Sunday, February 28, 2010

And that's a wrap

In the Olympic event that mattered most to Canadians, Canada took home the Gold in men's hockey with a heart-stopping, sudden death overtime win over the United States. Sid the Kid from Cole Harbour, Nova Scotia put the game away 7:40 into a 20 minute overtime period.

This was the best Olympic outing in Canadian history, with 26 medals (third overall). And, with 14, Canada surpasses the former record for Gold Medals previously held conjointly by the Soviet Union and Norway.

Perhaps, though, there is something quintessentially Canadian about our household. After the initial shouting and cheering, neither my beloved nor I could help but empathise with the crushing disappointment of the American team who, in about eight minutes of playing time, had gone from "about to lose" to "tied it up and gained the momentum" to "lost." It seems to us that, while a Silver in the individual events feels like you did very, very well, a Silver in the team events probably feels like 46 kinds of crap.

But the classiest moment of the post-game coverage, to my mind, was the CTV interview with US goalie Ryan Miller, who had been the key to American success throughout the games up to that point. See if you can find it (I'll look later). That young man is a class act.

And the most moving moment? Listening to our national anthem after the medal presentation. The music was instrumental, but you could hear every word distinctly as the crowd sang out our usually subdued pride. And then, part way through, the visual was no longer an ice rink in Vancouver, but a briefing room in Kandahar, where Canadian soldiers, sailors and air folk were on their feet singing through the tears of joy.

Now, off to evensong.

Is it inappropriate to ask for a solemn Te Deum in the evening?

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Apparently an MA from Cambridge is no guarantee of intelligence

Michael Scott-Joynt, the Bishop of Winchester, has written an article for The Guardian in which he explains that the six Lords Spiritual in the House of Lords voted against amendments to the Equality Bill in order to preserve religious pluralism.

Now, agree or disagree, it is internally consistent to argue that the preservation of religious pluralism requires that religious bodies have the ability to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

Here's the problem. One of the proposed amendments that +Winton and the other Lords Spiritual present voted against would have allowed the registration of civil partnerships (ie, marriage-like unions which can include same sex relationships) to be conducted in religious houses of worship.

Now, let's be clear. The amendment did NOT say that religious bodies would have been REQUIRED to have anything to do with civil partnerships. It merely allowed religious bodies that choice.

Three religious bodies in the UK - Quakers, Unitarians and Liberal Jews - have indicated that they want the option to perform civil partnership rites in their houses of worship.

But in the name of religious pluralism, +Winton and his ecclesiastical cronies decided that the rights of Quakers, Unitarians and Liberal Jews don't count.

+Winton received a BA (1965) and an MA (1968) from King's College, Cambridge.

Apparently you can get a BA and an MA from Cambridge while still failing to grasp the fundamentals of logic.

If I were the Provost of Kings, I think I'd be asking +Winton to turn back his degree in order to preserve the credibility of the institution.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Go forth into all the world . . .

At the conclusion of the liturgy every Sunday, I tell the people to go.

Well, actually, I tell them they should come downstairs for coffee, food and fellowship. And then, after that, they should go into the world to love and serve the Lord. I take full advantage of the rubric which says theat the people should be dismissed with "these or similar words." (By rights, this part of the liturgy ought to be done by a deacon. At the moment, we have no deacon.)

This fits neatly with a recurring theme in my preaching: that the old mission strategy of building a Church and opening the doors may have worked once (though I'm not convinced), but it certainly doesn't work now. The work of the Church is out there in the world.

That was why I was struck by this pictorial essay from the Chicago Tribune about Episcopal priest Lane Hensley of the Church of the Transfiguration in the Chicago suburb of Palos Park, who went to the local commuter train station and offered the imposition of ashes to any commuters who desired it.

This wasn't the only place this sort of thing happened - it was just the first I read about. Another example was an ecumenical initiative in St. Louis - though that one apparently involved a more extended mini-liturgy.

There has been a lot of discussion about this here, here, here and in various other places.

Several commentators have a legitimate concern about the propriety of detaching a symbolic thing and ritual act (ashes and the imposition of ashes) from their proper context. What does it mean, to the average person, to have ashes smudged on their foreheads with an admonition to recall that "you are dust, and to dust you shall return?" Does the separation of the symbol and ritual from their proper context impair their meaning and strip them of their significance? And does this feed into the consumer culture - creating, as it were, a liturgical drive-through McSpirituality?

I think that these are very real and very legitimate questions. (After all, if my friends Dan Martins and Elizabeth Kaeton are asking the same tough questions, they must be legitimate questions.)

But I also think they miss a larger reality about our present context.

A generation or two ago, we could safely assume that the majority of those rushing by on the train platform in Chicago were (at least nominally) affiliated with some organized religious body. If they were from a Christian Church with a liturgical tradition that observed Ash Wednesday, we could similarly assume that, if they weren't going to be attending Church that day, the decision was more or less a conscious one - even if it was a default decision.

That was Christendom. Or at least the dying days of Christendom.

This is post-Christendom.

