Giving, Receiving and the Love of God and Neighbor: A Sermon for Proper 25, Year A

Posted on by
Reply

October 23, 2011

One of the most memorable experiences in my life was the first time I distributed bread during the Eucharist. It is one of those roles that in the Episcopal Church is reserved to the ordained. To that point, I had participated in almost every way in the Eucharistic celebration. I had prepared the table, shared the cup with the congregation. What I remember most about that first time, and what continues to dominate my experience of sharing the bread, is seeing all of those hands reaching out to receive the bread—big hands, small hands, hands of every shape, size, and color, hands wrinkled by age, and the hands of a toddler—all of them reaching out in desire, and hope, and hunger. Continue reading →

St. Paul’s Cathedral to close because of Occupy London

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s the report from CNN.

Thinking Anglicans’ coverage. The Guardian’s coverage. A video shows the size of the encampment.

Seeing the images in that video make the issues clear to me. There’s a great deal of comment in various places about churches needing to participate in the movement, welcome it, etc. I would agree with that position, and early on, the Cathedral was encouraging and welcoming. But churches, a place like St. Paul’s Cathedral has several missions and many constituencies. The presence of so many people camped just outside the building creates enormous issues, and not just health and safety issues. It’s an enormous stress on staff and clergy; it does make worship difficult; and it can prevent, or seriously limit other forms of pastoral ministry. I wonder whether it would be possible to devise a compromise that would permit a small group of protestors to remain, in order to lessen the overall impact. Neither outsiders nor protestors can judge the toll this sort of presence can take on those who live, work, and minister in the middle of it.

There’s been a lot of “theological” reflection on the movement. Tom Beaudoin asked whether it would be possible to occupy the Catholic Church. He also is documenting the use of sacred imagery here and here. There are clergy and seminarians involved as “Protest Chaplains.”

Brian McLaren reflects on the symbolism of the term “occupy”:

The term “occupy” is winning me over because it puts an ironic spin on one of our most questionable national habits—occupying other nations: occupying Iraq, occupying Afghanistan, supporting Israel in occupying Palestine. Like kingdom of God, it turns that familiar language on its head.

The term “occupy” is also winning me over because it’s about presence, making our presence known and felt in public spaces. These public spaces—from economic markets to political processes—have been colonized by powerful corporate elites (the 1 percent, or maybe the 10 percent), elites driven not by an ethical vision but by the relentless demand to maximize shareholder return. The 99 percent are realizing how destructive this colonization of public spaces has become, and by simply coming back—by re-inhabiting public spaces—we are demonstrating that we see what’s happening and we are not going to tacitly comply with its continuing.

The latest on St. Francis House

Posted on by
Reply

It has been a month since the Common Council approved the development proposal for the St. Francis House property at 1001 University Ave. The deadline for appealing the council’s decision ran out today.

After taking a little time to catch our breath (and for me to catch up on my sleep—I doubt I had been up that late two consecutive nights since my 20s) the developers have begun moving quickly to begin demolition and site preparation. They hope to begin work on January 1. What that means for the Board of St. Francis House and campus ministry at the University of Wisconsin is that we have a lot of work to do, from vacating the premises to planning for ministry during the year and half of construction.

The students who had contracted to live in the house during the 2011-2012 academic year were provided alternative accommodations in a rental property, but there are offices and furnishings to move, among many other things. The board also had to consider what the ministry would look like during the interim.  At our meeting in early October, we decided to move forward in seeking to hire a full-time chaplain who would begin work at the first of the year and would shepherd the community and the development through this period. Having a chaplain on staff now will also provide an opportunity for careful thought and planning about the future of the ministry.

After consultation with the wardens and vestry, Grace Church will offer space to the part-time administrative assistant and the full-time chaplain beginning in the New Year. We currently have a vacant office in the office suite and other under-utilized space that could be adapted for the administrator. This is an exciting opportunity for us to build relationships with the Episcopal Campus Ministry and to explore ways in which we might reach out more effectively to the students who live in our immediate neighborhood, many of whom attend our services. While the precise shape of the St. Francis House ministry at Grace will await the arrival of a new chaplain, it is likely that it will look very much like it does now: a weekly Sunday evening service with a meal of some sort, and other offerings during the week, the latter probably on campus.

These plans are tentative and may undergo considerable change in the coming months as a new chaplain shapes the ministry in keeping with his/her vision of the future. I hope you will join me in welcoming St. Francis House to Grace in the New Year and participate in the conversations about the future of its ministry and our cooperative efforts to reach out to students and young adults in Madison.

Meanwhile, other development proposals in Madison continue to be controversial. The Edgewater returned to the news this week with a lengthy article exploring the process leading up to that development’s approval.

