This post is inspired by a fantastic blog post I read on the blog catholicity and covenant. The title is called "The Anglicans George Weigel doesn't know."
In it, the blog poster responds to sharp attacks on Anglicanism, by Roman Catholic commentator George Weigel, regarding the selling out of Christian orthodoxy to political correctness and whatever society decides is good.
George Weigel says that women's ordination and same-sex blessings are sell outs to modern society that started with the supposed acceptance of contraception in the 1930s.
Here is what the poster says in response to contraception:
"As for the two issues raised by Weigel - contraception and women priests -
Anglicanism's developing doctrine on these two issues may be presented
in terms of conformity to modernity, but they need not be. The 1930
Lambeth resolution on contraception was no acceptance of an understanding of
sexuality defined by a contraception mentality:
The Conference
records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception control
from motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."
This certainly doesn't sound like approval and the Episcopal Church leaves these issues to the believer's conscience. Perhaps Weigel would be better served by worrying about the 98% of Roman Catholic women who have used contraceptives?
Moving on to women's ordination, the poster says:
"Regarding the ordination of women as priests, in 2009 +Rowan
reminded us that the Anglican decision to ordain women to the ministerial
priesthood, while it can be dismissed as conforming to modernity, is rooted in
explicitly theological reflection:
"The claim of certain
Anglican provinces is that the ordination of women explicitly looks to an agreed
historic theology of ordained ministry as set out in the ARCIC report and other
sources ... But for many Anglicans, not ordaining women has a possible unwelcome
implication about the difference between baptised men and baptised women, which
in their view threatens to undermine the coherence of the ecclesiology in
question."
In some cases, are such arguments framed in political correctness terms? Of course, but for the those who are centered on the "Trinity" and a "Christological center", the arguments are rooted in theological reflection, not conforming to society.
The blogger finishes up by saying:
"The same can be said for the on-going debate surrounding human sexuality. Thus,
for example, +Rowan's 'The
Body's Grace' and Sam Wells' more recent 'Wholly
Holy', quite clearly do not argue for a conformity to modernity but, rather,
seek to reflect on the phenomenon of committed same-sex relationships in light
of the Trinitarian and Christological centre.
It's difficult not to come
to the conclusion that Weigel doesn't really know and doesn't 'get'
Anglicanism. Admittedly his experience may be defined by encounters with those
in TEC still shaped and defined by the liberal protestant agenda of the 60s and
70s. Many of us, however, who are catholic, evangelical, charismatic or liberal
Anglicans simply will not recognise ourselves in Weigel's descriptions."
Arguments can be made supporting same-sex blessings by deeply rooted theological arguments. The blogger points out that the liberal protestant agenda of the 60s is largely gone from the episcopacy of the Church of England. Theological arguments regarding these issues can be made, but they must be rooted in a Christological and Trinitarian understanding and the not the political/theological understandings of 1960s liberal protestantism, which has little use for deep theological reflection. Parishes that are conservative, evangelical, catholic, liberal, and Charismatic that have this focus on the Trinity and a Christological center will not match the descriptions of Anglicanism given by George Weigel. That is the claim of the blogger and I am inclined to agree.
As far as TEC goes, where is the Trinitarian focus and the Christological center when presenting arguments for same-sex blessings? Can we claim, like the Church of England, that our episcopacy has largely moved on from the liberal protestantism of the 60s? Unfortunately, I don't think so and that gives guys like Weigel all the ammunition they need to fire away at TEC. When are we going to get serious about rooting our arguments in deep theological reflection and not in the political agenda of the 60s? If we want people to bother with church on Sunday, then we need to be able to feed them good theology, theology that is rooted in the Trinity, that is rooted in the physical Resurrection, that is rooted in a Christological center. Are Episcopalian leaders going to continue to throw the baby out with the water and sell Christian orthodoxy down the river or are they going to finally get serious about rooting their arguments in theological reflection and a Trinitarian understanding? Doing theology the "Spong" way is an embarrasement to those who take Anglicanism seriously.
Thoughts?
