Moving-On, Going Forth

So my bags were packed and I was ready to go, at least as much as I was going to be ready. My friends and family helped to pack-up the truck -- Thank you! My brother Paul, and friend Theresa are packing scientists who seemed to know exactly how to fit things together to optimize the full volume of the truck while being gentle with my things and keeping my possessions safe from too much movement or damage.

My last days living on Long Island seemed surreal. After the truck was packed, I spent a couple of days with my BFF Ginger (I'm such a geek -- "Best Friend Forever") while I attended my last Mass with Prince of Peace on Sunday, and my last day of work on Monday. My friends from Prince of Peace were unbelievably gracious and loving to me. They offered a "Going Forth Mass" which included Celtic prayer and blessings. I truly felt super-charged, blessed and so loved.

The car trip (truck trip?) took 17-hours of driving; it was 11-hours the last time I drove from Long Island to Charlotte. However this time I kept it slow and easy, and also stopped along the way for meals and naps. To say the least, I was exhausted.

It was heart breaking when I left Long Island at approximately 4:30 in the morning. My best friend Ginger saw me off. I love her so much. We both were crying -- it was hard to imagine being apart. But through the tears we both knew that this was all part of God's plan. We also knew and continue to know that we will never be apart as our love stretches beyond geography. With phones, emails and travel, we will stay close. Thank you God for Ginger.

As you could tell from this post and the previous post -- I am publishing them in February...but were written while I was going through this transition. Not having much time -- I never got to post them, but thought I would now to share my experience with you.

Discernment

Clearly I've been absent from my blog for quite a few weeks. It's been somewhat of a...well...I don't know how to describe this period of time. I thought I had well-laid plans and a strong sense of what my future was going to look like. And sure enough, God threw a monkey wrench into the works. I hate when God changes things just when I think I have everything worked-out.

For quite sometime I imagined that I would begin my ministry as a priest by building a Catholic Community on Long Island, New York. In addition, I thought that I would continue working for Catholic Charities -- providing services and housing for homeless folks who live with a disability. I figured that after I gained community-building experience and the community was well-established, I would consider immigrating south to Virginia Beach, VA or Charlotte, NC where there are existing United American Catholic Church ministries that could use my help. However, as the saying goes: "While I make plans, God laughs."

The anxiety started when my landlord & friend informed me that her family situation was changing and she would need the space where I live -- therefore I must move out by December. At first glance, it would seem that this change is not much of a crisis. While I am disappointed that I needed to move (I lived in a beautiful apartment on a canal with a terrific house mate), I had faith that I would find another apartment and would be fine. However, I immediately had this nagging feeling that there's an opportunity to further my ministry away from New York. It does not seem to matter that I have a wonderful job on Long Island and am currently serving as Deacon in a growing faith community -- I continued to hear the Voice of God in prayer telling me that I'm needed else where. That is where the crisis lay.

God's call is never easy, or at least it's never been for me. I heard God's gentle prodding to go into ministry for years before I took the first step on the journey toward the priesthood. And now once again, it is very hard to follow God's call for me to relocate. I love Long Island. I grew up there and left it only for a short time to attend school. I know the communities, the culture and have wonderful relationships with folks who live there. I have a strong professional network in the community-service and social work arenas. I love Long Island Sound and the Great South Bay, the wineries on the North Fork, the terrific community theatres and museums, and the fact that New York City is a short drive or train ride away. Although one can argue about some of the drawbacks to living in an area with one of this country's highest cost of living -- it was home for me and I was quite comfortable.

Yes, God's will is hard. It became apparent that I would be leaving Long Island soon when my dear friend Ginger, who knew I was discerning a big change, sang a Psalm to me over the phone and all I could do was cry -- tears of joy, tears of sadness, tears of uncertainty. The decision was made. Charlotte, North Carolina would soon be my new home. It was there that I was being called to assist with a growing community of Peruvians.

As is always the case -- stay tuned, there is more to come.

