Progressive Episcopal/Anglican Feed by IPC
ENS: War on Women
I wrote the following article which was published by ENS today. You can find it here or read it below. I'm hoping ENS will ask other women to write and this War on Women becomes an ENS series.
If you have something to say about this undeclared war, why not write an article about it and send it to ENS? It's one way to get your voice heard.
Note: I'm at Kanuga this week, having the privilege of being a reader for the General Board of Examining Chaplains. I just arrived. The scenery is beautiful. The schedule looks brutal. Blogging will probably be sporadic. I'll pray for you. You pray for me.
The ‘war on women’Round I: Komen vs. Planned ParenthoodBy Elizabeth Kaeton | February 6, 2012
[Episcopal News Service] There is an undeclared war on women in this country and around the world.
The recent decision by the Susan G. Komen Foundation to essentially end its decades-long partnership with Planned Parenthood brought this struggle, which was played out in the Internet at head-snapping speed, to a different new battleground.
Komen’s founder and chief executive, Nancy G. Brinker, held a news conference and insisted that the organization’s decision had nothing to do with abortion or politics. Rather, she said, it resulted from improved grant-making procedures and was not intended to make a target of Planned Parenthood.
Her comments directly contradicted those of John D. Raffaelli, a Komen board member and Washington lobbyist, who reported that Komen made the changes to its grant-making process specifically to end its relationship with Planned Parenthood.
By the end of the week, Brinker apologized and said that the grants promised to Planned Parenthood – $700,000 last year, a tiny portion of its $93 million in grants to finance 19 separate programs – would be re-instated. Indeed, in the process, Planned Parenthood received over a million dollars in additional contributions – including a very public matching grant of $250,000 from New York Mayor Bloomberg – in less than 72 hours.
No one from the Komen Foundation is talking, but from the buzz on the Internet, hundreds of thousands of people – men and women – are pledging not to support the efforts of the organization that made pink ribbons an outward and visible sign of the “race for the cure” to end breast cancer.
That battle was won but the war is far from over. The reproductive rights of women are under sharp attack from the religious and political forces of the evangelical right, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party. The battle plan is patently clear: limit women’s access to abortion, birth control, and services after rape and sexual assault by changing laws, state by state, and ensure that government funding is not delivered to any agency that supports reproductive rights in any way. Do this with a ballot in one hand and a Bible in the other. And when you don’t get what you want, cry “religious intolerance.”
On another front, human trafficking is a mega-billion dollar global industry unregulated by any country or international body. It is a criminal activity ignored and/or tolerated with devastating consequences for the person involved. Trafficking ranks just behind drug and arms trading as the most lucrative forms of commerce. It is no surprise that the vast majority of trafficked persons are women and children. Nor is it any shock that most of those who do the trafficking are men.
The violence continues unabated. A report released in late December 2011 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that one in four women in the United States suffers “severe physical violence,” and one in five is raped at some time in their life. Millions of women are suffering serious violence quietly at any time.
According to another CDC survey, four women die because of domestic violence every day in the United States of America. For every woman who dies, hundreds keep suffering without any recourse, without any letup in violence. They remain alive, but are not “living” by any dignified definition of the word.
These are just some of the battles of this war. There are many, many others, including employment, education, immigration, access to affordable health care options, health insurance, the military and yes, the church,
As national convener of the Episcopal Women’s Caucus, I receive calls and e-mails from women – ordained and members of the laity – who tell horrific stories of unfair employment practices, which include discrimination in salaries as well as hiring, firing, insurance and pension benefits. These may not show up in the statistics of the church, but the anecdotal evidence is overwhelming.
The recent battle between Komen vs. Planned Parenthood gives us many insights on how women and men of quality can fight back for equality. The fatal flaw in the Komen battle plan was to consider Planned Parenthood just another organization. It is not. It is what it always has been: a movement. Organizations are fine. Movements are better.
Social media played a critically important role in this battle. Women can mobilize without the cost of meetings and gatherings and travel expenses or salaries for executives and staff. It is relational but not incarnational, so it does have its drawbacks, but it remains a highly effective way to have our voices heard about what happens to our bodies.
“The personal is political.” That was the battle cry of the early feminist movement. It has never been more true than today. It is also deeply spiritual. Women of faith must begin to use the tools offered to us in the post-modern world to fight a battle that in many ways is as old as the Garden of Eden. With a modicum of organization, we can become a movement that is a force to be reckoned with.
So, pick up your smart phones, ladies, and take up your fax machines, turn on your laptops and fire up the Internet. Let’s tweet, text, IM, Facebook, fax, phone and e-mail our way to justice and equality.
There is an undeclared war on women in this country and around the world.
– The Rev. Elizabeth Kaeton is an Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Newark and the national convener of the Episcopal Women’s Caucus. She was recently elected to a three-year-term on the national board of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Rights.
If you have something to say about this undeclared war, why not write an article about it and send it to ENS? It's one way to get your voice heard.
Note: I'm at Kanuga this week, having the privilege of being a reader for the General Board of Examining Chaplains. I just arrived. The scenery is beautiful. The schedule looks brutal. Blogging will probably be sporadic. I'll pray for you. You pray for me.
The ‘war on women’Round I: Komen vs. Planned ParenthoodBy Elizabeth Kaeton | February 6, 2012
[Episcopal News Service] There is an undeclared war on women in this country and around the world.
The recent decision by the Susan G. Komen Foundation to essentially end its decades-long partnership with Planned Parenthood brought this struggle, which was played out in the Internet at head-snapping speed, to a different new battleground.
Komen’s founder and chief executive, Nancy G. Brinker, held a news conference and insisted that the organization’s decision had nothing to do with abortion or politics. Rather, she said, it resulted from improved grant-making procedures and was not intended to make a target of Planned Parenthood.
Her comments directly contradicted those of John D. Raffaelli, a Komen board member and Washington lobbyist, who reported that Komen made the changes to its grant-making process specifically to end its relationship with Planned Parenthood.
By the end of the week, Brinker apologized and said that the grants promised to Planned Parenthood – $700,000 last year, a tiny portion of its $93 million in grants to finance 19 separate programs – would be re-instated. Indeed, in the process, Planned Parenthood received over a million dollars in additional contributions – including a very public matching grant of $250,000 from New York Mayor Bloomberg – in less than 72 hours.
