Why I left ECUSA, Addendum: Roma è chiamata

Final thoughts to finish my series outlining why my family and I believe it is time for us to leave the Episcopal Church (read Part 1: A brief history, Part 2: A crack appears, Part 3: The deluge, Part 4: The end, and Part 5: A new beginning. . .)

I thought about writing a long post on how my family made the decision of which church to join, but Martial Artist beat me to it, so I thought I would post his comment, which is much better written than anything I could do.

The only difference between us is that while MA will start RCIA in November, I have already begun the classes at my local RC parish and am slowly working my way through the Catechism. (I have reformatted MA’s comment here for easier reading and have boldfaced some sentences.)

If, after going through RCIA (which I will likely enter in early November after I have returned from my present vacation and my last sea deployment of this year) I continue to hold the conclusion that my understanding of the Gospel is in full accord, or where it is not that I am prepared to assent to the teachings of the magisterium without reservation, then I will, at the Paschal Vigil (I prefer not to refer to it by a name that references a Celtic fertility goddess) I will seek acceptance into the Roman Catholic Church. This will not be as a reaction to TEC or Anglicanism, which is a separate, but not wholly unrelated, issue, but because I will have concluded that the Roman Catholic Church embodies the fullest understanding of Christ and the Gospels on earth. That is, in my mind, both a necessary and a sufficient condition to do so.

I am on vacation visiting my mother. She was raised as a Roman Catholic, but left the Roman Church for the LCMS when she married my father in 1942 at the age of 18. She is now 84, suffering from macular degeneration, and rarely gets to church unless driven. My wife and I, therefore, insisted on being fully available to see to it that she got to her regular congregation (about 20-25 minutes drive from her house) on the Sunday we were visiting.

The minister who preached the sermon made a very interesting statement about the LCMS church and the doctrine of sola scriptura. He said that all that is needed is scripture, not interpretation and not tradition. The clear implication (indeed, the several sentences he devoted to expanding on the doctrine made it almost explicit) is that each believer needs only the bible and the Holy Spirit.

Even based solely on my experiences with TEC over the past 38 years, I see this as an obstacle to joining any sola scriptura denomination. My reasoning is as follows: The Bible is composed of words. Words have meanings, both denotational, and connotational. It is not uncommon that a word or phrase has multiple meanings, whether denotational or connotational. If I am to be confident that I understand the application of scripture to any particular question, and to deal with the multiple meanings and the fact that some scripture is literal and historical, and some is allegorical and allusional, I (and every other individual in the denomination) will have to give up most of our other activities, including those that provide our sustenance, to have the time to ensure we fully and understand precisely how to apply scripture correctly to any given question or issue.

Clearly, some proposed responses will be obviously contradictory to scripture, but the current unpleasantness teaches us nothing if not that different readers will tend to apply it differently. The foregoing does not even begin to address the question of finding the time to master Hebrew, Syriac, Greek and Latin as those languages were used in the relevant time periods. My conclusion is that I shall ultimately have to rely on someone else to carry most of freight in getting to that unambiguous understanding that I need to live my life in accordance with the Gospel and God’s will.

Stated another way, I have to trust someone to have the correct interpretation of the scriptures that applies to at least some of the questions to which I am going to need the answer. I either do the interpretation myself, working to hear the Holy Spirit, and hope I don’t mishear, or I will have to trust it to someone more knowledgeable than I am, whose judgments I have tested enough to trust. So Pastor Mueller is demonstrably wrong in his statement, assuming, as I did and do, that he meant it literally. And while tradition does not trump scripture, it is an invaluable aid, along with the ecumenical councils, in understanding how those earlier, and therefore closer in time to the divinely inspired human authors of scripture, understood them, not that they anticipated the current issue/question, but that I can extrapolate, or interpolate, from their reasoning from the relevant scriptures as they applied them to their similar issues, in order to help discern the correct answer to my issue.

If I finish reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church and have found no issue on which I cannot submit myself to her teachings, then why would I persist in maintaining a schism the causes of which have been appropriately addressed? To do so on the basis that Catholicism had not successfully “proven” their understanding would require me to assume that I know more than they do, perhaps as much as God himself—a highly unlikely, and in the latter case, demonstrably false, assumption.

Finally, this individualistic assertion, that each believer is his own interpreter of scripture, appears to me to be a major contributing factor in the disintegration of TEC. If a Christian denomination has no magisterium, in the sense of an authoritative teaching authority, then it will always be more open to apostasy and heresy than a denomination that does have such an authority. I think it is also a major contributor to the always increasing number of Christian denominations, particularly within protestantism.

