The Thermometer at Resentful

Come to our bracing desert
Where eternity is eventful,
For the weather-glass
Is set at Alas,
The thermometer at Resentful.
-- W H Auden, For the Time Being

I have removed most of this post.

I am praying for Joel and for Margaret; for John and for Elizabeth and the rest of his family; for Mimi; and for Jonathan.

Exploring the Community - First Report

I decided to use my genealogy program, The Master Genealogist (TMG) to keep track of this small part of the blogging community. The inset paragraph that follows is technical and if you don't follow it, don't worry.

I began with this blog, Morningsider. I entered each of the Blogs I Follow and each blog on my blog roll Some Blogs I Read. To the program, the blogs are people. I also entered the blog owner as a parent to the blog, so I have a list of people that includes both bloggers and blogs.

Each blog I entered from my list was an associate of Morningsider. I then repeated the process with the associates of the first of Morningsider's associate, which chanced to be Adventus. I discovered that Adventus had a number of links to blogs that were far afield from the community of inclusive Anglicans but at first I entered them anyway. After a time, I realized that it was extraneous to my purposes to enter (those that are neither blogs nor directly concerend with inclusive Anglicanism. (If I encounter a link to "the other side," I will include it, but I will not explore its associates.)

After I finished Adventus, which is on my blogroll but not among those I follow, I decided to proceed down the list of Blogs I Follow. I have finished An Inch at a Time, Counterlight's Peculiars, and Father Geoff Farrow (who has no blogroll), and now I am working my way through In a Godward Direction.

Another Morning

Continuing in the spirit of the last few posts, I am going to continue to talk about me.

It has taken me at least a full day to come down from the high induced by the excitement of seeking the presidency of my coop. But now I am turning back to other things -- while at the same time remaining a committed board member and committee chair here at Morningside.

Morningside Gardens is a community -- six 21 story buildings with about 980 residential apartments and a population of more than 1,700 persons. I am deeply involved in this community and that involvement will not change.

I am going now to direct my attention to another community -- a community of people, many of whom have never met, who blog or comment on blogs on the inclusive side in the Episcopal Church and othe Anglican churches. I want to explore this virtual community more deeply than I have in the past.

On an occasion or two in the past, I have surfed from blog to blog, seeing where it took me. This will be a different sort of exploration. I'll keep writing about what I find.

Whew

The Board of Directors of Morningside Heights Housing Corporation had its organizational meeting this evening. The elections are over.

I narrowly escaped being elected president. There were two other candidates and the vote, so I was told, was 6-5-1. (I got 5 votes.)

I wasn't elected to any other office, so this year I am not an officer, and that's ok with me.

I was elected to the Finance Committee and to the Executive Committee.

Now that that's over, my preoccupation with this aspect of our coop is also over and I can get back to some other things that interest me.

Suspense

We got to Heart Lake (not having been there for 28 weeks) and found that the phone was out -- no dial tone. So I had no internet access -- we did have our emergency cell phone, so we used that to call the phone company. The phone was still out at the time we left.

After I got home I learned that there's no change in the vote count. Four people solidly for me, five if I count myself. Two more are needed to elect. Maybe we won't find out until the board meeting tomorrow night.

Away,away, ere I expire

This afternoon, Liz and I are taking off for our cottage at Heart Lake. We have haven't been back since the end of October.

I still don't know whether my supporter have rounded up enough votes to elect me as president. The truth is, while I am willing to be president, I am not running against anyone. There is another candidate who I think would be fine but there are some who are really against him. It's an odd position to be in.

I'm leaving right now. More later.

New Board Members

Well, the waiting is over. Four people have been chosen for the board -- three new and one reelected for a second three year term.
There is another candidate for president, but I think I am more qualified. I am actively campaigning for the office, although in a low key sort of way. While the Whip is finding out what the count of votes is, I'm waiting again, but more actively, because nobody gets to vote until Tuesday.

