What about the Bible?

I've recently made a few posts that may need a bit of clarification. Specifically, I have suggested a less than orthodox (there's that "right beliefs" stuff again) perspective of the bible.

I am by no stretch of the imagination a biblical scholar. I studied scripture in seminary, although such classes were far from my favorite. I took bonehead Hebrew and Greek, which gave me the ability to stumble around in a lexicon now and then. I read the bible daily, within he context of the Daily Office. I preach on an average of every other Sunday, usually on the Gospel lesson appointed for that day. But I am by no means a scholar.

If you would like a more thorough and scholarly (although still very accessible) treatment of the particular approach I use regarding the scriptures, I commend to you the work of Marcus Borg, specifically Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously But Not Literally.

My undergraduate degree was in English and History. I have always loved stories. Literature is the only medium I know of that can speak of philosophy, psychology, theology, mysticism, and politics without becoming a lecture that makes my eyes begin to glaze over. A well told tale is literally dripping with truth; the kind of truth that a painting or a piece of music can brings to light. A story knows that it can never capture the truth in the words, so instead it dances all around her, sometimes holding her close, other times spinning away.

Today, in a time when Science is Lord, many of us assume that truth can be captured; that we can put her in a testube, lock her into a mathematical formula, force her to reveal herself when summoned by the Scientific Method. I don't want her captured in that way. I don't want such a bleak reality to be her fate. I'd rather dance with her, and worship her from afar, than see her held prisoner by dissecting minds.

Often, in various settings, people will ask me, in regards to a particular passage from scripture, "But is it true?" I always hesitate. I have trouble understanding the question. Of course it is true. The bible tells us many wondrous things about our relationship with God and one another. It is the testimony of people throughout the ages that have considered those relationships the very ground of their being.

"But did it really happen just like that?" Here's where I get in trouble. Did Joshua literally stop the sun? Well, if the sun would have been rotating around the earth, I suppose maybe...nah..it didn't happen. Does the birth narrative document the actual itinerary of the Holy Family as they travel to Bethlehem, then to Egypt, then back to Nazareth? I don't know. Looks like a marvelous bit of midrash to me; going back to the prophesies in the Old Testament to fill in the blanks. I suspect he may have been born in Nazareth.

But, don't change the stories! Heaven forbid! Joshua is a heroic figure; larger than life. Keep him that way; he wears it well. The birth narrative is a marvelous story, that works on so many levels. The authors of that story were doing some serious waltzing with the truth.

But in regards to the queries as to if Jesus actually said this or that; if this miracle "really" happened, if that teaching was meant to be universal and for all time; I really don't know. What I do know is that it's not Memorex. No recorders, no photos, just words on paper.

About those words...let's keep in mind that the Church functioned just fine for at least 60 years (I suspect more like 100 years) without what we now call the New Testament. Paul's letters were passed around, and in some places read aloud when the community gathered. The Gospel accounts were most likely the work of scribes who wrote down the stories of some of the apostles so they didn't get lost when they died. John is probably the stories of an entire community. Many early Christians thought that Jesus was coming back any day, so the idea of saving the stories for posterity didn't even come up until the hope of Jesus' imminent return began to fade. In other words, they were written a few years, possibly a few decades, after the actual events had happened. Thus, they were stories, and were always intended to be stories, not historical documents.

The Old Testament contains the story of ancient Israel and their God. It was written by them. The New Testament is the story of the Christian people and their God. It was written by the Christian Church. In some ways, our Anglican understanding of the three legged stool of authority; scripture, tradition and reason, is a bit misleading. I would suggest that scripture is actually a part of the tradition, not a separate source of authority. We have a Christian tradition, which includes a treasury of stories. We discern the truth within this tradition by the use of reason (which includes using the heart as well as the mind to glimpse her dance).

What it boils down to is this; is the bible a human product or a divine product? I am convinced that it was written by humans, in some cases divinely inspired humans, but still finite humans, with all the baggage each of us carry contributing to their authorship.

It is those inspired bits; the places where the writers dance so gracefully with truth, that makes the bible, to me, the most cherished collection of writings I have ever encountered. I would never abandon it, or change one word in it.

To me, the bible functions sacramentally; it is an outward and visible sign of God. But, it is not God, nor the dictation of God. As in the old Zen story, I think it is essential that we not mistake a finger that points to the moon for the moon itself.

J.

Telling Stories

Demi shared a couple of excellent stories over on Islamicate;

...There is too much negative energy in the world right now. We need to remember that in all religions and cultures there are good people...even the "bad" people are good people in bad circumstances. Perhaps if I were put to that kind of test, I would react similiarly. I don't know. So we pray "subject us not to the trial" ("lead us not into temptation"). But the trials and tests do come, and sometimes we don't respond well to them.

But there are good people in the world... I am posting these two stories so that I can remember, and others can hear, too...

Go read the stories. Start telling your own. There are more trials and tests to come. If we are to respond faithfully, we need to listen more closely to one another.

J.

The Ugly Secrets of War

Seymour Hersh has a new piece in the New Yorker, The Gray Zone. He is claiming that Rumsfeld is responsible for the formation of a top secret interrogation crew that were authorized to use extreme measures. His sources suggest this crew was working in Abu Ghraib. Daily Kos has an excellent commentary up on this. The final paragraph is worth repeating;

Permitting unrestrained acts of hubris is completely antithetical to one of the fundamental assumptions of our founding fathers--the fallibility of man. Madison and the federalists knew men weren't angels. The problem with this administration is that it acts in the name of President who believes his acts come from the divine intervention of God, and many of the policies of this administration are perpetrated by individuals--such as Cheney and Rumsfeld--who are so arrogant to act as if they themselves were gods.

Newsweek is reporting a similar story, with this rather striking addition;

What Bush seemed to have in mind was applying his broad doctrine of pre-emption to interrogations: to get information that could help stop terrorist acts before they could be carried out. This was justified by what is known in counterterror circles as the "ticking time bomb" theory—the idea that when faced with an imminent threat by a terrorist, almost any method is justified, even torture.

With the legal groundwork laid, Bush began to act. First, he signed a secret order granting new powers to the CIA. According to knowledgeable sources, the president's directive authorized the CIA to set up a series of secret detention facilities outside the United States, and to question those held in them with unprecedented harshness.

The Pentagon is claiming Hersh's accusations are outrageous. No surprise there. I can hardly wait to hear what the "fair and balanced" boys on Fox have to say.

We can now expect lots of screaming about unpatriotic liberals threatening the safety of our troops. After all, that is the GOP's plan of attack. Personally, I have zero tolerance for anyone in the oval office who signs off on war crimes. Time to begin impeachment procedures?

J.

UPDATE: US Forces Taught Torture Techniques;

...Critics of the Bush administration say the president and other officials sent a powerful message after the September 11 terror attacks that the previous standards of law no longer applied.

