Openly Episcopal in Albany

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.

Can the Cost be Justified?

Thanks to Carolyn D'Agostino, a Facebook friend who brought this blog posting to my attention.  It is from the pen of John Shore, a (straight, married) Christian writer who has been "trying God's patience" quite a bit of late.  The news hits close to home, as it involves the death of a young person from a place not far from here.  Can we in the Diocese of Albany read it and not feel just a twinge of recognition?

Jamey Rodemeyer is a 14-year-old gay kid from Buffalo, NY, who earlier this week, after years of being bullied, committed suicide.

If you’re a Christian who believes that being gay is a morally reprehensible offense against God, then you share a mindset, worldview, and moral structure with the kids who hounded Jamey Rodemeyer, literally, to death. It is your ethos, your convictions, and your theology that informed, supported, and encouraged their cruelty.

We Christians who believe that God created gay people as much in His own image as he did straight people are begging you to reconsider your theology — to do nothing more than be open to an alternative, fully credible, scholastically sound interpretation of one or two lines from Paul.

How can you be unwilling to do something so simple, when you see the horrible ultimate cost of that refusal?

Christ died so that you could love more. And now you’re part of a system that allows that same Christ to be used as a moral justification for the most vile kind of abuse. How could that have happened? How could something so right have gone so wrong?

Turn, friend. And when you do, open your arms. Discover waiting to embrace you a new Christ behind the relative shell of the one you inherited. Jesus Christ died for your sins. That was unthinkably beautiful. Now Jamey Rodemeyer has died from your sins. That is not. That is the very hell that, awfully enough, you’ve somehow tricked yourself into believing your life refutes.

Bishop Love's Unscripted Comments

Bishop Love was interviewed on July 29 by Anglican TV for his reactions to the Marriage Equality law in New York State.  The interviewer was Kevin Kallsen, backed up by George Conger.  Anglican TV is an Internet-based news and editorial content provider that is strongly neo-orthodox in the opinions expressed. In practice, Anglican TV takes every opportunity to criticize the programs and policies of The Episcopal Church, while praising the activities of ACNA and GAFCON.

The interview in question was a short part of the weekly feature called Anglican Unscripted, and begins approximately at  minute 22:13 of the 30 minute episode.  All of the interviewer’s questions sought to provoke intemperate reactions from Bishop Love.  While he did not strongly criticize TEC policies or the actions of New York representatives, he again defended the diocese’s opposition to marriage equality and held up the discriminatory canon passed in 2008 as a model for diocesan “flexibility”.  The interviewer’s line of questioning ended inconclusively, but it is likely that this will not be the last time our Bishop Love submits to questions posed to him by Anglican TV.

Since the existence of the interview has not been made widely known, and is somewhat difficult to follow online, I have made a transcrip of the exchange:

Kevin:  I’m on the line here with the Bishop of Albany, Bishop Bill Love.  We're going to discuss here for a few moments the ramifications of a new law passed here in New York State, a law that says that any same sex couple can be married, which is certainly a violation of the canons of our Church. But I’m wondering what the ramifications are for the Diocese of Albany?

Bishop Love: Thank you Kevin.  Unfortunately this was not unexpected.  We had hoped and prayed that it would not happen, but there has been a movement for the last several years in New York to try to ask for same gender, same sex marriage legislation.  In anticipation of that, the Diocese of Albany a few years ago, in 2008, passed two canons which pretty much explained the diocese’s understanding of marriage and how the clergy and the diocese of albany would participate in the sacrament of marriage.  Both canons recognize that marriage, as we understand God intended it, was to be between one man and one woman, and it is that union that the church can participate in and bless. And we believe that it is the union, the desire of the couple to include God and our Lord in their marriage together.  And so the two canons pretty much stipulate what we can and cannot do in terms of participation in marriage ceremonies.