Friday, May 23, 2014
Monday, May 12, 2014
Why Secular Society Doesn't Care About the Church and the Effects of Negative Crossover
As the Episcopal Church continues its attendance, baptism, confirmation, wedding, and membership free fall, many in TEC are scratching their heads and wondering why? First of all, it is true that there are a whole host of factors that have an impact on church membership and attendance. In some cases, it is a matter of a larger number of older members dying, while the birth rate in the church declines. It is true that most denominations are experiencing decline, however, most are not in the same membership free fall as TEC. Why the free fall and why has society not given us a look?
So, what does church attendance/membership and secular society have in common with each other and how does this relate to negative crossover? Well, TEC has prided itself on becoming more "inclusive" and more open, welcoming all to attend and give our church a shot. However, the execution of this "inclusiveness" has left a lot to be desired. First of all, watering down theology and watering down the transforming power of the Gospel is not bringing in anybody new. Why would anybody who normally doesn't care about church all of the sudden get excited about a message that has been watered down to the point that there is no message? They wouldn't, that is why they stay home on Sunday and watch football. Furthermore, some vague "Oprahfied" spirituality message with a very small amount of Jesus just isn't appealing. The truth is, secular society doesn't want to attend a church that looks no different than secular society. I don't know why that is so hard for the national leadership to fathom. While the leaders of the church are patting themselves on the back about how much they look like society, desperately trying to get societies rubber stamp, faithful Anglicans are leaving in droves. Jesus says that many in society won't like the message, he didn't say to "fashion thy message on the values of society and form your message on the popular whims of society and hope to gain their approval."
Moving on, how does this relate to negative crossover? Negative crossover is when a change alienates those faithful before the change, while not attracting anybody new. This new watered-down theology has alienated those who are faithful to the church and faithful to the power and transforming nature of the Gospel message. Truth is, Anglicans can go to the Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church, Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, or a variety of other churches and get the "meat and potatoes" of the Gospel, without it being watered down to the point of being nothing. On top of that, secular society doesn't care about this new watered-down Gospel and there is no mad rush to get to their local Episcopal parish to hear that it doesn't matter what you think or believe.
For a prime example of negative crossover, take a look at the idea of Communion without baptism. Many of those who support the measure say that we must be more "inclusive" and that it may make some feel "unwelcome" if they are unable to receive Communion since they are not baptized. Without getting into many of arguments of why this may be one of the dumbest ideas ever, let's look at what this says about the Episcopal Church. First of all, it says that our Communion means almost nothing and that it is more of a power meal if anything. Secondly, it says that baptism, membership in Christ's church, means almost nothing. Third, it says that so-called "feelings" and "experience" trump Tradition, Scripture, and Reason! I've spoken to a TON of Episcopalians who have said they are gone if this church changes the cannons to allow Communion without baptism. They contend that Sacramental theology would be diluted to the point of being almost useless and it would represent a clear departure from apostolic Christianity and they are absolutely right to think that way. Moving on, who is going to start coming to TEC because they can now have Communion without being baptized? Are our leaders really naive enough to think that there is going to be a mad rush to get to the local TEC parish after this change? No, nobody will care. Waiting to be baptized before Communion actually encourages a person to become a baptized Christian in the first place!! Thus, with one swift move, you alienate a large number of Episcopalians, while not bringing any new people to church. Mind boggling isn't it?
In the end, what brings people to church? It's really simple actually and it can be found in the bible, preaching the transforming power of the Gospel and Jesus Christ, while proclaiming Christ is risen! Christ is risen indeed! Jesus tells us to go and proclaim the Gospel to all nations and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. If we as a church start to believe that Christ is risen and proclaim the Gospel, then others will start to believe it too. If we do that, then maybe we get God's seal of approval, rather than societies. Thoughts?
So, what does church attendance/membership and secular society have in common with each other and how does this relate to negative crossover? Well, TEC has prided itself on becoming more "inclusive" and more open, welcoming all to attend and give our church a shot. However, the execution of this "inclusiveness" has left a lot to be desired. First of all, watering down theology and watering down the transforming power of the Gospel is not bringing in anybody new. Why would anybody who normally doesn't care about church all of the sudden get excited about a message that has been watered down to the point that there is no message? They wouldn't, that is why they stay home on Sunday and watch football. Furthermore, some vague "Oprahfied" spirituality message with a very small amount of Jesus just isn't appealing. The truth is, secular society doesn't want to attend a church that looks no different than secular society. I don't know why that is so hard for the national leadership to fathom. While the leaders of the church are patting themselves on the back about how much they look like society, desperately trying to get societies rubber stamp, faithful Anglicans are leaving in droves. Jesus says that many in society won't like the message, he didn't say to "fashion thy message on the values of society and form your message on the popular whims of society and hope to gain their approval."
