Is there somewhere on earth where the Sunday afternoons are so interminably long that ones life would be more enhanced by reading in detail the Reflections on the Lambeth Conference 2008 than by, say, watching another re-run of The Great Escape or re-attempting a Sudoku puzzle? Perhaps there is, but for most of us life is too short for me to recommend the exercise.

What was the Lambeth Conference convened to achieve? The answer is: nothing. Remember, with the exception of the very first (and with interruptions for world wars), Lambeth Conferences have occurred decennially. They are held because it is time to hold one, not (essentially) because there is something that needs to be done which only a gathering of Anglican bishops from all the corners of the globe can achieve.

Thus, despite the acknowledgement within the Reflections document itself that the Anglican Communion is in crisis’, it was possible to organize this conference with the express intention of avoiding confronting the issue. Behind the scenes, of course, the intention was that by avoiding confrontation, a resolution of sorts could be approached, since keeping everyone together would further establish the status quo as de facto policy.

Publicly, the means to this end was a bastardized African import, the so-called indaba groups. These, one suspects, as much resembled the real thing as village-hall yoga does the Indian mystic tradition. Historically, an indaba is a meeting of Africans, not Anglican bishops, and brings with it the assumptions of African, not western liberal, culture, one of which is not ‘constantly avoiding confronting the issue’ (thus, from an old ANC Daily Briefing on the internet: ‘Sport and Recreation Minister Ngconde Balfour has called a one-day indaba to thrash out the problems plaguing professional boxing in South Africa’). The organizers of the Lambeth Conference adopted the term indaba because it sounded good, but used it for their own ends.

And now a Conference called for no particular reason, holding meetings designed to reach no particular conclusions, has produced not a report but a series of reflections.
Having decided to decide nothing, it appears that the Conference felt it must comment on everything. Thus the reader who is willing may wade through pages of good intentions about good causes ranging from disaster relief to carbon footprints. Yet, of course, nothing is (nor could be) specific; not even the Gospel which, it is claimed, lies at the heart of the Communion’s concept of mission. In reality, as we know, there is no shared concept of ‘Gospel’ across the Anglican Communion, and so in matters of religion specifically there can be no shared concept of ministry. (Indeed, I amused myself with the thought that the Bishop of Durham, Dr Tom Wright, who addressed the Conference on the authority of Scripture, would have held that almost none of the delegates were gospel preachers’ in his own terms – certainly not Dr Rowan Williams, who has his own peculiar take on the topic.)

Moving beyond matters of doctrine, however, the Reflections unabashedly define the social mission of the Anglican Communion in terms of fulfilling the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals. (Quite what would happen to the mission of the Church were these goals to be achieved does not seem to have crossed anyone’s mind).
But what about the elephant in the living room – the crisis in the Communion which prompted so many bishops not even to attend? Thanks to the process set up by the Conference organizers, the elephant is, of course, admired from every angle, but remember, there is no intention to remove it from the room. The last Lambeth Conference spoke clearly and concisely on the subject; yet we have been reminded by both words and deeds that such pronouncements have no binding force (despite the Conference being acknowledged as one of the instruments of the Communion, para. 136).

So no matter what the indaba groups may have shared or the Reflections may reflect, only the pathologically optimistic will suppose anything is going to deter the western churches from promoting and supporting the revisionist agenda. As many have noted, the dominant voice on campus, other than the bishops themselves, was that of the many pro-LGBT groups, not only in the market-place but via a daily ‘newspaper’.

What fewer seem yet to have noticed is that, as defined in the Reflections, one of the three ‘moratoria’ on actions currently ‘dividing’ the Communion would require sanctions against the Church of England itself, namely ‘Episcopal ordinations of partnered homosexual people’ [para. 131]. These are, of course, entirely permissible within the law of the land and the guidelines set out in the 2005 statement by the House of Bishops on Civil Partnerships: ‘The House of Bishops does not regard entering into a civil partnership [with someone of the same sex] as intrinsically incompatible with holy orders’ [para. 19]. True, the statement goes on to say that this is ‘provided the person concerned is willing to give assurances to his or her bishop that the relationship is consistent with the standards for the clergy set out in Issues in Human Sexuality (i.e. is sexually celibate).’
However, the Reflections clearly need to be more careful on this issue at least. And in any case, the latitude exercised by some English bishops in refusing, as the Bishop of Chelmsford puts it, ‘to engage in intrusive behaviour into the private lives of their clergy’ means that the conditions of the moratoria are almost certainly being breached in the English Provinces.

