Confirmed: Archbishop Peter Akinola denied entry into Jordan

Our sources confirm that Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola was denied entry into Jordan.

Interesting little story here.


FRIDAY UPDATE: The New York Times is now reporting that Archbishop Drexel Gomez of the West Indies was also denied entry into Jordan. Archbishop Gomez is the chair of the Covenant Design Committee.

The Lambeth equivalent of the "October Surprise" in June

It is now clear that the wedding was a political time bomb set to go off as the Lambeth equivalent of an "October Surprise." What we see here is a rector who kept this impending wedding a secret so that there would be maximized media coverage (forget the idea that this is just a mere "distraction," Bishop Chartres) - this is the type of street politics that has been underway in the U.S. churches. We didn't become refugees out of our Episcopal homes for nothing. Learn from our mistakes, sir - this is the real thing and they take no prisoners. You either deal with it swiftly (and be ready for what will happen to you, as has happened to Peter Akinola) or attempt to sweep it away as a distraction. Welcome to our world, sir.

Richard Chartres, the Bishop of London, has written a stern letter to the rector of the church where the wedding of two male priests was conducted. Unfortunately, as we see in the posting below this one, he has appointed a buddy of Martin Dudley - not exactly impartial is he? Either that is an attempt to sweep this under the rug in time for Lambeth and to keep sleeping giants like this or this in the fold, or to place such personal pressure on the rector (which in England they call a vicar) as to cause him to fold in contrition. Guess we'll see.

Here's the letter:

Dear Martin,

You have sought to justify your actions to the BBC and in various newspapers but have failed more than two weeks after the service to communicate with me.

I read in the press that you had been planning this event since November. I find it astonishing that you did not take the opportunity to consult your Bishop.

You describe the result as “familiar words reordered and reconfigured carrying new meanings.” I note that the order of service, which I have now received, includes the phrase “With this ring I thee bind, with my body I thee worship”.

At first sight this seems to break the House of Bishops Guidelines which as I explained in my letter of December 6th 2005 apply the traditional teaching of the Church of England to the new circumstances created by the enactment of Civil Partnerships.

The point at issue is not Civil Partnerships themselves or the relation of biblical teaching to homosexual practice. There is of course a range of opinion on these matters in the Church and, as you know, homophobia is not tolerated in the Diocese of London. The real issue is whether you wilfully defied the discipline of the Church and broke your oath of canonical obedience to your Bishop.

The Archbishops have already issued a statement in which they say that “those clergy who disagree with the Church’s teaching are at liberty to seek to persuade others within the Church of the reasons why they believe, in the light of Scripture, tradition and reason that it should be changed. But they are not at liberty simply to disregard it.”

St Bartholomew’s is not a personal fiefdom. You serve there as an ordained minister of the Church of England, under the authority of the Canons and as someone who enjoys my licence. I have already asked the Archdeacon of London to commence the investigation and I shall be referring the matter to the Chancellor of the Diocese. Before I do this, I am giving you an opportunity to make representations to me direct.

Yours faithfully.

The Rt Revd & Rt Hon Richard Chartres DD FSA

Yes, this was the Lambeth equivalent of

London Times reports "investigator" appointed by Bishop of London is buddies with Church of England rector under investigation

Oh what tangled webs we weave. From Ruth Gledhill of the London Times:

Yes, it is the case that the Bishop of London has asked the Archdeacon of London to investigate. But I don't think Bart's Rector, Fr Martin Dudley, will be too worried. The Archdeacon was an honoured guest at his recent birthday party, and the two are great friends.

Read the rest here.

Smashing the Silos and Tearing down the Walls

It seems to me that the four quadrants we see in the political test that Mark Harris alludes to here at the Cafe and elsewhere is closer to the truth then Graham Kings' quadrants, or what I might describe as Graham's Silos.

In the four political quadrants you have degrees of residence, it's not a done deal. Above the horizontal axis you have what I might call those who primarily desire Order (Authoritarian) and below the axis you have those who I might say primarily desire Freedom (Libertarians).

