Linda's comments are powerfully right on. Einstein's (or whomever it was) comment about the insanity of doing the same thing over and over and getting the same negative results seems apropos.
Yet the essential question remains unaddressed. How to facilitate the change so necessary. Do we begin to change at the parish level, seems a little disloyal when dioceses are in such dire need. Same thing with the national church. Yet starting on one of these higher levels seems Sisyphean.
Do we have the commitment and energy to work on all three level a at the same time? Or do we need a new platform, sort of like parallel development organization, that sounds downright seditious. So how DO we start?
Jim Papile

The Church is the ark of salvation, and not easily compared with theories of business. St. Paul calls the church "the pillar and ground of truth." My personal view is that our real problem is the obsession with the all-elusive idea of cultural relevance, and not clearly explaining and fully inhabiting the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church as she is and always has been.

The Church--and the cross for that matter--will always be "foolishness" to the eyes of the world.

I keep saying that the spirit is leading people out of the institutional church into less structured forms of relating to reality. Ms. Grenz's six questions would help the church to follow. I wonder why she doesn't confront the main obstacles to such action -- predatory forces, expressed in CANA and ACNA, pretending to Medieval orthodoxy, seize upon any deviation from tradition to claim the hearts and property of TEC organizations. The official church has been forced into the position of claiming fealty to the traditional forms (interpreted metaphorically and poetically). The crossed fingers are not accepted by the opponents, who point to them as indications of bad faith.

Apostolic succession is widely recognized as a historical fantasy going back to Constantine, not the early Church (which lacked bishops or uniform teaching). Apostolic order reflects the church of the Roman Empire and its successors, Europe and the West. The old church was a department of the civil order and is coming adrift as the civil order crumbles. Yes, let's rethink our means, our goals, and our structure. So far, it's seemed worthwhile to drag our feet on confronting the structure, in order to keep it out of the hands of the power-grabbers. Perhaps the time will come to let them have the empty shell and move on. In the meantime, they propose to do much mischief with it.

I like these questions. Dioceses, bishops, and buildings might be nice but unnecesary. Linda L. Grenz asks good questions and is on the edge or the limit of the remains of the Constantinian church. "Grenz" in German, interestingly, means crossing and is related to "Grenze," edge.

Collaborative ministry is what must be developed, a ministry which serves the larger community.

I think we could learn from the new Reform Jewish Prayer Book, Mishkan T’filah, which offers very traditional Hebrew prayers alongside nonsexist alternative English and more traditional English prayers. People can choose what still speaks to them today and coexist with others who have different opinions.

Something important has yet to be born and is still not dealt with. Jacques Derrida called this the future, the to-come, which must remain to come. Derrida was playing with the French avenir (future) and à venir, to come.

Gary Paul Gilbert

Where is God at work in the world around us and, if we had no structures or ways of being the church already in mind, what would we create to align ourselves with and participate in doing God’s mission?

This is THE question we need to answer at all levels of the church--What is God up to and how can we best participate in it? I don't know if we are up to the task of reforming the church from within, but the alternative is death. I do think we need to make a distinction between being intentionally counter-cultural for the Kingdom's sake (the Cross as foolishness) and the far more common problem of being either culturally clueless (Why aren't people coming to our wonderful service?) or adopting a fortress anti-cultural mentality. I submit that most of the obstacles to newcomers are things that we either haven't thought about or consider essential to being who we are, when they may well not be.

Good thoughts and timely discussion. She's accurately describing my parish.

In my view, we have been given a very important message, and it's our simple remit - and privilege - to try to pass the message on to the next group of people.

The message is the "good news" - the Gospel. The message is that living can be joyful and exhilarating - "the Kingdom of Heaven" of the parables. That if we "become as little children" - i.e., teachable - it is available to us. That if we surrender, we win, because we are then open to all kinds of possibilities - that new and unexpected, unimagined things can happen for us, despite whatever our own personal situations happen to be. (More, again, in the parables.)

The message is that as human beings, we are not dependent upon the world and its often heedless, impersonal, soul-destroying forces for our worth. (This, IMO, is more important than ever today, in the survival-of-the-fittest capitalist system that has become the order of the day worldwide.) The message is that people are worth something - and we are worth healing, as Christ made very clear during his ministry.