No one from the Komen Foundation is talking, but from the buzz on the Internet, hundreds of thousands of people – men and women – are pledging not to support the efforts of the organization that made pink ribbons an outward and visible sign of the “race for the cure” to end breast cancer.
That battle was won but the war is far from over. The reproductive rights of women are under sharp attack from the religious and political forces of the evangelical right, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party. The battle plan is patently clear: limit women’s access to abortion, birth control, and services after rape and sexual assault by changing laws, state by state, and ensure that government funding is not delivered to any agency that supports reproductive rights in any way. Do this with a ballot in one hand and a Bible in the other. And when you don’t get what you want, cry “religious intolerance.”
On another front, human trafficking is a mega-billion dollar global industry unregulated by any country or international body. It is a criminal activity ignored and/or tolerated with devastating consequences for the person involved. Trafficking ranks just behind drug and arms trading as the most lucrative forms of commerce. It is no surprise that the vast majority of trafficked persons are women and children. Nor is it any shock that most of those who do the trafficking are men.
The violence continues unabated. A report released in late December 2011 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that one in four women in the United States suffers “severe physical violence,” and one in five is raped at some time in their life. Millions of women are suffering serious violence quietly at any time.
According to another CDC survey, four women die because of domestic violence every day in the United States of America. For every woman who dies, hundreds keep suffering without any recourse, without any letup in violence. They remain alive, but are not “living” by any dignified definition of the word.
These are just some of the battles of this war. There are many, many others, including employment, education, immigration, access to affordable health care options, health insurance, the military and yes, the church,
As national convener of the Episcopal Women’s Caucus, I receive calls and e-mails from women – ordained and members of the laity – who tell horrific stories of unfair employment practices, which include discrimination in salaries as well as hiring, firing, insurance and pension benefits. These may not show up in the statistics of the church, but the anecdotal evidence is overwhelming.
The recent battle between Komen vs. Planned Parenthood gives us many insights on how women and men of quality can fight back for equality. The fatal flaw in the Komen battle plan was to consider Planned Parenthood just another organization. It is not. It is what it always has been: a movement. Organizations are fine. Movements are better.
Social media played a critically important role in this battle. Women can mobilize without the cost of meetings and gatherings and travel expenses or salaries for executives and staff. It is relational but not incarnational, so it does have its drawbacks, but it remains a highly effective way to have our voices heard about what happens to our bodies.
“The personal is political.” That was the battle cry of the early feminist movement. It has never been more true than today. It is also deeply spiritual. Women of faith must begin to use the tools offered to us in the post-modern world to fight a battle that in many ways is as old as the Garden of Eden. With a modicum of organization, we can become a movement that is a force to be reckoned with.
So, pick up your smart phones, ladies, and take up your fax machines, turn on your laptops and fire up the Internet. Let’s tweet, text, IM, Facebook, fax, phone and e-mail our way to justice and equality.
There is an undeclared war on women in this country and around the world.
– The Rev. Elizabeth Kaeton is an Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Newark and the national convener of the Episcopal Women’s Caucus. She was recently elected to a three-year-term on the national board of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Rights.
"Addicts' Brains May Be Wired At Birth For Less Self-Control"
From NPR:
Many addicts inherit a brain that has trouble just saying no to drugs.
A study in Science finds that cocaine addicts have abnormalities in areas of the brain involved in self-control. And these abnormalities appear to predate any drug abuse.
The study, done by a team at the University of Cambridge in the U.K., looked at 50 pairs of siblings. One member of each pair was a cocaine addict. The other had no history of drug abuse.
But brain scans showed that both siblings had brains unlike those of typical people, says Karen Ersche, the study's lead author.
"The fibers that connect the different parts of the brain were less efficient in both," she says.
These fibers connect areas involved in emotion with areas that tell us when to stop doing something, Ersche says. When the fibers aren't working efficiently, she says, it takes longer for a "stop" message to get through.
And sure enough, another experiment done by Ersche's team showed that both siblings took longer than a typical person to respond to a signal telling them to stop performing a task. In other words, they had less self-control.
That's what you'd expect to find in addicts, Ersche says.
"We know that in people who are addicted to drugs like cocaine, that self-control is completely impaired," she says. "These people use drugs and lose control on how much they use. They put everything at risk, even their lives."
But the fact that siblings without drug problems also had impaired self-control offers strong evidence that these brain abnormalities are inherited, Ersche says.
And she says the finding also raises a big question about the siblings who aren't addicts: "How do they manage with an abnormal brain without taking drugs?"
Ersche hopes to conduct another study of the sibling pairs that will answer that question.
In the meantime, the findings about self-control have implications that go far beyond drug addiction, says Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
"Self-control and the ability to regulate your emotions really is an indispensable aspect of the function of the brain that allows us to succeed," she says.
That's because the part of the brain that decides whether to take a drug is also the part that helps us decide whether to speed through a yellow light or drop out of school, she says.
And this brain circuit seems to be involved in a lot of common disorders, she says.
"One of the ones that attracts the most attention is ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder], where kids are unable to control their response to stimuli that distract them," Volkow says.
Impulse control is also central to behaviors like compulsive gambling and compulsive eating, she says.
The new study shows it's possible to identify people who have inherited a susceptibility to these sorts of problems, Volkow says. And it should help researchers figure out how to help susceptible people strengthen their self-control, she says.
"Predetermination is not predestination," Volkow says.
The image above is captioned this way:
The red areas show gray matter that is abnormally increased in drug users. Blue shows gray matter that is abnormally decreased in drug users. Yellow shows white matter tracts, called fractional anisotropy or FA. FA is significantly reduced in both the drug users and in their siblings, which suggests that the white matter tracts work less efficiently.
This explains the phenomenon of "craving" talked about by A.A. members from the earliest days. It is the reason for the saying "It's the first drink that gets you drunk" - and why A.A. taught from the beginning that alocholics cannot drink safely, at all, ever.
It doesn't explain the reason(s) that alcoholics continue to attempt to drink normally even despite all the anecdotal evidence that piles up around the disastrous effects of "the first drink" - except to say that most folks really do believe, every time they pick up a drink, that "This time, it'll be different." It also doesn't explain the reason(s) addicts feel the need to drink or take drugs at all; I wonder whether they will find that this "wiring" has other manifestations in that connection.
But, this is the first research evidence I've seen that does show a "hard-wired" connection to addictive behavior - even though people have been telling this story on an anecdotal level for decades (and possibly lots longer)!