What Graham Kings' graph doesn't account for is the fact that orthodox Episcopalians and those who have separated from TEC remain in Communion with one another - not just ecclesiastically but also relationally - we have moved out of our silos.

For example, I received communion at the Diocese of Virginia's Diocesan Council earlier this year - though in court with the Diocese of Virginia, I take communion in the Diocese of Virginia. I've taken Communion several times in Episcopal Churches this year, including other churches in the Diocese of Virginia and the Diocese of Washington. But this is understandable, not from Graham's Silos but because politically I'm below the horizontal axis. I am more politically libertarian than authoritarian. What matters to me are the relationships, not who owns the chalice.

The events of recent days in London of the marriage between two ordained men in the COE Church was done by those who are also probably below the horizontal axis, though over on the far left toward the anarchy side. Their actions are more akin to exerting their freedom than in upholding Order, as the terse statement that came from Canterbury and York illustrates. In fact, it appears to be their intention to set off an explosion (oh I know, they say "who little ole me?" but that's just part of the crazymaking) not only at those who have opposing theological views (i.e. Gafcon and Reformed) - but those who in fact hold the same theological views as they do but retreat into Order - like Rowan Williams.

Rowan Williams is on the left politically, but is an institutionalist so is above the horizontal axis. In fact, he's diagonally across from me (I just don't know how far in). He will frustrate all of us - conservative or progressive who are below the horizontal axis, whether we are aligned with Integrity on the Left or GAFCON on the Right. We all don't know how far up the grid he is or if he might at any moment cross the line. The activists in London set off a bomb to see where he might land. His statement with York indicates he's not that far in, but he's in. Rowan will preserve order over freedom.

It is then no wonder that those who are theologically conservative but above the horizontal axis - like Graham Kings or John Howe - would do all they can to support Rowan Williams because they are both devoted to Order. They live above the horizontal axis on the right. That makes them natural allies with others above the axis, even if they are on the left.

I find this way of thinking - as much as I often grieve over the politicization of the church - as frankly a more accurate - and creative - way of understanding not only our differences, but also how we can sometimes surprisingly find ourselves allies or at least friends when we least expect it. We can be diligent when one quadrant is pitted against another and recognize it for the political strategic decision is is. In my case, the enemy of my enemy may also be my enemy. And that can be plenty surprising.

It was a discovery to see that Mark Harris is also below the horizontal axis and closer to what I might term the "Freedom" side then the "Order" side (you can take the test here). How close we find ourselves to the vertical line might denote that we have some common ground - as I know we do since we both support Five Talents, for example.

The preaching of hierarchical structures by 815 has been a big surprise to me since I assumed that that all the progressives were below the horizontal line - that they were more aligned to freedom than order - sometimes to anarchy. But this has not been the case in TEC - where at least in the legal and canonical theatre, those aligned with 815 are in the upper left quadrant, politically liberal but authoritarian. They are preaching structures over relationships, they are not political libertarians. This is quite illuminating.

It helps explain why they can find John Howe a useful ally since he is also above the horizontal line, but on the right. He too craves Order over Freedom. That can come in handy if imposing Order is your primary concern. But it can cause tremendous rebellion as well, as Great Britain found out in 1776.

It is clear then that if you are above the horizontal line, you will want to gain security by pitting the two sides below the line at each other. That would mean you have a battle in the streets between what I guess we could call the Integrity lobby (and all their many facades and umbrella organizations) and GAFCON. If these two wings fight with one another into oblivion (blessings vs border crossings) then those above the line step back and watch the rest implode and pick up the spoils.

In that way, 815 could be encouraging the political antics of the left - hoping it will inflame those on the right into public blood baths of the messy kind and in doing so, rise above the fray and impose order as a solution to the chaos - the Episcopal Communion. But that may not be what those who desire freedom will want in the long run. At some point, all the orthodox will be gone and then what? How much will those who desire Order first tolerate those who desire Freedom first? Getting the marriage certificate and the consecration may not be everything one bartered for in the end.

