I posted this very short article from the Anglican Digest back in July, 2003. I think I need to post it again. I think I am going to use it in my sermon today at St. Paul’s – Orthodoxy and/or Orthopraxy, and when considering the two, what causes the world to hate us, today?
—-
This was written in 1991 by The Very Rev. George Back, then Dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral in Oklahoma City. It was reprinted by The Anglican Digest
Conservatives? Liberals?
I have heard rumors that conflicts between conservatives and liberals are tearing the Church apart. Don’t believe it.
Few of these people exist. I have had letters and phone calls from some who claim to be one or the other. As far as I can tell, they are impostors. Of course, I can only judge from their behavior.
If the Church had many conservatives, the buildings would be packed on Sundays as they keep the Sabbath holy. Our Church would have money since they would tithe 10% of their income. Our Church life would be glorious as they would undertake all the traditional Sunday School, retreat, and holy day obligations. An authentic personal morality would be exemplified in their holy lifestyles.
If the Church had many liberals, they would be enthusiastically including people all the time. The Church would grow as they reached out to the poor and the isolated in various ministries. Our service ministries would be overwhelmed with volunteers and resources. An authentic social conscience would be exemplified in the compassionate lifestyles.
Judging only by behavior, the Church has too few religious conservatives and religious liberals. God bless the ones we have; they are doing wonderful work.
Then where is the problem? There are numerous anti-conservatives and anti-liberals. These are people who compare their particular ideology with other’s actual behavior. Their convenient posture enables them to be both righteous and removed at the same time.
Both know that others need to change their bad habits. The sins, failures, hypocrisy, and mediocrity of these others provide a good reason not to attend worship and not to give money and not to serve energetically and not to love affectionately in the Lord’s name.
Religion is behavior, not theology. To worship God with all one’s heart, mind, soul, and strength is not an idea, it is a practice. To love one’s neighbor as an _’idea’_ is an illusion. Love must take up space and time; it costs lots of money and much energy.
Church is a place for religious behavior, where one worships God and serves God’s children. It is large enough to include true religious conservatives and true religious liberals, since they only emphasize one or the other aspect of religion.
The Church will never be at peace until the commitment to God and the Gospel of our Lord take priority over any personal warp to some left or right ideas. People who have a primary commitment to their own opinions and a secondary interest in religion always threaten to destroy the Church.
What good reason and right opinion do you have to excuse yourself from the costly practice of true religion?

The saga continues. From Kendall Harmon’s website, titusonenine, the summation of Controversy Involving the Bishop of Chelmsford, England, and the Primate of the Anglican Church in Kenya.
I posted a response, along with lots of other people. Here is my response:
# Bob G Says:
May 24th, 2006 at 12:22 pm
Whether anyone agrees with it or not, supports it or not, or will accept it or not, the Lambath resolution calls for us to be in dialogue and to listen to gay and lesbian Christians.
If those opposed to homosexuals in the Church want those in favor of it to abide by the Lambath resolution, then all need to abide by it equally. Those who demand compliance to one part and refuse to comply with both parts are hypocrites. That sounds harsh, but what other conclusion can be made – “we demand you comply, but we will not comply.”
A good many primates in the Global South will not be in dialogue, as called for by the second portion of the Lambath resolution. Their opinions on the interpretation of Scripture applied to homosexuality are set and they will refuse to consider that they may be wrong. There are many bishops, clergy, and lay in the North who agree with their Southern brothers. I cannot help but consider it hypocritical that the demand goes forth to those who support a rethinking of the homosexual issue to stop rethinking and conform to the traditional understanding because the Lambath resolution is the mind of the Communion, when they refuse to comply to the second part of the resolution, which is also the mind of the Communion.
To have integrity, and in my opinion to be faithful to Christ, there needs to be consistency and honesty on both sides. If there will not be, then I see no reason to give much credence to the other side, whether for or against rethinking the issue.
I’ve gotten to the point where I want to say to the 10% hard-core supporters on both sides of the issue to sit down and just shut-up for a while and let the remaining 80% deal with the issue forthrightly.

