Tag Archives: The Episcopal Church

“dreaming a new church into being” –and the Diocese of South Carolina

Posted on by
2

The official word is that the Title IV Disciplinary Board has certified that Bishop Mark Lawrence of the Diocese of South Carolina has “abandoned” the Episcopal Church. The news article is here. Crusty Old Dean provides background on the notion of abandonment. He also points out that we’ve all seen it coming but no one seemed able to prevent it.

And now the war of words escalates.  Mark Harris asks Bishop Lawrence to admit he lied during the process that led to his consecration as bishop. The Episcopal Lead assembles the evidence pro and contra. The Diocese of South Carolina cries foul and criticizes the “assault” on their bishop.

I find it interesting that these events are taking place this week against a backdrop of the first meeting of TEC’s Executive Council after General Convention 2012. There were also stories about the work that took place this week: conversations about budget, mission, and restructuring. All of that talk about “putting everything on the table,” the end of Christendom, imagining a new way way of being church for the twenty-first century.

Ah, that word–restructuring. It seems to me that here is a prime opportunity to think creatively about structure, the way we do business, and imagining what a twenty-first century Episcopal Church might look like.

Here’s my question. Why not let the Diocese of South Carolina go? It’s been clear for at least a decade that they don’t want to be part of the Episcopal Church. Their recent actions suggest the plan is to incorporate as a separate denomination (The Protestant Episcopal Church of the Diocese of South Carolina).

What’s coming next is years of litigation, increased acrimony, conflict played out in the press. The lawyers will make money; bloggers will get lots of website hits; there will be anger, pain, and bad publicity all around.

So why not stop it all now? Why not imagine what a church would be like that could allow those who want out to go, leaving behind all of those who want to remain in the Episcopal Church? Let them have their property and go their separate way. And after they go, let’s imagine what an Episcopal mission might look like in the low country of South Carolina–an Episcopal mission freed from the oppressive traditions of slavery, racism, sexism, classism, and homophobia.

Why not put our limited resources toward that vision of a future church rather than paying lawyers and fighting to hold on to a vision of an eighteenth or nineteenth century Church?

South Carolina secedes!

Posted on by
3

Curious that the only story about this comes from the Diocese of South Carolina’s website:

On Monday, October 15, 2012, Bishop Mark J. Lawrence, the 14th Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina was notified by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, that on September 18, 2012 the Disciplinary Board for Bishops  had certified his abandonment of The Episcopal Church. This action by The Episcopal Church triggered two pre-existing corporate resolutions of the Diocese, which simultaneously disaffiliated the Diocese from The Episcopal Church and called a Special Convention. That Convention will be held at St. Philip’s Church, Charleston, on Saturday, November 17, 2012.

I wonder when the story will hit the Episcowebs.

Breathing life into Diocesan Convention?

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday, the 165th Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Milwaukee met. Details of the gathering are here.

There were two resolutions: one a change to the canons to permit vestries of six members; the other the annual minimum compensation for clergy. Neither elicited any debate. There were only two contested elections (for a lay member of Executive Committee, and for a clergy slot on Standing Committee).

I wasn’t able to stay for the discussion of the budget but from my twitter feed, it seems that there was little debate on that. In fact, a newcomer to the diocese observed that the explanation of the rules for debate took up more time than the debate itself. It’s as if we were going through the motions–doing things that needed to be done without any energy or excitement.

The only time it seemed the room began to fill with ideas and energy was as we talked around our tables about three questions Bishop Miller gave us at the end of his address. Here they are:

How is your congregation experiencing new life?
How do we, continually ourselves and others to see the new life God is calling forth and deepen our relationship with God?
How can diocesan structures and ministries help you in these efforts?

The questions were oriented toward the diocese’s ongoing strategic planning process in which I participate as a member of the task force.

It got me thinking, though. We’ve been talking a great deal about restructuring the church, on the congregation, diocesan, and church-wide level. Diocesan conventions seem ripe for complete rethinking. Every year, several hundred of the most committed Episcopalian Christians gather in each diocese to elect members to various bodies, debate resolutions, and pass budgets. I’ve never met anyone who said they love the business session of a convention. We do it because we have to do it, because we can’t imagine another way of doing it. But here we are, several hundred of us, gathered to work and worship. We hang out together, rekindle relationships, make new friends. How might we use our time together more effectively: for teaching and learning, for asking big questions and hearing about new initiatives? For praying? Studying the Bible? Instead, we go through the motions of doing business. In our diocese, we hear the Bishop twice, preaching the sermon during the Eucharist and his pastoral address during the business session. Instead of listening, how might we foster more conversation, dialogue, and listen for the movement of the Holy Spirit?

Here’s Bishop Miller’s Pastoral Address to the convention.

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.