For those of us who continually pray for a peaceful resolution - or even a peaceful cease fire - it's clear that if Order is your primary focus, then this is not going to happen. It can't - because Order is the dominant value. Seeking peace means tolerating a certain amount of creative chaos. It will not be neat - it will be messy. It seems that those in the upper quadrant of the left cannot so easily handle creative chaos - and neither can those on the right. Ultimately they want Order.

But for those of us who value freedom (NOTE: I'm using shorthands here - as in the test there are level of degrees as the illustration shows) we can think creatively of how we might be able to call a cease fire as we try to find resolution. For us, it is not ordered structures but relationships built on trust that would hold us together through such a process. It's Jefferson and Adams banding together - and those two were so different, they spent most of their time fighting, but in the end they found peace and America is built on both their ideals. Thank God they didn't kill each other.

The structures of TEC are imploding and imposing more stringent attempts to maintain the semblance of order (new canons to discipline the laity, more lawsuits, more defrockings and inhibitions) does not solve the problem! The grip tightens which lessens freedom - freedom to be creative and to love and to have the audacity to risk failure. There can be no growth, spiritually or as a church, if we are not free to risk failure.

I maintain that for all the ConCom's protests - many of them are now finding themselves slipping under the horizontal axis. And what Rowan is realizing if our sources are correct is that those who are below the horizontal line on the left are not loyal to the institution. They are using the institution for their own political agenda and that's not lost on him, believe me. The events of this past month went too far. Or as Janis Joplin sang, freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. I am not that far from the horizontal line to discard the importance of order and of institutions. I am not an anarchist. But the actions in London proved to be a form of ecclesiastical anarchy.

Again, where Graham Kings analogy breaks down is that it does not grasp that there are many in the Common Cause Partnership and Gafcon allies that desire order, but it's order based on a common vision of scripture and the trinity and the place of common worship. not on propping up old broken structures. The Church does not save us. That's a job for Jesus.

It is for freedom Christ came to set us free. He didn't bring us authoritarian order (though he could have - Judas and the other disciples expected it and He let them down), he brought us true freedom in Christ. I would maintain that the freedom we enjoy informs our reading of scripture - to read scripture is not to read it as an oppressive rule book of a Cranky God out to play Blue Meany to His people, but as the autobiography of God our Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and of His people. The scriptures are alive as He is alive and they breathe into us freedom, a freedom born in Jesus - it is a freedom to do good. It's one of the great paradoxes. "He that loses his life for My sake, finds it." That's not holding tightly, as we would when we crave order, but by letting go - which seems to be the last thing we think of to do these days. Let go.

Our nation was founded on a document that spelled out our freedom in the most vivid terms. It has since then gotten into our DNA. The Declaration of Independence was not about imposing authoritarian structures on the American colonies but about being set free from them - including the Church of England. We in Virginia used to remember that.

This is why many of us call what's happening to us in the Anglican Communion the "realignment." We have to think differently about ourselves, about our structures, about our relationships to one another, about smashing the silos and tearing down the walls. The Episcopal Church wishes to live in a Silo of their own making, while many of us - surprising allies perhaps - wish to tear those Silos down and be set free - not to be autonomous anarchists, but to be born again.

Tuesday Afternoon at the Cafe: It's all about Shakespeare

Time out from The Troubles. This is a full show, so order a couple of butterbeers and chai and consider this informative show on our favorite playwright. We are not exactly a big fan of Howard Bloom, in fact, in our Shakespeare classes at Georgetown we were forbidden to even utter the name Shakespeare in class, but as Bloom wrote a book about the playwright, the interview is fascinating, as are the interviews that follow. It's all about Shakespeare.

Archbishop of Canterbury and Archbishop of York issue joint statement on recent same sex wedding in Anglican Diocese of London

Rowan Williams and John Sentamu issue joint statement on same sex wedding officiated by an Church of England priest at St. Bartholomew the Great in London. From here.

