LOWER ORDER WOMEN BISHOPS IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND?

Let's hope and pray that will not be the case.  The following poem was written by David Booker, a former colleague of themethatisme.  David kindly gave me permission to post his poem.

The case for clause 5. 1c

You are not like me.
The difference is obvious,
as plain as the nose on your face.
I am sorry to say
that although I have nothing against you
personally,
and although some of my best friends are like you,
I cannot, in all conscience,
accept the gift you offer.

Please don’t feel this secondary issue
in any way makes you second class.
Rather marvel at my exegetical acrobatics,
turning up to down, and north to south,
and Galatians 3 verse 28*
into a culturally bound reflection
we cannot be expected to take literally.

You must allow bigotry to triumph over grace
because unity demands the majority be silent.
As good Christians you must respect me
even when I refuse to recognise you
or eat from a table you may once have used
for fear of contamination
and deliberately airbrush you out of scripture
by mistranslating your name to suit my prejudice.

Yes, although our Church recognises
there is no theological objection,
you must turn a blind eye to injustice,
chauvinism, sexism, poor scholarship
and an incredulous watching world,
to guarantee a perpetual place for my ignorance.

After all, the permanent no go areas
we are asking you to create
will not stop those of others races,
or those with a yet incurable disease,
from exercising their ministry.
No, we only want to protect ourselves from women
and we really don’t understand the fuss.

David Booker

*Galatians 3v28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus
I can not support the amendment 5. 1c and dearly hope that it will be removed.

The statement on clause 5(1)c from the website of the Church of England.

WATCH (Women and the Church) on the clause:

But the amendment to Clause 5 has caused widespread dismay. It would entrench discrimination against women in the Established Church and place a permanent question mark over the validity of women's orders.  The confusion over its interpretation amongst commentators demonstrates that it would prove to be bad law

Sign the petition requesting the House of Bishops in the Church of England to withdraw clause 5(1)c.  You don't have to be English to sign.

GOLF NUT

Ed and Nancy met while on a singles cruise and Ed fell head over heels for her.

 When they discovered they lived in the same city only a few miles apart Ed was ecstatic. He immediately started asking her out when they got home .

Within a couple of weeks, Ed had taken Nancy to dance clubs, restaurants, concerts, movies, and museums. Ed became convinced that Nancy was indeed his soul mate and true love. Every date seemed better than the last.

On the one-month anniversary of their first dinner on the cruise ship, Ed took Nancy to a fine restaurant. While having cocktails and waiting for their salad, Ed said, "I guess you can tell I'm very much in love with you. I'd like a little serious talk before our relationship continues to the next stage. So, before I get a box out of my jacket and ask you a life changing question, it's only fair to warn you, I'm a total golf nut. I play golf, I read about golf, I watch golf on TV. In short, I eat, sleep, and breathe golf. If that's going to be a problem for us, you'd better say so now!"

Nancy took a deep breath and responded, "Ed, that certainly won't be a problem. I love you as you are and I love golf too; but, since we're being totally honest with each other, you need to know that for the last five years I've been a hooker."

Ed said, "I bet it's because you're not keeping your wrists straight when you hit the ball."

(Your Saturday morning laugh from Doug.)

Picture from Wikipedia.

IT'S NOT TOO LATE...

Must-have button for GC12

...to donate to help with expenses for lodgings for Malcolm French, Moderator, and Lionel Diemel, US Convener, of No Anglican Covenant Coalition as they attend General Convention 2012 (July 5–12) of The Episcopal Church in Indianapolis.  Agents Malcolm and Lionel will be hustling our Resolution D007 calling for rejection of the Anglican Covenant.

Lionel says:

For the first time, the No Anglican Covenant Coalition needs to solicit financial help in support of our efforts. To date, coalition members have run our operations on a shoestring, and some members have made significant personal sacrifices to enable us to oppose what we believe is a disastrous change in direction for the Anglican Communion.

Our presence at General Convention will be our most expensive undertaking so far, requiring funds for travel, lodging, meals, buttons, brochures, etc. We estimate that this project will cost more than $3,000 US. Your help is urgently needed. Please consider making a generous donation to this important effort.

Use the "Donate" button below.  You do not need to join PayPal to make a donation.

FOR NO ANGLICAN COVENANT COALITION EXPENSES AT GC12

 

REMEMBER THIS...

UPDATE: Or as Gov Bobby Jindal of the Gret Stet of Loosiana succinctly puts it - "Obamneycare".

In a brief slip of the tongue while discussing the Supreme Court’s health-care ruling, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal invoked the term “Obomney’’ care, a phrase that does Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney no favors.
....

“There’s only one candidate, Gov. Romney, who has committed that he will repeal the Obomney, uh, the Obamacare tax increase,’’ Mr. Jindal said.

Oops.

H/T to David A on Facebook.

