Turning Things Upside Down

A 15 Minute Play About Forgiveness

2012-01-10T21:28:00.000-08:00

A MATTER OF LIFE OR DEATH

CAST OF CHARACTERS:

HARRY: a male clerk of any age.

SUSAN: a troubled young woman, between 25 and 35 years old.

WARD: a middle-aged man, dressed and groomed well.

TIME: Daytime – the present.

PROPS: A cell phone for Harry. A life-sized cutout of a

clean-cut man.

TIME: Daytime – the present.

SCENE: A tobacco (or similar)shop with a counter and a bench

for customers who are waiting. HARRY is speaking on

his cell phone.

For permission to perform this play, contact Tom Woodward, 13 Calle Loma, Santa Fe, NM 87507. (505) 231-9829. The play works well as a stand alone play or as a sermon.

HARRY (talking on phone)

OK, OK. That one didn't work, so here’s another. There was this guy who was close to death and he was on this makeshift bed just off the kitchen - and the smell of freshly baked chocolate chip cookies is in the air and his kids are surrounding him on every side. With what little energy the guy has left before he dies, he asks his daughter if she would please bring him a couple of those chocolate chip cookies. Just when she returns with the cookies and he reaches out to take one, his wife swoops down, jerks the cookies away and scolds him, saying, "Don't you dare eat those cookies – they’re for the wake!" . . . So that was just pretty good? . . OK, you want my best. . . So here we go. Sarah Palin and these two alligators walk into a bar. .

SUSAN walks into the store and begins to browse at the rear of the stage.

HARRY (Cont'd.)

Look, someone just came in. Let me get back to you. . . That's right, Sarah Palin and two alligators. Hold that thought. . .

HARRY (Cont’d, turning his attention to SUSAN)

Oh, Hi. Welcome to the store. . . Can I help you?

SUSAN (caught by surprise)

Will you say that again?

HARRY

Why? Do you have a hearing problem?

SUSAN

No, I just need to hear those words again.

HARRY

Sure. Can I help you?

SUSAN

I don't think so.

HARRY

I say "Can I help you?" not once, but twice -- and you tell me you don't think so?

SUSAN

I mean I don't know.

HARRY

You don’t think so? You don't know? What’s next?

SUSAN

I mean I'm not doing very well.

HARRY

You’re feeling sick?

SUSAN

Worse.

HARRY

That means you’re depressed?

SUSAN

Worse.

HARRY

That means you’re feeling hopeless?

SUSAN

Worse.

HARRY

That means. . .Suicide?

SUSAN (nodding her head "yes")

Suicide.

HARRY

There went my afternoon.

SUSAN

Your afternoon? What about me?

HARRY

I’m sorry. Why? Why suicide?

SUSAN

Why not?

HARRY

Why not? You've got your whole life ahead of you.

SUSAN

That's why.

HARRY

That's why? Because you have your whole life in front of you?

SUSAN

I can't take it any longer.

HARRY

It must be pretty bad.

SUSAN

It is more than pretty bad.

HARRY

And not just bad. .now.

SUSAN

That's right - not just bad now!

HARRY

Never ending?

SUSAN

That's it! Never ending - and it's time to put an end to never ending.

HARRY

But never ending is just beginning.

SUSAN

Cute.

HARRY

Seriously, are you telling me that you can't take it for another. . .what? Month? Week? Day?

SUSAN

Try half an hour.

HARRY

"Half an hour."

SUSAN

Cute. Very cute.

HARRY

What was that?

SUSAN

Cute. Very cute, Asshole!

HARRY

Bingo!

SUSAN

Bingo?

HARRY

Bingo! You just climbed out of yourself.

SUSAN

I don't know what you mean.

HARRY

Just for an instant, with that splendid little piece of sarcasm, you left your little corner of self-pity -- and joined the real world.

SUSAN

This is not self-pity -- it's really bad!

HARRY

What could be that bad?

SUSAN whispers in HARRY’S ear. HARRY listens thoughfully, then looks directly at SUSAN.

HARRY

You’re right. That’s bad. In fact, that’s really bad … but look, I’ll forgive you for $100.

SUSAN

You’ll forgive me for $100? Are you making fun of me?

HARRY

Am I making fun of you? No, I'm not making fun of you. I said I would forgive you for $100 and I will. And if that is making fun of you, OK. I’ll forgive you for $500.

SUSAN

You’ll forgive me for $500?

HARRY

Do you want to hear me say it again?

SUSAN

O God, No. I just don't understand.

HARRY

It's simple: I've got what you need - and you've got . . .

SUSAN

$500.

HARRY

The amount is not so important.

SUSAN

But you just. . . .

HARRY

I said, "The amount is not important."

SUSAN

Then what is important?

HARRY

That you know it doesn't come easy - that it's worth something.

Long pause while SUSAN pulls something out of her purse.

SUSAN

Here's the $500 . . . but what difference does it make if you forgive me!

HARRY

Well, who else is there?

SUSAN

The people I hurt.

HARRY

Sorry. If they forgive you - that's for them. . . not you. If they forgive you, that allows them to go on with their lives. It really has nothing to do with you.

SUSAN

Can you say that again?

HARRY

Honey, I'm not sure I said anything that smart the first time.

SUSAN

Are you saying that if they forgive me - that lets them go on with their lives? But it doesn't do anything for me?

HARRY

Right.

SUSAN

But that doesn't seem fair.

HARRY

That doesn't seem fair?

SUSAN

No. It's not fair.

HARRY

What's not fair about it?

SUSAN

Well, for one thing, they are forgiving ME . . .but I don't get anything out of it! I'm not part of it!

HARRY

Exactly!

SUSAN

I don't get it.

HARRY

Exactly! You don't get it. They can't give it to you.

SUSAN

So I'm stuck.

HARRY

You’re not stuck, you’re. . . .No, I take that back. You’re stuck. . . But maybe there is something that can loosen that up a bit.

SUSAN

I don’t see how.

HARRY

Look. Bear with me for a while . . just for a short while, because I don’t want you to think I’m crazy. So let me tell you about a friend of mine.

SUSAN

“A friend of yours?” Sure. Where have I heard that before?

HARRY

OK, Susan, let me tell you my story – which is not an easy thing for me. . .

SUSAN

What did you say?

HARRY

About it not being easy for me?

SUSAN

No. You called me by my name. How could you know my name?

HARRY

Don’t worry about it.

SUSAN

Don’t worry about it? What in the Hell is going on here?

HARRY

Look, we’ll get to that in good time, but there is some really hard stuff that comes first. And this is going to be awkward for me.

SUSAN

Awkward for you? Not so fast, Hot Shot. First you offer to forgive me for $100, then $500 . . . as though you were. . . and then you seem to know my name without my telling you. I repeat: What in the Hell is going on here?

HARRY

We’ll get to that. But first. . .how shall I start this? . . (seriously pondering how to proceed) I’ve often wondered what it would be like to be God.

SUSAN

Are you going to talk to me about religion? Cuz if you are, I’m out of here.

HARRY

No, I’m not going to talk to you about religion. This is the nitty-gritty that comes before religion – and, fair warning, it’s not very pretty.

SUSAN

I’m uneasy already. Look, you’ve got five minutes – and then I’m out of here.

HARRY

Do you see these lines on my face?

SUSAN

The tracks that tears make?

HARRY

Yes, the tear tracks. They weren’t always there. I started out with something so beautiful, so full of hope and promise – and a lot of that still survives.

SUSAN

Is this going to be a sad story?

HARRY

Given what you are considering, I think you can handle it.

SUSAN

Not if this is some kind of grandiose stall for time.

HARRY

I won’t be long. To tell it all would be more than you. . or I could handle. . . Do you know the name “Matthew Shepard?”

SUSAN

Wasn’t he that gay guy in Montana who was – how do they say it? – crucified on a barbed wire fence outside the town?

HARRY

And these numbers on my arm – do you know what they mean?

SUSAN

Is that the combination to your safe deposit box?

HARRY

A long way from that. This is the number the Nazi’s tattooed on the arm of Hannah Klein, wife of Isaac, mother of Aaron and Deborah. I watched her standing naked in the cold outside a

crematorium, cradling her babies in her arms, trying to comfort them as they were herded into the cement structure where they would be gassed to death.

SUSAN

The Holocaust.

HARRY

The Holocaust. Do you know how many Isaacs, how many Hannahs and Aarons and Deborahs wore these numbers?

SUSAN

Too many.

HARRY

Way more than too many – millions more than too many! And do you know why?

SUSAN

I must have heard, but I can’t imagine why.

HARRY

It was because they had my name.

SUSAN

You’re losing me. Are you telling me that your name is Hannah Klein?

HARRY

Hannah, Isaac, Aaron, Deborah Klein. Klein and also Cohen and Greenberg, Bloom and Katz and … (painfully) Yes, that is my name.

SUSAN

You said you wouldn’t talk about religion; but if you are talking about God, there is so much that is good in the world.

HARRY

Don’t get me wrong, Susan. I love the gratitude, the songs, the prayers and all that; but the pain: the terrible, unrelenting pain and the . .. darkness just seem to overwhelm it all.

SUSAN

But that was a long time ago.

HARRY

Sixty four years ago – that may be a long time for you, but I feel it like today. And all this is not just then, but now. In the Sudan, Dafur, Nigeria, Argentina, and even in Juarez, five hours south from where we are standing just this minute. And if that’s too far to drive, it’s happening on your own block.

SUSAN

My own block? What are you talking about?

HARRY

You know Phyllis Chesney, three doors down?

SUSAN

The nice woman who had the miscarriage.

HARRY

The miscarriage after her husband knocked her teeth out and stomped on her stomach because she wouldn’t have sex with him the way he wanted it before he went to work.

SUSAN

Oh, my God! I didn’t know.

HARRY

Don’t get me wrong, Susan. The world is a place of incredible beauty and such heroism and loving kindness; but, but, but how can even the most beautiful gesture make up for the horror

faced by Matthew Shepherd, Phyllis Chesney, by the Hannahs and their children? And on a slightly different level, by you?

SUSAN

But. . .but . . .

HARRY

Tell me, Susan. Tell me how many birthday parties with helium balloons and party favors does it take. . to make up for just one Hannah and her children?

SUSAN

I’m sorry. I don’t understand. . . I’m overwhelmed.

HARRY

And so am I. I am overwhelmed.

SUSAN

But those soft, kindly lines on your face?

HARRY

Do you know what thought preoccupies my mind? Do you know what single thought … preoccupies my mind? (whispers in SUSAN’S ear.) . .

SUSAN

No!

HARRY

Yes.

SUSAN

“Suicide?” You?

HARRY

I think about it every day.

SUSAN (after stunned silence)

But you – whoever you are – you can’t. . .

HARRY

It’s not that I can’t – I won’t.

SUSAN

You won’t? Why not?

HARRY

Because. . . because in a strange way, I suppose, knowing the extent of my guilt in allowing all that – and accepting that … that opens, that gives the depth and the urgency to my compassion for those who struggle so hard.

SUSAN

Are you telling me that you are God?

HARRY

Am I God? Do I look like some kind of Cosmic Teddy Bear overflowing with mushy, sentimental Hallmark love . .who is unwilling to hold anyone, any country – even your own – accountable for anything?

SUSAN

Then you’re not God.

HARRY

Did I say that?

SUSAN

I am really confused.

HARRY

Confused is the best place to start.

SUSAN

So who are you?

HARRY

For right here? Right now? Susan, it doesn’t matter who I am. I’ll take care of that. What matters right here, right now is what you do with your own pain and guilt -- and your incredible personal beauty.

SUSAN

I don’t know about the beauty, but I think I can understand something about the pain and the guilt – that they don’t need to be the end.

HARRY

Not the end, but the beginning.

SUSAN

Of what?

HARRY

As they say, Susan, God only knows. But I can tell you one thing: those who are in deepest deficit need you. They need you -- in all you can bring -- more than anything, anyone else.

SUSAN

But, but . . .I don’t understand. And you just keep confusing me more and more.

HARRY (with emotion building)

Susan. Susan, listen to me. Let your pain – even your self- inflicted suffering – be the deepening. . .not the block. . to your heart.

SUSAN

But I’m so. . .

HARRY

Look, who would you want beside you in your deepest distress: Gregory Goody-Goody or Disappointing Old Fart, which is me?

SUSAN

That’s easy.

HARRY

And of your friends in dire need – who do they need, a Cindy Crawford model of perfection or a tarnished young woman named Susan? … They need you.

SUSAN

Because I’ve stood on the edge?

HARRY

Because of your own wounds.

SUSAN

But. . but. . I think I understand, but then you just keep confusing me more and more.

HARRY

Look, Susan, I need to go next door for a few minutes. Can you handle things here for a few minutes?

SUSAN

But I don’t know how things work here.

HARRY

You’ll do fine. Trust me.

SUSAN

Sure, just like an hour ago.

HARRY exits. WARD enters.

SUSAN (Cont’d.)

Can I help you?

WARD

Will you say that again?

SUSAN

Why? Do you have a hearing problem?

WARD

No, I just need to hear those words again.

SUSAN

Sure. Can I help you?

WARD

I don't think so.

SUSAN

I say "Can I help you?" not once, but twice and you tell me you don't think so?

WARD

I mean I don't know.

SUSAN

I know, Ward, I know.

WARD

What did you say?

SUSAN

Don’t worry about it. We’ve got more important things to talk about. . .

SUSAN and WARD find a place to sit. She takes his hand in hers and they begin talking to one another. HARRY reappears quietly and watches as the lights fade.

- THE END -

Synopsis of the Gonzo Opera “And the Winner Is. . .”

2011-05-08T22:14:00.001-07:00

Composed by Daniel Steven Crafts

Libretto by Thomas B. Woodward

The opera opens as Tony, the host of the Ms. American Beauty Pageant, wrestles with the self-doubts brought about possible imminent success in his aria "It's Every Man's Dream."

As the aria ends, the next to last contestant in the pageant, Ms. Tennessee, comes on stage with her puppet to perform her Talent part of the pageant. As she begins the duet, "Dove il mio orecchio," her puppet, given voice by an off-stage tenor, joins her in the romantic (and highly comic) duet.

During the following commercial break, the pageant's final contestant, Bobbie Wentworth, joins Tony in the wings as both wait to go onstage. There is an instant chemistry between the two and they quickly begin flirting with one another. The flirting escalates until the two are on camera and Tony asks Bobbie when she first became interested in the Ms. American Pageant and receives an answer he doesn't expect.

As Tony attempts to establish order, Bobbie continues to break taboos – as when she notes that her real talent for the pageant is not her baton twirling act, but hiding her disability. In her aria, "Sing an Inspiring New Song," she wonders "Wouldn't it be wonderful if Ms. American of 2011 and Ms. Disability of 2011 were the same person?"

The shocks and surprises continue as the Pageant moves from chaos to inspiration and then romance. Having won each other's affections, Bobbie blows kisses to the television audience as Tony helps her offstage.

The opera is composed by Emmy-winning composer, Daniel Steven Crafts. The libretto is based on an original play by Tom Woodward and written by him. If you are interested in further information about the opera or in producing it, please respond to Thomas B. Woodward, 13 Calle Loma, Santa Fe, NM 87507.

The Major Prophets in One Hour - notes

2011-02-28T18:01:00.001-08:00

What is a Prophet?

Rabbi Abraham Heschel used to tell the following story to describe the calling of the people of God and of individuals to be prophets: Once upon a time there was an agricultural kingdom which prospered year after year. Everyone had plenty to eat and everyone was happy. But then, one year it was discovered that whoever ate that year's grain became crazy - really crazy.

Aware of the terrible crisis, the King and Queen gathered the wise men and women of the realm and met with them around the clock for several days. Then they called the kingdom together for a very important message. When the kingdom was gathered, the royal family began "It is clear that we are in a terrible, terrible crisis; but we have our response. From the kingdom, we are setting aside twelve men and women. They will eat last year's grain while the rest of us will be eating this year's grain. The twelve will serve a very important function. Their mission will be to remind the rest of us that we are, indeed, crazy."

There is no higher calling. But now, on to the three "major prophets," Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

THE MAJOR PROPHETS

THE CALLING OF THE PROPHETS: each called with a powerful vision and a commissioning.

ISAIAH (calling 742) His calling is described in Isaiah 6:1-5, 6-10. Some of the elements of that call are an overwhelming experience of Holiness (his words are reflected in the Sanctus) and a piece of burning coal applied to his lips (cleansing). Later, like Jeremiah, Isaiah believes he was called from mother's womb 49:1-3

JEREMIAH (calling 626) Calling: 1:4-8, 9 (reflected in Psalm 139) like Isaiah verse. 5 "touch my mouth." He complains that he is too young and unexperienced and, given God's charge, Jeremiah was totally unsuited temperamentally (the experience of the fool is described at: 1:10

Elements of his call:: like Ezekiel, Jeremiah "eats God's words," Is this reflected in the Collect: that we might read, mark, learn and inwardly digest Holy Scripture?

EZEKIEL (calling 593) His calling: 2:1-2; 3:1-3: elements of his call include a strong and bizarre experience of Holiness, as with Isaiah a piece of coal is applied to his lips, and he describes the power of the Spirit. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel eats God's words.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE THREE PROPHETS

ISAIAH: He was an artistocrat and very aware of foreign realities -- much like a Teddy Kennedy or our own Bill Stewart. His language is majestical -- some of the most eloquent in all of Scripture. He also has an almost unique vision of the whole of humanity under the love and mercy of God -- his phrase is that Israel is to be a light to the nations, bringing them into the wholeness intended for the People of God.

JEREMIAH: he began his ministry at an early age – not with the same sense of awe (as Isaiah and Ezekiel). On the other hand, he struggles and wrestles with God -- much like an Ann Sexton or John of the Cross.

Much of the book of Jeremiah is "biography," written down by his secretary Baruch. Some of the best of the book are his confessions, prayers, and inner reflections. He has an intensely personal relationship with God – exhibiting deep faith in God as well as intense anger at God for what he experiences as betrayal. Another way of considering this is the tension between his own personal inclinations (wanting to party with his friends) and his deep sense of vocation.

His stress on personal experience of faith helped define a new foundation for faith after the Exile.

EZEKIEL: his message is defined by vision of absolute holiness, otherness of God – the last part of Ezekiel is very similar to the Holiness Code (Leviticus 18ff.).

Ezekiel was a pastor and fiercely protective of his flock – also bound to speak against them. His tirade against the Watchmen (pastors) who do not attend to the deeper needs of their people is searing.

THE BOOK OF ISAIAH: its setting is when Uzziah was King 783-742 – Judah was at its most powerful; but Uzziah becomes proud and attempts to usurp power of priesthood. Confronted, he becomes leper and the power and influence of the nation goes into decline. There are two quite different people and time periods in the two major sections of the book, identified as I Isaiah 1-39; II Isaiah 40-

I ISAIAH The setting for Isaiah's prophesies is the nation's interest in political intrigue/alliances. Isaiah sees all of this as a betrayal of God's rule and protection. For him, the world is in God's hands – it is folly to enter into alliances. Thus, he rails against

-- reliance on world power – rely not on weapons, but on God.

-- subservience to nation like Assyria – which will mean accepting their gods and cults.

-- alliance with Assyria meant involvement in her military operations.

King Ahaz - in treaty w/ Assyria for protection:he was willing to compromise religious principles to curry favor.

King Hezekiah wants alliance with Egypt – Isaiah, to illustrate futility of such dependence, walks naked through the streets of Jerusalem. .

For Isaiah, problem is not foreign policy, but the inner state of the nation.

Two Stages in I Isaiah: disaster is coming and a remnant will return Isaiah 33:15. Then from the remnant, there will be redemption for all nations. God's covenant will be not only with people, but with Zion and with the land.

Of special interest: Apocalyptic vision of Messiahnic Banquet Isaiah 25.6f. which is not just for Israel.

II ISAIAH 40-66 Doom is no longer relevant and there is the promise of Return.

High Points of II Isaiah:

His description of the character of God 40:1-5, 40:11; v12f. and creation ex nihilo (42:).

Description of the calling of the military man, Cyrus as instrument of God in freeing the Jews from captivity. Cyrus, a foreigner, was first to be referred to as "Christ" 45:1ff.

Vision – which is reflected in what we sing in Handel's Messiah.

His descriptions of the the Suffering Servant (read during Palm Sunday and Holy Week) – is this Isaiah? the Jewish people/nation? One to come? This suffering is not a penalty – but a privilege, sacrifice.

Light to the Nations (here it is God, not Isaiah, talking to Israel)

God said to Jeremiah: "I appointed you as a prophet to the nations," to Isaiah: "I appointed you as a light to the nations." 49:6. This vision of our being Light to the nations 42:6-7, 42:1-4

JEREMIAH b. 650 in Anathoth, 4 mi. north of Jerusalem, called to be prophet 626.

Jeremiah's mentors were Isaiah, Hosea, Amos and Micah (quotes Habbakuk's words of struggling with the notion that the evil seem to go unpunished)

Lived through Josiah's Reform 621, but found it dealing with externals only - and thus inadequate.

Heschel – p. 105 for description (3/2)

Much of Jeremiah is introspective:

loneliness 15:15-18

psychological 20:4-11. Abraham Heschel notes that Jeremiah's words about betrayal are better translated as a virgin being seduced/a married woman being raped.

Internalizes religious faith – out of faith comes practice. This is a big step from religion as obedience to rules.

Jeremiah's sense of God's initiative. Like Ezekiel, at the end Jeremiah has a well defined belief in Grace.

Jeremiah's high moral sense: 22:13-19 29:7f.

Baruch – when Jeremiah could not appear in public because of threats on his life, he enlisted Baruch 36:4-8 to take down his speeches and deliver them. Baruch also chronicles the inner life of Jeremiah, as well.

1In first part of Jeremiah, he preaches wrath: all are l under condemnation. 2:8: later, those who repent will be saved. 7:5-7

Speaks of the Fatherhood of God 3:19

Restoration: 29:10f It is God who has sent Jews into exile – and God who called Persian military leader to free them.

High Points in Jeremiah

1. My favorite image: Cisterns 2:13f.

2. Morality: 22:13-19 very similar to the prophet Amos. Later, he counsels those in exile not to rebel against Babylonians, but to find their lives where they are. 29:7f.

3. What do you do as you are trying to exit your country before it is overrun? Jeremiah buys property! 32.6ff

4. Jeremiah's Book of Hope, chapters 30-33 (motto of OT 30:3) This forms much of the basis the teaching of Paul & Jesus.

The Big Oops: a delightfully humorous piece: 34:8-11. everyone suddenly becomes religious – so what happens?

Notion of Grace: 31:1-6 v. 3

Jeremiah elucidates the theme of OT "in spite of everything, I have remained faithful."

The most important part of the Book of Jeremiah: The New Covenant 31:31-33, v. 4

EZEKIEL: The structure of the book: Judgment: 1-24; Hope 25-32; Restitution of Israel 33-48 (Chapter 40f. similar to Leviticus 19ff. Holiness Code.

Themes:

1. As pastor of exiles – felt responsibility for each individual

2. Certainty of ruin of Jerusalem & Judah as a result of their idolatry and moral iniquity.

3. Judgment is not disciplinary or redemptive – it is simple punishment.

4. Promise of Restoration and Renewal. Powerful notion of the New Covenant - 11:17-20 based on Grace - an interpolation of Jeremiah.

5. Individual Responsibility - huge step forward in Hebrew religion: 18:1-9; 20f. (especially verse 23)

6. High Doctrine of Holiness (we are to be holy because Yahweh is holy)

7. Restoration of Israel: God takes initiative, doesn't wait for our repentance.

Vision of the Dry Bones 37:1-14. Note that the dead are soldiers.

Yahweh, the Good Shepherd 34:11ff. God is gathering flock from everywhere.

Gift of New Heart/New Spirit 36:25-27, 31. Truly Majestic!

8. Restoration Complete only if God lives in midst of people 40-48

Plans and dimensions for new Temple

Priests in charge of Temple (no foreign helpers as before)

Emphasis on the Cult (very much in the Priestly tradition).

What Is Gonzo Opera?

2011-02-08T21:57:00.001-08:00

GONZO OPERA

A Manifesto

by Daniel Steven Crafts

What is Gonzo Opera?

1) First of all, despite its subject matter, it is real opera, and not a parody of the genre as are many works in the last few years that call themselves "opera." It uses beautiful classically-trained voices and allows them to demonstrate all the marvelous attributes of traditional vocal technique. The Gonzo style is full of melody (something sorely lacking in most contemporary opera)—memorable melody that shows off the voices in the best possible light.

But…

2) Gonzo Opera takes as its subject matter outrageous comedy/satire, subjects heretofore completely foreign to opera. It is as contemporary as the movies. No pathetic, dying heroines here. Shannon Wheeler's Too Much Coffee Man was made into an opera with great success. It was not so much the traditional opera audience who came to see it, but Shannon's audience (the 20-40 year olds). This was the first of the Gonzo operas.

3) Gonzo Opera is designed to be portable and inexpensive to produce. This should prove a boon to smaller opera companies as

a) It attracts a new, young audience (which all companies are crying out to do) and,
b) It can be produced with simple sets, and a small combo of instrumentalists (as opposed to a full orchestra).

Opera as an art form, desperately needs a swift kick in the pants—the same kind that was given it by the verismo movement in the late 1800s. When the overwhelming percentage of works in standard repertoire are 100-300 years old, something is severely wrong. One need only compare the quantity of good and memorable new operas from the second half of the 20th century with the second half of the 19th. The 21st has so far fared little better.

My Opera

2011-02-08T21:40:00.001-08:00

"And the Winner Is. . ."

Composed by Daniel Steven Crafts, Libretto by Thomas B. Woodward

The opera opens as Tony, the host of the Ms. American Beauty Pageant, wrestles with the self-doubts brought about possible imminent success in his aria "It's Every Man's Dream."

As the aria ends, the next to last contestant in the pageant, Ms. Tennessee, comes on stage with her puppet to perform her Talent part of the pageant. As she begins the duet, "Dove il mio orecchio," her puppet, given voice by an off-stage tenor, joins her in the romantic (and highly comic) duet.

During the following commercial break, the pageant's final contestant, Bobbie Wentworth joins Tony in the wings as both wait to go onstage. There is an instant chemistry between the two and they quickly begin flirting with one another. The flirting escalates until the two are on camera and Tony asks Bobbie when she first became interested in the Ms. American Pageant and receives an answer he doesn't expect.

As Tony attempts to establish order, Bobbie continues to break taboos – as when she notes that her real talent for the pageant is not her baton twirling act, but hiding her disability. In her aria, "Sing an Inspiring New Song," she wonders "Wouldn't it be wonderful if Ms. American of 2011 and Ms. Disability of 2011 were the same person?"

The shocks and surprises continue as the Pageant moves from chaos to inspiration and then romance. Having won each other's affections, Bobbie blows kisses to the television audience as Tony helps her offstage.

For production information, contact Tom Woodward, 13 Calle Loma, Santa Fe, NM 87507. For information about Mr. Crafts, see his web site: www.dscrafts.net.

Words Do Have Consequences

2011-01-10T09:07:00.001-08:00

Words do have consequences -- and we do have limits to the way those words are used. The old saw is that I do not have the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire. I wish there were a way to hold those responsible for the escalation of demonizing and dehumanizing rhetoric from both the right and the left. While the "Once we get rid of the liberals we will be OK" language of the Sean Hannitys and the "Worst Person in the World" of the Keith Olbermanns may not lead directly to violence and killing, they sure do support a climate and culture which fosters them.

As an example: One of the first thing a country at war does to motivate its armed forces is to dehumanize and demonize the enemy. We weren't killing Germans and Japanese, it was Krauts and Japs (Slopeheads). We have similar names for our foes in Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Reading Laura Hillenbrand's searing biography "Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption," it is clear how closely tied the Japanese demonization of American troops in WWII led to the worst kinds of torture (random as well as planned) of combatants and non-combatants from our country. What is even more frightening is to realize that our own recent "interrogation techniques" mirror in nearly every aspect the atrocities of the Japanese in WWII! And we are pretty much silent.

I don't expect Olbermann, Matthews, Palin, Beck and Limbaugh to take responsibility for their incendiary language and attacks. That ugliness is their bread and butter: when we stop tuning in to hear about those who are stealing our country or defacing the Constitution, they won't have jobs. I don't expect much from the Christian churches or even the Anti-Defamation League. We all will probably defer to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, two comedians who take their religion very, very seriously.

The Old Testament in One Hour

2010-12-20T13:18:00.001-08:00

REFLECTIONS ON OLD TESTAMENT THEMES AND STORIES

St. Bede's Adult Forum

Some literary treatments of Old Testament Themes and Stories

Genesis: Robert Crumb – Genesis in comic strip narrative (at Public Library)
Soren Kierkegaard, Abraham and Isaac in Fear and Trembling
John Steinbeck, East of Eden – Cain and Abel
Job The Living End, by Stanley Elkin,

J.B. by Archibald MacLeish

Ecclesiastes The Byrds – Turn, Turn, Turn

Isaiah G.F. Handel - The Messiah
etc.

