News from General Convention

July 14th, 2009

The Mainstream Media (MSM) headlines screamed this morning: “The Episcopal Church ends ban on gay bishops.” The headline, and the articles were sensationalistic, but misleading. Resolution D025, which passed the House of Deputies and amended, passed the House of Bishops yesterday, did no such thing. In fact, there was no ban or “moratorium” on the consecration of gay bishops, something even the Archbishop of Canterbury seems not to have understood. What the media, and the Archbishop were referring to was resolution B033 from 2006, which “urged restraint” on bishops and standing committees in their consents to the elections of gay or lesbian bishops.

Resolution D025 changes nothing. It simply states where the Episcopal Church is and what the canonical requirements for ordination are. The canons (the rules or laws) that govern the church say nothing about sexuality or gender when listing qualifications for ordination. Quite the contrary, the canons are explicitly non-discriminatory.

Resolution D025 points that out. It also acknowledges the deep divisions in the Episcopal Church and in the Anglican Communion over matters of sexuality.

For more on this, the Episcopal Cafe has been following the debates. In addition, there is a fine essay on the Anglican Centrist. But I encourage you especially to read Bishop Henderson’s letter on the meaning of the resolution. I should note that he offered an important amendment to the resolution in the House of Bishops, which they passed.

Jean Calvin Quincentennial

July 11th, 2009

Was it just coincidence that the General Convention of the Episcopal Church began on July 9, the 500th anniversary of the birth of Jean Calvin? Calvinism has been important in the history of the development of Anglicanism, even if most of us like to downplay its role in contemporary Anglicanism. In fact, the English Reformation got its start before Calvin arrived on the scene and there was never a single voice of Reformed Protestantism influencing early English Protestant theology. Martin Bucer, the Reformer of Strasbourg, spent some time in England, and Heinrich Bullinger, the Zurich reformer was enormously influential as well.

Calvinism became significant only relatively late, in the Elizabethan period, and from the start, there was significant “push-back” from the crown and from other important players. The reason for Calvinism’s unpopularity among the political and religious powers was his vision of the church, and especially the critique of bishops. That meant that much of the rest of his theology eventually was rejected as well. Still, there was significant Calvinist (and Reformed) influence on the Elizabethan Settlement.

I’ve never found Calvin particularly appealing, and it is not just his understanding of human sinfulness. Rather, I think my aversion has to do with style or approach. The Institutes are a marvelous system of theology, carefully argued, well-organized, even elegant. I like my theology a little messier, reflective of the conflicts and emotions that drive theological thinking and innovation. That being said, Calvin continues to influence contemporary theology, as he has done for 450 years.

General Convention

July 6th, 2009

The General Convention of the Episcopal Church will convene on July 9 in Anaheim, CA. No doubt there will be news reports concerning various actions taken, but most prognosticators expect less excitement generated this year than in 2003 or 2006. We will see. If you want to learn more about what is going on in Anaheim, check out the General convention website here. For commentary and background, visit the Episcopal Cafe, where deputies and other attendees will be blogging. The deputation from the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, including Bishop Henderson, will also post.

I suppose meetings of this sort are necessary in any denomination, but I’ve also thought that they tend to bring out the worst in people and in a denominational ethos. Much of the legislation is “feel-good” of one sort or another, and much of it seems designed to score political or theological points, with little significance for the local church or for individual Christians. Of course, there are decisions that have repercussions throughout the church and the world, but sometimes those effects aren’t felt for years, and often they are completely unexpected. Whatever happens at Anaheim, life and faith will go on in the local parish.

Communion of the Unbaptized

June 30th, 2009

General Convention begins next week and surely one of the hot topics will concern changing the canons to allow unbaptized people to receive communion. The House of Bishops Theology Committee has issued its report. It is available here as is a lively discussion.

Some people may find it odd that what seems to be an esoteric debate sparks such strong emotions. In fact, the question of whether unbaptized people should be admitted to communion gets at the heart of our theology, our liturgy, and our understanding of the sacraments. The argument for centers around “radical hospitality,” the idea that we need to be open and welcoming to everyone, just as Jesus ate with tax collectors and sinners. On the other side are equally sound arguments based in the church’s traditional practice in keeping the Eucharist limited to baptized members.