Hypocrisy is All the Rage On McCain's Choice of VP

I can't help but harp on John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as VP nominee. Not only is it insulting to the voters (especially to the Republican voters), but it has shined a new light on the hypocrite Republican pundits. Jon Stewart did an excellent job at illustrating their hypocrisy.

Wake Up America!

This is one speech that didn't make prime time at the DNC, but worth seeing.

Peace!

McCain/Palin Are Counting on the 'Stupid Vote'

Yesterday, Sen. John McCain selected Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate for this year's presidential election. There are so many worthy candidates he could have chosen to be the Republican nominee for Vice-President. And clearly there are special interest voters that he needed to consider when he made his choice: conservatives, evangelical Christians, young voters, moderates, women, environmentalists, undecideds, etc. So I imagine that he must have thought long and hard about who could produce the most votes, as well as who could fill his shoes as President of the United States if needed. So lets take a look to see which votes that John McCain is hoping to garner with this selection.

According to a number of sources (take a look here, here and here), Palin is the Governor of Alaska for only 19 months, and prior to that was a City Council Member (1992-1996) and Mayor (1996-2002) of Wasilla, Alaska (population less that 5,000). She is a staunch social conservative, against abortion rights, against gay-marriage, pro-gun rights, supported wildlife predator control efforts (hunting wolves from the air by shooting them from helicopters), promotes "gas and oil resource development in Alaska," has tried to prevent polar bears from being listed as endangered species and has tried to stop the polar bear region from being listed as protected for fear that it would interfere with oil development. She is non-denominational Christian, the wife of a small business-owner/fisherman and has five children -- including one special needs child with Downs Syndrome

So which voters would be swayed by Palin? First, let's cross-off those groups who obviously would be opposed to her positions: staunch liberals & democrats, the gay community, pro-choice folks, gun-control advocates, and environmentalists.

What about young voters? Well, traditionally, the majority of younger voters vote liberal. And it seems that polls suggest the same again this year. So clearly a staunch conservative could not be expected to attract young voters -- at least not anymore than would be already swayed by McCain. Except of course, stupid young voters who don't know that Palin is not a liberal and would vote for her because she's a lot younger than McCain.

What about conservatives? It would seem that Palin solidifies an already conservative base that McCain already has. However, Palin has limited voting history to support her conservative views. Therefore it would seem that her selection would not necessarily be a gain in the number of conservative votes; except maybe for conservatives who may not be aware of McCain's conservative credentials: i.e. stupid conservatives.

What about women? Well the pundits have speculated that the primary motivation of McCain to pick Palin is because she is a woman. The hope is that she will garner votes lost by the democrats when Sen. Hillary Clinton failed to gain the democratic nomination for President. The McCain camp believes that women who supported the liberal, pro-choice, pro-gay Clinton will switch to the conservative, pro-life, anti-gay McCain/Palin because Clinton was not nominated. This seems unlikely....unless of course, the women supporters are stupid -- who think perhaps a conservative woman is the same as a liberal woman. Sort of like what radio talk show host, Lynn Samuels suggested about men yesterday on her show: "... men think that all vaginas are the same."

What about moderates & undecided voters? Well it seems that one of the issues that has lost voters for Sen. Barack Obama to moderates and undecided voters is his perceived lack of experience. As a matter of fact, McCain has hit Obama hard on this issue. So it couldn't be that McCain was hoping to gain votes based on Palin's experience considering that she has less of it than Obama -- specifically on all national issues. This is a woman who said,

But as for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day?

Therefore she will NOT gain votes for McCain based on her experience, unless of course, the moderate and undecided voters are stupid and believe Republican pundits who suggested that Palin does have more experience than Obama.

So therefore, who is McCain hoping to convince to vote for the Republican ticket with the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate? Isn't it obvious? The stupid voter! Who else votes continuously against their own best interests because they can't or won't grasp the issues? Stupid voters. That's right, McCain is hoping that he can get the stupid vote to the polls this November to vote for him! The ones who will vote for him because Palin is so much younger regardless of her views or voting record (or the lack thereof). The ones who will vote for him because they think that by selecting a woman as VP, he must really care about women's issues despite his efforts to stop bills from being passed that prevent gender equity in salary, and his views on abortion. The ones who will vote for Palin as Vice-President -- one heart beat away from the presidency -- despite having the least amount of experience than any other candidate in modern times. Yes, McCain/Palin count on the stupid voter! And hopefully they will know when & where to vote!

