The Prayer - Sunday Music

Chloe Agnew of Celtic Women - and some friends - in a gentle bit of music for a Sunday. Enjoy.

The Cathedral To Ring "Imagine"

Over at the Church Times Dave Walker has discussed the ringing of Imagine, the 1971 song by John Lennon, on the Cathedral Bells.  He goes on the ask readers to vote if this should be done, given the lyrics and all.  The last vote I saw was 70% against and 30% in favor.  It seems that many years after John Lennon's death the religious right is still out to crucify John Lennon.  More aptly, there is a large chunk of the population that did not think beyond their pew when John said the Beatles were more popular than Jesus Christ and now, today, they still cannot.

John railed against the establishment.  The hollow words and vicious action we as a group, as a society, spoke and acted upon.  When he wrote this song he looked at those things that held us back from becoming one group acting in concert.  Religion, more aptly the practice of religion by so many folks was fraudulent.  John believed the practice of Religion did not follow the great teachings of Christ in Matthew 26.  It allowed people to go to church on Sunday and kill people on Monday.  It allowed people to preach "God's word" and perform corporate theft. It allowed the first world to be smugly comfortable and not help those in need.  He feared that if people were either afraid of hell and/or working toward heaven they would not help people in the here and now.  

Imagine no possessions 
I wonder if you can 
No need for greed or hunger 
A brotherhood of man 
Imagine all the people 
Sharing all the world 

You may say that I'm a dreamer 
But I'm not the only one 
I hope someday you'll join us 
And the world will live as one 

If you ask me not much has changed since John wrote Imagine.  We still have a large group of people so caught up in the righteousness of their cause that they refuse to see the crushing needs right now.  The banks, the auto industry, the religious right are all examples of what and why John wrote this song.  I understand that many would vote against ringing this song out on the cathedral bells.  John liked to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.  Apparently the comfortable are even today reaching out to reduce John to an inconsequential musician from Liverpool.  What say, just for a change,  we give John a break.  He has been dead a long time so how about we start to read the lyrics and try to understand what John was trying to say.  John was a great musician and an even better poet.  Let's begin to recognize that fact and think with both heart and head.  

Orthodox Litigation Strategy 12/28/03

Maybe everyone knows this but in light of the most recent decisions from the various courts in California and in New York I would like to refresh the memories of many of our followers on some of the "issues" surrounding the litigation.

"Judge Bellows upheld the written law, correctly applied the Constitution, and was judicious in his rulings throughout this legal process. We hoped that TEC and the Diocese would recognize this and would have put this legal battle behind us," said Jim Oakes, vice-chairman of ADV. "We are saddened that The Episcopal Church and the Diocese find it necessary to continue with more litigation. An appeal process will cost additional millions of dollars that could be spent on mission and ministry.

www.americananglican.org dated February 3, 2009

Within the walls of North America we have The Episcopal Church and the Church of Canada fighting against the Anglican Resistance, using millions and millions of dollars in legal fees and defrocking anyone who stands in their way, without appearing to have any thought to the long-term damage to their own institutions.

BabyBlue dated March 2, 2009

The important question, though, is why would the leaders of the Episcopal church, the center of love, inclusion, and tolerance, spend millions of dollars to sue parishes that apparently amicably departed four years ago at the discretion of the bishop of Ohio? Well, I may have an idea. I have found that some who throw around the words “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “tolerance” are often some of the most non-diverse, exclusive, and intolerant folks around, especially if you don’t happen to agree with them on their pet issues.

blog.ancient-future.net

The facts relating to Diocesan withdrawal are well-known to all of you. Similarly, our position in the Calvary litigation has been consistent and straightforward from the very beginning. The 2005 Stipulation and Order does not address Diocesan realignment.

Mr. Robert Duncan's Lenten Pastoral Letter

3. What legal liabilities would you face if you wanted to leave your current diocese? Recent litigation indicates that the local diocesan authorities hold almost all the cards if they want to play "hardball".
But we think that the political realities are such that the American revisionist bishops will be reticent to play "hardball" for a while. They have just handed the gay lobby a stunning victory, but are forced to pay a fearsome price for it. The opposition at home is far greater than they anticipated and the opposition overseas is serious and inflamed. ECUSA will certainly lose members and funds at a high rate over the next few months accelerating their decline. . . .
ECUSA leaders know well how conservatives could quickly become the "victims" in the public mind. They also know that all our AEO (Alternative Episcopal Oversight)
work will eventually find its way across the desk of the Archbishop of Canterbury(ABC). All of this will create pressure for them to cooperate with the ABC/Primate's call for AEO. So we suspect that there will be a window of time before they return to "hardball" tactics.

This last piece is from Geoff Chapman, dated December 28, 2003.

Ladies and gentlemen, They continue to play all of us for all that they (and we) are worth. When next you see the orthodites complain about "litigating is hurting the church" and "suing is so unchristian like" please refer back to this post. And then, send that newspaper, blogger, editorial writer this reference. These antics are christian???