Moving on, how does this relate to negative crossover? Negative crossover is when a change alienates those faithful before the change, while not attracting anybody new. This new watered-down theology has alienated those who are faithful to the church and faithful to the power and transforming nature of the Gospel message. Truth is, Anglicans can go to the Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church, Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, or a variety of other churches and get the "meat and potatoes" of the Gospel, without it being watered down to the point of being nothing. On top of that, secular society doesn't care about this new watered-down Gospel and there is no mad rush to get to their local Episcopal parish to hear that it doesn't matter what you think or believe.
For a prime example of negative crossover, take a look at the idea of Communion without baptism. Many of those who support the measure say that we must be more "inclusive" and that it may make some feel "unwelcome" if they are unable to receive Communion since they are not baptized. Without getting into many of arguments of why this may be one of the dumbest ideas ever, let's look at what this says about the Episcopal Church. First of all, it says that our Communion means almost nothing and that it is more of a power meal if anything. Secondly, it says that baptism, membership in Christ's church, means almost nothing. Third, it says that so-called "feelings" and "experience" trump Tradition, Scripture, and Reason! I've spoken to a TON of Episcopalians who have said they are gone if this church changes the cannons to allow Communion without baptism. They contend that Sacramental theology would be diluted to the point of being almost useless and it would represent a clear departure from apostolic Christianity and they are absolutely right to think that way. Moving on, who is going to start coming to TEC because they can now have Communion without being baptized? Are our leaders really naive enough to think that there is going to be a mad rush to get to the local TEC parish after this change? No, nobody will care. Waiting to be baptized before Communion actually encourages a person to become a baptized Christian in the first place!! Thus, with one swift move, you alienate a large number of Episcopalians, while not bringing any new people to church. Mind boggling isn't it?
In the end, what brings people to church? It's really simple actually and it can be found in the bible, preaching the transforming power of the Gospel and Jesus Christ, while proclaiming Christ is risen! Christ is risen indeed! Jesus tells us to go and proclaim the Gospel to all nations and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. If we as a church start to believe that Christ is risen and proclaim the Gospel, then others will start to believe it too. If we do that, then maybe we get God's seal of approval, rather than societies. Thoughts?
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
What We Do When Extended Family Doesn't Care For Our Church?
I was inspired to write a post about this topic when I saw several threads on a Christian forum that detailed the experiences of a person whose extended family did not accept the Episcopal Church (mainly due to liturgy, sacraments, and a perceived liberalism at the national level). This isn't isolated to the Episcopal Church, as this topic/issue comes up over and over again and I'm sure many of us have experience in dealing with family who comes from a different faith background.
Unfortunately, I have first-hand experience with dealing with extended family who doesn't accept my faith. My mother's extended family are made up of mostly Jehovah's Witnesses (two aunts and uncles, a cousin, and a grandma). Jehovah's Witnesses believe that all other faiths are a part of "Christendom" and are of the devil. In many ways, Anglicanism and Jehovah's Witnesses couldn't be much further apart when it comes to theology and worship. Fortunately, I was never baptized in the Jehovah's Witness faith, therefore, my extended Jehovah's Witness family are actually allowed to talk to me. That being said, we never "argue" about religion or theology. The fact is, if a Christian is well formed in their faith and are able to make a reasonable defense of that faith, you will generally have the respect of your family, even if they do not agree.
Sadly, letting your family run roughshod over you and running your Church into the ground isn't going to help anything. You don't have to argue with your family, but you should make it abundantly clear that bashing your faith is hurtful and you should be able to explain why you believe the way you do. This why it is important to attend bible study and study materials on your own. One of the best New Testament bible study series out there is the "For Everyone" series by retired Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright. N.T. Wright's series is set up as being introductory and offers understandable answers. Also, if you are interested in study bibles, I'd highly recommend the Oxford Study Bible. (\For more info on the Episcopal Church, see this blog post New to the Episcopal Church
Remember, your family may never accept your faith, but if you are well formed, you may gain their respect.