What's really interesting, of course, is that A.A.'s approach doesn't deal with this hard-wiring at all; it long ago simply accepted empirical evidence for something it didn't have hard proof of, and dealt instead with the personality, and with the emotions.
Many addicts inherit a brain that has trouble just saying no to drugs.
A study in Science finds that cocaine addicts have abnormalities in areas of the brain involved in self-control. And these abnormalities appear to predate any drug abuse.
The study, done by a team at the University of Cambridge in the U.K., looked at 50 pairs of siblings. One member of each pair was a cocaine addict. The other had no history of drug abuse.
But brain scans showed that both siblings had brains unlike those of typical people, says Karen Ersche, the study's lead author.
"The fibers that connect the different parts of the brain were less efficient in both," she says.
These fibers connect areas involved in emotion with areas that tell us when to stop doing something, Ersche says. When the fibers aren't working efficiently, she says, it takes longer for a "stop" message to get through.
And sure enough, another experiment done by Ersche's team showed that both siblings took longer than a typical person to respond to a signal telling them to stop performing a task. In other words, they had less self-control.
That's what you'd expect to find in addicts, Ersche says.
"We know that in people who are addicted to drugs like cocaine, that self-control is completely impaired," she says. "These people use drugs and lose control on how much they use. They put everything at risk, even their lives."
But the fact that siblings without drug problems also had impaired self-control offers strong evidence that these brain abnormalities are inherited, Ersche says.
And she says the finding also raises a big question about the siblings who aren't addicts: "How do they manage with an abnormal brain without taking drugs?"
Ersche hopes to conduct another study of the sibling pairs that will answer that question.
In the meantime, the findings about self-control have implications that go far beyond drug addiction, says Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
"Self-control and the ability to regulate your emotions really is an indispensable aspect of the function of the brain that allows us to succeed," she says.
That's because the part of the brain that decides whether to take a drug is also the part that helps us decide whether to speed through a yellow light or drop out of school, she says.
And this brain circuit seems to be involved in a lot of common disorders, she says.
"One of the ones that attracts the most attention is ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder], where kids are unable to control their response to stimuli that distract them," Volkow says.
Impulse control is also central to behaviors like compulsive gambling and compulsive eating, she says.
The new study shows it's possible to identify people who have inherited a susceptibility to these sorts of problems, Volkow says. And it should help researchers figure out how to help susceptible people strengthen their self-control, she says.
"Predetermination is not predestination," Volkow says.
The image above is captioned this way:
The red areas show gray matter that is abnormally increased in drug users. Blue shows gray matter that is abnormally decreased in drug users. Yellow shows white matter tracts, called fractional anisotropy or FA. FA is significantly reduced in both the drug users and in their siblings, which suggests that the white matter tracts work less efficiently.
This explains the phenomenon of "craving" talked about by A.A. members from the earliest days. It is the reason for the saying "It's the first drink that gets you drunk" - and why A.A. taught from the beginning that alocholics cannot drink safely, at all, ever.
It doesn't explain the reason(s) that alcoholics continue to attempt to drink normally even despite all the anecdotal evidence that piles up around the disastrous effects of "the first drink" - except to say that most folks really do believe, every time they pick up a drink, that "This time, it'll be different." It also doesn't explain the reason(s) addicts feel the need to drink or take drugs at all; I wonder whether they will find that this "wiring" has other manifestations in that connection.
But, this is the first research evidence I've seen that does show a "hard-wired" connection to addictive behavior - even though people have been telling this story on an anecdotal level for decades (and possibly lots longer)!
What's really interesting, of course, is that A.A.'s approach doesn't deal with this hard-wiring at all; it long ago simply accepted empirical evidence for something it didn't have hard proof of, and dealt instead with the personality, and with the emotions.
MADPRIEST'S THOUGHT FOR THE DAY
On this day when we are celebrating our Queen's sixty years of monarchy let us turn for our moment from our jubilation and spare a thought for those countries that are not part of the British Commonwealth, especially the United States. Just think, if the republicans hadn't won the American War of Independence the people of the U.S.A. would today be just as civilised as the Canadians or even New Zealanders.
Jonathan Haidt — Nails It
Last night's Bill Moyers interview with Jonathan Haidt was a superb example of rational analysis of issues. A primary theme of getting people to talk across their differences without polarizing demonizations reminded me very strongly of the goal of the Continuing Indaba and Mutual Listening Process.
Have a look.
Have a look.
Jonathan Haidt Explains Our Contentious Culture from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGWORSHIP AT ST. LAIKA'S
HOLY
COMMUNION
ACCESSION DAY 2012
THE YEAR OF THEQUEEN'S DIAMOND JUBILEE
All are welcome to join me in taking communion.
There are no exceptions.
The order of service is posted beneath the audio file so that you can join in with the service. The words in bold type are the ones we say together.
If you want to physically partake of communion you will require a small piece of bread and a small amount of drink (preferably made from grapes and containing alcohol). How you view the nature of this part of the service is completely up to you.
Click on the arrow on the player to stream.Download via the MP3 icon below the player.Download podcast via iTUNES.
MP3 File
INTRODUCTION
"Trumpet Tune" by Henry Purcell - Paul Hart and Elizabeth Le Grove
GREETING
BIDDING
CONFESSION AND ABSOLUTION
"Gloria In Excelcis" by Charles Villiers Stanford - Westminster Abbey Choir
COLLECT
READING
"Behold, O God Our Defender" by Herbert Howells - Choir Of New College Oxford
READING
"Rejoice In The Lord Alway" - The Schola Cantorum Of St. Peter's In The Loop
Alleluia, alleluia.Great and amazing are your deeds, Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are your ways, King of the nations!Alleluia.
Hear the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ according to Luke.Glory to you, O Lord.
GOSPEL
This is the Gospel of the Lord.Praise to you, O Christ.
INTERCESSION
THE PEACE
"All People That On Earth Do Dwell" - Norwich Cathedral Choir
All people that on earth do dwell,
Sing to the Lord with cheerful voice.
Him serve with fear, His praise forth tell;
Come ye before Him and rejoice.
The Lord, ye know, is God indeed;
Without our aid He did us make;
We are His folk, He doth us feed,
And for His sheep He doth us take.
O enter then His gates with praise;
Approach with joy His courts unto;
Praise, laud, and bless His Name always,
For it is seemly so to do.
