General Convention Notes

I've been ill the last few days and simultaneously need to put both research projects back on the railroad tracks. Fortunately, there are two meetings scheduled tomorrow for that purpose. But it's no fun to work fairly hard for nearly a year and then realize you know nothing except that there is still a problem which requires solving. But I like to think I'm making some sort of progress.

When I've not been analyzing my research to date, learning similarity theory, or trying to understand exciting new paradigms in fisheries science, I've been reading General Convention blogs. CaNN has a helpful list on their General Convention blog, which is sorted ideologically (but slightly imperfectly) for your convenience. Father Jake has been giving very useful coverage and sane commentary. Mark Harris is getting worried. Fathers Kniseley and Kirkley have been waxing eloquently on sexuality and more important matters. The lay deputies have equally interesting things to say. The sheer volume of blog is amazing. Even my parish has a blog , where you can read about the video I mentioned earlier and the exciting lobbying activities of clergy and laity. It almost makes me wish that I were in Columbus. But I'm fairly sure that God means me to be here. He possibly wanted me in Minneapolis in 2003, but I turned Him down. Lutheranchik calls the Lord, "the CEO." I should be called, "the oblivious intern." But I should write a little about interesting topics.

Gossip

"God willing and the people consenting, the Most Reverend Peter Jasper Akinola will consecrate the Reverend Canon Martyn Minns a Bishop in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church at the Church of XYZ in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, June 18. Clergy wear red."

Yes, I've been reading gossip of this type. The casus schismae shall be the election of ++Jefferts-Schori as Presiding Bishop and Primate after the conservatives realize they won't win the PB and throw votes to Jefferts-Schori, because she's a girl, and there ain't no girls in the College of Primates Supersecret Treehouse. The gossip on the other side is that the liberals are planning a global communion of their own by emphasizing relations with Latin American dioceses (some actually part of the Episcopal Church.) I was tempted very briefly this evening to send an inquiry to Canon Popoola about ++PJA's travel plans, but I thought better of it. Frankly, if I want gossip, I'll go over to the Daily Mail and hear that Prince William is secretly engaged to Kate Middleton or something. Schism isn't juicy. It's unspeakably painful. If I had been at Constantinople or Rome on a certain day in 1054 (it was a major feast, right?), I would have cried.

Digamy: Ontological or Prudential?

My chief objection to consent to +VGR was digamy. I still get those thoughts in my mind sometimes. It occurred to me today that 1 Timothy 3 is not quite as plain as I thought, since there are two possibilities that arise of how a potential bishop could not be "a husband of one wife", (1) he divorced and remarried; (2) he is a widower and remarried. In the first case, one wonders how he could be a potential candidate for bishop at all, since if the community in question would be rebuking him for living in adultery by a strict interpretation of Matthew 19 etc. Is it possible that Matthew 19 was not regarded so strictly in this context? (Or the oral teaching on which Matthew 19 was based for all you NT scholars). As for the case of the widower, is Paul trying to advise against anyone who can't control their urges enough to be satisfied with one wife? I'm not so sure. People could be widowed/widowered in the Roman world at 16 or 17 quite commonly, and yet all of the Fathers mention anxieties about baptism at that age because of concerns about the risk of fornication.

No, I think Paul's advice is prudential rather than ontological. He is not speaking of someone living in deep sin. He is looking for someone who organizes his household affairs as the household of the Lord should be organized. For he writes, "for if a man does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take charge of a congregation of God's people?" Paul is looking for bishops who are stable and faithful and maintain intimate relationships even in times of great difficulty. A bishop is wedded to those in his charge much like a husband to his wife (or vice versa ), a possible source of the ancient prejudice against translation, his fidelity must be above reproach.

In our less stringent times, we sometimes forget that this prudential standard is no less important than the ontological one. The latter condemns the candidate as a sinner in mortal peril, more worthy of the church's care than to take care of the church. The former is a qualification, like a bachelor's degree. The failure to be acceptable under either criterion is a reason to withhold consent. But at the same time, the qualification is more flexible.

These issues now arise again with Rev. Canon Beisner's election in Northern California, where the Committee (according to Brad Drell) wants to hear about Beisner's second divorce. What I want to know is why they don't want to hear about his first one. If one thinks ontologically, such limits seem reasonable. We live in more flexible and forgiving times, after all. It used to be one divorce and you're out. Now, it's two divorces and you're out. We must uphold the Scriptures somewhere. But that's not the right idea of it at all. What turned me about concerning +VGR were two things. First, it was clear to me that both parties entered his first marriage fully conscious of certain matters that could arise in the future and both tried to maintain that relationship as best as they could. But there is a difference between friendship and intimacy after all, the gulf between the present and the eschaton. Second, +VGR worked to make sure the physical and emotional needs of his wife and his family were met before he sought any form of romantic relationship with another man. In the first example, I saw a man who was truthful, honest, and willing to struggle. In the second example, I saw a man who put the needs of his household before his own emotional fulfillment. His wife, after all, needed a husband who was ontologically capable of being an intimate. To some extent, I have seen these traits as marks of his episcopate. At other points, I have been disappointed. But looking at other episcopates, I have seen patterns of infidelity that have had little to do with marriage (meaningful cough...).

Thus, in examining Beisner, I would urge the Committee to consider the holistic aspects of Beisner as a household manager rather than focusing on some legalistic definition of fitness. If his divorces suggest he possesses qualities that might make him a poor bishop, consent certainly should be refused, but if this becomes some sort of test case to uphold the authority of Scripture, the authority of Scripture will be compromised by it.

Clarity

As you probably know, it is Amish Fudge that is being sold at Convention and not Anglican Fudge. Amish Fudge, of course, explains why some Anabaptist sects allow adherents to operate riding lawnmowers. But the great fear of the reasserter side is that the Anglican variety will reappear soon in the form of the SCECAC resolutions. Mysteriously today, there appeared a piece by +N.T. Wright, Bishop Palatine of Durham (he's no longer Palatine, but humor me...), in which the SCECAC resolutions were deemed insufficient by his Lordship and not in compliance with paras. 135 (or was it 136) of the Windsor Report. Well, Bishop Wright, I'll give it to you straight. I would prefer there be strong compliance with Windsor or no compliance. But at this point, we reassessors have no assurances that border-crossing will be punished, nor that the parts of Lambeth I.10 we like will be enforced. Thus, if you're going to quote committee documents or Lambeth resolutions (you only do so implicitly) as law to us, you must simultaneously give assurances that the whole of the law is enforceable in some settled tribunal. And the thing is, my Lord, it's not.

At this point, the desire for clarity from Minns et al. is half-earnest and half a desire for an excuse for schism. (See Gossip). Even if GC complied with the Windsor Report, I am fairly certain little would change. Initially, the Federal Conservatives (see Thinking Anglicans) would run around like decapitated chickens, but I very much doubt the powers and dominions set against TEC here and abroad would be appeased by such concessions. Because at the end of the day, it would still be the same House of Bishops and same House of Deputies. If you refuse to commune with a body before they do things you dislike, you are unlikely to commune with them when they have failed to do so. And, of course, even TEC complies, Bishop Iker still is compelled by Canon to ordain women. This is a horrible ordeal to him. He will want it to stop soon. And his allies will do likewise. Over the last few decades, TEC has revealed its true self. For me, it is a ground ready for re-planting. For them, it is too choked with weeds to continue. I really hope I'm wrong. I hope they'll stay. But I also know there are those in Ft. Worth and Pittsburgh who have been gravely injured by some of these. I count one as a good friend. If they do stay, there must be some exchange of pastoral oversight between each side. Perfect love must take away all fear.

Budget Priorities

I'm disappointed that Children, Youth, and Young Adults was defeated as the top budget priority. We are in such dreadful shape when it comes to evangelization and catechesis of my generation and the generation after me. And frankly, looking at the numerical trends in infant baptisms in many dioceses of the church, this is worrisome. The infant baptism rate is 5-7% of ASA in some dioceses. If we could keep these infants as ASA, we would do much good to souls and help the rest of the world. I do believe that a well-catechized and faithful Episcopalian can be a great force for good. I'm not much of one, of course. But I have friends who clearly are and see how much their faith is at the root of it. I also have seen in the Episcopal Church and in other denominations what the effects of bad catechesis and poor flexibility with regards to youth are. People talk about how going to Bard College or Europe is a way of getting their Christian faith attacked. You know where I felt most despised as a Christian. Texas. People my age have been burned by the church there.

