The Dean's Blog

Evangelism and Inclusiveness

2012-01-10T10:13:00.000-08:00

In recent years, among Episcopalians, in conversations, publications, and on the internet in blogs and networks, the word “Inclusion” and its value of “a Church that is open to all people” has become dominant in our common life. I would contend has it has become one of the main defining terms of our current identity. Take the issue of “open communion,” or giving communion to non-baptized people. Those who practice this justify it as an inclusive action.

At the same time, we hear less among Episcopalians about “Evangelism.” One reason for this is that our community has never been too comfortable with the “E” word. Despite the Decade of Evangelism and the 2020 Resolution, evangelism still does not seem to be much of an Episcopal thing. Add to this, the defection of many Episcopalians who identify themselves as Evangelicals and we can see that the word seems, well, a bit foreign to us. As a result, the word inclusive seems to fit our temperament much better. However, I would like to content that inclusion and evangelism are not the same thing; that both belong as values of the Church, and that apart from one another, they can lead the Church to unhealthy and dysfunctional behavior. In a healthy Christian community, evangelism and inclusiveness should be seen as complimentary values, the kind of values that enhance each other.

There are many in TEC today who have embraced the concept of inclusiveness and use it as a substitute for evangelism. They might even argue that a truly inclusive church expresses what the early church meant by evangelism. An inclusive church reaches out and accepts all people regardless of race, economic status, gender and, even for many, creed. Isn’t the good news of the Gospel that God accepts and loves all people? Yet, is inclusiveness enough to express what the church is called to do in evangelism? Is the Great Commission, “Go therefore and be inclusive of all people?” I would content that inclusiveness makes much more sense when it is related to the Great Commandment “to love one another” than “to make disciples.”

We should also be honest and admit that for many in our church the word inclusiveness does not extend in the broad sense to everyone. It is a code word related to gender inclusiveness. An inclusive parish is one where GLTB folks are accepted openly and allowed to be open about there sexuality. It is a community that champions same sex marriage, and is committed to advocate full rights for all such people in both society and the church. This is certainly the way that Integrity uses the word.

Further, the word inclusive can be used in another code way. In this way, it means that we are an inclusive church that welcomes all inclusive people. In other words, we are open and welcoming of those who see themselves as inclusive in the political, social, and intellectual landscape of America. This seems to me to be the way our Presiding Bishop uses the term. Not included, and certainly not welcomed, in such churches are people who are perceived to be non-inclusive. These two uses of the word are in a basic sense exclusionary. However, I do not think this is what most Episcopalians want it to mean. We genuinely want to be a community that is open to all people. “The Episcopal Church Welcomes You” as our signs once said.

But if a church community such as ours is to be truly inclusive in the boarder sense, if we intend to be a diverse church made up of people across ethnic, racial and gender boundaries, than evangelism is central to this goal. This is because the work of evangelism involves strategies to reach just such people. Evangelism is intentional, planned, and often strategic. When the Church in Antioch decided to do the work of evangelism, this multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and inclusive community prayed, set apart leaders (Paul and Barnabas who were good at reaching Gentiles) and sent them to advance the gospel among non-Jewish people. As one Bishop has said, “Evangelism is the most anti-racist thing the church does.”

Let me give an example from the Cathedral Church in Dallas. 30 years ago, the Cathedral decided to reach out to the increasing number of Hispanic people who were immigrating into the Dallas area. They set out a strategy that first involved starting a Spanish language service. Then, they hired a Hispanic missioner to give leadership to this fledgling group. Today, over 60% of our worshipping community Sundays attend our Spanish service. We strive hard to remind ourselves that we do not have two congregations, but are one church, yet, I would content our success in becoming a diverse and more inclusive church has been the direct result of evangelistic outreach.

Is it possible that evangelism can be a code word for “people like us?” Of course it can. In many larger evangelical communities in America, this is exactly what it means. The congregations grow in numbers, but they grow by methods aimed at reaching more people from the same socio-economic class who share many of the same values before they ever arrive at their churches. While there are outstanding counter examples of this among Evangelical churches, the stereo-type of the former exists because such churches exist. But, as I hope the Cathedral illustrates, this does not have to be either the strategy in evangelism or its fruit. True evangelism always makes the church more, not less, diverse.

The important thing in all this is to realize that evangelism and inclusiveness are complimentary values. The two, existing together in creative tension, force us to evaluate our intentions and results, our methods and their consequences. I have been an advocate of evangelism within this community for many years. I remain concerned about the decline of our denomination and its inability to do the work of evangelism effectively. Yet, at the same time, I am also concerned about the fruit of our present behavior. I see the word inclusive justified and used more and more in the exclusive sense, so that its meaning is becoming “people like us.” I fear we are becoming an elitist community that looks with contempt or pity on those who are not as enlightened as we are.

When I was a young priest, it was said of the Episcopal Church that we were the Republican Party at prayer. More recently, was said that we were NPR at prayer. Now I fear we are becoming MoveOn.org at prayer. Well, we may be at prayer, but we are not yet the kind of community that Christ has called us to be. To become this, we must follow that path that leads to both evangelism and inclusiveness.

The Power of a Word of Thanks

2011-12-20T13:29:00.000-08:00

On December 19^th, I celebrated my 40^th Anniversary of my ordination to the priesthood. That morning I opened my email and found a note of thanksgiving for my ministry. It came from Professor Louie Crew a long-time leader in the Episcopal Church, and an activist for the full inclusion of all people in our faith community. For many years now, like many Episcopal Clergy, I receive a note of encouragement from him on my birthday, my wedding anniversary, and my ordination anniversary. Here is the interesting thing about all this; Professor Crew and I have found ourselves on opposite sides of issues over the years, yet, every year I get words of encouragement from him. This intentional act on his part is more than I have ever received from any other church leader including the eleven Bishops in the seven dioceses that I have served.

I remember how such affirmations and encouragement have helped me over the years when I did get them. For example, one Christmas I opened a Christmas card from Bishop John Krum of Southern Ohio. I was a chaplain resident in Cincinnati and on Sunday provided supply services at one of his congregations, although I was not canonically resident in his diocese. The card had a printed greeting. On the inside he had hand written, “Thank you for helping with our congregation in Norwood. It means much to me.” At that point in my life when I would have doubted that the Bishop of that diocese even knew who I was, it meant a great deal. 30 years later, I still remember it! Even more significant was the fact that up to then, 10 years into ordained ministry, it was the only such personal note I had ever received from a Bishop.

Of course, I have received much encouragement over the years from many folks inside the Church. I felt well affirmed by Bishop Payne in Texas, but then I worked closely with him as a member of his staff. However, I worked closely with him and I am not sure the other clergy of the diocese felt the same. Actually, I think if we are honest about it that we clergy would have to admit that affirmation and encouragement from our leaders comes seldom and far between.

I say all this not to make any of you feel bad. I actually want like to affirm all you who give leadership in the Church. What I do want to say is that my 40 years of experience tells me that when it comes to affirmation and encouragement, there is a drought in the Church. What is strange about all this is that you would think Christian leaders would be people who especially were abundant in our praise and encouragement of others. I think of the example of St. Paul who began all his letters save one with a generous thanksgiving for the church he was writing, and ended most of his letters with acknowledgement of individuals in these local communities. After all, the great commission is to make disciples, but the great commandment is to love one another.

Personally, I would have to admit that I have been slow to figure out the importance of such words of affirmations. Today, when I look upon the revitalization of the Cathedral here in Dallas, a struggling, multi-cultural and bi-lingual inner city parish, I can most attribute our positive movement to a decision I make early on to affirm and love our folks, especially our leaders. I only regret that I haven’t done it more.

I think clergy leaders need to remind ourselves that the Church in our age is entirely a volunteer organization. Our people come, work, and give because they want to do this. They choose to do it in our congregations. We should be thankful for this and make our thanks known.

One of my dearest mentors told me that he kept a stack of Thank You cards on his desk in his office. He regularly scheduled a time each week when he would stop everything else and prayerfully write thank you cards to members of his large congregation. I admired what he did. I only wish I had followed his example better. I cannot help but wonder what a healthier and better community we would be if all our leaders could show much more encouragement and thanksgiving to others.

A few Sundays ago, one of our pre-school children came up to me after the main service and said, “Dean Kevin, can I give you a hug?” And even before I could say yes, she stepped forward and gave me one. “Yes,” I said to her, “even Deans need hugs.” To my surprise and delight, she smiled and said, “Yes, I know.”

Headlines that We Would Like to See Versus

2011-12-01T14:04:00.000-08:00

Headlines that We Would Like to See Versus Headlines We Will Probably See

Recently, I got to thinking recently about headlines that would be good to see versus those we will probably see in the days ahead.

We Would Like to See

Jerusalem, July 18, 2017: Prime Minister Martha Swartz announced today that a permanent peace agreement has been reached between Israel and the State of Palestine. In the agreement, both parties have agreed to keep Jerusalem a free city open to all visitors. Israel has agreed to cease expansion of new towns into the West Bank, and Palestinians have agreed to a peaceful recognition of Israel’s right to exist. “What were we thinking?” The Prime Minister said in her opening remarks before the Israeli Parliament . . .

We Will Probably See

Jerusalem, June 1, 2020: Israeli tanks rolled into Gaza early this morning as Israel launched a pre-emptive strike again Hamas to punish them for rocket fire against Israeli settlements. Prime Minister Netanyahu said “It is time Israel shows our determination to . . . . .

We Would Like to See

Karachi, Pakistan, March 15, 2015: Pakistani and Indian representatives announced a wide-sweeping peace agreement between these two long divided nations which includes disarmament of nuclear weapons by both sides. In a joint statement, the leaders declared, “Each of our nations have enough problems of poverty and poor education than to waste our time and energy building up huge armies and weapons in a battle that neither of us could win.” Military leaders from both countries hailed the . .

We Will Probably See

Mumbai, India, March 16^th, 2019: India began retaliatory shelling across its disputed borders with Pakistan today in reacting to the recent alleged state sponsored terrorist attacks in the major cities of . . .

We Would Like to See

Kabul, Afghanistan, September 15, 2021: Free and democratic elections in this troubled state have led to the election of the first female Prime Minister. “This is a victory for reform and the rights of all the people of Afghanistan” said the new leader as she . . .

We Will Probably See

Kabul, Afghanistan, September 20, 2030: 87 year old President Hamid Karzai was re-elected today in an election marked with extensive fraud and violence. President Karzai now presides over one of the most corrupt governments in the world while three of the Provincial Capitals are now held by a resurgent Taliban. After the election, President Karzai committed himself to the on-going reform of his government and said that, “All our present troubles are directly the result of decisions by the U.S. government to . . .

What We Would Like to See

Oslo, January 20, 2030: World scientists acknowledged today that “We are seeing the beginning of the reversal of recent global warming as Nations adhere to the New Paris Accords on limiting CO2 gas emissions combined with the growing use of cold fusion energy developed in 2019 by a team of renowned international scientist at the Institute of . . . “

We Will Probably See

Miami, Florida January 20, 2030: The City of Miami was officially abandoned today after extensive efforts to hold back the affects of increased ocean waters failed. This makes the 7^th major world city to be washed over due to the effects of global warming and the melting of the polar ice caps. Meanwhile, both the U.S. and China announced their planned veto of a U.N. backed resolution that called for a 3% reduction in . . .

In Remembrance of My Father, Glenn Martin

2011-11-11T07:47:00.001-08:00

My favorite picture of my father was taken just after he entered the army in 1943. He was 18 years old, good looking, and oh so young just like so many of his generation. Next to this picture, my wife has placed his Purple Heart which he earned at the battle of the Bulge in a shelling in the Ardennes forest. Dad hit Normandy on D-day plus 6 with the 251^st Artillery Division. He found through to the end of the war. He was truly one of the Greatest Generation.

He seldom talked about his war experiences. He never talked about his Purple Heart and when I first found it, he passed it off with “I was luckier than a lot of guys.” Recently, I learned of the many unit citations his group received. He was silent on all this. I do know that his best friend died the same night he was injured which is why I think he never talked about this.

Dad returned home to build a life after the war. When he could not break into the meat packers union in Cleveland, he packed up his young family and moved to Dallas. Here he taught himself to be a machinist eventually becoming a Master Machinist with Texas Instruments. After I entered the ministry, he admitted to me that he had hoped that I would become an engineer. He always let me know, however, how proud he was of me.

For many of my early years, he worked two jobs. I seldom spent time with him. Of course, this was before quality time and bonding. Truth is we really never connected until I was over 40. The older we both became, the better our relationship.