In any case, we keep returning to the question of whether anything coming out of this Lambeth Conference can add to what has gone before or to what is currently in process. Remarks contained in the Reflections suggest anxieties about the Instruments of Communion, a lack of confidence in the Windsor Process, suspicion about the Covenant (specifically when it comes to any disciplinary process) and a determination that the proposed Pastoral Forum should be toothless – a ‘pastoral’ body without legal powers acting solely at the discretion of the Primate of the Province concerned.

One is reminded finally (and ironically) of Oscar Wilde’s dictum: ‘The Lords Temporal say nothing, the Lords Spiritual have nothing to say’ Sadly, we may modify his final comment about the House of Commons to read: ‘the Lambeth Reflections has nothing to say and says it.’

–This article appears in the September 2008 edition of New Directions magazine, page 10

Every four years, Democrats in the United States make the same mistake. They underestimate the appeal of the Republican Party to Middle America, and then reduce their own appeal by belittling it. Now, Democrats are falling into the same trap again with Sarah Palin, John McCain’s vice-presidential nominee.

Palin is a tremendously popular pick among the party base, which had previously been unenthusiastic about McCain’s candidacy. These are not people who are interested in gender as such; they like Palin for her persona and her politics. So far, though, Palin’s critics have concentrated mainly on her persona. In her speech to the Republican National Convention this week, Palin has a great opportunity to take advantage of these tone-deaf critics.

Most obviously, Palin can benefit from criticism of her family life. Some commentators have attacked Palin for running for vice-president when she has a new baby with special needs. It is ironic for anyone on the left to say that a woman should just stay home with the kids. Never mind that they would never say such a thing about a male candidate (or a female Democratic one). This makes Palin more relatable to working moms, and the families who pitch in to help them. It makes her critics look sexist.

Read it all.

I will consider posting comments on this article which are submitted first by email to: KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

Dear All,

Despite the Geraldo and Anderson Cooper hype we’re hanging in. We have about three more hours of heavy winds as the backside of the storm pushes through. Then we’ll have to watch the storm surge until about midnight. Of course, we remember after Katrina being given the “all clear” and making plans to return home when we heard reports of “water coming into the City.” So more cautious optimism.

We still haven’t heard any solid reports yet on the condition of the River Parishes that are taking the direct hit. Need to keep them in prayer and be ready to help dig out. Hearing some reports of the Mississippi coast really getting thumped as well.

Here on the North Shore we’re safe and sound. No power, kinda hot and humid in the house, but the kids are playing and all good. I’m up after a brief nap, kinda tired from the storm run-up and preparations. Our Tennessee contingent apparently doing well.

Thanks to all for your prayers, concern and support as ever. I’ll post further updates on the blog as reports come in. Many blessings,

–The Reverend Jerry and Stacy Kramer, Church of the Annuncation, New Orleans

In a statement, Governor Palin said: “Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows that she has our unconditional love and support….

The family’s statement [went on to say] “Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family. We ask the media, respect our daughter and Levi’s privacy as has always been the tradition of children of candidates.”

At a rally at a ballpark Saturday evening in Washington, Pa., Bristol did not join the rest of her family on stage.

“Then we have our daughter Bristol, she’s on the bus with the newborn, and then we have our daughter Willow, who is here, and our youngest daughter Piper,’’ Ms. Palin said as she introduced her family. “On that bus we have our son Trig, who is a beautiful baby boy we welcomed into the world just in April. It’s his naptime, so he is with his big sister on the bus. But we thank them for being here. “

Read it all.

Update: The official press release is here.

Another update: There is more from the LA Times here as well.

Dear All,

What we’re seeing now is some overtopping of the Industrial Canal toward the Gentilly side. Please pray the water level doesn’t rise any further and that all the levee walls hold. There is also some concern that barges — which shouldn’t be there in first place, some heads are going to roll — could break loose and damage a wall a la Katrina. We need to make it through this surge period. Obvious the walls were not rebuilt high enough. If this were a CAT 4, as originally projected, we’d really be in the soup (literally).

