Most of us begin with the relatively easy, local initiatives like changing the light bulbs to compact fluorescents, or examining our use of disposable items, and then move on to upgrading building insulation and heating and cooling systems. Old buildings can be a challenge, but many have found creative ways to install photovoltaic systems on the roof and even power-producing windmills. General Seminary is doing the geothermal drill. Those who have the opportunity to rebuild or build anew can explore the latest in low-carbon or sustainable building footprints. Doing that kind of work in the congregation can be a remarkable teaching opportunity that will raise the skill of other pastoral gardeners in their own homes and the larger community. Discovering how much waste a congregation produces, and how much can be recycled, is another way of teaching and even changing community norms. There are still too many local communities that make no provision for recycling, or have only inadequate programs.
In the same way that frequent moving of the flock can raise the productivity of the grassland, recycling reusable resources brings another kind of abundant life. I saw a great example in New Hampshire this last weekend. St. Andrew’s, West Manchester is collecting and sharing food with the hungry through its food bank. They are collecting and sharing clothes and other hard goods with those in great need. They are renovating an old house behind the church parking lot to both provide an apartment for a low-income family and provide a more accessible space for their thrift shop. In the process, they’re offering ministry opportunities for seniors and the otherwise unemployed to share their gifts with others. That is good pastoral care at almost every level ”“ it’s simple and yet profound.
So . . . . . am i to understand that the Hobart Lecture is traditionally an academic talk, and not a sermon? Truly, i don’t know. I’d love to hear from someone who knows. Hard to believe, though, that any bishop (of any communion) would use a speaking opportunity and not use a single scriptural citation, let alone stay rooted and grounded in commonalities and platitudes of popular eco-science and environmental education. My wife is an environmental education professional, and this is the kind of thing a sophomore seminar presentation might put out. I’m not wanting to belittle the busy woman, but this is just startling shallow, let alone almost empty of Gospel comment.
“Greetings from Episcopalians in all the other parts of this Church:..”
There is no mention of “Anglicans”. They have left – they are gone.
Don
By the way, that last page 6 closer “in quotes” is an “idunnowhat,” but it isn’t a scriptural quote: unless you can translate “servant” alternatively as “shepherd,” and my feeble Greek sez no.
An intriguing talk. I’m a bit surprised to see no reference to Ezekiel 34. A reference to Moses or David as shepherds called by God to shepherd His people would also have been appropriate. Her passing reference to John 10 seems to have missed the point that Jesus is the Shepherd–and our task is to point people to Him as the one who gives life abundantly (vs 10) because He is the one (and only) shepherd (vs 16). Yes, intriguing.
4. LCF+ wrote:
“An intriguing talk.”
Yes, and when it got to the end and she says to remember that the shepherds must also eat, I had this vision of a Jesus-like figure with a wolf’s head eating the bloody sheep.
Don
I am struck by the uncritical full-throated acceptance of the social gospel position. Afterall, there’s been a generally well-accepted critique of the social gospel at least since Barth, but it seems that Schori is totally unaware of it.
Schori’s notion of bringing the Reign of God to the earth has already hit some snags that all human attempts to usher in God’s reign tend to hit. For instance, there’s always those recalcitrants who don’t want to go along with the program. So, what to do with them! Surely, the canons can not mean what they say because that would deter us from ushering in the Reign. So, the canons must be interpreted to facilitate the program. The first thing to go with all Reign of God programs is the law.
Knapsack (#1) -the Hobart Lecture is “The Hobart Lecture, founded in 2000 and named after Bishop John Henry Hobart, the third bishop of New York (1816-1830), is a series of annual addresses presented to acknowledge and encourage the pastoral ministry of the Church.”
(according to an ENS release).
I found a couple of things interesting in her lecture:
[blockquote]The gatherings of Christians whose pastors build permanent high fences to keep the flock from exploring other pastures rarely thrive over the long term. Those communities who have enough freedom to wander over to another patch of grass, who don’t perseverate or obsess over three clumps of grass in one corner, have a greater chance to thrive.[/blockquote]
Yet, she seems intent on not letting congregations or dioceses leave to find other pastures and we see the results in the rapid decline of ASA in TECUSA.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
This kind of “preaching” seems to becoming more and more prevalent, and I find it really disturbing (especially from the PB). It’s like spiritual junk food–very little nourishment; I’m still left hungry.
I think I see the pattern: They can’t go deep, so they go sideways (and shallow). The PB’s Christmas message: Instead of attempting to dive deep into the mystery of the Incarnation, she latches onto “no room at the inn” and segues into a discussion on immigration. Our vicar did something similar: Used “the Word became flesh” to tee up a sermon on how our words can hurt others, etc.