So, what have your experiences been? Have you faced family who are unable to accept you faith?
Unfortunately, I have first-hand experience with dealing with extended family who doesn't accept my faith. My mother's extended family are made up of mostly Jehovah's Witnesses (two aunts and uncles, a cousin, and a grandma). Jehovah's Witnesses believe that all other faiths are a part of "Christendom" and are of the devil. In many ways, Anglicanism and Jehovah's Witnesses couldn't be much further apart when it comes to theology and worship. Fortunately, I was never baptized in the Jehovah's Witness faith, therefore, my extended Jehovah's Witness family are actually allowed to talk to me. That being said, we never "argue" about religion or theology. The fact is, if a Christian is well formed in their faith and are able to make a reasonable defense of that faith, you will generally have the respect of your family, even if they do not agree.
Sadly, letting your family run roughshod over you and running your Church into the ground isn't going to help anything. You don't have to argue with your family, but you should make it abundantly clear that bashing your faith is hurtful and you should be able to explain why you believe the way you do. This why it is important to attend bible study and study materials on your own. One of the best New Testament bible study series out there is the "For Everyone" series by retired Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright. N.T. Wright's series is set up as being introductory and offers understandable answers. Also, if you are interested in study bibles, I'd highly recommend the Oxford Study Bible. (\For more info on the Episcopal Church, see this blog post New to the Episcopal Church
Remember, your family may never accept your faith, but if you are well formed, you may gain their respect.
So, what have your experiences been? Have you faced family who are unable to accept you faith?
Friday, February 14, 2014
AAWA: Advocates for Awareness of Watchtower Abuses
I imagine that most of the readers of this blog are almost completely unaware of the doctrines and practices of the Watchtower Society (Jehovah's Witnesses). If any of the readers of this blog are interested in learning more, then they can visit some of my older blog posts that deal with the act of "shunning" disfellowshipped family/friends or they can read my post detailing my journey out of the Watchtower cult.
As much as I want to focus this blog on Anglicanism and the Episcopal Church, it would be a great disservice not to touch on the effects that a damaging cult can have on one's life and spirituality. If there is one good thing that came out of my experience in this cult, it is the fact that I can use my voice and knowledge to held inform Episcopalians and others of this dangerous cult and I can potentially reach those who are still trapped in the Watchtower Society.
Thankfully, there are many organizations out there that were created to fight the Watchtower Society and to offer support for those who left, some of which are shunned by their own family and their friends. Some former members have literally given up everything in the search of truth and to relieve their conscience.
There is a new organization bringing the fight against the Watchtower Society called the Advocates for Awareness of Watchtower Abuses or AAWA for short. The organization is the broadest of its kind, including contributions from atheists, agnostics, Christians, and other religious/non-religious people. Personally, I think that this is a brilliant tactic. I've always maintained that the best way to reach those trapped in the Jehovah's Witness cult is to show them the utter lies and hypocrisy of the Watchtower Society and its Governing Body of elders. Sadly, you can argue in circles with a Jehovah's Witness on theology all day long, but you cannot dispute facts.
On the website, one can find articles and videos dealing with the lies of the Watchtower Society and resources to use when talking to Jehovah's Witnesses. The group also looks to expose just how damaging, even life threatening, some of the policies of the organization are. The group is also concerned with educating non-Jehovah's Witnesses about these policies.
I strongly encourage those who read this blog to visit the AAWA website and to educate themselves about the harmful policies of the Watchtower Society. Questions or thoughts are always welcome!
AAWA Website
As much as I want to focus this blog on Anglicanism and the Episcopal Church, it would be a great disservice not to touch on the effects that a damaging cult can have on one's life and spirituality. If there is one good thing that came out of my experience in this cult, it is the fact that I can use my voice and knowledge to held inform Episcopalians and others of this dangerous cult and I can potentially reach those who are still trapped in the Watchtower Society.