I think if this were our focus, the rest of it would stop seeming to be so important. So I think the first thing to do is to learn how to preach the Gospel in the current age. Then we can worry about programs and structure and the rest of it - but IMO our church has lost confidence in the underlying content, and without that, it's essentially hopeless.

With it, though: we can do anything.

Has anyone taken the online course that Linda Grenz has designed??

please tell me what it was like pros/cons and what do you recommend?

arisrivera .at. gmail .dot. com

"The Rev. Linda L. Grenz is publisher and CEO of LeaderResources. Her DMin project on using organizational systems theory and spiritual practices to transform church systems includes an online course to help congregations and groups implement a process that integrates systems theory and traditional spiritual practices."

Aristotle Rivera

Thanks to all for your comments on my article.

James, I do think we have to do it at all levels at the same time. We need people with the courage and faith to let go and lean into the future that is emerging ahead of us. Not everyone can go there -- but those of us who can, must take heart and start. This is a journey -- like the Israelites in the wilderness (our structures have become our oppressive Egypt). We have to learn how to follow the cloud by day and the fire by night -- in other words: we need to re-learn how to discern God's leading in this new landscape and have the faith to follow.

Gary: I am German and Grenze was probably the original spelling of my family name. And I do cross boundaries and operate at the edge! My DMin prof called me a "scout" -- spotting the path in the frontier. I hope he is right. I'm one of many people who are trying to find ways to help the church move into this new world. I welcome other scouts and travelers on the way.

The three-fold ministry of bishops, priests and deacons may not be “apostolic” in the sense once believed, Murdoch, but it is very ancient nonetheless. It has also been a hallmark of American Episcopalianism, and has for centuries helped to define us from the run-of-the-mill protestants here. Most of us in TEC are quite happy with the arrangement. If you question the need, there are plenty of other denominations which can accommodate you.

Kurt Hill
Brooklyn, NY

Yes, Kurt Hill, Anglicans define themselves as Apostolic, in distinction from Protestants who are merely Reformation. But our present church order traces to the Empire, not to the early church. It seems to me that people who pride themselves on belonging to the Historic Church should get their history right.

Medieval pageantry (and dressing-up) have had a long and satisfying run. Its justification is fading, along with the abstract speculation it reflects. I've gotten enough out of the tradition to wish it to continue, adapted to the world we actually live in. (That world has LBGT persons in it, like me, a little omission from the tradition that those who speak confidently of [and for] God somehow missed until recently.) The three-fold ministry actually is four-fold, and the Church might look to early models in which clergy emerged from the people, and were pastors rather than lords.

No, I'm not looking for a Church Home to accommodate my tastes. I'm looking for people to work in concert for justice, equality, and alleviation of poverty. Jesus and Paul had much to say on those topics. Too bad that justice and equality are rather against the interests of Empire. Individual righteousness is less threatening to Authority, and can be turned against minorities when diversion is needed.

Richard Holloway, then Primus of Scotland, dreamed during Lambeth 98 that the bishops assembled might move in company to the Thames and throw in their mitres. You'll be happy to reflect that he's no longer active in the institution. There's more going on outside.

Sorry, Murdoch, but your Low Church version of Anglicanism does not appeal to many of us—gays included. (I have been involved in gay liberation struggles since the ‘70s). Anglo Catholicism has a long and proud history of social justice involvement, both in this country and abroad. In fact, here in NYC it has been High Church Episcopalians who have taken the lead in working with the Occupy Wall Street movement, and I’ve participated in a number of OWS actions myself.

No, sorry my friend, for many Episcopalians, the historic liturgical practices and customs of the Church—the wearing of miters included—are most welcome and are not to be dispensed with. Of course, we will always make room for Low Churchmen such as yourself. Just don’t expect many Episcopalians to follow your liturgical tastes.

