August 31, 2009
Dear Friends:
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you.
In last month's post-General Convention letter, I shared with you the Presiding Bishop's challenging words about crisis. She reminded us: "The word crisis has its origins in the Greek krinein, meaning to judge, separate, or distinguish. A crisis is time for decision-making%u2026."
I've been doing some thinking about the word crisis myself. I recalled a teaching from a Marriage Encounter my wife and I attended many years ago. It seems that the Chinese symbol for "crisis" consists of the joining of two other words, "danger" and "opportunity." Therefore, "Crisis = Danger + Opportunity" is the Chinese formula and understanding of this word. I like this. It reminds us that however dangerous or dreadful a crisis might appear, there is also involved the possibility of opportunity and positive outcomes for growth and change.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has a sense of this opportunity as he concludes his post-General Convention reflections with the statement: "We must hope that, in spite of the difficulties, this may yet be the beginning of a new era of mission and spiritual growth for all who value the Anglican name and heritage" (Communion, Covenant and Our Anglican Future, § 26).
We are facing a crisis in which the churches of Anglicanism will soon be at a crossroads of decision as to whether to travel the path of an interdependent communion of churches or to go down the road of an independent federation of churches. The Archbishop of Canterbury and so called "Covenant" process are moving with the former, while General Convention clearly seems to be moving in the latter direction. (Please see my essay "Transitioning Towards Two-Tier Anglicanism" elsewhere is this issue).
This summer I read Phyliss Tickle's popular book "The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why" (Baker Books). She makes the observation that massive transitions in the church happen about every 500 years and that we are in the midst of one such upheaval currently. Basically, Tickle tells us not to despair because history teaches that when these changes take place three results typically occur: 1) a new, more vital Christianity emerges; 2) the formerly dominant expression of Christianity is reconstituted and renewed, and; 3) the Christian faith spreads into new geographic and demographic areas (p. 17).
The coming changes will challenge us at every level. These multi-level crises, with both their dangers and opportunities, are being faced at the global level through the Anglican Communion Covenant process; at the national level by cutting the budget by 14% while retaining an emphasis on serving the poor at home and abroad; in the Diocese of North Dakota by reorganizing for mission and ministry after reducing office and field staff; personal responses are left to the discernment of individuals, hopefully in the context of community.
For me personally, I have called upon a discernment committee to assist me in thinking and praying about where God might be calling in light of all these changing circumstances. (I am grateful to Deacon Zanne Ness, Dean Steve Sellers and Canon Kevin Goodrich OP for serving in this capacity and I invite you to visit with them about our process.) Some background:
As you know, I've enjoyed the opportunity of serving as a part-time assisting bishop in Louisiana the past two years. After Bishop Charles Jenkins announced his resignation, a number of laypeople, deacons and priests of that Diocese approached me about the possibility of being nominated. Initially, I thanked them and shared my reservations about whether God was calling me to serve in that capacity. Then other bishops from around the church with ties to Louisiana began to encourage me to accept nomination.
After the shock of the economic downturn and the realization that some drastic decisions needed to be made to ensure the future viability of the Diocese of North Dakota, I began to ask my immediate and extended family members what they thought about the possibility of my serving as the bishop of Louisiana. To a person they were at least open and some very encouraging. No one said no.
It was at this point that I received an invitation from yet another diocese to enter their search process and began to seriously wonder if God was up to something in terms of a change in my call. My experiences at General Convention and even the recently concluded Diocesan Council meeting have only confirmed my sense that "business as usual" is no longer the order of the day and that God is calling us to a new way of being a church in mission.
At this point, I can say with certainty and with the help of the discernment committee, not that I will be the next bishop of Louisiana, but that I am called to be part of their episcopal election process. I have allowed my name to go forward with the understanding, in the words of one of my former bishops, that "sometimes candidates are to be part of search or election processes not to be called to that post, but rather to assist those issuing the call to discern another candidate."
