Saturday, November 7, 2009

Meet And Greet The Candidates For Bishop

To the sound of Ray Charles' voice and piano, I headed to New Orleans to attend the walkabout to meet the candidates for bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana. The format was for each candidate to give a statement about 15 or 20 minutes long, after which we broke up into separate groups, and each candidate took a turn answering questions.

Since I am not a delegate nor an alternate to the electing convention, I was only able to ask a couple of questions, because I had to wait until all the delegates and alternates who wanted to ask questions were finished to have my chance. In all but two of the sessions, time ran out before I could ask my question. When I finally had my turn, since I foresee major challenges facing the church, the falling attendance numbers and the resulting diminished income, I asked the candidate about his ideas for addressing the problems. He did not quite understand what I was talking about and apparently did not agree with me that great changes were ahead for the church, therefore he did not really answer my question. Maybe I used the wrong phrasing.

My next and last opportunity for a question came with Bishop Michael Smith, about whom I blogged and later attended a class that he taught in the School for ministry in New Orleans. Before I asked my question, one of the delegates asked him how he could minister to his diocese in North Dakota and still spend so much time in Louisiana helping out here. Bp. Smith said that he was not moonlighting, but I don't remember if he truly answered the question. It seems not, but I could be wrong. In any case, he did not answer to my satisfaction, or I think I would have remembered. By that time, I had lost my pen and had nothing to write with to take notes. Toward the end of the session, when it seemed that the delegates were done with their questions, I raised my hand. Whoops! A delegate raised her hand at the same time, so she got her turn first. I thought the time would run out before I had my turn, because Bp. Smith gave the other woman a long answer. Could it be that he saw my hand up and wanted to run out the clock?

Anyway, my turn came. Earlier in the session, someone asked him how he handled difficult and hostile people. He said that one thing he does is pray for them. When I stood up to ask my question, he greeted me kindly and said he remembered me. I said, "You pray for me, don't you?"

He laughed and said, "No. I don't dislike you."

In his biography, Bp. Smith wrote of "...appropriate pastoral care for persons who experience themselves as gay, lesbian, bi-sexual or transgender...." Now Bp. Mark Lawrence used this very same phrase in his address to the Special Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina. You can find it in his address that runs to 9 pages, or you can take my word that it's there. I've seen the phrase used by others opposed to equality for GLTB folks. To me, the phrase is code for, "...persons who are not really gay, but who think they are."

I read the phrase to him and said, "This seems an odd way to phrase the statement. It implies that the persons may not really BE gay. Why not say 'persons who ARE gay, lesbian...'?"

Bp. Smith shook his head and said, "The science is not clear." Mistake.

I asked, "Well then, is it that I only experience myself as heterosexual, rather than that I AM heterosexual?" I heard laughter in the room, and I did not press for further elaboration of his answer to my question. I thought I'd made my point. In truth, I was in somewhat of a surreal state, because I was quite nervous about asking the question, and I half hoped that time would run out before I could get it in.

I could have asked him a more difficult question, like whether he attended the GAFCON conference in the Middle East, or who paid for his trip to visit the Archbishop of Canterbury, but in that milieu, I believe that I asked the right question. During the break, a few folks came to me to thank me for asking the question, and after the walkabout was over, a small group of people whom I met outside, thanked me. One of them told me that, at the time I asked the question, she said, "Who is SHE, from Thibodaux, asking THAT question?" Another said, "And you looked so innocent!"

Another of the candidates, Fr Ken Ritter, a former Roman Catholic priest, disagreed with the RCC on birth control, the hypocrisy of the annulment process, and, although he felt that he was called to be a priest, he could not live as a celibate. He left the priesthood, married, had children, and then became an Episcopal priest. He wishes to remain in the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion and approves of the Windsor Report and consideration of the Covenant. Thus, he would continue the moratorium on same-sex blessings and "on the consecration of bishops whose lifestyles present a difficulty for the wider Anglican Communion".

