Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Church Politics’ Category

Timothy Dolan, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Ne...

Timothy Dolan, Roman Catholic Archbishop of New York (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The day after evangelical pastor Rick Warren said that his followers would have trouble voting for Mitt Romney because Mormons do not believe in the Trinity, Catholic Cardinal Timothy Dolan said Sunday on Face the Nation that Republican front-runner Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith should not be an issue in the presidential campaign.

There may be reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney as president of the United States. That he’s a Mormon cannot be one of them.“I don’t think Catholics would have any problem voting for a Mormon at all.”                      —Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York

Dolan has reminded his followers that it was not too many years ago that Catholics felt the sting of such discrimination in the election of 1960 that saw John F. Kennedy win the presidency.  During the Republican primary season dominated by conservatives, Romney’s religion has been a recurring subplot in the strategy of his opponents.

For Cardinal Dolan to called out the discrimination for what it is was admirable, but it was also subtle, delicious political payback for President Obama’s action to force the church to support health care practices in opposition to its teaching.  The Cardinal is reminding the White House that the church is not without its influence in these matters .

Dolan brought up religion us prejudice in a speech to the Jewish Anti-Defamation League when he was asked how the Jewish and Catholic communities could cooperate better. He got a standing ovation after he told them

we Catholics and we Jews have felt the sting of the other side. And now, one of the ways we can cooperate is to see that religious prejudice, religious bigotry doesn’t enter the campaign.”

Read Full Post »

Dr Rowan Williams PC, DPhil, DD, FBA the 104th...

Image via Wikipedia

The Archbishop of Canterbury announced March 17, 2012 that he would step down at the end of 2012 and go back to academia as Master of Magdalene College in Cambridge, England.  The ABC has had a tough ride since he was appointed by former Prime Minister Tony Blair in 2002.

We rebellious Americans insisted upon being inclusive infuriating the traditional Africans who are anything but.  Williams tried to make peace in the Anglican Communion but succeeded only in exacerbating the problem by fuzzing up the boundaries of what an independent church may do and still be part of the Communion.  The Anglican Covenant solved none of the problems but has undermined the fundamental principles of the Communion itself with its meddling and two class membership.  No wonder it has met with unenthusiastic response and perhaps with Williams retirement the Covenant will also go back to academia.

At the ends of the process the appointment of an Archbishop of Canterbury is a political matter.  This is a hot potato Prime Minister Cameron probably also wishes would go away.  So expect a deliberate selection process designed to find the least worst outcome.

We wish Rowan Williams well in retirement.  He certainly is entitled to a little peace.

Read Full Post »

Seal of the Diocese of California

Image via Wikipedia

The 162nd Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of California rejected the Anglican Covenant by a wide margin October 23rd.  This was not a surprise since sentiment against the Covenant has run strong and deep since it was first unveiled.  But there was a holy and healthy peace about the decision and a sense of sadness that the debate had produced such acrimony across the Communion.

The Anglican Communion was formed as a freewill association of independent churches sharing the common faith foundation from the mother Anglican Church of England.  But America fought a revolution for its independence from England and has thrived for the past two centuries quite well on its own.  America democratized the church with the invention of the Standing Committee.

While the Episcopal Church of the US clearly wants to remain in communion with the other Anglican Communion members, we are not prepared to sacrifice our independence or subordinate ourselves to a Standing Committee other than our own.  Such a price is too high to pay—-and worse such a price is too high to even have the audacity to ask for.  So the logical answer is no thank you.

In a world full of intolerance, the message from the Diocese of California is clear and unmistakable: 

EVERYONE who loves God and seeks Christ is welcome at our table where we come together to find renewal, hope and unconditional love.

Read Full Post »

In Iran, Yousef Nadarkhani became a Christian as a teenager.  Later he became a pastor of a Christian Church.

Wonderful, you say?  Not in Islamic Iran.

Yousef was arrested in 2009 and now is under a death sentence charged with apostasy unless he recants his faith.  So says the Supreme Court of Iran.

The story in Freedom’s Lighthouse says he is unlikely to do so.

Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran says, “Most churches in Iran operate with some degree of secrecy. They operate in homes. People take their batteries out of their cell phones and leave them at the door. They show up at random times so as to avoid the appearance of a crowd filing in. The current government sees them as a threat.”

At this writing we do not know the fate of this fellow Christian, but we do know this.  As one of the great monotheistic religions we share with Islam a belief in God whether he is called Allah or another name according to the faith tradition.  It seems unbelievable that this oneness with God could result in such an un-holy profession of faith.

It is this intolerance that sets Islam apart from the rest of the world’s believers, and it is right that such intolerance should be condemned for what it is.

