felix hominum

Why I live under a curse

...because I am compelled to read and respond to the various papers presented by the Primate's Theological Commission.  Theology, like all intellectual disciplines, requires time.  An obvious drawback to engaging in dialogue with those who have produced this set of papers is the lack of time to adequately consider all angles of what is being said.  Nontheless, let me begin.  The order in which I am reading these papers is much like how I pick the movies I go to:  mainly based on the titles.  And for further reading, one might consider Pete Rollins' question:  who is a theologian?

Mostly I will respond according to the genre of my generation:  meandering. 

Walter Deller makes gives us some interesting "for instance" examples in his paper: Pastoral Practice and Doctrine—Two Instances of Change and Some Questions They Raise.  He uses two examples:  suicide and baptism of children born out of marriage.  I want first to look at the way he addresses the latter.  He relates the following to us:

As the synod presentation made clear it is still the practice in some parts of the Canadian Church not to baptize children who are born to parents who are not married. I am aware of clergy who have encountered in their ministry individuals who have been alienated from the church for long periods of time because of such refusals within living memory. This offers an interesting reflection point, since this instance is one where pastoral practice is in outright contradiction of doctrine.

He goes on to note that it has never been the doctrine of the church  to formally deny baptism based on the marital status of the parents.  Yet he notes that practices contrary to the teaching of the church have at least existed within the Canadian church.

There are a few problems I see with using this kind of example.  First, it must be noted that the practice was actually contrary to the teaching of the church.  As a model for implementing SSB, I find it less than persuasive.  Look at it this way:  the correction to a faulty practice is to bring it in line with the teaching of the church.  What is missing from Deller's example is the strong fact that this was not a widespread practice, and it was, by all accounts, contrary to the understanding of the sacrament itself.  So I find it rather unconvincing.  It does not prove a blanket "practices can change" principle.  It merely points out a set of clergy (how many? and for how long?) who engaged, of their own accord, in a practice which was contrary to the teaching of the church.  Seems to me that the model actually works against making a case for change...

16 papers from the Primate’s Theological Commission

And they can all be found here.

I know, I know...  First of all, who has time to read and adequately address such a plethora?  If St Augustine lamented the lack of time in book XI of his Confessions, then so can I.  But be that as it may, if one has the time, and one is Anglican, and one thinks that such things are helpful, then go and read them all and report back here.  BTW, just in case you had not guessed, they are all around THE topic.  Which is an area where good reflection is needed.

As an underlying principle, the notion that questions are 'open' is going to continue to be quite exciting.  Or, to put it another way, the notion that there are less absolutes than the church thought is working itself out in many ways.  Some say that we need to rethink our 'absolutes' in terms of ethics;  others say that we need to rethink our 'absolutes' in terms of polity. 

From a purely speculative point of view, the one gives permission to the other.  It is the same principle, only applied to a different category of church life.  One should not find it surprising that at the same time as there is a restructuring of ethical order, there is also a restructuring of ecclesiastical order within Anglicanism.

If it's all too much, take a break and go here:

What's wrong with the Rothesay Report: Part 1 of Many

The Faith, Worship and Ministry committee has released a paper entitled the Rothesay Report.  Good that this group has put some things down on paper and offered it up for consideration to the Anglican Church of Canada.  So let me pull up a chair and a latte, and have a bit of conversation with this Report and its authors.  Bravo for putting in the effort, honestly, I mean that.  Yet, having read through the report twice, there are numerous points in it which need to be addressed.  I might go so far as to say there are things which are at least a bit unclear, and some which are just plain wrong.  It will take some time to go through it all;  we'll do this with a few lattes and beers over the next little while...

First, let me begin with your footnotes.  You know, the place at the end where you tell us what sources you used for research, for informing interpretation, for exegesis, for theological reasoning.  Let me simply start by asking this:  is every author you reference pro same sex marriage?  I know you are hoping to "make a case" for the rationale of same sex marriage.  But making a case is not the same as making up a case.  Let me give one simple example: 

24:   Romans 1 refers either to a form of behaviour which Paul thought ought to be avoided because it was characteristic of the heathen Gentiles; [9] or to heterosexual individuals who engage in homosexual activity (since homosexuality is ‘unnatural’ for them; [10]); or to behaviour that amounts to little more than a Jewish taboo and needs therefore not to be regarded as ‘sin’ by those who don’t share the same cultural outlook [11].

[9]  John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality
[10]  Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality: contextual background for contemporary debate
[11]  William Countryman, Dirt, Greed, and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and Their Implications for Today

That's it?  I mean, let's have an honest conversation here.  These are the three options that you come up with for interpreting Romans 1?  James Dunn, Kasemann, Hengel, Ziesler, Sanders, Ridderbos, Keck, Donfried, Fitzmyer -- and that's just off the top of my head.  Let alone anything like what's his name - Robert Gagnon, but in case anyone thinks he's a red herring, leave him off the list.  If you are going to offer an honest theological rationale for same sex marriage, I think you need to address the flaws pointed out in the positions of the 3 authors you quote.  Making a case for something involves addressing the opposition to it; making a case involves addressing the exegesis of serious scholars who interpret Romans 1 quite differently, and for very sound reasons.

Faith Worship and Ministry first sought, and then received, clarification from CoGS that the subject is the marriage of same-sex couples, not all legally qualified persons. The church wants to reserve the right to define for itself who the proper subjects of marriage are, rather than leave this to the state.

Faith Worship and Ministry’s response is The Rothesay Report. This is a study paper, which was offered to the Council of General Synod in the course of their discernment. The Council has referred it back to Faith Worship and Ministry for further work, "to expand it to include a broader spectrum of theological thought on the question of the marriage of same-sex couples."

I am somewhat pleased that the paper got sent back for "further work", it certainly needs it.