For why? the Lord our God is good;
His mercy is for ever sure;
His truth at all times firmly stood,
And shall from age to age endure.
To Father, Son and Holy Ghost,
The God Whom Heaven and earth adore,
From men and from the angel host
Be praise and glory evermore.
PRAYER OVER THE GIFTS
The Lord is here.God's Spirit is with us.
Lift up your hearts.We lift them to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.It is right to give thanks and praise.
You are worthy of our thanks and praise…
… evermore praising you and singing:
"Sanctus and Benedictus" from "Mass in G Minor"
by Vaughan Williams - Elora Festival Singers
Lord God, you are the most holy one…
… all honour and glory be yours, almighty Father, for ever and ever. Amen.
Let us pray with confidence as our Saviour has taught us
Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done; on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen.
We break this bread
to share in the body of Christ.
Though we are many, we are one body,
because we all share in one bread.
"Agnes Dei" from "Mass in G Minor" by Vaughan Willaims
- Elora Festival Singers
This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
Blessed are those who are called to his supper.
Lord, I am not worthy to receive you,
but only say the word, and I shall be healed.
The body of Christ. Amen.
The blood of Christ. Amen.
"Nimrod" from "Variations On An Original Theme" by Edward Elgar - Halle Orchestra
POST COMMUNION PRAYER
God Save The Queen
BLESSING
My sisters and brothers, go in peace to love and serve the Lord.
In the name of Christ. Amen.
"Killer Queen" - Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
COMMUNION
ACCESSION DAY 2012
THE YEAR OF THEQUEEN'S DIAMOND JUBILEE
All are welcome to join me in taking communion.
There are no exceptions.
The order of service is posted beneath the audio file so that you can join in with the service. The words in bold type are the ones we say together.
If you want to physically partake of communion you will require a small piece of bread and a small amount of drink (preferably made from grapes and containing alcohol). How you view the nature of this part of the service is completely up to you.
Click on the arrow on the player to stream.Download via the MP3 icon below the player.Download podcast via iTUNES.
MP3 File
INTRODUCTION
"Trumpet Tune" by Henry Purcell - Paul Hart and Elizabeth Le Grove
GREETING
BIDDING
CONFESSION AND ABSOLUTION
"Gloria In Excelcis" by Charles Villiers Stanford - Westminster Abbey Choir
COLLECT
READING
"Behold, O God Our Defender" by Herbert Howells - Choir Of New College Oxford
READING
"Rejoice In The Lord Alway" - The Schola Cantorum Of St. Peter's In The Loop
Alleluia, alleluia.Great and amazing are your deeds, Lord God the Almighty! Just and true are your ways, King of the nations!Alleluia.
Hear the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ according to Luke.Glory to you, O Lord.
GOSPEL
This is the Gospel of the Lord.Praise to you, O Christ.
INTERCESSION
THE PEACE
"All People That On Earth Do Dwell" - Norwich Cathedral Choir
All people that on earth do dwell,
Sing to the Lord with cheerful voice.
Him serve with fear, His praise forth tell;
Come ye before Him and rejoice.
The Lord, ye know, is God indeed;
Without our aid He did us make;
We are His folk, He doth us feed,
And for His sheep He doth us take.
O enter then His gates with praise;
Approach with joy His courts unto;
Praise, laud, and bless His Name always,
For it is seemly so to do.
For why? the Lord our God is good;
His mercy is for ever sure;
His truth at all times firmly stood,
And shall from age to age endure.
To Father, Son and Holy Ghost,
The God Whom Heaven and earth adore,
From men and from the angel host
Be praise and glory evermore.
PRAYER OVER THE GIFTS
The Lord is here.God's Spirit is with us.
Lift up your hearts.We lift them to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.It is right to give thanks and praise.
You are worthy of our thanks and praise…
… evermore praising you and singing:
"Sanctus and Benedictus" from "Mass in G Minor"
by Vaughan Williams - Elora Festival Singers
Lord God, you are the most holy one…
… all honour and glory be yours, almighty Father, for ever and ever. Amen.
Let us pray with confidence as our Saviour has taught us
Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done; on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen.
We break this bread
to share in the body of Christ.
Though we are many, we are one body,
because we all share in one bread.
"Agnes Dei" from "Mass in G Minor" by Vaughan Willaims
- Elora Festival Singers
This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
Blessed are those who are called to his supper.
Lord, I am not worthy to receive you,
but only say the word, and I shall be healed.
The body of Christ. Amen.
The blood of Christ. Amen.
"Nimrod" from "Variations On An Original Theme" by Edward Elgar - Halle Orchestra
POST COMMUNION PRAYER
God Save The Queen
BLESSING
My sisters and brothers, go in peace to love and serve the Lord.
In the name of Christ. Amen.
"Killer Queen" - Royal Philharmonic Orchestra
Thought for 02.05.12
Few gay men in 1960s Britain ever would have imagined that within 50 years Parliament might be debating same-sex marriage. They were initially happy no longer to be sent to jail!
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
responding to an assertion that the move from civil partnerships to marriage is a sign of disingenuous political tactics, when it is simply how things move against entrenched opposition: step by step, just as in the movement from slavery to manumission, to emancipation, to segregation, to equality. Don't blame the oppressed for their "tactics" when the need for any tactic is the result of the oppressor's intransigence.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
responding to an assertion that the move from civil partnerships to marriage is a sign of disingenuous political tactics, when it is simply how things move against entrenched opposition: step by step, just as in the movement from slavery to manumission, to emancipation, to segregation, to equality. Don't blame the oppressed for their "tactics" when the need for any tactic is the result of the oppressor's intransigence.
WORSHIP AT ST. LAIKA'S
HOLY COMMUNION
THIRD SUNDAY BEFORE LENT 2012
All are welcome to join me in taking communion.
There are no exceptions.
The order of service is posted beneath the audio file so that you can join in with the service. The words in bold type are the ones we say together.
If you want to physically partake of communion you will require a small piece of bread and a small amount of drink (preferably made from grapes and containing alcohol). How you view the nature of this part of the service is completely up to you.
Click on the arrow on the player to stream.Download via the MP3 icon below the player.Download podcast via iTUNES.
