Community Meeting, McLean. Tonight was the Sixth community meeting being held by the Brother Love's Traveling Salvation Show Bishop of Virginia; the second in Northern Virginia. The forum was much smaller than the previous one, but maybe that lead more people to want to talk. This time there was only one round of speakers from each church present. This means that I didn't get to speak -- no great loss, I'm sure. Anyway, I'll post the statement I didn't give below.

The event was better run -- they're getting better at this kind of thing. The used Volvo salesman (Jim Papile, Rector from Saint Anne's in Reston) got up and gave his little spiel. He came perilously close to uttering the Clintonesque "I feel your pain" line -- in fact the word "pain" seemed to be passing from his lips when he caught himself, paused and said "deep hurt" in its place. (I really don't like this guy -- an old Larry Norman line "he quoted me perfectly and rewrote every word I spoke" came to mind. He kept trying to say "I hear what you are saying, but I say to you..." It was so evident, however, that while he may have heard what was said, he never understood it. He was very dishonest -- although I couldn't figure out if he was intentionally so or just incapable of understanding. He also looked like a cross between a very goofy Brian Wilson and a very goofy Bill Clinton. Do you get the idea I didn't like him?)

Peter Lee said that heresy and apostacy were just when you took a truth and pushed it to far. And he added that we haven't done that.

+Lee said that he would not consent to blessings in Virginia because there was too much division in the Church on the subject -- that would not come until there was more consensus. It was clear that if there wasn't so much vocal opposition, he would have no problem imposing it on Virginia.

+Lee again pulled out his choice between "fear and hope" line. It's a false choice -- you could plug anything in there. As my wife quickly jotted down "hope for restoration of a sinner" and "fear of the wrath of God." This seemed a lot more Biblical than what Lee proposed.

One of the presenters on "my side" really irritated me. It was a guy I've seen at Truro Church -- I don't know his name -- but he represented himself as being there on behalf of a campus ministry (he had to do this because Truro already had a speaker). Yes, I believe the one speaker per congregation rule was a bad one, but to misrepresent yourself (i.e., lie) to evade this rule was wrong. Of course, then he stood up and made a fool of himself. He was neither articulate nor logical, which belied his claim to university (intellectual) status. Now I'm extremely poor as a speaker -- so I shouldn't be throwing the first stone -- yet I almost believe that by sewing bad seed -- lying -- he reaped bad fruit.

Afterward, I saw an old friend from Apostles, who had also been standing in the line to speak. Someone from Apostles spoke so my friend didn't have the opportunity. I asked my friend what he would've said and it was excellent -- far superior to what the Apostles speaker said. Oh well. I was thankful the speaker from Truro (the legitimate one, that is -- not the University fraud) gave an excellent presentation.

In the earlier meeting, if I had to guess, the speakers were 75-25% opposed to what the Bishops and the delegates did at GC2003. At the 9/30/03 meeting, I'd guess it was probably closer to 60-40%

Oh, and Bishop Gray did try to clarify the statement he'd made at VTS. Tonight he seemed to be saying that he wasn't as concerned as to whether his opinion was thought of as right or wrong. I took his meaning to be that he did want to be right and was willing to admit if he was wrong. This is a far different meaning than what he said at VTS (and I confirmed it with others, so it wasn't just that I misunderstood him there).

Last, there was a presentation by two high school age girls from St. Christopher's. In passing one of them said that they thought we shouldn't place such emphasis on the Bible because in the Old Testament it teaches that women should be thought of as chattel. After the meeting, I asked where it said that -- I said I've never seen that. They were unable to point to any passage, but they said they've seen it there. I said that, to the contrary, in Proverbs 31, we see a woman being praised for buying and selling land, for trading in the marketplace -- in short, one who deals property, not one who is treated as property. She said that was just my opinion -- what a stupid way to respond. Nevertheless, on the slim chance she may be correct, I'd love it if anyone can tell me if there is such a passage -- even if it's a case of misattribution or hyperbole (like the "happy is he who . . . seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks" type passage).

So here's my statement with changes I made while standing in line (one major addition, because of what +Lee said about Martin Luther King, one deletion because the question was asked by Phil Ashley.

My Two Minute Statement.

My name is William Sulik and I am currently a member of Truro Church.

I rise today to tell you how deeply your votes in Minneapolis grieved me. You have taken the Episcopal Church away from the standard set forth in Article 20 of the Articles of Religion, which provides in relevant part,
“. . . it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.”

[added:] Martin Luther King once said that the church is not to be a thermometer merely measuring the societal values, but it is to be a themostat, changing society to conform to the Word of God.

In the remaining seconds, I would like to pose five questions:

First, Bishop Lee, you have indicated that you have voted for every candidate proposed for Bishop during your 19 years in this office. Would there ever be a reason for voting against a candidate for Bishop?

Second, what would be your authority for opposing a candidate, since in August you found no guidance in either the policy of Virginia or the Holy Scriptures?

Third, you have indicated that you believe the Holy Spirit speaks through councils. In Lambeth just five years ago the Holy Spirit spoke through the bishops assembled and “reject[ed] homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture.” Does the Holy Spirit change His mind like the blowing of the wind? Or could it be that either the bishops in Lambeth or the electors in New Hampshire were wrong?

Fourth, next month the Anglican primates are assembling to review the crisis provoked by the General Convention. If they announce the Episcopal Church has broken fellowship with the Anglican Communion, what will you do to restore communion?

Finally, you have indicated local control was the overriding factor in approving the Robinson vote. Will you similarly support local determination if individual congregations choose to follow the Articles of Religion and the Anglican Communion in separation from the Episcopal Church?

To my brothers and sisters in the Gay and Lesbian community, I would like to reaffirm the Lambeth statement that “all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ.” I need you in my walk with Christ and I believe the whole Church does as well. Let us meet at the foot of the Cross.

Thank you.

Tithes, Offerings, and the Golden Calf. Regular readers of this space know that one of the subissues related to the GC2003 fallout is the duty to continue to bring tithes to the local church, knowing they are being submitted to the National and Diocesean churches, which have frankly turned away from the teachings of Scripture.

Our Bishop has maintained that to withold funding of the Diocese is to employ "financial weapons." Indeed, I have heard some talk that we need to use contributions to the Diocese and National Church as a way of "sending a message" or holding the establishment accountable. In that context, Bishop Lee's comments are somewhat understandable; nevertheless, in my opinion, deeply offensive.

I see this a matter of contributing to a false and/or idolatrous religion. In my opinion, any religion that does not follow the Holy Scriptures is a false religion. Therefore, we should not be doing anything to support that religion.

Yet, what does the Scriptures teach? Clearly, we have a duty to bring our tithes to the local church -- if we are members, we can not withhold on the basis that the local church is idolatrous. If that is the case, we shouldn't be there in the first place. So then, does the local church have a duty to support the national and/or regional denomination? I don't know.

This afternoon, my wife pointed out in I Samuel, Elkanah and his wife Hannah regularly made their sacrifices and offerings, despite the fact the priests "were wicked men; they had no regard for the LORD" (I Sam. 2:12) and "This sin of the young men was very great in the LORD's sight, for they were treating the LORD's offering with contempt." (I Sam. 2:17).

God will judge the leaders who are wicked: "Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, 'The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.' " I Sam. 3:14

More. From Karen, see Haggai 2 -- actually see the whole book, it's short. But consider this:

"This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'In a little while I will once more shake the heavens and the earth, the sea and the dry land. I will shake all nations, and the desired of all nations will come, and I will fill this house with glory,' says the LORD Almighty. 'The silver is mine and the gold is mine,' declares the LORD Almighty. 'The glory of this present house will be greater than the glory of the former house,' says the LORD Almighty. 'And in this place I will grant peace,' declares the LORD Almighty."

At verses 6-9.

Apocalypse. If the Cubs and the Red Sox meet in the World Series, does the Rapture Index go up?

My thoughts on the first NoVa Community Meeting. I do have a few thoughts on the first of the Diocesean meetings to be held in the immediate Northern Virginia area:

1. First, I really felt a strong sense of prayer cover there. Yes, I knew that we were being prayed for by people from both the immediate grounds of the meeting area, but also from Africa to Asia. Nevertheless, I felt (and don't think I was just imagining it) a prayer covering. I believe that this is a battle being waged in the heavenly realm and that our struggle is not just against flesh and blood. In fact, I believe that our Lord's greatest concern is for those being lead astray by this deceptive undermining of Scripture.
   
   
2. I was deeply moved and humbled by my brothers and sisters from congregations that aren't considered part of the big four (All Saints/Apostles/Falls Church/Truro) and have remained faithfully toiling on behalf of our Lord. Before moving from Alexandria, my wife and I attended Olivet Church in Franconia; we have friends attending St. Andrews, St. Peter in the Woods, Christ the Redeemer, Good Shepherd, and Holy Comforter, among others. Therefore I should've known that the strength of the Diocese would not be limited to these four congregations. In fact, I think the presentations made by the big four generally reiterated the letters their vestries had made to the Bishop already. It was the voices of individuals who attended St. James, St. Margaret's and others who really gave flesh and blood to the concerns of the diocese.
   