Canadian Anglican General Synod won't consider same sex marriage in 2010

Well, at least according to a paragraph in the Anglican Journal:

Council of General Synod (CoGS) wrestled with the blessing of same-sex unions and marriage when it met here May 8 to 10 and in the end decided not to ask General Synod 2010 to amend the marriage canon to allow for the marriage of same-sex couples.

CoGS had a recent meeting;  some of the official notes are here, here and here.  The Primate's Theological Commission has put out a paper or two (alluded to earlier on this blog:  Galilee Report, updates & papers here).

So what exactly does any of this mean in terms of the ongoing stuff in the Canadian Church?  Not sure.  There are several possible outcomes.  Various bishops and dioceses continue to offer same sex blessings, while others (Ottawa, Toronto, Niagara) appear poised to begin doing so, regardless of any request for "moratoria" from the wider Communion.

Somewhere along the line, there is the possibility that someone will introduce a motion to amend the marriage canons anyway, or something to such effect.  CoGS says it won't ask General Synod to entertain  a motion regarding same sex marriage, but that doesn't mean that anyone else is prevented from introducing such a motion.  My money is on the latter option.  Actually, I anticipate something along the lines of what was introduced 2 synods ago; eg:  this General Synod recognize the integrity and sanctity of those baptized persons who have entered into civil marriage.

Anyone who wants to figure out how the recent Big Anglican Meeting shakes down is welcome to try.  We are all being processed to death. Here's what Bishop Mouneer Anis, President Bishop of the Anglican Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East had to say about the most recent international gathering to discuss the "Anglican Covenant":

There was manipulation. We had  deliberated long about section 4.  They put resolution A to detach section 4 and ask ABC to put a committee.   When the resolution was put for voting, we praise the Lord it was rejected.

Then it was like a shock to bring the two main clauses of the resolution we rejected and put it in the resolution we wanted to vote on. It is absolutely wrong.  We as members of ACC had decided that we do not want this resolution. We wanted the covenant to go straight to the provinces.  This led to what seemed to me to be a lot of confusion on the role of the ACC.  The ACC is not a synod to take decisions like this.  All we are asking for is that this covenant be sent for a further three years, until 2012, so that every province will have plenty of time.   The provinces can make amendments as well after it has passed.  There will be time for discussion and reflection. There will be objections and amendments.  Yet this body does not want to send it.  It was very clear from the rejection of Resolution A they way that the majority in the house wanted to go. This was a shock and confusion and a manipulation.

This was deliberate.  Resolution A was rejected and yet was brought back.   Even if it is legal I see it as wrong.  Also in the last few days, all of us were clear about section 4.  Even the Church in Canada had said for the sake of the communion and unity we will receive this covenant.   I personally think it is unfair to appoint people from three different provinces who are known to reject the covenant, - New Zealand, the United States and Scotland, - on the resolution committee.  Part of this crisis is due to distrust. I must say that all what happened increased the distrust.

On another front, I had a conversation not that long ago in which someone tried to offer the reassurance that of course clergy wont' be required to officiate at same sex blessings/marriages.  Well of course they won't.  That assurance is actually, in my opinion, precisely not the point.  Canon law already allows clergy to refuse sacraments on the basis of conscience.  And yes, I have had a few couples to whom I've said that I would not be willing to officiate at their wedding.  So saying clergy won't have to do SSM is really just an extension of what is already there.

The real question is this:  if and when (and I'm assuming a when) SSM passes in the Canadian Anglican Church, will any voice of theological opposition to the practice be allowed/tolerated? 

That to me is the real question.

What is the point of Anglicanism?  Ruth Gledhill has an interesting column in the Times regarding Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, who recently resigned his post in order to do more work with persecuted Christians.  The Bishop himself hails from Pakistan originally.  Here's an interesting part of the interview:

Bishop Michael spoke about the equal and opposite pulls in Anglicanism, towards the 'logic of Catholicism' or the 'logic of fragmentation'.

'The question now arises, which logic will prevail. It is quite possible that the logic of fragmentation will prevail and people will go their own way. Or it may be that the Anglicans will see their way to the Catholic Church, to God's will as expressed in Christ's highly prescient prayer for the unity of Christians across the ages and throughout the world.

'Anglicans to their credit have never claimed to be the one, true Church.' He noted that successive Lambeth Conferences had accepted that Anglicanism stands ready to disappear in the cause of Catholic unity, 'that is, it [Anglicanism] is not an end to itself but a means towards the greater Catholicism which is  God's will.'

is church "brand" a dead end road?

Fascinating article from Episcopal Life online, looking at the decline of the mainline "brand"

Not all the churches examined by the Pew survey are declining, of course. Most of us would not wish to belong to, or even visit, the kinds of churches that are growing; we dismiss them as evangelical, conservative, right-wing, even backwards.

But a little humility on our part might make it possible to see that it is possible they are better at answering the needs of seekers who otherwise might dare to enter our doors.

Yes, they spend less time talking about issues of the temporal world, issues of justice and equality – issues important to us. But they devote more time to talking about things we seem to be much less interested in, at least to those thirsty newcomers – sin and forgiveness, how to engage the Bible at a deeper level, how to raise a Christian family, how to find joy (joy!) in Christian faith.

Can any of us seriously wonder why someone just beginning a journey of faith would find that a more welcoming place?

Is the ship sinking? Is it still seaworthy? Here's a more difficult and more pressing question: Is it time to move on from the age of ocean liners? Are we more devoted to our institutions, to our way of being church, than to our gospel?

The gospel is the message. The church is only the medium. There is a deep, eternal truth to that message that will find a way to be communicated. If our medium can't adapt to carry that message, then it will be passed by – no matter how many ships we build.