Thankfully, there are many organizations out there that were created to fight the Watchtower Society and to offer support for those who left, some of which are shunned by their own family and their friends. Some former members have literally given up everything in the search of truth and to relieve their conscience.
There is a new organization bringing the fight against the Watchtower Society called the Advocates for Awareness of Watchtower Abuses or AAWA for short. The organization is the broadest of its kind, including contributions from atheists, agnostics, Christians, and other religious/non-religious people. Personally, I think that this is a brilliant tactic. I've always maintained that the best way to reach those trapped in the Jehovah's Witness cult is to show them the utter lies and hypocrisy of the Watchtower Society and its Governing Body of elders. Sadly, you can argue in circles with a Jehovah's Witness on theology all day long, but you cannot dispute facts.
On the website, one can find articles and videos dealing with the lies of the Watchtower Society and resources to use when talking to Jehovah's Witnesses. The group also looks to expose just how damaging, even life threatening, some of the policies of the organization are. The group is also concerned with educating non-Jehovah's Witnesses about these policies.
I strongly encourage those who read this blog to visit the AAWA website and to educate themselves about the harmful policies of the Watchtower Society. Questions or thoughts are always welcome!
AAWA Website
Thursday, January 30, 2014
The Baptismal Covenant and Abortion: I See Hypocrites
Whenever I decided to create this blog, it was with the intention of focusing on the many positive experiences I've had as an Episcopalian and as an Anglican. However, there are times when I just can't understand some of the things that goes on in our church. One of these issues is the very controversial and very political issue of abortion.
There are many Episcopalians that are strongly against abortion, however, there are also many that support keeping abortion legal. However, let us first examine the actual official statement on abortion:
While the Episcopal Church recognizes a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy, the church condones abortion only in cases of rape or incest, cases in which a mother’s physical or mental health is at risk, or cases involving fetal abnormalities. The church forbids “abortion as a means of birth control, family planning, sex selection or any reason of mere convenience.”
We can gather two things from this stance, first of all, we see that the Episcopal Church believes that it is a women's right to terminate her pregnancy. However, the Episcopal Church only sees abortion as being morally permissible under very extreme circumstances and absolutely reject abortion as a means of birth control.
However, does the Episcopal Church want to see abortions made illegal, excepting in the conditions mentioned in our own official statement. Nope! Not only that, one could argue that many in leadership positions in the Episcopal Church see nothing wrong with abortion at all. In fact, if one were to visit the Episcopal Digital Network, they will find plenty of articles written that support Planned Parenthood and support for abortions on demand. All of this is wrapped in the veil that a women shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of sexual intercourse. Whatever happened to the Church preaching a message of abstinence if one doesn't want to have a child? What about using contraceptives to ensure that a pregnancy doesn't occur in the first place? Where are articles written against abortion as a means of birth control? Where are the articles exposing the evils of abortion? Where is the balance? This idea that it is okay to use abortion as a form of birth control is disgusting and plain evil. This shouldn't be a political issue for the Christian, it should be a human rights issue and a moral decency issue. That said, the Episcopal Church is way too busy giving out awards to Episcopal priest Katherine Ragsdale, who believes that abortion should be a "Sacrament" of the Church and she would personally break the law to ensure that an underage girl could have an abortion. You are probably saying, "this is just one crazy priest, right?" Nope, this the is the dean and president of Episcopal Divinity School! Read the filth for yourself, if you dare: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/priest-who-calls-abortion-blessing-tells-congress-shed-break-law-help-minor-cross-state
Now, let us take a look at our the portion of our Baptismal Covenant that has been the focus of the Episcopal Church for quite some time:
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all
There are many Episcopalians that are strongly against abortion, however, there are also many that support keeping abortion legal. However, let us first examine the actual official statement on abortion:
While the Episcopal Church recognizes a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy, the church condones abortion only in cases of rape or incest, cases in which a mother’s physical or mental health is at risk, or cases involving fetal abnormalities. The church forbids “abortion as a means of birth control, family planning, sex selection or any reason of mere convenience.”
We can gather two things from this stance, first of all, we see that the Episcopal Church believes that it is a women's right to terminate her pregnancy. However, the Episcopal Church only sees abortion as being morally permissible under very extreme circumstances and absolutely reject abortion as a means of birth control.
