On mission - Post 2: Elizabeth Drescher

While I am working through thoughts on Mission, I thought Elizabeth Drescher's piece at Episcopal Cafe provided good food for thought, as well as the 20+ comments posted there in response.

Do we struggle with "singing a new song" in the church?  How so?  When I think of Jesus, I don't think of someone who was merely thinking about playing the "old standards"...he seemed to be pushing us beyond the same old same old.  However, we are often seeking the security of nostalgia for its own sake.  Is this what God is calling us to?  Is this what the Holy Spirit is empowering us to be?

The Church's Mission, Let's be honest

by Elizabeth Drescher posted at Episcopal Cafe

You know, I sometimes wonder whether the Israelites heard the call of the psalm we read today as I sometimes do: "Sing to the Lord a new song...? Really?"

I mean, let's be honest, even in the most literal sense, we struggle with this idea, resisting in our churches music that might nudge us even ever so slightly out of the nineteenth century. Oh, I'm not talking here about going all "U2-charist," or bringing in hip hop hymns that'll get the young folks dancing before the Lord. After all, we know that the few thriving emergent communities in our church are more likely to sing songs from the Middle Ages--a little Gregorian Chant, a remix of Hildegard of Bingen, or, to modernize just a smidge, some shape note tunes--than they are to be jamming to the spiritual stylings of Gospel Ganstaz. But they are singing those old songs in a new way--inhabiting them bodily, infusing them with a spirit that is often missing from our churches, truly "lifting every voice" in glorious praise.

Outside of these communities--the Crossing at St. Paul's Cathedral in Boston, Open Cathedral at St. Mark's in Seattle, Thad's in Los Angeles, Transmission in New York--"singing a new song" has, in the least nuanced, least metaphorical way, been something of a challenge for us.

And that makes me worry about how far along God's path we may be able to travel these days as we seek to realize the peaceable kingdom Isaiah prophesied. If we can't get the theme song down, what chance do we have to be so much as bit players in the whole new cosmic drama--the heartwarming story of true love realized across the earth that, as Paul reminds us, Jesus narrated with his life, death, and resurrection?

Of course, Paul points in his letter to the Ephesians to what throws us off tune in our efforts to sing a new, harmonious song, to live as one diverse body: barriers and the hostilities they cause among us. What do these barriers look like in our church in particular? If you've just lept in your mind to things like women's ordination or diverse opinions on human sexuality, I'm going to suggest that you guess again . . . 

Read the rest HERE

Dietrich Bonhoeffer (4 February 1906-9 April 1945

“But it is not we who build. He wills to build the church. No one builds the church but Christ alone. Whoever is mindful to build the church is well on his way to destroying it; for he will build a temple to idols without wishing or knowing it. We must confess - he builds. We must proclaim - he builds. We must pray to him - he builds. We do not know his plan. We cannot see whether he is building or pulling down. It may be that the times which by human standards are times of collapse are for him the great times of building. It may be that the times which from a human point of view are great times for the church are times when it is pulled down. It is a great comfort which Christ gives to his church: you confess, preach, bear witness to me, and I alone will build where it pleases me. Do not meddle in what is my province. Church, do what is given to you to do well and you have done enough. But do it well. Pay no heed to views and opinions, don’t ask for judgments, don’t always be calculating what will happen, don’t always be on the look-out for another refuge! Church, stay a church! But church confess, confess, confess! Christ alone is your Lord, from his grace alone can you live as you are. Christ builds. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.”

No Rusty Swords (London: Collins, 1970), p. 212.

Mulling it over: Reconciliation in Communion initiative from the good people at "Covenant"

I am currently mulling over the "Word to the 76th General Convention of the Episcopal Church" written by the good people at "Covenant" Blog. I have posted the executive summary below, but do make sure to click HERE to read the entire piece. On first look, I can affirm the vast majority of the statements, and am interested in some dialogue about some others, but I applaud this effort and hope that good can come from this good work. Kudos to Covenant!!!

