Episcopal young adults at UNCSW look to create a new Beijing

 

By Karen Longenecker

 

 

[Episcopal News Service] In 1995 women from all over the world traveled to Beijing for the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women. Their dedication and labor resulted in the adoption of what is now known as the Beijing Platform for Action, a social justice platform for work towards a more equitable world for women and girls.

In 1995, I think I was learning how to dance the Macarena and trying to catch the eye of just about any boy that would look my way. I was, after all, in the seventh grade.

In 2000 the UN had its five-year review of the Beijing Platform to assess progress, evaluate country reports, identify new problems and create solutions for women across the globe still facing poverty, discrimination and unequal access to resources.

In 2000 I was just beginning to freak out about where I was going to go to college. In 2005 as the UN had its ten-year review of the Beijing Platform, I was about to graduate from college and had no idea what I was going to do with my life.

This year was the 15-year review of the Beijing Platform and as part of the Episcopal young adult delegation to the UN's annual meeting of its Commission on the Status of Women, I was there.

A UNCSW delegates said that one of the greatest things about being a young adult is that we are both learning and feeling the world -- feeling passionate about our place and work in the world, and still learning at the same time. The learning began in 2009 with the Episcopal Church's first young adult delegation to the UNCSW. We learned how to advocate towards a more sustainable platform for care giving in the context of HIV and AIDS. Most importantly, we began to see the relationship between the church, the UN, social justice and our own faith.

This year, the Office of Young Adult Ministries sponsored a group of ten delegates to attend the 54th UNCSW meeting, which included the 15 year review of the Beijing Platform. The platform encompasses every issue that women still face in the world and can feel overwhelming, but hearing about it on a personal level is an experience nearly impossible to capture in words.

Imagine listening to a woman from Malawi who works for better access to reproductive health care, or a woman from Palestine who lives in a conflict zone and is a target for violence. Imagine a woman in Mexico who makes one-third the salary of her male counterpart and who lives in a country where women are murdered or trafficked in massive numbers every day. Or imagine a woman in the U.S. who is constantly bombarded with negative sexual images of her body, its purpose and value in her culture and who is supposed to be sexually liberated and certainly not a feminist. These women, and so many more, and their male allies and supporters make up the global face of the reason for the Beijing Platform.

The Young Adult Delegation attended the UNCSW for the first week of the March 1-12 meeting. Each of the nine women and three men chose an area or a couple of areas of the platform that we were passionate about and identified events those interests. We networked with other organizations, formed partnerships and expanded on the work being done at the UN. Our interests varied from women in conflict zones, woman and health, the rights of the girl child, violence against women, women in leadership, human rights of women, and women and education.

Together with young adult delegations from the World Council of Churches, the World Student Christian Foundation and the National Council of Churches, a group of nearly 40 people participated in an event titled A Rapper, A Rabbi and a Radio Host to discuss access to meaning-making and the institutions and authorities that are given power to assign meaning in a society. One of the three panelists was Garrett Braaf, aka G-Quinn, who is a Christian rapper and an Episcopal Church young adult delegate.

We also formed intergenerational partnerships with other delegates from the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. In order to continue the work of the Beijing Platform, it is necessary to partner with and learn from those who have gone before us, the women who were in Beijing and have been working ever since. If we are to continue with this work, we must learn from those before us in order to educate those after us.
 
The delegation left the UNCSW with the hope of bringing the work being done across the world and presented at the United Nations to their local communities. For some of the delegates, this means beginning what is known as a Beijing Circle, a sacred space where women listen to each other's stories and move towards action in their home communities.

For other delegates this means empowering young girls to understand their bodies and have a positive body image. Other delegates choose the sometimes-unrewarding work of spreading awareness that there are still women's issues in the world and certainly still in the church.

For all of the delegates, we came home inspired to have experienced the relationship between our church, global politics, social justice and our faith. Through this relationship and through our relationships with each other, change is transformative and equity in the world not just a hope, it is the agenda.

 

Karen Longenecker was a member and co-convenor of UNCSW Episcopal young adult delegation to the 2010 UNCSW. Jason Sierra, the Episcopal Church's officer for young adult and campus ministries, was the other convener. _____________________________________________________________________________

Episcopal News Service, March 12, 2010

Episcopal News Service provides information and resources which we
consider to be of interest to our readers.

However, statements and opinions expressed in the articles and
communications herein, are those of the author(s) and not necessarily
those of Episcopal News Service or the Episcopal Church.

 

 

Public Roles, Private Persons

 

 

 

By  Debra Erickson

 

Elshtain writes, “Christianity challenged the primacy of politics. It did not relegate secular power to silence and shadows as secular power had formerly relegated the private, but the claims of the public-political world no longer went unchallenged. Caesar now had to confront the formidable figure of Christ.”  Christianity bequeathed to the individual qua human being irreducible worth and dignity, and placed independent value on “the realm of necessity” inhabited by women. In so doing, it turned Aristotle “on his head.”  The Greeks had excluded women from the highest expressions of human life, action, and thought; Christianity smashed the distinction between higher and lower forms of human existence, with effects that reverberated through to the present.

 

 

More information can be found on the conference web site:

http://divinity.uchicago.edu/martycenter/conferences/engagedmind/2010/index.shtml

 

 

References:

 

Jean Bethke Elshtain, Public Man, Private Woman: Women in Social and Political Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981).

 

Read Courtney Wilder’s Sightings, “The Sacred and the Sartorial,” at http://divinity.uchicago.edu/martycenter/publications/sightings/archive_2010/0114.shtml.

 

 

 

 

 

The Pandora’s Box of James Cameron

 

 

By Joseph Laycock

 

 

Warning:  spoilers below.

 

Avatar, James Cameron’s high-budget blockbuster, is on track to become the highest grossing film of all time.  This two and a half hour saga tells the tale of the Na’vi, a race of blue skinned aliens with a pre-industrial culture.  Their planet, Pandora, is home to an ecosystem that has achieved a kind of sentience, and which the Na’vi revere as a deity.  The Na’vi way of life is interrupted by human strip-miners, who have come to Pandora in search of a mineral with the unlikely name “unobtanium.”

 

While audiences can simply enjoy the film’s cutting-edge special effects, few appear to be doing so.  Instead, Avatar has been compared to a cultural “Rorschach test,” onto which numerous allegorical meanings can be read, and discussions of Avatar frequently stumble into the realm of the transcendent.  Gaetano Vallini of the Vatican’s newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, received wide media attention for his review of the film.  Although Vallini expressed neither outrage nor enthusiasm, he did suggest that a heavy-handed form of nature religion “bogged down” the story.  Since Vallini’s review, the blogosphere has filled with posts debating Avatar’s significance as an endorsement of pantheism.

 

Even more interesting is the phenomenon of depression among those who have recently seen the movie.  Some viewers reported great distress after seeing Pandora and realizing that their existence is confined to Earth.  A comment on one of the forums that has sprung up around the film reads, “It's so hard.  I can't force myself to think that it's just a movie, and to get over it, that living like the Na'vi will never happen.”  Most viewers appear to recover in a day or so.  But for some, Avatar appears to have raised a truly existential problem.  One poster commented, “I even contemplate suicide thinking that if I do it I will be rebirthed in a world similar to Pandora and that everything is the same as in Avatar.”  And a growing community comprises individuals who feel that they are Na’vi who have somehow been incarnated as human beings.  Websites like “We Are Na’vi” feature discussions of how James Cameron managed to get so many details of the Na’vi home world correct.