Stations of the Cross

One of my fondest childhood memories is that of the Stations of the Cross. Of late, we were once told by a member of JDS clergy that the Stations of the Cross had no business inside a church. He told us that it was not "architecturally sound". I truly beg to differ. Here is one of the most moving songs I remember -- I hope, on this first Friday in Lent it helps set the stage for a reflective 40 days.

San Joaquin Updates

We have some updates for everyone.

First, the long awaited ruling with regard to who really is the representative of the corporate sole will have t owait for another day.  Actually, the motion for summary adjudication was postponed until March 11, 2009.  According to those in the know this is simply a housekeeping chore by the courts.  It manages their dockets and generally without explanation.  That happened, no explanation, this time as well.  In my line of work I beleive that sometimes, even though I am just the engineer, I want to beleive I am the conductor.  The fact is the conductor will manage the train.  We therefore pray and wait.

The second issue is the final determination/written ruling from the California Supreme Court on the issue of St. James, Newport Beach property.  They slightly modified their ruling and in part here is the modification:

The opinion herein, filed on January 5, 2009, and appearing at 45 Cal.4th 467, is modified as follows: The first sentence in the second full paragraph on page 473 is modified to read:"Applying the neutral principles of law approach, we conclude, on this record, that the general church, not the local church, owns the property in question."

The final line in the modifications cited by the court goes like this:

"This modification does not affect the judgment."

There had been a challenge to review the finds by several schismatics but the courts would have none of that nonsense. Here is the read :

The third full paragraph on page 476 is modified to read: "We granted review to decide whether this action is subject to the special motion to strike under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 and to address the merits of the church property dispute."The first full paragraph on page 478, under "B.," is modified to read: "Both lower courts also addressed the merits of the dispute over ownership of the local church - the trial court found in favor of the local church and the Court of Appeal found clear and convincing evidence in favor of the general church. We will also address this question, which the parties as well as various amici curiae have fully briefed. We will first consider what method the secular courts of this state should use to resolve disputes over church property. We will then apply that method to  analyze the dispute of this case." The first sentence of the first full paragraph on page 493 is modified to read: "For these reasons, we agree with the Court of Appeal's conclusion (although not with all of its reasoning) that, on this record, when defendants disaffiliated from the Episcopal Church, the local church property reverted to the general church." 

emphasis added.

There you have it.  Keep us in your prayers as the March 11 date slips up on us like the tule fog in February.

Sunday Music - 23rd Psalm

Howard Goodall's The Lord is My Shepherd, and yes - it's the theme song from The Vicar of Dibley!

Gracious Restraint? What's Up?

The Episcopal Book of Common prayer defines sacrament(s) as such:

Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God’s good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him.

The Roman Catholics define sacrament as such:

According to the New Roman Catholic Catechism, the definition of “sacrament” is “an outward sign, instituted by Christ, to give inward grace.” Each sacrament has an outward sign, something that the recipient can see and touch. Though the Church has built rituals around each sacrament to increase reverence and to explain the sacramental effects, the sacrament, itself, was instituted by Christ, since only God has the ability to confer grace

I hope we can all agree that a sacrament is not "magic" but rather a GIFT from God.  Now, as I read the two definitions I see no qualification of who can or cannot receive sacraments. No, let's not get our knickers in a twist, I realize that we, "the church" have established an ordering of sacraments but there are no prequalifications save baptism.  But even with Baptism, there is no "personal" prequalification. That is to say, I find no concept that in order to receive a sacrament one must be white, or tall, or man or woman, or anything such as that.  One must be contrite, in a relationship with the Lord and the gift is yours.  

At Father Mark's place he takes a reductionist argument saying in effect, let's just not baptize the LGBT community (don't get crazy, that was just an argument he used to further his point).  If, as I believe and that persons such as IT and Goran and JCF and others have scientifically demonstrated sexual orientation is an issue of genetics (IT, forgive me and clear it up if I am of target here)  Then gracious restraint, as Father Mark has described, must be invoked at baptism, actually prior to baptism. If it is not then we should be taking back baptism and then, we should withhold communion, ordination, confirmation, and all the other "sacraments" while the other folks restrain themselves from boarding an airplane and traveling to Canada or the United States.  Okay, all together now, HUH? That is by almost any standards, absolutely absurd!

The fact is sacraments are gifts from God, not from man. God gave them to man and I find it hard to understand how man can take them away.  Why would anyone believe that they can take away "God's good will toward us."  Why would anyone, correction, any professing Christian want to?  We must be very careful about taking on the persona of God. We must not decide who is worthy and who is not worthy of sacraments and grace and God's good will.  If we believe that our spiritual health depends on our individual relationship with God and then we place ourselves in God's place, well let me just parrot a line from the Devil's Advocate: "Pride, my favorite sin."