Aaargh!

Call me slow at times perhaps,
‘preoccupied’ might be a more apt description considering how the last many years have been spent in getting beyond the decade of my life which one professional referred to as ‘psychic rape in the name of God’ and avoiding the subsequent self-victimization one could have collapsed into.
It’s also been the very real adventure in grace of growing into the gift of being born a gay man and person of faith and claiming the blessings of both.
Striving to be authentically present and of service in the darkest years of the AIDS hollocaust here in Montreal; and to be authentically alive and present in the decades since, with all they have brought.

But this week-end has seen another one of those ‘aah-ha’ moments
long overdue perhaps (what took you so long,, I can almost hear one particular and very dear sister asking me already).
Maybe not quite on the scale of July 27, 2006, but one of those tight almost inevitable places when you’re dancing with the Holy Spirit; where almost everything cannot help but be changed- wether it’s broken open or now resonantly perceived in a larger context and understanding.
And as so often in my life there’s a person involved.

In this instance it’s ‘G’ who has been part of my life for more than twenty years, and is one of the very few still among the living who knew my beloved.
‘G’ first turned up as a too-well-intentioned Westmount lady wanting to volunteer for those ‘poor souls suffering with AIDS.’
An Anglophone, barely capable of managing the simplest of conversations in French, she was given to me for sensitization and training. Inspite of the great disparity of our economic backgrounds; our common Anglian background, and our personal struggles with the almost complete absence of both the official Church and practising Christians from the front lines of AIDS service made for a real closeness and prayerful practice.
Since then ‘G’ has gone a long way, and she gives me more credit than I am due when she calls me her chief cheerleader. The lady, and her adult daughter are both living wonders!

And it was ‘G’ who lobbed this particular experience my way.
Knowing that one of the sharpest bites of my current economic situation has been the loss of the freedom to buy books, and being partner of what I personally find an exceptionally rich on-going conversation on faith beyond patriarchy, ‘G’ thought of me when she came across a particular, recently released book. ‘A Lily Among the Thorns: Imagining a New Christian Sexuality’ by Miguel A. De La Torre, professor of social ethics (Illif School of Theology), a director of the Society of Christian Ethics. A single copy ordered several months ago, ‘G’ apparently thought of it as a possible Christmas gift for me. Only one day last fall, out of what she admits was idle curiosity, she dipped into the book herself- and ended up literally throwing it across the room at one point- where it apparently laid for several months.

In the meantime she ordered a second, undamaged copy for me. Which she tried presenting me with when we got together over the holidays.(a story for another time and place). Sufficed to say I ended up with ‘the more interesting copy’ and insisted on ‘G’ inscribing it to make my winning our tussle official.

Since then, ‘G’ has returned to Dr. de La Torre’s offering- leaving me two voice oblique messages, asking if I’ve ‘started’ the book or ‘reached that chapter yet?’

Well, beloved ‘G’ I did, and I have, and ‘that chapter’ has been one of the most agonizing reads in a longtime, and if you knew the contents of my bookshelves, you’d know that is saying a lot.

For me at least, as a person of faith, Dr. De La Torre is an individual at least ‘to be dealt with.’ Having said that, as my read of his offering is still unfinished, it is important for me to make clear this in no way implies a recommendation of the book.


Dr. De la Torre’s struggle is with the misogyny, racism and homophobia in the Bible, and he presents an what could be an interesting alternative to the standard either/or alternatives on Biblical interpretation and inerrancy- most particularly when tacking ‘those verses.’ This post however is not about his methodology. It’s about my experience of that chapter.

‘Liberating the Female Body’ - an innocuous enough title perhaps, though as a gay feminist, I confess to a certain guardedness to anything spoken or written by a straight theologian- no matter how well-intentioned, about my sisters, their lives or bodies or about my LGBT tribe, our lives or our bodies-



Give Dr. De La Torre credit though. I have yet to discover how workable his methodology for liberated Scriptural interpretation might be, however he sure had got my attention, and he sure does know his Scripture. That chapter ends up being an articulate, concise catalogue of the culturally defined objectification, exploitation and abuse of women in both the Hebrew and the New Testaments. In addition, Dr. De La Torre cites some of the consequences of those same verses in subsequent Church culture through the writings of Church patriarchs and those who have followed in their steps. And the whole experience left me positively reeling.

Yes, I might have already known many of the individual objectionable verses, recognized or vaguely remembered others, but it was seeing them all there in one chapter; not even simply listed but contextualized; this wasn’t casual curiosity about something which might prove interesting. This was my faith tradition standing convicted of something I detest, and each new instance registered physically, almost like an actual blow. Several times, I had to stop before continuing, resorting to my meditation training to get beyond my visceral reaction. By the time I had finished I was both raw and angry- very angry, and just sitting there with that inarticulate rawness seemed the most prayerful practice I was capable of late that evening.


Sitting there, a number of questions came to mind
How has this been allowed to go on so long? (cue that question from a certain beloved sister again)How can any intelligent human being, cognizant of these verses and of the insights of contemporary critical Scriptural study continue to claim inerrancy?
Where is the Church- our Church’s self-critical examination, discussion and repentance of the effects of this pernicious misogyny in our structures, theology and practices?
Where have our ordained and consecrated sisters-in-faith learned such heroic patience with their colleagues still trapped in privileged patriarchy? And has their patience indeed been heroic?

How serious is this?
I wouldn’t presume to try to mirror Dr. De La Torre’s scholarship by quoting Scripture, a few quotes from heirs of Scriptural misogyny suffice to show where it leads when unchallenged:

Woman was merely man’s helpmate, a function which pertains to her alone. She is not the image of God but as far as man is concerned, he is by himself the image of God.

Augustine

Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman

Clement of Alexandria ( c 150 -215)

God created man with a broad chest, not broad hips, so that in that part of him he can be wise; but that part out of which filth comes is small. In a woman, this is reversed. That is why she has much filth and little wisdom.

