MURRAY CHRISTMAS!!

Prayers, Please

Our local Cooper Tire manufacturing plant has announced it is definitely closing.

That's 2,100 jobs in our moderately-sized community. A real blow.

Pray for us, pray for this country, the whole shooting match.

Some depressions there ain't no pill for.

Why We've Helped Create Reasserters

I've had to come to accept that we, on the liberal side, have been complicit in allowing Reasserters, and, in the larger society, neo-cons, to cause the havoc they have.

In the name of compassion and kindness, we've tried to "engage" with them, to convince them of the errors in their beliefs. The result, however, has been like that of the typical co-dependent relationship, in that we've empowered their insanity, rather than helping them.

The fact is, by design or by accident, we've been weak, fearful, resistant to any sort of conflict. We're afraid of being labelled "bad guys," and, so, we've acted as if they had legitimate concerns.

They don't.

We serve no one's best interest, particularly those of these homophobes and rabid reasserter/neo-con/fundamentalists by pretending that they are operating from a reasonable, realistic, point of view. One shows compassion to a mental patient, but they must be made patients. You may have to forcibly commit them to psychiatric care, whether they or anyone else thinks you're a facist or any other ugly label. When a person tells you they need a drill to let the voices out of their and everyone else's heads, you don't hand the drill to them then try sweet reason in the hopes they'll stop drilling before they hurt someone!

We need to stop treating them as if their "concerns" were anything but delusional, as if they were operating from any position of reality. It may seem unpleasant, but think of it as the "slap" a hysterical person may need to calm them before they cause further chaos.

This ISN'T a game!!!!!

The anti-gay forces behind Prop8 - themselves vicious proponents of mob rule - are complaining that the anti-Prop8 protests are mob rule . . .

. . and comparing gays who oppose Prop8 to terrorists in Mumbai.

See here and here.

Unfortunately, response has been left to the now-infamous HRC, whose effectiveness has been demonstrated at nil - well, other than fundraising for themselves.

Just as unfortunately, the response from the gay-and-gay-friendly community has been "Oh, stuff and nonsense! Just a bunch of soreheads!"

REALLY?!!!!

ARE YOU INSANE?!

You do realize, don't you, that these monsters are trying to get us killed:

Roman Catholic Archbishop Niederaurer
Pat Boone
Whoever the Hell heads up the Mormon "church"

ARE TRYING TO GET US KILLED!!


This isn't a game of whining bullies, but a concerted effort by political-action groups - "churches" - whose entire existence depends on whipping up a mob and leading them by the nose, to STAMP US DOWN . . . AND PERHAPS OUT!

I usually don't put myself forward - I'm certainly not leadership material - but to underestimate this, to under-respond to this, is stupid, short-sighted, and suicidal.

Respond in kind? Hit them back before they hit us?

NO. That is to make ourselves the sort of animals they reduce their followers to.

But call them, at every turn in every public venue, on this attempt at passive homicide-by-mob!!!

MAKE IT CLEAR WHAT THEY ARE DOING! THEY ARE INCITING MOB VIOLENCE!

STOP RELYING ON A BASIC GOODNESS THAT HAS NEVER EXISTED ONCE HUMANS GET INTO A MOB!!

GRUSS VOM KRAMPUS!!!

It's Krampusnacht!

Perhaps that is why GAFCON is being called out to Lambeth?

Look out, ya daffy-gaffies!!

Heed these words, Bob Duncan

DON'T BELIEVE THE SONGS! - annual Christmas Time Warning

This Week

Nothing much to report.

Grandmere Mimi has a wonderful post on Advent as the season of Hope, and hope's been in pretty short supply all 'round, lately.

I really am beginning to get seriously discouraged at the state of the world around me. I've always had a feeling that we were moving forward, evolving, however much fundamentalists, hate-mongers, terrorists, the purely stupid, and the greedy and selfish tried to keep us back. I've always believed that, as we evolved, those people - and those impulses in us - would be transformed, as well. Now, I'm beginning to realize how little people actually look at themselves, their motivations and beliefs. At the risk of sounding superior, I think that we who do, who are self-aware in any degree, are a dangerously small breed, a species within a species. I look around and see Original Sin - not the bizarre concepts coming from Augustine and the Romans, but real Original Sin - the universal, self-perpetuating and self-imposed illusion of society and history all around us. We know the big illusions of sex, greed, etc., but what of the small ones we all embrace. "Competition breeds excellence." "People are just like that." "It's how the world works." All the lovely truisms that permeate even the church. "We have to be realistic!" Why? Realistic says "Hey, I only got one life, so I better keep from getting crucified or my message will die!" Even the very Church itself - Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox - participate willingly, lovingly in the illusion.

And illusions! Wow. Just the past week or so, talking with the anti-gay christians has been a horrifying eye opener. I think they really are crazy! They have twisted, gyrated and contorted their minds in so many self-justifications and rationalizations of their beliefs - and the concommittant illusion that they must be right or lack any center of stability - that they have literally drifted off into an alternate reality. Reality, right in front of them is gay people saying, "Look, you're really hurting me! You really are doing damage!" and they say, "Noooo. You just think you're hurting!" REALITY. It's right there. Right there!!!! I won't even get started on the people who really believe the Bible is literally inerrant. They should be under a physician's care.

Physicians! Doctors, trusted with care for human beings who come to them in need, and the government - our own little outgoing military junta - is trying to allow these doctors to say "Well, I swore to help you . . . as long as you agree with me morally!" How long before we say "Well, Catholicism, or Judaism or Buddhism or . . . what the hell ever . . . doesn't suit me, personally, so, as a doctor, I won't treat you." How long before it degenerates into fighting. This doctor won't see gays. This doctor will see gays, but not Jews, so that Jewish doctor won't see gays or Methodists, which that doctor happens to be . . . blah, blah, blah.

Illusion. Original Sin.

Still, there is hope, as Mimi points out. I see the hope a little differently, perhaps. The hope is not a future hope - the future is nothing - but a present one. The hope is in the fact that some of us see this ugliness, while others see business as usual. Phillip Kapleau said that Yasutani-Roshi spoke of the necessity of a "doubt-mass" in Buddhist practice to bring spiritual fruition. This doubt is not doubt as we think of it - the necessary operation of the limited human mind wondering if we've made the right decisions - still less the adolescent rejection of everything "conventional." This "doubt-mass" is that weighty, undeniable burden that some have that this is not how things truly are, that there is a better, fuller world and the evidence around us keeps saying there isn't. This doubt-mass brings fruition by pushing us. It doubts the illusion, the original sin and pushes us through it to greater things.

That is the hope, to me, found in this Advent. That is what will bring us to say "Why hasn't the Kingdom come? It's supposed to have!" and so saying, resolve to bring it, as Christ, as His body.

A Cold Fucking Winter

Well, the goddamned garnishment's gone through.

I can't live on this. It's ridiculous. I either go insane or just fucking die.

I'm not depressed. I'm not self-pitying.

I'm pissed off.

I owe the debt. So fucking what?! In civilized countries they actually have governments that pay for higher education. Pity we live in a capitalist cesspit like this. The damn financiers took the bad risk, it was their stupidity. It was their duplicity, too, as I was assured "Oh, don't worry! We wouldn't risk it if we knew you wouldn't be making plenty to pay it back!" 17 goddamned years old and never had a loan. Yeah . . . I bet they weren't worried. No counselling to seek a more affordable state school, or at least a less expensive private school, because then they can make a profit selling the debt over and over til it gets unprofitable then send the government thugs in.

Fuck debt collectors, too. One step above bottom-feeding protection-money thugs.

Maybe they thought Mom would watch out in the process. Hah! She was useless from the moment Dad died, and trying to farm me out to anyone who'd have me. All I ever heard was what a drain I was on her, how she and Dad had thought they'd be done with child-raising, them, BAM - their "mixed blessing." Blew the insurance money on every slick-talker that came along, then expected a 13 year old to be fucking man of the house. I was raised by TV and fear, is it any wonder I CAN'T FUCKING FUNCTION IN THIS SHITHOLE OF A SOCIETY!?

I have no one to talk to because the few I have in real life have too many problems of their own, and the rest stopped caring because they've heard me whine too much!

What good would it be, anyway?

"We're there for you!"? I wonder how many poor homeless crazy bastards heard people telling them "We're there for you!" as they sank into the gutter while "they" were over "there for you" not doing a damned thing.

