[In his Advent letter Archbishop Rowan Williams] also suggests that this working group “will also have to consider whether in the present circumstances it is possible for provinces or individual bishops at odds with the expressed mind of the Communion to participate fully in representative Communion agencies, including ecumenical bodies. Its responsibility will be to weigh current developments in the light of the clear recommendations of Windsor and of the subsequent statements from the ACC (Anglican Consultative Council) and the Primates’ Meeting; itwill thus also be bound to consider the exact status of bishops ordained by one province for ministry in another. At the moment, the question of ”˜who speaks for the Communion?’ is surrounded by much unclarity and urgently needs resolution”¦Not everyone carrying the name of Anglican can claim to speak authentically for the identity we share as a global fellowship.” These are enormous challenges and I, and the committee, need your prayers in the days ahead.

Perhaps the Archbishop got to the bottom line when he illustrated the issue as being “whether or how far we can recognise the same Gospel and ministry” in one another. We’ll see if we have both the wisdom and the will to arrive together at the yet-to-be determined far shore. We’re stuck, and we need to look for ways to become un-stuck.

Read it all.

Baroness Caroline Cox, several times this past weekend, quoted Archbishop Ben Kwashi: “We have a message worth living for; we have a message worth dying for; don’t you [in the West] compromise the message we are dying for.”

I heard from a friend in England several weeks ago that an announcement was imminent that would be very good news for the orthodox in the U.S. I learned from others that it would involve a plan for churches to connect to the Anglican Communion apart from the Episcopal Church – this is what we have been waiting for since the vestry letter September 2006. It was reported that this would have the blessing of the Presiding Bishop and the Archbishop of Canterbury. I hoped that this would allow Christ Church and churches like ours to disassociate from the Episcopal Church with the blessing of Canterbury, yet still remain a member of the Anglican Communion.

This is the news I’ve been waiting for but, I’m sad to say that it is not good news.

It turns out that the four U.S. bishops have only resurrected an old idea that was earlier rejected as inadequate by orthodox Episcopalians, i.e. the Presiding Bishop’s plan for alternate episcopal oversight. The plan of the four Windsor bishops is unworkable on every level. It will not help orthodox churches in hostile dioceses because it depends on the good will of revisionist bishops towards their orthodox congregations. For no reason at all bishops can say “no” to episcopal visitors (Communion Partners), and can still require churches to financially support the Episcopal Church (in their lawsuits against conservative congregations!). How is this good news for traditional churches? And for churches like Christ Church, it provides no way to connect to the Anglican Communion apart from the Episcopal Church. No wonder the Presiding Bishop endorsed it; it’s her plan and she gives up nothing! The plan of these four bishops is a last gasp from a dying institution.

Not only does this plan fail to address any real issues, it threatens to change the focus of discussion in dangerous ways. Instead of calling the Episcopal Church to repentance for breaking the trust of the Anglican Communion, these four (and other Windsor bishops?) are now figuring out ways to let the Episcopal Church continue with what it is doing now and in the future. The problem for these four bishops is not the Episcopal Church, but orthodox churches and dioceses that threaten the unity because they can no longer associate with the Episcopal Church. The strategy is to blame Peter Akinola and Bob Duncan for the disunity we face, rather than the Episcopal Church who repeatedly refused to respond positively to the pleas of the Anglican Communion.

Everything in this discussion hinges on the “pendulum.” Windsor bishops are 100% invested in the idea that the Episcopal Church, that has swung wildly to the liberal side, will one day swing back to a moderate centrist theology. But there is no indication in recent history or church history in general that there will be such a swing. There is no pendulum. Instead, I believe, the Episcopal Church is set on a trajectory away from mainstream Christianity that will never again intersect with mainstream Christianity. There are simply two churches within the Episcopal Church today with two totally different theologies and agendas. My concern is that we might get 5, 10, 20 years down this road before realizing that the likes of Louie Crew, Presiding Bishop Schori and Bishop Jon Bruno (and the next generation of revisionists that will control the Episcopal Church) will never concede to anything like a more balanced view of theology and morals.

Bishop Lillibridge gave a forceful address at the Diocesan Council last Friday for the essentials of the faith (See the next blog entry–KSH. It was heartening to hear him so strongly upholding the core teachings of the faith as nonnegotiables. As he attends the meetings of the Windsor Continuation Group in the months proceeding Lambeth we need to be praying for him. I will ask him to take to their meetings our concerns (and of many in West Texas from the feedback we’ve received) that churches who cannot in conscience submit any longer to the Episcopal Church be given a way to continue being “Anglican.” Hopefully this Continuation Group will uphold some of the disciplinary portions of the Windsor Report, something that hasn’t happened to date.

I am thoroughly energized by what God is doing at Christ Church these days. Our effort at Council last week was a remarkable witness to the vitality and life we are experiencing in the Holy Spirit. Leslie Kingman and Linda Camp, and the over 200 volunteers, deserve a huge thanks for showing our bishops and diocese that we are positive about our future and that we want to help guide and influence our diocese. Caroline Cox was overwhelmed by the spirit of our worship and fellowship on Sunday. I also appreciate the work the vestry and others are doing to collect information on the areas pertaining to the realignment.

The following is offered with the unanimous support of our parish leaders (meeting at the vestry retreat a few weeks ago) to assure our congregation that we continue steadfast in our mission and core values:

As the Vestry of Christ Church
»We remain firmly committed to Jesus Christ and the authority of Scripture.
»We are prayerfully seeking God’s wisdom and direction in light of the dilemma within the national Episcopal Church.
»We are preparing for our future, valuing our community and our rich heritage.

–The Rev. Chuck Collins is rector, Christ Church, San Antonio, Texas

More than a quarter of adult Americans have left the faith of their childhood to join another religion or no religion, according to a survey of religious affiliation by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

The report, titled “U.S. Religious Landscape Survey,” depicts a highly fluid and diverse national religious life. If shifts among Protestant denominations are included, then it appears that 44 percent of Americans have switched religious affiliations.