Martin Luther (1483 - 1546)

Does one need to get more specific than Martin Luther to recognize the foulness of Christian misogyny?

Well if Luther weren’t bad enough I would include but one example of Dr. De La Torre’s analysis which could very well be the point at which my friend sent the volume sailing through the air.

Women were considered the weaker sex, in part, because they were perceived to be the negation of men. Throughout the Hebrew Bible, the Law understood the legal concept of person to be male-centered; women (and children) were perceived to be incomplete males. Maleness was considered normative, the ideal. Anything that fell short of the norm fell short of God’s ideal. Thomas Aquinas wrote that ‘woman is [a] defective and misbegotten’ male- probably due to ‘some influence, such as that of a south wind, which is moist.’

This ideology was manifested in how the physical differences between women and men were comprehended. Women’s genitalia were viewed as the anatomical antithesis of men’s. From as early as the second century until the eighteenth century, the woman’s cervix and vagina were imagined as an inverted penis. Even the internal position of the ovaries was construed to be the counterbalance to the external location of the testicles. In this one-sex model, women had reached only a lower evolutionary stage of development; this categorized them as something less than fully human- a ‘defective and misbegotten’ man. Their stunted and inverse ‘penis’ only served to prove their deficiency as humans, their lack of complete maleness.

Sitting there late into the night it was my very clear sense that if our Church had indeed owned, self-critically examined and discussed and truly repented of its misogynist heritage when our sisters first stepped forward to claim their vocations to the priesthood, the current shameful circus and scandal over the full inclusion of LGBT baptized couldn’t have become the disaster it has allowed to develop into.

Even later I found myself wondering if part of the muddledness which exists in current discussions might have been avoided if we had not allowed the patriarchal interests to essentially define the issue and our role in it. Perhaps most particularly, I’m referring to being called ‘liberal’ which my have been but the initial wedge which has allowed them to accelerate into all sorts of name-calling ugliness while wearing the garments of their priesthood.

Liberal I and many I love and honour may be, but that label has nothing to do with our faith or our sense of what the Holy Spirit is striving to accomplish in and through the exemplary medium of Anglican practice in these times. An incredible diversity of individuals whose lives and experience have only informed their love and passion for the Christ the liberator who calls us to have life more abundantly. A people who reject the ‘necessary lies’ of violence, fear and the reign of guilt. Individuals whose lives are defined and liberated by our baptismal covenant, and who are equally unafraid of science, ambiguity and the finding of critical Scriptural scholarship. A people sure in the faith transmitted by the saints who recognize the elemental sacrament of the lives we’ve been given and of the interesting challenges of living in these times, who reject the fearful construct of medieval dualistic thinking.

My sense is that the term may not yet have been coined to describe the larger, post-patriarchal vision we share, and equally that we have yet to claim the skills to redefine the what is really at stake in the current turmoil our Church is undergoing. But with God’s grace and the long-suffering patience of the Holy Spirit this is still possible. Too often personal prejudice or opinion have been allowed to stand unchallenged as good theology, too often selective manipulation of Scripture and elective amnesia of contemporary critical academic study have been allowed to stand.


As I shared with ‘G’ on the phone last night, one thing the current debate has taught us is that the justice of LGBT inclusion is not even going to register with the patriarchy’s purity police when they have been so comfortable with overlooking and abetting so many centuries of institutionalized misogyny within the Church. As with my sisters in faith and their vocations, the redemption and vocations of my LGBT brothers and sisters rests alone on the great blessing and redemptive seal of our baptism and the covenant made at that time.

Bottom line, for me the essential question always is and remains which vision and understanding of what is currently at stake renders great glory to our wondrous God?



To echo a comment I made recently to a beloved sister, which gave her some pause; it is long overdue that we began behaving like the redeemed people we are. And it is my deep sense that it is only in that redeemed confidence the more intelligent and better educated than I will find their prophetic voices.

my Dec 1st

December 2, 2009

The day after World AIDS Day, and I can’t help but wonder, did anyone learn anything yesterday?

Living with the hard reality of unemployment and diminishing financial resources meant that World AIDS Day this year was observed the way I would have done so every year in the last 20+: in silence, in practice and prayer.


World AIDS Day is very personal for me.

It’s not just the loss of my beloved Louis, one of the most extraordinary beings I’ve ever known, co-founder of the first AIDS service organization here in Montreal and defining gift of my life.
It’s not just the 300+ buddies and friends who died in the care of a programme I helped run before moving on to other forms of activism.
It’s not just the great flood of memory and detail of two over-sized decades on the front lines of service and activism locally.
It’s not just the POZ folks I have known, most unforgettably from Africa, through conferences and networking.
It’s also the great wall of chosen indifference we’d thrown ourselves up against again and again for decades now.

It’s also the aching sense I’ve had since the very first time I met a POZ person from Africa that her suffering and the sense that , the obscene suffering of her great continent needn’t have ever happened if Westerners had re-examined their homophobia and stepped forward to help in that first, nightmarish decade of HIV/AIDS when some winter weeks we had folks dying daily.

It's all interconnected.


Sometime mid-afternoon, keeping my ass on the bench and the long-suffering of my creatures had brought me to a space beyond the memories of helpless frustration, loss and the seeming inability to make a real difference; to a reflective space.

Truth is, my life was totally altered by those decades- in more ways that you’d really want to know about.

Truth is, because of the very real courage, passion and grace I witnessed and shared in the lives of those we lost there are just some things I have zero patience with now.

Truth is it can never be the same: the way life was before those two over-sized, transformiatve decades.


Which strangely enough brought me to the seeing just how those years shape and inform my sense of what is going on in our Church at this moment.


The Church and AIDS you ask? Bare with me please.


Sitting there, the silence ended up asking a series of questions.

In those raw, first years before anyone really knew anything much; before AIDS had been normalized and so many careers were being built on the back of HIV AIDS; what were our options- what was our only real option.

