See highlights from the 2013 HTB Leadership Conference - and be encouraged!
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby is "more optimistic about the church now than I have ever been in my life."
From here:
"We need to be a risk-taking Church. There is no safety in Christ - there is absolute security, but there is no safety," he said during a question and answer session with the Rev Nicky Gumbel, vicar of HTB.
Archbishop Justin said he was more hopeful than ever for the future of the church as it "fills in" the gaps left by the state following the global financial crisis.
Referring to the food banks being run by the Diocese of Durham he said: “It is a great opportunity to demonstrate the love of Christ. I am more optimistic about the Church now than I have ever been in my life."
"For the first time in 70 years," he added, "people are realising that “Christ meets the needs of the world.”
But he warned the audience, composed of leaders from Anglican, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian and Pentecostal churches, against the dangers of fighting each other.
"We cannot live for our cause to win, we have to live for His cause to win," he said, adding that "very often the biggest wounds we experience will come from other Christians."
He spoke of how he became a Christian, how he met his wife Caroline and his life in the oil industry before he was ordained.
He spoke of the success of his recent five-day "journey in prayer" around five English cities, attended by more than 12,000 people, before his enthronement at Canterbury Cathedral in March.
In a light-hearted aside, he described of how he was approached during the pilgrimage by a man in Chichester Cathedral who did not recognise him.
"This person came up to me and said, 'I have heard that the Archbishop of Canterbury is here today' ... he said, 'Is there any chance you could introduce me to him?'. I said, 'Yes, it is me'. He said 'oh'."
Looking ahead, the Archbishop said his areas of emphasis would be the renewal of prayer and religious life, reconciliation within the church, and evangelism throughout the nation.
Leading the Royal Albert Hall in prayer, the Archbishop called for a "deep setting aside of all that holds us back from You".
"Forgive your fractured Church, renew our unity, direct our lives and may we see a revolution in our times," he said.
Archbishop Justin has prayed for Christian unity and told church leaders that "we need to be a risk-taking church".
The Archbishop was speaking this morning before an audience of more than 5,000 Christians on the first day of HTB's annual leadership conference.
 |
| Nicky Gumbel interviews Justin Welby at the HTB Leadership Conference in London. |
"We need to be a risk-taking Church. There is no safety in Christ - there is absolute security, but there is no safety," he said during a question and answer session with the Rev Nicky Gumbel, vicar of HTB.
Archbishop Justin said he was more hopeful than ever for the future of the church as it "fills in" the gaps left by the state following the global financial crisis.
Referring to the food banks being run by the Diocese of Durham he said: “It is a great opportunity to demonstrate the love of Christ. I am more optimistic about the Church now than I have ever been in my life."
"For the first time in 70 years," he added, "people are realising that “Christ meets the needs of the world.”
But he warned the audience, composed of leaders from Anglican, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian and Pentecostal churches, against the dangers of fighting each other.
"We cannot live for our cause to win, we have to live for His cause to win," he said, adding that "very often the biggest wounds we experience will come from other Christians."
'Forgive your fractured church'
The Archbishop said it is "natural for churches to grow," but said that it was "hard work" and urged his audience to find in their churches news ways of "liberating people to be risk-takers in the service of Christ."He spoke of how he became a Christian, how he met his wife Caroline and his life in the oil industry before he was ordained.
He spoke of the success of his recent five-day "journey in prayer" around five English cities, attended by more than 12,000 people, before his enthronement at Canterbury Cathedral in March.
In a light-hearted aside, he described of how he was approached during the pilgrimage by a man in Chichester Cathedral who did not recognise him.
"This person came up to me and said, 'I have heard that the Archbishop of Canterbury is here today' ... he said, 'Is there any chance you could introduce me to him?'. I said, 'Yes, it is me'. He said 'oh'."
Looking ahead, the Archbishop said his areas of emphasis would be the renewal of prayer and religious life, reconciliation within the church, and evangelism throughout the nation.
Leading the Royal Albert Hall in prayer, the Archbishop called for a "deep setting aside of all that holds us back from You".
"Forgive your fractured Church, renew our unity, direct our lives and may we see a revolution in our times," he said.
Read it all here.
Monday, May 13, 2013
HTB Leadership Conference LIVE
Sunday, May 12, 2013
“Can’t repeat the past? Why of course you can!”
“All I kept thinking about, over and over, was 'You can't live forever; you can't live forever.”
― F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby
“For we must consider that we shall be as a City upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us. So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, we shall be made a story and a byword throughout the world.”
― John Winthrop, (1588–1649)
The first time I read The Great Gatsby was in high school and I hated it.
The second time I read The Great Gatsby in college it changed my life. In fact, I recommend reading The Great Gatsby at least once a year, every year. But if for whatever reason you can't or won't do that, then go watch Baz Luhrmann's new film The Great Gatsby instead. It's that good.
I've been fascinated by reading the official critical reviews, as though the critics could not see themselves in the film. That so many of them could not, or would not, demonstrates all the more that it is true for our culture today that we are indeed repeating the past.