Also, folks closer to the coast are really getting thumped. Please pray for their safety and provision. We’ll be ready to help them all we can once this passes.

Bottom line: we need serious and continuous prayer coverage. Blessings,

–The Reverend Jerry and Stacy Kramer, Church of the Annunciation, New Orleans

Read it carefully and read it all. I caught this on podcast during the morning run, and should have figured that one of my favorite analysis programs did so well. The punditocracy this week was just really poor on the Palin pick, and nearly all the responses said so much more about the analyst than about Governor Palin. Quite revealing, really–KSH

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain has chosen Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, NBC News has learned.

She would be the first woman ever to serve on a Republican presidential ticket. The pro-life Palin would also be the first Alaskan ever to appear on a national ticket.

Palin, 44, was elected Alaska’s first woman governor in 2006. The state’s voters had grown weary of career politician Gov. Frank Murkowski, whom she defeated in the GOP primary.

Read it all.

Some Americans are having a change of heart about mixing religion and politics. A new survey finds a narrow majority of the public saying that churches and other houses of worship should keep out of political matters and not express their views on day-to-day social and political matters. For a decade, majorities of Americans had voiced support for religious institutions speaking out on such issues.

The new national survey by the Pew Research Center reveals that most of the reconsideration of the desirability of religious involvement in politics has occurred among conservatives. Four years ago, just 30% of conservatives believed that churches and other houses of worship should stay out of politics. Today, 50% of conservatives express this view.

As a result, conservatives’ views on this issue are much more in line with the views of moderates and liberals than was previously the case. Similarly, the sharp divisions between Republicans and Democrats that previously existed on this issue have disappeared.

There are other signs in the new poll about a potential change in the climate of opinion about mixing religion and politics. First, the survey finds a small but significant increase since 2004 in the percentage of respondents saying that they are uncomfortable when they hear politicians talk about how religious they are – from 40% to 46%. Again, the increase in negative sentiment about religion and politics is much more apparent among Republicans than among Democrats.

Read it all.

The original article on which the article posted yesterday was based is here. (Hat tip: BM)

I will post comments on that article here so as to prevent confusion between the two threads. I will also consider posting additional comments on this fuller article submitted first by email to Kendall’s E-mail: KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

I try hard to read from various points of view, and to follow that practice I sometimes follow Katie Sherrod’s blog. It is an acquired taste to be sure since she is so very angry at the diocese of Fort Worth in general and the diocesan Bishop, Jack Iker, in particular. Unsurprising, Ms. Sherrod was not at all happy with Lambeth 2008 in a number of ways, but she was encouraged that it was so different from Lambeth 1998 which she described as “brutal.” Why brutal? Listen to her own words:

[At Lambeth 1998 the leadership sought] to push for legislative solutions to hot button issues. It was a process that left deep wounds that even a decade later were still painful for many.

Got that? She doesn’t want “legislative solutions to hot button issues.” But of course the 2003 General Convention was exactly that. And the wounds there are deep, very deep indeed. So for Ms. Sherrod and other reappraisers legislative solutions to hot button issues are great when they are ones she agrees with, but “brutal” when she does not. The double standard simply screams out for recognition in the present fractious climate of TEC which is living with the fruit of precisely the process Ms. Sherrod deplores–KSH.

I live in a culture that is used to exercising its freedom. We live in cultural context where those conversations can be had.

When you talk with people in other parts of the world, they are dealing with life and death issues. The conversations about human sexuality, they often don’t have time to deal with it, and when it comes up they are dealing with a context in which homosexuality is criminalized.

What did you bring to the table in terms of explaining the American experience?

They were able to hear from me and other bishops from the U.S. about the possibility of the holiness of life of GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) people.

We’re accused of not embracing the authority of Scripture. I was able to explain to them I do embrace the authority of Scripture, but I understand some parts of Scripture differently because of my cultural context.

Read it all.

From here:

An article appeared in Tuesday’s Philadelphia Bulletin regarding the sentencing of Bishop Bennison. That article is inaccurate. The pre-sentencing process has not yet been completed, and the Trial Court has not yet imposed a sentence on Bishop Bennison.

In the light of recent comments made by Archbishop Alan Harpur, there is a need for a fresh Biblical integrity within the Anglican Irish House of Bishops.