This absence in TEC is, I think, its (possibly) fatal flaw, and, to the extent that it is present in other parts of the AC, their (possibly) fatal flaw, as well.

Like Keith, I also wrote a letter to my rector outlining our reasons for leaving. And I am approaching the RCIA classes with no deadline in mind. If it works out, I would love to enter the Roman Catholic Church at the Paschal Vigil, but as I've learned one thing in RCIA, there is absolutely no pressure - at least at my parish, they want you to be sure, not just present.

Because I am no longer with an Anglican parish, while I will continue to keep up with Anglican events and hopefully do some more interviews for AnglicanTV, I will end this blog soon. My focus is turning elsewhere - I can't yet see where, but I feel the time belongs to God.

Finally back home. . .

Well, we've been on vacation for the past week. Of course, it had to be the most interesting week of Lambeth, but I've decided it was actually a good thing that I was on the road and not tied to my computer. We finally (after 14 years in California) made the trip up Highway 1 from San Luis Obispo to Monterey - a beautiful drive through Cambria, Hearst Castle, Big Sur, etc. The weather was great - Monterey was actually cold, which I understand is not what the rest of the country is experiencing. We hiked, went to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, took a whale watching boat ride and saw some humpback whales.

But, I was able to check the web on my cell phone from time to time - just to get the Internet headlines - it was too hard to read any actual postings, so I'm playing catch-up the rest of this week.

Some initial impressions so far include the underlying racism or arrogance (I still haven't decided which it is) of some of the revisionist bishops from The Episcopal Church in talking about and responding to bishops from other parts of the world. But I'll have more on that later. Right now we're still unpacking, washing clothes, going to the grocery store, etc., etc.

No, I didn't feel a thing. . .

For those interested in the earthquake earlier this morning, I did not feel or see a thing, my son (who was downstairs) saw a table move slightly, and my husband at work south of us felt a tremor and the top floor of his building swayed a little.

Other than that, not much.

Why I left ECUSA, Part 5: A new beginning . . .

The fifth (and final) in a series outlining why my family and I believe it is time for us to leave the Episcopal Church (read Part 1: A brief history, Part 2: A crack appears, Part 3: The deluge, and Part 4: The end). UPDATE: And don't forget the Addendum: Roma è chiamata.

So, we decided we needed to leave the Episcopal Church sooner than I had thought we might. The problem with leaving a church is that you are not just leaving a building and a service style, you are leaving people and a culture, an ethos if you will, that, if you have been brought up in ECUSA like I have, is very grounded in your soul—a certain way of doing “church.”

And now it is gone.

There are a few things I do know, however, that have become the parameters and priorities for my family (every person and family making this move or deciding to stay in ECUSA will have their own priorities, so please don’t think I’m criticizing anyone’s decision—I know how difficult this can be):

• To be biblically sound


• To have a discipline structure in place


• To offer youth programs that emphasize Christ


• To be part of a greater Christian community


• To be fairly close by

I am not interested in joining another mainline Protestant denomination. If the idea of an Anglican Communion (which has had some groups leave, but no official splitting) is important to me—to feel part of a larger global Christian presence—then joining the Presbyterians, the Lutherans, the Baptists, the Methodists, etc. would be a step backwards. Fragmentation is not a gift of the Holy Spirit, and the breaking apart of these denominations over various reasons seems to me to show that they are not a full expression of God’s Spirit in this world. I'm beginning to have serious doubts about the long-term efficiacy of the Protestant Reformation.

Also, all of these denominations seem to be just a few years short of finding themselves where ECUSA is now on the issues of biblical authority and church discipline.

I also, for better or for worse, am not interested in joining one of the continuing Episcopal churches (APA, REC, etc.), even though it seems as though there has been great movement to start bringing those together with Common Cause and the Anglican Communion Network. For a family with children, these churches seem awfully isolated and small, and they are not technically part of a greater global Christian family.

So, with those parameters, that leaves us with several options:

• Try a community church


• Find an Anglican church under a Primate in communion with Canterbury


• Swim the Bosphorus


• Swim the Tiber

We started our exploration at our local community church, which has great youth programs and a lot of outreach (and is very close by). We knew there might be a problem when we walked into the “church” (really an auditorium) and our son said, “Where’s the altar?” I will say, it was a great Bible study, but not a church service as we recognized it. The service consisted of about 30 minutes of praise music from the band on stage, a few prayers, a great “sermon” (talk) from the pastor (very committed and Bible focused), then another song, another prayer, and we were done.

