see more So Much Pun
Thanks to Lapin.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES SAYS NO TO ANGLICAN COVENANT
Full text of the response of the Diocese of Los Angeles follows here:
The bishops, clergy and laity of the Diocese of Los Angeles, at the request of Katharine Jefferts Schori, our Presiding Bishop, Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies, and Rosalie Simmonds Ballentine, Esq., Executive Council member and Chair of the Executive Council D-020 Task Force, have actively engaged in discussion, discernment, study, prayer and dialogue concerning the proposed final draft of the Anglican Covenant. The study culminated at our Diocesan Convention, held December 3 and 4, 2010, with round-table discussions in which more than 800 delegates, representing our 147 congregations, participated.
This discernment leads us to recommend that The Episcopal Church not endorse the final draft of the Anglican Covenant but that we patiently continue the conversation out of our bonds of affection and mutual loyalty to the entire Communion, for the following reasons:
One of our chief strengths as Anglicans has been our ecumenical availability to Christians who find in us the essence of the faith once delivered to the saints, along with latitude in “things indifferent.” We have been a tradition of bridges, not walls. Ours is a tradition that has upheld seven Ecumenical Councils, three historic Creeds, the Thirty-Nine Articles, and a liturgical heritage blessed by the Book of Common Prayer expressed and celebrated through a wonderful variety of cultural influences. Our tradition holds Holy Scripture as containing all things necessary for salvation, the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds, the two sacraments instituted by Christ himself: baptism and communion and the Historic Episcopate essential to our faith. It is a tradition of reason that values the scholarly pursuit of truth which has allowed our Anglican ethos to be the middle way of a catholic and reformed faith “not as a compromise for the sake of peace, but as a comprehension for the sake of truth” (Collect for the Feast of Richard Hooker). Our hope is that our prophetic witness of openness to the Spirit’s actions might not be foreclosed by a desire to stake out too narrow a spiritual turf on which to stake our flag, but rather a desire to continue to be obedient to the Spirit’s call on our church.
The Episcopal Church was founded in democracy and has enjoyed a polity which is free and democratic since 1789. This long-standing course cannot be reversed. We do, however, acknowledge, honor and support the differences in polity and governance that distinguish the various churches of the Communion. We believe respect for those differences is a crucial component of our tradition that should undergird any Anglican Covenant. For that reason, we support Sections One and Two of the Covenant, which positively affirm the foundation of our faith, our common Anglican vocation, and do not challenge our unique polity.
We are concerned about the omission of the laity from Section 3. As St. Paul teaches, we are all of us the Body of Christ and individually members thereof (I Corinthians 12). There are four orders of ministry in the Church – bishops, priests, deacons and lay people, who also minister as members of the baptized people of God. Such an ecclesiology should both undergird the theology expressed in the Covenant and the church structures developed as means of connecting and serving the churches of the Communion. A Covenant to which we could subscribe would need to re-imagine the Instruments of Communion to provide a stronger representation from all the orders of ministry.
Section 4 is of greatest concern. It creates a punitive, bureaucratic, juridical process within the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion, elevating its authority over the member churches despite previous affirmations of member church autonomy (see, e.g., Section 4.1.3). It contains no clear process for dispute resolution, no checks and balances, no right of appeal. The concept of mediation, introduced in Section 3.2.6, is not mentioned in Section 4. The covenant’s focus on “maintenance, dispute and withdrawal” bodes of an immobilized church mission instead of one that is flexible and prophetic. For these reasons, we cannot agree to Section 4.
We cannot endorse a covenant that, for the first time in the history of The Episcopal Church or the Anglican Communion, will pave the way toward emphasizing perceived negative differences instead of our continuing positive and abundant commonality. We strongly urge more direct face-to-face dialogue, study, prayer and education before the adoption of a document that has such historic significance in the life of the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church. Our differences should not be seen as something that must be proved wrong or endured but rather a motivation to dig deeper into discerning God’s purposes for God’s church.
