Lolly

As a card carrying Episcopalian, I can assure you that we come in many forms. What keeps us together (up until now, anyway) has been a belief that we can share communion despite divergent and varying views. That said, I suspect that the larger part of the Episcopal Church in the USA is fairly liberal. Some of us are extremely so.

I have a sense that the current crop of Southern Baptists has been coopted by the televangelists. As for Presiding Bishop-Elect Schiori, I say, "right on!" The Episcopal Church is living in interesting times right now. There is an active and painful schism growing in that church between progressive and conservative factions, mostly centering around the fairly recent consecration of an openly gay bishop, and there have been rumors circulating that the election of Schiori was, in part, driven by conservative votes wishing to further enhance the schism. I can't say if or if not that is true, but I do think that the lord works in mysterious ways. In my own church, a mention by our Dean of the first female Presiding Bishop was met with a hearty round of applause. Lots of folks approve of it, but some don't, just as some disapprove of the gay bishop. It all makes for a strained communion, and what happens, ultimately, to the Anglican Communion (of which the Episcopal church is a part) remains to be seen. Fortunately, at least in most churches, the politicking is being left mostly to the church politicians, and Jesus' message of love and redemption can still be heard each Sunday... at least in the church I go to.

I was baptized as an adult, just last year. For me, it was not about "washing away sins" but was a deeply symbolic action which acknowledged, as witnessed by the faith community, my personal committment to do my very best to live as Christ lived. If anything was being "washed away" it was my life outside of this committment to Christ-- in a symbolic, not literal, way, of course. For me it was an intensely meaningful and heartfelt experience, but I also recognize that many would view it in a different light, depending on what they believe baptism is meant to achieve. My advice would be that anyone who does not feel ready to do such a thing should not do it. Do it only with your whole heart.

Excellent. It's about time people started using legal recourse to deal with these issues. Of course, at the rate this administration is going, it won't be long before this "loophole" in the law is closed, too.

Well, this is true . However, to stick to the point, buddhists do fight over doctrine and dogma and tradition. A lot, actually. There are fundamentalist buddhists and non-traditionalist buddhists and all manner of buddhists in between. The fundamentalists believe that anyone who doesn't believe their orthodox version of what the buddha taught (which varies from sect to sect) is not practicing the religion correctly or with the proper amount of reverence. Some of the strictest non-traditionalists believe that anything which smacks of mysticism has to be a remnant of superstitious cultural baggage and refuse to consider that mysticism may be a valid part of religious experience. In addition, buddhism as it's practiced in the west is a very different animal from buddhism in the east, and there are even cultural "issues" between practitioners of Chinese vs. Japanese vs. Vietnamese vs. Korean forms of zen.

Yes Bigotry is not limited to this or that religious or ethnic group; it's a universal blight on the human condition.

Thank you, lily. That was nicely said and, in my own view, to the point. I agree with your impressions of early Christianity as a mystery religion. A buddhist friend of mine is fond of saying of religion in general that there's little percentage to be gained for any institutional religion if the goal is to fully liberate the follower-- and that there's little to be gained for any spiritual follower if the goal is not to become fully liberated. Liberation, in this context, is a kind of zen shorthand for the process of freeing oneself from the illusion inherent in clinging to concepts and ideas so as to become capable of seeing things as they are and fully experience/appreciate the mystery that lives and breathes in the everyday.

We just planted two willow trees out back to soak up some of the water here. The rear part of my back yard is like a sponge. I have fence posts back there that I can move back and forth in the ground, it is so soft, and when I do it you can hear the water sloshing around. I'm with you all about the no-mowing thing. I'm planning to plant a lot of indigenous ground cover and/or just put up a sign that says "Natural Area"... How is your foot feeling, Aletheia? Better?

Yup!

What do you all think of the thought that the divine is, perhaps, something which permeates all of creation (in some way) but which, due to our humanness, we simply fail to appreciate? Put another way: God/Divinity resides in the so-called mundane. There is no true separation between the mundane and the divine. It is only our clouded and dualistic vision that prevents us from fully realizing God in our own lives, from seeing the divine inherent in all of creation.

Fred, every time I read your posts I wonder if you and I were not separated at birth

Hi, James. Every "quote tag" requires a "close quote tag", as a quote must have a beginning and an end in order to work. So, if the number of quote tags and close quote tags is not the same, none of the quotes tend to work correctly. The "Close all Tags" option in the posting menu should help you find any unclosed tags. Also, on another board I frequent which uses the same software I believe there is a limit to how many tags each post may contain. If you have a lot of quotes in one post, that might be creating a problem. Not certain about that one, though. HTH

Awwwww That's so sweet.

Yikes! Sorry you had to go through that, but I'm very glad it wasn't worse (I had some horrible thoughts when I read the title of your post). Hope you have a speedy recovery!

Thanks, Earl. I just opened this link, and it looks very interesting.

Aletheia, you're not alone. Much of this "churchy" terminology is rather new to me, too!

BroRog, this is encouraging news. Thanks for posting it here.