Prayer Continues

Of course, our attitude here at the monastery is that anything wrong with the world can be fixed by prayer, study, hard work, and four-square. So since I'm back nearly to 100%, I'll continue to say the Office with my friends in the Anglosphere and the work of General Convention in my prayers.

O God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, our only Savior, the Prince of Peace: Give us grace seriously to lay to heart the great dangers we are in by our unhappy divisions; take away all hatred and prejudice, and whatever else may hinder us from godly union and concord; that, as there is but one Body and one Spirit, one hope of our calling, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of us all, so we may be all of one heart and of one soul, united in one holy bond of truth and peace, of faith and charity, and may with one mind and one mouth glorify thee; through Jesus Christ out Lord. Amen.

Days 7 and 8

Day 7: Grow in Peace

The Collect for Peace (you can find it in Evening Prayer I)

Day 8: Grow in the Trinity

The Athanasian Creed. (It's in the back... ;) )

Day 6: Grow in Service

Adapted from the Confirmation Service of the Book of Common Prayer

Almighty God, we thank you that by the death and resurrection of your Son Jesus Christ, you have overcome sin and brought us to yourself, and that by the sealing of your Holy Spirit you have bound us to your service. Renew in us your servants the covenant you made with us in Baptism. Send us forth in the power of that Spirit to perform the service you set before us; through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen

Day 5: Grow in Gratitude

Because it is in the Holy Eucharist that I feel most expressive with gratitude, the Collect for Maundy Thursday

Almighty Father, whose dear Son, on the night before he suffered, did institute the Sacrament of his Body and Blood: Mercifully grant that we may thankfully receive the same in remembrance of him who in these holy mysteries giveth us a pledge of life eternal, the same thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord; who now liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit ever, one God, world without end. Amen

Day 4: Grow in Understanding

A Prayer attributed to St. Francis from the Book of Common Prayer

Lord, make us instruments of your peace. Where there is hatred, let us sow love; where there is injury, pardon; where there is discord, union; where there is doubt, faith; where there is despair, hope; where there is darkness, light; where there is sadness, joy. Grant that we may not so much seek to be consoled as to console; to be understood as to understand; to be loved as to love. For it is in giving that we receive; it is in pardoning that we are pardoned; and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen.

Day 3: Grow in Love

From the Book of Common Prayer, the prayer for the Human Family

O God, you made us in your own image and redeemed us through Jesus your Son: Look with compassion on the whole human family; take away the arrogance and hated which infect our hearts; break down the walls that separate us; unite us in bonds of love; and work through our struggle and confusion to accomplish your purposes on earth; that, in your good time, all nations and races may serve you in harmony around your heavenly throne; through Jesus Christ our Lord Amen.

Anyone Need A Godfather?

I'm available. My godson was confirmed this day by the Bishop of Pennsylvania and apparently acted commendably. And yes, the irony is killing me.

Blog List Updates

David Huff's blog is now linked. Simeon is gone. I also have added Rev. Dr. Knisely of Entangled States, which is a fascinating blog by an Episcopal priest who sidelines as an astronomy professor. (How I could I not love his blog?) He's also a GC Deputy if I recall, so expect interesting coverage at his site.

Octave of Prayer for General Convention

Which brings me to the next agenda item: the Monastery has been debating about how to observe this week. Well, the theme for today is "Grow in the Spirit."

So I post one of the Collects for today from the BCP:

Day 1: Grow in the Spirit

O God, who on this day didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people by sending them the light of thy Holy Spirit: Grant us by the same Spirit to have a right judgment in all things, and evermore to rejoice in his holy comfort; through the merits of Christ Jesus our Savior, who liveth and reigneth with thee, in the unity of the same Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.

And since it's nearly tomorrow, I probably should post a prayer for "Grow in Hope."

Here is the Collect for Proper 27:

Day 2: Grow in Hope

O God, whose blessed Son was manifested that he might destroy the works of the devil and make us the children of God and heirs of eternal life: Grant us, we beseech thee, that having this hope, we may purify ourselves as he is pure; that, when he shall appear again with power and great glory, we may be made like unto him in his eternal and glorious kingdom; where with thee, O Father, and thee, O Holy Ghost, he liveth and reigneth ever, one God, world without end. Amen

Morning Prayer will be so much fun tomorrow morning.

Bishop Swing Speaks

The madness is at T19. Just don't read the comments.

So at this point, here's where the story is:

1. The priest in question started predation while under the supervision of his brother, who is presently the Bishop of PA, and while their mutual father was a Bishop.

2. The priest was caught (?) and deposed after trial by the Bishop of Los Angeles at the time. No criminal charges were filed, probably for the sake of the victim.

3. The priest was restored to ministry under a Canon no longer in force, having not caused any trouble for three years.

4. The priest was called to a parish in the Diocese of California. No one bothered to notify the Diocese of certain important facts. I still can't understand that. The parish Search Committee somehow missed the fact that the priest had been deposed a few years before, suggesting that someone broke a key Commandment of the Decalogue.

5. The priest seems to have cleaned up his life in those three years. At least, no one complains of him now.

6. In 1993, someone finally brings this issue to the attention of California. California tries some form of restorative justice in consultation with the only known victim. Someone accuses the priest of further offenses in the past.

7. +Swing says that it's Los Angeles's problem. Can three clergy or seven laity in my Diocese be found to bring further charges? Is it worth it at this point? Is it Christian?

God save the Fathers for their vigilance:

If any Priest shall defile his lips, he shall not be deposed and instead be forbidden to assist at the Eucharist but take Communion with the order of Priests. If he shall offend more deeply [in this manner], he shall receive a greater penalty in proportion to his offense. (Paraphrase of an ancient canon).

GC2006 Take Three--All I Need is Three Deputies

GC Resolution DXXX

Resolved , the House of __________________ concurring,

that from the 27th of July 2006, the Feast of William Reed Huntington, Priest according to the Calendar of this Church, until the 27th of July 2009, it shall be an offense within the meaning of Title IV, Canon 1, Section 1 of the Canons of this Church for a Bishop in this Church to consecrate anyone a Bishop for this Church or for a Church in communion with this Church.

Resolved ,

that from the 27th of July 2006 until the 27th of July 2009, it shall be an offense within the meaning of Title IV, Canon 1, Section 1 of the Canons of this Church for any Deacon, Priest, or Bishop of this Church to officiate at the Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage, the Blessing of a Civil Marriage, An Order for Marriage, any rites heretofore irregular but within the bounds of our common life in which covenants are made between two persons of the same sex, or act as an officiant for anything considered a marriage, civil union, or domestic partnership at civil law.

Resolved ,

that from the 27th of July 2006 until the 27th of July 2009, the Presiding Bishop in consultation with the House of Bishops may authorize pastoral provisions for the unusual change in the life of the Church during this time, provided that such provisions do not violate the first two resolves of this Resolution.

Explanation: The Anglican Communion through the Windsor Report has recommended that the Episcopal Church desist from consecrating bishops who are in covenants other than Holy Matrimony and also desist from authorizing liturgies for the celebration of such covenants. At the same time, many members of the Episcopal Church have frank and serious disagreement with the theological motivation for these recommendations. However, recognizing that the recent fractures in the Anglican Communion will not be healed by continuing with all due speed on the course of enshrining these theological views throughout the life and doctrine of the Episcopal Church, this Resolution proposes to recognize as far as possible that gay and lesbian Episcopalians and Anglicans throughout the world who disagree with recent actions of the Episcopal Church have a full and equal claim on the conscience of this Church. Thus, the Resolution proposes to comply with the recommendations of the Windsor Report regarding concrete actions by the Episcopal Church but also suspend episcopal consecrations and marriages in consideration for Dioceses who feel called to elect gays and lesbians to the episcopate and for faithful gay and lesbian couples, who presently do not receive the ecclesiastical sanction for their relationships that many of us believe they are entitled to by natural law, Scripture, and Tradition. The Resolution also permits the Presiding Bishop and the House of Bishops to authorize pastoral provisions to deal with this interruption in our common life, while we seek closer engagement with Provinces in the Communion from which we are presently estranged. Pastoral provisions could include authorization for an exchange of marriage vows within the context of the principal Sunday Eucharist after the Peace or accomodations for alternate episcopal oversight of Dioceses with episcopal vacancies.


Frankly, I think the Explanation needs a little more Scripture. [I probably would confuse everyone by citing Romans.] But frankly, I think this resolution is shorter, to the point, and recognizes the great tension in both the Church and the Communion.)

New Blogger in the Sphere

Last month, Simeon in the Suburbs closed down, and the blogger moved off to a new blog.

Coincidentally, David Huff (of Thinking Anglicans commentariat fame) has just started a blog.

