Openly Episcopal in Albany

Bishop Love on Anglican TV: Part I

 

In anticipation of General Convention this year in Indianapolis, it might be instructive to reconsider Bishop Love’s comments to Anglican TV following the 2009 General Convention in Anaheim.  At that time, Bishop Love was interviewed by Kevin Kallsen, the ultra-conservative founder of Anglican TV, for his impressions of the proceedings.  Kallsen’s leading questions were clearly aimed at provoking +Love to repudiate the convention, criticize the Presiding Bishop and reject decisions taken on controversial resolutions, particularly D025 and C056.  To his credit, Bishop Love largely deflected the confrontational questions, but in his answers he provided ample evidence that he was not in accord with the direction of The Episcopal Church in most matters. His statements, given then, provide a good indication of the views that he and the Albany deputies will bring with them to GC 77.

Because of its length, I have divided the transcription of the interview into two parts.  Following is the first half of the conversation:

Kevin:  This is your first general convention as bishop?

Bp. Love:  Yes, it is.

Kevin:  You’ve actually been bishop now for two years?

Bp. Love:  About two and a half.  I was confirmed at the 2006 General Convention.

Kevin:  So you’ve been to a convention before or were just confirmed there?

Bp. Love:  I was a deputy to the '97 convention in Philadelphia. I came to be confirmed at the 2006, so this is my first one as a bishop. 

Kevin: But you’ve seen this before?

Bp. Love:  I have. After the '97 convention I decided that if I never came to another one it would be too soon. The Lord kind of changed things when he called me to be a bishop. 

Kevin:  Sure, the Lord put a purple shirt on you and said “be a bishop to my people”.  And now we’re here in Anaheim, California for the General Convention, 2009.  A lot of church-changing things happened here that I have witnessed.  Give me your impressions, just generally, as to what your expectations were the first couple days and what you experienced.

Bp. Love:  I came into the convention with a sense of hope, but also a sense of reality, and knowing that anything could happen at this.  And hoping for the best but being prepared for the worst.  I think we didn’t hit the worst, but we certainly didn’t hit the best either. One of the things that people kept talking about, at least within the House of Bishops, was a desire of clarity, in terms of where The Episcopal Church truly is.  And looking at the votes I would say that was achieved, there was clarity.  Unfortunately, where the majority of the church leadership is, at least represented at general convention, is not where I am and so that is of great concern to me.  And that is not new either.  I knew that coming into this.

Kevin:  You weren’t surprised by the resolutions and stuff like that...?

Bp. Love:  No.

Kevin:  I was kind of surprised that the bishops voted the way they did.  I kinda had the impression, talking to both liberals and conservative bishops coming up to this, that D025  wouldn’t pass.  Were you of the same impression as I?

Bp. Love:  I thought that there was a possibility that it wouldn’t.  At the last House of Bishops meeting we had in the spring, several bishops from all different theological persuasions or understandings made the comment to the effect that the best thing that could happen at this general convention was for nothing to happen.  And again, I think that people were aware, especially after the bishops having attended Lambeth, that we really are at risk of finding ourselves outside the wider Anglican Communion.  And I would argue that we already are, with much of the Anglican Communion.  But there is still the connection with the See of Canterbury and the Archbishop.  And I think that people were concerned that we could take things so far that even the Archbishop could no longer give his endorsement or receive us as being in communion.  So there was that sense of concern, but as I have seen so often in the House of Bishops, once the ball gets rolling, it’s hard to stop it.  And while it looks as though people may be leaning in one direction, depending on what’s said and how it’s said, then all of a sudden  the whole view can shift drastically,  just like the wind changing.  And that’s what happened, I think, with this.  We had put off, I think it was D025 that we actually stopped the vote, or didn’t vote and held off so that we could discuss it more in private session, but ultimately those that were in favor of it succeeded in getting it passed.  I was not on the winning side of that in terms of I could not support it.

Kevin: In terms of The Episcopal Church, how does this foreshadow the future of the church?   Are we watching the church die, imploding upon itself, or is there really a hope for this church?  What’s your sense?

Bp. Love:  It all depends on who you talk to.  Those that are in support of the direction that the church is currently going think that what has happened is a blessing and long overdue and will bring new life and energy into the church.  Is see it entirely different.  I cannot -- again, not being judgmental of those who voted differently than I did -- I think that everyone, or a vast majority of those who voted in support of D025 and C056, I think they were well intentioned in voting in accordance with their conscience, but I’m convinced that what they think is going to happen is not going to happen.  Rather than this being a blessing for the church I think it actually will ultimately be a curse on the church, and that it will not bring in new people, but the floodgates will continue to be opened even wider.  We’re going to be losing more people from our congregations, we’ll be losing more congregations, and there ultimately could be other dioceses that at some point leave.  That’s not suggesting that Albany is leaving, and I don’t want that --  anyone to think that -- but people, especially those that are theologically conservative, are struggling with this.  I’ve talked to several people that are just tired.  They’re tired of the fight, they’re tired of the direction that the church is going, and I don’t know how long some of those can hold on.

Kevin:  It started really bad for me the first day when we had the opening speech from the  Katharine Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop, where she mentioned that, in her opinion, redemption through a personal Jesus was heresy.  I struggle with that.  I know that I have a personal relationship with Christ and I know you very well, you certainly have a personal relationship with Christ.  Is that also a struggle, having that as another teaching in the church?

Bp. Love:  It’s a real struggle.  I haven’t actually been able to see the written text of her opening address, and so I’m hesitant to comment on exactly what she said.  I know that at the time, that what I thought she said caused great concern, and I was sitting there thinking “did she say what I just thought she said?”  And if in fact her comments -- and again, I haven’t seen the written text so I’m hesitant to quote anything -- but to suggest that it is heretical for people to think that they can be saved through a personal relationship with Christ as opposed to “we’re all in this together and we’ll be saved together as a body,” then that’s not scriptural.  The fact is, the Lord talks about the narrow door.  And while the door’s open for people to come through, they have to be intentional about choosing it.  And our salvation is the result of our acceptance of the gift of what Jesus Christ did on our behalf, of his dying on the cross to, offering himself as a sacrifice for the sins of the world, and dying on the cross, conquering the power of sin and death and rising to new life, and it’s our belief of that gift that he made possible, and that faith in Jesus as lord and savior, and the dedication of our life to him.  That’s where salvation comes from.  It’s not by being part of a particular group of people, but it’s that ultimately each one of us will have to answer the question that the Lord asked the disciples, and that was “but who do you say that I am?”  And the answer to that question is essential in terms of our ultimate destiny.

Notes from the Albany Pre-Convention Meeting

Dare to Share the Joy is the theme of this year's convention

The pre-convention meeting of the Metropolitan Deanery (Albany city and surrounding parishes) took place at the Cathedral of All Saints in the evening of May 9th.  This meeting, and others around the diocese, was in preparation for the annual diocesan convention which will take place this year, as every year, at the Camp of the Woods in Speculator, from June 8 to 10.  Since this is also the year of General Convention, the diocesan convention will have added significance.

Bishop Love began the meeting by introducing Canon Bob Haskell for a report on parishes.  So far, 93 parishes had filed a parochial report.  39 parishes reported a decline in Sunday attendance between 2010 and 2011.  “Average attendance is the best measure of how a church is doing”, according to Canon Haskell, so it is good that the speakers at convention -- four bishops from outside the diocese -- will speak on the topic of evangelism.  Haskell+ concluded with an exhortation to “go home, fill out the registration forms, see how many people you can bring to convention.” 