If you like I can share those with you and that will help clarify where we are.  I just recently sent out a pastoral letter to the diocese, again reminding the clergy and the people of the action that was taken in 2008.  Canon 16:1 states that “a member of the clergy..." [Here Bishop Love reads the entire section of canon].  Canon 16:2 states “properties owned…" [Again the entire section is read].  So essentially those two canons outline how we will respond to anyone who comes to the Church and asks to be married. Those are the guidelines that we have that were overwhelmingly passed by 80% of the diocese a few years ago, at the 2008 convention.  And that’s the guidelines that we will continue to follow, which is essentially the Church's practice up until now.

Kevin: Yeah, that’s 2000 years of Church policy right there. And very concisely.  You have a very good canon lawyer.  The way the law is written right now, they aren’t forcing churches to marry.  Do you foresee a time in the future that the law changes and churches are forced to adhere to this law?

Bishop Love:  No one knows for sure what going to happen.  I’m very thankful that New York State legislation and the Governor saw the wisdom in allowing those of us who are unable to support this law to have the freedom not to participate in it.  And it’s my hope and prayer that that understanding continues.  I’m sure that there are individuals who would like to eliminate any possibility of me or others from declining to officiate in the marriage of same sex unions.  But that’s, again nobody knows how that’s going to turn out.  But at the time being we do have that flexibility in the canons that were passed, even though other Episcopal dioceses in New York State may choose to respond differently.  In fact, most of them have chosen to respond differently.  We still have the flexibility within the Diocese to honor that which we believe the Lord is calling us to in terms of exercising the Sacrament of Marriage within the Church.

Kevin: Do you expect any pressure from the National Church in this?

Bishop Love:  Again, I pray that there is not.  In the pastoral directive, or the pastoral letter, that was sent out to the clergy and the people of the diocese, I did copy the Presiding Bishop.  I also copied the other bishops in New York State, so they are all aware of the policies within Albany, and so far I have not heard from anyone regarding it.

Kevin:  [speaking as the credits roll across the screen]  See, the courts are everywhere, and if the law… well I could go on forever.  That’s this weeks’ news.

A Letter from Bishop Love

Earlier this evening I sent a heartfelt email to the Bishop of Albany, William Love:

I, along with a great many members of the Diocese of Albany, are dismayed that there has been no official reaction to the devastation that has befallen so many communities within your episcopal care. Please read the posting on Openly Episcopal in Albany, including in particular the comments made in response. Please consider a pastoral letter to your flock, and to the larger community, even at this late date. It would go a long way to relieve the hurt felt by so many in our region.

Later this same evening, I found the following reply in my email Inbox, which I am happy to share with you:

Dear John,
     Thank you for your email and most especially your concern for all the victims of Irene.  You are justified in your criticism that I have not responded publicly to the devastation of Irene, much of which occurred in our own Diocese.  Right after the storm hit, I began calling the clergy in the areas that I was aware of that had been hit especially hard.  The report I kept getting from most of the parishes is that the parishes themselves escaped with little to any damage.  Some of the parishioners suffered flooded basements, etc.  Tragically I am aware of two people related to our parishes that died as a result of the storm.  Before sending out a statement, I was trying to get a better sense of the loss to our parishes and parish families.  I regret not first offering a public prayer or word of comfort immediately following the storm.  The damage assessment could come later.  That was a mistake on my part for which I apologize. 
     While no public statements were made, as mentioned, I was making private calls and have been in touch with Ms. Nelson at ERD.  Before making an official appeal to ERD, we have been trying to discern what was actually needed.  That is still underway.  One of the lessons learned in all of this is that our Diocese is not currently prepared to respond to large scale disasters such as Irene.  I have already met with some of the Diocesan staff to begin working on this so that we can be better prepared in the future.  I was in the process of working on a Diocesan Update mentioning Irene, when I received your email.  I hope to have that out tomorrow (Wednesday).

Yours in Christ,
+William H. Love

No Help From Diocese in Time of Trouble

It has been a week since tropical storm  Irene barged through Upstate New York, leaving flooding, property damage and ruined crops in its wake.  Various churches and denomination have offered prayers and relief efforts for those effected.  The brunt of the local storm was felt in New York counties that fall within the Diocese of Albany.  What has been the response of the diocese?  Not a word.