My dad never really wanted much to do with the Church even when my mother and I became quite active in the Episcopal Church. This was probably a reaction against the hell-fire and brimstone religion of his Southern Baptism mother. When our Rector found out that dad was a machinist, he asked dad to help him with the restoration of a pipe organ. They spend hours together in the evenings working on it. One day, to our amazement, dad announced he was going to church because he was going to be confirmed. He never missed a Sunday after that until illness prevented it. I found out recently that he often double dipped on Sundays taking communion from one of our LEMS at the Cathedral and then getting it from the Disciples of Christ folks at the nursing home.

My dad was, according to everyone including most recently his nursing home aids, “a good man who never complained.” He would have quite literally given someone the shirt off his back. He taught me to never regard someone’s income or race, and to be fair to all. He often ended conversations with “don’t worry about your mom and me, we will be alright.”

My dad never hired anyone to work in our home. He did everything and taught me to do so too. From him, I learned the dignity of hard work. It seemed every weekend as I child, I watched him doing repairs on something or improving our home.

Then when I turned 12, he took up golf. He took me with him, and this became the one really bonding experience between us. The last few years, our visits at the nursing home were punctuated by watching some tournament together. “Great shot,” he would often say. Last Christmas, a visiting church group asked “Mr. Glenn” what he would like. He asked for a new pair of golf shoes and to everyone’s amazement, they brought him a pair. He wore them regularly while being pushed around in his wheelchair.

After an emergency trip to Baylor Hospital last month, his doctor told me that he simply could not drink or eat enough to sustain himself any further. Reluctantly, we discontinued any further treatment, returned him to the nursing home to be close to mom, and we engaged hospice. While I had long expected this to come, I wept. My mom has no short-term memory and serious dementia. She does recognize “her honey” and he always smiled when she came into his room. They had a long love affair that lasted 67 years.

On November 6^th, my dad passed from this world. I will miss him, but I am not worried, as he often told me, he will be alright.

Extending Communion to All Present

2011-10-13T12:20:00.000-07:00

There is serious debate taking place among Episcopalians about what is commonly called “Open Communion.” This means that we should invite all persons present at a Eucharist to receive communion even if they are (a) not baptized or (b) a member of a different faith community. I would like to suggest that our current discussion about communion might be moved to another level if we consider our present situation in light of, and contrast to, that of Bishop Cranmer’s.

Cranmer’s problem was definitely not ours. Nothing reveals this more than the fact that baptism was never a concern in the matter of the reception of the communion. He could assume that everyone in an Anglican Church, indeed the Nation, was baptized. His concern was whether the baptized were actually Christian. From his theological viewpoint he had many in the Church who were "sacramentalized," but not evangelized. They were at best “cultural Christians.”

We must all remember as members of a highly liturgical church that one of our most vulnerable areas is that liturgy, once it becomes familiar, can also dull our senses to what is actually happening. For Episcopalians the prophetic words that “these people honor me with their lips, but there hearts are very far from me” could have direct application to us.

In contrast to this, Cranmer made his invitation to confession – the prerequisite for receiving communion. Remember the words?

“Ye who do truly and earnestly repent of your sins, and are in love and charity with your neighbors, and intend to lead a new life, following the commandments of God, and walking from henceforth in his holy ways: Draw near with faith and make your humble confession to almighty God devoutly kneeling.”

Where is baptism in all this? Cranmer’s concern was that the baptized person look inwardly at one’s own heart and examines oneself as to our willingness and intention to receive the Lord’s Supper with a right attitude and disposition. Now, personally I am a Cranmerian when it comes to this issue.

Consequently, I think the emphasis on baptism leads us in the wrong direction. Mostly, what I hear now in Episcopal Churches, or read in the bulletin is something like this: “We welcome all baptized Christians (which should be “baptized persons”) who wish to receive communion to come forward and to the altar rail and join us.” I think all of us clergy rightfully avoid the awkward addition from the House of Bishops directive “who are able to receive communion in your own church.”

At the heart of my discomfort with all this wording in our attempt to be gracious and inviting is two-fold. First, our world is not one in which all are baptized. Even more importantly as the House of Bishops directive indicates, our emphasis at that moment becomes “membership” in a church. This is precisely what I think a seeker person hears from us. I think Cranmer would be astonished to discover that his descendents are more concerned with membership than attitude. Again, his theological perspective was largely one of the heart.

All this is made more complex by the fact that we now live in what is clearly both a post-Christendom world and a post-denominational culture. No wonder we are confused, life has gotten very complex. In the midst this complexity, we stubble over trying to be Episcopalian in welcoming and being inclusive toward others.

I would like to see our House of Bishops theological committee construct a brief paragraph that could be placed in our bulletins that expresses our theology, that all who are baptized are one. It also needs to express our pastoral reality that as a Eucharistic-centered community we welcome, in the Lord’s name, everyone who wishes a deeper participation in Christ and desire to follow him in his ways. This means that in our world we will inevitably have non-baptized seekers as well as non-Christians in our midst. Excluding those seekers from receiving communion may not be in our Lord’s best interest. Not clarifying the need for repentance and renewal may not be in their best interest whether they are seekers or members of our or some other church.

Holy Women Holy Men Revisited

2011-09-04T06:53:00.000-07:00

At General Convention in 2009, thechurch passed a large number of additions to Lesser Feasts and Fasts, ourcommemoration calendar. Even though some of the names suggested metwith serious objections, the resolution passed overwhelmingly. On June 30^th, the year trial usageended, although the resource will continue to be used with its passage in 2012nearly assured. I voted against it, andthe more that I have thought about this, the stronger I feel about thisissue.

Until recently, the Church’scommemoration calendar has been a slowly evolving item. It took time for a consensus to emerge for aparticular person to be added to the commemorations of the whole church. Take the failed efforts of some quite well-meaningchurch members to place King Charles the alleged martyr to our corporateprayers.

Then the Standing LiturgicalCommission came up with a long list of new names for us to remember. Intuitively, my radar when up. Here is what I concluded. Only a church led by baby-boomers would beaudacious and self-centered enough to believe that we are entitled to add toour commemorations so many people at one time. Past generations exercised restrain and modesty in adding people (andremoving them.)

As a boomer, I have known for sometime that my generation believes itself the most enlighten that has ever livedon the planet. I would contend that HolyWomen, Holy Men says more about our generation than the people weintend to honor. It has been said thattradition is the living vote of those who have gone before us. Most boomers consider those who have gonebefore us as not worthy of a vote. Nowonder we find such blatant inflation of the list by those believing ourselvesmost worthy of choosing.

In addition, the criterion seemedto be one of the ever invasive “inclusiveness” that now dominates the thinkingof current church leaders. Not only aremany of these persons not Christians, but several were openly hostile to theChristian Church. Why should we commemoratethem? No other organization would makeits honor roll of those who wished their own organization cease to exist. Thisis not a list of “Holy” women or men. Holinessin any classical sense of the term was never a serious criterion. The better title should have been “Women andMen of Good Intentions and Deeds.”

The historic commemorationsinclude people who were saints in the very sense of the word. They are martyrs, witnesses and servants ofextraordinary sacrifice. When we think ofFrancis, or Anthony, or Hilda, or Constance, we are thinking of people throughwhom the light of Christ, their savior, shone brightly. They did not just dogood things that should be appreciated by other humans. They led holy lives that pointed to something,or rather someone, beyond themselves.

Lastly, I would point to theconsequence of this sudden inflation of names. In a very real sense, the saints are the most valuable commodity ofGod’s reign on earth in every generation. They are the examples that point all of us to a further life of serviceand holiness in God’s Kingdom, as the old hymn says, “And I want to be onetoo.” They tell us, to paraphrase G. K.Chesterton, that Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has beenfound hard and therefore not tried. Thesaints and those we commemorate in the old Lesser Feasts and Fasts, give us aglimpse of what can happen if Christianity, true discipleship, is found hardyet lived. These folks are in a veryreal sense the currency of the Kingdom. As we all know, when a nation or community decides to simply print morecurrency, it does no spread the wealth. The consequence is exactly the opposite, it devalues the currency.

This is my most serious objectionto the well-intended Holy Women, Holy Men. Its consequence is not to inspire the kind ofholiness of life that our former commemorations did for us. Its true consequence is to make the term holyalmost meaningless.

I draw one last consolation in allthis. History has taught me that afuture generation, perhaps not very long from now, will simply look at ouractions in this matter and ask, “Who did these people think they were?” That may be the most important questionraised by this action. Not who werethese people we added in so great a number, but who were we to act in such aself-centered and self-absorbed way? They will only need to look at how few saints our generation hasproduced to grasp the answer.

Tiger's Achilles Heel

2011-06-22T14:34:00.000-07:00

Actually, as it turns out, Tiger Woods’ Achilles heel is not his heel, but his knee. He has had four surgeries to repair damage done to his left knee because at impact in his 120 mile an hour swing, he violently kicks his left knee strait. This means his left knee has to absorb the full impact of his champion swing. What does all this have to say about congregational leadership? It says a lot if you stay with me.

In Tiger’s own book on the golf swing, he describes this “violent kick” as a distinctive part of his way of doing things. Of course, today sports physiologists shake their heads at what he does and the damage it has caused him, but my point is that he told us 10 years ago his rationalization for doing so. It is a unique characteristic of his swing. Despite three well publicized coaching changes, he still repeats this action. As Lee Trevino said recently, “Either he will stop doing this, or his career is over.”

Often, I have found clergy leaders, even very outstanding leaders, who have a unique habit (dare I say flaw?) that they justify as simply part of their individual style. In other words, they view, what is really a fault, as a strength. For example, I remember a Bishop with a notoriously bad temper who explained to me that “When I am mad at one of my clergy, I sure let them know it It clears the air, and afterward it is over and done as far as I am concerned.” Of course, it wasn’t over and done as far as many of the clergy on the receptive side of the interchange were concerned, but my main point is that this leader saw such behavior as a unique part of his own style that was beneficial in some way.

I also remember a vestry person in my first congregation that would regularly tell me her frank opinion about most church issues. She would fire off a broadside followed by her comment that “You may not like it, but you always know where I stand.” I can tell you that her husband, her children, and her employees also always knew where she stood, and most had long since stopped caring.

In the long run, such justifications are just that, justifications. They are used to rationalize behavior that one should change, but many leaders use their strengths to justify such things as a virtuous part of their personal style. I know that I have done this. I am a mild introvert on the Myers-Briggs personality index. One day a clergy friend pointed out to me (painfully, I might add) that I sometimes used this as an excuse for not more positively engaging people on Sunday mornings. At first, I thought my friend was unkind for saying so, and that he did not really “understand me.” After time, I came to realize that I was using my introversion as a justification for not carrying out one of my primary jobs of as a leader, namely, showing people that I genuinely care about them. I cannot say it was easy to change this behavior. I would say that realizing that it was a problem, and that I needed to address it, rather than justify it as a part of who I was, became an important step in learning to be a more effective leader.

Let’s face it, personal insight and commitment to change is hard. God grant it to us, and God give us also truthful friends who care enough to give us such feedback. Recently, a colleague shared with me a remarkable book about just such issues. It is Overcoming the Dark Side of Leadership: How to become an Effective Leader by Confronting Potential Failures by Gary McIntosh and Samuel Rima. If you are a leader committed to growing as a leader, you may want make this part of your summer reading.

Forgive me Oprah, I Have Sinned

2011-05-26T12:22:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, as the whole world knows, was Oprah’s last show after 25 years. After all the hype, she effectively stood on stage by herself and urged all her audience and millions of viewers to essentially find their passion and make a difference in their world.

For years, folks have laughed and cried with her while identifying with her personal struggles and many triumphs. She is one of the richest people in America, and without a doubt, one of the most influential. She has used this influence to help elect a President, help people discover the joys of good reading, and provided hope and comfort to millions suffering from all kinds of afflictions and addictions. It is probably fair to say that Oprah and her therapeutic spirituality have a greater audience then any religious leader in our culture. She is loved and respected by Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims and millions of seekers.

I acknowledge this openly, although I have a confession to go with this. My first year at the Cathedral, I made an offhanded and denigrating remark about Oprah. One good lady here took me to task afterward for speaking despairingly about a woman who had helped millions of individuals and especially millions of women find their voice. As I reflected on her comments, I had to admit I had taken a cheap shot.

Not that Oprah is perfect by any means. In fact, it is her imperfections that are part of the power of her influence. How many over-weight folks have watched her many programs on losing weight and exercise, only to be comforted later by her weight gain – “see, she can hope, try and even fail, just like the rest of us.” My personal gripe with her was a series of remarks she make about the impossibility of people remaining in long-term marriages these days. She explained that life-long marriage was an idea created by folks living in a world where the average age was 25. Good point, but what she omitted, and is omitted by everyone who speaks popularly on this topic, is that most first time marriages, the vast majority, remain long-term commitments.