To turn up- to step into the very real poverty of the ‘need’.

What did you have to work with?

Nothing much except each other. Let me rephrase that- nothing much but the grace of God in and through each other.


Please don’t misunderstand me, I am NOT glamorizing, idealizing, or fondly looking back.
I remember just how little there was in the way of resources; and how much at times, we were able to do with it.
I remember the end of too many months when there was NOTHING to give.
The meals left out in the hospital hallway- on the floor!
Medical staff double-gloved and masked just to take a temperature.
Substandard housing, inadequate welfare and treatments options running out.
Friends carried out of their apartments, while the landlord hovered, impatient to change the lock.
Unpaid bills, unbought winter clothes, the indifference or rejection of families.
Funerals and late night bedside vigils.
The polite avoidance both by too many churches and the corporate sector.
I remember wasting flesh, the rawness of diapers needing to be changed, silent sunken eyes and fetid breath.


Yes, there was also moments of extraordinary grace- so many of them. Laughter, the incredible Christmas parties we somehow organized, the silent defiance of our marches through the gay village and the joy and generosity of our friends when they knew that Louis and I really were a couple.
Mostly, I remember the raw chasm of ineffective helplessness with each death, and none more so than that of my beloved.


Sitting there, a kalidescope of faces and memories- many of them of ‘the moment’ when individual lives broke open to the hard reality and grace of their situation. The naked place where ‘who,’ ‘when,’ ‘how’ became irrelevant; where victimhood was cast off, and Life- every precious moment of it became the only priority.


Which brigs me even closer to this sense of the interconnectedness between the reality we lived then and the current state of our Church.

Current appearances to the contrary- yes inspite of all the noise, the panicked fear, the threats, recriminations, the supercilious posturing and condamnations; we, the Church - let me be more specific, the Anglican Church is standing on very sacred ground, where the Holy Spirit is closer to us than breath, where the transformative possibilities are limitless; where the ‘dream of God,’ and the call to heal Her creation has never been stronger or clearer.

But inherent in that dream- that call, are a few things the Church- our Church has to embrace and own up to; and as I say this the face of one exquisitely precious friend comes to mind. An accomplished correographer and dancer, it was only in that quite, but very sacred moment when she owned her sero-status, that she stepped beyond being a victim of either circumstances or virus and owned the gift of life she had been given, with all its many graces, its gifts and its lessons.


Likewise, I’d suggest there are a few things our Churches have to own up to and own:

1) It’s history, and the suffering & harm it has done in too many lives, the scandal and insanity it has, at times been implicit in- never more so than currently in Uganda.
Buried in this hard but radically freeing truth is a TREMENDOUS gift once we step into the realization that the life, ministry and death of our blessed Lord and Saviour was about anything but power. It was and is about Life

I have come that they may have life, and have it more abundantly.

2) The sacred ambiguity (h/t saint Verna) which contemporary critical study of Scriptural texts calls us into is a wondrous, freeing, ambiguous gift. Within this context it is my understanding that ‘idolatry’ is essentially a futile attempt to control reality, to colonize or franchize the Living God and the sacrament of life itself- usually in the exercise of power.

3) The sacramental gift of the lives, grace and ministry of the faithful laity, and none more so now than the LGBT faithful, who continue to fill our pews, continue to contribute of their gifts and time, and continue to stand witness to that ‘Love beyond our wildest imaging’ in their lives and vocations within a patriarchal monolith which continually wills them back to a ‘crucified place.’
To quote one, very dear sister, ‘when are they going to realize, it’s our best they receive- the best of our loves, our lives and faith.’


Please let me contextualize this within two conversations which began in the weeks before December 1 but which resonated deeply within my practice and observance yesterday.

‘P’ is a man in his thirties, an accountant by profession, a faithful son of the Roman Catholic Church, who recognizing his gender as a gay man chose to remain faithfully celibate, and for more than a decade worked in his diocesan structure as a professional accountant before moving on to work in the corporate sector. ‘P’ knew of me through a family member of his in another city with whom he’d often had issues over her leaving ‘the Church’ over the issues of the ordination of women and the full inclusion of LGBT faithful. ‘P’ like too many closeted faithful was ‘the Church’s’ staunchest defender' in their ‘discussions he told me ironically.’

Two things in particular brought ‘P’ ‘to the wall,’ to use his words: ‘taking on’ James Carroll’s ‘Practicing Catholic’ and subsequently the ‘arrogant pronouncement of the American Council of Bishops’ on the efficacy of end of life suffering.

‘It all just shattered- like that’ he told me through audible tears. ‘Carroll is right- so much of it is man-made b.s. inflicted on a Jesus-hungry faithful to shore up the power of a bunch of old men in skirts.

There was one paragraph in particular ‘P’ read to me over the phone:

‘When the Gospels have Jesus ‘predicting’ the destruction of the Temple and identifying himself as the replacement, they are describing an after-the-fact adaption that Jesus’ followers made to what the Romans had already done. Writing in 80 or 100 a story that claims to be happening in 30, they bring into that story, as prophecy, the decisive destruction of the Temple in 70. The Temple will be destroyed, Jesus says, because the Jews are rejecting him. But the rejection in question is experienced not by Jesus in 30, but by Jesus’ followers in 80 or 90 or 100, afer the Temple has been destroyed.
James Carroll, ‘Practicing Catholic’ pp 143

‘Why were we never taught this? How can they continue to teach inerrancy,’ ‘P’ challenged me over the phone.


The other conversation began almost two weeks earlier, from ‘E’ in her late forties; single mother of two adult children; a narcotics officer seconded for a year to an American federal agency. ‘Away from home for a year’ on this posting, she’d quite innocently asked the pastor of the Lutheran Church she is currently attending for some reading suggestions for the long evenings she spends alone in her’ temporary quarters.’

‘E’ was reading Marcus Borg when she called- referred by that same pastor who has been an online friend of mine for more than two years now.

