Sarx

ISHOP Marc blogs on the possible evolution of the ministry of episcope:

I think that a new phase for the exercise of episcopé will be for bishops to seek to connect the people of God more directly with one another, rather than through us.

One of the interesting things I’ve noticed about the internet is it override boundaries we thought were real. In the church this means that the local congregation is not the only thing that matters any more. I’m convinced that the only reason +Gene Robinson matters at all in the life of the Anglican Communion is because we can no longer pretend he doesn’t exist.

Bp Gene is not the first gay bishop. Every major urban area in the communion has had its share of gay clergy. Some think this has been a sort of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, but really, it’s been more of a pulling-the-wool project. Most people didn’t need to be told to look the other way: they just did. Hell, even in 1990, I could take a group of visiting clergy from overseas, out to lunch at a gay restaurant in Greenwich Village. I doubt they’d have noticed his orientation if the waiter got naked and danced on the table - although the nudity would have annoyed them. When the visiting Bishop showed up at St Mary’s with his lover (in 1988) I think the members of the SSC who were then present just had a good giggle - fooled some more laity by calling Fr John “the Bishop’s Driver”. And when an Orthodox Bishop says to me “I am what I am” I’m rather certain he’s quoting La Cage Au Folles and not Exodus.

The internet changed all that.

Orthodoxy is seeing this too: it’s possible to look deeply into the mind of the community next door, in the next town, in the next city or around the world. We can see, read, hear that there is a gay priest in Pasadena - not because of the media telling us, but because we can click there, ourselves.

And yet clergy (and I’ve met some) are terrified that “their people” will go visit some place else. Hell, I don’t need to visit another parish: all I need to do is click.

The internet is not the problem. It’s the attitude that they are different and therefore must be wrong. Because clearly we are right. That’s the problem.

To be certain - it flows both ways: Evolutionists (who imagine a “theological journey”) and Creationists (who imagine “the faith once delivered”) poke bitter fun at each other all over the net. People who believe in Theistic Evolution of theology and church bicker with those who believe in Humanistic Creation. People who imagine a divine human synergy argue over which side trumps. And the internet is filled with the evidence of their battles. Whereas in the days before internet, it might take centuries for word to get out - and the world never cared. (Who in the entire world, but the ardent church geeks among us, knew about the debated on the poverty of Jesus without watching or reading, The Name of the Rose?)

(Speaking of Getting Out the News, I think we need to spread the story of Nicholas punching out Arius. It would make a good Christmas Movie… Rock’em Sock’em Santa! Now at Toys-R-Us everywhere!)

This problem - that they are different and therefore must be wrong. Because clearly we are right - leads immediately to territorial issues. When Constantine invented the idea of clergy as Functionaries of the Empire, he divided things up into geographical territories. That is the origin of “diocese” and “parish”. What church you go to, in this world, is not related to what’s good or better: but rather on where you live. You can’t just wonder out of your “parish” (neighbourhood) to go to another church because the sermons are better! Thankfully, this system has broken down: but clergy are still as territorial as can be! Some are even bitter when people leave - to go off to “that nut” over at a neighbouring church.

It’s still true, to be certain, even though territory is not an issue any more: many people think there is an objectively right way to do Sunday services and, of course, home is right. They get bitter when they travel and see how many people do it wrong. The really bitter know their own parish does it wrong as well! I’m amazed at how many Episcopalians have never worshipped outside of their home parish. In some communities this shows up as wondering why we even bother with “other” churches - as if Peter Akinola were not, certainly, a Bishop in my Church.

In this world bishops have to come together and meet because, well, the rest of us will never get a chance to see other Christians. The Bishops, serving as regional satraps, talk to each other in the name of “their people”.

In Rome this has metastasised into an infallible papacy and a massively centralised administration: soon, you will not be able to transfer membership from one parish to another without Rome finding out. In Orthodox, things fragment nearly as quickly as among Episcopi Vagantes. In Anglicanism, we avoided it for a while… but here it is: the bullies demanding to be in charge of everyone because everyone must do things our way (which is, really, the way the bullies were taught to be by their colonial dictators, but we won’t go into that!)

Thank God the Episcopal Church realised - 200 years ago - that the laity needed to see each other, to fellowship, to have a voice in the ruling of their church!

Bishop Marc asks us to imagine something new: a world where all of us are ambassadors and where all of us have to meet our brother and sister Christians where they are. What a concept!

Bishop Gene is asking us to live in a panoptical church where everyone can see everyone. And We’re supposed to love them.

Tags: anglican, bishops, change, communion, episcope, evolution, internet, lambeth, ministry