Read Full Post »

Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and P...

Image via Wikipedia

Reprinted from Thinking Anglicans:

New Zealand Maori diocese rejects Covenant

The central North Island hui amorangi (Maori diocese) of Te Manawa o Te Wheke has become the first New Zealand episcopal unit to formally give the thumbs-down to the proposed Anglican covenant.

Read more about this at Manawa o Te Wheke rejects Anglican covenant.

The text of the motion passed unanimously:

That Te Hui Amorangi o Te Manawa o Te Wheke, for the purpose of providing feedback to Te Hinota Whanui/ General Synod, states its opposition to The Anglican Covenant for the following reasons:

  • After much consideration this Amorangi feels that The Anglican Covenant will threaten the Rangatiratanga of the Tangata Whenua.
  • We believe The Anglican Covenant does not reflect our understanding of being Anglican in these islands.
  • We would like this Church to focus on the restoration of justice to Te Tiriti o Waitangi which Tangata Whenua signed and currently do not have what they signed for.

There are five [Maori] hui amorangi. Any motion must gain a majority in all three Tikanga (Maori, Pakeha, and Polynesia) and three hui amorangi constitute a majority in Tikanga Maori. So two further similar votes would cause the Covenant to be “dead in the water” in New Zealand.

Peter Carrell has written Dead Duck Covenant?

Bosco Peters has written Maori vote against Covenant

…Since 1992, the Constitution of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia provides for three Tikanga (cultural streams) partners to order their affairs within their own cultural context: Tikanga Maori (the indigenous people of Aotearoa-New Zealand); Tikanga Pakeha (those here by virtue of te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi); Tikanga Pasefika (encompassing the episcopal units of Polynesia in New Zealand, Vanua Levu and Taveuni, and Viti Levu West, and the Archdeaconries of Suva and Ovalau, Samoa and American Samoa, and Tonga).

When significant decisions are made at te Hinota Whanui/General Synod, as with other Anglican Provinces, there must be agreement across all houses – here those are the house of bishops, clergy, and laity. There must also be agreement across all Tikanga. In other words, even if Tikanga Pakeha and Tikanga Pasefica are in majority agreement in favour of the Covenant, if Tikanga Maori votes against the Covenant, the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia would be saying no to the Covenant…”

Read Full Post »

Cranmer's Prayer book of 1552.

Cranmer's 1552 BCP

At the Contra Costa Deanery meeting this week we had a useful presentation on the Anglican covenant and lively discussion around the tables about whether the Episcopal Church of the US should agree to the covenant.

I have written about the Anglican Covenant several times and you can find those posts in the category called “Church Politics” for that is exactly what this is pure and simple.

The decision we face is a Hobson’s Choice:

Do we want to be in “communion” with the other Anglican churches of the world so much that we are willing to give up the sovereignty of our national Episcopal Church of the US, subject our faith values and practices to the will of an international Anglican Communion Standing Committee and other bodies mostly made up of member provinces that have already told us we are sinners for our beliefs and our actions border on apostasy.

This is a little like turning over the authority of the US Congress to the UN General Assembly and hoping for the best.

We empathize with the problems of the African bishops and provinces facing the growth of Islam putting pressure on them to move their philosophy and rules of behavior closer to those of the Muslim majorities in their countries.

We recognize that some bishops and provinces such as Mexico find themselves in the minority and signing onto the Anglican covenant brings them closer to the views expressed by the majority Roman Catholic Church.

The question is whether the Anglican Covenant is a Sophie’s Choice?

Sophie’s Choice in the movie was to choose which child to sacrifice and which to save.  By choosing one the other would die.  The question we face is whether the Anglican Covenant so corrupts the principles of the communion that it has the practical effect of undermining the very faith foundation of the Episcopal Church in the US and others.

In the US we already face a 40 year trend in declining participation among the mainline Protestant religions.  Will adding more controversy and division in the life of the church improve our attractiveness to the unchurched and underserved?

The Genius of the Book of Common Prayer

The answer to our problems lies in the history of the Anglican Church.  Just as at the time of the split with Rome, the church faced divisions and uncertainty.  The differences were healed by allowing the people of the church to pray over them and instead come together around Archbishop Cranmer’s Book of Common Prayer which celebrated our oneness in the love of Christ, in the ritual of the Eucharist and in the Easter of our shared future.

Just as it was not necessary to resolve every difference in the time of Cranmer so it is not necessary to resolve our differences in such a win-lose way today.

For me the answer is simple.

We cannot be the Body of Christ in the Episcopal Church of the US if we abandon our independence, subject our values to a veto by a foreign church and leaders with different values, or abandon our faith tradition in the genius of the Book of Common Prayer.