In conclusion, the Diocese of Los Angeles thanks and commends the entire Anglican Communion for taking this time of holy discernment and suggests that the period of discernment continue so that no hasty decisions are made that would undermine the process of conversation and reception by all the churches of the Communion. We pray that the Holy Spirit illuminates our future steps so that we all may celebrate our common bonds of affection while respecting our varying cultures, ethos and polity within the one body of Christ.
Respectfully submitted,
The General Convention Deputation and the Bishops of the Diocese of Los Angeles
The bishops, clergy and laity of the Diocese of Los Angeles, at the request of Katharine Jefferts Schori, our Presiding Bishop, Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies, and Rosalie Simmonds Ballentine, Esq., Executive Council member and Chair of the Executive Council D-020 Task Force, have actively engaged in discussion, discernment, study, prayer and dialogue concerning the proposed final draft of the Anglican Covenant. The study culminated at our Diocesan Convention, held December 3 and 4, 2010, with round-table discussions in which more than 800 delegates, representing our 147 congregations, participated.
This discernment leads us to recommend that The Episcopal Church not endorse the final draft of the Anglican Covenant but that we patiently continue the conversation out of our bonds of affection and mutual loyalty to the entire Communion, for the following reasons:
One of our chief strengths as Anglicans has been our ecumenical availability to Christians who find in us the essence of the faith once delivered to the saints, along with latitude in “things indifferent.” We have been a tradition of bridges, not walls. Ours is a tradition that has upheld seven Ecumenical Councils, three historic Creeds, the Thirty-Nine Articles, and a liturgical heritage blessed by the Book of Common Prayer expressed and celebrated through a wonderful variety of cultural influences. Our tradition holds Holy Scripture as containing all things necessary for salvation, the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds, the two sacraments instituted by Christ himself: baptism and communion and the Historic Episcopate essential to our faith. It is a tradition of reason that values the scholarly pursuit of truth which has allowed our Anglican ethos to be the middle way of a catholic and reformed faith “not as a compromise for the sake of peace, but as a comprehension for the sake of truth” (Collect for the Feast of Richard Hooker). Our hope is that our prophetic witness of openness to the Spirit’s actions might not be foreclosed by a desire to stake out too narrow a spiritual turf on which to stake our flag, but rather a desire to continue to be obedient to the Spirit’s call on our church.
The Episcopal Church was founded in democracy and has enjoyed a polity which is free and democratic since 1789. This long-standing course cannot be reversed. We do, however, acknowledge, honor and support the differences in polity and governance that distinguish the various churches of the Communion. We believe respect for those differences is a crucial component of our tradition that should undergird any Anglican Covenant. For that reason, we support Sections One and Two of the Covenant, which positively affirm the foundation of our faith, our common Anglican vocation, and do not challenge our unique polity.
We are concerned about the omission of the laity from Section 3. As St. Paul teaches, we are all of us the Body of Christ and individually members thereof (I Corinthians 12). There are four orders of ministry in the Church – bishops, priests, deacons and lay people, who also minister as members of the baptized people of God. Such an ecclesiology should both undergird the theology expressed in the Covenant and the church structures developed as means of connecting and serving the churches of the Communion. A Covenant to which we could subscribe would need to re-imagine the Instruments of Communion to provide a stronger representation from all the orders of ministry.
Section 4 is of greatest concern. It creates a punitive, bureaucratic, juridical process within the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion, elevating its authority over the member churches despite previous affirmations of member church autonomy (see, e.g., Section 4.1.3). It contains no clear process for dispute resolution, no checks and balances, no right of appeal. The concept of mediation, introduced in Section 3.2.6, is not mentioned in Section 4. The covenant’s focus on “maintenance, dispute and withdrawal” bodes of an immobilized church mission instead of one that is flexible and prophetic. For these reasons, we cannot agree to Section 4.
We cannot endorse a covenant that, for the first time in the history of The Episcopal Church or the Anglican Communion, will pave the way toward emphasizing perceived negative differences instead of our continuing positive and abundant commonality. We strongly urge more direct face-to-face dialogue, study, prayer and education before the adoption of a document that has such historic significance in the life of the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church. Our differences should not be seen as something that must be proved wrong or endured but rather a motivation to dig deeper into discerning God’s purposes for God’s church.