Waiting

Last night, our Morningside coop had its annual meeting. We voted for four board members to begin three year terms. Now it's all over but the counting.

Depending on the outcome of the election, I may or may not be chosen by the board to be the next president. As I said before, I don't really want the job, but I am willing to take it if the votes are there.

So I'm waiting for the results -- waiting to see who will be on the board.

Update: I had thought the results would be out this afternoon, but I just learned that the Elections Committee will not begin counting the votes until this evening. So I had best be patient.

What's Up?

This morning I was asked whether I am a candidate to be president of my coop. My answer was that I am not seeking the job, but that if there are six board members who want me to, I will accept the job (and be the seventh vote.)

There is another person who I am told wants the job, but since the person who told me that is severely irony-challenged, I don't know for sure -- the statement the presumptive candidate is quoted as making could have been meant humorously.

I have already served as president of this coop for five years -- and I am completing my fourteenth year on the board. I do not want to be president -- it's quite enough to be a responsible board member. So why am I willing to accept the job?

First, though I say this who shouldn't, of all the present and potential board members, I am the most suited for the job -- temperamentally, by availability, and by experience. For over a decade now, the president has been a retired person. When I was president the first time, in the early 1980s, I was not only working but I was beginning a new career -- high school teaching. During my second stint, from May 2004 to May 2006, I was putting in 20 to 30 hour weeks at the job. I believe our outgoing president is averaging more time than I did.

I think I will able to chair even handedly. Depending on who gets on this time, there may be some sparks. I think I have the skill (or at least the vision of what's required) to help the board have vigorous but civilized discussions.

I think my experience at Morningside both on and off the board will help me help the board to be a better board.

Our main challenge right now is financial -- this has nothing to do with the current economic crisis, but that sure makes finding solutions more difficult.

The first time I was president I had just been overwhelmingly elected to the board for a second three year term. My three years as president ended in acrimony -- not over me, but it left such a bad taste in my mouth that I vowed never to be on the board again. Six or seven years later I ran again and that time I was tied for a one year term. I won the run off and a year later I was elected to a full three year term.
In 2004, I was on a trip in early February and when I checked my phone messages I had received an urgent message that things were awry at Morningside Gardens. Upon my return I was urged to run for the board (even though the official deadline for a candidacy had passed.) I did run and I was again elected with a large number of votes. I was elected president by the board, unseating the then current president. Two years later the same thing happened to me -- I was unseated by an incoming director.

In November 2007 I wrote in a small notebook:

Should I run for the board or shouldn't I?

Against:

I need to have my time.
If I run, I might want to be president.
Being president is too time-consuming.

For:

It's fun.
I want to.
The corporation needs me (or somebody good.)
I'm good

As it happened, in December I decided against running -- then in January a board member implored me to run. So I did.
Sure enough, I was asked to be a candidate for president. It turned out, there weren't enough votes and I withdrew. I didn't really want to be president anyway, and I also did not think that the incumbent, who had unseated me two years before, was all that bad. We all have strengths and weaknesses and the question was this -- did her weaknesses trump her strengths? For some board members, the answer was yes -- and some were against her for political reasons. But there were an equal number who were for her on account of her strengths.

Some of that politics is still here, but the cast of characters is changing slightly, and my candidacy would not be challenging anyone. In our coop we have twelve directors; each year four are elected for three year terms. A director may serve a maximum of six consecutive years -- that is, normally, two three year terms. Three years ago, four new directors were elected -- three of them were clearly perceived to be part of a faction. This year, none of those three are running for reelection -- they are all going off the board.

I hesitate to say too much about the politics here -- largely because so much of it is driven by personalities. I will say this -- for each of the six candidates for the board there are people who say "I wouldn't vote for that person," because of either a personality trait or a position that person has taken (or is said to have taken) on a no longer live issue. In my judgment, none of those reasons speak at all to the question of whether any of the candidates will be a good board member.