 

Avatar has been compared with numerous other films about the conflict between pre- and post-industrial cultures, including Dances with Wolves, The Last Samurai, and Fern Gully.  Surprisingly, it has not been compared to The Space Trilogy by C.S. Lewis.  These books, written during the Second World War, combine Christian themes of fall and redemption with space exploration.  Lewis’ hero is sent against his will to Mars, home to several races of benevolent humanoids, by a group of scientists hoping to plunder the planet’s resources.  Eventually it is revealed that the rest of the solar system enjoys a state of prelapsarian grace:  Earth alone is a fallen planet and the domain of spiritual evil.  The religiosity emerging around Avatar may actually be more akin to Lewis’ Christian cosmology than to the new-age influences cited by the Vatican and others.

 

The idea that our world is flawed and that a perfect world exists elsewhere is the hallmark of a transcendent religion.  Karl Jaspers argued that between 800 and 200 BCE numerous civilizations from Greece to Israel to China began to form an idea of a transcendent order.  This “Axial Age” led to the rise of the world religions that have largely eclipsed older beliefs such as pantheism.  It also created a lasting social tension between the transcendent order and the mundane.  Cameron created the world of Pandora through technology never before seen by mankind.  For some, this seems to have had the effect of the transcendent vision described by Jaspers.  Compared to Pandora - as a movie-going experience for some and as a real possibility for others - Earth is a prison that must be escaped.  In fact, in one of the final scenes of Avatar the narrator makes a statement that is certainly poignant and possibly soteriological: “The aliens [i.e. humans] went back to their dying world.  Only a few were chosen to stay.” 

 

Ironically, the desire to live in another world is the antithesis of the pantheistic religion of the Na’vi.  While the Na’vi could imagine an even better world - perhaps one not inhabited by enormous carnivores - they do not.  The Axial Age has yet to occur on Pandora.  The perpetual search for a more perfect and more meaningful world is a uniquely human behavior.  But while humans cannot brachiate through phosphorescent jungles or ride prehistoric raptors, we can take comfort in our ability to imagine better worlds and to re-order our own.  In this sense, we have a type of radical freedom that the Na’vi do not.

 

References:

 

“You Saw What in ‘Avatar’? Pass Those Glasses!” Dave Itzkoff, The New York Times, 20 January, 2010.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/movies/20avatar.html

 

“Audiences experience ‘Avatar’ blues,” Jo Piazza, CNN.com, 11 January, 2010.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/11/avatar.movie.blues/index.html

 

We Are Na’vi [Na’vi Reborn]

http://community.livejournal.com/tothehometree/

 

 

 

Joseph Laycock is a PhD student in religion and society at Boston University, and the author of Vampires Today: The Truth About Modern Vampirism (Praeger Publishers, 2009).

Sightings 1/28/10

Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.
 
To subscribe to Sightings and/or visit the Martin Marty Center website: 

http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Faith and Money -- Going Beneath the Surface

By the Reverend Dr. James P. Wind

The current issue of Congregations returns to a recurring Alban interest, the economic realities of congregational life.  Global economic events of the past two years give this often neglected topic more urgency than normal.   In the pages of this quarter's journal, you will read about the 2009 Congregational Economic Impact Study, recently conducted by the Alban Institute and the Lake Institute on Faith and Giving at the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.   Prompted by the worst economic recession since the Great Depression, this new research reveals some important things. First, it has surprising news about the resilience of congregations. At a time when almost every American institution had to trim its budget, a majority of the congregations surveyed saw their fundraising receipts hold steady or increase. That is good and important news for those accustomed to the prevailing "mainline decline" narrative told in our culture. Second, it shows us that congregations responded to the economic crisis with food, clothing, and shelter for those in need. The traditional, charitable impulses of Christian congregations endure and still make an important difference. Third, the survey reveals that the same congregations that many write off as dying are in fact innovating, partnering with a host of not-for-profit organizations like Habitat for Humanity and Second Harvest and doing new things like offering credit counseling and emergency loans. To be sure, not every American congregation saw its income increase during this tough time, and more than a few had to cut back their programs. But this survey provides evidence, as do larger surveys like Giving USA 2009, that even in an era when many are dropping out of organized religion and turning to less demanding types of spirituality, giving to religious institutions, unlike other sectors, actually increases when times are tough.   There is good news in this research but something is missing. Almost no mention is made of congregations starting new business ventures to widen and diversify the revenue streams that support their missions. Yet some are doing just that. A recent article in the Washington Post ("At Home in the Houses of the Lord: Church Missions, Portfolios Embrace Residential Real Estate," August 8, 2009) featured a local real estate boomlet led by congregations. In Landover, Maryland, Reston, Virginia, and the District itself, congregations have been teaming with local real estate developers to build residential communities that provide both affordable housing in high-priced markets and new streams of revenue to support community ministries. These entrepreneurial congregations are not only resilient and able to motivate donors in tough times; they are trying to dig beneath old stewardship ways of thinking about money (pass the plate, sign the pledge card) and find new ways to love and serve their neighbors.   Last summer, I stood in the nave of the Cathedral of Notre Dame de Reims, trying to take in the glory of one of France's greatest buildings. Begun in 400 CE and rebuilt numerous times, the cathedral is one of France's holiest sites and the place where a majority of the monarchs of France received their crowns. A Gothic masterpiece, the building is also a great symbol of the complex relationship that exists between communities of faith and their surrounding economies. Throughout the Middle Ages, this cathedral was both a sign and a product of the great wealth of the French kings. The building tells the Christian story in its great windows and carved stones. However, its sculpture, stained glass, and sacred treasures also make it clear who paid the bills. Only a feudal economy could have produced it. In World War I, another wealthy power, Germany, and a different kind of economy brought the cathedral to its knees. Years later, an infusion of new wealth, this time from the Rockefellers, resurrected the building, replacing destroyed stained glass with windows designed by Marc Chagall and other contemporary artists. Now a new global tourist economy keeps the cathedral alive as sightseers buy tickets and souvenirs.   As I strolled through the nave, one of the newer windows caught my eye. The Champagne window by Jacques Simon, completed in 1954, celebrates the local economy; its scenes of grapes and winepresses seem out of place next to all the kings and biblical figures. Its three lancets depict the hard work of making champagne. If one looks closely enough, a Benedictine monk with a famous name, Dom Perignon, comes into view. This window, constructed to celebrate the champagne economy that now surrounds the cathedral and the city of Reims, also bears witness to a deeper and longer story. Beneath Reims and running right up to the cathedral and the neighboring abbey is a vast network of chalky tunnels. Along their many miles, millions of bottles of Dom Perignon, Veuve Clicquot, and Taittinger champagnes age. For centuries, countless monks like Dom Perignon scurried through the warren of tunnels, shuttling between their times of prayer and their daily work of fermenting the ripened grapes. Once upon a time, the window reminds us, and for a long time, communities of faith, like the great Order of St. Benedict, integrated work and prayer, money and faith, in a way of life that benefited many.   Having walked the champagne cellars of Reims, I wonder if maybe congregations limit their options with a too simple "stewardship" mindset. The champagne window reminds us that once upon a time faith communities integrated their piety with surrounding economic activity. They did work that created things of value to human beings and produced revenue that supported still larger missions. Might there be merit in reconsidering the Dom Perignon option?   "The Leading Edge" is Alban Institute president James P. Wind's regular column in Congregations magazine. Please click here to read more from the current issue.