~The Rev. Peter M. Carey

From "Covenant-Communion" blog

Reconciliation in Communion

A Word to the 76th General Convention of the Episcopal Church

An Executive Summary of “Reconciliation in Communion”

NB: The full text of “Reconciliation in Communion” may be found below and online at http://www.covenant-communion.net

• Evangelism is central to the life of the Church’s mission.
• Our Baptismal Covenant calls us to live lives leading to holiness, justice, and peace.
• The rite of Holy Baptism in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer contains no theology unique to the Episcopal Church.
• Baptism before Communion is the best way to be faithful to our Baptismal Covenant as we engage in evangelism, and reflects an ecumenical consensus we cannot ignore.
• The Episcopal Church’s full communion with the See of Canterbury and its full and active participation in the other Instruments of Communion, as well as in the life of the whole Anglican Communion, are essential elements of our identity.
• The actions already taken by General Convention that demonstrate the Episcopal Church’s good faith intention to remain in full communion with the Anglican Communion are to be affirmed.
• Schism undermines the Gospel; what divides the Church is not of Christ.
• Unilateral actions undermine justice, even when such actions are intended to establish it.
• The Anglican Covenant is the only viable path at present for maintaining communion and should be adopted by the Episcopal Church.
• General Convention should not speak with one voice on public policy or other issues when that voice is merely that of the majority, and not reflective of genuine consensus.
• General Convention needs to keep in mind that schism among Anglicans damages the witness of all involved, and thus should focus on building mutual respect leading to reconciliation.
• Youth and young adults are necessary to the growth of the church and should be a top priority over the next Triennium.
• Bishops and other leaders need to pursue constructive and charitable relationships with those who are currently estranged from the Episcopal Church, particularly since we must be mindful of the legacy we will pass on to the next generation.
• Making a commitment to remaining lovingly engaged in worship and service with all members of this church, even amid our conflicts, is an essential feature of what it means to love each other as Christ loves us.

Read the entire piece (HERE), and post a response on the Covenant blog on your thoughts!

Anglican Primates meet in Alexandria, Egypt

From the Anglican Communion News Service (ACNS)

Following a private meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams, His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, the Coptic Pope, received the Primates of the Anglican Communion at the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate in Alexandria on Saturday evening, 31 January. The Primates are meeting in Alexandria in the latest of their series of regular meetings.

In thanking Pope Shenouda for his warm welcome and hospitality the Archbishop of Canterbury drew attention to the significance of meeting together in the city where many of the universal doctrines of the Christian faith were formed and where the seeds of the Christian monastic movement had been sown in the third century.

Pope Shenouda welcomed the Primates. Bishops, he said, had a special responsibility to guide their people in the path of holiness. Engaging with the young was particularly important. The Coptic Church in Cairo alone was providing Sunday school education to between 30 and 40,000 children. He also gave an account of the resurgence of the Coptic monasteries in Egypt. There were more than twenty communities with over 100 monks each.

Bishop Mouneer Anis, Anglican bishop in Egypt and Primate of the Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East thanked Pope Shenouda for his generosity and paid tribute to his extraordinary teaching ministry based at the Coptic Cathedral in Cairo.

Archbishop Rowan Williams Responds to the Gafcon Declaration

Our Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams can be criticized for many things, but this response to the GAFCON final declaration is excellent, and points to several problems with the recent declaration. I echo Tobias Haller at In a Godward Direction by giving the Archbishop a hearty "hear here" for this response. Have a read...

from the Anglican Communion News Service...

Archbishop of Canterbury responds to GAFCON statement

Posted On : June 30, 2008 5:04 PM |
ACNS: ACNS4417
Related Categories: Lambeth

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has responded to the final declaration of the Global Anglican Future Conference with the following statement:

The Final Statement from the GAFCON meeting in Jordan and Jerusalem contains much that is positive and encouraging about the priorities of those who met for prayer and pilgrimage in the last week. The ‘tenets of orthodoxy’ spelled out in the document will be acceptable to and shared by the vast majority of Anglicans in every province, even if there may be differences of emphasis and perspective on some issues. I agree that the Communion needs to be united in its commitments on these matters, and I have no doubt that the Lambeth Conference will wish to affirm all these positive aspects of GAFCON’s deliberations. Despite the claims of some, the conviction of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as Lord and God and the absolute imperative of evangelism are not in dispute in the common life of the Communion

However, GAFCON’s proposals for the way ahead are problematic in all sorts of ways, and I urge those who have outlined these to think very carefully about the risks entailed.

A ‘Primates’ Council’ which consists only of a self-selected group from among the Primates of the Communion will not pass the test of legitimacy for all in the Communion. And any claim to be free to operate across provincial boundaries is fraught with difficulties, both theological and practical – theological because of our historic commitments to mutual recognition of ministries in the Communion, practical because of the obvious strain of responsibly exercising episcopal or primatial authority across enormous geographical and cultural divides.

Two questions arise at once about what has been proposed. By what authority are Primates deemed acceptable or unacceptable members of any new primatial council? And how is effective discipline to be maintained in a situation of overlapping and competing jurisdictions?

