November 19, 2009
Over the years we have seen many schemes for organizing and thinking about differing kinds or types of churches. Anthony B. Robinson, author of Changing the Conversation: A Third Way for Congregations (Eerdmans, 2008) has published an article called “A New Apostolic Moment in Yale Divinity School’s Reflections (Fall 2009; p.8-10) in which he offers another typology.
He sees congregations falling broadly into three kinds. Civic Religion represents the kind of church people join as part of their civic and community life, a way to be engaged in the community, an expected norm of sorts. At All Saints’, in contrast to much of North America, we still enjoy a good measure of this kind of motivation for engaging the church. We see it made manifest when we tend to drift away from worship once our careers have reached their peak and our children are safely launched in life. We see it in a desire to hold on to an understanding of confirmation as he final act of baptism, something The Episcopal Church abandoned officially thirty years ago with the publication of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. We abandoned such thinking in favor of ideas such as the one we teach at All Saints’ that confirmation is the outward expression of an adult affirmation of lifelong commitment and the empowering of the Holy Spirit for specific ministry. The shorthand we use for this is ‘ordination to the laity’. While the church no longer thinks that confirmation is necessarily for everyone and is certainly not a kind of ‘get-them-done-so-they-can-get-on-with-life’ deal we still have plenty of people with the very reasonable (if often unexamined) desire to give their children what they had regardless of their level of participation in their own community of faith. We tend to handle this graciously, urging commitment and attendance but avoiding haranguing or chastising. Cultural change of this sort is well under way. It is inevitable and necessary given other changes in society but it is not brought about over night. What Robinson call ‘civic religion’ we have been talking about as the assumptions of Christendom, and age and reality that is still very much with us, but at the same time clearly passing away.
The “culturally accessible” church is most often associated with the movement that emerged in the 70s, flourished in the 80s and will be with us for a long time, namely the megachurch. The mentality of such congregations which might be characterized as ‘out with the old; in with the new’ has been around, certainly in North America since some of the earliest revivals and is arguably a basis for all Protestantism. At All Saints’ we have resisted this to the point of snobbery and our most recent congregational survey suggests that we will be unambiguously committed to our fairly formal and arcane worship for a long time to come even as we want to find ways to make it more welcoming and accessible to newcomers and visitors.
The third kind of church according to Robinson is best characterized as ‘communities of formation’ or communities of discipleship’. These may be congregations, new or old, large or small, conservative or liberal in theology, formal or informal in style. They tend to find themselves in some kind of tension with the society that surrounds them and see themselves as a kind of ‘apostolic outpost in the mission field’. They are neither characterized by comfortable familiarity (civic) or instant accessibility (culturally accessible) but by invitation and challenge, a generally higher expectation of commitment than some churches of the past, especially those who are emerging from Christendom kicking and screaming. In one way or another, this third type is the least easy to define and is clearly the direction that we will be taking as we follow our soon-t- be-ready-for-general-release ‘strategic plan for ministry’. As the direction is turned over to staff and ministry leaders to consider and bring into effect, we will begin to choose to emphasize those ministries that hold out the hope of our experiencing greater liberation in Christ marked by a greater capacity to roll with the warp and woof of life. (Traditionally these are expressed as the ‘fruits of the Spirit’.) We will be focused on engaging God and Neighbor as our city becomes increasingly multi-faith, multi-cultural and with it more divided and conflicted, in need of the kind of leaven we will be prepared to become. All this will be rooted in our worship, traditional or yet-to-be-developed, in which we remember and enact the foundational story of our Christian faith, orient ourselves to that which is of ‘ultimate worth’ (worth-ship), and are in turn shaped and challenged by God.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Ecologies of Grace, Chapter 1
November 18, 2009
Ecologies of Grace: Environmental Ethics and Christian Theology by Willis Jenkins is a book which begins by recognizing the difficulty of making environmental imperatives “intelligible to Christian communities.” He writes “climate change places new dimensions of society in moral jeopardy” and asks “but how is that preachable on Sunday mornings?” (p.3) He intends to trace strategies of ethical response to environmental challenges and then explore theological resources that can help their cause.
