Half-assed baptized?

Most of the folks I talk to are waxing rhapsodic about the 'historic' gathering in Atlanta with 1/4 of the elected deputies to General Convention and the members of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music (SCLM) to discuss General Convention Resolution C056 on gathering data about blessing the covenants made between same gender couples.

I applaud the church for taking this important first, brave, bold step - after an almost 40 year journey - towards marriage equality.

Brava, Mother Church! Brava!

You'll forgive me, however, if my applause is slightly less than enthusiastic.

I keep hearing Bishop Barbara Clementine Harris' question at the Triennial Integrity Eucharist at General Convention in LA:

"How can you initiate someone and then treat them like a half-assed baptized?"

Look, I understand full well how the institutional church works - especially in terms of justice. I've been at this most of my adult life.

We take three steps forward and two steps back. We're still a long way from the dream of "full inclusion," and, at the rate the institutional church moves, I have serious doubts as to whether or not we'll get there in my life time.

I understand this. I don't accept it.

General Convention C056 is far from the "whole enchilada" that Susan Russell speaks of, and yes, there's a whole lot more guacamole in there than we've ever had before.

I understand. Susan is a very wise leader. She has more political acumen in her baby finger than I have in my whole body. I am deeply grateful for her leadership and that of the leaders in Integrity and Claiming the Blessing.

Me? I'm still hungry.

Actually, I'm really tired of being hungry. I'm sick and tired. Truth be told, I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired.

I'm weary of the knowledge that the church is baking cakes - feasting on them, in fact - and giving out crumbs. Indeed, the bow on the package is bigger than the crumb of justice we've been tossed.

I understand. The charge of Resolution C056 was to gather data and resources about pastoral care and liturgical rites of blessing and to offer "pastoral generosity" to those bishops in those dioceses in those states where there is marriage equality.

Given all that is happening in the Anglican Communion and in The Episcopal Church and all that's swirling around about the Anglican Covenant, the SCLM is most probably very wise to stay within a narrow focus of that charge.

And yet.... and, yet....

This sure feels like "separate but equal" to me. At the end of the day - or, actually, even at the beginning or middle or any part of the day - that doesn't feel very equal to me.

Because, in fact, it's not. Far from it.

Separate but equal works for the fruit in the above picture. Or, vegetables. But, not people. Funny, but I thought we had figured that out during the Civil Rights Movement.

The worst part is that Mother Church is being caught up short on Her whole theology of marriage.

There are a few embarrassing frays in the theological fabric of "Holy Matrimony".

It begins with the first sentence of the theological introduction to marriage in the Book of Common Prayer (p 423). You probably know the words by heart: "Dearly beloved: We have come together in the presence of God to witness and bless the joining together of this man and this woman in Holy Matrimony."

We do not 'marry' anyone. The two marry each other. We 'witness and bless'. The 'marriage' part is a legal contract which the church performs as an agent of the state.

That's just the beginning of the confusion.

The church must begin to challenge herself about this 'unholy' alliance between church and state. We don't allow the state to dictate to us on any other sacrament or sacramental rite of the church. Why do that with marriage?

That's my first question.

The next few have to do with the veracity of the claims made by this rite in the next few statements of the theological framework of marriage.

"The bond and covenant of marriage was established by God in creation . . ."

Really? Somehow, I don't remember a word about marriage in either of the two stories of creation in Genesis. We are told that God made humankind in God's own image - male and female God made them.

I don't recall God ever saying to Adam and Eve, "I now pronounce you man and wife". It's just a wild guess, but I'm thinking we've imposed our own 20th Century understanding of marriage onto the scriptural story.

We do it again in the second part of that second sentence:

"... and our Lord Jesus Christ adorned this manner of life by his presence and first miracle at the wedding in Cana of Galilee."

Really? I guess I've been reading the story wrong all these years. Seems to me that Jesus was present at the wedding because he was an invited guest - not to make a statement about marriage, one way or the other. He showed up because he was invited.

The only comment we have from Jesus about that marriage is when His mother points out to him that the wine is running out. "What does that have to do with me?" he asks, rather impertinently.

Then, at the request of His mother, Jesus turns water into wine - not as a sign of approval of the marriage, but at the request of his mother for generous hospitality.

I mean, the whole thing does beg the question: If Jesus was so high on the subject and institution of marriage, why didn't He, Himself, get married?

Mind you, I don't think Jesus wasn't supportive of marriage. Indeed, He had some very harsh things to say about divorce. Funny. We don't listen to those words very closely, now do we?

So, I'm left questioning the whole scriptural underpinnings of marriage as outlined in "The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage" in the Book of Common Prayer.

Here's where the church and I agree:

"Therefore marriage is not to be entered into unadvisedly or lightly, but reverently, deliberately, and in accordance with the purposes for which it was instituted by God."

Well, okay. Strike those last five words. I don't think marriage was 'instituted by God'. It was instituted by good men of God who believed with their whole heart and mind and soul that marriage is inspired of God.

I do, too, but not in the way that those good men of God first imagined it.

Let's face it, "traditional marriage" is a legal contract between two men wherein the woman is the subject of the legal agreement. That's why the father of the bride walks the bride down the aisle and "gives her hand in marriage" to the groom.

She's property, is all. The church has been complicit in this legal transaction since the fourth century.

Marriage is best understood as a sacred vocation. It's a calling from God that the two shall live as one. Not everyone receives that call. Not everyone - heterosexual or homosexual - is able to live into that high calling.

That does not diminish the fact that it is a vocation. God does not put barriers of race or gender or sexual orientation on vocation.

I think 'holy matrimony' is at its best when understood as being inspired by good people of God based on what we understand in the story of creation when God says, "It is not good for humankind to be alone."

That's 'holy matrimony' at its best.

It's a covenant made between two people which mirrors the covenant God made with humankind in creation. And, of course, the church can and should bless that covenant and make it 'holy'.

That's the church at its best.

Funny that it should take LGBT people to call the church to its 'orthodox' understanding of the covenant of marriage.

Indeed, we've been doing this for about 40 years. It's interesting to watch and listen to some people come to these understandings as if they were "new insights".

Outwardly, I smile and nod and say, "Yes! Right! Good for you!" On the inside I can feel something in the pit of my stomach calling out, "What the hell do you think we've been talking about for the past 40 years?"

It must be the way some of my African American friends feel when I come to yet another insight about the subtleties of racism. I'm grateful for their kindness and generosity as a model for the way I need to behave. I can only imagine that they must roll their eyes and say, "Well, she's just a nice White girl, trying to make a difference."

I don't know about the 'nice' part, but I do try to make a difference.

Even so, you'll excuse me, then, if my enthusiasm for what the church did in Atlanta this past week end, and is about to do in Indianapolis at General Convention in 2012, is tempered by all of this.

I guess I'm particularly chagrined by those who say to me, with great enthusiasm, "We'll finally get liturgical rites of blessing passed next year at General Convention in Indianapolis and then we can get on with the work of justice."

Excuse me?

First of all, C056 does not provide for authorized liturgical rites of blessing. It only provides for a gathering of data and resources. In order to get authorized liturgical rites of blessing, that's going to take a separate, new resolution.

See? I know how the institutional church works.

I fully suspect that General Convention 2012 will authorize the development of Liturgical rites of blessing to be submitted for authorization in 2015.

When that does happen - and, I have no doubt that it will - my prayer is that the liturgical rite of blessing won't promote "separate but equal". My prayer is that whatever rite is developed, it can be utilized for the covenants made between same and opposite gender couples.