Peace.

The Amazing Tony Melendez

When a friend shared this video with me -- my first thought was, "What a wonderful gift!" Please take a look -- it will make your day. God bless!

Missional Life, Missional Church

I have tried to live a missional life as long as I can remember. I think that I've tried to live a missional life longer than I've known what it means to live a missional life. Some might say that I live an alternative lifestyle. Others might say that I've made some poor decisions when choosing the direction of my life: "Don't go into the helping professions -- you'll never make any money." And one of my favorite comments: "If you got paid for half the volunteer work you've done, you'd be rich!" I see these observations as a sure sign that I'm living missionally.


When I say that I live a missional life, it means that I live as though I've been sent to proclaim the Word not only through traditional means (i.e. leading a faith community), but rather living the Gospel in my life's work by modeling Christian living in my day-to-day activities, living the Great Commission -- Missio Dei, everyday! To me, missional is not a technique or a theology or a activity; it's simply a way of life. I don't proselytize and evangelize in a traditional sense, instead I try to live a Christian life as best as I can by helping others, hoping to spread the Word through my life example. "And they'll know we are Christians by our love..." is my mantra. And by no means have I done it perfectly. Quite frankly, I am far from perfect. But again, I do the best I can.

Currently, I am struggling with how to translate missional living into missional church. In the last few weeks some 5o bloggers addressed the question, "What is missional?" in a SynchroBlog that was organized by Rick Meigs of Blind Beggar. Rick called for a SynchroBlog hoping to reclaim the word 'missional' after some discussion about the fact the this buzz word has been overused, watered-down and has lost it's meaning. I was two busy to add my two cents, but I still wanted to write about missional community as I discern my calling in community building. I encourage folks to check out the discussion through the SynchroBlog as I have found it to be quite valuable in weighing what it means to build a missional church.

As new clergy in a small but growing denomination, I am excited about the prospect of building a new community. And I find it a real challenge to visualize what a truly missional catholic community will look like. My experience is that most people only look at church as a place to go on Sunday to receive the Eucharist rather than a vessel of the Great Commission. When I speak with people about building a community, they want to know where the church will be located ("...near where I live?") or how many people am I hoping will attend, or what kind of activities and services will be offered. These are all valid questions. However when we start to think that we should go to church to have something "done to us" or that we should be serviced while we sit in the pews, it is a sure sign that we've lost track of what is church. Although I too have been a victim of that sort of thinking, I find it quite disappointing that folks seem to have lost the point that Jesus sends us to make disciples of everyone. The problem is that the idea of "church as a building" has been ingrained in us for what seems forever. Even when our pastors remind us that true church is the people not the building, it seems that they undermine that very point when they say, "keep coming to church." Really what they mean is "keep coming to the building."

Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit."

Jesus sends us. I'm not sure when He said this He meant, "Y'all wait here and put a welcome sign on the door. When the people arrive, tell them about me." And I'm also not sure that He meant for us to visit our friends and neighbors and say, "Hey, I'm building a church in town. Come on down -- we're going to praise God, learn about Jesus, share in the Eucharist, and have a fund-raiser for the homeless shelter," and if our neighbors refuse our invitation we move-on to the next one without much more thought. I also don't think He meant that we should only 'do mission' on Sundays or to use it as a technique, i.e. servant evangelism. Being missional goes beyond servant evangelism. Mission is a way of being -- just as in life, it also must be in church.