In a brief survey of secular emphases beginning with Lynn White’s 1967 article on “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis” in which the church was indicted for unhelpful anthropocentrism he ends with sociologist Laurel Kearns three ethics or models among Christians in the US: eco-justice, stewardship and creation spirituality. This kind of triad (or trinity) will reappear often in this book in slightly shifting forms and shapes. (p.19) These forms broadly relate to three different theologies of grace: sanctification, redemption and creation. In turn we might recognize the various emphases of Roman Catholicism, Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
Jenkins ends his introductory chapter with a personal story about his grandparents farm being annexed to allow the expansion of the Shenandoah National Park in Virginia. As someone who is not altogether familiar with the ethical discussion and debate that is the basis for much of this work, I find having a specific ‘case’ or ‘situation’ in mind helps me to evaluate what I am reading.
So questions for discussion include: a) can you think of personal stories that raise questions of environmental ethics? b) Do you share my suspicion that theologies of salvation might make it easier for many of us to engage the conversation at an existential level? Why or why not?
Ecologies of Grace: Environmental Ethics and Christian Theology by Willis Jenkins is a book which begins by recognizing the difficulty of making environmental imperatives “intelligible to Christian communities.” He writes “climate change places new dimensions of society in moral jeopardy” and asks “but how is that preachable on Sunday mornings?” (p.3) He intends to trace strategies of ethical response to environmental challenges and then explore theological resources that can help their cause.
In a brief survey of secular emphases beginning with Lynn White’s 1967 article on “The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis” in which the church was indicted for unhelpful anthropocentrism he ends with sociologist Laurel Kearns three ethics or models among Christians in the US: eco-justice, stewardship and creation spirituality. This kind of triad (or trinity) will reappear often in this book in slightly shifting forms and shapes. (p.19) These forms broadly relate to three different theologies of grace: sanctification, redemption and creation. In turn we might recognize the various emphases of Roman Catholicism, Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
Jenkins ends his introductory chapter with a personal story about his grandparents farm being annexed to allow the expansion of the Shenandoah National Park in Virginia. As someone who is not altogether familiar with the ethical discussion and debate that is the basis for much of this work, I find having a specific ‘case’ or ‘situation’ in mind helps me to evaluate what I am reading.
So questions for discussion include: a) can you think of personal stories that raise questions of environmental ethics? b) Do you share my suspicion that theologies of salvation might make it easier for many of us to engage the conversation at an existential level? Why or why not?
Annual Council
November 9, 2009
Our Presiding Bishop visited the Diocese of Atlanta for our Annual Council. She answered questions, met with a number of groups and ministries, as well as preaching at the Council Eucharist. She stayed on her message of ‘mission, mission, mission.’ Among the more interesting his she said in answer to a question was that neither she nor the Archbishop of Canterbury had made a statement about the proposed anti-homosexual hate legislation in Uganda at the request of those most affected. They consider that such ecclesial pressure would weaken their cause. A brief excursion into the blogosphere and we find that many people are angered, disgusted and confused as to why there has been no statement. It is not clear to me why the word is no out.
This is what I reported to the vestry about Council:
The presiding Bishop visited the Annual Council of the Diocese of Atlanta. Among the many things that she said (which I reported at a ‘rector’s forum’ on November 8) was the reality that attendance in worship is down throughout the nation while other indicators of engagement (baptisms, confirmations, membership and financial giving) is up. It seems that we are not alone. Nonetheless I note that vibrant parishes offer a variety of times and styles of worship and wonder what we are doing if worship is not at the center of what we do. We were ably represented by the clergy, Diane Barber, Bruce Garner, Richard Hall, Florence Holmes and Robert Wadell, who enjoyed a number of reports indicating that we are a healthy and leading diocese in the church as well as Cathedral worship at which the PB preached. The various major addresses of council are available here
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Environmental Stewardship
November 5, 2009
With the big meeting in Copenhagen coming up, environmental concerns are moving to the front and center for many eco warriors. I have been struck by a Newsweek editorial by Jon Meacham (November 9, 2009 p.5) in which he shares his more-or-less commitment to recycling but says “It is just that my lightbulbs and Diet Coke cans are not going to make up for the CO2 pouring forth from china’s coal-fired plants.” This echoes my recent post on Ecologies of Grace and fuels (sic) my sense of urgency that I find some kind of existential (or maybe simply emotional) connection to the importance of this work. I understand the ethical importance of caring for the environment and support work in that direction. I hope that those who meet in Copenhagen know whereof they speak and will act accordingly in some way that makes for justice for all.
