Excerpts from the Address from the Chair
Episcopal News Service. March 14, 1990 [90067]
Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning
Executive Council of the Episcopal Church, Kansas City, Missouri March 6, 1990
Such a swirl of events on the world's stage since we last met. Can you believe that in the few short weeks since November
- walls have fallen everywhere, beginning with that most infamous one of all, in Berlin, and continuing even to Victor Verster Prison in Capetown;
- martyrs' blood has once again been shed in El Salvador; church workers imprisoned and mistreated, even tortured; church communities harassed and intimidated;
- a mighty and fearsome dictator in Romania has been cornered and shot like an animal, while churches once subservient to the dictator have been found sadly wanting;
- another dictator has fallen closer to home, in Panama, but at a cost yet to be determined both to the Panamanian and the American peoples;
- the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has surrendered its constitutional monopoly of power and a brave new world has begun to stir;
- in Nicaragua, a secret, surprising ballot has mandated the first peaceful transfer of power in that nation's tortured history.
- President Bush probably spoke for all of us when he said that the world was moving so fast he often didn't know what to make of it, didn't know what was certain anymore, didn't always know how to respond.
- In times like these I turn to one of Ted Ferris's prayers, especially this one:
We live, O God, in a world that is forever changing. Give us such power of discernment that we may distinguish that which changes for the better from that which changes for the worse. Then help us to see the things which do not change, and give us the courage to stand up for them, to speak out for them, and to live by them in our daily lives. We ask all these things in the name of Jesus, the same yesterday, today and forever.
Allow me to do three things. First, look with me a little more closely at some of the fast-moving events I referred to, particularly those that claim our special attention as people of faith. I want to bring you up to date on what I and others have done in the crises affecting the dioceses of El Salvador and Panama, in the crisis occasioned by the ordination of Mr. Robert Williams in the Diocese of Newark, and on the joyful occasion of the tumbling of walls and the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa. These events have without exception special meaning and implications for us as a church, not the least in the program implemented by this Executive Council.
Second, I want to share with you the results of a special Gallup poll, commissioned by me, on "The Spiritual Health of the Episcopal Church." I believe that the results of this poll, which are being made public today, both affirm and challenge us in leadership positions in the church. There is much here we can wrestle with well into the twenty-first century.
Finally, I want, as always, to challenge you to get on with the mission of this church, looking at what is past and what is yet to come, that which changes for the worse and that which changes for the better, that which endures and is eternal, and for which we stand up, speak out, and live by as followers of Jesus of Nazareth, in the power of the Holy Spirit.
The first rude shock that greeted us after the November Council meeting was the intensifying violence in El Salvador -- the bloody offensive launched by the FMLN, the horrifying murders of the six Jesuits, their housekeeper, and her young daughter, and the arrests and imprisonment of numerous church people, including more than 20 Episcopalians and associated workers. I don't think I need to rehearse all this with you since the Episcopal News Service has done such an outstanding job in spreading the story far and wide, but I do want to acknowledge several things and tell you about what is happening now.
You know that all the Episcopalians and their colleagues have now been released from detention. Luis Serrano, long-time priest in El Salvador and rector of St. John the Baptist parish in San Salvador, has been in Spain for rest and is expected here in the United States shortly. Josie Beecher, our Volunteer for Mission from the Diocese of Olympia, is back in this country and has been tireless in efforts on behalf of her colleagues and the people of El Salvador.
You will know that I and my colleague heads of communions have had a series of meetings with administration, congressional, and Salvadoran government figures, including Secretary of State Baker, House Speaker Tom Foley, and President Cristiani. We have focused on two subjects above all in those meetings: damage to the churches (both psychological and material) and the safeguarding of religious workers, and the need for a negotiated end to the violence in El Salvador. My colleagues and 1 look forward to delivering the same message to the FMLN, since we are particularly concerned about battlefield tactics of the guerrillas that put churches in danger and compromise their mission.