However, does the Episcopal Church want to see abortions made illegal, excepting in the conditions mentioned in our own official statement. Nope! Not only that, one could argue that many in leadership positions in the Episcopal Church see nothing wrong with abortion at all. In fact, if one were to visit the Episcopal Digital Network, they will find plenty of articles written that support Planned Parenthood and support for abortions on demand. All of this is wrapped in the veil that a women shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of sexual intercourse. Whatever happened to the Church preaching a message of abstinence if one doesn't want to have a child? What about using contraceptives to ensure that a pregnancy doesn't occur in the first place? Where are articles written against abortion as a means of birth control? Where are the articles exposing the evils of abortion? Where is the balance? This idea that it is okay to use abortion as a form of birth control is disgusting and plain evil. This shouldn't be a political issue for the Christian, it should be a human rights issue and a moral decency issue. That said, the Episcopal Church is way too busy giving out awards to Episcopal priest Katherine Ragsdale, who believes that abortion should be a "Sacrament" of the Church and she would personally break the law to ensure that an underage girl could have an abortion. You are probably saying, "this is just one crazy priest, right?" Nope, this the is the dean and president of Episcopal Divinity School! Read the filth for yourself, if you dare: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/priest-who-calls-abortion-blessing-tells-congress-shed-break-law-help-minor-cross-state
Now, let us take a look at our the portion of our Baptismal Covenant that has been the focus of the Episcopal Church for quite some time:
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all
people, and respect the dignity of every human
being?"
I guess striving for the dignity, peace, and justice of every human being doesn't include the unborn baby? Maybe our baptismal covenant should be re-written to include that we will "respect the dignity of every human being, unless they are unborn or if they go against progressive political politics." Now, if the Episcopal Church added that to their Baptismal Covenant, I that would square the Church away on my hypocrisy claim. If you think that the murder of a generation of children is "progress," then you are probably a psychopath.
At the end of the day, abortion is a very difficult decision and it is one that shouldn't be taken lightly. It is also true that the Church should be a voice of forgiveness, understanding, and love. Personally, I don't think that abortion should be 100% illegal, I think that the reasons given in the Episcopal Church's official stance are all good reasons and morally acceptable reasons to consider an abortion. However, our Church is being lead by a bunch of hypocrites who cite the Baptismal Covenant when it agrees with their politics, yet they utterly trash it when it goes against their politics.
As laity, we need to make our leaders "respect the dignity of every human being," including those who are unborn. Leave the politics at home! Thoughts?
Thursday, January 16, 2014
The Beauty of Anglicanism
First of all, sorry for the delay in posting. I have been working two jobs and it has made it almost impossible to keep up with anything. That said, things are starting to return to normal.
I wanted to share some of my favorite youtube videos with you all that really captures some of the beauty that is the Anglican Christian tradition. I hope you all enjoy the videos and I hope there is something for everybody here. As always, please feel free to comment!
I wanted to share some of my favorite youtube videos with you all that really captures some of the beauty that is the Anglican Christian tradition. I hope you all enjoy the videos and I hope there is something for everybody here. As always, please feel free to comment!
Friday, July 12, 2013
Our Hope Lies With The Youth
Our hope lies with the youth. It's no secret that any church that wants to stay relevant (and in business) needs to have a strong youth demographic. The purpose of this post is not to dwell over the numbers of youth in our Episcopal congregations, but to look at what it is the youth of our church believe.
Common sense would suggest that the youth in our church would be more receptive to praise bands and modern liturgies. Common sense would also suggest that the youth in our church have less use for historic hymns, the Creeds, the prayer book, and other treasures that define what it means to be Anglican. However, in this case, common sense is not reality. In this blog, I've made it not secret that I'm supportive of many directions the Episcopal Church has taken, especially the inclusion of our gay/lesbian brothers and sisters. That said, I'm strongly committed to the historic creeds, the prayer book, and traditional Anglican theology and Christian understanding. I would go as far to say that many, if not most, Episcopalians feel this way. However, it seems that trashing the Creeds (Spong), the liturgy (disco and Bob Dylan masses), and rejecting the deity of Christ (Spong and Jesus Seminar) is something that can be done in the Episcopal Church without any sort of protest by leadership. It seems that some of our leadership seem downright afraid to proclaim Christ as the risen Lord!