SHAME ON YOU, SEN. VITTER

From my inbox today:

Dear Friend,

The Supreme Court decision on Obamacare is obviously an extremely disappointing ruling. But I am more committed than ever to repealing Obamacare outright.

  

Obamacare may have been judged constitutional in this clumsy way, but I think it's also been proved a bad idea since its passage that's making things worse.  It continues to increase the cost of health care services and puts the federal government between patients and doctors.

I’m sure President Obama and his liberal allies that forced this law through Congress will try to spin the Supreme Court ruling as a major victory, but the bottom line is Obamacare is a disaster.
 
This decision is misguided - it rewrites the Obamacare mandate as a tax in order to uphold it. But that also makes clear that President Romney and a Republican Congress can repeal this all through reconciliation - with a simple majority in the Senate. That's what I'll demand, what I'll fight tirelessly for.
At the beginning of this Congressional session I introduced leading bill in the Senate to fully repeal Obamacare, and I’ll continue to work tirelessly to get that passed.
Sincerely,

David Vitter
United States Senator

Dear Sen. Vitter,

I am not your friend, nor have I ever voted for you.

A member of my family has a job that provides no health insurance benefits  Greater numbers of people are finding themselves in a similar situation.  What you call the Obamacare disaster is already helping her buy health insurance.  What would you offer to replace Obamacare?  You have your safe government health care plan for you and your family.  Would you call your health insurance socialized medicine?  The government pays.  Why should not every American citizen have access to the same health care benefits as you and your family?

Shame on you and your fellow Republicans and your announcement of your intentions to repeal the Affordable Care Act.  Where is your compassion and concern for the common good of your fellow citizens?

Your constituent, but not your friend,

June Butler

OBAMA HEALTH CARE UPHELD

Esquire Politics ‏@ESQPolitics

From SCOTUSblog - bottom line: entire ACA is upheld, with exception that federal govt's power to terminate Medicaid funds is narrowly read.

MSNBCNews:

In a dramatic victory for President Barack Obama, the Supreme Court upheld the 2010 health care law Thursday, preserving Obama’s landmark legislative achievement.

The majority opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who held that the law was a valid exercise of Congress’s power to tax.

R. I. P. NORA EPHRON

Obituary in the New York Times.

Nora Ephron, the essayist, author and filmmaker who challenged and thrived in the male-dominated worlds of movies and journalism and was loved, respected and feared for her wit, died on Tuesday of leukemia. She was 71.
....

She was tough on others — Bernstein's marital transgressions were immortalized by the horndog spouse in "Heartburn," a man "capable of having sex with a Venetian blind" — and relentless about herself. She wrote openly about her difficult childhood, her failed relationships, her doubts about her physical appearance and the hated intrusion of age.
....

Her screenwriting credits included "Heartburn," the nuclear power drama "Silkwood" and the romantic comedy "When Harry Met Sally ..." She twice directed the team of Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks, in "Sleepless in Seattle" and "You've Got Mail," and also worked with John Travolta (in the fantasy "Michael"), Steve Martin ("Mixed Nuts") and Nicole Kidman ("Bewitched").

I remember reading Heartburn and thinking, "Wow!  Go get him, girl!" Nora was pregnant, for crying out loud!  

Thank you, Nora, for making us laugh and making us cry.  We will miss you.  

Thanks to Ann V. for the link.

THE INDIFFERENT BULL

A farmer goes in half with a friend to buy a bull so he can increase his stock.

A couple of weeks later the friend comes by to see how his investment is doing.

The farmer complains that the bull just eats grass and won't even look at the cows.  His friend suggests that a veterinarian have a look at the bull.

The following week his friend returns to see if the vet helped.

The farmer looks delighted: "That bull has taken care of all my cows, broke through the fence, and has even serviced all my neighbor's cows!"

"Wow," says his friend, "what did the vet do to that bull?"

"Just gave him some pills'" said the farmer.

"What kind of pills?" asked his friend.

"I don't know, but they sort of taste like peppermint."


Cheers,

Paul (A.)



(I didn't get the joke right away then, "Ha, ha, ha!")

Picture from Wikipedia.

GC12, RESTRUCTURING, BUDGET, AND RESTRUCTURING BY BUDGET

My head is spinning from reading posts about General Convention and what will take place in Indianapolis - about budgets, restructuring, and restructuring by budget.  Neither budgets nor restructuring institutions is my particular area of interest,  nor are they my areas of expertise.  From the viewpoint of a humble person in the pew, my overall impression is of a tug of war over diminishing resources between those in favor of further centralization and those who wish to retain ideals of a church that functions with a measure of democracy.  I freely admit that my overall picture may, indeed, be distorted, but I am trying to understand the present situation in the church as best I can.

By default, I lean in favor of democratic ideals and practices.  That's not to say that I wish to get rid of bishops, because I do not.  What I'd like from the bishops is that they view themselves as servants of all in their particular dioceses, and for the Presiding Bishop to view her/himself as the servant of the whole church.  "It will not be so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant..."

