According to a report from the Episcopal News Service in The Living Church, August 31, the Bishop of New York, Mark Sisk, and the Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, expressed surprise at the worldwide "lack of understanding" of the Episcopal Church in the United States.

"I was surprised at questions about basic theological tenets and whether we really believe them or not," Bishop Jefferts Schori said. "It's a reminder that even though we may think all Anglicans believe the basics of the faith, not everybody believes that we believe them."

Why would anyone think we believe the basics of the faith? For many decades now, the refrain from pulpits and in clergy conclaves has been wink-wink, nudge-nudge about "the basics of the faith"? I have a copy of a sermon that was delivered on Easter Day by a leading bishop, calling the entire Resurrection proclamation into question. Last November, when the churches traditionally read passages of judgment prior to Advent, I heard with my own ears a Yale Divinity School graduate say from the pulpit that judgment has no place in our faith, essentially repudiating the lessons that had just been read. We don't have to look at the "theses" of the ineffable Bishop Spong to find widespread undermining of the foundations throughout the church. The takeover of the churches by "liberal" theology has been so complete that few, whether in the hierarchy or in the pews, have even noticed. That's the real issue, not the argument about homosexuality which is a "presenting symptom," not the underlying problem.
Read more and comment ...

Most Episcopalians, especially clergy, will testify that they are repeatedly being asked--whether at interdenominational gatherings or at cocktail parties--"What's going to happen to the Episcopal Church?" or "What's going to happen to the Anglican Communion?" These questions are not helpful. It's like asking who's going to win the Presidential election. Who knows?

What would be helpful would be questions about the issues involved. This would give us liberal- evangelical, postliberal, apostolic (or whatever we call ourselves) Christians a chance to weigh in on something other than homosexuality, schisms, acronymns, and the African bishops.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, actually steered in this direction a couple of weeks ago when he said, "We [need] a bit more of a structure...to give guidance on what would and would not be a grave and lasting divisive course of action by a local church. While at the moment the focus...is sexual ethics, it could just as well be pressure for a new baptismal formula or the abandonment of formal reference to the Nicene Creed...it could be the regular incorporation into liturgy of non-scriptural or even non-Christian material." Exactly. This is what's at stake. In parishes, seminaries, weddings, funerals, and diocesan events all over the country, these "regular incorporations" have been common for decades. It is ironic that the 1979 Prayer Book, so much vilified by traditionalists 30 years ago, looks positively conservative today. One wag said that we now need a Society for the Preservation of the 1979 Prayer Book (instead of the 1928).

A friend in the PCA lamented to me recently that his right-wing denomination was becoming more and more defined by cultural conservatism, less and less by Scriptural fidelity. So the problem exists at both ends of the spectrum, with the mainlines defined by political correctness and the conservative evangelicals by anti-abortion and the American flag (so to speak). The Wall Street Journal reported last week that, contrary to the wishful thinking of many, Rick Warren was nowhere near moving left; Warren himself says that the evangelical left is minuscule in numbers, a fact to which I can attest.

We desperately need an infusion of genuine Reformed theology, the sort that has never really taken root in America (as Dietrich Bonhoeffer lamented when he was in New York in 1938 )--truly radical, subversive theology that calls all our cultural commitments into question, and especially our religious ones. Dare we speak the name of Karl Barth?
Read more and comment ...

The Berkshire Record (Mass.) reports on an area of New England where thousands of affluent people have second homes and enjoy the wonders of Tanglewood, fine restaurants, and beautiful mountain views. Largely unseen and silent, the full-time resident population suffers. Domestic violence is rising along with increasing financial despair. With the winter approaching, many people do not know how they will be able to pay for heat. Social workers in the county report that when the economy is precarious, violence in the home becomes much more common. Much of it happens out of sight, since people who suffer from violence very often do not report it. Often they do not feel entitled to protest, or they cannot imagine where they would go if they left the only home they have.

A chilling detail in the article gives some idea of what people are living with. People fearing violent attacks by family members are advised by counsellors to stay out of the bathroom, because the space is small and enclosed; and to stay away from the kitchen, because it has "hard surfaces and weapons." We have all seen movies of murders in kitchens, but in real life most of us think of the kitchen as homey and nurturing. All the more horrifying therefore that a woman should be afraid of her own kitchen.