The Great Gatsby is about us.
Not "them," but us. You can just be human, of course, but it helps especially to be American. Or wish you were American. But it is about us - a stern warning “even as we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
One of the remarkable achievements of Luhrmann's interpretation of The Great Gatsby is that it lifts the prose up, literally sometimes, so it's unmistakable that a crucial component of the story is that it is about words - the power of words. Or the Word. Or what happens when the Word becomes merely a fading billboard advertisement hovering over the edge of town. It might be glamorous, but it's not pretty.
A bold step that Luhrmann takes is the soundtrack. Fitzgerald's prose is the prose of the Jazz Age, but the jazz of the 1920's may quickly become quaint or nostalgic to today's thumping iPod generation. Fitzgerald's prose and photographic imagery remain steady and timeless and so Luhrmann's unorthodox decision to blend contemporary hiphop with Gershwin's magnificent jazz is brilliant. We are faced at once, as we would be on the page, that Fitzgerald's backdrop is the 1920s Jazz Age, but the story is now. It is always now. It is now more than ever. And one cannot see the film and not see that it is about now.
In that sense, Gatsby is right when he refutes Nick's assertion that we cannot repeat the past. “Can’t repeat the past? Why of course you can!”
How was it that trusted banks and investment firms and quasi-federal government corporations were turned into wanton casinos on steroids, burning through credit with lavish lifestyles and exploiting the very people the legislative innovations were designed to help? “Can’t repeat the past? Why of course you can!”
Long ago in British history, after a long dark age when theatre seemed to disappear entirely from memory, it made a stunning comeback with the introduction of miracle or morality plays. These plays, reflecting the most extraordinary play of them all - the Eucharist - were meant to affect a response from the audience, just as the Eucharist should. They weren't merely for entertainment - they were for worship, you anticipated meeting God when you went to see the play. It could change you.
The Great Gatsby, whether on page or now on screen, may elicit such a response. One of the first surviving British miracle plays was called The Harrowing of Hell. Wiki tells us that it is about the "triumphant descent of Christ into Hell between the time of his Crucifixion and his Resurrection when he brought salvation to all of the righteous who had died since the beginning of the world (excluding the damned)." The Great Gatsby, with it's cast of the damned, is another kind of descent into hell, filled with extravagant opulence, moral decadence, and greed, one that does not lead to resurrection and redemption, but its own protagonist drowned in the pool. His "greatness" sadly does not save him.
What was lost to me when I read The Great Gatsby the first time was the power of sin - how corruptible sin is even when presented with the best of intentions. And no one gets off the hook. God isn't kidding when He tells Moses to write down on the tablet the first commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." He's not doing that to be a "spoiled sport," but to save us all from ruin. Once we fashion our new gods, we are as doomed as Gatsby.
This I learned after reading it the second time.
Gatsby is the American Dream. He is reinvented. He is born one way and he reinvents himself another, tapping into cherished American myths. The parts that aren't true, he makes up. His reinvention is for a romantic love, but a love that turns to idolatry. His dream, Daisy, becomes an obsession and he lives in his dream world, even to the end, for his own personal redemption. His dream is rooted in show, manufactured, materialistic, and yet also idealistic, romantic - indeed, he wants to be faithful, even as he seems oblivious that in order to attain her, Daisy must be unfaithful, a moral failure.
And so is Nick Carraway, the narrator.
I recall when the book was covered in one of my Creative Writing courses in college, that we discussed whether Nick Carraway was a good narrator. The book triumphs or fails on whether Fitzgerald was right to place his story in the voice of Nick Carraway. What Nick sees, we see - do we trust his observations? Is he right about his perceptions of Jay Gatsby?
Nick is outstanding in his characterizations and his storytelling as the narrator of the book, like Chorus in a morality play. But unlike his predecessors in literature, he is a participant, he, as a character, is a an example that indeed you can repeat the past because you never learned the lessons in the first place - and even if you did, you are powerless to change on your own.
God in this morality play is reduced to gazing over a desolate and morally bankrupt landscape, as Wilson tells us. A mere advertisement, fading away, watching as the world He created is wounded without redemption. If this is how we see God, no wonder all hell broke lose on Wall Street.
It is difficult in this age where sin is a byword, where even Christians look for ways to explain the Gospel without mentioning it, to confront what happens to the landscape where there is moral and spiritual decay. Baz Lurhmann's film opens with a sensational and over-indulgent Gatsby party which almost fools us into thinking that this is any different then the decadence and despair we later see around Wilson and Myrtle's garage. Glamor and power do not buy redemption - and in fact, invite ruin.
No wonder some critics are oblivious.
It is indeed The Harrowing of Hell - but one absent of Christ. If we want an America where God is merely an advertisement on a billboard, then indeed we will repeat the past. If you're not sure, go see The Great Gatsby.
― F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby
“For we must consider that we shall be as a City upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us. So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause him to withdraw his present help from us, we shall be made a story and a byword throughout the world.”
― John Winthrop, (1588–1649)
The first time I read The Great Gatsby was in high school and I hated it.