Since I have little expertise and knowledge in the areas I mention, I refer you to others who know much more than I.  I'll attempt to place the posts in the order I read them, not necessarily in the order they were written.  I urge you to read the posts to which I link in their entirety.   Judging them by my brief quotes will not do the authors justice.

First of all is the crie de coeur from Katie Sherrod, who serves on the Executive Committee of TEC.  Katie was a pillar of strength in the continuing Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth after the schism.

I left that meeting deeply troubled, not by the criticism the Council was getting – I’ve been a writer for newspapers and television much too long to get my feelings hurt by criticism. What troubled me was that leaders I admire and trusted seemed to me to be acting in confusing ways – saying things that were contradicted by their actions.  Again and again they urged Council to see that ministry is carried out as “close to the ground” as possible and by those people who can do it best, which is usually lay people in congregations across the church. Yet what they keep doing is to try to operate from a top-down model.

I began to pray for clarity and guidance.

Much of the rest of the commentary seemed to me to bounce off Katie's heartfelt post.

Tobias Haller weighs in with "Storms and Structure":

So my appeal, brothers and sisters, is that of Jesus, “Peace, be still.” Most importantly, can we focus on actual proposals and legislation free from any attributions of motive or power-play, and judge them on their merits? Could we take a breath , count to ten, and refocus our attention from the ad hominem to the substance of the tasks actually at hand, with less of a sense of urgency and panic and apocalyptic? Think for a moment about just how much the decisions on the budget, and the resolutions of General Convention will touch your parish, or your ministry, for good or ill. Stop trying to solve all the problems and save the world. Jesus did that already. He is asleep in the stern. We can do our part to assist in that ministry and mission, but our efficiency at that task is seriously encumbered by panic and busyness that accomplishes little work. Can we begin by trusting each other rather than assuming the worst? Can we approach our work as colleagues rather than as adversaries? 

Then Muthah+ at Stone of Witness:

Often times our bishops get in the habit of ‘doing for’ others rather than doing things ‘with others.’  And here lies the problem.  It is all too easy to for clergy to do something themselves that they think is a wonderful solution and present it to the rest of the church only to find that it isn’t accepted.  Then we are likely to think the people ungrateful when it is not received joyfully.  But it is the process that has been ignored.  It is the listening that has not been appealed to.  The process of becoming community in the production of that budget is what has been lost.  The process has not produced “Church” that sense of community that makes us all members in the same standing. 

Other posts caught my interest, but you have enough homework for now.  I will probably post again with more links to similar subject matter.

CONGRATULATIONS BRYAN! ANOTHER GRADUATION

Bryan in black tie rather than cap and gown

That's Bryan, my grandson who lives in New Orleans.  Jesuit High School graduates do not wear cap and gown for graduation.  He looked so handsome in his tux.  I had to help Bryan with his cuff links and studs, as no one else knew the trick.

At the ceremony, the group of boys were well-rehearsed and moved individually and as a group like military men in formation.  When I was in high school in NOLA, Jesuit boys wore military uniforms.  The Jesuits ran a tight ship then.  I don't know about now, but the graduates toed the line.

My grandson did not know all the words to the fight song, which is sung at sports competitions, but I did, because my high school friends and I attended the Jesuit football games.  I sang the fight song for the family after a couple of glasses of wine and embarrassed them all.

Jesuit graduates on the stage

We were seated in the nosebleed section at the Pontchartrain Center, since none of us were interested in arriving two hours early.  I never found Bryan in the group until his name was called, and he went up to get his diploma.  Yay Bryan!  Shouting or applause for individuals was prohibited, and the audience mostly heeded the rule. These days, graduations move along rather quickly, which is a relief from the long ceremonies which I remember from days past.

Bryan will join his cousin Joey at LSU in the fall. 

Grandpère and brother Andrew

A rather nice photo of Grandpère and Andrew, Bryan's brother.  How 'bout Andrew's red bow tie?  An unflattering photo of the ladies, my daughter and me, is not included in the post.

Bryan was known as "the antiseptic baby", because he was the first child in the family, and his parents took very seriously the doctor's caution not to let anyone touch him except the parents and me, who was there to help.  I remember a young neighbor coming to visit, and Bryan's Dad told him at the door, "We're not letting anyone touch the baby."  The young man walked over to the bassinet to see Bryan with his hands in the air, as if to say, "Look!  I'm not touching."  When the next two boys came along, the rules eased up, as there's nothing like having another little one in the house to spread germs, so the Mom and Dad gave up.

Bryan walked at the age of 7 months, but I think his brain was not developed enough, because he walked into walls and banged himself up at an alarming rate.  His crib had to be padded, because he pulled himself up to stand at an even earlier age, and he would then let go and bang his head against the side of the crib.  His parents missed the big event of the first steps, as I was taking care of Bryan at the time.

Anyway, all's well that ends well.