Tuesday 17 June 2008

"We have heard the reports of the recent service in St Bartholomew the Great with very great concern. We cannot comment on the specific circumstances because they are the subject of an investigation launched by the Bishop of London.

On the general issue, however, the various reference points for the Church of England's approach to human sexuality (1987 Synod motion, 1991 Bishops' Statement- Issues in Human Sexuality- , Lambeth motion 1:10, House of Bishops' 2005 statement on civil partnerships) are well known and remain current.

Those clergy who disagree with the Church's teaching are at liberty to seek to persuade others within the Church of the reasons why they believe, in the light of Scripture, tradition and reason that it should be changed. But they are not at liberty simply to disregard it."

Or what?

At the turn of the tide ...

"All you have to decide
is what to do with the time
that is given to you."

Bishop Duncan appoints "Collegiate Vicar" for the Association of Western Anglican Congegations

The realignment continues. More and more the Anglicans are banding together in regions as members of the Common Cause Partnership. Since this region does not have its own American bishop yet, they will be represented by a Collegiate Vicar for now. The Anglican District of Virginia is represented by Bishop David Bena (local), as well as Bishop John Guernsey and Bishop Martyn Minns (national). Watch this space. From here.

NEWPORT BEACH, CA — June 14, 2008–- Bishop Robert Duncan, Moderator of The Common Cause Partnership (CCP), appointed a “Collegiate Vicar” for The Association of Western Anglican Congregations. The decision was announced to the Western Anglicans House of Delegates meeting in Newport Beach today. As the Collegiate Vicar, The Rev. Bill Thompson, Rector of All Saints Anglican Church in Long Beach, California, will serve as an ambassadorial link between Western Anglicans — a cluster of 21 orthodox Anglican congregations in Southern California and Arizona — and the Common Cause Partnership (CCP).

“The appointment of the Collegiate Vicar is a wonderful step in the process of unifying orthodox Anglican believers in North America,” said Ron Speers, Western Anglicans President. “We are modeling at the grass roots what CCP is doing at the national and international level.” Thus far Western Anglican member congregations have canonical ties to the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone of South America, The Anglican Province of Uganda, and The Reformed Episcopal Church. All Common Cause Partners churches in the region, whatever their jurisdiction, are invited to participate.

“We’ve already deployed dozens of clergy and laity in shared ministries, as we await developments at the national level,” Fr. Bill Thompson explained. “And we’re not about to recreate the dysfunctional model of top-down management,” he said. Fr. Russell Martin, Rector of St. Timothy and St. Titus Anglican Church in San Diego, California, concurred. “We’re all about the historic Christian faith that’s based on the deity of Jesus Christ and the authority of Holy Scripture,” he said. “Ministry happens person-to-person at the grass roots level. A hierarchy can’t make it happen. We’re looking forward to bishops who defend the historic faith, who share the faith with the unchurched and plant new churches, not just leaders wielding monarchical power.”

“Hopefully, the appointment of the Collegiate Vicar for us can serve as a model for other CCP-related church clusters elsewhere in the country,” Speers said.

The Western Anglicans Board of Directors elected The Rev. Bill Thompson Chairman and CEO, succeeding Speers, a lay person, who continues as President and Chief Administrative Officer. Fr. Thompson also serves as Dean of the Western Convocation of the Anglican Communion Network.

For more information about the Association of Western Anglican Congregations please visit westernanglicans.org.

BB NOTE: I believe the photo is Bill Thompson. If I'm mistaken - or correct - could someone let me know? Thank you!

PreLambeth FilmFest: Name that Tune

Guess Americans aren't the only ones who love their land with gusto. But of course, this land called Cymru is known for its robust and enthusiastic singing and public speaking (indeed, as it is, many of our own ancestors who settled in America originally came from this land, which may explain a lot) and it continues to be known as "the land of song." Y Ddraig Goch ddyry gychwyn.

