COMMENTARY ON AN ESSAY IN FAVOR OF THE ANGLICAN COVENANT

The Living Church launched Our Unity in Christ, a series of essays supporting the proposed Anglican Covenant, in February 2011. An introduction and complete index to the series are available here.

I've read several of the essays published by TLC, and I find them far less than persuasive. I'd say the essays include some of best defenses of the covenant around, and I suspect that the text of the document itself is a major problem for those in favor of its adoption. Of course, those of you who have previously visited my blog know that I am strongly opposed to the covenant. See the emblem on the sidebar, and, in the interest of even fuller disclosure, I am a member of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition.

My commentary on quoted excerpts from the essay by Bishop Victoria Matthews, Bishop of Christchurch, New Zealand, titled 'Greeting the Saints', in support of the Anglican Covenant follows. Of course, please read the essay in its entirety and make your own assessment.

Bp. Matthews says:

People are sometimes surprised that I support the proposed Anglican Covenant because there is a widespread belief that the crafters of the Covenant intend to stop new developments in the Communion. Similarly, many Anglicans believe that if there had been a Covenant 25 years ago, we would not have both sexes elected and consecrated to the episcopate. (“We would not have women bishops,” they say, without speaking of “men bishops.” Bishop is not a gender-exclusive noun, and women is not an adjective.)

I confess I am surprised. How would we have had women bishops with the covenant in place, unless the churches which decided to ordain women bishops moved forward in the face of objections by other churches who oppose the ordination of women as bishops and risk 'relational consequences' of some undefined sort? When would the churches of the Anglican Communion have come to one mind about women bishops? Who can say?

Also 'women' can indeed be an adjective. So says Merriam-Webster.

It is widely acknowledged that modern communication technologies, and especially the Internet, have complicated the life of the Anglican Communion.

Technology complicates many aspects of life today, not just that of the church. For good or for ill, communication is close to instantaneous, and we all need to adapt to the change. Isn't it about time to stop moaning about technology and start to adapt? The internet with its instant communication is not going away.

I have even heard that it is advisable not to attend certain events, as the coverage at home is always superior to what one learns by attending in person, and by staying at home you don’t have to meet the people who you know are wrong anyway.

I've heard that, too, but think of the logical consequences if everyone took the words to heart and stayed away: There would be no event. At the same time, technology opens up the possibility of meetings without all the participants having to be physically present. Of course, since I'm an incarnational type, I value highly face-to-face meetings, and they are, at times, quite necessary.

What would happen if the provinces of the Communion were equally dedicated to being in relationship one with another, no matter what? Archbishop Rowan commended this to the bishops at the 2008 Lambeth Conference’s opening retreat. The Indaba Group of the Lambeth Conference also attempted to foster it. What if the requirement of the Covenant actually enforced listening and being in relationship? I imagine you cringe at the word enforce, and so do I. But will it happen otherwise? Section 4 of the Covenant exists precisely to ensure the kind of listening, communication, and relationship that is presently missing in the Anglican Communion.

Those churches, Primates, and bishops who choose to boycott gatherings seem not very dedicated to being in relationship. Besides, to use Lambeth 2008 as any kind of model seems ludicrous to me, when the one person who most needed to be included in the Indaba, Bishop Gene Robinson, was not invited to Lambeth by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams because he was a partnered gay man.

Yes, I cringe at the word 'enforce'. To attempt to enforce listening is as futile as the Anglican Covenant's call to force the bonds of affection. You can put people in the same room, but you can't make them listen to each other.

It is my prayer that the Anglican Covenant will act as a midwife for the delivery of a new Anglican Communion, a Communion that has its gestation in relationship and deep listening.

What is the bishop's vision of the new Anglican Communion? I'd like a clearer picture. Whatever her vision, the choice of the Anglican Covenant as the midwife for the delivery seems to me disastrous.

Bishop Matthews serves on the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order. I understand that for members appointed to committees by the Anglican Communion Office or the Archbishop of Canterbury the pressure to speak in favor of the covenant must be rather intense. Still, much of what Bishop Matthews says seems to me faint praise. I find it especially telling that so few quotes from the actual text of the covenant appear in the essays in favor of the covenant. Could it be because the covenant is badly written?

And, in passing, the name of the committee on which Bishop Matthews serves makes me cringe, because it reminds me of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church, which began life as Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition. As a former Roman Catholic, I know that the Congregation was often used to discipline 'dissidents'. The comparison may be unfair, but I wish the committee had another name.

UPDATE: I meant to link to Lionel's post on Victoria Matthews' essay at Lionel Diemel's Web Log, where I first posted parts of my commentary.

DIANA SNOOZING

Above is our Diana in one of her favorite spots doing what is now one of her favorite things. See how she moves the tray under the drainpipe out of the way so she can get comfy? She's not only half blind, but she is deaf, too, so I didn't disturb her at all when I took her picture. She hears some but not much.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENS AT BISHOPS' MEETINGS

From Dave Walker at Cartoon Church.

THE WISE HUSBAND

A young couple moves into a new neighborhood.

The next morning while they are eating breakfast, the young woman sees her neighbor hanging the wash outside. "That laundry is not very clean", she said. "She doesn't know how to wash correctly. Perhaps she needs better laundry soap."

Her husband looked on, but remained silent.

Every time her neighbor would hang her wash to dry, the young woman would make the same comments.

About one month later, the woman was surprised to see a nice clean wash on the line and said to her husband:

"Look, she has learned how to wash correctly. I wonder who taught her this."

The husband said, "I got up early this morning and cleaned our windows."

And so it is with life. What we see when watching others depends on the purity of the window through which we look.

Thanks to Doug.