Talk amongst yourselves...

a terribly uncomfortable solution to Anglican lawsuits

From time to time, as part of my Lenten discipline, I will look in on the rest of the Anglican family and see how things are going.  If you look through the curtains, you will see any number of lawsuits going on:  diocese of Niagara, British Columbia, New Westminster.  I'm sure I have missed a few, or at least there will be more by the time you read this.

Perhaps because it is Holy Week, I am going to suggest a very simple but uncomfortable solution.  It is merely based on a parable in Luke's Gospel.  You all know it, it starts out like this:

Jesus continued: "There was a man who had two sons. The younger one said to his father, 'Father, give me my share of the estate.' So he divided his property between them.

You see, I propose that the Dioceses act like the Father in the parable.

I know it needs work, but I'll keep at it and add more details when they come to me...

Writers needed: "Ministry Matters"

From the Anglican Church of Canada facebook group page. 

Writers needed!
Today at 3:22pm
Hello all,

MinistryMatters is a magazine that publishes articles, resources, and information to inspire and support Canadian Anglican leaders in their ministry. This award-winning publication is now moving online, and we’re looking for a few good columnists.

WHAT WE NEED:
-Online columnists would write one 500- to 750-word article each month for a six-month stint. Articles could address a range of topics interesting to Canadian Anglican leaders.

-If readers post comments in response to an article, columnists are expected to keep up with the discussion and throw their two cents in.

WHO WE NEED:
-Canadian Anglicans (especially, but not necessarily, in ordained ministry) who think interesting thoughts and write dazzling prose.

WHAT TO DO NEXT:
-Email a short statement of introduction, three column ideas, and two writing samples to Ali Symons at asymons[at]national.anglican.ca by May 1, 2009.

I look forward to hearing from you!

Editor, MinistryMatters

I know of at least a few local Anglican bloggers (lay & clergy) whose prose is sparkling, so I'm putting this out as a public service announcement.

I would try to submit a sample of my own stuff, but I are not a riter.

As promised (sort of), I'll begin by suggesting a few writers whose work would enhance our national Anglican publications.  First up, I'd like to see a regular column by the Crimson Rambler, whose command of English prose is rivalled by few.  You can actually take pleasure in reading the Rambler's stuff.  It's just that well written.

Partnering with the Council of the North, one parish at a time

Rita lives on the Red Earth Reserve, about three hours northeast of Prince Albert. There are around 2,000 people living on the Reserve, with a large population of children and youth. Rita herself has six children, 32 grandchildren, and 20 great-grandchildren. Many families on the Red Earth Reserve struggle with poverty, although Rita describes the conditions as “not too poor, compared to some other places.” St. Stephen’s Anglican Church, where Rita serves, is a small building that is only heated for services. “I often arrive first to start the fire,” she notes when asked about the cold winter days.

The people of St. Timothy’s Church in Edmonton were moved by a presentation at their Synod last year about the conditions of many Reserves, and that the clergy there are not paid for their ministry work. The ACW group of the church offered to become a partner with Rita and her work at Red Earth, and raised $500 to help out. When they challenged their congregation to match this amount, they were thrilled to see it more than triple!

From the diocese of Saskatchewan website.

I mention this for a couple of reasons.  First, I think it vitally important that local parishes have partnerships with other parishes.  And I do want to stress the word partnership.  This is a time when there is much fraction and division within our Anglican family.  And no, I don't bury my head in the sand (or snow, if you are more northern) and pretend that these difficulties do not exist, or that they are going to magically disappear any time soon.  But at the same time that need not prevent us from, well, loving our neighbours in the most practical and sincere ways we can.

Second, I wanted to thank all the members of St Timothy's, Edmonton, for supporting this work, and understanding that they are part of a larger family of Anglicans.  I suspect that many of us act as if we are a congregational style church. "Me in my small corner, and you in yours" - as the old hymn used to say.  But that vision of church is, I think, not true to the vision of Christ, nor of the apostles, nor of the Fathers.  And while we may not, as individual parishes, find ourselves able to solve all the questions of ecclesiological confusion, we are able, as individual parishes, to exercise our commitment to be part of the larger family.

Third, I think it is a visible reminder, not that such parishes as St Stephen's "need" parishes like St Tim's.  Rather, I really think it works the other way around.  We at St Timothy's would be poorer as a church without developing a partnership with a parish like St Stephen's.  Our diocesan Dean recently returned from a visit to another Canadian Council of the North diocese, and we think there might be more opportunities to share resources - human, spiritual, financial.

Draw your church together, Lord into one great company of disciples, together following our Lord Jesus Christ into every walk of life, together serving Him in His mission to the world, and  together witnessing to His love on every continent and island, through the power of the Holy Spirit.

I'm writing to the embassy...

To:  The Anglican Church of Canada
Re:  Your "blog" Vision 2019

Sir:

I have received word that one of the comments under my care has been held "in moderation" for over 1 week.  In this time I have had no assurance that my comment "in moderation" has been properly cared for, nor has this comment been allowed (under the terms of the Silicone Valley Convention) to communicate with other comments in your Vision 2019 "blog".

This comment was sent in good faith on March 12, 2009.  The comment itself was unarmed, and was a member in good standing of the Anglican Church of Canada.  It was baptized and confirmed in the Diocese of Edmonton, and had served faithfully on two local internet parish councils.  While I understand that some care needs to be taken in assigning server space, I anticipate that the comment under consideration has felt excluded from the conversation, and will most likely need extensive pastoral counseling when and if it is ever released back into cyberspace.

