Monthly Archives: October 2011

Give to God that which is God’s: A sermon for Proper 24, Year A

Posted on by
Reply

So, this is some of what I intended to preach this morning…

October 16, 2011

I don’t often get preached at. Around here, I’m usually doing the preaching, and when I’m not, when someone else—Carol, Margaret, or Max, for example—is preaching, they’re not usually preaching with me in mind (except as a critic, perhaps) they are trying to help you understand and hear God’s word. I was at diocesan convention this weekend and in his sermon at the convention Eucharist, the Bishop preached to us, to all of us, clergy and lay people, gathered together to make decisions for the Diocese of Milwaukee. Continue reading →

Reforming the structures–what about Diocesan conventions?

Posted on by
2

So I was sitting in the room today, paying attention to the day’s business and I started reflecting on what we were doing in the context of the larger issues facing the church both nationally and locally. Such issues and the need for change were acknowledged–in Bishop Miller’s sermon last night and address to the convention today, and in Assistant for Congregational Development Peggy Bean’s report as well. Still, that need for change and for thinking about change was not reflected in the business of the day. We elected people to Executive Committee and Standing Committee (as well as other offices), debated resolutions, and passed the budget. It was very much like conventions I had attended in the previous two years in the Diocese of Milwaukee, and before that, in the Diocese of Upper South Carolina.

Two things struck me more than anything else. First of all, the age of those in attendance at the Eucharist yesterday evening. We were old, probably 90% of us over 50. Second, our Eucharist was celebrated in a church that was perhaps a symbol of the church that existed in the 19th and 20th century–a huge edifice, the nave constructed in 1866, capable of seating 400 or 500 people, in a downtown filled with boarded up buildings or, surprisingly, a lively nightlife, if the streets I drove through late in the evening were any indication. In other words, it was a building constructed in a different era, culture, and for a different church. They’re doing something remarkable and new, however, having begun a hospitality center for the homeless this past spring that has seen remarkable growth in the numbers of those involved both in volunteering and those seeking help.

Our conventions–the very notion of them–are a product of a different era, different culture, and different church. They are constructed on a legislative model, necessary of course, but are they capable of being the places in which creative thinking about ministry and mission might occur? We elect officers, debate resolutions and budgets, all the while the hard questions of what it might mean to be the Episcopal Church in the twenty-first century are not being discussed.

What would it look like if instead of debating minimum compensation packages, health insurance, and concealed carry, we had discussions about the future ministry and mission of the Episcopal Church in Madison, Racine, Richland Center, and the Diocese of Milwaukee?

For info on what we did today, here’s the website for Diocesan Convention.

Previous posts on the need for structural change in the Episcopal Church here, here, and here.

Debating the principles of Biblical interpretation with Atheists

Posted on by
Reply

Trust me, it’s not a pretty sight.

Mark Shea asks: “Does Evolutionary Science disprove the Faith?”

Jerry Coyne takes issue: “Catholics claim that lies are truer than truth”

Ross Douthat chimes in.

Coyne’s response to Douthat.

Andrew Sullivan’s comments here and here.

Coyne assumes that readers of the Bible are completely arbitrary in their approach to scripture; that they decide randomly, what to take as “literal fact” and what to take as metaphorical. While that may be the case for many fundamentalists, it is not for those readers who have any theological education, and that is true whether one is talking about 21st century Christians or 5th century Christians. Certain texts are problematic, although the problems are very often quite different in different historical or cultural contexts. Thus, the Fathers had great difficulty in the Exodus text that will be read on Sunday in many churches, a text that references “the backside of God.”

Many atheists are fundamentalists in that they assert the only possible reading of a text is its “literal” interpretation, whatever that may be. Interpreters since Philo, at least, have sought deeper meaning in biblical texts that were problematic in a literal reading. Augustine went so far as to say that any possible interpretation of a text that was plausible given the words on the page, was perhaps a legitimate interpretation. Coyne would find Augustine’s “literal” interpretation of Genesis 1 nonsense. The point is that for thoughtful readers of Scripture, a literal reading in many cases, perhaps in most, is nonsensical.

Look forward, not back: A United Methodist Pastor on history and the future

Posted on by
1

I’m making a very simple point here: Let’s stop comparing our present to our past. Our context is different from those other places and eras. Discipleship in the 21st century may have nothing to do with church attendance, or baptisms, or recorded professions of faith. It may have nothing to do with buildings, denominations or clergy.