Praying for you is another good one. Want to know how much that's worth, look how well monasteries are doing and how respected they are. Monasteries! Forget that, Mark, as you're gonna die in debt and they don't take those too old . . . or too poor. Gotta have plenty of hard cash to renounce the world - and do it at an early age!

The president-elect, like every politician before, talks about helping the American family! Fuck the American family. They've got each other to depend on. What about us poor bastards who have no one else, and expect little while paying taxes and obeying the law? What about us who don't go around overpopulating the world with children we have no time for and expect the government to pay teachers to raise? What you gonna do for us, Obama? What about us who dropped in the cracks because the same government in cahoots with finance companies failed to keep the economy steady enough to support a decent education-finance or job market? What about us?

And then I'm supposed to feel bad about thinking about myself because there are all these poor people all over the world and that's where our money should be going to. Yeah. 'Cause of course, people like me don't get cold, or hungry, or afraid, or alone - we have to worry about them! them! them! Ignore your neighbor, give money so that half of every cent can almost feed some child with no future in a blighted country, while the rest lines "charitable" pockets!

I hear about fires, storms, bad economy. I hear, "Oh, we lost everything, but we'll rebuild!" Great. Something happens to me and my home, that's it. I'm done. No fallback. Can't even afford to rent a goddamned apartment!

God won't help. Oh, He'll see to it that you're okay after you die - all the more reason to do so - but this world, well, He just doesn't do this world.

And this damn blog. Nobody cares. Everybody's got their own thing, and I don't even feel I have a right to be angry because everyone does have their own problems. Why bother? No one reads the fucker and it's a little too accessible for a diary. Time to go.

But, damn it, when does somebody start helping and caring about me?

Next time I get a letter asking for a donation, I'm going to say, "Nope! I alread gave to the 'Help the Mark' foundation!" When the Treasurer at church asks about my pledge, I'll say, "I pledge to take care of myself, just like all the rest of you do."

I'm sick of feeling like I'm not worth it. I'm sick of feeling like everyone else - even God and Jesus - feel like I'm not worth it. If I've got to be so alone, why worry about anyone else? It hasn't done a bit of good, so far.

The Past Week

Has been exhausting.

I can't say, in the wake of Prop 8, that I've been particularly impressed with either side, as a group.

On our side, there is this vengeful streak, saying to shame, target, boycott - make 'em pay!

There's nothing wrong with boycotts, if they are aimed at a worthy object. But, to organize and call for boycotts of companies because they didn't do enough, in your opinion, or because they employ people who contributed to Prop 8, that is the same tactics and same motivation of the Prop 8 blackmailers who threatened companies for not contributing to their campaign. Remember that? To try to drive people - individuals - from their jobs because they contributed, simply crying "Public record! Public record!" is a type of censorship. Sorry, but it is. Saying "Zero tolerance to bigotry!" is the exact same thing in a democratic republic as saying "Zero tolerance to tolerance!"

In a practical sense, it's a disaster to the movement to end Prop 8, and, perhaps to the struggle for gay acceptance. It divides resources and focus from those companies that - as companies - supported Prop 8, deflects attention away from the unconscionable manipulation of politics by the Latter Day Saints and the Roman Catholic bishops. You don't divide overstretched forces. It's unwise.

Also, practically, it's playing into the Pro-Prop-8 stereotype: you are trying to police thought and squash dissent. You are punishing people for having different views. You're giving parents every chance to carry and spread the bigotry to a new generation - "See, Son, you're Dad got fired because of the fags, just like . . . " "See, the fags will make everyone get on board with their agenda!" "See, the fags are evil! Without their mark you can't buy or sell!" and on and on.

Now, the Pro-Prop-8 gang:

First, their position is reprehensible. It has been arrived at by such contortions of thought, basic human goodwill, and, indeed, basic humanity that it is purely nauseating. The degree to which so many simply surrendered to groupthink in the guise of religious conviction or "My church told me to!" is worthy only of disgust.

Aren't you humans, anymore? Can't you arrive at your own conclusions? Did God simply waste His time making you to be a receptacle for every whim of vox populi, whether it goes by the name vote or the name religious hierarchy? Or, worse, waste His time by creating something just intelligent enough to create fantastic structures of self-deception to justify hate without the slightest introspection?

Shame. On. You.

The best I've gotten is from people who, while claiming "I know x number of gays, and I don't disrespect them!" also present claims about gay relationships, thought processes, motivations, beliefs, that, apart from being more than they could possibly know, are so far into fantasy that it makes it clear that they don't know any gays anymore than they know the person who stands behind them in the checkout line!

It's all based on fantasy, an "exoticising" of gays so that we have different motivations, desires, brain functions than you because we are attracted to a sex you aren't! It is bizarre, irresponsible, and sad.

Gays want to marry someone of the same sex for the exact same reasons you want to marry someone of the opposite sex. If you marry someone of the opposite sex simply for procreation, then you are using that person and unworthy of marriage!!!! END OF DISCUSSION!!!

Gays are sexually attracted to people of the same sex for the exact same reasons you are attracted to people of the opposite sex. If you force yourself to be attracted to someone because you are "supposed" to be, you are NOT attracted to that person!!!!END OF DISCUSSION!!!!

Gays mean the same thing in "committment" to a person of the same sex as you do to a person of the opposite sex. If your "committment" is based on mere external pressure, it is NOT a committment!!!! END. OF. DISCUSSION.

I have seen an otherwise intelligent person on Tobias' In A Godward Direction argue the "need" for an institution separate from marriage because gays expect different things, and "proving" this with some linguistic sleight-of-hand accompanied by an image of homosexuals and homosexuality with absolutely no basis in reality.

It's absolutely ridiculous, this manipulating yourself and others, being manipulated by self and others, all because you are too damned lazy to be responsible human beings!! It's not your leaders' fault . . . you put 'em there and that's what leaders do, they try to control . . . it's your fault for being so willing to be controlled.

Speaking of Music - THE BAD OLD DAYS!!!! (and they were better)

People born after, say, 1985, really don't know what it's like to have a really impressive national enemy.

1984.

I was 2 months shy of 17, getting closer and closer to draft age.

This was the October Revolution's anniversary, but was by no means an unusual display on our own televisions back in the US of A at any time of the year.

This is why my generation didn't really see a tomorrow, our parents were scared shitless, and Putin (ex-KGB) still scares some of us.

Enjoy!



PS - I must confess, I really do love the tune to that anthem!

Music Time!

I need cheering up, and this is some of what does it for me.

The first polka is Rosamunde, but better known in America by another name. The second polka - if there are any p. c. complaints, they will be mercilessly mocked, then zapped.













P. S. - Can ya tell I spent my early childhood in Miami?

Emotional Depth, Intellectual Depth.

The Shoe Comes in Different Sizes

From Susan Russell's blog comments:

What you and other proponents of same-sex marriage propose to do is to remove the objective foundation from the meaning of marriage. You may not have even considered that objective aspect of marriage important. You may have thought that male and female was merely custom, not a part of the essence of marriage. But marriage is a relationship based on both objective (male and female) and subjective (love) elements.

If you remove the objective aspect of marriage, what you have left is the subjective. Affectional preference is the determinant factor. When all you have left is the subjective, you have an extremely unstable foundation. Two women are sexually attracted to each other and have a deep love for one another. Why not marriage for them? But if you have made the subjective aspect – affectional preference – the basis for marriage, then what do you do about all the other affectional preferences that exist? Why is “two” the magic number? Why not three, four, or more? Why not father and daughter? Why not an adult male and an eight-year-old boy? Why not siblings? Why not the living and the dead? Why not affection for animals? If all you have to base marriage on is affectional preference, you have no reason to exclude any affectional preference?

By making the subjective element the sole element for marriage, you have destroyed the very idea of marriage. There are no longer any boundaries. A man or woman may say, “I cannot help it. The only place I find any sense of joy or fulfillment is in brief encounters. Why cannot I have a wife/husband for a week and then move on to someone new?”

You will not destroy my marriage of course. I know what marriage really is, and my wife and I are committed to that God-given ideal. But if, according to law, any and all relationships can be called marriage in the world my grandchildren grow up in, they will be surrounded by instability, and they will not know what it means to be committed to a person for life. They will be given the ideal by law (and quite likely by the educational system, if things continue as they have been going) that only affectional preference matters. And mere emotion, which is so variable, is no foundation for a life. We will have societal chaos that will make our current instability look like “the good old days.”