Looks like their people haven't lost their gusto, which might be a good thing to keep in mind in the days ahead.

London Telegraph All eyes turn to Rowan Williams after two male priests marry in a lavish ceremony held in historic London Anglican church

BB NOTE: We continue to maintain that this is a political action event timed to follow Gene Robinson's wedding last weekend and to push the Communion into schism (remember this?) as Lambeth approaches next month. It was a wedding - check out the side-by-side analysis of the wedding liturgy here). That the Episcopal (and now Anglican) activists would pull such a public stunt as this inside an historic Anglican church in the Diocese of London no less illustrates a desperation that frankly should cause the orthodox Anglicans to pause.

This is classic crazymaking - and if you don't know what crazymaking is, learn more about it here and here and here - and here. The classic crazymaking responses can be read here and here, but put your cup of tea down before you read them or watch the twisted interview with the celebrant, especially if you read the liturgy comparison first. Really, put the cup of tea down first.

Make no mistake about it, the point of this wedding is the equivalent of setting off an ecclesiastical bomb, especially just days before GAFCON begins. Perhaps the response from London and Canterbury should keep that fact in mind.

From here.

LONDON---The Church of England's first homosexual wedding could not have come at a worse time for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams.

A breakaway group of conservative Anglican archbishops meets this week, threatening to split the worldwide communion over the issue of homosexuality, and the 10‑yearly Lambeth Conference starts next month. The future of the 80 million-strong Anglican Communion hangs by one of Dr Williams's whiskers.

Anglicans in Africa and Asia are infuriated enough with the liberal North American churches, where openly homosexual clergy and church blessings for same-sex couples are now commonplace. But the news that two male priests used a traditional wedding liturgy, involving the exchange of rings and vows, in a Church of England church could push them to the edge.

The marriage calls into question the authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury – one of four fundamental points of unity for the worldwide communion – and tears at the very heart of Anglicanism.

Only three years ago, Dr Williams flew to meet the African archbishops to reassure them that the Church's teaching on sexuality would not be compromised by the introduction of the Civil Partnerships Act. The Church issued guidelines allowing clergy to register their relationships on the condition that they assured their bishop that they would abstain from sex. It said homosexual couples should not be given formal services to celebrate their relationship.

The archbishop stressed that priests who broke these rules would be disciplined. However, a number of clergy have since performed so called "blessing services" for homosexual couples. These are significantly different from wedding services: they involve no wedding rite; there is no exchange of vows, no bridesmaids or pageboys. Most are carried out quietly. Despite being controversial, not one has resulted in disciplinary proceedings.

The fact that one vicar has actually conducted a proper wedding service, using such traditional liturgy and furthermore, between two priests, makes the issue impossible to ignore.

Even Gene Robinson, the homosexual cleric whose appointment as a bishop in the United States triggered the current crisis, had a relatively low-key blessing service in comparison with the pageantry of this wedding.

Some may try to argue that the relationship is not legally recognised as a marriage. But there can be no doubt that in every other respect this service constituted a church wedding.

The Rev Martin Dudley, who presided at the service, is understood to have received a plea from the Bishop of London, the Rt Rev Richard Chartres, not to offer such a ceremony. His decision to ignore this request leaves the Church's guidelines in tatters and brings the Anglican Communion to the brink of irreversible schism.

The eyes of the Anglican world will now be on Dr Williams.

The archbishop will be expected to act by showing strong leadership. This will test his authority and potentially shape the future of Anglicanism.

While the pro-gay lobby will argue that this wedding is part of being an inclusive Church, the traditionalists claim that homosexual behaviour is a sin and conceding on this would be to undermine the authority of the Bible.

It is set to ignite a battle for the soul of the Church.

UPDATE: The Bishop of London, the Rt. Rev. Richard Chartres has now ordered an investigation by the Archdeacon of London. Read more about it here.