GENESIS
The notion of myth – it is not when did it happen, but where is it happening?
Myth addresses -How did we get this way? That is, in good part, at the heart of the stories of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham & Isaac, Joseph and his Coat
Two Creation Stories: Genesis 1:1 – 2:4a; 2:4b-2:25, each written at different times with different purposes by different "schools:"

J earliest, existentialist, interested in themes of obedience, alienation, life & death issues
P justifies priestly, ritualistic religion – cult, seasons and festivals, Sabbath.
D understands history through experience – faithfulness and apostasy.
E uses "elohim" (gods) for the Divine.

Themes
Cain and Abel: on-going struggle between siblings, between urban/agrarian
Retribution: Lamech
Then Lamech said to his wives:
"Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;
Wives of Lamech, listen to my speech!
For I have killed a man for wounding me,
Even a young man for hurting me.
If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,
Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold." 4:19-24 –
That sense of retribution is transformed in Exodus 21:24 (an eye for an eye)

Noah – the first of the Covenants (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Davidic)
Abraham – adventures and misadventures – his descendents (literally) in his seed
Birth of Isaac – Isaac means "laughter" after the laughter of his parents in their 90s when Isaac was conceived.
Abraham & Isaac 22: Several authors and philosophers have wrestled with this.
Stories about Jacob – cheating his brother, wrestling with an angel, being renamed "Israel."
"We worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" or "the God of the Liar, the Larcenist and Laughter")
Jacob and his brothers – the twelve tribes of Israel.

EXODUS
Israelites are in bondage in Egypt 2:23-25
The calling of Moses (temper and voice 7:1-2 – Aaron was his mouthpiece)
The Plagues followed by the Passover (preparations 12, exodus 13ff. – 15:1!
Time in Wilderness, first set of the 10 Commandments 20ff
The Tabernacle and Ark of the Covenant 25:8f. these represent God's will to live in the midst of his people – the extension of which is the Incarnation.

LEVITICUS – High Morality & The Problem of Guilt
Holiness Code: 19:1ff High Points of Biblical morality – which is based on the holiness of God.
19:9 Gleaning – Salinas Valley, where the practice of gleaning is still practiced
19:17 first appearance of loving your neighbor- see v.33
19:33 the sojourner – big deal in that culture, milieu
The Jubilee Year – no one crushed forever 24:ff

NUMBERS
DEUTERONOMY
Years in the Wilderness
Second set of 10 commandments – recalling covenant (religious service) Deut. 5ff
Shema 6:4-5f.
The Notion of Election 7:6f (reflected in New Testament in I Peter.
The Kind of God we worship and serve 7:9f
Office of a Prophet 18:15
The Blessings of Obedience 28:1ff. – the heart of Deuteronomic history (you obey, you prosper; you disobey, it's curtains for you) These laws applied to nation primarily – individual focus later.

JOSHUA – God's promise upon entry into Promised Land.
Rahab (chapter 2 and end of 6) – one of four women in the geneology of Jesus, Rahab was a prostitute.
Joshua's leadership in establishing a stronghold in the new land.

JUDGES - wonderful stories of early leaders of the Hebrews
Continuing struggle to take control of the land.
Deuteronomic history played out
Judges/Deliverers: Ehud (3:13-28), Ms. Jael kills Sisera(4), Deborah! (5) Gideon (6:13f),

Samson (14) – all great and very vivid stories.

RUTH – purpose to show intermarriage can be successful religiously
1:15 "Wherever you go, I will go. . . ."
3:5f. marriage and property tied together, reflected in a father giving his daughter away.
Ruth & Boaz sire Obed, the father of Jesse, father of David (geneology) Illustrates a foreigner as part of the geneology of Jesus

I SAMUEL – this and II Samuel are some of the best history ever written – inside information, great use of sources and documents, compelling narratives.
Song of Hannah, ch. 2 – from which we get the Magnificat
Capture of the Ark 4
Request for a King (big deal) 8:4f. "we want to be like all the other nations"
The origin of The Holy Spirit – takes possession, ecstatic 10:5
12-14 – the core of Deuteronomic history.
16 – The Calling of David – a mirror image of the Cinderella Story!
17 - David and Goliath
18 Saul and David in conflict
20ff The Friendship of David and Jonathan (2Sam1:25-27) – many hold this to be a homosexual relationship.

II SAMUEL
7:16 God's promise to David and Descendants
11 David and Bathsheba and Uriah
12ff. Nathan's Fable – rebuke to David.
Stories of Absolom and others

I KINGS – again, much great history
Solomon made King ch 1ff and his wisdom and judgment
Chapter 5ff preparation for the building of the Temple
Chapter 9ff. Solomon's apostasy
Stories of intrigue
Chapter 15 – war between Israel and Judah.
Chapter 17ff. The arrival of Elijah the Prophet
Chapter 19:11f – major shift in understanding of God – not in nature, but interior voice.
Stories of Ahab

II KINGS
1-2Elijah taken into heaven, mantle passed to Elisha
Stories about Elisha – miracles
Stories of immensely evil kings, interrupted by Hezekiah, then Manassah the worst.
22 – Reform under King Josiah!
23 Judah now has constitutional rule – accretions gone.
24-5 Destruction of the Temple – Exile

I & II CHRONICLES
History retold by P or Priestly tradition

EZRA in the year of Cyrus, king of Persia – Return of the Exiles
Ezra & Nehemiah deal with evil doers differently- Ezra tears his hair out/Nehemiah tears their hair out.
Rebuilding of the Temple begun – rebuilt 520-516 Legalism begins – with Torah being taught 7:16ff.

Mixed Marriages abandoned.

NEHEMIAH (holds position similar to a senior warden)
The rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem, list of those who returned. Here and through Chronicles great attention given to recording people's names.
Ezra the Priest's Reading of the Law to the people (8:1ff)
The Samaritan schism begins 13:28

ESTHER – the story establishing/justifying the feast of Purim
Haman wants to destroy Jews, Esther intercedes, Mordecai is a hero.

Very popular story!

WRITINGS

JOB – rejection of Deuteronomic theory of history (represented by Job's "friends")
Job is a righteous man – Satan promises to make him curse God.

Job's friends:
Eliphaz: Only God is pure: the rest of his creations, including the angels, are not – which means that humans must accept some punishment for their inescapable impurity. Job must have sinned, not because he was evil, but because he was human.
Bildad: The sins of the sons are reason for father's punishment.
Zophar: Job's punishment is the result of Job's own secret and substantial guilt which he must be hiding, even from himself.

Problem in Job: God does not answer Job's legitimate questions about suffering of the innocent, though it is widely believed that he does.
Ending of Job may have been tacked on.

PSALMS – separate entry in this blog.

PROVERBS: Wisdom honored – beginning of the notion of Holy Spirit as part of Godhead.
8:22 and 8:22-31 is crucial passage in early understanding of Trinity!
Sayings: 1:2 gold ring; Every Member Canvass 11:24-26; Thanksgiv'g 15:16-17;

a worthy woman, 31ff.
Other parts of Proverbs noted earlier in blog – comic structure of the Bible.

ECCLESIASTES – tries to find meaning and is defeated (despite tacked on holy ending)
Great Passages: 1:1-11; 3:1-8 Byrds; 4:9f marriage; 9:11f. nothing new under the sun;

positive 9:7-10

Ecclesiastes may have been an atheistic tract, transformed into a Jewish text.

SONG OF SOLOMON – used to be favorite part of the Bible for horny teenage boys.
The book asserts that the love of God and erotic love are not different in kind.
2:8-13 lovely poem; 4:1f. each part of the beloved praised; 4:9ff erotic love

PROPHETS

AMOS – earliest and most biting
2:6-8; 3:1-2; 4:1-3; Plumbline (7:7-9); verses quoted by MLK – 5:21-24

HOSEA – some hope
Marries Gomer, the prostitute (3 ff) Hosea's faithfulness to his whore/wife is compared to God's faithfulness to a whorish nation.
"For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings."

JOEL – post exilic (after Jews have been freed from exile in Babylon)
Quality of Repentance 2:12-13; for final battle 3:9-1-

OBADIAH –focus on judgment of Edom

NAHUM –

The book is written as an acrostic in Hebrew;

the overthrow of Ninevah (Babylon) (see Psalm 137)
foresees auto (2:3-5) not really, but the images are there.

HABAKKUK – like Job, opposes Deuteronomic history
Individual faith: 2:4
Environmentalist: rejects violence to trees & animals 2:17.
Many liturgical passages are found here.
Wrestles with the problem of evil.

ZEPHANIAH
Woe to Jerusalem and the Nations
The Restoration of Israel 3:14-20

HAGGAI
Argues for rebuilding of the Temple (building fund 1:4)
Economic Depression explained (1:10-11)
A Temple for all – 2:7f.

ZECHARIAH
Theme – the universal reign of God.
New sense of repentance –totally by grace of God (3:1-5)
Pacifism: 7:8-10
Old men and old women . . .glories yet to come (8:4-5)

MALACHI Priestly prophet
Inclusion of Gentiles (1:11), 2:10.

ISAIAH – three different books
Themes: against foreign alliances (31:1ff. for example),
Vision: 6:1ff. the holiness of God
Isaiah walks naked as protest – one of the great clown/fool moments in Scripture.
Vision of the Messianic Banquet at the end of history (Chapter 25).
II Chapter 40 "Comfort, comfort . . .straight (return from Babylon)
Transcendance – creation ex nihilo (40:12ff)
The Servant Passages (especially 50:4-11, 53:1-12) – key to Good Friday liturgies and Passion
God chooses Cyrus – first mention of the Annointed or Christ(45:1f.0)
The Nation as a Light to the Nations 49:6b
III Post-Exilic

JEREMIAH
Jeremiah's call to be a prophet
Transformation of the Outward to the Inward in Ethics (chapters 31 and 33)

EZEKIEL
The responsibility of the Shepherd/Watchman
Freeing ethics for individual responsibility (rejects the belief that a father's sin infects children)
Ezekiel's Vision of the Wheel
Hope – Valley of the Dry Bones

DANIEL – Apocalyptic (bizarre visions about the end of the world and salvation for the saints - this is reflected in the 13th Chapter of Mark, called "the Little Apocalypse" and the Book of the Revelation of St. John the Divine. All three written to encourage the faithful who are being persecuted.
"The Son of Man" here and in the Psalms – the phrase here is the Son of Man coming in clouds of glory to claim his kingdom. Elsewhere, especially in Ezekiel, the phrase refers to humans in our finitude. Jesus seems to combine the two uses in order to drive others to see who he really is instead of assigning simple labels.

Stay tuned for better work on the Major Prophets.

Audition Script for “The Smedleys Are Here”

2010-12-01T09:54:00.001-08:00

JIM and JANICE Smedley are waiting to meet the director of Swenson's Funeral Home to arrange for the funeral of a very difficult person.

LOLA (off-stage)

The Smedleys are here, waiting for you in the Garden of Memories.

MORT (entering to meet family)

Good afternoon and welcome to Swenson's; but first, I want to tell you how sorry I am about your loss.

JANICE (distracted, while admiring the Rhododendrons)

He's sorry about our lapse? Jim, we can't be behind on our payments so soon. We just got here.

MORT

I'm sorry, I just wanted to express my deepest sorrow for your loss.

JANICE

Our loss?

MORT

The loss of your Beloved.

JIM

Not really our Beloved, more like our Tolerated.

MORT

Your "Tolerated."

JANICE (joining the others)

Actually, our Barely Tolerated.

MORT

Your "Barely Tolerated."

JIM

No, probably worse than barely tolerated -- more like a complete pain in the ass.

MORT

You have come to the right place.

JANICE

Really?

MORT

Yes, this is a family owned and operated Funeral Home that is dedicated to serving the survivors of . . very difficult relatives.

JANICE

I'm not sure I understand.

MORT

My father, who founded Swenson's was a very spiritual man, a visionary. He realized that when a relative passes away, those who grieve … have more than sufficient resources for dealing with their loss – flowery cards, sympathetic neighbors, the pandering of friends … All that is well and good, but where does that leave the rest of us – and Barely Tolerated? Grief is assuaged in months – anger and resentment can go on forever.

JANICE

I never looked at it that way.

MORT

And that is precisely where Swenson's comes in. . we ensure that the torment and abuse you have experienced over the years is repaid. .repaid on a daily, weekly or monthly basis, relieving you of that responsibility.

JANICE

So you are Mr. Swenson?

MORT

Actually, no. Swenson's is a Swedish name. My family came from an Eastern European Country.

JIM

So your name is?

MORT

My name is Rasputin.

Jim

Rasputin?

MORT

Yes, of the Akron, Ohio Rasputins.

Bathhouse Blues

2010-08-02T09:16:00.001-07:00

After reading an article which lamented the Anglican Communion's Standing Committee's refusal to chastise, punish and exile the Episcopal Church for its treatment of gay and lesbian people as full members of the Body of Christ and worthy of the full dignity of being human. How, the author of the article asked, could they have failed to exile the Episcopal Church?

I then noted, "Apparently the Standing Committee and others are not ready to elevate Paul's condemnation of ritual prostitution between males to the level of belief in the Incarnation and Resurrection of Jesus, the Christ." An unnamed respondent reproduced my observation and added "That Paul. Just no fun at AT ALL down at the bath-house."

What a gift! Now I think I understand better than I had before. The respondent illustrated a good bit of the problem with Dissident Theology. Bathhouse Sexuality is precisely what Paul does attack in Romans. Of course. However, progressives and moderates are not advocating Bathhouse Sexuality - we are talking about faithful, committed, intended to be life-long relationships between homosexual persons - relationships that are marked by the presence of the Holy Spirit as spelled out by Paul in Galatians 5.

Perhaps the Standing Committee finally got it right – this is not about Bathhouse Sexuality, despite the confusion perpetrated by those who cannot conceive of homosexual relationships being anything but Bathhouse. Well, one can always hope.

Using the logic of the Dissidents (all gay and lesbian relationships are nothing more than the distorted relationships of the bathhouse), we should probably do away with marriage because there are men who abuse their wives.

The Parable of the Prodigal Son – A Parable of our Anglican Struggles

2010-06-08T13:44:00.001-07:00

This parable of the family of a father and two sons is remarkable in many ways. One of the most remarkable is the way it reflects the ongoing emotional and spiritual struggles within each one of us – and, as we shall see, the current struggles within the Anglican Communion as well as other denominations.

The Freudian take on human personality is that it is an expression of the struggle amongst three elements of the human psyche – the id, the super-ego and the ego:

- The id represents biological forces or the life-force and is governed by the pleasure principle or a form of hedonism. It is marked by instinctual urges of sexuality, aggression and the desire for instant gratification or release. In the parable, this is the Younger Son, breaking free from the constraints of the family, wasting the early inheritance from his father on pleasures of the moment, living an unfettered life with (by his brother's description) whores and then, in a surge of self-destruction, ending up sharing life with the religiously forbidden pigs of their Gentile owner. Freud's notion of the id caught up in the Oedipus complex is not far from the Younger Son's challenge to his father to "drop dead." The Younger Son could easily serve as the proto-type of the id.

- The superego, from the German "Uber-ich" ("over me") serves to inhibit the biological instincts of the id and to enforce moral standards. This is the Older Son in the parable -- dutiful to his father, but resentful of his younger brother who dishonored his father and has violated the most basic moral codes of the family's religion. When he learns that his younger brother is being honored in a loud celebration rather than summarily punished, the Older Son experiences an enormous crisis, as the very basis of his being has been to oppose and restrain the immorality of his brother. It is bad enough that he has failed in his mission – it is far worse to watch as his father seems to be celebrating his failure.

- In Freud's world, the ego is our link to reality (as different from the drives and the standards of the id and superego) and is the moderating force between the two opposing forces of the id and the superego. The work of the ego/Father is to hold the personality/Family together. Thus, while the id may be crying out for gratification as the superego counters with moral precepts and the accumulated wisdom of a developing conscience, the ego/Father works to resolve the conflict, balancing and moderating both id and superego. In the parable, the Father is attempting to fulfill this function by embracing the unrepentant Younger Son in a welcome home party while also embracing the rejecting Older Son as he resists joining the party.

As the party is in full swing, the two sons remain independent forces – and all bets are off on what will happen at the breakfast table the next morning! But that is the nature of the human personality: as Doug Adams was fond of saying, nearly every good parable and most miracles in the Bible end in chaos.

Both the Parable of the Prodigal Son and the Parable of the Sower have enormous possibilities in addressing our lives at a multitude of levels, but particularly the psychological struggles that happen deep within us. This is true in a more limited sense in the Parable of the Leaven, with the woman creating the bread from the wild energy of the leaven (denoting "corruption in the rest of the New Testament) and the passive purity of the flour. All three parables have within themselves powerful possibilities for framing, understanding and then transforming the struggles faced by our church communities and each of us as individuals within them.

What we are experiencing in the Anglican Communion is just this struggle, with the Progressives committed to their desire to do what is necessary to achieve a fully inclusive community -- even if that involves overturning long established order and tradition.

Within the Christian church this same struggle has appeared and reappeared in countless forms through the centuries most recently as we have come to terms with the evils of slavery and the exclusion of women. One of touchstones of the Anglican Communion has been our commitment to being governed by the role of the ego or adult dealing with the forces of id and superego in ordering the life of our family.

What we are lacking now is a common commitment to living within the struggles of the human and religious community. From my perspective, what we are experiencing now is a Father demanding to act, not as a force within the personality of the whole, but as "The Decider" who has, by ruling for one Son against the other, abdicated his role as the ego. The recent letters from the Archbishop of Canterbury and Canon Kearon declaring agains the Episcopal Church are clear examples of the abdication of the Parent in our family – and no good thing can come from that.

Like a healthy human personality, our Episcopal Church, the Anglican Communion and world-wide Christianity are best when, in the language of the Parable, the Father, the Younger Son and Older Son are in a dynamic relationship. With decrees, scurrilous attacks and shunning the energy of the Younger Son, we are not saving anything – only our own destruction.

Jesus, Israel and Arizona

2010-05-04T10:26:00.001-07:00

In all the discussions of the Arizona law regarding illegal immigration there has been little, if any, discussion about the religious significance of it all. As a result, what we have been left with, largely, is a hodge-podge of liberal and conservative catch phrases. So what can Christians and Jews have to contribute?

First, there is a constant reminder throughout the Hebrew Scriptures that we are a refugee people -- not just immigrants from Egypt, but political and economic refugees. To forget that is to forget God, says the Psalmist..

Second, for Christians the earliest reality for the Holy Family was as refugees in their flight to Egypt. We should probably be grateful no one there asked to see their papers.

Third, the one constant in Jesus' own experience as the light shining in the darkness was as refugee, as unwelcome immigrant: "foxes have holes and birds have their nests, but the Son of man has no place to lay his head."

The issues involved in illegal immigration are complex -- even on purely economic grounds. If we take our own religious history and identity at all seriously, they become even more difficult -- as we live under the words of the Incarnate One, "Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these, you have done it unto me."

Egypt and Arizona, Mexico and Caanan, and on and on it goes.

Lastly, the truth is not served by asserting that any significant numbers of illegal immigrants are criminal element types -- or that there are no criminals involved. In my experience, the largest numbers have risked their lives in coming here from desperation. Paul Levine, normally a comedy writer, has captured that reality in his new novel, "Illegal." It speaks of the reality of the nitty-gritty details of people's lives

Ultimate Ironies, beginning with Kierkegaard

2010-04-07T10:30:00.001-07:00

In his diary, Soren Kierkegaard wrote one of the most ironic lines in all of Christian theology: "In the splendid Palace Church a stately court chaplain, the declared favorite of the cultivated public, shows himself to a select circle of distinguished, cultivated persons and preaches a moving sermon on this word by the Apostle: 'God chose the lowly and despised.' And nobody laughs."

Remembering Kierkegaard's lines, I began thinking of other phases from Scripture equally ironic to the context of the Vatican's failure to address that church's failure to take any appropriate action against those priests who have raped our children and the bishops and archbishops who have abetted that. Here is my list so far:

Ascending to the pulpit before the great crowds in St. Peter's Basilica on a Sunday morning in his gold embroidered cope and mitre and his elegantly red Prada slippers, Pope Benedict removed his mitre, looked lovingly over the assembled faithful and began his sermon on the text from Mark 10:14, "Suffer the little children to come unto me. . ." and no one vomited, no one rushed the pulpit.

As he was reading from the day's appointed Scripture to the solemn gathering of the wizened old men who comprised the College of Cardinals, Pope Benedict passed quickly over verse 42 of the ninth chapter of Mark's Gospel, "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea." The sound of old men either winking or shifting about in their velvet covered sedallias was deafening.

Questions:

Over and over again, Jesus sets a child in front of the religious authorities of his day and tells them that this child represents the Kingdom. So when one of the church's priests desecrates the child, what are we to say about his regard for the Kingdom of God? Is the word "anti-Christ" appropriate? If so, what are the words or phrases for an organization which protects the anti-Christ?

When We Can No Longer Cope - A Forum at St. Bede's

2010-04-03T22:32:00.001-07:00

A short quiz: In the Bible, what is the event which immediately precedes the Feeding of the Five Thousand? The answer is "The beheading of the one man closest to Jesus, John the Baptist." Jesus, full of grief as well as of fear (because surely he would be next), does not retreat from life but enters into it fully and with compassion and care for those around him. He is affirming life in the midst of death -- that is the overriding aspect of his life and that forms the underpinnings of what I have to say.

This morning, I want to talk about some of the boundary situations we all face sooner or later -- hopelessness, severe depression, feeling unforgiven or being unable to forgive. Mostly I want to talk about the spiritual resources we have in dealing with those situations, ourselves, or in helping others as they attempt to deal with them.

What about the tough stuff? How do we deal with that? Most of the time, most of us do fairly well with life as it comes to us. We have plenty of reserves and when we are disappointed or hurt "Hey! That happens. . .life goes on." Thank God that is how life is for most of us. . most of the time. But there are the other times – either when something big overwhelms us or when the dailyness of life has somehow gotten to be too much. .and our reserves are gone.

We know what happens when our reserves are gone. Usually something small – it may be anger or loss or disappointment -- something seemingly small can touch us and we suddenly feel ourselves left defenseless before life. All of a sudden we feel we're close to going over the edge.

We usually begin by trying to handle that by ourselves, sometimes by toughing it out – which is usually only to postpone and to exacerbate. We reach down inside ourselves. .and find that we are empty. We reach for strength, but all we find is ancient pain.

So what are the resources of our faith? The first thing to do, it seems to me, is to acknowledge the truth: we human beings do not come equipped with a built-in reserve. The last thing any of us need feel guilty about is running out of reserves or feeling empty. It happens: that is how we are made. I used to run marathons. You know the phrase, "hitting the wall?" In a marathon, that is what usually happens at mile 20 of 26. What it means is that your body has run out of stored energy and if you body is going to use any more energy, it is going to get it. . . by eating muscle cells. When we hit the wall emotionally, spiritually. . .we have hit the wall, period. There is no place to go, inside. .no muscle cells to eat. So what is there?

There is first, simply entrusting ourselves – entrusting ourselves to the care of God, to the care of a spouse or friend. I hope we all know that it is more than ok to draw on someone else's strength when ours has given out. That's part of being a church family. If you are too far gone even to pray: ask someone to pray for you. . .or with you (and praying with someone can mean simply sitting with him in silence). And when you do entrust yourself to another or to others, take the time to feel the power of that depending on someone's prayers or support. That is important.

One of the spiritual meanings of sickness is that it is often the first time in our lives when we are able to come to terms with our dependence on God – our emotional, spiritual and physical dependence on God. This may be the occasion for our being able to understand and accept

and live. . within our dependence upon God. I think the reason so many of us are so frightened of death is that we have so little experience or practice of entrusting ourselves to anyone. . much less God.

So, first, we are incomplete –that is basic to who we are - not a matter for shame or guilt. We need others and we need God -- just as the Ringling Bros. were incomplete without Barnum and Bailey, hot dogs incomplete without mustard. That's the way it is. The only people God finds almost impossible to work with are those who see themselves as perfect.

When you entrust yourself to the care of a spouse or friend, be specific: when you ask, ask for specifics. In Salinas, one woman I had been seeing weekly, asked to see me in my collar every day – somehow that reminded her of the presence of her Lord, though with her pain, that was the only way she could experience that presence. That was something I could give her – or the congregation could give her through me.

A second matter: When we are in a crisis, that is not the time to question our beliefs: it is the time to trust them. There are so many things in life which assault us,which knock us for a loop. When the big ones hit us, they almost always do so in a way that brings our basic values/beliefs into question. "How could God have done this? "If this is what God is like, to Hell with God."

But even as the questions come, this is not the time to rethink, re-evaluate our beliefs. That is so for the very same reason I was told years ago that the time to make decisions about sex is not in the backseat of a car.

Even so, in the middle of crisis, if you are angry with God, BE angry with God. If you are disappointed with God, BE disappointed with God. But at the same time, reach through the disappointment and anger to trusting that God will be there to support you, to heal you. Try to trust that God will be present to bring some good out of the chaos, the fear, threat or loss you are experiencing.

Most of the time, in our relationship with God, it is like we are on a first date. We are nice. We are on our best behavior. However, when at the end of our rope, when we are really angry with God, that may be the occasion to move past a dating relationship and into a real relationship with God.

Third, it is important, sometimes, just to endure. . to live it through. The Bible often links Hope and Endurance, holding on -- and the heart of holding on is knowing, trusting, hoping that our present pain/loss will someday be a part but not the whole. .of our lives. Our lives are colored, changed drastically by deaths, divorce, disfigurements, long-term illness. .but that will not be the ONLY reality in our lives. In a word, it is important not to let the H.O.L.E. hole in my heart be the W.H.O.L.E. whole of my life. I know that has been true in my life – as time after time I have dealt with losses and death in my own life. There are holes, deep holes in my heart, as I know there are deep, deep holes in each of yours. And I honor that pain and sorrow and regret; but they do not constitute the whole of my life. .which continues to be rich in meaning, and joy and possibility. So part of the task is, simply, to hold on, to endure to that time when that hole in your heart is no longer the whole of your life.

Fourth: It is so hard when we are stressed out, depressed to allow our perspective to shift. That is especially so with the difference between healing and cure. So often when we pray for the sick, we pray that they will be cured. And often while looking for the cure, we miss the healing that happens. We miss the healing when it comes.

I remember when my father was very sick, how we all prayed that he would be cured. And in the looking for the cure, we all but missed the many ways that healing was occurring, not only in his own life and outlook, but in the family as well. And so it is with any significant loss: when we so focus on the restoration of things as they were before, we miss the possibilities of healing and the gift of new direction in our lives. Something has changed – and things will never be the same as they were back then. But with repentance and forgiveness and dealing with the changed circumstances, wholeness is possible.

The Chinese language has a profound way of understanding crisis. The Chinese character for crisis is made up of two separate characters, one superimposed on the other. One of the characters stands for danger. . .the other for opportunity. A crisis is the conjunction of danger and opportunity. With any significant loss, there is danger. . danger that we will lose ourselves in unending grief, danger that we will pull away from life, isolating ourselves from life, shutting the world out.

And there is also opportunity. .opportunity for finding new and expanded personal support, opportunity for healing, for deepening our response to life. Looking at things this way doesn't mean that our loss didn't happen – or that our hearts will ever completely heal . .but it is a path, a way towards wholeness.

I want to say a few things more about the crisis of losing something, someone important. Once we are well along in our grieving, it is important to throw our energies into living with the changed circumstances. That's a mouthful, so let me say it again: it is throwing our energies into living with the changed circumstances. It is not "Why did this happen?" or "How did this happen? I'll never be the same. ." but "How can I order my life in view of the changed circumstances? Our wholeness is not dependent upon following the original script. Our wholeness is not dependent upon any given scenario.

As an example, there are marriages which never recover from instances of infidelity or adultery. The hurt and the sense of betrayal is just too much to bear. The marriage simply can't bear that weight. But there are some couples – probably more than we know – who have been able to survive such a terrible, terrible loss . . as a way of confronting life and one another on a deeper level than either had thought possible.

One last thing – it is something called "Reframing." When we are deep into grief or fear or depression we are usually stuck with one perspective, one way of looking at our lives and our possibilities. At such times it is sometimes to open up whole new vistas by reframing our situation.

The first time I understood this phenomenon was when a nurse at the VA Hospital in Madison, Wisconsin told me about an encounter one of her patients had with a member of the clown troupe of seriously disabled people I had formed. As the patient told the story to her, he was lying in bed hoping to die. Both his legs had been amputated and he did not want to leave the hospital: he wanted to die. But then a strange sight was wheeled into his room. "It was a guy with cerebral palsy with clown make-up smeared on his face and a little cowboy hat on his head. The guy was flailing his arms around and making strange noises while looking at me. That went on for three or four minutes and then his helper wheeled him out of the room and into the corridor. At that point I broke down in tears. I said to myself, 'This guy had nothing going for him – nothing at all. But he was giving me everything he had. Everything.' And from that moment I could not wait to get out of that hospital to see what I could do with what I have."

Years later, my colleague in a neighboring parish came to me in great distress. He, a married priest, had been having a sexual relationship with someone in the parish. He had been canned from his job as rector and he had been forced to leave his home and family and get an apartment. "This," he said, "is the worst thing that could happen to me." On a whim I asked him to tell me why this could be the best thing in the world that could have happened to him. After a moment's thought he said that was easy: he really was not happy in his job, but didn't think there was a way out; his marriage had been a disaster for both of them, but now there was, at least, the possibility of confronting one another and working for a deeper and more satisfying relationship than either had thought possible. . and on and on.

