Tag Archives: The Episcopal Church

The day after General Convention

Posted on by
1

When Madison Episcopalians met in May to talk about General Convention, we highlighted several issues that we thought we be at the top of the agenda for the triennial meeting. The issues we selected were same-sex blessings, the Anglican Communion and Covenant, the budget and restructuring. As we met that month, we added another item to the list, communion without baptism.

We guessed correctly. All of these issues were discussed and to some degree shaped the convention’s narrative. The larger culture took note of General Convention because of the decision to approve liturgies for same-sex blessings but for the life of the church, for its future, it may be that other decisions will have a greater long-term impact.

Certainly, the task force on restructuring that was established has the potential to transform the church on all levels. The full story from Episcopal News Service is here. I’ve had a great deal to say about restructuring on this blog. It is a crucial element in our effort to transform and adapt the Episcopal Church for the twenty-first century. We are in a period of rapid change. The old structures and institutions are in crisis across the board (not just religious institutions) and we are developing new ways of organizing ourselves and relating to one another. Christianity has seen such change before in its history and has responded creatively, although often that change has come at great cost (the Protestant Reformation, for example).

In fact, the biggest story out of General Convention may have nothing to do with the things that were voted on. Instead, the biggest story may be the restructuring and reorganizing that took place on the edges of convention. Twitter was alive with the hashtag #gc77, creating networks and relationships, building community in cyberspace. The Acts 8 movement, begun by three bloggers, has already become a community geared toward transformation. Read Nurya Love Parish’s post here. More about the Acts 8 moment here.

It’s far too early to judge the significance of this General Convention. We may not know for a decade or two whether what was set in motion in Indianapolis will transform the church. No doubt some of what was ventured during the last two weeks will fail. But there was passion, excitement, and hope, not only in Indy, but among those of us who participated in the conversations from afar. There is also God’s grace and God’s working in the world. I pray that our church will be a channel of that grace.

From the Episcopal News Service: Re-envisioning the Church for the 21st century

From Andy Jones

Is there room for diversity in the Episcopal Church, cont.

Posted on by
2

Among the news tidbits from yesterday at General Convention was word that the deputation from the Diocese of South Carolina departed. Their official statement is here:

Due to the actions of General Convention, the South Carolina Deputation has concluded that we cannot continue with business as usual. We all agree that we cannot and will not remain on the floor of the House and act as if all is normal. John Burwell and Lonnie Hamilton have agreed to remain at Convention to monitor further developments and by their presence demonstrate that our action is not to be construed as a departure from the Episcopal Church. Please pray for those of us who will be traveling early and for those who remain.

I won’t make comment on that action but I believe it does speak directly to the question I raised in a previous post. I don’t have an answer but I think it is crucial that we struggle with it on all levels of the church.

Two other pieces address the question in different ways. Rod Dreher quotes a commenter:

It’s more that the Episcopal Church looks to all three of those sources of authority, and is stuck in between them, and can’t decide which it trusts most. And, stuck in the middle, it flounders, without securely committing either to rely on tradition, on scripture, or on the personal guidance of the Holy Spirit. In too many churches, the faith isn’t presented in such a way that it provides a genuine challenge to the culture: not in terms of sexuality, not in terms of economics (which is much more important to me: capitalism seems like a much bigger violation of Christian ethics than homosexuality, contraception, premarital sex, etc.), and most of all, not in terms of the naturalistic, rationalistic ethic that too many people have nowadays. Too many Episcopal parishes no longer preach on the miracles of Jesus, on the spiritual realities underlying the material world, on the existence of the angelic and the diabolic, and most of all on the greatest miracle of all, the literal conquest of death.

And an open letter of apology from Katrina Hamilton to conservative Episcopalians:

I am honored by your presence. You are the faithful remnant. When others gave up, you stayed. I do not envy your position, and I can’t imagine what it’s like to walk into that room knowing you are the minority and will not win the vote. And now that we have passed this resolution, you have to go back to your diocese and explain why you couldn’t stop it. Explain that you did all you could. Explain the small victories you were able to accomplish. And I’m sorry.