The second time I read The Great Gatsby in college it changed my life. In fact, I recommend reading The Great Gatsby at least once a year, every year. But if for whatever reason you can't or won't do that, then go watch Baz Luhrmann's new film The Great Gatsby instead. It's that good.
The Great Gatsby is about us.
Not "them," but us. You can just be human, of course, but it helps especially to be American. Or wish you were American. But it is about us - a stern warning “even as we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
One of the remarkable achievements of Luhrmann's interpretation of The Great Gatsby is that it lifts the prose up, literally sometimes, so it's unmistakable that a crucial component of the story is that it is about words - the power of words. Or the Word. Or what happens when the Word becomes merely a fading billboard advertisement hovering over the edge of town. It might be glamorous, but it's not pretty.
A bold step that Luhrmann takes is the soundtrack. Fitzgerald's prose is the prose of the Jazz Age, but the jazz of the 1920's may quickly become quaint or nostalgic to today's thumping iPod generation. Fitzgerald's prose and photographic imagery remain steady and timeless and so Luhrmann's unorthodox decision to blend contemporary hiphop with Gershwin's magnificent jazz is brilliant. We are faced at once, as we would be on the page, that Fitzgerald's backdrop is the 1920s Jazz Age, but the story is now. It is always now. It is now more than ever. And one cannot see the film and not see that it is about now.
In that sense, Gatsby is right when he refutes Nick's assertion that we cannot repeat the past. “Can’t repeat the past? Why of course you can!”
Long ago in British history, after a long dark age when theatre seemed to disappear entirely from memory, it made a stunning comeback with the introduction of miracle or morality plays. These plays, reflecting the most extraordinary play of them all - the Eucharist - were meant to affect a response from the audience, just as the Eucharist should. They weren't merely for entertainment - they were for worship, you anticipated meeting God when you went to see the play. It could change you.
The Great Gatsby, whether on page or now on screen, may elicit such a response. One of the first surviving British miracle plays was called The Harrowing of Hell. Wiki tells us that it is about the "triumphant descent of Christ into Hell between the time of his Crucifixion and his Resurrection when he brought salvation to all of the righteous who had died since the beginning of the world (excluding the damned)." The Great Gatsby, with it's cast of the damned, is another kind of descent into hell, filled with extravagant opulence, moral decadence, and greed, one that does not lead to resurrection and redemption, but its own protagonist drowned in the pool. His "greatness" sadly does not save him.
What was lost to me when I read The Great Gatsby the first time was the power of sin - how corruptible sin is even when presented with the best of intentions. And no one gets off the hook. God isn't kidding when He tells Moses to write down on the tablet the first commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." He's not doing that to be a "spoiled sport," but to save us all from ruin. Once we fashion our new gods, we are as doomed as Gatsby.
This I learned after reading it the second time.
And so is Nick Carraway, the narrator.
I recall when the book was covered in one of my Creative Writing courses in college, that we discussed whether Nick Carraway was a good narrator. The book triumphs or fails on whether Fitzgerald was right to place his story in the voice of Nick Carraway. What Nick sees, we see - do we trust his observations? Is he right about his perceptions of Jay Gatsby?
Nick is outstanding in his characterizations and his storytelling as the narrator of the book, like Chorus in a morality play. But unlike his predecessors in literature, he is a participant, he, as a character, is a an example that indeed you can repeat the past because you never learned the lessons in the first place - and even if you did, you are powerless to change on your own.
It is difficult in this age where sin is a byword, where even Christians look for ways to explain the Gospel without mentioning it, to confront what happens to the landscape where there is moral and spiritual decay. Baz Lurhmann's film opens with a sensational and over-indulgent Gatsby party which almost fools us into thinking that this is any different then the decadence and despair we later see around Wilson and Myrtle's garage. Glamor and power do not buy redemption - and in fact, invite ruin.
No wonder some critics are oblivious.
It is indeed The Harrowing of Hell - but one absent of Christ. If we want an America where God is merely an advertisement on a billboard, then indeed we will repeat the past. If you're not sure, go see The Great Gatsby.
Thursday, May 09, 2013
Farewell to Dallas Willard
 |
| Dallas Willard 1935-2013 |
From Christianity Today:
Many of us in the church have been impacted by Dallas through his teachings and writings that are often categorized as being about 'spiritual formation,' although his real preoccupation and concern was focused on the 'kingdom of God', or what he would often speak about as the 'with-God life.' He said the four great questions humans must answer are: What is reality? What is the good life? Who is a good person? And How do you became a good person? His concern was to answer those questions, and live the answers, and he was simply convinced that no one has ever answered them as well as Jesus.
These 'spiritual' writings of Dallas almost never used a technical vocabulary, but they had a density to them that makes them slow-going for most of us. I think the main reason for this is that any given word Dallas uses is a compressed summary of the history of human thought which he has digested and distilled. Words which are vague for most of us were precisely calibrated by him.
Read it all here.
Tuesday, May 07, 2013
I have been and always shall be your friend?
