The recent General Convention of the Episcopal Church did many things. Bottled water is now officially a Bad Thing, for example. One of the more important things it did was eliminate, completely, evangelism from the national budget. Now it's quite possible to argue that was a good thing, given the current nature of Episcopal theology. But, were I a member of the Episcopal Church I would be worried. Evangelism is how churches grow. The money, effort and staffing spent evangelising is an investment in the future.
Certainly, individual dioceses and parishes will spend money on evangelism. Some of them even have officially designated evangelists on staff. But where an organization spends money is clear sign of what its priorities are. What are the Episcopal Church's priorities? Well the only items to see increases in funds were those included under the heading of Presiding Bishop's office. This includes $3 million for litigation and $1 million for disciplining bishops (and possibly other clergy). That's a staggering sum.
Currently, the official position of the Episcopal Church is that only individuals may leave. Diocese, parishes and such may not leave. Also, all property belongs to the national church. The national church has resolutely resisted any attempts by churches to exit with their property.
The problem is, that even if you happen to agree with 815, what argument can be made against allowing a church to buy its own property? In the vast majority of cases of a congregational split, the remnant congregation has been folded. Selling vacant churches is almost always problematic. I'm told St James, Newport is on the waterfront, which makes it extremely valuable, but most of the dissident churches have not been so blessed.
The litigation has been justified as a 'stewardship issue'. I'm just not buying it. Then again neither are the churches in question. A good and wise steward would seek to extract the maximum value for the property. Disregarding any prohibitions against litigation and being totally worldly, the good steward would assess each case on its facts, and litigate when the cast of the suit was well below the value of the property. He would also negotiate whenever possible to get the greatest value for property.
Outside of Central Florida, we haven't seen this. And again, I have to ask: Why?
What, exactly are the priorities of the Episcopal Church?
All signs point to an organization that is trying to stay on an even keel while the ship sinks. The officers and crew seem to just want to stay afloat until they retire. Any thoughts of repairing the damage have been officially cast aside.
Showing posts with label pessimism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pessimism. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
General Convention Reform
I've never been to the Episcopal Church's General Convention (GC). Thanks to modern technology, I will never need to. This GC has around 1,000 delegates for a church that has less than a million attendees. Add to that, the more delegates a legislative body has, the less gets done. More people means more time for discussion. The GC is both ungainly and expensive.
Were I in charge, which is highly unlikely, I'd change things in the following ways: First, I'd trim the delegates to 1 bishop and 1 lay delegate from every diocese. That cuts the delegates down to slightly over 200 total. Allow for the election of a non-participating, unfunded alternate. But the total funded attendance would be one fifth of the present size. That means instead of using expensive rented facilities, the GC could meet in a parish hall. That would be a lot less glamourous to be sure, but it's also a great deal more frugal.
I'd also allow for committee meetings, either live or virtually ahead of time. In fact, I'd probably make that mandatory. The bishops already know whether or not they are delegates. With the laity, all that would have to happen are elections far enough in advance for committees to be formed.
By trimming delegates and shifting committee meetings to before, the GC could be reduced in its length as well. Currently it's a two week commitment, which prevents a great number of potential delegates from participating. Two weeks is the standard annual vacation for most Americans. Trim it to four days and all of a sudden working stiffs can run for delegate. To counter balance this egalitarian move, I'd remove all delegate funding from the diocese. Delegates would have to pay their own way. This would further encourage the delegates to be about their business.
Of course, none of the above will ever happen.
Preview: I'm working on a detailed rant/essay about grilling. I've no idea when I'll post it though.
Were I in charge, which is highly unlikely, I'd change things in the following ways: First, I'd trim the delegates to 1 bishop and 1 lay delegate from every diocese. That cuts the delegates down to slightly over 200 total. Allow for the election of a non-participating, unfunded alternate. But the total funded attendance would be one fifth of the present size. That means instead of using expensive rented facilities, the GC could meet in a parish hall. That would be a lot less glamourous to be sure, but it's also a great deal more frugal.
I'd also allow for committee meetings, either live or virtually ahead of time. In fact, I'd probably make that mandatory. The bishops already know whether or not they are delegates. With the laity, all that would have to happen are elections far enough in advance for committees to be formed.
By trimming delegates and shifting committee meetings to before, the GC could be reduced in its length as well. Currently it's a two week commitment, which prevents a great number of potential delegates from participating. Two weeks is the standard annual vacation for most Americans. Trim it to four days and all of a sudden working stiffs can run for delegate. To counter balance this egalitarian move, I'd remove all delegate funding from the diocese. Delegates would have to pay their own way. This would further encourage the delegates to be about their business.
Of course, none of the above will ever happen.
Preview: I'm working on a detailed rant/essay about grilling. I've no idea when I'll post it though.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
Timeo Episcopos Et Dona Ferentes
Well the big Anglican gabfest in Jamaica has concluded. The bottom appears to be that there will be no meaningful Covenant for now. So we continue to not know what being an Anglican is. This pretty much guarantees that the Anglican Communion will split, with the Global South going one way and the dying North going another.
The architect of all this muddle is of course our beloved Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. He does not want a split, but if there is to be one he will be on the side of stagnation and stasis.
Rowan Williams is an intelligent man, but he is not a wise one.
The architect of all this muddle is of course our beloved Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. He does not want a split, but if there is to be one he will be on the side of stagnation and stasis.