MP3 File
Derby: No to Covenant
I'm awaiting further confirmation of this but the Diocese of Derby (UK) Twitter feed shows that the vote on the Anglican Covenant was decidedly negative:
Bishops: for 0; against 1 (bishop Humphrey not present)
Clergy: for 1, against 21, abstention 2
Laity. for 2, against 24, absention 1I'm terrible at maths, but that seems an overwhelming No. Derby has been an Indaba partner with New York and Mumbai (India) and according to the Twitter feed comments on the debate the Indaba experience contributed to the negative vote. This is natural, because Indaba represents the ideals the Covenant lauds but paradoxically disables in its notorious Section 4.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
Bishops: for 0; against 1 (bishop Humphrey not present)
Clergy: for 1, against 21, abstention 2
Laity. for 2, against 24, absention 1I'm terrible at maths, but that seems an overwhelming No. Derby has been an Indaba partner with New York and Mumbai (India) and according to the Twitter feed comments on the debate the Indaba experience contributed to the negative vote. This is natural, because Indaba represents the ideals the Covenant lauds but paradoxically disables in its notorious Section 4.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
DON'T BLAME MADPRIEST, BLAME MAD DAD
The only cow in a small town in Ireland stopped giving milk. Then the town folk found they could buy a cow in Scotland quite cheaply. So, they brought the cow over from Scotland. It was absolutely wonderful; it produced lots of milk every day and everyone was happy. They bought a bull to mate with the cow to get more cows, so they'd never have to worry about their milk supply again. They put the bull in the pasture with the cow but whenever the bull tried to mount the cow, the cow would move away. No matter what approach the bull tried, the cow would move away from the bull, and he was never able to do the deed. The people were very upset and decided to go to the vet, who was very wise, tell him what was happening and ask his advice.
"Whenever the bull tries to mount our cow, she moves away. If he approaches from the back, she moves forward. When he approaches her from the front, she backs off. If he attempts it from the one side, she walks away to the other side."
The Vet rubbed his chin thoughtfully and pondered this before asking, "Did you by chance, buy this cow in Scotland?"
The people were dumbfounded, since no one had ever mentioned that they had brought the cow over from Scotland.
"You are truly a wise Vet," they said. "How did you know we got the cow from Scotland?"
The Vet replied with a distant look in his eye: "My wife is from Scotland."
"Whenever the bull tries to mount our cow, she moves away. If he approaches from the back, she moves forward. When he approaches her from the front, she backs off. If he attempts it from the one side, she walks away to the other side."
The Vet rubbed his chin thoughtfully and pondered this before asking, "Did you by chance, buy this cow in Scotland?"
The people were dumbfounded, since no one had ever mentioned that they had brought the cow over from Scotland.
"You are truly a wise Vet," they said. "How did you know we got the cow from Scotland?"
The Vet replied with a distant look in his eye: "My wife is from Scotland."
What's in it for you?
Agnus DayOf all the things Jesus said and did, texts like this one from Mark 1:29-39 are the ones that make me squirm in my stiff white collar. We'll hear it tomorrow morning in church.
Jesus had no Temple or Church. No office hours. No one made an appointment to come see him. He went out to where the people were and preached and taught and healed them where they were.
He collected no salary or pension or health or life insurance. No travel or housing or continuing educational allowance. No car, in fact.
He hoofed it on foot, walking all over Israel, from the North to the South and sea to shining sea.
In a way, I envy him. He never had to worry about the Three Killer B's of Parish Ministry: Budgets, Boilers and Bishops. (There are another B-words some use to describe some of the people in the pew - or the pastor in the pulpit - but since this is a family blog, I'll refrain from elaboration.)
St. Paul told the early church in Corinth: "For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward; but if not of my own will, I am entrusted with a commission. What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel". (1 Corinthians 9:16-23)
What he means by this, I think (and whoever knows what Paul is really thinking), is that he didn't want to give anyone any ammunition to discredit him or impugn his motives for preaching the Good News.
You have to admit, it's a powerful argument.
When I was going through the ordination process, someone on the Commission on Ministry asked me, "So, what's in this for you?" At the time, I was shocked and deeply resented the question. I was angry and hurt that anyone would question my motives.
Understand, please, that I was the fourth woman to go through the ordination process in a diocese that had been intensely hostile to ordaining women. I automatically assumed that his question was filled with gender bias.
Perhaps there was some of that in there, but I was comforted when I later learned that he asked that question of all aspirants for Holy Orders who came before the COM.
It's a good question. It's an important question. It's a question everyone who is doing any kind of ministry - lay or ordained - should ask themselves and each other: Why you are doing what you are doing in the church?
What are you getting out of it? I mean, besides the fact that you love Jesus and want to live a sacrificial life of servant ministry? What's in it for you, besides the good feeling that comes from feeling good and righteous and noble?
Tough question, isn't it? Makes you squirm a little, doesn't it?
The thing of it is that, unless we get clear about our motives for ministry, we set up ourselves and others for all sort and manner of power dynamics and dysfunction.
Agnus DayThere's an excellent article by Bradley N. Hill in this month's Christian Century: "An elephant in the room?: How meeting agendas get hijacked".
When someone claims there is an elephant in the room it generally means a huge and hot topic present that is so volatile everyone tacitly agrees to avoid it.
"The elephant," Hill writes, "is an obvious but hard truth that is not being addressed, in part because to face, name and own the related issue would be frightening. Honesty becomes taboo. No one wants to cause embarrassment. The group prefers avoidance and feigned ignorance to bold but painful confrontation. It is a form of denial."
More often than not, however, it's more like crying wolf in the midst of sheep. Or, yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.
It's a power-play.
"As a result," says Hill, "the elephant crier takes over the meeting and the elephant - whatever it is, however big or small - defines the terms of engagement. We must deal with the elephant before we can do anything else. The elephant crier usurps the agenda and owns the floor......Either way, any other discussion is cut off because of the urgency of this "new" issue.
I submit that the real issue in these cases can be found in the murky baptismal water of motivation for ministry.
I know I'm going to sound really, really jaded when I say this, but here it goes: I suspect that all this talk in the church - well, these days, in The Episcopal Church - about mission is not about mission but a power-play that serves the institutional church.
Here's why I say this: A plan that seeks to 'restructure for mission' which limits the power of the baptized but not ordained is not an honest plan. It's not at all about mission but institutional preservation.
The presenting problem would seem to be declining membership and finances. Instead of putting our energies into dealing with the problem, we invite a herd of elephants into the room which are not the problem but may be part of the diagnosis of the problem.
