Category Archives: Anglican

September 26: Lancelot Andrewes “For Holy Communion”

Posted on by
Reply

Today is the commemoration of Lancelot Andrewes. Here’s a biography.

FOR HOLY COMMUNION

O LORD, I am not worthy, I am not fit,
that Thou shouldest come under the roof of my soul;
for it is all desolate and ruined;
nor hast Thou in me fitting place to lay Thy head.
But, as Thou didst vouchsafe
to lie in the cavern and manger of brute cattle,
as Thou didst not disdain
to be entertained in the house of Simon the leper;
as Thou didst not disdain that harlot, like me, who was a sinner,
coming to Thee: and touching Thee;
as Thou abhorredst not her polluted and loathsome mouth;
nor the thief upon the cross confessing Thee:

So me too the ruined, wretched, and excessive sinner,
deign to receive to the touch and partaking
of the immaculate, supernatural, lifegiving,
and saving mysteries of Thy all‑holy Body
and Thy precious Blood.

Listen, O Lord, our God, from Thy holy habitation,
and from the glorious throne of Thy kingdom,
and come to sanctify us.

O Thou who sittest on high with the Father,
and art present with us here invisibly;
come Thou to sanctify the gifts which
lie before Thee,
and those in whose behalf, and by whom,
and the things for which,
they are brought near Thee.
And grant to us communion,
unto faith, without shame,
love without: dissimulation,
fulfilment of Thy commandments,
alacrity for every spiritual fruit;
hindrance of all adversity,
healing of soul and body;
that we too, with all Saints,
who have been well‑pleasing to Thee
from the beginning,
may become partakers
of Thy incorrupt and everlasting goods,
which Thou hast prepared, O Lord, for
them that love Thee;
in whom Thou art glorified
for ever and ever.
Lamb of God,
that takest away the sin of the world,
take away the sin of me,
the utter sinner.

–From Lancelot Andrewes, The Devotions of Bishop Andrewes, Vol. I (accessed at the Christian Classics Ethereal Library)

Pray for the selection of the new Archbishop of Canterbury

Posted on by
Reply

The Crown Nominations Commission, the group choosing the next Archbishop of Canterbury, is meeting today and tomorrow to select the next head of the Church of England and of the Anglican Communion.

The Church of England has offered this prayer for our use:

Almighty God,
you have given your Holy Spirit to the Church
to lead us into all truth:
bless with the Spirit’s grace and presence
the members of the Crown Nominations Commission.
Keep them steadfast in faith and united in love,
that they may seek your will, manifest your glory
and prepare the way of your kingdom;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord.
Amen.

The press release is here.

The meeting brings increasingly speculation on who will be chosen. Adrian Hilton offers his perspective here (he advocates Justin Welby of Durham). John Martin in The Living Church guesses Richard Chartres, Bishop of London. Andrew Brown wrote last week in The Guardian about the alternatives.

From this side of the pond, the whole thing looks rather odd and quaint. In the first place, because of establishment, some members including the chair, are appointed by the Prime Minister. Second, in spite of representation from both bishops and lay people, it’s all quite undemocratic, in a way even less democratic than the Roman Catholic process for electing a pope. Although the ABC is the head of the Anglican Communion, only one member of the commission comes from a church other than the Church of England (Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales). Then there’s the fact that one can place bets (currently Richard Dawkins is running 200/1).

But the selection is significant for the Church of England, the worldwide Anglican Communion, and the Episcopal Church. Whoever is chosen will continue to have to deal with issues confronting the CoE–women bishops, same sex marriage, and will have to also deal with the widening rift in the Anglican Communion.

The decision will be announced next week.

An Anglican Pope?

Posted on by
Reply

Well, not quite.

The Telegraph has an interview with Rowan Williams, the outgoing Archbishop of Canterbury, in which he says something like this:

The outgoing leader of the world’s 77 million Anglicans suggested a form of job share after admitting that he had failed to do enough to prevent a split over homosexuality.

Dr Williams said a new role should be created to oversee the day to day running of the global Anglican communion, leaving future Archbishops of Canterbury free to focus on spiritual leadership and leading the Church of England.

Denials came quickly, beginning with Kenneth Kearon, Secretary General of the Anglican Communion Office.

I doubt very much that such an office is under consideration or would ever be instituted. After all, the relatively minor effort to strengthen the power at the top evidenced by the Anglican Covenant demonstrates how little interest there is in such power grabs. Still, the very fact that such an office could be proposed reflects something of the overall tendency toward centralization and increasing hierarchy that seems to dominate thinking about the Anglican Communion in many quarters.

Thinking Anglicans links to the Telegraph’s articles and the audio interview.