Saturday Night at the Cafe: Lambeth Marketplace Choir Rehearses for July Debut

Okay, not really - but then again, one never knows.

American-style activism spreads to Church of England: Westminster Abbey priest marries his partner in COE Church

SUNDAY MORNING UPDATE: Peter Ould has done a fascinating "side by side" analysis of the marriage liturgy used in the church "wedding" ceremony of the two male priests in the Church of England. You can read it all here.

During one of my periodical sojourns to London to visit family, I remember reading an article in one of the major papers berating the then-Prime Minister Tony Blair for permitting former government ministers access to current government ministers. The paper was up in arms over the practice, shouting about it's unethical standards and engaging in a rhetorical meltdown over the horror of it all. About four paragraphs into the article, the paper finally describes the practice as it is called in United States: lobbying.

It wasn't clear if it was official lobbying that they were up in arms over or if it was because it was yet another sign that American-style politicking had recrossed the Atlantic and was finding a new comfortable home in Tony Blair's newish government. All ready he was an "American-style" politician, called "New Labour" much as Bill Clinton was once heralded as a "New Democrat."

American-style street politics has been raging through the Episcopal Church for quite some time now, since the 60s ended and the lesser political activists went searching for new venues, some quickly discovering the Episcopal Church, a perfect venue with it's overwrought governmental structures and it's bourgeoisie facades. Perfect! For thirty years the street activists - one can hardly call them liberal - labored away, going to endless meetings and taking minutes, getting elected to councils and taking minutes, getting ordained and taking minutes. At the same time, the renewal was also underway but the great majority of those leaders intentionally stayed clear of the political realm, leaving the house without adult supervision.

Now those same street-style political strategies are crossing the Atlantic and one of the first public examples of this comes in the news today from London. A "Priest Vicar" at Westminster Abbey, the Rev. Peter Cowell, has "married" another COE priest, the Rev. Dr. David Lord, in the Church of England's Diocese of London. They were married using an adaption of the marriage service from the Book of Common Prayer, complete with rings, vows, and the Eucharist. Their liturgical imagery was to eroticise the relationship between King David and Jonathon. The marriage between the two men was held inside one of London's historic churches, St. Bartholomew the Great within a stone's throw from our old college hangout, the Barbican.

What will the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London do about it?

Now, while the activists will emphasize that we should send the toasters and gift cards, the point remains that this was a direct political action. It's goal is political.

It was timed to coincide just as GAFCON is convening and a month out before Lambeth. Last weekend we had Gene Robinson's wedding in the Episcopal Church. Looks like the brethren in England did not want to let him hog all the limelight.

But what it means is that the COE activists have borrowed the infamous TEC activists' playbook of recent years. When there is organized opposition to their marketed strategy of prophetic inclusion, then it's time for drama. Now that drama is crossing the Atlantic from Minneapolis to London on the eve of the Lambeth Conference.

We remember that Bishop John Spong had a meltdown in a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury where he accused Rowan Williams of ecclesiastical treason, that Rowan Williams was picked because he endorsed by word and action the inclusion of men marrying men and women marrying women. When Dr. Williams made several key decisions that undermined those activist goals, the street activists in the Episcopal Church were outraged.

They were emboldened when Rowan Williams was appointed the new Archbishop of Canterbury. They threw all caution to the wind and flew forward at an accelerated pace, confident that Canterbury would not blink but look the other way. The Episcopal activists were very worried that their momentum had peaked at Denver's General Convention and if they did not move fast, they be set back decades. Their base of support was aging - who could guarantee that they would have sufficient numbers in another 20 years to achieve their political goals? It did not look good.

The resistance from the orthodox at Denver 2000 shocked them into taking a more drastic and dramatic steps along a different route to force the Communion to comply (never dreaming that they could not control the developing structures of the Anglican Communion as they had for decades with their handouts and their creation and funding of the Anglican Consultative Council - ACC). While they had control of the structures, the structures were a fallacy - they were so heavily manipulated that they gave 815 and the base a sense of security that was not - and is not - there. They were hoisted by their own petard.