Along with at least one other person, I sensed a bit of dissonance here. Fr Ritter could not live a celibate "lifestyle" as a priest, but he expects GLTB clergy to live a celibate "lifestyle" for now, whether or not they are called to a vocation of celibacy.

At the walkabout, I found that a couple of the candidates looked better on paper than in real life. My favorite of all and the one I would vote for if I had a vote is Fr Morris Thompson. He looked good on paper, and I liked him face to face. My second choice would be Fr Paul Johnson. Links to the biographies of the candidates may be found at the diocesan website.

23 comments:

  1. I have a suspicion MP will jump on that looks so innocent remark. :-)

    Good luck on your bishop winnowing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mimi,
    I have t osay, my hat is off to you. You really did ask the right question. And I second the notion, you do look innocent (at least in your pictures). But, what granmere doesn't?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Can a cat resist twitching string?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Your election of bishops is so different. I have just discovered I have been reading the blog, and he has a link to mine, of the bishop-elect of Dunedin, NZ, announced today. I thought he was to be my new vicar.
    He writes:
    "On October 11 I was elected as the 9th Bishop of Dunedin. This was not something I had planned on or looked for. I went to the electoral synod as nominator of another, strong candidate, and argued vigorously on his behalf for all of the Saturday of the synod. On Sunday I was nominated from the floor and elected."

    ReplyDelete
  5. I figured you were doing something important today. Thanks for the report. Loved your input to these people. We could use you right now in our diocese, but I think you're probably needed more where you are.

    Congrats on being from the State that provided the single Republican vote Cao for Nancy Pelosi's just-passed Health Bill.

    ReplyDelete
  6. That's wonderful, Mimi. I wish I could have been there to see the reactions to your questions.

    The divorced and remarried homophobe bishop of my diocese, Gary Lillebridge, speaks in the same nonsensical riddles attempting to sweeten the poison.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The walkabout was an all-day affair. I didn't get home until 5:30 or so. I am on a mission campaigning against Bp. Smith, and I was able to talk to quite a few folks who can vote about him.

    At one point in his talk, I wrote in my notes, "He speaks in code. He speaks BS". I showed the words to the woman who was seated next to me, and whom I did not know. I couldn't help myself.

    Bp. Smith divided the church into three groups:

    1. The Catholics, who focus on the church
    2. The liberals, who focus on the human elements
    3. The evangelicals, who focus on the Gospel

    I wanted to shout out, "Liberals (I prefer the label "progressive") focus on the church and the Gospels, too!" Why this silly and narrow categorization which, to me, implies that liberals are godless and disregard the Gospels? I suspect that this is code talk, too. Staying in the church, only to constantly undermine it, is nearly as destructive as schism.

    Thank you all for your kind words. I did not realize how difficult it would be for me to ask a simple question, but Bp. Smith fed me my follow-up line just like in a George Burns and Gracie Allen routine.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Any chance of your posting the video?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bishop Smith gives me the creeps...I´ve read all I can find about him...there is something slippery going on...I wrote to the Tresurer of the Diocese and inquired about the travel expense money for Lambeth and inquired about a possible Gafcon outing (and who paid, if so)...NOTHING...they didn´t have the courtsey to reply to ¨outside questions¨ regarding the ¨financially troubled¨ Episcopal Church diocese of North Dakota (where the bishop is not present but doesn´t moonlight...does that mean they pay him for NOT being present?)...how can one vote for such shadowy behavior and dodgey answers? It´s seems Bishop Smith is loaded with ¨contrived¨ answers and unclear background achievements...but then, what do I know?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Brava Mimi! I hope you made them all totally uncomortable, although I know your gentle ways of frankness far outweigh your boldness.

    I'm not particularly surprised by the political aspect of the process. After all, these guys are all campaigning in the political sense, and the demagogues among them deal in code language, etc.

    At least TEC does it in the open, and the church has some forewarning of what is about to befall it. (Unlike in the RC tradition where the politics are totally sub rosa, and directed only at the hierarchy of the already anointed.)