‘Jesus, Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary’ was the volume in question, and ‘the wall’ ‘E’ had hit was Borg’s chronological de-construction of Scripture.

Rather than weeping, ‘E’ was angry- without being sure who the real target was, and uncomfortable sharing what she was feeling with her interim pastor, ‘someone I barely know,’ she told me without being aware of the irony of speaking to an absolute stranger long distance.


When my initial suggestion, that what was really going on here was a call from the Holy Spirit, an invitation to embrace both a larger life and a larger faith, ‘E’s anger and the pain beneath it found its bullseye- yours truly.

Less than an hour later she called back, and we talked, prayed in our respective silences, and yes, even laughed late into the night. (Danged time differences!)


Several times ‘E’ quoted to me what I sensed were the articles of the faith of her particular denomination, none of which I ever challenged.

However I did suggest they might be only part of the picture, a ‘particular context.’

Sometime after midnight, with me asking questions more than anything ‘E’ was silent for several very long moments. ‘... I think I’m finally getting it... there’s God, and there’s the Church, and what I’ve been doing... what I’ve been holding on to is the Church, not God.’

I reminded her of her own family’s story, how one of her grandfathers or great grandfathers had literally been responsible for much of the construction and all of the beautiful carving in the prairie church she still considered her spiritual home, and that there is real beauty in all of that.


‘Yes, but Church without... personal relationship with God is... rules and real estate.’

We actually ended up discussing ‘the gift of Borg,’ how the scholarship he shares can be used as a lense- an always incomplete lense, for ‘seeing through the structure to God waiting for us in the very sacrament of our lives.


Yes, we actually talked about the sacrament of ‘E’s’ life, and that’s when there were tears.

‘E’ I sent back to her pastor with the suggestion that perhaps they might want to start a group study of Borg’s book.


‘P,’ with his permission I put him in touch with a gay Episcopal priest I know of in his city. Not for conversion- for friendship.

Their first contact was when ‘P turned up ‘unannouced’ at Sunday Eucharist, and sat there in tears, ‘at the sheer wonder if it all. So many tears I almost didn’t go up to receive the Sacrament,’ he told me.

‘P’ and his new friend have got together several times, for an ‘incredible meal’ at the rectory, for a film 'that had nothing to do with anything but laughter,' and several long walks.

‘E’s’ last e-mail to me closed with ‘ not a cloud in the sky. Everything is indeed possible with God.’


And sitting there late last night it all fit together- my understanding of the great blessings our ordained sisters have brought our Church; the awesome miracle of November 2, 2003 and the truly great gift the faithful of New Hampshire gave our Church; the frightened noisy theatrics from what another friend calls ‘the peanut gallery of the Anglican purity police’; the persistent wonder of the faithfulness and generosity of so very many LGBT lives within our Church and the life-affirming powerful ways in which the Holy Spirit is using those lives to bring us into ‘life more abundantly.’

Yes, there were tears, of love and thankfulness, of awe and remembrance.

Thanks be to God.

Rocky but sacred ground

Before anything else, a very deep bow to ‘K’, former Zen priest, teacher, partner, father and dear shanga buddy, who complains that the longer he knows me the more Anglican he’s becoming. Many years now, since his first e-mail querying my ‘rather original practice’ ( no bowing to statues, no chanting in languages I didn’t understand). ‘K’ was one of the first to realize, when I was blogging more regularly that most of my posts were about a lot larger things than just the then-current events in the Anglican Communion. He has also graciously, but very persistently reminded me that I have been noticeable for my absence from this space.

A deep bow also to my beloved siblings in Christ Jesus. You know who you are, the kick-ass brothers and sisters who receive and act on my Prayer Calls, the bloggers whose sites I visit and comment on frequently- often on a daily basis. Living blessings each one of you, for me personally you’re also the most real embodiment of the extraordinary blessings of being a member of the Living Body of Christ.


Yes, it’s been a while- July 27 2008 to be exact, the date of my last post.
Lambeth 2008 was drawing to a close, and the title of my previous post was ‘Sad but Confident.’

Yes something happened- yet again the Church, OUR Church broke my heart- ‘shattered’ perhaps a more exact description of what happened this time, because there were pieces, lots of pieces.


It wasn’t just the dis-invitation of the blessed Bishop of New Hampshire.

It wasn’t just the extremely comic but obscene extravagance of the Big Blue Tent, when the C of E remains one of the largest property owners in Great Britain;
nor was it just the obscene expense of all those security fences and the people manning them; the fancy passes, the shuttling back and forth from Cathedral to campus...

It wasn’t just the hypocritical theatrics of a very public walk to end world poverty which lasted but one hour - a lot less time than it took everyone to lunch at ++Rowan’s London palace or to take tea with the Queen.


You don’t need my experience and study in organizational transformation to see what a patently hollow, exercise in passive-aggressive control and avoidance Lambeth 2008 really was.

At one of the most critical and decisive junctures in our Church’s history, the host and seeming episcopal head of our Church not only excused by his silence the very individuals who were levelling threats against our Church, he exiled one of our Church’s most prophetic voices, declared ahead of time that no decisions would be made; and then, just as everyone’s already packed & saying their fond farewells he slams down on the table two papal-like takes on Anglican reality- the latest Windsor-Whatever, and his summation of the exercise.

Give the party a exotic name, build a fancy venue, create a tight programme which leaves everyone overwhelmed but feeling good, and then send them home too exhausted to question what’s just happened, but so very glad they’ve been invited.

Sounds pretty controlling and disingenuous to me, and as I write these words I’m remembering an e-mail from an African priest now living outside. “Rowan and his ilk owe the people of Africa and saint Desmond Tutu a public and heart-felt apology for misappropriating ‘Indaba' and mis-using it to their own hollow ends.’

When it came time in 2008 for me to write my next post, on the outcomes of Lambeth 2008 I wrote it with my tears and prayers, and never posted it.