"The attitude that was communicated started from the highest levels and was sent on down the chain. It created an overall climate in which adversaries were dehumanised, the distinction between suspect and known perpetrator was effaced, and the overall message was that international law or domestic niceties get in the way of doing quote 'what we had to do', said Rosa Ehrenreich Brooks, formerly a senior adviser on human rights to the State Department. "When that is the message from the top it enables all sorts of bad behaviour."

Right Beliefs?

Warning! Potential heresy to follow!

You have been warned. Proceed at your own risk.

I don't know about you, but I sure get tired of debating sometimes. It's as if to some people the most important thing about being a "Christian" is holding the "right beliefs." Is it?

In my tradition, we baptize babies. Obviously, they do not have the intellectual ability to know what is going on. They cannot possibly hold the "right beliefs." But we baptize them anyway. Just as a baby does not know that he or she needs physical nourishment when they are hungry (you can give them sugar water to stop the crying; not recommended, but it works...forgive me my children), so they do not need to understand their need for spiritual nourishment in order for the Church to offer it to them.

When a young child comes to the communion rail, and shows an interest in receiving communion, I ask the parents if I might offer it. Do they need to understand what the Holy Eucharist is before receiving? Do they need to know the difference between transubstantiation and memorialism? I think not. There is something special going on here, that mom and dad seem to think is very important, and they want to be included. In most places I've served, that's enough.

I'm not advocating the approach of "anything goes." As we seek God's will, we use the tools that we have received. We look to scripture, we listen to the Church, both past and present, and we listen for God in the stillness of our prayer. Most times, we will get some inkling of what it is God would have us do, a blurry glimmer of what might be best.

More and more, I encounter folks who seem to know exactly what God's will is on a number of topics. When they makes such proclamations of "absolute truth," I am astounded, and often do not know how to respond.

We are limited, finite beings. How can we expect such beings to ever be able to discern absolute truth? We can never be objective enough. Our perception of reality is always one step removed from reality itself. Our frame of reference, our memories, color so much of our perception.

I don't want to spend my life navel gazing, however. For some bizarre reason, I've always been preoccupied by ultimate things (some would call it "God stuff" I suppose). I came to the conclusion I'll never figure it all out some years ago. It was time to get on with living life, instead of just observing. So I grabbed the best set of assumptions I could find (which in my case happens to be the Nicene Creed), and ran with them. The Creed gives me a foundation on which to stand so that I can press on the Kingdom.

Assumptions? That's right. I didn't stutter. They are still ideas trapped in words, and can never capture the reality they attempt to express, the reality some of us refer to as God. In some ways, this set of assumptions is like a deck of cards. I think it is healthy to pick one up and carefully examine it once in awhile. But if it is too near the base, I have to be very careful, or the whole house will fall, and I'll be back to navel gazing. Life is too short for that.

I don't think our relationship with God has much to do with "right beliefs" in the end. I think the fruit of a healthy relationship with God is revealed in "right actions". Of course the actions need to be informed by the beliefs, and the tools we use to discern those beliefs; but the tools cannot be allowed to supplant that which they serve.

Thank God we are more than a brain. Thank God we are free to set aside the disputes of "what is fit and what is not," and follow our hearts.

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
- The Book of Common Prayer, p. 324 (also found in Matthew 22:37-40. Along with some other Anglicans, I love the bible because there is so much Prayer Book in it!).

That pretty much sums it up, I would say. Our relationship with God, and one another is rooted in love, which in the above quotation is a verb. Being a Christian is primarily about actions, about bearing fruit with acts of love, not holding the "right beliefs."

As I've mentioned before, I assume that when I get to heaven (whatever "heaven" turns out to be), God is going to say, "Jake, you got it all wrong, but I sure am glad you're here!"

Either that or I'll be slowly browning over the flames. In which case the fact that I never believed in the existence of the flames will most likely not hinder the browning process.

J.

Let Light Perpetual Shine Upon Him

I feel compelled to comment on the atrocious murder of Nick Berg. I've read quite a few reactions, but have waited for my own internal turmoil to die down before attempting to put anything in words.

I grieve in sympathy with those who mourn this day. I grieve for the loss felt by us all. The world is less today.

There is no justification for such cold-blooded murder. These are animals, who cannot be allowed to roam freely around the globe. They will be apprehended. They will be held accountable.

The perpetrators are members of Al Queada. We know that they are twisted beings. We know they are killers. This should come as no surprise.

What outraged me was the distribution of the video. I have not seen it, and have no intention of seeing it. These twisted minds are counting on me viewing it. I won't give them that satisfaction.

As I have mentioned before, my life experience has made it clear to me that I am a killer. I suspect that in the dark interior recesses of most people resides a killer. Humans are capable of cold-blooded murder. There is no doubt in my mind that if an intruder came into my home and threatened my family, I would not hesitate to stop them, even if it meant killing them. There is little doubt in my mind that, if I were able, I would have killed the men in that video. There is a thin line that separates me from those men.

Let me say a bit about that thin line. If I were to kill an intruder, justified or not, I would still have to hold myself accountable to God. It is my belief that it is a very human characteristic to kill. I do not think that it is a divine characteristic. What I understand separates me from the rest of the animal kingdom is my conscious awareness of God. That awareness calls me to rise above my animal nature. That awareness calls me to a higher standard. That awareness informs me that the shedding of blood, the release of the nephesh, the life-force, is always a tragedy, is an act that grieves the heart of God, and makes this world a little smaller.

I am a killer that now refuses to kill, not because I am unable, not because I am weak, but because I am obedient to my Creator, the Life-Giver.

The human Jake says kill the bastards. But I hear another voice whispering in my ear. A voice that suggests that it is in our weakness that we discover our strength. Playing this ugly game on their level is to become just another manifestation of the spirit of death that seems of late to have a strangle-hold on us all. The violence must end. The end of this destruction begins with me.

And then, by extension of my ego, the violence must end within my family, my neighborhood, my faith community, my city, my state, my nation, and my world. But it has to begin with me.

I will not give in to such intimidation by animals. They need to be put in a cage to protect the innocent from their savagery. I will not give in to my own violent nature and desire for revenge. I will not call for their heads.

Actions speak louder than words. I will tell you of a symbolic action I am taking. It is a little thing, but quite big to me. I have a small single shot 20 gauge I've held on to, for "sentimental reasons." Once I decide the best way, I'm going to get rid of it. Demi never liked the thing anyway. I need to remove this implement of destruction from my life. The end of the violence has to begin with me. My response to this tragedy will be to listen to that whispering voice, and begin the act of disarmament within my own household. A small symbolic act; symbolic of my conviction that the killing must stop.