No-one should for a moment impute selfish or malicious motives to those who have offered pastoral oversight to congregations in other provinces; these actions, however we judge them, arise from pastoral and spiritual concern. But one question has repeatedly been raised which is now becoming very serious: how is a bishop or primate in another continent able to discriminate effectively between a genuine crisis of pastoral relationship and theological integrity, and a situation where there are underlying non-theological motivations at work? We have seen instances of intervention in dioceses whose leadership is unquestionably orthodox simply because of local difficulties of a personal and administrative nature. We have also seen instances of clergy disciplined for scandalous behaviour in one jurisdiction accepted in another, apparently without due process. Some other Christian churches have unhappy experience of this problem and it needs to be addressed honestly.

It is not enough to dismiss the existing structures of the Communion. If they are not working effectively, the challenge is to renew them rather than to improvise solutions that may seem to be effective for some in the short term but will continue to create more problems than they solve. This challenge is one of the most significant focuses for the forthcoming Lambeth Conference. One of its major stated aims is to restore and deepen confidence in our Anglican identity. And this task will require all who care as deeply as the authors of the statement say they do about the future of Anglicanism to play their part.

The language of ‘colonialism’ has been freely used of existing patterns. No-one is likely to look back with complacency to the colonial legacy. But emerging from the legacy of colonialism must mean a new co-operation of equals, not a simple reversal of power. If those who speak for GAFCON are willing to share in a genuine renewal of all our patterns of reflection and decision-making in the Communion, they are welcome, especially in the shaping of an effective Covenant for our future together.

I believe that it is wrong to assume we are now so far apart that all those outside the GAFCON network are simply proclaiming another gospel. This is not the case; it is not the experience of millions of faithful and biblically focused Anglicans in every province. What is true is that, on all sides of our controversies, slogans, misrepresentations and caricatures abound. And they need to be challenged in the name of the respect and patience we owe to each other in Jesus Christ.

I have in the past quoted to some in the Communion who would call themselves radical the words of the Apostle in I Cor.11.33: ‘wait for one another’. I would say the same to those in whose name this statement has been issued. An impatience at all costs to clear the Lord’s field of the weeds that may appear among the shoots of true life (Matt.13.29) will put at risk our clarity and effectiveness in communicating just those evangelical and catholic truths which the GAFCON statement presents.

© Rowan Williams

Check out the Seminar (on Conflict Ecclesiology)!!

There are some good posts and discussion over at the Seminar on Conflict Ecclesiology .... come on over and let us know what you think!

I think the discussion on "discernment" is a very interesting one, as we (in the churchy world) use this term, discernment, a great deal -- perhaps without much common understanding of it ...

Come on over, and put in your 2cents!

Peace, Peter

Agreement to Disagree, a proposal by Paul Stanley

In light of all that is going on in the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, this post by Paul Stanley (not the KISS performer, at least I think not) on "Fr. Jake Stops the World" blog has some very interesting proposals...and there have already been nearly 300 comments on the post ... it is worth a read if you have the time!

Peace, Peter

Here's a portion of the proposal:

In the comments of the previous post, Paul Stanley proposed "An Agreement to Disagree." I think it is worth further consideration. Here it is:

(Note that the ordering of the specific points has been amended from the original, with Paul's permission. The original order, to which the early comments refer, can be found here - J.)
__________________________

1) We agree to disagree. We accept that some Christians conscientiously believe that same sex relationships are legitimate and holy. We accept that some Christians consider them to be sinful. We do not regard the expression of either of these views as incompatible with full membership of the Church, and we specifically resolve that we remain in communion with those of both views.

(2) We agree, however, that where people choose to live in a same sex relationship, that relationship must be lived on the same principles as marriage between people of different sexes--with faithful and loving stability. We provide accordingly for the marriage of persons of the same sex.

(3) No minister will be compelled to marry people of the same sex. But if asked to do so, a minister whose conscience does not permit him or her to perform such a marriage must ensure that the couple are referred to a minister who is willing to do so, and must treat the request with pastoral sensitivity. Pastoral sensitivity is not necessarily inconsistent with making it clear that the minister's own view is that same sex marriage is wrong, but due restraint must be exercised, and the minister must always make it clear that this view is his own and one on which others disagree.

(4) No church will be required to have as its priest in charge or as an ordained minister a person who is married to a person of the same sex.

(5) No church will be required to have as its priest in charge or any ordained minister a person who is conscientiously unable to perform marriages for persons of the same sex.

(6) Where a diocese has a bishop who is married to a person of the same sex, arrangements will be made to delegate episcopal functions to a bishop who is not so married in relation to any parish that requests it.