While immersed in the El Salvador crisis we were greeted with the news of the invasion of Panama. Here, too, the Episcopal Church was directly affected, not the least because Bishop Ottley's house and his cathedral church are near the most heavily bombed part of Panama City. We can thank God that the bishop and his family and staff were spared injury and death. We can thank God, too, that we have a pastor and leader like Jim Ottley in this church. Not only is he the bishop of Panama, he is also bishop-in-charge of El Salvador. His leadership during the crises of these past months has been exemplary -- absolutely tireless and unflappable -- and this church owes him an enormous debt of gratitude.
The Panama invasion by most accounts has been very popular, not only in the United States but in Panama as well, at least among those sectors in Panama who had come to experience General Noriega as the corrupt dictator he was. I am troubled, however, that amid the euphoria we have not appreciated the enormous costs. We still do not have an accurate accounting of the Panamanian civilian dead, a subject on which the administration and our own media have been remarkably silent. There are thousands upon thousands of homeless people, and an economy that may take years to be resurrected. Bishop Stough has issued a report through the Presiding Bishop's Fund that makes clear the costs to our own institution, the Episcopal Diocese of Panama, especially its schools.
Two initiatives at the Episcopal Church Center have come out of the double crisis of El Salvador and Panama. First, I have established an informal "crisis management team," convened by my deputy for Anglican relations, for the purpose of anticipating and monitoring situations of crisis in the world that directly affect our church or a partner church. Second, having called publicly for a reassessment of our entire Latin America policy on the part of our government, I am taking steps to see that the Episcopal Church contributes at all levels to that reassessment. I see our participation in this as positive and constructive, not simply one of criticism from on high, and I expect to engage the Executive Council in this reflection at a later time.
Perhaps I should add parenthetically here an announcement I intended to make at our November meeting but neglected to do. In an oblique way it has to do with our ministry in Panama and El Salvador, as well as with a number of other partner churches around the globe. I refer to issues of economic justice and the interweaving of those issues with other aspects of our ministry.
In November you heard the excellent report of the Economic Justice Implementation Committee, formed to implement those resolutions of the 1988 General Convention concerning economic justice in the United States.
Economic justice issues have a global dimension as well. We have had a long-standing commitment to responding to the needs of poor and oppressed people overseas through support of development grant requests, grass roots development training programs, and other activities. The Presiding Bishop's Fund anticipates increased income for future development work, and we as a council and staff have struggled with the question of the use of government funds to support a ministry of global economic justice and development.
There is now a need for us to identify and spell out the future direction and nature of our commitment to a people-centered development ministry. We need to integrate and coordinate existing programs in the interest of better service to our overseas partners in development. I have therefore asked my staff to prepare a paper outlining a comprehensive and intentional approach to global economic justice ministry. This strategy will be shared with you at our June meeting. I believe it will give us a new way of thinking about the program that reflects our Christian commitment to the holistic development of people.
Since the upheaval began in Eastern Europe I have received a number of letters from Episcopalians asking about our mission strategy in light of the drastically changing situation. This is a fair question, although about as unexpected as the events in Eastern Europe themselves. Let me just say that I have asked the executive for world mission to undertake urgent consultations with the Convocation of American Churches in Europe, our partners in Europe, and ecumenical partners in the National Council of Churches. I believe that this will be a welcome move on the part of our own convocation in Europe, who are already asking themselves searching questions in the midst of the momentous events occurring about them.
The release of Mr. Nelson Mandela was an occasion of great joy not only for the people of South Africa but for all of us who have worked for many years to see the destruction of the apartheid system. A great wave of expectation has begun to break, and it is incumbent upon us to keep our heads and stay the course in our partnership with the church and people of South Africa. In a statement I made on Mr. Mandela's release, I expressed my opinion that, hopeful as the situation now is, this is not the time to ease economic pressures on the government of South Africa. That time will come, I am sure, and it will come when there is an irreversibility in the negotiations for a nonracial, truly democratic state. Our Southern Africa Task Force and our joint working group with the Church of the Province of Southern Africa will continue to monitor the situation closely, carrying out the mandate of General Convention and the program of this Executive Council, which have been affirmed time and again. In the meantime, we extend to Nelson Mandela our warmest greetings and assurances of our support for the just cause of the South African people. We congratulate President de Klerk for his bold and courageous leadership and urge him and his colleagues to continue their course. We rejoice that walls are tumbling and that captives are being freed and the broken-hearted are given hope.
