Health care in America seems more appropriately like “sick care,” and we need to make sure health, of the proactive variety, is more a part of the equation.

The recent debate raging over what happens, who pays and who’s covered comes at the same time of shocking evidence that we, as a nation, continue to ignore these five simple rules of wellness.

1. Don’t smoke.

2. Exercise almost every day.

3. Eat well (five to nine veggies and fruits a day, smaller portions, few to no soft drinks).

4. Maintain a healthy weight.

5. Drink alcohol in moderation.

Only 8 percent of us adhere to those rules, according to a study in the June issue of the American Journal of Medicine.

Read it all.

Someone was buried in Florence Marmor’s grave, and it was not Florence Marmor.

When Mrs. Marmor visited her deceased husband’s cemetery plot in Flushing, Queens, one afternoon, she found that someone had been freshly buried in the spot next to his, where she had planned to rest someday. No one could tell her why.

Strange and wrenching discoveries like that have sprung up repeatedly in Jewish communities over the past few decades as families have discovered that the cemetery properties where they expected to be buried among spouses, children and parents are caught in a legal knot that no one can untangle.

The reason: the Jewish burial societies that sold the gravesites no longer have administrators. Founded by the immigrant ancestors of the people caught in this bind, the societies, in effect, have died.

Read it all.

Unbelievable heat, nasty wasps, hardly anyone around. May their heroic work not be forgotten–watch it all.

Walter Jones, a professor of health policy and health economics at the Medical University of South Carolina, said there are a number of reasons South Carolina is on the high end of the wrong list:

”¢ A number of people are employed by small businesses that can’t afford to provide insurance.
Ӣ Many people work in the tourism industry, which tends to pay less and not offer health insurance benefits.
”¢ The state’s requirements to qualify for Medicaid are overly strict.

Read it all from the front page of the local paper.

The second resolution on same sex relationships also says two things: The first part is purely pastoral. Every resolution of the Episcopal Church mentioning homosexual persons since the early 1980’s has called upon the clergy to offer them pastoral care. The duty to afford pastoral care to gay and lesbian persons has been affirmed by the Lambeth Conference, the Windsor Report, and the Primates of the 39 Anglican Provinces. Every one of our clergy has taken vows to extend such care to “all” our people. So the principle is well established.

This Resolution notes that there has been a recent wave of law making and law changing concerning these relationships ”“some laws allowing gay marriage, some laws allowing civil unions, and other laws banning such unions. This new legal situation presents new pastoral challenges to which we must respond. The resolution says bishops “may” ”“ not “must” but “may” ”“ offer a “pastorally generous response.” What that means depends on the situation, the context, and the judgment of the bishop. The New York Times says it means blessing civil unions. But I never heard any bishop, liberal or conservative, define it that way. It could mean a special ritual or a prayer or a phone call. It’s up to the bishop. Pastoral generosity is not defined.

The second part of the resolution deals with developing theological and liturgical resources for same sex unions. There was no decision to authorize gay marriage or bless same sex unions. We worked with the language of the Resolution the best we could to make it clear that there is not a decision on that hard question. This Resolution requests the Liturgy and Music Commission to compile and develop theological and liturgical resources so that if and when we consider that issue in the future, we will have some examples to look at.

In 2006, we passed a resolution calling for restraint in “authorizing the blessing of same sex unions” until there has been time for an international conversation on the issue. We have exercised restraint for three years and will continue to exercise restraint while that conversation continues. That does not mean no one anywhere will ever bless a same sex union. The Primates have recognized some leeway for conscience in these matters. Well before General Convention, I assured our clergy that no one in Nevada would be disciplined for following their conscience on this question. That is still the case. The new resolution calls for pastoral generosity on the part of bishops. I hope I was already pastorally generous to all of our people and will try to always be so.

Read it all.

Anaheim does not mean that the Episcopal Church is now a unified whole. There will be those who will want to boldly press forward and those who believe that now that things are settled it is time to rest for a bit. New fractures and caucuses will develop along a political continuum of those who remain. There will be fights over gender and power language in the development of new liturgies. Heated discussions will arise over the permanence and the number of partners to a marriage. (No, I’m not trying to say something flippant or sensational. It’s a discussion that’s already happening and, I think, a quite logical one if you accept some of the basic premises I’ve tried to sketch out above.) Contextual theologians and their more traditional counterparts will continue to wrestle over the boundaries of interfaith dialogue.