More importantly, I had to reflect in all this about “where” I was coming from that morning in the pulpit. I concluded that I had unconsciously betrayed one of the foremost biases of Episcopal clergy. I was, of course, being elitist. It was precisely her popularity that bothered me. Not that I begrudge an African-American woman getting a piece of the American pie. It was that she had gotten a large piece of the popular American pie. Forgive me Oprah, I had sinned.

One of the reasons that Episcopalians are becoming such a rapidly extinct species is precise what I showed that day. We are, generally speaking, deeply out of touch with common people and their needs, hopes and aspirations. Oprah is not. Oprah got constant feedback on this and it is called “ratings.” Ours is slower, but it is called “attendance.” As the ratings war goes, we are losing.

Many think we are losing because we use the wrong music style. Others, such as our own Presiding Bishop, think we have grown old and do not reproduce in significant numbers. Dissenters think we have all plunged down the slippery slope of liberalism and moral relativism. I think it is deeper.

Jesus came to the earth, lived among ordinary people, and preached the Kingdom (or reign) of God using illustrations taken from everyday life. Most Episcopal leaders that I know live in the realm of esoteric ideas, cast out theological concepts that are too complicated, and offer preaching and teaching that has almost no “take home application” at all. If you believe us, what would you do? I once heard a prominent Episcopal leader say that “application in a sermon is trivial.” Guess we can tell you what to think, but do not ask us to tell you how to live.

We might all take a lesson from Oprah. Want to help our people and at least keep the folks we have? Then, come down from heaven and live on the earth with the rest of the folks. Jesus did.

Clergy and Marriage

2011-05-05T14:38:00.000-07:00

One of my pet peeves in life is the fact that more and more Episcopalians, even clergy, are taking a Roman Catholic view of the sacraments rather than an Anglican one. I saw this as candidates before the Standing Committee in Dallas would explain their view of the Eucharist. I wonder if this is not part of the current debate about so-called “open communion.” If one believes that the Eucharist will benefit a person no matter what their own personal spiritual situation, then by all means go into the local market and give it to everyone.

Another area is that of marriage, and this is most illustrated regarding married clergy. I find that most Episcopalians that I know view married clergy from a Roman perspective. What I mean is that Episcopalians see our clergy as Roman priests who are allowed to have a live in companion. This is ok as long as we spend 50 to 60 hours a week attending to parishioners and their needs. Yes, Episcopal leaders will often acknowledge how hard being a Priest is on one’s family, and there is the problem.

Let me be absolutely clear about this. My being married and my marriage to Sharon is central to my vocation as a priest. If I am to be the shepherd that I am supposed to be for the people of the congregation, this flows out of my vocation as a husband (and a father.) Being married is not something that I am allowed to do in addition to being a priest.

If I have any regrets about being ordained, the main one has to do with my relationship with my sons. I wish that when I was younger that I had given them more quality time. I was off overworking in parishes and I justified this by saying that I was trying to be a good parish priest. In the Anglican view, as I give myself to my family, I am giving myself to my vocation. It was a wise older priest who taught me this hard lesson.

I remember an incident in the Diocese of Texas that deeply troubled me. One young clergy family was faced with a major medical crisis with their son. This demanded them spending many hours at the hospital and in therapy helping. After a while, the Vestry asked the Bishop to remove the clergy. “After all,” they argued, “We brought him here to minister to us and not his family!” It never occurred to them that God had brought that particular family to them for their opportunity to offer ministry. When the Bishop heard this, he shook his head and said, “They just don’t get it.” They never did either and eventually forcing him to resign.

Having said this let me ask how clergy are to model the Christian vocation of marriage if we do not get this ourselves? One of the critical issues in our success driven meritocracy is that men and women are consistently asked to sacrifice their marriages and family at the altar of success. Christians should be a counter-culture to this and it could start with our attitude toward our clergy.

Good Friday and Earth Day

2011-04-22T15:45:00.000-07:00

Today is both Good Friday and Earth Day. While my religious sentiments leave me believing that it would have been better to postpone Earth Day a week, secular folks would no doubt point out that it is not Earth Day that is a movable festival. And it does seem appropriate in some ways that the two are connected.

Some of us would like to point out that we are doing to the Earth what others once did to the Son of Man, Jesus of Nazareth, namely, we are crucifying it. Dean Morton, the former Dean of St. John the Divine, who shocked a whole generation of pious Christians by placing a female figure on a Crucifix, suggested once that his next feat would be to place a wolf on one. I do not know if he ever made good on this threat. Provocative as this may sound, he had a point.

The same passions that once led a jerrying mob and their paranoid leaders to put Jesus on a cross stand behind the catastrophic destruction of nature that is happening in our modern world, and this is selfishness. We cannot collectively save the rain forests, or the whales, or the water we drink, or the air we breathe because it would inconvenience many and cause others to lose money. We are frequently warned by sane and reasonable people that we should think of what radical environmental action would do to our Gross National Product. Like Pilot, we know what the right decision and just action must be, but for expediency, we surrender our planet over to mindless destruction. In this sense, the connection of the two days seems theological justifiable, but this is far enough down that road.

Unlike the events of Good Friday, the current crucifixion of the environment has a limited comparison. For example, there is no resurrection for the environment from our willfulness, neither does its death redeem anyone. Originally, the celebration of Earth Day was a naturalist or, as some would deridingly say, tree-hugger event. But of late, many mainline clergy have taken up the cause. Having been an Episcopal Priest for nearly 40 years, I am tempted to dismiss this as one more faddish attempt of upper-class religious types to find some purpose or cause relevant to our world. God knows they have long ago abandoned the idea that the original crucifixion has relevance. They now join Professor Bork in believing Jesus’ death (if it really happened) was a tragic accident that had no atonement significance except in the minds of his early deluded followers. On this point, however, I confess my jadedness. I have lived too long with my numerous high-church Universalists colleagues to take much of any of their new theological innovations too seriously.

I say let Good Friday, and Passover for that matter, stand alone. I would suggest to those who do care passionately about our Earth that the two religious events help us to understand why the polar ice cap is melting, polar bears are dying off, and plastic bottles are gathering in cataclysmic numbers in the oceans. The point is this, human beings are flawed and we are weak. Even when it is in our own best interests, we are too flawed to act. We are, in the truest biblical sense, sinners in need of redemption, and we are not able to save ourselves. Neither should we naively look to science to save us either.

The only answer, as classical Judaism and Christianity offer, is conversion. We do not need awareness and urging to take some simple steps to reduce our global footprint and practice being green. We need a moral revival and a corporate and communal change of heart. Christians can start by shouting that this is not our world and that the Earth does not belong to us. It is God’s, and we are but stewards whose vocation is to pass off a healthier and better world to our children’s children. To fail in our vocation corporately (my buying a hybrid is not enough) as stewards of this planet is open rebellion to God and God’s inevitable judgment will, and is, falling upon us. We need to see that our rebellion and selfishness causes the Earth to suffer even to the point of death. In other words, good intentions will not do what we need. The path to conversion begins in this area, as in all areas, on the road of repentance.

We need the passion story and we need it first or we will never be able to summon the communal will and the moral courage to alter the path that is leading us to immense suffering, pain and death, not just for the planet, but for us. You may not agree with me that this is God’s world, but I think you can agree with me that Earth does not “belong” to us, we belong to her, “this island earth our home.”

The Acts of Love Campaign

2011-04-07T07:29:00.000-07:00

As I have coached Congregational leaders about stewardship, a frequent question is; what about time and talents? I always give them a few pieces of advice:

1. Separated it from the financial appeal. This only diffuses the focus on financial stewardship. Financial support for congregations is difficult enough without diffusing the energy around three different things at one time.

2. Never offer an area of ministry that is not available or is screened by an uncooperative gatekeeper. When people fill out a sheet that contains the various ministries of the congregation, and they indicate an area of interest, that area needs to be available. For example, a smaller congregation list for time and talents lay reader. However, the church already has seven lay readers, and adding more lay readers will only mean less opportunity to read. This de-motivates the leader of the lay readers from adding the person.

3. Always follow up. This is closely related to the above. A common complaint from many people is that they volunteered for something and no one followed up. When a person experiences this, they are less likely to volunteer in the future.

In recent years, I've been challenged by the need to get people to sign up for areas of ministry. Like many of you, I have put announcements in the bulletin and in the newsletter with little or no response. Part of this can be explained by the high demand on people's volunteer time. Recently, I gained some new insights into the difficulty of recruiting people for ministry, especially younger people.

First, I was reminded that for those under 50 years of age, membership in an organization is not a destination. In the book titles “Bowling Alone” the sociologist author contends that many more people are participating in activities but refusing to join organizations.

Second, the younger people are, the more they want to make a difference, a hands on difference.

The combination of these two insights led me to create for the Cathedral The Acts of Love Campaign. Here are the steps I followed in creating and executing this campaign:

1. I ask all my leaders to develop a one sentence description of what a person does in their area of ministry. (It was amazing to see that some leaders were not able to do this.)We prioritized the list to one page. This allowed for 15 to 20 items.

2. We balanced these between internal ministries (benefiting current members) and external ministries (reaching those outside the congregation.)

3. We communicated the purpose of the acts of love campaign based on the theology of tithing; giving 10% of one's time and talents.

4. To the left of each item listed, we had one box that indicated an interest in a new area of ministry, and a second box that indicated continuing in an area of ministry.

5. I set a goal of having 25 to 50 new commitments. We created a thermometer of new commitments and continuing commitments to place in the entrance to our parish hall.

6. We mailed the sheet to everyone in the congregation along with a reminder sheet that they could keep for their own benefit.

7. We followed this for one month reminding people to make their commitments, providing additional sheets to those who needed them, and placing sheets at the front and side entrance to the Cathedral.

8. We had a staff member follow-up all new commitments by communicating to the leader of that area of ministry the contact information on those who had indicated an interest.

9. We followed up with leaders to be sure that they had contacted the person and invited them to participate.

The next time I do this campaign, I intend to incorporate short testimonies from volunteers in various areas into our Sunday liturgy. I also plan to track these commitments, particularly the new commitments, to see which areas of ministry are of most interest, and which are not. I hope by doing this to find out something about our people’s passions. As of today we have had 114 new commitments and 116 continuing commitments. Amazing!

Speaking as an Independent

2011-02-24T20:45:00.000-08:00

What the Media and the Tea Party Get Wrong

I can speak with some authority on this topic even though many people do not like clergy giving commentary on politics. My authority comes from the fact that I have been a part of choosing the past several presidents and determining the make-up of congress. How can I make this bold claim, because I am an independent voter, you know, one of about 20% of the population that carries the swing vote in our country.

For example, I could have told Democrats why John Kerry would lose the election against George Bush when many of both parties thought the odds were on his side. I would like to point out that nobody asked me, but the bottom line would have been “show me that you can have a better plan than Mr. Bush in how to handle Iraq and Afghanistan and you have me vote.” He did not, and they did not, so I voted to stay the course even though I was not happy with the course.

Since the last election, the Tea Party folks who have a vested interest in convincing us that they are the way of the future, and the media, who should do a better job of asking “us” have tended to come to the wrong conclusions. Here is their message. In the last election, the voters have reacted to the spent thrift polices of the Democrats, panicked over the health care reform, and have converted to fiscal conservatives who now want, more than anything else, less government, less taxes and a balanced budget. This is why we will have to vote the rascals out in the next election, and prove again that many in the media simply do not get it. Further, I will predict that if Republicans in general make this their cause in the next election, President Obama is assured of a second term.

If they had asked, here is what I (and lots of independents) would have wanted them to know.

1. We are disappointed with the Democrats. They had a majority in both Houses and the Presidency and yet were unable to give clear direction for the future and to bring about the kind of creative change that the President promised. Do the words “immigration” and “Afghanistan” have meaning here?

2. The President spent one year working to reform health care. What we got was some good, and a typical governmental action that is completely incomprehensible to an ordinary citizen. Does the phrase Tax Code clarify what I mean? Hence. I wanted a course correction.

3. There is an almost a 10% unemployment rate in our country. I know many affected by this. Jobs and the economy are my primary concern. I lost confidence in believing those in power in Washington (read Democrats) were doing anything constructive about unemployment.

4. I am concerned about a growing deficit for my children and grandchildren. I believe this deficit is the price for fighting two wars without raising taxes to pay for them. I am willing to pay the price for good government and things to improve our collective life. I do not want to pay for an endless war in Afghanistan especially by funding a corrupt bunch of politicians stealing the money mean to improve the welfare of their country.