Grant, O Lord, to all who are bereaved the spirit of faith and courage, that they may have strength to meet the days to come with steadfastnes and patience; not sorrowing as those without hope, but in thankful remembrance of your great goodness, and in the joyful expectation of eternal life with those they love. And this we ask in the Name of Jesus Christ our Savior. Amen.

J.

The Mystery of Christ

In a refreshing and honest reflection, (translation; go read it!) Rachelle reminded me of a book by Robert Capon that I started but never finished. Capon is a gourmet chef who also happens to be an Episcopal priest. He proudly admits that he has been fired from every position he has ever held in the Church. My kind of guy. His writing is delightful, cutting through all the doubletalk found in most approaches to systematic theology, as well as inserting a bit of humor and a few recipes to ward off the feeling of heaviness that usually accompanies such topics. Personally, I think that Hunting the Divine Fox needs to be required reading for all theology students. The Third Peacock, which specifically addresses the problem of theodicy, is also a timely book. Here's Capon's imaginative view of the act of creation;

Let me tell you why God made the world.

One afternoon, before anything was made, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit sat around in the unity of their Godhead discussing one of the Father’s fixations. From all eternity, it seems, he had had this thing about being. He would keep thinking up all kinds of unnecessary things -- new ways of being and new kinds of beings to be. And as they talked, God the Son suddenly said, "Really, this is absolutely great stuff. Why don’t I go out and mix up a batch?" And God the Holy Spirit said, "Terrific! I’ll help you." So they all pitched in, and after supper that night, the Son and the Holy Spirit put on this tremendous show of being for the Father. It was full of water and light and frogs; pine cones kept dropping all over the place and crazy fish swam around in the wine glasses. There were mushrooms and mastodons, grapes and geese, tornadoes and tigers -- and men and women everywhere to taste them, to juggle them, to join them and to love them. And God the Father looked at the whole wild party and said, "Wonderful! Just what I had in mind! Tov! Tov! Tov!" And all God the Son and God the Holy Spirit could think of to say was the same thing, "Tov! Tov! Tov!" So they shouted together "Tov!" And they laughed for ages and ages, saying things like how great it was for beings to be and how clever of the Father to think of the idea, and how kind of the Son to go to all that trouble putting it together, and how considerate of the Spirit to spend so much time directing and choreographing, and for ever and ever they told old jokes, and the Father and the Son drank their wine in unitate Spiritus Sancti, and threw ripe olives and pickled mushrooms at each other per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen.
- The Third Peacock

I finally found Capon's book that Rachelle mentioned underneath my bed, which is usually where I find books that seem to have disappeared. I have a haphazard pile on the floor. Inevitably, while leaping out of bed to find out why the fool dog is barking, or to shut off the dagnabbit alarm, I knock over the precarious pile, and the top volumes slide under the bed skirt, to rest forgotten in the dark until some comment motivates a search that quite frequently leads to foraging among the dust bunnies.

While browsing through my recovered copy of The Mystery of Christ, I stumbled across this passage;

The whole, reconciling work of God incarnate in Jesus, you see, is already in everybody and everything by the universal presence of the Mystery of Christ. Therefore, the church is 'catholic' not because it has the whole human race inside it (it never has had, and it probably never will) but because it is the sign (sacrament) to the world of the catholic reconciliation God has handed to every last human being from Adam to whomever. And do you see what 'that' means? It means that the Mystery of Christ is present not just in Christians or in good guys but present in sinners right in the midst of their sins. It means that the Mystery isn't something that picks up its lily-white skirts and runs away when somebody does a no-no. The Mystery just hangs around everywhere; it's in the murderer at the moment he puts the knife in the victim's chest; it's in the victim as the knife punctures her heart - and it's in the abuser and the abused, the torturer and the tortured, the violator and the violated. You don't earn it's presence by being a good egg, and you can't lose it by being a bad one.
- The Mystery of Christ, pp. 65, 66.

I don't know about you, but the news reports today give rise to a cacophony of emotions within me. I needed Capon's words this day, to help keep things in perspective.

He concludes the chapter from which the above quote was pulled with this statement;

You don't have to work for the relationship because you've got it already. Just trust Jesus and open your eyes.

The Mystery of Christ within me greets the Mystery of Christ within you.

Namaste.

J.

Zapped by God

But a man named Ananias, with the consent of his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property; with his wife’s knowledge, he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles' feet. "Ananias," Peter asked, "why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, were not the proceeds at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You did not lie to us but to God!" Now when Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard of it. The young men came and wrapped up his body, then carried him out and buried him. After an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter said to her, "Tell me whether you and your husband sold the land for such and such a price." And she said, "Yes, that was the price." Then Peter said to her, "How is it that you have agreed together to put the Spirit of the Lord to the test? Look, the feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out." Immediately she fell down at his feet and died. When the young men came in they found her dead, so they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. And great fear seized the whole church and all who heard of these things.
- Acts 5:1-11

I'm facilitating a class on the Acts of the Apostles right now. This passage is coming up. It is one of the most ugly passages in scripture, ranking right up there with crazy Abraham's child abuse and the Psalmist bashing baby heads.

Why are the monotheistic traditions so caught up in the wrath of God? A God who went around zapping people who ticked him off is not a God worthy of worship. Such a tyrant God would demand rebellion.

As time goes on, I find the bible to sometimes be more of a stumbling block than a help. I blame it on the invention of the printing press. Now every literate person is told they have access to "the plain truth of the bible." Nevermind that the act of reading, the eye taking in symbols on a page and forming them into words and the words into concepts, involves a process of interpretation. The bible said it, I believe it, that ends it. And if you don't "believe" (read, "interpret") like I do, then you are wrong, and are in danger of hell fire. Gag me with a spoon.

And we wonder why the three monotheistic faiths keep on trying to kill each other off? As they read it, the "plain truth" of their sacred writings justifies the bloodshed.

I also find the treatment of "God's Word" (which I always think is a reference to Jesus, but am usually corrected; Paul being more important in some circles than John, I suppose) as THE source of revealed truth to often be expressed in ways that sure seem idolatrous to me. Even my tradition, with our Gospel procession, etc., has the scent of idolatry around it. It's just dead trees folks. Words on a page. Far removed from the realities they attempt to represent. It astounds me when a book is given a higher priority than living beings. Do people really think God loves a book more than humanity?

When we get to this passage, I'll probably use the African Bible Study Method (also known as the Lambeth method). My experience is that even the most horrid passage can still be a conduit for inspiration, if we set aside all the cerebral stuff, and simply ask, "What is God saying to me, right here and right now, in this passage?" I could present the various spins on this text; exegesis, contextual setting, identifying the appropriate hermeneutical principles, etc. But the reality is that a bunch of that stuff that they put in your toolbox in seminary is just intellectual gymnastics to avoid having to admit the truth; some of the folks who somehow got their writings put in the bible were really twisted.