The Apostles’ Teaching and Fellowship

Liz and I went to Philadelphia this past weekend to attend a Gala Celebration honoring Leonard Swidler. The Gala celebrated Leonard Swidler’s 80th birthday, the 45th Anniversary of the Journal of Ecumenical Studies, and the establishment of the Leonard and Arlene Swidler Chair in Interreligious Dialogue at Temple University.

In 1977 Leonard and Arlene Swidler edited a book entitled Women Priests: A Catholic Commentary of the Vaitican Declaration (referring to Inter Insigniores, the Declaration of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the question of the admission of women to the ministerial priesthood. -15 October 1976.) The text of this book is available at the Women Priests Internet Library.

While the Swidler gala was getting underway at Temple University, two Catholic women were being ordained a few miles away– one to the diaconate and one to the priesthood. I heard from a friend that several people who might otherwise have been at the gala were attending the ordinations. The ordination was under the auspices of Roman Catholic Womenpriests, an international movement of Roman Catholic women and men who support the ordination of women and since 2002 have been ordaining women and some men to the diaconate, priesthood, and episcopate. [NOTE: the Women Priests Internet Library is separate from Roman Catholic Womenpriests.]

In looking up information on Roman Catholic Womanpriests, I discovered that last week four Catholic women were consecrated bishop, and now there are five Catholic womanbishops in the United States alongside three in Europe.

UPDATE 10 hours later: His eminence, Jonathan the MadPriest, has picked up the story. Sadly, his focus is on the spin put out by the RC hierarchy.

Good Friday

In a Good Friday meditation a few years ago, I said that Jesus' death on the cross was God's act of solidarity with us humans. I don't much care about the atonement in the sense of reparation or appeasement. What's important is the original meaning of atonement - reconciliation. In Jesus' death, God reconciles us with himself.

Last Sunday Liz and I were at Christ Church, Montpelier, Vermont. The rector, David Hall, told us he was very fond of the processional, celebratory part of Palm Sunday. He referred to The Last Week, the book by Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan. The opening of that book is cited here in a post this afternoon by Doorman-Priest. Jesus's entry in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday was a subversive event. Both David Hall's sermon and Doorman-Priest's post remind us that we are faced with the question of which camp are we in -- in simplest terms, that of the rich or that of the poor. For many of us, it's a bit of both.

Two weeks ago, we were in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, at Moravian Theological Seminary, for a talk by Ian Douglas, the priest and missiologist. He got us all to think about being either in a p0sition of privilege or a position of being a target (I don't have the vocabulary quite right) and made us realize that we may well be in different positions in different areas of our lives.

Last night at St. Mary's, our Deacon in training, Sydney Blake, preached on servant ministry. Sydney reminded us that Jesus's statement in John 13:15 "I have set you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you" calls us to all aspects of servanthood, not simply foot washing.

Next weekend I will be attending the Left Forum. One of the reasons I go every year is to be reminded that our economic system is inherently unjust. The Religion & Socialism Commission of DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) is sponsoring a panel "God's Economics: Is an Ethical Economy Possible?" I look forward to it -- I know many of the panelists. The question makes me ask myself about employment practices here at Morningside Gardens. I'm an currently 1st Vice President of our housing cooperative, so I get reports of personnel actions taken by management. Here is a case that came to my attention.

Tom needed to unlock a door in the course of his duties. He discovered that the new key he had recently been given was defective. Tom left his assigned place and went to the shop. The locksmith was not there so Tom began making a copy of the key himself. A supervisor told Tom to stop because he was not authorized to use the key making machine. Tom protested in an angry manner and went on to make the key.

Tom was suspended pending investigation for the following reaasons:

* unauthorized use of the key machine
* failure to follow supervisor's instructions
* insubordination
* unauthorized break

The actions of management in this instance are fully consistent with the culture. Tom is a union employee and is being treated fairly according to the union contract. But I suggest that there is something wrong with the culture operating here.

