Inhibitions

Another inhibition was handed down this week in our diocese. The priest concerned is a well-respected retired person. No reason for the inhibition was given. Of course, these days the first thought is sexual misconduct, but that is not necessarily so. And I would hope that thinking Episcopalians would avoid such speculation

I emailed the priest and assured him of my prayers. No inhibition absolves me from praying for a colleague, innocent or guilty, in such a situation. I do not believe in shunning. As a part of inhibitions, there is often a requirement that the priest may not speak of the charges against him/her or have contact with fellow clergy. I believe that is a real miscarriage of justice. If the bishop has the obligation according to canon to prevent a priest from carrying out his/her ministry while an investigation is going on, then the charge or the subject of the investigation should be made public. A cleric still needs his/her Church at such a time.

The secrecy of such inhibitions is what separates the church system of justice from the American form of justice. In the secular courts there are important procedures to make sure that one is to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Everyone has access to the same process. The church system of justice does not have such provisions. When secrecy is an element of the proceedings, all do not have access to the truth of a given case. All too often I am seeing people accused, inhibitions pronounced and then nothing done for inordinate amounts of time. Such delays can cause irreparable damage to an innocent priest’s reputation and career. In the ‘60’s we used to say that “justice delayed is justice denied.” And it is true even today. Long drawn out procedures to decide whether or not charges should be made leave the priest unable to clear his/her name.

Also, there is no statute of limitations on any of the canons. Times change and what was acceptable 30 years ago may today be a prosecutable offence. A good example of this: When I began my ministry, many of the priests who were the leaders of major parishes had met their wives in their first parish. In fact, it was considered the parish’s responsibility to find “a nice young woman” to marry to the new curate who came to the parish from seminary. It was one of the ways that the community “took care” of their clergy. Today, if a priest enters into a relationship with a member of the parish, it is considered a boundary violation.

Yes, there are those priests who do abuse their relationship with their congregations and violate all kinds of boundaries. But after knowing some of those who have done so, I have found that they are often people who were basically good people who had lost their way at a point in their ministry. The incident of clergy depression, isolation and fear is endemic as noted by church insurance companies in most denominations. They generally not hardened criminals or blind to their failings.

This does not absolve priests from their responsibility. Clergy who violate their ordination vows should be held accountalble. But it does require some sense of faith to salvage those who have fallen. Clergy are necessarialy community based folks. And isolation from the community of faith brings punishment when there may be no evidence of a crime.

However, when power politics are the name of the game in a particular diocese, the political jockeying to be in the “right” group often isolates some clerics. No longer is the clericus the place where the normal collegiality which should provide a sense of community for a priest or deacon. In our diocese we have other organizations that provide clergy collegial support. But in the past even those organizations were also co-opted by the powers of the diocese.

There seems to be an open season on clergy in the diocese. Even the hint of impropriety can bring a priest to inhibition or shunning. And yet when there was a clear case of repeated abuse by a priest, no inhibition was made. While in some cases, no inhibition is made, just accusations with no opportunity for refutation is given. And if recent cases are to be used as evidence, the lack of promptness in dealing with investigations and legal proceedings lead to the abuse of the inhibition. Hopefully the powers that be in the diocese will see to a prompt resolution of this inhibition. Meanwhile it is my responsibility to raise up such proceedings to the light because it is only in the light do we see the truth.

Mother's Day--a reflection

This year I have been with my mother for Mother's Day. My mother is 94 and is drifting into the kind of dementia that all of us fear. She cannot see, cannot hear well and now cannot speak because the synapses just do not fire frequently enough for her to have a vocabulary. I arrived in Ft. Worth last week so that we could have a Mother's Day together. Something we have not had in many a year.

I found that her wardrobe had fallen afoul of the laundry gremlins at the assisted living place where she lives. So we needed to do something about that. We went shopping. Something that I always dread. We even went shopping for shoes. Through it all, even though she could not see what was going on, she tried on clothes, and shoes with good humor. Shoes are difficult in this part of the country. It is hard to find anything but sandals here. But on Sunday morning I arrived and she was dressed up in her new finery to go to Church.

Off to First Methodist Church. (I wouldn't get caught dead in an Episcopal Church in this diocese.) Mom has been a member at this huge church for many years. There were those who greeted her and were happy to see her. Sadly many of her Sunday School Class have already passed on, but new ones have taken their place. The sermon was on the faith of Lois and Eunice, the mother and grandmother of Timothy. The preacher did a nice job of it. Mom had me sing Faith of our Fathers in her ear so she could hear it.