Bishop Love then stepped in to note that the diocese “has gone to great trouble and expense to bring people in from other parts of the Anglican diocese (sic)”.  He meant the Anglican Communion.  He hoped that all of the clergy in attendance would stay the whole weekend and not return to their parishes early even for Sunday services.  It should be noted that the practice of keeping clergy from returning to their home parishes on Sunday morning has been criticized in the past.  Apparently there are no plans to change that policy.

Following a review by Bishop Love of diocesan positions to be filled by ballot at diocesan convention, Canon Haskell reviewed clergy compensation.  “We are unwilling to recommend that parishes increase the stipend for clergy,” he said, pending resolution by General Convention of a mandate that dioceses utilize the Church Medical Trust in all parishes.  This requirement, according to Haskell, would be prohibitively expensive for churches.  A delegate to GC asked how diocesan compensation stood in relation to other dioceses in our region.  Canon Haskell admitted that there is no regional benchmark, but “that is a good idea.”  Bishop Love quickly stepped in to say that “several years ago” the DoA was “at the bottom” of the scale of compensation, but had come up to “the middle or near the middle.”  Although not a very satisfactory answer, there was no follow up.

Bishop Love introduced and explained the six resolutions included in the pre-convention booklet.

Resolution 2 would amend diocesan Canon 16.1 on the celebration or blessing of marriages to state that clergy shall not participate “in any clerical capacity” in a same-gender ceremony.  This would effectively allow clergy to attend, but not celebrate.  Bishop Love attempted to explain his position by saying, “just to let you know how this has been handled, when clergy come to me and say because of pastoral reasons they need to attend, I have granted that, asking only that they be part of the congregation, not wearing their clericals and not leading the service.”   Those supporting this resolution were not in favor of the canon when adopted.  Some might argue that an attempt to repeal the canon rather than tinker with it in order to make it more palatable to progressives should have been the strategy.  It will be interesting to see how this resolution fares at convention since the Bishop finds it innocuous.

Resolution 3, similarly, is an attempt to ameliorate Diocesan Canon 11.8 by affirming the national church’s ban on discrimination in the ordination process.  The canon would retain the definition of marriage as between “one man and one woman” while denying discrimination based on marital status or sexual orientation.  Bishop Love brushed off the attempted change in wording by saying, “while I appreciate the clarity, it is already in canons, so it is somewhat redundant.  It will come before the Constitutions and Canons Committee.”  There may be a basis for criticism of this amendment, but Bishop Love’s apparent argument that the changed language is assumed in the original appears disingenuous.   His disdain for the resolution reappeared later in the meeting.

Bishop Love announced that there had been two other resolutions offered for consideration by convention that did not make it in the pre-convention book, but which would appear in the convention materials.

The first additional resolution encourages member parishes in the DoA to disassociate from organizations providing abortion services.  It also affirms the sanctity of life by supporting the organization Anglicans for Life.  Bishop Bill said that this resolution appears to be “somewhat redundant” because previous conventions are on record in support of the sanctity of life.

The second resolution states that the DoA stands in support of and in solidarity with the Catholic Church in calling on President Obama to endorse legislation allowing freedom of conscience for religious institutions when providing health care for their members.  Bishop Bill editorialized that current health care legislation “goes very much against the teachings of the Catholic Church and other churches.”  He called on the diocese to support the request contained in this resolution. 

In answer to a question from the floor, the Bishop said that his purpose was not to endorse or oppose any resolution, but simply to read and explain them.  Immediately after saying this he called out Dennis Wisnom, the mover of Resolution 3 on Standards for Ordination and Consecration, to say that his resolution was particularly redundant.  Because of this, Bishop Bill was referring it to the Constitution and Canons Commission to rule if it should go forward.  Many at the meeting interpreted this to mean that the resolution was dead on arrival, and no doubt Dennis felt the slight.  It is interesting that this was not the only measure the bishop found redundant, but he singled out Dennis for a very public rebuke.

Clark Curtis, the diocesan treasurer, followed with a review of the 2013 budget.  Out of total revenues of $1,624,000, the total budgeted support for the Spiritual Life Center is $124,000, almost as much as all other diocesan ministries combined.  The contribution to the national church, $109,000, includes amounts earmarked from parish choice to TEC and “diocesan tithe of its non-assessment revenue, $6,750."

Bishop Love told the pre-convention attendees that there is no change in diocesan assessment from previous years.  He claimed “the assessment is much lower” than in many other surrounding dioceses.  He takes into consideration each parish’s ability to pay and that there are no repercussions for non-payment such as lack of vote at convention, demotion to mission status or removal of clergy.  “We try to take a more pastoral approach” in responding to individual cases.  But of concern is that some parishes have not yet paid a portion of their assessment, and some wait until the end of the year to pay anything.  At the same time, all parishes have access to diocesan programs and services.  “Every parish in the diocese receives the same consideration from the diocese... none of those services have been withheld from anyone.”

An eloquent plea.  But if that is the case, why have some parishes moved to seek DEPO under his watch?

The meeting ended with a blessing and all those in attendance were dismissed to prepare for diocesan convention in their home parishes.

Blood Sacrifice

We are now in the Season of Easter.  We can again say “Alleluia, Christ is Risen, Christ is risen indeed!”  But to get to this happy season we had to travel through Lent, share again the Last Supper and grieve the crucifixion on Good Friday.  Having just relived the agony of Christ, it seems a good time to ask, what does it mean?

In an article written for Religion Dispatches online, Rev. Peter Laarman critiques a recent online book by Tony Jones titled A Better Atonement: Beyond the Depraved Doctrine of Original Sin.  In that book, the author examines and rejects the doctrine of Christ’s saving action that is held by “the vast majority” of mainline Christians.  That formula, he says is “penal substitution.”  This is atonement “of the standard, unreconstructed, washed-in-the-blood variety.”  This doctrine holds that God is so offended by the sin of the world, yours and my sins in particular, that someone has to pay the price.  That someone was Jesus.  His willingness to submit to torture and death was perfect righteousness.  Through faith, that righteousness is imputed to us.  But his death was both the necessary and sufficient substitute for the punishment that should be ours because of our sin.

The idea of penal substitution is originally medieval.  Its classic formulation can be found in the thought of the 12th-century theologian, Anselm of Canterbury.  Anselm would have understood the concept of feudal honor and the idea that God’s honor, having been offended, requires satisfaction.  The Reformation updated this concept, and it lived on in the teaching of John Calvin.  Our Articles of Religion reflect a distinctively Calvinist theology.  So a medieval cultural construct continues to inform our understanding of the most important event in our faith life.

Laarman recalls the fundamentalist preaching that he endured as a youth:

Growing up with hellfire ringing in one’s ears every Sunday still generates real suffering and real damage that scars young people for life. So too with the supposed antidote to eternal fire: Christ’s redeeming blood. One might be able to make a case for a theology that is painful to bear but intellectually defensible. The bloody sacrifice idea, however, is is wrong in both senses. It does not simply perpetuate human suffering... (but) the “satisfaction” idea is also pretty dubious on biblical grounds.

Given the damaging effects of such theology, Laarman applauds the author’s attempt to “re-frame how Christ draws us humans to God.”  But Jones brings little of original insight to the table, in Laarman’s estimation.  Much of the argument had already been made by Matthew Fox in the “pathbreaking” book Original Blessing, first published almost 30 years ago.  Laarman cites other authors whom “most reasonably literate Christians” might recognize.  I confess that not all of them are familiar to me, but they include the philosopher and historian Rene Girard, along with “Girard’s foremost Catholic expositor,” Gil Baillie.  Laarson also mentions the works of Walter Wink, James Alison, S. Mark Heim, Rita Brock, and others.