In the year plus, it has primarily been my beloved siblings in Christ who have essentially been the Living Body of Christ for me.

As I said, earlier you know who you are, and you have no idea of the blessings, the sources of love and grace you’ve been for me personally, and thank-you doesn’t quite cover it.

But failing or declining to meet the opportunities the Holy Spirit was offering our Church in 2008 we’ve come to an even darker, harder place. A chance and calling writ large, the Holy Spirit’s invitation to act like the redeemed people we are; to accept Her transformative gifts implicit in the situation in Uganda; to speak truth to those who inspite of their atrocious acting out are still our brothers in Christ.


I am referring of course to the proposed anti-homosexual legislation in Uganda. Legal insanity which could see imprisonment for ‘suspected homosexuality’ the death penalty for ‘aggrivated homosexuality’, and imprisonment for friends and family who fail to report our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters within 24 hours. Legislation, encouraged, aided and abetted by the leaders of the Anglican Church of Uganda. And shamefully, with only two public exceptions, the leadership of our Church has not found its voice.

On so many levels it should be clear, this IS a defining moment for our Church. And once again the Holy Spirit clearly appears to be ‘leading from the floor’ as she did in Anaheim.

As I have reeled and wept over much that has been reported on this horror, I have also cheered and glowed with pride over the postings, letters and protests by many I am blessed and honoured to call brothers and sisters in Christ. They’ve done some incredible work- and we will keep it up.

And I’m talking about some of the Church’s biggest, most unrecognized defenders, some of it’s hardest workers and most generous; many of whom have paid a very real price for their faith in one context or another and continue to bear the marks of that sacrifice. But they’re also some of the most radiant, loving people I know. I fear for where our Church might be without them.

But its hard and it’s real- and a verrrrry sacred the place in which we stand right now as a Church- absolutely transformative in its possibilities. And after much prayer, silence and tears it’s my sense that it’s those possibilities which may have something to do with the shameful silence from the Churches so-far.

None of our Provinces of the Church have a very good record of wholeheartedly embracing the opportunities of growth, grace and healing the Holy Spirit is offering us by welcoming and celebrating the loves, lives and vocations of our LGBT faithful and those who will follow them back to the Church we are called to be. If Rowan or Katherine speak prophetically on Uganda things can’t possibly remain the same in their own provinces. And perhaps that's what's scaring them the most.

Anyone else see the radically transformative possibilities here?


But to quote one slightly irrevrant brother ‘and maybe it’s just possible that +Rowan’s grown too comfortable with a picket up his ass, sitting on that proverbial fence?’


Yes, I’ve heard the theorizing about how any comment from ‘the west’ could only incense greater reprisals, wilder insanity inflicted on our brothers and sisters in Uganda and elsewhere in Africa.

Nice theory, but the individuals involved are not only legally responsible adults- parliamentarians, priests and bishops, many of them are baptized Christians who are called to accountability by the same God as you and I. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR REACTIONS, FOR THEIR REACTIVE BEHAVIOR.

All we can be responsible for is witnessing to the truth as we see it in the two-fold commandment given us by our Savior ‘To love the Lord your God with your whole heart and mind, and your neighbor as yourself.’

Our responsibility is for our words or our silence; our actions or cowering inactivity.

As one beloved sister reminded us powerfully in her recent post SILENCE = DEATH, and in this instance the death won’t just be of our Ugandan brothers and sisters but of the prophetic voice & moral witness of a Church called to be implicitly prophetic by embodying the wisdom, grace and ambiguity in the tension & balance of our model of practice- the three-legged stool.

One voice out of Uganda suffices: this thanks to The Changing Church
http://changingattitude-england.blogspot.com/2009/11/should-archbishops-of-canterbury-and.html

I have no doubt that behind the scenes, in a delicate Anglican way, feelers are being put out and contacts made both in the UK and Uganda to discern what might be an appropriate reaction to the Bill, and how Church of England leaders might exert and influence.

One of the reasons advocated for saying nothing in public is that western outsiders, and ex-colonial rulers to boot, have no right to comment on legislation and morality and church teaching in Uganda. Gug, one of Changing Attitude’’s gay Ugandan contacts, begs to differ.

He writes:

Funny, I am a Ugandan, desperately worried because of this Bill in parliament. If it passes, which most likely it will, I and my partner will face life imprisonment, or death, once caught.

Is it surprising that I don’’t mind anyone, even a 'foreigner' speaking out for me? Especially when I cannot speak out myself in my country about this bill? I used to like political correctness until I realised that life does not follow its rules. My country mates plan to kill me, and you fear to say no, because you don’’t think you as a foreigner should comment?

It happened in Nazi Germany, for Jews, and homosexuals; it happened in Rwanda as recently as 20 years ago.

When, I pray, do you as a 'foreigner' plan to challenge my murderers that they have gone beyond the pale of humanity? When I am dead? Do you really think that will help?

I believe it is actually an opportunity for the Archbishop of Canterbury to take back the moral high ground from the Church of Uganda leaders. They have made it abundantly clear that they support the Bill. They support it in its terribleness. And now they have started back peddling. They are in a dilemma. It is almost impossible for them to recant, but the Bill is so terrible that they must recant! These guys have gone too far, and they realise it. They are on the back foot.

Let the Archbishop just be gracious and negotiate with them. I am sure they don’’t have a clue on how to retake their international standing. Besides now not having an 'official' stance on the bill, they are stopping the comments. On the day of the debate, the representative of the Church of Uganda who was supposed to support it did not appear. Yes, the pressure is working. Instead, his place was taken by someone else who was sadly funny. Except, the blood they are baying for is mine. They are not in danger!

Uganda is contemplating gay genocide. And yet, the people who are behind it are also adamant that they love gay people. They are just fearful of the spread of the gay disease. Not AIDS but homosexuality. They fear for themselves, they fear for their children, and their fear has translated into a fight for life, the lives of people like me. And we are losing.


In tears, I first read this powerful witness many hours ago, and it wouldn’t let me go.