Other Episcopal dioceses in the Northeast provided their parishioners with resources to prepare for the storm and recovery support after Irene passed.  The Diocese of Newark posted continuous updates on its website and Bishop Beckwith issued a pastoral letter following the storm.  Likewise, the Diocese of Connecticut, the Diocese of New Jersey, the Diocese of Massachusetts and the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania, among others, used their websites to keep their people apprised of the progress of the storm and efforts to clean up afterward.    

Among other Christian communities, the Roman Catholic Church seems to have been the most prepared, canceling services and opening churches and schools as shelters, from Staten Island and Manhattan to upstate.  Other denominations that led preparations for the storm include the United Methodists and the Evangelical Lutherans.  Following the storm many church groups, among them the Baptists, the Christian Reformed denomination, and our Presbyterian neighbors offered material help and prayers.  These links are just a sample of the outpouring of Christian concern from other branches of the Church.

Within the borders of the Diocese of Albany, from the Catskils to the Canadian border, "the amount of damage is devastating," in the words of Gov. Cuomo. In Upstate New York, the town of Windham was literally wiped out and local emergency services were completely overwhelmed.  In Greene County the Schoharie River overlowed, causing major damage, while Schenectady County was flooded by the rising Mohawk.

This disaster is not in some remote country, it has happened right on our doorstep, within our own diocese, and to our own people.  Where are the words of comfort, Bishop Love?

In the absence of any material support or spiritual guidance from our own diocese, let us pray with our Lutheran brothers and sisters this prayer offered by their bishop:

Oh God, who in Jesus stills the storm and soothes the troubled heart, bring hope and courage to all who are afflicted by this flood as we await in uncertainty.  You are God and we need you.  We pray in the name of Jesus Christ, our Saviour and Lord.  Amen

 

 

Memorializing 9/11

This September 11 will be the tenth anniversary of the worst act of foreign terrorism on United States soil.  Many denominations will hold special services in remembrance of 9/11, including Episcopal churches.  Executive Council of The Episcopal Church adopted the following resolution at its June meeting:

RESOLVED, That the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church, meeting in Linthicum Heights, Maryland, from June 15-17, 2011, invites Episcopal communities of all kinds to open the doors of their institutions the weekend of September 10 and 11, 2011 to commemorate the 10th Anniversary of the attacks with acts of prayer and remembrance, service, creativity, inter-faith cooperation, education, community building, and fellowship, offering our institutions as active, accessible sites of healing for our local communities.

(signed)
The Rev. Canon Dr. Gregory S. Straub
Secretary of the Executive Council and
The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America

There are many Episcopal resources for crafting an effective liturgy.  A poster on the House of Bishops/Deputies Listserv noted that there is a collect and suggested readings for, "On the Anniversary of a Disaster" on p. 734 of Holy Women, Holy Men.  Another person commented on the appropriateness of the lectionary readings for the day: 

The Gospel lesson is the one about "how many times must I forgive?” Yes, I find it something more than coincidental and have no other explanation except divine mystery.  The Genesis track is Joseph forgiving his brothers.  The Exodus track is the Red Sea story, and the Epistle is Romans 14: 1-12, which includes not passing judgment on others and us belonging to God whether we live or die.  It all seems to fit!

Regarding music, another poster to the listserv reported that:

Hymns are likely to include "O day of peace that dimly shines", and "Love divine all loves excelling".  We are looking at a couple of choir anthems, including John Rutter's  "The Lord is my Shepherd" from Requiem.  Barber's "Adagio for Strings" will be in the service, probably as the prelude.

The Episcopal Café noted that many Episcopal parishes, especially in New York City and Washington, D.C. are busy planning special commemorative services on Sunday, September 11.  It would be very appropriate for parishes here in Albany, the capital of the state that was hardest hit by the effects of the attacks ten years ago, to host our own services of remembrance.  As the Episcopal Café article asks:

What will your church be doing?