One way to understand sin is to define it as "twisted good." At the root of every sin is something good. The idea that we can cut sin out of our lives is a very damaging image; to do so would require we also cut out a piece of ourselves. Instead, why not engage in the slow process of untwisting it, until we arrive at the good root? I think the same thing can be done with the difficult passages in scripture. I do believe in redemption, after all. But to do so, we first have to get folks to agree that the passage is twisted. Good luck on that one.

Maybe I'll look into Buddhism. The only problem is I'm still head over heels in love with Christ. Maybe the Unitarians? Bad liturgy. Drat.

J.

Instructions for Life

The Dalai Lama's Instructions for Life:

1. Take into account that great love and great achievements involve great risk.

2. When you lose, don't lose the lesson.

3. Follow the three Rs:
Respect for self
Respect for others and
Responsibility for all your actions.

4. Remember that not getting what you want is sometimes a wonderful stroke of luck.

5. Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.

6. Don't let a little dispute injure a great friendship.

7. When you realize you've made a mistake, take immediate steps to correct it.

8. Spend some time alone every day.

9. Open your arms to change, but don't let go of your values.

10. Remember that silence is sometimes the best answer.

11. Live a good, honorable life. Then when you get older and think back, you'll be able to enjoy it a second time

12. A loving atmosphere in your home is the foundation for your life.

13. In disagreements with loved ones, deal only with the current situation. Don't bring up the past.

14. Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.

15. Be gentle with the earth.

16. Once a year, go someplace you've never been before.

17. Remember that the best relationship is one in which your love for each other exceeds your need for each other.

18. Judge your success by what you had to give up in order to get it.

19. Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon.

J.

A New Bishop Rivera

From the Episcopal News Service;

Hispanic woman elected bishop suffragan in Olympia

by Peter Strimer
ENS 051004-1
Monday, May 10, 2004

The Rev. Bavi Edna 'Nedi' Rivera was elected Bishop Suffragan in the Diocese of Olympia May 8, making her the first Hispanic woman bishop and only the 12th woman bishop in the history of the Episcopal Church in the United States.

The election, held at St. Mark's Cathedral in Seattle, took three ballots with Rivera holding a substantial lead among both clergy and lay people in the first two ballots. The Diocese of Olympia comprises 33,000 Episcopalians in the western half of the state of Washington.

At the closing worship of the convention, diocesan Bishop Vincent Warner offered, "I just want to put in perspective that this is the first suffragan elected in this diocese in 150 years, it is the first woman elected in this diocese, it is the first woman of color elected in this diocese and the first woman of color suffragan bishop who has a father who is a bishop. It is part of God’s history of God’s church."

Rivera is the daughter of the Rt. Rev. Victor Manuel Rivera, who served as Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin, California, from 1968 to 1988. She is presently serving as rector of St. Aidan's Episcopal Church in San Francisco. She was ordained a priest in 1979.

The diocese sought a bishop who would lead the church in its efforts to expand ethnic ministries, evangelism and the work of faith formation. Rivera is a leader in youth work and a member of the clergy of color in the Diocese of California. She has done advanced study at the Vancouver School of Theology in parish revitalization.

The Episcopal Church was the first province in the Anglican Communion to ordain a woman as bishop when Barbara Harris was consecrated bishop suffragan of the Diocese of Massachusetts in February,1989. Rivera becomes the 16th woman bishop in the history of the worldwide Anglican Communion of seventy million members.

- Peter Strimer is Communications Director for the Diocese of Olympia.

My family and I lived in Visalia, California, in the San Joaquin Valley, for some years. We attended St. Paul's Episcopal Church. All of us children were baptized there by the rector, Father Vic. I left my family, and the Episcopal Church, at age 11. Father Vic was the only image of an Episcopal priest I had until I returned to the Church 15 years later. By then he was bishop of San Joaquin. Father Vic was a great priest, and, most likely, in many ways, an excellent bishop. His image was a good one for me to hold on to.

When I began the ordination process, I imagined one day serving under Bishop Rivera. Being rather naive, it wasn't until I arrived at seminary that I learned, much to my surprise, that he was one of the few bishops in the Church who opposed women's ordination. That meant that I would never be able to serve in his diocese. Not because I have the "wrong plumbing," but because I served in one diocese which banned women priests, and once was enough to learn the lesson. Never again. The theology that leads to such exclusions includes many more strange teachings that are contrary to much of what I believe and my understanding of the priesthood.

And now Father Vic's daughter is Bishop Suffragan of Olympia. My understanding is that Bishop Rivera supported his daughter as she sought God's will regarding her vocational call. I would imagine that when he heard the news of the election, he felt like a proud father, and maybe even rejoiced (privately, of course). I wonder if he will participate in her consecration?

J.

Courage

From The Foundation for a Better Life;



J.

Our Mother, Who Art in Heaven...

Today, throughout this country, we honor one of the most important roles of humanity. Today, we honor Motherhood.

In today's culture, you would think that this day would be decreed to be something a little more inclusive. Parent's Day, maybe? But no, over time, this day has managed to keep its significance, and identify the role of Mother as being unique to the role of Father. Is there a difference?

In today's households, many roles are shared by the parents, making the line between Moms and Dads a little more blurry. The stereotypical roles no longer define parents in today's world. The reality is that we are each a composite of many different characteristics; some masculine, and some feminine. More than ever before, the title Parent seems more appropriate.

Our Parent, who art in heaven... That doesn't quite have the same ring to it, does it? That's the problem with language. It is not always a rational endeavor. And maybe that's a good thing, as our images of God are not always rationale, either. When it comes to the nature of God, we know very little. We talk about God using metaphors. Sometimes metaphors are helpful. Sometimes they're not. If our reference to God as Father leads us to believe that God must be male, much like our earthly fathers, and our experience of earthly fathers is negative, then the metaphor of God as father may hinder our relationship and our understanding of God. Speaking of God as Parent probably isn't much better, as our relationship with God might become yoked to our interaction with our earthly parents.

Our Father/Mother, who art in heaven... This is a cumbersome way to address God, but it does have some merit. It is a complex image, a unique image, and one that is not readily accepted literally. It contains an element of mystery. But, once again, it just doesn't sound right to our ear, does it?

Our Mother who art in heaven... This metaphor has the same problem as the Father metaphor. Referring to God as Mother makes it easy to let our earthly Mother become our model of God. Yet, it is a metaphor worth exploring, as I think it is an option that has been neglected for much too long.

God is both Father and Mother. God has both masculine and feminine characteristics. You may have never thought of God before with feminine characteristics. I invite you today to consider God as Mother; to consider God as the One who gathers us under Her wings.

Mother's Day is not specifically a religious holiday, although it is interesting that the lectionary provides us with today's Gospel for the Sunday set aside to honor mothers. Jesus said, "I give you a new commandment, that you love one another."

If there was ever a human metaphor for the love of God, it would probably be the love of a mother for her child; an unconditional love. God's love is totally unconditional.

