Leaving Church
14 May 2007 - 27 אייר 5767 by Huw
Interesting review of Leaving Church, by Barbara Brown Taylor. She describes her perfect church:
She said it would consist of 52 people, and it would be a community of pastors, in that all of the leadership would be shared. Hopefully they would be a community of social activists, a community of leaders, and they would never own a building - because she said as soon as you have a building, then the problems begin. Some interesting thoughts for would-be emerging church planters.
Whoa! Sounds like Praxis.
We need to get church on.
A quote from the book:
If being ordained meant being set apart from them, then I did not want to be ordained anymore. I wanted to be human. I wanted to spit food and let snot run down my chin. I wanted to confess being as lost and found as anyone else without caring that my underwear showed through my wet clothes. Bobbing in that healing pool with all those other flawed beings of light, I looked around and saw them as I had never seen them before, while some of them looked at me the same way. The long wait had come to an end. I was in the water at last.
Wow… the author was never Orthodox, huh?
I’ve been told that by canon law (even tho’ it gets broken a lot) a priest is not supposed to be in a place where alcohol is served - not even Denny’s with beers…
I’ve been told priest can’t talk about life before ordination…
I’ve been told that he can’t wear street clothes…
etc.
Some people get off on the spookiness. That’s why I note “I’ve been told…” instead of “it is true”. Some (like a lot of “ethnic” clergy) manage to break out of the mould, but just as that happens a lot of American Converts get in the act and call those others “modernists” and they start to feud.
(Yes, Fr Ernesto, I know: it’s not all one way or the other, but you were converted by ethnic sorts. Come up to “Orthodoxy in the Mountains” where it’s all-converts-all-the-time and make fun of the GOA at Typica. You’d have to time travel, but comments at St Raphael’s typika about how modernists did liturgy were plentiful, even from the clergy. And not just from St Raphael’s clergy either. And sometimes it’s not so generous even in the saner places outside of St Raphael’s.)
You knew I was going to comment! GRIN.
Yes, you are right, I have not really met the type of people you describe, yet. Nor have I met the people who interpret canons the way you record. Maybe I am just fortunate.
However, it is not just the younger clergy who do not follow the “mold” that you quoted. I have never experienced either Bishop Antoun or Metropolitan Philip to be in that mold either. Moreover, one only needs to look at an old canon law commentary to see that the canons have had changing interpretations, changing applications, and even some benign ignorance, for hundreds of years. This does not mean that canons are not valued or obeyed, but it does mean that canons are not interpreted (and have never been) in an American black and white way. For goodness sake, St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil both gave (and recorded they gave) economia more than once over the actual wording of the canons.
One other note. As I read about the Emergents (from this blog), it strikes me like seeing a youth today with hiphuggers and a tie-dyed T-shirt. It brings back fond memories of a former age. Read up on the Jesus People. Notice that Fr. Jack Sparks published, back when, a New Testament for hippies in San Francisco that used “modern” slang. Look at the rejection of clergy/lay distinction and church buildings. Now look about 10 to 15 years down the road and see it all coming back. Frankly, like tie-dyed T-shirts, the Emergents are (again) replaying the past. I fully expect them to replay it all the way to church buildings and ordained clergy again.
You are right about Bp A. I’ve removed the “younger”. Sorry about that - although I was thinking, specifically, of one priest who comments on this blog :-)
I also agree about the Jesus people. The JP are one of my favourite topics. What is it that Churchill said about being liberal youth and conservative older? 100% true here. I wonder if the problem - and I see it as a problem - was the choice between these two questions:
“What is the True Church?”
“What is the true way to be Church?”
I firmly believe those are two very different questions. One can truly be Church (ie Christian) without worrying about all the others around me all being exactly the same as me. I think that’s, at heart, the issue. Can I follow the way of Jesus without worrying about you? Or you without worrying about me?
Yes - doesn’t matter if we are Orthodox, Emergent or Calvinist.
But it might be easier for some folks to do that in one place… and for different folks to do that in a different place.
That’s not my experience of the Orthodox church either, in fact it’s sort of the opposite, but I was converted by ethnic types too I guess. (First-generation Albanians in my case for the most part.) I still sort of wonder if the uberfromm don’t only exist on the internets. I’ve never met any in real life, at least not the way I’ve heard them described online.
I don’t know why I felt the need to weigh in. It’s not like you need me to tell you if you have Fr. Ernesto– I suppose I just felt the need to, you know, represent. And to say that I hope you find a home for yourself with as little poisonous stuff going on as possible.
One thing I’m learning: when I was with the Uber folks (mentally, even when not physically) it was easy for me to project uberfromity on everyone else.
I still think that a good few on line manage to be that way, but, more and more, I’m seeing a few poeple are *not* that save in my imagination.
Ie, I have certain doubts about the frum-ness of clergy I never met “but I’ve heard of their piety” from other Uberfrum folks. And if I assume you are as frum as I am, then your words sound very righteous in my ears, yes?
Here’s a story:
Visitor: why do you all bow to your priest and get a blessing and kiss his hand.
Me: ain’t that the way you’re supposed to do it?
V: Never done that.
Local Priest: harrumph.
Later… local priest visits that parish.
LP: I don’t know what Visitor was talking about I saw him kiss his own priest’s hand, they all do it.
Later… me chatting with a different member of that parish:
Dif. Member: Our priest can’t stand to have his hand kissed. None of us do it.
So, who’s telling a fib here? My guess was the Local Priest since none of us ever met the other priest and only heard about him. But we all *wanted* to know we were doing it right and so was everyone else - at least our friends. When “our friends” were the ROCOR the Antiochians were nuts, you know. But when “our friends” were the Antiochians, all Antiochians became Very Pious.
But of course, it was all hearsay.
I don’t know if any of this is making sense.