Marriage Bells for Joseph and Ralph

As reported in the Albany Times Union, Dr. Joseph Eppink, choir director and organist at St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church and his partner, Ralph Panelli, who is also the sexton at St. Andrew’s, are planning their wedding on September 17.

Joseph and Ralph have been together  for eight years, now.  Their union was blessed by an Episcopal priest, but the new Marriage Equality law in the State of New York allows them to finally have the wedding ceremony that they wanted.  Their ceremony will be conducted by a Lutheran minister at First Lutheran Church in Albany.  They would have preferred to be married at St. Andrew’s, but the discriminatory policy of Bishop Love and punishing canons of the diocese prevent not only an Episcopal priest from presiding, but for any clergy in the diocese from even attending the wedding.

This has not prevented the congregation of St. Andrews from supporting the joyful couple in their decision to wed.  As Joseph recounted to the Times Union reporter, on the Sunday after Marriage Equality became law “We had a coffee hour in front of the church, and there was this huge cheer from people. The church, the parish, they're all very excited."  Ralph sees their step together as not only a blessing for them, as a celebration to be shared.  "We can give this to the world now," he says.

Episcopalians in attendance at the wedding will have the opportunity to join in a congregational blessing of the marriage taken from Scripture and the Episcopal prayer book.

Please join me in wishing Joseph and Ralph a perfect wedding and a long and happy life together!

Living Our Baptismal Covenant

The Rev. Paul Hartt, Rector of St. Peter's Episcopal Church in Albany, has commended an article for our consideration titled "Reclothing the Emperor" from The Living Church.  He calls the article "worth posting and discussing”.  Paul Hartt is a regular reader and occasional contributor to this blog.  He notes that even The Rev. Susan Russell from All Saints Church Pasadena, and convener of the church group Integrity, has approved the part of the article that addresses our  Baptismal Covenant.

The article’s author, The Rev. Dr. Russell J. Levenson, Jr., starts off with the tired assertion that The Episcopal Church is in numerical decline.  This observation is used to support a rather forced analogy with Hans Christian Anderson’s tale of the emperor, the “naked truth” being that the Church must realize that its own actions are causing a loss of membership.  Never mind the fact that all mainline Protestant churches are currently losing members due to a confluence of inter-related factors beyond the strategic reach of any one denominational body.

The course of The Episcopal Church since the 1970’s, according to Dr. Levinson, has been “fraught with faulty assumptions about the nature of the gospel and its mission.  Reformation is needed, and two actions are key to reforming the Church.  These include engaging in evangelism and living our baptismal covenant.  As The Rev. Paul Hartt observes, the points raised in the section titled “Living Our Baptismal Covenant” are a good starting point for general discussion, so I will quote here: 

The substance of virtually every resolution proposed at each General Convention and diocesan convention concerning human dignity and justice can be found in our baptismal vows, which are grounded in the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount. If we want to spend time at our gatherings focusing on “issues” which affect our daily lives, let us do so through the lens of the Baptismal Covenant and Scripture, rather than taking our cues from the divided political world around us. Following Christ first naturally leads to the secondary tasks of discipleship: outreach, mission and stewardship, expressed chiefly through generous and sacrificial love.

Conservative voices hold the minority on the stage of TEC’s policy and polity, but they must be allowed to practice their beliefs without threat from national or diocesan leadership. This works in many dioceses: liberal bishops permit alternative oversight for conservative parishes, and vice versa. Given that liberals represent the majority, however, they need to work harder to welcome conservative voices into discussions and decisions on all matters related to ecclesiastical life.

When Episcopalians have trouble agreeing to common definitions of original sin or Christology, we should not be surprised at divisions regarding sexuality. Many have expressed concern that theological depth is desperately lacking not only among many of our priests but among our bishops as well. Fortunately, several healthy seminaries seem to be pushing back toward the center.

These are just a few hallmarks of what a “church reformed” (and, indeed, a Church Catholic) will look like in the years to come.