I am therefore writing what is known in the business as a "Strongly Worded Letter" to the Queen, and expect that you will take the appropriate action.  If by chance you have permanently deleted my comment, or have somehow found it offensive, let me offer the following by way of replacement:

“I have been called both “fundamentalist” and “pietist” by unsympathetic readers, since they put me in an already-closed slot in their minds, to which they had relegated the use of the Bible. They did not read me carefully enough to be aware that my reading of the scriptural texts was post- and not pre- critical.”
The Politics of Jesus Revisited (1997) John Howard Yoder

I suspect that there are a number of people for whom the appearance of any opposition to SSB on biblical or theological grounds needs to be reduced to a charge of "fundamentalism/literalism", but that is simply not the case.  There is simply a failure to admit that one can hold such a view in a post-critical age.

Indeed, I have found that this episode has caused me such personal anguish that I must break my Lenten fast, and seek solace with a 1998 Pinot Noir.

Yours truly, etc

Vision 2019: why my comments are lost in the limbo that is the Anglican Church website

Comment 1:

Bob Bettson, Dauphin says:
March 11, 2009 at 3:30 pm

I afraid this post is an example of the kind of extreme rhetoric which is disrespectful of our Primate and our Bishops. There has been all too much of this during the current debate. If the poster thinks the church leadership is apostate, he doesn’t know what he is talking about. These are faithful servants of Christ and the church trying their best to deal sensitively with difficult issues at a difficult time.

The writer thinks no motion should have even gone forward on blessing of same sex unions because scripture clearly has spoken. The writer should know many of us believe scripture has not spoken in the way he thinks. Instead we believe that it is selective literalism of the kind that the Anglican Church has never embraced which brings about such an extreme position.
Those of us who remain in the Anglican Church of Canada are followers of Christ and believers in the word. We celebrate the Eucharist Sunday by Sunday, preach the Gospel, care for the sick, study the Bible. How dare Frank W. judge us all and declare those faithful Bishops, clergy and lay people who remain in the church as apostate.

Property matters have nothing to do with greed. The churches have been built and maintained for years by faithful Anglicans. They don’t deserve to be taken by literalist/fundamentalists who have little grasp of our Anglican tradition of diversity and tolerance. The pattern of parishes leaving and trying to keep the building seems to rely completely on having a literalist/fundamentalist incumbent who has conditioned the people with many years of anti-Anglican rhetoric.

Comment caught in Limbo:

Joseph Walker says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

March 12, 2009 at 10:18 pm

Bob, with all due respect, I find that your use of the literalist/fundamentalist “nom de terror” is precisely the kind of “extreme rhetoric” which you say is disrepectful.

I tend to think that there is a third option, perhaps best articulated by John Howard Yoder: “I have been called both “fundamentalist” and “pietist” by unsympathetic readers, since they put me in an already-closed slot in their minds, to which they had relegated the use of the Bible. They did not read me carefully enough to be aware that my reading of the scriptural texts was post- and not pre- critical.”

John Howard Yoder: “The Politics of Jesus Revisited” (1997)

Perhaps my comment did not meet the suggested criterion:

Vision 2019 welcomes a range of contributions to the "Tell us your story" project--from affirming to critical. Comments are monitored, however, to ensure that a respectful conversation can take place. We ask that you be relatively brief and that your language be respectful to others. You must also provide your name, place of residence (city or town is adequate) and parish.

If so, then I heartily apologize.

If, however, the problem seems to be that after 5 days no one at head office can decide whether or not the suggestion that there is a post-critical reading of the text which is neither literalist nor fundamentalist can be posted publicly, well, then, my work is done here.

Or just beginning.

(I wonder if the literalists/fundamentalists are people like this,(BA,MA,MRel,ThD) who also seem to be this.)

Russ B - let me take you for lunch

So the national church thought it a good idea to solicit public opinions regarding the Vision 2019 project.  And that it would be a good idea to post these up on the national website.  You can add your own story to the mix.  One in particular caught my attention, mostly because the author is from my own hometown.  Anyway, Russ B, if you are out there, send me an email - I'd like to take you out for lunch sometime.

Dear Anglicans,

I was interested to see on your national church website that you are engaged in something called “Vision 2019″, and that you wish to hear from church members about “your community, your local church, your theology, your worship, your passions, your dreams, your nightmares”.
I am no longer a church member, although that fact in and of itself might be of interest to you.

Let’s start.  “My community”.  I was raised in the diocese of Caledonia, but have since then lived in the dioceses of New Westminster, British Columbia and Edmonton (but have never been a church member during the time I’ve lived in Edmonton).

“My local church”.  Well, the parish in which I was raised was dissolved and the property sold by the bishop of the day in order to raise money to (I swear I’m not making this up) repair the dry rot afflicting his cathedral in Prince Rupert. The Anglicans in my home community have dispersed, variously to the United Church, Catholic Church or (in many cases) have abandoned faith communities altogether.  Nice work...

Russ B, Edmonton

Russ's contribution can be found in full here

prayers for Michael Hawkins

By the Grace of God
Michael William Hawkins
will be consecrated the
Twelfth Bishop of Saskatchewan
on Ember Friday
the Sixth of March, Two Thousand and Nine
at seven o’clock
in Sacred Heart Cathedral, Prince Albert.


The Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Saskatchewan
requests your prayers and presence.

Installation in the
Cathedral Church of Saint Alban the Martyr
Prince Albert
Saturday the Seventh of March
at eleven o’clock

We will keep you and the diocese in our prayers.

The lenten challenge part one

Dear editor,
There are three tenets in the Christian faith that have always puzzled me. And I’m not being facetious. 1. How could John the Baptist baptize Jesus and what words could he use? 2. God the Father is supposed to have sent his only beloved Son to redeem mankind, but there’s no mention of God’s wife. 3. If the Holy Ghost impregnated Mary, wouldn’t that make Jesus divine on His father’s side and human on His mother’s? Maybe some of your readers can enlighten me.
William Bedford
Toronto

From the letters to the editor in the March edition of the Anglican Journal.