Here is an interesting article in today’s UK Telegraph newspaper.

Continue reading →

It is my understanding that technically all parish clergy in the Church of England are required to read Morning Prayer in their parish churches every morning. Whether they do so or not is something all together different, but again I understand they are supposed to.
Being at The General Theological Seminary, that offers Morning Prayer and Evensong every day, I became spoiled that these ancient monastic offices – the prayers of the hours – where so readily available. I truly came to appreciate them and the slow but deliberate effect they have on us, if we yield ourselves to their transformative power that is.
I do think we in The Episcopal Church need to bring back the Daily Offices! I know that many parish churches and many clergy, as well as lay people, do say the Daily Offices but there is no coordination, it seems. It is my intent when ever and if ever I am able to move closer to St. Paul’s Carroll St. in Brooklyn to begin the practice of reading Morning Prayer in the church once again. It is an Anglo-Catholic parish, after all, and the former home of the Cowley Fathers. Money, like always, keeps things from happening. Whether anyone else wants to participate is irrelevant, although I do hope some will. It is a wonderful way to begin the day.
It is my understanding that technically all parish clergy in the Church of England are required to read Morning Prayer in their parish churches every morning. Whether they do so or not is something all together different, but again I understand they are supposed to.
Being at The General Theological Seminary, that offers Morning Prayer and Evensong every day, I became spoiled that these ancient monastic offices – the prayers of the hours – where so readily available. I truly came to appreciate them and the slow but deliberate effect they have on us, if we yield ourselves to their transformative power that is.
I do think we in The Episcopal Church need to bring back the Daily Offices! I know that many parish churches and many clergy, as well as lay people, do say the Daily Offices but there is no coordination, it seems. It is my intent when ever and if ever I am able to move closer to St. Paul’s Carroll St. in Brooklyn to begin the practice of reading Morning Prayer in the church once again. It is an Anglo-Catholic parish, after all, and the former home of the Cowley Fathers. Money, like always, keeps things from happening. Whether anyone else wants to participate is irrelevant, although I do hope some will. It is a wonderful way to begin the day.
Oh, we now have a new priest in Christ’s Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church – The Rev. Sonia Waters. I attended her ordination to the Holy Order of Priests at Grace Church in Brooklyn Heights this morning. A wonderful service – and I got to see a lot of my former classmates, too. What a deal!

Mark Harris, an Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Delware, has written a couple new comments on his blog, Preludium, concerning world-wide Anglicanism. The posts are for March 7th & 8th, entitled, “Hold the Anglican Church of Nigeria to Account” and ” Not a Worldwide Church, but a Fellowship”, respectively.
Read them here.

Here is a good commentary from the TimesOnline (Longdon Times, that is) by Dr Geoffrey Rowell, the Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe. (I found this on Kendall Harmons’ titusonenine, thanks!)
The dangers of unbalancing the ‘broad church’ of Anglicanism Credo
by Geoffrey Rowell
The Times January 28, 2006
A FEW weeks ago a European diplomat asked me to explain what was meant by saying that the Church of England was “a broad church”. As Anglican travellers know all too well, it is quite difficult to explain the identity of Anglicanism to many Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Christians with no experience of the Church of England. It is, we say, both Catholic and reformed, a Church that experienced the Reformation of the 16th century, yet was careful to maintain the historic threefold apostolic ministry of bishop, priest and deacon; a Church that in its orders of morning and evening prayer (matins and evensong) creatively continued the pattern of the old monastic daily offices, but adapted for congregations; and which retained not only the sacraments, but sacramental signs like the ring in marriage and the sign of the cross in baptism.
If there was concern for reformation, there was also concern for continuity, and it was the faith and order of the early centuries of the Church that were looked to as the benchmark of the English Reformation. Later medieval patterns of worship and practice were tested against the practice of the undivided church of east and west and early apologists for the Church of England emphasised that the English Reformation was a reformation by tradition.
As the genius of the Church of England grew and developed within the broad structure of its “reformed Catholicism” there was room for those with different theological emphases. So the Church of England accommodated groups with differing expressions of worship and different theologies, often co-existing happily, sometimes fighting battles to push at the boundaries.