We cannot be the Body of Christ for the people of God in our midst if we exclude and vilify those of difference instead of loving and welcoming them to the table where all who love God and seek Christ are welcome.

We cannot be the Body of Christ in America if we abandon the principles of independence, freedom of speech, religion, the press and association that are the foundation of our nation and the reason we broke away in our own revolution—an independent church able to call our own bishops, raise up our own priests and preach the Good News to any who walks through our doors to receive it.

If we abandon these things for the sake of being in communion with those who do not respect our rights, our faith values and our liberty then we will end up with buildings but no soul.

Just say no!

Read Full Post »

500 million year record shows current and prev...

Image via Wikipedia

I recently stumbled upon this fascinating blog post by Richard Stuebi writing in the cleantech blog which I recommend to you as food for thought in the relationship between religion and the debate over climate change.

by Richard T. Stuebi

A fascinating article in Slate noted that 55% of scientists in the U.S. are Democrats, as opposed to 6% Republicans (with the remainder being independents or “don’t know”).  Since most Democrats favor action on climate change, so do most scientists.

The implication, as the Slate article says:  ”the results of climate science, delivered by scientists who are overwhelmingly Democratic, are used over a period of decades to advance a political agenda that happens to align precisely with the ideological preferences of Democrats.  Coincidence — or causation?”

The flip-side of this equation is religion.  Gallup has found that Republicans tend to be more religious than Democrats.  And, Republicans are generally more skeptical about the climate change phenomenon — (1) whether it’s happening at all, (2) even if so, whether human activity is causing it, and (3) even if so, whether it’s worth spending anything more than zero to do anything about it.

It also follows, then, that there is a negative correlation between religious belief and concern about climate change.  Put more simply, the more a person has religious faith, the less a person tends to worry about climate change.

If religious fervor can be quantitatively assessed, then it’s safe to say that evangelicals would get a high score, and it seems to be the case that evangelicals are especially adverse to the climate change issue.

As reported in the New York Times article “An Evangelical Backlash Against Environmentalism”, a non-profit evangelical organization called the Cornwall Alliance calls the environmental movement a “false religion”, and has issued an educational program titled “Resisting the Green Dragon” to warn Christians that the forces of radical environmentalism are seeking tyrannical control over all other beloved institutions such as God and country.

To make matters more confusing, a court in England ruled in 2009 that a belief in climate change can be considered a religion in itself.

With respect to climate change, the “Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming” is well worth reading in its entirety to get a flavor of the position of the Cornwall Alliance.  It’s a far cry from the “creation-care” movement that other less-strident Christians have embraced, using theology as a foundation for planetary stewardship.

It would appear that the ages-old schism between religion and science has therefore appropriated climate change as the newest issue over which to tangle.  Since the two U.S. political parties tend to cleave pretty neatly also alongside the science/religion divide, it makes the climate change debate particularly thorny and hard to untangle in either our churches or our legislatures, since strongly-held beliefs are always more emotionally powerful than facts.

Read Full Post »

Sewanee: The University of the South

Image via Wikipedia

The debate provoked by the Episcopal Church now playing out in the Anglican Covenant might end up being overshadowed by an even more disruptive change brought on by prayerful reflection.

What could be more disruptive than that, you ask?

I’m talking about the decision by the Board of Trustees of the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee to CUT tuition and fees for the next school year by 10% to reflect the “new economic realities” facing its students and their families.

While virtually every other college and university is raising its tuition and fees, Sewanee’s action is a direct challenge to each of them to do a little prayerful reflection on their own.  The University of the South is owned by 28 dioceses of the Episcopal Church.

Higher education is on the verge of pricing itself beyond the reach of more and more families.”-–Sewanee President John McCardell Jr.

Every parent of a college age kid knows exactly what he is talking about.  It does not matter whether the school is public or private, sectarian or church affiliated, higher education has lived in its ivory Tower seemingly insulated from the economic realities around it.  It spends money as if it could print its own by merely demanding it of students, alumni or the public.

The Federal Government is also provoking some disruptive change of its own with the challenge by the Department of Education to private, for profit, colleges whose business model is to enroll students eligible for federal student aid or loans and charge tuition and fees disproportionate to the earning power of the students graduating.  While this is a shot at the private technical schools and the University of Phoenix—the same logic applies to public universities and private colleges including the Ivy Leagues to get their costs under control.

Thanks be to Sewanee for leading the way.