Therefore, if I am discerned to the final slate of candidates, I will trust the Holy Spirit's call extended through the Louisiana Electing Convention this December. If not elected, I will trust that God is continuing to call me to serve for a season as bishop of North Dakota.
We are in need of a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit if we are to thrive in the dangers and opportunities ahead of us and to resist the momentum of institutional decline. I request your prayers for all our futures. Pray for renewal. Pray for revival. Pray for the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I am,
Yours in Christ,
+Michael
(My emphases)
So. Bishop Smith, a member of the "Magnificent Seven" who recently called on Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and subsequently submitted this statement about their visit, is officially a candidate for bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana. Upon consultation with his immediate and extended family, Bishop Smith reported, "No one said no". I am not a member of his immediate or extended family, but I am a member of the family of the Diocese of Louisiana, and if anyone asks me, I will say "no" to Bishop Smith as the bishop of my diocese. No one will ask me, and I don't have a vote, but I will express my opinion to the delegates from my area and ask them to vote for another candidate and to vote "no" to the election of Bishop Smith. I'd rather not have a bishop who is teetering on the edge of being part of the Episcopal Church. I'd rather a bishop who is loyal to the Episcopal Church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop, rather than a bishop who may work to undermine the church.
Our retiring bishop, Charles Jenkins, expressed his disagreement with decisions of the national church on more than one occasion, and yet he remained loyal to the church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop.
Thanks to Ormonde for the link to Bishop Smith's letter.
I thank God for baptized folk like you, Mimi, who speak up and speak out. Bishops get way too isolated from the people.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Paul. We do what we can, but I wonder who pays attention?
ReplyDeleteHow does your parish select its delegates to diocesan convention? Frankly I think you should have a vote.
ReplyDeleteMy parish does it in a closet -- vestry picks and I am not in favor at the moment nor do I expect to be again. ;-) Something about being too outspoken for current management's comfort.
Ah well, if trends continue we will be homeless by the time the next convention meets and that is not a voice they choose to hear.
FWIW
jimB
Vestry chooses the delegates, Jim. I was on the vestry for one term, but I was pretty ineffective, and I would not serve again. I don't know if I would be asked again, but if I were, I would decline.
ReplyDeleteJim, you and Sue-z are on my daily prayer list. I hope and pray that you won't come to be amongst the homeless.
Thanks Mimi
ReplyDeletejimB
Thanks, Mimi. There has been no public discussion of the coming election in our diocese. Perhaps we should use your blog for this purpose, once the candidates are officially announced.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOrmonde, I am not pleased about the lack of public discussion at all. I offer my blog as a forum for doing just that. Thanks for starting the conversation.
ReplyDeleteAnn, pray, indeed, that Louisiana has someone else in mind, for more reason than one.
That trite, shop worn use of the Chinese characters...you'd think a guy would look some stuff up if he was bishop material.
ReplyDeleteamyj
I can relate to your vestry experience. I was a member for 5 years and came away very dissatisfied with my lack of impact. I cannot imagine going back to it.
ReplyDeleteI suppose it was not the largest failure in my life, but it is on the list. ;-)
FWIW
jimB
Amy, I believe that the website designers aimed for the ancient manuscript look in the lettering.
ReplyDeleteJim, I don't hold myself too responsible for my lack of effectiveness, because I was asked to be a candidate several times and refused because I knew that I would not do a good job. Finally, I relented and said I'd take my turn, and it turned out as I expected. I took my turn, and now that's over and done.
Thank you, Mimi.
ReplyDeleteYou're about the only thing I can believe in, anymore.
Mark luv, thank you, but, for your own good, don't believe in me. I'm sure to disappoint you one day.
ReplyDeleteGreetings, Grandmere Mimi & Ormonde:
ReplyDeleteI'm in Louisiana for the week.
You wrote of me: "I'd rather not have a bishop who is teetering on the edge of being part of the Episcopal Church. I'd rather a bishop who is loyal to the Episcopal Church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop, rather than a bishop who may work to undermine the church."
