This prayer came across my email screen and it seems like a good way to ask you all what you will be praying for this Thanksgiving Day.

 

O God, when I have food, help me to remember the hungry.  When I have work, help me to remember the jobless. When I have a home, help me to remember those who have no home at all. When I am without pain, help me to remember those who suffer. And remembering, help me to destroy my complacency; bestir my compassion, and be concerned enough to help, by word and deed, those who cry out for what we take for granted.

Wishing you all a Blessed Thanksgiving Day.

As the national Episcopal Church in America suffers from shrinking membership and lawsuits over wholesale diocesan defections to more traditional Anglican points of view, the Episcopal Diocese of South Dakota is having its own legal problems.  South Dakota Episcopalians are facing the impending closures of nine small, struggling churches on Pine Ridge Reservation, all of whom recently filed suit in tribal court to stop the closings or at least return the church properties to tribal purviews. What is your perspective on the liberal/conservative conflicts confronting the TEC nationally, and what do you see as the future of the Native American Episcopal church community in South Dakota?

Rev Brian Carpenter - Presbyterian Church in America

There are two issues here.   The first issue is what I think the Episcopal church ought to do.  The second issue concerns theological liberalism

The first I ought not comment on, as I’m not sure I’ve got a right to an opinion.  I imagine the Diocese wants my advice on how to run the church about as much as I want their bishop showing up at my presbytery meetings dispensing wisdom.  Financial concerns often dictate the issue of closing churches, and I have no idea how the finances in the Episcopal Church are doing.  If they’re anything like my old denomination, the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA), there’s plenty of money at headquarters left by church members in days gone by, but they’re rapidly chewing through it.  I understand why the ECUSA might be reluctant to deed the property of the closed churches to the tribes or to the congregations.  That would create a precedent for a claim of congregational ownership at a time when the denomination’s ownership of a particular church’s property is all that’s keeping that church in the denomination.

The second issue is one I think every Christian has a right and even a duty to take a stand on.  Theological liberalism is a cancer.  It is “respectable unbelief.”  It is the hiss of the serpent in the Garden asking “Hath God said…?”  It arises from within an ecclesiastical body, pretends to be a legitimate part of that body, and then feeds off of the resources of that body until it has grown strong enough to kill its host.

J Gresham Machen was a Princeton Seminary Professor who was run out of the PCUSA over the liberalism of the Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions.  He became the father of a denomination we in the PCA have fraternal relations with, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.  He wrote a book called “Christianity and Liberalism.”  He concluded after an exhaustive study that Christianity and Theological Liberalism were in fact two different religions.  In the last 100 years it has gutted every mainline denomination, denuded them of members and vitality, perverted the gospel, driven faithful Christians out of churches they love, and sent countless people to hell.  My own denomination (the Presbyterian Church in America or PCA) was begun in 1973 by faithful Christians who could no longer remain within the denomination that became the Presbyterian Church USA.

In the liberal mainline denomination all show steep delines in membership since the 1960’s.  The PCUSA had 4.25 million members in 1967.  Now they have 2.6 million, and I can tell you from experience that when they say they have 2.6 million members, what they mean is they have 2.6 million people on the books.  In the average congregation around 50% of the members actually show up on a regular basis.  True, many are elderly and homebound or nursing home bound, but a significant number are simply playing golf or sleeping in.

The thing I find most infuriating about theological liberals is their basic dishonesty.  It is less of an issue today than it was 100 years ago, because they have changed the rules to suit them.  But every denomination has a confessional or doctrinal standard.  For Episcopalians, it’s the Nicene Creed, the Apostles’ Creed and the Athanasian Creed.  They also have a series of excellent statements in their Prayer Book called the 39 Articles of Religion.  These have some force or influence historically.   In the PCUSA, we had a fat book of confessions and creeds called “The Book of Confessions” which contained some very good theological statements from various periods in history.

Every pastor takes an ordination vow that he (or she) will abide by the Church’s polity and confessional statements.  Liberal pastors most often do not believe the things those creeds…. things like the Virgin Birth, or the miracles of Christ, or the Four Last Things, or the Resurrection of Christ, or the basic reliability and authority of the Scriptures.  Therefore, such a pastor lies when he takes that vow.  He cannot say what he says without doing violence the basic meaning of the words of those Creeds and Confessions.

A man who works for the Republican Party and draws his paycheck from that party may decide he doesn’t believe the central tenents of Republicanism anymore.  He may, in fact, become a liberal.  He has every right to do that.  But once that happens, doesn’t basic honesty demand that he stop taking his pay from the Republicans and go find a new job?

I will make an offer to the Episcopal Diocese.  If they will give the property to the congregations on the Reservation, or will leave those churches open, I will find a way to fill the pulpits of those churches and conduct Eucharistic Services based on the 1928 Book of Common Prayer.  I will see to it that men who believe in the Three Creeds and 38 of the 39 Articles (#36 being the exception) come on a regular basis to preach and administer the Lord’s Supper for simply the cost of travel.  Not the IRS rate, just the cost of gas.  All I would ask is that the Bishop’s authority over those men be consensual and he not violate their consciences by demanding they do anything contrary to Presbyterian Polity or doctrine.