   
3. Bishop Gray, while opposing the position taken by Bishop Lee and the majority of the Virginia Delegation, expressed a very troubling sentiment when he said that unity was more important than being right or wrong.
   
   
4. The admission by Bishop Lee that he called Canon Robinson and asked him about withdrawal is intriguing.
   
   
5. I sense in Peter Lee a growing sense that he might have been wrong. He was still very defensive, yet I have to believe that now that he is hearing from the pew-dwelling Episcopalians and not the 815 establishment, it may be dawning on him that he was rooked.
   

I am planning on going to Tuesday night's meeting. I have a number of questions I would like answered. Unfortunately, given the limited time, trying to draft both a brief statement and questions, make both seem to be somewhat terse -- perhaps it's the lawyer in me. I do want to make points (that is articulate points, not "score" points), yet to try to cram it all in makes it seem antagonistic. I would appreciated prayers.

More See this report on how the Winchester meeting went.

Housecleaning / Football. Sorry for taking so long to post the fourth part of the "community meeting." I really need to do a summary -- but I wanted to post everything I could remember before I started getting into doing my own commentary.

I also wanted to take a break and look at something completely different: football. I caught the last 3 minutes of the Redskins-Patriots game and then the last minute or so of the Texans-Jags game.

The 'skins got a bad ruling on the Laveranues Coles replay revue. He clearly puts both hands on the ball -- in fact, he touched it with both palms -- and got both feet down. He had his hands on the ball and twisted forward, thrusting the ball forward to ensure he got the first down and only upon hitting the ground, did he lose the ball. But that shouldn't have mattered because he clearly controlled the ball -- i.e. had possession -- prior to twisting -- and far prior to losing the ball.

The Texans game showed that pass interference can operate somewhat like late fouls in a college basketball game -- actually a smart play. The Texans had the ball inside the 10 and just needed a FG to tie the game and send it into OT. A touchdown would win it for them. The Jags committed at least two pass interference penalties -- but those were effectively meaningless, because they kept the Texans from scoring and allowed the clock to run down. The Texans ran a play with 6 seconds left on the clock and the Jags broke up the pass by committing pass interference. Effectively, this was a meaningless penalty because it meant the Texans had one more play -- a play which they should've used to kick a FG. However the Texans coach went for the win -- and got it when QB David Carr dove over the pile into the end zone. Nevertheless, I think the NFL Rules Committee should consider adding 10 seconds to the clock when the defense commits a pass interference penalty at the end of a game (during the last 2 minutes).

Oh, and did I mention that my Raiders may have finally woken up?

Part 4: Comments and Questions from the Audience (continued).

Larry Panser from Church of the Epiphany in Herndon was next. He asked whether scripture is the rule of our Church and Faith. He quoted Gene Robinson who stated:

Just simply to say that it goes against the tradition and the teaching of the church and Scripture does not necessarily make it wrong.

(according to Christianity Today, this was in the Washington Post, and I checked the quote to make sure I accurately recorded what the Post quoted.) Most of us here are sinners, yet we try to overcome our sin, not say that it isn’t sin. Placing someone in the highest office who is living a life contrary to Scripture is something we shouldn’t do. He then asked if Bishop Lee agreed with Rev. Robinson's statement.

Ann Sundlin, (St. James, I believe) Mt. Vernon said that the vote of the Bishop was inconsistent with his duty. She noted he seems to indicate that his view of "collegiality" contravenes Scripture. She expressed dissatisfaction with the format of the community meetings saying they seemed designed to "mimic our faith." She asked the Bishop "Did you rise to defend God's Word" at the General Convention. She said "collegiality is fear of God's favor." She concluded by saying: "You refused the crown of thorns waiting for you in Minneapolis. Jesus had a crown of thorns waiting for you which you could wear by standing up to the world. 'not my will, but thine, be done.' . . . He will not be mocked."

Gene Reed of Grace Church in Alexandria offered that "nothing that took place at General Convention changes the work of God."

Dan Van Ness of Truro Church appeared at the microphone, however, since Truro already had one person speak, Van Ness was sent to the end of the line.

Next was Melinda Artman who said she was there on behalf of Integrity Virginia. She did not state which church she was from. In light of the one speaker per church rule, the audience and facilitators pressed her to specify which church she was a member of. She reiterated that she was there on behalf of "Integrity Virginia a separate ministry." Not good enough -- she needed to specify a church -- that was the ground rules. This time she said that Integrity Virginia was a ministry operating at St. Clements and the facilitators ruled that she was there on behalf of St. Clements. (Note that she never declared where she was a member or even if she was a member of an Episcopal Church. More: According to the Integrity website, Ms. Artman is with St. John’s, Centreville. Perhaps this is another instance of that confounded one person per parish rule -- Ms. Artman not wanting to speak for the entire St. John's congregation.) She began by stating that the gay and lesbian community gained little at the General Convention; that there was just a perception of gain. She said that the gay and lesbian community would continue to work for change in the Episcopal Church ("The members of Integrity will not abandon the Episcopal Church") and would work for the day that the ECUSA was regularly ordaining non-celibate gay ministers and was sanctioning gay marriages.

Sam Thomsen, a church member from the Falls Church was next and he began by stating: "Bishop Lee, my wife and I love you and we pray for you daily. But, Bishop Lee, we are heartbroken. You have betrayed the trust of the Diocese of Virginia" by voting to confirm Gene Robinson as a Bishop.

Bill Harding of St. Margarets in Woodbridge said he was very disappointed in this action and was "disturbed that you [Peter Lee] don't" understand why this is wrong. At General Convention they voted to accept worldly values. He said that he feels abandoned. The letter released to the diocese explaining the vote was "insulting to my intelligence." (preach it brother!) "The idea that this is not acceptible in Virginia, but it is acceptible in New Hampshire is absurd. According to the Washington Times, he said:"How can you justify a statement saying sexual immorality is good and acceptable in New Hampshire, but not good in Virginia?" Mr. Harding asked. The audience began to laugh when he added: "Where geographically between New Hampshire and Virginia does a moral lifestyle transition to an immoral lifestyle?" At this someone in the audience called out "New Jersey!"

The Rev. Tom Herrick of Christ the Redeemer expressed "deep dismay" that the General Convention has "turned away from the traditional teaching of the Church." He said there is a lot of talk about inclusion but the majority of the delegates seem to want to exclude the traditional or scriptural. He said he wants to believe we can go on from here but "how can we possibly go forward by acquiessing to the demands of society?"

Carolyn Law of Christ Church Alexandria acknowledged that she is a "redeemed sinner," and admitted that she doesn't know everything in God's Word, but she did have three observations. First, it appears that the church is being lead by the Hollywood Spirit, not the Holy Spirit. Second, each one of us has been bought for a price; Christ died for the homosexual person and doesn't love anyone more or less because of this. Third, Christ still says to us as He said to the woman caught in adultry "Go and sin no more."

Ed Schneider of Olivet began by acknowleding that one representative problem, saying that he probably doesn't represent anyone at his church -- that its a very diverse church. "It's not my job to judge whether Robinson is a sinner." He said to look at Simon Peter -- that Christ took "one of the biggest sinners of his followers and put him as the leader of the apostles. So did the people of New Hampshire."

Next was Harry Finkenstaedt, a retired priest now worshipping at Grace Church in McLean. He asked whether Bishop Lee and Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold could meet with Canon Robinson and ask him to withdraw from this office for the good of the church.

Next was Sara Burk of Church of the Good Shepherd in Burke (being the second person, it appeared that now every church had had at least the opportunity to have one person speak). She said that she was not an Episcopalian but that in doing graduate work on England during the 1660s to 1680s she was impressed with how the Anglican church accepted each other regardless of their position on differing forms of worship and belief and decided to join such a church.

Next was Emir, a college age student who attends Truro. He noted that in John 15 Jesus said that the branch that bears bad fruit is cut off. He then explained that his family was a Muslim family from Egypt and that they would not even consider attending an Episcopal chuch that approves of such immorality. He then noted the Senior Deputy's pride about starting a leadership program for students 18-25 but asked "what are we going to teach them?" He said we need guidance before action, but by taking these actions, the General Convention put action first and "we're still waiting for guidance." Finally, he concluded asking "What's more important to you -- unity or being right or wrong?" At this point there was a loud burst of applause that lasted about 5 seconds and the facilitator spent about 2 minutes explaining why this applause was so bad.

Dan Van Ness, who had been sent to the end of the line earlier, made it back up. He noted that Virginia has a clear policy which has been reaffirmed by Bishop Lee which governs the ordination of persons living in a sexual relationship outside the bounds of matrimony. "Six of eight members of the Virginia delegation went to the General Convention and voted to separate themselves from the Diocese of Virginia. Now it is we who are being rebuked for questioning this departure. Now it is we that are being rebuked for seeking to hold the leadership accountable. Now it is we who are being rebuked for being stewards of the resources provided to us."