Meacham believes that “Mammon trumps God” and “Human beings change their behavior only when danger is imminent or when money is at stake”. He hopes that “commerce with a conscience” is going to be the result of concerted government action. We see with the healthcare debate the difficulty of acting for the interest of all over the particular interests of an individual or economic interest group. Can governments express national interest in a way that becomes the equivalent of enlightened self-interest for all people? And can they do it bearing in mind the interconnectedness that means that poor countries still need the ability to grow their economies even while caring for the planet costs money?
With the big meeting in Copenhagen coming up, environmental concerns are moving to the front and center for many eco warriors. I have been struck by a Newsweek editorial by Jon Meacham (November 9, 2009 p.5) in which he shares his more-or-less commitment to recycling but says “It is just that my lightbulbs and Diet Coke cans are not going to make up for the CO2 pouring forth from china’s coal-fired plants.” This echoes my recent post on Ecologies of Grace and fuels (sic) my sense of urgency that I find some kind of existential (or maybe simply emotional) connection to the importance of this work. I understand the ethical importance of caring for the environment and support work in that direction. I hope that those who meet in Copenhagen know whereof they speak and will act accordingly in some way that makes for justice for all.
Meacham believes that “Mammon trumps God” and “Human beings change their behavior only when danger is imminent or when money is at stake”. He hopes that “commerce with a conscience” is going to be the result of concerted government action. We see with the healthcare debate the difficulty of acting for the interest of all over the particular interests of an individual or economic interest group. Can governments express national interest in a way that becomes the equivalent of enlightened self-interest for all people? And can they do it bearing in mind the interconnectedness that means that poor countries still need the ability to grow their economies even while caring for the planet costs money?
Richard Hooker
November 3, 2009
Richard Hooker, whom we remember today, is credited with articulating the theology of the Anglican three-legged authoritative stool of first Scripture, then Tradition and Reason. As such he gave voice to the breadth of the Elizabethan Settlement making for a church that was both Catholic and Reformed, avoiding the excesses, as he saw it of both puritan Calvinism and popish Romanism. The day puts me in mind of a conversation I had with contextual education students at the Candler School of Theology about the strengths and weaknesses of various images or metaphors for the church (‘servant of God’, ‘body of Christ’ etc.). I have long liked the image of the ‘leaky chalice’, -- a container of sorts from which grace is somehow nevertheless dispensed if not always from the intended aperture. The point being that however essential that there be some sort of container or institutional form that is the vehicle by which the people of God pass on the story of the faith, the precise shape of that form is not of ultimate importance. It can, does, and should change over time. An argument over the faith and integrity of the church can all too easily disguise an argument over the power of the clergy, for example. This is why I read, admire and continue to find value in Richard Hooker without worrying too much about the future shape of the Anglican Communion. I do not anticipate it disappearing even though I believe that its essential integrity is in being an expression of catholicity that is first and foremost relational rather than strictly doctrinal or centered on some other authority such as that of a bishop or particular preacher.