Yes, I’ve e-mailed, written letters, signed petitions and prayed my heart into tearful silence- but it’s not enough. Our brothers and sisters in Uganda still live in fear for their very lives; for something not of their making; for a toxic theology; for generations of blood-soaked generations misogeny looking for a new prey.

When, I pray, do you as a 'foreigner' plan to challenge my murderers that they have gone beyond the pale of humanity? When I am dead? Do you really think that will help?

When, I pray, do you as a 'foreigner' plan to challenge my murderers that they have gone beyond the pale of humanity? When I am dead? Do you really think that will help?

When, I pray, do you as a 'foreigner' plan to challenge my murderers that they have gone beyond the pale of humanity? When I am dead? Do you really think that will help?

I can’t forget these words. They won’t leave me alone.

So yes I’ve still not recovered from Lambeth 2008, but our brothers and sisters in Uganda can’t wait for the Bishop of New Hampshire to receive his personal letter of apology from the Archbishop of Canterbury or from the Bishop of Durham either.

So David@Montreal is back, and you’re going to be hearing from me. Count on it!

In closing, a dear brother in Christ who has become a treasure and radiant source of blessing in my life posted a prayer on this matter

A Prayer for Deliverance

O God, your glory blazes with the light of love and justice, your righteousness and your mercy flow together as one mighty stream: May we who beseech deliverance from violence, oppression, and degradation be purged within of their roots--of fear, envy, powerlessness, anger, resentment, the lust for revenge and the desire to hurt--and of the blindness and willfulness which beset our best intentions; that we may not act with violence, neither oppress nor degrade any of your creatures, but may strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being; for Jesus' sake. Amen.

And may the people of God say Amen.

Your brother in Christ

David@Montreal

Enough!

Have these bullies of the patriarchy no shame?

They selectively not only mis-represent the Holy Scriptures, publicly tie the love of our blessed Saviour into knots, alienate faithful Christians from each other in their own interests; they judge and discount the working of the Holy Spirit in an Independent Province of our Church, abuse the gracious patience of the Primate of that same Province, ferment discord and disrespect centuries old Provincial boundaries, now n their latest assault, they try blaming the dear brother who has born the brunt of their vitriolic ugly behaviour for their shameful public displays and lack of control.

And this right on the heels of the dissembling performance by ++Rowan at his press conference yesterday. An example which might have given +Daniel implicit permission for his little stunt today- joined by+Jack Iker.

Of ++Rowan, Jim Naughton of Episcopal Café: The Lead reports

‘but Williams seems to be arguing that bishops not only represent their diocese, but participate in a worldwide ““fellowship,”” that Gene’’s membership in that fellowship is ““questionable”” for reasons that Williams did not elaborate upon, and that he had been excluded for those unexpressed reasons.’

‘Questionable?’

The only thing questionable as a reflection of Anglican faith and tradition, as far as I can see is

the total absence of respect towards the people of New Hampshire and the working of the Holy Spirit among them;

the election, the confirmation of their choice of their candidate for the Episcopacy by the requisite number of American bishops- themselves duly elected, confirmed & consecrated, and the Spirit-filled consecration of that same brother Christian

the discourtesy and shameful public rudeness repeatedly carried out towards the Primate of that same independent Province because of her gender and the grace and intelligence she has shown in execution of her office.

the complete disregard for the autonomy and boundaries of the Episcopal Province of the American Church; fostering dissent, poaching parishes and one diocese to date

the threats, verbal violence & lack of courtesy heaped on one of their own brothers- duly ordained, duly elected, confirmed and consecrated

the willful, selective use of Scripture to misrepresent the Good News of Christ Jesus

and then there’s the whole shameful handling of Lambeth by which ++Rowan’s cowardice; failing as ‘first among equals’ to call those who persist in exposing themselves as bullies of the patriarchy to accountability implicitly confirms all of the above and discounts our LGBT lives of faith as ‘necessary collateral damage’ once again.

If all of this is not questionable Christian behaviour, I’d like to know what is?


Will nothing stop these men in the shame they cause our Church, the scandalizing of untold numbers of laity who have spent their who lives faithfully worshipping and supporting our Church, and the spectacle they make in the media?


++ Rowan’s performance however was old news today, and two of his brother prelates stepped up to take his place- both equally shamefully.


brother ++Daniel, I guess it would be an understatement to say you positively break my heart, and that we disagree on perhaps everything but the punctuation in your statement.

++ Daniel wrote ‘We believe that human sexuality is God’’s gift to human beings which is rightly ordered only when expressed within the life-long commitment of marriage between one man and one woman. We require all those in the ministry of the Church to live according to this standard and cannot accept church leaders whose practice is contrary to this.’

++Daniel, of Christian charity I respect this to be your belief, and even that of the Church of Sudan, which is the only quarter in our Communion for which you are duly consecrated to speak. That said, might I not expect the same courtesy from you as a fellow Christian, and a life-long Anglican?

++Daniel wrote ‘We believe that God created humankind in his own image; male and female he created them for the continuation of humankind on earth.’

Coming from a continent struggling with poverty, starvation, AIDS, over-population in urban centres & drought in too much of the countryside how can you possibly perpetuate such a primitive understanding of our humanity?

++ Daniel wrote, ‘Women and men were created as God’’s agents and stewards on earth.’

Brother if we are in accord on this, why aren’t you speaking to the exploitation, the pollution, the extinction of the same resources of this precious earth, rather than interfering in the life of the Holy Spirit in another province of the Communion, as equally autonomous as yours?

++ Daniel said in his interview ‘God is not making a mistake creating Adam and Eve,”” Deng said, asserting that homosexual activity contradicted Biblical teaching. ““He would have created two Adams if he wanted.’

But did God’s involvement and blessing stop with the creation of Adam and Eve?
Or is God not implicitly present in the blessed birth of all his sons and daughters, made in the image and likeness of the one true living God?