Tom needed a key to do his job, so he took steps to get a working key. This was initiative which should be commended. But instead, Tom is charged with violating a boundary (using the key machine,) insubordination, and leaving his post. There's a presupposition here that Tom (or any employee) needs to be subordinated to a supervisor and needs to operate under strict rules.

How does the way I (by proxy of management) treat our employees square with the Baptismal Covenant? Is it a proclamation of the Good News of God in Christ? Is it seeking and serving Christ in every person, loving my neighbor as myself? Is it striving for justice and peace among all people and respecting the dignity of every human being? In our complex, and all too human society, is there anything I should be doing to change the way we conduct employer - employee relations?

I don't know the answer. And yet, even on Good Friday, the kingdom of God has come near: repent and beleive in the good news.

John 3:16

Over in Leeds on the fourth Sunday in Advent, Doorman Priest preached on "what is probably the most famous Gospel text known to Christians."

For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son so that all who believe in him may not perish but have everlasting life.

D-P writes "Taken literally this passage from John suggests that those who do not believe in the son will perish," and then proceeds to argue against taking the passage literally. Now I liked D-P's sermon, but I have to say "Sorry, D-P, but that is not correct. Taken literally, this passage (unlike John 14:6) asserts nothing at all about those who do not believe in the son."

A 2004 paper by Samuele Antonini points out that for students of mathematics, the false equivalence of a statement and its inverse is intuitive and the true equivalence of a statement and its contrapositive is not intuitve. The same is true for most people who are not trained in mathematics or formal logic. But what do the terms inverse and contrapositive mean? Taking the statement in John 3:16 as an example (and restating the may as will):

1. Statement: Those who believe in the son will not perish.
2. Inverse: Those who don't believe in the son will perish.
3. Contrapositive: Those who perish don't believe in the son.
There is a fourth possibility, the converse:
4. Converse: Those who do not perish, believe in the son.

Now we take 1, the statement, as true, based on our view of scripture. For most people, it is not intuitive that 3, the contrapositive, says exactly the same thing as 1, and so is also true.
2, the inverse, and 3, the converse, also say the same thing as each other, but, despite our intuition, their truth value cannot be deduced from the truth of 1.

But to leave the realm of logic and return to the substance of the sermon, D-P points out a corrective to those whose intuition tells them that statements 1 and 2 are equivalent. In the passage before this, Nicodemus mistakenly takes Jesus literally (John 3:4). In a 2006 sermon entitled No One Comes to the Father But By Me, John Thatamanil makes the same point about John 14:6.

I'll say more about this topic in my next post.

Litany in Time of War

Last year I hoped I would not be posting the following email this year:

Subject: Great Litany at the Isaiah Wall From: Earl Kooperkamp To:

Dear sisters and brothers:

Please be aware of the following and pass it on to others who may be interested:

The Great Litany chanted in Solemn Procession:

The Fifth Friday in Lent, March 27, 2009 12 noon
The Last Friday in Lent, April 3, 2009 12 noon

Ralph Bunche Park (The Isaiah Wall) NW corner of 42nd Street and First Avenue
(across from the United Nations)

Vestments: Cassock, surplice, tippet and hood (clergy are asked to vest, and if lay members of Altar parties in parishes care to vest, please come in cassock and surplice)

Please join us as we ask for God's mercy on us for the continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and we mourn the deaths of the children, men and women of those nations and the death United States and other military personnel.

Sponsored by: St. Mary's Episcopal Church - Episcopal Peace Fellowship chapter

For more information, please contact Earl Kooperkamp, (212) 864-4013 or revkoooperkamp@aol.com

Thank you for your kind attention and may you observe a blessed Lent.

Peace, Earl Kooperkamp

The United States invaded Iraq six years ago in the small hours of March 20, 2003. Here in New York, it was still St. Joseph's Day, March 19. We began chanting the Litany at Ralph Bunche Park during Lent in 2003. We've done it at least once or twice every Lent since. We intend to keep it up at least as long as there are US combat troops in Iraq. I'm going to lobby for continuing the practice while we have troops in Afghanistan.