5. I do not think government is too big or too costly. I do believe that being big it wastes money and this should be under constant review. Along with this, I am offended by so called “ear marks” except when they benefit North Texas. (Hey, I did not say independents are always reasonable.)

If I am right, and I am, at least about most independents. Those who promote the idea that the Tea Party, balanced budgets at any cost, and the reversal of the Health Care Bill are our top priorities (along with stopping President Obama from serving a second term) are wrong. They have interpreted what we meant as a “course correction” for a revolution. They are listening only to the strident voices. If this leads to shutting down the government, pursuing a balanced budget to the determent of our economy and employment, and counting our votes as the wave of a Tea Party future, they will receive a shellacking in the next election. They, Republicans and Democrats both, should have asked. The media should be asking now.

Happy Holidays, Bah, Humbug!

2011-01-04T13:57:00.000-08:00

During the recent Holiday Season, our brothers and sisters in Christ down the road from the Cathedral at First Baptist in Dallas stirred up some controversy over greetings during Christmas. You may have heard about it. Upset that more and more businesses were using the more politically correct “Happy Holidays” as opposed to the more traditional “Merry Christmas,” the pastor at First Baptist decided to take action. The Church produced on the website a list of the “Bah Humbug Businesses” that used the generic Happy Holiday greeting. They also listed businesses that used the clearer Christian Merry Christmas. They left it up to their members to decide who to patronize, godless materialists, or, well, you get the point.

This action generated the kind of heated discussion that one could predict with all sorts of people chiming in on whether it was appropriate to take such an action. The argument from First Baptist’s perspective seemed to be one of witness, “Jesus is the reason for the season,” and of evangelism, there may be some out there who don’t know that Jesus is the reason for the season.
What I found interesting was in a completely different direction.

My grandmother was a Baptist and my earliest exposure to the Christianity was in a Baptist Church thanks to her. Back in those days, as my Grandmother carefully explained to me, Baptists didn’t celebrate December 25th as a special day, neither did they go around bubbling “Merry Christmas.” A little knowledge of History goes a long way in expressing why this was so.

Baptist historically believed, as did most Calvinist, that the tradition of celebrating Christmas on December 25th was a Catholic late innovation that is not justifiable on the basis of Scripture. It should go without saying that nowhere in the Bible is December 25th mentioned as the date of Jesus’ birth. In the reforms generated out of Geneva in the 17th Century, Protestants tried to reform the Church basing all teaching and corporate life “solo scriptura” on the scriptures alone as the authority.

The Calvinist folks in the Church of England were called “Puritans” because they wished to purify the Church from such papal and medieval trappings. Puritans attempted to change the Church from within, but when Anglicans decided to retain certain traditions which seemed godly if not directly provable by scripture, many puritans became disenchanted. In the 1640s, they lead a revolt, indeed a civil war, that led to the execution of the English King. He was replaced by Oliver Cromwell as Lord Protector of England. The puritan revolt was also a strongly democratic revolt, but Oliver soon imposed a dictatorial rule over England. It can be argued that England as an Empire with its world dominating navy began under his rule. Under his rule, the Puritan clergy and perspective was given free reign. And one of their first acts was to eliminate and forbid the practice of Christmas. No government officer or official could go around with Merry Christmas on his lips unless he be boiled in his own pudding and have a holly sprig stuck in his heart. Christmas did survive, but mainly among the peasants and poorest of the nation. The civil celebration of Christmas, indeed the very use of the term “Christmas” was eliminated from public life.

They did have a point. The word Christmas, after all, comes from the two words “Christ’s Mass.” Well, with Cromwell’s death, and the brooding negativity and joylessness of Puritans having dominated all life, the English Parliament restored both King and English Church along with all of its elaborate celebrations including Christmas.

Puritans and their descendants including Southern Baptists, however, never relented of their position that Christmas was both papal and even pagan in its origins. Hence, here is the origin of my Grandmother’s position, and the position of most Baptists till about 30 years ago.
Then a historically counter-intuitive thing started to happen. Many younger Baptist clergy noticed that Christmas was still around and, even in its highly commercialized existence, it created an evangelistic opportunity. Consequently, they began holding Christmas Eve services, having living Christmas trees singing carols, and some even instituted pageants retelling the Luke account of the Birth of Jesus, yes with manger, donkeys and all. After all, as the argument went, people might be wrongheaded about Christmas, sentimental to a fault, and Christmas might be commercial to a sinful degree, but people do think about Christmas, celebrate it, so why not squeeze juice out of this lemon and make some evangelistic lemonade? Personally, I think their spiritual mothers and fathers would be stunned by this action which is, after all, a betrayal of all they once fought for. But, hey, I am not a Calvinist and it is not mine to say.

This recent development, however, brings us back to our friends down the street. My question is not whether taking on political correctness was the thing to do. My question is how far they have compromised their own tradition. Now, ironically, First Baptist has become the defenders of saying “Merry Christmas,” by which we commend one another to the celebration of Christ’s Mass on December 25th.

Of course, some of you will want to say that as an Episcopalian I am only mad because Baptists are trying to steal our franchise, and you might be right. However, I still think it worthwhile to point out the ironic contradiction in their actions. There is also something more.

I am happy having folks say Happy Holidays to one another and don’t feel it my duty as a Christian pastor to correct them when they do. There are two reasons for this. First, there are other Holy Days for other religions during this time of year, and I am not comfortable with any group of Christians believing we have the right to force our particular celebration upon non-Christians. Second, there is enough soberness, humbug and mean-spiritedness in our world today. If there is a time of the year when even atheist can join in “Happy Holidays,” and we can join with them in providing toys for needed Children and clothes to keep them warm, then I think the world a bit brighter place for it. After all, isn’t the bottom line of all this that “the light has shined in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it?” I think this attitude more in the gracious spirit of the person whose birth we Christians remember at this season of the year.

Feliz Navidad,
Dean Kevin

What Would Mary Do?

2010-03-24T13:26:00.000-07:00

Most of you have probably seen the clever wrist band made famous by innumerable youth groups that has WWJD on them. This stands for “What Would Jesus Do?” The point, as used by youth leaders all over the country, is to get teenagers to think what Jesus would do if faced with their circumstances and situations.

While I think this is clever, I have never really warmed to the slogan. It is not that I cannot think of what Jesus would do in many situations. My problem is that I can. For example, I attend a funeral, WWJD? He would raise the dead. Or, I visit a sick person, WWJD? He would heal them. Or, I am faced with evil, WWJD? He would drive it out. Nor is my problem that I do not believe that some Christians are called upon to do such things. I do. I just do not think his behavior is normative for us as believers. (My wife does tell me that I often confuse my job description with that of the Messiah, but that is a dysfunctional issue, not one of faith.) No, my issue is that Jesus did many things that I cannot do. I think the better wrist band would be WWMD, What Would Mary Do? On this eve of the Annunciation, let me say why.

Mary is the prime example in scripture of God’s faithful servant. When the Angel announced to her that she would be in instrument of God’s grace, overwhelming as it might have been, her faithful response was, “be it to me the servant of the Lord” or as the Beatles would translate it, “let it be.” Sure, the message to Mary was startling. It may have been hard for her to fully comprehend. Yes, and maybe she was a young girl, but she was also smart enough and realistic enough to immediately understand the difficult of the call. “How can this be,” she asked because, “I am still a virgin.” She knew her circumstances. She clearly understood her situation that she was to be a pregnant, unmarried woman in a small village where everyone could talk and certainly everyone could count. She understood this would be humiliating.

And what was she to say to Joseph? “Joseph, it is ok, an angel told me in a dream that I would get pregnant by the Holy Spirit before we were married?” In the scriptural account, all that she could do was leave this up to God.

Devotional writers have often portrayed Mary as the idealized image of passive femininity who acted out perfect submission, but this is not the Mary of the biblical narrative. She was human. She was not perfect, and as the Magnificat reveals, she was not passive. But mostly, she was faithful. Mary believed what the Angel told her and she trusted by faith that God would work out all the details. We could very aptly paraphrase Paul’s words about Abraham applied to Mary, “She believed God and God reckoned it to her as righteousness.“

What then would WWMD mean to us? It would mean that faced with difficult decisions or moral choices, we need only ask what would Mary, who believed God and trusted God, do in this situation. This is something that I can imagine in all sorts of situations. It seems to me that the whole life of a disciple essentially is to believe God’s promises by faith and live as though God will work out all the details.
WWMD?

This might not be as catchy or as clever, but it does make a lot more sense to me as I struggle as a believer and disciple in the many circumstances and situations that I must face in this world. As we remember the feast day of the Annunciation, we could do a lot worse than remember to ask ourselves WWMD?

Learning from Wesley

2010-03-04T11:59:00.000-08:00

On a cold January evening in 1975, I knelt in the darkened living room of the Rectory of Emmanuel Church in Stamford, Connecticut and made a total surrender of my life to Jesus Christ. This surrender came in response to an overwhelming sense of God’s presence as I spoke out the desperation and despair that I felt. The details of what happened are not important here because I am writing on the feast day of John and Charles Wesley to share what I learned from John Wesley after my conversion.

The problem was that I was already an ordained priest. It was some time later that I would learn that I shared with Wesley a post theological education conversion to Christ. I say “conversion to Christ” because that is what it was for me. I had felt called to the ministry, and, before seminary at least, I had believed in the Trinity and the creeds of the Church. What happened to me that night was that I experienced a personal sense of forgiveness and total acceptance by a living and real Christ. Jesus Christ became alive for me in a new way.

The most immediate result of this was expressed by what I did that night. I took the sermon that I had written that week and burned it in the fire place. I was determined to speak now of the love of Christ I knew personally, and not the ideas about God that I had learned in seminary. Let me be clear on this. I am not proud of the fact that I am a post theological education Christian. For example, people are surprised to know that one of my faculty advisors was Henry Nouwen. Yes, I was blessed by a number of outstanding teachers, not the least of which was Jaraslov Pelikan while at Yale. I do believe that some of them had a deep relationship with Christ. But none of these teachers ever spoke of a personal relationship with Christ as something to be desired, and most down played any sense of conversion. Conversion, if it existed at all, was a gradual process of growth. Consequently, I look back a bit jaded at my seminary experience.

For several years, I struggled to integrate my experience with both my theological education and my experience with Episcopal Church practices. Then on my tenth anniversary of ordination, I took a month’s sabbatical. I spent the month at a seminary following guidance from the Dean. What the Dean asked me in our first session changed my theological identity. As I shared trying to put these pieces together, he asked me, “While you were in seminary, did you read the source material of Anglicanism?” What he meant was whether I had actually read Cranmer and the other English Bishops of the reformation. Of course, I hadn’t. I had read commentaries and histories about them, but not the actual works. For the next month, I felt that I had found my roots. I discovered my evangelical and conversionist legacy which is thoroughly Anglican. Then he introduced me to the “Three Ws of Anglicanism; Wesley, Whitfield and Wilberforce. Wesley spoke to me.

Wesley was a high church Anglican who’s “heart was strangely warmed” in the Aldersgate experience, and who had deep commitments to the marginalized and poor of his world. In reading Wesley, I found an Anglican who expressed both what I believed and what I had experienced. I am not a Wesleyan if you mean by this a Methodist. I consider most Methodists that I have known to be very nice and well-intentioned people none of whom have either the conviction or passion of Wesley. I remain a person who believes in both conversion and sanctification. Here are some of the other things that I learned from Wesley:

All the head knowledge in the world cannot substitute for “knowing Christ Jesus in the power of his resurrection.”

Religious experience apart from creedal belief usually ends in shipwreck somewhere.

True conversion leads to passionate love for the poor and to concrete steps to alleviate their poverty.

Social justice and evangelism are both mandates of scripture, to hold one without the other is to diminish Christ’s work.

Holiness of life is the goal of all disciples – we don’t want to be people who do good things - we want to become people who are Christ-like.

Simplicity of life is a Christian virtue.

Christian leaders who hold power often work to suppress Christian experience even those who once claimed a conversion experience.

Being called a fanatic is often a compliment.

Nominal Christian life is the greatest enemy to true discipleship.

Innovation for the sake of mission and evangelism is Apostolic and needed in every age.

Extreme Calvinism quenches human freedom and is joyless.

People have free will and it is obvious that we have to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in ministry and growth.

In Christ, women are equal to men and can be effective agents of ministry.

Bishops are important, but prelacy is a sin against Christ and his Church.

And when it comes to preaching, “set yourself on fire in the pulpit and the whole world will come to see you burn.”

The Pope and TEC

2009-10-27T14:12:00.000-07:00

Many of you have by now read or heard accounts of the offer last week from Pope Benedict to receive members of the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church into the Roman Catholic Church. The reports were a bit confusing and misleading. Here are some Q & A’s on this.