As the Episcopal Church lives more fully into its search for radical inclusion and deep engagement with the multiple cultures from which it draws its members it is highly unlikely that TEC will be a dull place. Those who previously thought of themselves as holding the middle ground will find themselves to be the new right of the church. Many who prided themselves on being progressive will suddenly find themselves to be the new voices of moderation.

I expect that for the next year or more the action will move to the international stage where the global Anglican Communion will wring its hands over what to do about the Episcopal Church. Don’t expect much of consequence. While the majority of the Anglican provinces in the developing world are opposed to TEC’s stands on a variety of issues, TEC has its supporters in Canada, South Africa, New Zeeland, Japan, Brazil, Scotland, Wales, and large sections of the churches in England and Australia. There may never again be a Lambeth Conference where everyone gathers together at one altar, but TEC will remain an important part of a truly global fellowship of one sort or another.

Read it all.

The division in this state’s United Methodist Church has come to the surface since the testimony of a same-sex couple at the denomination’s June 12 statewide meeting in Jackson. The Mississippi Annual Conference was attended by about 2,000 people.

A debate followed over whether that testimony should have been given during the conference’s worship service and without a rebuttal of the homosexual lifestyle.

Since that service, the ranks of a group of Methodist evangelicals in Mississippi have grown, said the Rev. Ginger Holland, leader of the Mississippi Fellowship of United Methodist Evangelicals.

“We had about 1,800 members when the conference started. We have well more than 2,000 now,” she said.

Two Methodist ministers, the Rev. Jeff Switzer of Senatobia and the Rev. James Twiner of Pascagoula, started MSFUME in 2002, she said.

“It began over multiple issues, but in particular over the attempt of gay and lesbian caucuses trying to change our church’s stance on homosexuality,” Holland said.

Read it all.

Conservatives, however, have accused Episcopalians, in the words of one activist here, of “having an adulterous relationship with the spirit of the age.” Bishop Peter Beckwith of Springfield, Ill., said, “We are allowing our church to be shaped by the culture rather than pursuing our God-given mission of shaping the secular culture.” Beckwith compared homosexuality to gambling, which is legal in several states, but which many Christians oppose on moral grounds.

Even liberals here have said the church should not depend on the state to make decisions for it. Former New Hampshire Bishop Douglas Theuner, who retains a vote in the House of Bishops, argues that all bishops – not just those in states where same-gender partnerships are legal – should be allowed to adapt rites of blessings for gay couples.

“If we say we’ll only do what the state allows us to do, then in effect we’re saying that the state effects our theological decisions, and that shouldn’t be,” Theuner said.

Episcopalians have taken cues from the culture on marriage mores before, particularly in the 1970s when it voted to allow divorced people to remarry in the church, said Bishop Stacy Sauls of Lexington, Ky.

“We need to respond to the realities our people face and the culture in which they live,” said Sauls. “That doesn’t mean we cave to expectations and give up our standards, but it does mean we have to be culturally sensitive.”

Read it all.

Two Episcopal dioceses have nominated gay and lesbian priests in same-sex relationships to become bishops, testing a weeks-old policy and the Episcopal Church’s place within the global Anglican Communion.

The Diocese of Minnesota nominated three candidates for bishop on Saturday (Aug. 1), including the Rev. Bonnie Perry, a Chicago priest who has been in a same-gender relationship with another Episcopal priest for more than 20 years.

Read it all.

The first Hispanic woman to serve as a bishop in the Episcopal Church is retiring from the Seattle-based Diocese of Olympia, talking of how she has “loved” being here but hinting at difficulties with the man who beat her in an election for diocesan bishop.

The Rt. Rev. Nedi Rivera, the suffragan (assisting) bishop, said that she and Diocesan Bishop Greg Rickel share the same goals, but are going down “different roads.” In recent months, Rivera has spent one-third of her time doing double duty as interim Bishop of Eastern Oregon.

“I feel for the first time in my life that I am behind the times, slow on the uptake and out of synch with the future: I think I am part of the old order here,” Rivera said in a letter released on the diocesan website.

Read it all.