Van Ness also pointed out Bishop Lee's earlier comments about how this is a matter of justice, seemingly indicating that justice is somehow evolving. He asked if this is a matter of "justice," will that justice evolve in the future to encompass gay marriages? And if that happens, will those churches that refuse to endorse gay marriages be deemed to be "unjust" and subsequently disciplined?

Next was Ann McCracken, also of Truro Church who addressed one of the statements expressed by the Virginia establishment. "The actions of the General Convention has hurt the ministries of the local churches." She explained that she had spent the past nine months establishing an outread to Spanish speaking persons from Latin America and all that work has collapsed because of the well publicized votes of the General Convention. People do not want to associate with an immoral church. She concluded by noting that the Bishops were concerned about Scripture with respect to money but not with respect to morality.

Walter Fogue began by stating he was not from Truro Church. He said that he was a member of St. James in Mt. Vernon. He said there had been a lot of talk about Scripture and tradition but that no one had mentioned Reason. He then began talking about process and to be honest, I was not following what he was saying. He concluded by saying "A man who didn't deserve to be elevated was." I wish I could give you a better report on this one, but I missed it.

Sandy Walker of All Saints Dale City began by noting that she had had woderful times with each of the three bishops. Then she posed questions to each of the bishops. To Bishop Lee, she noted his comments on human sexuality where he mentioned that there is a new understanding that reflects the demands of justice. If that is the case, she asked, "when will the injustice of the denial of blessings [in Virginia] be revoked?" To Bishop Gray she questioned his emphasis on "unity" over being right or wrong. She asked "isn't having the mind of Christ more important?" To Bishop Jones, she noted his reasoning was reminesent of the Viet Nam era logic that we have to destroy the village to save it.

Gregory ?
said that the Bible is not the standard of authority.

[here, I do need to interject a lengthy editorial comment, because this is flat-out wrong. First, both the Preface to the Book of Common Prayer of 1549 (reproduced as an Historical Document in the Prayerbook of 1979) and the Preface of 1789 (with its references to the 1662 Preface) contained in ECUSA’s Book of Common Prayer of 1979 make it clear that the ECUSA “cannot be contrary to the Word of God or to sound doctrine,” as articulated in the teaching of the “ancient fathers” (1549 Preface). Second, Article XX of the Articles of Religion (or 39 Articles) provides: "The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. " (at 871)]

Joel Beser of Grace Church concluded by saying she thought we needed a time of Diocesean-wide prayer and fasting.

Then Peter Lee responded.

With respect to B001, Bishop Lee said he didn't recall the vote -- he thought it was a voice vote, but he said that he would've abstained or did abstain. He said he thought it was a political move and he was annonyed that it didn't include other essential articles of faith, such as the creed. [of course, this doesn't square with his vote on C0__ -- the local blessing initiative.]

Why should Churches stay? "Because this is your family."

How can I be held accountable? He said you have to communicate -- he said that he's received a lot of message over the past few months. He said that the Episcopal Church isn't a church where we "Pay, Pray, and Obey." [Yet, this is contrary to his earlier accusation -- I guess he sees the Episcopal Church as just a place where we Pay and Pray.] He said that he's been serving the Diocese of Virginia for 19 years and he won't be around forever. He said if we don't like his decisions, we need to elect someone we approve of. However, he said if we leave, we won't be able to vote.

Did he agree with the Robinson quote made to the media? Lee said that in his dealings with the media, he knows that quotations aren't always accurate. Nevertheless, if the quote was what was accurately portrayed, he would disagree.

With respect to the question asked by Harry Finkenstead, citing the example of Jeffy Johns in England, Bishop Lee said that he spoke personally with Gene Robinson just one week ago and asked him whether he was going to go through with this. Robinson told him that he is in daily prayer about this and is consulting with a spiritual advisor, but has not been lead to back out. Lee said that he would not pressure him to refuse the appointment.

Bishop Lee concluded by saying that we needed to listen to the truth in each of us and ask "What have we heard tonight."

WaPo on the Community Meeting. Today's Washington Post carried this report on the Bishop's Community Meeting last night.

And now, looking at the pictures, I can confirm that the obnoxious photographer was Olivier Douliery of the Post. See this picture.

Part 3: Comments and Questions from the Audience. The facilitator had kind of an interesting role throughout this -- basically the woman was reduced to the ringing of a bell at the 2 minute mark (more or less) and the man did all the speaking. What's up with that?

Anyway, here are the comment and questions, as best I recorded / summarized in order.

First was Stephen Barhart (please excuse my misspellings of names) of St. Christopher. He wanted to thank Bishop Lee and the Deputies for voting yes on the ordination of Gene Robinson. He also had a second round of thanks for voting for the blessings resolution. He said its only because of the darkness in our own heart we do not accept this, but that, in time he hopes we will adapt and adjust. (My wife said later that she though he was given about 5 minutes.)

Next was Robert [? There was a lot of noise -- grumbling, I suspect because the first speaker was given so much time -- and I didn't catch this gentleman's name.] of Church of the Holy Spirit in Ashburn. He said that the action taken at General Convention may have already caused a schism. He said this declared the ECUSA to be apostate and heretical and was contrary to Scripture. He then asked Bishop Lee how he voted on Resolution B001 which reaffirmed provisions from the Articles of Religion and the Chicago-Lambeth quadrilateral. Specifically, "Did you vote for B001, if not, why not? How can you stand for ekklesia if you voted against this resolution?"

Next was Dr. Paul Julienne from Truro Church. Julienne read from the Truro statement of disassociation.

The next statement is verbatim, as it was e-mailed to me by the deliverer (emphasis in original):

My name is Linda (last name omitted), from the Church of the Good Shepherd, in Burke. I do not claim to represent the majority of my parish. This is a personal statement.

I will follow Christ, -- but I do not know if I can continue to follow the Church, a church I have attended in many states.

Autonomy, the concept, and as a principle for voting , I do not find consistent with the concept of One Body, which is the Body of Christ.

I would agree with Fr. Papeal that Scripture must be seen as a whole. Somehow, however, in the wake of General Convention, as I dusted off my Bible, I'm finding different lessons. I believe God loves all of us, but like any good parent, he doesn't always love what we do.

Jesus did not accept everyone's acts. He condemned the legality of the Pharisees; he turned over the tables of the "salesmen" in the Temple; he told the woman who was not stoned - "go and sin no more."

Our disagreement is as fundamental as that word sin.

There are those who would see only the positive, but God also knows us, gives us free will -- and still calls us away from sin.

Sin - that which separates us from the love of God -- sometimes may even have a genetic component. In my own genetic family tree, besides homosexuals, are alcoholics, and those with mental illness. So you can be glad if you're not related to me. But does a genetic predisposition to alcoholism make alcoholic behaviour now sanctioned?

I love and accept my daughter, but I do not accept her living with her fiancee, without the blessing of holy marriage, as no longer sinful because it is accepted by our culture. I dearly love a homosexual cousin, and I like his partner, but I do not find that relationship, in the form that it takes, sanctioned, any more than my daughter's behaviour. If the most important perspective were cultural norms and justice, then we should endorse all loving consensual sexual acts --

[about here, the chair ruled her time expired -- although there were cries to let her finish -- I think everyone was moved by both the emotion and the reason behind what she was saying. However, she has since indicated to me that she was fine with the time limit, wanting to give as many people their opportunity to speak.]

But the chair moved on to Rachel Andrews of All Saints Dale City. Ms. Andrews was equally moving explaining how deeply grieved the actions at General Convention left that congregation. She read from the letter of the vestry and noted that over 400 members had signed letters of repudiation and dissassociation. And then in a statement that caused an audible gasp to arise from the entire crowd she addressed Bishop Lee and said that he was scheduled to conduct confirmations at All Saints in November and very respectfully asked that he not visit All Saints to conduct the confirmations.

John [missed last name] said that he attended St. Michael's in Arlington but he just had sort of a point of order and didn't want to have his appearance at the microphone held against other members of his congregation. The dais ruled that it would count and John merely asked that the Diocese somehow tabulate the cost of the witholding of contributions and so on and publish it.

Before I go on, I do want to note that this is a very important point given the rule imposed on us that there could only be one member allowed to speak from a church until every church in the area had one speaker give an address. This did have a "chilling effect" on the speakers -- knowing if you got up, every member of your congregation was somehow cut off from speaking. I was concerned that this meant that each of the 77 churches in the area would have to be heard from first, but in cross talk on the stage, someone said there were 30 different congregations represented at this particular meeting.

Next up was Rob Higgins from Aquia Church who said that he believed these actions were part of a coordinated effort of Satan to undermine the Church. He concluded by asking how we can hold you, Bishop Lee, accountable.

David Harper, Rector of Church of the Apostles noted that the Anglican communion is a worldwide communion and that we are a communion in mutual submission to one another. He said the actions at GC were a statement that the Lambeth Statement simply doesn't matter. He called this a "breakdown of love." He observed that we will be seen as the heretics and what seemed like a very quick bell cut him off.