IGNORANCE

Spot the logical fallacy? Of course you do! Why it's the same gasping, wheezing, elaborately self-justifying fallacy of all slippery slope arguments.

So why can't the poster?

Because he doesn't want to.

We Need More Monastic Support

I originally published this at Tobias Haller's blog, but it generated little discussion as part of a thread:


I wonder if we really don't encourage monasticism as much as we should - in fact, I know we don't.

The abuses of the monastic vocation in the Church's past have left many with a feeling of distaste for people "living off of" others. The truth is, as Thich Nhat Hanh has said, being a monastic is something of a luxury, but, I believe, it's a luxury the larger church needs. With all due respect to MDG's and outreach and all the other very necessary parish/diocesan/national-church activities and projects, it is also good to have places in which there are those given to the spiritual, or mystical, or theological dimension of our churches, and which provide a haven for others to approach the transcendent in a total environment of prayer and detachment. I think that it's healthy to have those who detach, even from worthy activities, as Mary sitting at Jesus' feet.

This certainly isn't the sole answer to the malaise in our - and indeed most - churches, but I think it is a major part of a solution.

That Shoe Fits Pretty Well!

From a piece in the Washington Post:

But Kesha Young, 32, called religious arguments a cover for persistent prejudices rooted elsewhere. Taboos against homosexuality are exceptionally strong in Africa, McCoy acknowledged.

"I'm going to tell you something about the black race: We love to pass judgment. I think that's just a smoke screen about the church thing," said Young, a licensed vocational nurse.

Anthony Maurice-White, 31, who is gay, said he learned early in life to keep his sexual orientation to himself around fellow blacks as a matter of routine. "Closed minds," he said in the mall parking lot. "And they're afraid of change."

IGNORANCE

His friend Ike Young, 21, nodded agreement. "I'm straight, but I think a lot of people are bi-curious but they're afraid of what family members will think of them," he said.

The Latino vote for the ban also appears rooted in culture.

"It's our tradition," said Flor Guardado, 38, who voted yes. "In Latino Central American culture, the gays aren't accepted."

Guardado said that in her native Honduras, she would not tell her mother if she had a lesbian friend. "If I had a lesbian friend, they'd think I was a lesbian, too," she said.

IGNORANCE

But in Los Angeles, where she owns a hair salon, a different kind of diplomacy obtains. All eight of her employees are gay. When they asked how she voted, she tells them it's a secret.

"I'm sorry for the gay people. They have feelings," said the mother of two. "Legally, I don't want that for the children. They will be confused and think it's okay. They might think they're gay, too."

IGNORANCE

Pablo Correa said his mind was made up by a TV spot in which a young girl comes home from school and tells her mother she learned how a prince could marry a prince.

IGNORANCE

"Before, I didn't know about Proposition 8. When I saw the commercial, it opened my mind," said Correa, 42, standing in his beauty supply story in Boyle Heights, in heavily Latino East Los Angeles.

"I don't discriminate against people," he said, with a wave at the rows of lipstick and makeup. "I have a lot of customers who are homosexuals, transsexuals and bisexuals. I'm not against these people."

He added: "But I'm a traditionalist. I come from a traditional family. People can do whatever they want in their own life, but I have to protect my family."

IGNORANCE

SEX, LIES, AND ECCLESIASTICS

NOTE: The Catholic bishops in California committed a few sins of ommission!

Tobias has the story here.

No hay mas de esto, indeed.

REVOKE TAX EXEMPTION FOR MORMONS

They did it in England, and we should do it here, if they are going to be such movers and shakers in politics, let them pay like the individuals and corporations do.

SIGN THE PETITION!

My Prophetic Witness

I am the voice of one in the wilderness, crying, "You kids get off of my wilderness!"

Monstrous, Just Monstrous

I was prepared, today, to counsel that perhaps the passage of Proposition 8 with the election of Barack Obama was a sign that there were greater problems to fix in the USA, and we were being called to focus on those. I was going to say this, with profoundest sorrow, knowing the pain faced by thousands of couples in California, as well as those who are my friends here in the blogosphere . . . particularly IT, who was just beginning to think we may not be completely "out there" for believing in God.

Then I saw people coming to kick those people when they were down, most notably a Reasserter deacon whom I had once respected (now I wonder what Hell-church would ordain such a deacon).

Anger is not always a bad thing, especially when it is toward those who do evil and revel in it.

This is what immediately came to my mind, to pray heart and soul for those who voted for Prop 8, and this "deacon" and the others coming to bathe in their enemies' blood:

109 Deus, laudem
1
Hold not your tongue, O God of my praise; *
for the mouth of the wicked,
the mouth of the deceitful, is opened against me.
2
They speak to me with a lying tongue; *
they encompass me with hateful words
and fight against me without a cause.
3
Despite my love, they accuse me; *
but as for me, I pray for them.
4
They repay evil for good, *
and hatred for my love.

5
Set a wicked man against him, *
and let an accuser stand at his right hand.
6
When he is judged, let him be found guilty, *
and let his appeal be in vain.
7
Let his days be few, *
and let another take his office.
8
Let his children be fatherless, *
and his wife become a widow.
9
Let his children be waifs and beggars; *
let them be driven from the ruins of their homes.
10
Let the creditor seize everything he has; *
let strangers plunder his gains.
11
Let there be no one to show him kindness, *
and none to pity his fatherless children.
12
Let his descendants be destroyed, *
and his name be blotted out in the next generation.
13
Let the wickedness of his fathers be remembered before the
LORD, *
and his mother's sin not be blotted out;
14
Let their sin be always before the LORD; *
but let him root out their names from the earth;
15
Because he did not remember to show mercy, *
but persecuted the poor and needy
and sought to kill the brokenhearted.
16
He loved cursing,
let it come upon him; *
he took no delight in blessing,
let it depart from him.
17
He put on cursing like a garment, *
let it soak into his body like water
and into his bones like oil;
18
Let it be to him like the cloak which he wraps around himself, *
and like the belt that he wears continually.
19
Let this be the recompense from the LORD to my accusers, *
and to those who speak evil against me.

20
But you, O Lord my God,
oh, deal with me according to your Name; *
for your tender mercy's sake, deliver me.
21
For I am poor and needy, *
and my heart is wounded within me.
22
I have faded away like a shadow when it lengthens; *
I am shaken off like a locust.
23
My knees are weak through fasting, *
and my flesh is wasted and gaunt.
24
I have become a reproach to them; *
they see and shake their heads.
25
Help me, O LORD my God; *
save me for your mercy's sake.
26
Let them know that this is your hand, *
that you, O LORD, have done it.
27
They may curse, but you will bless; *
let those who rise up against me be put to shame,
and your servant will rejoice.
28
Let my accusers be clothed with disgrace *
and wrap themselves in their shame as in a cloak.
29
I will give great thanks to the LORD with my mouth; *
in the midst of the multitude will I praise him;
30
Because he stands at the right hand of the needy, *
to save his life from those who would condemn him

But I can't pray that for them.

Unlike them, I know that what wrong I wish on others affects everyone. I believe in responsibility, and do not worship "the belly" as my God, as they do.

So, here is what I have, will, and do pray with all my heart and soul for all those who voted against gay marriage, who approve that vote, in California, Arizona, and Florida:

May you know, every moment of every day, the same emotions, the same experiences as you have caused those whose marriages you voted against, and may you know it until God changes hearts and minds. AMEN.

CURRENTLY

John McCain is giving his concession speech.

I leave it to others to find fault with it if they will, to me it seems gracious and positive.

All evidence (I'm sorry, but I'm not going to say definitely until our man's in the White House - too many W. memories) at this point says that Barack Obama is president-elect, the 44th President of the USA. I'm proud today to be part of a nation and part of a process that has risen above race, at least on the face of it (no witticism intended), but I hope Obama won't be the "black president." He's ours - all of ours - now, and, if he's the man we hoped for, he will truly bring us all together. I have said that I have no faith in voting for the one who will do good, but for the one I thought would do the least harm . . . I hope I'm proved wrong, and we'll see a man who accomplishes real good for us.

What did give me hope, was an interview with a group of young people in New York, and one young woman, beaming from ear-to-ear, said (paraphrasing) "My candidate didn't win, but I'm just so excited to be a part of this!" It was genuine, joyful and generous.

Be a light. Be a light.

