While I tend toward the progressive side in this controversy, I am not persuaded by either analysis. My own sense is that we face a crisis of credibility. For those especially under 40, the Episcopal Church (and its companion churches and faith traditions) no longer seems a credible place in which to engage God, learn to pray or to give ourselves in ministry. We seem, to those outside us, exclusive and opaque.
Those of us who love the traditions (and habits) of institutional Christianity might feel somewhat wounded by the seeming disinterest in the practices we have come to live by. But if the Episcopal Church is to thrive in the 21st century, it must do three things. It must develop a clear, missional identity. It must project that identity outward and invite people into it. And it must take seriously the needs and concerns of those who come toward us and adapt to the new life and energy they bring.
I look forward to seeing their how this actually plays out. My guess is that they lose members.
The article doesn’t mention whether this “clear, missional identity” will involve the Gospel, but I guess everybody has to make sacrifices in the name of pragmatic, evolving tradition.
No. 2, If it is anything like every single sermon he preached at Seabury, “clear, missional identity” means clear Left wing causes of every shape and form.
This is true, at least “…the Episcopal Church (and its companion churches and faith traditions) no longer seems a credible place in which to engage God….”
It’s worth something that Hall recognizes ECUSA isn’t really “a credible place in which to engage God.” That would be the first step in fixing the problem, if he really believes that – but I doubt he does.
In any case, none of the four points of the “strategic plan” he touts have anything to do, really, with Christianity. Fail.
“But if the Episcopal Church is to thrive in the 21st century, it must do three things. It must develop a clear, missional identity.” This it has done. Gayness, transgenderism, and expressions of every sort of sexual identity pose no bar to ordination.
“It must project that identity outward and invite people into it.” This it has done: Integrity, Rainbow flags safe parishes, ordaining non-celibate same-sexe-er clergy and bishops.
“And it must take seriously the needs and concerns of those who come toward us and adapt to the new life and energy they bring.”
This it has done and sued for when they were traditionalists or identifiably Christian.
How’s that hope-y change-y thing worked out in the alleged three, four or five decade of non-discussion that it took to accomplish it?
The statistics don’t lie, Dean, but the interpreters sure do?
“My own sense is that we face a crisis of credibility. For those especially under 40, the Episcopal Church (and its companion churches and faith traditions) no longer seems a credible place in which to engage God, learn to pray or to give ourselves in ministry.”
This confession, seemingly soul-baring and sincere, is rendered disingenuous and therefore meaningless by its inclusion of the truly operative parenthetical phrase “(and its companion churches and faith traditions)” and hence by its lack of confessional notes re TEC in particular. TEC lacks credibility for several specific historical reasons of its own–enacted over recent years. Why not address those specific facts directly? Because it’s easier to hide behind the skirts/problems of all of oldline Christianity.
“Those of us who love the traditions (and habits) of institutional Christianity might feel somewhat wounded by the seeming disinterest, not disinterest in the practices we have come to live by. But if the Episcopal Church is to thrive in the 21st century, it must do three things. It must develop a clear, missional identity. It must project that identity outward and invite people into it. And it must take seriously the needs and concerns of those who come toward us and adapt to the new life and energy they bring.”
Maybe vapid prose is another turn-off worth considering, not to mention squaring up to hard facts.
Frankly, I would rather go eat at Chick-fil-A.