 

 

Top 10 iPhone apps for organizing a priest's life

 

 

By Michael Pipkin

[Episcopal News Service] As priest-in-charge of a growing church, I am in good company with many of my colleagues when it comes to finding a happy balance between work, family and everything else that life throws at us.

The church is a sometimes-frenetic place that often doesn't fit well into our culture's 9 to 5, Monday through Friday paradigm. How do we find time to help out with grocery shopping, house cleaning, plan for vestry meetings and worship, manage staff, read and respond to 100+ e-mails a day, spend time with our children, plan a great adult education program, spend meaningful time with our spouse, and cultivate a rich spiritual life that feeds?

Certainly there must be some way to simplify everything while maintaining our sanity, enhancing our marriage, ensuring that all of our tasks and administrivia are not overcome by events, and most importantly, helping to strengthen our spiritual foundation so that everything else makes sense. And if that wasn't a tall enough order, it must be pocket-sized.

Bring in the iPhone. My iPhone is not just an amazingly beautiful piece of technology, it is also my professional brain, and lately, I've been discovering some amazing applications - commonly referred to as apps - for the iPhone that help sync my administrative, personal and spiritual lives.

My Top 10:

1. Facebook -- Yes, Facebook. If you're not using this tool for ministry yet, then we need to talk. My Facebook app allows me to keep up with the roughly 75 percent of my parishioners who also use Facebook. Even more, if you've got a Facebook page for your church, you can update your church's page through the app.

2. iBCP -- It's not free, but it's worth the $5 you'll pay never to be without a prayer book again.

3. NAB Bible Reader -- It's not cheap, either, but it's a great translation of the Bible, and it's searchable. Better still, you can highlight and make comments.

4. Things -- Things is a productivity manager, aka a To Do list, based on the GTD (Get Things Done) format. It will sync with "Things for Mac." Everything that I am supposed to do is organized and prioritized in Things.

5. WordPress -- I can edit my church's webpage from my iPhone. Can you? Seriously, if your church's website is based on Wordpress formats, you can use the WordPress app to control nearly everything on your website: create new pages, add news and information, upload pictures, etc.

6. MileBug -- Current IRS mileage rate is .50c/mile. MileBug will help you track your miles and then export a report for your taxes or expense reporting.

7. iXpenseIt -- Keeps track of budget line items, tracks spending, creates expense reports, etc. iXpenseIt also allows you to take pictures of receipts so that you never lose one again.

8. Maps -- The Google Maps function on the iPhone is good enough to get me to every parishioner's house because I've got all of my parishioners' names and addresses in my address book, which is No. 9.

9. Contacts -- Seriously. Download your parish directory into the iPhone and you'll never be without the name, address, or phone number of that pastoral contact that must be made today.

10. Pocket God -- Stay sane by laughing. It's probably bad form to name the pygmies after parishioners, though.

While the iPhone itself might be smart, it needs a bit of a foundation that will support all of your needs. When it comes to e-mail, for example, it is best to separate office accounts from personal accounts. If possible, use IMAP so that e-mail actions performed on the iPhone are duplicated on the server. This means that if you read, reply, delete, move or forward an e-mail on your iPhone, it replicates this action on your computer so that you don't have to do it twice (and vice versa, between computer and iPhone).

Organizing calendars is also advised. I find that setting up multiple calendars using Google Calendar works the best. You can set up as many as makes sense. I have four: a parish calendar that includes all of the regular parish events; a work calendar that includes all of my appointments and pastoral meetings; a personal calendar that includes only information that I need to remember; and lastly, a family calendar that my wife and I share to schedule dates, appointments and chores. The best part about Google Calendar is that you can publish (privately or publicly) your calendar through the CalDAV protocol, which enables you to read, write and synchronize information on each calendar from your iPhone or computer. Using CalDAV also enables you to use your calendars along with family members, administrative assistants, etc., to allow you to delegate and manage effectively.

 

The Rev. Michael Pipkin is priest-in-charge, The Falls Church (Episcopal), Falls Church, Virginia.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Episcopal News Service, February 2, 2010 

Episcopal News Service provides information and resources which we
consider to be of interest to our readers.

However, statements and opinions expressed in the articles and
communications herein, are those of the author(s) and not necessarily
those of Episcopal News Service or the Episcopal Church.

 

 

The Sacred and the Sartorial

 

By Courtney Wilder

 

 

 

At first blush, the blog Beauty Tips for Ministers does not seem like a hotbed of feminist theology of the body. Written primarily, though not exclusively, for women, the blog includes posts on a wide range of topics related to clergy and their professional dress, including how to discern between attractive, trendy shoes and those that are too sexy for ministry, the difficulties of achieving professional-looking hair, what constitutes good makeup, and how clergy should dress for weddings.  The advice is practical, the commentary is very funny, and the images are consistently good.

As one reads more posts, and reads them more deeply, a distinctive pastoral theology begins to emerge, a theology that embraces the physical presence of women in ministry.  The author, whose nomme de blog is PeaceBang, is otherwise known as Reverend Victoria Weinstein, the Harvard-educated pastor of First Parish Unitarian Church in Norwell, Mass.  She addresses her readers with a range of endearments, including “darlings,” “my revered pigeons,” “kittens,” and “my pets.”  Blog posts include examples of especially good fashion choices on the part of clergy, images of garments which would be appropriate in clergy wardrobes, critiques of dowdy or inappropriate ministerial outfits, and answers to readers’ questions.  

What keeps the blog from being either frivolous or harsh is Weinstein’s consistent recognition that female clergy occupy a professional and theological space that requires them to respond to a long and often critical tradition.  In a post titled “Too ‘Hot’ For Ministry?”  Weinstein offers advice for young, female members of the clergy who have been instructed to tone down their attire because someone, perhaps the senior pastor, considers them too attractive.  She writes, “Document EVERY word you can remember from that first meeting and before you do a thing about shopping, call in another pair of eyes to assess your wardrobe and appearance.  It may, in fact be that you DO need some sprucing up.  It may also be that your supervisor is trying to shame you for being a hottie.  Don’t fly off the handle; walk carefully and govern your angry thoughts.  We serve a monumentally sex-phobic institution, my darlings — this should neither surprise nor enrage you.  Be ye wise as a serpent and…you know the rest.”  In the remainder of the post, Weinstein offers practical advice on how to navigate this especially thorny situation.

The purpose of the blog becomes clear when Weinstein reflects on the connection between professional appearance and what it means for congregants to have their pastor present in the room.  She writes, “I guess what I am trying to say is that in some way, our ministerial bodies are not just personal but are also communal.  This may be neither rational nor fair, chickens, but that’s just how it is.  When one of our beloveds is dying, it’s not just anybody who shows up who can represent the church.  It’s when your particular body shows up that the Church is there at bedside.  You know it, I know it and God knows it.  When you become a ‘Rev.,’ your body isn’t just your body anymore.  Maybe not fair or rational, but I think that’s how it works.”  Beauty Tips for Ministers is not only about how the pastor ought to look, but about why it matters.  