We went out to lunch to a Mexican restaurant--she liked the spicy food which she doesn't get at the retirement center. And then back home for a nap. She slept for an hour or so but she didn't want me to leave. I watched TV for a while and then she wanted me to lie down next to her and talk. Slowly some of her words came back to her. Snuggled together we journeyed down memory lane remembering the small town in Missouri where she was born, the little town in Illinois were I was born, the time when my brother was born, her high school chums and Topeka, KS where she was married in 1930. She asked me why she couldn't remember the date. And I said that most people couldn't remember things for 77 years. Most people don't even live that long!

It was a tender and heart-warming time. I give thanks to God for a mother who I didn't miss the chance to snuggle with, didn't miss the chance to be mothered by, didn't ignore the chance to mother to and just be friends after all these years.

Alleluia, He is risen!

Hard Times

It is a difficult time to be in the Church these days. It is hard to be clergy, and it is hard to be laity. I don’t have too much conversation with bishops any more, but I would guess it is hard to be a part of that august body too.

The reading of church news and the blognews of various takes on religious matters makes one weary. There are few stories of goodness and kindness being reported. There are even fewer reports of kindness and goodness being shown anywhere.

Attending church is often a surface endeavor depending on the size of the congregation. We say hello to friends, ask after their families and get the news. We may or may not hear a sermon that touches us where we hurt or where we question. We listen to music that mostly we cannot understand and sing hymns that are not of our era or musical bent. We might stay for coffee hour but generally we get to our cars in the parking lot before someone can enlist our help on a project.

We have failed to understand that we go to church, not for ourselves but for God. We pray to God, not for ourselves or others, but for God. We have a hard time realizing that what we are for is God, not for ourselves.

I do so want to go to a service that speaks to ME, but that is not what I really need from Church. I need a service that is going to keep me in touch with God. The service is for that communication, to keep that conduit going back and forth. The eucharist touches my soul if I let it. The touch of another’s hand at the bidding of the peace reminds me of my relationship with those I have offended and allows me to atone for my sins. The music and color reminds me that I am not just a head person, that God wants all of me.

I am not looking for brownie points in my attendance. I am looking for a connection and at present I have difficulty finding those connections to God being expressed in the Episcopal Church. Don’t get me wrong. I love the Church and I would not think to leave it. It is merely an observation that it is difficult to be constantly confronted with which side you are on, what position you take, your opinion about lgbt issues, women clergy, yadayada...

It is difficult to keep your eyes on Christ in all the kafuffle about who is in and who may not come to church or do things in the church for whatever reason.

The issue it seems to me is not who should be in the church but who IS there and are they hearing the Gospel of Christ’s love and welcome. And is that gospel real or some drivel that cannot be lived?

It is hard to address people each Sunday when those issues cannot be addressed because it isn’t kosher, or it is uncomfortable.

But the Christian life is not easy. And I am tired of those who try to teach that it is easy. We don’t have a crucifix on the wall for nothing. I go to Ft. Worth next week and the issues will all be there in full blown idiocy. Maybe I will find God there and maybe I won't. But on Mother's Day I will go with my mother to her church (not Episcopalian, not Lutheran) and try to make connections with my God.

Good for the Goose....

The response of the House of Bishops (HoB) to the Primates was a wonderful statement of definition and standing their ground. It said that we are the Episcopal Church of 14 different nations and we are governed by a different polity than many of the churches of the Anglican Communion. The resolutions of the HoB made clear that those who are beyond accountability may not speak for the Episcopal Church or set its mission. It is an especially important statement of self-differentiation rather than a reaction to a fairly abusive Communique from the Primates.

This comes as a healthy sign after the erosion of the basic rights of parishes and clergy over the past 10-12 years both in practice and canonically. It will be interesting to see if the bishops can be as egalitarian and as self-differentiated if there is a move by clergy and laity to regain some of the authority that has been lost.

Much of the equilibrium of the polity of the Episcopal Church in the past was because laity and clergy took seriously their responsibility in their ministry of the Church. These days, it seems to be a common experience for bishops to appoint a rector in small parishes as if they were missions. We are told that “it is not easy to find clergy to come to a parish as small as yours,” when it is more of an issue of trying to find clergy who will fit with the bishop’s ideology, or a desire to control issues in the diocese. The nation-wide crisis of the deployment system (cf. Episcopal Life, last month) leaves both clergy searching for a call and congregations looking for clergy jammed up in diocesan offices rather than in a fair market.