For at least a generation, scholars have noted that more Americans are moving among faiths, as denominational loyalty erodes. But the survey, based on telephone interviews with more than 35,000 Americans, offers one of the clearest views yet of that trend, scholars said. The United States Census does not track religious affiliation.

It shows, for example, that every religion is losing and gaining members, but that the Roman Catholic Church “has experienced the greatest net losses as a result of affiliation changes.” The survey also indicates that the group that had the greatest net gain was the unaffiliated. Sixteen percent of American adults say they are not part of any organized faith, which makes the unaffiliated the country’s fourth-largest “religious group.”

Read it all.

Kentucky Episcopalians heard a combination pep talk and Bible study yesterday from one of the leaders in efforts to keep the fragile Anglican Communion together despite what seem irreconcilable differences over sexuality and theology.

The Rev. Katherine Grieb told the annual meeting of the Diocese of Kentucky that divisions in the church are as old as the church itself, and Bible passages offer differing models on whether to split or stay together despite differences.

We’re having a family argument,” said Grieb, a Virginia Theological Seminary biblical scholar and a member of a team drafting a “covenant” to hold together the Anglican Communion, which consists of the Episcopal Church and other national churches descended from the Church of England.

“There never was a golden age when everybody in the church agreed about everything,” she said at the gathering at St. Peter’s Episcopal Church in southwestern Jefferson County.

And the problem with this argument is-say it again after me–there are different kinds of differences. Read it all.

Update This is worth rereading also, it includes this:

It is so very sad to see a …[Church leader] once again parlaying the ECUSA hierarchy’s offical party line which is: to be Episcopal means to agree to disagree agreeably, we have been through struggles before, and this is yet another struggle through which the church will find her way.

The problem is the hidden theological assumption here that all theological differences are the same. They are NOT.

The active clergy of the diocese of South Carolina are meeting with the Presiding Bishop in Mount Pleasant this morning. Thank you for your prayers.

More importantly, for Toplady’s verses, the water flowing from the rock was a type or foreshadowing of the water that flowed, together with blood, from the side of Christ when he was pierced by a spear as he hung on the cross.

Toplady and his congregation were equally aware of the water that flowed from the right side of the temple in the vision of Ezekiel (47:1). That verse is sung round the world at Eastertide (and has been set by great composers such as Victoria) during the Asperges, the ritual sprinkling of the people at the beginning of Mass. That is not a practice of which Toplady would have approved, although the biblical reference is the same.

And this is what is so strange about Toplady’s devotion to the wounds of Christ, the real subject of his hymn. They (standing for Christ’s one sacrifice in his suffering and death) have saving power. The hymn writer wants to “hide himself” in them – at face value a grisly desire. Yet it is one that medieval mystics expressed too – Julian of Norwich springs to mind.

Read it all.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

It is not quite 11:30 PM here in Orlando. In London it is not quite 4:30 AM tomorrow. And Jonathan Petre of the London Telegraph has just released a story about yesterday’s meeting between four American Bishops (Howe, Central Florida; MacPherson, Western Louisiana; Smith, North Dakota; and Stanton, Dallas) with the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church.

Petre could not have been much more inaccurate! Here are his opening remarks:

“The Archbishop of Canterbury is backing secret plans to create a ‘parallel’ Church for American conservatives to avert fresh splits over homosexuality…. Dr Rowan Williams has held confidential talks with senior American bishops and theologians who oppose the pro-gay policies of their liberal leaders….
“Dr Williams is desperate to minimize further damage in the run up to the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference this summer which could be boycotted by more than a fifth of the world’s bishops….
“According to insiders, Dr Williams has given his blessing to the plans to create an enclave for up to 20 conservative American bishops that would insulate them from their liberal colleagues.”

No, Dear Friends. Here is a summary of what we presented to the Presiding Bishop yesterday. We were not quite ready to release it, but in the light of this significant distortion, I am doing so tonight:

Communion Partners
In the context of the Episcopal Visitors concept announced by the Presiding Bishop at the House of Bishops meeting in New Orleans, a number of us have reflected a need for a larger gathering which we are calling Communion Partners. We believe such a gathering will afford us the opportunity for mutual support, accountability and fellowship; and present an important sign of our connectedness in and vision for the Anglican Communion as it moves through this time of stress and renewal.
Purpose:
Ӣ To provide a visible link for those concerned to the Anglican Communion
Many within our dioceses and in congregations in other dioceses seek to be assured of their connection to the Anglican Communion. Traditionally, this has been understood in terms of bishop-to-bishop relationships. Communion Partners fleshes out this connection in a significant and symbolic way.

Ӣ To provide fellowship, support and a forum for mutual concerns between bishops
The Bishops who have been designated Episcopal Visitors together with others who might well consider being included in this number share many concerns about the Anglican Communion and its future, and look to work together with Primates and Bishops from the Global South. In addition, we believe we all have need of mutual encouragement, prayer, and reassurance. The Communion Partners will be a forum for these kinds of relationships.

Ӣ To provide a partnership to work toward the Anglican Covenant and according to Windsor principles..
The Bishops will work together according to the principles outlined in the Windsor Report and seek a comprehensive Anglican Covenant at the Lambeth Conference and beyond.
Scope:

”¢ The Communion Partners will be informally gathered ”“ there will be no “charter” or formal structure

Ӣ Are committed to non-boundary-crossing: the relationships will be governed by mutual respect and proceed by invitation and cooperation

Ӣ Will work with mutual cooperation within and beyond the partnership

Participants:
Ӣ The Episcopal Visitors who desire to participate (EVs named at House of Bishops New Orleans)

Ӣ Those Bishops who are willing to serve as EVs

Ӣ Initially, five Primates of the Global South: West Indies, Tanzania, Indian Ocean, Burundi, Middle East

Transparency:
Ӣ Communication of activities with both the Presiding Bishop and Archbishop of Canterbury

Ӣ Respect for the canonical realities, integrities and structures of the Episcopal Church and other Churches

Our purpose in meeting with Bishop Schori yesterday was to apprize her of this plan, seek her counsel, and assure her that we remain committed to working within the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, and that the Primates involved in this discussion are NOT involved in “border crossing,” nor would we be. We will visit no congregation without the Diocesan Bishop’s invitation and permission. We do believe this is a step forward, albeit a small one.