Thus what separates Weinstein’s approach from secular guides to professional dress are first, her ability to exercise pastoral care in guiding her readers, and second, her clear conviction that having (and dressing) a female body does not interfere with a pastor’s vocation. Indeed, Weinstein argues that for female clergy dressing one’s body ought to reflect both affirmation of one’s gender and acknowledgement of the leadership role of clergy within the community.  She identifies the tendency of some female clergy to efface their gender and/or sexuality in their professional attire and argues that this approach does no one any favors; instead, she advocates for a model of religious womanhood that is frankly feminine, and simultaneously highly professional and even sartorially conservative.  In so doing, Weinstein presents a deeply feminist view of religious vocation: She holds that not only are women suitable to be clergy, but that women can most powerfully embody their vocational calling when also attending to the care of their own bodies.

Visit Beauty Tips for Ministers at www.beautytipsforministers.com. 

 

Courtney Wilder, Ph.D., teaches in the Religion and Philosophy Department of Midland Lutheran College, an ELCA institution in Fremont, Nebraska. She is a past Junior Fellow at the Martin Marty Center. 

_____________________________________________________________________________

Sightings 1/14/10

Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.
 
To subscribe to Sightings and/or visit the Martin Marty Center website: 

http://marty-center.uchicago.edu/

 

 

 

The Synod of the Diocese of Niagara

 

This Brave New World Needs a Brave New Church

 

The Rev. Dr. Gary Nicolosi

 

I presume that most of you at this Synod are parish leaders. Even if you don’t consider yourself a leader, you care about the church. And because you care, you are aware of what is happening in the church today. People are saying the church is irrelevant. The church is dying and almost dead. The church as a religious institution is finished. And the remarkable thing is that some of the people saying these things genuinely and passionately love the church.

 

Church consultant George Barna has devoted years to tracking the impact of the church on society. In his book The Second Coming of the Church, Barna writes, “At the risk of sounding like an alarmist, I believe the Church in [North] America has no more than five years - perhaps even less - to turn things around and begin to affect the culture, rather than be affected by it.”

 

Barna wrote those words in 1999, and judging by several recent surveys on the state of religion in Canada, he was right. Not only is the church losing members at an alarming rate, but belief in God is in steep decline.

 

An April 2009 Canwest News Service and Global National survey found that the nationwide proportion of Canadians who believe in God has dropped from 84 percent in 2000 to 71 percent today. According to pollster Ipsos Reid, the biggest decline was among men, which went from 86 percent to 63 percent.

 

The poll results corresponded to a 2008 poll by Harris Decima that found only 72 percent of Canadians claiming to believe in God. Among men the percentage was 67 percent. Perhaps most disturbing is that more than one in three - 36 percent - of those under age 25 said they did not believe in God.

 

Both polls correspond to the numbers given by sociologist Reginald Bibby in his major study on Canada’s emerging Millennials - persons born between 1980 and 2000. (1) Bibby reports that among Millennials 67 percent believe in God or a Higher Power, with 33 percent saying they do not believe in God.

 

Bibby also reports that teen identification with Protestant churches has declined from 35 percent in 1984 to 13 percent in 2008. Anglican teens as a percentage of the overall teen population have declined from 8 to 2 percent during that same period.

 

It is hard to put a positive spin on what is happening today. According to pollster Michael Adams, weekly church attendance in Canada has fallen from nearly 60 percent in the 1950s to 22 percent in 2002. (2) Among post Boomers the number who attend church weekly is only 10 percent, though 17 percent claim to attend monthly.

 

The membership trends in the Anglican Church of Canada run parallel to the national decline in religious belief. In 1961, there were 1.3 million Anglicans on the church rolls in a country of 18 million people. In 2001, we had 651,000 Anglicans on the rolls in a country of 32,000,000 people. The Globe and Mail recently put the 2005 membership at 610,000. (3) This would be consistent with a report to the House of Bishops several years ago that the church was losing 13,000 members per year. At that rate, the authors of the report predicted the last Anglican will leave the church in 2061. (4) That probably will not happen. There will still be Anglicans in Canada in mid-century, but if present trends continue, we will be a much smaller church with a very different shape and structure than we now have.

 

No doubt we Anglicans see these trends at work in our own congregations. Our churches are not as large as they use to be nor as generationally diverse as we once were. The average Anglican is 60-something and the average Canadian is 30-something - and the gap is widening.

 

So let me ask: Do you ever get discouraged about what is happening today? You believe in a loving, caring God, but you also sense that things seem terribly wrong and that if we continue the way we are going, there may not be much of a church left in ten or twenty years.

 

Jim Collins is a business consultant, author of the bestseller Good to Great, and a mountain climber. He shares an analogy which I think is pertinent to the situation we now face as church leaders. “Suppose you wake up at base camp at the foot of Mount Everest and a big storm rolls through. You can hunker down in the safety of your tent and let the storm pass. But if you wake up as a vulnerable speck at 27,000 feet on the side of a mountain, where the storms are bigger and faster moving, the environment severe and unforgiving, and everything more uncertain and uncontrollable, then a storm just might kill you.” (5)

 

Do we as church leaders ever feel we are moving higher on the mountain, into an increasingly turbulent and unforgiving environment? Perhaps you are unsure how to respond to such an environment. Some of you may feel there is not much we can do about it. Others may be hoping that the culture gives the church a second look without the necessity of our having to change too drastically. Still others may choose to keep doing what we have been doing, because we are comfortable doing it. But if we keep doing what we have been doing, what is the likely outcome? Do you remember Einstein’s famous observation? “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result.”

 

I would like to suggest another alternative: Have the courage to face the brutal facts of the present situation but keep hope alive. In other words, retain an absolute faith that, with God’s help, we will prevail, and at the same time confront the hard truth about our current reality.

 

Your diocesan mission statement is a good summary of what needs to be done - to follow Christ passionately, to pursue excellence, to practice justice and to grow. Your mission statement reflects the three mandates that I believe are absolutely crucial for healthy, vital congregations - what I term the Spiritual Mandate, the Cultural Mandate and the Missional Mandate. Together, these three mandates answer the question, “How does the church participate best in what God is doing in the world?”

 

 

The Spiritual Mandate

 

The spiritual mandate is to make our churches communities of transformation where people experience God. I know this may sound obvious. However, I am amazed at all the people claiming to be spiritual, but who automatically dismiss the church as the last place where they would expect to experience God.

 

Peter Drucker used to say the most important question for any company to answer is, “What business are we in?” I suggest the church is in the business of transforming lives in Jesus Christ. If lives are not being transformed in Christ, then the church is not fulfilling its purpose.

 

When I served as Canon for Ministries at the cathedral in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, we had a major social service ministry as part of our campus. New Bethany Ministries sheltered up to seventy-five residents each evening, distributed clothes, and had a soup kitchen that served over 125 meals each day.

 

I remember having a discussion with the Director of New Bethany, and I commented what a blessing it was for the church to be able to feed and shelter all these needy people. I was taken aback by his response. “Yes,” he said, “we feed these people but it’s up to you in the church to feed their souls and give them Jesus. We can help by supplying food, clothing and shelter, but you people in the church have to do your part, reach out to them and draw them closer to God. Some of these people may get their lives together and some of them won’t, but all of them need God. They need the church’s spiritual resources to help them face the future with hope.”