As I see it, the church’s tradition, our liturgy and sacramental theology, all seem to militate against changing our practice. Hospitality can be shared, radical hospitality can be shared without opening the Eucharist to anyone. Communion knits us together as one body of Christ, and baptism is clearly what brings us entry into that body.

At the same time, I have no interest in becoming a gatekeeper, or an ID checker. I will never demand to see a baptismal certificate before putting bread into an outstretched hand at the altar rail. But if I learn that a child or an adult has received communion without being baptized, I will take the opportunity to begin a discussion about what it means to be a member of the Body of Christ, and what baptism and the eucharist mean.

I’ve detected in many of those most vocal in their opposition to the practice of open communion, not so much theological rationale, but concern for boundary maintenance. Boundaries are important, distinguishing and defining the nature of the church is crucial, but it is also true that all boundaries are porous (just ask our Border Patrol).

Proper 7 Year B

June 28th, 2009

I thought I would upload my sermon from last week. Since I preached without a text, I’m not sure what I said. Here’s what I meant to say:

This is the first summer in many years that we’ve had so many thunderstorms. It seems like every day there are more warnings and more violent storms in the area. I know many people tend to be a little afraid of storms—there is always the possibility of tornadoes, after all. But for me, the greatest fear is that we will lose our power at home. I hate being stuck in hot weather without air conditioning.

Truth be told, I’ve always loved thunderstorms. Growing up on the flat land of the Midwest, we could watch the storms building and approaching for a long time, or we could watch as the storms went to our north or south and passed us by. Watching thunderclouds build in the distance is an awe-inspiring thing. Summer thunderstorms usually meant that we could run for cover and take a break from work while waiting for the rain to stop. There was that time, though, when we were caught unawares by a storm, as we were putting a metal roof on a barn. Not a wise place to be during a lightning storm.

The gospel story we heard today is one of the most familiar of all, Jesus calming the storm. It is familiar, and for many of us who have a more scientific cast of mind, it is deeply problematic. At the same time, it tugs at our deepest emotional level. Most of us can relate tales of being caught in a storm so strong and dangerous we were concerned for our safety. It may have been in a boat, or on an airplane, or perhaps like mine, on a wet, metal roof, in the middle of a lightning storm. The fears of the disciples are fears that we all have shared. And Jesus’ calming words, “Peace, be still” are the words of a savior who delivers his companions, and us, from great danger.

But there’s more to the story than that, much more. As Shelly Matthews reminded us in her sermon last week, Mark is the least wordy of the gospels, so it’s important to pay close attention when he does provide detail, and pay close attention to how he tells the story. The little things matter a great deal. One of the things that strikes me in Mark’s version of this story is how he depicts Jesus—sleeping on a cushion in the midst of a mighty storm. Mark presents us with an image of Jesus at ease, comfortable, resting, while all around him is struggle, noise, and tumult.

Also of interest is the little point that Mark doesn’t bring up the disciples’ fear until after Jesus calms the storm. Jesus asks the disciples after the coming of dead calm, “Why are you still afraid?” Mark’s telling of the story lets us ask the question: Was it the storm that caused their fear, or was it that Jesus brought the storm to an end? Which power is more frightening, more awesome, the power of a storm or the power of the one who can calm the storm?

There is something of a storm raging in today’s lesson from the Hebrew Bible, as well. It is a storm raging in King Saul. In the lectionary this summer, many of our old testament readings will come from the story of King David. Today’s lesson comes immediately after David killed Goliath and it includes several interesting elements. First is the relationship between David and Jonathan, who is Saul’s son and heir to the throne. The second is the beginning of the rivalry between Saul and David.

