Who speaks for God?

The following is a response to a priest who posted a message about prophets/being prophetic on a listserv that I read....

---

Interesting topic.

I had a conversation with my priest the Sunday after Easter, where we were discussing "my" issues that will never be aired in a public forum (over the idea of which bishop might be good to invite to speak at a conference I'm going to in August). I commented that the priests and bishops who seem most likely to openly speak out on "my" issues are those who are either non-parochial or retired. She agreed (probably implying a way to be left off the hook) and differentiated between the need for being pastoral vs. the need to prophetic. (The need not to create a divisive environment.)

Unfortunately, even though we agreed, it didn't make me feel any better about the Catch 22 that I'm stuck in there. If I had read this back then, I could have accused the Church of being a "not-for-prophet institution". Great description! I think it's worth a book.

No congregation, and certainly no religious institution, really wants or welcomes any kind of prophet in their midst. (I could rattle on, but won't.) But the bottom line for me is that since no one welcomes any type of truth that causes discomfort or implies any expectations from the hearers, or "makes ancient good uncouth", nothing much will ever change in a meaningful way. And it's too bad that I feel that way about the only institution that ostensibly represents God.

S...
[appropriate hymn]

"My own hunches and experiences point to an institution that is largely disconnected from the issues, needs and hurts of the world. I have felt that the church has been distressingly silent in terms of offering prophetic commentary and moral insight for the largest problems we face. In matters of public policy and personal transformation most churches are irrelevant."

-- (the Rev.) Peter Sawtell, from "The Irrelevant Church" (9/6/02)


"When the voice of God is invoked
on behalf of those
who have no voice,
it is time to listen.
But when the name of God is used
to benefit the interests
of those who are speaking,
it is time to be very careful."

-- Jim Wallis, Who Speaks for God?

Oprah, quotes & "A Lenten Fast From Violence" revisited

This is a post I decided not to send to one of my listservs. But it falls within the definition of a mini-rant. So I'll post it here:

---

Hi, all. I added links & quotes pertaining to Oprah's 21 day vegan cleanse on my site, along with things that came to mind as I went from link to link, both on her site and elsewhere.

If you look (or if you continue reading this) you might gather that after all these years, it still irks me, whenever I think about it, that our churches -- or the World Council of Churches(!) -- will not even mention giving up meat for Lent as an "option" for people to consider. Well, I know of one exception among us, in another part of the country. But I guess one has to be a veg'n to "preach it", because no one else will -- unless they're Orthodox, and observing a vegan Lent is the norm -- and from what I understand, the expectation to even be able to take Communion (with dispensations for the young and the elderly). As I've lamented in the past, The Episcopal Church is either too "protestant", or too self-indulgent (which is more likely the case), to care about such vestigial practices as self-examination, penitence and self-denial, even for the one season out of the Church Year that is set aside for that kind of thing.

Well, I'm thankful that Oprah is doing this.

Maybe her fans will take notice.

Sue


“How can you say you’re trying to spiritually evolve, without even a thought about what happens to the animals whose lives are sacrificed in the name of gluttony?”
– Oprah

Rogation Sunday

So, today was Rogation Sunday. I had a little bit of hope that today would be the day I could interest some people in my church to join me in gardening this summer, with the intent of growing a few organic things for ourselves, and to share the extras with others at church including our Community Meal (soup kitchen).

This was the dangling carrot I invented for myself, to have a reason to continue going to church "for a season".

Nothing was planned for Rogation, except for the choice of hymns. I asked my priest (who liked my idea last September) if she would say something during the announcements, or if I could. She suggested that I do it, because she might forget. And so I did.

On the way out, I asked if she could bless my seeds. She wasn't sure, because the cancer support group was doing the forum (which we don't have on a regular basis) and said it would depend on time, etc., depending on what's going on with their presentation.

So during the forum, I sat at a long table next to my set-up card table. (I also had my copy of the Book of Occasional Services on the table in front of me.) She ended up sitting next to me. But as soon as the cancer presentation was finished, she got up and left.

So not only did I feel completely unsupported, as if I were the "Weed of the Church", I was subjected to the group who is encouraging us to support the Relay for Life, where the proceeds go to the American Cancer Society -- and the main chunk goes to (animal) research to "find a cure". Whatever.

No group in that church gets much support, if any, from the rest of the congregation. The church is "unresponsive".

I was visably upset before I left, and told one guy why (not a member, but a regular attendee) -- not just because of today, but because of the benign neglect (a passive way of saying "no") over the unpreviewed Proclamation DVD. I asked the guy who does the liturgical schedule to take me off, because I am in need of a "sabbatical".