(7) Where a diocese has a bishop who is conscientiously unable to perform marriages for persons of the same sex: (i) the bishop may not refuse to permit clergy in his or her diocese to perform such marriages and (ii) arrangements will be made to delegate episcopal functions to a bishop who does not have such conscientious objections in relation to any parish that requests it.

(8) But nobody may (i) refuse communion to a person on the grounds that he or she is married to a person of the same sex or (ii) deny the validity of the orders of any member of the clergy on the ground that he or she is married to a person of the same sex.

I don't think either side would or ought to be altogether happy with this. But I don't see why it couldn't be a modus vivendi.

For the entire text, check HERE.

Rowan Williams Interviewed by Time

The current European edition of Time magazine interviewed Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, there are two articles there that are well worth reading. You can find them here, and here. You can also listen to Archbishop Rowan Williams' interview here on a Time Magazine podcast. (Shoutout goes to Will at the Yearns and Groans blog for letting me know about the articles).

Father Matthew Rocks on YouTube!

If you haven't seen Father Matthew Moretz on YouTube, you just have to check him out. In his weekly 3-5 minute videos he really packs a punch and not only teaches about the church, but shows us a lively mind and spirit ... in his February 7th Video, he takes on the question of Unity and Diversity in the Episcopal Church. No matter your perspective on the issues at hand, his discussion is worth 4 minutes of your time for reflection!

Can there be Unity without Uniformity?

A brief question that encapsulates some of the issues that I tried to address in my honors thesis was the question of "Can there be Unity but not Uniformity?" within the Church, within the gathered community, within even other entities such as schools, families, organizations? My assumption is that there can be Unity but not Uniformity, though it will require a dynamism that most communities have difficulty tolerating and celebrating. My assumption needs to be challenged and tested ... as it probably is in many local churches, as well as in the Global Anglican Communion.

Can there be Unity but not Uniformity?

Summary (abstract) of the work...

An ecclesiology of communion that is Trinitarian offers a model for the Church of living together in unity though not in uniformity. This model may allow for and affirm prophetic voices from the margins so that the church might respond to the cries of a world in need. This thesis attempts to explore and describe an ecclesiology of communion that is influenced by Trinitarian theology. In this awareness of difference and tension, this model of ecclesiology is dynamic and transformational. The hope is that this ecclesiology may describe a more dynamic Church that not only exists in judgment but also exists in action to dismantle systems of oppression.

This thesis begins with Dietrich Bonhoeffer and his sense that the Church is constituted socially by Christ. He states “The church is the hidden Christ among us.”[1] In this ecclesiology, Christ is at the center, and communion is known within and between people as they encounter Christ and one another. Further, the “church is only the church when it exists for others.”

The poetic and mystical descriptions of church by Rowan Williams offer a model that the church, along with the creation itself, is gift. As God made the world and as God gave his son to the world, God also gave the church. As such, the church exists in a contingent way, it exists in judgment. As a community of the forgiven, the members of the church are made up of persons, not mere individuals. The persons of the church can be likened to the persons of the Trinity, living in unity and difference, in the mystical Godhead. Finally, in Rowan Williams description, Christ is present in the interaction between people as they encounter and welcome those who are different, that is; the other.

Lastly, to evaluate how communion exists in judgment and action this thesis takes up James Cone’s critiques of ecclesiology. For Cone, “The Christian church is that community of persons who ‘got the hint,’” and thus refused to be content with human pain and suffering. Refusing merely to speak of the church mystically or metaphysically, Cone challenges conventional (white, European) assumptions and claims about church and also challenges even the highly nuanced theology of Rowan Williams. If the church universal and local embraces such a model, it may move from individualism to community, from inward gazing to outward mission, from a focus on the in crowd to focus on all those at the margins.

Living into a model of the dynamic church, the persons of the church would hear the cry of the poor and oppressed and then act to end oppression, to see the injustices of our world, and act to counter them. As we turn to one another in our local churches, in our larger church bodies, and in our worldwide churches, we rely on the work of Christ to bring us to full unity. As we turn to one another with the ordinary, time tested practices of our tradition, we approach one another with humility, with an awareness of our own brokenness, and our own incompleteness. From the interaction between and among the members of the church there emerges a personal and communal transformation into a church that is dynamic, outward looking and responds to a world in need. In the contexts of the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church, we are perhaps at a turning point, an opportunity, or a catastrophe, depending on one’s perspective.

---

[1] Bonhoeffer, Dietrich No Rusty Swords: Letters, Lectures and Notes – 1928-1936- From the Collected Works, Volume I (Collins, London: 1965)