 

Anglican Fudge or Anglican Genius? Bishops respond to General Convention’s actions on Same Sex Blessings

Posted on by
Reply

The approval of General Convention resolution A049, to authorize the provisional use of the rite for the blessing of same sex relationships has created an interesting dynamic in TEC. The resolution placed authority for the use of such rites in the power of diocesan bishops.

In the weeks since GC, bishops have slowly been making public their plans. Not surprisingly, as they respond from their own theological perspectives and in their particular local contexts, the roadmaps they lay out are varied and reflect to a large degree the breadth of Anglicanism, and the Anglican penchant for finding a middle way. As more proposals come out, no doubt partisans on both sides will be disappointed, even angered, but what I find most interesting, and most promising, is the way the bishops are searching for a “generous pastoral response” to the people among whom they minister.

The Rt. Rev. Ed Little (Northern Indiana) will not permit the rite in the diocese, but will allow clergy to celebrate it in parishes in adjoining dioceses: 2012GCPastoralLetter.

The Rt. Rev. Kee Sloan (Diocese of Alabama) voted in favor of the resolution at General Convention, but will not permit the rite in his diocese.

The Rt. Rev. Philip M. Duncan II (Central Gulf Coast) voted against the resolution but has this to say:

The Rt. Rev. Philip M. Duncan II, bishop of the 63-congregation Diocese of the Central Gulf Coast, stated in a letter to his flock of about 19,000 people: “I will consider each request for blessing individually, and I shall permit it where it has pastoral warrant.”

Many bishops (like my own) have announced a process of discernment that will involve clergy and lay people in an effort to determine what a “generous pastoral response” might be.

We live in a world of sound bytes, partisanship, and easy answers to complex problems. Life is messy and complex. Negotiating a path of faithful discipleship is difficult. So too is trying to discern how to respond to particular pastoral needs. In the abstract, decisions may seem quite easy and clear-cut, but when addressed in the context of one’s own understanding of what it means to be faithful, and in the particular context of one’s ministry, the way forward may not be obvious at all.

We may find a bishop’s decision to vote in favor of the rite, but not permit it in his diocese, or to vote against the rite but and permit its use, or even to forbid it in the diocese while allowing clergy to travel outside, wrong, hopelessly muddled, or proof positive of the moral bankruptcy of the Episcopal Church and Anglican theology. Looked at from another perspective however, these varied responses may be evidence of the genius and continuing vitality of the Anglican way.

I look forward to reading about what other dioceses come up with.

 

Bishop Miller’s letter to the Diocese of Milwaukee

Posted on by
Reply

the full text is available here.

A portion of it is quoted here:

As was to be expected the issue that received the most attention in the press was the adoption of Resolution A049 which authorized for provisional use a liturgy and other materials related to the blessing of same-sex unions. l voted against the resolution in accordance with the position paper published on my blog site
milwaukeebishopwordpress.com. This paper was sent to the bishops of the Church and many forwarded it on to their dìocese’s deputations. Still the resolution passed and the rites may be used beginning on the first Sunday of Advent with permission ofthe diocesan bishop.

Prior to General Convention wrote and shared with you that “I have learned, in my almost nine years as bishop, that there will be plenty of opportunity to discern how best to respond and follow through on the decisions of General Convention following General Convention, for it is only after convention that we would know what has been approved ond mandated.”

We are now in that time of discernment. To that end I invite the clergy of the diocese to meet with me to begin this discernment. These meetings will again follow the indaba format we used when we gathered before General Convention to discuss this resolution. The first of these sessions will be heid at Good Shepherd, Sun Prairie on July 31st and at St. Bari:’s in Pewaukee on August Elm from 3 to 5 pm. on both dates. I realize that vacation plans may keep some from attending these first sessions. Additional sessions will be scheduled in the near future. It is my hope that every priest of the diocese will be involved in these discussions over the next few months. I also look forward to hearing from other members of our diocese in the months ahead.

In conclusion, 1 would like to remind you of these words from my earlier letter, “As your bishop, I am confident that we will go forward together regardless of what is or is not decided at General Convention. This ability to go forward together may in fact be our most important witness to a world which is more and more divided along economic and ideological lines. Remaining in community with each other is a crucial witness of our understanding of what it means to be the Body of Christ, even when (or maybe especially when) we disagree an certain issues.

Denominational meetings and social media

Posted on by
Reply

Monica Coleman reflects on the role of social media at gatherings of mainline denominations this summer:

I’m only a member of one of these denominations, but I’ve enjoyed being a voyeur on all of their activities. I think of it less as spying, and more as keeping my finger on the pulse of American Protestantism. While reports roll in on the decreased religiosity of Americans and low commitment to mainline denominations, these online reports tell a different story. They show the tensions, politics, hopes, aspirations, frustrations, and celebrations of people who care deeply about their faith and their community. I see them struggle with generational, moral, political, and theological differences. All while trying to be friends with those with whom they disagree. Within these churches are groups of people who are discerning when to walk away, and when to stay and fight. In my online spying, it seems like denominational conferences aren’t so different from most Christians I know. I find that immensely reassuring.