Des, My heart and prayers go out to you and your mom. I lost my dad in 1997; he had been in a nursing home for several years because of Alzheimer's disease. The disease is very difficult on family members as well as the person who has the disease. I found myself unable to visit Dad much when he was in the home. There were a number of factors involved. I had been through a great deal of stress trying to tie up family affairs, take care of him emotionally, and get him proper medical care when he first became ill; my mother was at a complete loss as to what to do, and other family members were not around much to help. I had gone back to college (I was already 30 years old) and I had to give up my formal education because I couldn't handle school on top of the stress of dealing with what was happening to dad at the same time. I was literally spending all day with him trying to keep him smiling, and then crying myself to sleep at night. My mother tried to take care of him at home for as long as she could but when he became wholly incontinent she finally put him in the nursing home. By that time, I was past my own breaking point and it was obvious that Dad had checked out of his body a long time ago. He didn't know anyone, didn't recognize anyone. It was so sad, but he simply was not "there". He had always said that, should something like that happen, he didn't want anyone to see him "that way". Indeed, it was very hard to see him and, toward the end, I didn't go to see him much. I knew his wishes, and knew that he would want me to keep on living my own life. I felt it was better to respect his wishes. I know that it was probably easier on me, perhaps a cop out, but it had seemed more important that I had taken the opportunity to be there for him and to spend quality time while he was in the earlier stages; we spent a lot of time together and we had a lot of laughter and camaraderie at that time, as I felt it was important that he have a good quality of life during that time frame. I wanted him to know how much I loved him while he was still "in there" to experience it, and I did everything within my power to make that transitional time as easy for him as possible. I don't think I could have given any more and lived to tell about it. It took a long time, but finally now when I think of Dad I no longer think about the person with the illness, but about the person Dad was before he became ill. I think this was what he wanted, and I think it would have been a lot harder to get to had I been there with him (or with the shell of what used to be him) daily at the very end. The bottom line is that you do what you need to do. I don't think any other disease demands so much, emotionally, from caregivers or has so much potential for creating little pockets of guilt in us. There is only so much we can give of ourselves before we reach a breaking point and only each one of us knows where that point is. We help no one at all if we're broken. Anyway, you're in my thoughts and prayers, Des. Lolly

A friend of mine from another forum is fond of saying something like "it's not what others do or don't do that concerns me, it's what I do." The mote in most of our eyes is wickedly huge. How could we possibly be in a position to judge the vision of others when we cannot see clearly ourselves? The very first order of business has to be attending to our own blindness.

We have Lay Eucharistic Ministers (LEMs) and Lay readers in our Episcopal Church. The LEMs do not administer the sacrament of the bread, but they do offer the chalice, and they help the Rector with the eucharistic part of the liturgy. Lay readers come to the front and read the scripture appointed for that day. There are usually three readings (OT, NT and Gospel) so there can be as many as three readers. I agree with the suggestion that anyone who is interested in learning would probably be well advised to visit the churches in their area and get a sense of what it really feels like to be there and participate. The liturgy in our church has a well structured form; some might call this "high church" and that term by itself might put people off. Let me tell you, historically I'm not big on "structured" anything, and have always taken a rather free-from approach to spiritual matters. However, this church makes it very easy for new people to participate, and I've always felt that the liturgy in this particular church is very much alive. This may be due to the fact that we have a very gifted Rector (imo) or it may be due to the fact that the congregation is unusually attentive/involved, I don't know, but the energy is good. It has never felt stodgy or sale or authoritarian; it has always seemed heartfelt and sincere. I suspect that the community of worship, in its entirety, is what breathes life into the liturgy (or doesn't, as the case may be). The litugical form is simply there so that the community has some common means of expressing worship together.

Lets do it. You do the honors Lolly, if you don't mind...or anyone with a cogent thought. I've got company now but I will be back. lily <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Okay, done. Here's the link, for reference: http://tcpc.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopi...st=0entry3852 Let's continue this discussion in that thread, to keep this one on topic.

This is a tangent that went off topic in another thread, sparked when Cynthia asked about how people handle their intolerance of intolerance. It starts here in the thread about the new pope: http://tcpc.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopi...findpost&p=3828 You can read the initial posts there from Cynthia, myself, lily and curlytop, and I will kick off this thread with the most recent post on the subject: Yup. There's a phrase I like to use which speaks to this: Everyone starts where they are; it cannot be any other way. We can't expect people who are at one point in this process to pick themselves up and plop themselves down at a different point. It can't be done. They are where they are and cannot pretend otherwise. I think that there are so many wisdom traditions because there are so many different levels of receptivity in humankind. We may have started in one place and find that today we are in another, yet everything we have experienced-- including perhaps the indoctrination into and rebellion against a dogmatic way of thinking-- is part of what brought us this far. Shall we continue?

This story moved me to tears. Thanks for posting it here.

Yup. There's a phrase I like to use which speaks to this: Everyone starts where they are; it cannot be any other way. We can't expect people who are at one point in this process to pick themselves up and plop themselves down at a different point. It can't be done. They are where they are and cannot pretend otherwise. I think that there are so many wisdom traditions because there are so many different levels of receptivity in humankind. We may have started in one place and find that today we are in another, yet everything we have experienced-- including perhaps the indoctrination into and rebellion against a dogmatic way of thinking-- is part of what brought us this far. I am wondering, though, if maybe this discussion belongs in a thread of its own? Anyone care to continue it elsewhere?

Yes! I've found that in order to deepen understanding, it's often necessary to rebel to some extent in order to find one's path to the next phase of understanding. To use your analogy, we may need to drink the mild for a period of time, but when we are ready for more substantial nourishment, the milk-givers will insist that we continue to take only the milk. At some point we have to be willing to acknowledge that milk is no longer what we need. It takes a certain courage and willingness to part from our current level of conditioning to continue an honest pursuit of a spiritual path. We may need to be willing to part company from the milk-givers, many times over. This is very difficult when one has been conditioned from birth to believe that he or she must drink milk, or die. The reality of that situation is that those who believe they have our best interests at heart are often the ones whose influence most effectively impedes our progress.