Live From Indianapolis II

The first official day of General Convention was marked by several notable moments. There was a splendid opening Eucharist – first class music and an excellent sermon by Bishop Katharine.

In the evening between legislative duties, I joined the Indigenous Theological Training Institute at a reception. It was good to see old friends and meet new ones. ITTI does vital work – unseen by most.

Then, we had the “big hearing” on structure. I was honestly surprised. 400 people attended. There has been a lot of nuttiness and paranoia on line about structural reform; but there was only one speaker who even suggested a smidgen of that. 40 people were given the chance to speak to the reform proposals. 38 passionately endorsed creating a special commission to propose transformation in governance. Several people spoke in favor of a Constitutional Convention to adopt the changes that would be proposed. The reason for the special commission is that the existing standing commissions are good at polishing the existing canons but are not set up to design a whole new system. The reason for a Constitutional Convention is that changing canons would be a roughly 9 year process and the Canons would then probably turn out to be unconstitutional.

The second day felt like a roller coaster. This morning the Structure Committee discussed what we heard last night. While some were impressed by “the overwhelming groundswell” for change; others characterized the call for a special commission as “magical thinking,” “unfaithful,” etc. and it did not sound like much was going to happen at all.

In our Friday afternoon hearings, we heard testimony on a resolution re-imagining the Presiding Bishop’s office as part time, with the PB no longer playing the role of CEO, and another moving toward a smaller unicameral convention. Both ideas seemed interesting at a minimum, perhaps promising. Then we heard from a slew of young adults wanting to serve on the special commission on restructuring. I felt some inner discomfort knowing that whether there will be such a special commission is not the sure thing they think it is. They are eager, in fact insistent, on participating in the restructuring process which I was not at all sure the existing governance structures were willing to hand over. I spent the afternoon fretting about what dashing their hopes might do to their passion for mission and ministry.

Then tonight at our committee meeting, some subterranean shift had happened. No one expressly said they had changed their mind, but tonight people were generally accepting the assumption we were going to create a group to propose adaptive change to our governance structure. I would not put any money on what the sentiments will be in the morning. But, for tonight, we appear to be headed toward some new thinking.

Along the way, I have encountered seminary classmates, a former member of the Community of Celebration (FisherFolk) with which we lived for a summer, the grandchildren of people I have buried, clergy colleagues and folks I worked with on diocesan conventions in Georgia, etc.  General Convention has a kind of This Is Your Life quality.

We have just been decompressing with the Nevada deputies. It is helpful after a day of the strange world of Convention to compare notes with people we know who have been having their own strange adventures. Comparing notes is a bit of a reality check.

Live From Indianapolis II

We got down to business this morning with a 3 hour meeting of the Structure Committee followed by what was supposed to be a 2 hour hearing in the afternoon but it turned out to be another 2 hours of meeting instead.

I am markedly impressed with the Structure Committee. It has a number of folks who are real players in the national church, including our deputy chair, Gay Jennings, who is a contender for the next President of House of Deputies. I am just getting to know her, but am so far very favorably inclined toward her leadership.

In the morning we did the basic work of setting the ground rules for our process and had a good general conversation about how to make structure serve mission. I have been a bit perplexed by the level of discomfort with this year’s reform proposal because there is no substantive change even on the table. The proposal is just to appoint a task force to study the possibility of structural reform and make a recommendation in the future – a recommendation we might like or not, enact or not – and would probably like and enact only in part, one of these days. So why the panic? I came away from today’s discussion with a better understanding. We had at least three different committees each of whom understood structure to be in their bailiwick. Now we have a proposal to create a new ad hoc task force with the clear mandate to make something happen. Even before a specific change is recommended, several groups feel displaced from their jobs. So dealing with the relationship side of this process is delicate.

We had a room full of witnesses at the “hearing” this afternoon; but it turned out only one of them wanted to speak to one of our resolutions; and it was not a hot button resolution. Since we had the time, we took on a number of resolutions which were mostly house-keeping. Even though they were of the most minor nature, we were meticulous with the wording and so managed to devote considerable time and energy to fine tuning the canons.