Rowan Williams is an intelligent man, but he is not a wise one.
Labels:
Anglicans,
bad ideas,
Episcopal Church,
pessimism
Friday, December 05, 2008
Lovely Word
My favourite word is 'love'. But one of my top ten faves is 'hope'. Recently, I had an exchange with Dean Munday of Nashotah House on his blog. A concern of many among the conservative Episcopalians has been the complacency with which the leadership of the Episcopal Church regards the decline in membership. Both average Sunday attendance and actual membership have decreased since the mid-sixties. There have been a few years in that period where the trend has leveled or reversed, but overall the trend has been down.
The word from our leadership has been that this is a natural result from our demographics and the trend is shared amongst most mainline Protestant denominations. All of which is true. What has been missing is any sense of urgency as well as any sense that this is serious and worth devoting energy and resources to reversing.
I read the House of Bishops and Deputies Mailing List at least twice a week. One senior clergyman reports on church defections and other demographic catastrophes from time to time. The responses to his posts have been largely vitriolic, condemning him for presuming to mention bad news. I have been and remain somewhat perplexed by these responses.
I am not the most optimistic person on the planet. My wife has repeatedly said that my brother got double the normal dose of optimism and I received double the normal dose of pessimism. She is probably right. I rarely think things will end well. Reality is messy, and the world is full of pain.
However, in the end, all will indeed be well. At the core of the Gospel is that lovely word 'hope'. Our hope is in Jesus, and He has said that we are known to God and loved by Him and that we have a home with Him at the end.
I think Dean Munday hit the nail on the head when he wrote “I would argue that this aspect of the European mentality is characteristic of American liberals as well. And that is hardly surprising, since once you have given up the assumptions of historic Christianity about the Gospel, sin and redemption, the nature and destiny of the human soul, etc., a kind of resignation about one's own decline and death or the destruction of human institutions takes over. “
So what we are seeing is a church that shows that it has abandoned the Gospel by its lack of hope. Is it little surprise that it also shows very little love either? A church without hope is a church that will not feel the need to evangelize. If there is no Good News, then there is no need to share Good News. What is left is a need to make the best of our time here on earth before we totter to our graves and the final oblivion.
This has produced some good results. The Episcopal Church really did well in promoting civil rights in the fifties and sixties. But it also has left us with a church unpinned by any constraints. As well as a church complacent in its own righteousness and purpose, because if there is no hope, then there really isn't any God. All that is left is social action as defined by a relativistic human scale.
As for me, as pessimistic as I am, and I am pessimistic, I cling to the hope we have been given by our Creator and is best exemplified by His Passion and Resurrection. That hope is well worth sharing.
The word from our leadership has been that this is a natural result from our demographics and the trend is shared amongst most mainline Protestant denominations. All of which is true. What has been missing is any sense of urgency as well as any sense that this is serious and worth devoting energy and resources to reversing.
I read the House of Bishops and Deputies Mailing List at least twice a week. One senior clergyman reports on church defections and other demographic catastrophes from time to time. The responses to his posts have been largely vitriolic, condemning him for presuming to mention bad news. I have been and remain somewhat perplexed by these responses.
I am not the most optimistic person on the planet. My wife has repeatedly said that my brother got double the normal dose of optimism and I received double the normal dose of pessimism. She is probably right. I rarely think things will end well. Reality is messy, and the world is full of pain.
However, in the end, all will indeed be well. At the core of the Gospel is that lovely word 'hope'. Our hope is in Jesus, and He has said that we are known to God and loved by Him and that we have a home with Him at the end.
I think Dean Munday hit the nail on the head when he wrote “I would argue that this aspect of the European mentality is characteristic of American liberals as well. And that is hardly surprising, since once you have given up the assumptions of historic Christianity about the Gospel, sin and redemption, the nature and destiny of the human soul, etc., a kind of resignation about one's own decline and death or the destruction of human institutions takes over. “
So what we are seeing is a church that shows that it has abandoned the Gospel by its lack of hope. Is it little surprise that it also shows very little love either? A church without hope is a church that will not feel the need to evangelize. If there is no Good News, then there is no need to share Good News. What is left is a need to make the best of our time here on earth before we totter to our graves and the final oblivion.
This has produced some good results. The Episcopal Church really did well in promoting civil rights in the fifties and sixties. But it also has left us with a church unpinned by any constraints. As well as a church complacent in its own righteousness and purpose, because if there is no hope, then there really isn't any God. All that is left is social action as defined by a relativistic human scale.
As for me, as pessimistic as I am, and I am pessimistic, I cling to the hope we have been given by our Creator and is best exemplified by His Passion and Resurrection. That hope is well worth sharing.
Labels:
Episcopal Church,
pessimism,
rambling,
serious
Sunday, September 21, 2008
You say half full, I say half empty
This article (H/T Instapundit) touts the advantages of the ever spreading use of cell phones. Not only are more people using the little devices, but they are using them to accomplish more and more tasks. That would seem to be a good thing.
Except my very first thought on reading the article was: "Jeez now they're going to be texting the 419 scam on my cell."
If that hasn't already happened, it will shortly.
Except my very first thought on reading the article was: "Jeez now they're going to be texting the 419 scam on my cell."
If that hasn't already happened, it will shortly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)