I invite you to recall some of your memories of unconditional love from your life. They don't have to be memories of your mother's love. You might remember such love from your father, grandparents, spouse, or any other significant person in your life. We are referring to this "no strings attached" love as motherly love, but it didn't have to come from your mom. We've all experienced this kind of love, expressions of care that were unearned and undeserved. Even though it may not have been your personal experience, the idea of unconditional love, born through the ages in song and literature, has been wrapped up with the image of Mother.

This morning I want to suggest to you that the term Mother is an appropriate way to address God, who offers us unconditional love, and who gives us a new commandment, that we love one another.

Let me tell a story to illustrate the difference between the masculine and the feminine, a story that might help illustrate why I think right now, in this time in history, the image of Mother is a good way to envision God. It is a story told by Ed Gentry, a bible study leader at a church in Texas.

When I was a kid, we used to go to my grandparents dairy farm for a week each year. Each morning my grandmother would wake up at 4am and head out to the pasture to round up the cows and take them to the barn for milking. I will never forget the day I came of age. It was announced the following morning I would be allowed to get up and go with my grandmother as she performed her duties.

By the time grandmother was ready to go, so was I...decked out completely with cowboy boots, plastic chaps, genuine leather holster, metal cap gun, bandana, cowboy hat, and, if memory serves, she found me digging around for a piece of rope to be used to wrangle the particularly reluctant doggies.

You can imagine my surprise when, as we started to walk to the barn, she began to softly call out the cows names into the darkness. By the time we got to the barn, the first few cows were lining up to come in and get milked. I don't remember if the surprise knocked me off my feet or I slipped on a cow patty, but I was really bothered. This was not how you were supposed to round up cattle. It bothered me for a long time. As we studied Psalm 23 last month, this memory came rushing back. My vision is of God gently calling our names in the dark as we walk through our lives. I think cattle prods would be more effective.

Our Mother, who art in heaven, softly calling our names in the darkness. God the Creator giving birth to all creation, nurturing and sustaining Her creation, and expressing an inclusive love for all of creation. I think our world needs this metaphor for God right now. One who creates, nurtures and sustains.


Today, I have invited you to stretch your understanding of God, to explore the possibility of seeing God as your heavenly Mother. I have found this metaphor to be helpful in my life. I suspect it may be helpful to some of you.

Let us celebrate motherhood this day, and give thanks to God our Mother. Let us also honor God as we encounter Her in those around us. Express your love for the mothers in your life. They are created in the image of God.

J.

Putting the Lid On Too Late?

Electrolite informs us that it appears the military may have ordered KBR (Kellogg, Brown, & Root, a division of Halliburton, of course), who provides net access for US troops in Iraq, to cut off all “inessential” access to email and the net for the next 90 days.

Could it be they don't want news of what's happening on the home front to get in, and further reports of what is going on in Iraq to get out?

If they want to control "stories told out of school," then they had better figure out how to gag troops returning to the states. Because they are talking, and it ain't pretty;

'It is a common thing to abuse prisoners,' said Sgt. Mike Sindar, 25, of the Army National Guard's 870th Military Police Company based in the San Francisco Bay area. 'I saw beatings all the time... A lot of people had so much pent-up anger, so much aggression...It was not just these six people...Yes, the beatings happen, yes, all the time...'

...Until earlier this year prisoners would arrive at Abu Ghraib with broken bones, suggesting they had been roughed up, he said. But the practice ended in January or February, as practices at the prison were coming under increased internal scrutiny...

...Some say investigators went out of their way to keep the allegations under wraps. When military investigators were looking into abuses several months ago, they gave U.S. guards a week's notice before inspecting their possessions, several soldiers said.

"That shows you how lax they are about discipline. 'We are going to look for contraband in here, so hint, hint, get rid of the stuff,' that's the way things work in the Guard,'' Leal said.

Anyone else interested in revisiting The Kucinich Plan to bring our troops home?

J.

Naked Twister?

I confess; I turned on the TV again. This time I watched CNBC's Dennis Miller. To say I was shocked is an understatement. Here is how Weekly Standard editor Jonathan V. Last described Iraqi prison tortures;

I hope these guys are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law ... but at the same time, let's not get too crazy and call them Nazi-like. ... Worse happens in frat houses across America ... bad pictures with some guys playing naked Twister. It's bad, but we don't want to get too crazy.

The "naked twister" comment got a good laugh from the audience.

I couldn't believe that this is the spin the neocons are trying to put on this. A little bit of checking affirms that, amazingly, this is exactly the defense being made for these atrocities.

From FOX's Hannity and Colms, in an interview of Tony Robinson, former U.S. Army sergeant and interrogation instructor;

Robinson: Well, one thing that needs to be understood, is that there's also an impact on the torturer. ... Now, I use the word torture, but that's not what's happening in these pictures.

Hannity: What is it?

Robinson: I've seen - I've seen worse than this at - frat hazing is worse than this.

Hannity: So in other words, this is not a big deal? What should the punishment be if these guys in fact are found guilty of whatever is going on over there, whatever is going on?

Robinson: Well, it's not torture. If it was, they'd be accused of torture. They're accused of maltreatment. I'm not making excuses for them.

From Rush;

Caller: It was like a college fraternity prank that stacked up naked men...

Rush: Exactly. Exactly my point! This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation and we're going to ruin people's lives over it and we're going to hamper our military effort, and then we are going to really hammer them because they had a good time. You know, these people are being fired at every day. I'm talking about people having a good time, these people, you ever heard of emotional release? You ever heard of need to blow some steam off?

Naked Twister? Frat hazing? Blowing off steam? Is this the best defense they can come up with? It would seem an obvious point, but possibly we need to keep in mind one important point; these are not a bunch of willing frat boys, these are POWs in a country we are occupying!

I wish this kind of commentary (and there is more of the same out there, btw) could be dismissed as more hot air from the spin doctors. But I suspect that this is how both the President and his Secretary of Defense see this situation. From Donald Rumsfeld;

My impression is that what has been charged thus far is abuse, which I believe technically is different from torture... I don't know if the - it is correct to say what you just said, that torture has taken place, or that there's been a conviction for torture. And therefore I'm not going to address the torture word.

That's enough to cause one to wonder if the Secretary has yet to read the Taguba Report, which included the following actions by the US military:

Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet;
Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees;
Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing;
Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time;
Forcing naked male detainees to wear women's underwear;
Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped;
Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them;
Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture;
Writing "I am a Rapest" (sic) on the leg of a detainee alleged to have forcibly raped a 15-year old fellow detainee, and then photographing him naked;
Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee's neck and having a female soldier pose for a picture;
A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee;
Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee;
Taking photographs of dead Iraqi detainees.
Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees;
Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol;
Pouring cold water on naked detainees;
Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair;
Threatening male detainees with rape;
Allowing a military police guard to stitch the wound of a detainee who was injured after being slammed against the wall in his cell;
Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick.