++ Daniel wrote ‘We reject homosexual practice as contrary to biblical teaching’

That dear brother in Christ Jesus is your opinion. But I might also add that it is an opinion which is not informed by the presence of a identifiable gay and lesbian community in your life, by your own admission. Which perhaps has not witnessed the violence, prejudice and lies these same people have suffered, most often at the hands of purported Christians. Or likewise witnessed the wondrous acts of healing and redemption being carried out by the Holy Spirit as these brothers and sisters consecrate their love and their lives to God within our Churches

++ Daniel wrote ‘We strongly oppose developments within the Anglican Church in the USA and Canada in consecrating a practising homosexual as bishop and in approving a rite for the blessing of same-sex relationships.

This too is your prerogative, dear brother, but in the context of our Church’s life and transformation it stands as nothing more than a personal opinion or the practice of your Province. To use this as grounds for passing judgement on the working of the Holy Spirit in another Province is an insult to all parties involved, and hardly becoming of one who loves the Anglican tradition.

++ Daniel wrote ‘The unity of the Anglican Communion is of profound significance to us as an expression of our unity within the Body of Christ.’

I would suggest that this is true for every, faithful living Anglican, and for anyone to set themselves up in judgement by suggesting to the contrary would be a great act of disrespect, both for our Communion and its members.

++Daniel wrote ‘It is not something we can treat lightly or allow to be fractured easily.’

And just who would you suggest is treating our Church in this manner, ++Daniel?

++Daniel wrote, ‘Our unity expresses the essential truth of the Gospel that in Christ we are united across different tribes, cultures and nationalities. ‘

I have yet to meet a living, breathing Anglican who does not believe and embody this- inspite of unsightly behaviour in some quarters of the Church. And here, let me clear, I am not referring to our American brothers and sisters in Christ.

++Daniel wrote ‘We have come to attend the Lambeth Conference, despite the decision of others to stay away,’

Brother this is where, sadly, we start to part company. ‘Despite the decision of others to stay away-‘ sadly, that was THEIR decision, and the discourteous manner in which they carried out that decision, did not, I would suggest bring any glory to our Church.

++ Daniel wrote ‘to appeal to the whole Anglican Communion to uphold our unity and to take the necessary steps to safeguard the precious unity of the Church’.

How, dear brother, can those present at Lambeth be expected to singlehandedly uphold our unity without the presence of those same partners who have chosen to boycott & dishonour the current fraternal exercise of prayer, worship and Scripture, without single-handedly capitulating to their opinions and demands?

++Daniel wrote ‘This has not only caused deep divisions within the Anglican Communion but it has seriously harmed the Church’’s witness in Africa and elsewhere, opening the church to ridicule and damaging its credibility in a multi-religious environment.'

With all due respect, Whoa Daniel!

We obviously have two different recollections of the course of the past months in the life of the Communion.

It was not the voices of full inclusion for all baptized who threatened or called schism?

It was not the witness of the transformative Church which publicly dishonoured the gifts and ministry of American Primate, of the Archbishop of Canterbury, of the people of New Hampshire, of the Lambeth gathering, of the polity and people of the American Church and of election of one of their duly elected & consecrated brothers.

Do I need to remind you? Sadly, it was our brothers who decided to set themselves apart from Lambeth, and who invoked GAFCON- mis-representing & insulting the government of Jordan in the process of inventing their own mythology.


So, sadly dear +Daniel, it will come as no surprise to you that I completely repudiate your call for our blessed, radiant brother +Gene to step down from is Episcopacy and to renounce his calling as Bishop.

A scandalous suggestion under any circumstances, but particularly disappointing coming from a Christian brother at a time when in so many quarters it has become so abundantly clear that our beloved Church, upheld by the unfailing grace and compassion of the Holy Spirit is undergoing a transformation and reconciliation to the ‘love beyond our wildest imagining’ of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. And with unwavering faith in that same Love, I will carry you in my heart brother ++Daniel


Sadly ++Daniel, you are quoted as having ‘called on the Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson to resign to preserve the unity of the Anglican Communion.’ elsewhere you are further quoted as telling him to resign and go home to be a ‘normal Christian’.

Brother, it is this statement, more than any other which moves me in the Spirit to challenge you.

Not only is such a suggestion an insult to the Holy Spirit and Its working in the American Church, we both know it is only the unfailing grace of that same Holy Spirit which can preserve any unity within the Body of Christ.

And it was NOT the Right Reverend V. Gene Robinson who engendered this threat of schism in the first place, but those who refuse to recognize that the Holy Spirit could possibly ever act outside the limits of their experience and understanding , those whose witness and practice has repeatedly dishonoured the Communion.

Holy Scripture tells us ‘by their fruits ye shall know them.’

I would invite our GAFCON brothers to cast off their jeuvenile genital fixation and look at Bishop Robinson, the man and the fruits of his ministry, and then to own their own shameful part in the long suffering our Communion has undergone.


As to your comment about ‘normal Christian’ as your brother in Christ, I would dare to remind you that there is nothing ‘normal’ about our lives or vocations as Christians; that in Christ Jesus we are all equal before God and man, having been equally redeemed by the same sacrifice on the Cross.


‘Transformation,’ ‘reconciliation’ & ‘renewal’ it’s not hard for me to imagine how frightening these words must be for some, especially when it’s being carried out in lives the ‘establishment’ prefers to reject, abuse or ignore. But this too, I would suggest dear brother is only further proof that this work of redemption & renewal I speak of is clearly from God, in accordance with our Lord Christ Jesus’ ministry and His promises to the Church.


So of course dear brother, confident in that same ‘love beyond our wildest imagining,’ I will remember affectionately in prayer.


your brother in Christ Jesus, whose Love is indeed beyond our wildest imagining.