 

I have never forgotten what the director said to me that day. He was passionately committed to social justice, but he also understood that the Christian faith is about the mystery of being met by Jesus, and being encountered, blessed, reassured, fed and sustained for the adventure of living.

 

God forgive our misguided attempts to whittle down the church to a volunteer social service organization, a holistic health society, or a moral improvement club to make nice people even nicer. To be Christian is to be among the fortunate group of people who have been with Jesus, who have looked at this Jew from Nazareth and have seen the very face of God. With him, we gather week by week to break bread, pass the cup, and experience the presence of God - a God who loves us always, everywhere and forever.

 

So let’s be clear about what the church has to offer the world. The one and only thing that uniquely distinguishes the church from every other spiritual and social organization is Jesus. Dan Kimball, an emerging church pastor says that people may not like the church, but they do like Jesus. People will read about Jesus. They will talk about Jesus. Even if they claim to be atheists, Jesus attracts them.

 

We are missing the boat if we don’t talk about Jesus - who he is, what he means to us, how he makes a difference in our lives, and why we follow him. Jesus, in fact, is the way we connect with the culture; and who better to speak about Jesus than the church?

 

“You know why I keep coming to church?” a woman said to me one Sunday as she was leaving worship. I thought she might mention the music, or the fellowship, or even the preaching! No, what she said is, “I keep coming to this church because it’s here where I meet Jesus. He comes to me, embraces me, and I go on to face another week. Without that, why bother?”

 

Why bother indeed?

 

 

The Cultural Mandate

 

So how does the church participate best in what God is doing in the world? First, there is the spiritual mandate - to make our churches communities of transformation where people experience God. The second is the cultural mandate - to bridge the gap between the church and the world.

 

We in the church need to become cultural anthropologists. By that I mean that we need to know and study culture with as much diligence as we study scripture and tradition.

 

Remember Karl Barth who said that preachers need to have a Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other? We need to know culture as well as our own faith. The church has a message to tell, but we need to know the audience to whom we tell it - who they are, how they live, what they value, and where they spend their time and money.

 

Take, for example, the most receptive demographic group in Canada to attending church. Contrary to what you may think, it is not seniors. It is families with children. So why doesn’t the Anglican Church of Canada have more of them? This demographic group, which is more socially conservative than the general population, will consider going to church, but they do expect two things: 1) Excellent programs and facilities for their children and teens, and 2) The church’s support in helping to make sense of their lives, to give their lives greater purpose and significance, as well as to be good parents. In short, they want the church to address the issues that matter to them - and to do so from the standpoint of Christian faith. Churches that can meet these expectations with quality programs, faithful, competent ministers, attractive facilities and effective marketing are the most likely to be successful with this group.

 

Here’s a basic church growth principle: If you want to reach people, you first have to know them. In fact, the fastest growing churches in North America - progressive and conservative alike - are churches that seek to understand the community around them and to fashion their ministry to meet the needs of their target audience. They don’t keep offering a product that nobody wants; rather they strive to be culture-friendly, building bridges with the people outside the church, and connecting with them at their level of need and understanding.

 

We have a church in the Diocese of British Columbia that has a jazz vespers service once a month that actually draws more people than the regular worship services. The majority of the people attending are from the community, and not members of the church. I find this pattern becoming common - alternative worship services attracting far more non-members than traditional worship. We need to take a hard look at ourselves and ask, “Are we effectively connecting with the people we want to reach?”  We have the kind of worship services that appeal to us, the kind of ministries that appeal to us. We rarely stop to ask, what are the needs and the preferences of the people Christ has asked us to reach?

 

I like to think of the church as a bird bath rather than a bird cage. Church is not a matter of being in or out, a member or a non-member - that’s the bird cage model. But with a bird bath there is definition, shape and function but also freedom and flexibility and open-endedness that allows people to come and go, to find their way, and to have permission to become and grow at their own level of need and understanding.

 

That’s why I strongly support the whole idea of an open church - open baptism, open communion, open hearts, open minds and open doors “for whoever you are and wherever you are on your journey of faith.” The open church blesses rather than curses, affirms rather than condemns, counts people in rather than kicks people out, and expands its circle of love just a little bit more so that no one is ever shut out.

 

And here, let me offer you the Starbucks model of church.

 

Starbucks built its entire business plan on becoming a Third Place in people’s lives. Howard Schultz, the founder of Starbucks, was one of the first executives to comprehend the concept of the Third Place - that informal public place outside of work and home - where people could gather, put aside their concerns of work and home, relax and talk.

 

Starbucks is not just about coffee. It is about connection, conversation and community where people can sit in comfortable chairs, listen to jazz, read the newspaper, work on their laptop or chat with friends. In this relaxed atmosphere where you can escape after a stressful day at work and stay as long as you like without anyone giving you a dirty look, you can enjoy one of life’s affordable luxuries - a fine cup of coffee.

 

In light of the Starbucks phenomenon, I want to ask the question, Can the church become a Third Place for the people of Canada today? There was a time not that long ago when the church was the Third Place where the community gathered for governing, for mourning, for celebrating, for relationship building. Somewhere along the line the church lost credibility as a place for sacred relationship and transformative experience. People no longer found the church helpful in connecting with God or connecting with each other.

 

If we are to bridge the gap between the church and the world, we need to begin by addressing the felt needs of people. We need to meet and accept people as they are, and not as we want them to be. We don’t change the Gospel message, but we do adapt our methods of ministry, being sensitive to the preferences of people, reaching them with what they want rather than what we want. The oft-repeated church growth maxim is true: “Find a need and meet it; find a hurt and heal it.” The more needs met, the more hurts healed, the more likely a church will grow.

 

 

The Missional Mandate

 

How does the church participate best in what God is doing in the world? First, there is the spiritual mandate - to make our churches communities of transformation where people experience God. Second, there is the cultural mandate - to bridge the gap between the church and the world. And third, there is the missional mandate - to become the kind of church that can reach this kind of world.  

 

There was a reference to the U.S. Episcopal Church in a marketing book not long ago. Author James Twitchell, in his book Branded Nation wrote this: “Observe the current state of the once-dominant Episcopal Church. Episcopalians committed an unforgivable marketing sin: they forgot their brand because they lost their story.”

 

Your brand is your identity, your distinctive voice, what makes you unique, special and worthy of consideration. Ask yourself, why should people invest their time, energy and money in what your church has to offer? The answer: because you add value to their lives.

 

Twitchell was making the point that in the world of marketing, the Episcopal Church had no clear focus, no compelling message, no one overriding passion that would attract new members. The Episcopal Church, for example, boasts its commitment to tolerance, pluralism, inclusivity and diversity, but you don’t have to be Christian to affirm any of these. Thus, the Episcopal Church lost its competing edge in the culture. As it blended into the culture, it lost its brand.

 

So what is different, unique, and special, about being Anglican? What makes the Anglican way of being Christian compelling? Why, in other words, would people want to get up on Sunday morning and join us, be part of us, and give their time and money in support of the things we believe in? What is it that we have that people need and want?

 

I suggest that one of our problems is that people are confused about our message. Many people have no idea what Anglicans stand for, what they believe in, or what’s important to them. If you don’t believe me, then go and ask the clerk at the supermarket check-out counter what he or she knows of the Anglican Church. My bet is that your question will be met by silence. 

