about this situation. We expect to make an additional statement in the near future.

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)

Time Out for some Shameless Home Pride

Way to go, Matt Romei! My man!

Here's the money quote from Coach Humphreys:

"These kids don't need to worry," Humphreys said. "I don't have to worry about them, either. These kids stay focused. They've all improved and they've all stepped it up."

That's what I'M talking about!

Chatham champion
Freshman Romei helps bring home sectional title

BY BRENDAN KUTY
DAILY RECORD
Tuesday, May 22, 2007


LIVINGSTON -- His heart pounded through his white, sweat-soaked shirt as Chatham's fate hung in the balance. But with a single, mighty serve, Matt Romei laid all doubt as to what team would be named sectional champion to rest.

Romei, with all eyes on him, blanked West Essex's Ben Sunshine in the final set of third singles, giving the Cougars a 3-2 victory and a North 2, Group II section title.

"It feels great to get the win today," Romei said, still breathing heavily. "It's great to be champs."

Many players may have wilted under such pressure, according to Cougars coach Bruce Humphreys, but not Romei.

The freshman looked the part of a seasoned veteran as he prepared his game-winning serve to secure the win (6-3, 4-6, 6-0). However, he admitted to being "very nervous" in what he said was the "biggest game" of his career.

Romei won the match's first set handily, but attributed his struggles in a second-set loss to his passive nature.

"I wanted to be aggressive," Romei said. "I'm usually not that aggressive. I wanted to hit my shots, come up to the net and make my volleys."

The freshman said he never doubted his chances to win going into the third set, but it was his coach's vote of confidence that sparked his tenacious side.

"I just told him, 'you're my guy,'" Humphreys said. "I said (he) can bring it home and (that he knows) what to do."

This is the second section title in Cougars history, the first coming in 2004. Back then, senior Jon Haverty was a just a freshman paying his dues on junior varsity.

"This feels amazing,"Haverty said. "They won it all last year. It was very nice to beat them this year."

Haverty and his doubles mate, junior Michael Lee, were impressive as they took second doubles in two sets (6-0, 6-1). It was the only match that Chatham controlled from the start as the pair came out strong and allowed their experience to take over in tough spots.

"We've played these guys before," Haverty said. "We beat them in both matches, so we knew we had the upper hand coming in."

After the match, Humphreys noted that the play of senior team captain Alex Rivera and junior Ben Klein in first doubles was "huge" as the duo scrapped together a victory in a seesaw contest (6-3, 3-6, 6-0).

Rivera and Klein cruised through their first set, but faltered in the second due to some mental errors. The pair rebounded to breeze through the final set in which the left-handed Rivera uncorked a rocket that sliced through the five-hole of one of the Knights.

"That was the hardest ball that I've ever seen him hit,"Haverty laughed.

Patrick Monaghan (first singles) and Paul Salierno (second singles) fell to their opponents in straight sets. Monaghan, a freshman, admitted to being overwhelmed by West Essex's Evan Zimmer, who carried into the duel an Eastern Section ranking of 108.

"He played much better this time," Mongahan said, who narrowly lost to Zimmer in their previous match up. "He got up pretty early and I just got down on myself."

Chatham didn't just lock up a sectional title with the win. It also got even with the Knights, who defeated the Cougars, 3-2, on April 23. But back then, Chatham was just a team struggling to find its identity, according to Humphreys.

"We've shown so much improvement from the beginning," Humphreys said. "At that point, I just felt that we would get hammered. They've come a long way. ...I'm awesomely proud."

Next Thursday, the Cougars will go toe-to-toe with West Essex one last time to decide who will take home the Iron Hills Conference Championship.

"These kids don't need to worry," Humphreys said. "I don't have to worry about them, either. These kids stay focused. They've all improved and they've all stepped it up."

North 2, Group II

Chatham 3,

West Essex 2

Singles: Evan Zimmer (WE) def. Pat Monaghan, 6-1, 6-1; Jeff Young (WE) def. Paul Salierno, 6-2, 6-4; Matt Romei (Ch) def. Ben Sunshine, 6-3, 4-6, 6-0.

Doubles: Alex Razera and Ben Klein (Ch) def. Jared Prince and Jared Davidson, 6-3, 3-6, 6-2; Jon Haverty and Michael Lee (Ch) def. Mike Sackman and Rob Gelberg, 6-0, 6-1.

