Summary of Via Media Sessions
(Saturday 1/10/04: El Paso; Sunday 1/11/04 Rio Rancho)
Hope-what
do you want to have happen; an optimistic vision.
1. We want a new Bishop who is a reconciler, not someone on one side or the
other.
2. A Bishop must be a unifying force. We need to focus on our common beliefs,
rather than letting minor issues divide us.
3. How do people with widely differing views reconcile within a parish, particularly
in small communities where there is only 1 parish? How do we get back to where
we were, people’s opinions haven’t changed, only the circumstances.
4. Our diversity is one of our strengths as a church
5. It seems to me that most individuals in the church are moderates, but our
leaders are on the fringes. You can’t hear from the fringes.
6. We will find a way to feel free to speak in diverse opinions without being
ostracized.
7. There were more moderate/liberal people who resigned rather than work with
current leadership.
8. Take a bottom up approach. Healing of issues within parishes might be productive.
Parishes in smaller communities would be good test cases.
9. Perhaps those of us on the liberal/moderate side should listen to our more
conservative brethren as a first step in the reconciliation process.
10. The likelihood of us changing their opinions is small.
11. That we can all come together and accept our diversity and shut out no
one.
12. Better communication
13. We need to recognize that there are many who believe there is a need for
common group but we recognize there are those who believe there is no common
ground-that unity is impossible.
14. We are very willing to listen and discuss issues, but our group is all
over the map on opinions and feelings about these issues.
15. Develop structure for good communication throughout the diocese.
16. Creating community that celebrates diversity
17. Using communication and community to change existing processes to allow
everyone in the Diocese to have a voice.
18. We require a place to discuss and raise questions for accurate information
19. We need to affirm our unity and community of the church (no split)
20. The responsibility for moving this forward lies with us, (laity) not the
church hierarchy.
21. Keep reconciliation as the primary goal for Via Media and that our dioceses
would move into a more centrist position with less polarization, from our
diocesan leadership.
22. Feel save when offering opinions, thoughts, when in dialogue with one
another privately or publicly in the church.
23. That God will provide a fair, loving accepting Bishop to pastor all of
her people
24. Remain a part of ECUSA.
25. We hope for a process of reconciliation in our diocese during a search
for a new bishop or in a new Bishop ministry. A Bishop who will pastor to
all.
26. We need to come together in love and trust even in disagreement and turn
our focus back to God’s work.
27. We want a diocese that is a place that thrives on dynamic tension. A place
that is awesome in the power of word and fire. A place where people can be
heard, all opinions can be valued as worthwhile.
28. Some interim to come in and heal the Diocese, take time for open communication.
To search for a Bishop that is willing to encourage open environment, to be
willing to set a tone for conversation that ??
29. Need for communication; an open dialogue between Via Media and the Bishop
and Standing Committee, and between factions that are in disagreement among
themselves.
30. Belief in maintaining the historical tradition of inclusiveness in the
Episcopal Church and the need to find and articulate the basic unity within
which diversity exists.
31. That a spirit of respecting our differences can develop in the diocese.
32. Find an Interim Bishops so that we can begin a process of dialogue and
reconciliation whether or not its with a Bishop or Co-adjustor.
33. To elect a Bishop that will pastor to his priests.
34. Devise a more democratically managed Via Media’s definition of healthy,
balanced and reconciling
35. That the Episcopal Church will remain a united Church
36. That there will be a blending of ideas in the Church and all groups are
tolerant of one another.
37. What will each group have to sacrifice to continue in full communion and
under canonical authority of ECUSA.
38. A sense of belonging
39. Free to express difference viewpoints and ideas.
40. Open communications
41. A diocese where all people are free to express ideas different from the
few in power, without being labeled as subversive or mischievous. If we are
one body in Christ, then each person should be respected, accepted and valued.
42. A process for listening
43. Stay in full communion with ECUSA
44. Listening
45. To actively advocate for respectful consideration of the diverse views
of the diocese as decisions are made affecting our lives. Shared recognition
that all needs reflect the diversity of the diocese.
46. That this diocese becomes one that is welcoming, listening and a safe
place for all.
47. Recognition that this is the people’s church, not the Bishop’s
church.
48. We had a wide range of views in the room today. We were able to sit around
the table and discuss our views. This should happen all through the Diocese.
49. A church that has a history of living with diversity welcomes all Episcopalians.
50. That all voices will be heard and be allowed to participate in the process.
51. That these discussions will be viewed as a move toward an open forum not
seen as defiance.