With such appointments, the clergy are no longer beholden to a call from the parish and are more beholden to the personality of the bishop. This undermines the basic construction of a diocese as an ongoing ministry of the Church which may be influenced by the ministry of the bishop but not dominated by the ministry of a bishop. It also undermines the movement of the Holy Spirit for both parish and diocese. In the past, part of the general understanding of the role of the parish was to call into it clergy who would stand for the rights of the laity in the parish and support the ministry of the Bishop. Nowadays clergy are often placed in parishes because they support the Bishop.

Secondly this undermines the ministry of the laity in parishes. Parishes have been able to call clergy to fulfill their needs and to fit with the basic ministry of their parishes for over 200 years. The parochial centralization of the polity has maintained the voice of the laity in the governance of the Church. The over involvement of bishops or bishop’s personnel in the call of a rector muddies the clear call of a parish’s mission that is part of the call of the diocese, not the other way around. All too often the mission of the diocese becomes central focus, not the mission of the parish.

If the bishops have found it necessary to claim the character of the Episcopal Church as being one which is founded soundly on the equality of Lay, Clerical and Episcopal orders, then the diocese must be willing to stand as a microcosm of that larger model. The ministry of the laity in calling their rectors must be upheld as part of the fabric of that mutuality. The deployment officers of a diocese need to be aware of the needs of the parish rather than vacancies becoming a place where a bishop wants to “stick” a favored priest.

The formation of the CDO (Clergy Deployment Office) process of the national Church was developed in part to give clergy from all over the country a chance to be viewed by parishes throughout the Church. This CDO process has been dismantled by many dioceses in favor of “the old boy’s network” which is what CDO was developed to discourage.

If we are going to regain the sense of polity that works well when all three orders are self-differentiated, we will need to call our dioceses to clear and open calling procedures. This means that yes; good background checks need to be made, but that the process is open to all clergy who wish to apply,

This also means that the laity must be willing to pick up the responsibility for their clergy. Many of the difficulties between clergy and laity that have resulted in church fights have been because there is not a sense of mutual responsibility between clergy and laity in the parish. Clergy need to be willing to negotiate a meaningful payment package and be responsible for their work. And the Laity needs to be willing to be responsible to their clergy when it comes time for benefits and remuneration. Accountability is absolutely essential in the parish ministry. But the accountability lies between the parish and the cleric, not the cleric and the bishop.

If the Episcopal Church is going to gain from the self-differentiation of the HoB, we need to be willing to do that in all orders. It is the only way that our polity works—if laity and clergy as well as bishops are self-differentiated and strong. We need to be willing to step up to the ministry to which we are called in order for the Church to regain its strength.

God's Friday

So keep fightin' for freedom and justice, beloveds, but don't you forget to have fun doin' it. Lord, let your laughter ring forth. Be outrageous, ridicule the fraidy-cats, rejoice in all the oddities that freedom can produce. And when you get through kickin' ass and celebratin' the sheer joy of a good fight, be sure to tell those who come after how much fun it was.
Molly Ivins 1944-2007

I found this quote over at MadPriest. I have always been a follower of Molly Ivins. She was a columnist on the Ft. Worth-StarTelegram so I have always claimed her as part of my heritage. Her insight into things political always gave me hope.

It seems appropriate to post this quote from her on Good Friday. On the day of the most solemn observance of the Christian Calendar it seem appropriate to talk about fighting for justice. There is no doubt that is what Jesus did on the cross. This is the reason that Good is often used for this day. It is God's work, good work that is done this day. And in some way we can hear the laughter of God as God overcomes death, over comes the grave, overcomes sin. The laughter is at the fear. The laughter is at the all the attempts Power tries to corrupt the lovely. The laughter is from all of us who understand how revolutionary the cross is.

We need not be solemn on Good Friday. At some level we need to be laughing our heads off, because Love triumphs over the pain, the torture, the hatred, and the desires to control. God's Friday is a day of remembering the Joy of looking at death and laughing.

What ARE we teaching in the Episcopal Church?

Elizabeth Kaeton, Rector of St. Paul's, Chatham, Chair of the Women's Caucus, and Chair of the Diocese of Newark's Standing Committee was quoted by + Jack Spong recently. I post this here in hopes that it will begin some serious discussion about what IS being taught as Christianity in our diocese.

For over 30 years the Episcopal Church has taught that LGBT Christians were as much a part of the Church as anyone else. This means that the clergy who have been ordained in the past 30 years have said that they beleive that LGBT Christians are as much a part of the Church as anyone else. And yet we have those who have been ordained in the past 30 years who would teach otherwise. So we need to look at what is being taught to see if the "standard of teaching" of the diocese is inkeeping with the Constitution and Canons of the Church. LG


Primates who met at Windsor, Dromantine and Dar es Salaam continue to uphold the Lambeth resolution on human sexuality to be the "standard" of the church, which conservatives want "enforced" so that all are in "compliance."