Yes, it is a commercial and yes, it is ... well, see for yourself:
Tip of the Tinfoil to LM.
Tip of the Tinfoil to LM.
Thursday, May 02, 2013
Breaking News: California court orders Anglican congregation to hand over church to the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles
From here:
The Bishop of Los Angeles had no authority to give the parish of St James in Newport Beach a written waiver exempting the congregation’s property from the reach of the Episcopal Church’s Dennis Canon, an Orange County Superior Court Judge has held.
In a ruling for summary judgment handed down on 1 May 2013 Judge Kim Dunning ordered the parish to hand its multi-million dollar properties over to the Diocese of Los Angeles.
The decision was unexpected, Daniel Lula – an attorney for the parish -- told Anglican Ink, as the matter had been set down for trial later this month. In an email to his congregation, the Rev Richard Crocker said: “We have received notice this morning from our attorneys that the court has handed down a significantly negative ruling in our court case. This of course changes the landscape of next week's trial,” he noted, inviting the parish to a meeting with Mr. Lula “to offer explanation of what we know about the ruling at this point.”
In her decision, Judge Dunning said the Episcopal Church’s rules governing parish property on the diocesan and national level took precedence over civil property and trust laws. She dismissed as non-binding a 1991 letter signed by the then Canon to the Ordinary D. Bruce MacPherson, later to become the Bishop of Western Louisiana, on behalf of Bishop Frederick Borsch that released the diocese’s claim to the property.
“The purpose of the conversations between the Diocese and St. James was for St. James to hold title to its property in its own name free of any trust . . . [as] part of an agreement in order for St. James to secure substantial donations for its building program, “ Bishop MacPherson said in a deposition.
However, this waiver did not amend the parish bylaws and diocesan canons she held. Even if it did, according to the present leadership of the Episcopal Church’s interpretation of the canons “the Bishop of the Diocese did not, and does not, have authority to amend any of these instruments.”
Judge Dunning cited the declaration by the Episcopal Church’s expert witness Robert Bruce Mullin in support of her deference to canon law over the evidence of the deeds and waiver noting the “Mullin declaration concerns ‘religious entity governance and administration,’ and this court is bound by it.”
The court further stated that it believed a parish was a subordinate unit to a diocese and had no existence outside the diocese. While the Episcopal Church could exist without St James, St James could not exist without the Episcopal Church – and as it had no existence independent of the diocese, the loss of its property to the diocese could not harm it.
In 2011 the California Supreme Court rejected an argument of the Episcopal Church that the 1991 letter had been declared invalid by its first review of the case in 2009. The Court said, "We express no opinion regarding the legal significance, if any, of the 1991 letter. We merely hold that a court must decide the question,” overturning an appellate court ruling that did not allow the parish to put forward a defense.
In 2005 the Orange County Superior Court ruled the Episcopal Church's allegations were legally defective, but an appellate ruling reversed the trial decision and allowed the complaints to go forward. A second trial court issued a summary judgment in favor of the diocese, but in early 2009, the California Supreme Court sent the case back to the Orange County Superior Court, where St. James answered the complaint, raised affirmative defenses, and began discovery proceedings.
If the parish does not appeal the decision it will have to vacate the property in the near future.
In his invitation to the parish meeting Mr. Crocker said: I ask that all members of St. James come together in unity at this time to hear from our attorney and to pray together. The Lord is not surprised by this decision and He is in our midst. But His strength is particularly manifested when we come together in unity and prayer.”
Read it all here.
BB NOTE: Have dear, dear friends at St. James Newport Beach. Praying for you all in this time. As I was praying and thinking of you this evening, this song came to mind. We do not grieve as those who have no hope.
 |
| The congregation of St. James Newport Beach learned today they may forced out of their church home. |
In a ruling for summary judgment handed down on 1 May 2013 Judge Kim Dunning ordered the parish to hand its multi-million dollar properties over to the Diocese of Los Angeles.
The decision was unexpected, Daniel Lula – an attorney for the parish -- told Anglican Ink, as the matter had been set down for trial later this month. In an email to his congregation, the Rev Richard Crocker said: “We have received notice this morning from our attorneys that the court has handed down a significantly negative ruling in our court case. This of course changes the landscape of next week's trial,” he noted, inviting the parish to a meeting with Mr. Lula “to offer explanation of what we know about the ruling at this point.”
 |
| St. James Newport Beach. |
“The purpose of the conversations between the Diocese and St. James was for St. James to hold title to its property in its own name free of any trust . . . [as] part of an agreement in order for St. James to secure substantial donations for its building program, “ Bishop MacPherson said in a deposition.
However, this waiver did not amend the parish bylaws and diocesan canons she held. Even if it did, according to the present leadership of the Episcopal Church’s interpretation of the canons “the Bishop of the Diocese did not, and does not, have authority to amend any of these instruments.”
Judge Dunning cited the declaration by the Episcopal Church’s expert witness Robert Bruce Mullin in support of her deference to canon law over the evidence of the deeds and waiver noting the “Mullin declaration concerns ‘religious entity governance and administration,’ and this court is bound by it.”