Melinda Collier from Holy Comforter (I think that's right -- I wrote down Comfortable-- Freudian Slip?) in Richmond said that her congregation was thankful for the actions taken at GC. She said "we believe that gays and lesbians should not be strangers at the gate. She noted the Episcopal Church is a large tent and hopes that it will create appropriate structures for blessings.

[At this point, I'm going to call it a night == I'll publish the remainder in a Part 4 -- it's late.]

Part 2: The Meeting Starts We sing the hymn accapella:

Though with a scornful wonder
Men see her sore oppressed,
By schisms rent asunder,
By heresies distressed:
Yet saints their watch are keeping,
Their cry goes up, “How long?”
And soon the night of weeping
Shall be the morn of song!

The facilitators are being introduced Dr. Jean Milliken of the National Cathedral and Rev. W. Bruce McPherson on temporary assignment with a church in Annapolis Maryland – St. Stephens.

The first speaker will be Senior Deputy Russ Palmore. He said that at worship one day at General Convention there was a verse read from Romans, Chapter 10 that contained the following passage: "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!" (quoting Isaiah 52:7) He says there was good news from this convention that over 400 resolutions passed. Blahblahblahblah… There is a photographer literally crawling all over the stage taking pictures. I think it’s the same guy who was outside. I would think the folks on the stage would be highly annoyed – he’s really getting in their faces. It’s so overdone, it’s almost crossing into parody – like a Monty Python skit. Anyway, the Sr. Deputy is almost done talking – he’s noting that the ECUSA want to reach out to persons ages 18-25.

Next up – Jim Papile, Rector from Saint Anne's in Reston. Papile was smooth – like a used Volvo salesman. He has the decency to first acknowledge the twin issues that bring all of us out and then to proudly acknowledge voting for both. He said that this is the fourth such “event” he’s been to in four days and he knows what people are going to say – he’s heard it before and he heard it at the General Convention so he want to address these concerns.

He says he voted the way he did because of the totality of the Scriptures: “The Bible stands for inclusion.” He says that the Bible speaks of a God that called a slave nation out of Egypt and delivered it to Israel, showing his concern for the lowly. (My thought: uh-huh and he told Israel to include the Amorites and Amalekites and Midianites – this is actually one of the toughest themes of the Old Testament – the exclusivity of God.)

He said that when questioned about the essence of his theology, the great “orthodox theologian” Karl Barth said “Jesus Loves Me, This I Know.” Not, Papile added, that he loves some better than others. “Inclusion and acceptance of all people is the theme that runs through the Bible.”

He said to those who rely on tradition, he asks us to reflect on Martin Luther and Henry (I assume he meant King Henry VIII, the English King who was named “Defender of the Faith” by the Pope and who was instrumental in the founding of the Anglican Church), [Thomas] Cramner, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Each of whom, Papile claimed went against tradition. Moreover, he said that the tradition of the church grows daily and that it’s not finished being developed

“To those who say our ability to reason should be excluded, I direct you to Augustine” and other great scholars and theologians who employed reason. (I must interject here and note that I have never heard anyone denigrate reason and for Papile to make this claim was pretty insulting.)

To those who say that people are leaving in droves, “I say people are coming.” He then noted that he had two people in his newcomers class, one of whom got very emotional and couldn’t even say his name and the other said she was afraid to bring her 8 year old to church but she’ll bring her next week. (Honest, this was what he said – if he was trying to make a point, it went right by me. Perhaps Papile was trying to indicate that the gentleman was gay and now felt welcomed in church and the woman was lesbian – if that’s what he was trying to articulate, he should’ve said so – it would’ve been more helpful.)

He said “You will hear those talking about dismay, hurt, fear.” Yet Papile sees “promise, hope, opportunity.”

He said that we have a decision to make – is the church broad enough to take in all this or will this be the thing that breaks the deal. Papile said the Holy Spirit will be our guide.

Whereas, the prior speaker introduced Papile, Papile does not introduce anyone.

It’s Russ Randle of Christ Church Alexandria. Russ begins by noting that he was the only lay Deputy from Virginia to vote against the ordination of Rev. Gene Robinson and also the only lay Deputy to vote against the blessing resolution. He says this is the hardest decision he ever had to make. He said that it was a gay evangelical Christian who brought him back to Christ years and years ago, but that both propositions go against the clear teaching of the Church. “The Church has not endorsed sexual relationships outside marriage.”

He objected because we can’t as a church say that “Jesus is Lord” and then turn around and say “Jesus is Lord except of my sex life.”

He objected because we can’t have one standard for a bishop and another standard for every other member of the church.

He asked who had been on a mission trip outside the U.S. He said that he thought most of those who had were opposing these actions of the Episcopal Church because of the severe impact it would have on brothers and sisters in other lands.

He said that the ECUSA can’t take this action in the name of inclusiveness and the write off those who object as expendable or collateral damage.

He then turned his aim on the evangelicals in the audience asking this question: “What did the General Convention do to make any of our ministries less important or necessary?” He said that Jesus did not say to abandon your ministry – and we all have a ministry – because you are angry with your brother.

He cited the example of Thomas – he remained in the fellowship even though he rejected Jesus resurrection and Jesus reached out to him, restoring him. He concluded by saying that none of us is better than the apostles, so we must stay.

Next, Peter Lee spoke. He said that he woke up at 3 a.m. – that he’s awaken at 3 in the morning for many mornings since the General Convention. He said that he’s glad that we can meet together to have these exchange of honest views.

He acknowledged that the General Convention acted in two ways that many find “controversial:” the affirmation of the calling of Gene Robinson by the people of New Hampshire as Bishop and the resolution.

He said the resolution as originally proposed would have added the blessing of same sex unions to the book of occasional services. The resolution was amended and so the “resolution recognizes that” blessing do occur in various diocese throughout the country. He said what was left in was “descriptive” but that these blessing do not happen in Virginia and will not happen while he is the Bishop.

“So how could I have given consent given that we [in Virginia] do not” recognize or utilize these services? “I prayed a lot. I consulted other Bishops. I consulted the Deans of the different regions.” He said that he read his Bible and was struck that “the gospel erases barriers that humans erect.” (I’m trying to avoid a lot of editorial comments, but this statement compels me to ask if he believes the scriptural sanctions were human erected barriers or God-given commands?) He said that he was struck by the power of grace, not law.

He read this passage:

I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.
Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.

He said he saw this as a conflict between hope and fear – hope for the future and fear of change and that he would not give in to the fear of change.

He said that he reread Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail and noted that we he, Peter Lee, was considering ordination in 1963, Rev. King was writing this letter in part to white ministers who were condemning King. Lee said that one of the Bishops (he didn't mention the name -- was it George M. Murray?) that King was writing about severely disappointed Peter Lee, because Lee had always admired him, but now that bishop was giving into timidity. Lee said that he resolved then to never be timid and to act out of fear.

Lee said he was ordained a Bishop in 1984 and has never voted against a single candidate for Bishop – whether divorced or whatever – he said he even voted for those bishops now threatening to leave.

Lee said for those with the “permanent orientation of homosexuality” living together with one partner in a long term monogamous relationship is as close to matrimony as there could be. (The implication, I gather is something a lawyer might term “constructive matrimony” meaning it’s okay for Robinson to live in this relationship.)

“What difference does this mean?” he asked rhetorically. The Episcopal Church has no doctrine of infallibility – bishops are wrong – councils are wrong and when we’re wrong we can get over it. He said there’s so much more that unites us in mission than sexuality.

He then launched into his spiel on funding. “Withholding of funds has no impact on New Hampshire.” Not one penny of funding goes from the Diocese of Virginia to the Diocese of New Hampshire. He then used his “financial weapons” analogy and I lost my temper. Rather, my anger boiled up within me and the rage literally made me began shaking. It was all I could do to restrain myself and hold myself in my chair. I was so tempted to stand up and shout out: “this is not a matter of financial weapons. You are asking for money for an apostate Church and we will not give one earring for the calf you are building.” Thankfully, I was restrained – the main reason I mention this is that I did not record anything he mentioned after this. If fact, I’m not sure that I even knew what he was saying. I was livid.

I began to regain control by the time Bishop Gray began speaking. He started off by saying that he and his wife are reading The Purpose Driven Life together. There is something in there about how other Christians will disappoint you. He noted that there is no perfect Church and there won’t be one as long as he is in it – nor as long as you are in it either. The laughter was very welcome and necessary.

He said that Ephesians 4 says to speak the truth in love and he said that is why he was there. He said he believes the General Convention was wrong in ordaining Gene Robinson. He said that our partners around the world advised us not to do this and we did it anyway.

Nevertheless, Gray said that this is not an apostate church. “No General Convention can cause a church to go apostate unless it abandoned the Book of Common Prayer or the Scriptures.” He cited a Latin maxim I was not familiar with, but did not explain it. "Lex orandi, Lex credendi" See this essay by Peter Toon.