What we did needed doing; but I wondered if a smaller group might not have handled it better. I also did not grow personally, make deeper connections, or feel inspired. It is not the nature of the legislative process to grow the soul. Yet, I truly believe that this was a room full of people worth knowing, that if we could come together on a deeper level, the Holy Spirit might move among us. The conventioneers who were not stuck in hearings were at a baseball game. The chance of something spiritually edifying happening is far better at a baseball game than in a legislative hearing.

Coming out of the Structure Committee “hearing,” I encountered Karen Johanns, formerly of Trinity, Reno and had a great time hearing about her gritty inner city ministry in Pontiac, MI and updating her on the movings and shakings of the Silver State. 

Live From Indianapolis I

The thick grey sky hangs, like a celestial woolen blanket, over a flat city holding in the dank heat. Ok, Hayden Koenig[i] could of said it better. But you get the idea. It is hot and muggy here. First question: why must we have General Convention in July when people are at the height of irritability? Why not in the very merry month of May in some pleasant romantic climate?

One more gripe: this hotel ain’t the greatest. It sure makes me miss my beloved Gold Country Inn (Elko) with the moose curtains and bedcover; Hotel Nevada (Ely)  with its variable water and neon vistas; and Mizpah Hotel (Tonopah) with its Edwardian décor and ghosts.

Nonetheless, this is the best part of Convention. Business does not begin in earnest until tomorrow. My favorite part of convention is registration, ably overseen by the credentials committee starring our own Elizabeth Tattersall. This is where we see people we have not seen in months or even years. I have seen Paul Colbert of San Joaquin, Mimi Wu of Hawaii, Lucinda Ashby of Idaho, and various bishop buds. It is a true delight to meet up with all these good Episcopalians again and to ask the mundane things – How was your flight? How are the kids? – that are as human as they are pedestrian.

But the proper nature and spirit of General Convention is already a subject for wonderment. I have been reading Russ Crabtree’s The Fly in The Ointment; Margaret Wheatley’s Leadership & The New Science II, and Peter Senge’s Presence – all of which call our present way of doing business into question. Crabtree would like to see us focus more on helping parishes do the real mission. Wheatley and Senge are looking for a more relational, less mechanical, legalistic organizational life.

So today, one of our more scholarly bishops was telling me of his problems with the language of a resolution endorsing “the Principle of Subsidiarity,” a doctrine that sounds good once you learn how to pronounce it but has taken odd double-speak twists ever since it was invented by Pope Pius IX. A woman from a Western state overheard us and butted into the conversation arguing in support of the Principle because the words mean something more sensible in her field, economics. Immediately, it was not a conversation but a debate over something few can pronounce, fewer still can spell, and has never saved anyone’s soul or fed a hungry child.

We made an abortive attempt to change the way we interact last Convention by trying “public discourse.” It may not have been well presented and it did not go well. I don’t know how to change the way we relate to each other and negotiate our business. But I long for something more like I have experienced in small group relational meetings in community organizing, in Indaba Groups where people state candidly what they have at stake and how they feel about something without trying to persuade – just express; spiritual story sharing in spiritual direction groups; or non-judgmental wondering about each other’s experience in Parker Palmer circles of trust. I just don’t know that we can have a Christian conversation within the constraints of Roberts Rules. When I go to a Ministry Developers Cohort I come away feeling like a better person. I want to feel that way when I come away from General Convention.

I did enjoy the Integrity Reception tonight. I met some new people and connected with friends. It was then on to the Province 8 Synod – a business meeting for the regional level organization of the Episcopal Church running from Utah and Arizona to Guam and Taiwan. It was a long meeting with many reports. I was grateful to hear Nevada acknowledged several times for our contributions in various ministries around the Province. I only regret I couldn’t get a word in edgewise to campaign for our own JoAnn Roberts Armistead who is running for Executive Council.

---

[i] Hayden Koenig, the protagonist in Mark Scweitzer’s liturgical mystery series, is a writer of pulp fiction mysteries emulating Raymond Chandler. His sentences make this one look good. The first book in this hilarious series is The Alto Wore Tweed.