Prayer for the Day

Almighty God, to whom we must account for all our powers and privileges: Guide the people of the United States in the election of officials and representatives; that, by faithful administration and wise laws, the rights of all may be protected and our nation be enabled to fulfill your purposes; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

No on California Proposition 8

This is a subject that I haven't broached at all because I'm aware of how few readers I actually have, and how few of those few are in California.

But this is important, especially now, as the time for the vote approaches, and Mormons from out of state are pouring money into the hateful attempt to illegalize gay marriages that were just made legal. It is a pandering end-run to try to whip up fear, and the religious right has not been above outright lies and confusion, belying their claim to Jesus as Master.

Defeat them. Show them the USA still has some value, because as soon as the fundamentalists take over, this will cease to be a great land, and become a Third World nation, as always happens to theocracies.

If that doesn't sway you, vote against it for IT, for all the others who've made this committment in love and responsibility. Please, for God's sake, please vote down Proposition 8. It is now All Saints' and Sunday is All Souls' - think of the living saints and souls as well as those who've gone on.

Don't let the witness be one of hate and despair. Don't let the soothing words of oily "traditionalists" convince you you're doing the right, the loving thing, when you know in your heart you aren't.

Follow all the Pro-Proposition 8 lies and confusion here.

For those not in California, there's still time to donate and help out here, or click the banner on this thread.

Please . . . don't let us fall into darkness.

A Belated Happy Halloween!

You Are All My Blessings

All my closest friends and best supporters are farthest away (though James has a car now . . . Huzzah!)

For people like me, the internet gives the distance to be open. I can say things to you that I couldn't, to my own family and fellow parishioners. You've listened, and stepped over that distance to give warmth and love.

Thank you.

I am a weak, self-pitying man: please, keep reminding me of my blessings.

Love,

Mark

Anthem For Duncan and Pals Communion Inc.

Suitable for all "orthodox" Anglican occasions!

Well, Folks, It's Really Bad

I received a reply to my objection to the Administrative Wage Garnishment:

They're going to proceed with taking 15% of my pay until all 12,000-something of it's paid off.

James, who is my dearest friend and much of a guru to me, because of his strength and ability to navigate life successfully and cheerfully, has assured me this is a challenge I can rise to, that I can do whatever it takes, moving, starting over, getting a second job. I love him for his faith in me, but he isn't a 40-year-old depressive. I don't think I can do it. I know that it's a struggle for me to just get through the 40 hours a week of one job, and to keep myself together emotionally in a familiar and safe(ish) environment. It's quite likely this will be the end for me.

But, it may not be. Who knows?

In any case, call it karma or tikkun, it is the same thing: I'm a rotten human being, and always have been. I've been trying, lately, but you don't erase the karmic debt of all the years before, spent in selfishness, irresponsibility, poor decision-making. It's come home and is settling on the corpse. Take up your cross, right? God forgives sins, but not karma - He forgives them their sins while chastising them, to paraphrase the psalm.

What has made it worthwhile is the people I've found - and all too often hurt. For this, I am truly sorry, to all of you, both in blogland and in real time. Especially James and my mother. This is my fire of repentance, and I have to pass through - everyone must pass through the gates of Hell alone.

The worst is my faithlessness. For all my talk of detachment, of mutual responsibility, of self-examination, what have I really done but whine and run away? These aren't evil people garnishing me, and they have no debt to me to worry whether I survive or not, so why do I feel it so unfair that they are "doing this to me?" It's ridiculous and childish. I owe them, they are fellow-man, and they are within their legal rights. I have spent my life and my intelligence foolishly and selfishly, worse, hypocritically. Where have I reached out to help others? Where have I made anything better? Where have I truly embrace Christ in His distressing disguise? When I leave this world, what then - what will be left behind? Nothing good, I fear.

I've made my Hell and I have to burn in it. Still, I am sorry for the times I denied the hand held out in need. I am sorry for the fellowship I neglected. It's all led to this, and a realization of how really alone I am and that it's my own fault.

THIS IS NOT A SUICIDE NOTE, JUST IN CASE YOU'RE THINKING THAT. I've sat, blade in hand, and couldn't do it. I don't have the courage, too much self-grasping. But, I am at the end of my own power and wits, and, unless someone has an idea, I'm just stuck, bobbing up and down til I don't come up again.

It's pathetic, and it's my own doing.


Here's the ape, just to lighten things up.

The Fall of Empires

With the coming election and the stock-market "crash," it's been on my mind.

What I think really causes civilizations to collapse, though, is when we stop being community. I see a lot of that, right now, and have seen it for quite some time, I realize.

Here's what I keep hearing, a la "Joe the Plumber" - what does it do for ME?

I have gay friends who say they will vote Republican - when I ask why, or rather, "How could you?!" they say, "Well, the Democrats just want to give all my hard-earned money to those n*****s (or illegals, or white-trash)!"

That's what it seems to boil down to with "conservatives," particularly, is me, my, mine. I'm sure there's a good deal of that amongs liberals, as well, but more among conservative Republicans. The rest of the world can go to hell, as long as I have mine. I especially see it in "log-cabin Republicans" who want to ensure their cash-flow, so that they can live down to the stereotype of the affluent, promiscuous, frivolous homosexual, happy to do so at cost to those who want to form families and stability.

"I don't want my paycheck . . . "
"I don't want my children . . . "
"I don't want my future . . . "
. . on and on.

Well, you've forgotten. You wouldn't have "your" paycheck and the things you buy with it without the hard work and patronage of those around you, including those "shiftless s.o.b.'s" your tax money goes to. That money doesn't happen because you generated it alone, and it has no meaning without others around you.

You're short-sighted. They're "your" children, only in the sense that you birthed and/or took responsibility for caring for them. They come into contact with and influence other children. They will grow up and the rest of us have to share a society with them, formed by them, influenced constantly by them. Your children are our neighbors!

You're blind. There is no "your" future, only "our" future - unless you plan on living out I Am Legend. What you do affects us all, and you've no right to expect that the entire civilization should cater to your comfort.

You want to see the "good ol' USofA" fall like Humpty? Just keep on with "me, mine, my" - the magic chant for killing empires.

Just a Song at Twilight

Walking home, this morning, the sun still barely making a purple glow on the horizon, I looked up into the branches of the oaks that line the streets here. They were black against the sky, and their shapes and the "white space" effect touched me, delighted me, somehow. I remembered, then, how such things delighted me as a child, not because of anything, just because they were. I was fearless, then, an odd self-contained little fellow, quiet, silent even. I remember my mother taking me out when we lived in Lawrenceville, gathering (seemingly) huge fall leaves, pasting them in a book and drawing faces, ever so lightly on them, her teaching me through that to love the leaves, to see connections and shapes in them, beauty - not because of anything, just because they were. I remember being puzzled as to the outing, but delighting in it, settling into the knowledge that if she and I were doing this, it must be enough.

Years have gone by - the fearlessness has been knocked out of that little fellow, fears aplenty showing themselves in all their gruesomeness as he moved out into the world. The self-containment has become withdrawal. Now, I would be anxious to know what the lesson is if someone took me out leaf-gathering, tense, calculating, "figuring it out." Still, without the fears, it is not bravery, just fear-less-ness. Without the withdrawal, there would've been no way to know the difference between true self-containment and the mere shell/story-making/movie-script everyone makes for themselves, not knowing because they were never labeled "withdrawn."

Creation. Fall. Resurrection.

Picasso (I believe) once said, "When I was young, I could paint like Raphael. It has taken me my whole life to learn to paint like a child."

Videos of the Day

"Today in Bollywood . . . " as Louella Parsons might say.



And, for those of us who love Looney Toons, a blast from the past:

here.

Even McCain Can't Keep Them Under Control

Grandmere Mimi has linked to this video.

Watch, and think of Frankenstein's monster.

McCain's Snarling Mob at Mimi's

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!

From Rolling Stone:


The Truth About Sarah Palin

and Matt Taibbi's Mad Dog Palin (so I'm not the only one!)

Taibbi's piece is a great reflection, bitter as it must be, on the American "culture" that has allowed a Palin to rise to this point.

Two bits I love: Taibbi's description of her convention speech as "Gidget addresses the Reichstag" and this quote:

So, sure, Barack Obama might be every bit as much a slick piece of imageering as Sarah Palin. The difference is in what the image represents. The Obama image represents tolerance, intelligence, education, patience with the notion of compromise and negotiation, and a willingness to stare ugly facts right in the face, all qualities we're actually going to need in government if we're going to get out of this huge mess we're in.