Besides "not doing mission" - which is a valid issue, here are some of those elephants I've heard:
* Liturgy and music and preaching have to be more 'relevant' - the definition of which changes depending on which elephant is crying loudest.
* We've got to "get back" to using *only* the BCP.
* We've got to have more "creativity" and use language that is not only expansive and inclusive but more reflective of the times. * We have to have more "ethnic" music.
* The sermons have to be shorter - or, longer - and more expository in nature.
* The liturgy has to be "fun" or (gasp!) "entertaining".
* The younger generation is not just missing, it's members are missing because they don't have a youth group or a designated meeting room, or they're not allowed to 'tweet' or 'text' during the service, or the "music doesn't speak to them", or the service is not otherwise "youth friendly".
* We don't "market" our church. We need a mission statement that relentlessly appears everywhere on everything: the agendas of every meeting, the committees of the Vestry and even the budget has to be organized around the mission statement.
* Unaddressed issues of 'sin' - primarily among the leadership, staff or members.
* The congregation has never 'healed' from past disastrous leadership. They need 'time'.
* "Money follows mission". (This one makes me cringe. Every. Time.) If we just started doing the mission of the church - whatever that is - we'd have lots of money for the church. (As if those were two separate things.)Mind you, these may be valid components of the reason congregations (and dioceses) are stuck and do not have something we like to call 'vitality' but, like 'mission', we're not really certain what that means.
We don't really have a consistent set of 'vital signs' to be able to determine whether or not a congregation has 'vitality'. Clearly, the old weights and measurements of ASA (Average Sunday Attendance), numbers of Baptisms, Marriages and Funeral, the number of children in Church School, and the Accounts Balance Sheet do not give the whole picture.
What if we looked at other standards, like, say, how many of the congregants feel that what they hear in church on Sunday shapes and forms what they do the rest of the week?
Or, how many of the church members have a strong sense that they are better equipped to be moral agents in their families, neighborhoods, and work and market places in the world because they are members of a faith community?
Or, here's my own, personal favorite 'vital signs' of a faith community:
How is 'church' defined - locally, diocesan, nationally and internationally?
How many would say that the church is a vehicle of transformation and healing?
Do the community members see themselves as servants of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Do the ordained leaders model servant leadership?
Do people in the congregation sense the living presence of the Risen Christ?
Is the focus of the church on what happens on Sunday morning or does what happen on Sunday morning shape and form what happens in the church - and the world - the rest of the week?
What risks has this community taken - what sacrifices has it (and it's individual members and leaders) made - for the Gospel?
Is the wilderness wild enough for them to confront their demons?
Is the desert dry enough for them to let die what needs to die?
Is the well deep enough for everyone who is thirsty to drink?
Is the spiritual food rich enough for everyone who hungers to be fed - and empowers and enables them to go out and feed others?There are lots of reasons for church decline and financial difficulties, but crying 'mission' as the elephant in the room is to not confront some of the more difficult problems inherent in the fact that 'trickle down ecclesiology' - financial support of the institutional church at diocesan and national levels as the major focus of the church - has become *the mission* of the church.
Jesus came to save and heal others - not the church.
I remember hearing the rector of the congregation that supported me in ordination process preach, "The church that lives for itself, dies by itself." That is the picture that is emerging from the last Executive Council meeting. Clearly, that is the picture we'll be confronted with at General Convention in July in Indianapolis.
Clearly, that's not the picture we see in either Sunday's Gospel or in the snapshot Paul gives us of the early church in Corinth.
There's a little non-denominational evangelical church up the road from me that always has sayings on the church sign out front that sometimes makes me angry, sometimes makes me laugh, and sometimes makes me squirm.
This month, the sign reads: "Free coffee and eternal life at every service."
The gospel, says St. Paul, is "free of charge". He says that this is lest anyone question or impugn the motives of those who bring the Glad Tidings of God in Christ as we read it in the Gospels.
And the rest, as they say, is history. The Gospel was spread and the church grew and has lasted for centuries.
In the morning, while it was still very dark, he got up and went out to a deserted place, and there he prayed. And Simon and his companions hunted for him. When they found him, they said to him, "Everyone is searching for you." He answered, "Let us go on to the neighboring towns, so that I may proclaim the message there also; for that is what I came out to do." And he went throughout Galilee, proclaiming the message in their synagogues and casting out demons. (from Sunday's lectionary).I know, I know. It makes me squirm, especially as I sit here typing this on my seven-year old $600 lap top in my nice warm home on the water, living frugally but comfortably on the pension I earned which is calculated by the income I received from working for the institutional church and the itinerant ministry I now perform.
Perhaps squirming is the beginning of the process of transformation. You know, the way you decide to begin to diet and exercise when you begin to feel too snug in your favorite jeans.
Perhaps transformation begins with the clarifying question, "So, what's in this for you?"
I suspect that question is the biggest elephant in the room.
Jesus had no Temple or Church. No office hours. No one made an appointment to come see him. He went out to where the people were and preached and taught and healed them where they were.
He collected no salary or pension or health or life insurance. No travel or housing or continuing educational allowance. No car, in fact.
He hoofed it on foot, walking all over Israel, from the North to the South and sea to shining sea.
In a way, I envy him. He never had to worry about the Three Killer B's of Parish Ministry: Budgets, Boilers and Bishops. (There are another B-words some use to describe some of the people in the pew - or the pastor in the pulpit - but since this is a family blog, I'll refrain from elaboration.)
St. Paul told the early church in Corinth: "For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward; but if not of my own will, I am entrusted with a commission. What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel". (1 Corinthians 9:16-23)
What he means by this, I think (and whoever knows what Paul is really thinking), is that he didn't want to give anyone any ammunition to discredit him or impugn his motives for preaching the Good News.
You have to admit, it's a powerful argument.
When I was going through the ordination process, someone on the Commission on Ministry asked me, "So, what's in this for you?" At the time, I was shocked and deeply resented the question. I was angry and hurt that anyone would question my motives.
Understand, please, that I was the fourth woman to go through the ordination process in a diocese that had been intensely hostile to ordaining women. I automatically assumed that his question was filled with gender bias.
Perhaps there was some of that in there, but I was comforted when I later learned that he asked that question of all aspirants for Holy Orders who came before the COM.
It's a good question. It's an important question. It's a question everyone who is doing any kind of ministry - lay or ordained - should ask themselves and each other: Why you are doing what you are doing in the church?