[Mark Harris] asks why those that want TEC to sign the Covenant do not wait for the next General Convention and there cast 51% of the votes for ratification. If this time were taken before a final judgment, there might, he says, be some possibility of a provincial decision by “the so called ”˜local’ Church.”

It is of course the case that if no provision is made before that time for dioceses to ratify the Covenant, then dioceses would not have to hold off casting their votes. They would have no vote to cast. The question would be moot. However, if provision is made for diocesan ratification dioceses that want to ratify the Covenant would simply be foolish not to do so. First The Episcopal Church has already taken steps that both effectively repudiate the approved portion of the Covenant and make ratification of a Covenant that limits its autonomy impossible to imagine. Second, a provincial decision that is the result of consensus building among those who support the decisions of the General Convention and those who do not now sadly lies beyond reach and has, in any case, been contradicted by a majoritarian system of decision-making. Pronouncements of victory have been heard resounding from the halls of our deliberations. “It’s time to move on” is the mantra that focused the attention of the vast majority of all three orders and both houses. How then can there be consensus building that includes those who have a problem with the majority if they have no way to contribute to building such a consensus. According to the reports we have received, a declaration of consensus by majority vote has already been made.

In such a context “minority influence” must be exercised in new ways. Thus, in taking the step of direct ratification the minority would, as previously noted, be saying no to a Christian identity defined first all by boundaries of a nation state and the confines of a denomination that locates itself first of all within those boundaries. Again, as previously noted, the primary objection we lodged against Fr. Harris’ first two articles on these subjects is that they locate the identity of The Episcopal Church first within the boundaries of a nation state. His further explication of his views makes doubly clear that this is indeed his position. And having stated it in this way, it becomes increasingly clear that Fr. Harris not only believes this innovative understanding of our polity is true, but also that it must be enforced as true by making all dioceses and members suffer whatever fate is in store for a province that does not intend to sign any covenant restricting a course of action undertaken, for example, like that of the last General Convention. All must go where the church of the nation goes, whether they want to or not, even if to do so calls into question their belonging to the Anglican Communion.

Read it all.

We are in the midst of a showdown over the legal definition of marriage….

…as a comprehensive sharing of life””an emotional and biological union””marriage has value in itself and not merely as a means to procreation. This explains why our law has historically permitted annulment of marriage for non-consummation, but not for infertility; and why acts of sodomy, even between legally wed spouses, have never been recognized as consummating marriages.

Only this understanding makes sense of all the norms””annulability for non-consummation, the pledge of permanence, monogamy, sexual exclusivity””that shape marriage as we know it and that our law reflects. And only this view can explain why the state should regulate marriage (as opposed to ordinary friendships) at all””to make it more likely that, wherever possible, children are reared in the context of the bond between the parents whose sexual union gave them life.

If marriage is redefined, its connection to organic bodily union””and thus to procreation””will be undermined. It will increasingly be understood as an emotional union for the sake of adult satisfaction that is served by mutually agreeable sexual play. But there is no reason that primarily emotional unions like friendships should be permanent, exclusive, limited to two, or legally regulated at all. Thus, there will remain no principled basis for upholding marital norms like monogamy.

A veneer of sentiment may prevent these norms from collapsing””but only temporarily. The marriage culture, already wounded by widespread divorce, nonmarital cohabitation and out-of-wedlock childbearing will fare no better than it has in those European societies that were in the vanguard of sexual “enlightenment.” And the primary victims of a weakened marriage culture are always children and those in the poorest, most vulnerable sectors of society.

Read it all.

No matter which side of the issue members come down on, they will find that the people who put them in office remain deeply confused about what the still-being-written overhaul might bring.

And most Americans are equally suspicious of ”” and confused by ”” claims being made by both supporters and opponents of President Obama’s most ambitious domestic initiative.

With Congress still struggling to fashion legislation and Obama letting the details take shape on Capitol Hill while he sells its broader parameters during appearances that include town hall meetings, most outside Washington have no idea what the overhaul will look like, what it will cost and how it could affect them personally, says Mark Blumenthal of Pollster.com.

“Much of this story has been a big, inside-Washington debate about cost and bending the cost curve,” he says. “It’s a remote, technical discussion.”

Read it all.