Here's what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins "Country First" buttons on his man titties and chants "U-S-A! U-S-A!" at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.

And, of course, Sarah, being a caricature, is the easiest target, but let's not forget the Republicans'Make-Believe Maverick, described in these words in the article by a former War-Planner for US air forces in Europe:

"McCain says his life changed while he was in Vietnam, and he is now a different man," Dramesi says today. "But he's still the undisciplined, spoiled brat that he was when he went in."

We're in Big Trouble

Look, I don't care how you feel about Obama, he really is the lesser of two evils. While you may not like some of his ideas, he is far less likely to be able to accomplish anything too massive.

On the other hand, when we come to McCain and Palin, they are truly dangerous.

Here, and see a perfect example of demagoguery, worthy of any Third World dictators.

And, his Evita.

Read, listen and inwardly digest, folks, and - as Lewis Black has said - if this still doesn't get through to you, you may need electro-shock.

There is no other way to put it: these are would-be dictators, a madman and a mad dog . . . with lipstick. They are whipping up a crowd so that, even if they lose, they can get a good little rebellion going. By the ballot box or by the ammunition box is what they're saying, folks, no two ways about it.

Read more about Palin, the champion of one-person-one-vote right here.

Note the quote from the local paper:

Mayor Palin fails to have a firm grasp of something very simple: the truth . . . Wasilla residents have been subjected to attempts to unlawfully appoint council members, statements that have been shown to be patently untrue, unrepentant backpedalling, and incessant whining that her only enemies are the press and a few disgruntled supporters of former mayor John Stein.

and this:

The director of the Alaska Wildlife Alliance says that her motto is ‘cut, kill, dig and drill’ and that she lives ‘in the Stone Age of wildlife management, and is very opposed to utilising accepted science’. For many voters, that’s ample reason to see her as a folk hero.

The crowds chant "Sarah! Sarah! Sarah!"

Sounds a lot like Juan Peron's wife and her cult.

You saw John McCain's speech, the cadence, the body language? You saw him lash out at Tom Brokaw? Refer to Obama as "that one?" His contempt, his rage.

COMPARE




There really is only one choice this time around - sadly.

Maybe, one day we'll be a democracy, but, for now, keep us from being a dictatorship.

Francesco's Gift

The Little Poor Man
Holds empty palms outstretched,
"Here!
It's yours, always was!
I just watched over it.
A precious thing;
Don't lose it!"
I sing songs of wordless wonder.

Bennison Trial

Ecclesiastical court recommends Charles Bennison be deposed.

Liberal or conservative, no one deserves a free pass on abuse of office and failure as a pastor.

If he is not deposed, the Reasserters will be outraged, but, in this case, so will I.

Depressing and Completely In Character

Now our neo-con friends have made a movie - no, not the execrable garbage Fireproof (produced by a vehemently anti-gay church here in my own town) - but An American Carol

Read some of the user comments. It's telling. The usual bully complex of the neo-cons - tough when in numbers "We're the American majority!" and pathetic and self-pitying when stood up to "We're soooo alone in Hollywood! Everybody mistreats us!"

Feh!

And, yes, Airplane was funny . . . but it wasn't trying to "say" anything and was made to appeal to people looking to suspend their intellect and just laugh. The fact that so many of the neo-con commenters compared Carol favorably to Airplane also backs up the bully hypothesis by showing a sophomoric level of political "commentary" is about their speed.

I don't like Michael Moore, and he doesn't do what he does for any reason other than to make money and build his fame, but, at least he shines a light on real corruption, and doesn't feel the need to make up tales with ghosts and uneven comparisons. He allows the people he lampoons to carry their own petard.

The part that makes me sad is the number of actors I liked and had admired who I will now be unable to support because of their involvement in this film and the rabid neo-con streak it shows in them.

Robert Davi
Kelsey Grammer
James Woods
Leslie Nielson
Jon Voight

I'm sorry that I'll never be able to watch one of your films again.

UPDATE:

Since I have received a personal note from one of the above-mentioned actors (and, yes, I'm quite willing to accept him at his word), I want to add a few things.

NOTE: I am not calling for a boycott of these actors! They are fine actors, very accomplished and talented. The worker deserves his wages and these are excellent workers! Even if I thought I had the pull or audience to call for such a thing, I would never call for the shunning, either professionally or socially of any individual. I am sure that they are decent, likeable people with good intentions, as well.

What I am stating here is my profound disappointment, even heartbreak, over seeing actors that I admire and follow actively supporting a regime, a world-outlook, which harms me and mine, which minimizes my humanity, strips me of my dignity and leaves me alone and threatened. Mr. Davi, you speak of feeling isolated in Hollywood . . . imagine how it would be to feel isolated, hated and threatened, physically as well as professionally in relation to your entire nation. I'm afraid that, actually, I am extremely conservative with a liberal outlook, and part of that conservativism is a deep distrust of my fellow man when in groups. I believe in the slippery slope, and when my most conservative acquaintances tell me that forced therapy, concentration camps, secret police, the illegalization of protest could never happen here, I tell them "It hasn't happened yet."

SECOND: I see in my writing that I have minimized the concern and alienation that these artists feel in their own community, and, as I despise it when I see others engage in such dismissals, I apologize. It was out of line and if you feel insecure, that is a call for my compassion, not my sarcasm.

Contemplation

Screen flickers behind eyes,
Films of terror and glory.
Mind writing poetry -
How clever I am!
Cat puts head on my knee,
Purrs.

Just this.

Student Loans and Really Enough About Me

There's a lot of talk right now about debt and the problems of debt repayment, etc.

Well, one of the things they don't talk about is student loans.

Here is my advice to anyone considering to go to school on student loans:

DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES TAKE OUT A STUDENT LOAN!!!!

Here's why -- if you have a homeowner's loan, they can repossess your home. Debt paid. If you have an unsecured loan, you can declare bankruptcy. Debt paid.

If you have a student loan, the reality is, bankruptcy or not, home or not, whatever or not -- they will never let you go. If you cannot pay, they will still garnish your wages - administrative garnishment - under "national standards" at so ridiculous an amount that no one could possibly meet them - unless they had enough to pay already.

That's right. They don't care what you make, but how much they think you ought to spend in a crazy theoretical world.

In addition, you will be given a "grace period" to apply for a "hearing" that doesn't possibly give you enough time to gather the bills and invoices they want and figure the absurdly detailed amounts they want to know about in the time of the "grace period."

The reality of "don't have enough" and "working poor" and "emotionally disabled" means nothing. They'll take it anyway. It's the modern-day equivalent of debtor's prison. You. Have. No. Hope.

In short, we're in a tanking economy, the job market is ever-changing and ever unstable, our public representatives are removed from us and insulated by money - even insulated from being voted out.

You won't win.

How do I know? Because it's what I'm going through now, and the very real, very calm reality of suicide as necessity is rising before me.

I'm not mewling, wailing, self-pitying -- I'm just warning. It's not a cry for help, since none can help. I don't want to die, but there really is no option. No money. No help. It's a calm thought, though terrifying. I'm not despairing, simply looking realistically at what I can do, once the "appeals" have failed, as I fear they will.

Do not allow yourself to fall into this. Don't allow your children to come to this.

Hildegarde of Bingen

As usual, it took a visit to Grandmere Mimi to remind me to acknowledge a saint's day, even though I've said the saint's collect twice today.

So, here's my favorite icon of Hildegard:

Here's my favorite film depiction of Hildegard, played by Patricia Routledge (aka: Hyacinth Bucket):

Another Response!

This one is an actual letter from Bp. Shaw of Massachusetts - a gentleman I had the great honor of meeting during a stay at the SSJE monastery in Boston.

Dear Mr. Brunson:

Thank you for your letter of August 19 concerning your views on the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lambeth Conference. I will certainly consider what you have said as we move forward in our discussions specifically at the House of Bishops meeting in September.

Please know of my prayers for you.

Faithfully yours,

M. Thomas Shaw, SSJE

Thank you Bishop Shaw, and my prayers are with you and the HoB, as well.

Your Lab Can Fetch? HA!!!!

Website Recommendation

I received, out of the blue, a catalog called Monastery Greetings

It is wonderful!

It brings together, in one "clearing house," so-to-speak, various Christian monastic traditions and products. Though the RC orders comprise the lion's share of the catalog, both Orthodox and Episcopal are represented, as well.