STORY OF THE DAY - SIGHTSEEING

You're not going to see people like this
again for a long time, he said & I said I
always saw people like this & he looked
at me for a moment & said, You're not
from around here, are you?

From StoryPeople.

CORN MAZE FOR BLONDES

It's been a long, long time since I posted a dumb blond joke. Still...don't blame me. Blame Ann.

THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS ONLINE

From The Official Google Blog:

It’s taken 24 centuries, the work of archaeologists, scholars and historians, and the advent of the Internet to make the Dead Sea Scrolls accessible to anyone in the world. Today, as the new year approaches on the Hebrew calendar, we’re celebrating the launch of the Dead Sea Scrolls online; a project of The Israel Museum, Jerusalem powered by Google technology.

Here's the link to the website for the Digital Dead Sea Scrolls. Have a look at The Great Isaiah Scroll, which you can follow by chapter and verse. How exciting for biblical scholars and how wonderful for the rest of us just to be able to look.

Many thanks to AnnV for the link.

THE ELEPHANT AND THE TURTLE

An elephant was drinking out of a river one day, when he spotted a turtle asleep on a log. He ambled on over and kicked it clear across the river.

"What on earth did you do that for?" asked a passing giraffe.

"Because I recognized it as the same accursed turtle that took a nip out of my trunk 53 years ago."

"Wow, what a memory you have!" commented the giraffe.

"Why, yes -" replied the elephant, "turtle recall".


Cheers,

Paul (A.)

Yes, I've asked Paul (A.) to leave the stage.

SCOPES FOR BISHOPS

In her very good post titled What Are Bishops For?, Lay Anglicana discusses in a mostly serious way the role of bishops in Anglicanism today. The post is well worth a read, along with several interesting comments.

Lay Anglicana lists a number of scopes which might prove useful for bishops in their service to members of their dioceses.

Amphiscope: Looking at both sides of a question
Cryptoscope: Solving life’s little (and big) mysteries
Diascope: Making a window into men’s souls
Endoscope: Looking remorselessly within every file in the cupboard
Extrascope: Looking at the bits the Archdeacon isn’t telling you
Gyroscope: Measuring people’s orientation (actually, this is one of the existing job descriptions which could be dropped?)
Interscope: Reading between the lines
Megascope: Ensuring the Church does not ignore the obvious
Metascope: Keeping an eye on the life beyond
Microscope: Remembering the detail
Neoscope: Knowing how to introduce the new
Oscilloscope: Working out which way the wind is blowing
Paleoscope: Valuing the old
Periscope: Communicating with the above in order to transmit to those below
Polyscope: Wearing many hats (and not just mitres)
Prososcope: Looking onwards, pointing the way
Stethoscope: Listening out for rumblings in the Body of Christ
Telescope: Keeping a watch on the horizon
Ultrascope: Linking congregations throughout the diocese, and their diocese with others

What do you think? What are the essential attributes of a bishop which are missing from this list? (Or have I included some which have no place in the list of episcopal talents?)

Two scopes came to mind as additions to the list, one of which is a bit naughty, but both I'd consider as quite useful.

Colonoscope: Detecting bullshit
Kaleidoscope: Enjoying the great diversity of God's creatures

I did not besmirch LA's comments with my suggestions, but I present then here, along with her list of useful scopes.

What I did say in the comments to the post:

Bishops are, first and foremost, to be servants, which role seems to have been been mostly swept aside in the discussions of their lesser roles.
....

Jesus said, ‘The greatest among you will be your servant.’ Of course, the words are not just for bishops; they’re for all of us.

Pictured above is the giant kaleidoscope at San Diego harbor from Wikipedia.

US - BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE WORLD?

From an editorial in the New York Times:

A widespread shortage of prescription drugs is hampering the treatment of patients who have cancer, severe infections and other serious illnesses. While some Republican politicians have railed against the imaginary threat of rationing under health care reform, Congress has done nothing to alleviate the all-too-real rationing of lifesaving drugs caused by this crisis.

The Food and Drug Administration says that some 180 medically important drugs have been in short supply, many of which are older, cheaper generic drugs administered by injection that have to be kept sterile from contamination.

A survey of 820 hospitals in June by the American Hospital Association found that almost all of them had experienced a shortage of at least one drug in the previous six months and that nearly half had experienced shortages of 21 or more drugs. As a result, more than 80 percent of the hospitals delayed needed treatments, almost 70 percent gave patients a less effective drug, and almost 80 percent rationed or restricted access to drugs.

And if the plans by the president, the Congress, and the FDA to remedy the shortage of vital drugs are not favored by the pharmaceutical companies, the government officials will face intense opposition from the drug company lobbyists, who are amongst the most powerful in the country.

From the article in the New York Times linked above:

“These shortages are just killing us,” said Dr. Michael Link, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the nation’s largest alliance of cancer doctors. “These drugs save lives, and it’s unconscionable that medicines that cost a couple of bucks a vial are unavailable.”
....

A group of leading oncologists has started a not-for-profit drug company that it hopes will soon be able to import supplies of some of the missing medicines. The company will eventually manufacture the drugs itself, according to Dr. George Tidmarsh, a pediatric oncologist and biotechnology entrepreneur who will lead it.

“We have a meeting with the F.D.A. next week,” Dr. Tidmarsh said. “This unfolding tragedy must stop, and right now.”

So it goes when the free market runs free. The profit margin on cheap generic drugs is small, so the incentive to produce the drugs hurts the bottom line of the drug companies. Of course, Republicans will counter that the situation is the result of too much government regulation. You decide.

UPDATE: Please read IT's post on why we need the FDA. IT is a working scientist, and she knows whereof she speaks. One word should be enough to get your attention: Thalidomide. I'm old enough to remember the tragic results of inadequate testing of a new drug.