October, 2004 Calendar In This Issue: Evangelist Critiques Peers Sit, Stand, or Kneel? Spirituality and Religion All Things New: A Reflection on the Exodus to Uganda Season of Mists and Mellow Fruitfulness

by The Rev. Hartshorn Murphy

Recently, the press has delighted in reporting the news of three "breakaway" congregations in the Diocese of Los Angeles which have sought refuge in the Anglican Diocese of Uganda in protest to the "apostasy" of the American Episcopal Church in ordaining an openly gay man in a long term committed relationship, to the Episcopacy in New Hampshire. The secondary, but related precipitating factor, they would claim, is the fact that our diocesan bishop, Jon Bruno, presided at a same-sex commitment ceremony for Mark Thompson and his partner for 20 years, the Rev. Dr. Malcolm Boyd, former priest associate here at St. Augustine's.

Officially, the clergy and Vestry leadership of these 3 parishes: St. David's, North Hollywood; St. James, Newport Beach; and All Saints', Long Beach have voted to leave the Diocese of Los Angeles and the ECUSA (Episcopal Church U.S.A.) and to place themselves under the authority of the Diocese of Uganda and its Bishop, who has been the most outspoken critic of the American Church in the worldwide Anglican community. It was a provocative decision.

Bishop Bruno asked these churches to rescind their actions and return to the fold. It was a time certain invitation which will expire in 6 months, at which time the clergy involved may be deposed. Through their attorney, they have responded by rejecting the pastoral and spiritual authority of this Bishop and asserting the protection of their "canonical residence" in the Diocese of Uganda; the Bishop of Uganda has warned Bishop Bruno to "lay off his clergy." Our family fight has become an international incident.

This stalemate will surely end up in court. The breakaway churches argue that they simply want to worship God in their churches in peace. It sounds reasonable. After all, if this Bishop won't do, why not get another one? Perhaps the best prism through which to look at all of this is one of "dating." Relationships - even "going steady" - don't always work out, so why not a courtship with Uganda?

The problem is that it simply is not our polity.

Church Polity 101: The Episcopal Church is not a Congregationalist federation but is rather a hierarchical institution. Historically, we have claimed that the basic unit of the Church is not the congregation but is the Diocese. As such, the ministry of the presbyters (priests) is an extension of the Bishop's ministry. For example: historically, the sacrament of baptism was performed by bishops. As the Church Catholic grew ever larger, citizens of the Empire were dying without benefit of baptism which the Church taught was necessary for salvation. As a practical solution, the authority to baptism was delegated to parish priests and the sacrament of confirmation (to "make firm") was created by which the Bishop, making his visitation months and even years later, would "complete and affirm" the baptisms of his priests. To symbolize the connection between the Bishop's ministry and that of his priests, a custom evolved by which acolytes on horseback would take a fragment of the Eucharistic bread from the Bishop's Mass celebrated early on Sunday morning and ride in haste to the parishes throughout the Diocese. That fragment was then dropped into the chalice as a symbol of the unity of the Church "scattered but not broken" and also symbolizing that this mass in the parish was an extension of the Bishop's Mass in the Cathedral. Today, many priests deposit a small piece of the priest's host (wafer) into the chalice at the breaking of the bread. We once said: ecce episcopi, ecce ecclesia (where the bishop is, there is the church) at least, I recall it that way. The very name of this denomination - "Episcopal" - affirms the centrality of Bishops. Indeed, in this Church the Bishop is often referred to as the "ordinary," not because he or she is not exceptional but because it is "ordinary" to have but one Bishop as chief pastor and symbol of organic unity. To claim a pastoral relationship with another Bishop from another Diocese (indeed another continent) is at best bizarre.

Edifice Complexes: These churches assert a claim on their buildings. After all, they suggest, we built them and maintain them. Well, not exactly. Hear an excerpt from our official church history:

"The first Episcopal service in the city of Santa Monica was held on April 15, 1876 in a rented hall, but it was not until about November of 1885 that services were regularly scheduled and a Sunday school organized…Through the early 80's, Episcopalians of the lagging community struggled to raise enough money for a church, but without success. Then, in 1885, Bishop Kip of California appointed the Rev. Henry Scott Jeffries priest-in-charge of the Santa Monica mission …the congregation was in a happy mood that Sunday in June 1887 as workmen mortared in the cornerstone of the building destined to become Santa Monica's oldest church building."