He said that he believed in the “Indefectibility of the Church” which he explained meant that the Church might make mistakes, like, he believes it did here, but that in the long run, it will come back to the truth.

He noted that Bishop William Frey once said something to the effect that the defense of virtue has all the same thrill as engaging in vice. Gray said he thought that was true and there were a lot of people experiencing thrills – citing “ecclesiastical money-laundering, self-righteousness and hubris.”

Gray noted I Peter 5:5: "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble."

He acknowledged that the Episcopal Church is flawed, but said that “unity is more important than being right or wrong.”

Next, Bishop Jones spoke noting that he has been to a number of General Conventions and said “many people attended their first convention this year on CNN.” He said that GC is confusing for Bishops and Delegates and people who are there – that there is no way to understand it on CNN. (That why we have CANN!) He said that no bishop or delegate can influence the convention. Nevertheless, Jones said that Bishop Lee was being too modest in not noting his influence in the Convention. He said that “the confirmation issue was directly linked to the blessing liturgy issue” and that Peter Lee was right in the heart of it. In Bishop Jones opinion, the elevation of Robinson to Bishop was insignificant compared to the blessing liturgy. He said that Peter Lee stressed the autonomy of local diocese and that by voting the way he did he was able to influence the outcome on the blessings issue.

He said that he understands the concern and anguish felt by some following Minneapolis. He said he had similar feelings after leaving past conventions and mentioned Phoenix and another. He said that for some, the offense seems insurmountable, but for him, he looks to what Paul wrote in Romans 8

For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

He concluded “Ultimately, I must put my faith in Jesus.”

Then our facilitators approached the microphone and people began lining up behind the lone mic in the center aisle.

Community Meeting, Part 1 Because it's long, I'll post my summary of the Diocese of Virginia Community Meeting held 9-23-03 at Virginia Theological Seminary in three parts. The first is just pre-meeting stuff. Part 2 will be the statements of the Delegates and the Bishops. Part 3 will be the statements of the people of the Diocese.

Debbie and I arrived at about 6:30 p.m. and went over to the steps of one of the buildings and had our dinner – Subway sandwiches. There was a large group in the center of the quadrangle singing and praying. Debbie verbalized what I was thinking: maybe we should be fasting.

We went over and joined the circle – now numbering about 100-150. Someone was there taking pictures. Not snapshots, but pictures, like a news photographer.

Vic Meyer, who with his wife Joan is Truro Church’s most mighty prayer warrior, greeted us. He told me where the gathering was and I asked if he was going in. “No, I’m staying out here and praying.”

God bless the Vic and Joan Meyers of this world.

So, shortly before 7, I went over to the auditorium to see if my name was on the list. I was handed a “program” and walked in, sitting on the far right side of the auditorium (the entrance was on the left side), five rows from the front.

I wish I had stopped and prayed with Debbie before going in. I wish she were here with me.

The program is interesting. In addition to the agenda and order for worship (we’ll start with a hymn – The Church’s One Foundation), it contains the final version of Resolution C051 and, what is most interesting, the Minority Report drafted by Kendall Harmon.

I am seeing a lot of folks I recognize and not just from Truro. I do love the Episcopal Church and I hate to see it die. Perhaps this is just an extreme sickness and it will recover. There are precedents in the history of the Church, I understand, for resuscitations and resurrection.

It is 7:21 and the bishops have just sat down on stage. A bell is tinkling and the auditorium is growing quiet. Peter Lee is sitting just to the right of the podium – oops – they just scooted their chairs back a little, meaning the podium block my view of Bishop Lee.

Everything You Know is Wrong. From the WaPo Corrections today:

A Sept. 21 item in the Metro in Brief column about a woman fatally shot in Prince George's County and a child who was wounded incorrectly reported the woman's age, the child's sex, the child's location at the time of the shooting, and the street on which the shooting occurred.

Water. We have put together a 3 to 7 day supply of water -- pursuant to the emergency preparations guidelines for terrorist attacks. When the water supply went down, we got to test this. As I indicated below, we had no water at all for 24 hours and are still under a "no drink" order -- don't drink without first boiling the water. When I lived in Taiwan in the early 1960's we had to boil all our drinking and cooking water. Still, I found this episode very disconcerting. More so than if we had lost our power -- or perhaps that's part of it -- I expected to lose power, but not water.

I believe this is a good test of our preparedness -- there were somethings we were fine on -- others need improvement. Sad to say, but I believe there will be a major terrorist attack on the DC area in the next decade that will require full use of these resources.

I get a little irritated at some other folks who haven't taken the initiative to prepare:

"This is the second store I've been to," said Jennifer Hull, 30, in front of the empty shelves. "You would have thought that with all this preparation for terrorism that the water supply would have been a priority."

Umm, are you suggesting that we fund, create and build a warehouse to stockpile Evian? Or maybe do you think that it is up to the individual citizen to do a few small things in the way of preparing on their own.

I stopped at Food Lion this morning on the way home from Church to get some milk for the kids -- the shelves were completely empty -- not something I had expected.

Priceless. Every Friday night is "Family Fun Night" -- a different member of the family gets to pick something fun they want to do. Tonight was Emilie's turn. Emilie is a little over 2 years old and she wanted to "Hokey-Pokey." So we hokey-pokied until we dropped. At one point, my wife's former boss, who is now a very Big Shot at the FDIC called to chat (since she was without power). Although my wife would've loved to chat with her -- family fun night takes precedence (a rule my wife is pretty strong about enforcing).

Two pizzas -- $16.70
Root Beer -- $1.29
Telling your former boss you have to go hokey-pokey: Priceless.

Checking in. We're all okay here. Surprisingly, there were no losses of power (although lots of flickering thru the night). My parents checked in from Kitty Hawk and are doing well -- their power was only out for 3 hours and they had no damage. My sisters in Fairfax and Loudoun counties are still without power. We only lost one tree in back -- one that was dead and expected to go.

No showers or tap water for awhile -- but we have a good emergency supply of water on hand.

All in all, this was good -- thanks for prayers.

Update. My sister called about 9 p.m. to say her power finally came back on. We had just talked with my brother-in-law in western Fairfax who was still without power. My wife's little brother, who lives out near Gainesville (and closer to the main path) has been without power or water since 4 p.m. yesterday, but his house made it through intact.

Last, our water came back on at about 9:30 p.m. I'm looking forward to taking a shower. I'll soap up well and brave the contamination risk.

Important Update. Set forth in the comments to the last note is the following message. Because of it's importance, I want to give it added prominence:

My name is Sue Hardman. I am a life long Episcopalian, a former member of Truro Church, and a member of Christ the Redeemer Episcopal Church, however I am also a senior seminarian at VTS, from the Diocese of VA. I can assure you that Dean Horne did not "declare" a quiet day. The quiet day was planned long before general convention, actually it was planned mid-year last year.

Neither students nor faculty are at work, they are at prayer. Given the state of the church, I would say that prayer for the church would be at the top of most our list. I pray that as we take this very rocky journey together we listen before we speak and we find out all the information needed before we write. I pray that everyone does take the time to pray before they gather, even if that time is not on the grounds of the Seminary. God knows we are together in heart and soul. If I could just suggest one thing. Let's leave our own agenda at home, come together with open hearts and minds ready to see and believe that the Holy Spirit is working in the life of this church.

Yours in Christ, Sue Hardman

Travel. I'm traveling this week for work -- I've been working long hours to try to wrap things up before Isabel hits -- I should be back by the weekend or next week.

More of the Iron Boot treatment. A good source* tells me that there is a lot of maneuvering regarding the holding of the main northern Virginia diocesan meeting. Specifically, the meeting, originally scheduled for Church of the Good Shepherd, now scheduled to meet at Virginia Theological Seminary ("VTS") is subject to a great deal of strategic maneuvering. Since the Bishop is scheduling these "community meetings" as merely a show designed to give the appearance that he is concerned about "his flock," he is needing to ensure that we all go along like docile sheep. This is why there are a limited number of appearances. This is why there is limited amount of time. This is why there is limited seating. Yet, the number and degree of passion behind the confessing members of the Episcopal Church is great. Accordingly, although they intend to limit seating to members of the evangelical and charismatic churches, such as Falls Church, Truro, and Church of the Apostles ("COA"), the members of these churches have informally decided to gather together, on-site, and pray together.

A vicar at a mission church has decided to collect names and do some loose coordinating of these efforts and from what I hear* it appears that over 1,000 people have expressed their intent to gather and pray. When the establishment got word of this, they decided to put the clamps on the meeting.


The Very Reverend Martha J. Horne, Dean of VTS, serving at the pleasure of Peter Lee, has announced that the day of the Bishop's community meeting is a "quiet day." This means that there will be no assembly allowed on the grounds of VTS -- students and outsiders are not allowed to gather together and pray or meet (except for classes), and no one not on the list of those meeting with the Bishop will be allowed on campus.

My attitude is "yeah, right -- let an Episcopal Seminary try to keep us from praying." What are they going to do? Lock us up for praying. So be it.