There’s been some discussion of the significance of Twitter for General Convention 2012. It may be that we will have to take some time to think about its significance and what we can learn from our experiences. Will there be a lasting impact? There’s been a great deal of talk about building networks in conjunction with restructuring. Are we seeing the birth of something new?

The same could be said about the viral response to the mainstream media stories on General Convention and the Episcopal Church. Dozens of writers responded almost immediately to the articles in the WSJ and NYT. Their pieces were tweeted and retweeted, shared widely, and offered the whole church ways of sharing our version of our story.

But there’s more. Social media has not just allowed us to build new networks and relationships internally, it has also contributed to our ecumenical conversations. It wasn’t just Episcopalians who responded to Douthat and others. Other progressive and mainline Christians did as well and new relationships are being forged even as the conversation is broadening.

I am interested in seeing how this all develops.

Today’s items of note from the Episcopal Blogosphere

Posted on by
1

Laura Toepfer has some ideas on how to use the recent publicity concerning the Episcopal Church to welcome newcomers.

The Curate’s Desk on what really matters:

It may sound nonsensical or naive but I truly think the most crucial task for the Church is not growth, justice, discipleship, survival, nor restructuring. The most crucial task facing the Church is worship. We must strive anew for a way of being the Body together. The world’s, and the Church’s, desperate need now is for that expanded awareness of the presence of God – the enlarging of the Eucharistic action to encompass relationships that desperately need healing, hearts that are broken, hopes that are shattered, memories that are fraught with pain, and even nations that seem lost.

Frederick Schmidt: “Why Convention 2012 doesn’t matter:” “It’s the ecclesiology.”

A rather different perspective on General Convention. From Nick Knisely, who’s been a deputy since 2003, was elected Bishop of Rhode Island this spring, and moved from his seat in the House of Deputies to the House of Bishops:

A number of people asked me about the differences between the House of Bishops and of Deputies. There are two strong impressions. One is that the people in the House of Bishops know that they will be coming back to the next convention. Unlike the deputies who are re-elected each triennium, the bishops are members of their House for the rest of their life. That automatically gives a different rhythm to the conversation. The bishops all know each other, they respect each other even when they disagree and they take collegiality very seriously. One of the bishops mentioned to me that he thought the particular charism of the office of bishop was “unity”. It took me a while to agree with that, but having watched the House of Bishops stress the importance of their communal life which is meant to serve as an icon to the rest of the Episcopal Church, I eventually came to understood his point.

On becoming ammunition in the culture wars

Posted on by
Reply

The Episcopal Church has been fighting the culture wars since before the concept was invented. Now, we are experiencing something new, becoming ammunition, or a battleground for other culture warriors. When Ross Douthat, the Wall Street Journal, et al, try to place the decline of the Episcopal Church in the culture war context, you know we’ve arrived. And of course there’s been a sharp reaction from those of us in the Church. I’ve posted links to many of them already.

The problem, of course, is that the critics are right, at least insofar as numerical decline and the decline of the cultural power of the Episcopal Church point to TEC’s waning influence. The Episcopal Church is not what it was forty or fifty years ago.

So what? What does that mean for the work God has given us to do? How do we reach out to offer hope, and the taste of God’s grace to those who seek it? Rachel Held Evans should give us pause. She writes about the split between progressive and conservative Christianity and the toll it takes on those who don’t quite fit in with either group:

But the reason I struggle to go to church on Sunday mornings is because I generally feel like I have to choose between two non-negotiable “packages.” There are things I really love about evangelicalism and there are things I really love about progressive Protestantism, but because these two groups tend to forge their identities in reaction to one another— by the degree to which they are not like those “other Christians”—Sunday morning can feel an awful lot like an exercise in picking sides.  And often, when I find myself actually sitting in the pew, the pastor  or priest will at some point in the service, either subtly or overtly, speak of the “other side” as an enemy.

Steve Pankey has this to say:

In the days that followed General Convention, two opinion pieces, one in the Wall Street Journal and one in the New York Times, have attempted to build those walls back up.  They have written half-truths sprinkled with inflamatory rhetoric, and, in many ways, Episcopalians of all stripes have taken the bait.  We’ve gotten defensive.  We’ve honed our snark.  We’ve begun to define ourselves around social issues instead of the Gospel.

We are in the process of rebuilding the walls that Jesus has long since torn down.

Let’s not go there.  Let’s draw on the hard experience of being together, and not fall back into the old model of anonymous comments and blind rage.  Instead, how about we embrace our disagreement, talk openly with one another, listen carefully, and, above all else, love.  We did it in real life, let’s keep it up online.

Ya’know, for the sake of the gospel and all.

