I've looked at absurdity from both sides (of the Atlantic) now.

 

Once again the Real World has saved me the trouble of having to come up with my own ideas, this time with not one, but two instances of the denigrating of women.  But while the happenings in Maryland have the makings of a Greek tragedy, these are more like Theater of the Absurd, with some Monty Python’s Flying Circus thrown in.

On January 26, Rev. Libby Lane was consecrated as the first female Bishop of the Church of England.  That’s the good news.  The bad news is that on February 2, Rev. Philip North will also be consecrated.  At a consecration, all the attending bishops lay their hands on the candidate.  Rev. North has asked that no bishop who touched Rev. Lane or any bishop who has participated in the ordination of a woman lay hands on him. 

Rev. North does not agree with the ordination of women as bishops because bishops have always been male, going back to St. Peter.  And as St. Paul said in First Timothy 2:11-15:

“I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet women shall be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness with modesty.”  See more at

 http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2004/03/St-Paul-Friend-Or-Enemy-Of-   Women.aspx?p=2#KleFjdxzRKpEzVyV.99

(Or maybe it's just because he’s a d**k.  I can say this because I am a churchlady and not clergy.)  This is bad enough, but I guess he is entitled to his opinion.  I’m sure he would say I am entitled to mine.  (You can give this whatever score you want on the Snarkometer.)  However, he also says that a bishop who has participated in an ordination and actually touched the female candidate is “tainted.”   This reminds me of that old nasty playground game, in which someone is said to have “cooties” and everyone goes “Yuck” and runs away from him or her.

The Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, Rev. North’s boss when he becomes a bishop, has declared that

“[because] those who are unable to receive the ministry of women bishops or priests continue to be within the spectrum of teaching and tradition of the Anglican Communion, the Church of England remains committed to enabling them to flourish within its life and structures.” - See more at

http://wwew.archbishopofyork.org/articles.php/3204/forthcoming-consecrations#sthash.DBX6PkTN.dpu

The Archbishop, who has ordained women and is therefore “tainted” will not be laying hands on Rev. North.  He is asking the other “tainted” bishops to join him in “exercis[ing ] gracious restraint” and let two handpicked “clean” bishops  perform the laying on of hands. 

So the absurdity, instead of rolling downhill, is leaping up.

There’s nothing I can do about it.  Rev. Lane and women bishops and women priests don’t need me to defend them.  But by pointing this out, maybe I am doing something.  Oh, and I can pray.  (Sorry, God, I forgot that for a minute.)

And here in the States, absurdity is alive and well.  Various evangelical churches are sponsoring Purity Balls in which pre-teen and teen girls promise not to have sex before they are married.  They also promise not to kiss, hold hands, or date.  (I don’t know how they will ever find anyone to marry at that rate, but that’s their problem and their parents.’)  That is, with any male but their fathers.

So the girls will not be able to attend their proms, but they get a chance to wear beautiful gowns and have their hair and nails done, which is really the point of proms anyway.  Their escorts are their fathers.

A common reaction to this seems to be that it is “creepy.”  And anger that is taking away the girls’ humanity.  They are now the exclusive “property” of their fathers and have signed away their right to decide what to do with their own bodies.  By the way, there doesn’t seem to be a Purity Balls for boys.  Maybe they don’t need them if the girls are holding up their end of the bargain.

Now, I have nothing against waiting until you are married or at least until you graduate.  Who has time for a serious love life in high school, what with sports, part time jobs, homework, shopping, texting and hanging out with your friends, and everything else?  (I always told my daughters that it wouldn’t be problem if they got pregnant, because I would kill them.  Just kidding.)  But . . .  But . . .

As I write this, I am starting to see that this whole situation is not just about the degrading or objectification of girls and women.  Thinking about this we can be challenged about our feelings about parental control (which is not always a bad thing) and sexuality.  Okay, I am being challenged.  As parents, we only want what is best for our children.  Sometimes they need to be saved from themselves.  But what is the best way to do that?  And what would Mary and Joseph do?

As I’ve said before, I don’t have answers.  But I do have questions.  What do you think?

 

 

 

 

 

  

Serendipity or the Work of Satan?

It seems that whenever I’m having trouble coming up with a topic to blog about from my own (some people say overactive) imagination, something will come along from The Real World to inspire me.  It might be the refusal by the manager of a Christian soup kitchen to allow atheists to volunteer (“And the Award Goes To . . .”  October 26, 2013), or a diocese’s proposal of a resolution to eliminate the titles of Father and Mother for priests because this reinforces stereotypes based on the patriarchy (“It  Came from the Risen Consciousness,”  October 22, 2014), or the recent tragedy in Baltimore in which a bishop driving under the influence struck and killed a cyclist (“This is all about me.  And it should be!” January 1, 2015).