Nothing had changed for either of them, but he had been able to reframe the circumstances – and thus could begin to hope. And that is so key for us at those times when we are depressed or overcome with loss or grief. It is holding on, remembering who we were before the crisis and remembering the strength and the goodness of our faith before our pins were knocked out from under us. It is remembering that the hole in our hearts is not the whole of our lives – and that with the support of others we will not only survive, we will live differently, but fully.

There is one verse in the 23^rd Psalm which frames all this in a powerful way – and for me it is one of the two verses of the Bible that I trust completely. The first is "And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness will never overcome it." The second, from the 23^rd Psalm, is this: "Yea, though I walk through the Valley of the Shadow of Death, I shall fear no evil. . ." Notice the difference an "r" makes. It is "though," not if or perhaps or if things don't work out – it is "though I walk through the Valley of the Shadow of Death. ." And it is "through." And we all go through the Valley of the Shadow of Death. That is life and it is inescapable and it is not something that we have to do alone. We are surrounded by love of friends and love of God – and nothing can stop the influence and goodness of that love and support.

Second Forum Talk

2010-03-30T09:38:00.000-07:00

I had hoped to have this talk on this site last week, but have had to work overtime with the Census. Give me a couple of days - maybe just tonight.

Thanks,

Tom

First You Die: Then You Live – A Forum at St. Bede’s, Santa Fe

2010-03-15T21:25:00.001-07:00

We could easily spend a whole year dealing with death in its many forms and aspects, but this morning I want to focus on the kinds of questions most of us have – and then begin to open up a few others. As we look at various aspects of death and our dyings, the key to nearly everything that follows is the question: "Why were we created?" What our faith tells us is that we were created for God's enjoyment and to be in full relationship with God. That reality undergirds all that follows. Keep that in mind in any thinking about death.

I want to begin with three of the best prayers dealing with death and dying, first, the Prayer of Commendation (Entrusting) from the New Zealand Prayer Book

God our Father, we thank you that you have made each of us
in your own image,
and given us gifts and talents
with which to serve you.
We thank you for Phil,
the years we shared with him,
the good we saw in him,
the love we received from him.
Now give us strength and courage,
to leave him in your care,
confident in your promise of eternal life,
through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Second, from the Burial Office in our Book of Common Prayer:

O God of grace and glory, we remember before you this day our brother Phil. We thank you for giving him to us, his family and friends, to know and to love as a companion on our earthly pilgrimage. In your boundless compassion, console us who mourn. Give us faith to see in death the gate of eternal life, so that in quiet confidence we may continue our course on earth, until, by your call, we are reunited with those who have gone before; through Jesus Christ our Lord.

And the Collect for All Saints in our Book of Common Prayer, which begins:

Almighty God, you have knit together your elect in one communion and fellowship in the mystical body of your Son Christ our Lord. . .

With those prayers as background, I want to talk about our physical dying, what Scripture says about our physical dying – and then return to our dyings in a broader context.

SO, FIRST, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DIE?
(For a much deeper exploration, try Sherwin B. Nuland's book "How We Die")

What can we expect when we die? From most of the recounting of near-death experiences, we can expect calm, serenity, light and, perhaps, a welcoming presence to guide us across the threshold into our new life.

A friend of mine, Jim, who had experienced a temporary death or near-death experience, told me that it was all light and peace. He said, "Tom, I may be afraid of a lot of things, but there is one thing I am not afraid of any more – and that's death." I have to say that if anyone I've ever known had reason to fear what death might bring, it was Jim. Mostly, what we can expect is calm, serenity, light – and a welcoming presence to guide us.

The other thing we can expect in our dying (in cases of dying from natural causes) is a gradual narrowing of our world. As our condition worsens, our world narrows – from a world in which we are focused on the news of the day, our to-do lists of tasks and projects and appointments to the world of our bedroom at home or a room at the hospital or nursing home -- our focus is on a little bit of the outside world, but mostly on the comings and goings within the room, itself. That world eventually gives way to the world surrounding our bed and the visitors to our room – and then to the world comprised of our bed, itself. Soon our world is narrowed to the sound of our own breathing – and then we let go. In all of this, we never seem to have more to deal with than we are able.

If you are a caretaker of someone who is dying, please keep up with what is happening. There are a host of things that can go wrong when friends and loved ones do not attend to what is going on. One of my favorite people in Salinas was a retired doctor who had been struggling with cancer for over two years. His doctor told me and his daughter that Smiley had less than 36 hours of life – and would most likely die before noon the next day. Noting Smiley's obvious pain, I asked why the doctor was not administering morphine. His answer was that he was afraid the morphine might kill Smiley!!

Similarly, if you have a Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care, keep a copy in the glove compartment of your car (so you will have it when you drive to the hospital). Check with the hospital, too, to see if you can keep a copy on file there.

What should we say when visiting someone who is dying? The answer to that question is simple – the important thing is showing up. The words probably don't matter much, except to tell the patient of your love for him or her and that you will stay close in body, prayer or spirit (don't make promises you probably won't keep). Your physical presence is the most important thing, but be sensitive to the positive and/or negative effects of your touching.

WHAT SCRIPTURE SAYS ABOUT DEATH IS THIS:

In our Baptism we are joined with the risen Christ. Last week Peggy Patterson talked about the experience in the early church in Baptism of being drowned (dying) as one was pushed under water – and the liberation of being brought back out of the water into the new life of the Baptized. There is a death and resurrection here – and our reality is changed, because our reality, our identity is rooted in the resurrection Christ.

In a sense, our address has changed – it is now firmly within the Kingdom of God – and the address change is permanent. Because our home is in the Risen Christ, our rootedness. Our relationship with God is not changed by physical death. We remain Christ's – and we remain joined to one another, to the living and the dead. We continue in another dimension, the dimension of the Holy – not another "place," but within the reality of the Holy.

There are several things I have tried to say in almost every funeral sermon I've preached. The first goes something like this: "When someone has died, we often say that 'he now belongs to God.' But he has always belonged to God – in his Baptism, through childhood, his teen-age years, young adulthood, middle age and now in his dying. He has always belonged to God, just as you and I belong to God, now and through eternity.

The second is that when a loved one dies, our relationship to her is changed; but it is not over. We can still love one another, pray and support one another – just not in the flesh in this world. As is celebrated in that Collect for All Saints Day in the Book of Common Prayer, our relationship with the dead is that our lives are knit together, intertwined.

In the Litany of the Saints in the Prayer Book of the Berkeley Free Church, saints and exemplary people through the ages are invoked with the words, "Stand here beside us." I think, as well, of the meeting between Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prime Minister Botha when the Prime Minister began to chastise Tutu about his opposition to apartheid. Tutu interrupted to say, "Mr. Prime Minister, this is not a matter merely between the two of us: if it were, you would surely prevail. However, you are not just dealing with Tutu: behind me and beside me are Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; Deborah and Sarah and Isaiah and Jeremiah; Jesus and Mary and Peter and John and Paul – and it is we who shall prevail!"

One of our tasks in life is never to forget Tutu's words – for our own use. We are never alone or without support for all the saints, the big shots and the everyday saints are constantly standing with us and behind us.

We belong to Christ in life – and we belong to him in death. In both instances we are enfolded by the Communion of Saints.

SECOND, THERE WILL BE A RESURRECTION OF THE BODY.

There is nothing in the Christian Scriptures about immortality of the soul. It is resurrection of the body. We will be persons – recognizable persons. We will not be amorphous souls, all kind of blended in with one another. We will be embodied persons – having, as St. Paul writes, "spiritual bodies," but bodies none the less. Do you remember Peggy's discussion of Ezekiel's Valley of the Dry Bones? The Biblical scene is of bodies which have been killed in war. As God's Spirit is joined with the dead bodies, they are given life – both body and spirit are necessary for life. In Ecclesiastes, spirit disembodied from flesh is, simply, wind.

AND THEN JOHN WRITES ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THE RESURRECTED LIFE:

"Beloved, we are now God's children, but it is not yet clear what we shall become. We know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, Because we shall see him as he really is." I John 3:2-3

The healing, the compassion, the commitment, the beauty and power we know in Jesus -- that is what we grow into. That is what life will be like. "If you want to know what our new life will be like," says the Bible, "look at the Lord telling the stories, holding the children, eating and drinking and trading stories with his friends, that bursting in of life upon life. That is the What as well as the Who it – will be like.

John's Gospel is, in many ways, a meditation on our relationship with the Risen Christ. For me, two images stand out. The first, in chapter 13, is the image of the Risen Christ as the Vine and we as the branches. That life-line, that absolute connection of life and nurture and identity is so whether we are alive or dead. Spend time with that powerful, powerful image – as well as the second image, of abiding or living in God. That theme runs all the way through the Gospel, with Jesus telling us to abide, to live in him. Rather than my explaining it, get your own understanding of that in reading through the whole Gospel. Both images describe our life, now, and our life through eternity.

HOW CAN WE FACE OUR DYING?

The first emotion most of us will feel as we face our dying is fear. For us to fear the process of dying is natural – just as it was natural for Jesus. In describing the experience of Jesus (John 12:27), we speak of the Agony in the Garden – and that was true: there was deep, deep agony in the heart of Jesus. But that was not all that was there – and that is not all there is for us. There comes a time for many people in their dying when they decide to let go. . to let go of life and begin that process of transformation into resurrection. It is a real blessing to come to that point where we simply let go and allow ourselves to be borne, simply, by the loving hands of God. (I spoke last year of allowing our bed to represent the hands of God, praying simply "Into your hands, O Lord, I commit my spirit.")

For others, their dying is dominated by a struggle to stay alive – a determination to fight death .. as thought death were really an enemy. So there is a holding on. . at any and all expense. As the writer of Ecclesiastes says, "There is a time to live and a time to die." (Ecclesiastes 3) It is important for us to know which time it is.

My father knew. One of my most vivid memories of my father is when he and my mother were living in Wickenburg, Arizona. My father was very sick and he had been in near constant pain for several years. He and I were out walking in the desert when we spotted a large group of buzzards circling overhead. My father looked up at them, raised his by then emaciated fist at them and shook it, shouting "Not yet, you sons of bitches! Not yet!" He was not ready to die.

He was not ready to let go of anything. There is a time to live and a time to die -- and for us, the necessity of knowing which time it is.

IDENTITY

There is another way of talking about death that is very important – it has to do with our identity – and our destiny. Here is how Scripture describes our identity: we are "in but not of the world." Our lives and our destiny is not linked to the structures/ the powers of this world. In Baptism we have been set aside (one of the meanings of "holy") from all that.

Again, Peggy talked about the sense of death in the waters of Baptism. The hold of the world, as marked by sin – has been broken. We have died to that. In order to live fully in the Kingdom of God, we first die to "the principalities and powers" -- the world's violence, consumerism, misogyny, racism, suspicion, isolation and all the rest. We continue to live in it: our lives are surrounded by it, constantly tempted by it. But our vocation is to live out our identity of being in, but not of. . that world.

That reality is described different ways in Christian Scripture: we are "in but not of the world," we are citizens of heaven, Ambassadors from heaven and, again, in John's Gospel, Jesus talks about our living in, or "abiding in God." My favorite illustration of all has to do with the character of Murray in Herb Gardner's "A Thousand Clowns." A social worker has come to take Murray's nephew away from him, as Murray is more than seriously unconventional. The climax of the conversation occurs when the social worker says "Murray, you've got to come back to reality." To which Murray responds, "OK, but only as a tourist." In but not of the world.

At the heart of our Baptism, we die to our allegiance/captivity to this world marked by sin and alienation. In this, we follow Jesus' own journey into wholeness through a series of renunciations/deaths:

-Jesus' time in the Wilderness;
-Peter's admonitions to compromise/get along, to which he responds "Get behind me, Satan."
-The Syro-Phoenician Woman – forces him to confront his own racism Mk 7:24-30.
-The Parable of the Leaven – "Kingdom of God is like a woman. ." Luke 13:21-2
-Parables, especially Leaven, which renounce morality-based kingdom (corruption/flour mixed)
-Marriage Feast – marginalized fully a part of the Kingdom
-Good Samaritan – alien/enemy embraced and honored.
-Jesus calls Matthew to be an apostle when Matthew was a dreaded tax collector.
-Jesus having "table fellowship" with sinners and tax collectors.
-On Palm Sunday, Jesus rides the donkey (symbol of the country at peace, renouncing violence)
-In the Passion, Jesus does not respond to the demands of Pilate.
-His scepter, symbol of authority, is the bent reed (symbol of flaccid penis).

Each step was away from sin – and into his full humanity. And in all this he transformed the basis for our morality – away from guilt, shame and a rule based morality. The keys to a moral and holy life were, instead, the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:1-12 ("Blessed are the. . ."), the basis for the separation of sheep from goats Matthew 25:31-46, and Paul's list of the marks of a Spirit filled life in Galatians 5:22-23. For Jesus, the command, "You shall be perfect," has to do, not with obedience to a set of rules, but wholeness, being complete. (The word he uses most for sin is a term from archery, meaning "missing the mark.")

Throughout his life, Jesus chooses another world – one that involves dying to the kingdoms, principalities and sin which presses in on us and oppresses us. So central to the meaning of the Cross is that on it, one person accepted the full cost of being human – really human. At that moment, in such a way there would never be any question about it, one person utterly and completely rejected the craziness of the world. There is a remarkable beauty in that.

The central theme of Jesus' life: You have to die . . .in order to live. First he died, then he lived. That is the pattern of Jesus life and our own.

An illustration from our own lives: on marrying another we promise that we will " forsake all others. . ." That means a lot more than burning one's Little Black Book with addresses, telephone numbers and e-mails of past romances. It means saying "No" to anything and everything that might threaten the life and health of this marriage. We die those deaths of forsaking for the possibility of full intimacy with another and with ourselves – for the possibility of healing, completeness. The promise of marriage is: first you die, then you live.

On the other side of each renunciation is affirmation. We renounce, in order to affirm – our relationship with God/life in the Kingdom of God. And so it is in the Baptismal Covenant in our Book of Common Prayer.

Life is, in reality, a series of dying. When we go off to school for the first time, life is changed and we have died to something. In all our transitions in life – if those transitions are to be healthy ones -- life is changed and there is a dying. . as well as a rebirthing. Whether it is life transitions or saying "no" to the elements of death in our culture, life is not a continuum. . .but a series of deaths. The heart of our belief, as Christians, is that we can let go. . .and entrust our lives to God. First we die: then we live.

RESOURCES

The Christians in the world

"Christians are indistinguishable from other men either by nationality, language or customs. They do not inhabit separate cities of their own, or speak a strange dialect, or follow some outlandish way of life. Their teaching is not based upon reveries inspired by the curiosity of men. Unlike some other people, they champion no purely human doctrine. With regard to dress, food and manner of life in general, they follow the customs of whatever city they happen to be living in, whether it is Greek or foreign.

And yet there is something extraordinary about their lives. They live in their own countries as though they were only passing through. They play their full role as citizens, but labor under all the disabilities of aliens. Any country can be their homeland, but for them their homeland, wherever it may be, is a foreign country. Like others, they marry and have children, but they do not expose them. They share their meals, but not their wives.

They live in the flesh, but they are not governed by the desires of the flesh. They pass their days upon earth, but they are citizens of heaven. Obedient to the laws, they yet live on a level that transcends the law. Christians love all men, but all men persecute them. Condemned because they are not understood, they are put to death, but raised to life again. They live in poverty, but enrich many; they are totally destitute, but possess an abundance of everything. They suffer dishonor, but that is their glory. They are defamed, but vindicated. A blessing is their answer to abuse, deference their response to insult. For the good they do they receive the punishment of malefactors, but even then they, rejoice, as though receiving the gift of life. They are attacked by the Jews as aliens, they are persecuted by the Greeks, yet no one can explain the reason for this hatred.

To speak in general terms, we may say that the Christian is to the world what the soul is to the body. As the soul is present in every part of the body, while remaining distinct from it, so Christians are found in all the cities of the world, but cannot be identified with the world. As the visible body contains the invisible soul, so Christians are seen living in the world, but their religious life remains unseen. The body hates the soul and wars against it, not because of any injury the soul has done it, but because of the restriction the soul places on its pleasures. Similarly, the world hates the Christians, not because they have done it any wrong, but because they are opposed to its enjoyments.

Christians love those who hate them just as the soul loves the body and all its members despite the body's hatred. It is by the soul, enclosed within the body, that the body is held together, and similarly, it is by the Christians, detained in the world as in a prison, that the world is held together. The soul, though immortal, has a mortal dwelling place; and Christians also live for a time amidst perishable things, while awaiting the freedom from change and decay that will be theirs in heaven. As the soul benefits from the deprivation of food and drink, so Christians flourish under persecution. Such is the Christian's lofty and divinely appointed function, from which flourish under persecution. flourish under persecution.

-From the Second Century Letter to Diognetus

OTHER IMAGES OF LIFE AND DEATH

First, a poem by one of the Beat Poets, Robert Creeley, an Episcopalian. I have often offered a prize for the best approximation of the title – no one has come close. The usual entries are "heaven," or something similar. The title is at the end of this blog.

If you wander far enough
you will come to it
and when you get there
they will give you a place to sit

for yourself only, in a nice chair,
and all your friends will be there
with smiles on their faces
and they will likewise all have places.
from "For Love"

In Frederick Buechner's novel, Lion Country, Leo Bebb, the founder of Holy Love, an ordination-by-mail enterprise, talks about his assistant Brownie, who is not a bad guy at all:

"Now you take a man like Brownie, Antonio, and you ask yourself where the Almighty went wrong. Well, I tell you it's not the Almighty went wrong, it's Brownie went wrong." The Almighty gave Brownie life, and Brownie never lived it. He just crammed it up his ass. . .and sat on it."

In Equus, the play by Peter Shafer, Dysart, a psychiatrist, is wrestling with the way his own life has become a matter of compromise – moving steadily from life into deadliness. He is talking his patient, Alan Strang:

"Look, to go through life and call it yours – your life – you first have to get your own pain. Pain that's unique to you. You can't just dip into the common bin and say, "That's enough!" He's done that.
"All right, he's sick. He's full of misery and fear. He was dangerous and could be again, though I doubt it. But that boy has known a passion more ferocious than I have felt in any second of my life. And let me tell you something: I envy it."

In Graham Greene's novel, "Dr. Fischer of Geneva, or The Bomb Party," the narrator, Alfred Jones, recalls opening an anthology at random and reaching Chin Shengt'an's "33 Happy Moments."

"To me," he recalls, "there. . seems to be a horrible complacency about (much of) Oriental wisdom: 'To cut with a sharp knife a bright green watermelon on a big scarlet plate of a summer afternoon. Ah, is not this happiness?"
"Oh yes, if one is a . . philosopher, well-to-do, highly esteemed, at ease with the world, above all safe, unlike the Christian philosopher who thrives on danger and doubt."

Martin Luther King, Jr. on the eve of the March to Selma: "If I do not do now what my conscience tells me I must do, I may live a long life – and if so, when I die, it will just be my body catching up with my soul. . which died a long, long time ago."

Much of our calling has to do with the vocation of the Fool: it is most often through the vision of the fool that the world is returned to its senses, thus: The Austrian officer paused during a training drill to ask: "Katsenstein, Katsenstein, why does a soldier give up his life for his country?" Private Katsenstein responded: "You're right, Sergeant. Why does he?"

I know no better illustration of our identity in the world than one of the fantasy lives of Jesus by A. J. Langguth. He is writing about the boyhood of Jesus. His fantasy about Jesus has its own reality in the imago Dei that is each of us.

"Jesus opened his notebook on the study hall desk. Using the ruler from his geometry class, he drew a ledger's line down the center of one page. At the top of the left hand column he wrote 'ASSETS.' and over the other, 'LIABILITIES.' Under 'LIABILITIES,' he printed in block letters, 'IMPATIENT.' Shielding the page from the girl across the aisle, he added:

DEMANDING
SELF-RIGHTEOUS
PROUD
MOODY
SUSPICIOUS
FILLED WITH DOUBT
TEND TOWARD ARROGANCE

With some dismay he counted the entries and began to contemplate the "ASSETS" column. With another look to be sure the girl couldn't see the page, he wrote, "SON OF GOD." In better spirits, he closed the notebook and started on the next day's translation of Cicero."

Despite all our liabilities, confusion and the dailyness of our lives, we have been chosen for a God who, for some strange reason, delights in us. It is so important to remember the left hand column: it really cannot be taken away from us. Part of the ministry of the fool, in this culture, is to remind us, always, to contemplate the ASSETS column.

The title of Creeley's poem is "Oh, No!"

The Deacon in the Census Supply Room

2010-01-17T14:00:00.001-08:00

I am now on my second stint with the U.S. Census Bureau. First, I was an enumerator, going from household to household helping to update the Census maps. In late October I was hired as one of eight clerks to open and develop the Santa Fe, NM office. I was given the job of managing the Supply Room, receiving and organizing enormous amounts of inventory with some shipments arriving in over one hundred 40-50 pound boxes (which I had to unstack, open, inventory and then restack in ways the forms and supplies would be available to the operation.

There have been major learnings for me in this. First, it was good to be at the bottom of an organization -- especially as a seminary trained Harvard graduate (three of us eight clerks are Harvard graduates!). Second, I soon realized that my work from that Supply Room into the working areas was essentially that of ordained ministry! The first realization was the diaconal character of my work, doing the menial work in support of the body of the organization. I am being paid $9.35 an hour as a servant minister. Throughout most days I could feel the heart of my diaconal ministry (transitional but very, very real for over forty years) being expressed in a very secular setting. Then I realized that this was priestly service as well -- everything I did was to equip and enable the work of the body of clerks, supervisors, managers and the rest. The joy and the humility of my decades of priestly service of equipping and enabling lay ministry (both diaconal and priestly in character, themselves) is now being relived as "The Supply Guy."

My Point: my life as an ordained leader in the Episcopal Church and my spiritual understanding of my life as clerk would have been greatly diminished without my early months in the diaconate -- and the knowledge that my diaconal calling was not overridden by my priesthood, but central to it.

Do We Want the Anglican Covenant or Renewal?

2010-01-03T08:20:00.001-08:00

How refreshing it would be to see the Anglican Communion address the issues in our faith (that is, our relationship to Jesus Christ and to the Trinity) rather than the ways we include or exclude one another through different processes of interpretation of Holy Scripture.

Some of what I have found most life-giving in the Anglican Church has been our understanding of the presence of Jesus Christ in the world and in our lives through our sacramental theology. Much the same has been through our theology of creation -- and our focus on the broader themes of the Gospel of John and on the comprehensiveness we find in Luke's Gospel.

Wouldn't it be more energizing for the Communion to embark on a joint, prayerful study related to those things rather than on the several codifications of them in our various ethics, moralities and the like – which, over time, have becoming increasingly less connected to our faith, our sacramental understanding and experience of Jesus Christ and our religious understanding of Creation?

I believe such a venture would be a call for renewal and service in ways the Covenant is not and never will be. This process would be centered on our common reality in the Body of Christ, where the Covenantal process has been focused on the ways we are leery of others' living out their vocation as provinces or dioceses. So let's call the Communion into its full vocation through a period of study and reflection on:

The Sacramental Presence of Jesus Christ

Our theologies of Creation

The Gospels of John and Luke as reflected in our vocation as individuals, congregations, dioceses and provinces.

Diversity in the Body of Christ - in Biblical experience as well as in the early and later periods of church history.

I'm as tired as tired can be of factions and provinces chesting one another about who is more faithful or more moral or more powerful than those with whom they differ. That's a young boy's playground game -- and that is the game I see as the subtext of the various covenants before us. What was it that Paul wrote? "When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man (adult) I gave up my childish ways."

The issue here is simple: Do we really yearn for a time when we can learn from one another as fellow members of the Body of Christ – or is insisting that our way is the only way more important? To put this in another way: Do we want the Anglican Covenant or Renewal? We can't have both.

Open Letter to the Diocese of South Carolina

2009-10-25T11:13:00.001-07:00

After several people from around the church objected to proposed actions about to be taken at the Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina, Kendall Harmon, the Canon Theologian for that diocese asked this of me and others: "Why don't you all read the bishops address and see what he really said?" This is where you will find that address:
http://www.dioceseofsc.org/lawrence_mark_convention_address_10_24_09.pdf

My response to Canon Harmon and the leadership of the Diocese of South Carolina:
I have read Bishop Lawrence's address to your convention and find it repeatedly marked by untruths (whether intentional or not), misunderstandings, misstatements and ignorance of the issues he references. On the whole I believe it represents a betrayal of trust towards the people entrusted to him by General Convention.
Let me be specific. First, when he talks about my and others' "false understanding of the Christian faith" which is "founded upon human speculation rather than divine revelation" he does not know what he is talking about. There is no revelation separate from human experience and discernment. Neither Bishop Lawrence nor his Canon Theologian has an inside track on some Gnostic sort of revelation unknown to the rest of us. It would be interesting to hear about Bishop Lawrence's theory of direct revelation unaffected by human experience, intellect or judgment – such a theory would be an innovation of the first order.
Second, what he attacks as "the Gospel of Indiscriminate Inclusivity" actually predates his ordination. That Gospel goes back to Jesus' Parable of the Marriage Feast in which Jesus points us beyond our notions of the chosen to two different levels of the excluded. That teaching runs through several of Jesus' parables (available on request). It is also reflected in his actions and in his other teaching. The Gospel he attacks has also been dominant through history, beginning with the inclusion of the Gentiles in the Book of Acts and later with such indiscriminate inclusions of Blacks, women and now gay and lesbian people. What is disturbing – and foreign to the teaching of our Lord -- is his Gospel of Discriminate Exclusivity (which, conveniently or not, matches his own proclivities).
Third, he seems to claim that traditional teaching about Grace, Unconditional Love and God's preferential love for the poor and marginalized have somehow challenged "the doctrine of The Trinity, the Uniqueness and Universality of Christ, the Authority of Scripture, our understanding of Baptism and. .our Constitution and Canons." Where have Lawrence, Harmon and their advisors been when our PB has painstakingly clarified and corrected the incessant and almost instantaneous distortions of her sermons and speeches by the right? Where did they learn there is one and only one understanding of the authority of Scripture? One which, ironically, is closer to that of the Southern Baptists than traditional Anglicanism. As I noted in my "The Undermining of the Episcopal Church" (found on this blog), the real threat to our traditional understandings of the Trinity, the Universality of Christ, the Authority of Scripture and our Sacramental Theology comes from the self-styled "orthodox," themselves.
I am one of the least of many, many pastors, lay people and theologians who have shown why tradition, Scripture and reason do not support the bishop's claims. Does he not read anyone outside his own perspective?
His charge that "TEC was moving inexorably in what seemed an increasingly unbiblical direction" is the precise charge made by the pro-slavery people in the church against the abolitionists. I do not believe or infer that Mark Lawrence is a racist, but the similarity of arguments and claims should bother him.

I believe the last piece of his address is so wrong it is beyond laughable – and I enjoy a good laugh as much as anyone. To quote, "When some were taking radical actions, disregarding the creeds and the canons, the defenders of orthodoxy were gentleman (sic) still fighting according to Marques of Queensbury rules. Those pushing the agenda were more like street-fighters." What is there to compare to the libelous and scurrilous attacks of the DVD "Choose This Day" which was produced to undermine the trust of faithful Episcopalians in their church? Do you remember the language of that production, funded and produced by the people you and your bishop hold up as heroes of civility and fairness? Do "counterfeit religion," "enemies of Christ," "the church has been hijacked," "a foreign and alien and pagan religion," "a non-Christian religion" ring any bells? How about our "ignoring the cross?" While some of the rhetoric on both sides has been harsh, nothing can compare to that still unrepudiated Trash Document "Choose This Day," followed by the on-going echoes of its irresponsible rhetoric by Bob Duncan and others.

While Bishop Lawrence's allies and others have accused those with whom they disagree as heretics and worse, I believe those so charged have consistently either defended themselves against the charges – or responded saying traditional Anglican comprehensiveness has made room for both our views. No one is pushing Kendall Harmon or Bishop Lawrence out of the Episcopal Church – there is room for both. What is asked of them is that they will cease battering others who, on the basis of our traditional understandings of Scripture, Tradition and Reason, hold a more traditional view of Christian theology and ethics.

Finally, when Bishop Lawrence charges that General Convention "has replaced a balanced piety in this Church with the politics of one-dimensional activism" he simply is terribly, terribly wrong. This claim of his is, strictly speaking, libelous as he is publicly and maliciously attacking the spiritual integrity and faithfulness of the vast majority of bishops, priests, deacons and lay people in this Church. An apology is required.
I do not question Bishop Lawrence's devotion to our Lord, Jesus Christ or the sincerity of his beliefs. I know him to be a kind and pastoral person. I fault him on repeating slights, misunderstandings and untruths and for directing his diocese on the basis of those errors. My prayer is that he will read things like Tobias Haller's new book as well as the discussions on the more responsible blogs and websites, including Mark Harris's Preludium and others.

Response to Anonymous re: Hermeneutics, etc.