Then, I hope someone else will submit a resolution charging both the House of Bishops and Deputies as well as the SCLM to study our theology of marriage and return to General Convention 2015 with a report, and a revised theology of marriage, along with a proposed new rite which supports marriage equality.

Because I know how the institutional church works, I know that I'll probably get a "Task Force" which will study our theology of marriage and gather information about what is already being done in terms of marriage equality.

Then, in 2015, General Convention will review, discuss and debate that report and, not only authorize the development of liturgical rites of blessings, but pass a resolution to authorize a Task Force to write a new theology of marriage equality which will be reviewed, discussed and debated at General Convention 2018.

That's if all goes well and the Anglican Covenant doesn't scare everyone into stepping five steps back with the threat of "relational consequences", we just might get those authorized rites and theology of marriage equality in 2021.

So, I say to my enthusiastic friend, this issue is a work of justice. And, the work of justice on this issue is far from over. Indeed, it is a continual work of justice.

There is no hierarchy of injustice or prejudice or bigotry. Neither is there a hierarchy to the work of justice.

Yes, there are priorities, which Jesus named: feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for all those in need.

We do those things - tending to the basic human needs of people first. That being said, justice denied is justice delayed. And, whenever justice is either denied or delayed to anyone, justice is diminished to all.

Bottom line: Separate but equal is a lie. Always has been. Always will be.

I hope what the SCLM is able to provide in its report to General Convention is proof positive, beyond-a-doubt evidence that the Church has been participating in the sin of 'separate and unequal' and ought not take a move to participate in the lie of 'separate but equal'.

I pray that the church will take a bold step, this time, and move to marriage equality. It's not great leap. Not for those who profess to follow Jesus and pledge in their baptism to "grow into the full stature of Christ".

I'm not half-assed baptized.

I am, as Luther said, baptized.

I'm only expecting to be treated as such.

Is that so much to ask?

Spank The Yanks

The Anglican Covenant is making the rounds in England, seeking approval from the various deaneries and diocese around The Church of England.

Meanwhile, one hundred ninety-five clergy and lay deputies from 98 dioceses in The Episcopal Church registered for a gathering that began mid-afternoon on March 18 and concluded at noon March 19.

It was an historic gathering in Atlanta with the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music to discuss General Convention 2009 Resolution C056 concerning the gathering of resources to develop liturgical rites of blessing of the covenants made by people of the same gender in The Episcopal Church, as well as the pastoral care and teaching resources for these couples and the church.

Here's a video of the live web conference, presented by Ruth Meyers, chair of the SCLM and including reports from the co-chairs of the Pastoral Concerns Committee, Susan Russell and Thad Bennett. Please do take a moment to watch it.


Among the deputies registered to participate, 51 will attend their first convention as deputies in 2012; for another 18, Indianapolis will be at least their fifth convention, according to statistics presented during the opening session.

Another nearly 50 people participated as presenters and small-group facilitators. In addition, representatives of the Presbyterian Church USA, the Moravian Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America observed the process.

You can find lots more information, videos, etc. at The Episcopal Cafe, here.

The Church of England is - and indeed, the entire Anglican Communion will be - discussing the approval of the Anglican Covenant as an 'instrument' of the Anglican Communion which would determine "relational consequences" for some of the very issues discussed in Atlanta.

The Anglican Covenant is being presented to the church as a "final draft". We must vote up or down on the whole megillah. We may not, we are told, vote 'yes' or 'no' on any one section or change any part of the document.

"Take it or leave it" is the "deal or no deal", and, while it isn't exactly clear what "relational consequences" might befall you if you "leave it," you just might be "left behind" in your member status in The Anglican Communion.

It sounds to my ears the development of a sort of "upstairs/downstairs maid" class status which the British rather infamously created.

The score card, thus far is:

Diocese of Lichfield - voted to approve the covenant.

Diocese of Wakefield - voted not to approve the covenant.

Diocese of Hereford - the debate was adjourned without out vote.

Diocese of Oxford - referred to deanery synods.

That's far less than the ringing endorsement expected from the folks at Lambeth Palace, I'm sure. It's an initial response that brings me much hope.

The Rev'd Dr. Caro Hall, a member of Integrity and rector of St. Benedict's Episcopal Church in Los Osos, California, reported on the first day of the gathering in Atlanta group, especially on the theological principles reflected by Jay Johnson.

Reflecting theologically on same-gender unions should be grounded in baptism and how we live out our baptismal covenant which suggests three key theological touchstones:

1) The loving faithfulness of faithful relationships exhibits the character of a sacrament;

2) Christian life generally, but in particular committed relationships, shares in God’s Trinitarian life characterized by inclusive, dynamic and mutual giving

3) Committed relationships can renew our hope – the gospel promise of union with God

Reflecting further on covenants:

1) Everyone is called to live out the baptismal covenant, but not everyone is called to do so in the same way… it is helpful to think of entering a couple commitment as a vocation;

2) Entering into covenant with another person can enrich our experience of covenant with Christ;

3) Covenantal relationships create households which require intention and discipline enriched by divine grace – thriving households don’t just happen on their own but come from intentional spiritual practice;

4) Faithfulness and love enable us to give to the wider community – to nurture our baptismal calling in the world. Within a covenanted relationship we can discover and nurture gifts for baptismal ministry. Covenantal relationships are blessed and can become a blessing to the faith community.

It would appear, once again, that The Episcopal Church and the Church of England are two member churches of the same Anglican Communion, separated by a common language.

The Church of England is discussing the approval of The Anglican Covenant - deal or no deal - which contains, in Section IV, punitive measures for those members of the communion whose theology is an "affront" to another member of the communion.

The Episcopal Church is discussing the approval of rites of blessing for Covenants made between two people of the same gender based on our Baptismal Covenant - which, they say, everyone is called to live into, but not everyone is called to live out in the same way.

Ummm . . . Covenant is the topic on the table, but we seem to have Very Different understandings about what 'covenant' means and Very Different processes to deal with them.

Anyone else see the disconnect here?

One process shuts down conversation and disregards intellect and reason unless it comes from on high. The other process opens it up the conversation and encourages all the baptized, in the words of St. Paul, to "live into the full stature of Christ".

Indeed, one deputy who was in Atlanta reported this:

"In the conversations in the small group I was in . . . I and others, straight and GLBT, began to think about marriage in general and our own (mostly straight)marriages in new ways because of those conversations.

Particularly helpful to me was what a married gay man in our group shared of his experience and his theological work in this area. It seemed to most if not all in our group that the conversation around blessing of same-gender relationships that we are engaged in has the possibility for jump-starting the much needed marriage theology conversations that are long overdue in TEC. Maybe in 50 years we'll be able to articulate a re-newed theology of marriage for all."

I understand that another of the conversations making its way around small groups was to challenge the church's role as agents of the state in marriage. Imagine that!

Meanwhile, the strategy which seems to be employed by those in the CofE who wish to see the Anglican Covenant approved, was summed up by a British colleague of mine as "Spank the Yank". The strategic argument appears to be:

“We need the Covenant because the yanks have been very naughty and consecrated a Gay bishop and that split the communion and then when poor old Rowan was just trying to pick up the pieces the yanks went and consecrated a Lesbian bishop and completely wrecked the whole thing... and Rowan had expressly put a moratoria out on that. Now TEC figures show that it is in free fall and all the poor old faithful to the Bible Episcopalians have no where to go.”

Well, there it is, then.

And, look, the Yanks won't stop. Now, even now, they are meeting in Atlanta, talking about blessing what boys do together with their 'dangly bits' and the horrors of what women do together with their 'naughty parts'.