What was offered?

The Pope offered to receive members of the Anglican Church (and the Episcopal Church) into the Roman Church. Clergy could remain married and churches could use the Episcopal or Anglican Prayer Book services.

Was this new?

Yes and No: Anglican clergy have been allowed to join the Roman Church. For example, there is a former Episcopalian serving one of our nearby Roman Parishes. Such clergy are “re-ordained” and allowed to be married. There are also at least seven “Anglican Rite” Roman Churches in the U.S. These parishes have been given approval to use extensive parts of the Prayer Book in Liturgy and many elements of Anglo-catholic worship. However, there were two additions in this announcement. First, it was made public by the Pope in a high profile news release. These issues have been handled more quietly in the past to respect on-going ecumenical talks. It is clear that no one, including the Archbishop of Canterbury knew this was to be announced.

Second, the offer was to parishes and even dioceses and not just individuals. However, the clergy will still need to be ordained in the Roman Church and no married clergy would be allowed to serve as a Bishop. So, of the U.S. dioceses that have left TEC like Ft. Worth, only one of the Bishops would even qualify for consideration.

Will this affect many Episcopalians?

Probably not. It might affect some of the already spin off groups of churches. For example, the Anglican Church in North America has churches that are very Anglo-catholic and apposed to women’s ordination and at the same time has evangelical parishes. This could draw off churches from that group, but still, we are probably talking about less than 100 clergy. This could have some effect in the English Church where there is some current tension and division over the question of women bishops, however, this is very hard to determine. Only time can tell.

Will lay people be involved?

They might if they are in congregations that have left the Episcopal Church, however, lay people have always been free to move membership to Rome if they wished. Consequently, we are not talking about very many people.

If this affects few people, why did it make such news?

There are three reasons for this. First, the Pope, by making the announcement, stepped over previous protocols on how such matters are handled. Second, the on-going conflict in the Episcopal Church, The Canadian Church and even the Church of England made this seem newsworthy. Lastly, most reporters had little understanding of the current church issues and thought this was new, innovative and an open raid on the Anglican Church by the Roman Church. They were misinformed.

Does this affect either the Cathedral or the Diocese of Dallas?

No, not at all. We continue to carry out our mission and ministry as we believe God is leading us.

Connected?

2009-09-24T11:58:00.000-07:00

I have over 300 “friends” on Facebook. There are over 200 families at the Cathedral, and I have over 300 “contacts” in Outlook on my computer. So, why at times, do I feel so lonely?

It may have to do primarily with my being an only child. I have over the years wondered if being an only child leaves one feeling like we are special and unique with its consequential down side of feeling alone. It could be.

Another answer to this question comes from a recent article in Leadership Magazine. The author refers to “The Loneliness of the Senior Pastor.” The point of the article is that a Senior Pastor, read Dean of the Cathedral, lives with a strange paradox. We have hundreds of relationships with our members, can even enter one of their homes by just knocking on the door, yet most of our members tend to see us in a utilitarian manner. We are like their doctor, their lawyer, their shop clerk. If you think about it, you would notice that most of these folks are not friends no matter how often you see them. Indeed, we often need to hold folks like our doctor at a bit of a distance. The less we know of his or her humanity, the better off we feel. The same could be said of one’s pastor.

I think, however, a better explanation came from a presentation on media communication during our Diocesan Body Building Day. The speaker made this observation about loneliness in today’s world. “We make the mistake of thinking that because we have all these instant contacts through email, Facebook, and Twitter that we are in actually in relationship to these people.” To this he added, “Being connected does not mean that you are relating with these people.” What a profound insight.

This explains my recent withdrawal from participation in the House of Deputies listserv. I found myself becoming more and more frustrated with the level of communication. What I could not articulate was that I was sharing a lot, but connecting almost none at all.

I’ve known for some time that email is a poor form for many kinds of communications. Since you can not nuance someone’s intonation or voice, there is a tendency to take all email as literal communication. So, “John is an idiot” without a wink and smile attached communicates that you think that John (who has a PhD from Harvard) is actually an idiot. And don’t even move in the direction of irony. I tried an ironic statement on the House of Deputies listserv and brought down the wrath of many an accepting, inclusive, and well-meaning deputy, liberal in their interpretation of Scripture and fundamentalists in their reading of email!

So, could it be that at times I feel lonely because I am confusing all this connectedness with actually relating to someone? This doesn’t mean that being an only child or a Dean isn’t part of the formula, just that they are not the only issues in this.

So what do I plan on doing? I am taking friendship more seriously and doing it in person. How about you? Are you confusing “connectedness” with “being in relationship?”

Travels with Garmina

2009-05-26T13:35:00.000-07:00

Last Christmas my wife Sharon gave me a wonderful gift. It was a Garmin GPS system to use in my car. All I had to do was type in an address and the Garmin would direct me to the quickest route. Of course, my wife was never expecting that I would use the Garmin when she was in the car because it has been our long tradition that she navigates.

I knew we were in for some tension when Sharon headed to the American Automobile Association for maps and books for our planned trip to North Carolina. “We can use the Garmin,” I suggested. This generated a terse, “Why? I’ll be in the car.”

To make matters worse, the Garmin gives directions with a feminine voice, “turn right in 2 miles and continue 15 miles to destination.” The day of our trip, I placed the Garmin on my wife’s dash board. To her suspicious looks, I reassured, “You will be surprised how helpful it is.” By Texarkana, I had to mute the voice because Sharon found it annoying.

A break though of sorts occurred just outside Memphis as we searched in vain for an agreeable restaurant. “Let me show you this,” I said as I went to points of interest and found a very acceptable place to eat. Later Sharon allowed, “I can see where that might be helpful.” And indeed it proved helpful finding gas, lodging and other things the next day. By the end of the second day, Sharon volunteered, “Well, I can see why you like Garima so much.” From that time onward, Garmina became a kind of consultant as my wife would consider suggested routes and either agree or direct me to “a short cut that Garmina doesn’t seem to understand.”

On our last night driving home, Sharon had planned on us stopping in Shreveport because it would be late getting home. Garmina indicated that our arrival time would be 7:04 pm and we agreed to drive on home and sleep in our own bed. Of course, Garima’s arrival time did not take in consideration a rest break at the Texas Information Center, a gas stop, numerous red lights in the Dallas area, and so by 8:30 my wife was obviously annoyed with how Garmina had “misled us.”

Last week, I forgot and left Garmina in my car. Although generally out of sight on the floorboard, someone broke my window and stole the GPS. I was late for an appointment when I found it missing and Sharon was kind enough to do the report to the police and see to the window repair.

That night, as I was sitting eating dinner in a somber mood, Sharon said in a kind voice, “I am sorry that you lost Garmina.” “Thanks, I responded,” but I couldn’t help but notice that she seemed to have a slight smile as she said it. “Maybe we can replace it someday,” she offered. Then she added, “If we do, we can call it Garminette.”

“Thanks,” I mumbled again, but in my heart I understood.

How Did I Ever Get to Be a Conservative?

2009-03-18T11:02:00.000-07:00

This is a question that I have been asking myself a lot these past few weeks. I know that I am one because people tell me that I am. Recently, in an email exchange with one of the progressive leaders of the Church, she said to me in passing, “this is important because you are a known conservative. . .” The ironic thing is that I do not think of myself as a conservative and never use the word regarding myself.

I remember the very day that I was first called this. It was at the annual convention for the Diocese of Olympia in 1987. There had been an active debate on the floor that morning on a resolution dealing with some civil war in Central America. I do not remember the details, but I do remember that the floor debate was made difficult because the resolution was very poorly written. Having attended many conventions and heard too many resolutions, I went to the microphone and pointed out that the poor wording made it almost impossible to understand the purpose of the resolution. To my surprise, the Bishop asked me what I would suggest. I suggested that we postpone the resolution and allow the author and one other person to take a moment and rewrite the resolution saying in short declarative sentences what they really wanted us to do. The Bishop thought this a wise recommendation and adjourned for a break while the combatants were sent off to do the re-wording work. I went to find a cup of coffee. That is when it happened.

I was standing in the line when the author approached me with a re-written draft. “What do you think? he asked me. I read it over and responded that I thought it much better worded and that this would allow people to act more decisively. “Good,” he nodded, “So, as a leader of the conservatives, do you think this is a good compromise?” “Leader of the conservatives?” I laughed, and he went off shaking his head. I stood there a long time pondering what I had just heard.

There I stood, the Rector of St. Luke’s Parish in Seattle, a church known for its leadership in Charismatic Renewal. There I was, a person despised by many traditionalists for daring to bring “aerobics worship” into the Episcopal Church, contemporary music, and lay folks doing all kinds of things that used to be reserved for clergy like anointing sick people for healing. I thought of myself as an innovator who had spent over 10 years serving at the margins of the Church.

In addition, I considered myself a moderate to progressive on most church issues especially having been a strong advocate for women’s ordination. Yes, my own personal renewal experience had brought me into a deeper engagement with scripture, a more committed devotional life, and a deeper appreciation for the theology and heritage that my Anglo-catholic upbringing in the Diocese of Dallas had given me, but I never saw this as inconsistent with social action. Further, one of my heroes of the faith, John Wesley, had proven himself a dedicated abolitionist and social reformer, and this all out of his passionate spirituality. How could anyone call me a conservative?

What I did not understand, and still have trouble understanding, is how far the Episcopal Church had moved from the time I was ordained until that moment and even further now. For me, conservatives were folks who loved Elizabethan language and the Rite I liturgy. They were Anglophiles who spoke with slight English accents to congregations that found this assuring. They opposed women’s ordination. They lectured me on how “that” music was pandering to low brow and pop fads of the day.
As I stood in the crowed parish hall of St. Mark’s Cathedral, I looked around the room and began to realize that all those folks were retired or gone. Now, because I at least believed the Creeds and affirmed the biblical authority of the Church, and believed in a basic Christology, I was now numbered among the conservatives.

While I grew to understand my new label, I have never worn it well and never used it in reference to myself. The chief reasons for this are two-fold. First, I am not a conservative regarding social issues and politically. I remain a social moderate and a political independent. Second, I find the very bad behavior of many who call themselves conservative divisive, mean-spirited, often arrogant, and too self-righteous.

Who am I then? I am an Episcopalian who found my heart strangely warmed, do know that I am forgiven and loved by Christ and want to whole world to know of this love. I am a catholic in my love of the Church and her sacraments, an evangelical in my devotion to the God’s Word, and a progressive in my view of the reform of society and the gospel work in our world. In my mind, I am an Episcopalian.

Gregory the Great

2009-03-12T06:53:00.000-07:00

In her book “The Great Emergence,” Phyllis Tickle mentions as one of the great turning points in the history of the Church the leadership of Gregory the Great. March 12th is his feast day, and in the liturgy, we catch three glimpses of his contributions.

The first comes form the Old Testament reading in Chronicles when we hear of musicians being set aside for the worship in Israel. Gregory was known for his reformation of the Western Church’s liturgy.

Second, in the gospel reading, we hear the lesson on servant leadership from Mark. Gregory served the Church as a leader and left it in much better shape than when he took over as a leader.

Third, we Episcopalians hear reference in the collect of his sending missionaries to England. Of course, these missionaries found the Church already present thanks to the work of the Celtic Christians, but we honor Gregory for re-connecting the Celtic Church to the wider community.

I am writing about the second of these, Gregory’s reforms. The Apostolic era had long faded, and one of its greatest victories, becoming the official religion of Rome, had played itself out in corruption and decay. Gregory set out with vigor to recapture the Church’s initial Apostolic zeal and holiness. His methods did not move the Church backward but forward, and this is one of Tickle’s major points.

In order to do this, Gregory reached out to the margins of Christianity to the emerging monastic movements and brought them into the center of the Church’s life. In doing this, he set the tone and character of the Church for the next 500 years. He made major improvements in the education of clergy. He reformed the hierarchy while standardizing the liturgy, and recapturing the missionary zeal of the early Church. He is rightfully called “the Great,” and he established the See of Rome as the dominant force in the Western Church.

Tickle goes on to suggest in her work that we are at precisely one of those emerging moments in the history of Christianity when the Church must be transformed into a renewed community. If she is right, and I believe she is, let us pray that God will raise up other servant leaders to guide us through this new transformation. What better day to pray this than on the day we remember one leader who did.

Invitation to Lent

2009-02-25T14:16:00.001-08:00

“I invite you, therefore, in the name of the Church, to the observance of a holy Lent.”