These events, of course, probably have nothing to do with one another.

Not For the Squeamish

Frightening on So Many Levels
(hat tip: Wannabe Anglican)

I'm not going comment much on this. It hits far too close to me. (And I will not say more. I was not the one harmed.) But a few months ago, I met the wife of the head of the Anglican Center at Rome. One of her jobs is to determine whether clergy who have committed offenses of this kind should again exercise ministry. She noted that she is usually the strongest voice against that kind of rehabilitation. It's not about mercy or forgiveness, it's about protecting the flock (paraphrase).

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.

Old Wine in New Blog

At Scotist's place, Father Harding and Scotist actually seem to be having a reasonable approximation to a conversation, so I'll contribute a reply to one of Father Harding's key points: it doesn't matter that fratrimony and sororimony bear fruit if they are not part of God's natural and normative intention for creation.

To which I reply by appeal to the construction of Summa Theologica (S3.41.1):

Are fratrimony and sororimony natural institutions?

Objections:

1. Animals are not united in fratrimony and sororimony, yet animals know the natural law by instinct.

2. Natural law has existed during the entire cultural evolution of man, but fratrimony and sororimony are only found in particular times and places.

3. Most law does not recognize fratrimony and sororimony, yet the natural law should be the common foundation of human law.

4. Fratrimony and sororimony does not contribute to the reproduction of the species, so it does not further any purpose of the natural law, so it cannot be part of the natural law.

Aquinas claims that matrimony is according to natural law by citing the Digest “The union of male and female, which we call matrimony, is of natural law” and notes Aristotle in the Ethics says man is inclined to both political and connubial society. We do not escape so easily.

But let us consider the Digest (1.1.1.3) (my translation), “Ius naturale est, quod natura omnia animalia docuit: nam ius istud non humani generis proprium, sed omnium animalium, quae in terra, quae in mari nascuntur, avium quoque commune est. hinc descendit maris atque feminae coniunctio, quam nos matrimonium appellamus, hinc liberorum procreatio, hinc educatio: videmus etenim cetera quoque animalia, feras etiam istius iuris peritia censeri. (Natural law is that which nature has taught all the animals, for that law is not specific to the human race but is common to all of the animals on the land or that swim in the sea and to the birds. From this source originates the union (lit. yoking together) of man and woman which we call matrimony, from here originates the procreation of children, from here originates their education; for we see the other animals, even the wildest of them, yielding to the obligation of that law.)

The key I answer is that human beings may call certain institutions natural which have some being among the animals. The word descendit literally means “comes down [to us].” I think Ulpian chose descendit to suggest there is some evolution between maris atque feminae coniunctio , and matrimony since Ulpian would know enough natural history to hear of birds and elephants mating for life but would not be surprised about various monkeys making frequent change in sexual partners. Matrimonium is natural in origin but is somehow regularized in the context of the human species. Since the union of man and man (or woman and woman) takes place among the animals, (e.g. the penguins , and penguins are one among hundreds of examples), any institution regularized in the human context involving same sex unions would be natural in the framework of Ulpian.

If I really need a pagan philosopher to back me, I will call on Aristophanes’ creation myth in Plato’s Symposium . I then argue that if man is inclined to connubial society as Aristotle says, and there is such a thing as homosexual orientation (which many deny), an inclination to connubial society of the same sex would be logical and natural.

But Aquinas’ answer phase leads us into further trouble, since he sees matrimony as part of a stronger understanding of natural law as mediated by human free will, since it gives to children definite parents, thus improving their chance of survival. Second, it provides benefits to human society through the exchange of goods and services between the married individuals, who as Plato said in the Republic (Aquinas uses Aristotle but the discussion of this subject in the Politics is similar) are “not self-sufficient but are in need of much.”

The second assertion is less of a problem since the same mutual exchange of goods and services is possible in a same-sex household as in a traditionally married one. The only difference I can see is based on complementary gender roles in economic production, which is both naturally and socially constructed and is unimportant in practice.

The first assertion is a strong argument against same sex unions being according to nature. Traditional marriage certainly better serves the ends of natural law by bringing children into the care of both of their biological parents. But where Aquinas and the ancients see the strength of their kind of natural law, we as moderns rccognize the rearing of children as part of the biological imperative developed by the stress of natural selection. For us, natural law is broader and deeper but still deeply ingrained in matter and bodies.

One controversy of homosexuality is that it appears to defy the usual rules of natural selection. If this is true (and not a genetic artifact of the closet) and homosexual orientation is a product of nature rather than culture, homosexuality must further some intention of natural law as expressed through natural selection. Certainly, natural law is not obeyed through homosexual promiscuity, since there is the spread of disease to consider. It could be furthered by celibacy as well. But it is also possible that same-sex orientation exists to provide spare parents for children. There may be a link between a woman’s fertility and the sexual orientation of her brother, where there would be a greater need for such a backup. Moreover, we cannot believe that homosexual orientation would exist (if it does exist naturally) if it were not meant to be expressed according to its end, which is apparently unitive. Thus, some form of same sex acts should be according to nature. And if promiscuity is not according to nature, then we are left to conclude that same sex unions are according to nature.

As for the replies to the objections, Aquinas’ first reply is agreeable if we use our interpretation of Ulpian and the possible relevance of homosexuality to the rearing of children. His second reply refers to Genesis as evidence that matrimony is a primal institution among men. Before I start sputtering, let me say that I have no doubt that traditional marriage was prior to same sex union as a natural institution, since one must bear children before they have a need for rearing (and backup plans). Moreover, the first evidence of matrimony in the Scriptures is Genesis, whereas we first hear of a same sex union in 1 Samuel 18. Father Haller notes quite convincingly the parallelism between the language used by Saul and the language of Genesis in the comments to his post. . Moreover, since we do not know how homosexuality furthers the ends of natural law, how could we expect any people in an earlier stage of cultural evolution to know? Thus, same sex unions may not have existed in earlier stages of human cultural evolution, though the prohibitions of the legislators of many peoples suggest homosexual acts have been known for a long time. The third reply is agreeable to our argument. The fourth reply again refers to the benefits to children of two parents, and although there are certain things parents in a same sex union cannot do, the response to a stressor of a child under the care of same-sex parents is surely much better than a child devoid of all parents. The children in a same sex union thus, I argue, constitute an attempt to perfect being in an imperfect world of many vicissitudes.

Thus I argue (with some uncertain premises) that same sex unions are according to nature. QED.

General Convention Resolution Draft II

Resolution AXXX The Windsor Process, the Lambeth I.10 Process, and the Common Life of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion

Resolved , the House of __________________ concurring, That the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church reaffirms the abiding commitment of the Episcopal Church to remain a constituent member of the Anglican Communion to the highest degree possible and to bear much fruit in communion with the true vines grafted from the British Isles and planted by Christ throughout the whole Earth.

Resolved , the Episcopal Church over the last forty years has become convicted of her long participation in the oppression of the least in American society and the human race and thus has sought to convert her life to accomodate the marginalized in accordance with the commandments of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Resolved , that the Episcopal Church has recognized for thirty years that gay and lesbian persons are by Baptism full members of the Body of Christ and of the Episcopal Church as “children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church” (GC 1976-A069). The Episcopal Church, however, continues to struggle with the issue of how much intimate same-sex relationships are consistent with a healthy Christian life. On one hand, General Convention has affirmed that it is the teaching of this Church that sexual intimacy should be restricted within Christian marriage as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer (GC 1991-A104). On the other hand, General Convention has urged the civil authorities to provide civil status to such relationships that are equivalent to those enjoyed by married couples (GC 1994-D006); apologized for mistreating gays and lesbians (GC 1997-D011); and stated most recently that homosexual persons are children of God, and that differences exist in how best to express that in the pastoral care of those who intend to live in monogamous noncelibate unions; that the Church expects such relationships to be characterized by fidelity and monogamy; and recognizes "that local faith communities are operating within the bounds of our common life as they explore and experience liturgies celebrating and blessing same-sex unions." (2003-C051). These and other resolutions of General Convention have commended a process of theological reflection at many levels on human sexuality and pastoral care for gay and lesbian persons but the Church admits and regrets that these efforts have been insufficient.

Resolved , that individual Dioceses of the Episcopal Church have varied greatly in their approach to abiding by this and similar resolutions. In some Dioceses, there are strong theological objections to admitting sexually active gay and lesbian persons to Holy Communion, even though many of these are in relationships characterized by "mutual fidelity" and the general cultivation of the Christian virtues. Yet in other Dioceses, sexually active gay and lesbian persons in such relationships are considered worthy for ordination and the exercise of Christian ministry and their relationships are recognized by public or private rites of blessing.