Today, for most of those rushing by, whatever faint religious affiliation remains is a distant memory of an hereditary affiliation. (I think Grandma was a Lutheran. Or was it Baptist? Maybe Church of England?) If they aren't going to attend an Ash Wednesday service, it's mostly because a) they didn't realize it even was Ash Wednesday, b) they had no idea what Ash Wednesday was, c) it would never occur to them to attend a Church service on a Sunday, let alone a regular work day.

Yet, if the assorted demographics tell us anything, this same generation is yearning for spiritual meaning. There is a hunger for a community of faith and for a religious sensibility which is neither a bland "be kind to others" nor an angry denunciation of non-conformity.

Yes, it challenges the religious sensibility of those who are already inside the doors. But then, so did Jesus when he healed on the Sabbath.

I'm inclined to think that Fr. Hensley's approach offered too little context. Practically speaking, I suspect the roughly three minute liturgy in St. Louis would be to much context in the context. (And, like several commentators at the various websites, I have some issues regarding the ecclesiastical haberdashery.)

But I like the idea. My quibbles on the execution are minor and easily managed.

To go out into the world and to proclaim to people - in a respectful and inviting way - their need of God, of grace, of repentance. That, it seems to me, is the Gospel in action.

If it awakens only one person, was it not worth it?

(The Diocese of Missouri page has a video that one cannot embed. Go check it out at the bottom of this page.)

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

The Ugandan Homosexuality Bill - not just about killing gays

It's also about killing anyone who doesn't hate gays.



While Archbishop Henry Orombi (after significant international pressure) has managed to cavil over the death penalty provisions, he and the Anglican Church in Uganda have endorsed the legislation overall.

Do I need to point out that this is in violation of Lambeth 1998 1-10?

Didn't think so.

Can you spell "h*a*t*e*m*o*n*g*e*r*i*n*g***h*y*p*o*c*r*i*t*e?"

Episcopal Café's The Lead has good coverage of other commentary as well.

Prayers for Lent - at your computer


The Anglican Church of Canada is offering a nice service to assist the Lenten devotions of the 'puter-bound.



Throughout Lent, this space will feature striking landscapes paired with prayers from the Anglican Church of Canada and its partners. This resource is intended to offer a visual pause and to promote this season of reflection and repentance.

A certain geographical ecumenism seems to be at play since the first picture is of the Arizona desert.

And a certain liturgical breadth since the initial prayer is from the 1962 Canadian Book of Common Prayer.


Almighty and everlasting God,
who hatest nothing that thou has made, and
dost forgive the sins of all them that are penitent:
Create and make in us new and contrite hearts,
that we worthily lamenting our sins,
and acknowledging our wretchedness,
may obtain of thee, the God of all mercy,
perfect remission and forgiveness;
through Jesus Christ our Lord.

"Fruitless mix of racism, conspiracy theories"

Ironically, Faux News seems unable to control their own messaging.

Now, online polls are far from reliable, but the results of this Faux News online questionaire seems pretty close to the mark.



What do you think the Tea Party movement is about?

* Small government and fiscal responsibility - 10%

* Exposing Democrats socialist agenda - 1%

* voicing outrage at out-of-touch politicians - 4%

* Fruitless mix of racism, conspiracy theories - 84%

* Other (add your comment) - 1%



That's with more than 300,000 responses. Seems uncannily accurate if you ask me.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Proud moment for egregiously nice people

Alexandre Bilodeau made history this morning. He became the first Canadian in history to win an Olympic gold medal on Canadian soil.

We were, until today, the only Olympic host country ever to walk away without a gold won at home. Our drought lasted through the Montreal Olympics of 1976 and the Calgary Winter Olympics of 1988.

It seemed like our drought might never end when defending Women's Freestyle Moguls gold medal champion Jennifer Heil was narrowly edged back to a silver yesterday. (I met Jennifer Heil a couple of years ago and got to hold her gold medal from Turin. I may be one of a small handful of people in the world who has held both an Olympic gold medal and the medal of the Nobel Peace Prize.)

Alexandre Bilodeau was expected to finish no better than third. Instead, he became a Canadian hero.

To round this out, I offer two things.

Please go check out this humourous yet affectionate column about Canadians by American writer Rick Reilly of ESPN. Among my favourite bits:

These people are nice. Preposterously nice. Aunt Bee in mukluks nice. This is a country that has human-chomping grizzlies on every corner and yet chose the furry beaver for its national animal.

. . .

• Go to Tim's (short for "Tim Hortons") and have a double-double (two creams, two sugars) and some Timbits (donut holes) and stand around and talk about curling. This will be a welcome topic. The Canadians are still great at curling.
You: The boys oughta do priddy good, eh?
Him: Oh, sure. The sweeps are beauties.
You: You thinkin' they might be winnin' and whatnot, eh?
Him: Boy, would that ever be neat!

. . .

• If you're a snowboarder and you snap your neck in three places doing your Double Fakie Ollie Grab and they're putting you in the ambulance, smile and go, "It's fine! Canada's got free health care!"


And, finally, the song we were all waiting to hear at the Olympics.