Nathan Humphrey Post

This provocative post comes from Fr. Nathan Humphrey, a priest in D.C. who blogs at Communion in Conflict. I find much here that resonates with my feelings. Though he admits to venting here - and is speaking from the heart - he raises an often neglected point: leaders in the Church do have power, (and not merely clergy,) and it is a certain kind of power - and we mustn't fritter it, waste it, or (what's worse) misuse it. It is not the kind which many seek (political, commercial, military, etc.), but it is a kind of authority, influence and stewardship of resources. The power we have as leaders in the Church is intended by God, I believe, for the mission of God -- and that mission includes, among other things, reconciliation in the name of the Holy Trinity, and toward the end of finding our lives in Christly mutual submission and love. While it is indeed a mark of mission that we seek a transformed and just world - we so often see our own private, sub-corporate, national, sub-cultural ethical priorities as "Truth" or "Justice" - and then use our powers toward those perceived goods, being willing in that pursuit to forgo reconciliation, wider unity, mutual submission, etc. In other words, we very often abuse our power (generally self-righteously) for the sake of an end we have become convinced is 'The' end, and thus further states of antagonism and division.

... I think I've pinpointed the nexus of my ecclesiological anger, however, in the underwhelming lack of authentic generous initiatives I've been able to find on the blogosphere. (Admittedly, the blogosphere is perhaps the wrong forum in which to seek such initiatives.)

For instance, I read this post by Mark Harris, a left-leaning Episcopal priest whose analysis is often quite insightful and whom I think tries to take a common-sense, even-handed approach to controversial questions. But in this case, all he can offer up by way of "generous initiatives" are carping about the proposed covenant and a prescription for what I've characterized elsewhere as separatism. Where's his own generosity? This is nothing new, and I'm disappointed. Of all liberals I should think capable of generosity and initiative, it would be Mark Harris.

I was equally disappointed by Leander Harding's response to my question, because again it was about "them" and not "us." Again, of all conservatives I should think capable of generosity and initiative, it would be Leander Harding.

Our leaders, yet again, are failing us. Not because they are failing to stop same-sex blessings and gay bishops, or because they are pushing same-sex blessings and gay bishops in the face of clear moratoria, not because they are boundary-crossing or failing to observe that moratoria, not because they are pro or con the proposed Covenant, but because they seem to be incapable of acting Christianly in the midst of conflict. Rowan Williams is (for the most part) succeeding in this. And I know many liberals and conservatives who want to move us forward, but I get frustrated when I hear that my friends think the best way to move forward is to avoid or ignore the conflict and focus instead on other "more pressing" issues, such as the Millennium Development Goals or world missions. What I want is for us all to continue to fight the good fight within our own contexts, to stand up for what we believe is right, but to stay committed to each other in so doing.

A decade or so ago, I had hope that my generation, Generation X, and perhaps also the Millennials, would not repeat the mistakes of the Baby Boomers, that when we were entrusted with power we would not abuse it in the same ways. Specifically, I hoped that we would live into the third core value of Gathering The NeXt Generation: "We value our relationships in Christ over issues that divide us." This pragmatic statement recognizes that issues do divide us idealogically and in many practical areas, but they need not separate us from each other in Christ, that is, in Christ's one Church. I used to think that the fissiparousness of my Boomer elders was due to the relational dislocation of the 1960s, but that the children (and grandchildren, and great-grandchildren) of divorce such as I might carry our woundedness into the Church in a redeemed way, rather than a tired old recapitulatory way. But when I see young, bright leaders such as the star bloggers on the left and the right using their newfound power to break apart the family of the Church, I think that the sins of the fathers are being visited upon the sons of the latter generations.

How discouraging to behold my peers, more interested in winning their battles for control over the direction of the Church than in bringing people into relationship with God and each other in Christ. I do not question the integrity or sincerety of the convictions that lead them to abuse their power. Each side believes that what they are doing is serving the heart of the Gospel, and that people's souls are at stake, either in that if they fail, people will be damned for eternity, or that people will live the rest of their earthly lives oppressed and marginalized and denied the justice that Christ longed to usher in with the Kingdom of Heaven. I understand your agendas, folks. I just don't think they're the right ones.

The sad thing is that I agree with parts of each agenda, not in a wishy-washy way that's seeking to stand "in the middle of the road." There's no inherent virtue in being idealogically moderate. I agree that salvation and justice are part of the Gospel. I just think each side is idolatrous in how they have used political tactics to try to move their versions of the Gospel forward. I'm with Rowan Williams when it comes to searching for a truly Christlike way forward, and I'm with those who worry about what kind of "sacrifice" we're really talking about when that rhetoric comes up: sacrifice-as-kenosis or sacrifice-as-scapegoating? (More on that in a separate post.)

My point here is to beg all communion-minded people not to let the liberal and concervative activists get the upper hand, because if they do, they're going to strangle the life out of the Church, despite their best intentions to renew it....