We decided it would make a great Wednesday night Bible study, but left something lacking for a church service. I also feel community Christian churches are sometimes too personality driven. A particular pastor develops a following that starts a church. What happens when he retires? Or deviates from the Christian path? There is nothing behind a community church to keep it focused on anything other than what the pastor wants.

In San Diego, we have quite a few Anglican churches up and running, under the Southern Cone and Uganda, thanks to Bishop Mathes’s pastoral skills. The churches have worked hard together to create an Anglican presence here. One of the churches, St. Timothy & St. Titus, has taken the lead in organizing the youth and has done a great job in putting together retreats and programs that draw all of the Anglican kids in the area, including from Orange County. Unfortunately, St. TnT is quite a ways away and one of our priorities is proximity. My husband commutes every weekday down to San Diego and the last thing he wants to do on a Sunday is have another commute. It also makes it difficult for us to get involved in weekday activities if the drive is too far. There are two Anglican churches somewhat closer to us and we are looking at both.

But my concern with the Anglican churches, which I am still working through, is two-fold.

First, even though these churches have left ECUSA, there is still a lingering miasma of hurt and contention, within the churches and sometimes the clergy. These churches were part of the failed institutional structure of the Episcopal Church. That is not so easy to discard even though they have moved under another Anglican entity. I will say that the service with ++Gregory Venables at St. Anne’s Anglican in Oceanside was a joyous, forward-looking event that all of the local Anglican church participated in. If that feeling of moving on and focusing on God can eventually become the dominant thrust in these churches, that would be wonderful indeed.

My other concern is the overriding one of discipline in the Anglican Communion. Right now, there is none. Will that change? What is to keep what happened with ECUSA from happening again with another group? There is no there there to look to. The Instruments of Communion are broken and ignored. How will that change?

Lambeth seems geared towards keeping anything from happening or any decision from being made definitively. And I don’t believe an Anglican Covenant will fundamentally change anything. We have our Covenant Agreement, it’s called the Bible and the Book of Common Prayer. If a covenant does end up being adopted at some point, I think one of two things will happen. Either the covenant will be so anemic as to be pointless or the covenant will be ignored. Neither of these outcomes will bode well for the Anglican Communion.

So that moves us down to the Orthodox Church. I’m the first to admit I don’t know that much about it except that it strives to remain as the closest idea of the early church. Other than that, it seems to be present in this country divided into ethnic groups. We have the Greek Orthodox, the Russian Orthodox, the Armenian Orthodox, etc. With the last name of Coletta, I’m looking for the Italian Orthodox and I don’t see it (well, actually I guess that’s the Roman Catholic Church). There are Antiochian Orthodox churches in the area but they are way down in San Diego and too far away. We do have friends who left ECUSA and now go to the Greek Orthodox Church nearby who have invited us to visit with them (thanks, Jeff and Claudia!) which we will have to do before we make any final decisions.

And now we’re at our last possibility—the Roman Catholic Church. First off, there is one right up the street—less than five minutes by car (so how shallow can I be? Hey, try me!). We have been a few times, and to see the number of children there makes you realize right away that you’re not at an Episcopal Church! My main concern here is that there are areas of doctrine I’m not sure about (although I’m willing to give the church the benefit of the doubt—after years of ECUSA doing its own thing, there is something nice about admitting that I personally don’t have all the answers and that maybe, just maybe, the greater Church does know a thing or two that I don’t, since she has been thinking about them for 2,000 years).

But going to the Roman Catholic Church in a sense closes the door on being Anglican. You don’t just start going to a Catholic church—you join a Catholic church. You become Catholic. You can’t get away with saying, well, we’re just going here for a while. No, you have to commit to becoming a Roman Catholic. That’s a big step and not to be taken lightly.

So here’s my chart:

Priorities	Churches
	Community	Local Anglican	Orthodox	Roman Catholic
To be biblically sound	Y	Y	Y	Y
To have a discipline structure in place	?	?	Y	Y
To offer youth programs that emphasize Christ	Y	Y	?	Y
To be part of a greater Christian community	N	Y	?	Y
To be fairly close by	Y	?	N	Y

(I have no idea why there is such a big gap here-sorry!)