Yikes! That's not me you're talking about. I take as many hits from the Right as I do the Left for being TOO loyal to the doctrine, discipline and worship of The Episcopal Church. A bishop is supposed to "guard the faith and unity of the church." I'm working as hard as I can to keep conservatives in the Episcopal Church and liberals in the Anglican Communion.
This weekend I'll be leading the School for Ministry course "Polity and Issues in the Anglican Communion" at the Cathedral in New Orleans (Friday evening and Saturday). Harriet Murrel tells me there's room for more. Please come join us and visit with me in person.
In Christ,
+Michael G. Smith (the least magnificent of the Seven)
Thank you for your comments, Bishop Michael. It would be wonderful if all the candidates were to use Mimi's blog to state positions and answer questions.
ReplyDeleteHello, Bishop Smith,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your most gracious response, despite my weak attempt at irony. I'm considering attending the sessions at the Cathedral, but I don't know if I can put it together.
While I have your attention, if I still have your attention, I have a couple of questions:
1. Did you or the other bishops who visited with the Archbishop of Canterbury, as a courtesy, notify Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori in advance of your meeting with the ABC?
2. In your statement after meeting with the ABC, you say:
5. We encourage Bishops exercising jurisdiction in The Episcopal Church to call upon us for service in needed cases of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight.
Are you and the 6 other bishops declaring yourselves the DEPO bishops in the Episcopal Church? If so, by what authority?
My concern is not simply about having a bishop who will try to take our diocese out of the Episcopal Church, but about having a bishop who will stay in the church, while, at the same time, attempt to undermine the authority and polity of the church.
Amy, I see that I misunderstood your comment about the Chinese characters. Sorry about that.
ReplyDeleteS'ok, my friend!
ReplyDeleteamyj
Thanks for asking. In answer to your questions above:
ReplyDelete1. Yes, we notified the PB as a courtesy.
2. A few years ago, the PB invited me and a number of other bishops to serve as bishops for DEPO. Such invitations, however, can only be issued by the diocesan bishop exercising jurisdiction. The offer for DEPO is an attempt to keep further congregations or dioceses from leaving TEC.
I don't understand who you think is attempting to "undermine the authority and polity of the church." Could you be more specific?
Hope to see you this weekend. +mgs
Bishop Michael, thanks for your response. Who are the other bishops who were asked by the PB to serve as DEPO bishops? Is there a list somewhere? I understand that the diocesan bishop must issue the invitation for DEPO.
ReplyDeleteAs to the undermining of the church, Bishop Mark Lawrence in his address to his clergy says:
So too in our present context it is not The Episcopal Church that is the problem, it is those who have cloaked it with so many strands of false doctrine that we can well wonder if indeed it can be salvaged. Like an invading vine unnatural to the habitat that has covered a once elegant, old growth forest with what to some looks like a gracious vine it is in fact decorative destruction. What may look like a flower may be bramble.
Then he proceeds to list the "false teachings" on The Trinity, the Uniqueness of Christ, scriptural authority, etc., some of which are core doctrine, and others which I do not view as core doctrine. I find no false teachings in TEC about core doctrine. I just don't see it. The list includes matters which, in my view, are not core doctrine.
Then there is this statement in the address, which I find quite troubling:
The Standing Committee and bishop will be proposing a resolution to come before the special convention that this diocese begin withdrawing from all bodies of governance of TEC that have assented to actions contrary to Holy Scripture; the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this church has received them; the resolutions of Lambeth which have expressed the mind of the Communion; the Book of Common Prayer (p.422-423) and the Constitution & Canons of TEC (Canon 18:1.2.b) until such bodies show a willingness to repent of such actions. Let no one think this is a denial of the vows a priest or bishop makes to participate in the councils of governance. This is not a flight into isolation; nor is it an abandonment of duty, but the protest of conscience. It is recognition that the actions of GC’09 were in such blatant disregard and violation of Holy Scripture, the bonds of affection, and our own Constitution & Canons that one is led by reasoned conviction to undertake an intrepid resistance to the tyranny of the majority over judicious authority; therein erring both in Faith and Order.