--------
* I do need to make absolutely clear that this is not something I heard from the clergy or staff at Truro Church. Actually, the clergy are being appropriately circumspect. Also, it needs to be reiterated that this is hearsay -- I have not been able to verify it myself. Nevertheless, I do believe my source is reliable on this, which is why I publish.

Am I the Only One? Or does anyone else find it creepy that the Bishops Agenda is published under the heading "Commission on the Prevention for Sexual Misconduct."

Sgt. Shultz would be proud. It's the old "Shut up, he explained" routine. The Diocese of Virginia has published the agenda for the "Community Meetings" which Bishop Peter Lee declares, "I believe this format will enable us to allow the greatest possible number of speakers and viewpoints and still maintain our time schedule." In simple terms, he want the train to run on time.

The meeting is scheduled to run a total of two (2) hours, of which, 45 minutes are allocated to "the community." And, since each speaker is allowed a total of 2 minutes to speak (rule 1), you can figure there will be a total of about 10 speakers. The remaining rules are as follows:

2. No more than one person from any congregation may speak until someone from each congregation present has spoken.*
3. Speakers are expected to state their name, congregation and whether they are offering a question or a statement
4. Facilitators reserve the right to seek balance of viewpoints and ensure broad representation among the congregations present.
5. We are here to engage in respectful conversation.
6. We are expected to take ownership of our own thoughts and feelings through using "I" statements.

To be honest, I never know what the last kind of statement means. Does it mean someone must say "I say you are an apostate, Peter Lee." Or can the "I say" part just be implied. After all, if someone stands up and says "You are an apostate, Peter Lee" there's noting there that implies the person four rows back is claiming Lee is an apostate.

And of course, it would be most proper, with regard to rule number 5 to say "With all due respect, you are an apostate, Peter Lee."

[Notice, I haven't even touched on rule number 4 where the diocesean henchmen will act as censors. This whole thing is beginning to look like as phony as a $200 bill.)

--------
*Rule 2 ensures that dissent will be completely shut off. In the DioVa, there are 15 Regions. Figure that for the Northern Virginia Region, there are 77 churches alone, drawn from the following regions:
Region 3, with 9 churches (Arlington)
Region 4, with 8 churches (Alexandria)
Region 5, with 8 churches (Vienna/McLean) includes Holy Comforter Church.
Region 6, with 12 churches (So. Alexandria to Woodbridge) includes All Saints
Region 7, with 11 churches (Fairfax), including Christ the Redeemer, Church of the Apostles, Church of the Epiphany, and Truro.
Region 8, with 6 churches (Falls Church) includes The Falls Church.
Region 13, with 23 churches (Loudoun County and west).

Faulkner on life after 9-11. Last week, there was an excellent column by Claudia Rosett in the WSJ, that I just got around to reading. In it, she quotes extensively from William Faulkner's Nobel Literature Prize Address, an address which speack to us today:

Our tragedy today is a general and universal physical fear so long sustained by now that we can even bear it. There are no longer problems of the spirit. There is only the question: When will I be blown up? Because of this, the young man or woman writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself which alone can make good writing because only that is worth writing about, worth the agony and the sweat.

He must learn them again. He must teach himself that the basest of all things is to be afraid; and, teaching himself that, forget it forever, leaving no room in his workshop for anything but the old verities and truths of the heart, the old universal truths lacking which any story is ephemeral and doomed - love and honor and pity and pride and compassion and sacrifice. Until he does so, he labors under a curse. He writes not of love but of lust, of defeats in which nobody loses anything of value, of victories without hope and, worst of all, without pity or compassion. His griefs grieve on no universal bones, leaving no scars. He writes not of the heart but of the glands.

Until he relearns these things, he will write as though he stood among and watched the end of man. I decline to accept the end of man. It is easy enough to say that man is immortal simply because he will endure: that when the last dingdong of doom has clanged and faded from the last worthless rock hanging tideless in the last red and dying evening, that even then there will still be one more sound: that of his puny inexhaustible voice, still talking. I refuse to accept this. I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance. The poet's, the writer's, duty is to write about these things. It is his privilege to help man endure by lifting his heart, by reminding him of the courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and sacrifice which have been the glory of his past. The poet's voice need not merely be the record of man, it can be one of the props, the pillars to help him endure and prevail.

Johnny Cash. This is what you need to know about Johnny Cash -- my grandmother, who would be 100 years old if she were still alive -- went to one of his concerts in the very early 1970s. He also cut a song with the Christian punk/heavy metal group One Bad Pig (on the album I Scream Sunday).

Just last night, I was listening to the newly released At Madison Square Garden a 1969 concert. It's interesting to note how very outspoken he could be, yet you could never pin him down as a "liberal" or "conservative." Or "saint" or "sinner," for that matter. Prefacing his singing an anti-war song, he noted how he'd gone to perform for the troops in Viet Nam and, in a phrase that probably sums up the American approach to war, said, "I may not be a hawk... But maybe I'm a dove with claws..."

Only Johnny Cash could have a setlist that featured the following songs, in consecutive order: A Boy Named Sue - Cocaine Blues - Jesus Was A Carpenter - The Ballad Of Ira Hayes.

And his rendition of "Were You There (When They Crucified My Lord)" is like being in church on Good Friday.

Everyone would probably give a different recommendation about where to start a Johnny Cash collection. I'd recommend "God," if for no other reason than it contains his very hard to find song about the apostle Paul, "Man in White."

Johnny Cash was a modern-day Jacob, who not only wrestled with God, but with all of life.

Oh thus be it e'er when free men shall stand
Between their lov'd homes and war's desolation!
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that has made and presrv'd us a nation
And conquer we must when our cause is just
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

My Little Mind. I have a little mind, therefore I can not understand the apparent inconsistency of Diocese of Virginia Bishop Peter Lee.

You see, his rationale for voting for the consecration of Gene Robinson was that he deferred to the will of the people of New Hampshire. In his letter announcing why he was voting for consecrating a man who was not qualified for ordination in Virginia, Lee explained:

Since the election in New Hampshire, I have prayed and wrestled with this question. I have consulted with other bishops, with our diocesan Standing Committee, with deans of our regions, and individually with clergy and lay persons. I have listened to differing points of view and I am aware of the inherent controversy no matter what the final outcome. I am convinced of the need to respect the Diocese of New Hampshire's decision, in spite of my personal reservations and our current diocesan policy, which would not permit Canon Robinson to be ordained in Virginia.

* * *

I believe the Holy Spirit guides the church often through the decisions of lay people and clergy at diocesan conventions, councils and synods.

Well, I guess this position of "states rights would have appeal to a man named Lee in Richmond. Nevertheless, he has not always held such a position.

As recently as last year, Lee chaired a committee sent out by the Presiding Bishop designed to force local congregations to both ordain and call ordained women ministers to the local churches. In fact, Lee didn't give any consideration to the locally presiding Bishop:

"When I wrote to state my objections to the presiding bishop and Bishop Peter Lee, chairman of the task force, I was told that I was not invited to this meeting and that it would go on as planned," [Bishop] Iker said.

Note how Lee's deference to the expressions of the local diocese has rapidly grown in the past year.

See also this article -- an please note that these are articles from the house organ, and are slanted accordingly.

Now, as I've noted in the past, I believe in the ordination of women. I believe it is Biblically consistent and orthodox. Nevertheless, I understand that there are some who read the scriptures and have come up with a different perspective. For the most part, those who trust in the Scriptures respect one another and have worked out ways to repect the conscience of one another. See, for example, this wonderful letter by clergywomen arguing for tolerance of the male-only priest supporters .

Interesting Conversations in Purgatory, Pt. II. Warren Zevon, Leni Riefenstahl and Edward Teller all passed away. Peter Kreeft had a book about a conversation betwixt C.S. Lewis, Aldous Huxley and JFK, all of which departed the veil of tears on November 22, 1963. He could do a sequel regarding these three.

Front Runners. In the campaign to be the nose-picker of the free world:

Dick Gephart


John Kerry


Joe Lieberman


Howard Dean
(I can't believe I originally left him out -- sorry Howie)

Two other candidates demonstrate unconventional nose picking skills (possibly the reason they are not "front runners."):

And, for the record, the reigning nose picker of the enslaved world:

Fidel Castro

News and Prayer Alert! All this from an e-mail received from the other side of the world:

PRAYER ALERT:
TOMORROW & THURSDAY, Sept. 10th & 11th, several of the orthodox bishops will be meeting with Presiding Bishop Griswold to discuss the fall out from General Convention & thoughts on the future in preparation for the upcoming Primates Meeting. Let's PRAY! Invitees include: +Ackerman (Quincy)

News:

1) Diocese of Florida (Bp. Jecko--Voted NO, very strongly orthodox) -- Bishop Jecko [age 63] announces his retirement effective Feb 2004. His assistant bishop coadjutor (Howard) will become new diocesan bishop. Bishop Jecko expresses every confidence in him. I've read that Jecko said it is not really to do with General Convention, but it's hard to know. With his retirement and Bishop Hughes' (see below), it seems like a few of our godly orthodox bishops feel they need to pass on the fight to younger men... We can only pray that the new bishops in these dioceses will contend for the faith once delivered.