If you are able to make it on either Friday, you will be welcome. As it turns out, I won't be able to participate on April 3rd and it's not likely I'll be there March 27th either. At the beginning of April, Liz and I are going to Vermont to see our granddaughter Aamnda and her parents. More on that later.

This coming Thursday, March 26, Liz and I are going to Bethlehem, PA, to attend the 2009 Campbell Lecture sponsored by the Lehigh County Conference of Churches. The speaker will be the Rev. Ian Douglas, of Episcopal Divinity School, speaking on Living into Unity in a Time of Disunity. We're staying overnight in Bethlehem and depending on the weather we might pop up to Heart Lake on the way home.

Bishop Katharine on Morningside Heights

This past Monday evening, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori gave the Episcopal Lecture at Columbia University. The event was jointly sponsored by the Canterbury Club and the Episcopal Chaplaincy at Columbia.

After some brief introductory remarks, Bishop Katharine fielded questions from the audience. I made a few notes on her remarks – these are not verbatim quotes and represent only what I took away from the evening-- they are the equivalent of a few sound bites.

“The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society”
I have interspersed some comments of my own in [brackets.]

The corporate name of The Episcopal Church lifts up the missionary calling of our church. Bishop Katharine describes it as working towards God’s reign – by feeding the hungry, striving to end poverty, healing the sick, working for peace, for justice, for environmentally responsible actions.

The word “Society” in our corporate name highlights our interconnectedness – that we are interdependent. Churches in the Anglican tradition place a good deal of emphasis on the incarnation. As a consequence we take bodies seriously. As Christians, we say that the church is the body of Christ. [It should be obvious that this is a metaphor.] Theologian Sally McFague talks about all of creation as being the body of God. [Another metaphor.] When one part of the body suffers, the whole body suffers. [“God hath created nothing simply for itself: but each thing in all things and of everything each part in other hath such interest that in the whole world nothing is found whereunto anything created can say, I need thee not.”– Richard Hooker: Learned Sermon on Pride. Compare specifically 1 Corinthians 12:21, Romans 12:4-5 and Ephesians 4:15-16, and more generally, 1 Corinthians 12: 12-31; Romans 12: 3-8;Ephesians 4: 11-16.]

On Sexuality

Taking the Incarnation seriously and taking bodies seriously means, in the Episcopal Church, that we take sexuality seriously.

Some of the tensions in the Anglican Communion over sexuality arise from the fact that in some cultures sexuality isn’t discussed at all and it is deeply embarrassing to have to discuss it.

Another characteristic of Anglicanism is lex orandi, lex credendi. We have very few systematic theologians – our theology is contained in our prayer books and our worship. The question of developing a liturgy for the blessing of same sex unions is fraught with tension, because the existence of such a liturgy would bring same sex unions right into the center of our life as a church – into our worship.

On Intra-Anglican Relations

Both the election and consecration of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire and the election of Bishop Katharine as Presiding Bishop were seen in some parts of the world as just another example of American arrogance, alongside the arrogance of the Bush administration. The change in Washington, as well as the conversations in last summer’s Lambeth Conference, have helped ease things somewhat.

Americans who are bishops in African churches [Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda] do not attend synods in those countries. The local bishops do not like that and wish their primates (some of whom are near retirement) to correct the situation. This is a hopeful sign.

On Ministry

In our thirty year old “new prayer book” the Episcopal Church emphasizes the ministry of all the baptized. What used to be “Canon 9 priests” or priests ordained for a purely local ministry need to be viewed in the light of the ministry of al the baptized.

On Emerging Church

Because we take the incarnation seriously, we recognize that things don’t necessarily need to be the same everywhere.

On the proposed Anglican Covenant

In the latest draft, the first two parts seem ok. The objections are to the third part. The next draft is scheduled to be presented to the Anglican Consultative Council in May. We’ll have to wait and see what its contents are and what the ACC does with it.