Dear Mr Bedford:  I'll have a latte before I begin my reply, in which I hope most graciously and charitably to ask your patience as we explore the possible answers to your questions.

ps, if you are a long time reader of the letters in the Anglican Journal, you will recall that it might just be one of Mr Bedford's favourite avenues of expression.

the Barnabas Initiative

It's a project in the Anglican Diocese of Edmonton, focusing on new ministry initiatives.  There is a website up and running (in its infant stages) where Thomas Brauer has begun to post a few items.  Head over and have a look.

St Mary's Nanoose Bay (BC) leaves ACoC

The parish has removed all links from their website pointing to anything "Anglican Church of Canada"-ish.  According to an Anglican Network in Canada news release, the parish has

voted overwhelmingly on Sunday, February 8, to come under the episcopal oversight of Bishop Donald Harvey, Moderator of the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC), and under the Primatial authority of Archbishop Gregory Venables of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone.

Now here is where it gets interesting:

St Mary’s rector, the Rev Guy Bellerby, met today with the bishop’s commissary from the Anglican Church of Canada BC Diocese to request an amicable arrangement that would enable the congregation to remain in the church building pending a mediated process. This is in the spirit of the request made by the Primates (leaders of Anglican Churches worldwide) at their recent meeting in Egypt. The Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada said earlier this week that he would like to participate in such a mediation process.

I will be more than curious to see how the mediation process mentioned will work itself out.

On Good Friday

I want to do an evening of acoustic blues.

Seriously.

Anglican Primates' Meeting: a "fog of confusion"

The 2009 Primates’ Meeting in Alexandria, Egypt, has opened in a fog of confusion with little expectation the five day meeting will resolve the Anglican crisis...the primates appear exhausted and frustrated, unsure of their authority within the Anglican Communion and the purpose of the meeting.

article by George Conger, at religious intelligence

Paul Feheley, Principal Secretary to the Primate, is accompanying Archbishop Fred Hiltz to the Primates' Meeting in Alexandria, Egypt.  He has a report here.

I've never had the opportunity to worship in the Anglican church in Alexandria, but I have some wonderful memories of worshiping with the congregation in the Anglican cathedral in Cairo.  If I dig out a pic or two I'll post them.  There is also an article at the Anglican Journal, in which we learn that the Archbishop of Canterbury was greeted by the Coptic Pope, Shenouda III.  Personally, I think the Copts are where it is at.

The Anglican Church as the monastery of this age

I've had this thought tumbling around for some time.  It's still tumbling.

Once upon a time a culture collapsed.  I, like many who have a fondness for dates, would suggest the deposition of the last Western Roman Emperor (476) as a nice symbolic event.  The responses to this collapse were varied;  one response was the rise of communal monastic life.  Within several decades of each other, Benedict could form his monastic community, and Boethius could use the figure of Lady Philosophy to drive home an essentially Christian message.  In chalkboard level history, one was forming a community in order to survive the shift in culture, while the other was freed to look around and take from the culture something which could be of service to the faith. 

I propose that there were two unthinkables at work here.  The first is that it would have been unthinkable to Christians only 400 years prior that a community cut off from the world would have been a desirable goal for the church.  The second is that it would have been unthinkable for Christians only 400 years prior to suggest that the figure of Lady Philosophy could play the role of handmaid to the faith.

All of this overly simplistic analysis is merely to say this:  the Anglican Church of Canada as we know it is, I submit, mostly like the monastic community of old, even while it struggles to engage the culture in which it finds itself.  This is not in and of itself a bad thing.  The monastic tradition has been (in either solitary or communal form) a vibrant part of Christian tradition from earliest times.  When the culture shifts, there is a certain comfort in knowing that certain things are being preserved;  that treasures are being safely stored; that at least some of the "things that were" are still preserved in ritual and in particular places.  Yet it was never a simple task to join the community.  In some traditions, the would-be novice had to stand at the door and knock for some days (in order to test his perseverance, we are told).  The community was a "solid" place, to which those who were destined were called.  And once inside, the novice found himself subject of a particular way of doing things, under an hierarchical structure which sought to bring order to a society in which chaos had come to be the norm.  The monastery had walls, it had order.  It was, in many ways, a self contained community.  Perhaps too many of our parish churches have become Benedictine in their construction and outlook:  we are a safe haven against the changes and chances of this fleeting world.  Those who would become members must essentially become novices, and then find their place within the established order.

All of this at some juncture has to do with being a monastic or a missional kind of community, or at least being able to combine the best of both.  When I have that figured out, I'll sell you the book and become a celebrity.

can one evaluate proclamation/preaching?

There's an interesting little discussion about this topic over at Simple Massing Priest's place.

When I signed on for this thing, I was given the twofold task of "word and sacrament". Some of my thoughts on the matter are in the comments over there.

Bishop Ron Ferris joins Anglican Network in Canada

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 23 January 2009

Bishop Ronald Ferris, recently retired Bishop of Algoma (in Ontario), has announced that, effective immediately, he will minister as part of the Anglican Network in Canada under the Primatial jurisdiction of Archbishop Gregory Venables, Primate of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone.  Bishop Ferris is the third Canadian bishop to be received under Archbishop Venables for ministry in the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC).

While Bishop Ferris will focus primarily on church planting in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, he will be available to assist Bishop Donald Harvey in episcopal ministry.

“Bishop Ferris has been an unwavering advocate of orthodox Anglican and Christian beliefs and practices within the Anglican Church of Canada’s House of Bishops,” said Bishop Harvey.  “He has always supported the stand taken by the Anglican Network in Canada, even when the vast majority of his peers opposed us. Bishop Ferris is a gifted man of God who is highly respected in his former diocese and throughout Canada.  He has a true pastor’s heart and is wholeheartedly dedicated to Christ’s ministry and service. I am grateful for the privilege of ministering together.”