Read Full Post »

Flag of the Anglican Communion

Flag of the Anglican Communion Image via Wikipedia

“I am wondering if the proposed Anglican Covenant is as dead as many Episcopalians think it is. It seems to me that Rowan Williams is making slow but significant progress toward assembling a notional center that he can then play off against the left (constituted by us, the Brazilians, the Scots and maybe the Welsh) and the right (constituted by Nigeria, Uganda and the Southern Cone.)”

That is the lead paragraph in a new blog post today on Episcopal Café by Jim Naughton.  So far, Myanmar, Mexico and West indies have approved the Covenant and the plodding process moves forward for consideration in many other provinces. Not all those opposed to the Covenant object to its provisions—many of the Global South provinces think it does not go far enough.  Naughton leaves you with the impression he believe the Anglican Covenant still has a reasonable prospect of adoption among the Provinces.

An actual scorecard on the actions to date on the Anglican Covenant can be found on a website devoted to that purpose at http://noanglicancovenant.org/background.html#status . If you are looking for background information on the Anglican Covenant or the issues leading up to it this is a useful place to find it all in one location.

Diocesan Dilemma: Blessing Civil Unions and the Anglican Covenant

Meanwhile back at Westminster, the Archbishop of Canterbury has another fight on his hands after it was reported in the Telegraph on Valentine’s Day that Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat equalities minister in the UK Coalition Cabinet is expected to ask the House of Commons to lift the current ban on civil partnerships being conducted in church. The report said they could also be carried out in the future out by priests or other religious figures. The Church of England is on record as not allowing any of its buildings to be used for civil partnership ceremonies as is the Roman Catholic Church.

The action by Equalities Minister Featherstone follows her predecessor from the previous Labour government Lord Alli, a Labour life-peer in the House of Lords and its only openly gay Muslim member, who acted as Tony Blair‘s floor manager in Lords in passage of the Civil Partnership Act 2004, giving same-sex couples in the United Kingdom the ability to enter into civil unions with equal rights as married couples. In 2009, Lord Alli lead an effort to repeal clauses in the Civil Partnerships Act which prohibited religious institutions from conducting the ceremonies on their premises which resulted in a compromise bipartisan amendment, which became part of the Equality Act 2010. Action by Parliament is required to fully implement the new policy to allow use of religious building and rituals if the denomination approves.

So what?

See, our situation in the Episcopal Church is not so bad after all.  We are an independent member of the Anglican Communion with the right to say “no” to any action of the other provinces seeking to impose conditions or limitations to our actions.  Pity poor Rowan Williams,  he not only has the rest of the primate cats to herd but now the politicians are telling him who to bless and where to go.

Oops, let me rephrase that last sentence!

Read Full Post »

Samuel Seabury, (1729-11-30 - 1796-02-25), Bis...

Bishop Samuel Seabury Image via Wikipedia

“The crisis in the Communion is still unfolding. In an attempt to keep the conservatives from walking away, Rowan Williams is urging all the provinces to sign a Covenant – essentially a promise not to innovate in ways that are unacceptable to the majority. Provinces that prize their autonomy too highly to sign will be reduced to ‘associate’ members of the club. Would such a change in status matter to the Episcopal Church? Or might it be a badge of pride, like Hester Prynne’s scarlet letter? The bishop [Mark Sisk, Episcopal Bishop of New York] is reluctant to be drawn on this; he offers some rhetoric about the aim of the Covenant being to keep as many people as possible talking, and that being a good thing, and it being too early to say what the American response will be.”—Theo Hobson, The Spectator, February 9, 2011.

The Anglican Covenant was first proposed in “The Windsor Report” as a response to conflict among Anglicans following the Consecration of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003. Some Anglicans refused to attend Holy Communion with others as a result.  The Archbishop of Canterbury told the General Synod of the Church of England that without the Covenant we could expect the dismantling of the Communion ‘piece by piece’.

The Long History of Church Politics and Controversy

The Episcopal Church of the United States is one of the independent churches that make up the Anglican Communion.  It has its roots in the Church of England from which it broke away during the American Revolution just as our country did.  But the roots of the church are actually a more ancient tradition that begins with the first followers of Jesus. The very name of the Episcopal Church indicates its participation in the Apostolic Succession or the historic episcopate, the passing of teaching and authority across the generations through bishops, beginning with the apostles—an unbroken chain of faith.

What separates the Episcopal Church of the US from other Christian denominations is its history as part of the Church of England.  If you study our church history you will quickly find that controversy is nothing new to the church.  It was born in controversy and has thrived despite it. The Church of England was born out of King Henry VIII’s breaking away from the Roman Catholic Church in 1534.  That break was prompted by politics, among other things, by the Pope’s refusal to invalidate Henry’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon so that he could marry Anne Boleyn.  So Parliament made the king “the supreme head of the Church of England.”  Although the church was separated from the authority of the Pope, its structures, practices and teaching remained similar to that of the Roman Catholic Church and the bishops remained as overseers of the church.

