Rectors - Resign, Get Fired, Retire, Die

So what’s a congregation to do when a Rectorship is open, for whatever reason?  The answer to that question is critical to their future!  Who can argue that it is God’s plan to place the right priest in the right place at the right time?  Numerous books and articles have been written to provide guidance to congregations, diocesan staffs and transition specialists on what must be accomplished and even how to accomplish it.  Nevertheless, the same old mistakes and strategies prevail to the determent of all concerned.    

Most congregants want a new Rector as soon as possible and furthermore they want the person to be just like or very opposite the one leaving.  “What will we do without you?” Or, “We’ll never find anyone we like as well!”  Or, if they were not happy with the rector, then you might hear, “Thank God.”  In any case, focusing on getting someone new in place is not the starting point. First parish members need to resolve their feelings of loss, grief, anger, relief, guilt and panic about the future.

Neil Simon wrote a play titled “The Second Time Around” which showcases the difficulty of starting a new relationship before recovering or resolving a prior commitment.  Still, congregations  practice denial by saying, “we’re an exception to the rule.”  So, some congregations say goodbye to the departing rector on one Sunday and welcome the new rector within weeks; a recipe for failure.  Some quickly choose to promote an Assistant because “the show must go on and we actually like this person better anyway.” 

Friends, never start looking for a new Rector until the former one is well gone and the grief work effected.  Equally true – even though there are a few places where promoting an Assistant worked, for the most part promoting an Assistant to Rector turns the person into an unintentional interim which is problematic.  

Smaller congregations or those with budget problems often choose to buy “supple clergy” for worship and pastoral duties, try to bank some dollars, and turn over the interim process work to the diocese.  The truth is few dioceses have the time or the expertise to actually take on these duties and do them well, not to mention the always present conflict of interest.  The first, the very first, task is to see if the parish can obtain the services of a trained and credentialed interim rector or at least a trained interim consultant or experienced interim clergy team.  Don’t be stampeded into starting the business of naming committees and setting agendas too soon.   

The time will come when a congregation is ready to begin determining what skills will be needed in the new rector if the parish mission and goals are to be accomplished. Soon enough, months not weeks later, the congregation, working through the vestry or a special search committee, will seek and interview candidates.  Once I asked a vestry this question:  “Assuming you needed the services of a Cardiologist and your applicants were the following: a Neurologist, an Urologist, a Dentist, a recent Medical School graduate, and an EMT with great references – who would you hire?”  You guessed it. More than half of the vestry named someone from the list.  The remaining few got it right - “None of the above!” But it happens all the time! Search Committees present candidates who fail to meet the needs of the congregation because these candidates are the only ones who showed an interest, or they are the only candidates the parish thinks it can afford.  Just as disastrous, dioceses often try to push clergy that need to move or are newly ordained and need a place; again clearly a conflict of interest.  The right person is out there but you may need to say “none of the above” a time or two. 

Sound ominous?  In fact a well done transition process is an exciting spiritual journey and educational endeavor for the whole congregation.  The best advice is to take your time and do it right!

Rector@garygilbertson.org

The Essential Gift of the Episcopal Church-- Part 2

I owe a great deal of my teenage years’ achievements to  the power of the Episcopal/Anglican understanding of Christian life and witness and those leaders who inspired me. I felt propelled with courage. I became the president of the student body of Southeast High School in Oklahoma City, a special scholar in science and overcame my fear of standing up and speaking in public. Instead of nearly joining the NROTC with a scholarship, I went to Denver, CO to an international meeting of Episcopal youth in August of 1964 to learn about Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence and by the end of my freshman year of college was accepted by Bishop Chilton Powell as a Postulant for Holy Orders. 

Oh, do you not know what Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence is?  If not and probably not if you are under 50 years old, then I had better go back and catch you up.  (After testing out my thesis in various preaching and speaking engagements, that our seminary education and the excellent University of South’s Education for Ministry may help a student know biblical and ancient church history,  I can confirm that the Church fails to help adults grasp any of our Anglican history in the 20th Century.)  Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence (MRI) was one of the greatest historic and last “effective structures of hope” produced by Anglicanism.

Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence in the Body of Christ

                                             11 am, Saturday, August 17. 1963

As cited: Three central truths at the heart of our faith command us in this:

The Church's mission is response to the living God Who in His love creates, reveals, judges, redeems, fulfills. It is He Who moves through our history to teach and to save, Who calls us to receive His love, to learn, to obey and to follow.