I hope this is helpful, and I thank you for your prayers regarding this important meeting.

Warmest regards in our Lord,

The Right Rev. John W. Howe
Episcopal Bishop of Central Florida
1017 East Robinson Street
Orlando, Florida 32801

Wonderfully inspiring.

Now, as Polycarp was entering into the stadium, there came to him a voice from heaven, saying, “Be strong, and show thyself a man, O Polycarp!” No one saw who it was that spoke to him; but those of our brethren who were present heard the voice. And as he was brought forward, the tumult became great when they heard that Polycarp was taken. And when he came near, the proconsul asked him whether he was Polycarp. On his confessing that he was, [the proconsul] sought to persuade him to deny [Christ], saying, “Have respect to thy old age,” and other similar things, according to their custom, [such as], “Swear by the fortune of Cæsar; repent, and say, Away with the Atheists.” But Polycarp, gazing with a stern countenance on all the multitude of the wicked heathen then in the stadium, and waving his hand towards them, while with groans he looked up to heaven, said, “Away with the Atheists.” Referring the words to the heathen, and not to the Christians, as was desired. Then, the proconsul urging him, and saying, “Swear, and I will set thee at liberty, reproach Christ;” Polycarp declared, “Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?”

–The Matyrdom of Polycarp, Chapter IX

O God, the maker of heaven and earth, who didst give to thy venerable servant, the holy and gentle Polycarp, boldness to confess Jesus Christ as King and Saviour, and steadfastness to die for his faith: Give us grace, after his example, to share the cup of Christ and rise to eternal life; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.

Watch it all.

The credit crisis is no longer just a subprime mortgage problem.

As home prices fall and banks tighten lending standards, people with good, or prime, credit histories are falling behind on their payments for home loans, auto loans and credit cards at a quickening pace, according to industry data and economists.

The rise in prime delinquencies, while less severe than the one in the subprime market, nonetheless poses a threat to the battered housing market and weakening economy, which some specialists say is in a recession or headed for one.

Until recently, people with good credit, who tend to pay their bills on time and manage their finances well, were viewed as a bulwark against the economic strains posed by rising defaults among borrowers with blemished, or subprime, credit.

“This collapse in housing value is sucking in all borrowers,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com.

Read it all.

Then there’s over a month until the next contest, in Pennsylvania on April 22. That stretch of time could be key. It could be the moment for many of the uncommitted superdelegates to begin ratifying the choice of Democratic primary voters, and to start moving en masse to Obama.

Many of these superdelegates are elected officials. They tend to care about winning in November. The polls suggest Obama matches up better with John McCain. And the polls are merely echoing the judgment of almost every Democratic elected official from a competitive district or a swing state with whom I’ve spoken. They would virtually all prefer Obama at the top of the ticket.

All of this will move the superdelegates to Obama – perhaps as early as just after March 4, or perhaps not until April 22, or perhaps not even until the last match-up on June 7. But the superdelegates will want to avoid a situation in which they could be in the position of seeming to override the popular vote, or of resolving a bitter battle over whether and how to count votes from Florida and Michigan, at the convention.

And there are, as a final resort, two super-superdelegates (so to speak) who would have the clout to help Democrats achieve closure: Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi. If they stepped forward at the right time, they would earn the gratitude of their party. And they might also enjoy contemplating a derivative effect of their good deed – the fall of the house of Clinton.

Read it all.

Very cool–check it out.

Nearly 100 leading laity in the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh have signed an open letter expressing their “strong support for the godly direction” of Bishop Robert W. Duncan Jr. in removing the diocese from the national church and realigning it with a more biblically conservative province of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The letter, the idea of Edith M. Humphrey, a professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, and Leslie Thyberg, chair of the diocese’s board of examining chaplains, was written in response to a separate letter last month by 12 conservative clergy who broke with the bishop in declaring their intention to remain in the Episcopal Church.

“We were just talking about the letter that the 12 clergy had written openly to the diocese and we were concerned that people might not understand the whole story,” said Dr. Humphrey, a member of the Church of the Ascension in Oakland.

Read it all.

Three days after the voting ended, the race for Democratic delegates in Super Tuesday’s contests was still too close to call. With nearly 1,600 delegates from Tuesday contests awarded, Sen. Barack Obama led by two delegates Friday night, with 91 delegates still to be awarded. Obama won 796 delegates in Tuesday’s contests, to 794 for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to an analysis of voting results by The Associated Press.
In the Republican contest, Sen. John McCain had a commanding lead in the race for delegates.

Nearly a third of the outstanding delegates are from Colorado, a state where Obama won the popular vote. California, a state that Clinton carried, had 20 Democratic delegates still to be awarded. Neither state expected to have complete results before next week.

Obama won the popular vote in 13 states Tuesday, while Clinton won in eight states and American Samoa.

In the overall race for the nomination, Clinton has 1,055 delegates, including separately chosen party and elected officials known as superdelegates. Obama has 998.

A total of 2,025 delegates are need to secure the Democratic nomination.

Read it all. I see on Intrade that Mr. Obama is at 59.2 and Mrs. Clinton is at 38.7.

The Power of Fellowship with the Divine: Vocation

Motive, will and moral character are of themselves insufficient for true leadership if they are not undergirded by an active correspondence or fellowship with God. This is true because man is quite simply a being possessed with a spiritual nature”” an appetite for fellowship with the Divine. Humanity has always listened for the voice of God even when it has rejected those who have spoken on behalf of God. Such fellowship was tantamount to vocation. “God becomes one with whom we correspond and who corresponds with us in our careers, asking for our cooperation and allotting to each a definite sphere of action.” (Leadership, p. 180-181) Such a vocation “”¦can be found only where there is a towering personality more determined to reach us than we it”¦a call superior to that of mere incidental conditions or abstract ideas, sounds in our ears.” This sense of vocation comes from and is sustained by an ongoing fellowship with God. One’s motive, will, and moral character (which in themselves are formed in correspondence with God) are not enough to do what needs to be done: to do what the leader is created and called to do.