In conclusion, the Diocese of Los Angeles thanks and commends the entire Anglican Communion for taking this time of holy discernment and suggests that the period of discernment continue so that no hasty decisions are made that would undermine the process of conversation and reception by all the churches of the Communion. We pray that the Holy Spirit illuminates our future steps so that we all may celebrate our common bonds of affection while respecting our varying cultures, ethos and polity within the one body of Christ.
Respectfully submitted,
The General Convention Deputation and the Bishops of the Diocese of Los Angeles
THOUGHT FOR THE DAY - "SPEAK TO HIM"
Speak To Him
Speak to Him thou for He hears,
and Spirit with Spirit can meet -
Closer is He than breathing,
and nearer than hands and feet.
Alfred Lord Tennyson
THE GAY PASSION OF CHRIST CONTINUES...
4. Jesus Preaches in the Temple (from The Passion of Christ: A Gay Vision) by Douglas Blanchard
“And he was teaching daily in the temple.” -- Luke 19:47 (RSV)
All kinds of people crowded around Jesus when he taught at the temple: male and female, young and old, rich and poor, healthy and sick, people from every race and nation -- and the queer ones: women who acted like men, men who acted like women, those who loved someone of the same sex, those with bodies somewhere between male and female....
Part 4, Part 5, and Part 6 of the Gay Passion of Christ series are now posted at the Jesus in Love Blog. The combination of Doug Blanchard's paintings and Kittredge Cherry's words, along with passages from Scripture is powerful, indeed. The series will run daily throughout the Lenten season. See for yourself.
JUST IN TIME...
Holy Week approaches...
From Time:
Alrighty, then. Let your imagination run wild, and lots of things could be. I mean, you never know.
So what's the story here? Old nails were found. The nails may have been in what certain archeologists think may be Caiphas' tomb. Somehow the nails may have been separated from the rest of the contents of the tomb. The nails could be the crucifixion nails.
No shortage of loose ends, surely, a tangled trail, and lots of speculative leaps. The many "may have been", "could be", "appeared", "thought to" ought to give the reader pause.
Israeli TV and The History Channel, which should perhaps change its name to the It Coulda Happened Channel, will feature the documentary by Simcha Jacobovici, titled The Nails of the Cross. Jacobovici says:
But there is no question mark in the title of the documentary, Mr Jacobovici.
From Time:
Just in time for Easter, an Israeli television journalist has produced a pair of nails he says may have been used to crucify Jesus Christ. "We're not saying these are the nails," says Simcha Jacobovici, holding aloft a pair of smallish iron spikes with the tips hammered to one side. "We're saying these could be the nails."
Alrighty, then. Let your imagination run wild, and lots of things could be. I mean, you never know.
The case for the possible rests on a specific combination of research, surmising, guesswork and either the ineptitude or the skittishness of Israeli archeologists who inventoried the tomb thought to contain the bones of the Jewish high priest who ordered Christ's arrest. The tomb, found in 1990, appeared to contain the ossuary, or bone box, of Caiaphas, the jurist who paved the way for the crucifixion.
....
"When you raise the question of Jesus' crucifixion nails," Jacobovici says, "there should be a lot of skepticism."
Indeed the case arrives with no shortage of loose ends. The IAA's inventory states that one nail was found on the floor of the tomb, or cave, and another was found inside an ossuary. But there were 12 ossuaries in the tomb, and there is no record of which one it was in.
So what's the story here? Old nails were found. The nails may have been in what certain archeologists think may be Caiphas' tomb. Somehow the nails may have been separated from the rest of the contents of the tomb. The nails could be the crucifixion nails.
No shortage of loose ends, surely, a tangled trail, and lots of speculative leaps. The many "may have been", "could be", "appeared", "thought to" ought to give the reader pause.
Israeli TV and The History Channel, which should perhaps change its name to the It Coulda Happened Channel, will feature the documentary by Simcha Jacobovici, titled The Nails of the Cross. Jacobovici says:
"I don't think anybody's going to say, 'Crucifixion Nails' exclamation point," Jacobovici says. "I think they're going to write, 'Crucifixion Nails' question mark."