 

Who are we as Anglicans? Can we articulate a compelling story about who we are in two minutes or less to someone who knows nothing about us?

 

I was getting my morning coffee at Starbucks several months ago, and I just happened to be wearing my clerical collar. The barista asked, “Are you a Roman Catholic priest?” I said, “I am an Anglican priest.” She asked, “What’s an Anglican?”  I responded, “Think of Anglicans as Catholic Lite: 50 percent less guilt but twice the fun.”

 

But seriously, what would be lost, and how would the world be worse off, if we ceased to exist? To answer that question, we have to keep in mind our core business - why the church exists and what we are here on this earth to do. I have suggested that our core business is transforming lives in Jesus Christ. When an institution no longer focuses on its core business, or becomes diverted with some other business, it sets itself up for decline. Could we in the Anglican Church of Canada be in decline because we have gotten away from our core business?

 

The former President of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Carnegie Samuel Callian, would always ask the question, “Where is the passion in the church today?” People with passion are on a mission. People on a mission change the world.

 

At the end of World War II, Robert Woodruff, president of the Coca Cola Company from 1923 to 1955, had a mission. “In my generation,” he declared, “it is my desire that everyone in the world have a taste of Coca Cola.” With a vision and dedication rarely matched in corporate North American culture, Woodruff and his colleagues spanned the globe to make Coke the best-selling soft drink in the world.

 

Years after Woodruff retired, Roberto Goizueta became Chairman and CEO of Coca Cola. Under his leadership Coca-Cola was enormously successful, in part because of his passionate commitment to the product. In a speech delivered to the Executive Club of Chicago on November 20, 1996, Roberto Goizueta said, “At the Coca-Cola Company, we have built and grown for more than 110 years. Remaining disciplined in our mission has brought us to remarkable places. Not long ago, we did some research and came up with an interesting set of facts. A billion hours ago, human life appeared on Earth. A billion minutes ago, Christianity emerged. A billion seconds ago, the Beatles performed on The Ed Sullivan Show. A billion Coca-Colas ago was yesterday morning. And the question we are asking ourselves now is: What must we do to make a billion Coca-Colas ago be this morning?”

 

As you can tell from this excerpt, Roberto Goizueta was passionate about Coca-Cola. My question is: Do we have that same passion in the church for Jesus that Robert Woodruff and Roberto Goizueta had for Coca-Cola? If not, why not? What are we Anglicans passionate about? What do we really get excited about? What is it, when we talk about it, a tear comes to our eye and a lump forms in our throat?

 

If we don’t have passion, then we might as well pack it in as a church. To the outside world, we look more like The Night of the Living Dead than the saints of God. In fact, in all the years I have been studying congregations, I have discovered that church growth is much more basic than feasibility studies, demographic reports, marketing programs, and strategic plans. It is really very simple - it begins with a passion for Jesus. Where churches have passion for Jesus, they grow. Where that passion is lacking, they die. When we focus on Jesus, everything else follows.

 

So let me ask: Do we have the passion to do whatever it takes to draw as many people as possible by all means possible to Jesus and his church?

 

Jim Collins and Jerry Porras have given us the concept of a BHAG - a Big Hairy Audacious Goal. Every visionary company has a BHAG - an achievable but huge, daunting challenge that demands our best efforts - a commitment so big that when people see what the goal will take, there is an almost audible gulp. What if the Anglican Church of Canada had a BHAG to regain 10 percent of the Canadian population - a percentage it once had up until 1960? Ten percent would mean we would have 3.2 million Anglicans in the church today. We would grow not for the sake of growth, but in order to share the good news of Jesus with the increasing number of Canadians who are not members of any Christian church. We would grow not to engage in a numbers game, but because we believe that the Anglican way of being Christian is still a blessing to the world.

 

If you think that kind of growth is impossible, consider Wal-Mart. If the Christian Church grew at the same rate as Wal-Mart since its’ founding as a small country store in 1959, today the entire population on the planet would be Christian. If a secular business can grow like that, why not the church?

 

I remember once hearing a speaker make the distinction between two kinds of people: those who say “whatever” and those who say “whatever it takes.”

 

“Whatever” is the response of the shrug, a “who cares?” attitude, one of indifference, apathy and resignation. “Whatever it takes” is the response of the committed. It is a “can do” attitude that refuses to give up or give in.

 

Think of those two responses when it comes to the church’s mission. Jesus said to love your neighbor. Whatever. Jesus said to go and make disciples of all people. Whatever. Jesus said there is more rejoicing over one sinner who repents than 99 that stayed in the fold. Whatever.

 

Now, let’s change the response to “whatever it takes.” Jesus said to love your neighbor. Whatever it takes. Jesus said to go and make disciples of all people. Whatever it takes. Jesus said there is more rejoicing over one sinner who is found than 99 that stayed within the fold. Whatever it takes.

 

Are we willing to do whatever it takes to draw as many people as possible by all means possible to Jesus and his church? Answering this question will test our character and mettle, but it is crucial to our success and effectiveness - and the results we produce in our congregations.

 

Dear people of the Diocese of Niagara: There is good news! God reigns and Jesus lives! We must never capitulate to the idea that decline is inevitable, brought on by forces out of our control. We are not imprisoned by our circumstances, our set backs, our history, our mistakes, or even our disappointments. By God’s grace, we can make choices that affect our future and bring about positive results. Yes, the challenges are considerable, but as long as we exist there is hope. So we take confidence in the Spirit’s work in the church, and we do not lose heart. Jesus is with us still and we are people on a mission.

 

The Rev. Dr. Gary Nicolosi

Congregational Development Officer

Diocese of British Columbia

900 Vancouver St.

Victoria, BC, V8V 3V7

(250) 386-7781, ext. 110

gnicolosi@bc.anglican.ca

 

1.     Reginald Bibby, The Emerging Millennials (Project Canada, 2009)

2.     Michael Adams, Fire and Ice (Penguin Canada, 2003) 50

3.     Globe and Mail, October 21, 2009, A3

4.     Anglican Journal, December 2005, 13; The Living Church, January 15, 2006, 12

5.     Jim Collins, How the Mighty Fall (Harper Collins, 2009) 118-119

 

 

 

 

Courageous Living for Chaotic Times

 

 

By Dr. Gary Nicolosi

 

 

 

One of the most important areas in theoretical physics is chaos theory. For most of history, scientists have looked at the universe in a linear fashion, assuming that A leads to B leads to C and so forth. Now they are beginning to see that the universe may function more by virtue of relationships between particles and matter, and that those relationships move about more in a chaotic, non-linear fashion. Chaos is normal.

 

Think about that. Chaos is normal. Life is often complex, uncertain and messy. Life is rarely straightforward or logical or sequential. There is nothing normal except the cycle on the washing machine. We can expect political and social turmoil. We can expect market meltdowns and economic upheavals. We can expect earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes and every sort of disaster Mother Nature can come up with. We can expect epidemics like H1N1 and SARS. As soon as one disease is conquered, another will pop up. As soon as one political problem is solved, another will arise.