Resolved , that the other Provinces of the Anglican Communion likewise vary in their pastoral care and theological approach to gay and lesbian persons and in some cases have promoted actions by the civil magistrates against gay and lesbian persons, injuring their freedom to assemble and self-identify as gay and lesbian persons.

Resolved , that this Church disagrees with the view of the Anglican Communion on human sexuality expressed in Lambeth Resolution I.10 of 1998. In particular, this Church believes that the condemnations of homosexual activity in the Holy Scriptures are not sufficiently general to warrant the continued condemnation of homosexual activity in faithful relationships today; that the Holy Scriptures may hold a positive view of homosexual covenantual relationships and orientation (as far as it was understood by the Biblical authors); and that insights from the natural sciences require us to look carefully at our understanding of the Biblical teaching explicated in Lambeth I.10 and historic Christian teaching in general (but not in toto ). We would like to remind the entire Anglican Communion that classical Anglican theology takes a positive view of the revelation of the created order, as the "liber creaturam" and that the Apostle Paul teaches that those who disdain such revelation are "without excuse" (Romans 2) (J. Donne, Essay on Divinity ) for the created order is an icon of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "through whom all things were made." Thus, this Church seeks honestly to discern in communion with gay and lesbian persons what God has ordered them to be and what their place is in the communion of saints.

Resolved , that we concur with Lambeth I.10 in that "We commit ourselves to listen to the experience of homosexual persons and we wish to assure them that they are loved by God and that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ... ...call on all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals, violence within marriage and any trivialisation and commercialisation of sex."

Resolved , that many provinces of the Anglican Communion have taken actions inconsistent with Lambeth I.10, either by the legitimization and benediction of same-sex unions or the ordination of those united in the same (as in the case of this Church) or by refusing to listen to the experience of homosexual persons (especially those among the baptized) and by providing defective pastoral care to them and their relationships or by promoting the irrational fear of homosexuals (as also in the case of this Church).

Resolved , that whereas priests and deacons are ordained for the service of particular Dioceses, bishops are consecrated for the entire Church of God, and so the consecrations of bishops deeply affect the life of the Communion but the ordination of priests and deacons do not. Yet at the same time, the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral recognizes that the Historic Episcopate must be "locally adapted" to the needs of particular local Churches.

Resolved , that the Book of Common Prayer teaches that marriage is to be honored by all people, and so the benediction by the church of a state of life other than marriage in which sexual expression is thought pleasing to God or the benediction of marriages that do not adhere to the teaching of Holy Scriptures and Tradition affects the entire life of the Communion.

Resolved , that the ecclesiology and theology of matrimony and human sexuality in this Church has been in great disarray for many years.

Resolved , that the consent of General Convention to the consecration of V. Eugene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire was problematic for the rest of the Communion, in that he would not be an acceptable candidate for Holy Orders in many Provinces, both on account of being divorced and also on account of his being in a faithful same-sex relationship and that General Convention unwisely prioritized the authority of the call of the Holy Spirit they discerned in his election by the representatives of the clergy and laity of New Hampshire over the need to allow Bishop Robinson to be a Bishop for the whole Church and take his place in her councils.

Resolved , that the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church repents on behalf of the Episcopal Church for taking this action and straining the bonds of catholic unity and affection between the Provinces of the Communion and urges the repentance of all her bishops, clergy, and laity for their participation in the same. Moreover, we ask the forgiveness of Bishop Robinson for giving insufficient reflection to the catholicity of his ministry but affirm that we still discern his call to the episcopate of this Church and support his ministry generally.

Resolved , that at the same time, various members of this Church have used the actions of recent General Conventions as an excuse to reject the authority of their bishops in favor of the supervision of bishops both in and out of the Communion with this Church, who likewise have acted precipitously against catholic unity and order in the Communion by crossing diocesan boundaries. We ask all involved to repent of this.

Resolved , that the Windsor Report promotes a process whereby the ecclesiology of the Communion will be better clarified, which could be called, "the Windsor Process."

Resolved , that Lambeth I.10 promotes a process whereby the theology of human sexuality will be better clarified, which could be called, "the Lambeth I.10 Process."

Resolved , that while such Processes have the earnest participation of the Provinces of the Communion, it would be uncharitable for this Church to take further decisive actions that might appear to reject our communion and accountability to the other Provinces.

Resolved , that the mind of the Communion as expressed in the Windsor Report suggests that the consecration of bishops in same-sex unions or the authorization of public rites for same-sex blessings constitute decisive actions on matters of ecclesiology and human sexuality.

Resolved , that the Windsor Report recommends moratoria on such consecrations and authorizations.

Resolved , that the Apostle Paul commands us to share the sufferings of fellow persons created in the image of God and our fellow brethren in Christ when he says, "But God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior member, that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honored, all rejoice together with it." (I Corinthians 12:24-26).

Resolved , that moratoria on the consecrations of gay and lesbian persons and the benediction of their unions would cause them and those who love them and appreciate their membership and leadership in the Church to continue to suffer and be alienated from the sanctifying grace that is present in the sacraments and the sacramental common life of the Church.

Resolved , that present theological doubts about ecclesiology, matrimony, and human sexuality make it increasingly difficult to justify the consecration of bishops or blessings of intimate unions in general, when there is insufficient consensus about the relation of these matters to the divine economy.

Resolved , that while earnest discernment of ecclesiology and human sexuality continues in the Communion, there should be moratoria on the consecrations of bishops in general and the benedictions of marriages and same-sex unions.

Resolved,

that Canon I.18 of be amended to read:

For the time being, no Member of the Clergy of this Church shall solemnize any marriage.

[I'm not sure how the rest of it should work. Resolved, , that until the next Triennium, the clergy of this Church are forbidden from performing the services of Marriage, the Blessing of a Civil Marriage, or an Order for Marriage or acting as an agent of the civil power in solemnizing marriages or civil unions on pain of deposition or suspension. The clergy of the Church forbidden to perform benedictions of any other similar unions in any form whatsoever. Instead, the Bishop of the Diocese (or the Ecclesiastical Authority) may authorize a rite at the Peace of the principal Sunday Eucharist in each congregation, in which two members of the congregation (having notified the Minister beforehand) may make vows to one another of solemn covenant in accordance with Christian principles in a form provided by the Diocesan Bishop or the Ecclesiastical Authority. These covenants to be respected as marriage for all relevant purposes. Ministers forbidden to allow exchange of such vows for bigamous and incestuous unions. Bishops and other Ministers urged but not to required to permit exchange of vows between those of same or different sexes and offer premarital counseling. ]

Resolved,

that Canon III.16.5 be amended to read:

For the time being, upon receipt of the consents and assurance of the acceptance of the election by the Bishop-elect, the Presiding Bishop shall not take any order for the ordination of the Bishop-Elect.

Resolved,

that Canon III.16.8 be amended to read:

For the time being, no person shall be ordained Bishop.

Resolved,

that Canon III.17.2d be amended to read:

For the time being, when the Presiding Bishop shall have received a certificate signed by the President and Secretary of the House of Deputies (or certificates signed by the Presidents and Secretaries of a majority of the Standing Committees as the case may be), that the election has been approved, and shall have received notice of the acceptance by the Bishop-elect of his election, he shall not take order for the ordination of the Bishop-elect.


Resolved , that these provisions are to be reviewed next General Convention and maintained if the Processes continue in fidelity but not otherwise.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Alphabet Soup Meme

From Episcosours via Bending the Rule

Accent: Eastern WASP with the slighest hint of South Philly

Booze: Vodka, red wine, and hard cider. (But not together).

Chore I Hate: Laundry

Dog or Cat: None.

Essential Electronics: Laptop (iPod kaput). Have a cell phone I use sparingly and generally keep at home.

Favorite Cologne(s): Cologne? Never tried.

Gold or Silver: Silicon about my neck and steel on my wrist.

Hometown: Philadelphia, PA

Insomnia: Self-induced.

Job Title: Research Assistant

Kids: Maybe when I grow up.

Living arrangements: Four person apartment; my own messy bedroom.

Most admirable trait: Creativity.

Least admirable trait (added): Grandiloquence

Number of sexual partners: N=f(0,1), where f is some Boolean with user-defined condition.

Overnight hospital stays: When I was born.

Phobias: Open ledges.

Quote: "We are deceived by the appearance of right" (Horace)

Religion: Episcopalian, subspecies Radical Anglo-Catholic

Siblings: One younger brother.