The court further stated that it believed a parish was a subordinate unit to a diocese and had no existence outside the diocese. While the Episcopal Church could exist without St James, St James could not exist without the Episcopal Church – and as it had no existence independent of the diocese, the loss of its property to the diocese could not harm it.
In 2011 the California Supreme Court rejected an argument of the Episcopal Church that the 1991 letter had been declared invalid by its first review of the case in 2009. The Court said, "We express no opinion regarding the legal significance, if any, of the 1991 letter. We merely hold that a court must decide the question,” overturning an appellate court ruling that did not allow the parish to put forward a defense.
In 2005 the Orange County Superior Court ruled the Episcopal Church's allegations were legally defective, but an appellate ruling reversed the trial decision and allowed the complaints to go forward. A second trial court issued a summary judgment in favor of the diocese, but in early 2009, the California Supreme Court sent the case back to the Orange County Superior Court, where St. James answered the complaint, raised affirmative defenses, and began discovery proceedings.
If the parish does not appeal the decision it will have to vacate the property in the near future.
In his invitation to the parish meeting Mr. Crocker said: I ask that all members of St. James come together in unity at this time to hear from our attorney and to pray together. The Lord is not surprised by this decision and He is in our midst. But His strength is particularly manifested when we come together in unity and prayer.”
Read it all here.
BB NOTE: Have dear, dear friends at St. James Newport Beach. Praying for you all in this time. As I was praying and thinking of you this evening, this song came to mind. We do not grieve as those who have no hope.
Dylan in Richmond: Yes, things have changed
Live recording of Bob Dylan at the Richmond Show. Too much fun.
Rowan Williams takes to the streets!
Does he look really happy or what?
Read it all here.
 |
| The former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams in Cambridge. |
Read it all here.
Monday, April 22, 2013
God loves Episcopalians!
How could He not?
UPDATE:
Doug LeBlanc has an article up The Living Church on the recent service at the St. James Episcopal Church in Richmond that included compositions by Bob Dylan. He writes:
Bob Dylan has performed six times in Richmond, Virginia, during his 50-year career. This year, a month before Dylan and his five band members took the stage again at Richmond’s Landmark Theater, the members of St. James’s Church gathered for their first Dylan Mass. Mark and Virginia Whitmire, who oversee the music and choirs at St. James’s, do not pretend that Dylan would have added bluesy riffs on his Hohner mouth harp had he been in town a month earlier. They mention honest doubts about whether Dylan would be pleased at their liturgical use of his songs. But they stress that the Dylan Mass rises from their adult conversion to the Dylan fan base, an eventual discovery of what Mark Whitmire calls Dylan’s “authentic prophetic voice.”
The Dylan service was part of a rotation of contemporary music sung by the parish’s West Gallery Choir, which already has adapted bluegrass and jazz to blend into contemporary settings of the Holy Eucharist.
The Whitmires and the Rev. Carmen Germino, assistant rector, spent hours finding common themes between the readings for March 3 and Dylan’s lyrics. “We started with the lectionary and it was providential that the service was in Lent,” Virgnia said. “It was Burning Bush Sunday.”
The choir sang “Knocking on Heaven’s Door” as a prelude, followed by the apocalyptic “Ring Them Bells.” The processional litany used a Dylan album title (Oh Mercy) and a song title “Strengthen the Things That Remain” (cf. Rev. 3:2) as prayer responses. The choir and congregation sang “The Times They Are A-Changin’” before sitting for the lessons. “When the Ship Comes In” served as the Gospel hymn.
“Saving Grace,” one of Dylan’s rare and startling expressions of humility (“If you find it in Your heart, can I be forgiven?”) was the offertory hymn. Communion songs included “Every Grain of Sand,” Dylan’s haunting anthem that draws from the work of William Blake, and “I Shall Be Released.” “Blowing in the Wind” served as the recessional hymn.
Read it all here.
UPDATE:
Doug LeBlanc has an article up The Living Church on the recent service at the St. James Episcopal Church in Richmond that included compositions by Bob Dylan. He writes:
Bob Dylan has performed six times in Richmond, Virginia, during his 50-year career. This year, a month before Dylan and his five band members took the stage again at Richmond’s Landmark Theater, the members of St. James’s Church gathered for their first Dylan Mass. Mark and Virginia Whitmire, who oversee the music and choirs at St. James’s, do not pretend that Dylan would have added bluesy riffs on his Hohner mouth harp had he been in town a month earlier. They mention honest doubts about whether Dylan would be pleased at their liturgical use of his songs. But they stress that the Dylan Mass rises from their adult conversion to the Dylan fan base, an eventual discovery of what Mark Whitmire calls Dylan’s “authentic prophetic voice.”
The Dylan service was part of a rotation of contemporary music sung by the parish’s West Gallery Choir, which already has adapted bluegrass and jazz to blend into contemporary settings of the Holy Eucharist.