At The Rev. Hartt’s invitation, and keying off of the section just quoted, let me begin the discussion.  The Baptismal Covenant in The Book of Common Prayer includes the questions “Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?”  And, “Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?”  The congregation responds to each of these questions, “we will.”  As Dr. Levinson admits, fulfillment of these promises has been the goal of every resolution of General Convention, and the goal also of many of the dioceses.  The conversation in the Diocese of Albany must address the question, how have we measured up to these promises?

Specifically, the article calls upon TEC to allow conservatives freedom to act “without threat from national or diocesan leadership.” Turning the focus on the Diocese of Albany, will the leadership here grant liberal parishes the freedom to act “without threat”?  Seemingly not, in the essential matters of marriage equality, or the calling of practicing, gay clergy.  The author of the article approves of “alternative oversight for conservative parishes”.  Would the Bishop of Albany be willing to consider such a concession for “liberal parishes” in the DoA?  If Paul Hartt encourages us to engage in discussion on the basis of the article, perhaps he can tell us if this possibility is on the table.  And if the national church needs to work harder to "welcome conservative voices,” should not the leadership in Albany be called upon to include progressive voices that have been shut out from the councils of our diocese?

Yes, there is real need for discussion of issues in the Diocese of Albany, and it might well be started by the points raised in the article that Rev. Paul Hartt has brought to our attention.

 One voice in our diocese that has not been heard from, and whose thoughts on the matters raised are of signal importance, is the Bishop of Albany himself.  I count myself among many in the diocese who would welcome the inclusion of The Right Rev. William Love in this forum.  The participation of our bishop in the conversation is one that is long overdue.

Marriage Equality -- A Threat?

It is interesting to consider how passage in New York State of the Marriage Equality Act changes the threat perceived by the Diocese of Albany to its policies of sacramental discrimination.

Diocesan Convention passed resolutions in 2008 that distanced the DoA from the emerging consensus of the Episcopal Church on the rights of homosexual persons.  Resulting revisions to Diocesan Canon 16 prevent clergy in the diocese from blessing same gender relationships, regardless of the allowed practice in other ecclesiastical jurisdictions.  The intent then, in 2008, was to prevent church blessings of couples who were not at that time even eligible for a civil wedding.  Since the wedding of same gender couples was not a legal option, the role of the clergy as officers of the State in a marriage ceremony was not an issue. 

A sharp distinction must therefore be made between civil marriage and Church sacrament.  Section 16.1 of the Canon states that:

Clergy...shall neither officiate at, nor facilitate, nor participate in...the Celebration or Blessing of a Marriage...other than those of one man and one woman in Holy Matrimony.

Marriage is a civil matter.  Clergy who witness marriages are acting on behalf of the State.  Holy Matrimony is the blessing of a marriage.  When revised in 2008, Canon 16 implicitly recognizes the distinction.  The blessing, a Church prerogative, shall not be offered to any couple not married -- in other words, not in a civil union.

Two years later, the Marriage Equality Act was passed in New York, insuring that:

A marriage that is otherwise valid shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of the same or different sex.

However, the Act recognized that a crisis of conscience might result if clergy were  required to act as civil officers at a wedding when the Church banned a blessing of the union.  Therefore a religious exemption clause was included which provides that:

A religious corporation...shall not be required to provide accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges related to the solemnization of a marriage.

Translated from legaleze, clergy will not be required by the Act to bless a marriage.  But again, and implicitly, the Act reaffirms that marriage is a civil matter.  Blessing, solemnization, Holy Matrimony -- these are Church prerogatives, about which the State is silent.

This, then, is the law that Bishop Love asserts “redefines” marriage.  That it definitely does not do.  It expands the definition of who shall be eligible for marriage, yes.  But the Act is clear that marriage, which has always been a civil matter, remains such.  The position of the diocese on who is eligible for the blessing of a marriage -- Holy Matrimony -- also remains consistent.  But now, by standing in opposition to the Marriage Equality Act, the Bishop and diocese are clearly taking a wrong side in a wider culture war.  The Act is perceived as an additional threat to the authority of the Bishop, who again asserts the right to practice discrimination.  The difference is that the discrimination is now not only one of sacramental exclusion, but of rejecting the right of parishioners -- and citizens -- their legal access to civil marriage.  That, regardless of exclusions built into the Marriage Act, is a violation of civil rights.