Time I wake up: 7 AM

Unusual talent or skill: Weather forecasting

Vegetable I refuse to eat: Eggplant

Worst habit: Nosepicking

X-rays: Arm.

Yummy foods I make: Spaghetti with spinach sauce.

Zodiac sign: Sagittarius

I Own One CCM Album, I Swear (well...maybe two)

And it's like that long Saturday between
your death and the rising day
When no one wrote a word, and
wondered is this the end.
But you were down there in the
well, saving those that fell
Bringing them to the mountain again

-- Caedmon's Call, "Valleys Fill First"

Goat Song

You came into Salem like Bacchus into Thebes.
And from Silenus' mount, you brought the fury
Of a double sun to the house of God Most High,
Furnished gaily for the use of god most base.
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

Your nard-kissed feet, your whip-filled hand
Laid low the counting tables and the offerings.
The doves escaped. The sheep returned.
The men in charge your hubris only saw.
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

In an upper room, you took bread with thanks
And wine as well, offering your body to all within,
Who would destroy you on the morrow without.
You preached to fair friends the way of peace.
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

On your knees and thinly garbed, you washed
Their shining feet and gave to them a mandate
To love as you loved, to love in all humility,
So God might dwell in them and they in you.
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

But now the wicked namesake of the righteous
Has kissed your cheek and men with swords
Lay hands upon you as if you were a bandit
How false this recognition and yet how true!
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

The rulers and the noble ones seek your death;
The Chorus cries out for the shedding of blood.
They choose one like you to go free to the desert,
Not knowing that their sins are on your head.
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

Ah, Jesus, now you hang nude, alone, and dry
Outside the camp at the side of the highway
While the Chorus derides you for your plight
And offers you the rot of the vine for moisture.
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

But in fairer type, you have become many beasts
And wear in honor the rainment of the priests.
O God of many miens that hangs upon the cross,
Why is our wickedness to you not our loss?
Goat song, goat song, now we sing a goat song.

I Have Activated My Profile

There's method to my madness, but I need more time for reflection. I'm too strung out on coffee at the moment to hear the Spirit.

General Convention Resolution (Very Much A Draft)

Resolution AXXX The Windsor Process, the Lambeth I.10 Process, and the Common Life of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion

Resolved , the House of __________________ concurring, That the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church reaffirms the abiding commitment of the Episcopal Church to remain a constituent member of the Anglican Communion to the highest degree possible and bear much fruit in communion with the true vines grafted from the British Isles and planted by Christ throughout the whole Earth.

Resolved , that at the same time, the Episcopal Church over the last forty years has become convicted of her long participation in the oppression of the least in American society and the human race and thus has sought to convert her life to accomodate the marginalized in accordance with the commandments of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Resolved , that the Episcopal Church has recognized for thirty years that gay and lesbian persons are by Baptism full members of the Body of Christ and of the Episcopal Church as “children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church” (GC 1976-A069).

Resolved , that individual Dioceses of the Episcopal Church have varied greatly in their approach to abiding by this and similar resolutions. In some Dioceses, there are strong theological objections to admitting sexually active gay and lesbian persons to Holy Communion, even though many of these are in relationships characterized by "mutual fidelity" and the general cultivation of the Christian virtues. Yet in other Dioceses, sexually active gay and lesbian persons in such relationships are considered worthy for ordination and the exercise of Christian ministry and their relationships are recognized by public or private rites of blessing.

Resolved , that the other Provinces of the Anglican Communion likewise vary in their pastoral care and theological approach to gay and lesbian persons and in some cases have promoted actions by the civil magistrates against gay and lesbian persons, injuring their freedom to assemble and self-identify as gay and lesbian persons.

Resolved , that the mind of the Anglican Communion on human sexuality is most fairly expressed in Lambeth Resolution I.10 of 1998: "in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage; recognises that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God's transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships. We commit ourselves to listen to the experience of homosexual persons and we wish to assure them that they are loved by God and that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ; while rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture, calls on all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals, violence within marriage and any trivialisation and commercialisation of sex; cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions;"

Resolved , that many provinces of the Anglican Communion have taken actions that go against the mind of the Communion on human sexuality, either by the legitimization and benediction of same-sex unions or the ordination of those united in the same (as in the case of this Church) or by refusing to listen to the experience of homosexual persons (especially those among the baptized) and by providing defective pastoral care to them and their relationships or by promoting the irrational fear of homosexuals (as also in the case of this Church).

Resolved , that the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church repents on behalf of the Episcopal Church for her contempt for the mind of the Communion on this issue in taking such actions and straining the bonds of catholic unity and affection between the Provinces of the Communion and urges the repentance of all her bishops, clergy, and laity for their participation in the same. We also urge the repentance of any among the Communion who likewise have shown contempt for the mind of the Communion in Lambeth I.10.

Resolved , that at the same time, various members of this Church have used the precipitous actions of recent General Conventions as an excuse to reject the authority of their bishops in favor of the supervision of bishops both in and out of the Communion with this Church, who likewise have acted precipitously against catholic unity and order in the Communion by crossing diocesan boundaries. We ask all involved to repent of this.

Resolved , that whereas priests and deacons are ordained for the service of particular Dioceses, bishops are consecrated for the entire Church of God, and so the consecrations of bishops deeply affect the life of the Communion but the ordination of priests and deacons do not.

Resolved , that the Book of Common Prayer teaches that marriage is to be honored by all people, and so the benediction by the church of a state of life other than marriage in which sexual expression is thought pleasing to God or the benediction of marriages that do not adhere to the teaching of Holy Scriptures and Tradition affects the entire life of the Communion.

Resolved , that the ecclesiology and theology of matrimony and human sexuality in this Church has been in great disarray for many years.

Resolved , that the Windsor Report promotes a process whereby the ecclesiology of the Communion will be better clarified, which could be called, "the Windsor Process."

Resolved , that Lambeth I.10 promotes a process whereby the theology of human sexuality will be better clarified, which could be called, "the Lambeth I.10 Process."

Resolved , that while such Processes have the earnest participation of the Provinces of the Communion, it would be uncharitable for this Church to take decisive actions that might appear to reject our communion and accountability to the other Provinces.

Resolved , that the mind of the Communion as expressed in the Windsor Report suggests that the consecration of bishops in same-sex unions or the authorization of public rites for same-sex blessings constitute decisive actions on matters of ecclesiology and human sexuality.

Resolved , that the Windsor Report recommends moratoria on such consecrations and authorizations.

Resolved , that the Apostle Paul commands us to share the sufferings of fellow persons created in the image of God and our fellow brethren in Christ when he says, "But God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior member, that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honored, all rejoice together with it." (I Corinthians 12:24-26).

Resolved , that moratoria on the consecrations of gay and lesbian persons and the benediction of their unions would cause them and those who love them and appreciate their membership and leadership in the Church to suffer.

Resolved , that present theological doubts about ecclesiology, matrimony, and human sexuality make it increasingly difficult to justify the consecration of bishops or blessings of intimate unions in general, when there is insufficient consensus about the relation of these matters to the divine economy.

Resolved , that while earnest discernment of ecclesiology and human sexuality continues in the Communion, there should be moratoria on the consecrations of bishops in general and the benedictions of marriages and same-sex unions.

Resolved,

that Canon I.18 of be amended to read:

For the time being, no Member of the Clergy of this Church shall solemnize any marriage.

[I'm not sure how the rest of it should work. Resolved, , that until the next Triennium, the clergy of this Church are forbidden from performing the services of Marriage, the Blessing of a Civil Marriage, or an Order for Marriage or acting as an agent of the civil power in solemnizing marriages or civil unions on pain of deposition or suspension. The clergy of the Church forbidden to perform benedictions of any other similar unions in any form whatsoever. Instead, the Bishop of the Diocese (or the Ecclesiastical Authority) may authorize a rite at the Peace of the principal Sunday Eucharist in each congregation, in which two members of the congregation (having notified the Minister beforehand) may make vows to one another of solemn covenant in accordance with Christian principles in a form provided by the Diocesan Bishop or the Ecclesiastical Authority. These covenants to be respected as marriage for all relevant purposes. Ministers forbidden to allow exchange of such vows for bigamous and incestuous unions. Bishops and other Ministers urged but not to required to permit exchange of vows between those of same or different sexes and offer premarital counseling. ]

Resolved,

that Canon III.16.5 be amended to read:

For the time being, upon receipt of the consents and assurance of the acceptance of the election by the Bishop-elect, the Presiding Bishop shall not take any order for the ordination of the Bishop-Elect.

