A Wonderful Day

I am completely overwhelmed.

I planned my visit to Washington at least 9 months ago and wanted to attend Eucharist in the National Cathedral. I went there as a tourist on a weekday with my sister in 2007.
Last night I checked the website for the times and was floored to find it was a special service for Gay Pride Month.
The preacher was Rev Dr Cameron Partridge the first out trasngender priest to preach at the Cathedral.
And the presider was Bishop Gene Robinson the first openly gay man to become a bishop in the Anglican communion.
I met Bishop Robinson in Sydney probably 6 years ago when he came to St James, King Street and sat in the congregation. Of course he could not be officially welcomed , the jensenites would have been appalled.  However he came to a meeting afterwards and I met him and told him some of my story. He gave me a big hug.

At the end of today's service I introduced myself and he said he remembered which was nice of him
I cannot believe that I should have gone to the cathedral today of all days.

My photo of +Gene Robinson was taken while he was being interviewed.

Eucharist with the Prime Minister

Well, Christmas is now over for me for another year. I was on the 6.50am train as on a usual Sunday although the combined service was an hour later but I wanted to make sure of my usual pew so found a coffee stand open and filled in 40 minutes in the city. That was wise as the church was packed and the congregation included the Prime Minister of Australia. As the news services stated.
Mr Rudd, his wife Therese Rein, and their three children - Jessica, 24, Nicholas, 22 and Marcus, 15 - attended a Christmas service at St James Anglican church in Sydney's CBD this morning.
The photo shows him with his wife and our Assistant priest Father John Stewart.
It was good to see him queued up in the aisle with everyone else for communion although I was coming back along the side aisle at the time and between looking to see his wife and being a bit disconcerted by the security guys coming towards me (the wrong way) I went at first to the wrong pew. My sister thinks it is sad that the family have to be followed by security officers but that is the way of the modern world.

The Prime Minister has now attended our church several times this year. His main home is in Canberra but there is a house reserved for him in Sydney which has a prime location on the harbour for watching the start of the yacht race today and the fireworks on New Year's Eve. My sister thought he would attend the cathedral but he grew up in the Diocese of Brisbane so would obviously prefer the real Anglican services at St James rather than the Calvinist hotch potch of the cathedral. And who would want to listen to a sermon by one of the Jensens on Christmas day?

The choir sang the Kyries, Gloria, Sanctus & Benedictus from Mozart's Spatzenmesse K220 which, while beautiful, I found a bit long to stand.
I much prefer exercising my own lungs in the processional hymn 'O Come All Ye Faithful', the offertory hymn 'Christians Awake, Salute the Happy Morn' and the final hymn 'Hark the Herald Angels Sing' but this year was particularly moved by the Gradual Hymn 'It Came Upon the Midnight Clear' ( music below) especially finding the third verse apt:

Yet with the woes of sin and strife
The world has suffered long;
Beneath the angel - strain have rolled
Two thousand years of wrong;
And man, at war with man, hears not
The love-song which they bring;
O hush the noise, ye men of strife,
And hear the angels sing.

I seem to be very melancholy this Christmas

We did not arrive at my sister's home until nearly 1pm and we did have hot turkey and ham with salad for main with salmon for entree and plum pudding as dessert. Just as well the temperature did not go above 23'C (73'F) and the morning was cloudy but this can be a trap for the unwary as the UV was high so there could be some sunburnt European tourists today. Brut and New Zealand sauvignon blanc meant I felt quite strange for the more than 2 hours train trip home arriving just in time to see the news with the Prime Minister leaving my church and to watch something I never miss, The Queen's Christmas Message.

Lay Presidency in Sydney???

I feel very unqualified to comment as a lay person with little to no training but the recent decision of the Synod of the Diocese of Sydney to allow deacons and lay people to preside at Holy Communion is causing much comment especially at Thinking Anglicans. I have been reading and feel I must put my thoughts into words even if not very clear.