The Primate’s remarks inferred that, in certain circumstances, homosexual behaviour should be viewed as a ”˜natural’ (acceptable?) pattern of human behaviour.

Such an assertion is at odds with Scripture, common sense living and historic Christian practice.

Read it all.

The controversy within the Anglican communion over same-sex issues, considered again at the recently concluded Lambeth Conference, and concern about human rights in China in the context of the Olympic Games, throw up an awkward question.

To what extent is the promotion of human rights a western colonial exercise?

To what extent are so-called “self-evident truths” arising from the Judeo-Christian tradition – still dominant as a pattern of thinking in the West if not any more where religious practice is concerned – simply by-products of a particularly successful culture rather than being “truths” that genuinely have the universal application claimed.

You might ask the same of democracy, still so new where so many of our fellow EU countries are concerned. It remains a novel political system for most countries in eastern Europe and for such western European countries as Spain and Portugal, as well as Greece farther east.

Read it all but when you do remember that Archbishop Rowan Williams made it quite clear that the debate is precisely NOT about rights:

I might just add, perhaps, a note here. One complication in discussing all this is that assumption, readily made, that the blessing of a same sex union and / or the ordination of someone in an active same-sex relationship is simply a matter of human rights.

I’m not saying that is claimed by people within the church but you hear that from time to time. You hear it in the secular press. And that’s an assumption that I can’t accept because I think the issues about what conditions the church lays down for the blessing of unions has to be shaped by its own thinking, its own praying.

Now, there is perfectly reasonable theological reflection on this in some areas, I’m not saying there isn’t. But I don’t want to short-circuit that argument by saying it’s just a matter of rights.

Therefore to say the rights and dignities of gay and lesbian people, as people in society, is not what we are disagreeing about. I hope and pray anyway.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

The Fourteenth Lambeth Conference has come to an end. The “Reflections Paper” I described to you yesterday has been released (all 44 pages of it!), and the Archbishop of Canterbury has just concluded his Third and Final Presidential Address, stating unambiguously that Jesus Christ is, indeed, “the Way, the Truth, and the Life,” and that we find our unity in him.

Shortly the “Reflections Paper” will be available online (Anglican Communion web site, also the Episcopal News Service web site).

In our Indaba group this morning we discussed our discomfort at the thought that this Paper might be read as if it had the character and (moral) authority of the Reports and Resolutions of previous Lambeth Conferences. We drafted a brief Introductory Statement that we wish to be attached to the Paper. (Note: this is the Statement of OUR group of 40 Bishops, not that of the Conference as a whole.)

Nevertheless, if you download (or otherwise receive) the “Reflections Paper” it would be my hope, personally, that you read it in the light of the following Introduction:

“The statement which follows cannot hope to capture the mood and experience of the Lambeth Conference 2008.

“Cold words are inadequate to express the quality and passion of the journey we have shared. We have listened intently to one another, we have laughed together and wept together. We have discovered in our Bible Study and Indaba Groups the kind of friendship and fellowship which is life-changing.

“This statement represents a distillation of insights and opinions, not from a single group but from 16 Indaba Groups and it therefore takes the form of a patchwork which no editorial process can make seamless without creating a garment that never existed.

“In order to read this document with appreciation you must allow yourself to imagine that you are in a safe space with others whom you have come to love and whose opinions you have grown to respect at the deepest level. Only the reader can breathe love, humor, tears, admiration, urgency and imagination into this document so that it can truly live, and so that the experiences that gave it birth can be seen to have animated our renewed relationships.”

Again, my profound thanks to all of you for your prayerful support of the Bishops gathered here in Canterbury for the past three weeks.

Warmest regards in our Lord,

The Right Rev. John W. Howe
Episcopal Bishop of Central Florida

Rebecca Anne Binder, the daughter of Dr. Martha Connell and Dr. Jack Binder of Scarsdale, N.Y., was married on Saturday to Amanda Elizabeth Laws, the daughter of Oneida Méndez-Laws and the Rev. Thomas Laws of Montclair, N.J. Ms. Binder’s father, who was authorized by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, officiated at St. John’s Episcopal Church in Charlestown, Mass., where Ms. Laws’s father, an Episcopal priest, participated in a blessing ceremony.

Read it all.