The exercise itself may be the most important part of the process.

On the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury

We view him as first among equals. He has the authority to call people together for conversation.

All of the questions were friendly,but there were three questions that were somewhat challenging. First, there was a young man who asked Bishop Katanrine how she responded to those who challenge the validity of her ordination as a women -- after all, Jesus chose only men as the twelve.

Mary Magdelene was called "the apostle to the apostles." Women in leadership positions are referred to in Acts and in Paul's letters. We don't know very much about actual ordination in the early church. There's some evidence that the rules against ordaining women are post Constantinian.

[I'm reconstructing and perhaps making up this part.] Our incarnational theology of people and our baptismal theology of ministry both lead us to support the ministry of all persons.

Bishop Katharine was asked about the prophetic ministry of the Episcopal Church and mentioned two issues -- our stand against the death penalty and our stance for the right to abortion while we recognize that abortion is a moral tragedy. The same young man asked how we could support the right to an abortion while calling it a moral tragedy. In this case, my notes don't have Bishop Katharine's exact answer and I am not going to put words in her mouth.

The third challenging question was about a hypothetical ordinand who admitted that he no longer believed in the Resurrection -- the question was whether she would ordain him. Three things stick with me from her answer:

He seems on the face of it to be unusually honest.
She would want to have a long talk with him.

and finally,

God calls us to keep wrestling with our faith.

I have left out a good deal, but I hope I've given a flavor of what it was like to hear Bishop Katharine.

The audience included a dozen or so members of the Canterbury Club, other Columbia students, six or eight clergy unknown to me, and a group from Grace Church in Nyack, New York, including the Rev. Emily Sieracki, the assistant to the rector at Grace. Emily was sponsored for ordination by St. Mary's and the Columbia Episcopal Chaplaincy. Others there associated with St. Mary's, besides Liz and me, were Dean James Parks Morton and Pamela Morton, who are current members of the parish, and the Rev. Winnie Varghese, Episcopal Chaplain at Columbia and member of Executive Council, who was at St. Mary's while she was in seminary. And since our former rector Bob Castle ("Cousin Bobby") used to say to those who came to church at St. Mary's that they were now members of our parish, Bishop Katharine herself is now associated with St. Mary's.

Facebook

This morning I received an invitation to be become a Facebook friend of one of my Florida cousins. I joined Facebook in January 2008, but have been very inactive. In October, I became a friend to a Massachusetts cousin, but was still incative. In January, i became a friend to an internet store, Betterworld Books, but still was otherwise inactive. But tonight, I have acquired new friends from a 17 year old high school junior (I'm her uncle and godfather) to an 84 year old retired pastor (he's my uncle.) And just now I became Facebook friends with a blog friend -- one who came to Of Course I Could Be in New York. It opens up lots of possiblilities -- this person has lots of friends who I know -- some in person and some through blogs.

And so to bed.

Baptismal Covenant

The time changed this morning – Liz and I almost missed the change and would have been late for church. This morning we had some special guests – women from the Plainfield Community Church in Plainfield New Hampshire. The Rev. Suellen Luegers, pastor of the church was our preacher. The women had been here for a week, working in various community outreach programs – some based at St. Mary’s and some nearby. But most important, they brought us quilts which the Episcopal Church Women will give to families in a homeless shelter at the end of our block.

Today we had four baptisms of children – all siblings or cousins. As a result, we got to say the Baptismal Covenant – to my mind the best new thing in the 1979 Prayer Book. We promised, with the help of God,

• to continue in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in the prayers,
• to persevere in resisting evil, and whenever we fall into sin, to repent and return to the Lord,
• to to proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ,
• to seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving our neighbor as ourself,
• to strive for justice and peace among all people, and to respect the dignity of every human being.

We have a fair number of baptisms at St. Mary’s each year, so we get to renew this covenant frequently.