52.
Question about Via Media and its activities, mission, goals.
1. How do we communicate and gain communication skills to dialogue with someone
with whom you totally disagree?
2. Problem in Diocese is the lack of knowledge as to the process within the
church.
3. What can we do? Work for reconciliation within our own parishes; listen
to others’ opinions; communicate the results of this meeting; focus
on what we have in common; pray; figure out how to communicate with diocesan
leadership.
4. Since those on the conservative side of the argument have not come to this
meeting are we dismissed as irrelevant?
5. What is the process that the standing committee will use to select a new
Bishop?
6. Will the candidates talk to anyone outside the standing committee?
7. Have the standing committees within the national church approved our diocesan
process?
8. Who is on the nominating committee?
9. How important is the convocation’s decision really?
10. Do the sheep have no say concerning the shepherd(s)?
11. How to have meaningful input in resistance to the path being set up by
our present Bishop?
12. How to bring this Diocese into the 21st Century, i.e. 99% of the sheep
can read and write and think for themselves, why or who can they affect the
leadership process?
13. What is the process to establish leadership? Is the church a democratic
institution?
14. How can we, the people in the pews, make more of a difference on a diocesan
level?
15. What is our relationship to the national church going to be under the
new Bishop?
16. What is the funding for Via Media?
17. What can we, Via Media, do to help choose an alternate candidate for coadjutor,
so we won’t be railroaded?
18. How far will Via Media go in pursuit of its goal and if not successful,
what next?
19. How can we get this diocese to be openly communicative so all have a voice
at the table?
20. What happened to the proposal of VMRG to use the search process for the
Bishop the same as for a parish rector? Are they looking to history to determine
this process or what has worked before? Court cases in the 70/s and court
cases of today.
21. At what point do we speak of a split?
22. How do we get Via Media Rio Grande’s mission known?
23. How do we avoid being Episcopalians in name only?
24. How do we begin a dialogue when Via Media has already been put down?
25. How does Via Media get a voice on the Standing Committee?
26. How did World Anglicanism become so conservative without ECUSA evidencing
much awareness of the direction the world church is going.
27. How can this group establish conversation with “authorities”?
what are the next steps?
28. How do we prevent a fight? What is a really healthy balanced environment?
29. The steering Committee should represent all of the diocese-a feeling that
the North is primarily the source of decisions. Hope for balanced representation.
30. How do we do it? We really want dialogue going between units of differing
opinions within the Anglican Church.
31. What can we do to address declining enrollment in our churches?
32. How do we regain our comfort level that we shall remain Episcopalians?
33. What is the fall out for the diocese of not sharing like funds with the
national Church?
34. what my role in the above? And how do I assist in the movement toward
a more inclusive diocese?
35. Where’s the common ground?
36. How can our parish view be taken seriously?
37. How do we assure that the election process will be canonical?
Concern/ worry,
fear and reason for it.
1. Given the history of hierarchical control in DRG (information, communication
etc.) and given the history of hierarchical damning/put downs/bad mouthing
of people seen as subversive/revisionist/apostate/heretical; How or what can
we do to open dialogue?
2. That we have a process to select a Bishop who is willing to allow the people
to have a voice in the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande. I am against schism
and would like to see a process wherein the people of this Diocese can voice
their feelings about the selection of the Bishop and all other issues. I believe
that the majority of the people in this Diocese are for reconciliation.
3. The main question to me is: and ought to be: “What would Jesus do?
Do we look for guidance to laws and statutes, purity codes and rules or do
we look for love, for inclusion, for diversity. It was the diversity, the
warm, welcoming face of Jesus’ teachings that brought me back into the
church. You can’t talk to someone if they are outside your doors. Religion
is powerful for good or ill. We must be educated.
4. How can the election process assure more inclusiveness and less exclusiveness
with a transparent and fully informed constituency?
5. Regarding the election of a co-ajudtor we don’t want a clone of the
current Bishop. We want more insight into the process of selection (who is
on the committee)
6. Not clear that we should ask someone from the outside to be involved
7. We are 1 body in Christ and we are opposed to splitting the church. The
issues from the convention are not as significant as some would have us think.
8. The demise of the Rio Grande has resulted in a lack of communication
9. That the church will split
10. Literal interpretation of scripture is driving us apart. Take the Bible
seriously but not literally.
11. Official leadership of the diocese seems unable to deal with the diversity
of the faithful. We deal on our differences not on our commonalities.
12. Remember that all of the groups, liberal, conservatives and moderates
all have something to contribute. The whole is greater than the sum of the
parts.
