The Five Most Difficult Words to Say and Lambeth

The five words: I'm sorry. I was wrong.

The force of human pride makes these simple five words, in these two simple phrases, perhaps the least spoken words in any language. What a pity. They are the words that lift burdens and cast grace.

It seems that some Bishops have learned from Lambeth that trying to settle differences through the media, and not eye-to-eye, is not a very effective method of conflict resolution. I concur. Of course this does not include the GAFCON folks, perhaps with the exception of Archbishop Venables (Southern Cone, based in Argentina), oddly enough, who has agreed to meet with San Diego Bishop Mathes to discuss ways to "move forward". At least they are talking, though I am not sure, yet, at whose expense. That may promise to be a much more difficult topic.

Meanwhile, Archbishops Orombi (Uganda), Akinola (Nigeria), Nzimbi (Kenya), "The Dunk" (TEC) and a few other Gafconites have sent arrows of fire into the conference through the media, refusing to attend, but not refusing to light afire the smoldering coals of Lambeth 1998. They are so predictable.

I am waiting to hear the language of my own Bishops of Los Angeles, Bruno, Carranza, Anderson and Talton after they return. I hope they will thoroughly address the many issues of Lambeth and do so in a very straight-forward way.

What I find unsurprising, is the failure of anyone who has or is continuing to degrade the lgbt members of our communion admit to a turn-around, nor have I heard ANY apology for the violence that harms those they disagree with through their language of hate and discord. I had so hoped they would prove me wrong.

It would appear that the seamless and air-tight Gafcon bunch have no room for the fresh air of apology or regret. They CAN hold their positions, while apologizing for any violence their words may have caused. They can gentle their rhetoric, which kills. They can use different words in the future. But none of this has occurred. I didn't expect they would wallow in new thinking, but I was sure hoping that the language of degradation rather surprisingly used by Lambeth attendee Archbishop Dr. Mouneer Anis--language common to the Gafconites--would stop. I was sadly mistaken.

It is more than clear that nothing concrete occurred during Lambeth. That is good. While some may call it eventful-less, I do not view it in that way from what I have read. I read it as going back to square one on the issues of how to communicate. Those that refused to communicate except through venomous ways forced others actually interesting in communicating (they were basically threatened with action by their Archbishops if they did come) into silence. I find absolutely nothing Christian about that. Interestingly, this is rarely reported by the press. Insisting they stay a unified force in protest, even if by force, while demanding the communion take their path is so bizarre it needs no iteration. It is evident, on its face, that they may not be as unified as they claim except through threats.

These hard-liners have a lot to learn in terms of people skills, strategy and activism and even psychology. As I pointed out in a July post, they should fire their PR people. They should stop taking the advise of North Americans on how to get attention, it is backfiring.

One thing does seem clear in reading dozens-upon-dozens of posts coming from Lambeth: While many were sorry the 250 or so did not attend, they also did not respect or appreciate the arrows of fire sent by some vivacious non-attendees.

I write that the lack of concrete action is "good" because there is more to our communion than the issues of lgbt people, and certainly the issues of mission--fighting poverty and the attendant issues of hunger, education, and health so bogged down because of politics, working on HIV, and the now-critical issues of environment, premiere among them global warming, are important. These issues are also very important to me personally. The more we fragment, the harder these issues are to touch. There are good reasons to stay together, mission probably being numero uno.

I was angry, personally, for instance, at Archbishop Bul's (Sudan) language and methods as a Gafconite. I thought his temperamental outburst and its timing were outrageously poor, and they were. They reflected on him badly, overall. And while I can write him off, personally, in terms of respect, I cannot write off the needs of the Sudanese people nor will I. I think many feel the same way. It would be an unchristian thing to stop mission work in that country because of one bad-mouthed Bishop, badly advised, by bad guys (again, all men) largely, ironically, from the US. None of these folks can apparently see beyond their own sense of self to hear the cries of their people and I have NO reason to believe that their American simpaticos care either. They were made Bishops not to work in Africa, but to come back to the US basically as renegade Bishops as part of their "inside" expansion plans.

How ironic is it, though, that millions in the demonized North American churches can see the mission? These millions will not read Bul's words and even if they did, they would help. THAT is charity and love. That is the ability to walk past the words to the needs of the people. That is what we're all about, and I am sure that is what we will do, as in other similar cases. While these Bishops demonize those they cannot be charitable to, we won't walk on that path.

The issue of Colonialism is, indeed, a real issue, but they have it wrong in approach and in delivery. The message that comes forward is this: You colonialists brought us what we have. Therefore, as you walk away from it, you are the bad guys. Standing on the wrongs and hurt of history, they reach out with a sword. It is entirely understandable from an emotional point of view, but vexing in terms of Christian thought. Theirs is the one and only way, though others move on, in context, something they either cannot do or are unwilling to try to do. In the context of their cultures and nations, we have to trust that they know their people better than we do (and vice versa). But their spitting vitriol does nothing to gain favor or friend and nothing to forward their issue. Wrapped in the mantle of Christ is the fundamental concept of forgiveness.