Nor have other Christian traditions historically held the same substitutional view of Christ’s saving work.  According to Laarman, the Eastern Orthodox tradition “never had the bloody cross as its central focus.”  Instead, the Eastern tradition “shows us Christ Pantokrator sustaining the world and raising or exalting humanity to a higher plane, rather than descending into suffering and death among utterly corrupted humans.”  Laarman recommends the book Saving Paradise by Rita Brock and Rebecca Parker for an exploration of the soteriology of the Eastern church.

Laarman invokes Paul Tillich and asks, what if there is no conflict between God’s love and God’s Justice? What if God’s justice lies not in the demand for a blood sacrifice to avenge Him, but in His transforming a violent, degrading death into the ultimate repudiation of evil?  There would be no devaluation of the importance of the crucifixion in the faith narrative.  The cross would still stand as the supreme symbol of God’s love, a love that can take a needless tragedy and use it for the ultimate victory.  Faith remains.  The only thing disrupted is the cycle of sacrificial violence that the Gospel itself stands against.

These are questions that Laarman himself says we must think on deeply and pray about.  But the book and the issue it raises concerns “anyone who’s even considering whether ‘that old-time religion’ isn’t quite good enough any more.”

Bishop Adams' Easter Message

Bishop Gladstone B. "Skip" Adams is the Bishop of the Diocese of Central New York, now exercising DEPO supervision at the parish of St. George's, Schenectady.  His Easter message is published in the diocesan newsletter, The Messenger:

 

 

"Christ was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and he appeared to Cephas and then to the twelve."

                     I Corinthians 15:4-5

Dear People of Central New York,

 

We come again to the primary celebration of the central truth of our Christian life and experience:  the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.  St. Augustine would tell us that the very reason you and I were created is to adore the Mystery of this truth.  Through the journey of this week we are invited again to consider the reason we exist on this earth.

 

As I have this Lent daily lifted all the people of the Diocese of Central New York to God, I have prayed that somehow, some way in God's grace, that we would be drawn into a renewed and deepened awareness as a people passionately loved by the One who seeks us out.  My hope is that we will be empowered even now to act on the new life we are given.  The promise of Easter gives us the opportunity to know ourselves as God knows us in Christ - created for love as God originally intended for all the creation.  Secure in this embrace, we are able without fear to give the gift of newly rekindled love to others.  Wherever we can bring mercy, justice, release and reconciliation, there Christ's resurrection is known.  It is then that we live out the pattern of Jesus' own giving of himself.

 

What was Jesus' purpose?  It was love, nothing else but love.  May your Holy Week and Easter celebrations bring each of you the joy and peace of this resurrection hope.

 

+Bishop Skip

 

Gospel Exercise

 

 

I have written before about how much I enjoy the intellectual challenges from reading the blog Entangled States by Dean Nicholas Knisely of Trinity Cathedral, Phoenix.  In his latest post he poses a Lenten challenge.  How would we summarize the Gospel if we had to explain it in just two sentences.  He writes, in part: 

This Lent I’m leading a book study of Scot McKnight's latest book, “The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited”. McKnight’s point in the book is that ever since the rise of the Enlightenment groups of Christians have tended to equate the Gospel with saving people.  The claim is that the Gospel is about personal salvation and it’s deeply connected to Paul’s writing in some of his letters (not all).  I suppose that’s why, if you listen to Soterians (McKnight’s word for people who focus on personal salvation as the Gospel) preach you note that they tend to focus almost exclusively on St. Paul.

McKnight spends a number of pages developing his point, but the simple version is this; Jesus, the Messiah has come, and all that God has been promising to us has been (or has begun to be) fulfilled. McKnight uses early Christian writers, the early liturgies of the Church and the Creeds to bolster his argument.

Earlier this week I spent a couple of days reading diagnostic exams for a group of young seminarians We had asked a question of the students that was something to the effect of “Can you give us a two sentence summary of the Gospel?”

Most of the answers tended to focus on the role of Jesus as exemplar of what humanity is capable of achieving. None of the answers were of the form that McKnight would describe as “soterian”. But none of the answers talked about Jesus as Messiah either.

So here’s a question for you to ponder: How would you tell someone the Gospel in two sentences?

 

Sounds like a good Lenten exercise.  Care to stretch your mind?

The Right of Identity

The one resolution originating from the Diocese of Albany to go before the 77th General Convention of The Episcopal Church will be the one titled "A Right to Human Identity" sponsored by the Rev. Mark Diebel.

As reported in this blog when it came before the 2009 diocesan convention in Albany, the resolution aims to address the loss of history for both adoptees and persons born through artificial reproductive technology, including surrogacy parenting.  The proposal was passed in Albany and referred to the 76th General Convention.  There it was taken up by the Commission on Social Justice and Public Policy.  That commission referred it, without change, for consideration by General Convention in 2012.  The 77th General Convention will meet in Indianapolis this June.

The author, Mark Diebel, sees room for expansion of the resolution.  He would like to see GC “undertake a study of the implications of artificial reproductive technologies for human identity and report their findings”.  In fact, an amendment to that effect was proposed at the 2009 Albany diocesan convention, but was defeated before the main resolution was passed.  Now Diebel says that the resolution "needs exposure and discussion in order to get understanding of it."  Here is the resolution that will be considered at 77th General Convention, and explanation:

RESOLVED, the House of ________ concurring, that the 77thGeneral Convention of the Episcopal Church urge all dioceses to adopt the following statement: Personal history is a fundamental human right and knowledge of one’s entire parentage should be assumed as part of a person’s natural property, and be it further;

RESOLVED, that the 77th General Convention urge all dioceses to adopt the following statement: That all state legislatures be urged to establish procedures that would enable adoptees (upon reaching legal age) to secure current information regarding their historical heritage, medical history, and genetic derivation without the necessity of court action.

EXPLANATION

The Episcopal Church has had little formal conversation on issues related to the advances in genetic engineering, and their impact upon our daily lives. At the 76th General Convention, such an opportunity was missed as a similar resolution to this one was submitted. Though the resolution passed for debate, it did not get out of legislative committee in time for consideration by General Convention. The Standing Commission on Social Justice and Public Policy believes that a general debate is timely and of increasing importance to the wider Church. It is of note that the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, in its 2011 Church Wide Assembly received a social statement paper on Genetics.

Adoptees in the United States are not necessarily granted knowledge of their parentage because state law in forty eight states seals their original birth certificate. There are no laws that protect the identity history of children born using artificial reproductive technology. Sperm, egg, and/or embryo donations may not be disclosed to the children so conceived. Similar concerns exist for children born of surrogacy parenting.

Theological grounds for knowledge of one’s origins maybe seen in scripture: a) Old Testament scriptural testimony is structured around genealogical narratives; b) the theological concept of adoption witnessed by Paul incorporates knowledge of one’s origins; c) Jesus’ birth narratives incorporate genealogies; d) the concept of fatherhood is retained in the New Testament. Furthermore, Church history has testified to the importance of blood line in canon law. The theological concept that a person may become a “child of God” by the “will of God” does not negate other origin narratives, but fulfills them. Narrative theology emphasizes the importance of the human narrative on personal and social levels.

The Episcopal Church has already declared in GC 1982-D082: “Resolved, the House of Bishops Concurring” that state legislatures be urged to establish procedures that would enable adoptees (upon reaching legal age) to secure current information regarding their historical heritage, medical history and genetic derivation: 1) without the necessity of court action, and 2) with sufficient safeguards provided for the protection of all parties in the adoptive triangle – the adoptee, the adoptive parents, and the biological parents; and be it further resolved, That every Diocese and Parish be encouraged to support such action in every state.” GC 1982-D082, however, should be superseded in regard to section 2, which is too vague.