Now, it’s important to note that much of the story of the rise of David seems to derive from the court of David, or soon thereafter. As such, it seems to be concerned with legitimating David’s kingship. The details are too complex to go into here, but this episode plays a role in that story. David is shown to be a successful commander and popular with the people. Saul seems to become jealous, is beset by an evil spirit (from God) and raved within his house. He tried to kill David, but was unsuccessful, and as leaders often do with their closest rivals, he sent him away. There is much worthy of comment, but what I find fascinating is the connection with Jesus’ stilling the storm.

As I said, the story of David and Saul is complex on many levels. While everyone knows the story of David and Goliath, most people aren’t familiar with the earlier relationship between Saul and David. David was brought to court as a musician. Saul had already lost God’s favor, he was tormented by that evil spirit sent by God. As a remedy, the musician David was sent for, his playing would soothe Saul and force the spirit to leave. We imagine Saul stark, raving mad, whether from jealousy or from some mental illness. The Hebrew suggests an alternative explanation. The word translated here as “raved” is the same word that is translated as “prophesy” elsewhere, the difference being only that in this case, it is because of an evil spirit, not the spirit of God. But remember, this was written by supporters of the Davidic monarchy.

During the summer, the lectionary gives us options for the Old Testament readings. We can read the story of David, as we are doing this summer, or we could read another set of Old Testament texts, that are more prophetic in nature. The alternative today also has to do with a storm. This time it comes from Job, the famous passage where God replies to Job out of the whirlwind, asking him “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the universe?”
There are storms and there are storms. There are devastating weather events that cost lives and destroy homes and livelihoods, as we saw this week in the upstate. There are storms like those that troubled Saul, and there are even storms like the whirlwind that spoke to Job. Storms are significant religiously because they bring us up against our finitude—the limits of our power, knowledge and humanity in the face of uncontrollable nature.

The gospel story reminds us of that. Whatever Mark intended with the story, it’s pretty clear that it is meant to demonstrate Jesus’ power to his disciples. It is one of the few of the miracles in Mark’s gospel that is done in front of the disciples alone. They are the beneficiaries of Jesus’ intervention, and they alone are witnesses to his power. And that’s the conundrum for us. What is their response to that show of force? From Jesus’ question to them, it would seem they were full of fear. From Jesus’ question to them, it would seem they still lacked faith. And from their question, which Mark leaves hanging, leaving us to answer, “Who then is this, that even the wind and sea obey him?” it is clear that they still do not know who Jesus is.

The setting of the story is important, too. It comes at the end of the day on which Jesus taught the people using parables. Indeed, for Mark, it is the only significant occasion on which Jesus told parables. The enigmas he presented his listeners then, the kingdom of God he was preaching by using the parables, are presented here in the story of the calming of the storm, in another way.

The disciples asked him to explain the parables, now they ask who he is. Mark doesn’t provide answers to them now, those answers will come much later in the gospel, in the cross and resurrection. But already we see elements of the answer. It isn’t so much that Jesus has power. That’s not particularly important for Mark. Rather, what is important is that his readers understand who Jesus is and what it means that he is the Messiah. Storms rage around us, and in us, but do we see Jesus Christ in their midst?

In the midst of their storm, the disciples came to Jesus, in a way rebuking him. Why are you sleeping as we are about to perish? They didn’t ask him for help. They didn’t ask him to save them; they asked him only to be aware that all of them, including him, were going down with the boat. Just as they didn’t understand the parables, they don’t understand their true plight. Neither do we.

In the midst of storms, whether they be weather events, or the troubles of contemporary existence, it can be difficult to recognize God, to see Jesus Christ at work in the world and in our lives. Like Saul, we may be overcome by emotion when things don’t go our way. Like the disciples, we may be looking for a way out of a difficult situation. And very often, the answers we receive to our requests and questions don’t seem adequate to the situation. It may be that we want Jesus to calm the troubled waters by saying, “Peace, be still.” But instead, we may hear God speaking to us out of the whirlwind as he spoke to Job.

Whatever the case, let us be mindful that God is there, with us, in the midst of it all. Let us be mindful, too, that like the disciples, we may not see or recognize God. But let us be open to God’s presence, open to God’s speech, and open to the possibility that God will still those storms all around us.