Canon Glasspool, 55, referred to her sexuality early in her profile: “It was during my college years (1972-1976) that I began to discern a vocation to ordained ministry and concomitantly to discover my sexuality. Both these areas were sources of intense struggle for me, as I wrestled with such questions as Did God hate me (since I was a homosexual)? or did God love me? Did I hate (or love) myself?”

Canon Glasspool also wrote of her sense about this election’s timeliness.

“It’s time for our wonderful church to move on and be the inclusive church we say we are,” she said. “I believe that the Diocese of Los Angeles is in alignment with the kairos — ready to move boldly into the future, with a strategic plan centered in the love of God and purposed with bringing God’s reign of justice and love further into being, modeling for the whole church an episcopal team. And maybe, just maybe, God is calling me to be a part of that exciting future.”

Fr. Kirkley, 42, wrote about his coming out as a gay man in the early 1990s and of becoming an adoptive parent.

“The gift in this is that I had to come to grips with both my own relative social privilege as a white, well-educated, male, and the marginalization I experienced as a gay man,” he wrote. “In whatever contexts I have worked subsequently, a commitment to the work of personal integration and social reconciliation has remained with me. This commitment took on a greater sense of personal urgency when my husband, Andrew, and I became parents. When we began the journey of adoption ten years ago, we didn’t anticipate that we would fall in love with a beautiful, African-American baby boy named Nehemiah. It was with some fear and trembling that we two white, gay men embarked upon raising our son.”

Read it all.

To the House of Bishops:

I am immensely grateful to all of you for the way in which we conducted ourselves at General Convention. There was enormous pastoral sensitivity and real caring for those with different opinions, and I firmly hope that kind of compassion continues to be boldly expressed. When we are in deeply faithful relationship as brothers and sisters in Christ we can indeed move mountains, as Sandra Montes reminded us in Montaña ”“ “si tuvieras fe como un grano de mostaza, tú le dirías a la montaña, muévete, esa montaña se moverᔝ (if you have faith like a mustard seed, you will say to the mountain, “move” and it will move).

I appreciated the conversation we had about property issues over two-plus afternoons, yet we weren’t able to hear from all, and I don’t think we finished. There is indeed more to be said, and a little more than an hour simply wasn’t adequate to the task. The Council of Advice engaged me in a lengthy phone conference shortly before General Convention, and did reach a reasonable consensus, so I know it’s possible. We can take this up again in March if you wish.

I will continue to uphold two basic principles in the work some of us face in dealing with former Episcopalians who claim rights to church property or assets. Our participation in God’s mission as leaders and stewards of The Episcopal Church means that we expect a reasonable and fair financial arrangement in any property settlement, and that we do not make settlements that encourage religious bodies who seek to replace The Episcopal Church.
Pragmatically, the latter means property settlements need to include a clause that forbids, for a period of at least five years, the presence of bishops on the property who are not members of this House, unless they are invited by the diocesan bishop for purposes which do not subvert mission and ministry in the name of this Church.

I understand that other bishops, such as Anglican bishops in good standing (but not any who is involved in provincial border crossing) might be welcomed to preach, preside, confirm, or even ordain, but that diocesan permission cannot encourage anything that purports to set up or participate in another jurisdiction. It is my fervent hope that five years on, we will all be in a much more clearly defined position.

I continue to pray that those who have departed can gain clarity about their own identity. If and when they engage a positive missional stance that doesn’t seek to replace The Episcopal Church, I do believe we can enter into ecumenical agreements that will make some of the foregoing moot.

Clarity continues to emerge in the legal realm. I note that in every case which has concluded, The Episcopal Church has prevailed. Nevertheless, this has been difficult and painful work, often excruciatingly so. I give thanks for the faithful work several of you have had to do in stewarding the legacy of The Episcopal Church.

With continued gratitude for your ministry, I remain

Your servant in Christ,

–(The Most Rev.) Katharine Jefferts Schori is Presiding Bishop

Update: South Carolina General Convention Deputy Steve Wood has comments on this here

My own review of the Episcopal Church after General Convention 2009 is that we have reiterated, and claimed our dependence upon, local initiatives for ministry in this church. On the controversial sexuality issues of the day, the Episcopal Church recognized pastoral generosity at the local level. On matters relating to the wider Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church has urged local parishes, and dioceses and individuals, to develop personal and missional relationships themselves. I especially appreciated this Convention’s work on ecumenical and inter-religious relationships; again, our Episcopal Church recognized that good and healthy ecumenical relationships occur most authentically at the local level. We entered into full relationship with the Moravian Church; we took more definite steps toward theological discussion with our neighbors in the Presbyterian and Methodist churches.