Our unity in Christ, expressed in our full communion, is the most profound bond among us, in all our political and racial and cultural diversity.

The time has fully come when this unity and interdependence must find a completely new level of expression and corporate obedience.

Our need is not therefore simply to be expressed in greater generosity by those who have money and men to spare. Our need is rather to understand how God has led us, through the sometimes painful history of our time, to see the gifts of freedom and communion in their great terms, and to live up to them. If we are not responsible stewards of what Christ has given us, we will lose even what we have. . . . at the end--

We are aware that such a program as we propose, if it is seen in its true size and accepted, will mean the death of much that is familiar about our churches now. It will mean radical change in our priorities--even leading us to share with others at least as much as we spend on ourselves. It means the death of old isolations and inherited attitudes. It means a willingness to forego many desirable things, in every church.
In substance, what we are really asking is the rebirth of the Anglican Communion, which means the death of many old things but-- infinitely more--the birth of entirely new relationships. We regard this as the essential task before the churches of the Anglican Communion now.

The document was a call to an Anglican revolution. We were called to transform our view and understanding of all our resources: their development, sharing and implementation for massive efforts such as birthing fully non-colonial national Anglican bodies, as self defined jurisdictions. Our Province 9, as it is known today, is one of the major expressions of MRI.

For the full text of MRI, see: http://anglicanhistory.org/canada/toronto_mutual1963.html

There is vastly more to know, state and understand about MRI; however, for my purpose, it was my personal and for many others their call to serve in the life of the Church as stewards of the Gospel. I use stewards because MRI defined stewardship in what is now both a secular and Church usage as “more than money” and fund raising. A later document adopted by General Convention, Stewardship: the Main Work of the Church, has, as its antecedent, MRI. Empowered and inspired with the hope of a powerful vision, development of many new tools for mission and radical redefinition of jurisdictional bodies, many of us in our twenties came to serve the Episcopal Church.

More later, but for “homework,” here is your personal meditation question: What does Via Media have to do with MRI and what does the loss Via Media mean for radical stewardship?

Via Media Lost

At the Canterbury Club at my university we learned the song "I am an Anglican." sung to the tune of "God bless America."  It went this way.  I am an Anglican, I am PE.  Not high church, nor low church, but protestant and catholic and free.  Not a Presby, or a Methodist, or a Baptist white with foam.  I am an Anglican, just one step from Rome.  I am an Anglican, Via Media, boom boom.

Perhaps theologically wanting, the song nevertheless forged my spiritual identity with the idea that Anglicanism was the middle way between Rome and Protestantism.  Episcopalians were the perfect bled of the two, and we embraced all sorts and conditions of theologies and rituals into one Liturgy blended into one magnificent church.

The Via Media of Anglicanism began with the reign of Queen Elizabeth I.  The Act of Uniformity of 1558 allowed both the subjective and objective belief in the Real Presence at Holy Communion, thus blending the Reformation and Roman Catholic theologies of the Eucharistic Presence.  The original words are still found in our Prayer Book, Rite I, though they are rarely used.  In the bread words at Holy Communion, the Catholic position is present this way.  The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life.  The Reformed tradition lay in the subsequent phrase.  Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith, with thanksgiving.  In the early days of my ministry this had morphed into a creative tension between high and low church rituals in parish churches.  We all believed in the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament.

The key idea here is that in spite of our differences in theology and liturgy, we were held together by this Via Media glue.  The Prayer Book was the guiding force that directed our theology, and the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church guided the discipline and order of the church.  Diverse elements within the church were pulled together under the wide umbrella of the Via Media, and even though we disagreed, we were loyal.

In the late nineteen sixties it all began to come apart.  As my friend and fellow blogger Bill McVey says, "we drew a line in the sand" between the conservatives and the liberals, mainly over new liturgical materials and civil rights issues.  This does not mean that it was wrong to be either liberal or conservative, it is that in most instances the two decided they could not live together in the same church.  The first "line in the sand" was drawn over the civil rights movement, closely followed by liturgy and woman's ordination.  Now the split centers around sexual orientation.  Many have left the church.  The Via Media drifted away.