Anglicans and #OWS

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve not been following the #OccupyWallStreet events closely, but I did come across mention of two churches that have been directly affected and involved with the protests. Trinity Church Wall Street is very close to Zuccotti Park, the center of the protests, and has offered hospitality to protestors, and offered as well to be a place of reconciliation. Here’s the official statement. Their community center, Charlotte’s Place, has offered hospitality, respite, and laptop recharging. And they have already begun the work of reconciliation.

In London, St. Paul’s Cathedral has been the scene of protests as well. People have been camping out on the grounds and steps, and protestors entered the building on October 16. Police who entered the church in order to evict the protestors were asked to leave. The presence of protestors has affected the cathedral’s income from tourism, but Cathedral officials deny asking the protestors to leave. Details are available here. The Guardian’s story is here.

#OccupyMadison is rather small and located a block away from Grace Church so it doesn’t directly impact us as the earlier protests did this year, and we’ve not been directly asked to support them in any way. But I’m heartened to see other churches responding to protests outside their doors in ways similar to our response last winter and spring.

 

 

Another article on homelessness in Madison

Posted on by
Reply

I’m glad the Wisconsin State Journal is continuing to follow this story. While there’s little new here about either the problem or potential solutions, there is more detail about the situation in the City-County building.

We’ll be having a follow-up meeting with social service providers, churches, and downtown business leaders tomorrow afternoon.

One issue that isn’t highlighted in the article is the scope of the problem on weekends, especially Sundays.

Re-imagining church–The Church in the Round in Seattle

Posted on by
Reply

I’m intrigued by what is taking place in Seattle. An established parish has been asked to “re-start” another parish in another part of town. After interviews in the neighborhood, the group designing the new effort have identified a number of themes and priorities:

  • Alternative worship
  • The young adult community, including young families
  • Food, gardens, and green space
  • Homelessness services
  • A community center (coffee house, theater, multi-cultural meeting place)
  • Jobs

Apparently the questions they asked were:

1) What are your dreams for the Lake City neighborhood, 2) What are your fears for the neighborhood, and 3) What would be your ultimate dream for this space that includes 2 acres and a building that includes a sanctuary in the round, a parish hall in the round, and a few additional spaces?

I’m intrigued, because rather than trying to restart on the basis of what was already there or some preconceived notion of what the Episcopal Church ought to be in that place, they reached out to the community first. In a way, it’s not unlike what St. Luke’s Racine has done.

It’s also an example of how to rethink and adapt physical spaces to meet new needs and new forms of ministry. Among the Episcopal Church’s chief assets is its property, specifically church buildings. Buildings are often perceived to be albatrosses, especially in the case of nineteenth-century or twentieth-century buildings located in downtowns, blighted areas, in need of maintenance and the like. The current dynamic in American culture might be to try to “unload” them; in corporate parlance, to eliminate unprofitable locations and invest elsewhere. But as a city councilor said during the debate over the St. Francis House development, we will never again build churches like those that were built in the nineteenth and earlier twentieth century. The question is how we can leverage them into opportunities and assets for ministry and mission, rather than perceive them only as potential liabilities.

Why Niebuhr now?

Posted on by
Reply

Jordan Smith on Diggins’ Why Niebuhr Now?

Smith writes:

Ever alert to the perils of fanaticism, as well as undue optimism or bleak pessimism, Niebuhr remained a small-d democrat who prioritized the possible over the ideal through his various political incarnations. And yet the problem with balanced thought is that it can easily be manipulated. Niebuhr’s principles were so elastic and general that they can be plausibly interpreted and applied in nearly infinite ways.

As an example, he uses the Libya intervention:

It should come as no surprise that Niebuhr’s spirit has been invoked in a variety of conflicting ways in our current Libyan crisis. David Brooks of the New York Times cast the intervention as Niebuhrian on the grounds that it was done reluctantly, (at least originally) with the modest goal of stopping an impending massacre, and with an awareness of the moral complexities on the ground. At the same time, in the American Prospect, Adam Serwer made the case that it was anti-Niebuhrian. The intervention, he argued, was justified by the purity of its intentions, and President Obama invoked American exceptionalism, both ideas Niebuhr persistently opposed. Similarly, even while writing that “pressing Niebuhr into service on behalf of any and all causes will make him irrelevant,” Andrew Bacevich has appropriated the pastor on behalf of anti-interventionism, calling him a “prophet” who foresaw that America would fall prey to its messianic instincts. Ultimately, though, Niebuhr’s diversity and unpredictability make applying his thought with any precision to contemporary problems an impossibility. The answer to the question “What would Niebuhr say?” is: We don’t know.

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.