It's disgusting, really. Let's 'spank the Yanks' and if they won't stop it - stop it right now. . . cease and desist immediately . . . then. . . why. . . there will just have to be ...."relational consequences".

It reminds me of that wonderful Eddie Izzard piece about The Church of England. "Cake or Death." Here, you can watch the whol one minute, fifty seconds of it while my blood pressure goes down and I can write without cursing.

Here in "Red Sox Nation," the term "Spank the Yank" has more to do with baseball than church.

But, that's another conversation for another time - preferably at Fenway Stadium near the Green Monster while we eat a good old fashioned American hot dog.


The thing of it is that the folks for whom the Covenant was written -  to keep "the orthodox" at the table -  have already left the building.

They have created their own parallel universe in the Anglican Communion and have declared their own "Jerusalem Declaration" as being far superior to The Anglican Covenant.

They have a point.

I'm no fan of the "orthodox" declaration, but it does lead me to ask: Is the Anglican Covenant really the best we can do to "stop the schism" in the Anglican Communion? Really?

What a complete and utter failure of religious imagination!

So, what's the point of the Anglican Covenant, if not simply to 'spank the Yanks'?

I think it's time for someone from 815 to ring up someone at Lambeth Palace and let them know that the jig is up. We know their strategy. "We" being not the "Royal We" but the common folks in the pew who share a common baptism and a common prayer for the church.

And not just "the bums in the pew" in The Episcopal Church, but all around the Anglican Communion - including the Church of England.

It's time someone told Father-Who-Thinks-He-Knows-Best that this little charade of ecclesiastical patriarchy has been exposed for what it is - the pathetic death grip of a Church that will soon die of the suffocation of the Spirit.

The Spirit of God seems intent, it is clear to me, on dragging us all - kicking and screaming, if necessary - into the postmodern era to deal with reforming the Body of Christ into an incarnational presence for the world.

We already have a Covenant which we made at our baptism. We don't need an Anglican Covenant to tell us - any of us - who Lambeth Palace thinks we are or to impose 'relational consequences' on those who still hold fast to traditional Anglicanism which is the spirit of accommodation and tolerance and a deep respect for the primacy of scripture, understood by the divine gift of human reason within the context of the tradition of the church.

The old joke told by Bette Middler is that, whenever the ball drops on Times Square on New Year's, it's always 1950 in London.

I would beg to differ with The Divine Ms. M. I think London is doing just fine, thank you very much.

It always seems to be 1950 at Lambeth Palace.

Meanwhile, The Episcopal Church looks forward to gathering at General Convention in Indianapolis in 2012. There, we will finally - FINALLY - approve the authorization of liturgical rites of blessing the covenants made by people of the same gender. Of this, I have no doubt.

I'm not patting ourselves on the back.

I've been at this since 1984 - many have been at this longer than I - and clearly remember the 1994 pastoral study document produced by The Episcopal Church and approved by the House of Bishops entitled, 'Continuing the Dialogue".

Mind you, this was after more than a DECADE of dialogue!

Bishop Jack Spong did not feel the report was strong enough in its support for gay and lesbian people, so he put forward A Statement in Koinonia, which stated, in part:

"We believe that celibacy is an honorable vocation for some of God's people and that those who have chosen to live in celibacy for whatever reason have gifts to give that will enrich both the church and the social order.

But we also believe that those who know themselves to be gay or lesbian persons, and who do not choose to live alone, but forge relationships with partners of their choice that are faithful, monogamous, committed, life giving and holy are to be honored. We will continue to relate to these couples with our support, our pastoral care, our prayers and our recognitions, in whatever form is deemed appropriate, that God is indeed present in their life together."

".... in whatever form is deemed appropriate . . ."

There have been many covenants blessed by many bishops and priests before and since that statement. The time has come and now is that the "appropriate" form of prayers and recognitions of those covenants are authorized in rites of liturgical blessing of the church.

The time has come and now is for the church to do what it is She says she does - blessing the people of God so that they might be a blessing to others.

It is an affront to me and many LGBT people and our allies that this has not yet happened in the church. No one has threatened 'relational consequences' for this shameful neglect. Instead, we wait patiently for "Mother Church" to catch up to where we are even as we continue to work for justice.

It just seems to be the mature, adult thing to do.

Nicodemus and Wild Air

“Wild air”  

A Sermon for Lent II A -  March 20, 2011

Genesis 12:1-4a  Psalm 121

Romans 4:1-5, 13-17  John 3:1-17
St. John’s Bowdoin Street, Boston, MA
(the Rev’d Dr.) Elizabeth Kaeton

Please pray with me: “Wild air, world-mothering air / Nestling me everywhere. . ./ Fold home, fast fold thy child.” In the name of the Triune God whose name is Love, whose life is Beloved, who spirit is Lover. Amen.

I beg your indulgence as I begin with a personal moment of nostalgia. I haven’t had the privilege of gracing this pulpit in almost 25 years.

I was a seminarian here, for two amazing years and was privileged to serve the beginning of my diaconate in this sacred space, under the tutelage of Emmett Jarrett and Margaret Rose and Ted Mellor.

I can still hear the giggles of our six children resounding off these walls, along with those of Mary and Peter Chen and Nathan and Sarah Jarrett. This was the altar where I presided at my first sung Eucharist as a newly minted priest.

Everywhere I have ever gone since I left this place, I have introduced myself in this way, “Hi, I’m Elizabeth Kaeton and I’m a missionary from St. John’s Bowdoin Street”.

So you will understand and please forgive me if I stand here in my proper Episcopal flats (and not my ruby slippers) and click my heels three times as I say, “There’s no place like home.”

Something wild is in the air. Can you feel it?

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but the air this week has been wild. I think it was Thursday night when the wind was so strong it blew the branches against the windows of what I like to call my third floor lonely writer’s garret on the campus of The Episcopal Divinity School, where I am presently privileged to be Proctor Scholar in residence.

The noise kept me up half the night.

Last night was the beginning of the celebration of the Jewish holiday, Purim, which commemorates the deliverance of the Jewish people in the ancient Persian Empire from destruction in the wake of a plot by Haman, as recorded in the Book of Esther.

In addition to reading the entire scroll of Ester (yes, they read the ‘whole megillah’), wherein, whenever the name of Haman is mention, the congregation will jeer and stamp their feet and make noises with graggers (noisemakers), everyone will feast on hamantachen (cookies that look like Haman’s hat), and meat kreplah, and drink vodka infused with jelly beans. It’s a wild party.

If you looked out your window last night, you might have noticed what NASA called a “super moon” and not just because it was the last full moon of Winter (If it weren’t Lent I’d say the A-word!), but because the elliptical path of the moon’s orbit brought it closer to the earth than it has come in eleven years, so it appeared much, much larger than normal.

So, maybe it’s Purim, or maybe it’s the Super Moon, or maybe it is because, after a long and particularly harsh winter, new life is beginning to emerge from the cold, hard ground.

Late last night, I heard peepers serenading the spring night. Early this morning, I saw a few crocus poking their bruised, purple heads up through the cold earth and the birds were singing a most enthusiastic Hosanna to the Lord of Creation.

March winds. Purim. Super moon. Something wild is in the air. Can you feel it?

Meanwhile, the people of Japan, still recovering from an earthquake and a tsunami, fear the wind carrying radiation from several nuclear reactor plants which were destroyed in the aftermath of the environmental double-whammy.

People in Haiti, still recovering from the earthquake that hit them a few years ago, fear the wind blowing cholera their way.