Is this a technique that homiletics professors are teaching now in seminary?
A lecture such as this places the Most Reverend Jefferts Schori as an ecological academic. The lecture demonstrates her complete lack of familiarity with the Kingdom of God. When Jesus spoke of soil, and talked of the fields ripe for harvest, he was speaking of the the souls of men and women, and their need to hear the good news of the Gospel. When He condemned the Pharisees for washing the outside of the cup and leaving the inside of the cup filthy, He was not (imho) discussing their ecological or recycling habits.
When she speaks of the role of the shepherd, she speaks as one unfamiliar with how the shepherd guards and guides the flock. It is the false teaching of materialism, putting one’s trust in things, relying on material wealth or status or position, which was the point Jesus made in discussing the yeast of the Scribes and Pharisees.
She is apparently not familiar with the OT command to rend one’s heart and not one’s garments. She does not know how God despises the sacrifices of lambs and the blood of bulls, and looks for a right spirit.
This is not an apt presentation by a Priest, less so of a Bishop, and least of all from a Presiding Bishop.
Too bad she has no familiarity with what Jesus is quoted as saying in Matthew about the final judgment.
Oh, well, She is too busy rending the flock, letting loose the lawyers, seizing property which she does not own, deposing those faithful to the Gospel, and destroying the Church for which Jesus gave His life.
It is still true. The sheep know My voice, Jesus says, and they follow Me.
“I saw a great example in New Hampshire this last weekend. St. Andrew’s, West Manchester is collecting and sharing food with the hungry through its food bank.”
[i] Edited by elf to eliminate unnecessary sarcasm. [/i]
I have a problem with the PB Economic analysis. Before I get into that, I must admit that I was offended by Bp. Schori’s use of Paul’s reference to God the Creator “in him we live and move and have our being.†(Acts 17: 28) to refer to “the many pastures in which the sheep of this Church live and move and have their being.” I wish she had used her own words rather than twisting Paul’s.
With this disclosure, I can now express my puzzlement at her Economics statement: “The overdependence on corn in our food supply also means that excess harvests are rewarded, which only depresses prices in developing nations where that staple food is most needed.†Now, I have been a professor of Economics for more than 40 years [authored 3 books and more than 60 papers in prestigious academic journals], and yet I fail to see how overdependence on corn in our food supply can depress prices in developing nations – I would have thought the opposite. Even if – counter to laws of supply and demand- our overdependence did depress corn prices, I would have thought that cheap price for a “staple food†in developing nations would be most welcome in those nations!
I hope her theology is better than her Economics.
Truly abysmal. Indeed her former homiletics professor should hang his head in shame. The few biblical references are misquoted as pointed out above. Forced similes, etc. Ironic that she would mention the on fire and growing emerging church in China with the near dead church in Sweden, killed by the revisionists, where about 1% of the population goes to church on a given Sunday and most of those are probably are little old ladies that are dying off.
Makes me very happy the liberals chose her!
I am always struck by her use of “creation” to describe ecological processes which she admires. Creation is interconnected. I guess everything else evolves. Or can this be?
If I had had to sit through lectures like this one, I doubt that I’d ever have graduated from college cum laude!
All this social gospel, and not one word of the Gospels of Christ. I do not think she knows any. Besides, she left Christianity long ago.
#9 and 11 – yours are very helpful, insightful and careful critiques of aspects of the lecture. In fact I wish they could be worked into a separate post critiquing the false premises and shortfall of vision that characterized this (and just about every other sermon or) lecture by KJS, to which some Anglicans are still subjected. It is particularly appalling that the elected head of a supposedly Christian denomination repeatedly subjects listeners to such sub-Christian and off-track musings, which are neither sound economics or ecology by academic standards – as you’ve showed – nor rigorously Biblically supported teaching which would be expected of a Christian leader.
But what happened to her deep concern over the impact of bovine flatulence on global warming that we were treated to last year? I’m VERY disappointed that this critical issue was not addressed again this year.
I think KJS could benefit from attending the Alpha Course and maybe sitting in on a class on the New Testament. Evidentally she slept through most of that one in Seminary.
“This is not rocket science,†just more of we have the save the world – ecology w/o the Great Commission.
“Some among us do still remember that early Christians called following Jesus the way.â€
In all due respect PB, real Christians still do. He is the way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Jesus. (John 14:6)
Pastoral Care? Real pastoral care prioritizes the world being reconciled with Christ and one another.
PB why don’t you extend some pastoral care to The Rt. Rev. Duncan.