So what does that mean? As I pray over this question, I realize that I complicate the answer. I think that most of us do. For the answer is simple: it means that the primary purpose of a church is to live and act as Jesus would. It means that we become missionaries in our own community; that we leave the confines of the four walls or our church, and the comfortability of our living rooms and go to where the people-in-need are and help them the best way that we can in the name of Christ Jesus. It's as simple as that. The word "mission" should fall from the preacher's mouth as much as the words, "prayer," "worship," "sin," "forgiveness," "love," "redemption," etc. A truly missional church is one in which its focus is on community, social justice, helping the poor, freeing those who are oppressed, and living the Word. A missional church is less concerned with what happens at church on Sunday, and more concerned with what is going on outside its walls and in its community everyday of the week. And a missional church is one of action. It should be a church of doing.

The challenge will be to re-frame the traditional view of church. How do we get our parishoners to think beyond the church service and more on service in the community? How do we teach the Word through faith in action?

What do you think it means to be a missional church? How do we make it happen? I'd like to hear what you have to say.

Peace.

Lambeth a Success?

I'm a bit troubled at the conclusion of the Lambeth Conference. Some have declared the conference a success because there was no further splintering or rebellion. How could there be? 250 of the most conservative Bishops were not in attendance, nor was the Bishop who was the focus of the controversy, Bp. V. Gene Robinson. In addition, there were no motions and no church legislation to be voted on. So did anyone leave the Anglican Communion? No. However the victory is hollow considering that nothing was gained during the conference. It seems that the conference was dominated by the American contingency (21% of the Bishops in attendance were from the Episcopal Church of the US). And with alleged "white papers" being distributed by Americans throughout the conference, it seems that their agenda became the focus.

What I find most disturbing is that Archbishop Rowan Williams called that there be a moratorium on further consecrations of gay Bishops and that gay-sex is still considered a sin. How long must the Anglican Communion keep gays & lesbians in the closet? How long is the moratorium to last...forever? I suspect that Williams' mandate will be ignored.

A Church of Doers

I love being Catholic. I especially love being a progressive, Independent Catholic. I'm at a synod meeting of our li'l denomination (the United American Catholic Church) and I am so proud of the work that we do.

I am reading a couple of different books that talk about what many hate about church -- specifically about the mixed message of churches who talk about mission but don't DO mission. We are a church of doers! My hope is that I can plant, build and grow a church of doers.

By the way, the picture above is (from left to right): Bishop Anthony Hash, Father Christopher Ross, myself and Father Tom Shortell.

Watching the Lambeth Conference

I had the pleasure of meeting Bp. V. Gene Robinson (the first openly gay Bishop consecrated in the Episcopal Church) last month. I was amazed by his positive perspective on the future of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. Despite the fact that he was being deliberately excluded from the Lambeth Conference, it was clear that he saw his presence there (on the outskirts of the conference) as an important opportunity to get to introduce himself to other Bishops. He told us that there would be a number of foreign Bishops who will discreetly meet with him, however he had to promise not to disclose the meetings as the consequences to the visiting Bishops could be dire.

I've been trying to follow the debate at the conference regarding the issue of homosexuality -- specifically the ordination of gay men & lesbians, and same-sex marriage, however the coverage in the mainstream media has been scant.

Interestingly, Stephen Colbert addressed the issue on the Colbert Report the other night in a way that almost split my sides! Please, click on the video below and enjoy.

Peace.

Where does the time go?

Too much to do and not enough time has been the story of my life. I have partial posts written and just haven't had the time to complete a thought, let alone finish a post.

I'm hoping for some breathing room soon.

Peace.

And You Thought the Price of Gas Was Determined by Supply & Demand...

I have some strong feelings surrounding this upcoming US election -- there's lots of reasons to vote for Barack Obama this fall. There are even more reasons to vote against John McCain. Here's another.

One of the greatest causes of the volatility of the oil market is out-of-control oil futures speculation. And it all began with deregulation of the market due to "the Enron Loophole." John McCain recognized this loophole and railed against it until he started to have second thoughts following political connections with Phil Gramm and his wife, Wendy Gramm.

See the video below -- it's worth watching.





With all that we know about the deregulation of the oil futures market, what is McCain's solution to the problem of rising gas prices? The so-called "gas tax holiday."