Episcopal Oversight in Albany

 

 

 

 

 

Interest in some form of delegated episcopal oversight, or DEPO, has been raised anew by the action of some parishes in the Diocese of Albany that have requested, or are considering a request for DEPO status.  Comments that I have read on blog postings or have heard expressed by parishioners indicate that DEPO is not widely understood for what it is.  Therefore I want to try to explain the limited objectives of DEPO, what it is and what it is not.  My explanation has been greatly helped by a web article published by the Ontario Consultants for Religious Tolerance.

It is true that the precipitating issue for DEPO remains a basic conflict over the understanding of human sexuality, but the remedy is designed to address other root causes of dissatisfaction between parishes and their diocesan authority.  While another bishop may be invited to provide pastoral care to aggrieved parishes, the intervention of another bishop does not relieve the diocesan bishop of his or her constitutional and canonical responsibilities.  And while a parish receives the benefits of alternative pastoral oversight, it does not absolve the parish from its responsibilities to the home diocese.  In other words, seeking and obtaining DEPO does not mean that a church is seceding from its diocese.

In March 2004, bishops of the Episcopal Church attended a two-day retreat at Camp Allen, TX, for a period of intensive conversation and prayer. There they developed a statement titled "Caring For All the Churches: A Response of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church to an expressed need of the Church." The need that the statement referred to came from individual parishes in liberal dioceses who "find themselves in distress because of the actions of the 74th General Convention.”  The distress was over the action of  consecrating the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

The remedy offered by the House of Bishops was “Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight", or DEPO.  As as originally outlined in the statement by the House of Bishops, DEPO would allow parishes in a liberal diocese to receive pastoral oversight from another bishop, "who neither supported the election [of Bishop Robinson] nor supports the ordination of homosexuals to ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church."  The DEPO procedure would start with a meeting between a conservative congregation and their more liberal bishop, “with a consultant, if needed, to find ways to work together."  If reconciliation could not be be obtained, then the congregation "may seek from their diocesan bishop...a conference regarding the appropriateness and conditions for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight." Then, “the bishop may appoint another bishop to provide pastoral oversight" for the congregation.  If conflict continues, "there may then be an appeal to the bishop who is president or vice-president of the ECUSA province in which the congregation is geographically located, for help in seeking a resolution."  Progress toward reconciliation would be assessed regularly, and reported to the Presiding Bishop and the House of Bishops.

Conversations with clergy from within and outside the Diocese of Albany suggest that the history of DEPO has not always followed the pattern outlined.  There were conservative parishes in the dioceses of Washington, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and San Diego that asked for DEPO not too long after the program was announced.  In each case, the churches were turned down by their liberal diocesan bishops.  In the handful of cases where DEPO was tried, it allowed conservative parishes to distance themselves from what they considered a “heretical” diocese and bishop without actually leaving The Episcopal Church.  As a priest friend from a neighboring, liberal diocese puts it, “I'm not aware of any case where DEPO was a means of reconciliation.”

Why, then, would Bishop Love consider allowing parishes in this diocese to seek DEPO status?  It may be that, at this remove from its inception, DEPO is seen to be less than the threat initially imagined by liberal bishops.  It could be that Bishop Love feels pressure not only from his own congregations, but from his fellow bishops to provide some “leeway” to liberal parishes.  In this regard, you may want to read a recent article in the Albany Times Union on the subject of DEPO.  In any case, Bishop Love’s willingness to consider the remedy is a small, but positive opening coming from our diocese.

As Dr. William Hammond, a member of Albany Via Media, pointed out to the board of that organization, there is an asymmetry to the way the path to DEPO is working out in the Diocese of Albany.  Elsewhere, the program has been used to distance a congregation from the perceived heresies of a liberal bishop and diocese.  Here the plan is seen as a way to open a window to a fresh perspective, including a welcome dialog with our own diocesan bishop, William Love.  The need for such a real dialog and mutual respect between conservatives and liberals within this diocese has been the subject of comment on this blog.  If the search for DEPO in our diocese accomplishes anything, it will be to open lines of communication which have been blocked for too long.  This is the goal.  But dialog will not work unless it begins at the top, and that means it must first involve our bishop and diocese.

Brotherhood of Faith

 

 

 

 

 

The Episcopal Church has historically been at the forefront of interfaith dialogue and cooperation.  The Episcopal News Service reports on an exiting new ecumenical ministry in Omaha, Nebraska, which includes Episcopal, Muslim and Jewish worshippers.  What has the Diocese of Albany done to reach out to our Jewish and Muslim brothers and sisters?  We can learn, as a Diocese and as a Church, from this radical example of brotherhood in faith:

 Episcopal Tri-Faith Ministries is the new church which will be sited with Temple Israel and the American Institute of Islamic Studies and Culture (AIISC) in a unique campus featuring a synagogue, a church, a mosque and an interfaith center.

“We are a congregation engaged in interfaith work because of our partnership with Temple Israel and the AIISC,” said the Rev. Canon Tim Anderson, who leads the new Episcopal congregation. “We are accepting in the name of all the partners in the Tri-Faith Initiative.”

The new church is a project of the Episcopal Diocese of Nebraska, which serves the whole state and has 55 parishes. The Diocese joined the Tri-Faith Initiative in 2006 along with the Jewish and Muslim organizations. “We all trace our religions back the patriarch Abraham.” explained Anderson.

Rabbi Aryeh Azriel of Temple Israel said “I have been amazed and overwhelmed by the strength and leadership of the Episcopal Diocese of Nebraska. After only five years of dreaming and visioning about the Tri-Faith relationship, we are poised to undertake the construction of a campus, where three faith communities will live in harmony under God’s watching eye.”

“The willingness of the Episcopal Diocese to learn and listen to the other two faiths has played a major role in continuing with this dialogue and advancing the relationship between the members of the three faiths,” said Dr. Syed Mohiuddin, president of the AIISC. “The intentional co-location of these places of worship of the Abrahamic faiths with the Center of Learning (a fourth building serving as an interfaith center) is a feat unheard of in our religious history. It will be a place where we will share our dreams, our hopes and our inspiration in the service of God.”

A Statement from the Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno

 

 

 

 

 

J. Jon Bruno is Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles

February 7, 2012

I was overjoyed when I heard that the right to marriage equality has been upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Constitution of the United States allows for equal rights under the law, and the 14th Amendment guarantees that every human being, regardless of race, ethnicity or sexual orientation, is equally protected by the constitution of our land.

It is a foregone conclusion that those people who disagree with this decision will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.  It is my prayer that there will be a swift action on the part of the Supreme Court that will strike down opposition to marriage equality.  We all are truly created in the image of God; therefore, we should all be afforded the respect and dignity of that creation.  I will pray that we soon will have regained the privilege and right of marriage equality for all people.

A Missouri Lutheran Blasts our Church

Issues, Etc. is the radio show of Lutheran Pastor Todd Wilkens

The blog Episcopal Cafe reports on a radio interview of Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori by Pastor Todd Wilkens of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.  After concluding the telephone interview with our Presiding Bishop, Pastor Wilkens hangs up and comments to his listeners: "Don't even think for a minute there's any way she can ontologically incarnate the office of the bishop", simply because she is a “she”.  This premeditated ambush of our Presiding Bishop took place on January 4th.

Talk about Jerry Springer-like behavior!  To Mainline Episcopalians, Pastor Todd Wilken’s outburst is only to be expected, considering the source.  As a comment to the Episcopal Cafe article recounts, “remember that an LCMS pastor was charged with violation of his orders simply for sharing the stage with an imam at an event remembering September 11, calling for peace.”  And a posting on Facebook states, “LCMS aren't even in apostolic succession! who's he kidding about orders?”

The Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church is not the same as ELCA, the denomination that is in full communion with The Episcopal Church.  The Missouri Lutherans are a conservative, confessional denomination.  Missouri Lutherans are not ecumenical.  They officially endorse creationism and have anti-Catholic tendencies.  Also, not surprisingly, they believe that the ordination of women is contrary to scripture.

This reported incident comes close upon the Diocese of Albany’s announcement of the speaker for this year’s Parish Leadership Conference.  He is to be Pastor David Born, an ordained minister in the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.  After a career in the pulpit of Missouri Synod congregations, Pastor Born is now a parishioner at Christ Episcopal Church in Cooperstown.  He is said to be experienced in evangelism, the theme of the leadership conference.

Now, it is not our intention to savage the Missouri Synod.  They will believe those things that their conscience allows.  Still, we must pray that they repent of a misogynistic view that is no longer socially or theologically relevant.  Likewise we must reserve judgment of Pastor Born’s upcoming talk.  Perhaps Pastor Wilkens expressed only his own biased viewpoint.  Pastor Born may well disavow these remarks as representative of of the Missouri Lutheran church.  If so, this conference would be an appropriate time to do so.

But it might be questioned why our diocese would emphasize that the speaker at our Parish Leadership Conference comes from a denominational background outside The Episcopal Church, let alone a denomination that would deny the sacramental legitimacy of our ordination rites.  Pastor Born’s experience and evangelical fervor are not in question.  Yet, The Episcopal Church must have many inspiring speakers willing and able to energize our conference toward evangelism.  Who better to ask to speak to us on evangelizing The Episcopal Church than an Episcopal missioner?  This, apparently, is an invitation our diocese does not consider worth offering.

The Parish Leadership Conference sessions will be held in Malone on January 21, in Oneonta on January 28, and at the Cathedral of All Saints on Feb. 4.

What is Orthodoxy?

I am a fan of the blog Ask the Priest.  This blog is maintained by Episcopal priests who answer questions on faith submitted to them by members of the public. Some of the questions posed are quite challenging, but the answers are always straightforward and pastorally sensitive.  If you are looking for a new blog to subscribe to, I would recommend Ask the Priest.

A recent question posed to the blog was "what is orthodoxy?"  The priest who answered this particular question is David Simmons, rector of St. Matthias Episcopal Church in Waukesha, Wisconsin.  The Rev. Simmons' reply is so direct, sensitive and truly Anglican that I want to share it with you.  See if it is what you, also, would offer as an Episcopal answer to the question of what is orthodoxy:

A reader writes in:

What is "Orthodoxy?"  I don't mean the Eastern version of Christianity - I know what that is. :) What I'm getting at is, what is considered the core, true Christian doctrine in the Episcopal Church?

That’s a tall order, and I’ll link to some other articles on the role of the Bible in the Episcopal Church at the end of the post.  But the central question is one of “orthodoxy.” Are Episcopalians “orthodox” Christians or not?  It depends on your definition of “orthodoxy,” of which there are many.  For Eastern Orthodox Christians, it means a Christian who is part of the Orthodox Church.  For Roman Catholics, it means a Christian who accepts the all the Dogmas of that church.  For Fundamentalist Evangelicals, it means a Christian who accepts (among other things) the literal inerrancy of the Bible.  When the term is used in the Anglican tradition, it is often being used by conservative Anglo-Catholic or Evangelical separatists to define themselves over and against  the existing church.  That definition usually has to do with positions over human sexuality couched in scriptural language.

The word “orthodoxy” is made up of two greek roots, “ortho” meaning “right” and “doxos” meaning “Praise.”  Orthodoxy is literally using the right praise of God.  However, most people interpret it to mean something doctrinal.  Some start with the so-called “Vincentian Canon,” which was formulated by St. Vincent of Lerins in 434, “that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all.”  My experience is that those who quote it think that whatever they believe fits that category.  However, it is very hard to get down to something that basic.  The Trinity?  Not for many early Christians before the first church councils.  The two natures of Christ?  Not for the Oriental Orthodox Churches.  None of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity can be said to be held “everywhere, always and by all” except perhaps the Biblical exclamation, “Jesus is Lord!” and the reality of the Resurrection in some form.

Since “orthodoxy” is a hard target to hit, perhaps it would be better to ask “What do Episcopalians believe?” and then decide whether that accords with your understanding of the Christian faith.  The normative beliefs of Episcopalians are to be found in the Book of Common Prayer.  The Catechism on page 845 is a starting point.  One Anglican writer notes that the “Anglican Dogmas” are the Trinity and the two natures in one person of Christ.  Now, do ALL Episcopalians believe in the Trinity, the two natures of Christ, and the bodily Resurrection?  Nope.  But that’s no more an indication of the central teaching of the church than nuns fomenting for women’s ordination reflect the central teaching of the Papacy.  

The Anglican tradition has been one of a “Middle Way” between Catholicism and Protestantism, where membership has to do with participation in worship rather than affirmation of any catechism or confession.  This goes all the way back to the Elizabethan Compromise.  As a result, our doctrine IS a little vague, and intentionally so.  We are more a family of churches than a singular incarnation of Christianity.  There is room in the Anglican tradition for manifestations of various flavors of Christianity.  We have extreme gin-and-lace Victorian Anglo-Catholics, Bible-thumping Evangelicals, Crypto-Unitarians, liturgical Pentecostals and more variations on those themes than you can imagine.  Yes, there is a “hippy-trippy” element to parts of the Episcopal Church, but that part has always been there.  The first Unitarians in America at the time of the Revolution were Anglicans who removed Trinitarian references from their BCPs and we have always retained that edge.

No matter what certain individual members may beleive, as a denomination we affirm Jesus as our Lord, even while engaging in interfaith dialogue.  I highly commend the Statement on Inter-religious Relations and Interfaith Dialogue which was passed at our 2008 General Convention for an excellent exploration of how we uphold our truth claims about Jesus while talking to others.

Whether the Episcopal Church is a good fit really has to do with HOW you view your Christian faith.  If you are the kind of person who wants a strict set of doctrines to believe, and to think that everyone else in the church has that same exact set, the Episcopal Church is not and has never been that place.  Much of the turmoil in the last few years has been due to people finally realizing that.  However, if you are “playful” with your faith, and think you might have something to learn from someone who believes differently, we might be the place for you.  Our rock is Jesus as the second person of the most Holy Trinity.  The rest, while sometimes important, is commentary.

David+

Trinity Cathedral Reaffirms Tie to Episcopal Church

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Grace Happens, the newsletter of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, comes news that Trinity Cathedral in the city of Pittsburgh has voted to return to its historic status as the the seat of the Episcopal diocese, solely.  This ends its temporary connection with Robert Duncan and "the diocese established by the former Episcopalians."  The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh continues its successful rebuilding after a time of schism:

The governing board of Trinity Cathedral in downtown Pittsburgh has voted to reaffirm its historic role as the cathedral church only for the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church in the United States.  

 

Since 1928 when it first became the cathedral church for the Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church, Trinity Cathedral has served as the symbolic seat of the diocese.  When some members of the diocese decided in 2008 to leave The Episcopal Church, Trinity sought to serve both the Episcopal Diocese as well as the diocese established by the former Episcopalians.  By its vote on December 15, 2011, a clear majority of the Cathedral Chapter indicated that the time and purpose of that dual service had now passed, and that in the interest of the Cathedral's future, it was necessary to re-affirm its original charter.  

 

"Trinity's effort to serve two dioceses was well-intentioned in its time, which was a period of uncertainty," said Bishop Kenneth L. Price, Jr. of the Episcopal Diocese.  "With much of that uncertainly behind us, the Episcopal Diocese stands ready to help the Cathedral grow in its mission as a church open to all and serving all in the name of Jesus Christ in the heart of the city," said the bishop. 