What are you getting out of it? I mean, besides the fact that you love Jesus and want to live a sacrificial life of servant ministry? What's in it for you, besides the good feeling that comes from feeling good and righteous and noble?
Tough question, isn't it? Makes you squirm a little, doesn't it?
The thing of it is that, unless we get clear about our motives for ministry, we set up ourselves and others for all sort and manner of power dynamics and dysfunction.
Agnus DayThere's an excellent article by Bradley N. Hill in this month's Christian Century: "An elephant in the room?: How meeting agendas get hijacked".
When someone claims there is an elephant in the room it generally means a huge and hot topic present that is so volatile everyone tacitly agrees to avoid it.
"The elephant," Hill writes, "is an obvious but hard truth that is not being addressed, in part because to face, name and own the related issue would be frightening. Honesty becomes taboo. No one wants to cause embarrassment. The group prefers avoidance and feigned ignorance to bold but painful confrontation. It is a form of denial."
More often than not, however, it's more like crying wolf in the midst of sheep. Or, yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.
It's a power-play.
"As a result," says Hill, "the elephant crier takes over the meeting and the elephant - whatever it is, however big or small - defines the terms of engagement. We must deal with the elephant before we can do anything else. The elephant crier usurps the agenda and owns the floor......Either way, any other discussion is cut off because of the urgency of this "new" issue.
I submit that the real issue in these cases can be found in the murky baptismal water of motivation for ministry.
I know I'm going to sound really, really jaded when I say this, but here it goes: I suspect that all this talk in the church - well, these days, in The Episcopal Church - about mission is not about mission but a power-play that serves the institutional church.
Here's why I say this: A plan that seeks to 'restructure for mission' which limits the power of the baptized but not ordained is not an honest plan. It's not at all about mission but institutional preservation.
The presenting problem would seem to be declining membership and finances. Instead of putting our energies into dealing with the problem, we invite a herd of elephants into the room which are not the problem but may be part of the diagnosis of the problem.
Besides "not doing mission" - which is a valid issue, here are some of those elephants I've heard:
* Liturgy and music and preaching have to be more 'relevant' - the definition of which changes depending on which elephant is crying loudest.
* We've got to "get back" to using *only* the BCP.
* We've got to have more "creativity" and use language that is not only expansive and inclusive but more reflective of the times. * We have to have more "ethnic" music.
* The sermons have to be shorter - or, longer - and more expository in nature.
* The liturgy has to be "fun" or (gasp!) "entertaining".
* The younger generation is not just missing, it's members are missing because they don't have a youth group or a designated meeting room, or they're not allowed to 'tweet' or 'text' during the service, or the "music doesn't speak to them", or the service is not otherwise "youth friendly".
* We don't "market" our church. We need a mission statement that relentlessly appears everywhere on everything: the agendas of every meeting, the committees of the Vestry and even the budget has to be organized around the mission statement.
* Unaddressed issues of 'sin' - primarily among the leadership, staff or members.
* The congregation has never 'healed' from past disastrous leadership. They need 'time'.
* "Money follows mission". (This one makes me cringe. Every. Time.) If we just started doing the mission of the church - whatever that is - we'd have lots of money for the church. (As if those were two separate things.)Mind you, these may be valid components of the reason congregations (and dioceses) are stuck and do not have something we like to call 'vitality' but, like 'mission', we're not really certain what that means.
We don't really have a consistent set of 'vital signs' to be able to determine whether or not a congregation has 'vitality'. Clearly, the old weights and measurements of ASA (Average Sunday Attendance), numbers of Baptisms, Marriages and Funeral, the number of children in Church School, and the Accounts Balance Sheet do not give the whole picture.
What if we looked at other standards, like, say, how many of the congregants feel that what they hear in church on Sunday shapes and forms what they do the rest of the week?
Or, how many of the church members have a strong sense that they are better equipped to be moral agents in their families, neighborhoods, and work and market places in the world because they are members of a faith community?
Or, here's my own, personal favorite 'vital signs' of a faith community:
How is 'church' defined - locally, diocesan, nationally and internationally?
How many would say that the church is a vehicle of transformation and healing?
Do the community members see themselves as servants of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Do the ordained leaders model servant leadership?
Do people in the congregation sense the living presence of the Risen Christ?
Is the focus of the church on what happens on Sunday morning or does what happen on Sunday morning shape and form what happens in the church - and the world - the rest of the week?
What risks has this community taken - what sacrifices has it (and it's individual members and leaders) made - for the Gospel?
Is the wilderness wild enough for them to confront their demons?
Is the desert dry enough for them to let die what needs to die?
Is the well deep enough for everyone who is thirsty to drink?
Is the spiritual food rich enough for everyone who hungers to be fed - and empowers and enables them to go out and feed others?There are lots of reasons for church decline and financial difficulties, but crying 'mission' as the elephant in the room is to not confront some of the more difficult problems inherent in the fact that 'trickle down ecclesiology' - financial support of the institutional church at diocesan and national levels as the major focus of the church - has become *the mission* of the church.
Jesus came to save and heal others - not the church.
I remember hearing the rector of the congregation that supported me in ordination process preach, "The church that lives for itself, dies by itself." That is the picture that is emerging from the last Executive Council meeting. Clearly, that is the picture we'll be confronted with at General Convention in July in Indianapolis.
Clearly, that's not the picture we see in either Sunday's Gospel or in the snapshot Paul gives us of the early church in Corinth.
There's a little non-denominational evangelical church up the road from me that always has sayings on the church sign out front that sometimes makes me angry, sometimes makes me laugh, and sometimes makes me squirm.
This month, the sign reads: "Free coffee and eternal life at every service."
The gospel, says St. Paul, is "free of charge". He says that this is lest anyone question or impugn the motives of those who bring the Glad Tidings of God in Christ as we read it in the Gospels.
And the rest, as they say, is history. The Gospel was spread and the church grew and has lasted for centuries.
In the morning, while it was still very dark, he got up and went out to a deserted place, and there he prayed. And Simon and his companions hunted for him. When they found him, they said to him, "Everyone is searching for you." He answered, "Let us go on to the neighboring towns, so that I may proclaim the message there also; for that is what I came out to do." And he went throughout Galilee, proclaiming the message in their synagogues and casting out demons. (from Sunday's lectionary).I know, I know. It makes me squirm, especially as I sit here typing this on my seven-year old $600 lap top in my nice warm home on the water, living frugally but comfortably on the pension I earned which is calculated by the income I received from working for the institutional church and the itinerant ministry I now perform.
