I attended a legislative session this afternoon and the combined hearing concerning the resolutions coming from the special commission on the Windsor Report before the special committee.
I am proud to be an Episcopalian and an Anglican. Proud, because within the various denominations I have been involved with over the years, this kind of respectful debate could never have happened. I value my years in the Foursquare Church, the Christian Churches/Churches of Christ, the Assemblies of God, and a couple independent Charismatic churches, but in none of them would this kind of dialogue, debate, and difference been allowed. People spoke passionately, but they spoke well and where for the most part respectfully received.
During the opening hearing before the special committee, six at a time were called as a group to the microphone to speak. The third or so group to be called forward ended with Bishop Duncan from Pittsburgh and Bishop Robinson from New Hampshire. The crowd of more than 1,700 (including all those sitting outside the ballroom) shifted and the murmur went up, at which point the secretary (?) of the committee simply said, “I’m just reading the list.” The crowd laughed.
Regrettably, Bishop Duncan said that he did not see at this point how the progressive wing and the conservative wing of the Episcopal Church could remain together. He said, basically, that there is now no hope. I hope – I hope that this is not true. This was the big meeting, until the final resolutions are presented to the different houses for approval or rejection. My prayer is that we remain together.
I met Kendall Harman of titusonenine, who was in line with his son before the hearings waiting to sign up to speak. He was very gracious, which I expected. I was a bit embarrassed. He was talking to a friend from the Diocese of Ohio. I waited until they were done and greeted Sam, at which point Kendall said something like, “Bob Griffith – are you the blogger?” I was quite surprised that he would remember who I am, but I wanted to great him and tell him that I appreciate his blog. I am still embarrassed and surprised when I hear from others who read these poorly written and chaotic musings of mine, particularly someone as busy and proficient as Kendall.
I desperately pray and hope, somehow through God’s grace and our ability to move in humility, that we will remain together in this wonderful and incredible enterprise called Anglicanism – part of the One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
I spent a good amount of time with Jason and Jodi during the afternoon. I am very glad I got to hang (if I put “out” at this end of “hang,” does it mean I’m and old fart) with them.
I am very tired.

This is a last comment on this topic. Wouldn’t you know it – almost the entire Eucharist this morning was in Spanish. I resigned myself to be present in the service the same way I was present in services in different European services when I served in Europe. I could be present, but not in the way those who understood the language could be present.
I had no idea what the sermon was about, and I forgot the printout of the sermon in English at our table.
These questions still arise: What do we mean by “Common” and how is it experienced in this kind of context? What is the purpose of the convention Eucharist’s?
I do understand the desire for this church to be welcoming and hospitable to all kinds of people. I affirm that desire. But, if we do not provide space for there to be a truly “common” experience, and I understand that some will not sense the commonality like all the others (been there, done that), we will balkanize. We already see this happening concerning our current troubles.
Okay, enough about this.
By the way, I heard the U2charist was great! It is reported that around 700+ showed up – literally standing room only. I wish I could have been there.
It is great seeing people I haven’t talked to in a long time.

Since I think “out-loud,” a lot of what gets into this blog is just that – thinking out loud. It is problematic at times because some will take everything I post as being what I think is gospel truth, when in actuality it is just ruminations. Of course, in all the ruminating what I do believe at any given period in time does come through.
When I think about the past post “What is going on with me?” as I tried to express some of the unexpected anger I was feeling over yesterday’s Eucharist, I realize that this is probably what I really want to say:
When we gather together from 16 different countries and from every area in this country in a worship space that accommodates 3,500 people at a convention where approximately 10,000 participate in one form or another, in order to have any sense of “common prayer” it seems that we would want to do that which is most familiar and easiest to comprehend.
It often seems, however, that those who plan these kinds of services see them as an opportunity to do the unexpected, the unusual, the “innovative,” the different in order to expose people to new things. I understand that, but when we have the common convention Eucharist, I don’t see how doing such things enable us to worship together, even though I know that while in English and according to the established forms of the Prayer Book will frustrate and anger some.
Yesterday, there was the U2 Eucharist. At some point soon there will be the Hip-Hop Eucharist. I suspect there will also be Eucharists in Spanish, perhaps French and German, too. Okay, so what about Anglo-Catholics? What about Charistmatics? This church allows for such a breadth of piety, and I believe this strengthens us and provides for the needs of many different kinds of people. A strength, yes, but when we have a common service, it should be in a form that will speak to and meet the needs of the vast majority of those participating.
That’s just my opinion.
On another topic – the battles have begun.
It came home to me yesterday that the different sides of the most pressing issues really do not understand their opponents. That is a shame, and it hinders us from coming to any kind of compromise. The really sad aspect of it all is that too many do not even want to understand their opponents.
The way I see it, do everything you can to get into the skin of one’s opponent to truly understand their perspective. Then, one can argue against it, but one doesn’t have to demonize the other in the process. And, incidentally, the original opinion held by the one doing the investigating may actually be changed in some way. A meeting of the minds may well be able to be accomplished at that point, even if to amicably agreeing to disagree.