A. K. M. Adam also weighs in:

Fourth, neither ‘we have to update doctrine’ nor ‘we mustn’t change anything’ bears a demonstrable causal relation to attendance numbers. You can sell people bottled tap water, my friends; you could fill a church with fiery social activists, or you could fill a church with entrenched doctrinaires, but neither proves anything about what the gospel is or should be — any more than the popularity of Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted shows that it’s a better film than Moonrise Kingdom. You can’t prove church teaching with attendance numbers, can’t, can’t, can’t. (I will offer a tip: the New Testament, if one still regards that as relevant, offers several lists of characteristics by which to identify the presence and effects of the Spirit. ‘Big attendance numbers’ doesn’t appear on any of those lists.)

And he reminds us all:

On strictly secular grounds, though, I can assure people who laud shallow theology and deprecate reasonable criticism that they’re selling sackcloth as silk, and that’s not a recipe for long-term viability. It’s not a family trade you want to hand down to your children. Cheerleading and finger-wagging help you sort out who’s on your side and who’s not, they make for great pep rallies, but they don’t obviate the need to do something wisely and well.

All this points to one of the important realities of our faith. Christianity was forged in an era dominated by apocalyptic, when many saw the world and human beings a battleground between good and evil. It’s easy for such imagery and language to creep into our discourse at every level. Politicians paint the world in black and white; culture warriors do; and many Christians, left and right, do as well. And there’s plenty of biblical precedent for it (remember the Laodiceans?)

Rachel Held Evans points out that life is much more complicated than simple black and white, that many of us experience the world differently, more nuanced; that we can see truth in the positions of those with whom we disagree. To succumb to the narrative of the culture wars is to succumb to a view of the world that is two-dimensional. To engage the culture wars is to divert one’s energies away from what really matters.

So, if folks want use the Episcopal Church as ammunition in the culture wars, I say let them do it. But I’m not going to play along. I’m going to preach the gospel, love God and my neighbor, share the good news of Jesus Christ, and invite people to know Jesus Christ around the altar of Grace Church. If Douthat or anyone else wants to use me as ammunition, I’m not sure who, or what, the target might be.

 

What we’re really up against

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve had lots of advice during and since General Convention about what’s wrong with the Episcopal Church, why it’s dying, and all. There’s the Stand Firm in Faith folks (I won’t link to them, I don’t want to be responsible for any heart attacks or strokes). There’s Ross Douthat in yesterday’s NY Times who is certain that the decline of the mainline is due to liberal theology divorced from the gospel.

There’s also been plenty of pushback from good Episcopalians who are confident and excited about the future of our Church. I am too, but the reality is that we are up against some significant cultural trends that require us to rethink almost everything (and we are doing it). Diana Butler Bass’s essay is typical of the lot (and it doubles as a plug for her most recent book).

Some of the response to Douthat has focused on larger trends that challenge all denominations, not just the Episcopal Church, or even mainline Protestantism. As Martin Marty points out, all denominations are in decline, including the conservative stalwarts like the Southern Baptist Convention (five consecutive years of decline in membership and numbers of baptisms).

One problem often cited as a reason for decline is litigation over property. Yes, it’s unseemly, but at least we’re not suing dissident groups for trademark infringement (like the Seventh Day Adventists).

Meanwhile, Gallup reports that confidence in religion and religious institutions is at an all-time low (but then so are all other institutions in American life).

But it’s not just a matter of confidence in institutions. People are searching for spiritual meaning in their lives in all sorts of ways and places. Here’s one example. Tracy Clark-Flory writes about yoga class as ersatz church:

I’ve always wanted to have a church to go to. I’ve fantasized about what my dream version of this would look like: a weekly gathering where passages are read from great literature, where experts give workshops on their area of expertise — whether it’s psychology, philosophy or art. (Which sounds a whole lot like … college.) Yoga doesn’t exactly satisfy all of those demands, but it comes close. My teachers read a range of inspirational (see, I even cringe at that word!) quotes and poetry, from Rumi to Philip Booth. I take from it what I want and what I believe. It’s open-source spirituality.

Open-source spirituality. The Book of Common Prayer simply can’t compete.

Viv Groskop, writing about her experience in the Church of England, tends to agree with Clark-Flory:

I would not describe myself as a religious person but I do have some sort of faith. I grew up singing in the choir in the church where I got married (sorry, blessed). Over the years, though, any belief I once had has dwindled away to next to nothing because there is no way to express it casually or on a part-time basis. You’re not that welcome at church services unless you want to become a regular member of the congregation…

Further,

I would like to see the Church of England be more inclusive not only towards women priests but towards people like me – people who rarely attend church, often question their faith, but who are, essentially, supportive of the church.

The last sentence echoes Clark-Flory: “A whole generation is heading to the nearest yoga class.”