And the threat of war with Libya hangs heavy in the no-fly zone, as the rest of the Middle East – from Tunisia to Tripoli – clings to the fragile winds of hope to bring a dream of freedom and justice and peace.

Earthquake. Tsunami. War and rumors of war. Something wild is in the air. Can you feel it?

I wonder if there was ‘wild air’ the night that Nicodemus and Jesus had their talk. Jesus said, “The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes.” J

esus talks with Nicodemus about the gift of a new birth – a birth from above, a birth of the Spirit – Ruach, Shekinah – that brings new life out of chaos. This new birth is a complete transformation, as traumatic and significant an event as our birth as newborns.

The story of Nicodemus blows through our previous assumptions about our relationship with God. It shatters the illusion of safety under which we might have sought shelter from the unshakable truth that a relationship with God costs no less than everything and leaves no part of the body, mind or spirit undisturbed. Entering into a relationship with God causes an earthquake in the soul and a tsunami in the spirit.

In the Genesis reading we discover with Abraham that the gift of the spirit – the breath, the wind – of God carries with it the gift of vocation – a calling that is always and everywhere bound up with the calling of a whole people. We are blessed that we might be a blessing to others.

Paul assures the people of Rome – as well as us today – that the spirit – the breath, the wind of God – also carries with it the gift of faith which is accessible to everyone in a way that the law is accessible only to Jews. Faith is a gift to people of every nation, says Paul, and those who are given – and receive – this gift of faith are reckoned as righteous before God.

New life. Faith. Vocation. Something wild is in the air. Can you feel it?

Yesterday, it was my privilege and my delight to gather on retreat with your Wardens, Vestry and Priest at the Convent of the Society of St. Margaret in Roxbury.

It will, no doubt, be among the last retreats to be held in that place. The Sisters have sold the building to a Charter School and will be moving to their Convent in Duxbury. Change is in the air. Everywhere.

We talked of many things, your community of leaders and I, but mostly about community. How they were a learning community of leaders who incarnate – embody – the vision and the mission of this church. It is from them – this incarnational learning community of priest, wardens and vestry – that the community which gathers to worship God in this sacred space learns how to live into – and out of – what you know about who you are as a Body of Christ.

We talked about the foundational issues of your spiritual life – individually and corporately – in terms of identity and intimacy, mortality and vocation.

Toward the end of our time together, as is often the case, we began to talk about how the Wardens and Vestry, together with your Priest, might envision new ways of being together that will more authentically live out your mission to “challenge yourselves – and the community around you – always to celebrate God’s love, beauty and grace in everyone and everything”.

I submit to you that, in order to do that, they – and you – like Nicodemus, must listen closely to the words of the Rabbi from Nazareth in this morning’s gospel passage.

While you are every bit as learned a people as Nicodemus, don’t try to think your way out of the challenges that are before you.

It didn’t work for Nicodemus.

It won’t work for you, either.

How can we be born again and revitalized as a congregation when we’ve got this old building and utility bills and not a whole lot of people?

Here’s my question to you: What if these are the people God has sent you to do the work Jesus asks you to do? What if this IS your ‘critical mass’? Will you still wait, twirling in the wind, for the transformation God has waiting for you?

What if this place, this building, this sanctuary is as good as it gets? While I don’t think you are in danger of an earthquake or a tsunami, what would you do if, God forbid, this place were destroyed by what we euphemistically call a ‘natural disaster’ or a ‘tragic accident’?

Would the destruction of this building destroy this community? I know you better than that.

Yes, I have moments of nostalgia and I have fond memories, but I don’t need this building to contain them. Indeed, this building can’t contain them. I carry them with me in my heart. Always. No one can take them from me. As the Fox said to the Little Prince, “What is essential is invisible to the eye.”

I know that you know that Jesus says, “What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.” Jesus says that new birth will come not ‘from below’ but ‘from above’.

Here’s the good news that was once proclaimed to Abraham, which is now our inheritance: You have been blessed so that you can be a blessing to others. Be faithful to the blessings you have received of faith and vocation so that more blessings will come. And, they will.

Wendell Berry said that the vocation of all Christians is to ‘Plant Sequoias’. So, plant some Sequoias. You won’t see them grow in this life. But, have faith! Seeing what you have planted in faith is not the point for those who have inherited the gift of Life Eternal.

So, plant Sequoias.

Something wild is in the air. Can you feel it?

Jesus says, “The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

Those who are born of the Spirit hold fast to the promise of eternal life, leaving behind that which is not essential.

Listen! Do you not hear it? A wild air is blowing through, bringing with it a climate change – a change that will bring about a transformation in the environment of this place – one that will remove the toxins and elements from that past which have been pollutants, and bring with it the wild winds of vitality and the smoldering embers of faith and vocation and new life.

A wild air that will one day soon bring with it cause to celebrate your own wild and crazy form of Purim on a night whose sky is filled with a Super Moon.

A wild air that will change and transform you, so that you will never again be the same, even as you are kept safe and sheltered from harm, so that you might grow to the full stature of Christ to stand upright before any disaster that befalls you – natural or unnatural. Or, wars or rumors of war.

A wild air that, even now, is whispering these words of assurance in your ear from the lips of Jesus: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him."

And you – and you – and you – and YOU – are the Body of Christ! Not just your priest, wardens and vestry members. YOU are the Body of Christ. You know that.

The question is: what are you going to do about it?

I leave you to consider one of my favorite poems, written by one of my favorite poets, Gerard Manely Hopkins. You may have caught wind of it in the opening prayer of this sermon. “Wild air, world-mothering air / Nestling me everywhere.. . .”

It is his poem to the Mother of God, which may sound odd to invoke in this time of Lent. I assure you, it is not. I leave it with you as prayer and inspiration.

I leave it with you as hope for new birth.

The poem ends in this way:

Be thou then, O thou dear
Mother, my atmosphere;

My happier world, wherein
To wend and meet no sin;

Above me, round me lie
Fronting my froward eye
With sweet and scarless sky.

Stir in my ears, speak there
Of God's love, O live air,
Of patience, penance, prayer:

World-mothering air, air wild,
Wound with thee, in thee isled,

Fold home, fast fold thy child.

 Amen.

Rob Bell Punches Back

I've been out all day at a retreat and will be preaching in the morning at St. John's, Bowdoin Street, Boston on Sunday.

I'll post that sermon later.

Until then, check out this interview with Rob Bell, whose book, "Love Wins" has caused a firestorm of controversy in Evangelical circles.

Rob Bell totally rocks. Hard.

Hat tip to my beloved brother David in Montreal.

The Lord Is My Shepherd

Bonhoeffer called it "The Cost of Discipleship".

Cold comfort when your life is actually on the line.

I am shocked and saddened by the news this morning that threats have been made on the life of the Rt. Rev'd Jo Seoka, Anglican Bishop of Pretoria, South Africa.

According to a report from the Pretoria news service:

Four armed men on Tuesday went to Seoka’s home and threatened to kill him and his wife, warning that they knew of his whereabouts even if he tried to hide.

They visited his home twice on Tuesday and have since made repeated phone calls to his home threatening to kill him.

Fortunately, the bishop and his wife were not at home.

Questions have been raised as to any links between these death threats and the death in November of Seoka's lay chaplain, Ntombekhaya September, a 45 year old business woman.

September, the first woman and lay person to be chaplain to the bishop, was found lying face down on her bed, fully clothed, by Seoka and her domestic worker.

There were apparently no visible signs of injuries to her body, which was found after Seoka called a locksmith to open her house when he could not contact her.