The Whitmires and the Rev. Carmen Germino, assistant rector, spent hours finding common themes between the readings for March 3 and Dylan’s lyrics. “We started with the lectionary and it was providential that the service was in Lent,” Virgnia said. “It was Burning Bush Sunday.”
The choir sang “Knocking on Heaven’s Door” as a prelude, followed by the apocalyptic “Ring Them Bells.” The processional litany used a Dylan album title (Oh Mercy) and a song title “Strengthen the Things That Remain” (cf. Rev. 3:2) as prayer responses. The choir and congregation sang “The Times They Are A-Changin’” before sitting for the lessons. “When the Ship Comes In” served as the Gospel hymn.
“Saving Grace,” one of Dylan’s rare and startling expressions of humility (“If you find it in Your heart, can I be forgiven?”) was the offertory hymn. Communion songs included “Every Grain of Sand,” Dylan’s haunting anthem that draws from the work of William Blake, and “I Shall Be Released.” “Blowing in the Wind” served as the recessional hymn.
Read it all here.
First Same-Gender Blessing held at Historic Christ Church
NOTE: The part that is particularly interesting here is this: "On October 12, 2002, they had a Commitment Ceremony, approved of by Bishop Lee at St. Clement's." Was not aware that Bishop Lee was approving "commitment ceremonies," since he publicly made quite different statements on what was accepted in the Diocese of Virginia at that time, four years before the thousands of members voted to separate from the Episcopal Church.
via email
via email
 |
| Christ Church Episcopal, Alexandria, VA |
Alexandria, VA, April 21, 2013 – Historic Christ Church celebrated its first same-gender blessing on Sunday, April 21. The Rev. Ann Gillespie, Christ Church Senior Associate Rector, officiated at the service,
“As an Episcopal faith community, we witnessed and asked God's blessings upon the lifelong commitment Melissa Capers and Brunilda Hernandez have made to one another. This is a significant and joyful event, not just in the life of Melissa and Bruni, but in the life of our church: as a congregation, we are taking a historic and faithful step closer to the inclusive, abundant, generous outpouring of God's kingdom.”
Melissa and Bruni have been together as a couple since 1999 and have previously had several events to mark their commitment. On October 12, 2002, they had a Commitment Ceremony, approved of by Bishop Lee at St. Clement's, Alexandria, but the ceremony was not allowed to take place in the sanctuary of the church and any kind of blessing was explicitly prohibited. Four days later, on October 16, 2002, they had a Civil Union in Plainfield, VT. In October 2008, they had a Civil Marriage in Northampton, MA. The public commitment of their lifelong relationship has been made in the ways that were open to them. Now their church can offer a blessing. Christ Church celebrated the Holy Union as part of a regular 5:00 p.m. Eucharist service on Sunday, April 21.
The Rev. Heather VanDeventer, Associate Rector for Faith Formation and Evangelism, knows the couple through their volunteer work at the church, “We recognize Melissa and Bruni’s special role in helping to bring a broader welcome to Christ Church.” This is considered an important event for Christ Church and the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia. When Bishop Shannon Johnston granted permission for this specific blessing, he offered his “thanksgiving for Christ Church’s leadership in our diocese as we continue to move forward in this new aspect of our liturgical life … I am no less thankful for Melissa and Bruni.”
To schedule a same-gender blessing, call Cindy Wright, Administrative Assistant for Worship, at 703-778-4936, or email cwright@ccalex.org.
The parish home of George Washington and many other government and legislative leaders since, Christ Church has long been at the center of the religious and public life of the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area. Nearly all the Presidents have attended Christ Church during their term of office. Other visitors include British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, Senator Elizabeth Dole, former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey, Rosa Parks, Nobel Laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former Secretary of Veterans Affairs Togo West, former Chief of Staff of the Army Gordon Sullivan, former White House Press Secretary Ron Nessen, and former Assistant Secretary of State Hodding Carter.
So the decline of the Episcopal Church is a myth?
 |
| The Very Rev'd Ian Markham. |
The Very Rev'd Ian Markham, Dean of Virginia Theological Seminary, recently spoke at the annual convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Delaware, on the topic, "The Myth of the Decline of The Episcopal Church." Am not sure the good dean's attitude is helping his case here. He seems to think it's all pretty funny.
Official stats put out by The Episcopal Church itself show that the Episcopal Church sees at best 657,000 in the pews on Sunday mornings, as opposed to, say, the 22 million Catholics in the pews. You can read the stats here.
Dean Markham thinks TEC can grow, could grow, would grow, should grow because it has more than one service (Rite 1 and Rite 2 - but doesn't mention that you can sort of write you own liturgy these days if you want to), that it requires "a skill set," in order to participate (stupid people need not apply), and says without irony that TEC is "generous," and "thoughtful," as opposed to all those other Christians who are stingy and stupid. He also thinks that there are people who aren't being counted on the rolls, though oddly enough, the fact that they don't go to church anymore doesn't seem to bother him.
How does he then describe the monumental events starting in August 2003, events that even the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia described as a legal division? Events that the Windsor Report warned is still tearing apart the fabric of the Anglican Communion?