So let’s quit trying to rebuild, recapture, redo old-time Methodism, whatever it was. Stop worrying about “death tsunamis” and “declining attendance” and “shrinking budgets.”

The serious disciple of Jesus only has one real question to answer: What does it mean to follow Jesus here and now?

via  The United Methodist Portal.

“Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me”

Posted on by
Reply

Bishop Morlino of the Catholic Diocese of Madison, has instructed his clergy to limit the sharing of wine at communion with the laity. Here’s the article.

His decision comes after the Archbishop of Phoenix announced a similar change. Stories about that are here, with a riposte from Anthony Ruff here.

I’m hesitant to comment about development in other denominations because of “the mote in my own eye.” But as a pastor, and as a historian of the period in Christian history when the debate over reception of communion in both kinds burned hot, I find this sad. I won’t debate the legal merits of the decision or even the theological basis (of course Jesus Christ is fully present in both bread and wine). What bothers me is the implicit sacerdotalism and clericalism. To worry about spillage of wine or that some might receive it irreverently seems code language implying that only priests can approach the sacrament. The sharing of the chalice by lay people with lay people is an important symbol of the fact that we are all the Body of Christ and that we all are equally worthy (or unworthy) to approach the holy.

And then there are Jesus’ words:

In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” (I Corinthians 11:25-26)

All baptized Christians are welcome to receive communion in both kinds at Eucharists at Grace and other Episcopal Churches and we encourage lay people to become chalice bearers.

Profile in Courage: The Archbishop of Canterbury’s visit to Zimbabwe

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a remarkable story unfolding in Africa. The Archbishop of Canterbury is visiting Zimbabwe, where the Anglican Church is caught up in the world-wide controversy over the ongoing rule of Robert Mugabe. A close friend of Mugabe, Nolbert Kunonga was Bishop of Harare. He was excommunicated and replaced by Chad Gandiya. This conflict has resulted in Zimbabwe Anglicans being locked out of their churches, beaten, and arrested.

On Sunday, Rowan Williams preached to a gathering of some 15,000 people. In his sermon, he said:

You know very well, dear brothers and sisters, what it means to have doors locked in your faces by those who claim the name of Christians and Anglicans. You know how those who by their greed and violence have refused the grace of God try to silence your worship and frustrate your witness in the churches and schools and hospitals of this country. But you also know what Jesus’ parable teaches us so powerfully – that the will of God to invite people to his feast is so strong that it can triumph even over these mindless and Godless assaults. Just as the Risen Jesus breaks through the locked doors of fear and suspicion, so he continues to call you and empower you in spite of all efforts to defeat you. And in the Revelation to John, the Lord proclaims that he has set before us an open door that no-one can shut. It is the door of his promise, the door of his mercy, the door into the feast of his Kingdom.

Directly critical of both colonialism and the continued rape of Africa’s natural resources for the material gain of a few, Williams spoke truth to power. He also sought a meeting with Mugabe where he could directly voice his concerns about the Anglican Church and about the overall situation in Zimbabwe.

The conflict over human sexuality within the Anglican Communion also played a role in this visit, with both Mugabe and Kunonga raising it in rather nasty terms. A spokesman for Mugabe is quoted by The Guardian:

“The second issue that the president wants this man of God to clarify is why his Anglican church thinks homosexuality is good for us and why it should be prescribed for us. He thinks the archbishop will be polite enough to point to him that portion of the Great Book [that] sanctions homosexuality and sanctions sanctions.”

I’ve been critical of the Archbishop in the past and continue to disagree with some of his positions, and his plans for the Anglican Covenant. Still, for him to challenge Mugabe directly in such a way is courageous. I wonder how many other leaders, political or religious, would be as brave. It’s also instructive to see how the Anglican debates are used by Mugabe and Kunonga to de-legitimize Williams’ message.

I’m also more than a little disappointed in the reaction among Episcopalians to this visit and the Archbishop’s words. While the Episcopal Cafe has covered the story, I’ve seen no mention from any of the bloggers who are most critical of Williams’ actions toward the Episcopal Church. I wonder why.

The text of Williams’ sermon is here. The Guardian’s article is here. Coverage by Thinking Anglicans is thorough; an article from the Episcopal Cafe.