13. The church is my family. How do we get a divorce from our brothers and
sisters. This shows a lack of commitment.
14. How to “not follow” this Bishop and maintain community?
15. Concern regarding lack of 30/20 year old presence-any true youth program
prior to current leadership has been dismantled and never re-grown. There
will not be a splintered church, there will be a dying church if the Focus
is not on growing the next generation and stewardship rather than personal
agendas.
16. Standing Committee Concerns?
• Not representative of the diocese
• Inability to communicate with them
• Search Committee has already been selected by Standing Committee so
how can Via Media impact them?
• Vicars who are afraid to be a part of this process
17. Our identity as the Episcopal Church of the Rio Grande.
• Choices dictated rather than made individually through an informed
conscience.
• Being forced into camps e.g. via media, being marginalized whether
we fit or not
• Ideally ability to hold and express divergent views. Now being squelched
and replaced by fear, McCarthyism, “You are not a Christian if…..”
18. Don’t like labels of “conservatives vs. liberals” but
we couldn’t agree on new labels (negatives vs. dialoguing)
19. How do we have dialogue with people who don’t talk to you?
20. Concern about a fair election
21. Facing the worst about schism and fragmentation: evolution vs. new/better;
keep from extremism; call to our integrity to do what we must; grieve and
move on.
22. How do we have a constructive positive dialogue with diocesan leadership
given the present situation?
23. Fear that the Church will split either officially or unofficially.
24. We are concerned about the sound of silence from the Search Committee
and this process:
• How does the standing committee envision completing this process in
9 months?
• To come up with a balanced process do a survey (by someone familiar
with Episcopal churches) to determine who we are as a diocese and what we
need in a new Bishop.
25. That Via Media will not be seen as a group of rabble-rousers who want
to cause trouble.
26. That the church not become divided into two churches on this issue-that
we can learn to live with those having divergent opinions.
27. That Via Media will be given a means to work with (or at least allow its
feeling to be known) the steering committee.
28. That the minority will be silenced.
29. That we will grow further apart before we group together.
30. Can our diocese leave the Episcopal Church. How would that be done?
31. Divisions of the Episcopal Church vs. those within the Parish
32. The apparently huge disregard of diverse views by the Standing Committee
and the diocesan administration. The diocese is geographically huge and of
its very nature diverse. I see Bishop Kelshaw trying to dictate the future
direction of the Church of the Rio Grande and I feel his extremely conservative
position is not at all reflective of the diocese of the whole.
33. I am really alarmed at the homophobic nature of the ultra conservative,
since I am very comfortable in a parish where sexual orientation simples is
not an issue.
34. Being shut out of the process
35. We need to Participate in the election. Interim is crucial. A divided
Church: We need to seek a fair process.
36. There are limits to what is acceptable. We need a baseline not rationalizing
of views.
37. This is not an issue of homosexuality
38. Will the search committee represent the entire diocese? Will it be a National
Search?
39. If the church splits, or if our diocese moves away from ECUSA, how will
the issues of property and pension be resolved?
Suggestions
1. May be worthwhile to have someone(s) visit and share with each and every
Deanery to tell them about our hopes and concerns. Looks like a community
Organization or union organization. Thinking ahead, plan to elect the best/a
good person.
2. We urge that we immediately create a web site for VMRG and using Dean Style
Internet advocacy to communicate with the standing committees around the country
for mass mailing.
3. Take lessons from the peace movement, the Civil Rights movement, women’s
movement, and the anti-apartheid movement for non-violent advocacy for building
a long-term commitment to bridge building, to open dialogue, to healing, to
tolerance.
4. Need diocesan wide education at the Parish level about political and financial
structure of Church at Diocesan and National level. Use Internet communications.
5. Make a VMRG web site.
6. Via Media started nationally since general convention. Could Via Media
articulate what they’re doing so that they’re not conceived as
mischievous?
7. VMRD sponsored workshops on basic Church processes, canons, workings of
conventions, standing committees and Diocesan Councils.
8. Know more about canon law
9. Need more knowledge of the Canons and how they can affect the future of
the diocese. Who are the people who support the autocratic way things are
done here? How can we encourage them to be honest and independent thinkers?
10. Spread the word that is wasn’t the ordination of Bishop Robinson.
11. Since I am a product of EFM I would like to see everyone doing theological
reflection.
12. Find another way to access more voices.
13. We, in this diocese, need a baseline of who we are before we elect a new
Bishop.