It is clear--at least to me--that these folks have made themselves irretrievable and I am willing to let them make that decision for themselves (not that I have any say). The mark of maturity on a man is their ability to see the whole picture. They obviously cannot do this or are unwilling to try. We do not insist they do as we do. We ask them to walk with us in spirit, as we would like to do with them, as they take another path. They insist we walk their path. We cannot do that. We are not able. As in their culture, context shows us a different reality and the compass points in a different direction. No one said, nor does the Bible suggest, that reality is the same for all or that the Holy Spirit blows the same message in the wind.

I look forward to more reading as the Bishops return to their homelands and after some badly needed rest, no doubt, begin to explain their intended courses of actions. I am hoping that our wonderful Presiding Bishop will do likewise.

And I am sure hoping I hear a lot of the five words in the near future from both sides of center. It is better to part in understanding and love, than be caught in the web of speechless ego.

"We're trying to figure out how to keep dancing."

Bishop Frade, Diocese of Southeast Florida, joins Bishop Wolfe, Diocese of Kansas, to talk about their day at Lambeth. Some very fine thinking that, at least, made me feel better, personally. It is so good to hear from these two Bishops. And this short video, courtesy of episcopallife online made my blood pressure come down a notch.

The internet is a place where our ability to see and hear at the same time trumps by far the mere written word. Humans are a very visual species and I myself find these kinds of videos more helpful that straight print. I am grateful they are available.

Your thoughts?

Archbishop Deng: Your Timing Just Sucks

If there's one thing a activist must understand, it is the power of timing. A protest at the wrong moment, a statement against the wrong context is lost.

Today, Archbishop of Sudan, Dr Daniel Deng, made what I believe to be a huge mistake in timing in calling for the resignation of +Gene Robinson.

For those of you reading this, I needn't review the background of GAFCON/FOCA Bishops and their assault on the Archbishop of the Anglican Communion and their self-positing of absolute Biblical understanding and requirement now apparently imposed upon every global Anglican as they see fit and according to their rather bizzare list.

Boys (and yes, they are all male), your timing sucks.

Realize, during Lambeth, GAFCON/FOCA sent out a letter on behalf of everyone of you (that is, the GAFCON/FOCA types) which (as every activist knows very well) is a huge mistake. Voices of majority or not, you have to be, um, "inclusive". Venables didn't seem too happy, but I have to admit, it gave me quite a chuckle to see you off and running with the horse in the barn and Venables left standing wondering where everyone went. Tsk.

I understand, fully, your desire to be opportunistic. After all, the Lambeth Bishops seemed peaceful and contented coming out of several days of prayer, consideration and Bible studies. These protocols, no doubt to open the hearts of all and forge some bonds of love and respect, might have been seen to be within striking distance.

Someone rescued from the spring thaw ice water of Minnesota, best not be tossed into a hot springs. It can cause a violent physical and mental reaction. Nonetheless, this is, essentially, what you did. And therein lies your mistake (amongst many others).

First of all, you need to take stock of where you really are in the scheme of things. After your GAFCON blasting of ++Rowan Williams, your rather pathetic response to Williams response, followed by your dismal, embarrassing and poorly researched response to SAD (covenant), you need to take a breather. You are making a lot of mistakes, which, of course, is common when one is really not well organized or structured not to mention when one speaking the words written (attention Minns) doesn't write them. Minns, my advice: Instead of promoting your own vision, try listening a little better and using their words and concepts. You are mixing cultures that don't express issues and thoughts in the same way. Actually, this is pretty disrespectful and, in the end, you will find that those speaking need to do so in their way. And yes, you are welcome for the advice. Also, get a different PR group. Whoever you are using hasn't a clue. I'd fire them, actually.

Second, your routine is getting old. All good activists know that you must freshen up your devices and language each time you attempt to make a point. Unlike Bush and the Iraq war, you really don't have a wide audience that will hear the message again and again. This makes you look and sound boring (which frankly, you are). What you have is a relatively small audience and your appeal needs some serious work. Besides looking like angry, and frankly stupid, Primates (though sometimes sincere), your desperation trumps your message in terms of take. Everyone knows that those that speak the loudest are often the most desperate. And since the frequency and wording and disposition of your speakers is always so grave and hostile, you are losing your audience. Why not get someone really chipper and happy to say that gays are sub-human?

Third, consider your venue and audience. If you want to be on the world stage for a moment, then do what you did. But realize that change in the Anglican communion comes from within, not from outside and surely doesn't happen in a moment. It leaves you (failed in the end), looking rather desperate and on the short end of things. Oh sure, some bloggers will carry your message (to those that faithfully salute) but you have done nothing to change your situation or position and, I assume, that is what you are seeking. You are at Lambeth. Bishops, ecumenical partners and Lambeth staff are there. THAT is your audience. There is a diversity of opinion, though, as always. If you cannot get them to listen, then just lay down in the main isle and pound the floor. Best to do honestly what it actually looks like you are doing. I would advise pinning your name on your back so the media knows who you are.