I have taken these words directly from the Ash Wednesday service on page 264 of the Prayer Book. This is the church’s annual invitation to her members to “move more deeply in and more intimately into” our relationship to Christ as his followers and disciples. Note that we speak of the Easter season as glorious and the Christmas season as joyous, but the Lenten season is called holy. This is because the theme of the season is holiness both individually for her members and corporately for the community.

I hope all of you will give some thought this week as to how you will intentionally keep this season. Of course, the first invitation is into more prayer. These forty days are a good time to add quiet time and devotions or extended them. Prayer basically is talking to God. It involves bringing before God all our cares and concerns. It also means focusing on our relationship with God through praise and adoration. It also means laying before God the truth about ourselves through self-examination and confession.

You may also want to take on some special study or devotional reading. I am continuing the Cathedral Core Curriculum with our second one on Christian Believing. You can attend on Sundays or sign up for the notes and materials through emails by just hitting reply and asking for them.

I would also like to invite you to consider adding Evening Prayer one night a week at the Cathedral. We have a regular service at 6pm Monday through Thursdays. This makes a great way to end a busy day. We continue to offer weekday Eucharist Monday and Wednesday at 10am and Thursday at 7:15am.

Some of you may wish to seriously consider fasting during this season. Such actions as giving up sweets or other self-indulgences fall under this category. If you need or want the assistance of our clergy, we stand ready to give you spiritual direction and guidance during this special season of spiritual growth.

Make a beginning by joining in our Ash Wednesday services. They are at 7:15, 10:00, 12 noon (Bishop Lambert presiding), 6pm and 7:30pm (in Spanish.)

“Almighty and everlasting god, you hate nothing you have made and forgive the sins of all who are penitent: Create and make in us new and contrite hearts, that we, worthily lamenting our sins and acknowledging our wretchedness, may obtain of you, the God of all mercy, perfect remission and forgiveness; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen”

Is the Episcopal Church a Denomination?

2009-02-18T14:55:00.000-08:00

This evocative question was put forward in a discussion among a group of the authors on the Covenant site. This is an interesting question, and it gives me a moment to reflect on some interesting developments of the Episcopal community.
The first thing that I would say is practical. From the perspective of a congregational development person and an organizational consultant, the question is largely irrelevant. Groups act like groups and organizations act sociologically and functionally as groups of people. So, congregations of 300 Episcopalians functions very much like a congregation of 300 Lutherans. I am not saying the differences are not significant, but what I am saying is that the differences have more to do with the organizations identity, stated values and common practices than how they function, organize, grow or decline. Thus, we can say from the start that this question is largely one of identity.

Of course, this question already betrays a catholic (small c”) bias and particularly that part of Anglicanism that believes that we have been and are THE church, or at least a part of the one, holy and apostolic one. This is so deeply engrained that most Episcopal leaders do not think of us as just another of the many denominations that occupy the landscape of American Christianity. Just ask any clergy person in TEC if we think we are Protestants and watch us react. I wish to add that this part of our identity or self-understanding is one of the most important contributions and successes of the Oxford Movement within TEC. This is clearly revealed in the Lambeth Quadrilateral where we state our willingness to go anywhere and work with anyone, willing to sacrifice all incidentals, to work for the day that the Church may once again be united both Catholic and Apostolic.

On the other hand, there has always been a strong strain of TEC that saw itself as Protestant and in America one of the “mainline” churches. This broad church stream fits more comprehensively into Tickle’s (The Great Emergence) idea of the social justice group of Churches. However, I would contend that even this group has much of the DNA of the more catholic view. When I have published items in the wider church where I point out the abysmal decline of our community in the past 50 years, some defender of the present progressive wing will always shoot back with something like, “I believe that the Church will do just fine and that somehow we will muddle through all the crisis we face, just as we have in the past.” This reflects denial, but it also reflects the sense that the “true church” will be upheld and sustained by God.

I believe two strong dynamics are at work, however, to change this historic view and consequently or self identity. First, is the tendency of the current majority, the progressive wing, to claim that we have always been a progressive Church. Ridiculous as this claim would appear to a 17th century separatist or an 18th century Methodist, it keeps being repeated and has become an increasing part of our identity. The drive for full inclusion of gay and lesbian persons into the life of TEC along with the desire to become a more diverse, multi-cultural, and multi-ethnic community has contributed to the repositioning of our community in the rainbow of denominations toward being a paradoxical Universalist liturgical community. I do not want you to think that by saying this that I am opposed to the efforts to keep and make TEC an open community welcoming of all people. I am just contending that the way in which our leaders, particularly our clergy, are pursuing this, is ending up looking a lot like the United Church of Christ with kneelers, a prayer book and a common chalice. Whether there is a need for such a positioned denomination may be suspect especially given the increasing decline in our membership and attendance. Perhaps we just need to wait for the thousands of new members that will flood into our denomination because of our full inclusion of all genders as has been predicted by numerous progressive leaders. Another common response by progressives is that “all mainline churches are declining.” With this, they acknowledge without realizing it that we are a denomination, or at least becoming more and more like one.

The second powerful dynamic working toward redefining us as a denomination is the state of ecumenical activities and our participation in them. Here is what I mean. The great ecumenical awakening of the 50’s and 60’s led to many attempts at organic mergers of communities. Some of the results, like the United Methodist Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America were, and remain, relatively successful attempts. Some like the Anglican/Roman Catholic and Anglican/Lutheran dialogues have not gone very far towards union. The move toward organic and organization unity has given way steadily toward the idea of mutual recognition and “shared communion.” This is clearly a path of lesser resistance. It is also true that in our post-denominational culture even Episcopal clergy have begun to realize that our lay folks do not mind sharing communion most anywhere they go. It seems we have become a victim of our own generosity in admitting that none of us, at least mainline folks, are really the true Church and that we are willing to share.

How does this dynamic add to our re-thinking our identity more toward becoming merely a denomination? Simply put, this accommodation to others works as an abandonment of the view of the more catholic desire to actually BE one. Of course, in the long run this could reverse as decreasing mainline churches are further thrown together out of survival and necessity, but for right now this has moved us far from the spirit of the Lambeth Quadrilateral. One might even point out that the splintering and fracturing of Anglicanism in North America really points to the exact opposite of the catholic view. Put all this together and the church that once envisioned ourselves as the bridge between Catholic and Protestant is now at a mid point between Unitarian Universalist and Methodists. Things have changed.

Where the rubber will really meet the road on this comes down to our willingness to abide by the restrains requested by our brothers and sisters in the world wide Anglican Communion. There is already a tendency among Episcopalians to refer to the other Communion Churches as though they are merely forms or expressions of Anglican denominations in other countries instead of full member of the one church of which we thought we were once members.

General Convention in 2009 may give us two moments in which we will further decide that our identity rests in denominationalism more than in unity. These will be our reaction to the Anglican Covenant, and any decision to move toward the writing of same-sex liturgies, both of which I believe have a strong chance of coming about. Another way this could be done is with the election of another gay or lesbian person living in a same sex union to the Episcopate. I believe the first two highly probable and the last one largely inevitable. In any case, I will remain because there is not another denomination that attracts me, and few that retain the vision of our Lord in his priestly prayer when he bid that we would be one. A glimmer of this idea remains among us, and burns much brighter in other parts of our Communion. Let us pray that a time will come when this vision is re-kindled among us.

What Others Think of Us

2008-11-20T11:59:00.000-08:00

When I would consult with congregations, I would ask them about their public profile. This is what non-members who live in their community think about their church. This has to do with image, namely what is the image the community has of us. This public profile is not only true of a local church, it is true of denominations. Think Southern Baptist, and what comes to mind?

When I am in a public place such as an airport, and I identify myself to a stranger that I am an Episcopal Priest, I am interested in their response. I can assure you that our public profile is not what we think of ourselves. Recently, a fellow passenger nodded and said, “Episcopal? Y’all are going through some sort of fight aren’t you?” I thought to myself, wow, what a great public image. This will line un-churched folks up to get into one of our congregations. I mean, who in their right minds would want to join a church that is having a fight?

There is, however, also a public profile of Christianity out there too. In a recent book, “Unchristian,” the authors surveyed numerous young people under the age of 30 to find out what they thought of us. The answers are unsettling to say the least. For example, 91% said that Christians dislike or hate homosexual persons. No matter how you feel about the issue of same-sex blessings, you have to realize what a terribly negative attitude this is toward those of us who represent Jesus and his Church.

In Dallas recently, we have had this attitude reinforced in a very public way. The pastor of one of our most public churches decided to do a series on homosexuality. The title of his first sermon that was placed on their front sign was “Gay is not OK.” This generated a number of protesters who gathered on that Sunday morning to voice their dissent from such a position. In the interviews that followed in the public press, the protesters sounded much more loving and compassionate than the pastor who claimed he was “speaking the truth in love.”

The next week, the issue of sex was raised in a very different way by the pastor of a newly formed and large mega-church who announced a series on marriage and sex. He delivered part of these sitting on a bed while suggesting married couples engage in sex every day over the next week. He promised it would be a “bonding experience.”

After my wife and I stopped laughing, I could not help but wonder if the pastor was in another way reinforcing the image among un-churched and non-Christian people that we Christians, and especially our clergy, are pre-occupied and even obsessed with sexual behavior. Neither example, I would content, helps our public profile. It probably is reinforced and even made worse here in North Texas with the action of the Diocese of Ft. Worth to remove itself from the Episcopal Church because of our increasingly liberal national church policies, specifically related to the election of a Bishop who is a gay man living in a same-sex relationship.

Put all this public profile in perspective of Christ the King Sunday. On this day, we hear the parable of the separation of the sheep and goats. This is a parable about judgment, so we might ask ourselves what criteria Jesus uses to separate the good from the bad? Surprise, it has nothing to do with sexual behavior. Even more, it has almost nothing to do with any personal habit or behavior such as smoking, drinking or with whom we have sex. It all has to do with how we treat the poor, the hungry and those imprisoned!

Now, we as the Christian Community need to ask ourselves why the profile of our Lord and of the Church is so far off our Lord’s values. Why are we not known for our concerned with the poor, and not with sexual behavior? The answer, of course, is that we are reaping what we sow. Talk about sex and people think we are primarily concerned with it.

The challenge for us today, and this very much includes the Episcopal Church, is to start talking publicly about what is really of deepest concern to us. In doing so, we should remember that Jesus commenced the beginning of his ministry with, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.” Further, we should ask ourselves if the presence of a church in any community is primarily good news to the widow, orphan, and stranger in our midst. As our Gospel for this Sunday assures us, this will be our King’s greatest concern when he measures us according to what we have done.

The Day After

2008-11-06T06:31:00.000-08:00

Since I had voted early, I spend Tuesday in Austin visiting my 7 month old granddaughter, Ana Miranda, arguably the most beautiful granddaughter in the world. I left early Wednesday morning to return to Dallas. Dressed in very casual attire and unshaven, I stopped for coffee at a local fast food store in South Dallas. I found myself standing next to an African-American gentleman about my age as we poured cream. “Great morning isn’t it?” I said.

“Yes, it is. The temperature is almost perfect,” he replied.
“I meant the day after the election,” I offered with a smile.
“Indeed it is,” he said back, “it IS a great morning.”
Before I could say more, he added, “I am a Viet Nam vet and I have lots of respect for John McCain. He is a great man. But, this was our day!”

“You and I are old enough to remember hearing Dr. King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech live, as he gave it,” I added. He nodded assent. “I bet that, like me, you never thought that you would see this day in our life-time,” He nodded thoughtfully and with a slight tear said, “Never in my life time.”
“Yes,” I agreed. Then I added, “I guess you could say it was every American’s day.”
“That’s true,” he said as he offered me his warm, firm handshake.
John McCain is a great man, and I pray that our President elect will become a great President. This morning at sunrise, we awoke to the possibility of being an even greater nation.

The Approaching Election

2008-10-21T13:07:00.000-07:00

Reflections on the upcoming Election, Politics and the Church
Here are some thoughts and opinions of mine as we approach the November election. I thought some of this might help Cathedral members and friends understand me a bit better.

During Seminary I became very involved in what today would be called justice and rights issues. This continued for a few years after seminary, but in 1977 I experienced a conversion experience. In brief, Christ became more clearly my Lord and Savior. Naturally, this touched most aspects of my life. One of these had to do with my involvement in political activism. It isn’t that I suddenly came to see these issues as wrong or unimportant. It was more personal for me. I came to see that my involvement in them was motivated by anger and at times hatred. I knew that love and especially the love of Christ were not my motives. Further, I realized that I tended to see those who differed from me as bad or evil. I needed to step back from all this.