2009-09-12T11:50:00.001-07:00

Dear Anonymous,

First, thank you for your thoughtful response – I will try to be faithful in responding to you. I tried to post this in response to your comment, but this was too long. Others should reference your comment to the previous posting on the Seven Bishops.

I take responsibility for not be as clear as I should have been re: Bronze Membership. I was trying to make two points. First, the assertion by some conservatives that there is only one interpretation of a key part of the Bible is outside traditional Anglicanism. To take a few instances: Luke's account of the Virgin Birth is taken by Roman Catholics as literal and thus as core doctrine – many Episcopalians agree with that interpretation and many do not, preferring either to reference the meaning of Isaiah's prophesy in which the word Luke takes as "virgin" has a preferential meaning of "young maiden" or to treat this part of the birth narratives as metaphorical (retaining the sense of the passage as asserting God's initiative in the Incarnation while leaving open one or more literal meanings of the passage). I would also cite John 14.6, which most conservatives claim is the church's assertion that there is only one way to the Father and that is through belief in Jesus Christ. There are many reputable scholars who dispute that claim on a number of reasons (including Paul's argument in Romans 8-11). A third instance has to do with the Words of Institution of the sacrament of Holy Communion. The Roman Catholics insist on a literal meaning of the words couched in Aristotelian terms, while Episcopalians have settled on the Doctrine of the Real Presence, while allowing our people to believe the literal.

Why should orthodoxy be dependent upon one of several faithful interpretations of a key element of Scripture? As I understand it, through most of the history of our church we have allowed a certain level of ambiguity in our interpretation of Scripture, while ruling some things out of bounds. To put this another way, almost all religious language is metaphorical and even while dealing with metaphorical and other language we are dealing with different texts, both of the Hebrew and Greek versions of Jewish and Christian Scripture – and within the same ancient text we are dealing with historical and cultural influences in trying to derive an accurate translation. However, the point in all this is to honor Scripture as best we can (even in its complexity and ambiguity) and to remember that the end is faith in Jesus Christ.

My second point has to do with Tradition – especially with those parts of our tradition which have defined who is in and who is out. Our tradition, until recently, has included the treatment of women as property, the Jewish religion as dispensable, the support of human slavery and the exclusion of various minorities. Most of these have been overturned by a deeper reliance on the overall meaning of Scripture and by reason and experience -- but through all this the same arguments for keeping those parts of our tradition and for discarding them have been offered again and again. It is those arguments that dominate our discussions on the full inclusion of gay and lesbian people in the full ministry of the Church. I believe the liberals are using the same basis for their wanting to clarify or overturn this part of the tradition as was used in dealing with slavery, the full personhood of women and the status of Judaism. It seems to me that the conservatives want to beat the dead horse over and over again.

Regarding hermeneutics: we have not begun to engage one another on this issue. I believe the various sides are working in good faith. There are problems with the authority of the Law and of the Holiness and Purity codes. There are places in Scripture where Jesus refers to their on-going authority – and other places, primarily for me in the parables, where he clearly undercuts their authority. We are still struggling with the intent and authority of various parts of John's Gospel. As I have often argued, when conservatives and liberal are struggling over our Scriptural mandates, the former refer almost exclusively to John, the latter to the Synoptics. I hold that we cannot exclude one another on the basis of a preference for one Gospel tradition over another. Those who claim orthodoxy as their sole province make a different claim.

I hope this clarifies things – even if we continue to disagree. To be clear – are you saying there is only one reliable strain in these matters or only one interpretation that is faithful?

Tom Woodward

Episcopal Institute to Meet with Seven Moderately Progressive Bishops

2009-09-03T15:22:00.001-07:00

The Episcopal Institute has announced its plan to meet with seven moderately progressive bishops of the Episcopal Church to respond to the current meeting between the Archbishop of Canterbury and seven American bishops who have publicly expressed their dissatisfaction with the democratic process in the Episcopal Church. Each bishop will be accompanied by four priests and seventeen lay people from the representative dioceses in order to reflect the full ministry and wisdom of the Episcopal Church.

The two sites under active consideration for the upcoming meeting are the recently dedicated Athanasius Room at the recently reclaimed Diocesan House in Fort Worth and the Starbucks located across the street from the Trinity School for Ministry in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The agenda for the consultation is consideration of several alternatives to the rumored Canterbury proposal of a "two-tiered" Anglican community. A spokesperson for the Episcopal Institute noted that "The problem here is three-fold. First, the notion of 'two tiers' is more appropriate to a football stadium than an international worshiping community. Second, if the concept of tiers is really accepted, it will not be long before we have between thirty-five and forty-seven different tiers given the nuances of a multiplicity of issues (such as human sexuality, social justice, the authority of the laity and differing styles of ecclesiastical vesture). Third, the notion of a multi-tiered Christian group has been tried before – with women, racial minorities and others – and has always proven inadequate to maintaining status quos."

A different and more subdued spokesperson for TEI revealed that at least two different orderings of the Anglican Communion will be proposed at the upcoming meetings. The first is to divide the Anglican Communion into three different groups: PLATINUM, GOLD and BRONZE. PLATINUM membership would be those who agree with The Episcopal Institute's goals, including the full inclusion of all Baptized members in all ministries of the church. GOLD members would include those who embrace most of TEI's goals while respecting their differences with TEI as part of Anglican Comprehensiveness. BRONZE membership will be reserved for those who insist on a single interpretation (their own) of key parts of the Bible and who regard all Tradition as absolutely binding, except the parts they don't like. There will also be an additional SILVER membership category for the lay people of the Communion who wonder what the problem is because the core doctrine of the historic creeds is not at issue. SILVER members will possess all the rights, responsibilities and regard as Gold or Platinum members.

The second proposed ordering of the Anglican Communion, favored by older members of the Institute, is the radical notion of Comprehensiveness, with differing provinces respecting the differing experience of other provinces while considering the unity of the Communion as a common belief in Jesus Christ and the decision to share with one another in the Sacrament of Holy Communion.

The Episcopal Institute has requested that attending bishops be accompanied by several clergy and lay people from their dioceses in recognition of the importance of the full ministry of the Episcopal Church.

FORGIVENESS – A Matter of Life and Death

2009-08-27T12:43:00.001-07:00

This is a cutting from my one act play "A Matter of Life and Death." Susan, a troubled young woman, has come to a tobacco store, figuring they knew about death, to talk about her plans to commit suicide. She is talking to the clerk, Harry, who later on is easily confused with God.

Later the play takes a shocking turn as Harry, "wondering what it would be like to be God," struggles with his own guilt in the ways the world has become so evil. The inspiration for "A Matter of Life and Death" came from Jack Miles' provocative book, "Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God." Susan has just confided to Harry what she has done that, in her mind, leads her to commit suicide:

HARRY
You're right. That's bad. In fact, that's really bad; but look, I'll forgive you for $100.

SUSAN
You will forgive me for $100? Are you making fun of me?

HARRY
Am I making fun of you? No, I'm not making fun of you. I said I would forgive you for $100 and I will. And if that is making fun of you, OK. I'll forgive you for $500.

SUSAN
You'll forgive me for $500?

HARRY
Do you want to hear me say it again?

SUSAN
O God, No. I just don't understand.

HARRY
It's simple: I've got what you need - and you've got . . .

SUSAN
$500.

HARRY
The amount is not so important.

SUSAN
But you just. . . .

HARRY
I said, "The amount is not important."

SUSAN Then what is important?

HARRY That you know it doesn't come easy - that it's worth something.

SUSAN (taking some money out of her purse) Here's the $500..but what difference does it make if you forgive me?

HARRY Well, who else is there?

SUSAN The people I hurt.

HARRY
Sorry. If they forgive you - that's for them. . . not you. If they forgive you, that allows them to go one with their lives. It really has nothing to do with you.

SUSAN
Can you say that again?

HARRY Honey, I'm not sure I said anything that smart the first time.

SUSAN
Are you saying that if they forgive me - that lets them go on with their lives? But it doesn't do anything for me?

HARRY Right.

SUSAN
But that doesn't seem fair.

HARRY That doesn't seem fair?

SUSAN
No. It's not fair.

HARRY
What's not fair about it?

SUSAN
Well, for one thing, they are forgiving ME . . .but I don't get anything out of it! I'm not part of it!

HARRY Exactly!

SUSAN
I don't get it.

HARRY
Exactly! You don't get it. They can't give it to you.

Episcopal Church 1 – Prelates 0

2009-07-01T09:21:00.001-07:00

The Catholic News Agency (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=16420) is wrong and President Obama is right about the "worn attitudes" of those seeking to isolate and castigate gay and lesbian people.

The misinformation and pandering to fear by the right has been longstanding. GLBT people are fully human and are just as loving, caring and compassionate as those who attack them – most certainly considerably more so. I mean, give me a break -- the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has not been in the forefront in talking about the mystery of human sexuality. Rather than more pronouncements they would do well to listen to people like Bishop Gene Robinson rather than villifying him and others.

I am grateful for the leadership of the Episcopal Church in these matters and for their willingness to look at the sacramental dimension of human sexuality rather than the Roman Catholic preoccupation with body parts.

When you get right down to it, the RC position is very similar to Hugh Hefner's Playboy Philosophy -- both focus on body parts instead of relationships and both seem unconcerned about the depth and quality of relationships in judging moral and ethical questions. Let's have sexually healthy people talk about the morality of human sexuality. Is that too scary for the Prelates? Episcopal Church 1 – Prelates 0.

An Open Letter to Stand Firm in Faith

2009-06-22T12:59:00.001-07:00

I note that my posting privileges at Stand Firm in Faith have been withdrawn. You would have saved me a significant amount of time had you had the courtesy to inform me of your decision. Courtesy, though, is not something which characterizes your site.

More and more you have become the ecclesiastical equivalent of Rush Limbaugh, inciting and nurturing hate towards any and all who differ from you, without, yourselves, contributing anything positive.

I notice that your recent targets are, again, Louie Crew and Mark Harris, two men of complete integrity who have served the church both in the United States and abroad. As you have done with Ernest Cockrell, Ann Fontaine, Lisa Fox, me and so many others, you have taken their words out of context and then invited in your host of fear and hate mongers for further vilification of good people. As Rush Limbaugh discovered some time ago, spreading hatred sells – what Rush has not learned yet is that spreading hatred in ways he and you do rots your souls.

Your latest attack on Louie Crew must have taken you a good bit of time, searching through Louie's enormous website to find the picture you posted of Louie and Ernest. That must have brought your gang a lot of snickers and laughs. The real laugh, though, is on you. Louie is perhaps the most generous, most compassionate and self-giving and kind lay person in the Episcopal Church – and has been for decades.

Your Christianity is not something one can recognize in Holy Scriptures. You represent a small, angry, fundamentalist segment of the Christian faith. The Christian church is far broader than your singularly narrow point of view – we are Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Quaker, Presbyterian, United Methodist, Disciples of Christ, Church of God, and on and on. Your belief that you stand above all other expressions of the Christian faith is ludicrous – compounded by your ignorance or disregard of the Beatitudes and the constant commands of Jesus Christ to love those with whom you differ.

Snickers and character assassinations do not a Kingdom make. They are only the outward and visible signs of an inward and spiritual bankruptcy. It is well past the time to put away your childish fear and hate mongering and to apologize and to make amends for the enormous hurt and distrust you have sown. Put very simply, it is time to grow up.

Thomas B. Woodward

Life is Sacramental

2009-06-18T09:37:00.001-07:00

As the Episcopal Church wrestles with questions of blessing, we need to remember that the world is sacramental. Where there are signs of God's blessing God is present, sacramentally. Not to recognize or affirm that is a sign of spiritual blindness. While we may debate categories and theological niceties, the underlying reality is that God is present and active in full sacramental power in relationships previous generations declared unholy. Let us praise God for enabling us to see clearly what we missed so terribly over the centuries. The following is an old sermon – but I hope it speaks to the underpinnings of our lives now.

What is the most special thing for you about the Episcopal Church?

For me, I think, it is our understanding that life is Sacramental.

We don't live in a world that is WYSIWYG.

We don't live in a world of sticks and stones. .chromosomes and bones

where everything is just what it is. . . and nothing more.

When a young child goes out and picks up some special stones

and brings them to you . . . and gives them to you. . .

("I chose these for you, Mom, Grandma, Granddad, Uncle. . .")

What is the meaning of those stones?

We believe that we live in a world which is alive: alive with meaning and alive with love.

And the way those things become real. . . is sacramentally.

That's how we express ourselves

and that is how God expresses . . himself/herself. . . .sacramentally.

Do you remember the Catechism definition of Sacrament?

"An outward and visible sign of an inward & spiritual grace.."

An outward and visible sign. . . .several small stones. . .

conveying an inward & spiritual grace. . . the child's love. . .

and God's love with it.

A lot of things are sacramental.

A kiss is sacramental.

A kiss is never just four lips in closest proximity.

With a kiss, we can manipulate, we can lie. . . .

or with a kiss, we can communicate love.

A kiss is an outward and visible sign. . .

of inward and. powerful spiritual things.

In the same way, a pat on the back, a hug or embrace,

a family meal, a bouquet of flowers - those are all sacraments.

And they are all . . more than just what we communicate:

they are also ways through which God. . touches our lives.

One of the basics of the Episcopalian faith

is that God uses the physical world to touch us.

There are several "official" ways God does this:

Remember the Seven Sacraments:

Baptism: through the water,

God cleanses us, renews us, marks us for his own forever.

Holy Communion: God uses the bread and wine

to feed us/transform us. . from the inside out.

God uses the holy oil and the Laying on of Hands

to give us strength & courage. . and to heal us.

And the same is true in Confirmation:

with the laying on of hands we are strengthened, commissioned.

I had a Seminary Professor who said:

"It is natural for the supernatural to act naturally."

The real miracles happen through the touch of a friend,

through the ministrations of a doctor or nurse,

through the devotion and thoughtfulness of a teacher or relative,

over coffee or cokes, bagels or cheeseburgers.

That is how God works.

If we believe that God is love

and that all love comes from God. . . through us.

Then that is how God works.

One of the things I always try to tell people

who are getting married is this:

You are each God's gift to the other.

It is through one another that you will experience God.

It is through one another that you will --

probably in the most profound way in your life --

experience the love, the forgiveness and the healing power of God.

That is because it is through one another

that God loves us, heals us, frees us, gives us peace.

We are God's gifts to one another:

in our families,

in our significant relationships,

through our acts of kindness and thoughtfulness.

Is teaching a sacrament? Yes.

Is nursing a sacrament? Yes.

Is changing diapers, raising children a sacrament? Yes.

Is running a business sacramental? You bet.

As are planning for the future, making love,

doing what is necessary for our home to be a welcoming and safe haven.

Is the presence of God dependent on the level of our skill

or the purity of our motives?

No.

Sometimes, as Paul wrote,

God's strength is made perfect in our weakness.

And, yes, our intentions and our dedication and our self-offering

are important.

The important thing is to remember and to trust,

First that this is God's world.

The universe is alive with the presence of God.

And second, that God is love.

God is the source of all real love . . .

and God gives that love freely. . . through us.

Whenever, however we experience real love --

as giving or as receiving. . .

we are experiencing God's love -- as well as what is in the here and now.

When we reject God as the source of all real love

by rejecting those whose lives are abundant with that love

but in violation of ancient prohibition,

we reject God.

And third, those people who are significant people in our lives

are gifts to us from God.

May we learn to treat them like that.

Life is sacramental:

God is present through the good times. . .God is present in the bad times --

sometimes as judgment, . . . sometimes as forgiveness,

sometimes as comfort and solace,

and sometimes simply as fellow-sufferer.

Let us praise God who is present in our lives

in more ways than we could ever measure.

Should the Church Be Involved in Controversial Political Issues?

2009-06-11T13:05:00.001-07:00

In response to a recent conversation about whether or not the church should be involved in speaking out on controversial matters, I offer these two excerpts from a talk by Albert Camus at the Dominican Monastery of Latour-Maubourg in 1948, found in his book, Resistance, Rebellion and Death.

"What the world expects of Christians is that Christians should speak out, loud and clear, and that they should voice their condemnation in such a way that never a doubt, never the slightest doubt, could rise in the heart of the simplest man. That they should get away from abstraction and confront the blood-stained face history has taken on today. The grouping we need is a grouping of men resolved to speak out clearly and to pay up personally. When a Spanish bishop blesses political executions, he ceases to be a bishop or a Christian or even a man; he is a dog just like the one who, backed by an ideology, orders that execution without doing the dirty work himself. We are still waiting, and I am waiting, for a grouping of all those who refuse to be dogs and are resolved to pay the price that must be paid so that man can be something more than a dog. (p. 71ff.)

"It may be, I am well aware, that Christianity will answer negatively. Oh, not by your mouths, I am convinced. But it may be, and this is even more probable, that Christianity will insist on maintaining a compromise or else on giving its condemnations the obscure form of the encyclical. Possibly it will insist on losing once and for all the virtue of revolt and indignation that belong to it long ago. In that case Christians will live and Christianity will die. In that case the others will in fact pay for the sacrifice." (p. 74)

School of Prayer – Meditation

2009-03-21T17:09:00.001-07:00

SCHOOL OF PRAYER - Part IV – Meditation

Thomas B. Woodward

We will look at several forms and approaches to meditation, both secular and religious, none of which are too demanding for people with limited time or background.

I. Recollective Meditation.

This form of meditation focuses on quieting our distractions and returning to a natural state of undisturbed, relaxed consciousness – who we are beyond our thoughts. The most popular form of this form of meditation is probably an offshoot of Transcendental Meditation. Dr. Herbert Benson, in The Relaxation Response, compares TM and various other approaches to meditation and finds remarkable similarities. You can get this book at amazon.com for the price of postage.

a. The use of a candle. Sit comfortably in front of a lighted candle and focus on the light given off as goodness, purity or another virtue. When you are ready, pay attention to your breathing and then breathe in the light and exhale the darkness in yourself. Don't be specific about the referents for the light or darkness. (Experience in the Committee on the Status of Women)

b. "I/We are in the presence of God." This introduces a brief meditative time before the beginning of a meeting – or of a new part of your day. (Dawley)

c. Dealing with distractions: when you are distracted in a consistent manner, you should consider focusing on the distraction as the matter to be addressed in your prayers at that time.

II. The Jesus Prayer

a. The classical form of the Jesus Prayer is, "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."
The actual words of our short prayers can vary. We might say the classic version of the Jesus Prayer, or we might say, "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me." or "Lord Jesus, have mercy." Or, we might say a Psalm verse, or a Bible quote, or some other prayer. (from St. Vladimir's Seminary). The prayer is repeated for long periods of time, often tied with our breathing. The end point is when we are repeating the prayer unconsciously.

b. While saying the Jesus Prayer, allow your mind to affix the five parts of the Five Finger Prayer to the time you spend in this form of prayer.

III. Meditation on an Object or Process

a. The Anglican use of the Rosary. Check this out on-line.

b. Michael Quoist's Prayers is a stunning collection of prayer/meditations on such things as a tractor and a Twenty Dollar Bill, as well as the events surrounding the Passion of Jesus Christ. You can find the book in the parish library and at Allibris for less than $2, plus postage.

c. Ken Feit's approach to joining American Sign Language to haikus. "Since my house burned down, I now have a better view of the rising moon."

d. Affirmations, as a way of contradicting the ways we have been badly conditioned.

e. Allowing the core of a story from the Bible to penetrate our hearts and souls. "Alleluia" and imagining various retelling of the core of the story.

IV. Jesus before my eyes, Jesus before my heart, Jesus in my hands.

This is the form of classic Christian meditation. It is similar in nature to our response to a successful advertisement: we are attracted to an image promoting a product, we begin to long to have that image for ourselves, we go out and purchase it.

The form of being attentive to a virtue or an image of Jesus in the Scripture, then longing for it in our own life, followed by a specific resolution for implementation or use of that virtue or quality is a needed corrective to simply meditating on a virtue without implementing it with specific action.

V. The Parables (and stories) of Jesus from the Inside

This approach can be used individually or in a group. It was developed by Walter Wink and based on a Jungian approach to Scripture. Wink believes that we can find important parts of ourselves in the various persons and elements in the parables and other stories – and can use that information in the spiritual transformation of ourselves.

First, select a parable or story from Scripture. Then discover the meaning of any technical terms that have an impact on the story (e.g., "What is a Samaritan? What is the significance of a Levite?" in the Parable of the Good Samaritan). Read the parable in more than one voice – and then ask yourself the question, "Who am I in the thief, the Levite, the Samaritan, and other elements of the story?"). Allow yourself to feel the pain, affirmation or struggle of that identification – and then ask for God's healing, guidance or whatever else you find you need at this point. (The Parable of the Good Samaritan) "The Parables of Jesus from the Inside," by TBW in The Sewanee Theological Review, Christmas 2003.

Other Matters

Basic meditation: http://www.beliefnet.com/Holistic-Living/Meditation/index.aspx. You can subscribe to various elements of beliefnet – Christian, Jewish and Buddhist daily postings are often very helpful. They are free!

"Alleluia" based on the story of the healing of the demoniac in Mark's Gospel, with encouragement from Ken Feit.

"Recent Entries from the Diaries of God V," by TBW. You can find this entry at: http://turningthingsupsidedown.blogspot.com/2006/02/recent-entries-in-gods-diaries-v.html
another entry is a little earlier in that year's postings.

School of Prayer – Praying the Psalms

2009-03-16T08:53:00.001-07:00

A SCHOOL OF PRAYER

Praying the Psalms

www.turningthingsupsidedown.blogspot.com

The Psalms were written at various times in Israel's history and were written for various occasions and needs. They have provided "the spiritual and theological grounding for both Judaism and Christianity. The Book of Psalms "presents nothing short of God's claim upon the whole world and that it articulates God's will for justice, righteousness, and peace among all peoples and all nations." (The New Interpreter's Bible, p. 643). They represent both human words to God and God's word to humans.

Allusion to Shakespeare and King James' Version of Bible: Psalm 46.

CATEGORIES OF PSALMS (not exhaustive)

Lamentation of an Individual (Prayer for Help – you will find yourself in these)
opening address
description of the trouble or distress
plea for God's response (often with reasons for God to hear and act)
expression of trust or confidence in God
promise to praise God (or offer sacrifice)
Psalms 5; 7; 11; 17; 26; 59; 109 (people falsely accused)
Psalms 3, 25, 56-57 (maybe by king or military leader)

Thanksgiving Song of an Individual
expression of praise and gratitude to God
description of trouble from which psalmist has been delivered
testimony to others
exhortation to others to join in praising God or acknowledging God's ways
Psalms 30, 34, 92, 107, 116.

Lament of the Community
same as of an Individual, but with first person plural.
Psalms 44, 74, 79, 80, 83, 77, 85, 89

Hymn of Song of Praise
opening invitation to praise
reasons for praise
recapitulation of invitation to praise
Psalms 100, 148, 150

Royal Psalms
Psalm 45 – royal wedding
Psalm 2 – coronation ritual
Psalms 72, also 18, 20, 21, 89, 101, 132, 144 for the king (on coronation day)

Wisdom/Torah Psalms (reflecting the spirituality of Proverbs and the Law)
Psalms 1, 37, 73, 128 (1, 19, 119 are Torah Psalms)

Entrance Liturgies

Psalms 15, 24

Prophetic Exhortation -urging decision about God's sovereignty, liturgical sermons
Psalms 81, 95

Psalms of Confidence/Trust
"eloquent professions of faith in God's protective presence and power amid threatening circumstances."
Psalms 16, 23, 91

The Psalms are intended for daily prayers of all the faithful. In our Book of Common Prayer, as you go through the Psalms, they are grouped by each day of the month, for morning and evening. So every month you will go through the whole Psalter.

PSALMS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Magnificat reflects Psalms 98 and 113
Royalty Psalms reflected in the Incarnation, title of Anointed One.
Nativity recalls content and movement of Psalm 29
Baptism of Jesus and Transfiguration, Psalm 29. 7
Beatitudes and Ministry of Compassion, Psalms 24, 37, 73; also 24, 37 and 73 (Beatitudes)
Entry into Jerusalem, Psalm 118
Crucifixion, Psalm 22; also influenced by Psalm 69

ILLUSTRATIONS
Psalms 23, 42, 43, 44, 84, 137, 139
Psalm 42, 84,, 93, 139 translated by Stephen Mitchell, A Book of Psalms
"Praying to Big Jack," Anne Sexton, 45 Mercy Street
"Thanksgiving after Communion," "A Bird in the Hand," by Vassar Miller (If I Could Sleep Deeply Enough)
"i thank You God for most this amazing" by e.e. cummings (XAIPE)
"Thank You" by Robert Creeley (The Charm)
Gerard Manley Hopkins, "Pied Beauty" and "God's Grandeur"

Illustrations of contemporary reflections on the Psalms – use them!

i thank You God for most this amazing
day:for the leaping greenly spirits of trees
and a blue true dream of sky;and for everything
which is natural which is infinite which is yes

e.e. cummings

Pied Beauty

GLORY be to God for dappled things—
For skies of couple-colour as a brinded cow;
For rose-moles all in stipple upon trout that swim;
Fresh-firecoal chestnut-falls; finches’ wings;
Landscape plotted and pieced—fold, fallow, and plough;
And áll trádes, their gear and tackle and trim.

All things counter, original, spare, strange;
Whatever is fickle, freckled (who knows how?)
With swift, slow; sweet, sour; adazzle, dim;
He fathers-forth whose beauty is past change:
Praise him.

God's Grandeur
The world is charged with the grandeur of God.
It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil;
And wears man's smudge & shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

And for all this, nature is never spent;
There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs --
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
World broods with warm breast & with ah! bright wings.
Gerard Manley Hopkins

PSALM 93

God acts within every moment
and creates the world with each breath.
He speaks from the center of the universe,
in the silence beyond all thought.
Mightier than the crash of a thunderstorm,
mightier than the roar of the sea
is God's voice silently speaking
in the depths of the listening heart.
Stephen Mitchell, translator

School for Prayer – Resources from the BCP

2009-03-07T18:17:00.001-08:00

SCHOOL FOR PRAYER - Session 2

Resources of the Book of Common Prayer

THE FUTURE OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER

Several books – Occasional Offices, Prayers and Thanksgivings, Lesser Feasts and Fasts.

View Prayer Books at: http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp and http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/slc-2.html for some supplemental texts.

In the future more texts and resources will be published on-line or in loose binders. (The Rite Stuff)

ASPECTS OF PRAYER: Contradicting Cultural Assumptions - meditate or reflect on "You are My Beloved" addressed to you.

Conforming Our Lives to Biblical Vision – Prayers for Prisons, St. Francis., Self-Dedication.

CHANGES FROM PAST BCP to 1979 BCP
Burial Office – not the guilt and impersonal, celebration of a life (p. 493)
Lay Participation – prayers of people in almost every service.
Full humanity of women (Churching of Women – Thanksgiving for a Child)
New Ministry for clergy and lay people.
Prayers written by women – many different kinds.
Form for Private Confession
New Saints – Women, Aelred (p. 19), George Herbert, Evelyn Underhill, MLK, Jr. - more in Lesser Feasts and Fasts.

THE DAILY OFFICE -- We now have many alternatives for Morning and Evening Prayer, as well as for Noonday Prayers and Compline (just before going to bed).

Rite One and Rite Two
Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer – Rite One
Morning Prayer – Rite Two (p. 75)
Noon Prayers (p. 103)
Evening Prayers (p. 109)
Evening Prayer Rite Two (p. 115)
Compline (p. 127)

DAILY DEVOTIONS (pp. 137 ff)
Morning
Noon
Early Evening
Close of Day

THE COLLECTS for use in daily offices and Eucharist as well as in private devotions.
Advent III (p. 212
8th After Epiphany (216)
"All Holy Scripture written. . . ." (p. 236)

COMMON OF THE SAINTS (lay ministry)
Ember Days (#1 at p. 205)
Vocation in Daily Life (p. 210)

SPECIAL SERVICES NEW TO THE 1979 BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER
Commitment to Christian Service (p. 420)
Thanksgiving for Birth or Adoption (p. 439)
Reconciliation of a Penitent I and II (private confession) (p. 447ff)
Laying on of Hands for Healing ( pp. 455 ff.)
Litany at the Time of Death (p. 462)

PRAYERS AND THANKSGIVINGS (p. 810) for many occasions, e.g.,
For our Enemies (p. 816)
Church Musicians and Artists (p. 819)
Armed Forces/Conscientious Objectors (p. 823)
In Times of Conflict (p. 824)
Leisure (p. 825) For the Oppressed (p. 826)
Prisons and Correctional Institutions (p. 826)
WWI Prayer (p. 831) (not knowing if person is alive or dead)
TBW for use at meetings "Direct us, O Lord, in all our doings. . ." (p. 832)
After Worship (p. 834)
Grace before meal when Jews are at table. "Blessed are you. . ." (p. 835)

TBW LIST OF FAVORITES
Compline p. 134 "Keep watch, dear Lord. . . "
Burial Office p. 493 "O God of grace and glory. . . "
Prisons (p. 826)
For Knowledge of God's Creation (p.827)
Addiction (p. 831)
Self-Dedication (p. 832)
St. Francis (p. 833)
Thanksgiving for the Diversity of Races and Cultures (p. 840)
All Saints Day ("knit together") (p. 245)

Exorcism - there are provisions for its use in the Episcopal Church
Vocation to Pray for Parish - might this be your vocation?