 

Let’s Get Busy! Moving forward from General Convention

Posted on by
2

I had an email exchange with a clergy colleague yesterday in which we talked about how the decisions of General Convention might play themselves out in the diocese of Milwaukee and locally. In the course of that exchange, he suggested that I might be anxious about those developments. I quickly responded assuring him that I have no anxiety about what might happen here. I am quite excited about the future of the Episcopal Church and the path that has been laid out from General Convention 2012.

Of course there are those who are anxious and worry about what it might mean. There are clergy who are concerned about how GC’s decision might play out in their parishes. Some worry whether there is a place for them in the Episcopal Church. I share their concerns and will work to make sure that the Episcopal Church remains a place where people can disagree about important matters and still come together to worship God and struggle together to discern God’s will.

There is much that could lead to anxiety, not least reports in the media. But those reports are not the story of the Episcopal Church. The story of our church is our story. It is the story we tell about ourselves. It is what we experience when we worship together, when we gather in fellowship, or to serve Christ by feeding the hungry or clothing the naked. It is the story we live when we baptize babies or mourn the faithful departed.

Ron Pogue has written a thoughtful essay in which he encourages us to embrace what General Convention has done: “Now is a perfect time to be unapologetically Episcopalian.”

Let’s be who we say we are. – We really have nothing to fear about this decision.  We have every reason to rejoice as we learn to live into the new opportunities it presents. We can hold up our heads and with humility, generosity, and without apology, we can do even more than ever to manifest God’s love.  We are stewards of important, life-transforming work that God wants accomplished specifically through our Church.  We are Episcopalians!  And, as someone has pointed out, there is no asterisk on those signs that say, “The Episcopal Church Welcomes You!”

On the other side of the pond, the Church of England is also struggling with restructuring and with the fall-out from its own General Synod, at which the decision in favor of the ordination of women bishops was deferred. Sam Charles Norton writes with insight and passion about what he believes the debate over women’s ordination teaches us about the church:

The dying of a church is not a management problem, it is theological and spiritual. In my view, the real issue is that there is is a hole where our understanding and practice of the gospel should be.

Norton is writing with an eye to the difficult adaptation the Church of England is having to make to the realities of changing culture in England.

The context is different here. I wouldn’t characterize ours as a “dying church.” It could die, if we do not adapt to the culture in which we live. It will die if we are unable to proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ

This is a point on which Ross Douthat and I agree:

The defining idea of liberal Christianity — that faith should spur social reform as well as personal conversion — has been an immensely positive force in our national life. No one should wish for its extinction, or for a world where Christianity becomes the exclusive property of the political right.

Proclaiming the good news is not hard. It takes courage, persistence, and deep faith in God. It takes a willingness to try new things and the freedom to fail. General Convention has given us some new tools. Let’s get busy.

Setting the record straight: The Episcopal Church and the Press

Posted on by
1

Articles in various news media, most recently The Wall Street Journal (owned by Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp), have painted a salacious and distorted picture of the Episcopal Church in general, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefforts Schori and General Convention in particular. One might almost conclude that there is a coordinated campaign.

The articles, especially the WSJ example, have not gone without response. George Conger, himself no friend of the progressive wing of the Episcopal Church, offers a measured indictment.

Arizona Bishop Kirk Smith has also responded, as has Margaret Waters.

But what it means to be church is not our infrastructure. It is how we serve the world in the name of Christ, who commanded his disciples to love each other as he loved them and to take that love and his gospel to the world. To my little parish, which is twelve miles south of Austin, Texas and worships only about 150 people a week, that means filling the shelves of food pantries, adopting four refugee families in the last two years, adopting an underfunded elementary school, driving for Meals on Wheels, teaching literacy in our local prison and taking care of each other and pretty much anybody who shows up on our doorstep with a broken heart. Jesus cares about that. He doesn’t give one hoot what kind of cross Bishop Katharine carries. Nor does he care about the address of the building from which we do the business that must be done.

And from Scott Gunn:

Alas, since Episcopalians didn’t provide any rude behavior for the media, the media need to try to invent some retroactively. You’ll never see a WSJ headline, “Episcopalians experience grace in listening” or “Christians practice their faith by treating one another well.” Pity.

If the Wall Street Journal wants to attack the Episcopal Church, they are welcome to do so. We can handle it. But I do wish they would use actual facts. I would encourage any Wall Street Journal staffer or reader to visit an actual Episcopal Church. I’ll guarantee you two things. First, it won’t be perfect. After all, the church is filled with humans. But note the second thing, and note it well. It won’t be the rancorous caricature that Mr. Akasie loves to write about.

The Episcopal Church welcomes you! Even error-prone reporters from the Wall Street Journal.

In a very different tone, The New York Times has published an article on the retreat ministry of the Society of St. John the Evangelist.