The articles brings to mind a “reconciliation service” at the Wyoming 2001 Diocesan Convention where participants were urged to seek forgiveness for being closed-minded, rigid in their thinking and guilty of several forms of phobia.
Essential reading on this subject by C.S. Lewis can be found in his penetrating essay “The Dangers of National Repentance”. You can read it here (it’s short and amazing).
He writes:
“When we speak of England’s actions we mean the actions of the British Government. The young man who is called upon to repent of England’s foreign policy is really being called upon to repent the acts of his neighbour; for a Foreign Secretary or a Cabinet Minister is certainly a neighbour. And repentance presupposes condemnation. The first and fatal charm of national repentance is, therefore, the encouragement it gives us to turn from the bitter task of repenting our own sins to the more congenital one of bewailing–but first, of denouncing–the conduct of others.”
My initial reaction was, “Well, find me a slave owner, and I’ll be happy to have a Come to Jesus meeting with him (or her) about the evils of slavery.”
No 3. Jon, thanks for the link. That is a good article. My major issue with things like this service or, more generally, “official” apologies from Congress or the President or whomever is to ask the question, “What is the purpose of doing this?” I mean, are we honestly trying to repent (that is to say change from our sinful ways) or is this just political grandstanding for the purpose of scoring political points.
My general rule of thumb is to apply the lens of Luke 18: 9-14 (paraphrased for my convenience):
[blockquote] 9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—slave owners, robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this racist tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.â€[/blockquote]
RE: ” . . . the encouragement it gives us to turn from the bitter task of repenting our own sins to the more congenial one of bewailing–but first, of denouncing–the conduct of others.â€
Hmmm . . . I quite like the sound of repenting of other people’s sins!
I will do — as my Lenten duty — a ceremony of national repentance for all those who have allied themselves with Islamic terrorists in dialogue and unity. Also, a ceremony of national repentance for anyone who has violated their oath of office.
Seriously, the first thing I thought of when I read the headline was “boy, those guys so so so need a cause don’t they.”
#9, I disagree. I thought that was a pretty good sermon and really right on point – the boundaries we create among ourselves are only crossed by our “touching the face of God.” We, as humans – black, white, red or yellow – will always fear and demean differences. Only allowing the God within us are we able to overcome that fear and urge to divide, just as Isaiah and Jesus called us to do. For once, I think she nailed it.
Good Lord, you and I have very, very different senses of what makes a good sermon. Yes – Atlantic slavery was terrible – but there’s a bit of bait and switch going on. She uses the emotional power of one issue in order to direct attention to political projects she broadly favors now.
Despite the highfalutin rhetoric, it’s not that she desires to overcome all distinctions – as if such a totalitarian project were even conceivable let alone desirable. For of course there are some boundaries and differences she’s completely committed to upholding. One being the difference between a born and an unborn child.
The normal end of repentance in the Christian tradition is to ask God for forgiveness. One sensed that pleading for forgiveness from God was less significant here than promoting particular pet projects and a particular set of values. I simply note in passing if we are here dealing with a genuine repentance (as opposed to a broadly political stunt) then, if possible, restitution is a condition of all real repentance. I didn’t see any mention of such (eg re-distributing historic revenues that were endowed by slave owning families) but would be happy to be corrected.
In every politically correct sermon in the Episcopal Church, the agenda is to equate civil rights for African Americans with acceptance of sexual immorality in the Church.
Well, I should point out that Pope JPII did a very sweeping public display of repentance for the same and similar issues so this is hardly an Episcopal invention. I think it’s rather healthy for the Church to repent of its corporate sins, especially at Lent. She just didn’t go far enough, IMO.
Nos. 11 & 12, it appears to me that you are reading what you know about the PB and her political leanings and statements into her sermon. In a simple and fair reading her sermon, I don’t see the promotion of any political agendas you are seeing. And as for restitution, neither she nor the church have such power at this late date, nor is there anyone left to which such restitution can be given. (And understand, I am as conservative as they come where our church is concerned and politically. But fair is fair, and I just don’t see what you are talking about in this particular sermon.)
[blockquote]What maintains those borders? What keeps us 20 feet apart, wary of those who don’t look like us, or speak with a different accent? Whoever we call [i]other[/i] is the image
of God, and [b]none of us will be complete until we can embrace another aspect of God’s good creation[/b]. Without moving toward the [i]other[/i] the breach continues. The fear that keeps us on edge and distant never leads to healing. Why is it that the angels always start out by saying, “fear not� Encountering the image of God is usually challenging, but it’s not deadly – death and diminishment and despair come from avoiding the image of God.
We should be praying for courage to cross the space between us. That’s where the journey to freedom begins – in reaching out to the image of God so close at hand, without whom we will never be free or whole. [/blockquote]
(Italicized emphasis on “other” in original, bolded emphasis mine.)
When the word “other” is used (intentionally given emphasis by Schori here), it is always Episcopal code-speak for GLBTQM.
This is great, I assume she will lead her fellow churchpersons in collective repentance for pre/extramarital sexual relations that have been and still are approved of by ECUSA? THAT would get attention and OBJECTION. Perhaps for the false teaching that has prevailed for 30+ years in the pulpit? Don’t hold your breath.
I think the temptation here is for people doing this kind of apologizing to feel good about themselves without it actually costing anything. In the case of Pope JPII apologizing for the Church throught the millennia, the humility was striking and affecting.
About time too. I released my slaves FIVE years ago!
The articles brings to mind a “reconciliation service” at the Wyoming 2001 Diocesan Convention where participants were urged to seek forgiveness for being closed-minded, rigid in their thinking and guilty of several forms of phobia.
Essential reading on this subject by C.S. Lewis can be found in his penetrating essay “The Dangers of National Repentance”. You can read it here (it’s short and amazing).