Under Henry’s son, Edward VI, Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, published the first Book of Common Prayer in 1549.  In a country whose religious traditions ranged from Puritan to Roman Catholic, this Prayer Book, rather than a statement of doctrine or allegiance to the Pope, was able to unite the kingdom in common worship while allowing great latitude for varying opinions.  Any moderate form of Protestantism was acceptable as long as it participated in the common worship of the Church of England. The roots of Anglicanism’s wide tolerance of opinion and expression were, in large part, laid during this time and are still being tested today by the demands for the Anglican Covenant.

English settlers to the American Colonies brought their faith with them.  But because Anglican (English) clergy had sworn allegiance to the Crown, the American Revolution presented great difficulty for the Church of England in the newly-formed United States of America.  The church remained the Church of England, with the sovereign as its head.  To make matters more difficult, there were no bishops in the United States.  Without them, no new clergy could be ordained.

Two men emerged during these post-Revolutionary War years to help reorganize the Anglican Church into an American denomination.  William White led the effort to form a legislative body (the General Convention, which first met in 1785) and gain recognition from the Church of England.  The other, Samuel Seabury, was consecrated bishop by Anglican bishops in Scotland so that the newly formed Episcopal Church could ordain clergy and take root in America while maintaining the apostolic succession that was so critical to its identity.  The Episcopal Church in the US authorized its own Book of Common Prayer in 1789.

In the same way, English colonists brought the Church of England to other parts of the world.  Churches in these colonies used the basic framework of Anglican worship, prayer and tradition, while allowing for local and cultural adaptation and expression.  The American Revolution goes global, so to speak. As those colonies became independent from England, so did their churches.  But they remained connected to (“in communion with”) the Church of England and each another.  This group of churches is now known as the Anglican Communion, consisting of 38 self-governing member churches or provinces in over 160 countries.  Each church in the Communion is governed independently.  The Episcopal Church in the United States of America is one member of the Anglican Communion.

Today‘s Challenge to the Communion

In its current history unfolding, the Church confronts controversies not unlike those at its founding including the ordination of women and then gay/lesbian priests and then there came Bishop Gene Robinson.  The current debate over breakaway parishes, recognition by far distant bishops and challenges to Church practice, teaching and politics come right out of Henry VIII’s 1534 playbook. It did not work then and it will not work today.

So be revolutionary and pick up that Book of Common Prayer in the pew rack.  Cranmer’s early attempt to bridge the gaps in church politics without losing his head in the process still enables those of us sitting in the pews today to focus on following Jesus and the teaching of the Apostles as the underlying principles of worship—and in so doing we become a link in that unbroken chain of faith ourselves.

What would Bishop Seabury do about the proposed Anglican Covenant?

Like many of you, I read the proposed Anglican Covenant and the communiqué from the Primates, and the letter of Marc in response. I have come to believe that this is an altogether healthy conflict to have in the life of the Church despite its discomfort.  We know what Bishop Seabury would do—he would pray for the primates—and join Bishop Robinson at the table.

This is the kind of conflict Jesus would wish for us.

I came to realize from my own experience that I did not sacrifice nor diminish my faith in marriage or the family by accepting the reality that there are different ways to define the commitment of two people of any gender to each other or the forming of family configurations different than my own.  Look around you, you will see both success and failure in unions and families in both traditional and “non-traditional” experiences.

I also believe that if we love each other as Jesus taught we already know the answer to the rest of these questions.  Our faith is our salvation and our way.

This is not a zero-sum game.  My values are neither strengthened nor validated; my faith is not dependent upon or renewed by denying others the right to live their lives differently than my own. Jesus, after all, expressed some fairly untraditional views in his own time, and he even had the temerity to associate with “tax collectors and sinners” after all.

Jesus told us to follow Him.  And while I hear the angst in the words of the Primates, I believe that together at the communion table these differences are healed by God’s unconditional love for us if we are only willing to come to Jesus.

And so we know our answer to the Anglican Covenant question in our hearts.

The answer is we are called by Jesus to be one by faith.  And if we are to love one another as He loved us we must accept one another as we are.  And so we accept the Primates and love them even when their views are different from our own.  But we belong to Jesus not the Primates—and so does the Anglican Communion.

To agree to the Anglican Covenant is to abandon both our faith and our independence because Jesus is alive in each of us—of every race, every age, every nationality, every orientation, every family of every kind—and where because of His unconditional love for all of us, every day around our communion table is Easter!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.