Vocation is the power which changed Jacob into Israel, and transformed Moses from merely a passionate avenger of wrong into the Leader of God’s chosen people. God’s transcendent call led each of these patriarchs of Israel into vocation. This vocation, experienced and sustained through fellowship, leads each of them (and us) into petition and praise. This is so woven into the fabric of human nature and God’s response to such petition and worship””which is humankind’s responding love of God””that it only “comes to us in His gift of vocation. We are called by Him, and our consciousness becomes steeped in the power of His call. The sense of vocation is the deepest secret in the lives of the greatest leaders, early and late. The call of need and the call of the crowd are both inspiring, but it is not until there is added to them, and heard through them, the call of God that the Leader is fully equipped to achieve.” (Leadership, p. 189-190)
Mere duty or responsibility is a stinging whip that exhausts and hurts, but when wedded to a sense of vocation it is the food for the journey that has sustained such leaders within the Church as St. Paul, Augustine, Savonarola, Luther, Newman, Phillips Brooks, and such leaders of state as Washington and Lincoln. As supporting evidence for the latter””having referenced a lengthy and extraordinary letter of Phillips Brooks to an inquirer highlighting the increasing sense of vocation he experienced over the years in his priestly ministry””Brent then quotes words Lincoln spoke to the folk of Springfield as he left for the Presidency: “With a task before me greater that that which rested upon Washington, without the assistance of that Divine Being who ever attended him, I cannot succeed. With that assistance I cannot fail. Trusting in Him who can go with me and remain with you, and be everywhere for good, let us confidently hope that all will yet be well. To His care commending you, as I hope in your prayers you will commend me, I bid you and affectionate farewell.” (Leadership, p. 195) Each of these leaders knew that God was behind their lives, “”¦not from any theory learned by rote, but because He told them so individually. No amount of argument could have disturbed their belief”, it was the great fact of their lives. This sense of being moved by God’s will brings no passive surrender as if to some paralyzing fate, but a fuller entrance into one’s call and life with passion, commitment and will.
The sense of vocation conveys a confidence that God desires to share with us whatever work he has called us to do. Without releasing us from accountability, “He expects us to talk over with Him our problems and plans for His aid and counsel. When we are sure we are called by Him to a task and have His interest and supervision, our sole responsibility is to commit ourselves to the activities involved.” (Leadership, p. 198-199) This fellowship with God brings a consciousness of his presence which enables us to apprehend divine power on both a conscious and subconscious level. “It changes experiment into a factor of certainty and relieves the agent [the leader] of undue anxiety.” (Leadership, p.198) Vocation provides a leader with an inner trust that keeps him steady, even undaunted or undismayed, in the face of failure or defeat””ready to start again with new power and wisdom. Brent, however, here speaks a wise and necessary word of caution””particularly should this sense of vocation lead one to think his or hers is the only guiding star or constellation in the firmament. “He who thinks that he alone is called is a tyrant of a dangerous type”¦. The Leader’s first duty is to remember that vocation is a universal gift, and it is part of Leadership to help all who follow to discern and obey their call.” Let the prayer he prayed with pen in hand (as he often did) and recorded in his journal in 1907 serve as a fitting illustration of his commitment to this end, and as a concise summary of his lectures which I have attempted to outline in these pages:

“O Father, I have been called by Harvard University to speak to Thy sons of the things that belong to their peace. But except Thou too call me my words will be uttered in vain and be but empty sound. Let me hear Thy voice bidding me serve the youth of this great center of opportunity, and make me responsive to Thy counsels that I may set forth the truth with force and ardor. Help me to fit my life more closely into Thine eternal purpose without reserve or self-will. Endow me with singleness of motive, strength of will, blamelessness of life, and devotion to Thee, that I being a true leader may inspire my fellows to rise to the full height of their responsibilities as leaders of men; through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (No Other Wealth, p. 37)

These, then, are Brent’s qualifications for Christian leadership, whether exercised in Church or State, in assigned Office or through an inherent authority undesignated by position””as was the case for Jesus of Nazareth. Social motive, will, moral character, and vocation, these are the metaphysics of leadership that convey an authority that mere office or position can never establish in the minds and hearts of the people. Brent puts them before us with convincing logic, vibrant language, vivid images and profound clarity””gained from deep thinking, meditation, study and prayer. Here is a philosophy of leadership that proceeds not from mere expediency, single-minded efficiency or ideological relativism””but from an interaction with a thoroughly Christian worldview and an expansive, even international Anglicanism. When these four dimensions””inherent as they are to the task of leadership and universally acknowledged (if not always specifically identified)””are married with throne or office, position is converted to its proper role, and privilege finds its true opportunity in the service of others. But whether office holder, priest or layperson, the one with these characteristics “”¦will be an accepted Leader the moment he appears in society. The world is waiting for him [or her].” (Leadership, p. 218) Such a man was Jesus Christ and as such a leader he was and is the Leader of leaders followed to the end of time.

The Resources for Leadership

Having looked at these inherent qualities of leadership I now want to briefly identify five resources from the Charles Henry Brent’s life which I believe to be helpful for those engaged in Spiritual Leadership””the Inner Life, the Intellectual Life, the Role of Friendship, the Inspiration of Responsibility, and the Representative Life.

