Monday, July 31, 2017
Reading Suggestions
The whole idea of the new website design is to be more friendly and accessible to newcomers and outsiders. When I looked at the thing, one whole section that I loved (but didn't fit into that "newcomers" idea) was the "Further Reading" section. I don't want to lose it, so I'm going to put it in the menu on the right on this page.
Saturday, July 29, 2017
A Sense of the Holy
The church website is making progress, bit by bit. I think I've got the appearance of the thing tamed, and it really is pretty. (I cannot take much of the credit for that. I'm using a free pre-formatted template from HTML5 UP! and it's beautiful. The artwork is mainly scrounged from the Internet.)
I would really love for it to go live early next week, to try to catch the new arrivals at Ashland University.
Right now, I'm still struggling with the concept of Episcopal DNA. We're an odd bunch.
I would really love for it to go live early next week, to try to catch the new arrivals at Ashland University.
Right now, I'm still struggling with the concept of Episcopal DNA. We're an odd bunch.
- In a lot of ways, we are more Celtic than the Church of England, and this leads us to a deep respect for the environment. Prayers for the physical world are part of normal Sunday worship. I think I should stick in something about Bellwether Farm, the new camp and retreat center the Diocese is building. Part of the ethos of Bellwether is that it will be a working, sustainable farm.
- The Three-Legged Stool illustration probably should go in because it emphasizes our focus on tradition and scripture and intellect. Some of the finest minds of the age have been in the Anglican tradition.
- We're willing to laugh at ourselves. Want to hear a good joke about Episcopalians? Ask one of us.
- I have read more than one comment saying that the younger generation is seeking a sense of the holy, a sense of worship. The shallow, all-about-me themes for worship seem to be losing out. (Certainly, this aspect is what drew me to the Episcopal Church). This poster isn't from St. Matthew's, and we don't use incense, but it gives an idea about this return to tradition:
Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Episcopal DNA
Like most of my projects, the website revision has grown and multiplied to a point where it threatens to become unworkable.
A friend looked at our current home page and said, "Wow! That's really dated!" Well, OK. I never did put myself out there as a designer, and the page's general appearance hasn't changed in years. So I began all over again, this time with a web search for a template that will do well with both desktop computers and phones. I found a really pretty one. The next task is filling it with material that will work for us.
I asked myself what a first-time visitor would like to know about a new church. Here's what I came up with:
Now we get into the accepting part. That's difficult to write. Yes, we do have four or five gay people who attend regularly, but I certainly don't want to put them on display. When a person walks into our sanctuary, the gay people don't just stand out. That's partly because gay teenagers will present themselves differently from gay middle-aged people, and partly because a person 40 or 50 years old has had a lifetime of trying to fit in. We're mainly a congregation of older white people, so you won't see young people, immigrants, or African-Americans. It's not that we would reject them; it's just who we are and who shows up. If you come to our annual Winter Convocation, you'd see a lot more diversity because people from the whole diocese show up. How do I write all that down to emphasize that we really do welcome folk regardless of race, sexual orientation, or wealth? That's a challenge.
A pastor at a church I used to attend would refer to the church's DNA. I like that term. What are the basics that are baked into the mix—not just layered on the top? How do I write about that DNA? That's even more of a challenge than the article on accepting. Do I go all the way back to King Henry VIII and comment that a church started by a guy who had six wives isn't likely to be judgmental? Do I point out that we're really more Scottish than English because we didn't have a bishop of our own after the Revolution, and the English church refused to consecrate one for us, so the Scots did? (Thus beginning a tradition of our being the "loyal opposition.") What about immigrants? What about electing leaders who are not always drawn from he pool of straight white old men? How do I convey, in just a few words, our tradition of thoughtful response to both Scripture and tradition? It's quite a task.
A friend looked at our current home page and said, "Wow! That's really dated!" Well, OK. I never did put myself out there as a designer, and the page's general appearance hasn't changed in years. So I began all over again, this time with a web search for a template that will do well with both desktop computers and phones. I found a really pretty one. The next task is filling it with material that will work for us.
I asked myself what a first-time visitor would like to know about a new church. Here's what I came up with:
- Where is the church?
- When do they do things?
- Will they accept me?
- What am I getting myself into?
Now we get into the accepting part. That's difficult to write. Yes, we do have four or five gay people who attend regularly, but I certainly don't want to put them on display. When a person walks into our sanctuary, the gay people don't just stand out. That's partly because gay teenagers will present themselves differently from gay middle-aged people, and partly because a person 40 or 50 years old has had a lifetime of trying to fit in. We're mainly a congregation of older white people, so you won't see young people, immigrants, or African-Americans. It's not that we would reject them; it's just who we are and who shows up. If you come to our annual Winter Convocation, you'd see a lot more diversity because people from the whole diocese show up. How do I write all that down to emphasize that we really do welcome folk regardless of race, sexual orientation, or wealth? That's a challenge.