Perhaps the most dramatic decision of General Convention was the Episcopal Church budget for the next three years. Surely everyone recognizes that the global economic recalibration has affected even our local parishes, and certainly our larger offices. The Episcopal Church passed a budget which eliminated some major staff positions at the national level; the budget assumes that some of those offices will no longer exist. There was understandable lament at those decisions.

On the other hand, that very budget was also part of a de-centralization theme, a theme of local initiative, which lay in the background of almost every General Convention action this summer.

Read it all.

* FINAL VERSION – Not Completed
Resolution: D089
Title: Invitation to Receive Holy Communion
Topic: Doctrine
Committee: 13 – Prayer Book, Liturgy and Church Music
House of Initial Action: Bishops
Proposer: The Very Rev. Ernesto R. Medina

Resolved, the House of _______ concurring, That the 76th General Convention direct the Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons to review and provide a recommendation to resolve the conflict between Article X of the Constitution, specifically, the invitation offered in the Book of Common Prayer “The Gifts of God for the People of God” and Canon I.17.7, restricting communion to only the baptized; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons consult with other appropriate Standing Commissions, as needed; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission report back to the 77th General Convention.

EXPLANATION

There appears to be a conflict between the Constitution of the Episcopal Church and the Canons of the Episcopal Church with respect to who is able to receive Holy Communion.

Constitution – Article X
The Book of Common Prayer, as now established or hereafter amended by the authority of this Church, shall be in use in all the Dioceses of this Church. BCP clearly states in the invitation to receive Communion “The Gifts of God for the People of God.” The question we ask is “who is the People of God?”

Canon 17 – Section 7

No unbaptized person shall be eligible to receive Holy Communion in this Church.

We are asking the Standing Commission on Constitutions and Canons to help resolve this conflict.

The General Convention of The Episcopal Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury are moving in different directions. How’s that for the understatement of the year?…

Where does this leave those of us who have been resolute in our commitment to remain both as dioceses, clergy and people of The Episcopal Chuch, and covenanted members of the global Anglican Communion as well? This includes, but is not limited to, those identified as “Communion Partners.”

The Constitution & Canons of The Episcopal Church are clear. In the Preamble, we claim for ourselves constituent membership in the “Anglican Communion, a Fellowship within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, of those duly constituted Dioceses, Provinces, and regional Churches in communion with the See of Canterbury”¦” (emphasis added). What happens if we are no longer in communion with the See of Canterbury? By our own definition we would cease to be part of the Anglican Communion.

It has become clear to me in discussions with Episcopalians inside and outside the Diocese that not everyone has the same appreciation or understanding of the importance of remaining “in communion with the See of Canterbury.” (A woman at coffee hour one Sunday remarked: “We always thought Anglicans were nice people, but we never thought of ourselves as Anglicans.”) I, on the other hand, have always used the terms “Episcopal” and “Anglican” synonymously. In fact, I was able to join The Episcopal Church precisely because it is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, thereby demonstrating its catholicity as a church of the redeemed “from every family, language, people, and nation”¦” (Revelation 5:9), and not existing in isolation as a small protestant denomination in the United States. This precious fellowship with the Archbishop of Canterbury and, through him and the bishops in fellowship with him, with millions of saints around the globe is essential to my understanding of what it means to be part of the Church catholic. It is this gift of “communion” that the Anglican Communion Covenant seeks to preserve and foster.

Read it all.

President Barack Obama’s treasury secretary said Sunday he cannot rule out higher taxes to help tame an exploding budget deficit, and his chief economic adviser would not dismiss raising them on middle-class Americans as part of a health care overhaul.

As the White House sought to balance campaign rhetoric with governing, officials appeared willing to extend unemployment benefits. With former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan saying he is “pretty sure we’ve already seen the bottom” of the recession, Obama aides sought to defend the economic stimulus and calm a jittery public.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and National Economic Council Director Larry Summers both sidestepped questions on Obama’s intentions about taxes. Geithner said the White House was not ready to rule out a tax hike to lower the federal deficit; Summers said Obama’s proposed health care overhaul needs funding from somewhere.