The Inner Life

Bishop Brent’s spiritual life provided him with an immensely formative power for leadership. Alexander Zabriskie in his biography, Bishop Brent, puts it bluntly: “The secret of Brent’s work and influence was his inner life.” Eleanor Slater, more floridly writes: “Leadership, when it came to him, came by painful and prayerful effort. It came of a fellowship with God so constant and steady that introspection became communion. He would have given God-consciousness as the atmosphere of his own development; he preached it to others as the atmosphere of all growth.” This life of prayer, intercession, meditation and mystical fellowship with Christ was not always easily won for him. “Pray with your intelligence,” he advised, “bring things to God that you have thought out and think them out again with Him. This is the secret of good judgment.” The more that I have studied his life and writings, the more convinced I have become that this prayerful judgment was the origin of his vision and authority as a leader. Simplicity and courage are two other virtues he considered indispensable for those who covet to live, serve and pray well. Especially must they be ready to embrace difficulty and court pain””and that through the long stretch of life. This is similar to what Eugene Peterson in our day has called a long obedience in the same direction.
He practiced many spiritual disciplines””daily meditation, Bible reading, especially as he grew older the Gospels, intercession, journaling and the composition of collects and prayers (many of which are widely anthologized and some included in the American 1979 Book of Common Prayer). About this discipline of writing prayers he notes, “Anyone of average intelligence, if he chooses to take the time and pains, has ample capacity for the purpose. Let him use his pen and write down his aspirations for himself and others as concisely as he can, and he will be surprised to find not only how much he has to say to God, but how easy it is to express what is in his heart.” (Adventure with God, p. 10)) This was a daily and constant enterprise for him. He experienced prayer as difficult and yet felt that here above all other duties one could expect God’s gracious assistance and compensation. “The best help is the hardest duty””the help that comes straight from God.”
Whenever possible he began his day with meditation from 6:00””7:00 a.m.; spent 7:00””7:30 a.m. in prayer; and from 7:30””8:30 a.m. in study. It is the inner life that the leader neglects at the very shipwreck of his power. While not insisted upon, nor imposed in all circumstances, this pattern marked the vast gravity of his inner life with his Lord and his diary or journal was kept even while on mountain trails, ocean liner, battlefronts or mission village.

The Intellectual Life

The Intellectual life of Bishop Brent was various and rich. He read books while around the campfire on missionary journeys in the Luzon Mountains of the Philippines, studied human nature aboard ocean liners crossing the Pacific, contemplated the recent publications in the sciences while in the throws of ecclesiastical gatherings, works of philosophy while sleeping in the huts of the Igorot natives, and complimented such study with the alert schooling that a life of travel in different cultures afforded him. He was rarely without a book close at hand. And this is all the more amazing given the constant activity of his life. He was a man of wide and wonderful curiosity””classically and broadly educated. “Best of all”, writes his finest biographer, “there was nothing terminal about that education. Bishop Brent retained the attitude of a humble learner all his days. [This made him] ”¦ the master of many arts and the doctor of a sane and broad philosophy.”
In his fascinatingly speculative book, The Sixth Sense, the bishop contrasts the narrowing intellectual life of Darwin with that of Lewis Carroll. Darwin in his Autobiography, mourns the loss of his aesthetic appreciation for poetry and music, which in his earlier years he felt such delight, seeing “the loss of these tastes as a loss of happiness.” Darwin then attributed this to an atrophying of inactive dimensions of the human brain. Brent postulated a different hypothesis, theorizing that “it would be more accurate, perhaps, to explain this loss”¦by too narrow specialization.” (Sixth Sense, p. 56-57) Carroll, in contrast, a professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, kept his vocational capacity in keen efficiency through the exercise of the quite different dimension of the brain in writing such immortal imaginative works as Alice in Wonderland, and Through the Looking Glass. So too he finds such breadth of interests in such scientists as Bacon, Pasteur, and Newton. He might well have included himself among a list of a man of universal interests of mind.
Neither a scholar nor a systematic theologian, he was nevertheless a keen contributor to the Christian thought of his day. He read a good deal of biography, history, science, philosophy, and poetry. Little seemed to be beyond the scope of his interests””from Plato to Bergson, William James to Baron von Hugel, Darwin to Eddington, Lincoln to Napoleon, Homer and Dante to Tennyson””all found a place on his desk or night stand. Life for him was one long continuous university. One finds arguments and quotations casually and yet effectively woven into the fabric of his writings and sermons. He was the author of eighteen volumes written in many diverse places””the rectory house in Boston, retreat houses in Europe, mission stations in Baguio, on transatlantic voyages, and even in the U. S. Embassy in England. They were the fruit of his thinking offered as gifts to the Church at large. May we today who aspire to leadership within the Church of Jesus Christ learn from him the enriching and diligent resource of a life in which education has no termination, nor sectarian focus.

The Role of Friendship

Along with such resources as prayer and study, Brent was also nurtured by many wonderful and abiding friendships. While none of his biographers fail to describe him as a man of profound loneliness, each is quick to note the legendary number of friends found in every walk of life. Those who considered him a formative influence on their lives who themselves who leaders of real significance in the world were men such as Governor Taft, (later President Taft), General Pershing (whom he prepared for confirmation while stationed in the Pacific and whom he made a point to visit in Paris shortly before his own death), Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury, Ambassador and Mrs. Houghton. Then of course were those hundreds of unremembered folk from every walk of life whether the poor in the slums of South Boston, the mountains of Luzon, the Mora pirates of the Southern Philippines, or the communicants in the diocese of Western New York.
And then there were the numerous younger men and women who through friendship and mentoring care he help mold into the future leaders of church and society. The tribute of Bishop Malcolm Endicott Peabody is sufficiently illustrative: “During the two years that I spent in Baguio, the Bishop treated me as a son, let me make his house my headquarters in Manila, guided my faltering thoughts into intellectual and religious channels, and took me with him on a tour of the islands in the summer of 1912. As he was the friend and pastor of every missionary he encountered, I had the privilege of observing his sympathy for churchmen of every branch of the Church. They laid their problems before him and looked upon him in a very real sense as their father in God.” (No Other Wealth, p.18) The sway and influence he had among people of so diverse backgrounds and education are due in part to his loyalty and prayerfulness towards them. The words he wrote about St. Paul are an equally apt description of him: “Everyone who once found entrance into the interest of S. Paul remained there to dwell. Time and distance did not obliterate them. Even in his silences they could feel assured of his loyalty to them. They were as truly his companions of his inner life as though they were before him in the flesh. They were the joy, the anxiety and the crown of his existence.” (Adventure for God, p.84) As Eleanor Slater wrote of the bishop, “He carried his friendships with him, wherever he went”¦” sending cherished letters (one of his friends noted that “you could live on one of his letters for days.”), to those he knew in every part of the world. (Slater, p. 91)
Complimenting his friendships, and often coinciding with them as a renewing resource in his life, was the sports and games he enjoyed. Tennis, golf, polo, baseball, hockey matches aboard ship brought much needed reprieve to a life of heavy and often exacting duties. His longtime friend and associate, Remsen Ogilby, could often be relied upon, when he saw his bishop weary in his work to get on his schedule some recreation either of the outdoor or parlor variety. Indoor games he found delightful, such as bowling, chess, and cards. His favorite sport though was fly fishing. To a friend who asked for a suggestion for a possible gift for him, he wrote, “Send me books on fishing.”