We are told there is more to come.

Frat house pranks? Abuse, but not torture? A weak defense for the tip of the iceberg being revealed.

We need to admit what we have done here, make the necessary changes, and remove the leaders responsible, so we can get on to other necessary investigations concerning civilian deaths and the assassination of wounded Iraqis. But first, let's figure out how to get out of Iraq.

One final note; I continue to speak on the behavior of the US military first of all because I am a Christian; one who follows Jesus Christ, who said "The Gentiles lord their authority over one another, but not so with you!" Oppressive violence can never be called "Christian," no matter how far one stretches the definition. I am also a veteran, who served during Vietnam. If called, I would serve again. I love this nation, and that is why I am outraged by the behavior of this administration. It is my Christian duty, and my patriotic duty, to speak out.

J.

UPDATE Daily Kos notes one of the latest spins to watch for; the abuses were in response to the murder of the mercenaries in Fallujah. Note that the abuses were going on way before that atrocity. The two events are not linked, unless we entertain the possibility that the outrage by the people of Fallujah was fueled by the abuses they knew were going on in Abu Ghraib.

Ask not what Iraqis did to you in Fallujah.
Ask what you did to the Iraqis before Fallujah.

Democrats Welcome Bloggers

Is anyone interested in covering the Democratic National Convention as a blogger?

You can apply for a press pass by following the instructions offered by N.Z. Bear

J.

The Spin Doctors

I made the mistake of turning on the TV last night. I really have no intention of turning Jake's place into a warblog, but some of the spin coming out now is simply outrageous.

I'll just note a couple that had me shouting at the fool tube;

The outrage and indignation from this administration is supposed to lead us to believe they didn't know about what was going on in Abu Ghraib. According to the Red Cross, Washington was warned a year ago about prisoner abuse. I suppose one can spin this with some wild story of why the Swiss might not be impartial, but I won't buy it. Washington knew, and chose to ignore it. Why? Because this is war, and ugly things are always done in time of war. As long as the "little people" don't find out, carry on. Guess what? We found out. And now we are outraged that you, our leaders, did nothing to stop it.

Some politician kept insisting that "this is only about six soldiers." Give me a break. There are 35 investigations regarding prisoner abuses among the Americans alone. Not to mention the accusations of British torture. Or the 12 murders being investigated. Or the targeting of civilians by Marines and regular Army. We have created a military monster, and the world is watching this monster run amuck.

Since it was the torture of prisoners that brought this monster of our own creation to light, how about demanding the dismantling of another ugly creation of the army; described by Amnesty International as "the human rights scandal of Guantanamo Bay." For two years, 650 people have been held as prisoners, with no trial. Who knows what kind of abuses, tortures and murders have been going on there. The "strategic location" does not make it a place of easy access for the press or human rights watchers, let alone visits from family members. I encourage you to support the Guantanamo Human Rights Commission, whose long term objective is to achieve an end to all forms of internment without trial.

A final note to those with a medical condition that requires them to avoid situations that might cause their blood pressure to rise; watch the spin doctors at your own risk. You have been warned!

J.

Preaching to the Choir

I found the following in my inbox this morning. It is a perspective worth noting. I'm removing names, as I don't have direct permission to use them. It begins with an introduction that was attached to the "sermon";

I don't usually get into this kind of thing, and I will apologize up front for the fact that this email could be considered political. I sent this to about everyone I could think of, because it hit me so hard. Truth has a way of doing that.

This is from E. A., a guy I know well. He has two doctorates, and I've known of his military service, but never the reasons he held it in such low regard. I produced a record of his music and know of his history. He's an intelligent, straight ahead guy.

Subject: preaching to the choir on American prisoner abuse
Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2004 6:15 PM

Hello choir,

I was just listening to the reports from Iraq and was reminded of my own experience training to be both a guard and a prisoner of war at the Air Force Academy during the summer program called S.E.R.E. ("seary"; survival, evasion, resistance, escape).

The "resistance" and "escape" part of the training, lasting about a week or so, takes place in a very elaborate mock POW camp in the mountains above the Academy. When I went through the program as a new sophomore (just after recovering from a broken jaw with six weeks of wires and very little food), the POW part of the training came after the survival and evasion parts, which amounted to two weeks of even less sustenance than my wired-jaw period. So I was already delirious, but I remember a variety of sadistic abuses, often in the form of mind games and humiliation. It was a horrible experience, but I imagine it might have prepared me to be in the position some of the Iraqi prisoners have unfortunately found themselves in. I don't really know.

A year after I went through the training as a prisoner, I was chosen to be a guard in the POW camp to facilitate the training of the class one year behind me. Whatever training we guards-to-be may have gotten on how to play the mind games, to humiliate, to be the sadists they wanted us to be, this training paled in comparison to the year we spent venting our pent up hostilities on the members of the class behind us since we spent the whole year "training" them to be cadets. The pent up hostilities came about during our year of abuse, which ended with a "hell week" that put hundreds in the hospital and provoked congress to stop the very old tradition of hell week. This year-long "training" is really an extended course on the type of sadism that permeates the Academies, and has done so since well before my grandfather was hazed in 1924 during his "plebe" year at the Naval Academy.

During my training, I have no recollection of learning the Geneva Convention's rules on the treatment of prisoners. We probably got it though. I just don't remember. I do remember learning about the "Stanford syndrome," where a mock POW camp was created at Stanford and the people involved in this unethical experiment ended up delusional about the reality of the environment and their role in it--ie, they started believing they were in fact guards in a prison, and the people they were treating sadistically deserved what they were getting. The prisoners fell into similar delusions, though of the masochistic kind. I remember being surprised and ashamed when I discovered that I was not as immune to this syndrome as I thought I would be. The realization came as I held a petite young female cadet's face in the dirt because she, as a mock prisoner, didn't listen to the command I gave her while I played the role of a camp guard.

I find it ironic and tragic that people might believe Rumsfeld's line that the abuse the Americans are dishing out to Iraqi prisoners is somehow un-American. The kind of sadism that we are hearing about is actually a rather standard and traditional part of military training. I imagine that most Americans are vulnerable to the fantasies that torturers are to be found among Nazi's, or would be found (the often racist version of these fantasies) in Latin American, Japanese or Vietnamese prison camps. I was disturbed by how familiar the photo of the strutting, smiling female guard with naked Iraqi men behind her was for me. It reminded me of my very American "training."

I was reminded of how I had to learn to "resist" the torturing of my captors. In order to learn how to teach this lesson, to teach "resistance," someone, the teacher, has to become an expert in torture. The US has many such experts. Many of them, as many of you know, work at what is known as the Army's "School of the Americas," recently given the Orwellian name of the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation." As Mary Turck puts it in an on-line article:

"What do Col. Byron Lima Estrada of Guatemala, Lt. Josê Espinoza Guerra and General Juan Orlando Zepeda, both of El Salvador, and General Juan López Ortiz of Mexico have in common?