2) Diocese of San Diego -- (Bishop Hughes -- Voted NO, AAC-affiliate) -- Bishop Hughes announced his plans to retire as of the end of 2004. An election will need to be held. Let's be praying now for God to raise up a god-fearing & orthodox bishop!

3) Diocese of Central Florida (Bishop Howe, strongly orthodox) has posted their resolutions for the upcoming special diocesan convention Sept. 20 on the diocesan website.

4) Diocese of Virginia (Bishop Peter Lee voted YES, but there are many VERY STRONG & LARGE orthodox parishes in the diocese that are taking a strong stand against apostasy) has posted dates for an additional diocesan meeting to discuss General Convention. The additional meeting is in Northern Virginia on Sept. 30th. This is a good thing, because the first meeting for Northern Virginia on Sept. 23 is full and N. VA is home to several major orthodox parishes that are on the frontlines in terms of networking with Anglican leaders around the world to find a solution for orthodox episcopalians (Four of these churches in Northern Virginia: Truro, the Falls Church, Church of the Apostles, All Saints Dale City, these 4 alone are bigger than the whole episcopal diocese of New Hampshire and there are several other major orthodox parishes in the area as well!). Anyway, lets pray the orthodox clergy & laity in No. Virginia will attend these two meetings in droves and that the Lord would enable our faithful brothers & sisters to speak God's truth boldly in love and with the power of the H.S., and that God would change the heart of Bishop Peter Lee.

5) Summary of some key upcoming events --please be praying! (Unless otherwise specifically noted, all the Bishops of these dioceses voted NO on Robinson).

Saturday Sept. 13th:
--Diocese of Florida: Diocesan Council

--Diocese of Georgia: Special Forum re: General Convention

Saturday Sept. 20th
--Diocese of Albany, Special Convention

--Diocese of Central FL, Special Convention

Tuesday Sept. 23rd & Tues. Sept. 30th
Diocese of Virginia: Northern Virginia Meeting to discuss General Convention. Northern Virginia is home to 5 or 6 very large, very wealthy and very influential orthodox parishes... (Bishop Lee voted Yes, but as the largest ECUSA diocese and one with a very strong orthodox presence, we need to be praying!)

Saturday Sept. 27th
--Diocese of Florida, Special meeting (scroll down on the link)

--Diocese of Fort Worth, Special Convention

--Diocese of Pittsburgh, Special Convention

Monitoring Massachusetts. Almost every morning, I check the website of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for the list of decisions to be announced that day. Today's list is pretty large, but the one I'm looking for, Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, doesn't appear there. The court could release it under a different name -- that's not unheard of -- Bush v. Gore wasn't filed that way. Accordingly, I checked the docket numbers, looking for SJC-08860, but that one is not there.

Goodridge, if your not aware is the case designed to end marriage between one male and one female.

Jeff Jacoby used the oral argument to get to the heart of the case:

During the oral argument in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, the Massachusetts lawsuit aimed at legalizing same-sex marriage, it was Justice Martha Sosman of the state's Supreme Judicial Court who put her finger on the crux of the case.

"Could it not also be framed," she asked Mary Bonauto, the lawyer for the gay and lesbian plaintiffs, that "you're seeking to change the definition of what the institution of marriage is?" After all there have been right-to-marry cases before, involving (for example) interracial couples, prison inmates, or the mentally retarded. But, Sosman noted, they "have not changed . . . the historical fundamental definition of what the institution is."

That's it in a nutshell. The plaintiffs are not asking for the right to marry, for each of them has exactly the same marriage rights as every other Massachusetts adult. What they really seek is to alter the legal definition of "marriage" so it encompasses something it has never encompassed before: same-sex unions.

Stay tuned -- it's coming.

Congratulations are due to Jason Michael Steffens who passed the Iowa State Bar exam.

Almight God, the Giver of Wisdom, without Whose help resolutions are vain, without Whose blessing study is ineffectual, enable me, if it be Thy will, to attain such knowledge as may qualify me to direct the doubtful and instruct the ignorant, to prevent wrongs and terminate contentions; and grant that I may use that knowledge which I shall
attain to Thy glory and my own salvation; for Jesus Christ's same.
Amen.

--Dr. Samuel Johnson "The Lawyer's Prayer," September 26, 1765

Bishops, Part 4. Last, it appears that pursuant to the resolution which passed the general convention, C051, (quoted below), at least one 'local faith community" in Virginia has begun to develop same-sex blessings, only to run afoul of Bishop Peter... more details later...

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring,
That the 74th General Convention affirms the following:
5. That we recognize 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.

Bishops, Part 3. In discussions yesterday, the question came up about whether the Robinson ordination as Bishop is, in fact an unstoppable, runaway train(wreck). In fact, the answer appears to be "no."

I had almost forgotten about this, but not too long ago, Rev. Robert Trache, (then) rector of St. James', Richmond, Virginia was elected Bishop of the Diocese of Atlanta. This election was certified and official and his nomination was signed off on by all the bishops of the ECUSA. It then came to the attention of the Presiding Bishop that after the election, Trache filed for bankruptcy:

According to news reports, Trache filed for Chapter 7 personal bankruptcy January 20, three months after he was elected, listing his assets at less than $18,000 and his outstanding debts at more than $122,000, most of it to credit card companies. The diocese would not clarify what it meant by "family matters" but it was widely rumored that he had marital problems.

The Presiding Bishop, together with the Diocese of Atlanta, cancelled the elevation of Trache to Bishop:

The Standing Committee of the Diocese of Atlanta, by unanimous decision, has withdrawn its consent to the consecration. The withdrawal, made in consultation with the office of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church and the professional advisors associated with the consecration of a bishop, means the consecration will not be ordered.

Trache later sued the PB, the ECUSA and others over this decision -- I would suspect this lawsuit is still pending.

For more information on this subject, see this, this, and this.

Bishops, pt. 2 [breaking up my earlier post] The Virginia Episcopalian hit the mailboxes on Saturday. The whole issues, stem to stern, is a shameless piece of propaganda shilling for Peter the Apostate. (okay, maybe not the advertisements -- the one bright spot in the issue was seeing Ken and Ginger McGowan in the ads on page 10. Ken was one of the lay leaders behind the formation of Church of the Apostles -- he was a government attorney and was, in later life, called to the ministry.)

In fact, Peter's letter in the center of Pravda that sheet purporting to be a newspaper is particularly galling. He spends time on e-mail by people consigning him to hell, yet fails to acknowledge the real issues. He is a bright man -- he's a Phi Beta Kappa -- yet, he willfully ignores and distorts the issues. This is not a matter of "policy" or "political hardball" this goes to the very central issue of the importance of the revealed Word of God and our duty to be shaped by His Will.

Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms said it best:

Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Holy Scriptures or by evident reason-for I can believe neither pope nor councils alone, as it is clear that they have erred repeatedly and contradicted themselves-I consider myself convicted by the testimony of Holy Scripture, which is my basis; my conscience is captive to the Word of God. Thus I cannot and will not recant, because acting against one's conscience is neither safe nor sound. God help me. Amen.

- Heiko Oberman trans. Luther: Man Between God and the Devil (English edition Yale, 1989), quoted by Christian History here.

I have read some of the e-mail messages and letters sent to Bishop Lee and for him to so characterize them as he has is greivously insulting to those who have spent days carefully crafting reasoned, loving, scriptural messages, only to receive his form response in reply. (One lady in our church was devastated to receive a form mail accusing her of hatred toward homosexuals after she set forth the Biblical basis for her objections. She indicated that she joined the Episcopal Church because of it's inclusivity and never dreamed it could be so intolerant toward her.)

Frankly, I'd like to see everyone post their letters and e-mails to Bishop Lee on the web so we could expose his slander. Sunshine is the best disinfectant -- rats and roaches flee before the light -- etc.

Bishops, part 1. The Community Meeting scheduled with the bishops from Virginia, originally scheduled for Church of the Good Shepherd, Burke has been changed to Virginia Theological Seminary (Addison Academic Center Auditorium). I see from the Diosecean website, that this meeting is "FULL." I confess to being a little nervous about this, as I have not received a response to my message, sent Friday, August 22, 2003 9:19 AM. At the time I sent my message, I noticed with some apprehension, that you were required to list your church. To be frank, based on the complete lack of good faith evidenced thus far by the Diosese, I suspect that members of the known confessing churches will be blackballed or severely curtailed in numbers.

I do have my e-mail message, appropriately date-stamped, and will holler to high-heaven if I find evidence of black-balling.

Speechwriting 101. Have you ever wanted to be a presidential speechwriter? This flash website allows you to do just that.

P. O. 'd. This really has me ticked.

More

On the Hill, in both the Senate and House, there are "caucuses" -- formal and informal groupings of Senators and representatives around a particular interest. They may be issue oriented ("Congressional Meth Caucus"), they may be racial or ethnic ("Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues") or they may just be a group of idiots.