"We are at the heart of the cultural wars and some people had real problems with it," he says simply, "so they decided to call it a day."
That's it. He says that and ignores the millions and millions of dollars spent - and continues to be spent - by the Episcopal Church on lawsuits and depositions and heartbreak.
That's it. He says that and ignores the millions and millions of dollars spent - and continues to be spent - by the Episcopal Church on lawsuits and depositions and heartbreak.
Watch it for yourself:
Part One
Part Two
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Outside the Virginia Supreme Court
I sat outside the Virginia Supreme Court on a misty Thursday morning in Richmond, the spring blossoms blowing across the sidewalk. Inside, the court was convening at 9:00 a.m. to deliver their decision as the bells of St. Paul's next door began to toll and then mark the hour.
As I waited and listened, I was reminded of John Donne's well-known poem.
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manner of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Farewell to the Iron Lady
In 1983, I was a senior at what I called at the time a "left-wing commie pinko college" in New England working on a "left-wing commie pinko major" of a Bachelor of Fine Arts (BFA) in Creative Writing and Theatre. My minor was American Studies. Perfect! I should be a left-wing commie pinko myself. For heaven's sake, I was Episcopalian.
So what happened?
In the first semester of my freshman year, I sat in my dorm room and watched a speech:
That was that. I was fired up. I joined the Reagan Revolution.
There were many times during college where I did feel like some lonely little petunia in a giant onion patch. This was despite the fact that even though many of my college profs were obviously children of the 60s, my classmates seemed to resemble Alex P. Keaton far more than Abbie Hoffman. Politics was not on the front burner for my classmates. For my progressive profs, it was a different matter.
I recall looking out the windows of my American studies class waiting for the professor to arrive only to see the majority of the college profs congregating on the college green below protesting loudly, while up in our classroom our tuition clocks were ticking. We packed up our books and went home.
It was true, this was probably not the most hospitable environment for a young member of the Reagan Revolution. I listened, I learned. I learned up close and personal a counter vision of America through the writings of great 20th century American writers as well as through the cultural history of my American studies classes. It was not a pretty picture.
I also had a picture of where that counter cultural vision could look like when I went to London to study theatre in my junior year and saw the world as it was in that time in a land that the new Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was taking on by the antlers. London was in many ways a dark place and crumbling place then, in the depths of a deep recession. You could still see evidence of the ruin of World War II and the hideous attempts to rebuild the city with Utopian monstrosities made out of cement.
In the theatre world that I inhabited in London, Thatcher was indeed Enemy #1, as Reagan was back home. There was a General Strike while I was there, something I had never experienced in the United States. The whole city stopped cold and thousands filled Hyde Park in protest.
The theatres, however, did not go dark. Instead, we were treated to left-wing political speeches following the performance. Many in the audience walked out shouting back at the stage - and I remember thinking as they walked out, so, could it be true that not everyone dislikes Margaret Thatcher after all?
By the time my senior year came along I was doing more speaking out, frustrated by the outlandish opinions I kept hearing from many of my profs. I remember one time one of my profs sat on his desk dangling his legs lecturing us in his jeans about the heyday of the 1960s and the cultural explosion after President John F. Kennedy was killed. "You remember when Kennedy was killed," he said, waiting for us all to agree with him.
"Actually, no," I said. I remembered I was only two years old when Kennedy was killed. "To me Kennedy's always been dead, like Abraham Lincoln."
The prof stared at me for a long time in the silently uncomfortable classroom. I kept thinking, okay, did I say something wrong? He must have been looking around the classroom, made up of too many bow-tied preppies for comfort and wondering what happened. He must have wondered when he got old.
But my resolve was firm. I took a political science class in the midst of writing my senior thesis. My prof was provocative and I spoke up as though provoked. I'd sometimes regret it later but I had just about had it - I was ready to be done with college and get on with it. This time, in my Political Science class, I was told by the prof to come see him at his office. "Uh oh," I thought.
I was familiar with the offices of my Fine Arts profs, I had spent many hours with my profs there - but it was filled with writers and actors and directors, it was sparsely decorated with the interior decor consisting primarily of posters announcing coming readings by poets and short story writers and student plays with props from shows done and yet to be done lying about the halls. Walking into the Social Sciences offices was quite a different story. It was a hotbed of radical slogans and hipness. It had potted plants. It was where it was happening. It was intimidating. I braced myself as I approached my political science professor's office. I was in for it, this Reaganite, this conservative, this Republican.
I approached the door and saw him, sitting with his hands folded, waiting for me behind his desk that was pointed right toward the door. No one who went by would miss his attention, and no one who went by would miss what was boldly displayed on the wall behind his desk. I stood there stunned.
On the wall behind him, as though looking approvingly over his shoulder were two towering portraits. One was Ronald Reagan. The other was Margaret Thatcher.
"Come in," my professor said to me with a smile, as I sat down across from his desk, still stunned, "I'd like to recommend you to a stipend internship in journalism in Washington this summer. Would you be interested?" He showed me an article about the internship in the current issue of The National Review.