The Inspiration of Responsibility

In 1899, while still a priest serving in the slums of South Boston Charles Henry Brent wrote and published his first book, With God in the World. The final chapter bore an interesting heading, “The Inspiration of Responsibility”. It would be the title of a book of essays he published some sixteen years later. Even more importantly it was to be one of the bedrock beliefs of his life and a theme he heralded again and again before audiences young and old, men and women, privileged and impoverished. The belief began to first take root with such words as these written in those early years of his priestly vocation: “The fault of most modern prophets is not that they present too high an ideal, but an ideal that is sketched with faltering hand; the appeal to self-sacrifice is too timid and imprecise, the challenge to courage is too low-voiced, with the result that the tide of inspiration ebbs low. The call to each soul to contribute its quota toward the realization of the most remote ideal so far from depressing is stimulating, and a necessary goad to the promotion of the individual as well as corporate development.” (WGW, p.127)
Not too long after penning such words the call came for him to take up a greater responsibility, to sacrifice his life in the service of a distant and, to him, unknown world. He was called by the General Convention of the Episcopal Church to become missionary bishop to the recently acquired territories of the Philippine Islands. His hand was called; here indeed was the inspiration of responsibility. Later his ability to express himself along these lines took on the bolder clarity and authority that comes from a more profound personal experience. Here is the voice of authenticity that intones a clear call: “Every self-respecting person craves an exacting task, a task that strains human nature. We need more than that degree of obligation which demands the exercise only of those gifts and powers that we know are ours. We must be under the domination of a responsibility which calls for the assertion of our latent and untried capacity, the power that declares itself only in the using”¦.The response of the will to the call of obligation becomes the opportunity of God to enlarge our capacity. He breathes into us fresh wisdom, new courage, added strength. His breath is life. And He can give us life only when we choose to live”¦.You should not be afraid to launch out into the deep of responsibility where, amid the billows and winds, alone is safety for the human soul.” (The Inspiration of Responsibility, pgs 1-10)
This call of God to embrace opportunity, to assume responsibility, awakens the imagination, which is the human capacity for the God-given vision. It is inspiring, transformative and akin to the bracing power of vocation. “Perhaps the earliest requisite of an effective life”, he writes, “is a vision”. The record of human experience compels the assertion. Often enough a richly endowed character will loaf halfway down life’s journey doing worse than nothing, or else will diligently use his gifts to other’s hurt. Suddenly an unseen hand touches his eyes and he awakes to responsibility. He has had a vision. Dreams give place to action, weeds to flowers.” (Adventure for God, p.2) In Brent’s taxonomy of leadership responsibility inspires the leader, and vision awakens, refreshes, sustains. These are integral resources for the leader’s life. Quite contrary to how unredeemed humanity usually thinks, it is as the leader runs from responsibility, opportunity and vision that he begins to die inwardly: his finest qualities decay: his capacity wanes. But when he or she turns to embrace a greater responsibility she receives from God a greater power; one commensurate with the challenge.