By the way...you can monitor local gas prices at GasBuddy.com.

Search for gas prices by US Zip Code

A Response to the NY Bishops Conference Statement on Same-Sex Marriage

Last week Roman Catholic Bishops from New York released a statement condemning the New York State recognition of same-sex marriage. The NY Bishops' Conference statement was in response to Governor David Paterson's directive that all state agencies must revise their policies and regulations to legally recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states (Massachusetts and California), as well as Canada. The Governor's memo warns that failure to do so could result in sanctions for violations of the state human rights law (You can see an Empire State Pride Agenda video of Governor Paterson announcing the directive, as well as the text of the memo here, on the New York Observer's website).

What I find most troubling about the Bishops' statement is not that it condemns same-sex marriage. Such a condemnation is not news coming from Roman Catholic Church leaders. The Church has condemned most things homosexual for centuries. And I wish not to debate the Bishops' assertion that "numerous theological and religious arguments could be advanced as to why same-sex unions should be rejected." I strongly believe their arguments are weak at best, and that there are theological and religious arguments that could be advanced as to why same-sex marriage SHOULD BE ACCEPTED (see the work of Princeton Theology Professor William Stacy Johnson, JD, PhD here, and here and, Marvin M. Ellison of Bangor Theological Seminary here, and Eugene F. Rogers, Jr. here). In addition, the argument that same-gendered marriage is against "common sense and natural law" is old and stale, and easily debunked. No, it's not their theological arguments that trouble me, but rather their attempts at using flawed, or perhaps intellectually dishonest sociological arguments to build a case against marriage equality.



The NY Bishops' rightfully make a case for two-parent families. In their statement, they remind us that a two-parent home is often better than a one-parent home. They even invoked the name of liberal democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan who fought for the family during his time in public service in making their case. However to use this argument for the two-parent family as a case against same-sex marriage is illogical and quite frankly, intellectually dishonest. It seems that the Bishops' are trying to make a connection that just doesn't make sense. Are they saying that same-sex marriages are the cause of divorce in America? Are they making an implication that two same-gendered parents are the equivalent of a single parent in regard to effective parenting? Of course, both of these premises are unfounded and absurd. The Bishops' Conference statement is "spinning" a case based on innuendo that families formed by gay/lesbian parents are somehow flawed or not as stable as families parented by heterosexuals. They even suggest that there is empirical evidence to support this contention, however they do not cite any. On the other hand, what the growing empirical evidence suggests is that "children who grow up with 1 or 2 gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual" (PEDIATRICS Vol. 109 No. 2 February 2002, pp. 341-344 as found on the AAP Policy website).

And by the way, it should be noted that Sen. Moynihan never publicly expressed opposition to same-sex marriage and voted "no" against the federal "Defense of Marriage Act" in 1996. It seems that the Bishops' have used a tactic that many against same-sex marriage have used by dishonestly suggesting through innuendo that the liberal senator was an ally in their fight against same-sex marriage (see "Gay-Marriage Opponents Distort Moynihan's Views" in The New York Oberver, July 25, 2004).

And contrary to the Bishops' statement, disallowing same-sex marriage IS an issue of discrimination because of the myriad of legal rights that are afforded married couples that are currently denied to gay couples without the same institution. Even the best lawyer can not put in place all of the legal directives and rights that a married couple is given by the simple act of marriage.

Same-gendered couples seek to get married for the same reasons as different-gendered couples. They seek an institution where they can share the love given to them by God and build a family just as any other married couple could. Their relationships are more than an expression of affection or commitment (as described by the Bishops' statement), but has the unique and sometimes indescribable qualities of love and shared values that make them wonderful spouses, parents, and grandparents. These God-given qualities are what distinguish a married couple from any other close relationship that one has with others, and they are not unique to just heterosexual couples -- they can be found in homosexual couples as well.

The Bishops fail to adequately justify disallowing same-sex couples from legally getting married in New York State. And it is disappointing that they use such a flawed premise in their statement.