Today’s must-reads from General Convention

Posted on by
Reply

Kathy Staudt on generational tension at General Convention and in the Church (she’s commenting on a post by Steve Pankey):

But for boomers there will probably always be more inclusivity to pursue: The way to this is through our struggles to be a community in diversity. I also grew up assuming that the Church, as instsitution, would be a voice for change in the public square. This has been the heritage of mainline denominations at their best, often, in my experience, allied with a progressive political agenda that focuses on the needs of the poor and the marginalized. This is the positive ideal that I was rasied with, and reflects perhaps, assumptions that the boomer generation operates with that are not necessarily the assumptions of a younger generation.

It is interesting to me that Steve, speaking from a generation that came of age in the “bubble” economic years of the 80s and 90s, hears what I have thought of as language about the church’s mission as language that can become laden with “shame,” “guilt” and “partisanship” — and I think it is true that we can get hung up on the work that remains to be done. In his post I hear a longing for the reclaiming of a sense of common mission centered in Christ. I’m not sure whether there is a “fundamental” generational divide here or just a difference of context that we need to process more thoughtfully. This of course would mean including multiple generations in our common conversation The more that that happens, I think, the more exciting the future of the Church will be.

Here’s a presentation on the demographics of the House of Deputies. It’s very interesting on a number of levels. There are only 46 deputies under 40 years of age (almost 20% of deputies failed to give their age, so this isn’t precise). The lay deputies skew much older than clergy. For example, of those in their 50s, 78 are lay, 137 clergy, while of those in their sixties, 152 are lay, 89 are clergy.

Tom Ehrich on the sale of “815:”

Rather, I see this as an important opportunity to do two things that badly need doing: liberating church life from its obsession with physical facilities, and opening the doors for insiders to look outward.

And a roundtable on the “Acts 8 Moment“

Is there still room for diversity in The Episcopal Church?

Posted on by
2

Anglicanism has long claimed to be the via media. In its origins, that meant trying to keep a Church united across the divide of Catholic and Protestant. Today there are other issues. In England, for example, there is continuing controversy over the ordination of women to the Episcopate. An attempt by the Church of England’s House of Bishops to offer a compromise for those who cannot accept the ordination of women has failed, and they will try again in three months to find a way forward for the ordination of women to the Episcopacy. More here.

In the US, the debate over women’s ordination ended long ago. However, given that women make up a tiny minority in the House of Bishops today, it’s clear that significant barriers remain. Still the question of keeping the Church together remains. There are significant issues that divide us, not only on matters of sexuality though they may be the most prominent. Given decisions made at this General Convention, The Episcopal Church needs to ask itself whether it continues to seek to be a via media, whether is room in our church for a diversity of theological viewpoints and approaches to scripture.

I hope so. If we value inclusion and diversity, we have to value it for conservatives as well as progressives. Ian Markham, Dean of Virginia Theological Seminary, on the need for genuine diversity in the Episcopal Church:

Living with disagreement is tricky. The desire to make the Church pure is so strong. We are so sure we are right that we don’t welcome conservatives. We are so sure that our progressive stance will be vindicated that we insist that those who want to “move less quickly” are ignorant appeasers.

Let us try to recover our commitment to genuine inclusivity. Let us continue to welcome our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters as an intrinsic part of the Church; but let us also extend a warm and affirming welcome to our conservative brothers and sisters. Let us try something new: Let us try to resist the tendency for purity and separation and instead live in a place that is more ragged and interesting.

Bishop Andrew Waldo (Upper South Carolina) statement following the House of Bishops vote (explaining his vote, and providing text of his statement during the debate).

Anthony Clavier also asks whether there is room for him in the Episcopal Church:

There are, of course, measures which could be taken to encourage those of us who are now on the margins of what was once a generous Catholicity. They would be radical, newfangled, untidy, would break traditions of jurisdiction and authority, but such problems haven’t deterred us from the revisions we have adopted during the past half century. Inclusion means more than a minimal tolerance for those deemed intolerably unenlightened. Inclusion means encouragement, it means refusing to erect barriers to growth and survival.