Resolved,

that Canon III.16.8 be amended to read:

For the time being, no person shall be ordained Bishop.

Resolved,

that Canon III.17.2d be amended to read:

For the time being, when the Presiding Bishop shall have received a certificate signed by the President and Secretary of the House of Deputies (or certificates signed by the Presidents and Secretaries of a majority of the Standing Committees as the case may be), that the election has been approved, and shall have received notice of the acceptance by the Bishop-elect of his election, he shall not take order for the ordination of the Bishop-elect.


Resolved , that these provisions are to be reviewed next General Convention and maintained if the Processes continue in fidelity but not otherwise.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

OK, brothers and sisters, I need help. This resolution is long, and its logic isn't entirely clear. But I think the basic principles are there. There might be need to be more work on theological approaches. If you have any thoughts, expertise in Episcopal canon law, or membership in the House of Deputies or House of Bishops, please look this over and suggest whatever changes you like. I'd like to see if I can get together something decent to send out to Deputies. I will activate my profile and include an e-mail address so you can send me revisions etc. (and I can send you stuff, too).

MII Test

See Bending the Rule for details.

Linguistic 42
Mathematics 40
Visual/Spatial 28
Body/Kinesthetic 26
Naturalistic 32
Music 40
Interpersonal 25
Intrapersonal 30

Who Has Teaching Authority?

Over at Titusonenine, the rhetorical games continue. Reappraiser says something. Reasserter says it makes no logical sense. Dialogue averted. QED

Phil Snyder says, "CG [sic] has no teaching authority."

Well, who does?

The conventional wisdom of the reappraisers is that the ABC is not an Anglican Pope. OK. But one does not necessarily have to be the Pope in order to have some teaching authority. See Eastern Orthodoxy. ++Rowan (as much as I fear giving him such dignity) might be like the Ecumenical Patriarch.

Or maybe he is something unique in himself.

What is the relationship between Canterbury and TEC? What strains the bonds of our unity? The answer to that question is to be found in the history of a most turbulent decade, both politically and doctrinally: the 1780s.

I don't quite know the answer yet.

Pandagon Drives Me Nuts

But it's always worth reading. Apparently, we're one step closer to Pharaoh.

Ephraim Radner's Latest Screed

isn't half-bad and provides some insight into the mind of a deeply thoughtful reasserter. Both Richard Kew+ and Rev. Mr. Radner are concerned about the effects of technology (especially biomedical) on personhood itself. Note that Radner mentions the issue of in(e/i)quity, for instance. And frankly, such technology does raise the twin spectres of both idolatry and inequity.

I'm still working through my response to such concerns about the relation between sin, God, creation, and personhood. But I think it will turn on "The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof" in the context of Paul and the meat market of Corinth, in which concerns about avoiding all implication of participation in idolatry are subordinated to the good gifts of God being used in thanksgiving.

Radner, of course, also makes the mistake of looking at science as potentially non-irrelevant (I use the double negative intentionally). God reveals Himself in very Word and very works: a dualism united and mediated through Our Lord Jesus Christ. Science in this debates serves an aetiological purpose. It purports homosexuality as a phenomenon and supplies an explanation that must agree with but is not in itself divine law. Scripture, too, provides an aetiology for homosexual activity (and other potential abuses of human sexuality such as adultery, fornication and arsenokoitia with one's wife. And respecting the Apostle, I will admit that it is possible that homosexual activity (and the other potential abuses) in some contexts arises from idolatry (either of foreign gods or the self). But if the works of God do provide non-idolatrous examples of homosexuality (and science may be capable of such demonstration), the church is called to reflect seriously on her tradition and how it might be deepened by this knowledge.

As for Radner's comments on "ascetics," I only will say that the tradition only speaks of men becoming celibate. And it speaks of this as a gift of the Holy Spirit. I'm still not quite sure what the Lord meant. And the gifts of the Holy Spirit are free gifts of God. Paul, when speaking of marriage in light of the eschaton says that it is better to marry than to burn with desire. He does not say that Christians who want to marry must have had bad relationships with their parents. He does not recommend that the community problematize the married. In fact, the Apostle and the tradition since have been careful to promote and cherish the gift of the eunuch-making spirit while recognizing marriage as a state of greater worldly obligation and as a vocation not to be despised in oneself or in others.

Thus, the third worst aspect of reparative therapy (after the harm it does to oneself and one's relationships) is that it seems to be the seeking of grace with works. If I were called to be a perpetual celibate (and I still may be), it would be obligatory for me to cultivate that. No one should say to me, "Well, if we give you enough therapy and keep you away from monastic breviaries and all other parts of the celibate lifestyle and make you read the Song of Solomon long enough, you'll want to marry a woman." So it remains clear. I and the tradition generally still don't know what to make of the Lord and the eunuchs. But I'm sure they are important somehow.

Finally, I have one comment to make on the relativization of Scripture. America is a land of immigrants, but throughout most of our history we've done our best to either keep them out and exploit them. It is unclear to me whether the first is prohibited by the Scriptures, but the second is forbidden by the Law and the Prophets in no uncertain terms. Our ancestors were strangers in Egypt, who were brutally exploited for the needs of the Egyptian polity and economy. We often talk of the immigrant as someone who will do what no American will do. Think on the end of Genesis, in which Israel and his family are admitted to tend sheep in Goshen, because the Egyptians think such an activity is unclean. How far might we be now from chaingangs of undocumented Americans (11 million or so) building the highways of Texas? How far are we from being Pharaoh? We are not far indeed if we forget our past. We are not far if we are asked on television about religious objections to criminalizing aliens (as Congressman Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin was asked recently) and our formation as Episcopal Christians leads us to say, "Jesus never crossed any national borders."

There is a kind of Scriptural relativism associated with the idea of "pluriform truth" and there is a kind of Scriptural relativism associated with honoring the fears of the culture and the ideal of the maximization of profit. Radner, I suspect, has in mind the former. I am learning to be concerned by both, but it is the latter that truly frightens me.

I Picked This Up From Derek To Lighten the General Mood

nstructions: Go to your music player of choice and put it on shuffle. Say the following questions aloud, and press play. Use the song title as the answer to the question. NO CHEATING.

[nb: I didn't cheat at all. I found I had to put albums after the names to distinguish, though…]

How does the world see you?
Jesus is My Boyfriend, J-Tron (My Apologies) [I didn't cheat, honest.]

Will I have a happy life?
Knife in the Dark (Fellowship of the Ring Soundtrack) [Yikes!]

What do my friends really think of me?
Tu qui Santuzza? (Cavalleria Rusticana)

What do people secretly think of me?
Walkaways, Counting Crows (MTV Live from the Ten Spot)

How can I be happy?
The Leavetaking, (Two Towers Soundtrack)

What should I do with my life?
Hope and Memory (Return of the King Soundtrack) [Ha!]

Will I ever have children?
Slaves to Rome, (Gladiator Soundtrack) [Huh?]

What is some good advice for me?
Bransles Simples (Coronation of the First Elizabeth)

How will I be remembered?
What Do You Do with a B.A. in English/It Sucks To Be Me (Avenue Q)

What is my signature dancing song?
Two Farandoles (Coronation of the First Elizabeth)

What do I think my current theme song is?
Office of Holy Communion (Collegium Regale) II. Credo, H. Howells

What does everyone else think my current theme song is?
He Trusted in God, Handel (Messiah) [Quite an interesting match to the first one]

What song will play at my funeral?
Te Per Orbem Terrarum, Charpentier (Te Deum) [Is it felicitous to play the Te Deum at funerals?]

What type of men/women do you like?
Get It Faster, Jimmy Eat World

What is my day going to be like?
These Words (I Love You, I Love You), Natasha Bedingfield [Maybe, that's tomorrow...]

What We Sometimes Forget About the Non-Jurors

A hundred years before, when William, Prince of Orange, came to the British Throne, and the Stuarts were banished, the Scottish Bishops refused to conform to the new regime, but remained loyal to King James. They were accordingly deprived from their sees, their places were given to Presbyterians, and the Presbyterian was constituted by law the established Church of Scotland. The deprived Bishops, hated equally by Scottish Presbyterians for their Churchmanship and by English Churchmen for their politics, met in secret for divine service, and perpetuated the episcopate by secret, but well authenticated, consecrations. They were only a few, and were persecuted bitterly, but they were ardent and true Churchmen, and perpetuated the old Scottish Liturgy, which was very similar to the first Prayer Book of King Edward VI. in England.

Persecuted Anglicans and by the sufferance of the Church of England? The idea of it!