 

Yes, chaos is normal - and with it change. There has been more change in the last century than in the previous 2,000 years. There will be more change in this decade than in all of the previous decades of the last century. Back in the early 1990s, it was suggested that the sum total of our knowledge doubled every four years. Now it doubles every eighteen months.

 

With all this change have come instability, uncertainty and an inability to predict - much less manage - the future.

 

Some of us may have read Nassim Taleb’s The Black Swan. Since the beginning of humankind, the assumption was there were only white swans. However, in recent years we have discovered there are black swans. No one could have predicted such a thing. And yet, we now know there are black swans.

 

Black Swan events don’t have precedents. Moreover, today’s world doesn’t resemble the past. There is no linear progression from past to present to future. Nonlinearities abound in every area of life.

 

The Anglican Church of Canada is undergoing its own kind of upheaval. Some of us, I know, find it difficult to accept the changes that are taking place in our church. I think of a dear lady I met at one of our regional meetings who was exasperated that the Book of Common Prayer was no longer being used in her parish. She said to me, “I feel you are taking away my church, and I will have nothing left.” I sensed the pain and confusion in her voice - her plea for stability and desire to maintain the status quo - not to hold onto the past but to give her a solid foundation on which to ground her life.

 

There are times when we read the news and think, “Stop the world! I want to get off!” For some of us, it’s the end of the world, or at least it can seem that way.

 

Of course, we don’t have to wait for the end of the world. The world ends all the time in so many ways. The end times are with us all the time.

 

I used to find a lot of my inspiration in the old Charlie Brown cartoons. In one of them, Charlie Brown says to Lucy, “Do you think the world will come to an end in our time?” Lucy replies, “I try not to think about such things.”

 

“Well,” says Charlie Brown, “Now that I’ve brought it to your attention, what do you think?” Lucy answers, “When things that I try not to think about are brought to my attention, I try not to think about them.”

 

But try as we may, the end times are with us all the time. So the issue is how we respond to the chaos and changes of life. Do we see in every end of things the possibility for a new beginning? Do we focus only on that which is dying or do we look upon that which is being born?

 

In our Gospel today, Jesus talks about the end times using images that are frightening, chaotic, turbulent. “There will be signs in the sun, the moon, and the stars, and on the earth distress among the nations confused by the roaring of the sea and the waves. People will faint from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon the world, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.”

 

It doesn’t seem like a very reassuring picture, does it? Chaos will abound, Jesus says. But notice what else he says: “Now when these things begin to take place, stand up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

 

Imagine. Just when we think things can’t get any worse, they get so much better. When we think it’s the end, it’s only just the beginning. Jesus saw a promise of a new heaven, a new earth when God would vindicate the faithful and achieve final victory.

 

But here’s the hard part: sometimes things can’t be made new until the old is destroyed. Sometimes there can’t be birth until there is death.

 

I remember being told as a young priest leading a small parish in upstate New York that churches rarely grow and become renewed without pain. The church I served was an architectural gem that had many problems. Members were stuck in the past, afraid of the future, reluctant to make any changes that would expand the church’s outreach to new members. Meanwhile, there wasn’t one month I was at the church that the budget was in the black. Finances were always a problem and consumed more than half our parish council meetings. I called in an experienced priest to advise me on my leadership. He studied our situation and then said, “For there to be a new church here, you’ve got to kill the old church. Something old must die in order for something new to be born.”

 

That sounded too radical to me. I couldn’t bring myself to say that to the congregation out of fear of losing my job. So the church continued to do what it had always done, with the result that it continued to decline in numbers and money. It simply could not relinquish the past in order to embrace the future.

 

Has anybody here had to die in order to live? Does someone here know what it is like to lose what you love, only to see it replaced by something much better? Has your very bad news ever become good news?

 

A member of my former parish shared with me: “When my husband died, I felt as if my life was over. I told God that I had nothing left to live for. My world was destroyed. But wonder of wonders, I went on, not with the same life, but with a new life. I wouldn’t have chosen for my marriage to end, to be alone, yet that was the life I got and I must say, it’s turned out for the best.” That lady knows the move from bad news to good.

 

When I served as Canon for Ministry at the cathedral in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, a dear parishioner and friend who was an executive at Bethlehem Steel was unceremoniously fired. When he went to his office on Friday morning, one of the Vice-Presidents walked in and just told him to clean out his desk and leave - the company was being restructured and he was one of the casualties. A guard escorted him out of the building.

 

I found him the next day, lying on his sofa in his living room, staring at the ceiling, horribly depressed. “The company was my life,” he said to me. “Now it’s gone, it’s all gone.”

 

Eventually, he and his family moved to Virginia where he got another job. When he returned to the cathedral for a wedding, he looked different, very much improved. I asked how he was doing. He said to me, “I didn’t have the guts to quit my job, so the company did it for me. I should have done it five years ago. I gave too much to the company and not enough to my family. But I’m better off now, happier, more relaxed, and I love my job.” There is someone who knows that sometimes things change for the worse, only to get so much better.

 

Now, there is no doubt about it, change, especially when it results in something new being born, is painful. Change is often disruptive. Something is often uprooted before something new can be planted. Some things are broken down before others can be built up. This is not only true of individuals; it also is true of the church. Christianity dies again and again, only to be reborn into something new and more wonderful. It is like Good Friday and Easter. It dies and then it rises again.

 

Today you can see the signs of resurrection throughout the church:

 

• Vatican II significantly transformed the Roman Catholic Church;
• Modern biblical scholarship is giving us new ways to read and interpret the Word of God;
• Baptism is now understood as the primary sacrament of ordination that commissions every Christian as a minister;
• Women have finally been allowed to become deacons, priests and bishops;
• Authority is increasingly viewed in non-hierarchical ways emphasizing mutual ministry and the priesthood of all believers;
• And the church itself is becoming more embracing, more inclusive, and more open to the Spirit of God at work in the world.

 

All of this is nothing short of a revolution in the way we do church. The old way is dying; the new is being born.

 

Yes, there is pain and confusion and consternation among some people. But in every end of things there is the hope of a new beginning. God helps us to begin again and to see the world anew.

 

Do you remember Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz? Thanks to my daughter Allison I have seen that movie more times than I can count. You remember her house in Kansas gets swept up by a tornado that brings her to the faraway Land of Oz. Up to this point, the film is in black and white, but as Dorothy leaves her house and steps into the Land of Oz, the film switches to color. Oz is a strange place of incredible beauty and enchantment. Dorothy marvels at what she sees and says to her dog Toto, “We’re not in Kansas anymore.”

 

Yes, we are not in Kansas anymore, but the future is filled with hope. The best days are yet to come. That’s not wishful thinking. Jesus tells us, “The Son of Man will come in a cloud with power and great glory.” Revelation is still happening, and God isn’t finished with this world or his church. God is still doing a new thing if we can but see it and accept it.

 

So don’t be anxious. Don’t be afraid. Amidst all the chaos and change in the world today, God is still in control. Never be afraid to trust an unknown future to a known God. Though the future may seem uncertain, God’s love is always certain. I like the way Billy Graham put it: “I’ve read the last page of the Bible. It’s going to turn out all right.”