Perhaps squirming is the beginning of the process of transformation. You know, the way you decide to begin to diet and exercise when you begin to feel too snug in your favorite jeans.
Perhaps transformation begins with the clarifying question, "So, what's in this for you?"
I suspect that question is the biggest elephant in the room.
Salisbury Stakes
Bishop Nick Holtam of Salisbury has raised the stakes in the same-sex marriage debate in England by coming out with a moderately supportive position, contrary to that of the Archbishop of York. The story in the Times is still behind a firewall, but I hope it will be visible soon. In it, the Bishop is quoted as saying, basically, that apart from procreation — which he notes is not required of heterosexual marriages even if it is the norm — there is nothing meaningful to distinguish a same-sex couple from a mixed-sex couple other than their sex, and that this is not enough on which to create a boundary to recognizing same-sex marriages. The Bishop testifies to his own change in point of view due to his experience of loving same-sex couples.
Some will ask (as they have already asked), "If it isn't about procreation, then why should we have marriage at all!?" — though it is interesting that they didn't raise that question in the face of infertile couples. And of course, the answer is, If what life is about is only the generation of more life, then life itself must have a value extrinsic to its generation. Life is more than a merely self-fulfilling prophecy or circular argument. It has value even if it does not lead to procreation. And that value is, for human beings, love, which is the divine image in humanity, a meta-biological reality. As I've said before, love and fidelity are virtues, biology isn't.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
Some will ask (as they have already asked), "If it isn't about procreation, then why should we have marriage at all!?" — though it is interesting that they didn't raise that question in the face of infertile couples. And of course, the answer is, If what life is about is only the generation of more life, then life itself must have a value extrinsic to its generation. Life is more than a merely self-fulfilling prophecy or circular argument. It has value even if it does not lead to procreation. And that value is, for human beings, love, which is the divine image in humanity, a meta-biological reality. As I've said before, love and fidelity are virtues, biology isn't.
Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG
"Apostates for Evensong"
From the Sydney Morning Herald; HT Sed Angli.
The St Paul's Cathedral Choir at Evensong. On Thursday, the choir celebrates 120 years since its formation. Photo: Michael Clayton-Jones
There are many crimes that one would flay the Anglican Church for. The heinous felony that concerns me today is an appalling sin of omission. I accuse the Anglican Synod of concealment.
The secret of which I speak is Evensong. Daily in Anglican Cathedrals around the world, observant Anglicans sing and chant their way out of the working day in a short but outstandingly beautiful ceremony known as Evensong. It is a quotidian calming. It is an opportunity for rest and reflection at the end of a day's travails. It would move the iciest atheistic soul as it indeed moves mine. In fact, I am a bit of an Evensong junkie having gravitated these Evensong ceremonies in the great choral centres of Anglicanism.
More accessible than the Sistine Chapel, more inspiring than the Western Wall, more easily reached than the Dome of the Rock, sung Evensong represents at once the most rousing and soothing aspects of faith.
In my home town of Melbourne, Evensong is celebrated at St Paul's Cathedral at 5.10 (during school term) frequently to an almost empty house. St Paul's is the sort of place that can look empty even when it is full. On occasions, the only attendees at Evensong might be the choir and other functionaries. This is an abomination. It is criminal PR neglect. And the risk is that if no one goes, it might be canned. That would be a disaster – a financially rational disaster but a disaster nonetheless. Evensong is practised less regularly in other cathedrals for example Sydney's is on Thursday at St Andrews. Perth's St George has one on Sunday.
Evensong also has costumes, solemnity and parading. In the capital city cathedrals, there will be a wonderful choir. In Melbourne, the choir is competent at times verging on sublime. Originally formed in 1888, the choir today consists of 20 boys (on scholarships) and 16 men. It must cost a fortune to fund.
When I sit in the cathedral, I see history, music and architecture paraded before me. One of the great duties of faith is to be the carrier of culture. Religions are the repository of our wonderful liturgical music and the majestic language of the King James Bible. The soaring architecture evokes images of both the Medieval roots of our European history and the Victorian English who, whether we like it or not, shaped much of the Australian persona. The art and painting, while less than genius, are the greatest of religious art (unfortunately to be found in other places). And the music is, for aficionados, deeply moving. It is the total package.
One can sit there at the end of the day and drain your brain of all earthly distractions and let it recover in this precious anachronism. The cavernous acoustics carry the peerless multilayered choral offerings to you and through you.
The irony is that when I speak to some Christians about Evensong they sort of pooh pooh it, arguing that such ceremony is about form not substance. They are Bible-centric believers for whom the archaic liturgy is a distraction from the text. I demur. Part of the power of faith is the excellent methods they have of helping the congregation transcend the daily grind. Music and architecture can be a legitimate method for reaching an emotional rather than logical state.
One of my most touching Evensong experiences was in King's College Chapel in Cambridge. It was packed and I was stuck in the back. In front of me were two women — a mother and daughter. The daughter cried throughout. Clearly some trauma had assailed her and she and her mum had repaired to Evensong for sustenance. Parental love twinned with Evensong was the chosen balm. I hope it worked – her heaving sobs trouble me to this day.
If you go, you can think spiritual thoughts, or like I do, think secular thoughts about the history of Australians who carried the culture to this land, struggled to build mighty edifices and bothered to preserve this timeless liturgy. And even the costs of our culture are manifest with the war memorabilia and token nods to indigenous culture. It is a complete picture of a part of Australia that is disappearing down the drain. For all this sacrifice and achievement, the modern Australian ignores it. The poor old demoralised Anglican Church lavishes this jewel with institutional neglect. And we are in danger of losing what we don't appreciate.
Well I am sick of it. I believe we need to support this glory box even though it goes right against my godless ways. I propose that we have a society, Atheists and Apostates for Evensong. And I further suggest that we gather and attend sung Evensong in every city that it is sung. None of us should let this atrophy continue.
Please blog me now on what gives you feelings of transcendence.
What gives you a sense of the non-logical, the spiritual and the numinous?
Is the search for mystical highs a noble one or merely a distraction from biblical truths?
Is it bad for Evensong that an incorrigible atheist loves it?
What rocks your spiritual world?
Over to you
By the way the choir's 120th birthday bash is on Thursday September 15.