He's A Better Man Than I

*Christopher has some great thoughts at Bending the Rule about our idolatry of catholicity, our various complexes about persecution and rescue that draw us from the way of Christ, and a nice shot about our general failure of imagination that I couldn't make without a bitter spirit. He can make it as someone who lives creatively in the shadow of the Great Traditions of the Body of Christ. He and C are very much like those who the Evangelist John writes about in the Gospel for today, "Those who live by the truth come to the light so that it may be clearly seen that God is in all they do."

There a few observations I want to make on his piece without cluttering up his comments box. The continual accusation of the reasserters against the reappraisers is that "they change the meanings of words." Initially, when I read *Christopher's description of catholicity, I first saw the merit in this. But then it occurred to me: what is catholicity anyway? For the Fathers I've read it seems to be the idea that the first order matters of Christian life are held in common by communities that differ greatly as to lower order matters. But that in the end, they are obligated to treat changes in first order matters together through the mutual consultation of their bishops looking charitably to the general practice of the church in the past. It began as a survival mechanism in the days of persecution, when you never could guarantee going from town to another that the underground community of Christianoi believed in a soteriologically effectual Christ. For that's what Christology is. It is the business of intellectually constructing a Christ whose soteriological efficacy we understand out of the faith we have in a Christ who is soteriologically effective no matter our intellectual deficiencies or subtleties. Christ has died! Christ is risen! Christ will come again! None of this changes if we believe Christ is the ground hamburger of our being, but we are certainly foolish (or perhaps over-wise) if we do believe so.

But the ancient model of catholicity has failed. If you're a Roman Catholic, you don't think so, because you have been conditioned to see Rome, her rites, and her doctrine as "universal." Unlike the account of Tacitus about the Christians and the Great Fire, Rome has become the place to which all justifying and sanctifying things of the world are drawn. But laid upon the ground of the ancient model of catholicity is the assumption that the mystical Body of Christ does not exist outside the Catholic Church. All other communities (except perhaps the Eastern Orthodox churches) are "ecclesial communities" not Eucharistic communities in which Christ is really present. To this day, I hear some Catholic commenters on Anglican blogs say that Anglicans shouldn't care about "catholicity," since Anglican orders aren't valid anyway, since it would take some gyrations of history to make them so. Of course, I don't believe this. I won't tell you why, but I am reasonably certain that the Eucharistic community extends well beyond the Roman Catholic Church.

But moreover, I cannot imagine the ancient catholicity to be workable in our present state of affairs. Who could imagine a meeting dominated by Eastern bishops and their agenda (though assented to by Rome) settling the doctrinal agenda of the Roman Catholic Church in this day and age? Who could imagine an Italian spending time in Coptic monasteries in order to establish a new religious order in Italy? But then again, who could imagine that a Swiss Protestant could found a religious order of both Catholics and Protestants from all the corners of the Earth? Could Calvin? Taize is more a model for catholicity in our time than Rome. This is best exemplified in her music, which began in French and Latin with French and Latin modes rooted in both the high and folk Mass traditions of France and Germany. But now each time a new brother with a charism for music is incorporated into that community, the music of the community becomes a little bit Xhosa or Cantonese.

At ILEOS, I have the opportunity to hear a great variety of Christian music from Africa. In my opinion, a new chant tradition, at least as rich as the Galician, is arising in South Africa from the churches of Natal, the Transvaal, and the Transkei. And the gifts of the Christian world are not given in music alone. From Australia and New Zealand, we soon may see signs of a theological awakening that may provide new insight into the relation between the Kingdom of God and the created order. These are a few examples of the catholicity of the church being lived out in the midst of globalization. And while I suspect I may see a day in which Nigerians sing American worship songs and I sing the Magnificat to the work songs of the Reef mines, it is all to the good.

For if we believe Christ took on the fullness of our humanity, each one of us has seen only a small measure of the Incarnate Christ. And most of all, we look to the time when there shall be before the Throne of the God and the Lamb a great multitude that cannot be counted: a kingdom of priests from every tribe, language, and nation to serve our God. Of course, if we ever discover aliens (as Father de Leuuw recently joked), our understanding of catholicity may need to be more expansive.

For in the end, our mimesis of Christ must be as wide and broad and long as our limitations will allow. For the One who came among us to die for our salvation is the same One "through Him all things were made." Any sort of catholicity that thinks it can say (even with reference to the Scriptures) that something in this world cannot and never under any circumstances can be of Him through whom all things were made may need to search the Scriptures more.

But as we seek to receive Christ widely in one another and the cosmos of his design (to be Plotinian about it), we do risk seeing ourselves as the firstfruits of the Kingdom. We cannot. We must seek continuity with our forefathers and foremothers in the Body who pray for us before the Throne. We must think on them with charity. We must acknowledge their critiques. And we must treat them to be as alive as they actually are. They must both argue and be critiqued. For the Scriptures suggest that we will come to judgment before them as well as before Christ. And by receiving them into the fullness of the Eucharistic community (as is their desert), our catholicity will be complete.

Quae Cantuaria et Hierusalem?

"Just look around the blogosphere from left to right, conservative to liberal, traditional to evangelical. We are obsessed with trauma and drama, with our unity and image, our wrongs and our rites, and we're intent on feeding the fire. We watch every move of Canterbury for a pronouncement, as if we had a Pope, and in so doing we betray the complexity of our catholic ecclesiology (which emulates fourth century locality as Fr. Haller, OBG repeatedly points out to no avail) and our own power. We offer tit for tat for our various disagreements fueling the practice of discourse at the expense of common prayer, the only practice that has held us together in our broad tent, and worse, at the expense of practices of neighbour care. "

I feel so very convicted by this, not because I really have some sort of papal ecclesiology (I will admit that the Archbishop of Canterbury is referred to around the Monastery as "Patriarch of the North") but because I realize just how attached I am to Anglican as a label. My attachment began as a familial one. If you go back far enough on both sides of the family, we have been Episcopalians or Anglicans. (There's many Roman Catholics, too, including one amazing collateral connection among the Maryknolls, asleep in the Lord now). I can't say they were spectacular Anglicans. I descend from New England slaveholders and a convicted arsonist. Camassia recently cited a piece by Maggie Gallagher about "crunchy cons" who become Maronites, because they do not have a tradition of their own. Gallagher alternately criticizes them and pities them for treating religion as just another consumer good.

I don't have that problem. My mother was good enough to insist I be raised as something, and my father was good enough to take the opportunity of my birth to find a TEC parish in his new environs. I was raised on critiquing the sermon, moaning about Morning Prayer instead of Eucharist, and enduring politely nasty church politics.

And yet I would say that I have made my tradition my own. At a certain point, there was no compulsion to continue in it, and it would be ridiculous to say that there could have been any compulsion during the last four years. And I confess that I have been an Anglican Communion wonk for a long time. When I was about eight, I wanted to go to Cambridge to study theology. These days, I'd settle for a postdoc. I've had fellow parishioners from the Church of South India. "Exiles" from Sydney and expats from Southern Africa are becoming friends. There's an Australian archdeacon (really more of a rural dean) who I remember in my prayers every once in a while. And a Nigerian priest in Ohio sends me some very useful e-mail once in a while. Apparently, he and his bishop have been working to help out some churches in Nigeria with funds and sweat equity. The Communion is not just a deeply flawed institution to me; it represents a lot of people in various corners of the Earth with whom I would like to serve and worship every once in a while. Anglican identity helps make strangers friends.

But why look to Canterbury? *Christopher is right. Our unity is founded on common prayer and local episcopal government by men with "magic hands" rather than any other idealization from some "pristine" era. TEC was founded by a man of positively presbyterian leanings. But there's just something about the Chair of St. Augustine that can turn a royal patsy into the king's leading critic or mold a wily intellectual into an audacious martyr. For an Anglican, Canterbury itself feels like home , especially when people are celebrating the Tridentine Mass in the crypt. [Random comment from radicalfeministpoet at Jake's place.] And English prelates in general feel like home. Christians ultimately are Jews who found their Messiah in a most alarming and beautiful manner. And so the shadow of the Temple's loss still lies heavy on our hearts. By creating institutions like Rome and Canterbury, we seek to consecrate new Temples and new high priests. But *Christopher is right. We cannot go too far with this. Our lives ought to be an ikon of the Temple in heaven and our High Priest ought to be Christ.