“There is a lot that can happen over time,” Summers said, adding that the administration believes “it is never a good idea to absolutely rule things out, no matter what.”

Read it all.

In response to Archbishop Nichols’ comments on social networking and youth, an interesting take on “thick” and “thin” communities. Listen to it all (approx. 2 3/4 minutes).

Iran is the major security issue facing Israel, which sees itself confronting an extremist regime seeking nuclear weapons and stating openly that Israel should be wiped off the map. Israel believes the military option has to be on the table and credible if diplomacy and sanctions are to have any chance, and many Israelis believe a military strike on Iran may in the end be unavoidable. The Obama administration, on the other hand, talks of outstretched hands; on July 15, even after Iran’s election, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said “we understand the importance of offering to engage Iran”¦.direct talks provide the best vehicle”¦.We remain ready to engage with Iran.”

To the Israelis this seems unrealistic, even naïve, while to U.S. officials an Israeli attack on Iran is a nightmare that would upset Obama’s outreach to the Muslim world. The remarkable events in Iran have slowed down U.S. engagement, but not the Iranian nuclear program. If the current dissent in Iran leads to regime change, or if new United Nations sanctions force Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program, this source of U.S.-Israel tension will disappear. But it is more likely that Iran will forge ahead toward building a weapon, and U.S.-Israel tension will grow as Israel watches the clock tick and sees its options narrowed to two: live with an Iranian bomb, or strike Iran soon to delay its program long enough for real political change to come to that country.

Israel believes the only thing worse than bombing Iran is Iran’s having the Bomb, but the evidence suggests this is not the Obama view.

Read it all from the weekend Wall Street Journal.

Ms. [Bonnie] Perry directly addressed the question of her sexuality at two points in her responses to the diocese’s nominating committee. In a one-page autobiography, she referred to the relationship by writing, “The Rev. Susan Harlow, my partner now of 22 years, and I moved to Chicago in 1992.”

In response to a question about individual and diocesan discernment regarding the next bishop, Ms. Perry mentioned that she stood for election in the Diocese of California in 2006 but has declined other opportunities since then.

“Until yours, I have not read a compelling diocesan theology,” she wrote. “I am also aware in the current worldwide Anglican climate it may be very difficult for me, an out, partnered lesbian, to be elected and/or to receive consents. … I am entering this discernment process now because I was invited and because your vision of a spiritually transformed, culturally appropriate, networked diocese has made me cry with hope for what could be.”

In response to a question that mentions the diocese’s wish to support gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons, the other two nominees affirmed that wish.

Read it all.

In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, the Archbishop of Westminster also voiced his concerns about the loss of loyalty and the rise of individualism in British society which he said threatened to undermine communities. He picked out footballers for acting like “mercenaries” and expressed his fears over moves to relax laws on assisted suicide.

He said that relationships are already being weakened by the decline in face-to-face meetings and conversations over the phone.

“I think there’s a worry that an excessive use or an almost exclusive use of text and emails means that as a society we’re losing some of the ability to build interpersonal communication that’s necessary for living together and building a community.

“We’re losing social skills, the human interaction skills, how to read a person’s mood, to read their body language, how to be patient until the moment is right to make or press a point.

“Too much exclusive use of electronic information dehumanises what is a very, very important part of community life and living together.”

The archbishop blamed social network sites for leaving children with impoverished friendships.

Read it all.

Have you ever tried to discuss an idea and, when mentioning that you disagree with what someone has proposed, you are told that they are a good person? This emotional blackmail is meant to end the discussion rather than risk a conversation.

All religious groups I know about seem to have many people who are afraid of conflict. They cannot distinguish between disagreement and condemnation.

Afraid to say ”no,” they live with things they cannot agree with or do jobs they do not really want to do. One day they explode. Then the situation often cannot be repaired, and the group has a problem that may take years to overcome, if it can be overcome.

Because people are afraid of conflict, religious institutions and community groups often tolerate behavior that would be unacceptable at any other level of society.

Read it all.

Sunday morning was a milestone for a tiny Lubbock Anglican congregation.