They have apparently forgotten, these princes of the church and teachers and guardians of the faith, that words like "enforce" and "compliance" are absolutely antithetical to the long tradition of the gracious Anglican Spirit of Accommodation.

In her conversation with the staff at the National Church Center, our new Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schiori points out the incremental progress of some Global South primates who can no longer claim not to have met lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender people (LGBT).. She muses that it's simply a "matter of time" before the rest of the communion allows "reason" to take its place along side classical Anglicanism of scripture and tradition.

So here are my questions. There are three:

1. How long, exactly, does it take, for the church to correct its "standard" when the church's standard is at least significantly different from the experience of others in other parts of the world, not to mention that the scientific evidence in the West is significantly different from that of the church?

Stop me if you've heard this one before:

For centuries, the church's teaching about the shape of the world was that it was flat, in accordance with what was written in scripture, despite scientific evidence that it was not. People were excommunicated – not to mention tortured and tried and sent to jail and murdered for disagreeing with the official church "standard" of teaching.

For centuries, the church's teaching about seizure disorder was that it was demon possession, in accordance with what was written in scripture, despite scientific evidence that it was not. People were excommunicated – not to mention tortured and locked in asylums because the outward manifestation of their lives were contrary to the official church "standard" of teaching.

For centuries, the church's teaching about left handedness was that it was a sign of evil, in accordance with what was written in scripture, despite scientific evidence that it was not. People were excommunicated – not to mention tortured and shunned and exiled because the outward manifestation of their lives were contrary to the official church "standard" of teaching. (My beloved can tell you stories that will raise the hair on the back of your necks about the abuse she and others suffered in Roman Catholic elementary schools because of their left handedness).

2. If we agree that the colonialism and cultural imperialism perpetrated by the North and West on the global South were evils of which we repent, why are we now allowing the attempted ecclesiastical colonialism and imperialism of the Global South primates to be visited upon the churches of the North and the West? I never remember Jesus teaching that "two wrongs make a right." Then again, I don't have a King James Version of the Bible so I may be missing something.

3. Who will take responsibility for the emotional, psychological and spiritual damage done to the church and her people for perpetuating the evils of this deficient standard of teaching? And, let's be clear: it's not simply LGBT people who will suffer. As we have learned from the evils of slavery, racism, sexism and the ignorance which once taught that the world is flat, people who have seizure disorders are possessed of demons and left handed people are the scribes of Satan: when the dignity of any human being is compromised or insulted, a mortal wound is created in the Body of Christ.

I think our Baptismal Covenant has something to say about "the dignity of every human being," as does the Outline of Faith (commonly called the Catechism). Who will take responsibility for the damage that is done while a deficient standard is upheld and promulgated in the church? Knowing what we know about the irrationality of prejudice, who could claim innocence? Knowing what we know about LGBT people and social sciences and lived experience, why isn't the church's "standard of teaching" being challenged – if not absolutely rejected? And, what price are we willing to pay for the damage done to the Sacred Body of Christ while we wait?

If nothing else, these questions underscore what I see as the need for a Season of Discernment, Study and Prayer so that we are very, very clear what it is we are being asked to do.

(The Rev'd) Elizabeth Kaeton
The Episcopal Church of St. Paul's
200 Main Street
Chatham, NJ 07928

Palm Sunday

It is hard to enter Holy Week first with Hosannas and then the Passion. It is almost too much for one service. But is that not what Jesus had to experience--being feted one moment and being crucified the next?

But none of this touches the mind. It hits much lower--the solar plexis perhaps. I have long grown used to the shouts of "Crucify him" from the congregation during the reading of the Passion. I hear my voice speak the words of forgiveness to rabble and yet this season they seem to hold a bit of sawdust. The bitterness of the struggle in the Episcopal Church is too much, too Byzantine. Even victory seems a waste of all that is holy.

The name calling, the wonderful cutting phrases that abound in the blogosphere seem more the words of the crowd than "crucify", the one-upmanship of bishops on this side of the Atlantic or the other call forth "father, forgive". And it makes the passion of Christ too much to stand at the cross. I cannot be like Peter and run away and cry. I can but stand at the cross and watch. But I do not hear the Centurion's call. I cannot find in any of this "This truly was the Son of God".

I know there is resurrection--I know it deep in my soul. But it is as if I am too weary to embrace the tomb. I wonder if there is too much bitterness in the Church to ever know resurrection. And will we arise like Christ or like Lazarus, wrapped in our sepulcral duds rather clothed in righteousness.

At the moment the Tomb is lutheran-like--a place to bide the transformation.