Richard Hooker, whom we remember today, is credited with articulating the theology of the Anglican three-legged authoritative stool of first Scripture, then Tradition and Reason. As such he gave voice to the breadth of the Elizabethan Settlement making for a church that was both Catholic and Reformed, avoiding the excesses, as he saw it of both puritan Calvinism and popish Romanism. The day puts me in mind of a conversation I had with contextual education students at the Candler School of Theology about the strengths and weaknesses of various images or metaphors for the church (‘servant of God’, ‘body of Christ’ etc.). I have long liked the image of the ‘leaky chalice’, -- a container of sorts from which grace is somehow nevertheless dispensed if not always from the intended aperture. The point being that however essential that there be some sort of container or institutional form that is the vehicle by which the people of God pass on the story of the faith, the precise shape of that form is not of ultimate importance. It can, does, and should change over time. An argument over the faith and integrity of the church can all too easily disguise an argument over the power of the clergy, for example. This is why I read, admire and continue to find value in Richard Hooker without worrying too much about the future shape of the Anglican Communion. I do not anticipate it disappearing even though I believe that its essential integrity is in being an expression of catholicity that is first and foremost relational rather than strictly doctrinal or centered on some other authority such as that of a bishop or particular preacher.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Ecologies of Grace
November 2, 2009
Ecologies of Grace is the title of a book by Willis Jenkins, (Oxford, 2008), an Episcopalian and the Margaret Farley Assistant Professor of Social Ethics at Yale Divinity School. He teaches environmental theology and ethics. I have been reading and thinking about environmental matters since St. Paul’s, Alexandria, provided significant leadership for the Diocese of Virginia and beyond under the leadership of the late Charles Allen Jr. I know that concern for the environment is important as a matter of stewardship. I have read many works extolling that point of view and many others taking the path that is known as ‘eco-justice’. I am sold as a matter of ethics, oughts and shoulds. I happily and enthusiastically recycle anything that can be recycled, usually remember to turn the tap off while I am brushing my teeth or shaving and make sure that places I work are not using large amounts of Styrofoam. But I have yet to succeed in connecting environmental concern with immediate existential concern. I hope the Kyoto Accord combat global warming (which I believe to be a real issue) and look forward to the day when we can develop the All Saints’ campus in an exemplary way that takes LEED standards as a minimum.
I’m reminded of so much of the work around issues of sexuality which seemed to be using scripture or tradition to make ethical arguments or calls to work of justice and so on. It was not until I read James Alison (our Holy Week preacher of a few years ago) that I read someone who incorporated his discussion of sexuality and reflection on his won experience into fundamental soteriology and so grew to connect ‘the issue’ with everything that really matters to all of us for life. The introductory chapter to Willis Jenkins’ book suggests that he might be able to accomplish something similar. He promises to look a three broad strategies within Christina environmental ethics in addition to some secular approaches. The Christian ones are “ecojustice theologies’, ‘stewardship theologies’ and ‘ecological spiritualities’. This last one, he says, “appropriate(s) themes of deification, by which personal creativity brings all creation into the gift of union with God.” (p. 19) I’m looking forward to finding out what that means and have some hope that this book might be ‘different’.
I plan to comment here as I go in the hopes that some of you might like to read along with me engaging some conversation through the comment section. You can order the book here if you are interested.
Ecologies of Grace is the title of a book by Willis Jenkins, (Oxford, 2008), an Episcopalian and the Margaret Farley Assistant Professor of Social Ethics at Yale Divinity School. He teaches environmental theology and ethics. I have been reading and thinking about environmental matters since St. Paul’s, Alexandria, provided significant leadership for the Diocese of Virginia and beyond under the leadership of the late Charles Allen Jr. I know that concern for the environment is important as a matter of stewardship. I have read many works extolling that point of view and many others taking the path that is known as ‘eco-justice’. I am sold as a matter of ethics, oughts and shoulds. I happily and enthusiastically recycle anything that can be recycled, usually remember to turn the tap off while I am brushing my teeth or shaving and make sure that places I work are not using large amounts of Styrofoam. But I have yet to succeed in connecting environmental concern with immediate existential concern. I hope the Kyoto Accord combat global warming (which I believe to be a real issue) and look forward to the day when we can develop the All Saints’ campus in an exemplary way that takes LEED standards as a minimum.
I’m reminded of so much of the work around issues of sexuality which seemed to be using scripture or tradition to make ethical arguments or calls to work of justice and so on. It was not until I read James Alison (our Holy Week preacher of a few years ago) that I read someone who incorporated his discussion of sexuality and reflection on his won experience into fundamental soteriology and so grew to connect ‘the issue’ with everything that really matters to all of us for life. The introductory chapter to Willis Jenkins’ book suggests that he might be able to accomplish something similar. He promises to look a three broad strategies within Christina environmental ethics in addition to some secular approaches. The Christian ones are “ecojustice theologies’, ‘stewardship theologies’ and ‘ecological spiritualities’. This last one, he says, “appropriate(s) themes of deification, by which personal creativity brings all creation into the gift of union with God.” (p. 19) I’m looking forward to finding out what that means and have some hope that this book might be ‘different’.