But there is no question mark in the title of the documentary, Mr Jacobovici.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
"AND WHY NOT...?"
From an all-biretta blog titled Domus Birettarum.
About the biretta in the picture, blogger Admin says:
...a Spanish Biretta with a tree in the middle of it. This is for a Spanish Philosophy Degree, apparently, thus explaining the need for a large brush on the top and a cascading fringe effect. And why not, we ask ourselves?
Not only do the bloggers blog about birettas, they create made-to-order birettas.
We hope you enjoy the content of this Blog. It is an endeavour of love and for entertainment rather than a deeply serious endeavour. We are merely enthusiasts and creators of clerical headgear, usually the more outlandish and unusual the better.
We also aim to provide our efforts gratis for those who genuinely cannot afford them, at home or abroad. For those who can afford to pay, we can produce bespoke birettas for the price of materials and a suggested (but optional) amount to keep us going.
How kind of them! I wonder if the bloggers create birettas for les femmes d'un certain âge.
DEPRESSED OVER THE BUDGET DEAL...
...taking refuge in my stuff, my collections. I thought I'd share.
Below are "hers" and "his" hats woven of palmetto by Marie Dean, a member of the Houma Indian tribe from Dulac, a small community south of Houma. Grandpère's hat is called a planter's hat. We wear them on special occasions, not for work in the garden.
The large basket with the handle pictured below was made by Sam Harris of the Harris family from split oak strips.
The basket on the left is woven of white oak by ____ Bradley, (the given name is worn off) a Native American Cherokee, and was on display for sale at the 1984 World's Fair in New Orleans. The fair was labeled a flop by the vicious local press, but it was actually quite nice. We visited several times and enjoyed ourselves immensely. The folklife area was great fun. The smear by the local newspapers and TV news, which soon spread throughout the country and the world, kept people from visiting the fair, so it ended up being a flop with respect to numbers of visitors and finally went bankrupt.
One benefit of the World's Fair was the revival of the Warehouse District in New Orleans, a mixed residential/commercial neighborhood. Many of the old warehouses, which were in a run-down condition before the fair, were converted into condominiums and offices and were followed by several fine restaurants in the area. I wouldn't mind living there myself.
The covered palmetto basket on the right is also the work of Marie Dean.
Admiring once again the fine workmanship in the hats and baskets, taking the pictures, and writing about them cheered me up quite a bit.
Below are "hers" and "his" hats woven of palmetto by Marie Dean, a member of the Houma Indian tribe from Dulac, a small community south of Houma. Grandpère's hat is called a planter's hat. We wear them on special occasions, not for work in the garden.
The large basket with the handle pictured below was made by Sam Harris of the Harris family from split oak strips.
The basket on the left is woven of white oak by ____ Bradley, (the given name is worn off) a Native American Cherokee, and was on display for sale at the 1984 World's Fair in New Orleans. The fair was labeled a flop by the vicious local press, but it was actually quite nice. We visited several times and enjoyed ourselves immensely. The folklife area was great fun. The smear by the local newspapers and TV news, which soon spread throughout the country and the world, kept people from visiting the fair, so it ended up being a flop with respect to numbers of visitors and finally went bankrupt.
One benefit of the World's Fair was the revival of the Warehouse District in New Orleans, a mixed residential/commercial neighborhood. Many of the old warehouses, which were in a run-down condition before the fair, were converted into condominiums and offices and were followed by several fine restaurants in the area. I wouldn't mind living there myself.
The covered palmetto basket on the right is also the work of Marie Dean.
Admiring once again the fine workmanship in the hats and baskets, taking the pictures, and writing about them cheered me up quite a bit.
TELL 'EM, ALAN SIMPSON!
Yeah, another anti-depressant video for you. This one is short and sweet, sweet, sweet.
H/T to Jim Burroway at Box Turtle Bulletin.
"LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL" - SHIRLEY AND LEE
My antidote for depression over the budget deal. Yeah! Let the good times roll!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)