Take a look!

I TOLD you what this was about!

It is, indeed, about racism and imperialism - just reversed.

It's a sad cycle of ignorance - they did it to us, so we hate them back and will do it to them.

MadPriest has the whole story here from the Sunday Sun concerning a meeting of Nigerian clergy and their unqualified approbation of "Big Pete" Akinola.

Here is my favorite quote:

Why did white people get involved in the gay issue?
They are very funny people. They keep animals as pets. They kiss animals and carry them like humans. As for their human level, I don’t know what to say, but their Christian level is another thing. They are not good Christians. This is why they are re-evangelizing them. We have our ministers in Britain, America and all parts of the world who are re-evangelizing the white people.

They Always Talk About Their Numbers, So . . .

Just a little PR idea for them.

AN IMPORTANT ELECTION-SEASON ANNOUNCEMENT

This was posted by IT, a respected, measured and highly intelligent poster in various blogs, who, from my experience, is given neither to hyperbole or rash rumor-mongering:

Another example of egregious behavior.
here's a special election for Senator in Mississippi, filling the seat that until recently was held for-freakin'-ever by Senate fixture Trent Lott. The newly appointed Republican interim Senator is facing a formidable Democratic challenger, and may in fact lose.

So what does Republican Gov. Haley Barbour (the former RNC chair) and the Republican Secretary of State do? They shuffle the placement of the race on the ballot in order to bury it. They put it last, under all the local and minor races, things like school board races and so on, so that it's difficult to find. They do their best to hide it, knowing that it will lower the response rate and help the Republican incumbent.

The problem is, it's plainly illegal. It's not "arguably" illegal, or "a little" illegal. It's just plain illegal.

In otherwords to reduce the likelihood that people will vote for the Democrat, the Republicans will try to "hide" the election. But the LAW REQUIRES Federal elections are at the top of the ballot.

This is CORRUPTION, people. Election-stealing LIES AND CORRUPTION.

The commenter goes on,
This isn't "political hardball", or "an aggressive campaign strategy", or any of those other rancid euphemisms that we've taken to using in our national discourse instead of calling corruption out as corruption. Haley Barbour is doing an illegal thing because he thinks he can, and because doing an illegal thing will help his Party.

More at Daily Kos

Are you outraged yet???? THees people may WIN ifyou aren't.

And, as I've said elsewhere, if McCain wins, The Handmaid's Tale will become reality.

At First I Felt Bad

Listening to yesterday's reading ". . . if your brother won't even listen to the church . . . " I mean, the church in terms of the AC has said "moratoria."

Then I remembered:

We did do what the church asked. We listened to the church. We were gracious and accomodating to the Reasserters in our midst.

In return, we were still ostracized, victimized, brutalized and villified -- by our "brothers."

Now, as most of you know, at most times I'm fairly suicidal, at current, moreso than usual, but the "loving words" of our good christian "brothers and sisters" makes me want to cut my wrists and stand in the middle of the street laughing with joy that I'll be off this planet soon. Really . . . that's what Reasserters and Rowan Williams put into my mind.


Conclusion:

These are NOT our brothers and sisters - christian or otherwise - and the AC is no longer "church" in any sense of the word.

Allright, Now Give Some Help!!!!

Walking With Integrity is asking people to email their bishops and help pull them out of the spin placed on the reprehensible Lambeth "Conference" by Rowan Williams.

Walking With Integrity has excellent suggestions, as well, for "reaching" your bishop. It's been over a week, I gave my email in the letter, and Bp. Whalon is the only one I've had a response from. Even if you don't feel you have much to say, it is important that you say it to your bishop! Don't let this Archbishop of Canterbury cut our bishops off from us!

I wrote, printed, mailed some twenty letters, so you can send an email, and with better chances of response than I have. It is vital that our bishops know that they are not alone, and are not given carte blanche!

So It's Not Just This American's Paranoia

From The Modern Churchpeople's Union, this report from a 72-year-old volunteer.

This part really stood out to me:

For me personally this was the third Lambeth conference, which I had attended in one capacity or another. The greatest difference was the lack of openness and the security. The press were not allowed to go to worship or plenaries, which is most unusual at international gatherings. We had to go to endless trouble to obtain passes. These were deemed essential for safety but when we arrived and not all were ready we were told that we did not really need them and they were too expensive to do more as they cost £4 each! I stood my ground and insisted we had them. People actually needed them if they wished to eat in the one restaurant where we were allowed to go. I am convinced that the passes had nothing at all to do with Islamic terrorists but were aimed at keeping gay people, women and yes- liberal theologians away from bishops!

Wow. So it isn't just our American pomposity and self-importance that makes things seem so lacking in transparency, egalitarianism and charity.

An Answer

Dear Mr Brunson,


Thank you very much for your note. I am sorry that I have disappointed you.


As you know, The Episcopal Church has not justified our position in any official statement. The traditional teaching on sex in marriage, for instance, remains unchanged. There are no official rites of same-sex blessings, which means there is no official teaching concerning them. The HOB has never discussed homosexuality in any theological form, other than the reactionary meeting of Port St. Lucie 1977. Each diocese has its own policy, as you know, which means of course that gay clergy cannot exercise ministry in certain areas. Which is ridiculous--who am I as bishop to have "my policy" on such an important matter? And yet I get letters routinely, asking what it is. (Answer: I want only good priests, come whence they may, be who they are.)


The point I am trying to make is that there needs to be a willingness from the whole Communion to find a way forward, or else we will simply be flinging slogans at each other for the next 100 years. Part of that work starts at home, and we need to do it with regard to our own context first. Much of it needs to be done elsewhere, beginning with the Archbishop of Canterbury. But the overall perspective must be global, if indeed justice for gay people is to be had. Furthermore, there needs to be more than mere justice--there needs to be love, as we have been commanded.


Perhaps we will simply stay where we are as a Communion--with justice for none and even less love. But that is unacceptable, for all kinds of reasons, and I intend to continue to speak out as I have been doing.


With respect to the open letter to the House of Bishops, I can assure you that none of your bishops wishes to act outside our polity--except those wishing to affiliate with other provinces, of course.


With gratitude for your efforts,


Yours in Christ,


Pierre Whalon





Le 20 août 08 à 06:12, Mark Brunson a écrit :


Rt. Reverend, Sir,

It was with *profoundest* disappointment that I read your recent essay entitled 'On Polygamy, Homosexuality, and Generosity' published on Anglicans Online Essays.

I'm a celibate homosexual, sir, and I simply cannot comprehend what it is you think you are doing - all of you in the episcopacy - to your homosexual brothers and sisters in Christ. I'm celibate by choice and *by gift*, sir, not by some misguided notion of 'generosity,' because it was God's generosity that gave us our sexuality. It was God's choice, as well, that non-celibate gays be called to the ordained clergy . . . unless you are willing to state, publicly, that our discernment to the ordained clergy is so fatally flawed that it would completely override God's Will in the whole affair.

In short, Rt. Reverend sir, I would like to know, frankly and fully, where the generosity lay in the moratorium on ordination of gays. It seems to be the bishops calling for this, and, I want to know, just what it is YOU are being so generous with. What do you lose? Will you renounce your orders in solidarity with your gay brethren? Will you become more active - dare we use the word 'bold' - in promoting this equality? What will you risk, sir? Where is *your* generosity in all this?

What I see, and what most of us are seeing, right now, is a group of privileged and pastorally-distant people laying burdens on gays and gay-supportive clergy and laypeople until they break! Yes, sir, this is what you are doing.

Do you honestly think that the people we're talking about will accept *any* theologicaly justification, regardless of Scriptural reference? You're right, it has been justified Scripturally -- and very publicly, and very transparently and we have been ignored, dismissed, vilified. You want justification? You want an understanding of theology? Ask the people in the pews who really live this. Stop excluding the gay people you talk about and claiming its someone else's fault. Be a leader, sir, or simply admit we queers don't matter to you.

I have attached a copy of a letter I've sent to several members of our House of Bishops, and I would like you to read it. We've done you the courtesy of hearing you out, and I would ask you do the same.

I await, as will those who see this letter on my blog, your reply.

Yours In Christ,

Mark Brunson

Here is Bp. Whalon's answer to my first email. He has since answered a second.

What I hear is a sensible, decent man with a complete disconnect.