Being aware of the hidden suffering that goes on all around us is surely a major aspect of Christian living. In these lean times, social service agencies are in greater need than ever of our support.
Read more and comment...

The excellent reporter Somini Sengupta files this story today from New Delhi:
--------------------------------
The remote, destitute state of Orissa, marred for years by Hindu-versus-Christian violence, erupted in a retaliatory killing on Monday after the murder of a Hindu leader led a mob to burn small Christian churches, prayer halls and an orphanage that had housed 21 children.

The police said a woman’s body, charred beyond recognition, was found inside the church orphanage. The church’s pastor, whom the police did not identify and who was injured in the fire, told the authorities that the body was that of a nun working there. No children were injured.

The attack on the orphanage on Monday, in an isolated district called Bargarh, came after the killing Saturday of a Hindu leader who had been associated with the World Hindu Council, and who was leading a drive to wean local villagers from Christianity. Radical Hindu groups like the council are vehemently opposed to conversions to Christianity, which in India tend to focus on traditionally downtrodden lower-caste and indigenous groups, and have lately taken to conducting mass ceremonies to convert them back to Hinduism.

The Hindu leader who was killed, Laxmanananda Saraswati, was among five people slain by unidentified armed men who stormed a Hindu school in the nearby district of Kandhamal. The police blamed Maoist insurgents who prevail in the area. Mr. Saraswati’s followers, however, blamed Christians...

The Press Trust of India reported that Hindu activists, defying an official curfew in the area, paraded through the streets, attacking Christian churches and homes.

Fights broke out in Orissa last Christmas Eve, when one person was killed and churches and temples were damaged. In 1999, a Hindu mob burned an Australian missionary, Graham Staines, and his two children while they slept inside their car. A Hindu has been sentenced to life imprisonment in their deaths. Eleven others who had been convicted were freed by an appeals court in 2005 because of insufficient evidence. Mr. Staines ran a hospital and clinics for leprosy patients.
--------------------------------------------------------------

I remember well the killing of Graham Staines, how the leprosy patients wept for him, and how his wife wanted to continue his work. Ms. Sengupta has not forgotten him. May the Lord continue to show forth his love for "the traditionally downtrodden lower-caste groups" (the Dalits, formerly known as the Untouchables) in India and everywhere, so that our faith might be known in the world for what it really is, not for ugly divisions and imperialist rhetoric.
Read more and comment...

Virginia Heffernan, a media reviewer for The New York Times, recently did a quick run-through of some of the newest self-help books. One of them is The Third Jesus: The Christ We Cannot Ignore, by Deepak Chopra. She describes the phenomenally best-selling Chopra as "a medical doctor and proponent of mind-body treatments [who] preaches with the authority of a healer, mystic and celebrity on virtually everything including love, sleep, weight, money, reincarnation, heaven, peace, yoga, desire, physics, addiction and success...."

She continues, "I don't really get The Third Jesus. Even its title is a head-scratcher. With the first Jesus still pretty hazy to most people, the idea of a third one--an arbitrary idea of goodness that might be wrested from Christianity--is not even an interesting mystery."

She quotes from Chopra: "One Jesus is historical, and we know next to nothing about him. Another Jesus is the one appropriated by Christianity. He was created by the Church to fulfil its agenda. The third Jesus, the one this book is about, is as yet so unknown that even the most devout Christians don't suspect that he exists."

And then she says, archly: "Let me guess: Chopra knows."

That's a good zinger, isn't it?

We need to be working overtime to combat this very widely disseminated idea (see The Da Vinci Code) that the Church made up its Lord to suit its "agenda." Is crucifixion an "agenda"? We need to say it every hour on the hour: there would be no Church if our crucified Lord had not been raised from the dead. Are we saying that? I don't think so, or Jesus Christ would not be "pretty hazy to most people."

Why is Deepak Chopra appearing at the National Cathedral in November?
Read more and comment...