The Representative Life

What was undoubtedly the greatest resource of his life as a leader was the one he referred to as the Representative Leader. Certainly he found in the lives of men such as Lincoln, Darwin, and Phillips Brooks the characteristics which distinguish a leader, but it was in Jesus Christ that Bishop Brent discovered the pre-eminent and mastering Leader of leaders. It is Jesus Christ alone who so fully “”¦inherits only to share, and to make us as nearly like Himself as we will permit Him to do”¦. We can rise to no higher conception of Leadership than this, can we?””living the richest possible life and sharing it universally. That is what Jesus did and does, if we reduce His experience to its simplest terms. He is His work. He is all that He gives. He is his own best gift.” (Leadership, p.123-124)
It was this fiercely incarnational theology that daily supplied to Bishop Brent the needed inspiration, strength and vision which the demands of his leadership required. Yet it needs to be stressed that Jesus is not merely an ideal or example. He is a living force for the would be leader: “We have at our disposal His power of will which dared the impossible and always achieved, so that one who takes Jesus at His word can say, I can do all things through Christ who strengthenth me. His victory over temptation is also ours.” (Leadership, p. 221) This availability of Another’s fund of strength and victory is unique in all of human history. His life and holiness is for our use through a fellowship exceeding all other intimacies. Christ’s sole complaint writes Brent, “”¦is that when He offers Himself Men do not accept Him. Ye will not come to me that ye may have life.” This is what he offered to humankind when he walked this earth. What he offers to us now far exceeds even such a gracious gift. “The whole wealth of His completed experience is His present gift.” (Leadership, p. 220)
Jesus then is the Representative Leader. He serves as model and empowerer of all who seek to follow him. He inspires and enables the leader in any walk of life. His is not merely an ecclesiastical or titular authority–the titles he had were only an expression of his actual authority. “They gave him nothing. His office was not taken from man. It was what He was in Himself.” (Leadership, p. 228) The minister of the Gospel, whether lay person or priest, is not first and foremost an office-holder. His authority and power comes from the presence and, in the words of Phillips Brooks, “the pressure of Christ.” Anything then that obscures this should be torn aside as a veil that hides his form, “”¦so that the simplest can see Him and the weakest reach Him.” Those whose lives are patterned after His example and charged with his Spirit will do this work most ably and bravely. (Leadership, p.219)
While there are areas of his thought married perhaps too closely to the “myth of progress” that too pervasively characterized the Christianity of pre-World War I Europe and America and thus he sipped too sparingly of the Neo-orthodoxy of Karl Barth and Emil Brunner, nevertheless, he was critical of a liberalism that expressed tolerance for tolerance sake. Better yet, there was little that was exclusively or merely Euro-centric in his worldview or thought. He once said that Christianity will not have run its full course until it has passed through the mind of the Orient. One cannot help but believe he would be one to celebrate the rise of the Global South as a vital force in world Christianity of our day, The Next Christendom, as Professor Philip Jenkins has dubbed it. Indeed, he was a World-Christian. In the Paddock lectures given to seminarians at The General Theological Seminary in 1904 he stated, “Say what you will about the Roman Catholic Church as stuck”¦, but when Rome thinks of its mission it thinks in terms of the world.” Anglicanism of today, particularly those in the West could use a good and lengthy exposure to such a leader. I have found over the years, with every fresh encounter I have had with Brent’s life and thought, that he has stretched my mind and worldview, deepened my spiritual life, and lifted my vision to think larger. Cannot all of us in the Church today afford to think at least one size larger than we presently do? As Bishop Brent came from his work in the Philippines, shaped by his experiences in the Orient into a World Christian, he brought a life touched by the Divine fire of God, and set forth a metaphysic, a philosophy of leadership, in the 1907 William Belden Noble lectures for the students of Harvard. The qualifications for leadership he argued were the Social Motive, the power of the Will, a Blameless or moral life that was ever seeking to grow in righteous, and a Fellowship with the Divine that leads inexorably to a sustaining sense of Vocation. He exemplified each of these in his own life. Elsewhere in his life and writings, for those who enjoy the work of excavation in relatively recent history (but a field of pastoralia too little explored by most of us Episcopalians), the resources for leadership, which were his lifeline and constant companions, can be discovered. Here is a true Anglican treasure accessible to most of us: wisdom free for the mining.

If you seek it like silver
and search for it as for hidden treasures
then you will understand the fear of the LORD
and find the knowledge of God. (Proverbs 2:4-5)

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brent, C. H. Adventure for God. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1912
Brent, C. H. The Commonwealth: Its Foundations and Pillars. New York: D. Appleton
and Company, 1930.
Brent, C. H. The Inspiration of Reponsiblity. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.,
1915
Brent, C. H. Leadership. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1912.

Brent, C. H. The Mount of Vision. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1918.

Brent, C. H. Presence. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1914.

Brent, C. H. The Sixth Sense. New York: B. W. Huebsch, 1912.

Brent, C. H. With God in Prayer. Philadelphia, PA: George W. Jacobs & Company,
1907.
Brent, C. H. With God in the World. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1916.

Damrosch, L. Charles Henry Brent in the Philippines. New York: The National Council,
1956.
Kates, F. W. (Ed.). Things That Matter: The Best of the Writings of Bishop Brent.
New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1949.
Kates, F. W. (Ed.). No Other Wealth: The Prayers of a Modern Saint, Charles Henry
Brent. Nashville, TN: The Upper Room, 1965.
Slater, Eleanor. Charles Henry Brent: Everybody’s Bishop. Milwaukee, WI: Morehouse
Publishing Co., 1932.
Zabriskie, A. C. Bishop Brent: Crusader for Christian Unity. Philadelphia, PA: The
Westminster Press, 1938.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bennis, W. An Invented Life: Reflections on Leadership and Change. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1993.
Bennis, W. On Becoming a Leader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.,
1989.
Bennis, W. Why Leaders Can’t Lead: The Unconscious Conspiracy Continues. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1990.
Bennis, W. Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. New York: Harper & Row,
Publishers, 1985.
Burns, J. M. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1978.
Clinton, J. R. The Making of a Leader. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 1988.
Greenleaf, R. K. Servant Leadership. Ramsey, NJ: Paulist Press, 1977.

Read it carefully and read it all .

You might want to remember what happened in American politics this week for a very long time.

I’m not talking about the spectacle of the remaining members of the Kennedy dynasty jumping on to the Barack Obama bandwagon (whatever you do, Senator, don’t give Teddy the keys). I’m not talking about the historic certainty now that John Edwards, the sole remaining white guy, has quit the race, that either Senator Obama or Senator Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Party’s nominee. I’m not thinking about the Democrats at all.

I’m talking instead about the quiet revolution that has overthrown the old order in the Republican Party. We have witnessed nothing less than a bloodless coup this week that promises to have ramifications for America perhaps even larger than the prospect of a black or a woman president.

Read it all.

China’s latest export is inflation. After falling for years, prices of Chinese goods sold in the United States have risen for the last eight months.

Read it all.

Watch it all.

Calling for economic evangelism and political advocacy, the Most Rev. Katherine Jefferts Schori, elected leader of the nation’s 2.7 million Episcopal Church members, roused an audience of her denomination’s regional leaders in Roanoke on Saturday.

“Pester your legislators” to be more aggressive in battling poverty and hunger across the globe, urged Jefferts Schori. “Annoy them.”

The 53-year-old former oceanographer, who is said by religious scholars to be the only female top-ranked official of a major denomination — except for Queen Elizabeth II, whose crown makes her head of the Church of England — spoke with the conviction of a street preacher.

“When I was a kid I remember being taught that the world’s food problems would be solved by protein from the ocean. T’aint going to happen,” said Jefferts Schori, who before being ordained a priest in 1994 had a career in science that included a stint with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

As the Episcopalians’ Presiding Bishop, essentially their chief pastor, the New York City-based leader has been outspoken about her belief that science and religion can comfortably coexist.

Read it all.