Dr. Nicholas Wallerstein–religious studies professor

I am from Boston and San Francisco, and I apologize for knowing absolutely nothing about the Episcopal Churches on the reservations. But the other point, about church liberalism, is something I know a bit about, and I have to admit that I agree with much of what the Reverend Carpenter has to say about the sorry state of affairs concerning Christian liberalism.

I was born, raised, and baptized in the Episcopal Church. As a matter of conscience, I felt I had to leave the Church in 1978, when I was twenty years old. By then, the Church was already well underway toward its liberal excesses, including the then-renegade ordination of women followed by the enormous influx of gay and lesbian priests, including now the elevation to bishop of an openly gay priest a couple of years ago in New Hampshire.

My father studied for the Episcopal priesthood at what was then, in the 1960s, called Episcopal Theological Seminary (ETS), in Cambridge, Mass. It is now Episcopal Divinity School (EDS), and is the second-largest Episcopal seminary in the country. I lived on the EDS campus in the dorms while I was a student at Harvard Divinity School, also in Cambridge. I was very pleased by the many friends I had at EDS, and I found it a warm and loving environment. However, there is no doubt that the demographic of the School showed the deep theological troubles the Episcopal Church has. EDS, for instance, was 80 percent gay and lesbian. Add to this that many of my lesbian friends there were also Wicca, and you begin to see a problem. They included pagan rituals in their practices, like dancing around the maypole in May. These women also wanted to be called “Priestesses,” not “Priests,” after they were ordained.

While I had wonderful friendships with my gay and lesbian colleagues at EDS, I must say that I was a bit confused why lesbian witches (white magic, of course) were in training for Christian priesthood. And lest you think this is some sort of strange anomaly that does not represent the mainstream of the Episcopal Church, remember that this is the second-largest Episcopal seminary in the country. In my experience, this is the norm, both from my experience at EDS and my years as a member of an Episcopalian family in California. While this radical liberalism may not be felt as much in South Dakota, just visit an Episcopal Church in Boston, New York, San Francisco, or L.A. You may be quite shocked. And while the Episcopal Church claims to be open and inclusive, let us not forget that the leadership of the Church has put into place, and is continuing to put into place, punishments for those who are not willing to go lock-step with its radical agenda—for instance, punishing bishops who, on the grounds of conscience and theology, still refuse to ordain women. These bishops believe that the ordination of a woman is not only against scripture, but that it is an ontological impossibility, i.e. it is against the nature of being. Some of us may, also in good conscience, disagree with conservative bishops and priests, but surely they should be allowed to follow their conscience as well. Simply to call them “wrong” and censure them or boot them out of the Church is quite unjust.

To sum things up: It is no wonder that the Episcopal Church in America is under threat to lose its communion with the world Anglican community, and that many Episcopal churches are giving up on the prevailing movement in the Church and becoming members of more conservative Anglican groups, or even quitting altogether and joining the Catholic Church.

 

Now that the country has a new president-elect, will the religion-politics mix in America change directions at all? How do you hope Barack Obama’s faith — he’s another professing Christian, as is his predecessor, after all –  will affect his presidency, his decision-making, his policies?

 

Brian Carpenter– Presbyterian Church in America

I think this is a very difficult question to answer in one way, and very easy in another.  It’s difficult to answer because  Mr. Obama plays his cards very close to the vest, and I have found it a challenge to assess what he stands for, other than a fresh articulation of the same old policies of the Democratic party, and “change.”  In that way he seems very much like FDR, a man who said many things while saying nothing and kept his private thoughts very private.

On the other hand, it’s easy to answer because I also think a president’s decisions are mostly guided by pragmatism, not Christianity.  Of course there are a few symbolic chestnuts thrown to the party base to keep their support.  For instance, President Bush prohibited new stem-cell lines for research upon taking office.  President Obama has indicated he will lift that ban.  But on the whole I suspect the principles articulated by Machiavelli are more important than the principles articulated by the Bible when it comes to Presidential decision making .

Reality must dictate a lot of a President’s course of action.  There’s only so far to the right a Conservative can go, and only so far to the left a liberal can go.  He has to work with both Houses of Congress and all the mess of tangled interests that represents. He has favors to pay the party faithful for in the form of positions of power and influence in his administration. I think that’s why we’re seeing a retread of the Clinton White House as Obama begins to form his administration.

President Obama will not be able to quickly and unilaterally withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, no matter what he said on the campaign trail.  It simply can’t be done for very practical reasons.  Keynesian orthodoxy will (unfortunately) determine his fiscal and monetary policy in this economic crisis, just as it did for Bush.  I will be very surprised if he can create a comprehensive healthcare reform package that covers everyone affordably.  If he is able to do so, it will probably not be very quick in coming.  He won’t abandon Israel or buddy up with Iran, and couldn’t even if he wanted to.  A nation, and especially a superpower with a soft empire, simply cannot suddenly change course that way on the whims of a single man.  Once again, there will be highly symbolic things that happen to mark himself out as his own man and distance himself from his predecessor, (the closing of Guantanamo, for instance) but they will be of little real impact.  He’ll just move the really nasty specimens somewhere else for detention.