One lady showed some interest in taking some lettuce, radish & cilantro seeds. But she has an apartment balcony, so doesn't really have room to grow much. Even so, since she's just one person, I really don't need to go back to church on a regular basis. I'll go back when I have something worthwhile to offer the church -- like my extra potatoes.



Even though it was cold today, I'm glad I wore my new "Episcopally-correct" T-shirt to church. It has the ENAW logo on the front, above a quote:

"Speak up for those who have no voice,
for the cause of those appointed to die."

-- Proverbs 31:8 [NKJV variation]

And on the back, it has one of the Baptismal promises from the BCP:

"Do you renounce the evil powers of the world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God?"

"I renounce them."


Another thing that bothers me is that the intercessions for the Prayers of the People are always cleared out, or non-existent. I have a friend in hospice care, and it is like pulling teeth to try to keep her on the church's prayer list. What's up with that?!


Basically, church depresses me. Why waste the gas to go? It takes me about two weeks to recover.

Inhibited by broken promises

I've been dreading going to church tomorrow, because I'm afraid my priest might ask, "How are you?" It's always such a complicated question to try to answer honestly, or accurately, since my mood can change from one day to the next. I will say that this was a rough week, and it took me most of that time to get over my disappointment of last weekend.

So what word would I use to describe how I am, or how I'm feeling? A few came to mind. "Grounded" was one that sounds pretty neutral, especially this past week, when so many jets were grounded to have their wire bundles in their wheel wells inspected. It is also fitting, because my organic veggie seeds arrived this week. So I've started planting them, hoping they'll be seedlings by mid-May.

But in the Episcopal Church's climate this week, the word "inhibited" came to mind. I feel inhibited. I'm not feeling personally inhibited as if I did anything wrong that would cause me to be kept silent. But the thing I was hoping would happen since last November won't ever happen, and now I am left feeling pretty much like the wind has been sucked out of my sails, that I am out of ideas, and that my hope has died. ("Zombie of the Church" just came to mind, too. But I think I'll keep that one to myself, hoping something will improve my mood soon.)

The gardening idea is still a "go". But I've all but lost interest in promoting it, even though I'll bring my seeds on the 27th (if nothing has sprouted by then) in case there is any sort of Rogation Sunday thingie that will be going on.

We talked briefly about the upcoming Animal Rights National Conference in August, where I'll be a speaker on the topic of animals & religion. I mentioned that the person who submitted my name asked if I knew of any bishops who might be interested in going to speak too. I had some in mind. My priest suggested another one, who happens to be retired. Somehow it came up in conversation that the clergy who are more likely to feel free to talk about animal issues are those who are either non-parochial or retired. And after the flak our Presiding Bishop got from the conservative bloggers, I felt like I was opting toward suggesting the retired bishop.

That whole idea brought up a Catch 22 in my mind -- knowing that non-parochial or retired means that this is a topic that will never get discussed in our churches in a meaningful way. Congregational life. It's a pit, because no one wants to ruin the tranquility, or get anyone riled up enough to leave. (I don't count. I'm just one person.) So this is what it boiled down to for me:

"...the thought occurred to me that the problem with the Church is that it allows 'the evil powers of this world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God' to orchestrate for us what is safe and acceptable to talk about in a public forum, and, that the churches are unwilling to 'renounce them'."

How is it that the Church expects people to publicly renounce the evil powers of this world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God as part of their Baptismal promises, when the Church will not?

The Presiding Bishop's Easter Message

Since this is a rant, I decided to move it here, from my other blog site. (It was from April 2nd.) As a background, here is the link to The Presiding Bishop's Easter Message.

---

I started a blurb, and then deleted it. It ended up being a diatribe about the typically disrespectful/hateful comments I found on the conservative blogs. I'll wait until I can simply state why I was happy to read the Presiding Bishop's Easter Message. I know why I was. I'm not so sure that I'd want to post it here. Maybe I'll let the positive reside on my March 23rd blurb with the excerpt that can speak for itself. Maybe I'll concentrate on the negative comments I read, instead, since I don't feel like posting my opinions on their blogs, and subject myself to the self-righteous pyranhas. I need to get some sleep.

---

Added 4/5/08:

In response to those who ripped the Presiding Bishop apart because her Easter Message wasn't "Christian-enough" for their taste (and nothing she could ever do or say would make them happy anyway), I would simply say that she was speaking to Episcopalians, who already know what Easter is about. Anyone who goes to church once or twice a year knows about Jesus' death and Resurrection. She was saying things that most Episcopalians do not seem to know about -- or care about. Why Easter? Why not? It is a time when churches traditionally do baptisms. Maybe people who read the Easter Message had a chance to hear this for the first time:

"Do you renounce the evil powers of this world which corrupt and destroy the creatures of God?"