Reflecting the sad fact that there are quite a few bigots in America, it turns out there is a large caucus of bigots in the Senate, the ALC. Set forth here are the members of the Senate's Anti-Latino Caucus:

Daniel Akaka

Max Baucus

Evan Bayh

Joe Biden

Jeff Bingaman

Barbara Boxer

Robert KKK Byrd

Maria Cantwell

Tom Carper

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Kent Conrad

Jon Corzine

Tom Daschle

Mark Dayton

Chris Dodd

Byron Dorgan

Dick Durbin

John Edwards

Russell Feingold

Dianne Feinstein

Bob Graham (FL)

Tom Harkin

Fritz Hollings

Daniel Inouye

Jim Jeffords

Tim Johnson

Edward Kennedy

John Kerry

Herb Kohl

Mary Landrieu

Frank Lautenberg

Patrick Leahy

Carl Levin

Joseph Lieberman

Blanche Lincoln

Barbara Mikulski

Patty Murray

Mark Pryor

Jack Reed

Harry Reid

John Rockefeller

Paul Sarbanes

Charles Schumer

Debbie Stabenow

Ron Wyden

More Football. I think I may be the only person to pick the 'skins to make the playoffs (although I pick them as a wildcard) -- this isn't just a home town prediction. Looking over their schedule, I can see them going 10-6. Their first seven games (before the bye) are tough, with every team being a 2002 playoff team or near miss contender. Yet, they open tonight with the Jets minus Pennington (and the other free agents the 'skins signed), then go to Atlanta, minus Vick. If they come out of the bye at 4-3, you can count on them to go 6-3, the rest of the way.

On the other hand, the Jints open with the Rams, host the Tuna and his 'boys on MNF, then take the shuttle down to DC before the bye. 0-3 is not out of the question, although I'm figuring 1-2. I see the Giants going at best 9-7, which leaves them out.

The Dolphins have a tough closing schedule, following that short week trip to Dallas (at New England, vs. Philly, at Buffalo and vs. N.Y. Jets). Nevertheless, the win over Dallas will give them a chance to take a breather before going to Boston - they should go 3-1 in December, giving them a 12-4 record. The Pats, with a somewhat easier schedule, will still only pull out 10-6. The Browns should eke ahead of them for the wild card, with an 11-5 record.

All of this bring us to the toughest Division in Pro Football: the AFC West. Who's the worst team? San Diego? With LaD and David Boston? Marty S. coaching? Denver? Jake the Snake throwing to Rod Smith, Shannon Sharpe and Ed McCaffrey, Clinton Portis in the backfield? Shanahan coaching? Hmmm, maybe the Chiefs? Priest Holmes? Tony Gonzalez?
Dick Vermeil and his fabled success in third season? Or maybe the Raiders -- who won the Division title for the past three years running? No, it's this competition that makes the whole division even stronger and will leave the winner going into the playoffs battle-tested and confident. The Raiders will win the Division for the fourth year, but only because they will beat the Chiefs in both games. Both teams will finish with 11-5 records.

Predictions. Ben "the Comish" Domenech fearlessly predicts the Raiders will win the Super Bowl. I hope, I hope, I hope, he's right.

My predictions:

AFC
East: Dolphins
North: Steelers
South: Titans
West: Raiders
Wild Cards: Chiefs, Browns

NFC
East: Eagles
North: Packers
South: Bucs
West: Rams
Wild Cards: 49ers, Redskins

AFC Title Game: Miami v. Tenn.
NFC Title Game: Rams v. Eagles

Super Bowl: Fins v. Eagles

Dolphins win everything.

(Or who knows, a rematch of Super Bowl 34?)

Making Amends. I was asked the other day if there was anything my (former) Bishop Peter Lee could do to make amends for his wrongs. What first went through my mind was the scene from Braveheart where William Wallace first presents terms to the British:

Here are Scotland's terms. Lower your flags, and march straight back to England, stopping at every home to beg forgiveness for 100 years of theft, rape, and murder. Do that and your men shall live. Do it not, and every one of you will die today.

Cheltham: You are outmatched. You have no heavy cavalry. In two centuries no army has won without--.

William: I'm not finished. Before we let you leave, your commander must cross that field, present himself before this army, put his head between his legs, and kiss his own arse.

Okay, granted even Peter the Apostate isn't quite in that league yet.

So seriously, what can he do to make amends?

Well, according to the Book of Common Prayer, at the vesturing [sp?] of a bishop, the Presiding Bishop must ask:

Brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus, you have heard testimony given that NN has been duly and lawfully elected to be a bishop of the Church of God to serve in the Diocese of [New Hampshire]. You have been assured of his suitability and that the Church has approved him for this sacred responsibility. Nevertheless, if any of you know any reason why we should not proceed, let it now be made known.

BCP at 514.

In short, for Peter Lee to make amends, he must repent and appear at the service for the installation of Gene Robinson on November 2, and voice his objections in the strongest terms. I would further recommend that he resign the episcopacy and devote his life to serving the poor, the sick, and those in prison. I suspect, however, that he will keep a firm grasp on his office.

High School. Today's the first day of high school for my oldest daughter. I'm feeling many mixed feelings. I'm so proud of her -- she's really an outstanding girl. She's learned a lot over the past few years (under my care and guidance as her 7th and 8th grade teacher -- yet, most of her learning has been "self-taught" rather than instruction). [For an example of her work-product, consider her science experiment, here.] I am confident in her and her abilities, yet, it is always hard to let go...

I'm most pleased with her work in math and geometry (and, somewhat related, logic). Her proofs have been very well laid out -- something I could never grasp. At the orientation on Friday my wife and I saw another mom who was homeschooling her daughter. This mom was surprised we put our daughter in Algebra II (Honors) and asked if we had to have her tested to skip geometry. I guess that's a question that comes up from time-to-time, see, for example, this article. Yet, it never occurred to me that she couldn't handle this level course (although she's the only 9th grader in the class). I'll tell you, I spent a lot of time examining different mathematics curricula -- plus I got good advice from bright homeschooled students (thank you nick e, wherever you are). I used the Harold Jacobs Algebra and Geometry books (get the teacher's guide and test form book, if you use these -- both are worth the money). [I see that there is now a third edition of Geometry out.]

10 Comedian Argus Hamilton observes:

Alabama complied Friday and moved the Ten Commandments from the court lobby to a closet just off the lunchroom. It's insane. In the space of three months, the federal courts have put the Ten Commandments in the closet and let the sodomy laws out.

While I have not written in this space on this controversy (I did try to submit a lengthy comment to Peter Sean Bradley's post here, apparently too long and swallowed in the ether), my thought is that both the lower Federal Court and the Court of Appeals were wrong -- but C.J. Moore was more wrong.

I do take a perverse amusement in people who love to throw stones at "fair-weather federalists" turning out to be fair-weather federalists themselves. Not to mention playing fast and loose with history.

The Churching of Women. A recent Christianity Today editorial notes

More than four decades after the introduction of the Pill, hardly anyone now getting married remembers the time when pleasure, procreation, passion, companionship, and parenthood were all intimately knotted into a bundle called marriage.

It then goes on to offer six points whereby "the local church [may] recreat[e] a biblical understanding of marriage in our society."

The fifth point

Fifth, churches must help their members recover the link between marriage and procreation. . . . Churches need to celebrate the fact that every marriage is procreative by design.

It seems to me that in the Episcopal Church, there is a wonderful little ceremony that reflects this reality. In the 1928 Prayer Book, it went by the quaint name "The Thanksgiving of Women after Child-birth commonly called The Churching of Women." I'll be honest - I know little about the origin of this service. Could it be derivative of Lev. 12, which calls for the purification of women after childbirth? Possibly [Probably]. Yet, the thrust of the title and the service appears to be one of giving thanks for a safe delivery. ("FORASMUCH as it hath pleased Almighty God, of his goodness, to give you safe deliverance, and to preserve you in the great danger of Child-birth") This probably seemed more necessary in a pre-modern age where there was a high rate of mortality in child-birth. Nevertheless, this simple ceremony is something I think almost every parent desires. I know we did -- the first public outing for all of our children was to Church -- to give thanks to God.

The rubric provides:

As soon as convenient after the birth of a child, or after receiving a child by adoption, the parents, with other members of the family, should come to the church to be welcomed by the congregation and to give thanks to Almighty God. It is desirable that this take place at a Sunday service. In the Eucharist it may follow the Prayers of the People preceding the Offertory.

The brief service includes this prayer:

O God, you have taught us through your blessed Son that whoever receives a little child in the name of Christ receives Christ himself: We give thanks for the blessing you have bestowed upon this family in giving them a child. Confirm their joy by a lively sense of your presence with them, and give them calm strength and patient wisdom as they seek to bring this child to love all that is true and noble, just and pure, lovable and gracious, excellent and admirable, following the example of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

In short, I submit, our predecessors left us a Biblical understanding of marriage, which we have, through neglect, allowed to wither. Let's bring them back to life.