A reflection from Nick Spencer on CNN’s Belief Blog:

God’s generosity, our generosity: A Sermon for Proper 23, Year A

Posted on by
Reply

October 9, 2011

On the surface, the parables we heard this morning seem quite familiar to us. Hearing a story about a king throwing a wedding banquet may conjure up for us memories of the royal wedding last spring. All the more so, because one of the chief fascinations with that event was the suspense about the wedding dress and what all of the guests would be wearing. In contemporary culture, weddings are one of those few occasions we have when people get dressed up in their finest and expect a really good party. Continue reading →

Witness to history: The ordination of Scott Anderson

Posted on by
4

And a little bit of a participant, too.

Scott Anderson’s ordination took place on a glorious fall day in Madison. It’s warm and sunny, and the leaves are reaching the peak of fall color. On the street corner opposite Covenant Presbyterian Church, a small group of protestors led by people from Westboro Baptist Church, held their signs denouncing the ordination of LGBT people. Opposite them stood a larger group protesting the protestors. There were TV news trucks on the street as well.

Inside, there was joy, thanksgiving, and celebration. There was also acknowledgement that this event was not being celebrated by all Christians, or all Presbyterians, that there is division, and hurt.

As I sat there, I thought of all of those, including Scott, who have struggled over the last decades, people whose callings were denied; clergy who were forced to live a lie, and many who still do. I thought of the gay clergy I’ve known, those who have been able to serve openly and those who have not. I thought of all of those who have struggled in the ordination process with their sexuality and were not able to answer God’s call.

Perhaps the most poignant moment came when Scott received back the stole that had been given him by his first congregation, made by Hmong members of that congregation. It was a stole he sent to the “Shower of Stoles” project, a spontaneous effort begun when one Presbyterian minister was forced to give up her ordination. The stoles represent LGBT clergy or lay persons who have not been able to live out their call in the church. Now there are more than 1100 stoles in the project, but Scott’s is the first to return to its first owner. It’s a remarkable story. Scott is a remarkable man, full of love, grace, and humility.

At the moment of ordination, all clergy and elders were invited to come forward for the laying on of hands. It was a powerful moment. Sharing in the gift of the Holy Spirit, sharing in this historic ordination, the hands that reached out to touch the shoulders of the person in front of us, were also reaching out to heal a broken world, and a broken church. As we stood and prayed, I caught a glimpse of the congregation. It seemed like almost all of the pews were empty. Clergy from all over the country, from many denominations, participated in this laying on of hands.

As  I sat, I wondered when I would be sitting in a parish of the Episcopal Diocese of Milwaukee, participating in the ordination of a LGBT person to the diaconate or priesthood. I pray for that day.

Is America a Christian Nation?

Posted on by
Reply

 

What would it look like if it were?

Adam Lee points out:

In reality, there’s such a huge diversity of opinion among self-professed Christians past and present that the term “Christian values” could mean almost anything.

Christians have been communists and socialists (including Francis Bellamy, the author of the Pledge of Allegiance); Christians have supported empire and dictatorship (including Mussolini, who made Catholicism the official state religion of fascist Italy). Christians have advocated positions across the political spectrum, from environmental preservation to environmental destruction, from pacifism to just war to open advocacy of genocide, from civil rights to segregation and slavery.

He discusses what forms of government are sanctioned in the Bible and points out that democracy is nowhere mentioned. Then he provides a lesson in constitutional history, observing that the constitution is a “godless” document.

… it’s easy to see just how unique, unusual, even unprecedented the Constitution is. The United States of America was the first modern republic that was created on the foundation of reason, without seeking blessings from a god, without imploring divine assistance or invoking divine favor. And, as I said, this fact was not overlooked when the Constitution was being debated. Very much to the contrary, the religious right of the founding generation angrily attacked it, warning that ratifying this godless document as-is would spell doom for the nation.

Tom Ehrich answers the same question from a very different perspective:

If we were a genuinely Christian nation, we would be gathering the harvest of this abundant land and sharing it with the hungry of our own land and of many lands. We would forgive our enemies, speak truth to power and go forth to serve and to sacrifice, not to rule.

We would stand with the poor when predators circled around them. We would stand with sinners when the self-righteous picked up stones. We would join hands with nonconformists and strangers.

We would become God’s beacon to the nations. And when the tired and poor followed that light to our borders, we would greet them with open arms and make room for them in our communities.

That’s what Jesus did, and that is what it would mean to be a Christian nation.