Granmere Mimi:
ReplyDeleteHere's a URL for a 2007 Episcopal Life article about DEPO bishops: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_90174_ENG_HTM.htm
I would never presume to speak for +Mark Lawrence, of that he is more than capable himself. I do know him, however, as a good and godly bishop.
You implied above that I am attempting to undermine the authority and polity of the church. About that I was asking for specificity.
This will have to be my last post until Monday. Hope to see you this weekend in New Orleans. Blessings,
+mgs
Bishop Michael, I am quite troubled by parts of the statement issued by you and the 6 bishops upon your return from Canterbury. In truth, I was troubled by the very visit itself. It seemed to me a signal of disregard for the position of our PB, sort of like going over her head to an apparent higher authority, who, in fact, has no authority at all over the governance of the Episcopal Church. The ABC is not yet our pope. I'm still not sure what was the purpose of your visit?
ReplyDeleteWhen you asked for an example of undermining, I thought of Bp. Mark Lawrence, who, as I see it, comes very close to crossing a line. Of course, I do not expect you to speak for him.
I see that not all seven bishops who visited the ABC are DEPO bishops. The names of Bishops Lawrence, Little, Love, and McPherson are not included in the list in the article that you sent me.
Again, thanks for your gracious response. I may see you this weekend.
Mimi, I hope you go to the School for Ministry this weekend. Your fans await your report.
ReplyDeleteI see that not all seven bishops who visited the ABC are DEPO bishops. The names of Bishops Lawrence, Little, Love, and McPherson are not included in the list in the article that you sent me.
ReplyDeleteI cannot speak to the others, but I can affirm that Bp. Little already serves as a DEPO bishop, with the consent of the local dicoesan, in at least two places-- and has since the option was first permitted.
Cranmer, thank you for your kind words and for the prayers. They are much needed.
ReplyDeleteOrmonde, I am at this moment trying to decide what to do. I had made up my mind to go, and then Grandpère told me about the severe weather warnings and possible flooding here and in New Orleans, so I am now uncertain again.
This is what I'm reading.
Jane Ellen, thank you for your information. I understand a little more about DEPO after talking to a friend. It is not a formal program of TEC, but rather consists in informal relationships, diocese to diocese, with the visiting bishop going into a diocese by invitation of the diocesan bishop. And it is happening. And I have no problem with it, so long as the visiting bishop has the permission of the diocesan.
ReplyDeleteAccording to this report, the bishops named by Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori to represent her in her canonical duty to visit dioceses (but not to be authorized to consecrate bishops or to oversee the discipline of bishops) were: Frank Brookhart of Montana, Clarence Coleridge of Connecticut (retired), Philip Duncan of the Central Gulf Coast, Duncan Gray of Mississippi, Dorsey Henderson of Upper South Carolina, Rayford High suffragan of Texas, John W. Howe of Central Florida, Gary Lillibridge of West Texas, Rodney Michel of Long Island, (retired), Michael Smith of North Dakota, James Stanton of Dallas, and Geralyn Wolf of Rhode Island. Such appointments were approved by the House of Bishops at their 2007 meeting in New Orleans, reported by Jake here. According to the Episcopal Life article cited by Bp. Smith, it would appear that Bps. Duncan, Gray, High, and Michael declined to serve.
ReplyDeleteThose of this group of twelve who are now members of the Magnificent Seven are boldfaced (no pun intended).
I have not researched as to which of the original twelve/eight may have had their appointment withdrawn or which may actually have served as appointed. Jim Stockton pointed out in Jake's August 2007 post that "DEPO options that are possible under our polity exist already and have already been rejected by the malcontents". I have seen nothing recently to change that. Bishop Smith may know more.
I must say, with all respect to Bp. Smith, that notifying the Presiding Bishop "as a courtesy" of his meeting with Abp. Williams is shallow indeed. The Seven would do and show more courtesy by not meeting at all with another primate in a private meeting behind her back.