He is working very hard to relocate some thousands of Iraqi refugees in France, after the US refused them. He is concerned with us (and, by the way, though I included my email on the letter, he's the only bishop that's responded to me) and our struggle. No doubt, he is "in the trenches," involved in a massive and dramatic undertaking.

And that's the point.

Massive and dramatic undertakings are just as outside the reality of TEC's day-to-day life as lived in its laypeople and parish clergy as the assertion that bishops can't be asked to make an either/or decision. The real world isn't divided into those who need help and those who don't . . . we all need help, and when we need it, all help is desperately needed. We don't have victims and saviors, we're all victims and helping one another. What this disconnect ignores is that the desperate person running and hiding for their life in the Sudan or Iraq cannot receive the help they need if the people they are looking to don't feel secure themselves -- if we feel our lives don't matter, our opinion doesn't matter, then why would we feel our help matters? There's also the reality that we are fallible human beings, and it's very hard to work up compassion and sympathy for those who, in turn, show none. This is the disconnect. Our bishops seem to live in a Platonic world, surrounded by ideals, rather than recognizing the world around them -- a world that is about to really shock them.

Here's the thing, are we wealthier, per capita, than people elsewhere? Yes. But we don't live elsewhere . . . we Americans, we Westerners, live here. We aren't wealthy here, where we really live, and that's the reality. Are we in constant danger of having our houses pulled down, or the government coming in and shooting us or dispossessing us because of our sexuality or religion? No. Yet we wouldn't be able to survive those hardships, because they are not our reality, and our reality is that we are just as devastated when we lose our friendships, family, jobs, voice . . . group humanity. Poverty is poverty and loss of humanity is loss of humanity. And loss of life. How many of my friends or acquaintances have I seen who, having heard time and again they are sinful beasts or their pain just isn't that important, have lost hope and lived for drugs, parties, sex and wound up dead, or worse? One would be too many.

You can't save the World, but you can save one person, and they another and another. But no one will be saved if that first. one. person. is not saved, however petty their concerns may seem in light of others. If this communion is really about relationality, then that's the lesson we have to learn. One to one is the only real relationality.

More Insanity

Bp. Pierre Whalon has written this essay on Anglicans Online.

Now, up to this point, I've always thought of Bp. Whalon as being a wonderful combination of level-headed and inclusive, but he's wholly fallen into the trap - largely a PR trap - that was set up at Lambeth by Deng Bul: It's all those nasty queers and their supporters' fault that Christians in Muslim countries have trouble.

An astounding claim, but even more astounding that it has been bought into by otherwise intelligent and sane people.

Now, I have no doubt that that is one of many excuses used by Islamic fundamentalists to justify abominable and barbaric acts, to lower themselves to the level of animals, but to think that removing every trace of "gay" from Christianity would make a bit of difference in that is, well, naive to the point of stupidity. They won't change their violence and brutishness because they are fundamentalists, just like Christian fundamentalists who won't change because it was never about anyone or anything but them.

Which is another remarkable bit of naivete in Bp. Whalon's essay: the assumption that one could say or do anything, upon any basis, which would change the fundamentalist mindset. It won't. This is not a point of debate, but proven again and again; just look at the total rejection of 40 years' worth of psychological and biological study by the pro-Proposition-8 fundamentalists here. Then, Bp. Whalon talks about having this conversation in public and transparently. WHAT HAVE WE BEEN DOING?! Even us dumb ol' laypeople can give you solid reasons, based on our reading of Scripture and understanding of Tradition with which we arrived at our conclusions -- usually more clearly than your average theologian . . . or bishop.
These conversations have been going on very transparently and very publicly for decades! Enough, Bp. Whalon. The only people claiming that it hasn't been discussed to death and needs better justification are those who simply say, "Nope. Uh-uh! Don't believe it!" What gobsmacked me was Bp. Whalon's dismissal of psychology and biology!

WHAT?!

What the devil - and I mean DEVIL - is going on in a mind like that? Has our episcopacy really been this infected by some contagious madness from the Reasserters? Has some evil force been given sway over our leadership? Or, is it just not PC enough, not media-friendly enough to say, out loud, "We sympathize with the problems in Sudan, etc., but we have a flock to care for here, as well, regardless of how white or middle-class they may be and we will live up to those committments?"

So, I've emailed Bp. Whalon, sent him a copy of my letter, and explained that I await his answer -- as do the people who may read my blog.

UPDATE

The letters all went out Saturday.

The Good Part About Supply Priests

We've had several supply priests since Fr. Bullion retired at the end of June, and, by far, the two best sermons have been from female priests - The Rev. Joy Fisher and Sr. Elena Thompson, OP.

The Rev. Fisher (I tend to think "Mother Fisher" like "Father Bullion," but some find it awkward) is a lawyer, as well, and brings the passionate delivery of an attorney to her sermons, a depth of earnestness, conviction and authority which I find incredible! She delivered a sermon on the Parable of the Sower that has really caused me to change a lot of my habits and perceptions.

Sr. Elena is brilliant, as well. In here is a depth of scholarship and spiritual introspection that combined to make a sermon event! She delivered such a stirring sermon on the multiple levels of prayer, on its binding effect communally, both horizontally and vertically - each other and God - and it was delivered in a voice and expression of complete joy and openness.

The men (but for the one retired priest who's joined our parish) have been . . . indifferent. We had a young priest from another parish in town, and he has that problem of recent seminarians; he is undoubtedly a brilliant young man, and much given to deep scholarship, but, somehow, it's not yet his own. He hasn't integrated it as faith and conviction, but holds it in the earnest "otherness" of the young and untried. I have great hope in him, though, because, in addition to brilliance, he radiates warmth and real compassion.

I'm A Rabble Rouser!

I actually sent a letter to my vestry, seriously recommending (that's about as close as I can get to demanding) that our parish make clear that none of our money to the diocese is to go to the Lambeth Conference. I also added that, if the vestry felt they could not do this in our time between rectors, that they please publish my letter in our parish newsletter as a personal appeal to our parishioners to specifically designate that their offerings are not to go to support the Lambeth Conference.

Please, Please Go and Read This

I get so wrapped up in the power struggles in the AC, I forget that there are far more immediate issues of life and death amongst us. I feel shame for that, as I should.

Doxy has covered it beautifully in in this post and corresponding links on the rise and reasons for that rise of AIDS right here.

The truth is, while I get so wrapped up in gays and lesbians being used as a distraction and a whipping-boy for the grave - perhaps insoluble problems - of the world at large, there are greater concerns out there, and deeper work than the problems of gay marriage.

This doesn't mean that this is no longer my fight - by the very fact of my being gay, it is - but it means that we must look beyond form to the very depths of the hate, the secrecy, the self-loathing and shame that is generated by, and at the same time feeds, the religious and social bigotry, and recognize this bigotry extends to so many other aspects of life, besides race, gender, orientation, and is within even the best of us.

I consider my sexuality to be a blessing in this; as I've said before, I am not a liberal, but a conservative with a liberal outlook. I am deeply conservative. Were it not for my sexuality - my being in a minority - I would never have looked at the topic of bigotry. But for my sexuality, there go I as Venables, or Duncan or, God forbid, Akinola. My sexuality allowed me to become aware of bigotry - the pervasive ignorance that breeds in unquestioned assumptions known as "common sense" in the secular and "plain reading of the Bible" in religious circles.

Yet, I must keep in mind that I - a white male - am in a majority, as well, and use that aspect of myself to help liberate from all ignorance and bigotry.

Must Read!

The wonderful Katie Sherrod has some very interesting information on Bp. Iker and his machinations, here.

Please do read.

All Right, Then . . .

. . I guess I'll just have to get my own names!

Maybe Santa Chiara will look in her television in help. :D

All Right, I'll Send It

Thank you all who've commented on the letter. I've been really torn as to whether or not to actually send it, and you've decided me. Perhaps it will do some good.


Now, to whom should I send it?

The obvious ones to me are:

The Presiding Bishop
Henry Louttit of Georgia Diocese
J. Neil Alexander of Atlanta Diocese
Bishops Bruno and Andrus


But that's all I have -- the PB for obvious reasons; Henry, because he is my bishop, and, though he'll likely disregard it, and is retiring, I owe him that much as my bishop and a decent man; Bishop Alexander because he's the other Georgia diocese, and has written (and one assumes profited from) his journey in understanding of homosexuality and seems unwilling to actually extend further than that; Bishops Bruno and Andrus because they should know we appreciate their having had the courage to speak out in defiance of Williams' scheme.