A pastor at a church I used to attend would refer to the church's DNA. I like that term. What are the basics that are baked into the mix—not just layered on the top? How do I write about that DNA? That's even more of a challenge than the article on accepting. Do I go all the way back to King Henry VIII and comment that a church started by a guy who had six wives isn't likely to be judgmental? Do I point out that we're really more Scottish than English because we didn't have a bishop of our own after the Revolution, and the English church refused to consecrate one for us, so the Scots did? (Thus beginning a tradition of our being the "loyal opposition.") What about immigrants? What about electing leaders who are not always drawn from he pool of straight white old men? How do I convey, in just a few words, our tradition of thoughtful response to both Scripture and tradition? It's quite a task.
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
Not One of Them
I read recently on Facebook that Christians are the major cause of people becoming atheists. Reading further, the article made the point that Evangelicals preaching hatred, particularly toward the LGBT community, drive younger people away from the faith. That keys into this Religious News Service article about Eugene Peterson, a retired Presbyterian pastor and author who is best known for his Bible paraphrase, The Message. The article discusses the pressure tactics, both financial and personal, deployed by the Evangelical community as a result of his comment that he would probably marry a gay couple if he were a pastor today. Christianity Today reported that Peterson's reported shift in opinion was actually a misrepresentation.
But the damage was done. The Evangelical troops were released and Peterson is now under attack.
In Judges 12, the Bible says that the Israelites used the word "shibboleth" to distinguish friends from enemies. The word itself is actually a very common word, but the point is that the Israelites pronounced it differently from the Ephraimites. You say it wrong, and we kill you.
Down through the ages, American church folk (I can't speak for other countries) have come up with a number of shibboleths to try to distinguish "true believers" from those terrible outsiders:
All this line-drawing has two terrible results.
The first is that it tempts people to say, "Well, I don't drink and I don't smoke, so I must be a Christian." No comment about Jesus, the Bible, or how one deals wit the poor or the rest of one's ethical life. No smoking and no drinking equals entrance into heaven. Or in our age, hatred of sexual minorities and hatred of abortion.
The second is that all this hatred and line-drawing is designed to keep people out of the sanctuary. There's nothing about a loving, welcoming Christ in all this—it's all about identifying and victimizing the outsiders.
No wonder that article said that the christian church (I'm intentionally using lower-case "C" here) is a major force in making atheists.
But the damage was done. The Evangelical troops were released and Peterson is now under attack.
In Judges 12, the Bible says that the Israelites used the word "shibboleth" to distinguish friends from enemies. The word itself is actually a very common word, but the point is that the Israelites pronounced it differently from the Ephraimites. You say it wrong, and we kill you.
Down through the ages, American church folk (I can't speak for other countries) have come up with a number of shibboleths to try to distinguish "true believers" from those terrible outsiders:
- "Real" Christians don't read novels.
- "Real" Christians don't play cards.
- "Real" Christians don't smoke.
- "Real" Christians don't go to movies.
- "Real" Christians don't drink alcohol.
All this line-drawing has two terrible results.
The first is that it tempts people to say, "Well, I don't drink and I don't smoke, so I must be a Christian." No comment about Jesus, the Bible, or how one deals wit the poor or the rest of one's ethical life. No smoking and no drinking equals entrance into heaven. Or in our age, hatred of sexual minorities and hatred of abortion.
The second is that all this hatred and line-drawing is designed to keep people out of the sanctuary. There's nothing about a loving, welcoming Christ in all this—it's all about identifying and victimizing the outsiders.
No wonder that article said that the christian church (I'm intentionally using lower-case "C" here) is a major force in making atheists.
Reclaiming the language
Maybe the damage is already done and we just need a new word or two.
I miss "Evangelical." Its root is a Greek word that means "good news" (though you'd never guess that from the behavior of modern Evangelicals). In the 1970s, the label was used by a movement to distinguish Fundamentalists from a newer group wanted serious Bible scholarship and a radical devotion to Jesus along with reaching out to the poor and disadvantaged and showing real care for God's earthly creation.
I also miss "Christian" as a term that would unite Baptists, Presbyterians, Catholics and Episcopalians around the core values. Now it's not about core values; it's about who we vote for. And I always feel awkward when I say, "Evangelical Christian is not really the right word for me. I'm an Episcopalian who believes that Jesus loves all of us and invites us into his Kingdom."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)