David@Montreal

Confidence & harm

Call me a naive Canadian, but in the last several days as so many of us have wept. grieved & prayed over the recent outrage at St. Nicholas Episcopal Church, Atwater CA, I’ve become quite concerned that we brothers and sisters of Christ’s fullest blessing not unwitingly harm ourselves, each other, or the Church of Christ Jesus.

Perhaps the most unfortunate instance of this was insistence of a couple of 'our' blogs on using a seriously unflattering photo of John-David Schofield in their reporting. Most of you will know which unfortunate picture I’m referring to.

I’m not disputing the picture was taken. I’m not disputing the man was there, holding that piece of paper. But unfortunately in the current context, this photograph objectifies a man, who, whatever else is still our brother in Christ, and who was created in the image and likeness of God. I might even suggest that use of this photo is personally invasive, as it hauls a brother’s personal issues into the public forum of faith in a context which has nothing to do with what’s currently going on.

I mean, I haven’t heard of anyone using this photo offering to meet with John-David to help and counsel on his personal pain.

Please don’t misunderstand me, I’ve wept and sat vigil with the people of St. Nicholas, Atwater, as so many of my radiant brothers and sisters have, and yes, for a moment, when reading a report I wailed ‘why the isn’t anyone doing something?

And on the next breath I regained my senses…
I might even suggest that what we have here is a perfect example of my sense of what’s truly going on in the Church right now– in the bigger picture of living process- that of Christ leading His Church out of centuries of frightened dualistic thinking.

No one needs to be objectified

No one needs to be called names

So long as we remember that what’s going on here is process, a dance of change & transformation, and we (humanity) are only one of the dancing partners- thank goodness & THANK GOD!

This is still the Church of Jesus Christ, Son of the True & Living God

And to momentarily resort to Holy Scriptures; it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God

so of course nothing’s going to be easy or run smoothly

we’re all being call forth out of fear,

we’re all being called into a larger, clearer, living experience of God’s passionate love and unconditional blessing… ‘a love beyond our wildest imagining’ to quote one blessed brother yet again.

we’ve all got healing and growth- and Christ’s necessary grace- to engage in here.

No more guys in black hats and white hats- this is not an old western movie. This is Christ Jesus, working through all of us to move us – the Church- beyond the fearful need to objectify, to damn, to conquer, to destroy- all verbs too commonly found in Christian history.

Working to move us into becoming the most radiant, unconditional embodiment of God’s love humanity has ever known.

An embodiment of Christ’s love ‘beyond our wildest imagining’ (and you all know where I got that from).


There is no way, the words or actions of John-David Schofield at St. Nicholas Episcopal Church, Atwater, CA can be justified, excused or explained as anything other than what is so obvious to us. But in the end, his true accountability for everything, like ours, is to the true & living God.

And in the meantime our responsibility has to be to not lose sight of our vocations as baptized Christians, as a people of hope, working with Christ Jesus for the renewal of His Church.

Yes, ache & get angry, but we can’t let that pain and anger stop us from being there for the people of St. Nicholas, and all the other parishes being manhandled in a similar manner.

Yes, ache & get angry, but we can’t let that pain and anger stop us from being there to listen to the hurt, confusion and disillusionment of our fellow Christians over the antics of certain ‘professional ‘ religious.

Yes, ache and get angry but we can't let otrage be our only witness or presence in our collective vocation of radiant embodiment.

Yes, ache and get angry, it can't stop there, or we’ll never see past the fear, to glimpse the active, working presence of Christ, who has promised to never abandon his flock.

And perhaps nothing has embodied that fearful thinking more than the rare anger or concern I’ve read about ++Katherine’s presence in all of this.

Where is she? What’s she doing? Essentially is what more than one voice has been asking,

It may just be my personal opinion, but as much as I honor and admire this particular sister-in-faith, a white cowboy hat might look slightly ridiculous on herright now, and riding into Atwater, both guns blazing would hardly do honor to the office of Presiding Bishop or the Church.

The bottom line is that ++Katherine, like the rest of us, is accountable to Canon Law, which has been prayerfully writ over time, in a conscious effort to know the will of the Holy Spirit, alive and at work in the Anglican Communion- exactly where we all find ourselves right now.

And that Canon Law provides our secessionist brothers a breathing spell of a specific duration in which they’re given a chance to reconsider and renounce their earlier actions.

And I would suggest that by respecting this requirement ++Katherine is showing herself to be a living embodiment of the best of Anglican tradition and practice.

Hurt, confused, angry, worried for the future of the Anglican Communion probably describes all of us in the fellowship of full inclusion right now. But it’s essential that none of us unwittingly play into the secessionist agenda by re-acting to whatever they do, or by adopting their frightened dualistic ideology and language.

One of the great blessings of my sitting practice is the understanding that to re-act is to always respond from a position of weakness or defeat to another’s action.

Bottom line: Jesus Christ is to be found in the thick of this work of transformation- this breaking open and transformation of all of our understandings and experience of the living Christ in our midst.

And my sense is equally that as far as Canon Law allows that’s also where +Katherine is aiming for. She did send her legal and clerical representatives to witness the events of Advent IV at St. Nicholas Episcopal Church. She has put the other secessionist bishops on notice, and never was our sister’s radiant grace more evident than when she side-stepped the antics of +Peter et al at the celebration of the Blessed Sacrament in Tanzania.

As scary, confusing and uncertain as it may feel at times, none of us is alone in this.
We are the Body of Christ, and as a living body, I would suggest that if we have faith, the only appropriate image for the current process is ‘growing pains.’

Growing pains and a glorious calling forth out of fear and fearful thought, speech and action.

Growing pains in a vocation of radiant transformation.

Growing pains which as any parent will tell us are a sign of health, a sign of life, and for me nothing stands proof of this more radiantly than all the wondrous brothers and sisters in faith who have stepped up to claim the promises of their baptismal vows, found their voices and bear witness to their radiant lives on faith- whether in the pew or here on the internet…. which includes each one of you m'dears.

Amen.

God’s Greatest Blessing, to God’s Greatest Glory- always & unconditionally