House of Bishops votes for same-sex blessings

Posted on by
3

The House of Bishops voted overwhelmingly in favor of the proposed liturgies for same sex blessings (an amendment had earlier changed the language from gender to blessing) this afternoon. The vote was approximately 111-41. The wide margin is a testimony both to where the church is today as well as who the church is today.

I watched some of the debate online and was moved by the tone of the conversation. There were deep disagreements but the bishops treated each other with respect. In many ways, their debate serves a model for conversation in the church. They demonstrate to all of us a way of discussing important issues in a civil manner, listening carefully, and honoring each others’ dignity.

The resolution now moves to the House of Deputies, where it will also likely be passed.

As a church, we will need to work hard, and seek God’s grace, to embrace this momentous change, and to reach out and continue to embrace those who struggle with it. At the very end of the debate today, Bishop Gray (Mississippi) spoke eloquently about the importance of humility for those of us on both sides of the debate, for recognizing that we all “see through a glass darkly,” and that we might be “wrong.” Wise counsel indeed.

The Best of today from General Convention

Posted on by
1

a few of the things I read that are worth passing along:

The Rev. Chuck Treadwell (deputy, Diocese of Texas) on the relationship between pastoral theology and doctrine when thinking about something like “communion without baptism:”

Any priest who has been a priest for very long knows, however, that pastoral theology often falls outside normative teaching and practice. Therefore, we occasionally respond pastorally in ways that bend the norms.
I am reminded of what I was taught by the Rev. Dr. Marion Hatchett: “never break a rubric unintentionally”. I think most priest have given communion to an unbaptized person. Hospitality and compassion may require it. But the doctrine of Baptism remains.

There’s a proposal to sell the Episcopal Church’s property at 815 Second Ave in NY. It’s expensive, underutilized, and a relic of a former age. Crusty Old Dean weighs in:

We can’t stop at selling 815 and think we have slain Constantine.  COD is enthusiastically supportive of this resolution (I thought we should move most everything to the ELCA building in Chicago) with two caveats.

1)  We will need to be OK with the transition needed.  Staff, including support staff as well as program staff, will be needed to be treated fairly.

2)  We must also think broader and more holistically, and not rush to details and obsess over things like where the new denominational building might be.  We must also have conversations about what function our staff should have and how they will connect to all levels of the church.

If we don’t begin to think in this way, it won’t matter where the denomination gets its mail.

 

The proposed C001 resolution on restructuring (Thanks to David Sibley)

And finally, and most importantly, Bishop Curry’s sermon from this morning’s Eucharist–check it out, he can preach!

Why would people want to attend church? continued

Posted on by
Reply

A follow-up to the previous post. We tend to assume if we just got things right, whether “things” be the liturgy, or coffee hour, or theology, or even the building, then things would be OK and people would want to join us. But there are deeper issues.

Brian McLaren writes (h/t Steve Knight)

“‎Christian mission begins with friendship — not utilitarian friendship, the religious version of network marketing — but genuine friendship, friendship that translates love for neighbors in general into knowing, appreciating, liking and enjoying … This knowing-in-particular then motivates us to protect our neighbor when he or she is under threat, as a little Rwandan girl understood: just before she was brutally murdered during the genocide, she said to her slayer, ‘If you knew me, you would not kill me.’”

Also this: “They don’t believe because your God isn’t desirable.” This is a reflection on debates between Christians and atheists, with the underlying assumption that one can prove the existence of God, or the superiority of the Christian faith, by rational argument.

But I think the same dynamic is in play in other areas, in the common deployment of terms like “inclusivity.” Not that I’m against inclusion, mind you, but sometimes I think we are so focused on the outward symbols of inclusion that we forget the importance of God’s love and our love of our neighbor.