School for Prayer – Session I

2009-03-07T13:27:00.001-08:00

School of Prayer – Session I – Back to the Basics

WHO WE PRAY TO: We believe that the heart of reality is personal. The experience of Jews and of Christians is that Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier are personal (the Trinity is apparent in the Book of Proverbs).

GOD THE FATHER: In Diane Tennis' " God as the Reliable Father, " she shows that OT references to God as Father are all non-patriarch, non-paternalistic, loving and enfolding. We should keep the reality of God the Father, she says, in part because so few of us have had reliable fathers. It is also Scriptural and part of our Anglican tradition to pray to God our Mother.

Generally speaking there are several ways we pray: Impromptu, Set, Ritualized and Reflective Prayers - each is important in our living and growing spiritually.

IMPROMPTU: Initiating – arrow prayers ("God help me get out of this traffic jam.")

SET PRAYERS – BCP, Lord's Prayer, St. Francis, Serenity prayer*, collections of prayers

RITUALIZED:

Daily Offices (rich array of choices, next week)

Psalms

Structured Prayer Life – mixture of set and impromptu

The Eucharist – a comprehensive prayer and dance with several movements.

REFLECTIVE:

Various Forms of Meditation (e.g., "Jesus before the eyes, heart and hands")

The use of Scripture, guides, lists of qualities.

OUR LIVES ARE A PRAYER: both an important truth and a cop out.

The Full Serenity Prayer

"God grant me the serenity to
accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

Living one day at a time;
enjoying one moment at a time;
accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
taking, as He did, this sinful world as it is, not as I would have it:

Trusting that He will make all things right if I surrender to His Will;
that I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him forever in the next. Amen

Reinhold Niehbur.

THE BASICS

No matter how good you are at something, it is always a good thing to go back to the basics.

Pianists. .. even when playing Rachmaninoff, Chopin still go back to their Hanon scales.

Jugglers go back to the motions of one club, one ball . . . back and forth.

Saints, who seem so close to God – most got there because of the basics.

Today: a structure for a complete life of prayer you can use effectively with 30 seconds a day.

Ron Popiel: "You can find prayer disciplines out there requiring 2 hours a day, 1 ½ hours a day, one hour a day. . .what we are offering you is not 2, 1 ½ or even 1 hour a day, but 30 seconds a day."

FIVE FINGER METHOD OF PRAYER (hold up your hand – each phrase attaches to a finger)

I Love You

For most, the hardest: it is easier being thankful, sorry, needy or generous. For me, the best place to start: say the words and be quiet or use a favorite Psalm. There are a lot of ways we love God with our lives: working for justice. . . caring for one another . . .doing the dailies, but that is another dimension of prayer. Here we take time just to offer our love or our desire to love God.

Thank You

A good place to start: just say the words or make or review a list, e.g., "Dear God, I thank you for x, y, z, . . ." The ore for which I am intentionally thankful, the more personal universe becomes. A priest in the Diocese of Dallas, Homer Rogers, looked nightly at his children when they were asleep as a way of remembering that his life with them was rooted in gratitude. Often when I preach a wedding sermon, I remind the couple that they are, quite literally, God's gift to one another – so in waking up, from time to time look at that scraggly, dragon-breathed person next to you and say to yourself, "This is my gift from God." The heart of many funeral sermons – what is it that God has been giving us in this life. . . .?

Thanksgiving is the Basis for our Life: Stewardship has to do with what we do, in thanksgiving, with what we have been given:

not just our pledges,

how we create our lives

how we create and nurture our communities,

what we give in our work, our friendships, volunteering.

I learned the basics of Stewardship at Esalen Institute: The only important question is "How am I going to spend my time?"

I'm Sorry

Episcopal Church is a full-service church: we confess sins of Commission and Omission; Commission is what we have done to hurt others, or hurt ourselves and . Omission is what we have neglected to do.

When I was younger, I used to have a check list of sins from the pamphlet "A Litany of Penitence." Good place to go for help in being comprehensive is Ash Wednesday litany or ask your spouse or best friend for help! (that is mostly a joke).

Hamartia: the word used for sin in Christian Scriptures is hamartia, a term used in archery for "missing the mark." It is missing "all that we can be" or "all that God wants us to be/ created us to be." We confess our sins and our sin (our missing the mark in our vocation in the world.)

Help Others

God uses our prayers, much the same way God uses our actions. To get something changed in the community, God uses us in different means - letters, speeches, raising money, telephone calls, demonstrating. It may be that God uses our prayers in the same way. (Maxie Dunham)

Today Show – Rabbi Kemelman and Joe Garogiola. Joe asked the rabbi to open the interview with prayer. He then said, "Dear God, assist everyone watching this show to turn off their TVs, take out paper and pen and write their Congress people to pass the Voting Rights Act." We pray with words and action.

Parishioners know and feel your prayers. I have felt the power of others' prayers for me. Intercessory Prayers – like karma, there is something almost palpable about them (The Holy as the Fourth Dimension explained briefly.

Some find it helpful to keep a list – it is OK to cross names off.

Help Me

This is both the easiest and the hardest of the Five Fingers - easiest because we ask for little things (arrow prayers) and hardest because in asking, we entrust ourselves to God's care and to God's Will. Most of us want a relationship with God in which he serves us as consultant. Truth in that: Act as consultant in knowing God's will for us and the world and Act as consultant as we figure out what we want.

Frederick Buechner on Vocation: it is the intersection of what most needs to be done and what I most need to do. (The example of Rabbi Zuzya.)

Ask for what you want and what you need. Sometimes in asking, discover you don't want or need it. We are beloved children of God – so we ask within that relationship.

PHYSICAL PRAYER – ways of centering our lives in God:

When you get out of bed in the morning and your feet hit the ground, feel that connectedness to the heart and center of the universe – let that represent your rootedness in God.

When you have no attention span or are in intense pain, let your bed represent the hands of Jesus Christ, holding and enfolding you. "Into your hands, O Lord, I commit my spirit."

HOW AND WHEN FOR THE FIVE FINGER METHOD OF PRAYER: Choose a time for your five finger method of prayer and stick to it. Begin with something really short, like 30 seconds and then increase the time as you wish.

Bishop Robinson’s Prayer for the Nation and Our Next President

2009-01-19T09:24:00.001-08:00

A Prayer for the Nation and Our Next President, Barack Obama

By The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire

(with thanks to The Episcopal Café for its transcription)

Opening Inaugural Event
Lincoln Memorial, Washington, DC
January 18, 2009

Welcome to Washington! The fun is about to begin, but first, please join me in pausing for a moment, to ask God's blessing upon our nation and our next president.

O God of our many understandings, we pray that you will…

Bless us with tears – for a world in which over a billion people exist on less than a dollar a day, where young women from many lands are beaten and raped for wanting an education, and thousands die daily from malnutrition, malaria, and AIDS.

Bless us with anger – at discrimination, at home and abroad, against refugees and immigrants, women, people of color, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

Bless us with discomfort – at the easy, simplistic "answers" we've preferred to hear from our politicians, instead of the truth, about ourselves and the world, which we need to face if we are going to rise to the challenges of the future.

Bless us with patience – and the knowledge that none of what ails us will be "fixed" anytime soon, and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah.

Bless us with humility – open to understanding that our own needs must always be balanced with those of the world.

Bless us with freedom from mere tolerance – replacing it with a genuine respect and warm embrace of our differences, and an understanding that in our diversity, we are stronger.

Bless us with compassion and generosity – remembering that every religion's God judges us by the way we care for the most vulnerable in the human community, whether across town or across the world.

And God, we give you thanks for your child Barack, as he assumes the office of President of the United States.

Give him wisdom beyond his years, and inspire him with Lincoln's reconciling leadership style, President Kennedy's ability to enlist our best efforts, and Dr. King's dream of a nation for ALL the people.

Give him a quiet heart, for our Ship of State needs a steady, calm captain in these times.

Give him stirring words, for we will need to be inspired and motivated to make the personal and common sacrifices necessary to facing the challenges ahead.

Make him color-blind, reminding him of his own words that under his leadership, there will be neither red nor blue states, but the United States.

Help him remember his own oppression as a minority, drawing on that experience of discrimination, that he might seek to change the lives of those who are still its victims.

Give him the strength to find family time and privacy, and help him remember that even though he is president, a father only gets one shot at his daughters' childhoods.

And please, God, keep him safe. We know we ask too much of our presidents, and we're asking FAR too much of this one. We know the risk he and his wife are taking for all of us, and we implore you, O good and great God, to keep him safe. Hold him in the palm of your hand – that he might do the work we have called him to do, that he might find joy in this impossible calling, and that in the end, he might lead us as a nation to a place of integrity, prosperity and peace.

AMEN.

Why the Venom? – A response to a question about Stand Firm in Faith

2009-01-01T12:23:00.001-08:00

A woman who posts at StandFirminFaith wrote me twice in the comments section of an earlier entry on this blog, inquiring about my take on the animosity towards me at that web site. Here are my thoughts about the animosity expressed towards me at Stand Firm:

1. Early on Matthew Kennedy from SF launched a four part attack on a piece I wrote for The Episcopal Majority on "Falsely Accused," in which I debunked the charges of SF and others against the Episcopal Church. As I responded to Matthew's various points, the responses to me on Stand Firm took on an ugly, personal tone. That has continued.

2. From time to time I have offered on StandFirm an alternative point of view about theology, the authority of the Bible and about church property. A few have engaged in that conversation, but most have responded with close to vitriol, as though I had slimed their mothers. What has angered most has been my suggestion (it is not just mine: it has been a staple of Anglicanism for centuries!) that there are differing points of view than their own.

3. The third reason, I believe, is that whenever someone challenges anything held by what Veblen called "The True Believer," the fear and resentment level for the True Believers reaches an incredible pitch -- and rather than deal with the challenge, itself, they attempt to eradicate the source of their discomfort.

4. The fourth reason is that the SFiF site has served for many as a dumping ground for disaffection and hatred -- and when that stream of "Ain't They Awful" is interrupted, any disrupters are quickly and soundly punished. I don't think this trend has been there for the full life of SFiF, but when you read through almost any string there are recurring themes:

-- ++Katharine Jefferts Schori is a fake and a heretic;
-- Anyone leaving TEC is a hero;
-- Any moral, ethical or theological viewpoint (no matter how well grounded in historical Christianity or contemporary scholarship) that differs from the narrow outlook of the SFiF leadership is "heretical," "apostate" or of Satan. -- Anyone challenging the Stand Faith sense of their own orthodoxy must be annihilated and there is no limit to the sarcasm, personal attacks and wild charges used to accomplish those attacks. Witness irenic, conciliatory remarks by me and others are invariably met by further personal attacks – their latest characterizations of me have been "heretic," "fraud," "abuser of my former parishioners," and other, worse, terms.

5. Lastly, there is the SF assumption that any of their staff and regular contributors can do no wrong in their personal attacks – and that when I, or others, draw attention to the scurrilous attacks, we must be discredited. That is often followed by references to what happens at the House of Bishops/House of Deputies list serve as "much, much worse" – a charge that is demonstrably wrong.

These, of course, are my own observations. I have had some meaningful conversations with Matt Kennedy through emails -- though he has informed me that if I showed up at his church he would not give me communion. I believe there are descriptive words for such an attitude and behavior, but they are not for me to throw around!

The voice of conservative Christianity is a voice which deserves to be heard and taken with utmost seriousness – but this use of it to tee off on those not of the same mindset is a cruel distortion of Christian conversation.

(adapted from the response at: http://turningthingsupsidedown.blogspot.com/2008/12/ode-to-stand-firm-in-faith.html

On The Occasion of St. Edmund’s, Elk Grove Departing TEC

2009-01-01T11:25:00.001-08:00

I read on David Virtue's web site this morning that the vestry and others in St. Edmunds, Elk Grove, Diocese of Milwaukee had officially left the Episcopal Church – and in a gracious spirit well known in that diocese, they left behind all claim to real and personal property. When I was serving at St. Francis House, Madison a few decades ago, an old friend, Bill Ohlenhausen, drawn by the mysteries of an offshoot of the Orthodox Churches, renounced his Episcopal Church ordination and left with some parishioners to explore their spiritual journey outside the Episcopal Church.

There are a few other parishes in my old Diocese of Milwaukee that, in essence, left the Doctrine if not the Discipline of the Episcopal Church long ago. Being a Christian in the far North dominated by conservative Roman Catholics and even more conservative Lutherans (though with many mainline Lutherans) is not an easy task. There were times when it seemed like it would be easier working among Muslims! However, now, with the false promise that they will remain Anglican if they leave TEC, some are declaring what they experienced long ago.

I do not see this as a judgment against The Episcopal Church: quite the opposite. This is not about the authority of Scripture, but about whether the resurgence of a Selective Biblical Fundamentalism Bordering on Biblical Inerrancy (SBFBBI) is the true and sole legacy of the early church.

Apparently none of the clergy at St. Edmunds bothered to tell the drafters of their statement that there are at least three different notions (later doctrines) of the Atonement in the New Testament (St. E's statement seems to claim there is only one). They have also failed to inform those voting to leave that claims to be following "the faith once delivered to the saints" is, upon even cursory examination, false and even bogus.

I'm sure that in the Diocese of Milwaukee, as in other dioceses where the Selective Biblical Fundamentalists Bordering on Inerrancy have left TEC, there will be genuine compassion and care for those leaving -- but a sigh of relief that this bogus approach to the Christian faith is no longer competing with the real heirs of the apostolic faith.

What a great history the Diocese of Milwaukee has had! While pretty fiercely Anglo-Catholic for most of its history, there has always been a tolerance and an embrace of other expressions of the Christian faith. When I served as Episcopal Chaplain to the University of Wisconsin in Madison, my predecessors included Alden Kelley (the great champion of the Ministry of the Laity when the notion was just beginning to take root in the wider church), Gordon Gillette, a pacifist priest run off the campus by the full weight of the United States Navy, Dan Corrigan, later Suffragan Bishop of Colorado, a great Anglo-Catholic and later ordaining bishop of the Philadelphia 11, Carroll Simcox, one of the early influences leading to the spitting off of the right wing of TEC, Charles Boynton, later Suffragan Bishop of New York and leading Anglo-Catholic, and Arthur Lloyd, a powerful leader of the Christian Socialist movement in the American Church.

During my tenure at St. Francis House, we were the first Episcopal congregation to serve as a Sanctuary church for political refugees from El Salvador and Guatemala (with great affirmation from Bishop Wm. Wantland!). We served as a shelter for the homeless men, women and families who came our way and operated a food cooperative where homeless and down on their luck neighbors would join our students for a great evening meal when they needed it. The Integrity Chapter founded there in 1978 is still thriving – and serving men and women not only in Madison but around the State. We served a large contingent of international students, including many from Nigeria and the former Zambian Ambassador to Russia, Martin Kaunda (none of whom had the slightest qualms about the work of the Integrity Chapter in their midst). At the heart of our ministry to the university, the city and, in many instances, the State of Wisconsin, were Biblical fundamentalist, Christian socialists, ordinary lay people and non-stipendiary priests, higher ups in the Tommy Thompson administration and on and on. ANY THOUGHT THAT A THEOLOGICAL FUNDAMENTALISM WOULD DRIVE US APART WOULD HAVE PRODUCED LAUGHTER AND DERISION.

That is the Episcopal Church I love – and, like those reading this, have labored for – over years, decades and generations. How we have tolerated those who, in the name of a narrowness not known before in our spiritual heritage as Anglicans, have driven us apart is a truth that has so far eluded me.

A Letter to the People at Stand Firm in Faith on the Occasion of My 45h Anniversary of Ordination to the Priesthood

2008-12-21T18:48:00.000-08:00

On this, my 45th anniversary of ordination to the priesthood of the Episcopal Church, I want to share with you a couple of reflections - mostly in response to direct questions from several of you "Why do you continue to post to Stand Firm?"

My first introduction to Stand Firm was when Matthew featured his four part response to an article I had written for The Episcopal Majority, "Falsely Accused." In the back and forth with Matthew (and later) I found the basis for discussion and dialogue. I think most of my time here has been with the hope of that in mind.

So, why continue? A major element of my service to the church over the years has been my work in building bridges between the church and groups of people outside the church (that has always been part of the church's charge to our deacons) and between groups within the church. This ministry has been a traditional part of our campus ministries -- so with 23 years in campus ministry it is part of my being.

I don't think I have been successful here at Stand Firm, but in other venues I have. At the last General Convention the Network endorsed my candidacy for Trustee of the Church Pension Fund -- I was also backed by the Deputies of Color and the consortium of liberal groups such as Integrity, The Episcopal Peace Fellowship and the rest. I have relationships of trust with Kendall, Chris Cantrell, Dan Martins, several of the most conservative bishops in TEC, Don Perschall, John Liebler and many others. Needless to say, we all have had to work at this and be committed to building and maintaining relationships of trust and respect with those with whom we differ most. It probably goes without saying that in the heat of things we all say or do things that threaten those relationships. As an example, my choice to post "An Ode to Stand Firm in Faith" on my blog rather than deal with my anger with Sarah Hey and others directly (actually there is no means for doing so really directly) resulted in hurt in people at SF who have reached out in kindness and respect -- so I am taking it off by blog and not posting it elsewhere.

There is something in this that is very important. One of my heroes in the life of the church has been Will Campbell. He is a modest Southerner who came out of the Southern Baptist tradition into the Episcopal Church. As you look at some of the old pictures of the civil rights marches involving Dr. King, you can usually find Will on the first or second row. In the early 70's Will addressed the national gathering of Episcopal campus ministries. He began his talk this way: "The only reason I've come here to talk with you all is that I want to remind you that Spiro Agnew (much hated by liberals of all stripes) -- Spiro Agnew is your brother." We were furious at Will for that – absolutely furious – but we knew that he was right. No human voice has touched me deeper. So I have continued to post at Stand Firm because Greg and Matt and Mousetalker, Sarah and Jackie and all the rest of you are my brothers and sisters in Christ. I have not always lived up to that -- and neither have you all. When Will Campbell was not walking with Dr. King, he was often waiting tables at a KKK gathering -- because, as he said, even though we despise what one another does, we are still brothers in Christ.

Neither I nor you is the KKK -- and neither of us is MLK, Jr., but we are all part of the Body of Christ through His invitation and incorporation. It is through the adoption as His children and His continuing grace and forgiveness that we continue in that embrace -- even as we too often believe that we, alone, belong. I believe the Anglican tradition is the best incarnation of that reality -- even as we struggle for what we believe is the best in that tradition.

To paraphrase what Sarah observed a couple of days ago, we seem to believe in different emphases in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I admire the way you represent the tradition of holding the purity of the church and its individuals as primary. That strain has not always been visible in the Episcopal Church -- as it has been visible in the peace churches, the early Methodists and the Assemblies of God and the Church of the Nazarine. That, I believe, is a crucial part of the Gospel, but is not all of the Gospel. I come out of a different, but equally important strain of Anglicanism – one that values the sacramental presence of Jesus Christ in the world and is focused on being the hands, legs, vision and heart of Jesus Christ as we interact with the world around us, often moving beyond comfortable boundaries in His service. Again, that is a crucial part of the Gospel, but not all of the Gospel. The better each of us does our calling and vocation, the stronger the church will be -- and the more praise to our Father.

So, when I return to SF, it will be to discern what I can appreciate in your vocation as fellow members of the Body of Christ – not to defame or demean you. I will leave the wisecracks behind. That is all I can control. If some of you reciprocate, so much the better. I can assure you that my faith is strong and it is deep -- and I have been teaching the Nicene Creed longer, I think, than most of you have been alive. Like it or not, I am your brother.
Tom Woodward

Ode to Stand Firm in Faith

2008-12-20T22:23:00.000-08:00

As a gesture of good will towards the people of Stand Firm in Faith, I have deleted the Ode, itself, while keeping the comments open.

I have, instead, posted a reflection on my time with Stand Firm as my celebration of my 45th anniversary of my ordination to the priesthood.
Tom Woodward

Body and Soul – Audition Script from Scene 1

2008-12-14T09:37:00.001-08:00

Body and Soul – A Play in One Act by Thomas B. Woodward

A cutting from Scene #1 for use as an audition script:

The Play: Body and Soul begins with two gay men. Then, as the conversation between them reaches a critical point, the two take a break -- and when they return to the stage to continue the conversation, one of the male characters has been replaced by an identically dressed woman and the conversation continues, though as a heterosexual dialogue. Again, the dialogue reaches a breaking point and the two take a break (for cell phones) – and when they return to the stage to continue the conversation, the remaining male has been replaced with an identically dressed woman and the conversation is resolved by the two lesbian women. The play is largely comic, though with strong and direct confrontations between the characters.

SETTING – BILL has sat down on a park bench and is beginning to hit on HARRY, a stranger, for some kind of sexual relationship. BILL has just told HARRY that he has been tossed out of his gay relationship because his partner had converted to a fundamentalist Christian group which had convinced him the relationship was evil.

BILL Yeah. So here I am. It's my birthday and I'm out here all alone and nowhere to go.

HARRY That's awful!

BILL I'm sorry, what did you say?

HARRY I said, that's awful. That's really awful.

BILL Oh, thank you.(moving closer to HARRY) You really are nice.

HARRY No, not really.

BILL No, really. You are very, very nice. In fact, I am beginning to feel a really deep connection with you.

HARRY You're feeling a really deep connection with me?

BILL Yes, I think something really important is happening between the two of us.

HARRY You "think there is something. . . ?" Are you hitting on me?

BILL Am I hitting on you? Do you mean spiritually . . .or sexually?

HARRY I don't know which would be worse.

BILL I'm sorry. I really don't want to offend you. But guess what?! It just occurred to me -- this may be our first argument!

HARRY (moving away from BILL) "Our?" "Our first argument?" Are you out of your frigging mind? There is no "our" here.

BILL Oh, damn! I'm sorry. I'm really sorry. I've been under so much stress lately and you are so kind and understanding. And despite all that stuff with Larry, I feel like I've been saving myself for someone. . .(softly)someone exactly like you.

HARRY Wait! Wait! Wait. All this talk about a "really deep connection" with me and saving yourself for "someone exactly like me." Haven't I heard those lines before?

BILL (Evasively) Maybe.

HARRY "Maybe what?" Where have I heard those lines before?

BILL I got them from the Dr. Phil Show.

HARRY You got them from Dr. Phil?

BILL Yeh, Dr. Phil.

HARRY Then why don't you leave me alone and try your shtick on some guy who looks like Dr. Phil?

THE PLAY CONTINUES. . . . .

Body and Soul – Audition Script #2

2008-12-14T08:10:00.001-08:00

BODY AND SOUL - THE PLAY The play begins with two gay men. Then, as the conversation between them reaches a critical point, the two take a break -- and when they return to the stage to continue the conversation, one of the male characters has been replaced by an identically dressed woman and the conversation continues, though as a heterosexual dialogue. Again, the dialogue reaches a breaking point and the two take a break (for cell phones) – and when they return to the stage to continue the conversation, the remaining male has been replaced with an identically dressed woman and the conversation is resolved by the two lesbian women. The play is largely comic, though with strong and direct confrontations between the characters.

A CUTTING FROM SCENE #2
SETTING – BILL, a jerk, has been hitting on HARRIET. For the first time in an extended conversation, she admits she does have some feelings for him.

HARRIET Bill, I don't know why, but I'm. . .I'm also developing feelings for you. (catching herself) Despite everything.

BILL (seductively)
So you are open...to a "spiritual" relationship with me? I'm touched. I'm really touched and I want to be completely open to you. . . and I mean open in every way.

HARRIET
I'm not sure I get this.

BILL
I want to be completely open to you. . . in every way.

HARRIET
Hold on. Let me get this straight. We've just met and you...you want me . . .to allow you . . . to be inside me? You expect me to be involved with you on the most intimate of levels?

BILL
Is that so bad?

HARRIET
Is that so bad? You want to touch my most private parts, to violate my deepest intimacies – and you ask, "Is that so bad?" You don't even know my name!

BILL
Who cares? We're both adults – and we're not getting married are we?

HARRIET
You have no idea about who I am, do you?

BILL
OK. So what do you do?

HARRIET
I'm a city employee.

BILL
Hey! So am I!

HARRIET
I'm on the police force.

BILL
Really? So you're taking a break from handing out all those tickets?

HARRIET
Not really. I'm a vice cop.

BILL
You're kidding.

HARRIET
Yes, I'm kidding.

BILL
Thank God. So what do you do?

HARRIET
I'm a priest – an Episcopal priest.

BILL
Oh, God. I'm sorry.

HARRIET
Sorry? You're sorry for what? Two minutes ago I was some kind of a piece of meat and now I'm some kind of holy person?

BILL
Well . . aren't you?

HARRIET
Honey, we all are. We women are all holy. You screw with me and you're screwing with God.

BILL (after a time of bewilderment)
That's very scary.

HARRIET What's scary?

BILL
I'm scary . . (catching himself). . I mean, I'm scared.

THE PLAY CONTINUES. . . .

Forgiveness – from Matters of Life and Death

2008-12-06T08:04:00.001-08:00

From the play, "Matters of Life and Death," by Thomas B. Woodward.

Susan has come into a tobacco shop out of desperation – to talk with someone acquainted with death. After a good bit of banter with Harry, the shopkeeper, she decides to share her secret with him. Later in the play there is a suggestion that Harry may or may not be God.

Susan whispers her secret in Harry's ear. Harry listens thoughtfully, then looks directly at Susan:

HARRY

You're right. That's bad. In fact, that's really bad; but look, I'll forgive you for $100.

SUSAN

You will forgive me for $100? Are you making fun of me?

HARRY

Am I making fun of you? No, I'm not making fun of you. I said I would forgive you for $100 and I will. And if that is making fun of you, OK. I'll forgive you for $500.

SUSAN

You will forgive me for $500?

HARRY

Do you want to hear me say it again?

SUSAN

O God, No. I just don't understand.

HARRY

It's simple: I've got what you need - and you've got . . .

SUSAN

$500.

HARRY

The amount is not so important.

SUSAN

But you just. . . .

HARRY

I said, "The amount is not important."

SUSAN

Then what is important?

HARRY

That you know it doesn't come easy - that it's worth something.

Long pause while SUSAN makes several attempts to pull something out of her purse.

SUSAN
Here's the $500 . . . but what difference does it make if you forgive me!

HARRY

Well, who else is there?

SUSAN

The people I hurt.

HARRY

Sorry. If they forgive you - that's for them. . . not you. If they forgive you, that allows them to go one with their lives. It really has nothing to do with you.

SUSAN

Can you say that again?

HARRY

Honey, I'm not sure I said anything that smart the first time.

SUSAN

Are you saying that if they forgive me - that lets them go on with their lives? But it doesn't do anything for me?

HARRY

Right.

SUSAN

But that doesn't seem fair.

HARRY

That doesn't seem fair?

SUSAN

No. It's not fair.

HARRY

What's not fair about it?

SUSAN

Well, for one thing, they are forgiving ME . . .but I don't get anything out of it! I'm not part of it!

HARRY

Exactly!

SUSAN

I don't get it.

HARRY

Exactly! You don't get it. They can't give it to you.

SUSAN

So I'm stuck.

HARRY

You're not stuck, you're. . . .No, I take that back. You're stuck. . . But maybe there is something that can loosen that up a bit. . .

The Charge that our PB is Denying the Uniqueness of Christ is Not Unique

2008-11-29T12:11:00.000-08:00

Earlier today I received a comment regarding my piece about what I considered to be a slanderous attack on our Presiding Bishop, The Rt. Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori. The concern of the writer is that our PB has denied the uniqueness of Christ -- I assume by responding to someone challenging her understanding of John 14.6 ("I am the way and the truth. . ."). The comment is well intentioned and generous, but it does have problems.

I believe our Presiding Bishop has been consistently precise in her statements regarding literalist interpretations of John 14.6 which seem to hold that no one who does not have a personal commitment to Jesus Christ as saviour will enter the Kingdom of God.

I don't have her quotes anywhere handy, but I believe that what she has said, more than once, is that we cannot rule out what God may choose to do -- including membership in the Kingdom. Interestingly, her position is also the orthodox position of the Roman Catholic Church! It is, I believe, those who want to impose limits on God's grace and embrace who are the unorthodox.

There is so much to say to this point -- let me say a little:

First, the witness of the Christian Scriptures is that Jesus honors the faith and the holiness of many who would be excluded by this translation of John 14.6. My favorite in this regard is the Syro-Phoenican woman -- there are many others. Likewise, Jesus broadens the notion of the saved in Matthew 25 where the blessed are referred to outside of a faith relationship to God through Jesus. The same seems to be true with most of the Beatitudes in Matthew 5. Now I believe that those who do believe in Jesus Christ have something that others do not -- and that he is the reliable way to the Father -- but Jesus indicates over and over again that his vision of the Kingdom is broader than what the author of John's Gospel attributes to him.

Second, Jesus does talk about "other sheep which are not of this fold."