Presiding Bishop's Christmas Message

[Episcopal Church Office of Public Affairs] “Jesus comes among us to remind us of a world living together in peace, to reclaim and make real that vision of creation for all humanity and all God’s creatures,” Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori says in the Christmas message for 2011.

The following is the text of the Presiding Bishop’s message:

See, your salvation comes – Isaiah 62:11

The great prophets before Jesus proclaimed a vision of a nation and a people redeemed.  We continue to share that yearning – as the Christmas hymn puts it, “the hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.”  We’ve seen abundant hopes spring up in the past year across the Arab world and Eastern Europe, and in the global Occupy movement.  Those voices seek a world of greater justice, communities in which decisions and the gifts of creation are more available to all.  Our understanding of salvation is most profoundly about justice in community, and as Christians we believe that help and healing for all are grounded in the incarnate presence of God – among us and within us.

We look for salvation to the one who came among us in the most humble way, a helpless child born in a scandalous way to a poor peasant couple.  The Incarnation, God with us, changed the world in ways that we insist are leading to the ultimate healing of all creation.  “See, your salvation comes,” says the prophet in every age, yet it is not yet fully come upon us.  We live in hope for its fullness.  May hope be nourished within us, in each and every human being and community, for the journey toward God’s healed and holy future.

That proclamation of coming salvation is a part of Isaiah (Isa 62:6-12) that will be read in some congregations at Christmas, but if you don’t hear it, go and read the whole of it.  Its centerpiece speaks of what that salvation looks like:

 The Lord has sworn…
            I will not again give your grain to be food for your enemies,
                        and foreigners shall not drink the wine for which you have labored;
            but those who garner it shall eat it and praise the Lord,
                        and those who gather it shall drink it in my holy courts.

Isaiah 62:8-9

That is not a vision of pristine isolation, but a vision of comfort and healing to a people frequently at war, occupied, or exploited by superior forces.  The fear of powerful others taking and using for themselves the produce of the poor is healed and transformed intllo a society in which the gifts God provides will be shared by all.  For when salvation comes, that society will

be called, ‘the Holy People, The Redeemed of the Lord’;
     and you shall be called, ‘Sought Out, A City Not Forsaken.’

Isaiah 62:12

Jesus comes among us to remind us of a world living together in peace, to reclaim and make real that vision of creation for all humanity and all God’s creatures. That world is put right as relationships between God and humanity are set right. The relationship between God and human being cannot be set right without equal healing of relationships between us mortals.  See, your salvation comes!  Will we welcome that healing?

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
Presiding Bishop and Primate
The Episcopal Church

Burn in Hell for All Eternity?

Giovanni Stradano - Illustrations For Dante's Inferno, 1587

A recent comment by Mary Lawthers on the AVM Facebook page concerning her experience with the Commission on Ministry of the Diocese of Albany has generated some online discussion.

A couple of years ago Mary sought permission of the commission to pursue a diaconal ministry.  According to her account, a priest on the commission told her that “to be an ordained person in the DOA you have to be willing to confront all homosexuals, and let them know that if they do not change they will burn in hell for eternity.”  Mary naturally found this statement of belief to be both offensive and personally cruel, and said so.  Unfortunately, but not unpredictably, her candidacy did not proceed.

The author of this outrageous remark was subsequently identified as The Rev. David F. Ousley.  I recall David Ousley from when I was a member of the Commission on Ministry, probably some time around 2004-2005.  Our infrequent conversations were cordial, and I found it difficult to believe that he could have expressed himself in this way to a candidate before the commission.  So, with Mary Lawlor’s permission, I decided to write to The Rev. Ousley to confirm what had been reported.  I sent him the following email through the diocesan website over a week ago:

Dear David+

A few years ago I had the pleasure of serving with you on the Commission on Ministry of the Diocese of Albany. As you recall, I left the Commission voluntarily, largely because of my perception that no candidate who expressed liberal or progressive opinions would receive fair consideration. If this impression was misplaced, I assume that you will correct my thinking. But as a former member of the Commission on Ministry, I am writing to you to request your recollections of a matter that came before the Commission.

Recently, on the AVM Facebook page, Mary Lawthers recalled a conversation with you in your capacity as a member of the Commission, in which you told her that " to be an ordained person in the DOA you have to be willing to confront all homosexuals and let them know that if they do not change they will burn in Hell for eternity." I do not recall hearing about this at the time of my service on the Commission, so I assume that it occurred after my tenure. But since it has become a matter of comment on Facebook, I want to ask you:

1. Did that conversation take place as reported? If so, did this remark reflect your considered theological opinion at the time? If it did, do you still hold such a position or have your thoughts on the matter changed in any way?

2. If these remarks were reported correctly, would you say that they reflected the majority position of the Commission on Ministry at the time? Would this correctly reflect the continued position of the Commission on Ministry, or has the position of the majority of the Commission been modified in any way?

3. If the candidate in question again appeared before the Commission under similar circumstances, would you express your opinion on the matter in the same way again? If not, how would you modify these remarks, given another opportunity?

Thank you for replying to my request for clarification. The reported incident has become a matter of some comment on Facebook, and I wanted to ask you your recollection of the matter before adding my thoughts to the discussion thread.

Sincerely,
John White

To this date, I have not received a reply from The Rev. Ousley.  Granted, there have been other communications with the diocese and clergy that have unaccountably been lost in transit.  It may be that Rev. David has not received this letter until now.  I prefer to believe that explanation rather than the alternative, which is tacit agreement to the charge that the Commission is  bullying toward candidates for ordination, as well as being homophobic.

Dr. William Hammond of this diocese reminds us on Facebook of the 1998 Lambeth Conference resolution regarding sexuality, which states that  "We commit ourselves to listen to the experience of homosexual persons and we wish to assure them that they are loved by God and that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ".  How is that commitment expressed in the actions of the Commission?

Another lay person in the diocese, Ann Carlson, commented on Facebook that she personally knew of another candidate who “had the same experience as Mary, and had heard of at least one other person who was also grilled on a position on homosexuality in that process.”  As Ann says:

“it appears that it used to be standard practice. Let's hope -- and let's try to make sure that -- it is no more.”

A Mysterious Disappearance

Albany Via Media (AVM) board member Joseph Liotta has brought to our attention the fact that the diocesan website does not include a list of priests licensed to officiate in the diocese.  He points out that it has in the past been a useful resource for parishes, clergy and laypersons alike.  Mr. Liotta writes:

After months of trying to find out what happened to the List of Licensed Priests in the Diocese (it used to be on the Diocesan website but hasn’t been there for many months now) I emailed Canon Haskell. Below is the text of my email to him and his answer to me:

Dear Canon Haskell:
Recently the List of Licensed Priests in the Diocese was removed from the Diocesan website. This list was not a duplicate of Canonically Resident Priests or Canonically Resident Deacons but a separate list. What was the reason for its removal? Will it be restored? Does this list still exist?
Joseph Liotta

Canon Haskell responded:

Dear Mr. Liotta:
Thank you for bringing to our attention the absence of a list of licensed priests on the Diocesan website. We will work on getting the list posted, although, with the Christmas season approaching, it will not be before January.
(The Rev.) Robert F Haskell

Be looking for this “mysteriously disappeared” list on the Diocesan website in January. I cannot believe that no one else in the Diocese of Albany has noticed this, especially the powers that be such as the Bishop, the Canon to the Ordinary, the Standing Committee members, the priests on that list, or vestries and churches trying to get a supply priest. It doesn’t make sense to me. I even brought this up at the AVM annual meeting and no one seemed to know anything about this issue, or that it was an issue.