Police have declared the death a murder and are on the hunt for a Congolese national they believe may be able to help them in solving the murder. The man is believed to work for a security company and is involved in selling clothes and fixing computers.

The Pretoria news also reported that:

Seoka’s security has since been intensified amid fears that the suspects might attempt to act on their threats.

“At the moment, we have no information about who is behind these threats or their motives,” said the SA Council of Churches, of which Seoka is the president.

“However, we recognise that Bishop Seoka has long been an outspoken advocate for social and economic justice.

“He is also a courageous opponent of corruption and unethical business practices in his capacity as a leader of the ecumenical movement.

“We cannot take these threats lightly because we know that clergy are often vulnerable.

“We have been shocked and saddened by past incidents in which clergy and church leaders have been murdered,” the council said.

Brooklyn police station commissioner Brigadier Andre Wiese was not yet aware of the threats made to the bishop but said police were hot on the trail of the man they were looking for after September’s murder.

Obviously, there is much to the story that can not, perhaps, at this time, be revealed.

The work of the Gospel does not come without risk or cost.

There is both risk and cost to being a disciple and an "outspoken advocate for social and economic justice" and "a courageous opponent of corruption and unethical business practices".

I ache for the people of South Africa as they continue the long struggle of pulling themselves up out of the ashes of Apartheid to form themselves into a nation.

I grieve for the people of Haiti, as they, with amazing, inspirational displays of faith and hope, pull themselves up from the ruins of the earthquake and the after shocks of cholera and dysentery.

I weep for the people of Japan as they pull themselves up from the ruins of the Tsunami with dignity and deep spirituality in a nation which has been called "non-religious".

Having a window on the world's suffering is both sobering and humbling. Prayers and donating a few shekels at humanitarian agencies are about all I can offer. It seems such a small thing in the face of such monstrous disaster.

I find comfort in the story of the "Good Samaritan" who tended to the man as best he could, leaving the man he found beaten and left for dead on the side of the road in the hands of the ancient manifestation of that cultural equivalent of social service agency.

I can't be there - in Japan, South Africa, or Haiti - but I can provide for those who are. And, I can pray.

Speaking to the Pretoria News, Seoka said:

“I have not done anything stupid or anything to provoke anybody.

“We have tried to identify who our enemy might be but we cannot come up with anybody.

“They have phoned here a number of times and repeated those (death) threats.

“They have also said they know where I am and where I will be, but my schedule is published by the church for all to know anyway.

“We suspect they have been following us because after the police came here, they said now that we have informed the cops about them, we must try to be safe and sleep well,” he said.

Asked whether he had beefed up his security, all Seoka would say was “the Lord is my Shepherd”.

"The Lord is my Shepherd."

The 23rd Psalm is so familiar, I sometimes say the words without considering their importance and significance in times of trouble.

I had forgotten the solace and comfort these words have brought me in times of grief and anxiety and fear and desolation.

The Lord is my shepherd,
I shall not want;
He makes me lie down in green pastures.
He leads me beside still waters;
He restores my soul.
He leads me in paths of righteousness
for His name's sake.

Even though I walk through the valley
of the shadow of death,
I fear no evil;
for You are with me;
Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me
all the days of my life;
and I shall dwell in the house of the
Lord forever.

As I continue to pray for the people of Japan and Haiti, for the people of Christ Church, New Zealand, for those in NOLA who are still trying to rebuild their lives after Katrina, and now, for the people of South Africa and especially, Bishop Jo Seoka, his wife and family, I will use this wonderful psalm as part of my meditation and prayer.

I invite you to join me.

The world has more suffering than one person can possibly bear. Thank God we don't have to bear it all. We have a Shepherd to help us carry our burdens which can bring us confidence and hope in times of danger and trouble, sorrow or grief.

May The Good Shepherd continue to visit all the places in the world where there is pain and suffering so that goodness and mercy may follow all the days of our lives.

We live in sure and certain hope.

The Via Francigena

Oh, woe!

If you read the newspapers, what you know about the church - any church, but especially The Episcopal Church - is this:

The church is in decline. We're 'hemorrhaging' members. All the mainline Protestant churches but even Roman Catholic churches are in decline.

We're informed that "brand loyalty" to a particular denomination does not matter to most people as much as things like the church being in close proximity to their home, the provision of child care, support groups, and a high entertainment value to the "service" (never referred to as a "liturgy") with "modern" music and "contemporary language" (Sometimes referred to, with notable an unhelpful disdain, by some church folk, as "Church for Dummies") .

To read the papers, you get the message that Christianity is passe and irrelevant while the number of Muslims is increasing daily. Some are interpreting this as a mild, subtle manifestation of the current wave of Islamophobia that seems on the rise. See? The church is failing and Muslims are on the rise. Beware!

The "answer" to the problem seems to be a return to the 'basics' of Christianity which finds translation in a "Religion of No": no sex outside of marriage, no women in authority, no LGBT people, no .... fill in the blank with your favorite prejudice cloaked in white robes.

There are variations on the theme, but you get the picture.

In February, the Wall Street Journal posted an article by Russell D. Moore entitled, "Where have all the Presbyterians gone"?

It would appear from both the article and the headline that the folks at the WSJ are practically gleeful about the travails of the mainline Protestant churches. Funny, but the article doesn't actually mention Presbyterians, except in a list of denominations with which fewer and fewer American Christians identify.

It seems that the current poster child for the "Failed Church Du Jour" is the Presbyterians. Sigh! I suppose everybody's got to have their turn in the 'Media Shed' with the hickory stick.

It should be noted that Russell D. Moore points out that, along with the growth of nondenominational churches, Southern Baptists have become the nation's largest Protestant denomination.

"Many of us believe denominations can represent fidelity to living traditions of local congregations that care about what Jesus cared about - personal conversion, discipleship, mission and community."

Moore is confident that such is the case with the Southern Baptist Convention.

Damien Thompson, a religious writer for the Telegraph UK (who was once uncharitably described by The Church Times UK as a "blood-crazed ferret"), reports, in breathless, "breaking news" this morning that, the Ordinariate for Anglicans converting to Rome (will be) 'ready by the end of the year'.

Two Anglican 'flying bishops' will take up the special canonical structure, which allows groups of Anglicans to come into full Communion with Rome without losing their Anglican identity.

I don't know about you, but I'm really weary about being lectured - subtly and not so subtly - about what's wrong with the church. I long for any sign of honest inquiry and discernment from those in my church and other churches. You know. So there's some semblance of "fair and balanced" reporting.

So, let's start with the numbers.

Pope Benedict XVI announced the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum coetibus in November 2009. It came as a response to requests from prominent Anglo-Catholics and offered a new canonical structure, similar to military dioceses called personal ordinariates in order to allow groups of Anglicans to enter into communion with Rome without losing their Anglican identity. The personal ordinariate covers a geographical area but has its own leadership and answers to the Pope.

At that time, four Anglican bishops, seven Anglican clergy and 300 Anglican laity were reportedly ready to sign on.

On the other side of the equation, The Church of England reports that, since 2005,

"14 former Roman Catholic priests have sought to be received into ordained ministry within the Church of England. As there is also discretion at diocesan level for acceptance into the ministry, not all candidates are centrally recorded, so the national figure is likely to be higher."

In February of this year, Bosco Peters, a very fine Anglican priest from New Zealand reported on his blog that:

Anglicans in Peru are setting up an Ordinariate for Roman Catholic priests who are keen to join the Anglican Church. Anglicans accept the validity of those priest’s orders. Exploration is also under way to incorporate independent catholic bishops. Many of these clergy may bring their congregations with them.