I suppose that it could be said that throughout my active ministry I would have been classified as a "liberal," whatever that truly means.  While I am a fiscal conservative and was mostly a good steward of the financial resources of the parish, I admittedly was a theological and social progressive.  However, I now lament the reality that the church put itself in the position where both liberals and conservatives drew such a hard line in the sand where neither side could give.  Hence the split and therefore the functional demise of the Via Media.  I grieve that loss and am sad about the fact that loyalty to the church faded away into the fundamentalist sunset.

The Bishop Speaks of A Punctuation Mark

Sometimes it is difficult to be an Episcopalian. It is especially difficult when we find ourselves in disagreement with one another, because we actually prefer unity to disunity. Nonetheless, even in the midst of turmoil we frequently come across a kind of “punctuation mark” in life that helps us remember who and whose we are called to be in our common life.

“Mom, you are not going to believe what happened in school today.”

This was a radio spot I heard in the car. A little girl was talking to her mother. She was very excited as she recounted the event.

“A Hopi Indian visited our class today. He showed us how he dances to pray and how he burned leaves to purify his soul. He showed us lots of other rituals. I wish I was a Hopi Indian.”

Her mother responded very gently, “Honey, we're Jewish – and we have rituals. When I was a little girl, my mother used to light candles every Friday night and we would sing special songs. Then on Saturday night, we would have a special meal to say goodbye to the Sabbath.”

“Mom, why don't we do those things?”

“Well, you know, we are pretty busy and you have lots of lessons and things. We just have a pretty hectic schedule to keep up.”

“Mom, can we go to Grandma's house on Friday so she can show me the rituals you used to do when you were a little girl?”

“This message was brought to you by the Jewish Federation. Come back, learn the rituals and participate in our programs.”

I am not sure I was able to capture all of it because I was in the car, but this is the essence of the message on the radio which surprised me recently. It made me think. It made me a little sad. It made me think again.

How difficult is it to be an Episcopalian? What are our rituals? How do they identify us?

This is your punctuation mark for today.

Futurist Liturgy, Google Glasses and the TMI Culture

Futurist Liturgy, Google Glasses   and the TMI Culture

            A few weeks ago, I was listening to an extremely respected, high tech market guru discussing the emerging digital wear market. More specifically, he was reporting on Google Eye Glasses focus group studies and the amazing positive feedback.

            It is difficult for an old timer like me to imagine that people will get excited about wearing Internet glasses throughout the day, but they are. In focus groups, users have found the glasses really cool. When a new technology is really cool, it is a win. The guru said that when he tested them, it was an exciting experience of being totally immersed in a live, dynamic digital cylinder.

Immediately, I recalled the Marshal McLuhan lesson of the Media is the Massage.  Not even McLuhan imagined that we would go beyond the Media is the Massage, but we have. With the coming of wear digital technology, especially the Google eye glasses, we are moving into the age of the total media Immersion. Total Media Immersion (TMI) means that we are in a constant digital cylinder of visual, text, and sound where all the senses are constantly touched. It is the ecstasy of the digital information cylinder.

Moving into a culture of TMI has serious and pressing implications for our Episcopal style of heavily print-dominated, historical symbols and ancient vestments liturgy. It just does not fit well into the immersion culture. Expecting young people under 25 to participate in a print-dominated liturgy is like asking them to watch a black and white Roy Rogers western movie with Chinese sub-titles.

As we move into the TMI culture, we need a new way of Episcopal worship. Perhaps we might begin by experimenting seriously with page 400 in the Book of Common Prayer, An Order for Celebrating the Holy Eucharist.  I suggest we should change the instructions for this rite to It is recommended as the principal emerging style of worship for Sunday and weekly celebration of the Holy Eucharist in the TMI culture.

In this style of worship, we would worship in a suitable room with a simple altar prepared for the celebrating the Eucharist. It is a plain room with comfortable chairs but on the white wall behind the altar, the celebration begins with an energetic spiritual projection of video art and music. Keyboard, wind, string and percussion musicians, praise singers and a soloist could be a part of the service.

The entire liturgy is built around concrete, spiritual, thematic preaching that is reinforced in the prayers. It is also supported by contemporary, easy to sing music like Sweet, Sweet Spirit, Blessed Assurance and inspiring solos similar to Love Lifted Me. Spiritually energetic video art is not just on the back wall, but it appears throughout the service, filling even the side walls with images and metaphors of glory, celebration, loving compassion, etc. There are no vestments. People distribute the bread and wine to their fellow parishioners. There is no need for special appointed and approved ministers. Some of the prayers are from the celebrant, but most are from the congregation and are casual, spontaneous and heartfelt.