To me it is just more proof that the Diocese is not 'Anglican" but that is something I concluded many years ago. There are many Anglican parishes within the diocese but the current hierarchy has moved away from any semblance of Anglican belief.
Just last week when I was in Manly I passed the "Anglican" church. The board showed Sunday services. 8am was advertised as a Traditional service. What does that mean? Probably Holy Communion but you cannot be sure. I think many of these 'traditional services' are just being kept for the old folks and the young presbyters (that is what they call priests, I have even seen pastor used) cannot wait for the time when they can get rid of such services. The other services in most of these churches are given various names, often Family service (are gays welcome???), and are more like the Baptist church down the road. I reported last week that some Sydney Evangelicals think 'Holy Communion' interrupts the preaching.

There is no way I would attend a Eucharist celebrated by a lay person in an Anglican church. I am willing to participate in a service of Holy Communion in the Uniting Church led by my lay friend who has been licensed in that church. But I do not consider it to be the Eucharist just a Remembrance of the Last Supper and my attendance would just be a sharing in Christian fellowship. If I was marooned on a desert island or (God forbid) we were invaded and Christian services were banned, it would be a different situation.

I am not so sure about deacons presiding. A deacon has been ordained although I realise not as a priest. I have often written about Sue who is a deacon but cannot (being female) become a priest here in Sydney. She could not administer the Eucharist to Mum in her last days but did anoint her with holy oil from Jerusalem. Apparently, under the new arrangements, she can preside at the Eucharist but only in the presence of women and children. This, of course, follows the belief of some of these Sydney types that women should not speak in the presence of men. Some churches do not even allow women to read the lessons. Would Sue now be able to give Mum communion at her bedside but only with my sister present? The thought of that happening brings me to tears of anger. I am sure Sue would not have allowed that and what the diocese didn't know would not have mattered.

The commentators have brought up the situation of parishes which are widely dispersed or dioceses with shortages of priests. These situations do not apply to Sydney which covers a small, densely settled, largely metropolitan area. Anyway I believe dioceses with such problems can ordain priests who have not had a full training and who have other income and are restricted in moving to full incumbency of a parish.

I believe the motion in Sydney has two reasons.
One is to give a sop to the women who want to become priests. Sydney's opposition to women priests is based on the notion of 'headship' ie that a woman should not be a leader of men rather than on any priestly theology.
While I often comment on their homophobic policies because they affect me personally, it is their sexist policies that make me most angry. Their exclusion of homosexuals shows their lack of compassion and understanding but their exclusion of women in this day and age, I consider a sin of male pride and a ridiculous view of scripture which they only follow when it suits them. I do not see them insisting on women wearing hats these days. (I Cor. 11:13)

The second reason is their 'low' view of Holy Communion. To them its importance is far below that of preaching. Sadly I find most evangelical preaching boring as after 60 years, I have heard it all before. On the other hand, since moving to a liberal Anglo- catholic parish, most sermons are thought provoking and they are biblical but not pure bible studies. I travel 4 hours most Sundays in order to partake in the Eucharist as well as to worship. I would be quite happy to receive my teaching at home from reading in books or online as I also do.

Even as a young person in a time when the idea of a woman priest was no more than an occasional theoretical discussion and I had no understanding of my homosexuality, I was an Evangelical but an Anglican. I was taught and believed that something special and mystical happened when the priest consecrated the bread and wine and God became present in some more important way. Last week in the studies preparing for Easter, we discussed that in Sydney both Evangelical and Anglo-catholic churches do not allow children to receive communion before confirmation. I was not aware this was also a difference between Sydney and the rest of Australia. When one person said "but children do not understand what is happening", the priest (from Adelaide) said "do you understand, I don't". No I do not understand what is happening and am glad a senior priest does not either. Another reason to look forward to when we 'will know fully'.