“After 28 wonderful years as Bishop, first in the Yukon and then in Algoma, I am delighted to embark on a new challenge – new church development,” said Bishop Ferris.  “My decision to relinquish the licence I held for so many years within the Anglican Church of Canada was not taken quickly or lightly. My wife and I deeply value our many years in Algoma and the Yukon and are thankful that during our time in Algoma the diocese remained united as a “communion partner diocese” and committed to upholding the teachings and disciplines of the Anglican Communion.”

Bishop Ferris retired September 30, 2008, having served as Bishop of Algoma since 1995.   He had previously served as Bishop of the Yukon from 1981 until 1995.  Bishop Ferris holds a Doctorate in Sacred Theology (1995) from Thorneloe University in Sudbury, Ontario, a Doctorate of Ministry (1995) from Pacific School of Religion in the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California, as well as a Doctorate of Divinity (1982) from Huron College in London, Ontario.  In 2004, Bishop Ferris was a candidate in the election for Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada.

A growing number of biblically faithful Anglicans in Canada, distressed by the seismic shift in the theology and practice of the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC), have joined ANiC in order to remain in the mainstream of Anglicanism globally and historically.  Today, ANiC numbers three bishops, 66 priests and deacons and 26 parishes with about 3200 Canadians in church on an average Sunday.

ANiC is under the Episcopal authority of Bishop Don Harvey and the jurisdiction of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone (based in South America) – one of the 38 Provinces in the global Anglican Communion.  The Anglican Church of Canada is also one of these 38 Provinces.

Members of the Anglican Network in Canada are committed to remaining faithful to Holy Scripture and established Anglican doctrine and to ensuring that orthodox Canadian Anglicans are able to remain in full communion with the vast majority of Anglicans around the world.

from Essentials

The Anglican Journal has a story on Bishop Ferris' move here.

Geez magazine - the Daringly Awkward Sermon Contest

Winnipeg, Canada –– Geez magazine is bringing the stodgy old pulpit back from the brink of cultural oblivion with a sermon contest of holy mischief.

The dark, wooden bulwark of yesteryear has little currency today, but what if the pulpit was torn from its moorings and planted closer to the action? What if it was available to anyone who wished the voices of spiritual authority would say less about other-worldly glory and more about the spiritual side of the big issues of our times?

Building on last year’s “30 Sermons You’d Never Hear in Church” contest,” Geez magazine’s 2009 Daringly Awkward Sermon Contest is ushering in a new and – make no mistake – decidedly different era of proclamation.

“The world needs bold voices of spiritual depth,” says Geez publisher Aiden Enns. “But maybe the message can have an element of holy mischief, a smirk instead of a furrowed brow, and, at the same time, more connection to the pressing issues of the day.”

The Daringly Awkward Sermon Contest invites entries that explore the aspects of social change that make us squirm, things like privilege, right-wing relatives, the drunk stranger in the back pew, guilt feelings, or litter in the poor part of town. Constructing a more fair and compassionate world involves awkward people, pauses and topics, and we want to find the wisdom in the awkwardness.

The Geez pulpit is set up and waiting for activists, anarchists, atheists and good old-fashioned Christians to step up and confront or comfort, pontificate or confess, urge or encourage.

The top three sermons will receive $400 each. The winners, plus a selection of other entries, will be published in the Spring 2009 issue of Geez. Deadline for entries is February 28, 2009. Word limit is 800.

Submissions can be sent to contest[at]geezmagazine.org or Geez Contest, 400 Edmonton Street, Winnipeg MB R3B 2M2, Canada. See entry forms at geezmagazine.org

Geez is a quarterly magazine of spirit and social action. It is aimed at over-churched, out-churched and perhaps even unchurchable souls on the North American fringes of faith. In its three years of existence it has been nominated for three Utne Independent Press Awards and won Magazine of the Year at both Canada’s Western Magazine Awards and the Canadian Church Press Awards.

I have a few ideas for submissions in the works.  Any suggestions?

3rd Annual Vital Church Planting Conference

I went to this last year & found it excellent:

Vital Church Planting 2009

We would like to invite you to the Third Annual Conference on Anglican Church Planting. It will take place at St. Paul’s Bloor Street in Toronto, from Tuesday February 17 until Thursday 19, 2009.

This conference will seek to build on the foundations laid by the previous two conferences. In 2007, over sixty attended from all over the country, including four or five bishops; in 2008, over eighty, including six bishops, attended. We expect over 100 this year.

In 2008, the speaker from the UK, George Lings, spoke a lot about Fresh Expressions, the creative grassroots church planting movement over there. Then, in May, Bishop Graham Cray of Maidstone UK was in Ontario, and again told stories of the diversity and vitality of fresh expressions of church. There was also a Fresh Expressions self-select session at Lambeth, and maybe you were able to attend and learn for yourself what this is all about.

In light of this, it seemed right to invite other leaders and practitioners of Fresh Expressions to come as our plenary speakers. They are:

The Rev. Paul Bayes is the National Mission and Evangelism Adviser to the Archbishops' Council. Paul has extensive experience of parish life, evangelism, church planting and developing different forms of new congregations. The National Mission and Evangelism Adviser has two main roles: to help equip the Church of England in the work of evangelism and to advise and assist in the missionary development of both parish congregations and fresh expressions of Church.

The Rev. Canon Phil Potter is Director of Pioneer Ministry for the Diocese of Liverpool. Phil has been a leading figure developing Cell Church nationally, and the church he led for twenty years has developed several exciting pioneer projects, including the very successful Kings Table café. He is author of two books, "The Challenge of Cell Church" and "The Challenge of Change--Shaping Change and Changing the Shape of Church."

One addition we are making to the program this year is a "track" of three workshop slots especially for bishops and other diocesan officers, to address the particular issues that face diocesan leaders in moving towards church planting and other fresh expressions of church.