Virtually all churches are legacies. (Newport Beach mission 1946, Long Beach mission 1925, North Hollywood mission 1942.) We stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before; whose sacrifice and dedication caused the buildings we enjoy to be built. Virtually all Episcopal churches began as either a diocesan mission - in which case a group of Episcopalians in a town where there is no Episcopal church approached the Diocese and its Bishop for permission to start a congregation and typically for money to buy land and erect the first building - or a parochial mission - in which case, a parish provides the support (St. Aidan's in Malibu, for example, was a parochial mission begun by St. Augustine's).

For a 12 member Vestry and a priest to vote to leave the Diocese and take their buildings and grounds with them as "theirs," ignores a long history of generosity of generations which preceded them. We hold these buildings in trust - the trust of those who preceded us and in trust for those who will succeed us.

The courts may not agree. When four churches left the Diocese of Los Angeles over the scandal of the ordination of women in the 1970's, one was retained by the Diocese on a technicality and three were lost by the ruling of a judge who analogized the Episcopal Church to a "McDonald franchise."

But if dissolution of a business is not the right model to guide us, what else is there? Three other images come to mind.

Divorce: The Church is often seen as a family. As such, if one spouse in the family decides to get a divorce (think of the midlife crisis dad with a new trophy wife/bishop), then typically the divorcing dad who decides to abandon his family moves out of the house, leaving the assets of home and hearth to support the wife and children he has recklessly and freely chosen to leave behind for a new life. If the Rectors of these parishes wish to minister in Uganda, by all means resign and go. But faithlessness should not be rewarded.

Runaway Adolescents: Kids run away from home for a variety of reasons. Many do so because they can not accept the discipline of their family of origin. Most come back home when, like the prodigal son, they come to their senses. But many never do - they simply make a life on their own terms. Should the clergy and even most of the members of these congregations wish to start a new church - say the Ugandan Anglican Church - in their cities, by all means do so. I'm sure the Bishop of Uganda will gladly forward the funds for a fresh start.

A Death in the Family: Perhaps this is the most poignant of all images. Most families that don't divorce break up through the death of one of the spouses. It is a sadness but it is also a fact of life. In some cultures, when there is an irreparable break in a relationship, one says to another: "You are dead to me." If this is the most honest assessment - that the clergy and at least some of the laity of these churches have "died" to the Episcopal Church, then we need to grieve the loss and let them go. (In this case, by going to another denomination which more nearly fits their theology). But it is unseemly for ghosts to inhabit the homes they formerly enjoyed in life.

Of course, where we are now is a Trial Separation. They rarely lead to reconciliation without a great deal of hard work. They never work when one partner is unwilling to commit to that work. Bishop Bruno has repeatedly affirmed his willingness to work toward restoration but without an encouraging response in kind.

The "ecclesiastical divorce court" will need to figure this out (sadly in reality, the civil, secular courts) and hopefully with a view towards what is best for the "children" - those Episcopalians of the generation not yet born.

Taking the Long View: It's important to remember that we've been here before. When General Convention opened ordination to the priesthood and Episcopate to women, critics predicted that half the church would "leave for Rome." Serving in the "Biretta Belt" (the northern Midwest dioceses are particularly "Anglo-catholic" in their identity), I experienced the Bishop of Milwaukee refusing to celebrate the Mass at St. Mary's Convent because they had invited an ordained woman from the East to celebrate there and thus, in his view, the Altar was desecrated. When the faculty of Nashotah House Seminary ruled that they saw no "theological impediment" to the ordination of women, the Bishop henceforth refused to attend graduation ceremonies at that Seminary. (He was, at that time, chairman of the board of directors). Herein lies the lesson: these people, by their actions, choose to isolate themselves more and more and most often, time and circumstances passes them by.