He writes:
“When we speak of England’s actions we mean the actions of the British Government. The young man who is called upon to repent of England’s foreign policy is really being called upon to repent the acts of his neighbour; for a Foreign Secretary or a Cabinet Minister is certainly a neighbour. And repentance presupposes condemnation. The first and fatal charm of national repentance is, therefore, the encouragement it gives us to turn from the bitter task of repenting our own sins to the more congenital one of bewailing–but first, of denouncing–the conduct of others.”
Isn’t that nice. Yawn.
My initial reaction was, “Well, find me a slave owner, and I’ll be happy to have a Come to Jesus meeting with him (or her) about the evils of slavery.”
No 3. Jon, thanks for the link. That is a good article. My major issue with things like this service or, more generally, “official” apologies from Congress or the President or whomever is to ask the question, “What is the purpose of doing this?” I mean, are we honestly trying to repent (that is to say change from our sinful ways) or is this just political grandstanding for the purpose of scoring political points.
My general rule of thumb is to apply the lens of Luke 18: 9-14 (paraphrased for my convenience):
[blockquote] 9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—slave owners, robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this racist tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.â€[/blockquote]
RE: ” . . . the encouragement it gives us to turn from the bitter task of repenting our own sins to the more congenial one of bewailing–but first, of denouncing–the conduct of others.â€
Hmmm . . . I quite like the sound of repenting of other people’s sins!
I will do — as my Lenten duty — a ceremony of national repentance for all those who have allied themselves with Islamic terrorists in dialogue and unity. Also, a ceremony of national repentance for anyone who has violated their oath of office.
Seriously, the first thing I thought of when I read the headline was “boy, those guys so so so need a cause don’t they.”
I would suggest a better cause – people are being enslaved today in the Sudan.
I’m relieved to know that She is repenting of her racism and slavery.
That’s a lot of highfalutin rhetoric which seems to boil down to:
1. Slavery was really bad
2. Let me tell you a bit about my views of contemporary politics.
#9, I disagree. I thought that was a pretty good sermon and really right on point – the boundaries we create among ourselves are only crossed by our “touching the face of God.” We, as humans – black, white, red or yellow – will always fear and demean differences. Only allowing the God within us are we able to overcome that fear and urge to divide, just as Isaiah and Jesus called us to do. For once, I think she nailed it.
Good Lord, you and I have very, very different senses of what makes a good sermon. Yes – Atlantic slavery was terrible – but there’s a bit of bait and switch going on. She uses the emotional power of one issue in order to direct attention to political projects she broadly favors now.
Despite the highfalutin rhetoric, it’s not that she desires to overcome all distinctions – as if such a totalitarian project were even conceivable let alone desirable. For of course there are some boundaries and differences she’s completely committed to upholding. One being the difference between a born and an unborn child.
The normal end of repentance in the Christian tradition is to ask God for forgiveness. One sensed that pleading for forgiveness from God was less significant here than promoting particular pet projects and a particular set of values. I simply note in passing if we are here dealing with a genuine repentance (as opposed to a broadly political stunt) then, if possible, restitution is a condition of all real repentance. I didn’t see any mention of such (eg re-distributing historic revenues that were endowed by slave owning families) but would be happy to be corrected.
In every politically correct sermon in the Episcopal Church, the agenda is to equate civil rights for African Americans with acceptance of sexual immorality in the Church.
Well, I should point out that Pope JPII did a very sweeping public display of repentance for the same and similar issues so this is hardly an Episcopal invention. I think it’s rather healthy for the Church to repent of its corporate sins, especially at Lent. She just didn’t go far enough, IMO.
Teatime2
It just goes to show that no church is immune to PC silliness.
Nos. 11 & 12, it appears to me that you are reading what you know about the PB and her political leanings and statements into her sermon. In a simple and fair reading her sermon, I don’t see the promotion of any political agendas you are seeing. And as for restitution, neither she nor the church have such power at this late date, nor is there anyone left to which such restitution can be given. (And understand, I am as conservative as they come where our church is concerned and politically. But fair is fair, and I just don’t see what you are talking about in this particular sermon.)
[blockquote]What maintains those borders? What keeps us 20 feet apart, wary of those who don’t look like us, or speak with a different accent? Whoever we call [i]other[/i] is the image
of God, and [b]none of us will be complete until we can embrace another aspect of God’s good creation[/b]. Without moving toward the [i]other[/i] the breach continues. The fear that keeps us on edge and distant never leads to healing. Why is it that the angels always start out by saying, “fear not� Encountering the image of God is usually challenging, but it’s not deadly – death and diminishment and despair come from avoiding the image of God.
We should be praying for courage to cross the space between us. That’s where the journey to freedom begins – in reaching out to the image of God so close at hand, without whom we will never be free or whole. [/blockquote]
(Italicized emphasis on “other” in original, bolded emphasis mine.)
When the word “other” is used (intentionally given emphasis by Schori here), it is always Episcopal code-speak for GLBTQM.
This is great, I assume she will lead her fellow churchpersons in collective repentance for pre/extramarital sexual relations that have been and still are approved of by ECUSA? THAT would get attention and OBJECTION. Perhaps for the false teaching that has prevailed for 30+ years in the pulpit? Don’t hold your breath.
I think the temptation here is for people doing this kind of apologizing to feel good about themselves without it actually costing anything. In the case of Pope JPII apologizing for the Church throught the millennia, the humility was striking and affecting.
As so often is the case, Jim the p has hit the target. Now THIS is an acuate reading of the sermon and the pb’s intentions. L
We DID repent of slavery — to the tune of 618,000 Americans who died in the Civil War.
Jim E. <><
Ms. Schori owned slaves?
Not to mention the near total destruction of the slave-holding economy.