Records: Chatham 18-4, West Essex 16-6

http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070522/SPORTS0803/705220374

Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory: La Cuchina Lambeth

So, kittens, while we were pondering the heavy issues of pornography here at "Telling Secrets," the rest of the Anglican Communion was (and rightly so) up in arms about the latest from Lambeth Palace.

There is much to consider and digest, but my initial reaction to the ABC's statement concerns the message it sends about the recognition of the authority of Gene Robinson and Martyn Minns as bishops.

While I am insulted and outraged that Gene has not been invited as a full and equal member of the rest of the bishops in the Anglican Communion, there is no doubt that his election (vs. "appointment") is seen by the ABC as "regular" and the status and authority of his episcopacy has been officially recognized in his status as "invited guest."

It is also obvious (and, I would imagine, painfully so to some) that Martyn's "appointment" (vs. election) is viewed as "irregular" and his status and authority as bishop therefore has not been recognized at all.

I take no comfort or joy in any of this. It's the same British sense which created the "upstairs/downstairs" maid status, which is a slippery slope to extreme segregationist evils such as apartheid.

Gene can attend, but can not vote. However, the ABC also made it very clear that there will not be any "voting" - that Lambeth is not nor now nor ever has been intended to be a "legislative session."

So, in actuality, the "invited guest" does everything an "invitee" does. The status is primarily symbolic - which does not, in any way, reduce its sting.

What is confounding to me is that if this is the ABC's way of appeasing those who would object to Gene's very presence at Lambeth, it has failed miserably. If Gene chooses to accept the invitation with the status of "invited guest," he'll still be present and able to attend all sessions with the other bishops, archbishops and Primates. He'll still have the opportunity to be incarnational to those who profess never to have seen an LGBT person. He'll still have an opportunity to tell his story.

And, please note: BEFORE the imposition of the so-called September 30th "deadline."

So, what has really been accomplished? What kind of authority has really been exercised here?

In case you were wondering, that pungent odor in the air is a burnt batch of Anglican Fudge.

It seems to be a specialty of the "Cuchina Lambeth."

What is pornography?

A little provocative question at the end of the day: What is pornography?

In 1964, United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart answered that question this way: "I can't define pornography but I know it when I see it."

My question is: Why do I have to see it in the first place?

Now, I can hardly be defined as a prude, but I just did an image search on the word "pornography" and 95% of what popped up was deeply offensive. I decided to go with the above picture because the looks on the faces of these kids pretty much summed up my exact response.

A few more questions: Is pornography okay in the "privacy of one's own home"? Or, is it only a problem when it upsets someone - like your spouse or partner?

So, it's okay on your personal computer, but not at work? Is that right? The privacy of one's home and all that.

Okay. Let's push that one step further: Is it okay on the rectory computer but not in the parish office?

So, is it okay, then, for clergy to view pornography? Is it okay with you to think that your priest is watching porn? Or, that your (male) clergy colleague can have a relationship of equality with you as a woman or other women and still read . . . view . . . (what IS the appropriate word) porn?

Okay, you want to know what I'm thinking. For what it's worth, here it is:

I don't think pornography in any form - Male/Female, Adult/Child - is appropriate for anyone at any time, but especially for those in Christian leadership.

Why? Well, what we're talking about here is a multi-billion dollar global pornography industry which objectifies the human condition - especially women, children and young adults - and demeans and cheapens it.

I don't think any of it is "harmless."

Rather, I think its effects are pernicious and deeply damaging to the soul - not to mention potentially addictive to the psyche. As such, I don't think it has any place in the Christian life - on church computers or personal lap tops, whether or not someone else "finds" it and is/is not upset by it.

I'm told there is "soft porn" - which, to me, looks like any video done by Beyonce, Jessica Simpson, Fergie, or Mariah Carey.

Of course, "sex sells" but here's my question: Is this 'sex' or is it 'soft' (I'm assuming, as opposed to 'hard core') porn?

What's the difference, really? That's a serious question. I'm just now realizing how very naive and uninformed I am about all of this.

It's not "just" a woman's concern, but as women are most often objectified and demeaned by the pornography industry, I think it's a feminist issue.

More importantly, I think it's is a Christian issue. Certainly, it is one that the Christian Right has defined, and not in particularly helpful ways. I have a classmate in the doctoral program at Drew who is a practicing Christian therapist in NYC, He is very deeply concerned about the growing number of men he sees in his practice who are addicted to porn.