Closer to home, another crisis of sorts erupted when Bishop Spong ordained Robert Williams to the priesthood just before Christmas. You are fully aware of this story and its sad aftermath, resulting in the resignation of Mr. Williams from his ministry at The Oasis in the Diocese of Newark. Feelings of hurt and betrayal have been abundant among all parties, including the many people of this church not directly involved in the controversy. You will have seen the statement issued by me and my Council of Advice on February 20th. Efforts are continuing in the House of Bishops and in other sectors of the church to address the issue in a way that is fair and thoughtful but also clear and firm. I am grateful for the restraint exercised by bishops and others understandably upset by the manner and timing of the ordination. I believe that our church will emerge stronger and more compassionate from this ordeal if we continue to exercise restraint and civility toward each other. At this point, let me just reiterate two things I have said before.
First, the issue is much deeper than the ordination of Robert Williams and other gays and lesbians. The issue is also one of collegiality in the House of Bishops and indeed in the General Convention; it is an issue of the boundaries of authority and the question of who speaks for the church; it is an issue of the tension between prophetic and pastoral ministry, particularly regarding homosexuals. If we fail to sound the depths of these larger issues, then we fail to address the ordination of Mr. Williams in a responsible way. For the issues presented by the ordination in Newark are perennial issues in the institutional life of this church.
Second, I want to repeat my deep concern about the effects of this ordination and its aftermath on the many members of our church who are gay and lesbian and who have served this church in great faithfulness. In a word, I fear a backlash. It is incumbent upon each one of us to take the greatest care in how we pronounce on this matter. How easy it is to injure and slander fellow members of the Body of Christ, for whom Jesus also died. I pray that we all heed the admonition of Paul to "...lead a life worthy of the calling to which [we] have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4: lb-3).
Let me shift gears now and introduce what I think could be a most fruitful instrument in our long-range planning and as we move into the Decade of Evangelism. I refer to a special Gallup survey commissioned by me after the Detroit General Convention, entitled "The Spiritual Health of the Episcopal Church." The survey was conducted by the Gallup organization last year and completed during the summer. I then discussed the survey with my Council of Advice, at its regularly scheduled meeting in December. It has been a helpful planning tool for me and the senior executives.
Let me for now highlight some of the poll's findings and offer a couple of my own reflections.
In the survey's introduction, George Gallup, Jr., offered this broad overview of his organization's findings:
"In broad terms the picture of the Episcopal Church membership that emerges from this survey is of a church body that is substantially orthodox in its religious beliefs (with these beliefs in many cases grounded in life-changing religious experiences); committed to growth (both personal and institutional); open to change and new expressions of faith within the church; and holding the view that the Episcopal Church should become more involved in areas such as ecology, matters of justice, war and peace.
"At the same time, however, the survey portrait reveals a membership that falls considerably short in terms of regular and consistent religious practice -- study of Scriptures, evangelism and invitation, financial giving, churchgoing, prayer habits, and small group participation."
We have, then (and the data bear this out), much for which we can be thankful in the strong, outward-looking posture of our membership, with its commitment to growth and openness to change. We have, too, a firm challenge to deepen our individual and congregational practices -- in Bible study, in prayer and spiritual growth, in mutual support. This is a perfect challenge as we enter the Decade of Evangelism!
As in any survey of this sort, small items stand out and call attention to themselves. Here are some that stood out for me.
Gallup divided what he called the "total Episcopal population" into roughly equal thirds: those who are active, involved, and committed; those who are on church rolls but are less active; and those who identify themselves as Episcopalians but are not part of any congregation. Of this latter group, Gallup claimed that fully one-half could be brought back into the community of active worshipers. In his "prescriptions" section (beginning on page 12 in your copies), Gallup made some helpful suggestions about ways in which these unchurched can be reached out to and reincorporated into the local congregation. This is a concrete and specific challenge to us in the Decade of Evangelism -- going first to the members of our own household!