Continue reading →

I am continuing to read through the latest Anglican Theological Review (vol.87 num.4). This issue concerns the Windsor Report and what the essayists think our response to that report should be or what they consider to be the significant aspects of the report.
Harold T. Lewis, the moderate Rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh, PA(!) wrote an essay on the differences between “covenant” and “contract” and his experiences in a diocese that is headed by the leader of the reactionary movement within The Episcopal Church. And, I am just now reading the essay by Ephraim Radner, Rector of Church of the Ascension in Pueblo, Colorado. Radner tends to be conservative from a Catholic perspective. I truly like his essays!
The following paragraph from Lewis’s essay, Covenant, Contract, and Communion: Reflections on a Post-Windsor Anglicanism is significant, I think:

“I contend that this quintessential Anglican trait of an ability to allow for such differences,” (he earlier detailed some of the significant differences effecting the Communion right now – primarily revolving around homosexuality) “this covenantal existence that has, since the time of Richard Hooker, allowed for divergent views under the Anglican umbrella, no longer obtains. Anglicanism today has ceased to be guided by covenant, which understands the church to be supple. Instead, it is beginning to be guided by contract, which understands the church to be rigid. IN as assiduous and tenacious reverence for and reliance on laws – biblical, constitutional, canonical – Ecclesia Anglicana is exhibiting an unprecedented sense of distrust stems almost solely from the existence of divergent views on the subject of human sexuality. Specifically, many opine that any individual, diocese, or national church body that believes that homosexual persons can be fit for ordination, or that the church should consider recognizing same-sex blessings, has removed itself from the ranks of orthodox Christians…
“What makes such actions so troubling is that the theology of those who hold such views is deemed suspect, and their very fitness for ministry is called into question. Actions arising from such suspicions can have serious consequences…” (pp 604-605)
The following is from Radner’s essay, Freedom and Covenant: The Miltonian Analogy Transfigured:

“…polity that is ‘open, democratic, and participatory – flowing out of the life of the community.’ ‘Autonomy’ within a culture of ‘democracy represents a vital piece of self-imaging for Episcopalians.’
“But is this understanding simply the result of ECUSA’s long immersion in an American culture, an appropriation of the secular foundations of American government?…
“There is a theology here. It does not, however, look much like the theology expressed by the eighteenth-century organizers of the Episcopal Church, whose interest in democratic voting was real, but limited (and certainly not universally shared). Instead, the biggest theological problem confronting the inventers of American Episcopalianism was bishops themselves, and how to justify them in a political and religious context in which ‘prelacy’ was often attacked as intrinsically oppressive and seditious… William White’s goal for the yet-to-be established Anglican body in the United States was that it should provide a religious option from those who were drawn to ‘episcopal’ forms of ecclesial life and worship.
“Today’s historical-pneumatic claims to liberty on the part of defenders of ECUSA’s autonomy are something else altogether…. But, their shape, within the context of historical Anglican debate, is quite surprising: it turns out to be far closer to the reformed congregationalist radicalism of someone like John Milton than to anything resembling ‘Episcopal’ values. This similitude demonstrates the paradox – and the irony – of current ECUSA official theology in the debate about Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. It appears as if the most extreme of anti-episcopal (‘anti-prelatical’) theologies is now wedded to an American ecclesial body distinctive precisely through its commitment to ‘prelacy.'”
Good stuff! I like Lewis’ focus on covenant rather than the legal black and white of contract, and the Body of Christ being supple rather than rigid. On the other hand, as I have been moving more towards a “Catholic” (not “Roman”) understanding of the Church, Radner’s emphasis on the unique situation of the American Episcopal Church being a church of prelates is important, since there is a move by both the “conservatives” and the “liberals” to push their views in a way that does seem more congregational than epsicopal.

Four churches in the Diocese of Ohio, my home diocese, intend on leaving the Episcopal Church. Bishop Hollingsworth issued a press release, and it follows. I am thankful that there is a willingness on all sides to work this out amicably.