I said okay, he did, and I went to Washington.
When I heard of Margaret Thatcher's passing this past week, I remembered that portrait on the wall of my professor's office. He knew, even then, that these two towering figures would change the world. And he was right. They did. And they changed my world too.
And now like Kennedy and Lincoln, they are gone. There is a generation now that sits in the classroom as I did, who will think of these people as people of the past, long dead. But while they are gone, their ideas and ideals, their hopes, their dreams remain again in a world not unlike the one they once knew. Even now.
So what happened?
In the first semester of my freshman year, I sat in my dorm room and watched a speech:
That was that. I was fired up. I joined the Reagan Revolution.
There were many times during college where I did feel like some lonely little petunia in a giant onion patch. This was despite the fact that even though many of my college profs were obviously children of the 60s, my classmates seemed to resemble Alex P. Keaton far more than Abbie Hoffman. Politics was not on the front burner for my classmates. For my progressive profs, it was a different matter.
I recall looking out the windows of my American studies class waiting for the professor to arrive only to see the majority of the college profs congregating on the college green below protesting loudly, while up in our classroom our tuition clocks were ticking. We packed up our books and went home.
It was true, this was probably not the most hospitable environment for a young member of the Reagan Revolution. I listened, I learned. I learned up close and personal a counter vision of America through the writings of great 20th century American writers as well as through the cultural history of my American studies classes. It was not a pretty picture.
I also had a picture of where that counter cultural vision could look like when I went to London to study theatre in my junior year and saw the world as it was in that time in a land that the new Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was taking on by the antlers. London was in many ways a dark place and crumbling place then, in the depths of a deep recession. You could still see evidence of the ruin of World War II and the hideous attempts to rebuild the city with Utopian monstrosities made out of cement.
In the theatre world that I inhabited in London, Thatcher was indeed Enemy #1, as Reagan was back home. There was a General Strike while I was there, something I had never experienced in the United States. The whole city stopped cold and thousands filled Hyde Park in protest.
The theatres, however, did not go dark. Instead, we were treated to left-wing political speeches following the performance. Many in the audience walked out shouting back at the stage - and I remember thinking as they walked out, so, could it be true that not everyone dislikes Margaret Thatcher after all?
By the time my senior year came along I was doing more speaking out, frustrated by the outlandish opinions I kept hearing from many of my profs. I remember one time one of my profs sat on his desk dangling his legs lecturing us in his jeans about the heyday of the 1960s and the cultural explosion after President John F. Kennedy was killed. "You remember when Kennedy was killed," he said, waiting for us all to agree with him.
"Actually, no," I said. I remembered I was only two years old when Kennedy was killed. "To me Kennedy's always been dead, like Abraham Lincoln."
The prof stared at me for a long time in the silently uncomfortable classroom. I kept thinking, okay, did I say something wrong? He must have been looking around the classroom, made up of too many bow-tied preppies for comfort and wondering what happened. He must have wondered when he got old.
But my resolve was firm. I took a political science class in the midst of writing my senior thesis. My prof was provocative and I spoke up as though provoked. I'd sometimes regret it later but I had just about had it - I was ready to be done with college and get on with it. This time, in my Political Science class, I was told by the prof to come see him at his office. "Uh oh," I thought.
I was familiar with the offices of my Fine Arts profs, I had spent many hours with my profs there - but it was filled with writers and actors and directors, it was sparsely decorated with the interior decor consisting primarily of posters announcing coming readings by poets and short story writers and student plays with props from shows done and yet to be done lying about the halls. Walking into the Social Sciences offices was quite a different story. It was a hotbed of radical slogans and hipness. It had potted plants. It was where it was happening. It was intimidating. I braced myself as I approached my political science professor's office. I was in for it, this Reaganite, this conservative, this Republican.
I approached the door and saw him, sitting with his hands folded, waiting for me behind his desk that was pointed right toward the door. No one who went by would miss his attention, and no one who went by would miss what was boldly displayed on the wall behind his desk. I stood there stunned.
On the wall behind him, as though looking approvingly over his shoulder were two towering portraits. One was Ronald Reagan. The other was Margaret Thatcher.
"Come in," my professor said to me with a smile, as I sat down across from his desk, still stunned, "I'd like to recommend you to a stipend internship in journalism in Washington this summer. Would you be interested?" He showed me an article about the internship in the current issue of The National Review.
I said okay, he did, and I went to Washington.
When I heard of Margaret Thatcher's passing this past week, I remembered that portrait on the wall of my professor's office. He knew, even then, that these two towering figures would change the world. And he was right. They did. And they changed my world too.
And now like Kennedy and Lincoln, they are gone. There is a generation now that sits in the classroom as I did, who will think of these people as people of the past, long dead. But while they are gone, their ideas and ideals, their hopes, their dreams remain again in a world not unlike the one they once knew. Even now.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Monday, April 08, 2013
Bono is back
Listen carefully to Bono's message - it's a great message - but listen not just to what he says, but how he says it. Listen carefully.
Why the manner of the message matters.
Why the manner of the message matters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)