They are all murderers. They were all trained at the School of the Americas. Because of them, and because of thousands of others like them, many people call U.S. Army's School of the Americas the "School of Assassins."

And what do Panama's Manuel Noriega, Argentina's Leopoldo Galtiere, Peru's Juan Velasco Alvarado, Ecuador's Guillermo Rodriguez, and Bolivia's Hugo Banzer have in common? They have all been dictators in their countries, and they were all trained at the School of the Americas. Because of them, and others, many people call the U.S. Army's School of the Americas the "School of Coups."

The School of the Americas (SOA) is a military training school for Latin American soldiers. SOA is an official program of the U.S. government, funded by the government and run by the U.S. Armed Forces since 1946. SOA graduates have long been implicated in terrorism, human rights violations, coercion, and atrocities committed against civilian populations across Latin America."

You can see the rest of the article at the web site below. My basic reason for sending this article is to give everyone a sense of how very American it is to torture, humiliate, terrorize, and not follow the Geneva Convention--which means how American it is to commit war crimes. There is a well-documented history of this for those who aren't blinded by their patriotism and their delusional John Wayne Americas. How these fantasy Americas so consistently stand up to the fact that not long ago millions of southeast Asians were killed by Americans ... so they wouldn't become communists ... boggles my mind. Millions killed so they would be "free"? Is this un-American too?

With this basic reality of the Vietnam war always there, think of the delusional mind-set someone has to be in to talk about torturing prisoners being un-American--how much denial there must be there. We might call it "fanatical." My guess is that bin Laden knows this violent American history quite well, and is teaching it to his Jihadist students. Different kinds of fanatics, but fanatics for sure; a clash between fanatics, which is the usual historically.

What seems so scary now is that Jihadists around the world now have an even stronger case that the US invasion of Iraq, led by a fanatical former oil man, is a US power grab, "naked aggression" (as Bush senior said of Iraq years ago), an illegal occupation with the goal of gaining more control over Arab resources, the second largest known oil reserves in the world. As if they needed a stronger case to stir up anti-American hatred. I am embarrassed that a year ago I was fooled into believing the WMD threat was real, and that I wasn't more against the invasion then. Perhaps my "training" clouded my judgement. Excuses, excuses.

School of Assassins

J.

Gatekeepers; Take the Day Off...

Better yet, take the millennium off. With pay of course. You'll still get your crown. Maybe a few stars in it for humility as well.

When Christians make arrogant statements in public forums, does it ever cross their minds that they may one day be held accountable for blocking the way into the Kingdom for others?

I know of no quicker method to turn people away from Jesus than to beat them over the head with the bible as we shout, "Believe like I do or burn!" Surely we can do better than that?

J.

Pressing On

A friend recently sent me a quote from Karen Armstrong, who is best known for her books A History of God and The Battle for God. This quote was drawn from The Spiral Staircase;

The great myths show that when you follow somebody else's path you go astray. The hero has to set off by himself, leaving the old world and the old ways behind. He must venture into the darkness of the unknown, where there is no map and no clear route. He must fight his own monsters, not somebody else's, explore his own labyrinth, and endure his own ordeal before he can find what is missing in his life. Thus transfigured, he (or she) can bring something of value to the world that has been left behind. But if the knight finds himself riding along an already established track, he is simply following in somebody else's footsteps and will not have an adventure. In the words of the Old French text of The Quest of the Holy Grail, if he wants to succeed, he must enter the forest "at a point that he, himself, had chosen, where it was darkest and there was no path." The wasteland in the Grail legend is a place where people live inauthentic lives, blindly following the norms of their society and doing only what other people expect.

What my friend could not have known, as it has been a few months since we have spoken, is that I recently started reading The Spiral Staircase, which I picked up after hearing an interview Armstrong gave on NPR. Quite the coincidence, if you believe in such things.

Entering into the darkness of the unknown; Dante's dark wood. The quote resonates strongly, although I don't feel particularly heroic. Just the opposite, actually. Some days it feels as if I'm swimming through molasses, a syrupy concoction of my own making. I know how to climb out of this thick, sweet pool. I'm too busy trying to stay afloat, and too preoccupied by the bubbles struggling to surface all around me.

Bubbles don't struggle of their own accord. They naturally float upward. In my thrashing through this ocean of brown ooze, I'm holding them down. I don't want them to surface. I'm afraid. I'm afraid that these tiny bubbles might just hold within them things I don't want to hear; things that just might make my own struggle end. I don't want to slowly sink down into those dark depths. But I am getting tired. In some ways, it would be a relief. Yes, it would. Not just yet, though. No, not quite yet.

Leaving the old world and the old ways behind; a few years ago, I packed up whatever I could fit into my car, and drove 3,000 miles to a new life, a new world. It is a good world. I'm not sorry I did it. What haunts me is the memory of severing the mooring lines. No question that they had to be cut. What sometimes causes me to gasp out loud is the unexpected recalling of some of the methods I used to break those ties. Some give good reason to despise myself. Others bring a sense of wonder at the ability to endure the ordeal without being destroyed.

These bubbles from the past, which appear without warning, rise from a song from the car radio, a vaguely familiar scent, or snippets of overheard conversation on the boardwalk. They don't signal another weekly conclusion of Lawrence Welk (yes, I am that old, folks! Anda one, anda two...), but instead announce the beginning of a fresh game of "What if..." If only I had done, or not done; said or not said...

It is a silly game. A game driven by fear; the fear of failing, the fear of being doomed to repeating the same mistakes over and over again, the fear of letting go of too much, the fear of losing myself.

Which brings me to the real foolishness in all of this. Am I the sum total of my memories? More specifically, am I my thoughts; or more clearly, is my identity completely consumed by the one who thinks such thoughts? If I were only a mind sitting on top of a long tube that sucks and blows, I suppose that would be a fair description.

I suspect that it is the thinker who is the source of all this molasses, and most likely the bubbles as well. And that thinker is somewhat imaginary. Every thought is a projection of a past event. Even a thought I perceive as instantaneous is still slightly removed from the present moment. Projections on a screen; projections trapped in the illusionary divisions of time.

Maybe I'll just float on my back for awhile, and let those bubbles rise to the surface, and smile as they pop; finally exposed as the illusionary fears they always were.

J.

From The Witness; Immediate Action Needed!