If you Google “Baptismal Covenant Episcopal” you will find that some on the right hand side of the aisle find that the promise to “respect the dignity of every human being” is problematic. In 2007, Canon Gary L'Hommedieu of the Diocese of Central Florida wrote “What is unarguable is the novelty of the final promise to "strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being." It is this final promise that distinguishes the 1979 baptismal liturgy from all previous ones, apart from incidentals of language. ... It is the final promise that comprises the spirit of the Baptismal Covenant. Or rather, the final promise IS the Baptismal Covenant. ... Even though the language of [the Baptismal Covenant] is purely abstract and non-specific, it typically finds application that is politically motivated and unabashedly partisan, and invariably to the left.”

Canon L'Hommedieu is spot on, save for one thing. He does not acknowledge, perhaps he does not recognize, that opposition to the “invariably left” application of “respect the dignity of every human being” is also “politically motivated and unabashedly partisan.”

I have only recently become acquainted with the relatively new field of cognitive linguistics and cognitive science in general. Central to that discipline is the discovery that most of human thought and reasoning is not conscious, is based of cognitive frames sometimes called metaphors, and, because we exist in our bodies, is embodied and inextricably tied to our emotions. Most of my reading in this field is in the writings of George Lakoff. Lakoff observes that much of our political, and I would say also religious, thought is informed by the metaphor of the family. Now there are at least two models of the family out there. One is the nurturant parent model and the other is the strict father model.

Very recently I read on some blog or other a definition of politics as being about decision making and a refutation that said no, it was about power and who gets to exercise it. In either case, I think I’m right is saying that the ecclesial and theological perspective of both religious progressives and religious conservatives are politically motivated.

to be continued ...

BTW, tomorrow evening PB KJS is speaking at Columbia University, a few blocks from here, and I intend to be there. I hope to report on what she says.

Annual Meeting

Yesterday we had our Annual Meeting at St. Mary's.

I made a motion, which was carried unanimously, that we communicate to our diocesan delegates to General Convention that we urge the repeal of B033. I originally forgot to include support for same sex blessings, but we managed to tack it on before the meeting broke up.

I know that the support of one parish is not terribly significant, but it's important for our small congregation to be reminded of our connection to the wider church.

At one point in the discussion, it was mentioned that St. Mary's was the sponsor of two of the Philadelphia Eleven (the first women in the Episcopal Church to be ordained to the priesthood in 1974, not the 2004 anti-gay demonstrators) and that my signature, as Clerk of the Vestry, appears on the documents sent to Bishop Paul Moore in support of the ordination of Carter Heyward and Emily Hewitt. I mention it only to make the point that we (and I) have been pushing issues for quite a while. It's part of who we are.

I'm put in mind of another part of who we are by MadPriest's recent sermon on Mark 1:9-15. We minister to the marginalized. For several years we operated a weekly soup kitchen -- just over a year ago we urned it into a food pantry. The siginificant point is that a large part of the staff consists of people who first came to us on the food line. Many people from the line have become involved in the church. These days we also provide bag lunches in a Saturday outreach program to homeless people in our general neighborhood.

Three weeks ago, Estelle, a sometime member of our choir, passed away. Her passing was noted by Padre Mickey as well as several others who remember The Ronettes. Estelle is just one of the many fragile folks who have gotten some fellowship at St. Mary's.

S words

In October 2004, the website Radical Calendar said of Fr. Luis Barrios that he “doesn’t hesitate to call God, Goddess.” This past Saturday, February 28, MadPriest, picked up a Living Church story that said that in an open letter, Fr. Barrios said it is his “duty to our Goddess to build a better world.” At the Living Church website, this “news” is dated February 26, 2009. The actual open letter appears on a website where the posts are not dated. The letter itelf is dated January 27, 2009. In a comment to the post at MadPriest, at first I said I did not believe the quote and then I had to admit that it was accurate. In this case, I posted first and googled later – not a good idea. In the course of googling, I came to realize what is going on. Later on, in the comments at MadPriest’s, David [Dah + veed] Allen put it better than I could: “The statement was issued in English and Spanish and it says Our Goddess (Nuestra Diosa) in the Spanish as well. It appears that Padre Luis is an alternating inclusive, using both masculine and feminine language for Our God (Nuestro Dios) in the same passages.”