 

 

Dr. Gary Nicolosi

November 29, 2009

Text - Luke 21:25-36

Advent 1, C

                   

 

 

 

In marriage, couples still hold the power

 

By Astrid Storm

 

 

[Episcopal Life] A friend recently told me about a wedding she attended that began with the bride and groom issuing a lengthy apology for entering an institution that continues to be so unjust for gays and women (the bride was a prominent feminist). It didn't exactly make for a very upbeat wedding, we agreed, but we got her point. Hadn't we both felt apologetic about entering the institution of marriage for those same reasons? And, moreover, didn't we both want a way to convey that to everyone else?

My own ambivalence about marrying stemmed not only from having gay friends who couldn't, but also from a conservative Christian upbringing during which I watched one too many strong, independent women mysteriously transform into the "surrendered wife" often demanded in that tradition. So when my now-husband and I decided to get married last summer, I was strangely comforted to remember that, for its first thousand years, the Christian church was ambivalent about the institution of marriage, too. "Marriage is not an evil thing," assured St. John of Chrysostom in what amounted to a positively ringing endorsement of marriage for its time from a Christian leader.

Granted, much of the early church fathers' rationale for this was their disdain for sexual activity and, well, women. And where they did condone marriage - as some did - it was usually to contain lust, as in Paul's tepid endorsement of marriage: "Better to marry than to burn." But they also rightly saw marriage as potentially leading to self-involvement and neglect of others, a warning you almost wish churches today would issue more forcefully rather than feed the nuclear family fetish.

It was only by the 11th century that the church entered the business of marriage, and I stress the word "business." Wealthy families came to the church to settle marital disputes where property and possessions were at stake, and the church, often ruling with its own interests in mind, arbitrated their cases. And, since civil authority was increasingly unreliable or sometimes nonexistent at this time, the church found itself more and more in the business of settling such disputes and, eventually, also marrying people.

This led to the church's eventual development of marriage as a sacrament and basically its gradual about face on the subject of marriage. But for those first several centuries, it was, in certain ways like any thinking person today, realistic about the risks and shortcomings of marriage.

Which brings me to another episode from church history that strangely comforted me as I prepared to marry: Even when the church embraced and started trying to control marriage, it still couldn't figure out a way to control it entirely. As with other points of canon law, medieval theologians discussed ad nauseum all the minutest details of marriage - grounds for entering it, grounds for annulling it, rules and exceptions to rules and exceptions to the exceptions to the rules.

So inevitably a debate began about when, precisely, a couple could be said to have consummated a marriage. Was it when they had sex, like many people had assumed before the church weighed in? But then what about Joseph and Mary? Alternatively, was it when they exchanged present-tense vows to each other - another point at which people had long taken themselves to be married?

But in a time when the church was trying to exercise total control over people's lives - and rightly saw control over this most intimate aspect of people's lives as an excellent way to increase people's dependence on the church - these means of consummating marriage were too much in the hands of the couple itself. So the theologian Duns Scotus came up with another idea: A marriage was consummated only when a priest blessed it.

That way, just like the other sacraments, whether a marriage was legitimate or not would rest entirely in the hands of the church. But alas, for the church this was deemed impossible to enforce. It rightly recognized that people would continue to marry without the blessing of a priest, much like they had, well, for thousands of years before the church ever came along. This would have entailed the church deeming void from the outset far too many working marriages for any reasonable person to take its pronouncements on the institution seriously.

The upshot of all this is that the celebration of marriage is still the only sacrament that is enacted by the couple and only presided over - merely witnessed - by a priest. I like reminding myself this when I'm doing weddings: I'm just an accessory. The power is in their hands. And it was nice to remember as I was getting married, too. All this may sound slightly odd coming from a Christian priest who represents the institutional church and routinely performs marriages. But that only made such small consolations that much more important. A public apology tacked onto the liturgy may still be worthwhile for some, but, thankfully, I found something of the same thing - written right into its history.

 

The Rev. Astrid Storm is vicar of St. Nicholas-on-the-Hudson in New Hamburg, New York.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Episcopal News Service, January 11, 2010

Episcopal News Service provides information and resources which we
consider to be of interest to our readers.

However, statements and opinions expressed in the articles and
communications herein, are those of the author(s) and not necessarily
those of Episcopal News Service or the Episcopal Church.

 

 

Remembering who we are

 

By Tom Ehrich

 

 

[Episcopal News Service] When I heard that the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles had elected a lesbian as suffragan bishop, my reaction was, "Here we go again."

I knew the anti-gay lobby would kick into overdrive with dire warnings about violating "biblical principles" and offending the Anglican Communion. I knew partisans on the other side would celebrate her election as an epic victory.

The warnings are nonsense, of course, and not at all supported by the entirety of biblical ethics. Nor do casual observers understand that the Anglican Communion is a tired and artificial construct of the post-colonial era, not a form of divinity. The celebrations over an ordination decision, meanwhile, sound tinny in an era of recession and expanding warfare.

My reaction was weariness: once again, my church would be known for nothing more enlightening than sexuality. It's better than our former reputation as "the country club at prayer," but it's no closer to the truth.

Yes, we have gay bishops, gay clergy, and gay lay members. So do other denominations, even the most conservative. So do other fields of endeavor, from banking to bridge building, from cutting hair to cutting federal budgets.

I just wish we were known for something more than sex.

Things like the hospitals we founded, for example, or the schools and colleges, the homeless shelters and food banks, and support groups for the wounded. I wish more people saw the missionary work we do among Native Americans, the ball fields we build for needy children, the teams that follow storms and do unsung ministry, from patching roofs to patching lives.

I wish more people stood in a typical Episcopal narthex on Sunday and watched the lonely be loved, the stranger be welcomed, the child be heard, and young and old find common ground -- the "radical inclusion" that is so necessary in our divided, intolerant and ideology-driven society.

The same could be said of any denomination. Progressive and conservative alike, our churches are more than mere social venues for debates about sex. A few diehards will always fulminate about homosexuality, but most Christians have more serious work to do.

Even now, singers of every skill level are holding extra rehearsals for heralding the Messiah. Children are learning their lines for Christmas pageants. Clergy are preparing their Christmas sermons. Food donations and cash-for-food donations are flooding into churches.

Pastoral teams make sure that shut-ins get a visit and tend to the seasonally distressed. Evangelism teams are preparing for the many strangers who will drop into churches for reasons they don't understand but that God does.

Small groups gather in homes. Support groups hug saints and sinners caught in human suffering.

Millions of Christians, home alone, drop to their knees in prayer, worry about the state of our broken world, write an extra check, make an extra phone call, shed an extra tear.

Some attend a performance of Handel's "Messiah." They hear alto and soprano give voice to the ancient promise, "He shall feed his flock like a shepherd." Will anyone ask if the two women are lovers? No, they will hear angels and feel within themselves a hunger that starts deep in the soul and draws them inexorably to God.

The sexuality of a bishop-elect is as nothing compared to this holy work. The controversy over it is a tragic diversion of the human spirit. Let's remember who we are and what work we are called to do.

 

Tom Ehrich is a writer, church consultant and Episcopal priest based in New York. He is the author of "Just Wondering, Jesus," and the founder of the Church Wellness Project, www.churchwellness.com. His website is www.morningwalkmedia.com.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Episcopal Life Daily, December 16, 2009

Episcopal Life Daily provides information and resources which we
consider to be of interest to our readers.

However, statements and opinions expressed in the articles and
communications herein, are those of the author(s) and not necessarily
those of Episcopal Life or the Episcopal Church.