By the way, it feels so funny when someone says, “Hello, Father.” I realized during today’s Eucharist, too, how much of a minority I am in the sense of becoming more “high-church” or “anglo-catholic.”

Okay, here is the issue: Why am I finding myself so angry at times? I’m not bust-a-vain-angry, but angry nonetheless.
Today in the opening Eucharist, various parts of the Eucharist were in Spanish. Is there anything wrong with having various parts of the Eucharist in Spanish? No. Other than this – some try so hard to be “inclusive,” but in the end means that there is not much left of “common,” as in “common prayer.” If the majority of the people do not understand the language being spoken, then how can they honestly enter in other than simply observing? Then, there is an “angry step-mother” attitude that “you’re gonna do it whether you like it or not.” It is maternalistic/paternalistic, and I don’t like it.
Yes, for those who only speak Spanish (or any particular language outside the norm), this happens all the time when the service is in English. Alright, that is a given. When I was in Germany working in campus ministry, I was often in services where I had no clue what was being said. I did not expect all those churches and peoples to change just for me.
Sometimes, some churches would have translators for those who did not speak the native language. At this morning’s Eucharist, there were translators for those who spoke French and German. So, why did those planning the Eucharist not include German and French in the Eucharist itself? Might not have the native German and French people feel neglected or excluded from the service? What about the Brazilians? My point is that when political correctness runs amok, we complete loose any sense of “common prayer.” There is nothing wrong with saying – this is in English, because the vast majority of those present understand English. I’ve very glad that we provided translators – even for the deaf, which thrilled me.
American, white, liberal guilt propagated through political correctness will only lead to more division and chaos, primarily because we lose any common thing to unify around.
Why not do a whole service in Spanish or French or German – heck, why not in English? I would be more inclined to participate in an entirely French service, than one that jumps back and forth between language.
So, why am I getting so angry about this? I don’t know. I don’t feel guilty about being a male, white, Anglo-Saxon, or speaking English. I know great atrocities were done by males, whites, Anglo’s, and Americans. You know what; ever culture in every time has perpetuated evil upon others. I don’t see why some in this Church feel the overwhelming need to be guilty about being an “English” church – after all, that is where we came from and the vast majority of our members speak English.
Yes, Americans should speak more than one language. Yes, we desperately need to understand other cultures. I’ve always been a big advocate of such things. One of my favorite times in Europe was when we were singing praise songs in a small group – African, European, Asian, and American – in different languages. But, because of American, white, liberal guilt, there is a sense where anything that smacks of America, Caucasian, English speaking, or male is absolutely bad and needs to be put down to make way for something else. What? No one seems to know other than “not this.” I absolutely value and want to experience cultures other than my own. But, I don’t expect them to accommodate me when I am in their churches, in their countries, or hear their languages. It is nice when they help, and I want to help non-American/non-English speakers too, but this castigation of who and what we are in order to ease some peoples’ misplaced feelings of guilt just needs to end.
Hospitality does not mean we have to stop being who we are. We may become something else than what we are right now, but we don’t have to be determined to destroy what we are right now in some misplaced compulsion to be something, anything, other than what we are.
Why am I so perturbed? Because I fear loosing what I have discovered to be a wonderful thing? Perhaps because I don’t like to be included in other people’s psychoses? I should not be angry, and I should not sink my claws into something that is temporal, anyway. I really do simply want to love God and my neighbor. It is in the doing of these last two things that the trouble begins.