    ReplyDelete
  11. If we're talking about gay vs. straight, I agree that "experiencing oneself" as gay makes no more sense than "experiencing oneself" as straight. But does sexual orientation always work out as an either/or proposition? Isn't it more like a continuum with some people at each end and some at various points end between? Let's say, for example, that you have three men all of whom are 51 percent attracted to Mary Pickford and 49 percent attracted to Douglas Fairbanks, Sr. Isn't it possible that one of them might self-identify as straight, another as bisexual and the third one as gay? And who am I (or who are we as a Church) to tell any of them that he's incorrectly self-identified.

    Where some people (very possibly including Bishop Smith) may get themselves into trouble is by assuming that this self-identification is a choice and that through some tremendous force of will (and perhaps some prayers thrown in) it can be changed. While it's _possible_ that an extremely small minority of people can change their orientation, the overwhelming majority of people cannot change their orientation, and the overwhelming majority of people (regardless of orientation) are not called to a celibate life. These is a reality that we as the Church needs to address pastorally regardless of our individual opinions on the specific issues of same sex marriage or same sex blessings.

    By the way, Father Thompson is dean and rector of my parents' home parish in Lexington, KY. A little over 20 years ago, Louisiana sent one of its priests to Lexington to be the bishop there. Perhaps its time for Lexington to return the favor (assuming, of course, that's what the people in Louisiana want).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Brian R, your system in NZ sounds simple and ancient. I can't understand why we have designed such a complicated nonsense for electing bishops in TEC.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Mimi, I didn't go to the clergy walkabout because I have been having hearing difficulties. Several persons told that all five candidates gave good presentations, and they especially liked Paul Elliott for his humor and intelligence. (He's the Australian from Atlanta.)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Of course, if we wanted to make it really simple, we could go back to casting lots like the apostles did to pick a replacement for Judas (and like the Coptic Church still does).

    ReplyDelete
  15. Lapin, no video unless someone had a hidden camera.

    Len, you know quite a lot. Bishops Lawrence (SC) and Love (Albany) appear to be ready to be more outspoken than other like-minded bishops. Of course, Bp. Smith is running for office so he must use the code talk. I always look for the hidden meaning beneath the surface of his words.

    Crapaud, there's more sub rosa in TEC than we think, but we're not yet Rome.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Paul Powers, I also see sexual orientation as a continuum, rather than either/or, but Bp. Smith's comment about science made no sense at all in any context.

    My position is that if a person tells me that she/he is lesbian, gay, straight, or whatever, I will believe the person. Who would know better?

    The phrase Bp. Smith used is to suggest, as you say, that with the proper treatment, you can change from gay to straight.

    Yesterday, a partnered lesbian woman told me, "Why would I choose the difficult life of a lesbian, if that was not my true orientation?"

    I'd welcome Fr Thompson with open arms.

    Ormonde, I wish we could have a simpler system for electing bishops, too. I gather that allowing all who pass the background checks to be candidates has opened up the system somewhat, in that the nominating committees formerly nominated only conservative candidates.

    I looked for you there, and I was disappointed not to see you. I'm sorry about your hearing problem.

    Elliott was quite personable and humorous in his talk, but I thought he did not do a very good job in the question period. He seemed not to really answer a number of questions.

    Paul Powers, I don't know that we'd do much worse with casting lots as our method.

    ReplyDelete
  17. IIRC one early bishop of Rome was supposedly elected after a dove landed on him and the people decided that was a sign from God. That he wasn't a priest didn't stop them.

    ReplyDelete
  18. You totally rock! Way to go G'mere Mimi! That was the perfect question, and I know you asked it with just the right amount of "innocence," even though we know the truth,

    ReplyDelete
  19. You do ROCK!! It is great that you went to the walkabout and that you are working to help people see the candidates more clearly.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "Well then, is it that I only experience myself as heterosexual, rather than that I AM heterosexual?"

    Grandmere, THANK YOU!!! I would so love to have a Grandmere Mimi in North Florida to ask the same questions!

    ReplyDelete
  21. SCG, and by extension, is it that Bp. Smith only experiences himself as a heterosexual? If the science is not clear, how would we really know unless we believe him when he says that he is?

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.