Third, St. Paul in Romans 9-11 writes that God has designated the Jews as the People of God and that God does not break promises. The Jews continue as the People of God and, writes Paul, through Christ we Gentiles have been grafted into the Jewish Holy History. So, are the "orthodox" in the Episcopal Church and Anglican Communion urging God to break the central promise made to humankind? Isn't that somewhat similar in intent to suborning perjury??

Fourth, there is a clear and consistent theme in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) of Jesus commenting that those who believe themselves to be IN the Kingdom are usually OUT and those who believe themselves to be OUT or excluded from the Kingdom are actually IN. One of those in the latter category was probably Levi, who was called to be an apostle while he was still a tax collector (no, there is no record of his repentance, though one can safely assume that came later).

To explain my fifth concern here I go back to a radio broadcast I hear decades ago. As a teenager and young adult I loved to listen to Garner Ted Armstrong hold forth on what were often strange and bizarre notions of religious faith and practice -- his delivery was so smooth and his tone of voice was so convincing. He was like a religious Ronald Reagan. But on the day in question, he was talking about inclusion and exclusion and the Kingdom of God. He talked about a remote village in Africa where a young mother wanted her mortally sick son baptized so he could be with God through eternity.

The problem was that the jeep carrying the priest from the city to the village had a flat tire -- and no spare in back. It was hours before the flat tire could be fixed -- and by the time the priest had arrived in the village, the child had died. "Are you going to tell me," shouted Garner Ted Armstrong into his microphone, "Are you going to tell me that because of a flat tire that child will be excluded from the Kingdom of God and the fullness of God's love through eternity?"
Do we want to give a flat tire on a jeep on a treacherous dirt road that kind of power?

Once we are here, the other questions come in -- those having to do with those who have lived faithfully in response to whatever of God's truth that has been revealed to them. One thinks not only of the spiritual big shots like Gandhi and Gautoma Buddha, but the men and women living in their wake. What about those we do not reach with the vision of Jesus Christ who might have believed? Should we be gleeful that we believe in a God who consistently slams the door shut on all those millions and millions of people? Perhaps we should all become Mormons so we can provide them with posthumous baptisms! We can join the Mormons in their twenty-first century baptisms of all the Jews Christians murdered in the Holocaust -- believing it is in our province to strip away their dignity as Jews, as the ordained People of God.

It is so much easier to admit that God is God and that if grace, mercy and forgiveness are at the heart of the Being of God then we may not invoke a single -- and I believe an incorrect --interpretation of a Biblical verse as gospel truth. Those of us who are Christians and desperate for certainty and certitude flock easily to the simplistic reading of the majestic words in John 14.6 -- but that desperate need leads not to truth, but to a triumphalism that Jesus rejects over and over again.

Jesus Christ is unique. We call him the Word of God -- that is, he embodies and he is what God wants to say. The problem here is with what is revealed about eternity through the uniqueness of Christ.

It is time for Christians to reject what our Presiding Bishop and hosts of the best of our Biblical scholars have rejected. It is time, simply, to insist that God is God -- just like it says in the Bible.

10 Reasons Why Now Is Not The Time To Realign

2008-10-02T07:10:00.001-07:00

Bishop Jack Iker recently published his Ten Reasons to leave the Episcopal Church. What follows is Bishop Iker's list with responses from John S. Morgan. The quotes are from my four part series, "The Undermining of the Episcopal Church," published by The Episcopal Majority. The series can be found on this blog as well as www.episcopalmajority.blogspot.com.

BISHOP IKER: Our 26th annual convention is approaching, and a momentous decision is before us as a diocese. At last year's convention, your clergy and elected delegates voted by majorities of around 80 percent each to remove language in our Constitution that affiliates us with the General Convention of The Episcopal Church (TEC). This year, clergy and delegates will be asked to ratify that decision to separate.

RESPONDENT: Friends of mine recently returned from The Province Seven Synod meeting. They listened to the goings on of a vibrant, healthy church. They listened to glowing reports of the effectiveness of the small indaba groups that replaced the rancorous and divisive legislative promulgations of previous meetings, returning the Lambeth Conference to the kind of fellowship, prayer, and mutual learning arena for which it was originally intended. No wonder that Bishop Iker, illegally removed Fort Worth from Province Seven. Their role in disputes within dioceses, their view of the larger church, their serving as a springboard to higher office in the church, was yet another type of awareness of the larger church that had to be curtailed.

Have you ever seen in Forward in Mission a description of an interpretation of Scripture that did not support the party line? An advertisement of a visit to the diocese from the president of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church? Have you ever seen any constructive or positive information about the Episcopal Church in Forward in Mission? Do you know that the Episcopal Church mails out an award winning monthly newspaper? That the Episcopal Church provides a service where-by Forward in Mission could be bundled with Episcopal Life and mailed to all communicants of our diocese? Do you know that outreach by the Diocese of Fort Worth is among the lowest of any diocese? Information has always been tightly controlled by the diocese. This is the reason that you may have only a one sided view of your national church. Perhaps this is why you have questions and uncertainties now.

BISHOP IKER: "Why now?" someone might ask. "Why is this the time for our diocese to separate from the General Convention of The Episcopal Church and realign with another Province of the Anglican Communion?" Here are a few of the thoughts that come to mind:1. This is God's time – our kairos moment – and it has been coming for a long time. We believe that God the Holy Spirit has guided and directed us to this particular time and moment of decision. Some might well ask, "Why has it taken us so long to take definitive action, given the past 30 years of the shenanigans of The Episcopal Church?" We have explored every avenue and exhausted every possibility. Now is the time to decide to separate from the moral, spiritual, and numerical decline of TEC.

RESPONDENT: If God the Holy Spirit has guided and directed the diocese to this particular time and moment of decision, where will he lead? Temporarily to the Southern Cone in violation of both the Constitution of the Southern Cone and that of the Episcopal Church? Eventually to pursue the formation of an orthodox, but presently nonexistent, Province in North America as Bishop Iker wishes or to the Roman Catholic Church where four of the senior priests of the diocese want to go, asserting that a critical mass of priests in the diocese are with them?

The Book of Common Prayer (September 1979) says on page 513, Ordination: Bishop: "When the reading of the testimonials is ended, the Presiding Bishop requires the following promise from the Bishop-elect" "In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, I, N.N., chosen Bishop of the Church in N., solemnly declare that I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation; and I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of The Episcopal Church." "The Bishop-elect then signs the above Declaration in the sight of all present. The witnesses add their signatures."

Does a bishop who remains in office yet fails to resign when first he realizes he is unprepared to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of The Episcopal Church represent the kind of moral and spiritual decline mentioned above by Bishop Iker?

BISHOP IKER: 2. Actions of the General Convention have brought crisis and division to the whole Anglican Communion, not just TEC. More than 20 of the Provinces of the Communion have declared themselves to be in a state of broken or impaired communion with TEC because of the ordination of a homosexual bishop living in a sexual relationship with another man and the blessings of same-sex unions in many places throughout this church. We need to dissociate ourselves from the bishops and dioceses that are violating the teaching of Scripture by doing these things.

RESPONDENT: The above sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. This diocese has declared itself to be in a state of broken or impaired communion with numerous Episcopal groups and individuals – with any diocese that ordains women; [inclusive partners in the Anglican Communion Network] with anyone who has ordained a woman; with anyone who participated in the Ordination of Gene Robinson.

Father Woodward says, "This is not all about sex and human sexuality. It is about our understanding of the sacramental nature of all of life. When that kind of understanding and faith gets squeezed into codes and rules, it is no longer faith. St. Paul, at his best, noted that we are to work out our salvation by fear [respect] and trembling; he sensed the complexity and the richness of our faith. He knew, as our church has known, that our faith is rooted in a living relationship with an ever-present God, not in a rule-book or set of codes."

BISHOP IKER: 3. The heresies and heterodoxy once proclaimed by just a few renegade bishops – like James Pike and John Spong – are now echoed by the Presiding Bishop, who is the chief spokesperson for TEC and speaks on behalf of our church to the rest of the world. She does not reflect the orthodox beliefs of Episcopalians in this diocese. The greatest problem we face with Katharine Jefferts Schori is not that she is a woman, but that she is not an orthodox bishop.

RESPONDENT: Neither Bishop Spong nor James Pike represents the center of the Episcopal Church, nor does their teaching represent a replacement for the Catechism of the Episcopal Church.

Father Barber says, "The Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, has taken a lot of grief over a brief answer she gave in a Time interview.

When asked if belief in Jesus is the only way to get to heaven, she responded, 'We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.' ++Katharine gave that answer in July of 2006, and it has been a favorite quote of the conservatives in our church who say that we cannot stay in a church where the chief pastor has such thoughts.

Personally, I would be astounded if the past several presiding bishops did not agree with her thinking. And let me go further, I believe that most priests and most lay people in the Episcopal Church would also agree with her. And, you would find a good number of Christian, orthodox theologians who would find her statement acceptable."

Archbishop Venables of the Southern Cone, when he was speaking in our diocese, made a statement regarding people's religion, that, at the death of a person when he doesn't know about that person's religious convictions, he leaves it "up to God" to determine what happens to that person's soul. That sounds similar to what Katharine said, that it is God who decides. Does not even Archbishop Venables reflect the orthodox beliefs of Episcopalians in this diocese?

BISHOP IKER: 4. If we do not act now, we will lose our momentum and lose our God-given opportunity. Many laity and clergy who have been standing with the Diocese, as a beacon of hope, will give up and leave for other Anglican bodies. We will never be stronger than we are right now! We will never have another chance to act with such a strong majority. The Episcopal Church many of us were born into or became members of many years ago no longer exists! It has been replaced by a liberal, revisionist sect that does not deserve our allegiance or support any longer.

RESPONDENT: Father Tom Woodward says, "As Episcopalians, we are part of a wonderful whole, with a full spectrum of witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ." "We have liberals, moderates and conservatives and everything in between, all celebrating a common faith. May we never be reduced to commonality – for the same reason I would never go to a circus which had only thirty-five elephant acts. I want the trapeze artists, the clowns, the jugglers and lion tamers. We have them all in the episcopate and in our congregations."

"Beware, when church leaders want to claim the whole of church for themselves, whether of the right, left or middle. Beware, especially, when those who believe they, alone, are the orthodox begin talking about the real orthodoxy as 'the faith first handed down to the saints.' Up until thirty five years ago, 'the faith first handed down to the saints' meant no women on vestries, no women allowed in church without a hat or head covering, no remarriage after divorce no matter what the circumstances, separate churches for Black people, no use of birth control measures, and a thoroughgoing marginalization of gay and lesbian people and others."

"That quasi-fundamentalist approach to Scripture, so often found in the 'orthodox' rants is one, but only one of many strains of Anglican approaches to Scripture – and a recent strain at that. Many in The Episcopal Church believe that approach does not honor Holy Scripture, tending to take a dynamic revelation and reducing it to a dictated document, tied to an ancient culture."

"Change and reassessment of our understanding of Scriptures and our tradition has not been an enemy of the Christian Church over the past several decades. Our task as the Church of Jesus Christ is to hold onto the core of the Gospel handed down to us by the faithful of previous generations, while letting go of the parts of that tradition which contravene and contradict Jesus' commandment of Love." "All anyone has to do is to visit our seminaries, listen to the preaching and teaching of our clergy, read through the Catechism at the back of the Book of Common Prayer and the liturgies of the Prayer Book. It all hangs together, even though it is not lock-step uniform."

BISHOP IKER: 5. TEC is not turning back and matters will only get worse. General Convention is out of control and beyond reform. The Deputies seem to think that they can do whatever they want as long as they can muster a majority vote, even if what they propose is contrary to Holy Scripture. We will not accept majority votes of the General Convention that compromise the Christian ?faith. The more they change the teachings of the church, the less tolerant they are of dioceses such as ours. By the time I retire (in the next 7 to 13 years), this diocese will be unable to elect an orthodox bishop to succeed me.

RESPONDENT: When the Bishop says, "this diocese will be unable to elect an orthodox bishop to succeed me," he is talking about the cart that drives the horse. The realignment is all about Bishop Iker's fear that standing committee consents from other dioceses will not be granted to a bishop, compatible with his views on women's ordination, who would succeed him.

The General Convention is composed of a House of Deputies AND a House of Bishops. The House of Deputies is divided into two groups: The priests and the laity.

Before ratification of any resolution, it is required that it passes BOTH houses – bishops and deputies. Many resolutions require the assent of all three groups before adoption, the bishops, the priests and laity. Bishop Iker seems to think that the bishops, the priests and laity, sent by every diocese to represent the entire Episcopal Church can do whatever they want… even if what they propose is contrary to Holy Scripture.

Although the bishop says he will not accept majority votes of the General Convention that compromise the Christian faith, what he really means is that he knows more than all of the other bishops and other priests and laity who were called upon by all of the dioceses to represent the Episcopal Church.

What he really means is that he will not accept majority votes of the General Convention that compromise his interpretation of what might constitute the Christian faith.

BISHOP IKER: 6. TEC is coming after us, and they are the ones that brought on this crisis. In October 2006 the chancellor to the PB wrote a letter to our diocese demanding that we change our Constitution to remove the clause that says that we will not accept General Convention dictates that are contrary to the Bible and the apostolic teaching of the church. In addition, we were instructed to remove provisions stating that all church property in this diocese is held in trust for the use of our congregations and to state instead that our property ultimately belongs to TEC. If we don't make such changes, the letter asserted that the Presiding Bishop would have to determine what actions she must take "in order to bring your diocese into compliance."

RESPONDENT: Bishop Iker is the one that brought on the crisis. As a requirement for being constituted as a diocese, agreement was given in written form that the diocese would give unqualified support to the canons of the Episcopal Church. Such an agreement is required of all dioceses.

The Constitution of The Diocese at its inception read:

The Church in this Diocese accedes to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, and recognizes the authority of the General Convention.

In November of 1997 it was revised to read:

The Church in this Diocese accedes to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, and recognizes the authority of the General Convention of said Church provided that no action of General Convention which is contrary to Holy Scripture and the Apostolic Teaching of the Church shall be of any force or effect in this Diocese.

The bishop says In October 2006 the chancellor to the PB wrote a letter to our diocese demanding that we change our Constitution to remove the clause. The diocese was told to remove the clause which puts it in conflict with the national canons.

BISHOP IKER: 7. At this time there is nothing in the Constitution or Canons of TEC that prevents a Diocese from leaving. Oh, I know that General Convention officials claim that dioceses cannot leave TEC, but you will not find that anywhere in the Constitution and Canons as they presently stand. So we have this window of opportunity to do what we need to do, for you can be sure that the next General Convention will close off this option by adopting amendments that will make it even more difficult to separate in the future.

RESPONDENT: The constitution in 1789 and the canons adopted in the second session have this provision:

Constitution: Article 2

". . . If the Convention of any state should neglect or decline to appoint clerical deputies, or if they should decline or neglect to appoint lay deputies, or if any of those of either order appointed should neglect to attend, or be prevented by sickness or any other accident, such state shall nevertheless be considered as duly represented by such deputy or deputies as may attend, whether lay or clerical. And if through the neglect of the Convention of any of the churches which shall have adopted, or may hereafter adopt this constitution, no deputies, either lay or clerical, should attend at any general convention, the church in such state, shall nevertheless be bound by the acts of such convention."

BISHOP IKER: 8. The vast majority of our younger clergy, those ordained in the last 10 years or so, are in favor of the decision to separate and realign. They are the voice of the future of this diocese; they are the leaders who will take us into the next decade and beyond. You will notice that most of the clergy leaders opposing this move are already retired or on the verge of retiring. This is not their battle; they have had their time to lead. Now it is time to let this next generation step forward and lead, as we prepare a future for our children and our grandchildren.

RESPONDENT: But, young or older and more experienced, just where will the Diocese be going? The Bishop says temporarily to the Southern Cone and then later to a new North American Province.

But the Reverend Canon Charles A. Hough, III [Canon to Bishop Iker for 15 years], The Very Reverend William A. Crary, Jr., The Reverend Louis L. Tobola, Jr., and The Very Reverend Christopher C. Stainbrook don't want to end up in the Southern Cone and they do not want to end up in the Anglican Communion

These priests said in their very recent secret communication with the Roman Catholic Bishop Vann of Fort Worth:

We believe the Anglican Communion shares the fatal flaws of The Episcopal Church" · "…it is apparent that the Archbishop of Canterbury is incapable of providing decisive leadership." · "…we have concluded that the difficulties we have faced in The Episcopal Church for the past thirty years will not be remedied by the Anglican Communion."

Where do they want to go?

"Our best guess is that approximately 59 clergy are willing to pursue an active plan to bring the Diocese of Fort Worth or a significant portion of it into full communion with the Holy See, if this be God's will."

How do they think the laity will react?

"We also recognize that it will take time to bring the laity on board with this proposal. While the clergy have come to recognize the truth which it held by the Holy See, we have much work to do with the laity."

Anyone can join the Roman Catholic Church. So you want to realign; you better read the fine print. There isn't much room for lay decision with this group.

BISHOP IKER: 9. We have international support for making the move at this time. Not only has the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone made provision for us to join them on a temporary basis as full members and partners in mission, but several Global South Primates are standing with us and have expressed their willingness to support us in this bold move. They have stuck their necks out for us and offered their encouragement, assistance and support. We must now have the courage of our convictions and act! What a joy and relief it will be to be part of a Province where we are not always under attack and on the defensive. We will then aggressively pursue the formation of an orthodox Province in North America in conjunction with the Common Cause Partnership.

RESPONDENT: You can find the Constitution of the Southern Cone at: www.fwepiscopal.org/downloads/PSCconstitution&canons.pdf

2. MEMBERSHIP

The Anglican Church of the Southern Cone….is composed of the Anglican Dioceses that exist or which may be formed in the Republics of Argentinia, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay…"

4 AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

For any changes or amendment to this Constitution, the following procedure is to be used:

4.3 The proposed change shall be submitted to the Anglican Consultative Council for consideration and then to each Diocesan Synod for approval.

No such proposed change will be sent to The Anglican Consultative Council. The Anglican Communion is VERY territorial. Nor does the Episcopal Church permit a diocese to withdraw from the Episcopal Church without consent from the General Convention.

We don't know if the ABC will recognize a non-geographic province in North America.

BISHOP IKER: 10. Most importantly, this decision is about the truth of the Gospel and upholding the authority of the Holy Scriptures. We believe in God's full self-revelation in Jesus Christ, not in the speculation of humanist Unitarians who have been elected to high offices in our church. Many leaders of TEC are teaching a false Gospel and leading people astray. Now is the time for us to take a bold, public stand for the biblical faith and practice of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.

RESPONDENT: Holy Communion service is celebrated throughout the Episcopal Church much as it is in Fort Worth. The same creeds are recited and similar Biblical gospels and Epistles are read.

Most of the Bishops, priests, and laity who have been elected to high offices in the Episcopal Church would take offense to being described as "humanist Unitarians" and Bishop Iker has no intention of welcoming any of them to visit this diocese so you can see for yourself.

Father Woodward says, "…all the while accusations have been hurled at us, the Episcopal Church has continued to reverence Holy Scripture, to teach the Christian faith in its fullness, to celebrate the sacraments handed down through the ages, to represent the moral and spiritual vision and life of Jesus Christ in the world we live in, and to embrace the entire creation as the focus for our mission and ministry. What occurs in our congregations and in our dioceses is what has happened decade after decade, generation after generation and century after century. How awful that our faith and life as Episcopalians is now being characterized as "pagan" by a movement that reflects the very worst of Biblical fundamentalism, Puritan moralism, and a recent wave that distrusts ambiguity, doubt, mystery, and the presence of the Holy in human experience."

"In the End, It is the Trashing of the Incarnation"

"We are being victimized by a sophisticated kind of "bait and switch" in which codes and rule books are being substituted for a faith based on the Incarnation. The attack is upon our understanding of life as sacramental."

BISHOP IKER: Now is the time to decide. Our cause is right, and the choice is clear. Let us act together, decisively, and with courage, faith and charity.

The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth
September 2008

Respondent: John S. Morgan

David Virtue, With Another Stupid Attack

2008-09-27T08:45:00.001-07:00

In one of the silliest and most moronic attacks on our Presiding Bishop, David Virtue has graced us with a sophomoric attack by the "orthodox" rector of St. John's Church in Savannah, Georgia, Fr. Dunbar. The title of the article is "Orthodox Episcopal Priest Goes Head to Head with Presiding Bishop over Biblical Interpretation."

At issue was our Presiding Bishop's meeting with the clergy of that diocese when she asked the clergy to meditate on Mark 1:11, "You are my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased," the words spoken by "a voice from heaven" to Jesus at his baptism in Jordan. She has used this approach during most of her visits with diocesan clergy around the church, asking the clergy to hear those words spoken to them.

I was present when ++Katharine Jefferts Schori used the same Scripture when speaking to the clergy of the Diocese of the Rio Grande. Individual responses to the meditations seemed to be along theological party lines. The conservatives were not able to hear the words of affirmation or blessing without qualifications. What they seemed to want was a qualified statement from God, e.g., "You are my beloved if you believe that John 14.6 means what the Network bishops say it means." On the other hand, the progressives were touched by the power of the words for themselves and for all those in the room – and many noted that the meditation helped them in affirming those in the room with whom they disagreed. The conservatives seemed to be left with "yes, but. . ."

Fr. Dunbar, along with those who commented on Virtue's article, were incensed that words which, in Mark, were addressed to Jesus would be taken to apply to anyone else. I would ask Fr. Dunbar, David Virtue and their cohort to re-read Matthew 5. When Jesus looks out at the crowd and says "You are the light of the world," he is not saying "I am the light of the world" or "If you believe x, y and z you may be the light of the world." He says to the crowd "You are the Light of the World."

What Jesus is saying to us in Matthew 5 is so very close to "You are my beloved. . . ." It echoes, as well, the blessings pronounced at the beginning of Matthew 5, the Beatitudes. If there are Bible classes nearby, I would urge the Dunbar-Virtue crowd to join one of them to study this crucial part of the Gospels. This is where Jesus is unequivocal about those who are Blessed – and there are no creedal statements required, no right wing litmus tests to pass. That is probably why Matthew is referred to as "Gospel."

Shame on these continuing attacks on ++Katharine Jefferts Schori. Time after time they reveal the theological and Biblical bankruptcy of the right wing of the Episcopal Church. It really does take a theological moron to take a meditation which reflects Jesus' own statements and turn it into an attack on the one leading the meditation.

David Virtue Gets It Wrong – Way Wrong!

2008-08-24T19:59:00.001-07:00

David Virtue wrote a series of observations/rants about what horrifies him about the Episcopal Church (can you imagine making what horrifies you about the Episcopal Church your life's work?). I noted that his reference to "Mrs. Schori" was a slight beneath the dignity of anyone in any church. In response to his hand wringing about all the money being spent on the lawsuits over property, I noted that the Episcopal Church is bound to protect its ownership of its property and, as countless others have seen, if those leaving the Episcopal Church would be civil and decent enough not to take property that does not belong to them there would not be the occasion for lawsuits.

I noted as well that there is no ownership of church property by those who make charitable gifts to the church, either through pledged support or capital gifts. If David Virtue had supported the church financially at any time over the past two decades he would have known that, as Church Treasurers have to note in their parish giving statements that nothing of value, other than spiritual value, was provided in exchange for the contribution to the church. Thus, if you claim a tax deduction for your pledges or capital gifts and then claim the property belongs, in part, to you – you can count on receiving free meals at a Federal facility or paying a large fine and penalty for violation of Federal law.

One of the first to respond was Cennydd, from Los Banos, California in the breakaway group John David Schofield engineered out of the Episcopal Church:

Re: Virtue Article - Orthodox Parishes Win In VA -- Schori Will Attempt to Depose Bp. Duncan.

TBWSalinas, David isn't the only one to refer to your "Presiding Bishop" as "Mrs Schori." And we are perfectly within our rights in doing so, since we do not believe that she is a validly-ordained member of the clergy. Yes, The Episcopal Church claims that she is, since your Church ordains women. This diocese does not, a fact of which I am sure you are well aware.

The lawsuits you mentioned....every single one of them....were brought against faithful orthodox Anglican Christians who want nothing more than to remain in the spiritual homes which they paid for and have maintained, where they were married, where their children and grandchildren were baptized, confirmed, and married, and yes, even buried from. The Episcopal Church filed those lawsuits; no one else did, and you know it!

In most cases, the dioceses and the Church have not contributed a dime to the purchase and upkeep of these properties; the people themselves having contributed gladly and with no thought that they would ever be sued in court simply for wanting to remain in their church properties....again for which they paid.

You will no doubt say that "faithful Episcopalians" also want to remain in their church homes, and you'd be right. I was once a faithful Episcopalian, and I never dreamed that I would one day leave the parish in which I had spent so many years of my adult life.

But when the Church I once loved decided to begin ordaining women to the priesthood and to do nothing to discipline +John Spong and +James Pike for their heresies (Pike got his hand slapped and was told to not do it again), and when they consecrated your present leader as Presiding Bishop....a woman who openly stated the "there is more than one way to God than through Jesus," when Jesus Himself said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He who hath seen Me hath seen the Father,"I knew that I had to make a decision. You know by my avatar what decision I made.

Yes, the lawsuits can stop, and they should! It has been said that Christians don't sue Christians. Certainly, Christian churches don't, but The Episcopal Church has chosen to ignore that message, and have diminished themselves in the eyes of the rest of Christendom. It is a proven fact! The issues of ordaining known non-celibate homosexual persons and of same-sex "marriage" are merely "presenting issues." The real issue is one of remaining faithful to 2000 years of teachings of the Church through Holy Scripture.

The Episcopal Church was once a great and highly-respected part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Sadly, by its own actions, it is no longer.
Cennydd
MY RESPONSE:

I hope the IRS does not see your response, Cennydd. They believe that when you donate money to the church, you give up control over it -- otherwise no tax deduction. When the dissidents assert, as you seem to, that you have bought and paid for the parish churches you are stealing from TEC you are violating federal law and every principle of Christian Stewardship.

Please don't try to fool me into believing that you believe all of "2000 years of teaching of the church. . ." If you read early church history you are aware that there were many theologies and ethics for a long time -- and little of early Christian ethics and understanding of the church's place in culture survived very long -- but then you may be in favor of the subjugation of women, the institution of slavery and approval of polygamy -- and what about women having their heads covered in church, etc., etc..

Isn't it odd that the women who were the only followers of Jesus who remained faithful through his crucifixion, who were the first witnesses to the Resurrection and leaders in the early church are branded by you and some others as unfit or unqualified for priestly or episcopal ministry in the church of Jesus Christ. So much for Jesus' witness regarding the place of women in his living and dying.

Cennydd, I believe your vision of the mission and identity of the church lacks the compassion, generosity, vision and witness of Jesus Christ. And those who agree with your understanding of John 14.6 are a marginal group, with few Biblical scholars to back them up. Jesus seems to disagree with you. Paul, even in Romans, disagrees with you. The Roman Catholic Church disagrees with you. You have made what you see as correct belief a substitute for faith -- and in the process have turned faith into a work, losing any sense of Grace. What you have is salvation by works -- that has been declared a heresy over and over again.

I wish you well in your brand of Christianity. I wish for you the joy and peace that is the Christian Gospel -- but to gain that you are going to have to let go of Christianity as a Country Club for the guys -- and straight guys only, at that.

Thomas B. Woodward

A Communion Sidetracked by a Morality of Works

2008-08-05T22:08:00.001-07:00

In the church as in life, how easily we get sidetracked. Nowhere is that more evident than with our current struggles within the Episcopal Church and Anglican Communion.

It seems clear to me that a good part of our problem throughout the church stems from treating Christianity as a moral code. People in all parts of our church are struggling with different moral codes -- and identifying them with the Christian gospel. This was a major error of the Eames Commission, reflecting the notion that Christianity is a set of rules and regulations to which one gives assent rather than a response in faith to the revelation in Jesus Christ. This error then led to an enormous amount of mischief and grief.

The Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Church is not alone with this misconception. Here is a brief excerpt from Jacques Ellul's book The Subversion of Christianity: "When I say that the revelation of God in Jesus Christ is against morality, I am not trying to say that it replaces one form of morality with another. . . Revelation is an attack on all morality, as is wonderfully shown by the parables of the kingdom of heaven, that of the prodigal son, that of the talents, that of the eleventh-hour laborers, that of the unfaithful steward, and many others. In all the parables the person who serves as an example has not lived a moral life. The one who is rejected is the one who has lived a moral life. Naturally this does not mean that we are counseled to become robbers, murderers, adulterers, etc. On the contrary, the behavior to which we are summoned surpasses morality, all morality, which is shown to be an obstacle to encounter with God." p. 71

What we now have before us is a morality of works, a litmus test replacing the grace and love of God. However, the parables of Jesus are subversive -- often as with the parables of the Leaven, Mustard Seed and Prodigal Son they subvert the authority of the purity code. They also subvert the kinds of divisions in this church around human sexuality. We are not talking about Paul's distinctions between sarx (flesh) and the Spirit. We are falsely labeling some spiritual relationships as though they were sarx (the way of identifying ourselves with the world), thus undercutting the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

While we humans seem to have a penchant for the security of rules and proscriptions, Jesus refused to give into that penchant. Instead he spoke of human qualities in the Beatitudes (Matthew 5), as Paul did of the marks of the Holy Spirit in Galatians 5. In what we have in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus speaks in hyperbole and metaphor, but not with rules and regulations.