I understand that Bp. Smith will be speaking tomorrow evening on the polity of the Anglican Communion. I am curious to know his qualifications on the subject.
(but not to be authorized to consecrate bishops or to oversee the discipline of bishops)
ReplyDeletePaul, thanks for further enlightenment on the role of DEPO bishops, especially for the information in parentheses. I've learned quite a bit from the comments here.
Weather permitting, I plan to attend the session at the Cathedral tomorrow.
Bishop Smith,
ReplyDeleteEconomic ¨troubles¨ are forcing the Diocese of North Dakota to face ¨the realization that some drastic decisions needed to be made to ensure the future viability of the Diocese of North Dakota--I began to ask my immediate and extended family members what they thought about the possibility of my serving as the bishop of Louisiana.¨ Why have you been detaching yourself from your duties in North Dakota during ¨economic¨ crisis?
Why weren´t you WORKING FULL TIME at the Diocese of North Dakota when it was having SEVER management and ministry problems instead of ¨assiting¨ elsewhere? Why are you busy cultivating greener pastures when your flock is starving and shrinking at home? Does the captain desert a sinking ship? Have you spent FAR TOO MANY WORKING HOURS playing Church politics? Who paid for your trip to see the ABC? Who pays your expenses while working in Louisianna (and does your full-time North Dakota salary remain the same when you are working elsewhere?).
Your tribute to ¨Godly¨ Gafcon Bishop Laurence (are you a Gafconner too) is shallow, the rest of us are ¨Godly¨ too. How dare you determine who is and who is not. Did you attend the Gafcon meeting in the Middle East? Any ACNA gatherings? Any ¨conversations¨ with PB Venables of the Southern Cone? If so, who paid your expenses? Your dilemmas offer no REAL reason for our confidence as you seek higher and more powerful ¨positioning¨ at TEC.
Leonardo Ricardo raises some cogent questions.
ReplyDeleteThe diocesan statistics seem to have gently declined ever since Bp. Smith took office.
According to the thumbnail description of the diocese North Dakota has 23 congregations and 10 clergy in charge.
"No one said no." Not that there that large a sample here, but maybe they'd just as soon Bp. Smith went elsewhere?
"No one said no" is clearly meant to be funny. Perhaps you should try a more lighthearted approach to such things. Have you ever met our current Bishop? He jokes all the time -- surely you wouldn't scrutinize every single funny thing that came out of his mouth.
ReplyDeleteMimi, you should wait until the Walkabouts in early November to get a better idea of what you're talking about. It is obvious that you are jumping to conclusions, and I truly hope you were brave enough to meet Bishop Smith face-to-face.
It's a shame that people will read this blog and be swayed by your false authority, your opinions alone and your misinformation.
You can write whatever you want in response, but I will not come back to this blog. It's jibberish. You will probably delete this comment anyway.
It is obvious that you are jumping to conclusions, and I truly hope you were brave enough to meet Bishop Smith face-to-face.
ReplyDeleteAmInformed, I did indeed go to part of the sessions at the Cathedral on Saturday, and I wrote about my time there. FWIW, I believe that attending the session was much more profitable than a brief visitation at a walk-about.
Of course, you have a right to your opinion on my "jibberish" blog, but I have a right to express my opinion, too. Others can make up their own minds about whether I am a "false authority". As for me, I make no claims to any authority at all. I hold no leadership position in the church, being only a simple pew-warmer.
See. I did not delete your comment, but - alas! - you will never know, because you will never return.
The Bishop Smith of North Dakota also refuses to answer real questions regarding his not-so-secret behind the scenes COVENANT GUILT campaign.
ReplyDeleteAgain, Bishop Smith, how many Gafcon functions have you attended and who paid for your passage and expenses? Are you drawing your regular salary at the faltering Diocese of North Dakota while ¨assisting¨ in Louisianna? Surely you wish to be transparent in all your affairs as candidate for Bishop. Most often in the business world, the real world and beyond folks aren´t rewarded for failure and are certainly not well respected for abandoning ship before the other passengers are safe.