We would like to invite you personally to attend the conference. Book your registration before January 16th and save, full details may be found on the conference website: www.vitalchurchplanting.com. If you have any questions please contact Jennipher by phone at (905)833-8327 or by email at ysimcoe[at]toronto.anglican.ca.

We look forward to seeing you in February!
 
Warmest greetings, in Christ,
 
The Vital Church Planting Conference Team

The Anglican Planet on the web & the death penalty

is located here.

In unrelated news, I've been tossing around various statements by anglican church leaders on the question of the death penalty.  Does anyone have a take on this issue?

And, in keeping with the meandering nature of this post, one day soon I'm going to try to update the links with a number of interesting blogs which have never made it into the sidebar for some reason or other. 

Conservative Anglicans Create Rival Church

In a history-making gesture, conservative evangelical Anglicans, deeply alienated by the decline of the U.S. denomination, sounded a shofar to herald the creation of the Anglican Church of North America.

On a snowy Wednesday evening, about 1,000 worshipers, mostly from the U.S. and Canada, gathered in Wheaton, Illinois, for a worship service to celebrate the creation of the new entity, which comprises 656 congregations, 800 clergy, 30 bishops, and 100,000 people in regular worship. They represent the evangelical, charismatic, and Anglo-Catholic traditions within Anglicanism.

read the whole article at Christianity Today

Related articles from the Anglican Journal:

Anglican Church in North America: new church or new province?

Creating a new province will take years, says Archbishop of Canterbury

"Conservative Anglicans determined to stay within church"

About 50 conservative Anglican leaders, including eight young theological students, gathered in Toronto for a one-day consultation on Nov. 25 and emerged with a determination to remain within the Anglican Church of Canada. They came from 16 dioceses across the country.

Rev. Brett Cane of St. Aidan’s Anglican Church in Winnipeg is chair of Anglican Essentials Federation who was quick to point out that the organization is going through a name change. He said that the “Essentials” label has negative connotations in some parts of the country. He said that the federation is loosening its connection to the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC). “We will still maintain links of fellowship with the network but we will not be organizationally tied together.”

ANiC includes 23 congregations, 14 of which are churches that left the Anglican Church of Canada, and the rest are new church plants. They are under the episcopal oversight of Bishop Donald Harvey, formerly of the Anglican Church of Canada, and under the primatial authority of Archbishop Gregory Venables, primate of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone.

Mr. Cane said that the federation will continue to meet together with those involved in ANiC, “being together in preaching, youth work and mission.” “We are all still brothers and sisters in Christ; we need to recognize their pain because it isn’t easy to leave the denomination you love.”

He said that the one day consultation dealt with “reformulating our vision” rather than issues around structure. He said he saw this conservative federation as more of a movement within the Anglican Church of Canada than an organization.

The concerns of conservative Anglicans reach beyond the blessing of same-sex unions, he said. There is a need for theological reflection on the uniqueness of Jesus, biblical interpretation, marriage, and the rights of children. Mr. Cane says the federation – whatever its new name – will be encouraging theological students to become engaged in these conversations...

...Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, sent a lengthy pastoral letter to the consultation in which he acknowledged differences in biblical interpretation and expressed appreciation for the fellowship’s determination to work within the Anglican Church of Canada...

from the Anglican Journal

Letter from the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Rupert’s Land

[ed note:  published with permission]

Message to the Church in the Ecclesiastical Province of Rupert’s Land

Greetings in the name of the risen and ascended Lord, whose return in glory we await.

We, the Bishops of the Province of Rupert’s Land returned from the Lambeth Conference, profoundly moved by our encounter with the other bishops of the worldwide Anglican Communion and deeply committed to our continuing life together.

As we and the other bishops at Lambeth sought to discern God’s call to us, we discussed many painful and complex issues on which we had deep and intense differences. Yet these differences were surpassed by the unity we discovered as we worshiped, prayed and studied the Scriptures together. One of those issues on which we sought God’s guidance was the blessing of same gender unions.

A significant majority of the bishops gathered at Lambeth requested that as part of our discernment process the moratoria proposed in the Windsor report continue to be honoured.

These moratoria mean that all bishops are asked to refrain from
1. Authorizing rites for the public blessing of same gender unions
2. Participating in the consecration of a bishop openly engaged in a same gender relationship
3. Engaging in cross-border pastoral interventions

Our Primate, The Most Reverend Fred Hiltz, has requested that we enter into a time of ‘gracious restraint‘ by honouring these moratoria.

We, the bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Rupert’s Land, give thanks for the courageous and pastorally sensitive leadership of our Primate. We commit ourselves individually and collectively to honour the moratoria. We do so with the clear understanding that in so doing we are not in any way prejudging the results of the discernment process.

Having committed ourselves to entering into the time of ‘gracious restraint’ requested by the Lambeth Conference, the Archbishop of Canterbury and our Primate, we call upon all those who consider themselves members of the Anglican Communion to honour this request. We especially call upon those bishops from outside of our Province who have chosen to interfere in our dioceses to immediately cease their activities. We call on all individuals within our Province who have aligned themselves with outside groups to return to their parish family and enter into open and respectful dialogue with us about how their concerns can be addressed and their gifts utilized more fully in the proclamation of the Gospel and the building up of the Kingdom of God.

May the Holy Spirit fill your hearts and lives with joy as you prepare for the season of Advent when we anticipate the celebration of the birth of our Lord Jesus as Saviour of the world and await his return in glory as the Judge of that same world.