In little over a decade the diocese of Peru has grown from having four priests to having 35 priests. 10 RC priests are exploring joining the diocese. Similar movements are happening in Uruguay, Ecuador, and Argentina.

William Godfrey, the Bishop of Peru, thinks that Pope Benedict XVI’s positive words about Anglicanism may have helped the move.

Around the world Anglicans are not keeping statistics about this, but estimates are that for every person moving from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism there are four moving in the other direction.

According to the Episcopal Church Annual Report ("The Red Book"), twelve to fifteen (12-15) RC clergy come to The Episcopal Church each year.

So, that's between 60-75 RC clergy who have become Episcopal priests in the past five years. It would appear that Dr. Peters' reported estimate is pretty close to being accurate.

Which, of course, doesn't include the numbers of laity - especially women - who have left Rome to become Episcopal priests. I was stunned to learn, a few years ago, that my name was still listed as a member of St. Elizabeth's Church in the city where I was born. Even though that church has been closed, the building demolished, and the land sold. I'm sure I'm still counted on the books someplace. Somewhere.

The media seem oblivious to the fact that The Via Francigena - the ancient road which served as a pilgrimage between Rome and Canterbury, passing through England, France, Switzerland and Italy - is a two-way street.

Is it their ignorance or is it that "swimming the Tiber" (going from Canterbury to Rome) is somehow more exciting than "swimming the Thames" (going from Rome to Canterbury)?

Or, are the folks at the national church level - The Episcopal Church or any mainline Protestant denomination - not media savvy enough to capitalize on this as a way to celebrate evangelism?

Or, is this an example of the sort of impervious, above it all, stiff upper lip, "tut-tut, there, there" which is in the Anglican DNA that communicates, without saying it, "Frankly, my dears, we don't give a damn."

Or, when placed side-by-side with the relentless reporting of Muslim being "the fastest growing religion in the world" is an attempt to awaken sleeping American Christians to a return to a similar, stricter religious experience? You know. The way it used to be "back in the day" when doing anything BUT going to church on Sunday morning was considered a step away from a slippery slide into debauchery?

Is the church in decline? In terms of numbers? Absolutely.

Why is that? I'm not exactly sure. Is it a call to metanoia - to turn away from the slick marketing techniques which bring people to church but doesn't feed their souls and sends them away even hungrier?

In The Jesus Way, Eugene Peterson says that:

"the great American innovation in congregations is to turn it into a consumer enterprise. It didn't take long for some of our brothers and sisters to develop consumer congregations .... (that convey) the gospel in consumer terms: entertainment, satisfaction, excitement, adventure, problem solving, whatever". But as Peterson concludes, "this is not the way God brings us into conformity with the life of Jesus."

I certainly welcome honest inquiry and discernment from those in my church, along with other churches about how we have been doing this, how we haven't, and what we need to change.

I also welcome a rigorous commitment from our churches to "proclaim the good news" and "publish glad tidings, tidings of peace" that God "who made all nations is not willing one soul should perish, lost in shades of night".

I'm not talking about sensational stories like those of Fr. Alberto Cutie, the former RC priest and television talk show host who left the church after being photographed on the beach kissing his lover (whom he would later, eventually, marry).

At the end of the day, I really don't think those kinds of stories are very helpful - except to sell newspapers.

Perhaps it's time for an Ecumenical Gatherings of Church Folk - not just the guys in purple shirts - to prayerfully consider the issue of church decline and work together to discern what God might be telling us.

Perhaps they'd do this with some encouragement from the Religious News Media who might give some inspiration to Christians who might actually and honestly seek to work together, across geographical and religious boundaries and ancient religious feuds, to reveal a variety of images and manifestations of Christ in the world.

Could it be that this is precisely what God is calling us to do?

My prayer is that we might meet each other on "The Via Francigena" and, perhaps, leave the path and cross some borders so that, together or individually, we might meet and find Jesus.

I think that would be the sort of "Good News" that would actually gladden the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

A Higher Authority

This past weekend, three Orthodox Jewish businessmen triggered security concerns by conducting a prayer ritual on board a flight from Mexico City to Los Angeles.

According to a report on the CNN Belief Blog, "Passengers on Alaska Airlines Flight 241 became alarmed when the three men began to pray out loud. "Shortly after takeoff ... three passengers were praying out loud in a language other than Spanish," according to an airline spokeswoman."

The report continues,

"When the planed landed at LAX it was greeted by members of airport police, the FBI and Customs and Border Protection.

According to FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller, the men were questioned and their baggage was searched before they were cleared to go.

"The men were extremely cooperative," Eimiller said.

Airport police Sgt. Belinda Nettles told CNN there was never any threat to passenger or aircraft safety."

Alaskan Airlines reported that:

Flight attendants instructed everyone to stay seated with their seatbelts fastened as the aircraft flew through turbulence shortly after takeoff. The three passengers disregarded repeated requests, however, and stood up several times to retrieve objects from their luggage in the overhead bin that the crew had never seen, including small black boxes fastened with what appeared to be black tape. The crew learned after the plane landed that these were tefillin boxes worn during the prayer ritual.

The men prayed aloud together in a language unfamiliar to the crew while wearing what appeared to be black tape and wires strapped to their forearms and foreheads and wires on their chests. Their actions and behavior made some other travelers and the crew uneasy. The three passengers responded, but provided very little explanation, to a flight attendant’s questions about the tefillin boxes and what they were doing.

Later in the flight, two of the three passengers visited the lavatories together while the third waited in the aisle and continually looked around the cabin and toward the flight deck door. Flight attendants thought he appeared anxious, as if he were standing guard.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Was it just that these three men were praying on the plane (Imagine!) or that they "looked funny" while praying. On the plane. Loudly.

"In a language other than Spanish"? (The flight originated in Mexico City).

And, acting "strangely"?

During weekday prayers, some Orthodox Jewish men wear teflillin, or phylacteries - black leather straps wrapped around the left arm and around the forehead. The straps are connected to small boxes with tiny scrolls containing Jewish scriptures. Many Orthodox Jewish men also wear a prayer shawl called a tallit under their clothes, with knotted fringes at each of the four corners.

One would think that the "small boxes with tiny scrolls containing Jewish scripture" would (1) pass security (2) be part of the "diversity training" all corporate employees are required to take so that flight attendants, etc, are aware that these things would be part of the luggage of Orthodox Jewish men.

One might also think that, especially in these days after 9/11 that Orthodox Jewish men might understand the "strangeness" of praying together loudly. In public. On a plane. In Hebrew. In their religious garb.

Or, perhaps, the current wave of Islamophobia has anesthetized other religious minorities to the suspicions and prejudices they have raised. It's easy to be lulled into such a false sense of security when the spotlight is on someone else.

The article continues:

"According to the Anti-Defamation League, this issue comes up occasionally. Last year after a similar incident, the ADL and Chabad sent a letter and a flier to all the major airlines explaining teflillin, said Deborah Lauter, ADL’s director of civil rights.

"We understand these prayer items may not be familiar. We gave them the suggestions that they do training about it. We had hoped they would include this in their training," Lauter said.

She said she is sending a letter to Alaska Airlines again to remind them.

Lauter said there is an onus on both parties in such a situation.

“The safety of passengers is paramount, and in this age of heightened security people are on edge. I think it’s understandable why people would have this reaction. There has to be a give and take too with the passengers. If they weren’t cooperating, that’s a different problem than religious sensitivity,” she said.

"Education is a two way street. We hope airlines will include this training with their staffs," Lauter said. “It also wouldn't hurt for passengers who are going to be participating in this ritual to alert the staff ahead of time.”