November 9, 2005
Dear sisters and brothers in Christ,
This afternoon I have released to the press the following joint statement with the rectors of the congregations involved:
“Four congregations in Northeast Ohio have voted to disaffiliate with the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA) and the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio. They are St. Luke’s, Akron; Church of the Holy Spirit, Akron; St. Anne’s in the Fields, Madison; and St. Barnabas, Bay Village.
“The four parishes held congregational meetings Sunday, November 6, 2005 to ratify the unanimous decisions of their vestries (elected church boards) to affiliate with the Diocese of Bolivia in the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. Their decision results from a
theological dispute with the Episcopal Church over divergent understandings of the authority of Scripture and traditional Christian teaching.
“The Rt. Rev. Mark Hollingsworth, Jr., Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio, was informed of these decisions at a meeting with the clergy leaders of the four parishes the following day. Together they discussed seeking a constructive way forward that will be
supportive of all involved. The bishop and the four parish rectors are committed to negotiating a mutually beneficial resolution and have agreed to continue working together toward that
end.
“The rectors of the four congregations are as follows:
The Rev. Roger Ames, Rector, St. Lukes’, Akron
The Rev. Kelly Irish, Rector, St. Anne’s in the Fields, Madison
The Rev. Scott Souders, Rector, Church of the Holy Spirit, Akron,
The Rev. Dr. James Tasker, Rector, St. Barnabas, Bay Village”
I have informed both the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Ohio and the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church about the actions of these parishes, and I wanted you to hear
of it directly from me. As well, I want to assure you that I am committed to working collaboratively with these congregations toward a faithful and just resolution.
The clergy of these congregations have agreed with me to say nothing more publicly about this situation, and I ask that you support our efforts by doing the same.
We are given in this an opportunity to move forward in a way that is worthy of our common vocation as Christians. Know that appreciate your prayers, just as I keep you in mine.
Gratefully,
The Rt. Rev. Mark Hollingsworth, Jr.
Bishop of Ohio

Brad Drell (Drell’s Descants) responded to numerous posts on the Episcopal House of Bishops/House of Deputies Listserv concerning the continuing loss of membership in the Episocpal Church with the following timely, true, and hard hitting post. I have his permission to re-post it here:
Church Growth – A Post To The HOBD Listserv

[HoB/D] TEC Continues To Hemorrhage-
I am going to play a little game with all of you here on the HOBD listserv. It is called the truth. I am going to absolutely tell the truth, as I see it in this post – no holding back. It is rather ugly, and I apologize in advance. But, reading this stuff about decline in our church, I’ve basically decided that my church seems to be ignoring some obvious problems.
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this whole church growth issue in terms of who is growing and who is not. The Catholic and Mormon churches are really growing. I think it is because they are birthing more members of their churches. Episcopalians I think have plenty of children, although probably less than most. The big difference seems to be that a lot of Episcopalian parents didn’t and don’t MAKE their children come to church. Children shouldn’t have a choice in the matter. I never did. Many of my friends did, however. I’m still in the church; they aren’t. Not a big surprise. Since we’ve skipped a generation of making children come to church, what are we going to do about it? Well, we might have to do some serious work to bring them and their children back.
There is a tremendous disconnect in our church. Much of it is the egotism of the baby-boomers. Yes, egotism on the part of a generation that was given everything by the great generation. It is driving Generation-X off. We have a tremendous gap in clergy, because people of my generation weren’t encouraged to go into the priesthood, but told to go get some “life experience” by the baby boomers. The baby boomers have produced a huge number of second-career priests. It was what I was told when I was looking at the priesthood before college. I think it is fine to have more women in seminary now than ever before. But, look at the ages of your average seminarian. I realize a number of the baby boomer generation ladies weren’t allowed to go to seminary when they were younger, granted, but where are the younger folks? **********’s Diocese of ************** is apparently doing something about this. Anyone else? No one said anything about what ********* has had to say about growth. He’s right on target.

Continue reading →