There is a story the monks tell on the Feast of St. Augustine of Canterbury,

When Augustine came to Britain, there were Christians among the Celts in Wales and the Westcountry and in the North among both Dal Riada and the Picts, the latter having been evangelized by Columba. Some wise monk in Wales, perhaps an Irishman and student of St. Finnian, advised the bishops of Wales, "Go to this Roman bishop and greet him in Christ as a brother. But see how he greets you. If he stands and embraces you, you will have no trouble from him. But if he does not greet you as a brother and sits in your presence, then this island will be rent not only between the Saxons and you in kingship but soon also in Christ. So some of the bishops went to Augustine and greeted him in Christ. And he did not greet them likewise but sat down and began to question them.

Until next time, the Holy Brothers pray that since we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Christ, we might be bold enough to go before the throne of grace and obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need

The Bishop of Exeter Lays Down the Law

Or that's the gist of this item, which has T19 abuzz .

Jim Naughton posted this comment on Thinking Anglicans while commenting on a different item, but it seems apropos :

WHEREAS we don't know which candidate will be elected in California, and

WHEREAS we don't know whether the elected candidate will be confirmed by General Convention, and

WHEREAS we have no idea which of the myriad proposed, rumored, imagined responses to the Windsor Report will be embraced by General Convention, and

WHEREAS we don't know by what yardstick (or whose yardstick) that response will be judged, and

WHEREAS the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada might not be the only provinces judged to be on the wrong side of the Windsor Report

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED...
that we not get too worked up about anonymously sourced items such as this one.

The difference is that this is not anonymously sourced. Ms. Gledhill claims there is a transcript of this speech. And unfortunately, David Virtue's sources seem not to have provided him with a copy. But he does have excellent coverage of the battle against Bishop Bennison (please remember four Dioceses in your prayers tomorrow: Tennessee, Albany, West Texas, and Pennsylvania). But Mr. Naughton's counsel remains solid.

But let this be clear: ++Rowan Cantaur fears both a schism in the Church of England and the Anglican Communion. His choice of the Bishop of Exeter as an envoy and the contents of his speech are very pointed. And there is a meeting scheduled in late April in which ++Rowan will consult with such prelates and lights among the laos as +Wright, +Nazir-Ali, the ACC delegation of the C. of E., and Anglican Mainstream. He wants to know what the Evangelical wing wants and he wants to have plans in place before June.

And some time in May, a letter will come from Lambeth to a certain address within the City of New York addressed to the Most Reverend Frank Tracy Griswold. And this letter will be kind, fudgy, and friendly in the salutatory, but it will be a yardstick written (as Jim Naughton might put it).

And there will be a line to this effect: "If the General Convention does not repent of its hasty and autonomous repudiation of the mind of the Communion concerning human sexuality, the ecumenical activities of the Communion may be irreparably wounded for the foreseeable future. Moreover, such a failure might destroy the unity of the Church of England, which I have vowed to uphold, and the unity of the Communion which looks to my See. I cannot allow that to happen. Thus, I will be forced to severe those bonds of communion which have joined our Churches for two centuries. It goes without saying that I will not invite you or any of the other bishops of TEC to the Lambeth Conference."

The Bishop of Exeter's speech is a worrisome sign of the mind of the Archbishop, but it is understandable. He has tried as far as possible to emphasize our need not to repent of what we believe or what we believe God calls us to do but of how our pride in that belief has caused us to act "irregularly." He wants us to remain in conversation. He still wants there to be a conversation. He suspects we have much to teach to and learn from the rest of the Communion and that the crises that will test the modern world in the next decades could take advantage of the collective wisdom of the Communion's churches. The truth is, our actions affect his conscience less than the cronyism of Central Africa and whatever really is going in Nigeria, but that our actions will make it very hard for him to hold them accountable. His recent spate of interviews and his past history as a theologian make this all too clear. He seeks a catholic ecclesiology in a less-than-catholic polity. Such an ecclesiology will guide him.

I am not yet convinced this is wisdom. But I appreciate that he is beginning to bare his crook a little.

But if I'm right about his mood, matters will become very interesting:

Any break will be provisional for the time being. He's at least going to give us until he retires. He will encourage our unity by not recognizing the Network. If he really did name them after Bonhoeffer's church, I suspect he did so to warn them of future suffering rather than an easy fix. He intends a separation, not a divorce. AKMA's plans to declare allegiance to ++Rowan will be thwarted. ++Rowan is not going to create any special jurisdictions. He will not wound his ecclesiology. But that will not be a problem. On some American corners, you will see the Church of Nigeria or the Province of Southeast Asia etc. No, he will leave the mess to us as poetic justice for our autonomy.

Now please go to the beginning of the post and read Jim Naughton's comment again. I just have laid out the worst case scenario from the little evidence we have. Ultimately, the times belong to God.

Until next time, the Holy Brothers pray that we may all be one as the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are One.

Two Brief Matters

Good Sarum Mass Site With Pictures

This link is mainly for my records.

Anglo-Catholic Boot Camp for Youth

I never went to church camp. When I was in EYC, we went out to South Dakota for a couple of weeks per year to do construction work (we built roofs and renovated and re-fenced a cemetery or two) and run a Vacation Bible School on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. It probably involved a little too much relativism for Mr. Foster's taste.

On the other hand, I gladly would send any potential child to something like my youth service trips or the St. Michael's Youth Conference. In the latter case, I would enjoy the mild amount of de-programming necessary afterwards.

Beautiful and True

Although the TEC calendar commemorates the three great prelatial Marian martyrs in October (and Cuthbert, Bishop of Durham this day), this is the Feast of Holy Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop and Martyr (and Patron of this Monastery). Rowan Williams gave a beautiful and insightful sermon on the occasion this morning.

Perhaps, the best part is in which ++Rowan notes that Cranmer didn't seem to have the certainty required to kill but did manage to pluck up the certainty to die. I think this is perhaps the most precise definition of epistemic humility, when faith is a matter of life and death.

(via T19).

Huh?

BBC Sunday Worship this week is not from St. George's, Belfast but from Downpatrick Cathedral. So no 1549 Communion service. Oh well. Maybe someday....

ECUSA March Madness in the Volunteer State

Or so goeth the Titusonenine thread .

One of the candidates has commented. People on the convention floor have commented. I think there's really only One Interested Party that hasn't commented (on Titusonenine, that is).

Let us pray:

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who by thy Holy Spirit didst preside in the Councils of the blessed Apostles, and hast promised, through thy Son Jesus Christ, to be with thy Church to the end of the world; We beseech thee to be present with the Council of thy Church assembled in thy Name and Presence within the Diocese of Tennessee. Save them from all error, ignorance, pride, and prejudice; and of thy great mercy vouchsafe, we beseech thee, so to direct, sanctify, and govern them in their present work, by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost, that the comfortable Gospel of Christ may be truly preached, truly received, and truly followed, in all places, to the breaking down the kingdom of sin; Satan, and death; till at length the whole of thy dispersed sheep, being gathered into one fold, shall become partakers of everlasting life; through the merits and death of Jesus Christ our Saviour. Amen.

BBC Sunday Worship Next Week

Will be from St. George's, Belfast. Why do I mention this? Well, they will be celebrating "The Supper of the Lorde and holy Communion, commonly called the Masse." Let the reader understand.

Cleaning Up the Links

Deletions

Normally, I don't update the links page unless I mention someone in the course of an entry. Normally, I don't remove links either. However, I have decided that I will remove links that no longer go to content. Therefore, I've taken Expectations off the sidebar. However, let me take this occasion to give my congratulations to Lucas Grubbs, who will be ordained to the Sacred Order of Priests on Saturday. For more Lucas Grubbs madness, go here....

Additions

I love Texas and I love Texans. In what other state in the Union do Pre-Revolutionary Appalachian culture and Evangelical Victorianism co-exist so amusingly and yet so frighteningly? Oh, the stories I could tell...

And that's why I'm so glad to link to two Abilene-area bloggers, both communicants at the Church of the Heavenly Rest. ACU Episcochick is just worth reading to see her profile image and serves as a portal into the Xanga-filled world of young Episcopalians (Warning: Enter at your own risk.) And Jared Cramer gives a thoughtful perspective on his life and Anglican doings from a perspective partially shaped by being raised in "the Church of Christ (a capella)."

Scotist is back! And with him came a great discussion about the key issue of the next few months: what is to be done in Columbus? Thanks to a little more Lenten discipline, I've been feeling more inclined to the promotion of Christian fundamentals (the Anglican variety). This attracted the attention of the Postulant.

The Postulant, like *Christopher, seems to be one of those Christians that confounds the wisdom of the world.

Until next time, the Holy Brothers pray that you may be strengthened in the wisdom (not of the world) but in the wisdom that empowered Christ to come among us and be crucified, which the world accounts foolishness.