"An onus on both parties".

That sounds like a reasonable and fair enough statement.

The Airlines also issued a statement of apology:

"Alaska Airlines embraces the cultural and religious diversity of our passengers and employees. We apologize for the experience these three passengers went through after landing in Los Angeles as well as for any inconvenience to our other customers onboard," Alaska Airlines spokeswoman Bobbie Egan said.

Alaska Airlines said it plans to update its awareness training of Orthodox Jews and is reaching out to the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle for help.

Also fair enough.

Why am I thinking that this may not be the first time this has happened, but it won't be the last?

These are squirrely times. "Homeland Security" has done its best to keep the citizenry alert to suspicious activity which may be part of terrorism.

There's been an earthquake and a Tsunami in Japan that has caused the deaths of thousands of people, destroyed homes and exposed the people of Japan to nuclear poisoning.

All of this has happened even as Haiti and New Zealand are still recovering from recent earthquakes.

The Middle East remains in fragile political condition, with fighting continuing in Libya and gas prices soaring at the pumps - increasing the cost of travel and pinching wallets and purses.

I suppose it's not surprising that, at least from time to time, some of us are going to overreact.

It would be good to remember that we all - every last one of us - reports to a "higher authority". Call it "God". "Jehovah". "Allah". "Jesus." "The Light". "Conscience." "Jimminy Cricket". "The Force". "Higher Power".

Whatever the name you use to summon up the parts of your better self, this would be the time to do that.

Otherwise, it could get even weirder in the world than it already is.

Oh, my heart!

This is Leo. He's a two year old (+/-) Poodle / Jack Russell Terrier Mix who was rescued a year ago from a situation of "hording" with 16 other dogs. He's been living with his foster mom and dad since he was rescued.

I'm thinking of adopting him.

No, seriously.

I've been thinking about this for the past six months. Yes, we already have two dogs, Lenny and CoCo, whom I adore. But, at least for a little while longer, we are going to have to live apart from each other.

I hate it.

I really miss the morning ritual of feeding the pups, taking them for a walk, playing with them. I love having to come home - not being away too long during the day - because they have to be walked and played with.

I love coming home to them at the end of the day, feeding them, taking them for a walk, playing with them. I love snuggling and cuddling with them on the couch as I read or watch TV.

So, Ms. Conroy and I talked about it. Actually, she's the one who found Leo online at New England Poodle Rescue.

My biggest concern was allergies. Mine. I'm terribly allergic to cats and some breeds of dogs. I'm fine with dogs with "hair" vs. "fur". So, I'm limited to the kinds of pets I can have.

I had a "home visit" with Leo and his foster mom this morning. As you can see, he's really a cutie. He's very silky. I was with him for more than an hour. No wheeze. No sneeze. No harsh cough. Not even a scratchy throat.

He's very smart - given his genetic pool, his IQ is probably higher than mine. He has clearly bonded with his foster mom. Never barked once, although I understand that he doesn't do well with most men - especially big, adolescent young men. One can only imagine the story behind that anxiety.

Which is the thing. He's anxious. He wouldn't come to me. At. all. His foster mom and I tried two situations to see if it would change. She went into the bathroom and closed the door and stayed for a few minutes.

No dice. He just walked around the apartment, nervously looking for her.

So, we sat and visited for another 10 minutes or so. She told me that this is pretty much the way he is in all new situations - even when she visits her mom here in Cambridge. He's fine with other dogs, but when she takes him for a walk, he cowers and shivers if someone stops to visit with him.

After we chatted for a bit more, his foster mom then suggested she leave the apartment for about 10 minutes and leave us alone with each other.

Better. I kept him on his leash and walked around, talking to him in soothing tones. He did get up on the couch and sat with me. Even allowed me to pat him - a bit reluctantly and hesitantly but basically, he was okay. He didn't shiver or cower. Actually, he even seemed to enjoy it.

I know I did.

When his foster mom returned, he was obviously pleased, but then sat under the chair where she sat so no one could get to him. Wouldn't come when I called to him.

Sigh.

We've left it that I will think things over for a few days before considering taking him for a two week period of time. His foster mom thinks that, once I've fed him a few times, walked with him, slept with him, etc., he'll adjust.

I guess you can tell I'm a little disappointed. It's not that I thought there would be "instant bonding". If I'm honest, however, I guess I hoped there would be. You know - a sort of "Ah ha! Yes! This is the one!"

It's not that he isn't "the one". It's just that I don't know that right now. I guess I'm not only disappointed but a little anxious about investing two weeks - for him and for me - if it doesn't work out.

It's like dating someone, right? I was never good at the dating scene. Ever.

So, what do you think? Are first impressions really that important? Is he just "shy" or has he been permanently scarred by his first few months of life where he was so badly neglected? Will he ever "adjust" and "get better"? Can I expect other manifestations of his anxiety?

He's a good walker - doesn't tug or pull on the leash - but his foster mom says he does get skittish when other people stop to visit. No growling. No barking. No biting. He just shakes and cowers. Poor little guy.

Do I take the risk? What if, in two weeks, it doesn't work out? His foster mom says she'll take him back, of course, so he'll be okay, I suppose. But, will I?

I invite your prayers and wisdom and advice as I go through this time of discernment.

Come quickly!

Today's collect calls us to pray:

"Almighty God, whose blessed Son was led by the Spirit to be tempted by Satan: Come quickly to help us who are assaulted by many temptations; and, as you know the weaknesses of each of us, let each one find you mighty to save; through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen."

Come quickly!

I understand.

The gospel (Matthew 4:1-11) appointed for the day is the reason for this prayerful plea. Jesus is being "assaulted by many temptations". Very serious temptations to sell his soul for a crust of bread, the promise of immortality and dominion over the earth.

My first temptation on this first Sunday in the Season of Lent is to be assaulted by the uncontainable hope contained in the deep green buds of tulips and crocus which are pushing their heads through the hard ground.

I can't wait for Spring. It's coming, of course, in just a few more weeks - on 21 March. And yes, the date on the calendar does not mean that we still might not get at least one more "good snow" (as they say in New England) or that the temperatures will automatically rise to more moderate levels.

It's been a particularly difficult Winter.  I am waiting for the promise - the hint - the smell of Spring as a woman awaiting her lover.  My pulse quickens when I smell Spring in the air and feel the promise of its warmth embrace by body. Its gentle rain seductively fingers my face and hair as in foreplay.

Spring is the time when the Earth awakens to become our Cosmic Lover - seducing us with brilliant color, new sounds, new stirrings. The temptation is to fall to its power too soon, knowing that the ultimate, eventual seduction is inevitable, anyway.

I am preparing my heart the way people are now preparing their garden beds - pulling out the old, dead brown leaves and twigs, raking over the cold, hard dirt to awaken it to receptivity.

I rejoice to hear the birds singing to the Earth in the morning, raising songs of Hosanna's to the Lord who is the Giver of All Life, and inspiring the whole round Earth to open herself to new life which will become their banquet and their feast.

More than a crust of bread, with the promise of immortality that is more powerful than the seduction of the idea of world dominion. 

Come quickly, Lord, as soon as these flowers open. Before they open. So we may be reassured that you do not leave us forever but return again and again to awaken in us a love for all of God's creation and creatures.

Including you - our Love, our Beloved, our Lover.

On the Road Again

Spring Break is almost over. In a few hours, I'm on the road again to New Jersey then on to Cambridge. Classes resume on Monday. My first class is Tuesday.  YAY!

It's been really nice to be "home" again, but I'm really looking forward to returning to classes.