As Christians, we are not governed by rules and proscriptions. We are governed by a Vision and a Life lived and given. As Paul notes, we work out the details in fear and trembling, but always in the context of trust and acceptance. That is the opposite of deciding the future of our Communion on the basis of a morality rooted elsewhere than in that Life. Living morally as a Christian is full of doubt and discernment and struggle --and absolutist versions of Christian morality detract from that vocation and eventually subvert and destroy it.

Put simply: our moralities are responses to the revelation of God through Jesus Christ, but they are not that revelation.

We have become so enthralled with the argumentative possibilities in defending our favorite morality or in attacking others' that in arguing about morality we really have come to believe that we are dealing with revelation and the content of our faith (relationship) in God. Not so.

Response to Fort Worth Canon Theologian’s Attack

2008-07-14T15:39:00.001-07:00

Following my talks to the Via Media and Remain Episcopal groups in the Diocese of Fort Worth, the Canon Theologian wrote what I believe is a scurrilous and intentionally misleading attack on me and on the essays I wrote for The Episcopal Majority entitled "The Undermining of the Episcopal Church" (found elsewhere on this blog). This response is meant, initially, for members of the HoBD list serve as I promised one member of that group a copy of this response. I am not of a mind to republish Fr. Heidt's attack - you can find that on-line.

Dear Canon Heidt,
I welcome fair criticism of my work, but I must object to your mischaracterizations, misunderstandings and distortions of what I wrote in "The Undermining of the Episcopal Church."

That pamphlet was written for The Episcopal Majority, an organization formed not to declare "open warfare," as you state, but to counter the misrepresentations of traditional Anglicans perpetrated by those who claim to be "orthodox." I certainly have no wish to fight my "enemies to the death." All I want is for there to be honest dialogue with respect for the truth. If you knew anything at all about me you would know that I have a long and distinguished career built on building bridges within the church and between the Episcopal Church and those outside it.

Again, had you read Undermining with any care you would recognize me as fully Trinitarian, with no tolerance for what you charge me with – confusing or identifying the church's Trinitarian God with "the nature of all life."

No place do I or my cohorts assume "the world is in some sense divine," as you charge (reflective of your irresponsible and wrong comments about pagan origins). Likewise, I do not know where you find license to drag the red herring of "the spirit of the times" or the church as "subservient to the culture in which it finds itself," unless you are referring to your own theological underpinnings – they certainly are not mine and are not reflected in my work.

Again, nowhere do I state or assume that "all life is sacramental," in anything like the simplistic way you characterize that notion. Here, as elsewhere, you make broad generalities take the place of responsible citations or quotes of a work you are attacking. While your belief that the sacramental action and presence of God seems to be limited to the church's official sacraments, you must be aware that your limitations are not reflected in traditional Anglicanism or classical Christianity which holds that there are at least these seven sacraments. I do not understand your statement that "God alone makes the sacrament of unction along with the other sacraments."

Your notion that God comes into the world from outside and beyond this world is wildly heretical on several counts, among which is your making God an object as well as separating God from the Creation. Better not to use that notion in countering me or anyone else – just as with your earlier criticism of me for holding the Johannine doctrine of the love of God.

In (2) you note correctly that I report that the church has been constantly changing its beliefs and practices through history. That is not rocket science. We did not start out believing in a Trinitarian God. Our understanding of marriage has changed radically over the centuries. The same is true of our moral codes regarding procreation, slavery, the dignity and equality of women, and on and on and on. However, I never said we must not look to the past – why would you impute that to me? Why the misleading information?

You have not given any indication of my objections to the reintroduction of the 1662 Prayer Book as normative for our theology – or the context for those remarks. They are pretty important. Instead, you wave another generalization that has no relationship to what I argued. Do you, in fact, disagree with my analysis of the dangers of using 1662 as normative? That would be a discussion worth having.

Again, you have grossly mischaracterized my remarks about the current use of John 14:6 as a litmus test. I believe you will find that most Biblical scholars of the 20^th and 21^st century mirror my analysis. Even Roman Catholic doctrine contradicts the stand of those who now claim to be the "orthodox."

I do poke fun at those who parade around the notion of "the faith once delivered to the saints." The term, when first used, refers, of course, to the Hebrew Scriptures, not to authors of the New Testament. I stand by my clear exposition that those who use the phrase use it not to proclaim early doctrine, but their own peculiar (often very peculiar) notion of a Christianity as they would like it to be. Quite contrary to your statement that I fail to realize the diversity of faith within the whole, I quoted with great approval the work of David Rhodes to that effect.

When you charge me with being fast and loose with the facts, you do not quote me. You do charge me with saying that St. Paul is not part of our Bible – that is completely untrue. It is a scurrilous misrepresentation or lie. I nowhere say that St. John is irrelevant. That is another lie. When I say that "so-called conservatives" are throwing away centuries of biblical scholarship, I give specifics. You choose not to address those specifics: that is sloppy and irresponsible scholarship. I wrote you an email about the facts of the matter regarding property. That was made clear in Undermining – and the courts have consistently held that to be true – and that is very clear in the State of Texas, which is a deference State.

In (4) you throw around a lot of words and phrases that are not linked to anything I wrote or believe. You completely misrepresent my Prayer Book understanding of the ordained orders of the church and of Baptism. Why do you do that? What I wrote about the authority of the laity in the Episcopal Church is straight Prayer Book and Constitution and Canons. If you want to attack them, do so – but don't attack and misrepresent me for following them.

Do check out the ordination and consecration vows in the Prayer Book. It does specify obedience within the Episcopal Church. Period. Why would you think differently? I do chastise foreign bishops for invading our own church in the United States. That practice was first outlawed at the Council of Nicea – and has never been changed or altered. Check it out. The history and practice of the Episcopal Church in Europe is very clear. That is all above board and in compliance with Nicea and the rules and regulations of other groups where we are located.

I have no interest in casting out anyone, as I note clearly in Undermining. I have a great interest in combating misinformation and the practice of demonizing, which I find present in your article. I am happy, though, to kneel at the altar next to you.

Contrary to your claim, St. Paul clearly speaks his mind that people who have sex with members of their own gender shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Do you know something about Michelangelo and Sir John Gielgud that others don't? Under Paul's teaching, they and the millions upon millions of gay and lesbian people who have loved Jesus Christ and have served Him sacrificially have no place in heaven – no matter what Jesus said.

I pray that you will apologize publicly for your misunderstandings and misrepresentations – as well as for your libelous characterization of me as Unitarian and "new religionist." Throughout (5) you again throw out a bunch of accusations with nothing to support them – because there is nothing to support them. They are wrong. I believe your own descriptions of God are wrong – and wrong by all standards of traditional and classical Christian theology and philosophy.

I am grateful that you have, finally, in (6), actually referred to something that I did write. I have not lumped scripture, tradition and reason all together. Check it out. They exist in a dynamic relationship, as Hooker noted and established for Anglicanism. Your characterizations of my understanding of the Bible and the authority of the Bible all come from your own mind and musings. They are deliberate distortions of what I wrote in Undermining and what I clearly believe.

I was very clear about Christian morality. You have chosen to ignore that for another scurrilous attack built against a figment of your imagination.

In conclusion, I am very disappointed in what you have written. I am angry about your lies and misrepresentations. I am offended that such sloppy work has been disseminated in the church, especially under the title of "Canon Theologian." I believe what you have done is a poor job of Swift Boating me. I would be happy to engage with you in honest discussion or dialogue about any of the issues raised in Undermining. As for now, I remain convinced that it is those who claim the loudest to be "orthodox" who are undermining classical and traditional Christianity.

Tom Woodward

Response to Fr. Wooten’s Attack

2008-07-14T15:35:00.001-07:00

Following my talks to the Via Media and Remain Episcopal groups in the Diocese of Fort Worth, Fr. Steve Wooten, a priest in that diocese, published a two part series attacking me and the essays I wrote for The Episcopal Majority entitled "The Undermining of the Episcopal Church" which can be found elsewhere on this blog. As promised to the HoBD list, I am posting my response to Fr. Wooten here:

Dear Fr. Wooten,

I have listened to the first of your two responses to the essays I wrote for The Episcopal Majority and have several concerns, especially as your responses have been widely circulated. I wish you had been able to attend my talk in Wichita Falls – had I more notice about that part of my schedule I would have invited you personally, as I had invited Christopher Cantrell and Dean Ryan Reed to my talk in Fort Worth.

I am not going to engage with you in debate here: however I feel it necessary to clarify some misinformation, mischaracterization and unnecessary confusion.

First, I did not come to Fort Worth from the national church. No one at the national church was consulted about my visit. I came by invitation from individuals who expressed the hope that another point of view could be articulated respectfully within the diocese. I asked Bishop Iker for an appointment before my talks to ask him if he had any concerns about my speaking in his diocese. He was very gracious in meeting with me and he told me of his concerns – which I share. It is my hope and prayer that I honored his concerns and that I mirrored my respect for him to those who attended the talks, including several of your parishioners.

You have my biographical history all wrong. You could have checked it on line at the Church Pension Fund site or in any Clerical Directory. I am a Harvard graduate, cum laude in philosophy, and was graduated from The General Theological Seminary. I have taught at the seminaries in Berkeley, California as well as at Nashotah House. Seabury Press has published two books I've written – one on theology and the other on an intergenerational approach to Christian Education. My work on the Parables of Jesus was published recently in the Sewanee Theological Review and has been under review by Fortress Press.

Your characterization of my work in the Diocese of the Rio Grande was completely wrong and foolish as well. After a disasterous Diocesan Convocation in which Network clergy and laity hurled nasty and scurrilous epithets at moderate and liberal members of the Convocation, Bishop Steenson assembled a group of leaders in the diocese to serve as a Task Force on Communion. They were to help guide the diocese towards a more loving and respectful community and Convocation. The level of venom in the original Task Force was so high that all the liberal members resigned, leaving only one moderate. Bishop Steenson, knowing of my reconciling work in the Diocese of El Camino Real, asked if I would serve on the Task Force. Being a tough old buzzard I agreed to serve. Despite being asked to resign three times by the chair of the Task Force for raising uncomfortable issues and concerns, I ended my service with profuse gratitude from Bishop Steenson and the diocese.

My stance has never been as you characterize it, "if you don't agree, get out." No one has worked harder in this very conservative diocese to hold people and congregations together, except for Bishop Steenson. I have spent over forty years working to build bridges within the Episcopal Church – and many of my closest friends in the church are among the most conservative. Check your General Convention materials: the Network endorsed my candidacy for Trustee of the Church Pension Fund at the last General Convention because their leadership knows me and trusts me, even as we disagree.

I believe there is room in the Episcopal Church for the full range of people in the Network. What I objected to in my booklet is the defamatory language often used by leaders of the Network which is present all the way through the DVD, "Choose This Day." I object in the strongest terms to the use of the slanderous and ugly language that I noted in my booklet. We may have deep disagreements about many things, but neither of us is "non- Christian" or "pagan." That kind of language has no place in your mouth or mine.

I object to your characterization of my understanding of the authority of Scripture and of the nature of revelation. You misquoted me in your talk as you have repeatedly done in your comments on Fr. Cantrell's blog. I believe your view of revelation as a sophisticated kind of divine dictation has not been honored in the history of Anglicanism, though it has its followers among Biblical literalists. My understanding of revelation as a response to the mighty acts of God in Hebrew Scripture and as the response to the life, ministry, teaching, incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ has been pretty standard for centuries. To characterize my understanding as that of God speaking to me through the beauty of a forest has got to be a deliberate and mean-spirited misunderstanding.

The tensions among Scripture, Tradition and Reason are far deeper than your fairly peculiar notion of Scriptura sola. I don't know of a single responsible Biblical scholar or historian who would would say, in your words, "Scripture trumps all." The Scriptural norm of polygamy, which I object to in the strongest terms, does not trump anything. Let us pray that it never will – and that is one of hundreds of examples. It was, as you know, the church which decided the Canon and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit which helps us to understand it.

I object in the strongest of terms to your use of various red herrings to defame the Episcopal Church. The Buddhist, Hindu and Wicca examples you used have all involved depositions or inhibitions by resident bishops. They represent an unacceptable expression of the church – we both know that. Your using them in the way you did would be the equivalent of my referring to the havoc wreaked by Don Armstrong as typical of people in the Network (Don has been a friend of mine, but I find his financial misbehavior terrible).

Your mischaracterization of my concerns about puritanism was unfortunate. Your statement that I and others have no regard for rules is laughable. My life in the Episcopal Church is full of upholding rules – and holding our church and others acccountable to Scriptural norms. Take a look at my piece on "Forty Years of Ordination" at http://turningthingsupsidedown.blogspot.com.

We do have much to talk about regarding the neo-Puritanism that I believe marks too much of the new "orthodoxy." My concern is that the rules and objectification in your rule dominated ethics and morality have undermined our traditional Anglican understanding of the sacramental nature of life, and thus of our understanding of Trinitarian faith. It is a serious argument and ignored at your peril. Your mischaracterization continued in your calling me a "Christian anarchist." The quotes about God as Love comes, of course, not from Augustine but from I John I. To characterize my discussion of Divine Love as having to do with an old geezer having sex with a 13 year old girl is way, way beneath you. I was happy to hear a parishioner cautioning you that you were confusing agape and eros.

You noted that "If God does not have codes and rules, why did Jesus have to die?" I believe if you look more closely at the Synoptics that you will find that it was largely Jesus' attack on the purity code and its grip on the People of God that led to his crucifixion – not his reiteration of the Ten Commandments. We had plenty of rules and regulations long before the Incarnation: what was lacking was Paul's notion of Grace and Law and Jesus' transformation of the Law into a new ethic. By the way, I do not know a liberal theologian or ethicist anywhere who says anything like what you tag me with, "Don't worry about anything, Grace will cover you." I read Bonheffer: where did you find that???

Again, your statement that I am advocating that the Holy is "found in human experience: just try everything once and you will find God" is gross distortion and has nothing at all to do with what I wrote or what I believe. I am pretty strictly Pauline on the matter of the revelation of the holy in human experience. Your literalism is what is bizarre.

When you begin talking about my discussion of Bedrock, you seem to align me with those advocating gay marriage. Please be careful: you are wrong. You accuse me of "throwing out tradition and discarding the Book of Common Prayer:" again, you are wrong! It would have been helpful for your parishioners to have heard about the traditions I did mention, such as the subjugation of women embedded in our prayer books for centuries.

You told your parishioners I called you a charlatan for accepting your paycheck. Wrong. I wrote of the conflict between being paid by an institution one is working actively to undermine or replace – and how similar that is to a husband who reaps the benefits of being married while plotting with a woman he is having an affair with about getting out of his marriage. I think the moral standard is that one works to preserve the marriage – and when that is impossible, then one leaves the marriage. Period. Bishop Steenson realized he had a deeper conflict with the Episcopal Church than he had previously thought, so politely he announced that he was renouncing his orders. He did that within weeks of his realization that he would be joining the Roman Catholic Church. He left with the good wishes of liberals and conservatives – certainly of my own. I believe that should be the norm – but that's me.

I certainly agree with you that the message of salvation can be "got" by all, despite the nuances of Scripture. Some of us hear that message differently from others. As I took great pains to note, there are different strains in the Gospels about the requirements for salvation. It is clear that you find the major strains of the Synoptics uncomfortable and so not part of the Biblical message. I said that what you are affirming is affirmed in the New Testament – and so is what I am affirming also affirmed there. There is no "winning" here.

I hope you are more respectful to our Presiding Bishop than your use of "Kate Schori" indicates. I know many of the clergy in your diocese disparage her regularly, but I want to remind you that her stance regarding John 14.6 reflects traditional Anglican understanding of salvation and is fully within the understanding of the Roman Catholic church of that scripture as well. Your slur reflects on you, not her. It is that kind of slur against women in authority that has led to a host of terrible consequences for women. You owe your parishioners better.

One last thing ( I know I have gone on too long): you accuse me of Marcionism, claiming that I "do not want your people to read Paul, John, Leviticus or most of the New Testament." On the contrary, I want nothing more than for your people to read those books. I want them to know the difference in quality between the Purity Code and the Holiness Code in Leviticus. I want them to read Galatians 5 and all of Romans. I want them to read of the expansive love of God in the Johaninne letters and in the Parables of Jesus which, over and over again, undercut the moralism which you seem to champion. Read the Parable of the Prodigal Son, The Leaven, The Mustard Seed and on and on. They represent a different picture than the one you draw. Note that I am not saying your picture is wrong: it is one among many. That concept is hard for a literalist, but easy for one reads the whole Bible.

If you want to have an open and honest discussion with me, I am up for that. From what I saw and heard in Wichita Falls, so are your people. They know that there is more than one respectable point of view on these important matters – I think they are tired of the others being so disparaged. Check with your bishop to see if such a discussion would be a possibility. Check with the leadership in the Network – John Liebler, Kendall Harmon, David Virtue, Bishop Little and others: they will tell you about my integrity and good faith. They will tell you that I make every effort to be fair and kind – and that when I step over the line I apologize honestly and profusely. I hope to be treateed with the same respect.

Tom Woodward

Stand Firm Dialogues

2008-06-04T22:31:00.000-07:00

After pretty unsatisfactory attempts at clarification and dialogue at Stand Firm, I have invited people from that blog community to TTUD. I welcome your questions, challenges and everything else and will attempt to keep up with my end.
Tom

The Beatitudes Turned Upside Down

2008-05-13T12:50:00.000-07:00

It does boggle the mind, with bishops in our church and others,
   absconding with funds given by ECUSA to their dioceses,
   tolerating priests sexually abusing parishioners,
  invading other dioceses,
   demonizing their own clergy,
   subjecting their own people to prison and death on the basis of their sexual orientation,
   inflicting their own mental illness on their dioceses,
   calling fellow bishops "apostate" and "imposters,"
   showing complete disrespect for our Presiding Bishop,
   involved in sexual misconduct, themselves,
   refusing to get help for serious addictions,
   involved in financial mismanagement of their dioceses
   and on and on . . .

 Bishop Gene Robinson,
  who has served this church faithfully and without incident at home and abroad,
  a saving spiritual icon to thousands of Episcopalians and others in this country,
  elected by his own diocese who has known him for many years, etc., etc.
  is not invited to the ABC's gathering of bishops.

I do not understand how the moral weighting is done in Canterbury,
but it sure ain't by Biblical standards or by any of the recorded statements of Jesus.
This is sort of "The Beatitudes Turned Upside Down."

A DISCLAIMER:  Don't get me wrong -- I believe our bishops, as a whole, are the best.
They serve faithfully and courageously. So many are truly gifts from God to this church.

Does the United States Get a Free Pass on Immorality?

2008-03-21T18:22:00.000-07:00

At times over the past few weeks it has felt unbearable listening to the smug attacks from both liberal and conservative news commentators on remarks made from a Christian pulpit, critical of the United States of America. The firestorm has centered on outtakes from a very few sermons by Barack Obama's UCC pastor, The Rev. Jeremiah Wright (who, incidentally has one of the most compassionate and most generous congregations in all of American Christendom).

Oddly (and tragically) the one remark by Pastor Wright that has proven most controversial seems to me fairly basic to a responsible understanding of the Christian faith. Stripped of the emotion and the phraseology, he is saying that the United States of America stands under God's judgment for our actions in just the same way that we believe other countries stand under God's judgment.

What could be more basic than that? Isn't that much of the heart of our Holy Scriptures, that Israel stands under the same judgment that other nations do? If I remember my prophets and historical books correctly, what we have been told as clearly as clear can be is that since we have been entrusted with the identity of the People of God, we will be judged even more harshly than "the nations."

The reality in this country is that we who really believe that we are that city built on a hill, the new Jerusalem will resist and in the process demonize anyone who reminds us that we stand under the judgment of God. How hypocritical! How counter to the revealed Word of God, spoken through the prophets and even by Jesus Christ, himself.

Surely we don't think we get a free pass on the torture we have inflicted in our current as well as past wars, the bombings of civilian targets, resorting to armed combat for economic reasons, our long years of practicing slavery, our condoning of marketing merchandise by images which degrade women, our deference to corporate power over the needs and the rights of the poor, and on and on.

We should all be seriously depressed at the depth of the civil religion practiced in this country that would exempt us from being held responsible for our national sins. We should be furious at those commentators who assume we can sever our prophetic roots from the Christian religion -- and who demonize one of the greatest pastors in our church for speaking the truth.

So what are the odds that Christian preachers have used this occasion to call our church back to its roots? Probably not very good. Why is that? Is that we really do prize being liked? Or is it that despite our words of reverence for the Bible, we have simply forgotten its words and message?

Don't you just love the way so many leaders of the "reasserters" claim to be the only ones in the Episcopal Church who care for the Bible and its authority while standing by as Pastor Wright is crucified by the left and the right? They are not "reasserting" anything: they are ignoring it. Those on the liberal side are not much better. We talk about the "unfortunate language" of the sermon excerpts, forgetting that we have not used ANY language in attacking our national sin. We, too, like the evangelicals are more comfortable in dealing with "personal" sins.

I had thought of including a few trenchant quotes from the prophets to sum up this short piece, but the only thing adequate would be to include the whole of the books of Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Judges, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Hosea, and all the rest. Maybe, since this is Holy Week, words from Jesus as he neared his own death in Jerusalem might be appropriate:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! (Matthew 23:36-38)

We who claim the identity of Jerusalem for ourselves have a major task of repentance ahead of us.

Bright Sunday Sermon

2008-03-14T20:33:00.000-07:00

I almost didn’t make it to the church this morning. I had a pastoral emergency that I just had to attend to. . .well, I might as well tell you, it was about Arnold. I’ve been trying to work with him about self-esteem issues and he called me really early this morning to say that he and Janet had had a big fight. So I asked him how the fight ended this time. “When it was over,” he said, “she came to me on her hands and knees.” “Really?,” I said. “That’s a switch. What did she say?” “She said, ‘Come out from underneath the bed, you sniveling coward!’”

And Arnold is not the only one who’s been under the gun. One of you was asking me a couple of weeks ago about when I’m going to retire. I told her I have no plans to retire anytime soon. But even so, her eyes started to tear up and she cried, “Oh, Father Tom, we are going to miss you so much!” Well, I tried to reassure her by telling her, “Look, the priest who takes my place will probably be even better than me.” “Yeah!” she said. “That’s what they said LAST time!”

And then, Bob Bonacci stopped my wife, Ann, outside of Star Market while Ann was struggling with a case of beer. Rather than helping her out, he called out to her, “Hey, Ann! Wacha get the case of beer for?” She said, "I got it for my husband.” "Oh!" he said, "Good trade."

This is Bright Sunday, a remnant of the Feast of Fools from the Middle Ages, a time during the year when the sermon is devoted, simply, to fun. And it is fun that needs no justification other than the knowledge that Jesus Christ has been raised from the dead – and that’s a time to celebrate in any and every way possible. So, today, some of the best and more of the worst from this past year. All the stories today are true in some sense -- especially the ones about parishioners and clergy

But, before we go any further, I want you to know that it is not always easy being a pastor. Last Sunday, for instance, when an unfamiliar couple was leaving the church Fr. Jaime said to them, “You need to join the Army of the Lord!” But one of them said, “We’re already in the Army of the Lord, Pastor.” So Father Jaime said, “Then how come the only time we see you is at Christmas and Easter?” The husband pulled Jaime aside and whispered in his ear: “We’re in the secret service."

But it’s easier here at St. Paul’s than it is over at First Presbyterian. You’ve seen those electric hand dryers in public bathrooms? Well, apparently somebody from their Board of Deacons at First Pres went into their bathrooms and pasted little messages on the electric hand dryers they have: The messages say: “Please press button for a brief recorded message from our pastor.”

Clergy are not the only ones to have problems with the people they serve. Dr. Denmark told me that last week he saw one of his elderly male patients walking along Main Street with a stunning young woman on his arm and a smile on his face. When the fellow came in for his appointment the next day, Steve said “You’re really going wild, aren’t you?” The guy said, “Hey, Doc, just doing what you told me to do: get a hot Mamma and be cheerful” “That’s not what I told you,” said Steve. “I didn’t tell you to get a hot Mamma and be cheerful. I said, ‘You’ve got a heart murmur. . . be careful.”

Ann has had similar problems as a therapist. Last week the receptionist walked into her office and said, "There's a young guy in the waiting room asking to see you. He claims he's invisible." “He claims he’s invisible?” said Ann, “tell him I can't see him."

When I was in the Midwest, the one thing we knew about California was the bad feeling between San Francisco and Los Angeles. What was it Mort Sahl used to say, “that in the event of a nuclear attack neither city would alert the other?” So Bill Schmalle told me my first week here, that if I wanted to be popular with the congregation, I should tell at least one joke a year about Los Angeles. The only thing I could think of was when I was flying to Los Angeles and the guy sitting across the aisle from me was a mess. . .he was pale, his hands were shaking . . in fact his whole body was shuddering and he was moaning in fear.

The fellow sitting next to him said, "Hey, pal, what's the matter?" “It’s awful,” said the first guy. "I've been transferred to Los Angeles: they've got race riots, drugs, the streets are filthy . .and they’ve got the highest crime rate in the world, I’m just scared to death.”

"Hold on," said the second guy. "I've been in Los Angeles all my life, and its not as bad as the media says. Find a nice home, go to work, mind your own business, enroll your kids in a good school and it's as safe as anywhere in the world." Well, the first guy really calmed down. “Oh, thank god,” he said, “I was worried to death, but if you live there and say it's OK, I'll take your word for it. By the way, what do you do for a living?” "Me?" said the second guy, "I'm a tail gunner on a Budweiser Beer Truck."

It’s probably time for a religious story: The way I heard it was that at a Giants game, a Buddhist monk walked up to a tofu hotdog stand and said to the vendor, "Make me one with everything." So the vendor gave him a hot dog with the works and the monk gave him a $20 bill. The vendor put the $20 in his pocket – and the monk asked, “Hey, what about my change?" The vendor paused for a couple of seconds and said, "Change comes from within."

Maybe I’ve got time to rescue things with a food story. A guy was standing out in front of one of the seafood restaurants on Fisherman's Wharf, when a waitress came out and told him about their special: "Our special tonight is Big Lobster Tales, $5 each." Amazed, he said:"$5 each for lobster tails. You’ve got to be kidding.” "Nope", she said, "It's our special just for today." "Well", he said, "they must be little lobster tails." "No," she replied, "It's the really big lobster." ‘Are you sure they aren't those green lobster tails - and a little bit tough?" "No", she said, "it's the really big red lobster." "Big red lobster tails, $5 each?" he said, amazed. “They must be old lobster tails!" "No,” she said, “they're definitely today's." "Today's big red lobster tails - $5 each?", he repeated, astounded. "Yes", she insisted.

"Well, here's my five dollars," he said, "I'll take one.” She took the money and led him to a table where she invited him to sit down. She then sat down next to him, put her hand on his shoulder, leaned over close to him and said, "Once upon a time there was a really big red lobster ..." (That probably would have done better as a Los Angeles story.)

But on a serious note, after experiencing some hearing loss, I began to look into buying a hearing aid; but I didn’t want to spend a lot of money, so I went up to this discount place in San Jose
and I asked the salesperson, "How much do they cost ?" "Well, that depends," he said. "They run anywhere from $4 to $4,000." I told him I would like to try the $4 model. .so he put this device around my neck and said "You just stick this button in your ear and run this little string down to your pocket." "So how does it work?" I asked. "For $4.00 it doesn't work," he said; "But when people see it on you, they'll talk louder!"

And it’s not just the hearing loss that’s been a problem. One of the issues with my ADHD is putting things down and then not remembering where I placed them. Well, a week ago I was cleaning out my closet and I found a ticket from the shoe repair shop over on Park Row. The date stamped on the ticket showed that it was over 9 years old. I said to Ann, "Do you think the shoes will still be there?" “I don’t think so,” she said.

Well, I thought it was worth a try, so I put the ticket in my pocket, hopped in the car and went to the shop. With a very straight face, I handed the ticket to the guy behind the counter. With a face just as straight, he said, "Just a minute. I'll have to look for these." (pause) Two minutes later, the man called out, "Here they are!" "No kidding?" I said, "That's terrific! Who would have thought they'd still be here after all this time." But the guy came back to the counter, empty-handed. He said, "They'll be ready Thursday."

We are close to the end. This next to last story is a true story that took place at our Vacation Bible School. The pre-schoolers were playing a "jack-in-the-box" game where one child hid in a decorated box while the other children stood in a circle and chanted. "Where is Jesus, Where is Jesus?" At the appropriate time, the child in the box would pop up and say "Jesus isn't here, he is risen!" All went along smoothly with each child getting a turn to be "Jack" until one of our children popped up from the box and said "Jesus isn't here, he's in prison!" (From such are saints made)

We’re almost there. . . .Again, a true story. . about the guy who went to a party and had too much to drink. His friends plead with him to let them take him home, but he said he lived only a mile away; but about five blocks from the party the police pulled him over for weaving and asked him to get out of his car and walk the line. But just as he starts, the police radio blares out a notice of a robbery taking place in a house just a block away. The police tell the party animal to stay put and they hop a fence and run down the street to the robbery.