"I renounce them."

One thing I found so potentially important about the message, is that we are big into the MDG's. I am hopeful that her message will encourage charitable people in our churches to find ways to support the MDG's that not only help the poorest of the poor, but do not hurt the environment, or add to animal suffering. If the higher-ups in the Church take her message to heart, maybe we can stop encouraging people to support "buy a cow for a poor family" schemes. Maybe ERD will phase out their "animal slavery project". Maybe the creator of the animal-exploitive Advent Calendar that is posted every year on the Diocese of Washington's website will update the daily outreach suggestions. Who knows what could happen, when someone in a position like hers actually goes out on a limb to speak to a topic that even our environmentalists who talk about Climate Change won't touch?

(Go ahead and eat your Easter hamburgers out of contempt for our Church leader, you self-righteous, self-indulgent, hard-hearted brood of vipers. Why not throw in a gluttonous Turducken while you're at it, just for spite? How many creatures of God are you willing to corrupt and destroy, just so you can dehumanize another Christian who doesn't fit your mold?)


The Easter Message came to my attention just at a time when I was ready to drop out, because I've been so impatient with, and disillusioned by the Church's silence (and "imposed silence") on these topics -- eternally displaced by more important topics of the day like "sex and schism" that is a smoke screen that diverts attention from everything else, and is generally out of touch with anything other than its own self-interests. I'm back, because she opened a door!


I was reminded of these old posts:


- An Open Letter to Episcopalians (and other charitable people) in support of MDG's

- The other "Inconvenient Truth" -- a message for the Church (and the world)


- MDG's: A few cruelty-free international relief and development organizations

The Easter Bunny reminds us of The Episcopal Church's GC2003 Resolution D016

This is a week late, but I decided to post it here anyway -- for as long as the link works:


Click here to listen to a surprising message from the Easter Bunny.


This is a reminder that we do have a resolution to "support ethical care of animals" in the Church's archives.

I just gave GC2003 Resolution D016 a "thumbs up" on "Stumble Upon". Since it was the first time anyone highlighted that web page, I had to write a review. Since adding some hyperlinks here, this is an "amended" version.

It is important for Episcopalians to know that our Church has a resolution on supporting the ethical care of animals in our archives. With so much controversy over a couple of things that get people worked up, everything else "collects dust". This is an FYI for those who didn't know, and a call to become educated on the way animals are treated by the animal use industries, and to do something about it, to make the world a more humane place for animals. But we should not wait for the Office of Government Relations to send out e-alerts on animal protection legislation, because it is 2008 now, and they haven't yet.

Please take the initiative to visit a site like the Humane Society of the United States, Farm Sanctuary or others to learn about the various issues, and any legislation that is in the works.

The Bishop of California went public as an endorser of the California humane farming initiative. Other Californians should follow his lead, and vote "Yes" on November 4, 2008.

Look beyond how animal (ab)use benefits you personally, and think about what life is really like for them every day of their lives. Look at who profits by keeping things the way they are, and how they do it in ads, in the media, with lobbyists, etc. Look to see who is against the animal rights advocates, and find out what their motivation is, who they represent, who pays them, etc. Then we can begin to break the myths, and get on with creating a better world for "the least of these" of the Church's concerns.

What kind of God do we worship?

When I Google for "I desire mercy and not sacrifice", my "boycott fur" page shows up # 5 out of 1,610,000.
When someone in NZ Googled for
the same thing, my page showed up # 3 out of 1,580,000. This is what shows up on Google:

'I desire mercy and not sacrifice', says God. Boycott fur.
31 Dec 2005 ... "I desire mercy and not sacrifice." -- God (Hosea 6:6). Of all the forms of animal exploitation that
benefit humankind, fur is the easiest ...
episcoveg.weblogger.com/2005/12/31 - 30k - Cached - Similar pages

Interesting that there's a difference in ranking & number, depending on where one is in the world.

Another page that shows up on that Google search is this one
this one from the Girardian Lectionary
with some anti-sacrifice quotes attributed to the same God who is credited for our Maundy Thursday reading that some of us found substitutes to read, to avoid "doing violence to our faith".

(As I've mentioned in the past, one of my favorite questions that the "unhappy" Episcopalians do not seem to have an answer for, or are unwilling to engage when they talk about the "plain meaning of Scripture" is, does God desire mercy and not sacrifice? Or does God desire sacrifice and not mercy? The "plain meaning" doesn't seem so plain to me. Inquiring minds want to know.)

Choose this day....

http://bible.oremus.org/?ql=73802486

"And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve;
whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood,
or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell:
but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."
(Joshua 24:15 KJV)