Sunday, Sunday, Sunday!

Like the advertisement...

Or not...

But a few interesting matters came up at ILEOS today that might be of wider interest:

1. ILEOS Screens Ten Minutes of Choose This Day

I walked in late to one of the adult offerings this morning and picked up a "Congregational Life Survey" (more below) and grabbed a seat. The Rector was talking about some film which he was going to show us that had something to do with the ACN. Of course, I was giddy as a schoolboy. It only could be "Choose This Day." Having already seen the film, I watched snatches of it while filling out the survey. What was the main sound in the room? Laughter.

However, the comments from the audience afterward indicated to me that the audience generally took the film seriously. Two points generally were offered: 1. "Choose This Day" presents a mockery (a "pastiche" in the words of one gentleman) of the "liberal drift" of the theology of the Episcopal Church And frankly, the audience should know. Their theological outlook is likely the most antithetical to the views presented in the film. 2. That said, the film presents its position effectively, authoritatively, and chillingly.

2. ILEOS Screens Trailer for Counterpropaganda Film

The second point came out because the clip from "Choose This Day" was followed by the trailer of a film that is intended to be a counterpoint to "Choose This Day." And, no, I don't know anything about how it's being funded. I think it's a production of Claiming the Blessing but don't quote me. Perhaps, the most impressive footage of the film is Susan Russell addressing the ACC at Nottingham. The camera swings right and left to capture glimpses of the rest of the TEC delegation, African delegates listening intently, and Rowan Williams looking very much like an academic at the departmental seminar. There is also footage of happy and affectionate spiritual brothers and sisters and even a fratrimony blessing at a High Church parish somewhere.

The audience's comments suggested that the second film felt weak and wimpy compared to the first. They were impressed by "Choose This Day" 's gags and hysterics. They were impressed by Bishop Duncan and Canon Harmon, because "they taught with authority." One man described himself as a "former propagandist" in a tone that suggested that he had given up that life to follow Christ. He noted that he could think of several ways the second film could be manipulated and turned against its producers. The footage was too ILEOS-heavy. Moreover, as many people commented, "Choose This Day" assumes the mantles of both Scripture and the Lord Jesus. They suggested that the second film focus more on Scripture and Jesus.

Countering the authority of the first film remained difficult. One suggestion was to get Bishop Spong. Anyone closely observing me when this was suggested would have seen me with my head in my hands muttering "no fruit for Spong." Now, I believe that I saw AKMA in a draft of this film that I saw a few months ago (and he's mentioned his involvement on his blog). So maybe the film will become more authoritative.

3. General Convention Note

Just in case any of you want to brave the spiritual battleground of Columbus, Ohio in June, I hear that Claiming the Blessing will be offering a variety of useful materials to inform pastoral care to GLBTs and will be offering prayer and other ghostly comfort to spiritually weakened individuals.

4. Why Are They So Fixated on My Mother?: The Congregational Life Survey

I didn't make too much of 815's latest (and very important) survey until well after I had finished it. It was very nicely done. At one point, there is a great question about the Apostles' Creed, namely whether you can recite: (a) all of it; (b) some of it; (c) only if there are a lot of people next to you; (d) none of it. Otherwise, it asks questions about you, your involvement in your congregation, and very broad indicators of congregational health.

It only was when my 18-28 year old fellow parishioners started filling it out that I understood what was interesting. Very few of them are cradle Episcopalians. Some may think of ILEOS as a more liberal and liturgical Saddleback. So they often had very little context for answering the questions.
[I will paraphrase these questions.]

a. Do all religions provide equally good paths to "ultimate truth"?

A friend soon to graduate from a notable evangelical seminary asks me, "[Caelius], what should I answer for this one?" I look at him. He says, "What do they mean by 'ultimate truth'? Salvation?" Already I know that this is a bad question if it's confusing a budding philosophical theologian steeped in both evangelical theology and Eastern Orthodoxy. So I say, "It's a question about Universalism," hoping that helps. Astute lawyer friend says, "I thought that question was about inerrancy." I reply in the contrary. Theologian marks "neutral." I marked "disagree." I feared "strongly disagree" would be interpreted as "all non-Christians are going to Hell."

b. What is your racial background? (mark two)

Much tittering about why this mattered. Astute lawyer noted that some people might have different worship preferences because of their racial background. I answered Caucasian and American Indian. (They did say mark two, it wasn't for purposes of affirmative action, and my connection with Lakota culture is related to my faith. I used to be able to say the Doxology in Lakota. The Abenaki side is much further back.)

c. Are you spiritual?
d. Are you religious?

Is it wrong that I thought of a J-Tron song when I came to this question?

e. Are you a member of this congregation?

It is a testimony to the strangeness of ILEOS that no one really knew the answer to this question. I invoked the Canons.

f. How would you describe your theological outlook?

Budding philosophical theologian is very confused. I suggest the less rabid rather than the more rabid liberal category based on his orthodox Christology. Astute lawyer accuses me of "censoring" his answers. I check "moderate."

g. How would you describe your political outlook?

I'm asked advice on this question. I reply "you're strange." I check the less rabid liberal category.

My general point is that these labels are based on self-perception and relativity. What is liberal in Alabama can be downright conservative in California. Indeed, what is liberal in Fresno can be conservative in San Francisco. And as for the theological spectrum question, I wish I could have marked "on the moderate end of potentially heresiarchical wackos." ;-P ;-)

h. Mark up to two other types of labels

I marked "Evangelical" and "Catholic." I waffled on "Liberal."

i. Various questions about conflict in the congregation.

Parish intern asks my advice. I say, "You would know better than I."

j. How often did your mother attend church while you were in high school?

Probably the most notable question on the survey. Many people wondered why nothing was asked about their fathers. I speculated that it had something to do with women being more likely to attend church and to emphasize raising a child in the faith.

The survey takes about 20-30 minutes to complete. I spent some of my time encouraging my fellow young parishioners not to fill out every other bubble etc., because I fear that this data will be interpreted in the next 2020 report or something. With the next Presiding Bishop likely to emphasize mission (see Fr. Jake's place), I want the church to get a fair view of those of my generation in the pews.

Until next time, the Holy Brothers commend to you the power of the Holy and Awesome Name of Jesus Christ for they know of no other name under heaven by which we may be delivered.