That being said, I can not believe what is happening at the gas pump. O.M.G.!!!!

My friend Doug sent these cartoons with the message, "I'm sure that everyone reading these will find at least one that makes them laugh."

These were the ones that made me laugh.  It's always the best medicine.

I hope you find some "medicine" in the ones that make you laugh. It may be the only way we get through these "economically fragile" times.

At least, as long as laughter is still free and Scrooges in Washington don't figure out a way to tax that.

v. "Let not the needy, O Lord, be forgotten."

r. "Nor the hope of the poor be taken away."

Ain't That A B-tch!

Jesus called this morning. He wants his religion back.

Actually, He wants us to stop calling ourselves Christian. Mostly because, He says, we're giving him a bad name.

Case in point: The American Family Association (AFA) has just gotten wind of the fact that the American Broadcasting Association (ABC), one of three major television networks, is planning to run a series on the book, "Good Christian Bitches".

Or, as the AFA demures, "Good Christian B-tches".

That's about the only thing they are demurring. Mostly, they are in a hot sweaty lather about the proposed TV series, saying,

It's a Christian-bashing version of ABC's current "Desperate Housewives." The show centers on a recently divorced mother of two who moves back to the affluent neighborhood where she grew up to find herself in the whirling midst of gossip, Botox and fraud.

Disney-owned ABC has no reservations about creating hate speech against Christians, but you can be sure they would never consider a show called "Good Muslim B-tches" or "Good Jewish B-tches."

With a title like "Good Christian B-tches," you can imagine what kind of show it will be. Even if they change the title, the content will still mock people of faith.

You can always depend on these folks for a good laugh. Except, they ain't jokin'. Indeed, if you head on over to their site, you can click on a link that will add your name to a petition to demand that ABC drop the show.

I'm sure ABC is shocked - SHOCKED, I tell you! - that they would get this reaction from the folks at the AFA.

Now, I haven't heard that the AFA has come out, as it were, against the TV Program "Desperate Housewives" - the entertainment value of which is completely lost on me. I find that program generally insulting to women, even though I know that there are 'desperate housewives' - of all sorts of religious persuasion - living in affluent suburbs all over the country.

I just find that program an unbearably sad commentary on the soft underbelly of heterosexism and classism. It's not funny. Well, it's not my kind of humor.

Some of us, who actively work against these prejudices and their various forms of oppression, are not amused.

The folks at the Parents Television Council, have also issued a statement which at least begins to address that point. A little.

“ABC’s decision is not only an affront to women, it blatantly attacks the world’s largest faith," PTC President Tim Winter said in a statement Wednesday. "The ‘b-word’ is toxic and is used to degrade, abuse, harass, bully and humiliate women. And the ‘Christian’ element only adds insult to injury. Regardless of whether the title ultimately makes it to broadcast, ABC has publicly proclaimed its values and it has tarnished the Disney brand."

Not only is is an affront to women . . . it blatantly attacks Christianity. One gets the message very quickly that the former is much more important to these folks than the latter.

Make no mistake. That's because, to these folks, it is.

If you rush too quickly by this whole embarrassing if not somewhat humorous kerfuffle, however, you'll miss a subtle point which Sarah Morice Brubaker raised in her essay for Religion Dispatches.

"Okay, this is fantastic. I mean, how lovely that the AFA now believes hate speech is worth taking seriously! And how lovely that its spokespeople can run mental scenarios in which hate speech is directed at Jews and Muslims. (Gosh, wonder if they’ve heard about that guy who said that Muslims, as a group, are inbred and have low IQs?).

Clearly the eschaton is upon us. The American Family Association is worried about hate speech and an organization headed by Bozell is concerned about misogyny. The lion is laying down with the lamb. The messiah is due any minute. Best get right with God, folks, because it’s all Hicks paintings, angelic choirs and vegetarianism from here on out."

Before you all rise to meet the Lord in the air, it may be a good idea to get this all into perspective.

The conversation has been swirling in feminist circles for a few years now that we ought to take back the word and, "Say it loud, I'm a Bitch And I'm Proud."

It's sort of the way African Americans have taken back the word "Black" or some LGBT people have begun to call themselves "Queer".

The thinking goes that a woman who adopts the label of “bitch” for herself subverts the social stigma associated with women being forthright, assertive, and selfish.

As Tina Fey once said on Saturday Night Live in response to the shameful sexist attacks on then Presidential Candidate, Hillary Clinton, "Bitch is the new Black."

The important thing is that women can call themselves and each other "bitch" but no one else can. See?

Sorry, that doesn't work for me. It doesn't translate the way "Black" does. I don't think it's appropriate in any situation to use the word for a woman that is most appropriately applied to a female dog.

But, I digress. And, it's so easy to do with the folks on the Right who actually think they are "right". Where to begin? Oh, right. I'm back.

The point is - at least for me - that, once again, the hypocrisy of the so-called "Conservative Christian Right" is exposed publicly.

You might remember that these good Christian folk did this just recently when they slammed Rob Bell's new book, "Love Wins" before they even read it.

Actually, if these 'good Christian folk' were to be true to the Scripture they worship and adore ("Bibliolatry. The idolatry of the Bible. From which their Theolatry - The idolatry of their own theology - flows.) they would, in fact, see all women as bitches - and objects of disdain, insignificant chattel, manipulative, scheming seductresses and the cause of The Fall of MANkind.

That's pretty much the image of women throughout Holy Writ - save for a few passages like Ester and Ruth and Judith, or where Jesus is very clear about elevating the status of women in antiquity.

I don't think you're going to see a TV add with 'good Christian women,  all neatly coiffured and doe-eyed, saying softly and demurely, "I'm not a b-itch". As I recall, that didn't work so well for Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell.

Neither do I think we're going to see any adds on TV with discretely attired women wearing cross jewelry or choir robes saying, "I'm a feminist." You certainly won't get good Christian men in proper business suits and helmet-head hair saying that.

Oh, maybe in the eschaton but I don't think there'll be television in the eschaton.

The real reason these folks are in a hot sweat about this whole thing is because the very title of the proposed show exposes their hypocrisy.  Indeed, I would suggest that ABC consider changing the title to "Good Christian Bitches and Bastards" - because many of these people (not all but many) display the very antithesis of good Christian behavior.  Indeed, some of them are the most mean-spirited creatures on the face of God's green earth.

They consistently shoot themselves in the foot and then blame everyone else because they're limping.  Being "persecuted" for one's religious beliefs is part of their whole gestalt. If they're not feeling persecuted, they create the situation to prove their point and satisfy their Theolatry.

Which is why Jesus wants his religion back.

I don't know.  Maybe the show could work, if - IF - they add a segment at the end of each show with a group of real Christian women who would review the evening's offering, sigh, roll their eyes, and walk away in disgust.

Or, perhaps it could end, like the Vicar of Dibly (Talk about a good Christian bitch! Here's one of my favorite moments from that show) with a few "knock-knock" jokes.

Knock, knock. Who's there? Orange. Orange who? Orange you glad you're not THAT kind of Christian?

Or, maybe, like Jesus, the women would just move a stick around in the dirt for a while and then say, "Let the one who is without sin cast the first stone."

I'm betting that the folks from AFA and PTC would be the first to comment, "Now, those women - the ones at the end of the show - are the REAL B-itches."

And, God, sitting from Her Heavenly throne, would throw Her head back in laughter, slap Her ample thigh, turn and say to Jesus and all the angels and archangels, and the cherubim and seraphim and all the company of heaven, "Ain't that a b-itch!"