He wants to do his doctoral work on male addiction to porn, but the only Christian research he can find is that done by the Dobeson/Focus on the Family Group which espouses a theology and treatment plan that will sound very familiar - and just as odious - to those of us in the LGBT Community.

So, what IS the appropriate response/theoloy? I think this topic is one that we who consider ourselves progressive Christians would be edified to discuss more fully.

What do YOU think about pornography? How do YOU define it? What do you think about clergy using it? What do you think the appropriate Christian response to pornography ought to be? What mechanisms of accountability are appropriate?

I expect a 150 word essay on my desk in the morning.

Episcopal Cafe: Lessons from Jerry

The following essay by Steve Charleston, former bishop of Alaska and Dean and President of The Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, MA (where Jesus himself went to seminary) can be found at The Episcopal Cafe.

We've come to expect brilliance from Steve and this essay doesn't disappoint. Thanks, Steve, for expanding the conversation and touching our lives, our minds, our souls and our hearts.


Lessons from Jerry
By Steven Charleston

The recent death of the Rev. Jerry Falwell has produced an expected flurry of media eulogies and critiques. Both his supporters and detractors have offered opinions about his legacy. If we read between the lines of these many political post mortems, I believe conservatives and liberals alike can find some lessons that the Falwell experience has to teach us. The question is: which side in the debate will learn the most from these lessons?

Here are four of those lessons for our shared reflection as we look at the mirror that Jerry Falwell holds up to all of us, what ever our faith or politics may be:

Lesson Number One: if you can create a constituency, you can exercise political power far beyond your real numbers. The secret is in perception. Jerry Falwell created the impression of a unified grassroots movement. He influenced politicians and supporters because he claimed to speak for a solid block of public opinion. While he did not invent this process, he certainly refined it in the context of American civil religion.

Lesson Number Two: all social agendas rise and fall on the tide of media exposure. In our culture, images on a screen are validation. Falwell was one of the early practitioners of media religion. By using the most contemporary forms of communication, he was able to galvanize large numbers of people to both see and respond to his message. Even those who disagreed with him were talking about him, and as anyone in show business knows, the fact that people are talking is all that matters.

Lesson Number Three: if public opinion is a tightrope drawn between acceptance and rejection, exaggerated rhetoric is a strong wind. Falwell undercut his own credibility (much like his counterpart, Pat Robertson) with outlandish statements that brought him censure and ridicule. There is a moral gyroscope at the center of culture and it can tilt quickly if any leader steps over the line of reason.

Lesson Number Four: personal power is ephemeral while shared values are enduring. The great preachers of the age come and go, but the message they deliver can be forever if it is embedded in the commitments of a community. Falwell’s community remains a potent and resilient force in both religion and politics. His true legacy will not be in how well he is remembered fifty years from now, but in how many people continue to self-identify with the values (or lack of them) for which he stood.

These four simple lessons, among the many that we may identify, are an integral part of the religious landscape of this century. As both conservative and progressive factions contend for social impact, political power, and moral persuasion in the United States and beyond, these lessons from Jerry Falwell will be acted out over and over again. Certainly Falwell’s constituency will be continuing to press for an agenda of values that embodies their political and social agenda. With just as much certainty, they will be confronted by others whose value system is radically different. Both sides will attempt to unify and focus a community. Both will seek to use the media and technology to expand their base. Both will search for language that invites people to believe and to act. But in the end, both will be measured by how well they can transcend images in order to influence reality.


The Rt. Rev. Steven Charleston, former Bishop of Alaska, is president and dean of Episcopal Divinity School, and keeper of the podcasting blog EDS's Stepping Stones.

--------------------------------------------------

Girls Just Wanna Have Fun!

The grandchildren came for the weekend.

What? You didn't expect pictures?

Here's Ms. Abby, now nine months old. She's a veritable leprechaun. Just non stop mischief when she's not being naturally curious and very physical. I'm thinking we have an athlete in the making here.

What pure delight!
And, here's Ms. Mackie - now "five and three quarters" years old.

And, a Princess. Of course.

She couldn't be more completely opposite in temperament from her sister. She's as bright as you please and very much into make-believe and let's pretend. What a joy to watch her imagination and creativity! How even more wonderful to be invited to participate in it with her!

Can you tell we had a FABULOUS weekend?