Diocesan Convention Reconsidered

This year's Diocesan Convention at Camp of the Woods in Speculator, New York, was marked by an embarrassingly low turnout.  The Bishop has reportedly expressed his distress that the "family reunion" of the diocese attracted so few delegates and other attendees.  If the Bishop's distress at a low turnout was as reported, this is indeed the time to revisit the place, time, and format of Convention. Given that business rarely takes more than a few hours, a one day business meeting could be held at the Cathedral of All Saints at little cost to the diocese, parishes, and individuals.  If the diocese wishes, there could be a separate time and place for a diocesan-wide reunion, featuring worship and fellowship. 

Why is the Camp of the Woods not an ideal venue for the annual business meeting of the diocese?  Instead of being equidistant for all, it is equally inconvenient for everyone.  Rent for these outside facilities could be avoided and applied to program if the meeting were at a location owned by the diocese.  The attendance, food and lodging charge to individual delegates and clergy is burdensome.  And the time and place of the convention takes both clergy and laity away from their parishes on an important Sunday.

On June 22 Joseph Liotta, an active member of The Episcopal Church in this diocese and a member of Albany Via Media, sent Bishop Love a letter expressing these views.  It was his wish that the letter not be published until the Bishop had been given sufficient time to offer a thoughtful reply.  Unfortunately, the Bishop has not honored the letter with a reply.

Therefore we are happy to publicize Mr. Liotta's letter, in the hope that it will stimulate a renewed discussion among delegates, clergy and laity of the timing, place and format of our Diocesan Convention.  As Mr. Liotta points out, it is within the authority of the Bishop to name the time and place for meeting.  We remain hopeful of a reply by Bishop Love to this thoughtful and reasonable request.  Bishop, do you listen to the petitions of your people, and will you offer a personal, pastoral reply?  We hope so.

Mr. Liotta writes:

Dear Bishop Love,

Thank you for posting your convention address in a timely fashion. Your address to the convention was helpful to me in fashioning this letter. It hit on some of the concerns I have, the first being the convention dates.

In your address you clearly pointed out the meaning of Pentecost as one of the seven principle feast days of the Church, and often regarded as the birthday of the Church. You then stated that “holding Convention on Pentecost Weekend presents a number of unique challenges back in our home parishes for which I am very much aware."

I am pleased to note that you are aware that many parishes in the diocese had no clergy at all. Some conducted Morning Prayer with lay readers. For the sake of the several hundred conventioneers, most of the other 15,000 or so souls in this Diocese could not celebrate the Eucharist on one of the seven principal feast days of the Church.

I will be interested to read about the attendance at the convention in general, the number of parishes represented, and the number of clergy in attendance.

If ever there was a time to change the date and place of the convention it was this year. And you have the constitutional authority to do that:

CONSTITUTION OF THE DIOCESE OF ALBANY

Article I

There shall be a Convention of the Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Albany each year. The Bishop, with the consent of the Standing Committee, or, in case of a vacancy in the Episcopate, the Standing Committee, shall appoint the place and time.

The presence of 30 of the Clergy entitled to vote and Deputies representing 25 Churches shall constitute a quorum which shall be necessary for the transaction of business.

My second concern is about the constituted quorum.  It seems that with 120 parishes and summer chapels and several hundred clergy in residence, including deacons, that 30 clergy and 25 Churches being a quorum as stated in the constitution, while legal, is not advisable. I suggest that a constitutional change to reflect the higher numbers is in order.

Canon Charles King indicated to me this past year that he was working on procedures for the convention. This was in reference to his erroneous ruling on Robert’s Rules he inflicted at the previous convention where he ruled that I was out of order for reasons he claimed were in Robert Rules. There was no text in Robert’s Rules that supported his interpretation. I was out of order for other reasons in Robert’s Rules. Whatever happened to Canon King’s recommendations? Were you aware of them?

Sincerely,

Joseph M. Liotta
Norwood, NY 13668