The Bishops of the Dioceses of
The Arctic
Athabasca
Brandon
Calgary
Edmonton
Keewatin
Qu’Appelle
Rupert’s Land
Saskatoon
Note: There are currently no bishops in the Diocese of Saskatchewan


[if you desire to make a comment, please exercise charity & clarity]

3rd Annual Vital Church Planting Conference

click here for the website

Briefly on church councils

One of the few pleasures of having been off sick for a few days was making my way through Leo Donald Davis' "The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology".  It is really one of the first major works in English to try to grasp the whole movement of the 7 Ecumenical Councils.  It was first published in 1983.  It covers an era of church history which is now gone; and the church of that era should be subject to neither nostalgia nor contempt.  It might well be said that it covers an era when "doing church" (to use modern jargon) was so much different.  Can we even think of what it might mean to have a truly "ecumenical" council?  A time and place and occasion when the whole church, or at least representatives of the whole church, could gather to discuss, and might I add, to decide?  Sounds marvelous in theory, but in practice:

On the night of February 8, 356, imperial troops broke into the Church of Theonas, where Athanasius, surrounded by his clergy and consecrated virgins, was conducting a vigil service.  As the arrows flew and the dead and wounded fell, his clergy hurried the reluctant bishop from his throne and Athanasius dropped completely from sight.  In the next year George of Cappadocia ceremoniously entered the sullen city to be enthroned as the new bishop.  He soon unleashed a reign of terror against Athanasius' supporters while on the side organizing profitable monopolies in pork, salt, papyrus and funeral arrangements.  In the desert, moving from one hiding place to another, welcomed by the monks, never once betrayed by his people, Athanasius remained the religious leader of Egypt, pouring out a steady flood of well-informed books and pamphlets defending the Nicene faith.  (pp 93-94)

Well, there you have it.

A few Anglicans have been having councils recently:

Bishop Donald Harvey's charge to the Anglican Network in Canada Synod in Burlington
Conservative clergy unveil new plan (Toronto Star online)

Diocese of Quincy ends affiliation with the Episcopal Church (US), and joins Southern Cone
Fort Worth Diocese (US) is on the "verge of secession"

Over at Dean Robin's blog there is a letter posted from the bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Rupert's Land; here is a snippet:

We call on all individuals within our Province who have aligned themselves with outside groups to return to their parish family and enter into open and respectful dialogue with us about how their concerns can be addressed and their gifts utilized more fully in the proclamation of the Gospel and the building up of the Kingdom of God.

May the Holy Spirit fill your hearts and lives with joy as you prepare for the season of Advent when we anticipate the celebration of the birth of our Lord Jesus as Saviour of the world and await his return in glory as the Judge of that same world.

As a side note, I find that often the first casualty in "church" discussions is Acts 23:5:  And Paul said, ‘I did not realize, brothers, that he was high priest; for it is written, “You shall not speak evil of a leader of your people.” ’

Anglican Church of Canada joins Facebook

[Toronto: Church House]

A press release on the ACoC website indicates that the church has decided to form its own Facebook group.  This comes at a time when the national church is seeing a decline in membership and it is hoped that this new initiative will allow the church to reach out in new and creative ways.  Director of Communications Initiative, Rev. Canon William Smythern-Jones, sees great potential in this new initiative. "We've got to bring the church into the 21st century", he said in a hand written letter in reply to our email.  "I've already trained most of our staff, including the Primate, in all the things the kids are doing these days.  We are regular hep-cats!"

Upon its launch, several members of the Anglican Church of Canada's national staff were busy figuring out how to "poke" Archbishop Akinola of Nigeria, and others were disappointed that Rowan Williams had not yet responded to their request to "add as friend".

Statement from the Anglican Church of Canada House of Bishops

excerpt:

One of our main topics of conversation was the agreement by many bishops at Lambeth on three moratoria: on the blessing of same-sex unions, on the ordination to the episcopate of people in same-sex relationships and on cross-border interventions. This discussion was in the context of decisions made recently by several diocesan synods in the Canadian Church that asked their bishop to prepare and authorize rites for the blessing of same-sex couples.

Our discussion initially comprised two parts. The first consisted of reports to the House from several bishops of whom such requests have been made -- Ottawa, Montreal, Niagara, Huron, and the Anglican Parishes of the Central Interior -- as well as bishops from other dioceses who anticipate such requests in the not-too-distant future and bishops whose dioceses have received unnecessary and unwelcomed "cross-border interventions."

For the second part, we formed an indaba group to reflect on what we had heard in the previous session. (Indaba -- a model for discussion used at Lambeth -- is an African word meaning "a gathering for purposeful conversation among equals.") Several themes emerged in this discussion.

Some dioceses have not yet engaged in the listening and discernment process and some are just beginning;
Some have been listening and discerning for many years and have reached differing conclusions;
Even in the face of difference, there was a desire expressed to "stay at the family table."
It became clear during this process that many individual bishops wanted something from the House as a whole "to take home" with them to share with members of the church.

In response to that request, we added to our agenda a third session on this vitally important topic. In April, 2005 at its meeting in Windsor Ontario, this House responded to a number of requests made in the Windsor Report including a commitment to the moratoria proposed in that document until General Synod makes a decision.

full text here

Anglican Journal story here. 

excerpt:

Bishop Clarke acknowledged, however, that he is “not sure” if he can manage to hold the moratorium, as affirmed by the other bishops, until the 2010 meeting of General Synod, the church’s governing body.

The “large majority” of Canadian bishops also said they would accept the request made at the recent Lambeth Conference of bishops for moratoriums on the ordination of gay bishops in same-sex relationships and on cross-border interventions.

I do have one quick question about the Journal's reporting:  are there any other bishops out there to whom the Journal staff could turn for some comments?  It seems to me that over the long course of following Journal articles on these topics, the same people are always the go-to bishops for quotes. I mean, if a "large majority" of bishops support such and such a position, might the average Anglican get to read a bit more of the thoughts of the individual members of this large majority?

Just a thought.