This is where the youth come in and why I have hope for the Episcopal Church. Middle-Aged Episcopalians (now the leadership of the Church) and baby boomers seem to be the biggest demographic that is obsessed with changing or tolerating almost anything and everything that takes us away from being Anglican. To be sure, not all feel this way and are actively doing these things, but we cannot ignore what seems to be the truth. Take a recent poll on the possible revisions to the 1982 Hymnal. The poll found that those under 29 were the most hesitant when it comes down to any sort of revision. What group is most willing to accept and even desire revision and changes? Baby-boomers and middle-aged Episcopalians. These findings are quite consistent across the board, the youth place great value on tradition and ancient liturgy, while middle-agers seek to move on from these traditions. Many even go as far to claim that these things are necessary to bring in the youth! http://thesubdeansstall.org/2012/05/15/dont-do-it-for-the-kids-of-hymnal-revision-and-young-adults/
Not only will changes to the liturgy and ancient traditions not bring in any new young members, but it will effectively alienate most of the youth that we actually have! It's amazing to see how much value our youth place on traditional Christian theology and how much they value our Anglican heritage. Being under 29, I'm one of them. Many middle-agers and baby boomers don't seem to understand that you can be committed to traditional Christian theology and be welcoming and inclusive of all God's children. Fortunately our youth understand this issue that seems to be perplexing those in leadership. If you want to bring in new people, you have to stand for something, you can't be all things to all people, that is impossible. Therefore, despite the bleak outlooks for the Episcopal Church, I remain very hopeful and confident that our youth has what it takes to turn this ship around. Thoughts or comments??
Common sense would suggest that the youth in our church would be more receptive to praise bands and modern liturgies. Common sense would also suggest that the youth in our church have less use for historic hymns, the Creeds, the prayer book, and other treasures that define what it means to be Anglican. However, in this case, common sense is not reality. In this blog, I've made it not secret that I'm supportive of many directions the Episcopal Church has taken, especially the inclusion of our gay/lesbian brothers and sisters. That said, I'm strongly committed to the historic creeds, the prayer book, and traditional Anglican theology and Christian understanding. I would go as far to say that many, if not most, Episcopalians feel this way. However, it seems that trashing the Creeds (Spong), the liturgy (disco and Bob Dylan masses), and rejecting the deity of Christ (Spong and Jesus Seminar) is something that can be done in the Episcopal Church without any sort of protest by leadership. It seems that some of our leadership seem downright afraid to proclaim Christ as the risen Lord!
This is where the youth come in and why I have hope for the Episcopal Church. Middle-Aged Episcopalians (now the leadership of the Church) and baby boomers seem to be the biggest demographic that is obsessed with changing or tolerating almost anything and everything that takes us away from being Anglican. To be sure, not all feel this way and are actively doing these things, but we cannot ignore what seems to be the truth. Take a recent poll on the possible revisions to the 1982 Hymnal. The poll found that those under 29 were the most hesitant when it comes down to any sort of revision. What group is most willing to accept and even desire revision and changes? Baby-boomers and middle-aged Episcopalians. These findings are quite consistent across the board, the youth place great value on tradition and ancient liturgy, while middle-agers seek to move on from these traditions. Many even go as far to claim that these things are necessary to bring in the youth! http://thesubdeansstall.org/2012/05/15/dont-do-it-for-the-kids-of-hymnal-revision-and-young-adults/
Not only will changes to the liturgy and ancient traditions not bring in any new young members, but it will effectively alienate most of the youth that we actually have! It's amazing to see how much value our youth place on traditional Christian theology and how much they value our Anglican heritage. Being under 29, I'm one of them. Many middle-agers and baby boomers don't seem to understand that you can be committed to traditional Christian theology and be welcoming and inclusive of all God's children. Fortunately our youth understand this issue that seems to be perplexing those in leadership. If you want to bring in new people, you have to stand for something, you can't be all things to all people, that is impossible. Therefore, despite the bleak outlooks for the Episcopal Church, I remain very hopeful and confident that our youth has what it takes to turn this ship around. Thoughts or comments??
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)