These are only suggestions, but I believe that we must begin to think in this manner. I am curious if any of our readers have similar feelings about the new direction for liturgy in the age of the Google glasses.  

 

 

 

What Dream Has God Given You

In the beginning God had a Dream of what He wanted the heavens and earth to look like—and He proceeded to create them according to that Dream.  There are over 125 references to dreams and dreamers in the Bible – evidence that God is sharing His Dream with us in our dreams and visions.      

           “Dream” in Hebrew means to “bind strongly or firmly.”  A dream from God becomes bound up in the heart of the person receiving the dream.      When God gives you a dream or vision—it is a very spiritual experience – not easily forgotten or set aside – it becomes a part of your heart and mind.

Two quick footnotes:  (1) the only difference between a dream and a vision is if you are awake, and, (2) not all dreams and visions are from God.  Nevertheless, dreams are often called God’s secret weapon or the sleep language of God.

            God gives each of us a Dream. Today, June 29^th ,  I celebrate the 50^th  Anniversary of Ordination.  I am a cradle Episcopalian and was 10 years old (1948) when God put into my mind and heart that I should be a priest.  That dream was a part of my reality in grade school, high school and college – the Dream was always with me.  Friends and class-mates pondered what they would do when they grew up – that was never a question for me – I was going to be ordained and be a part of God’s Dream for this world.

Following Seminary, God’s Dream found me Vicar of two large Native-American congregations on the White Earth Reservation in Minnesota – in case you were not aware – we are the largest church among Indian people in Minnesota, the Dakotas and Alaska.

            God’s Dream for me also included serving as Parish Rector, Cathedral Dean and activity duty in the USAF as Chief of Chaplains for the Air National Guard – following Military retirement, the Dream lead to Interim Ministry.  First, in a suburban Washington, DC Parish and then as Interim Rector for 3 years in our largest African-American Parish in Washington, DC.  Next came a call to an avant-garde Baltimore Parish and then the Dream lead to Kansas City and three wonderful Interim Rectorships.

            Each of you readers also has a story about your part of God’s Dream – was it about education, career, family, fine arts, athletics?  Was it about loving, serving, worshiping?   I pray that someone knows your story and that you will keep sharing it with others.

            This is in no way to suggest that God’s Dream always brings joy and happiness, sometimes quite the opposite. 

            Nor is it to suggest that all that happens in the Episcopal Church is actually God’s Dream, some may well be Satan’s nightmare. 

            Nevertheless, it has been a grand 50 years being part of the Dream!!!

Rector@garygilbertson.org

The Essential Gift of the Episcopal Church--Hope

I have come to realize that my central vocation of retirement has much the same venue as the priesthood job itself: it is practice. What I mean is that playing a superior game in and on any vocational and professional court of endeavor requires massive, daily practice, perfecting each minor detail and maneuver toward greater perfection.  In the active ordained ministry the practice is, of course, about the aspects of priesthood required by  ordination itself: liturgy, pastoral care and administrative management, adjudicatory participation, community involvement and so on. In retirement the practice is about reviewing the entire field of personal history and doing so both privately and, when available, with the privilege of reflecting with colleagues who are both active and retired. The purpose for me of this rehearsal of the past is to access the endgame meaning of my life and, where possible, our life together as colleagues.

I feel extremely blessed to have a great group of clergy I see every week for two to four hours as we share breakfast and conversation about the whole gamut of our lives. I truly respect and care for each and every one of them. As well, I have an extended cadre of highly skilled lay folk with whom to reflect, the most important one being Catherine, my spouse. As well, the unique relationship I have is with Bob Shahan, my dear friend, cousin and colleague.  Catherine, whose whole life has been as an Episcopalian, provides the constant home based conversation that enlivens our days.  She has the added achievements of being an EFM graduate and member of some rather enlightened ecumenical study and prayer groups. Bob and I share a very strong family connection that only increases as we reflect on  oral stories, articles, photos and family memorabilia that have helped each of us understand those launching Reed ancestors whose history we can trace back rather fully for at least two hundred years.  This endeavor has importance to us as we both believe that family systems affect many multiples of generations. Even more importantly, we share a professional history that is similar and complementary going back into the 1960’s.  Altogether the  amount of time  I know I put into the spiritual and conversational practice of personal, collegial  and vocational review involves no less than sixty hours of my life a month.  This practice bears a slow but meaningful result because I now have one basic vocational question:  What can I really, really say about the place of the Episcopal Church in my life? After over one half a century of formal life in the Episcopal Church what difference has it made?  What difference does it make now?