Fourth, don't EVER use the Eucharist as a political tool. You insult the Host and everyone else. It is a backhanded and failed way to gain support. Not to mention you look like an idiot in doing so. And please no stupid tirades, ridiculous processing across flags, etc. No hanging of things on doors. If you are going to make a point, make it fresh. Sheesh. Think of something new, and why not do it in a happy way? Use those Eucharistic flat breads as mini frisbees with a taped message on them given you seem to think they are meaningless, anyway.

Thanks so much for reading my thoughts.

Footnote: I am a seasoned and experienced organizer. I know what I see, and not through pink glasses. Part of what I have written here is truth and part is fiction. You can figure which is which, but you might be very surprised at the truth of the matter.

It is up to you to figure out which is which given the lines of what you do are barely discernable either way. But I can tell you this: If you continue in the way you have continued, you will lose, and this is drop dead honest assessment from someone that has no financial involvement on either side and, actually, leaves the weeds with the wheat. Turns out, biologically, that many of the weeds actually fertilize the wheat in terms of nitrogen stabilizing. Just some food for thought.

Spend your money better. Help those that need medical and health relief and food. This isn't about *YOU*. It is all about *them*.

Al Gore Lifts Up the US With New Energy Proposal

This video is so incredibly exciting. I literally had tingles down my back. Please watch this 27 minute video of Al Gore speaking to the new challenge of America moving to 100% renewable (electric) energy within 10 years. It is truly a remarkable piece.

The Episcopal Church--indeed the Anglican Communion--must step up their call for immediate and strong change on the issue of global warming. Here in the US, we are blessed with a brilliant Presiding Bishop well trained in the sciences as an oceanographer. She has spoken to the issue of global warming, indeed those now at Lambeth will be discussing it.

Let us take this time to call on PB Katharine Jefferts Schori and other leaders of our communion to unite in the "mission" of changing hunger and assuring greater security for nations world wide by actively taking the bold steps outlined by Al Gore in this incredible video.

My keyboard to Schori's ears, and likewise to the ear of God. God help us to be brave and courageous as we work to help ourselves and others. Amen.

ENOUGH! Shrill voices from the Anglican Communion ditch God and lead in hate

I am a Christian by baptism. The sign of the cross was oiled on my forehead as a wee baby sealing me to Christ at the font.

I am an Episcopalian, the U.S. church which is a part of the world-wide Anglican Communion. We're a diverse bunch.

Over almost four decades, God stuck with me through atheism and agnosticism. I was terrified of Christianity which appeared to me to beguile science, revel in hatred for those not "in step" with their thinking, blame horrible natural disasters and human-caused disasters on certain "segments" of the human population, relegate anyone and everyone to a supposed fiery hell for the slightest error, and, in general, seemed to hate God by eliminating those created by God they did not agree with. Some thinking. Some ego.

Why in the world would I want to be a Christian unless I was so self-loathing that I actually believed I deserved this kind of treatment under God? Talk about hell on earth!

And if God created junk--me--why would such a God be worthy of my praise?

This guilt thinking--the thinking of blame, the thinking of hate and non-redemption--and these kinds of words are more appropriate to politicians in an election year than the words of any kind of clergy that claims to understand God and the love of Christ.

I am an Episcopalian because this thinking, and these kinds of words are not representative of my belief or my church.

Make no mistake, these kinds of words are weapons. They kill the love of God in the heart of man, woman and child and drive them into the desert of no return, the guilt of clergy on their heads. They drive them away from mercy, deprive them of salvation, and hold them hostage in real and literal limbo.

This is what is happening, and has been happening, in the Anglican Communion, specifically through a few individuals that, for one reason or another, believe that the winnowing 'down' of Christ's love, and God's forgiveness, is balanced on their individual understanding of God and that this understanding is true and final. As a Communion, and most certainly as Episcopalians, we are not called nor are we required to understand God as they do. That is not what I, as an Episcopalian, or perhaps an Anglican does nor does it allege to Anglicanism at all.

I cannot and will not dance on the head of that pin.

I was created by God, I live in God, I am sustained by God. My very existence and continuum defies their position.

My love of God demands that I speak against this thinking, but pray for them.

To those of you who step aside from Lambeth, stand before the world press in condemnation of the church and your sisters and brothers in Christ unable or unwilling to defend the least in your own nations, in fact supporting laws which are internationally categorized as human rights violations, I say ENOUGH.

You are setting God and God's creations aside for personal vanity. You have supported the jailing of human beings rather than protecting and shielding them from harm because you disagree with who those children of God "are". You pretend not to know, but you do know. In the face of physical conflict, you walk away from peace and consultation and threaten more violence in the way of the shadow. While alleging to save millions of people, you outright condemn millions more to hell.

ENOUGH!

If you cannot walk the path of Christ's love, then perhaps it is not Christ's path you walk at all.

It is one thing to disagree. It is wholly another to take the Anglican Christian message into the territory of hate.