In addition, as I have aged and hopefully matured, I have become a lot more circumspect about politics. I am more inclined to look for the truth on both sides of issues. I have grown too in my conviction that pastors would do well to maintain a more independent and non-partisan position regarding candidates and political parties. We need to be able to minister to all our people and there are always Christians of good conscience on all sides of political divides and all parties. None of this means that I lack political convictions or even passion, I just am very concerned about maintaining the Church’s ability and mine to speak to power no matter which party or person happens to hold it.

I call myself an independent and have many times split my ballot voting for folks from different parties. Since 1980, for those interested, I have voted for the person elected President all but twice. I will leave this for you to guess where I may have gone wrong.

Here is one matter about which I have plenty of conviction. After the 2004 election, the IRS threatened to take away the not-for-profit status of All Saints Parish, Pasadena based on a sermon preached just before the election. Like many in the religious community, I reacted immediately to this interference and threat to the Church’s, or any religious communities, right to free speech and the ability to comment on political matters. Then, I listened to the actual sermon.

After that, I found myself on the IRS’s side of the issue. In his sermon, the retired Rector of the parish, not only took sides in the election, but essentially explained how Jesus would vote. Telling Christians how Jesus would vote is presumptuous and manipulative. This is the worse kind of blurring of the boundaries of Church and State. For me, for a pastor to try to tell folks for whom to vote is an abuse of our power.

Having said all this, here are a couple of observations about this election. Both candidates for president are right, we need a change in direction as a nation. Either will bring change. The most important change IMHO needed is how we carry ourselves in our relationship to the other nations of the world.

As Reporter Brian Williams has stated, I believe that both Senator Obama and Senator McCain are outstanding leaders and persons of character, and either would serve our nation well. I think that demonization and character assassinations do not serve us well. Such attacks undermine the basic truth that for the health and well-being of our nation, after the election, we will need to come back together. After the election, the person who is president will be added to our prayers of the people. He will be President of all the people. We can only pray that the person holding this office will always remember this.

I believe it is the duty of all Christians, as well as all citizens, to vote and to fully participate in our political process. So, don’t forget to vote November 4th!

Sermon on September 28th - Family Sunday

2008-10-05T12:37:00.000-07:00

(I don’t usually preach from a manuscript, but last Sunday, I did.)

LOVE, ACCEPTANCE, AND FORGIVENESS

Outside of Jerusalem rests the tomb of a young man. For centuries now Jews, Christians and Muslims have come to the tomb to throw stones and offer prayers of bitterness. Who could generate such universal reaction?

His name was Absalom. He was the favored son of David who created upheaval in his father’s household, tried to subvert his father’s rule, and finally led a rebellion and civil war that almost cost David his life.

The people who gather for such prayers demonstrate the universal pain of families that come apart. The bible is full of such stories and most of the families portrayed in Scripture qualify for the term dysfunctional!

Perhaps this is one reason that the story of the prodigal son remains so universally loved. The prodigal returns and receives the love of the father. Meanwhile, however, his older brother fumes in resentment.

This morning’s gospel reading gives us another view of family behavior. Jesus used it to show how people who once were outcasts could find their way back to the Father’s love. At the same time he showed that some who say the right things have the wrong motives in their hearts.

I had a friend who used to like to twist the familiar phrase “home is where the heart is” into home is where the HURT is. Each time he would say it, the rest of us would both smile in recognition and grimace in the plan truth.

I once say a cartoon that showed a large auditorium. Over the stage hung a large banner with “The National Organization of People from Functional Families.” The auditorium had about five people scattered around in it.

Families, of course, can be places of love and sources of strength to their members, but we all know from these examples that families are often the source of our greatest pain. Knowing this, I’ve often asked myself as a pastor, what the church can do about this.

Why do families and family members need the church?

The Church is called in Scripture the “Family of God.” At the core of this description are three cardinal values to comprise our family. Simply said they are
Love
Acceptance
Forgiveness

Most human families start out with the value of love. But love itself can become twisted. Love can become conditional – I love you only if you live up to my expectations. Love can become manipulative – If you love me, you will do what I want. Love can go sour when a family member goes in a different way. The message is clear, we love you but not if you choose to act that way.

This is where the church as the family of God has something significant to add to all of us. We are after all a community not only of love, but also of acceptance. When we are truly the church, we accept people as they are; who they are, unique. It doesn’t matter if this uniqueness is the result of different talents or strange quirks. If folks are baptized they are part of our family.

And further, we are a community of forgiveness. We start with the assumption that everyone is a sinner in need of forgiveness. And as Alina reminded us two weeks ago, we are to forgive others as we have been forgiven.

Jerry Cook was the pastor of a very large Four Gospel Church in Portland, Oregon. He had a large church with lots of programs, bible studies, and a terrific youth ministry. Then one day he began to think about the behavior of his members. He became uncomfortable with the typical church chatter. He became convicted that as good as his church was, it wasn’t really the family of God, but a group of people with similar values.

Finally, he decided to do something about it. For one full year, he preached sermons with only three themes: Love, Acceptance and Forgiveness. He said strait out that biblical knowledge and theological true are important, but it was more important to God that his family lived out love, acceptance and forgiveness. It took a while, but a church that had been largely suburban and white began to change.

Some members where surprised when street kids started attending.

Others were shocked when the church became integrated.

Some even left when lots of single people started attending including Gay and Lesbians.

What was once a nice church became a dynamic community that transformed its neighborhood and became a remarkable witness to forgiveness and reconciliation.

Love, acceptance and Forgiveness are the core values of the family of God.

Golf in the Kingdom

2008-10-05T11:59:00.000-07:00

Thursday afternoon the weather looked ideal. I had been spending too much time in the office and I had not been able to play golf for over two weeks. So, I took off and headed north to Ridgeview Ranch.

They had an opening for a single person. I was matched up with two nice business men who were making up a round for their golf league. We headed out just after 4pm and we knew that we wouldn’t be able to play a full round. I played extremely well and headed to the back nine just two over par.

Mostly I was putting very well thanks to an off hand comment by Johnny Miller during the Ryder Cup about judging break. I put in three putts for par that were over 15 feet. We finished the tenth hole and my playing companions who were having a tough day decided to head to the club house for a beer.

I went along alone paring the 11th after holing with another long putt for a par. Then I approached the 12th hole which is a medium par three. I stood in the twilight looking at the pin that was near the front of the green. I took out my Sky Caddie (given to me by two friends who understand) and calculated my distance. I was just at 140 yards from the pin. I took out a nine iron. For me, a nine iron hit well will go 145 yards. I figured it was late in the round and given a front trap, better to be long than short.

I hit the shot well and it flew directly at the pin. In the gathering dark I could not see how close I was. For a fleeting moment, I thought it might have gone in. I suddenly realized that I didn’t have any witnesses to vouch for me if it did. I drove the cart path around the green and realized that I had hit it pretty much my full length and was five paces above the hole with a down hill putt. No problem, I thought to myself, because I had already holed several of these.

Then to my alarm I realized that it had gotten just too dark to be able to read the putt. I was thinking to myself that the best strategy would be to just hit it firm right at the hole. Then, I paused and looked around me. The setting sun made a golden sunset and the surrounding houses added a luminescent to the scene. It must have been just perfectly 70 degrees. A small gentle breeze was blowing. I stood there taking in this absolutely perfect North Texas night. I remembered that I had just shot one of my best front nines ever.

I took a deep breath and offered a short prayer. “Thank you Lord for the gift of this day, the beauty that surrounds me, the joy and pleasure in a round played well, and most of all for good friends, who not only share a love for the game, but also are kind enough to help me enjoy it more.“

With that I picked up my ball. The birdie putt had by now been transcended by the beauty of the moment and a heart that was full of thanksgiving. I drove my cart slowly to the cart barn. I knew that there would be many more chances for birdie putts, but few moments in which everything comes together. In golf, just as in the rest of life, sometimes it does.

Two Critical Dynamics of Leadership

2008-08-07T07:56:00.000-07:00

August 7th, John Mason Neale

Today is the feast day honoring John Mason Neale in “Lesser Feasts and Fasts.” A prominent scholar and writer of the Oxford movement, he was born in London in 1818 and attended Cambridge University where he came under the influence of the then emerging “high church” movement. He was a talented writer, but his greatest contribution to the church was his extraordinary ability to translate Greek and Latin texts into meaningful modern hymns.

I want to use his place in this movement to write about two particular dynamics of leadership, the ability to stand apart, and the ability to draw together. As I have looked at many movements in the history of Christianity, I noticed that the leader, or early leaders, of each movement show the particular ability to stand apart from the mainstream of the culture of the Church in their time. They persist on their vision and change often at the cost of great criticism, even personal criticism. Since criticism is not something that an intuitive feeling person like me, an NF in Meyers-Briggs terminology, can tolerate well, I know that starting something new and different is hard. That is why many of these leaders have been Intuitive thinking folks (NT’s). I would put people like St. Paul, Martin Luther, John Wesley, and John Henry Newman is this category. The combination of intuition and thinking – “can’t you see the truth?” – gives them the ability to weather criticism and break from the flock (the current mindset) in a way that we feeling folks can only long for. Sometimes it seems that intuitive thinkers even thrive on criticism. This gives them the ability to persist in leading a movement that others simply cannot bear.

Having said this, however, it is important to realize that most effective movements in the Church have another component of success that is often overlooked, especially by the NT’s of our world. In the second layer of leadership, there is often a good “feeler” individual who can put to words and music the theology and philosophy of the movement in such a way that it can penetrate people’s hearts and then convert their minds. This is the other dynamic of being able to draw together. I believe John Mason Neale was one of these leaders in the Oxford Movement. It was his ability to use language to give voice and emotion to the vision that helped cement it into the culture.

I would also point to Charles Wesley as one of the major leaders who did the same thing for John Wesley and the Wesleyan Movement. While few Episcopalians identify with the theology of Wesley, yet, many still love to sing Charles’ hymns. These give voice to belief in Christ, longing for fellowship, and the desire for holiness that remains the great contribution of John and his followers. By the way, I have found that the same can be said of many Methodist; they reject the theology, but love the hymns.

This brings me to an important observation. When we look at the current movements in Christianity, and there are lots of them, we might ask how long lasting these will be? The answer may not rest in the current NT leaders, but in those who are able to give voice to the movement. This is one of the reasons that I believe much of the “Progressive Movement or Movements” of modern mainline Christianity will not endure for long. As one scholar has said, progressivism makes for a great criticism of the current status quo, put a poor substitute for it.

In summary, movements may be generated by intuitive thinking people, but unless the movement finds poets and songwriters along the way, there contributions may not last. When we remember John Mason Neale, we are reminded of this truth.

Wall-e

2008-07-15T09:51:00.000-07:00

Wall-e: What Does a Story Mean?
My wife and I are long-time animated film fans. We particularly like the recent work done by Pixar, and were eager to see their new one, “Wall-e.” I enjoyed it immensely. However, there is some controversy swirling around this movie and particularly around interpretations of what the story really means.

In case you missed this so far, there are some saying that the movie is a powerful allegory on the dangers of rampant consumerism and environmental destruction. Others are writing that this is a subversive movie intended, by a group of tree-huggers, to undermine the benefits of science, technology, and progress. My point in writing on this move is not to take sides, as you will read shortly; I don’t see the movie from either of these points of view. I do want to use the story to talk about stories and their meanings, and yes, this has important implications for Christians who hold dearly a book that is full of stories, namely, the Bible.

Last week, I had the benefit of hearing the Wall-e’s creator tell about the genesis of the story that became the movie. He set out with the simple idea of the last robot on earth. He then worked backwards to create a world where such a being existed. “Being is an important word, because even thought Wall-e is a robot, he has evolved into a remarkable self-aware being. Wall-e’s creator seems a bit perplexed by the interpretations of the story and the controversy that surrounds this. He said several times that, “it is a very simple story.” This comment by the author, however, leads us directly into the issue of what a story means, and more importantly for those of us who preach Christian stories, does a story only mean what the author intended it to mean?

The direct answer to this question is “no.” I would content what makes for a good story is that it captures our imagination, and allows us to read into the story. In this task, we become almost co-creators with the original author. Let me be clear, I am not in the camp of radical deconstructionist who ignores the author’s intent. I believe “what” the author intended is important. I am just saying that finding the author’s original intent is not discovering the total meaning of the story. What makes for a good story is this ability to engage the listener, just as what makes Jesus’ parables so good and long-lasting is their ability to continue to engage us in their meaning.

I think the power of the story of Wall-e the robot is not in found in the environmental wasteland of earth, or the distorted human beings who have lost connection with their true home and their true selves as they take their perpetual cruise in space. For me, Wall-e is most essentially a love story. However, it is not simply a story about two different robots who manage to find one another and fall in love. It is a story about how love, especially the love between a man and a woman, redeems us to our true selves.