I’m sure we all look forward to the return of the list of licensed priests.  Let's hope that it reappears sooner, not later.

The Rev. Tobias Haller to Speak

Albany Via Media is delighted to announce that The Rev. Tobias Haller will speak at its Annual Meeting in historic St. George's Church, Schenectady, at 2 p.m. on Saturday, November 12. His talk, Anglican Disunion: Issues behind the Issue, will bring us up to date on the state of the troubled Anglican Communion, whose divisive issues include (but go very far beyond) the place of homosexuals in the Church.

All are invited to attend this meeting and hear Tobias Haller speak.  St. George's is located at 30 North Ferry Street, Schenectady, NY 12305. Directions are available from the St. George's website.

About Tobias Haller

Born in Baltimore, Fr. Haller moved to New York City after graduating from Towson State College. He worked as an actor for 15 years before he was called to serve the Church in the Brotherhood of St. Gregory and, between 1983 and 1991, on the Presiding Bishop's staff. He attended General Theological Seminary, graduating with honors in 1997, and pastored a small parish in Yonkers, NY, before taking his present position as the Vicar of St. James Fordham, in the Bronx.

Involved at every level of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, from the diocesan Interparish Council to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Indaba Reference Group, Fr. Haller has an uncommonly broad view of the Anglican world. It was enriched by recent visits to London and South Africa. He shares his wide experience through workshops and retreats as well as numerous publications in the church press. His blog, In a Godward Direction, is a favorite of all who are concerned with Anglican matters. So too is his critically acclaimed book, Reasonable and Holy: Engaging Same-Sexuality (2009, Seabury Books).

Fr. Haller and James Teets, partners in life and ministry for 31 years, were among the first to take advantage of New York's new Marriage Equality Law.

 

Death Knell for the Covenant?

According to an Episcopal News Service report, Executive Council will submit a resolution to next year’s General Convention stating that the Church is “unable to adopt the Anglican Covenant in its present form.”  The unanimous decision to submit this resolution to General Convention came on Oct. 24th, the last day of council's four-day meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah.  If passed at General Convention, how would this resolution be received by the Diocese of Albany, which has passed its own resolution supporting the covenant?

Here is the text of the proposed resolution, as reported by The Rev. Mark Harris, a member of the task force that produced it:

Resolved, the House of _______ concurring, That this 77th General Convention express its profound gratitude to those who so faithfully worked at producing the Anglican Covenant; and be it further

Resolved, that The Episcopal Church commit itself to continued participation in the wider councils of the Anglican Communion and to continued dialogue with our brothers and sisters in other provinces to deepen understanding and to insure the continued integrity of the Anglican Communion; and be it further

Resolved, that The Episcopal Church recommit itself to dialogue with the several provinces when adopting innovations which may be seen as threatening to the unity of the Communion; and be it further

Resolved, that The Episcopal Church is unable to adopt the Anglican Covenant in its present form.

The reasoning behind the resolution is not to reject our Communion, but (as PB Schori noted) that the covenant conflicts with The Episcopal Church’s Constitution and Canons.  The task force has said that to adopt the current version "would significantly alter our current understanding of what it means to be an autonomous province."  This is a clear reference to Section 4 of the covenant.  Our first priority must be, in the words of the Presiding Bishop, "that all people of this church might be included in the life of the church."

If this proposed resolution, or one similar to it, is passed by General Convention, the future prospect of the Anglican Covenant is doubtful.  This is the conclusion not only of progressive Episcopalians, but of more traditionalist members of our Church.  The Rev. Kendall Harmon, blogger of Titus One Nine, has already acknowledged “the death knell for Dr Rowan Williams’ plan for the Anglican Communion.”

Where, then, does this leave the Diocese of Albany?  A small but vocal minority of "conservatives" within The Episcopal Church, including the DOA, feel that the covenant provides a framework in which to be faithful to the "orthodoxy" of the Anglican Communion.  But traditionally, to be Anglican is to allow the greatest latitude of response to "the work of the Spirit," in the words of the task force report.

Rather than cling to the dead letter of a rejected covenant, we must “continue the dialogue to which we have pledged ourselves,” both within our Province and with the rest of the Anglican world, as the of House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson has said.   But, most importantly, The Episcopal Church must be faithful to the work of the Spirit as our Church collectively perceives it.  And, according to the report of the task force,

when the Church is faithful, the unity of the Church is reflective of the unity that is in God, divinely ordered and discernible on the earth.

General Convention to Consider Blessings

As of this moment, on Saturday evening, the Episcopal News Service has not published this story on their website, but subscribers to breaking news via email have received the ENS article by Mary Frances Schjonberg .  The Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music will propose a Church-wide trial use of same-gender blessings at the 2012 General Convention.  If the resolution is passed, the three years between conventions would see a reflection on the Episcopal Church's "understanding of marriage in light of both societal norms and civil law."  Then the 2015 convention would decide whether to formalize the blessings as part of our official liturgy. God speed the passage of full sacramental equality, even in the Diocese of Albany!

ENS reports:

The Episcopal Church would spend three years using a rite for same-gender blessings and studying its application under a resolution that the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music has agreed to propose to the 2012 meeting of General Convention.

During that same time period the church also would reflect on its understanding of marriage in light of changes in both societal norms and civil law if convention agrees to a related resolution the commission will propose, according to the Rev. Ruth Meyers, SCLM chair.

The SCLM's decisions are the outcome of 18 months of work in response to General Convention's mandate (via Resolution C056) that it work with the House of Bishops to collect and develop theological resources and liturgies for blessing same-gender relationships, and report to the 77th General Convention in 2012 in Indianapolis.

The commission will present convention with 176 pages of material, including a rite of blessing, a theological essay on the issues involved in blessing same-gender relationships, a pastoral resource to guide clergy and trained lay people who would prepare same-gender couples to receive a blessing (the church requires heterosexual couples to engage in pre-marital counseling as well) and a discussion guide for helping congregations and other groups to discuss the rite and other materials.

The resolution that would authorize a three-year trial use of the liturgy also will ask for the continuation of the "generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this church," called for in C056, Meyers said, including allowing for adaptation of the rite for local use. And, the resolution would have the commission report to the
2015 meeting of convention on how all the materials are used.

Meyers said Oct. 15 that she and the commission want to invite the church to "receive the [blessing] material prayerfully as a resource that we hope will be useful for the church but [also] as work along the way and not as a final, finished product and a definitive statement."

"We have had a wide consultative process and so have got input from a number of people, and it still needs to be received by the wider church," she told Episcopal News Service during a telephone interview from the commission's meeting in Bloomington, Minnesota, a suburb of Minneapolis. "This is new territory for the Episcopal Church and so as we use material we expect we will learn more that will influence the content of the material that will help us refine the liturgy even further."

The commission decided to call for a three-year study of marriage as a result of feedback it received during the months it spent developing the C056 resources, according to Meyers.

"Throughout the triennium as we did our work on this people asked us questions about how this related to the understanding of marriage that the church has had up until this point and whether this liturgy itself was intended to be a marriage," she said. "The resolution called for us to develop a liturgy of blessing and that is what we have done, but we realized there is great need for the church to reflect more generally – in light of changing societal and cultural realities, and a whole range of changes in civil law – on how we understand marriage."

The commission's C056 work will become part of a report it must submit to convention detailing both its work on all matters referred to it during the triennium and any resolutions it proposes for convention to consider. Such reports of all the church's committees, commissions, agencies and boards are assembled into what is known as the Blue Book and the collection is released some months before each meeting of convention.