I have spent much of my academic and professional life reading, analyzing, reflecting and trying to find some tentative conclusions in the studies of political, social, church, scientific and psychological readings in historic analysis. I started the search in the library of Fr. Ross Wellwood, the first Rector of St. James in Oklahoma City, where I met Kierkegaard, Thomas Aquinas  and Jaroslav Pelikan.  I was trying to find out how to counter my school mates at Southeast High School who were condemning most of the people of the earth to hell because they had not heard of Jesus Christ. I found answers in that library that Fr. Wellwood let me use, and in those wise and kind words of my academic and historic mentors, I found hope and comfort.

I intend to expand my answers with more blog essays in the future. But I know for sure that the broad brush conclusion is that because and only because of the Episcopal Church in its people, clergy, scholars and truth tellers in my teen years I was truly saved: saved from much teen anxiety and given a platform of hope and the comfort which passeth all understanding. It made my high school life full of adventure because I was anchored in the  environment of hope given to me by the Holy Spirit at St. James Episcopal Church.

Rectors (Pastors): How to Reduce the Diocesan Assessment

If there were fewer bishops and their administrative costs, a diocesan convention could choose to reduce the assessment, which would give local congregations more resources to support their clergy and conduct local mission opportunities.  It is therefore useful to discuss a merging diocesan church that would take the heat off of congregations which are facing reduced membership and financial support.  Let's face it, as resources decline it is harder to pay the diocesan asking.  While it may be true that assessments have leveled off for some, simply leveling off doesn't cut it.  What needs to be cut is the assessment itself.

How might we do this?  Perhaps we can learn from the merging of the dioceses of Quincy and Chicago.  Sure, it is true that Quincy needed to merge by default because after the split in the diocese they didn't have enough congregations to remain autonomous.  This is the code word for having enough money to support themselves.  In addition, add the diocese of Springfield to Chicago.  They have 36 congregations, 5229 baptized members and an average Sunday attendance of 1045.  In this scenario one bishop would serve the state of Illinois instead of the three they have now.  Think about the financial savings in bishop's salaries and administrative expenses.  One bishop could make 50% more money than he does now and money is still saved.  Then there could be a reduction in parish assessments.

The ELCA bishop of the Central States Synod covers the entire states of Kansas and Missouri.  Having served as an interim in one ELCA congregation, I know for a fact that congregational giving to the synod is far less than Episcopal congregations in that same geographical area.  The reason for this is that we support four bishops and their staffs in four dioceses in the two states.

Therefore, consider the merging of Western Kansas, Kansas, West Missouri and Missouri.  Western Kansas has 30 congregations, 1680 baptized members and an ASA of 731.  Kansas has 46 congregations, 11,469 baptized members and an ASA of 4057.  West Missouri has 50 congregations, 11,105 baptized members and an ASA of 3811.  Missouri has 44 congregations, 12053 baptized members and an ASA of 4160.  Think of the overhead saved if these four dioceses merged.  Think of the thousands of dollars that would be saved that could be applied to priest's salaries and local mission. This "merged" diocese would then be about the same size as Chicago. This could happen throughout the church.

Bishops might complain that they can't get around to every congregation each year for confirmation.  The answer to this dilemma is simple.  General Convention could vote to give priests the authority to confirm.

On occasion this blog has called for a reduction in the House of Bishops.  If we take a look at the rest of the 2011 Episcopal Church Statistics, we can find good reason to support the notion of diocesan mergers throughout the church.  We are simply too small to support as many bishops and their staffs that we have now.  Rectors and Pastors, just think about what you could do for local mission in your community if we didn't have to support as many purple shirts and their staffs.  And you might have enough left over so that the vestry could give you a healthy raise.

The Bishop Speaks of The New Day

The Bishop Speaks of The New Day

The notion of being more spiritual and less religious has a great appeal for some people. On occasion I am one of those people. This is that occasion.

If you want to move gently into the world of words, and engage the word “religion,' you will find a mess. The word, religio, will lead you more deeply into mess and opinion.

This is great! The only way out it to select your favorite and move on. It is somewhat like engaging the “The Trinity” on Trinity Sunday. Sometimes it is just better to select the version you like best and move on.