The problem for me is that “our Goddess” is an imperfect translation of what Fr. Barrios means when he say “nuestra Diosa.” This is partly because English no longer has grammatical gender (differentiated third person pronouns do not constitute grammatical gender.) So “Goddess” is not simply the feminine form of “God,” it has other connotations, especially the form “the Goddess.” Moreover, “-ess” words in general are now problematic for many people.

That said, now that I understand it, I am not bothered by Fr. Barrios’s use of the word “Goddess.”

Of course the pseudo Anglicans of the radical right are all over the story, mostly because of the protest for which Fr. Barrios was arrested, but also because of some of his earlier activism and what I admittedly intemperately call their own inability to comprehend inclusiveness in any form or to tolerate diversity of opinion. But that's to be expected.

Taking Hold

As I noted way back at the end of October, my computer failed just a day after we drove home from Heart Lake through a snow storm that delayed us and turned a three hour trip into an eight hour trip.

The problem was diagnosed as hard drive failure and I paid around $1,000 for data recovery. I bought a new hard drive and I finally got my computer back just before Thanksgiving. In the meantime, I was using Liz’s notebook computer. Well, it soon became apparent that there was still something wrong with the computer, as it kept giving me the blue screen of death. So I took it back to the shop.

I picked it up again on December 3rd; the diagnosis was a software problem. However, I soon began encountering bluescreens again, so I took it back once more. The technician, Irit, took quite a long time to pin down the problem. I was away twice, she had a bad case of flu, but finally, after a good deal of trial and error, she determined that the problem was the video card, which unfortunately is part of the motherboard, so I needed a new computer. Since I had already spent so much on data recovery, I looked hard for a desktop replacement laptop for under $700.

Now I finally have my new computer and have finished the slow process of installing all of the software I normally use. It’s been a long three months. I still have to clean up behind myself on Liz’s laptop and I have a lot of catching up to do. But I don’t feel crippled anymore.

I’m Back

On Monday afternoon, around 4:45 pm, Liz and I arrived home from our Florida trip. I’m very happy we went and especially happy that I got to see my Aunt Joyce and my cousins Eric and Sven in Miami.

When we got home, as we came into the building we saw a notice that our neighbor Bob Seaver, a retired professor at Union Theological Seminary, had died last Wednesday. Then when we up to our tenth floor apartment, we discovered that our next door neighbor, Aimee Scheff, had died early Sunday morning.

Both funerals are this afternoon -- Aimee's at 2 pm at a funeral chapel on 91st Street and Amsterdam Ave. and Bob's at 4 pm at The Cathedral of Saint John the Divine, at 112th Street, also on Amsterdam Avenue. So they are a mile apart. It remninds me of the time we had invitations to two weddings, one at the cathedral and one at St. Michael's Church, at 100th Street and Amsterdam. It was not possible to attend both weddings, we had to pick one and go to both receptions. It will be possible to attend both funerals.

We didn't have high speed internet access for most of last evening, so we didn't check all of our emails. This morning we saw that there are some delightful new pictures of our granddaughter Amanda. I'll be posting one or two of them later -- as well as some pictures from our trip.

I'm still using Liz's laptop, since mine is still in the shop -- I'm betting I'll need a new one, but until I know definitely whether the problem is the video card or the motherboard, I'll keep hoping.

Greetings to all, especially my cousin Eric my only follower), my cousin Sven, and my Aunt Joyce. Gotta get dreesed for the funerals. Bye.

UPDATE 8:45 PM

We didn't get to the second funeral after all -- we spent the afternoon in a lunch with Aimee's brother and sister-in-law and several Morningside Gardens friends.