Kurt Hill
Brooklyn, NY

Kurt, the minute one qualifies catholicism, as in Roman or Anglo-Catholic, one has lost it, if one ever had or could have it. Murdoch and I used to go to Saint Mary the Virgin, so we are familiar with Anglo-Catholicism in the United States and its tendency to stress liturgy over political action. No less than Kenneth Leech himself has argued that when the Oxford Movement came to America it overemphasized liturgy. Richard Holloway was also one of the founders of Affirming Catholicism but his experience at Lambeth '98 of seeing the mitres stand for bigotry was a catalyst for him to veer toward liberal theology.

We are familiar with the product but remain skeptical, perhaps even faithful in our unwillingness to accept sectarian hype.

Different traditions try to do the best they can with the tools they have accumulated over the centuries.

Gary Paul Gilbert

I totally disagree with you, Gary. The fact that you attended perhaps the most frozen, inward-looking and politically disconnected High Church parish in NYC does not in any way lend credibility to your argument against the generally politically progressive character of Anglo Catholicism (particularly in its “slum work”). Miters can stand for inclusion as well as bigotry. It all depends upon who is wearing them. In NY Bishop Sisk is a disaster; here on Long Island things are different with Bishop Provenzano. Your liturgical critique does not move progressives like me at all. Thanks, but no thanks.

Kurt Hill
Brooklyn, NY

Kurt, you evidently weren't acquainted with the ministry of Edgar Wells at the Church of St. Mary the Virgin. He lost many Anglo-Catholic friends when he accepted women in the clergy. He changed his teaching partly in reaction to the rigidity and lack of charity he observed among his erstwhile colleagues. While we were there, we heard preachers like Victor Stock, Kenneth Leach, Richard Holloway, and Robin Eames, not to mention the chaplain of the Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Baily Circus. Our last act there was trying to save the shelter for homeless youth that was housed in the former convent. (It was ousted by the new rector, as poor kids of many colors and sexualities didn't fit into plans for the quickly gentrifying 46th Street.) Frozen, inward looking? Not in our experience.

I spent the 1960s working to further the sort of church you celebrate -- Eucharist centered, socially progressive, catholic in rite and practice. The cause espoused by the Episcopal Book Club and Anglican Digest, where I lived and worked, pretty much succeeded. But just as it was enshrined in the 1979 Prayer Book, it was fractured by reactions to the ordination of women and gay liberation, and the beginnings of the right-wing assault on the social gospel. You want to update the tradition for gays; Gary and I would like to update it for people who live in the world of evidence and history. Mythos is powerful, but it must acknowledge fact.

Jesus began a movement in his street clothes; it spread around the Mediterranean in people's homes. True, it became more grand and impressive when it moved into basilicas and cathedrals and raided the Emperors' wardrobe. The resulting riches allowed the church to do much good -- and also to exploit the poor and bless the sorts of empire that Jesus rebelled against. I don't see myself as "low church." More of a high-church a-theist.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is important -- it's forced the establishment to talk about income inequality and the plight of ordinary citizens. I'm not clear on how it's going to change the power structure, which is fabulously wealthy and entrenched. Gary and I have been focusing on electing progressive candidates locally. We support a group of progressive legislators in Queens, voices in the crowd. The higher you go in politics, the more money corrupts. Good work with the OWS; helps keep our guys honest.

I apologize to Linda Grenz for diverting discussion of her useful call for change. Her questions still are apt, traditionalists and heresy-hunters notwithstanding.

It was precisely the ousting of the homeless shelter for youth, Murdoch, I had in mind in my description of the parish’s current attitude. I have occasionally attended St. Mary’s for over 40 years, and I think that the eviction of the shelter program was just disgraceful! I remember the youth pleading with parishioners not to kick them out.

The Episcopal Church in general, and Anglo Catholicism in particular, should be welcoming to gays, women, and the economically and socially oppressed. I share your anger when Christians do not live up to the ideals we all claim we believe in. Hopefully, with the exit of the ACNA con evos and right-wing Catholics, we will have an opportunity to renew the Social Gospel in TEC.

Don’t give up on TEC, Murdoch and Gary! I can see from your responses you also take the heart of the Gospel seriously. Keep up the good work, and may God bless!

Kurt Hill
Brooklyn, NY

Thank you for your kind words, Kurt! I think that Linda Grenz offers new ways of doing church which sound promising.

Gary Paul Gilbert