I plan to comment here as I go in the hopes that some of you might like to read along with me engaging some conversation through the comment section. You can order the book here if you are interested.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Lutheran Colleagues
October 27, 2009
I have been with my pastor theologian continuing education and colleague group this year. We have been finishing our work on ‘allegiance and apologetic’ working especially with Daniel and Augustine’s Confessions. More on that later and elsewhere. Three of the group are ELCA Lutherans. (Our friend from the Missouri Synod has H1N1 and could not be with us). They serve in quite different settings from each other and enjoy quite distinctive theological emphases, but they are each dealing with the repercussions in their congregations of decisions of their General Assembly this summer which authorized the possibility of ordaining partnered lesbian and gay people and made a statement that declines to condemn homosexuality as inherently sinful. People in their congregations are showing the whole range of responses that we have experienced over the years at All Saints’, including seeing valued friends taking this as the immediate cause of their leaving the church or striving to get their congregations to separate from the ELCA en masse.
I find myself having a spectrum of reactions: sorrow that they have to go through this; sorrow that there are still so many people who cannot imagine God’s love and grace being at work in these decisions of their wider community of faith; massive relief and gratitude that we are largely through the turmoil of this significant shift in anthropological understanding; tired of discussing homosexuality apart from the reality of the lives of the people that I am given to love and serve and with whom I gather around the Table.
We have talked a lot about the insights of the family system theory of Murray Bowen and the reality that the systems in which we live do and will resist, sabotage, undermine change and otherwise seek stasis. I shared Giles Fraser’s memorable sermon at All Saints’ in which he asked us to change seats and then reflected on our resistance to change, and especially change announced and brought about by God through John the Baptist. We joined in hoping that we could recognize and acknowledge the reality that there is a significant change taking place as we move to a new understanding of homosexual people and that change includes a tipping of the balance of power on these issues in church and state. WE have also hoped that as we are all subject to God’s transforming grace we can help one another in our various disappointments to recover the role of the ‘loyal opposition’ where that is appropriate (rather than leaving in a huff for a place where we can have our preconceptions and beliefs affirmed rather than challenged.) As we have talked about the Communion of Saints’ and the unspeakable love of God expressed as the resurrection of the body after death, we have remembered that whatever happens we will keep working this out in the love of God.
I have been with my pastor theologian continuing education and colleague group this year. We have been finishing our work on ‘allegiance and apologetic’ working especially with Daniel and Augustine’s Confessions. More on that later and elsewhere. Three of the group are ELCA Lutherans. (Our friend from the Missouri Synod has H1N1 and could not be with us). They serve in quite different settings from each other and enjoy quite distinctive theological emphases, but they are each dealing with the repercussions in their congregations of decisions of their General Assembly this summer which authorized the possibility of ordaining partnered lesbian and gay people and made a statement that declines to condemn homosexuality as inherently sinful. People in their congregations are showing the whole range of responses that we have experienced over the years at All Saints’, including seeing valued friends taking this as the immediate cause of their leaving the church or striving to get their congregations to separate from the ELCA en masse.
I find myself having a spectrum of reactions: sorrow that they have to go through this; sorrow that there are still so many people who cannot imagine God’s love and grace being at work in these decisions of their wider community of faith; massive relief and gratitude that we are largely through the turmoil of this significant shift in anthropological understanding; tired of discussing homosexuality apart from the reality of the lives of the people that I am given to love and serve and with whom I gather around the Table.
We have talked a lot about the insights of the family system theory of Murray Bowen and the reality that the systems in which we live do and will resist, sabotage, undermine change and otherwise seek stasis. I shared Giles Fraser’s memorable sermon at All Saints’ in which he asked us to change seats and then reflected on our resistance to change, and especially change announced and brought about by God through John the Baptist. We joined in hoping that we could recognize and acknowledge the reality that there is a significant change taking place as we move to a new understanding of homosexual people and that change includes a tipping of the balance of power on these issues in church and state. WE have also hoped that as we are all subject to God’s transforming grace we can help one another in our various disappointments to recover the role of the ‘loyal opposition’ where that is appropriate (rather than leaving in a huff for a place where we can have our preconceptions and beliefs affirmed rather than challenged.) As we have talked about the Communion of Saints’ and the unspeakable love of God expressed as the resurrection of the body after death, we have remembered that whatever happens we will keep working this out in the love of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)