Meyers said the commission plans to ask the General Convention office to release the C056-related materials prior to the anticipated publication of the Blue Book so that it can be discussed at the March
2012 meeting of the House of Bishops and at the General Convention deputy training sessions during pre-convention provincial meetings.

Since the commission began discussing how to proceed to C056's mandate, the SCLM has conducted the "open process" called for in the resolution, Meyers said. Four task groups that included people from outside the commission worked on the topics of liturgy, theology, pastoral concerns and legal and canonical concerns. The liturgical task group received what Meyers said were hundreds of blessing rites, some dating to the 1970s. After the group developed a set of principles for reviewing the rites, they read each one and borrowed from some of them, she said.

The SCLM completed a first draft of all the materials in June and then invited 133 Episcopalians to review them. Using an online process, the reviewers made "extensive comments totaling in the thousands," Meyers said. The task groups then made major revisions based on those comments.

The rite and the theological essay were discussed during the House of Bishops meeting in September, according to Meyers. SCLM members, including the three bishops who serve on the commission (Tom Ely of the Diocese of Vermont, Pierre Whalon of the Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe and John McKee Sloan of the Diocese of Alabama), have reported to the House of Bishops on a regular basis.

In October 2010, the commission met for five hours with representatives of the church's Province I to hear about their experience with same-gender blessings.

Nearly 200 members of the House of Deputies met March 18-19 in Atlanta for a historic churchwide consultation on same-gender blessings sponsored by the commission. The SCLM had invited one lay and one clergy deputy from each of the church's 109 dioceses and three regional areas to hear about and reflect on its work to date on the mandate given to it in General Convention 2009.

House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson said that the Atlanta consultation was historic both for its topic and because a large group of deputies have never before gathered together outside of General Convention for church business and to discuss a topic due to be taken up at the next meeting of convention.

Resolution C056 also asked the SCLM to invite theological reflection and dialogue about its work from around the Anglican Communion.
Episcopal Church bishops were asked to discuss the church's work on
C056 with the bishops of any companion diocese relationships they may have and with the members of their so-called "indaba groups" from the
2008 Lambeth Conference of bishops.

In addition, the theological and liturgical principles for evaluating rites for blessing same-gender relationships that the SCLM developed for its C056 work were turned into a survey to which Anglican Communion bishops were asked to respond, either electronically or on paper or during conversation with commission members or other bishops.

In August, Meyers and Ely spent a half day in Canterbury, England, presenting the commission's work to that point to the International Anglican Liturgical Consultation.  The communiqué from the IALC meeting noted that the two SCLM members "hear[d] from IALC members in response to that province’s [the Episcopal Church's] exploratory theological rationale and liturgical principles for the development of rites for the blessing of committed same-gender relationships."

Much of the SCLM's work on C056 has been funded in a unique way. In July 2010, Church Divinity School of the Pacific was awarded a $404,000 grant by the Arcus Foundation to support the work. Through a contract with the Episcopal Church, the grant made it possible for the Berkeley, California-based school to help facilitate the commission's work. Meyers is the CDSP Hodges-Haynes Professor of Liturgics and the Rev. Louis Weil, Hodges-Haynes Professor Emeritus, is a SCLM member.

In July 2011, CDSP received an additional $90,000 from the Arcus Foundation and a $75,000 grant from the E. Rhodes and Leona B.
Carpenter Foundation to support the completion of the C056 work.

-- The Rev. Mary Frances Schjonberg is national correspondent for the Episcopal News Service.

Ralph and Joseph are Married!

On Saturday September 17th, at two o’clock in the afternoon, Dr. Joseph Eppink married his life partner Mr. Ralph Panelli at First Lutheran Church in Albany.  Joseph is the beloved organist and choirmaster of St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church, and Ralph is the dedicated sexton at St. Andrew’s.

The officiant at their ceremony was Rev. John Knarvic, pastor of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Loudonville.  Pastor Knarvic celebrated Eucharist according to the Episcopal Book of Common Prayer.  John Knarvic is a minister of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, a denomination in full communion with The Episcopal Church.  As well as a celebration of Joseph and Ralph’s love, the service was a symbol of Christian unity.

First Church in Albany is historically the oldest Lutheran parish in America, founded in 1649.  I like to think that the Dutch Lutheran founders of the parish looked down in approval on the inclusive love and fundamental acceptance that their spiritual descendents showed that day.

Many members of St. Andrew’s Episcopal parish were present to witness the vows exchanged that afternoon.  Unfortunately, the Rector of St. Andrew’s was not able to attend the wedding.  Joseph and Ralph’s spiritual shepherd was barred from attending by canon law passed recently under the leadership of the current bishop of the Diocese of Albany.  Still, as Joseph and Ralph graciously expressed in the service bulletin, “we continue to pray for our Episcopal Bishop and Diocese.”

Following the minister’s blessing of the union, Ralph and Joseph issued an invitation to “those who may wish to come forward and lay their hands in blessing” on the couple, to show their love and support for the marriage. Many members of St. Andrew’s and others in attendance came up to the kneeling couple and placed their hands on them as John White read the prayer on behalf of St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church.

We prayed a prayer of blessing written by The Rt. Rev. John Bryson Chase, Bishop of the Diocese of Washington, D.C.:

Most gracious God, we give you thanks for your tender love in sending Jesus Christ to come among us, to be born of a human mother, and to make the way of the cross to be the way of life.  We thank you, also, for consecrating the union of Ralph and Joseph in His name.  By the power of your Holy Spirit, pour out the abundance of your blessing.  Defend them from every enemy.  Lead thenm into all peace.  Let their love for each other be a seal upon their hearts, a mantle about their shoulders, and a crown upon their foreheads.  Bless them in their work and in their companionship, in their sleeping and in their waking; in their joys and in their sorrow; in their life and in their death.  Finally, in your mercy, bring them to that table where your saints feast for ever in your heavenly home; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who with you and the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

God grant Joseph and Ralph a long and happy life together!

Prosperity Gospel, Albany Style

Times of economic crisis in the United States often stimulate fundamentalist religious reaction.  For example, the populist crusade of Fr. Coughlin in the 1930‘s combined anti-semitic, nationalist sentiment with anti-capitalist rhetoric.  A more contemporary reaction to financial hard times is the prosperity gospel preached by some prominent media evangelists and Protestant fundamentalists in today’s churches.

It is perhaps not surprising, then, that the Diocese of Albany has seemingly jumped on the prosperity gospel bandwagon.  Christ the King Spiritual Life Center is promoting the “Treasure Hunters for God” seminar on October 22nd. Led by Chrystal Langdon (whose financial credentials are not given, but a web search reveals that she is the founder of Crystal Clear Finances, Inc), the seminar promises to teach how to “capture, cultivate and create wealth”.

The SLC brochure invites attendees to “discover the golden nuggets to help you... relate to money.”  Chrystal Langdon offers to “unlock the hidden triggers found within wealth and scarcity mindsets.”  She promises her followers that “we will be creating a Treasure Map”.

What happened to Crown Financial Ministries, that last financial anodyne promoted by our diocese?

In essence, prosperity theology says that “a combination of faith, positive speech, and donations to Christian ministries will always cause an increase in material wealth”.  This philosophy gained prominence in the 1980‘s through influence of such well-known televangelists as Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker.  But other prominent evangelists such as Rick Warren and Jerry Falwell have been sharply critical of the movement.

New Testament scholar Scot McKnight characterizes the God of the prosperity gospel as “The Vending Machine God: put in faith and out pops blessings.”  But the problems here are in both the Bible and Christian experience.  McKnight says:

The God of the Bible is there, watching and waiting for us to trust him. He's with us, through thick and thin. We may or we may not be prosperous; what we are called to be is faithful and loving.

Only there can be found true riches.