I have one real question and one real concern.  First the question.  Bush has significantly increased the power of the Exective Branch in the wake of 9/11.  Some of this shift came with the passage of the Patriot Act, but some was done simply by Executive Order.  I am highly concerned about many of these moves from the point of view of civil liberties.   Obama will have my respect if he is willing to rescind these orders and shrink the power of the Presidency back to its historic (and constitutional) limits.  But will he do so?  The temptation to hold on to that power “just in case” will be strong.  Like Sauron’s Ring, power corrupts the hearts of the overwhelming number those who hold it.  Will Mr. Obama be a Frodo, or a Gollum?

Secondly, my concern.  The Messianic expectations laid on the shoulders of Mr. Obama in these days after the election are most disconcernting.  No mere man can bear up under all those expectations, and must sooner or later disappoint.  I realize Mr. Obama is symbolically important to many African-Americans simply because he is half black.  No doubt some young people of color will be spurred on to higher achievement because they see somebody who is not a white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant in a position of power.   I do not begrude them their hour of celebration and wish them well.  But I caution them that disappointments will inevitably come.  I sincerely pray those who are placing Mr. Obama on such a high pedestal will not feel betrayed when they do.

 

Don Jones - Buddhist

Maybe the core question is a little different.  Instead of wondering how this Christian president will govern, maybe we should ask ourselves if the teachings of Jesus apply equally to governments as they do to individuals.   Many Christians can quote Jesus on any issue that applies to their personal situation.  Jesus said love your enemies.  Did he mean governments too?  “Love your neighbor as yourself,….. where a man’s treasure is; there is also his heart,…..  turn the other cheek, …. It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of  a needle than for a rich man to go to heaven… Thou shalt not kill”…… the list goes on and on.  Is this stuff only for Sundays? Only for individuals? for families? for communities?

Most everyone in the U.S. believes in the separation of church and state but yet we ask our leaders to have a moral compass that says they believe in God and will behave according to the laws of the Bible as well.  Yet scandal exists in every admistration, sexual and monetary misadventures, lying, self-serving and power hungry people do their worst in the highest circles of government claiming only that they have our best interests at heart.  Where is their moral compass on the job?

President Obama was elected I believe because his vision offered people the hope that perhaps such misbehavior will cease to be the norm.  Maybe we can be good neighbors to the countries of the world instead of offering such a prickly exterior.  I have travelled extensively in over 25 countries.  America is respected but also despised for its immorality , violence, and arrogance.  HIs burden will be to re-earn the respect of all countries and give Americans another reason to be proud other than military might and standard of living.  I hope that he will apply at least some of the teachings of Jesus as a behavior for a country as well as the individuals of his administration.

Buddhists have a high regard for Jesus.  Wouldn’t it be wonderful if everyone was simply kind to each other, offered a helping hand when needed,  and treated all races, countries, religious cultures as friends rather than potential enemies.  Have we become so accustomed to war and retaliation that we are afraid of peace?  It should be clear by now that injustice and inequality are the ingredients for anger and revolt.  Can we not address the causes as well as resist the violence?

Buddhists are not political in their teachings.  The responsibility is on the practitioner to go within, remove the plank from his own eye (so to speak) and improve the world by removing his own delusions and anger. He can then become a refuge from the standard reactions of others and perhaps guide them along a different path.

Father Thomas Williams - St. John’s Orthodox Church

In the Divine Liturgy (Mass) of the Orthodox Church there are several ektenias (litanies) sung by the priest at various times throughout this most holy service. One of the petitions  sung  twice by the priest during the the liturgy is: “For the President of the United States and all civil authorities, and for our armed forces everywhere.” The congregation responds by singing, “Lord Have Mercy.” This petition is also sung at Vespers and Orthros (morning prayer). Our Liturgy is more than 1,500 years old and has never had major change. The priest and the faithful always have and will continue to pray for their national leaders in this way.

 

Fr. Chip Johnson  –  St. Francis Anglican Community

Like the Orthodox liturgy, there are rich prayers in the Prayer Books of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Service Book for: the Office of the President of the United States, all in civil authority, the military, at home and abroad.

These prayers, in the 1928 BCP and the ASB, are to be said at every service, every liturgy of the Word, and I believe that they will be said in a heartfelt manner.  We are not facing perilous times, we are in perilous times, and regardless of religious persuasion, we must, as a nation, as families, and as individuals, call upon God to return us to a proper relationship with Him…no matter what we call Him, just as long as we do call on Him!

This is a time for the exercise of faith, not a time for following the ramblings of what has been termed the ‘drive-by press’, the naysayers and muckrakers of the popular and yellow-rag media.

We do NOT know what Mister Obama will do as President, what decisions he will be forced to make, what concessions with the Congress and Senate, even though it is a full Democratic Party sweep.

We, as Americans, can only own him as President of the United States, President of the Grand Old Party, President of the Democratic National Commitee, President of the Libertarians, of the Constitutionalists, of the Greens, of everybody.  Let’s give him a chance.  What he does with the responsibility is beyond our control…other than to pray for him and our government as time goes by.