That having been said. The word, religion, comes from the Latin root, religio, from which we take words such as “ruler.” It signifies the notion of measurement and the holding of a standard by which one is measured.

One of the things which can happen when we are organized around religio is that it becomes easy to be righteous. Some people seem to believe there is a righteousness scale from which we accumulate points which lead us to good feelings about ourselves and perhaps bad feelings about others.

I believe the church is not called to be more righteous. I believe the church is called to be more holy. Righteous and self-righteousness are rather like roommates. Holiness, on the other hand, is our call into relationship with God. It is knowingly being in that relationship which sends us forth into the world.

It is time for the church to stop being so weary and to perhaps lighten up about some of the things which seem to concern or preoccupy us at times; the things which make us so certain of who we are in our being.

It is a new day and we must declare it from this moment on. It is a new day. Our call is to be the church reborn. We are called to be the church which has recaptured the Spirit which set it on fire in the beginning.

Let those, who can hear these words, be different from the rest of the church. Let us be different from the world of politics and intrigue . . . . I have a sense if we are willing to take the first steps on the journey in this manner, the right action will open up for us. We will discover our true nature in the reflecting pool.

How would such a church look? How would it worship? Would it cherish silence, respect, would it tell the same story over and over, would it have a building, would it meet every week, would it encourage people to do more than behave and be present? And on and on.

Our commission is to make disciples for the living God, and there is only one way to do it. (Incidentally, it does not have much to do with changing the way people think.) We are called to be something which, others can see, which is good and holy and sometimes even a little righteous.

I have great hope for the church because I have faith in you. I know that out of all of the broken hearts and stumbles along the trail, there still exists within you that spark which waits quietly to be rekindled.

We are the church. Live that way. We are in this together even if we do not know one another. We Are One!

Why I Am a Liberal       A. William McVey

            I begin by explaining that I am not really a liberal in the usual sense of the word in present day Episcopal culture. As a matter of fact, the purpose of this blog is to reconstruct the meaning of liberalism. I find it important to achieve this purpose because I wish to make it clear that I am not a conservative. In point of fact, I was inspired to write this blog after reading an article by my favorite economist Friedrich A. Hayek, “Why I Am Not a Conservative.”

            After some Hayekian reflection upon theological and ecclesiastical discourse, I have come to the conclusion that present day church liberals and conservatives share a similar authoritative dogmatic and morally coercive attitude. Therefore, if there is a possible journey of hope in a postmodern missionary culture, I recommend a rediscovery of a 17 century Anglican latitudinarian culture.

            The Anglican latitudinarians of the 17^th century, especially the members of the Cambridge circle, were scholarly Anglicans, but they held that matters of doctrine, liturgical practice and ecclesiastical organization were of very little importance. Richard Hooker was really a liberal personalist who had a pastoral concern for the care of the individual soul and was indifferent about things like church leadership.  Is it not interesting that church leadership and polity are such big topics today? The Cambridge Latitudinarians would feel at home in the postmodern culture, and I suggest would be extremely confused by the conservative/liberal ideological division of Anglicanism.

            Eventually, the liberalism of the 17 c. that moved into the 18^th and 19^th centuries was changed by neo-liberal Anglo-Catholic theologians like Frederick Denison Maurice who wrote, “I seriously believe that Christianity is the only foundation of Socialism and a true Socialism is the necessary result of a sound Christianity.” Contemporary theologians, bishops and clergy to avoid being called socialist then began to call themselves liberals or progressive liberals. Consequently, we have redefined liberalism.

            These new progressive church liberals and the church conservatives, however, are rather similar in their demand for authority. Both schools hold that dogmatic and moral views are proper objects of coercion. It is primarily this aspect that distinguishes a classical liberal, or neo-latitudinarian, from a conservative or a liberal. The progressive liberal and conservative church persons hold for a body of persons who have a set of beliefs and morals that must be enforced on others through institutional policy. The classical liberal believes that there are higher beliefs and values that are shared in dialogue and spiritual transformation, but they are never enforced by coercive polity.

           

Let me offer a more via media Anglican diagram. It is a triangle with the conservatives occupying one corner, the progressive liberals pulling toward the second and the classic liberals (neo latitudinarians) toward the third. It is the conservative and the liberals who keep fighting the authoritative battles, and the classic liberals just keep seeing it as more and more irrelevant. I have a strong hunch that the best of our laity are neo latitudinarian liberals.