The Chicago Solution: There is another option: which is to honor ones conscience but to stay in relationship. For example: in the Diocese of Chicago in the late 1970's, Diocesan Bishop Jim Montgomery could not accept, in good conscience, the ordination of women. He would never personally lay hands on a woman sacramentally in ordination. But his Suffragan Bishop could. Bishop Primo ordained women in Chicago; Bishop Montgomery stayed home. Both their individual consciences were acknowledged and honored.

You don't like openly gay clergy, don't Call (hire) them. You don't believe in same-sex unions, don't do them. But don't presume to speak for all of us or to dictate the consciences of others.

A Comprehensive Church: Ultimately, the genesis of all this conflict may be in the inability of these churches to live in the ambiguity of Anglicanism. We are, firstly, a "comprehensive church." Historically, this has meant that this is a "big tent church" that has accepted within its family: evangelicals, Anglo Catholics, rationalists, traditionalists, mystics, social activists etc. But such diversity is rarely experienced in individual parishes. It is in the "basic unity" of the Diocese that such diversity is incarnated.

In our newcomer's class, I routinely tell people that "if this is not the parish for you, we are happy to refer you to another church which might more closely fit your spirituality." And it works two ways. Some years ago, a lesbian couple who attended All Saints, Beverly Hills, an evangelical parish, asked their Rector to perform a commitment ceremony for them. She refused because that is not where she or that parish is - but in doing so, she referred them willingly to St. Augustine's, where they were able to celebrate their love publicly and sacramentally and then return, without judgment, to All Saints. That's Anglican comprehensiveness.

Secondly, as a church we affirm what Richard Hooker (1554-1600) called a "3-legged stool" in which truth emerges from a dialogue between 3 sources of authority: scripture, reason and tradition (teaching). It's messy because given our cultural contexts; we may read and interpret the scriptures quite differently from a person in Africa or the Far East. But simplistic and literalistic biblical interpretations uninformed by reason (scholarship and experience, including the spiritual witness of contemporary gay and lesbian persons) and teaching (including the teachings of the General Convention), are not reflective of Anglican identity and ethos in its fullness.

In rejecting, by these provocative actions, Anglican comprehensiveness and diffuse authority, could it be reasonably argued that these parishes - at least their leadership - are not truly Episcopalian? That may be too harsh. But the failure of these people to acknowledge that Bishop Robinson was freely elected by his Diocese, not as a stranger but as a companion amongst them in ministry for years, and his confirmation by the larger Church, is a failure not of courtesy alone but of Episcopal polity.

Failure to understand the General Convention ruling that same-sex blessings are within the comprehensive norm of what this Church does and seeking to enforce uniformity on the whole church based on their own narrow interpretations is not our ethos as Anglican people.

This too shall pass: A generation ago, women priests distributing communion were directed to do so only from one side of the sanctuary so that lay persons could have a clear and unambiguous choice to receive the body and blood of Christ from a man or a woman, the sure implication being that femaleness corrupted and invalidated the sacramental presence of Christ.

I recall an occasion in which a woman priest wept quietly after communion from the pain and humiliation experienced when a woman in the congregation, in pretending to receive the sacrament, dug her nails so deeply in this priests' hands that they bled freely. I watched as ordained women with patience endured being called "priestesses" and much worse. Would those things ever cease in their lifetime? How could we hope for the future?

And yet I share again this delightful story. The Rev. Marni Schneider was the interim pastor here who immediately preceded me. On my first Sunday, a little girl asked her mother who I might be standing at the altar. She replied: "That's Hartshorn, our new priest!" The little girl responded with an incredulous laugh: "Don't be silly mommy, men can't be priests!"

A generation is not a long time in the history of the Church but it is rather like the dew fading on the grass - at least for those with the eyes to see it. This surely is a time for patiently waiting on God. "A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh." (Ezekiel 36:26)

So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away, see, everything has become new! All of this is from God…." (II Corinthians 5:17-18)

Copyright © 2004 St. Augustine by-the-Sea