I guess the only satisfaction to gain from the passing of this motion at Synod is the problem it is causing for GAFCON and FOCA. I am not the only person who has claimed that, despite them saying otherwise, the only thing the extreme Evangelicals and the extreme Anglo-Catholics have in common is their sexism and homophobia.
As stated I am opposed to them on both causes and if squabbling over their views of the Eucharist brings them to tears and schism, bring it on.

Liturgy and Ritual

I am concerned that people reading my post on +Forsyth's visit to St James might think I am overly concerned with his involvement or otherwise in the ritual. I really would not mind if he had refused to take part in any of it although I think as our bishop he should be prepared to accommodate some aspects as he did. It is his and the other bishop's refusal to accept +Gene Robinson or even meet and take communion with those who consecrated him that concerns me. The Gafcon bishops are attempting to split the Anglican Communion possibly for many reasons but are using GLBT people as their whipping boy. This is why I oppose and avoid them.

I grew up in this evangelical diocese at a time when it was evangelical but recognisably Anglican. If any one had told me then that one day I would be worshipping and participating in high church ritual I would have thought them mad. However I did learn to love the Anglican liturgy, the robed choirs, the chants and the beautiful 1662 prayer book.
As a youth leader I organised youth services at evening prayer once a month. We probably horrified our elders with guitars and modern music but the basic order of service was not changed. My rector insisted that as a leader in the church, Holy Communion was not to be neglected. While I believed it was mainly a memorial service, I also believed that something special happened and this required consecration by an ordained (in those days) man.

I have a close friend who since his retirement from teaching has taken the role of leadership in a small Uniting church (The Uniting Church of Australia was formed in the 1970's by combining the Methodists, Congregationalists and some Presbyterians). He is very happy that after a year of study he is now allowed to conduct a Communion service in his church. I am happy for him and would be glad to attend some day. I would see it as just a memorial service (as does he) so it would not satisfy me on a regular basis but am sure this different view will not cause our loving God to reject either one of us.

While I love the 1662 service, I realise it had to be modernised but I do miss the Prayer of Humble Access which is so meaningful.

I think it is wonderful that I can travel to NZ, Europe and USA and still worship in much the same way. There are of course subtle differences but the service is essentially the same. However it grieves me that several people have told me they have migrated from England or even moved interstate in Australia to Sydney and feel completely lost in the average Anglican church in Sydney. One man told me he felt he had finally come home again when he first attended St James. I sometimes think it is false advertising to have the name "Anglican" outside these churches.

When I began to work in Catholic schools, I felt I should be involved in the worship program of the school and began to learn the rituals involved so I found myself recognising the altar and making the sign of the cross. I began to believe that something even more important happened when the bread and wine is consecrated. I am very fuzzy on my thinking here. I do not believe it becomes the actual Body and Blood of Christ (with all the problems of spillage etc) but like the concept (which I think is Lutheran) that it changes in some real way as it enters the communicant by the act of eating and drinking. So it becomes the Body and Blood TO ME (and obviously my fellow communicants).
I did not like the usual practice of receiving only the bread in the Catholic services but was often amused that when offered in both kinds at staff retreats it was usually mainly the Anglican staff members who took the wine.
By the way, a Jesuit priest told me that as a member of the school community I was welcome to partake although I know not all the priests would have agreed.

I find that the ritual gives more meaning to me and also helps to keep me focused. I would prefer to kneel during the consecration but this is not done at St James. I do kneel to receive and standing and kneeling at this time is about half and half in our congregation. Perhaps kneeling will be less possible as I age. My sister, being older than me, does not kneel at any part of the service but still does to receive. She tells me she prefers not to make the sign of the cross etc as she does not know what to do and this is okay by me.

So I have no complaint about evangelical forms of worship as the 34th article says "It is not necessary that Traditions and ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly like."
I just ask that they be recognisably Anglican, usually follow the Lectionary in their program of teaching and be willing to recognise that others within the communion will prefer different rituals and are not to be condemned for so doing.