Now we see the activists in the Church of England employing the same kind of political strategy. Since their bishops are appointed ultimately by Queen Elizabeth, consecrating a bishop to fit their political agenda is not going to be their mode of opererations. They couldn't risk what they can't control. So they picked a priest associated with the iconic Westminster Abbey to tie the church in knots instead.

Apparently the Rev. Peter Cowell is also attached to St Bartholomew the Less Smithfield Gate, which is a very old chapel at St. Bartholomew's hospital. He is an adviser to the Bishop of London on hospital chaplaincies. He preaches at St. Margaret's, part of the Westminster Abbey purview and the official church of Parliament. Parliament.

No, we're not talking about a simple country vicar.

A very interesting bit about the venue, St. Bartholomew the Great Church. It has very clear ties to American benefactors. It's the classic set of a an Anglican Church and you go in there and poke around and not be stuck in long queues with steep fees as you would at Westminster Abbey. Their website has an entire page devoted to reach out to its American donors.

Last weekend we had Bishop Gene Robinson's wedding in an Episcopal Church in the Diocese of New Hampshire. This weekend we have the wedding of a priest from Westminster Abbey marrying another male priest in a London COE Church.

It's not about love, it's not about marriage - it's about street activism in the run-up to Lambeth and we wonder if it's not a sign that things may not be boding well for the progressives (we still don't know how The Episcopal Church is paying the millions and millions of dollars for their litigation warfare). It might behoove us all to take stock in the fact that the activists in TEC and now the Church of England have given up on working patiently inside the church structures and instead have taken to the streets with their direct ecclesiastical political activism. This puts lobbying out the window and kicked off the ledge.

The attention now turns to the Bishop of London - what will he do? A story from last April is displayed prominently on the front page of the St. Bartholomew the Great's webpage. What will he do? And Westminster Abbey, as I recall, has a separate covering - what will they do?

Interesting tidbit. On May 1, it was announced that Sir Stephen Lamport, former Private Secretary to Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales, has been appointed Receiver General of Westminster Abbey. He will take up his new post later this year.

"The post of Receiver General is the most senior lay position at the Abbey where Sir Stephen will take charge of nearly 200 staff and an organization with a turnover of more than £10 million a year," the press release includes. So obviously, a priest connected to Westminster Abbey will have royal attention as well (as an aside, we do wonder if, with this appointment, there is preparation all ready underway for the Succession). Needless to say, it's effective to have a priest vicar from Westminster Abbey getting married to his male partner to be assured of getting attention - royal or not.

If British Anglicans thought the mess was just over here on our side of the pond and we are left to sort it out, it is time to wake up and smell the hot tea brewing. Otherwise, plan to pop down to Marks and Sparks for that special little gift. Indeed, there will be more special events to come.

Farewell, Tim

We're taking it a bit easy today. Tim Russert (May 7, 1950 – June 13, 2008) was a hero and here at the Cafe this weekend we're lifting our glasses in tribute to Tim for being a perennial light in the darkness, a man of great faith and hope, as a Catholic, as a journalist, as a father, husband, son, and as an American.

This one's for Tim, the biggest Springsteen fan of them all:

Oh no - Tim Russert has died

The "Explainer-in-Chief." One of the bright shining lights in the media darkness. His famous whiteboard he uses on Election Night should go in the Smithsonian. How can we have an election without him? I'm shocked.

Update: He collapsed today from a heart attack while at his NBC News office here in Washington and died.

From here.