Why are the unchurched Episcopalians unchurched? Some have suggested that much of the reason has to do with positions the Episcopal Church has taken on controversial issues. Gallup's data do not bear this out. In his overview Gallup stated: "Factors that have contributed to the decline in membership...since the 1960s are primarily broad societal, lifestyle and demographic factors...and not specifically denominational issues...." Furthermore, Gallup's data undercut the assertions of some that the Episcopal Church is suffering an identity crisis. Indeed, Gallup suggested that "the national membership of the Episcopal Church have a fairly clear sense of direction and mission." What is lacking is a clear and consistent correlation between religious belief and religious practice. Of course, this is an ages-old challenge, and not one applying solely to the Episcopal Church. Yet I would like for us to see this in our own day as a challenge that calls for our best and most imaginative efforts in Christian nurture -- fully as important as our efforts in outreach to the society at large and in evangelism.
You will find your own items of interest, points of illumination and challenge. I am aware, of course, that different people read different messages in surveys of this sort; I am aware that numbers can be manipulated; I am aware that other survey results have recently been offered to our people. We each have our own impressions of the state of the church. For my own part, I must say that what this survey reveals has been confirmed for me time and again in my travels and visitations. But you test it. As you read it, compare it with your own impressions. Do you see your own parish or diocese reflected here? If not, where lies the difference?
"The Spiritual Health of the Episcopal Church" is an exciting document because it points us to an exciting task: becoming fully the church that God intends us to be. I am grateful to George Gallup -- a committed and very active Episcopalian himself -- for the care he and his associates have taken in preparing this survey. I am grateful for his having gone the second mile, in that he didn't simply gather the data but also reflected on it and offered, from his own perceptions and experience, some particularly compelling prescriptions.
At the beginning of this address we prayed in the words of Ted Ferris that God would "give us such power of discernment that we may distinguish that which changes for the better from that which changes for the worse." I try to reflect on what it means to stand now on the threshold of this last decade of the millennium. One can't escape the feeling that we are living in momentous times and that our lives are being changed, somehow, in ways we can't quite grasp or even imagine. Events unimaginable even a few months ago now whiz past us in daily succession. We gingerly poke our heads around the corner and look ahead -- in excitement, perhaps in fear, in hope. What will we find?
As people of faith, we know that, come what may, the struggle between grace and sin will continue. We live in the Gospel tension between promise and fulfillment. Surely the gift of discernment is more precious than gold at times such as this. How do we in faithfulness "test the spirits"? How do we distinguish between that which changes for the better and that which changes for the worse? Can we maintain that healthy tension between the "already" and the "not-yet"?
It is said that Christian history reveals two besetting dangers. On the one hand, there is the danger of collapsing everything into the future, into the "not-yet." This is the seductive danger of apocalypticism, the exaggerated expectation of final fulfillment. Such an attitude will have a decisive effect on one's priorities. Do you remember the confirmation hearings of Interior Secretary James Watt some years ago? When asked about some looming environmental danger, he replied to the effect that, in light of the expected imminent return of Jesus, he wasn't sure that the reputed environmental danger was really a problem. Usually the turn of a century sees such behavior in a frenzy. Now that we are about to turn the millennium, we will see even more, and not all of it will come from people we can dismiss as crazy.
The second besetting danger in Christian history is one we in the Catholic tradition are more prone to: the danger of an excessive identification of the kingdom of God with the church -- its structure, its liturgy. I must confess that at times our focus on institutional issues -- as necessary as this is seems to assume an importance all out of proportion to its true weight in the scale of God's issues. As we were struggling with one of those institutional issues a few weeks ago, I happened to read two small items in the New York Times. They caused me to think again about priorities. One item was about the 42 poorest nations of the world, under the leadership of Bangladesh, getting together in order to make their desperate case to a world suddenly captivated by events in Eastern Europe. The second item was the note that an AfricanAmerican man in Harlem -- in New York, in the U.S.A.-- had a lower life expectancy than a man in Bangladesh.
Both extremes -- that of too breathless an emphasis on the end-time and that of too ready an identification of the church with the kingdom -- fail to maintain the necessary tension of "already" and "not-yet" in understanding God's call and God's promise to us. The struggle between grace and sin continues. Hard choices confront us daily. We pray for that discernment which enables faithful witness, that enables us to "keep our eyes on the prize," on the "things that do not change," so that we gain the "courage to stand up for them, to speak out for them, and to live by them in our daily lives."