Sign-On Letter to Archbishop Robin Eames;

Editor's Note: The following Open Letter to Archbishop Eames, chair of the international "Lambeth Commission" of the Anglican Communion, is being offered to members of the Episcopal Church by the Rev. Elizabeth Kaeton and the Rev. Susan Russell on behalf of a coalition of Episcopalians concerned about the deliberations of this international Anglican body. Among other titles, Kaeton serves as president of the board of the Episcopal Church Publishing Company, and Russell serves as president of Integrity USA and executive director of the Claiming the Blessing collaborative. Information about signing on to the letter is provided at the end of the letter.

The Most Rev. Robin Eames
Primate of All Ireland
Chairman, The Lambeth Commission

Dear Archbishop Eames,

We are men and women, lay and ordained, who are faithful members of The Episcopal Church, USA. Many of us are members of the various independent justice organizations of our church, such as the Episcopal Women's Caucus, the Union of Black Episcopalians, the Episcopal Urban Caucus, the Episcopal Peace Fellowship, the Episcopal Ecological Network, the Episcopal Society for Ministry in Higher Education, the Episcopal Network for Economic Justice, Associated Parishes for Liturgy and Mission, the Episcopal Church Publishing Company ( The Witness ), the Every Voice Network, Integrity, Beyond Inclusion, Claiming the Blessing, and The Oasis, among others.

We are writing in an attempt to balance the letters you may be receiving from clergy who are members of the American Anglican Council because we are concerned that their particular perspective is not one that represents the vast majority of people in The Episcopal Church.

Far from being “torn apart,” or needing your assistance “to establish discipline, order and accountability for the Episcopal Church,” because our actions will “prove fatal to the unity of the church,” (from the AAC Clergy Letter) we find ourselves, overall, in remarkably good shape, given the dire forecasts which were being made in the days immediately following General Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Indeed, in March 2004, Integrity USA conducted an online systematic assessment of the recent actions of various diocesan conventions since August 2003. There were 58 completed surveys. Data was provided on 45 of 112 dioceses. The results are enclosed with this letter and can also be viewed at EveryVoice.net . Among the conclusions of the survey:

Diocesan convention support for affiliating with the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes is extremely limited.

Diocesan convention support for withholding funds from the national Episcopal Church, USA is also very small.

Diocesan convention support for authorizing development of a local policy on the blessing of same-sex relationships is inconclusive. Comments from several respondents indicate that this issue may be considered the domain of the diocesan bishop.

The outcome of other resolutions indicates that the majority of diocesan conventions support the actions of General Convention and Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) issues. In classical Anglican form, many diocesan conventions affirmed a via media that seeks to maintain unity while recognizing diversity.

The overall ratio of positive to negative impacts resulting from diocesan convention resolutions is 2.2 to 1.

This is not to deny that there is tension within the Body of Christ in this particular branch of the church. We believe that these tensions, while painful, are to be expected, given the depth of anger and hostility expressed by some of our more conservative brothers and sisters to these admittedly volatile issues of human sexuality. Moreover, our experience teaches us that justice is never achieved without pain or struggle.

You, particularly, Archbishop Eames, will recall these same emotions and tensions were visible and palpable after the ordination of women. Much of the same language and actions employed then are being heard and seen today. It is important to note that the year 2004 marks the 30th Anniversary of the Ordination of Women in The Episcopal Church and the 10th Anniversary of the Ordination of Women in The Church of England. This also means that both The Episcopal Church and The Church of England are “out of communion” with many of our Anglican brothers and sisters who do not support the ordination of women – a good many of whom are also members of the American Anglican Council. This has been so for more than a generation in the USA and now marks a decade in The Church of England, which, we note, still does not allow for the consecration of a woman as bishop.

We are grateful for the hard work of the ministry of reconciliation which is once again being carried out under your leadership and guidance. We trust that you will affirm and uphold the pastoral and more than adequate plan developed by the Bishops of The Episcopal Church to provide Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight. Anything less would be antithetical to the unconditional love of God, a detraction from the Way of Christ, and contrary to Anglican polity and practice.

Yours in the Liberating Spirit of the Gospel of Jesus Christ,



To Sign-on to this Open Letter please send an email by May 11, 2004 to editor@thewitness.org with the following information:
Title:
Name (required):
Email Address (required):
Diocese (required):
Congregation/ Organization:
Phone Number:

You are invited to print out this petition for use in your congregation or Episcopal community. Please note that signatories must provide a form of contact information (email or phone) so that their names may be verified. For an MS Word version of the text, please send an email to editor@thewitness.org. The file document will be emailed back to you within 48 hours.

This is important, folks. May 11 is not that far away. Please take a moment now and send off an e-mail.

J.

The Cost of War

From The Fellowship of Reconciliation:

The Cost of War Beyond Dollars

by Richard Earl Cross

In the glare of bright uniforms, waving flags, and martial music one can easily forget the brutality and dehumanization that accompanies warfare. Alongside physical war wounds there are suicides, domestic violence, and addiction. Many veterans languish for years, forgotten in VA hospitals, scarred in mind and body. One Green Beret was recently charged with “cowardly conduct as a result of fear,” later downgraded to dereliction of duty, because he had a panic attack upon seeing an Iraqi cut in half by a machine gun. While some soldiers were laughing as the corpse of the dead Iraqi was dragged past, this man threw up and shook for hours, with a pounding head and chest pains. “From his waistline to his head,” he said, “everything was missing.”

I would suggest that his only crime was that of being too human.

Erasmus (1517) said it well: “War is like a vast ocean of all the evils combined: under its influence sprouting buds wither, plants shrivel up, the frail collapse, the strong perish, and sweet things turn sour. It wipes out all traces of piety and religion. You cannot conceivably address a credible prayer to the father of all men when you have just driven a sword into your brother’s bowels.”

In war young men are called upon to kill other young men whom they don’t know. They are ordered to do so by old men sitting in their war room who know, but do not fight, the old men on the opposing side. It brings to mind the photo of Donald Rumsfeld shaking Saddam Hussein’s hand when he was our ally. Erasmus put it succinctly: “Nowadays princes declare war in perfect safety, and the generals get fat on it; but the heaviest burden falls on the peasants and poor artisans who stand to gain nothing from it and had nothing whatever to do with declaring it.” The leaders are not the bleeders.

Today more and more of our youth, born weaponless and now in their early twenties, trained to be soldiers and not policemen, are being served up as cannon fodder. They perish every day. I submit that the moral guilt of those who sanctioned this senseless war is mounting. The powers behind this tragedy make sure we never see any body bags; nor the returning coffins; nor the funerals that the president never attends. So our dead heroes are buried in obscurity and the general public is shielded from a wake-up call.

I do not know how many of these dead heroes were poor Southern white kids, Blacks, and Hispanics. But I suspect quite a number. I wonder how popular this wasteful war would be with local residents if Charlie Rangel’s proposal to reinstate the draft became law. Perhaps the hawkish mood of some armchair warriors would quickly evaporate.

"The leaders are not the bleeders." Therein lies the problem. Let's stop this insanity now.

J.