We defend the truth of the Gospel against those who would deny the existence of any ultimate truth at all. Disguised in false humility, we hear of those who present themselves as humble seekers, but not jubilant finders. In fact, anyone who “finds” is held suspect, because the underlying philosophy here is that there is no absolute truth, and therefore the Christian journey is reduced to nothing more than a quest, but a quest that has no object, like an Easter-egg hunt without any eggs. And what we are finding in our young people is the frustration and dismay of such a quest. Post-modern philosophy, spewing forth from our universities and even through our high schools, touts a world that has no ultimate answers. The result? Get what you can while you can. Enjoy life to the fullest, for there is no universe of meaning out there. And look what is happening, especially in Western civilization: we are hot in pursuit of entertainment and personal peace. Billions of dollars are now spent in and through the entertainment industry, and the difficult truth-questions are left unaddressed. Even if there is an interest in Christianity by those in their teens and twenties, the question often is, “What’s in it for me?” I have recently talked with Anglican leaders who are dismayed that the younger generation of ordained clergy seem more concerned about their salary and pensions than about the Gospel and its demands upon their lives. Diacletian, one of the Roman Emperors during the decline of the Empire, once said, “Give them bread and the circus, and that will suffice.” In other words, keep the masses fed and entertained, and they won’t give you any trouble. Today, we Americans are, for the most part, well fed and highly entertained, and the truth questions drift by us as we go to our movies, our sporting events, play our “gameboys” and try to improve our skills at bridge or golf.

More insidious is the use of familiar language that conveys objective truth to us, but has been eviscerated of truth by its user. This demands of us the constant question, “What does that mean?” For example, an Episcopal bishop says, “I don’t say the Creed, I sing it.” What does that mean? Or the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church remarks, “Jesus is our vehicle to the divine.” What does that mean? Or even the seemingly comfortable affirmations that “we, too, believe in Jesus, the Bible, and the Creeds.” What does that mean? The temptation is to avoid the hard work of careful study and clear articulation of the faith. Someone can say, “I believe in the Bible,” and mean nothing more than “I admire and acknowledge the Bible as the ancient chronicle of human efforts to understand spirituality.” But look at what such a statement doesn’t say. And at the risk of appearing persnickety, we must confront the world with the truth question and continue to ask, “What do you mean by that?” No longer can we assume that words mean the same thing. Lewis Carroll in Through the Looking Glass, understood the total collapse not only of language but of meaning itself when this world-view is adopted. Listen to this exchange from Alice and Humpty-Dumpty:

When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,’ it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master – that’s all.’

Being master ”“ a world without ultimate Truth becomes a world without meaning, which means we must assign meaning to the world for ourselves. We become our own masters. We cannot assign meaning to the words “Jesus,” “The Bible,” “The Word of God,” “The Resurrection” or any number of other critical words in the Christian lexicon without changing the meaning of the Christian faith itself. We at Christ Church stand to affirm a universe that has meaning, described by words that have meaning, and we recognize that we are not to assign our own meaning to those words, but allow their historic and constant definitions to remain. Now, intellectual honesty may demand from us that we say “I cannot believe this or that,” but it will not allow us to fudge the meaning of the words and then proclaim, “I believe!”

Read it all.

A weak dollar, outsized personal debt, a massive current account deficit, cash-strapped banks and Asian governments purchasing U.S. Treasury bonds to finance the national debt are not signs of American strength. Nor are they necessarily signs of American decline, because inherent U.S. vitality remains enormous.

But as Benn Steil, an economist at the Council on Foreign Relations, suggested: “We could be seeing a secular shift in confidence in the dollar as a store of value as the impression grows that the United States, to some degree, is losing control of its destiny.”

I expect the United States to bounce back, but not quickly. The central fact confronting the next president will be the new limits on U.S. power, both military and economic.

The central challenge will be the provision of needed reforms, primarily universal health care, that begin to alleviate the financial strains on median American families and allow them to get back to saving rather than leveraging assets in a phony consumption boom.

This won’t be easy. But then it wasn’t easy for Franklin Delano Roosevelt in a far worse situation in 1933.

Read it all and the blog discussion also.

The economic worries of 1992 helped elect Mr. Clinton, of course. And by the end of the decade, thanks to both his policies and a huge stock market bubble, the American economy was roaring along again. The deep anxiety of 1992 seemed to be a piece of economic history.

No more. Almost 16 years after Mr. Clinton’s speech at Wharton, the economy is again dominating a presidential race. While the details have changed, the main story line remains remarkably similar. A downturn has reawakened fears that the economy no longer works very well for the middle class.

Today, as was the case 16 years ago, the downturn itself isn’t the main problem. By 1992, as a matter of fact, the economy was already growing again. This year, it’s still possible ”” if less likely after Tuesday’s dismal retail sales report and another sharp decline in stock prices ”” that the country will avoid a full-blown recession.

The main problem now is that the good times are no longer good enough to carry the middle class through the bad times. For much of the last 35 years, the incomes of most workers have been growing far more slowly than they once did. In the current expansion, which started in 2001, the median weekly paycheck of workers has actually fallen 1 percent, once inflation is taken into account, according to the Labor Department.

Economists argue about the reasons for the great wage slowdown ”” technology, globalization, health care costs, the decline of unions, the rise of the new wealthy ”” but it clearly seems to have made people feel more vulnerable to small economic swings. In the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, only 19 percent of those responding said the country was headed in the right direction. That was the lowest percentage since the early 1990s.

Read it all. Note that the title above is that given by the NYT on its front page to this article, the article itself in Wednesday’s paper is entitled “A Revival of 1992’s Glum Mood.”

A Roman Catholic priest was arrested on perjury charges Wednesday, accused of lying about his relationship with a mobster in testimony to a grand jury investigating a casino owner’s possible ties to organized crime.

The Rev. Joseph Sica was arrested outside his home in Scranton. He is an adviser to Mount Airy Casino Resort owner Louis DeNaples, who is the subject of the grand jury investigation.

Read it all.

Watch it all.

An inspiring story of a school transformed.