The guy waits and waits and finally decides to drive home. When he gets home, he tells his wife he is going to bed and says, “If anyone asks, tell them I have the flu and that I’ve been in bed all day.” Sure enough, a few hours later the police knock on the door. They ask if Mr. X is there and his wife says yes. They ask to see him and she says that he is in bed with the flu and has been so all day. The police have his driver's license, so they ask to see his car. So she takes them to the garage and opens the door . .and there it is. . . .the police car, lights still flashing.

That’s really different from the night when a police officer was staking out a particularly rowdy bar for possible violations of the driving-under-the-influence laws. At closing time, he saw one guy stumble out of the bar, trip on the curb and try his keys on four different cars before he found his own. Then he sat in the front seat, fumbling around with his keys for about 5 minutes. In that time everyone else in the bar had left. . and driven off. Finally, the guy starts his engine and begins to pull away from the curb. The police officer was waiting for him. he stopped the driver, read him his rights and administered the Breath-alyzer test. But the results showed a reading of absolute zero. The cop was stunned. . and demanded how that could be. The driver replied, “Well, tonight I was chosen to be the designated decoy.”

And so it was with the Lord of Life. Hanging there on the cross, representing all who would follow him, he looked like a most appealing victim. So, the medieval theologians tell us, Satan swallowed him up, dragging him into the depths of hell. . . But the joke was on Satan and all the powers of evil because in three days, Christ had burst out of that prison, freeing not only himself, but all of humanity from the clutches of evil. .for a life of resurrection. While life still holds its struggles and pain, we live in eternity, loved and cherished by the God of Isaac, who is named “Laughter.”

Instructions/Reflections for Exploring the Nicene Creed

2008-02-26T11:08:00.000-08:00

First, thanks to all of you who have written for more information about this use of the creed, noted in the article in Episcopal Life. I have “preached” this sermon at least once in every congregation I’ve served and always with some degree of success.

What does “success” mean here? One thing it means is that I have helped people unburden themselves of the mistaken notion that unless they believe it all and understand it all, they are sub-standard Christians. I believe that notion is a lot more prevalent than anyone of us would believe.

The other thing “success” means here is that the congregation will have a different understanding of itself as community. I think we do very well when we see ourselves tied to one another in mission and ministry. We worship together and we all participate in things like the food pantry and welcoming newcomers, but we don’t see ourselves as a community which together is the fullness only because we make up for the incompleteness in one another’s faith, understanding, gifts and service. That, for me, is the biggie with this sermon.

The Mechanics

You can announce in earlier bulletins or newsletters that you will be speaking about the Nicene Creed on X date because there seems to be confusion or concern about it in the congregation – or just do it.

As I mentioned in the article, I have people turn to the Nicene Creed in their Prayer Books. I then say that I would like everyone participate in something that will be fun as well as instructive. “I will go through the creed, phrase by phrase. Your task (and mine) will be to stand when the phrase is something you believe – and that makes a difference in your life. The second part of the task is that we will sit down when the phrase is something we don’t believe or understand – or it doesn’t make a difference in our lives. Got it? I will repeat it one more time.”

Have people stand for a practice. Stay standing if you believe the practice statements of belief – and sit it you don’t believe them. [All stand].
“Today is Tuesday.” [Make sure you are seen to sit]
“Today’s sermon will be just what I need.”

Go through the Nicene Creed, phrase by phrase, giving people the opportunity to stand or sit. You or a couple of confidants may have to prime the pump for creating movement. Begin with all standing:

“I believe in God. .” (most will stay standing)
“The Father almighty. . .” (the more you emphasize “father,” the more you will have sit).

Continue through the creed, using short phrases.

Ask for observations at the end. You can control this with the following questions:

“Were there any phrases for which no one was standing?”
“So there was someone standing at all times. Were they always the same people?”

“Did you feel under any pressure to stand for a phrase you don’t understand or believe?”
Do you know what that’s about?
One of the things many of us like about the Episcopal Church is that we are permitted to doubt – but here it may be hard for us.

“Did you notice if anyone was sitting all the way through?”
“Did you notice if anyone was standing all the way through?”
“How about the clergy and wardens?”

“Would it (does it) bother you that we weren’t standing all the way through?”

The Message:

One thing I hope we learned is that the Nicene Creed is the creed of the Church. It is what we, as the whole church, believe – even though we each hold on to a part of it. We each have our “specialty” – and all the specialties together make up the fullness of the church’s specialty. What is hard for me, is probably easy for some of you – and what you don’t get, I or some others really believe. Separately we are partial, together we have the whole.

I like to go on to draw some conclusions about other parts of our life together. Some of the congregation are wonderful with prayer – and if we really want someone to pray for us or for someone we love, we go to them. Does that mean that the rest of us are slouches? Of course not – it’s like with the creed, we each have part. The same is true of hospitality – some are specially blessed at welcoming and including, while many of us find that hard. Some are teachers, others evangelists. Remember those great passages from St. Paul about all the parts of the Body working together. We each have our part to play.

Another way of illustrating this is with a spring bouquet of flowers (a large variety of flowers). Wander through the congregation, asking for a show of hands for those who are healers or in the healing professions – pick a variety (say a rose) and give one or more healers the rose (that is their part in the bouquet). Then ask for teachers, those who take great joy in giving to the church or community, those who have a vocation to pray – and don’t shy away from simply identifying someone in a category when he or she doesn’t do it on their own. Each grouping gets a flower for that group (you don’t have to go through the whole set of varieties).

Then take time to talk about how beautiful the rose is by itself, as with the lilac or gladiola. Separately we are beautiful – but together, we are breathtaking. Nobody has to do everything – in fact, that is the way we are called to service in the church, with differing gifts and abilities.

This, of course, is also an entry-point for talking about the varieties of expression in the Episcopal Church – or in the church ecumenical. No one would want to go to the circus to watch 26 elephant acts in a row. No one would want to sit through an organ concert when there was only one kind of pipe – and so on. Individually, we are fine – as a spring bouquet, we are amazing.

I will post this on The Episcopal Majority site http://episcopalmajority.blogspot.com – that will be a great place to add your comments or experience. You can also post your comments here.

The Episcopal Majority Meets Bishop Iker

2008-01-27T08:42:00.000-08:00

Upon receiving an invitation to speak to Via Media people in Fort Worth and in Wichita Falls January 18-20, I wrote to Bishop Jack Iker to request a meeting with him to hear whatever concerns he might have about a dissident coming into his diocese to challenge his consistent message to his flock.
I could not have been happier with his response. He would see me shortly before lunch on the day I arrived in Fort Worth. In preparation for the visit, I bought a six pack of Santa Fe Brewery Pale Ale and a couple of pounds of Hatch roasted green chilies as a love offering from me, though in spirit from the Diocese of the Rio Grande. I also was careful to inform Bishop Iker of the sorts of things I would be talking about, referring him to some of what I have written for The Episcopal Majority, including the booklet “The Undermining of the Episcopal Church.”
We spent the first part of our meeting exchanging pleasantries, and I expressed my regret that his experience in the Episcopal Church was such that he felt he must leave it. Then I asked if he had any concerns about my speaking to his people. He said that he did not mind debate and arguing about matters of theology and the Bible – but that he did not like the demonizing that often accompanied it. He then mentioned several of the phrases that were most hurtful to him. I assured him that I had not used any of that language about him – but have stepped over the line more than once with my rhetoric, but always grateful when others mentioned that so I could apologize and, hopefully, learn something. He noted that he, too, has stepped over the line from time to time.
I assured Bishop Iker that I intended no disrespect for him during my time in his diocese. We then shared stories of blessing and of hurt in our life in the church. At the end of our time I asked for his blessing. We stood and he put his hands on my shoulder and prayed a most beautiful prayer, asking God’s blessing on my son in his recovery, asking God’s blessing on my time in Fort Worth and on my talks to his people.
I carry several things away with me from that meeting. First, what a joy it is when two people, so opposed on so many critical issues and concerns, can spend time relating to the best in the other with the best of ourselves. That is not the whole truth, but it is part of the truth. Second, I do not discount the hurt and sometimes the humiliation my friends and others in Fort Worth have suffered when +Jack has stepped over the line, nor the havoc his beliefs and attitudes about women’s ordination and our “Anglican agonies” have wreaked. Third, at this point the two of us are in the same church and attempting to follow the same Lord. Fourth, there is certainly pain when we encounter the worst in each other, but the pain is worse when we encounter their best, for it is then that the deep ache sets in as we wait for a time when our several wounds are healed and our fears are stopped in such a way that our best is our consistent selves. We are obviously not there yet.
The talks did go well, both in Fort Worth and in Wichita Falls. They were followed by time with the Steering Committee of Via Media Dallas. While I had requested time with Bishop Stanton for an earlier trip that had to be canceled, there was no time for such a visit this time. I did, though, revel in my time with several of my heroes and heroines in the church, including Dixie Hutchinson, Katie Sherrod and Gayland Pool.
I will have more to say about the talks, themselves. One thing is probably worth mentioning here. I had done some thinking about what the faithful could do to sustain themselves and the thought about singing “We Shall Overcome” during communion at diocesan gatherings had stuck in my mind. However, reflecting upon all that is at stake in our struggles to remain in the fullness of the Episcopal Church, an even more appropriate song came to mind: “They Can’t Take That Away from Me.”

* This article appears on http://episcopalmajority.blogspot.com as well.

Audtion Script for "The Richest Man in Santa Fe"

2007-12-30T21:22:00.000-08:00

This is the audition script from "The Richest Man in Santa Fe," a play I've written that will be produced in "Benchwarmers VII" at the Santa Fe Playhouse in Santa Fe on February 23 at 8 pm and February 24 at 2 pm. This play and "So, What's with Eliot?" are one act plays running about 15 minutes each.

THE RICHEST MAN IN SANTA FE

Cast of Characters
HARRY: a street person/bum, but not too shabbily dressed. He may or may not be God. He has refused to say “Thank you” to Stan who first put a dollar in his basket, then a twenty.
STAN: a man in his mid-thirties to mid-forties. Stan is headed for a mid-life crisis. Harry has cajoled twenty one dollars from him and refused to say “Thank you.” The reading begins with Stan waiting for Harry to thank him.

SETTING: HARRY sits on the bench with a blanket and a basket with paper money in it.

THE AUDITION READING:

STAN
I’m waiting.

HARRY
I see that.

STAN
So where’s the “thank you?”

HARRY looks all around for a “thank you,” as if it’s an object.

HARRY
I guess it’s not here.

STAN
Where’s the “thank you?!”

HARRY
You want a “thank you?” . . . How much cash have you got on you?

STAN
How much cash have I got on me? Who in hell do you think you are?

HARRY
I’m not sure you’re ready for that.

STAN
Ready for what?

HARRY
For me to tell you who the hell I am?

STAN
Try me.

HARRY
O.K. God.

STAN
God, what?

HARRY
God. . . .That’s all. . .I’m God.

STAN
I guess I forgot in the middle of all this that I am in Santa Fe.

HARRY
It doesn’t matter: Santa Fe, Nazareth, Bethlehem, Espanola. It’s the same everywhere.

STAN
Yeah, sure. Look, I don’t want to hurt your feelings, but you look nothing like George Burns.

Audition Script for "So, What's with Eliot?"

2007-12-30T21:08:00.000-08:00

What follows is a cutting from one of the plays I wrote which will be produced in "Benchwarmers VII" at the Santa Fe Playhouse in late January through most of February. This cutting was used for auditions for the play.

SO, WHAT’S WITH ELIOT?

Cast of Characters

The Director: Male or female, has a seat in the front row center of the audience.
Phil: A young man dressed very Santa Fe. Phil is very New Age.
Ron: Older than Phil, dressed well, in a way that distances him from others.
Harry Somewhat shabbily dressed.
Ernest V-neck sweater over a white shirt. Slacks.
Eliot: Middle aged man, dressed simply. Has just learned that he has cancer.

SETTING: Phil is auditioning for an lib part with Eliot, who is about to reveal to Phil what is distressing him. After the first two scripted lines, they are on their own (only they follow THIS script).

ELIOT
I just got the news today.

PHIL
You just got the news today?

PHIL and ELIOT drop their scripts and appear to be on their own from here on.

ELIOT (Tentative)
Yeh, I’ve got. . . I’m. . . cancer.

PHIL
Oh, no! Really?

ELIOT
Yeh, really. Cancer.

PHIL
Bummer. Major Bummer.

ELIOT
You can say that again. . .

PHIL
Bummer. Major Bu. . .

ELIOT
That’s not what I meant.

PHIL
Hey, I’m sorry. I know something about what you mean. It’s hard. It’s got to be hard. That’s been one of the hardest things I, personally, have gone through.

ELIOT
You’ve been through this?

PHIL
Yeah! I’ve been through this. Big time. All my life I’ve been dealing with this. So I know what you’re going through. But with me, it wasn’t cancer: it was Capricorn.

ELIOT
Capricorn?

PHIL
Yeah. It’s this way: it’s like everything about me is Aquarius. I’m talking deeply Aquarius here. I should have been Aquarius, but I couldn’t move my December birthday. So all through my life there has been this awful conflict -- what you called “major bummer” -- between who I am as a person – definitely Aquarius – and who I am in the technical, surface sense – Capricorn. So when you tell me that you’re dealing with Cancer, I know just what you’re feeling. I’m with you, Buddy. 100%.

ELIOT
(feeling distressed, angry)
You don’t understand. . .

PHIL
I don’t understand?

ELIOT
You don’t understand. . . .I’ve got cancer in my body!
(Phil moves further away from Eliot)

My first 40 years as a priest

2007-12-02T18:53:00.000-08:00

I was ordained in Topeka, Kansas forty years ago and today I want to share with you some of my reflections on my life as a priest. I am deeply grateful to God for the past 40 years of ordination. On the whole, they have been wonderful years (that is, full of wonder). There have been very few days out of the past 40 years of ordained ministry when I have wanted to do or to be anything other than Episcopal priest. For me, it has always been a real privilege and honor to be a priest -- and that has been true even when the times have been rough. And they have been rough at times.

Two years after being ordained as the most conservative and, probably, one of the more racist members of my seminary class, I spent an afternoon listening to the stories of several Black students who were holding a civil rights demonstration at the University of Kansas where I was chaplain back in 1965. The stories I heard had such power for me and they represented so much of the presence of God I had read about -- so I joined them and, with 103 Black students, was arrested and jailed..

The County Jail was overflowing, with the male students 4-6 to a cell on the second floor and the women on the first floor. The students asked if they could be released from their cells for just 5 minutes, so I, the minister and only non-student, could lead them in prayers. My life and my understanding of the church changed that day more than on any other. The pain in the arrest came three months later, when my bishop, who had urged his clergy to be involved, caved into some very vindictive people and, in effect, put me on half salary for the next year and a half. I lived through that with him and more; but three years later, it became a choice between leaving the work and the people I really loved. . .or becoming terribly cynical about the church as institution. Much the same thing happened ten years later, when someone else's fear resulted in my having to leave friends and colleagues I had loved ...and moving on.

There have been other kinds of heartbreak -- sitting up night after night with a young 16 year old boy as his mother died, leaving him absolutely alone, without other family. And in Madison, what seemed like almost weekly AIDS-related funerals at the church. So often the service was for someone who -- just weeks or months before -- had been in a pew mourning another friend's death. There have not been many months in the 40 years without some kind of heartbreak.

Most of my forty years have been in campus ministry and it has often been wild and woolly: as priest I was arrested and jailed twice, and then I went back to jail, only this time to coach an inmates chess team which then beat the University of Rochester faculty chess team five matches to two. In earlier years, I led encounter groups, hosted Allen Ginsburg at our Coffee House ministry in Kansas, wrote two books, learned fire eating and juggling, and through my service as trustee of one the largest public pension funds in the country I got to go head to head with Roger Smith and the full board of General Motors and other major corporations on moral and ethical issues. I couldn't dream of a more exciting or fulfilling life. But the best, the very best has been out of the limelight and with you and with the people at Christ Church, Warrensburg, Missouri, week by week building up the life of those church families. That has been the deep satisfaction.

Things have changed drastically since I was ordained 40 years ago. When I was ordained, women were not allowed to serve on Vestries, girls were not allowed even to acolyte, there were separate churches for Black and white Episcopalians. Mostly white Episcopalians did not know about Latin American, Asian or other kinds of Episcopalians. When I was ordained, it was like the congregation hired a priest to be its minister. Where the priest was, there was the church: it felt like the task of the lay people was to assist the priest in his ministry.

Things are so much healthier now, where my reason for being here is to support you in the real ministry of the church -- the living out of the Christian faith in our families, in our businesses, in our schools and hospitals and agencies, as we try to reflect the will of God in this Valley. My job is to feed, to nourish, to support, sometimes to inspire, but then to get out of the way -- because you are the ministers.

What I would like to do is four things, fairly briefly: I'd like to tell you something about what it means to me to be a priest; to tell you some of the things I am most proud of; to share a couple of secrets; and then to say thank you -- to you and to God.

What it is like to be a priest? to be a priest is to wrestle with an on-going contradiction of isolation and intimacy. On the one hand, there is a powerful intimacy with people. It is an intimacy of being with you as you struggle with the most personal details of your lives. It is the intimacy of being privileged with the deepest doubts and the most serious questionings and struggles of so many people. What many of us have with one or two or maybe three people in our lives, a priest may have with hundreds of people over the years.

But over against the intimacy, is the isolation. Often, when I walk into a room with my clericals on, a hush settles over the conversation. And invariably people apologize to me for their language, or for being angry or upset – as though I'm holy God or a non-person. The worst came 26 years ago when I announced to the congregation that my wife and I had just adopted a baby boy. One member of the congregation cornered Judy at the coffee hour and with a loud voice that rang through the hall, announced, "What a wonderful way for a minister to have a baby!" Apparently she knew something I had not known: there are three genders - male, female and clergy.

There is a certain, maybe necessary, distance in pastoral relationships. Some of that, I've found, I bring, myself, and much of it probably goes with the territory. I think sometimes my ill-conceived humor is an awkward way of protesting the isolation, the sense that there is something different.

The best things about the work of ordained ministry are the people and the enormous variety of challenges and tasks and demands of the work: teaching, preaching, organizing, nurturing, administration, counseling, studying, working with community organizations -- the list is endless. The worst part of all that is that no one can do all those things well. And there is so much that I have not done well: partly because of temperament, partly from the ADHD, partly because if you are fully committed to be a pastoral presence in the lives of your families, it’s hard to shift focus to the organizational/structural concerns -- just as if you are fully committed to structure, process and program, it’s hard to shift focus to the pastoral needs of your families. So, there is always a built-in frustration in a pastoral relationship.

I think the things for which I am most proud are also the things for which I am most grateful. Thirty-seven years ago, a fellow college chaplain, John Simmons, asked me to join him in trying to build bridges between the church and the homosexual community. From that moment on, that work has always been a part of my life. What I have learned is that it’s not about sex – it’s about what it means to be human and what it means to exclude those whom God includes. Our culture has made this very difficult. Over the years, I have heard such painful, tragic stories -- even of clergy children whose fathers would not let them receive communion in their churches. And I have experienced such wonderful lives and inspiring stories from both sides of the bridge -- and none more inspiring than in the life of this congregation. So it’s some pride. . . but much, much more gratitude.

The same has been true with the clowning. The clowning (the performance side) has been nourished by so many clergy and lay people, mostly, probably, by a young graduate student in North Carolina, Kenny Kaye, who had dropped out of school to juggle. He was so talented and so gracious and forgiving; but he was also shy. He could not even pass the hat. .so he was soon broke. So, with Kenny’s skill (he ended our act by juggling 3 ping pong balls out of his mouth) -- with his skill and my professional training in passing the hat, the two of us formed “Uncle Billy’s Pocket Circus” as a street show and performed all over the South, including the International Jugglers Convention Banquet Show. Kenny, a Jew, taught me to see the clowning and the juggling as an expression of my faith and of my ministry. It was through the clowning that I saw, more and more, the parables, the Beatitudes and so much of the life of Jesus as the ministry of the fool, the pied piper, enticing us into a deeper and more compelling vision of life. None of it would have happened without Kenny and a host of others, including David Fly (my spiritual mentor in clowning and foolery) and Pat Anderson, who inspired and challenged me to develop and organize “The Care Fools,” a clown troupe of fairly severely disabled clowns who worked miracles wherever they went – real miracles.

One part of the 40 years most of you don’t know about was that my church in Madison, Wisconsin, was, I believe, back in 1983 the first Episcopal Church in the country to provide public sanctuary for people fleeing for their lives from El Salvador and Guatemala, knowing that we would very likely be arrested and imprisoned for doing so. I know it was from that experience in Madison, that the work with San Pablo’s, our sister congregation we house, was so attractive to me. What we learned from the refugees, living with them day by day, was that they had much more to give and to teach us than we had for them. One family, in particular, were so kind and so gentle and so committed to their faith; but their bodies were covered with scars from being tortured by their own government. They had earned those scars, as Archbishop Romero had earned his death, by witnessing to their faith. It was another side of church that continues to touch me.

Following that experience, it has been such a joy to have spent 15 years working with the people of San Pablo. Again, we each have much to give, much to receive from one another. The bonds of love and respect between St. Paul’s and San Pablo are so important for them, and even more, for us. Our ministry with San Pablo is unique in our diocese and nearly so, in the whole of the Episcopal Church. We are so fortunate.

Of my forty years as priest, the last 15 years have probably been the best -- in my life with Ann, in my life with our children and most certainly in my life with you and the people of this diocese. You have opened your hearts and your lives to me so consistently, and you make such a difference in one another’s lives and in being a bright beacon for the people of this Valley who need you so much. Time after time, you have been willing to stretch, spiritually, and to risk your own comfort for the benefit of others -- for the homeless, for those who struggle daily for survival, for becoming a really inclusive church and for entering into such a wonderful relationship with the people of San Pablo. Thank you for your part in all that.

Briefly, three secrets. Shortly before applying for the position here at St. Paul's I was on the verge of leaving the active ministry and going on to something else. I went through a career evaluation center and the night before the end of the program, I could only see alternatives outside the church. Something happened that night I know not what -- but the next morning my vocation was never clearer and I have not had a moment's doubt since. It could only have happened with Ann's support and the grace of God -- both were critical.

Second secret: When I arrived here, I knew very, very little about running a church, being a rector (but that is not a secret or surprise to many of you). Now other clergy often turn to me for advice. Whenever that happens, I give thanks for your patience and your willingness, and Ann’s, to teach, to challenge, and most of all, to forgive me. I think the love we have had for one another has covered a multitude of mistakes and mis-steps. Mostly, when I have done things you have thought were especially good or wise, that’s usually because I had previously consulted Ann. You will never know how important Ann and her wisdom and her vision have been to us all these past 15 years.

The last secret, which is not really a secret but something maybe that I should have spent all my time on this morning. I think the real strength of any of us in ministry (lay or ordained) comes not from our natural strengths, but from our disabilities or our woundings. I know that is true for me. In retrospect, one of the gifts I received from my childhood has been a deep acquaintance with pain and with darkness. For me, lurking somewhere beneath the surface is a kind of melancholy or poignancy. It has to do with the fragility of life and sadness. I have never seen this as something that should be feared or avoided. There is a sadness to life, but it is never the last or the only word: more often than not, it is the gateway to our deepest spirituality. It's the other side of the red nose and it has been more than equally important.

So I think of the hundreds and hundreds of times I have been moved to tears by the heroism with which you and others have faced life and all it brings. I see it in the ways you and those who have gone before you have faced death or serious dislocations in your lives. I have seen you affirm the power of life and goodness in the midst of darkness and despair. I have seen you love and support strangers, the homeless, those who, at the beginning, seemed strange and threatening.

It has been a rich 40 years. Thank you for having me as your priest these past 15 years. Spiritually you have been a real Godsend to me. I have felt from the beginning here, that God has called me here, through you. I am really honored to be a part of your tradition of caring, your reaching out into the community, and your loving concern for all kinds of people. You have given me wonderful Vestries and the best Senior Wardens. You have surrounded me with support and love -- you have been willing to reach and to stretch in wonderful ways. You are wonderful partners in ministry. For that, I give thanks to God and to you.

A False Notion of the Unity of the Church

2007-11-28T10:41:00.000-08:00

One of the threads in the discussions of the World Wide Anglican Communion over the past several years has focused on the priority of unity within the Body of Christ. In good part, I believe, that discussion has been fueled by the difficulty many are having with one of the central virtues of Anglicanism, comprehensiveness, which allows for differing viewpoints to co-exist within the same congregation, diocese, province and Communion. Against that sense of dis-ease, I note the following about our necessary unity:

First, it is most often that we find or discover our unity with one another in mission or in jointly resisting evil in the world. Councils and committees are important, but they rarely have the power of seeking justice and exercising compassion together in the world. The unity of the church, expressed in public documents comes in a poor second to the unity of the church in resisting evil or promoting the Kingdom of God.

In response to seek to replace comprehensiveness with uniformity, often referring to “the scandal of our divisions,” I fail to see how a wondrous array of perspectives and commitments being lived out through different denominations is scandalous. We are all united in the Risen Body of Christ -- what could be closer What I would consider as scandalous is what the Roman Catholics do and infer -- that is, saying that they are the authentic church of Jesus Christ while others represent different shades and expressions of inauthenticity and untruth.

This is what will be scandalous: It will be scandalous when the Quakers are not allowed or honored to be the very best Quakers they can be -- and the same for the Mennonites, the Baptists, Episcopalians and Orthodox. No one denomination, national or international church can represent the others. While there are strains of the Mennonites in certain enclaves of Roman Catholics, that witness will always be an aberration. In the same way, the discipline of the Assembly of God cannot be integrated within the Orthodox tradition without compromising what is special and unique there. Why compress everything into a shadow of its former self in the name of unity? Talk about your scandal!

The problem is not with our differing denominations -- it is with our lack of humility, charity and ability to see the fullness of Jesus Christ in ways we, ourselves, do not embody. I remember the words of a long dead bishop in the United Methodist Church, “Thank God we are not all United Methodists!” When Episcopalians can say that with convictions, we will be a much stronger and more faithful expression of the institutional life of Jesus Christ.

Bishop Richard Shimpfky preached an excellent sermon a few years ago about the diversity within the Trinity which co-exists with the unity. For Jesus to pray that the church may be one, even as he and the Father are one, does not presuppose a lack of diversity or difference. Diversity and difference are built in to the life of the Trinity.

Consider, too, the life of Jesus. Where in his band of disciples can one discern anything like "unity" within the followers of Jesus? Where could you ever discover such a thing -- even in the early church with its diversity of experience and beliefs? If you want to dispel the myth of “the faith once delivered to the saints” as having anything at all to do with a unified set of beliefs or ways of thinking about divine love, atonement, Baptism or any other core beliefs in the early centuries of the Christian church, read David Rhoads’ “The Challenge of Diversity: The Witness of Paul and the Gospels” (Fortress Press).

In the dialogue about unity in the church it is always fair to ask: Is there a way to the unity you are holding up that can come about by means other than strict enforcing of boundaries around theological and ethical formulations and concerns? I believe that the unity God provides the church is the unity which allows and encourages a variety of faithful responses through our varied faith in God.

Fear and Loathing in Fort Worth

2007-11-18T08:56:00.000-08:00

On the House of Bishops/Deputies list serve, The Rev. Liz Zivanov writes:

"I don't think the rest of the church really understands the gravity of the situation in Ft. Worth or the other ACN dioceses. Will we (the leadership of TEC, and especially the bishops) continue to watch as this sort of emotional and spiritual violence continues?

First guns from the Stand Firm folks; now guns and tasers in the Diocese of Ft. Worth. And there's not even an effort to hide this violent activity."

My Response:
The subtext of much of the Convention speech by Bishop Iker this past weekend in Fort Worth was full of demonizing and intimidation, while on the surface complaining of intimidation from those threatening to hold him accountable for his leadership of the diocese.

Here is a sampling:
"Wherever Christians gather to take a stand for the Gospel,even in church conventions, the devil will be close at hand, seeking to beguile, divide, and mislead. Watch out!"

Comforting words for those who oppose his agenda!

"Counterfeit Christianity, man-made religion, and revisionist theology must be identified and rebuked for the sake of the unchanging Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Strong words as precursor for honest and open debate about the nature of the Gospel.

"Let us not lose our will to stand for conscience and truth, whatever the consequences or the cost."

The force of this statement is not to honor individual conscience, but the bishop's conscience -- and those who have a different conscience,formed through their own lives in the church and in our seminaries, know well the consequences and cost involved in voicing them.

Granted that near the end of the speech there are notes of graciousness and caring for those who oppose the bishop's agenda; but it is difficult to be caring for those who have just been characterized as on the other side of truth, counterfeit Christians deserving of public rebuke, agents of the devil.

We can all understand the pressures involved when one's world is under attack, as the bishop's world of traditional exclusion of women and homosexuals has been under attack, but Christlike response to such differences is usually couched in prayerful commitment and offers of dialogue,not demonizing and devaluing. The response from those in leadership at this Convention mirrors a different spirituality than that embodied in our Scripture and Book of Common Prayer. We must not demonize them, for they are our brothers and sisters in Christ, but we must not allow their words or actions to define the presence of Jesus Christ in the world or in the church -- for where they stand is not where he said he will stand.