Who else? I don't want to pummel our allies in the HoB, but I don't see much to be gained from writing to the likes of Iker or Lawrence. I will, however, be very willing to listen to your suggestions.

The Letter to the Bishops

This is the message I've composed in response to FS's request/question.

Though I list no names, if I am going to claim the backing of others, I would like your comments and corrections on this very rough draft, which I've composed, mostly on the fly. There are parts I've felt are too soft, others too harsh, but we're never the best critic of our own work.



This has been written at the request of others, who, seeing my concerns on my blog, felt that these concerns needed to be shared with our own ecclesial leadership. Though I cannot claim to speak for a majority or even many, I believe that there are some righteous concerns to be addressed to our bishops. To that end, I am sending this letter to a few of The Episcopal Church’s bishops, in the hopes that it will generate at least some response, perhaps discussion in the larger national church, and might be shared amongst the bishops in our church.

First, let me say that many of us feel that the recent Lambeth Conference has underscored, and brought to a head, many basic problems in our church as it relates to the Anglican Communion, and as it relates to the egalitarian nature of our own church. What has now become clear is that our bishops are in an untenable position, requiring maintenance of both the unity of the Anglican Communion and the unity of the Episcopal Church. Quite simply put, this is no longer possible.

The punitive and biased words and actions of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, make it clear that he has neither respect nor patience for our democratic process in the American church. To this end, he proposes a curial model for the Anglican Communion which will place The Episcopal Church under the control, however indirectly, of bodies outside our provincial polity and essentially hostile to that polity. To opt for such a curial – or, as the Archbishop would have it, “covenantal” model – would be a betrayal of The Episcopal Church and those for whom you are accountable and to whom you are accountable.

Let me explain what I mean by this accountability. We are all – by choice – members of a church that operates on a hierarchical model. To this end, it is recognized that a bishop has a particular charism and a mandate to leadership. Without this realization, we would simply be one among many republican representative models readily available in the secular world. We accept that Grace is given in an outpouring to allow this leadership function. However, this is not leadership as is envisioned in the entirely authoritarian structure of the Middle Ages, nor that provided by the models of, say, the Church of England, in which a higher political authority is entirely responsible for the appointment of such a figure. The model envisioned in The Episcopal Church and set forth clearly in the ordination service, is rather one of a leader elevated from among the people, set apart, but not above. The ordination service reiterates this in the use of expressions such as “fellow presbyters,” “your people,” and, even asking the congregation “Is it your will that we ordain . . . ?” The bishop is a leader, but in the sense of a sibling, not a parent, understood to be equally fallible and equally in need of seeking counsel, and is enjoined to seek counsel from his/her “fellow presbyters” – priests, and all are, by virtue of baptism, called to the royal priesthood. In short, this form of episcopacy is not the mere managerial model offered by other churches, but a pastoral position which requires mutual accountability and humility – a reciprocity that requires both bishop and people – a people sanctified in baptism as priests themselves - recognize their interdependence, mutual accountability and mutual fallibility, and seek one another’s counsel.

The “covenantal” model that we are seeing is anathema to this very understanding! A primatial council, with the authority to set the bar of acceptability, which requires episcopal councils to decide membership is necessarily exclusive of the laity, priesthood, and diaconate, and, as such, hostile toward our polity and our charism. If you hand off this power to direct our church to a council of those disinterested and incapable of making truly pastoral decisions, you will, in your quest for unity, sacrifice The Episcopal Church, your diocese, the very people who trusted and elevated you. You will have sold your ecclesial heritage for a mess of pottage. Even were you to lose but a handful of individuals from TEC, and, quite possibly, from the very Church of Christ itself, that will be the breaking of The Episcopal Church. As it is, you surely realize that you will lose far more than that handful, and will inevitably drive a wedge between you and the very people of The Episcopal Church. The question is a painful one for you, and I regret you have to ask it, but, simply put, will you serve the idea of the Anglican Communion, or will you serve the people to whom you vowed service, those who trusted you to lead and, more, to help them?

This Lambeth Conference has also made clear to us something which is painful to say, perhaps dangerous to say, but which must be said, clearly, lovingly, and with the voice of prophetic witness: At this conference, you have grievously wounded and failed those who were entrusted to you.

You were called, in your ordination, to “. . boldly proclaim and interpret the Gospel of Christ, enlightening minds and stirring up the conscience of your people . . .” In what way can you be said to have boldly given forth the Good News as received and interpreted by you, or The Episcopal Church, at this conference by acting the hangdog over our desire for justice and inclusion? When you left your brother bishop, Gene Robinson, outside the gates, you left out, not just gays and lesbians, but the very church you represented – all of your brothers and sisters. When you sat in silence as our vision and our understanding was reviled and misrepresented, even by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself, do you not realize that your bloodless and passionless regard for your people deprived you of the right to claim prophetic or apostolic authority? In what way did you “support all baptized people in their gifts and ministries” by downplaying the works and gifts of others, the zeal and compassion shown by those entrusted to you? How were you “merciful to all, show[ing] compassion to the poor and strangers, and defend[ing] those who have no helper” by offering the sacrifice of the marginalized in secret counsel? Your desire – however earnest and well-intentioned – of cutting off the laity, priesthood and diaconate from your deliberations and discussions were, in the end, disastrous. It allowed the media to run wild, it generated “rumors of war” that would have been humorous, were it not that each and every one has left a scar or open wound on a soul somewhere.
This is how the current situation appears to us, and, frankly, you show no signs of confiding further in us, nor of seeking counsel from us. So, the question is now how – or if – you will be faithful to your vows as bishops in this, The Episcopal Church.

I – we – thank you for your time and your consideration. Keep in mind that these things are written from wounded and yearning hearts which love you, oh, so dearly, and which wait to see if they are a part of their own church, or merely unnoticed grist in the ecclesial mill.

Your response will ring through generations to come.

Yours In Christ,



Mark ******(personal info removed on advice)

Bishops

While I want to continue our discussions of the nature of a bishop, I also think there are some common threads coming out:

In short, I'm not the only one who believes a bishop is accountable; that episcopacy is something "done to" the laity.

Obviously, a bishop is more than mere administrator, upper management in the diocesan "branch office," just as priesthood is more than simply a "career choice." Obviously, there must be some recognition of a bishop's ability to govern and lead wisely, or we would simply have a congregational polity. To that end, there is a degree of submission and obedience expected from the laity, and rightly so. Among the many sound bites and cliches from the Reasserters, they have - inadvertantly, I imagine - given some truth; Truth is not decided by vote.

Among the many charges laid on a bishop, according to the BCP's ordination service, is the interpretation of the Gospel. This is important, I believe, because the word is not interpretation of "Scripture," but of "the Gospel" - the Good News. A bishop, in his/her leadership role, is to interpret what exactly the Good News is. This gives a great deal of authority to a bishop, but - and this is also very important - the same ordination holds the bishop in a remarkable position of accountability, not to institutional church, but to the sovereignty of Christ and the well-being of his/her people.



Some bishops - particularly "Windsor bishops" - have made a great deal of the role of the bishop in guarding the unity of "the Church," but this pales in comparison with the sheer number of times a bishop is mentioned as "chief priest," "fellow presbyter," to "follow Him who came, not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as ransom for many." The bishop, while not required to take counsel with the laity, is required to "support all baptized people in their gifts and ministries, nourish them from the riches of God's grace . . .," to take counsel with his/her "fellow presbyters" - and we are all of the Royal Priesthood, by Grace. Finally, and most egregiously ignored by most of our bishops, is this:

"Will you boldly proclaim and interpret the Gospel of Christ, enlightening the minds and stirring up the conscience of your people?" (emphases mine)

This pastoral role - responsibility to actual people, to an actual lived-out gospel - is mentioned, enjoined, emphasized again and again, while the duty of "unity" is mentioned, as a charge, perhaps twice or three times, and not, then, to any sort of ecclesial structure, but to "The Church of God."

I may be wrong, and accept that I may be, but it seems to me that the great majority of bishops - ours, CofE's, Nigeria's, Uganda's, Sudan's, even beyond to RC and perhaps the various Orthodox bishops - are completely falling down in this, having traded their role as pastor and presbyter for that of management, operations executive. Perhaps the loss of pastorship(sic) in our episcopacy is the reason for our increasing irrelevance and lack of clear and attractive Spirit.

Please, give me your views.