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.

Comments

[Tom Sramek Jr]

I guess his response might be that those two promises are often the ONLY two that end up on the church's agenda. There are more, and there are three that precede those: continue in fellowship, breaking bread and prayers; persevere in resisting evil and repent when you have sinned; and "proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ."

[Kathy Baldwin Keenan]

So long as he understands that a conversation is between two or more and it's not a speech, lecture or sermon--all one way...

[John White]

I doubt that others besides The Rev. Paul Hartt are unfamiliar with the use of hyperlinks. As the name suggests, they link the reader to other documents that can be opened from within the post. Paul Hartt may notice that there is a link in my post to the Living Church, and by clicking on that link the complete article appears. I encourage everyone to read the full article, and comments so far indicate that readers have followed my link to The Living Church. My “editorial comments” are intended to point out some of the issues that the article itself logically leads us to consider. But again, any discussion of the issues would be less meaningful without the participation of our bishop. Once again, I encourage Bishop Love to join the conversation. I hope that Paul Hartt will also invite the bishop to the table.

[Rev. Paul Hartt]

My open-handed proposal was to discuss the article itself, not the editorial spinning of it above. If Mr. White wishes to post the article itself, I would be pleased to participate in the unfolding discussion. I am encouraged by the responses thus far. Let me only note that the decline mentioned in the article is not an"assertion" but the own data work of TEC, which is apparently far from being considered "tired" by TEC's own leadership whatever their understanding of cause and effect. More importantly, the article itself has a great deal more to say than we have been directed to consider. Its overarching value is how it puts the open minded on both warring “sides" on the hot seat in terms of representing the true core of this Church.

[Fr. Mark Diebel]

From Levenson's article, "As we return and hold fast to him, giving ourselves away, as we simply remember him, we will find a church reformed and an emperor reclothed."

A pretty traditional reading of metanoia though without a particularly biblical result...'a reformed church' instead of humanity being healed, achieving sight, etc. Levenson is moving away from the speaking of a few years ago by a variety of Episcopal Church would-be reformers that instructed institutions to 'repent'. The goal (for him) is still institutional repentance. I wonder if he is confusing what is required for personal metanoia...for institutional reform.

[Dave DiSisto]

I wholeheartedly agree.