WASHINGTON -- NBC News is reporting that Tim Russert has died. Russert was the managing editor and moderator of "Meet the Press" and political analyst for "NBC Nightly News" and the "Today" show. He also anchored "The Tim Russert Show," a weekly interview program on MSNBC. He wrote to New York Times #1 bestsellers -- "Big Russ and Me" "Wisdom of Our Fathers." Russert took over "Meet the Press" in December 1991. It became the most watched Sunday morning interview program in the country. It is the longest-running program in television history. Russert joined NBC News in 1984. He was born in Buffalo, N.Y., on May 7, 1950. He graduated from Canisius High School, John Carroll University and with honors from the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. Before joining NBC, Russert served as counselor in the New York governor's office in Albany in 1983 and 1984 and as special counsel in the U.S. Senate from 1977 to 1982. He was admitted to the bar in New York and D.C. Russert is survived by his wife, Maureen Orth, a writer for Vanity Fair magazine, and their son, Luke.

Power Outage hits DC

DC is fun city, with a major power outage. Walking through a metro station in the dark is, like, fun. Walking up the Dupont Circle escalator and living to tell about it is funner.

Thursday Night at the Cafe: Dedicated to all ya'all packing your bags for GAFCON

Group Think at 2009 General Convention: But will they serve Kool Aid at Snack Time?

One wonders just what the TEC laity thinks of this helpfulness masquerading as a "public narrative." So much for conscience, it's now about collectivism. Democracy, Schmocracy, that's so last century. Now we are enlightened! Whatever happened to those old democratic principles of debating, deliberation, and voting? Gone with the wind? Imagine if the U.S. Congress begins to engage in these kind of tactics? What - are they going to replace the Speaker of the House now with the GroupThink Moderator?

Here's TEC's story of initiating their Anaheim-style GroupThink:

On June 16, the day after Council's Albuquerque meeting ends, 65 people, including all of Council's provincial representatives and the members of its CIM committee, will remain for a full day of coaching in public narrative. They will be joined by the co-chairs of the General Convention Worship Committee and other invited Convention deputies, bishops and others. Some of the people who participate on June 16 will then train others during the provincial synod meetings leading up to General Convention.

Use of the public-narrative tool will ripple out from the Council's introduction and the June 16 session in ways that are aimed at building "a cadre of facilitators who will be able to lead General Convention through a public-narrative discussion about mission,” Straub said. "It's not just for convention," he added, saying that “the purpose is to have an impact on the Church at large.”

Anderson envisions convention participants taking the skills they learn back to their dioceses and helping other people tell their stories, listen to others and then find their own answers what she calls "the so-what question."

"The Episcopal Church isn't good at stating its identity," she suggested. "The people in the Episcopal Church don’t have a common language to talk about who we are in the Episcopal Church and what we are called to do because of who we are."

A public narrative is is a process of airbrushing out the unhelpful bits to reimagine reality more to a uniform GroupThink's liking. Group Think by any other name still smells.

Here's eight warning signs:

Illusion of Invulnerability: Members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk, and are overly optimistic.

Collective Rationalization: Members discredit and explain away warning contrary to group thinking.

Illusion of Morality: Members believe their decisions are morally correct, ignoring the ethical consequences of their decisions.

Excessive Stereotyping:The group constructs negative stereotypes of rivals outside the group.

Pressure for Conformity: Members pressure any in the group who express arguments against the group's stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, viewing such opposition as disloyalty.

Self-Censorship: Members withhold their dissenting views and counter-arguments.

Illusion of Unanimity: Members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group's decision; silence is seen as consent.

Mindguards: Some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the group from adverse information that might threaten group complacency.

Read the whole thing here and ponder. Incidentally, could someone get Franz Mesmer on the phone? Right. And do pass the Kool Aid please.

Potter Watch: J.K. Rowlings "prequel" released today

Read it all here. Click on Read our author's stories. Let's say we now learn more about Sirius' motorcyle. The story was sold at auction yesterday for $48,855.

Wilberforce!

Question: Who were the ones on broomsticks?

BabyBlue's Political Compass

The Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: 1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.05

Surprised?

You can do your own here.
Tip of the TinFoil to Brad Drell.

LATER: It looks like it's a lonely quandrant. Wonder what would happen if they measured writers and artists and musicians instead of politicians and political leaders for their scores? Perhaps we might find more company?