This starts with Eve, the smooth, white, pure, and powerfully destructive robot who is sent on a mission to discover if there is life on earth. In Wall-e’s eyes, Eve becomes Ev-a. Wall-e calls her out of her own program and beyond it to become the mate he has longed for in his lonely existence. He even risks his life to save her from the evil “auto-pilot” who seeks only to preserve the status quo of his reason for existing. Tragically, in saving her, Wall-e is damaged and returns to his meaningless pre-existence as a mindless trash collector. Ev-a now returns to rescue him, and looking deeply into his eyes, she calls him back to himself.

This is what romantic love is really about. In our love and longing for another, sometimes born out of acute loneliness, we help our beloved see him or her self in a deeper way. They see themselves more fully as the beloved of another. At the same time, this beloved is able to look into our eyes and take us beyond our simple ways of seeing ourselves. Eve, the biological probe becomes the beloved Ev-a. Wall-e, the trash collecting robot, becomes the white knight whose quest for his beloved also happens to be the redeemer of all of humanity.

Where have we heard this story before? It is the heart of “The Man of La Mancha.” Wall-e is the crazy old man who becomes the valiant knight whose mad quest awakens the dull maiden into the beautiful Dulcinea. At the end of the story, as the evil agent convinces Don Quixote that he is nothing, it is the lovely Dulcinea who looks into his eyes and calls him back to his true self. In this, the true story of humanity unfolds.

But, look even deeper for a moment. What is a good story? It is a story in which we find meaning. This meaning is found in who we are. Yet, at the same time, the story is more than what we interpret it to mean, because the story is also able to call out of ourselves a deeper meaning of who were are. A good story is, after all, the Ev-a for all of us. Perhaps this is why most of Jesus’ teachings were stories. These stories were intended, not just to instruct us, but to awaken us and remind us of our true nature.

The Ad

2008-06-17T11:24:00.000-07:00

Last Sunday several of our members asked me the same question, "What did you think of the ad?" They meant the ad for the Episcopal church printed in the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram. If you haven't seen it, it says that serving others is another way of praying and that you can come and help slice carrots at an Episcopal Church. This ad among a few others had already generated some comments on the House of Bishops/Deputies listserv, so I was already curious to see some samples. What do I think of the ad?

First, I would want to commend whoever was responsible, I don't think it was the Diocese of Ft. Worth, for placing the ad. One continuing problem for TEC is that we have almost no "public profile" at all. Public Profile is what non-Episcopalians especially unchurched people think of us. In numerous survey's when asked about TEC, the most frequent response is nothing. Hard as it is for Episcopalians with our precious preoccupation with ourselves to believe, we don't read on most people's radar screen. They don't really know what our churches are like. On the negative side, many do know that, as one fellow traveler said to me, "you folks are going through some sort of controversy aren't you?" We must acknowledge that controversy would not be a high value for those seeking a spiritual home. So at least SOME ad is better than nothing.

On the other hand, that is the problem. The ad said absolutely nothing about us. If we changed the name Episcopal Church and put in Red Cross, the ad would stand exactly as it is. When I worked for the Diocese of Texas, we got some excellent advise (we paid for it) from one of the top advertizing companies in Houston. They taught us a lot about the purpose of advertising before they helped us develop ads. Here is what I learned.

1. An ad is an opportunity for you to tell people clearly about your "product" or as we would say our ministry and mission. It would hold up a particular value or dynamic of our life that would attempt to speak to others. A very good example of this was an ad put together for TEC before General Convention 2003. It showed a chalice and bread on an altar and the camera panned back to show a women priest celebrating. The voice over than added, "in the Episcopal Church, we believe a woman's place is at the altar." It went on to say further that we welcomed women in all levels of leadership as a church. Like it or not, it was true and it said something about us while it also communicated our sacramental nature.

2. An ad also needs to have a clear target audience. Per the above example, the market was all those Christians who believed that women should be treated equally to men, which is about 99% of everyone 50 years of age or younger! A poor example from the above ad campaign was, IMHO, an ad that opened with Bach music and two very gothic doors being slowly opened. Behind the doors was a lecture containing one of those large lecture Bibles. The voice said, "Would you come to church if we promised not to throw the book at you?" This ad was poorly thought through as to its target audience. It is aimed, not at unchurched people, but at de-churched people, namely people fleeing or hurt by a church that applies the Bible harsh way. To see the problem with the ad, think about its effect upon unchurched people. If they were planning on attending a Mosque, what would you think if the Mosque advertised that they had the Koran but didn't take it too seriously! (Needless to say, the members of the Executive Council of TEC loved this one.) We know from studies of unchurched people that they expect Christian churches to have a Bible, read from it and apply it to life. (I hope to write about the effects of having so many de-churched people in our community at a later point.)

3. We learned that an ad did not create a need. Put another way, no one got up from watching the U.S. Open and went out an bought a Bridgestone DT golf ball. All the ad wants to do is create a link between the need and the brand. If I need some golf balls, I stop and think, "I'll try those new DT's. I've heard they travel further." This is the very important part of advertising, namely to connect need to a brand.

Now, if I apply these three criteria to the ad in question, what do I get. A. No clear product. B. No clear audience. C. No clear link between a need and the brand. So, I think it was "a nice try, but no cigar." I would close, however, by asking you what kind of ad should your Church place? Can you communicate your unique message? Do you know your prime target audience? And, can you create a link between the audiences need and your ministry and life?

Here is one of my favorites from the Diocese of Texas campaign. You see a picture of the moon. Along side it is a quotation in bold print, "One small step for man, one giant step for mankind." Below it was the name Neil Armstrong followed by the word "explorer." Below that a smaller print tag line, "Neil Armstrong found a spiritual home in the Episcopal Church, you could too." It had a product, and audience, and a link; spiritual home for adventurous (with the people we used, there were a lot of other words that worked here too) people! Of course, this may not be your congregation's message at all, which is why you will want your own congregation to advertize so that you can create your own "Public Profile."

Anxiety

2008-05-27T09:26:00.000-07:00

“Do not be anxious,” Jesus said. Without a doubt, Jesus’ wise advice to his disciples is also applicable to a congregation or community. Over the years, as I worked with congregations, I grew to have a greater appreciation for anxiety and its effects upon communities.

Directly said, anxious communities are reactive communities. Anxiety is an emotional state that is processed by our minds and bodies in the same way we react to fear. Emotionally, we click into “fight or flight.” We fight when we respond with conflict and when we attack others. We flee when we withdraw or avoid others. Some congregations that I worked with were so chronically anxious that they repeated sick and toxic behavior. For example, in congregations that others have called “Priest killers,” I have found that this destructive behavior toward clergy is a symptom of a deeper underlying anxiety.

When our congregation or community becomes anxious it becomes reactive. It is not very able to respond certainly not in creative ways. Things are viewed through the lens of either/or, black/white, right/wrong. People and events are measured as being for us or against us.

For some time now, I have tried to state as rationally and calmly as possible that TEC is a community that shows all the signs of an anxious and reactive community. The continuing polarization on issues related to human sexuality and the fight or flight posture of many of our leaders is strongly indicative of our plight. I further believe that our current tension and polarization has gone on for so long that we are in danger of becoming, if we are not already, a chronically anxious community without the inner resources to turn toward health and healing.

I should mention that when I try to say this, those strongly caught up in the reactivity usually respond in very negative ways. They argue for the rightness of their side, or the importance of “rights” or “belief.” I want to make it clear, before you hit the “comment” button to my blog that I am not saying that the issues on both sides are not important. I am saying that we are dealing with them poorly because we have become so reactive.

What we do know about reactivity is that reason and understanding are pushed aside by emotion and passion. One continuing example of this is the way Episcopal leaders talk about, and the terms we use to describe, those we “see on the other side.” (One rule of thumb that I learned as a consultant is always to use the terms and descriptions that people and groups use about themselves WITHOUT giving these a pejorative definition.)

Those who have read articles from me already know that I have said all this before. What I want to answer in my blog is this question that is seldom asked: “What are we anxious about?” In other words, what is driving our present anxiety? I would say that the answer to this is complex, but it is knowable if we stop and thing about it.

First of all, as a Church with strong connections to American culture, we are anxious about all the things our general society is anxious about. Try this for a starting list:
The Post-cold war transitional world community
9/11 and global terrorism, our incursion into Afghanistan, and our disastrous quagmire in Iraq
Globalization (which includes all of the above)
The changing definitions of humanity and human sexuality, which corresponds to the diminishing identity we once found in our tribe, race or national origin.
The rise of violence in our society
The complexity of our society
The tremendous changes brought about by technology, the internet and computers
The decline of the family as the basic unit of culture and the emergence of the peer community as its replacement
The explosive growth in our understanding of the Universe and the diminishing place we humans find in it
The consequences of our dependence upon carbon fuels and the results, be they global warming or $5.00 a gallon gasoline

Then as a church:
40 years of decline
The loss of our “English” identity and the Americanization of ECUSA
The change from being a New York and East Coast elitist Community into a more upper middle-class community post WWII
The changing and emerging power of women
The declining number of African-Americans and blue collar workers who represented our previous “diversity and inclusion.”
The failure of Anglo-Catholics, Evangelicals, and Charismatics to gain control of our community combined with the absolute control of our national leadership by Progressives
The use of a Prayer Book that does not create a common sense of language and community – too many options for that
An aging membership that remains highly educated, largely Anglo and that can’t find many ways to live out the diversity that we value so much
A lack of consensus as to the role and place of Anglicanism in North America and a growing tension with Anglicanism in the rest of the world

Add to these, Post-Christendom, Post-denominationalism, and Post-modernism and you get a lot of anxiety.

So, what are we to do? When I suggested in a previous post that it will be 2010 before we will have the opportunity to move beyond our present stuckness, one reader, Sarah, stated her opinion that this will go on much longer. It certainly could. The result of such on-going anxiety will be the essential demise of our community. Sure, a remnant will remain, but it will be the remnant so burned out and dysfunctional that it will have no future.

Or we could simply have it out by fight or flight. The 2009 General Convention could be an essential sweep of the issues even at the expense of our membership in the wider Anglican Community. I have certainly heard this attitude expressed by some Progressives. We could see the withdrawal of more leaders, congregations and even dioceses. We (and they) kid ourselves if we think that such flight does not affect those who leave. I think a few folks who have left have managed to move beyond our present situation, but most clearly have not.

The answer in another way is quite simple, keep engaged and refuse to either win or withdraw. This is not a very easy road to take, nor a very comfortable one. Finally, one way to survive this is to surrender “the illusion of control.” As I said in my sermon May 25th, most human beings greatly over-estimate what we can really control. Worse, in believing we can control, we only create greater anxiety in ourselves and in our communities. Here is my summary comment for myself and the church I love, “When control is the issue, Jesus has left the building!”

On a personal note, I will be away for several days attending my grandson’s graduation from High School in Seattle. So, now you can hit the comment button and I will respond (hopefully not react) when I return.

Conversation with the PB (Part I)

2008-05-21T09:39:00.001-07:00

When our Presiding Bishop was in Dallas recently, I had a chance to talk to her about our work on the 2020 Taskforce together. When I told her that I was disappointed that I had not heard much on this from her, she told me a couple of things of interest to me.

First, she mentioned the reorganization of the National Church Staff and the move of several offices to other parts of the country from NYC (more on this issue in a later post.) She also mentioned several other initiatives which connected to the eight 2020 areas. I was glad to hear this and incouraged her to speak more about these. It did not come up in her discussion with our clergy. We still remain publicly fixed on "the issues."

I would be the first to say that I think most of 2020 is dead in the water, but I continue to talk about these for two reasons. First, some day we will move beyond the current issues of sexuality and will want to go back to the mission of building the Church and making disciples for Jesus Christ. Second, I still believe that the eight areas expressed in the 2020 Report are the critical ones for the future - take for examples, reaching the new ethnic groups in the U.S. and developing younger ordained leaders.

How long will TEC continue to be dominated and pre-occupied by "the issues?" Until at least 2010. Remember two of my observations over the years: "Issues divide and Mission unites" and "In a polarized situation, the most strident voices dominate and moderate voices are pushed to the margins!" Sadly, this means that if I am right, we can expect our present unpleasantness will continue until at least 2010.

Welcome

2008-05-20T11:55:00.000-07:00

I have served the Church as a Priest for 37 years, having served four congregations, two non-profits, and as canon for congregational development in the Diocese of Texas. This blog is a place for me to share my thoughts and reflections on issues before the wider church. Much of my perspective comes as a long time teacher and consultant and as a member of the initial 2020 Taskforce of the Episcopal Church.

I would like to invite those who care for and love the Church to respond and engage me in conversation.
Kevin