It’s been nearly 20 months since Lubbock’s St. James Anglican church formed in the wake of a national controversy stemming from the role of homosexuals in the Episcopal church.

And Sunday marked the first day the church’s pulpit had a leader – a priest from Hays, Kan., who hopes to lead his congregation closer to God and to be accepting of all people while maintaining their admittedly conservative beliefs.

“This is a huge day for us,” said Jo Vaughan, a founding member of the congregation, which meets Sunday mornings in a 90-seat theater at the Science Spectrum Museum.

Read it all.

Episcopal Church leaders in Los Angeles on Sunday nominated an openly gay priest and an openly lesbian priest as bishops in a move sure to ratchet up tensions in the global Anglican Communion.

The move follows an announcement on Saturday by the Episcopal Diocese of Minnesota of three candidates identified to become the Bishop of Minnesota, including a partnered lesbian priest in Chicago.

The nominations come just weeks after the 2 million-member Episcopal Church, the U.S. branch of Anglicanism, lifted a de facto ban on the consecration of gay bishops.

Read it all.

(Astute blog readers may note that Stan is my classmate from seminary. I am overjoyed to be able to say he is my friend. I still have a wonderful memory of his smiling face at our wedding in 1987, which seems like a long time ago in a land far away–KSH)

At the age of 19, through the example and sharing of a Christian friend, I asked Jesus to take over my life. While I knew the Lord forgave me, I continued to strive for personal perfection and holiness apart from God’s grace. I pursued the “call” off and on through my graduation from college in 1972, then living as a Capuchin (Franciscan) brother for two years.

What I discovered was my inability to live the Christian life. I was overwhelmed by my own rebellion against God. I was self-will run riot. While I “appeared” to be an active and “together” follower of Jesus, I knew better. My “insides” didn’t match up with what I appeared to be. I became quite accomplished at comparing what was going on inside of me with the public persona of other believers. I left the Franciscan community after my second year, and gave up on any thought of serving as a pastor.

Then in 1982, several folks from my home congregation, including the pastor, urged me to consider studying for the pastorate. I wanted no part of it. I knew what a hypocrite I was. I recall telling my pastor that I “wasn’t equipped to serve as a pastor.” Father George replied: “God doesn’t call the equipped. He equips the called.”

I didn’t want to pursue the “call,” knowing my own inadequacies. After wrestling in prayer with the Lord for the better part of a year, I agreed to pursue the “call.” With the agreement and support of my wife, children and local church, I applied to our bishop to begin seminary. There are heel marks to this very spot! I didn’t decide to be a spiritual leader, the Lord chose this for me.

Read it all.

Laypeople who see church as nothing more than a local congregation, which maintains a building, provides Sunday services and rites of passage, and functions as a venue for community activities are not short-sighted. They are right. The institutional church has nothing else of interest to offer its members or anyone else that isn’t provided by secular organisations.

Even after exploring the Anglican communion’s website I fail to see what bad consequences would ensue if it fractured into two or 200 pieces.

I’m not sure what a schism in the Anglican communion will mean for me as an Episcopalian. Will I still be officially entitled to receive communion in the CofE or Anglican churches elsewhere? It hardly matters since Anglican churches don’t issue communion tickets or check credentials, and I don’t see any other way that the schism could affect me.

Read it all.

Read it all and consider commenting.

Both resolutions were adopted against the wishes of the Anglican Church of England, which is associated with the Episcopal Church.

“Our resolution simply says a person’s sexual orientation is not a barrier to ordination,” [Gay] Jennings said in an interview last week. “There’s nothing in our church’s constitution or canon law that prevents a partnered gay or lesbian person from being elected to bishop.”

Jennings chaired a committee that drafted the resolution, while [Bishop Mark] Hollingsworth – working with another bishop – offered an amendment that helped to appease some bishops who had opposed it.

The amendment essentially recognizes that not everyone in the church agrees on ordaining gay clergy, but notes that God already has called gay people to ordained ministries in various Episcopal churches and may call them again.

“We are not all of one mind,” said Hollingsworth. “But each of us carries a piece of the truth and when we bring those pieces together it helps to discern what God’s truth is in our time.

“I don’t believe God is asking us to reconcile our differences, but to be reconciled as people.”

Read it all.