Authority in Anglicanism

June 20th, 2009

We were talking about authority in our Anglicanism class this morning. There’s the three-legged stool, of course (scripture, tradition, and reason), but there’s more to it than that. In fact, one of the pressing issues in Anglicanism has to do with the nature and exercise of authority in the church. One of the key problems has to do with where authority in the church comes from. In the Episcopal Church, for example, authority rests in laity and clergy together. In General Convention, there are two houses, the house of deputies consisting of lay and clergy delegates, and the house of bishops. In individual parishes, rectors are ultimately selected by the vestry, but they serve under the bishop. Bishops are elected in diocesan conventions, needing majority votes from lay delegates and clergy. In other nations, the Anglican church is organized quite differently.

All of this may seem esoteric and relatively unimportant, but that’s not the case. There is a connection, a symmetry between the structure and how authority it is exercised. In the Episcopal Church, democracy, or giving the people a voice, is written into our constitution. We talk a lot about the ministry of the baptized, but to giving laity voice and vote in church governance says a great deal about the relationship between clergy and laity, and about the role of the laity in the church. General Convention will take place in July, and no doubt there will be some news coming out of it. It is our governing body; unlike other churches, especially the Roman Catholic, people have a say in the governance and authority of the church.

The search for our next bishop

June 20th, 2009

You may remember that Bishop Henderson announced his retirement to take effect at the end of 2009. The Diocesan Executive Committee and Diocesan staff worked quickly to develop a plan for choosing his successor. The website for the search is here. The Diocesan profile has been made available and there are instructions and forms for nominations. Nominations close on July 3.

The profile makes for interesting reading. I would be curious how many St. James parishioners recognize themselves or our parish in the description of the diocese.

The bishop search is incredibly important and I hope that parishioners will become involved in the process. After the slate of nominees is announced, there will be a series of meetings throughout the diocese to meet the nominees and ask questions of them.

May 21st, 2009

I thought I would share a few images of the cats. Here they are, having a snack:

88450026

Here they are observing the birds at the feeders:

88450014

And here are Margery and Junia enjoying a nightcap:

88450020

Unchristians

May 15th, 2009

Occasionally things come in my inbox (email or the old way) that boggle the mind. An email message was forwarded to me a few days ago that invited me to lunch next week at a local hangout. The email came from an organization that purports to bring churches, “ministries,” and individuals together to network in Greenville. I suppose that’s a worthy effort. They weren’t just promising a lunch (not free, by the way) and conversation, however. There’s going to be a program. The email cited the statistic that 87% of Upstate South Carolina is “unchurched.”

In order to help ministers, churches, and ministries understand this phenomenon, this organization has brought together a panel of three “Unchristians” to explain why the church is failing. Isn’t that a little like the Cattlemen’s Association inviting vegetarians to explain why they won’t buy steak?

Julian

May 11th, 2009

In the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, Julian of Norwich has become one of the most popular and influential spiritual writers of the Christian tradition. That in itself is remarkable, because there is very little evidence of her popularity in her own day or even in the following centuries. Her writings were never widely distributed and exist in only one or two manuscripts.

What has made her popular is the depth and power of her theological and spiritual vision. Her use of maternal imagery with reference to God and to Jesus Christ, the phrases “all shall be well” and perhaps especially that remarkable statement of God’s love with which she concludes her Showings:

“And from the time that it was revealed, I desired many times to know in what was our Lord’s meaning. And fifteen years after and more, I was answered in spiritual understanding, and it was said: What, do you wish to know your Lord’s meaning in this thing? Know it well, love was his meaning. Who reveals it to you? Love. What did he reveal to you? Love. Why does he reveal it to you? For love.”

All of that endears her to contemporary liberal Christians and New-Agers. What many of these people often overlook is how firmly rooted Julian’s thought and experience are in the Christian tradition. The sacraments are important to her, but even more problematic in the twenty-first century is her vivid, devotion to the Passion of Jesus Christ. She describes images of Christ’s suffering and death that might offend modern sensibilities. But her understanding of Christ’s love is shaped by her experience of that love in his suffering and death on the cross.