This week, the bishop, Heather Cook, was indicted on charges of drunk driving and leaving the scene of an accident.  She was bailed out by her “steady companion” of a number of years, Mark Hansen, a former Episcopal priest who was defrocked for abandonment of his parish in protest of his diocese’s support of gay bishops in 2005.  She returned to the rehabilitation facility she had entered before her arrest. As they seem to be saying more and more, you can’t make this stuff up.

Naturally, tongues that had had a break for a few days before the indictment, felt obligated to wag again, often via the social media.  She is being treated too leniently either because she is a bishop (the church still has too much power and influence) or because someone in her circle had enough money to pay for bail (mo’ money, mo’ justice).

Often, especially on Christian websites, posters would call for compassion for everyone, including Bishop Cook and say that they were glad she was getting help.  Others said the best place for recovery would be jail, where maybe she could hit bottom and perhaps wise up.

And as usual, I joined in.  My first comment was “curiouser and curiouser” and the observation that anyone who gets involved with organized religion has gone down the rabbit hole.  I also wondered why the companion didn’t help her before all this happened.  And why she was associating with someone who at the very least had disrespected her church and could possibly be called a heretic?  Could that have been part of the stress that caused her to relapse?

This did not set well with a lot of people. I was being judgmental of both the bishop and her friend.  I realize that I have no right to judge and should have compassion for everyone involved.  And I do, for the victim’s family and for Bishop Cook and her family.  For Mr. Hansen, not so much, but some.

Like my previous post on the subject, this, too, is all about me.  Bring a relationship into a situation, and I (and I suspect a lot of people) forget about being objective.  After all, we get a lot of practice analyzing our own and our friends’ love or like problems and we usually don’t have trouble choosing sides.  I thought of all kinds of ways to condemn someone:  he didn’t help her and probably enabled her; she didn’t accept his help; he may have been in denial about what was happening; she manipulated him.   I told myself that I am a writer (often of fiction) and that I can’t help wondering “what if . . .” Is this an excuse?  Maybe.  Don’t people need to discuss or at least ponder tragic and frightening things?  Of course.  But at the end of the day the bottom line is that we must remember that everyone deserves our compassion, love, and prayers. 

So I am praying for everyone, including myself.  “Have mercy on me, a drama loving, gossiping sinner.”

And, whether I deserve it or not (probably not), God will.

For more information:  http://www.episcopalcafe.com/maryland-bishop-sutton-pastoral-letter/

Also:

I am not going try to make any connection, except as another thing you can’t make up, but on Friday, I came to work and heard that one of my coworkers had been badly injured when hit by the body of a woman who had fallen from and eighth story window.  The woman, an eighteen year old college student was allegedly leaning out the window to take a picture.  She was killed.

Perhaps I am adding this story as a chilling end note to remind us all of the randomness of life.   It’s something to pray about.

This is all about me. And it should be!

On Saturday, December 27, The Rev. Heather Cook, Suffregan Bishop of the Diocese of Maryland, was “involved” in a fatal traffic accident, in which the car she was driving allegedly struck and killed cyclist  Tom Palermo, 41, the married father of two children.  Bishop Cook left the scene of the accident, but returned about twenty minutes later.  The media later reported that in 2010, she had been arrested for driving under the influence and that drug paraphernalia was found in the car at that time.

This post is not about Bishop Cook!

Naturally, much has been said about this, particularly on Facebook.  People need to talk about tragedies in order to come to some understanding of them.  They are scary and incomprehensible.  Very often, we are speaking without knowing all, or any, of the facts.  I think it is useless to try to stop ourselves, to say that it is none of our business, but that we will pray for everyone.  We can only hope that we remember that we are speaking from emotion and that there are lots of things we don’t know.

There were many wise and compassionate posts, but there were also those condemning Bishop Cook and anyone who showed any sympathy for her.  Of course, I joined in, in an effort to process it all and maybe in the back of my mind, thinking I could straighten everyone out.

I was speaking very glibly (but, I truly believe, sincerely) about being compassionate and nonjudgmental, when I suddenly wondered. “Would I be saying these things if it had been my family member, or friend, or even the nice man who delivers our pizza who had been killed?”  I have to admit that I don’t think so. 

Loss of someone is too horrible to think of.  (I always say that being left behind, at least for adults, is worse than dying.)  We Christians have doctrine that is comforting, as long as it is theoretical, but are we perhaps whistling as we walk past the cemetery?

I hope and pray that I never have to make decisions about forgiving anyone connected with the loss of someone I love.  I hope none of us will.  So I will keep whistling.

One life is lost.  One is ruined.  A wife is without a husband.  Two children will grow up without their father.  Parents have lost their son.

There is nothing we can do about it.  So it turns out to be all about us, how we react, what we learn.  If we are not too confused, but especially if we are, we can pray for ourselves and for everyone involved.

(See “The Bishop and the Cyclist” by the Rev’d Dr. Elizabeth Kaeton at Telling Secrets at Blogspot.com.)