So, we are still in discernment and will be visiting churches over the summer and I will be doing more reading on various doctrinal and theological differences . . .

and we will see where God directs.

Why I left ECUSA, Part 4: The end

The fourth in a series outlining why my family and I believe it is time for us to leave the Episcopal Church (read Part 1: A brief history, Part 2: A crack appears, and Part 3: The deluge)


I am a wife

And a mother.

God created those roles for me, and for thousands of years society has understood their necessity.

Judaism and Christianity specifically have held both roles up for honor and respect as a reflection of God’s plan for men and women. The idea of marriage—husband and wife committed to each other for life to provide a stable, caring environment for raising children and to nurture each other—is the fundamental, foundational structure of our society. Even those cultures that practice polygamy recognize the necessity of both mother and father to raise healthy children. And I believe that it is only through monogamy that women and children are best protected and regarded as more than just possessions.

But my church—and my bishop—have decided that both of these roles, wife and mother (as well as husband and father), are not important or even necessary.

The designation of “wife” is now in California (for the short term, at least) eliminated and officially relabeled “Party A” or “Party B,” as though a lifetime commitment to “honor and cherish” is now a short-term business contract—and my bishop thinks this is just fine.

In fact, Bishop Mathes supports it.

And the role of mother is now optional, a “choice,” a convenience. ECUSA’s affiliation with a group that supports abortion, including partial birth abortion, means that they see children as a commodity, a possession. And if a mother and father are not both necessary to raise a child, if two women or two men will do just as well (even though studies suggest otherwise), then being a mother is meaningless. What I can offer my child can just as easily be offered by a man, according to ECUSA. Of course, this is not borne out by experience, but let’s ignore that because it doesn’t fit neatly into the new paradigm of interchangeable sexes and the commodification of children.

We were hoping to stay at our parish, a wonderful place to worship, until the Current Unpleasantness subsided/was resolved/went away. Our donations were directed so that nothing we gave was going to the national church. When Bishop Mathes brought lawsuits against those churches in the diocese that had left and kept their property, I first began to realize that our leaving might be necessary. We stopped contributing directly to our church because we did not want to fund anything that might be used to sue other churches, but I was prepared to stay and fight—I read Little Stone Bridges

and even ordered a TitusOneNine mug


and a Stand Firm t-shirt.


I was a delegate to diocesan conventions and kept myself informed on what was happening locally and nationally.

But, because I am a wife and a mother and my husband is a father (the best one ever!), once Bishop Mathes made his declaration of support for the elimination of marriage (and that’s what he did—his statement is his admission that he thinks God’s perfect plan for society and for individuals, one of God's first creations, is irrelevant, even unnecessary), we realized we could no longer bring our child up in the Episcopal Church and remain in Christ.

I believe the Episcopal Church as an institution, based on the words and actions of most of her church leadership and her bishops, has left the Christian faith. Not just because of their corporate stance on same-sex blessings/marriage, but because that stance reveals their inability to be part of a global community, and a cultural arrogance that in no way resembles the humility of Christ.

Even if we wanted to stay to remain a voice against these innovations, as responsible parents we felt we could not put a teenager in that culture. He will get enough of the "world" in school and everyday life, he doesn’t need to be part of a larger church that succumbs to the same zeitgeist.

Church should be where he hears what God desires for all of us in the best of all possible worlds. Reality may fall short and we will make mistakes, but we need to know what the expectations are, what the promises say, and what the rewards will be. As parents, we must try our best to provide a solid, faithful understanding of God and His Word for our child, to put him in a place where a relationship with Jesus is encouraged and recognized. To do less is to reject the blessings that God has given us through our son.

So our decision to leave ECUSA came down to

• our obligations as parents


• public statements by Bishop Mathes (and other California bishops) that undercut the biblical understanding of marriage and the role of male and female (after years of not listening to the greater Church on these issues), and


• our inability to continue to financially support our church because of diocesan lawsuits

And right now, we are parents—first.

Coming: Part 5: A new beginning. . .

Why I left ECUSA, Part 3: The deluge

The third in a series outlining why my family and I believe it is time for us to leave the Episcopal Church (read Why I left ECUSA, Part 1: A brief history and Why I left ECUSA, Part 2: A crack appears)

Every church is made up of sinners, including me. You don’t leave your church—that was how I was brought up. Ministers may come and go, you may like some and not like others, but the important thing is to be consistent and faithful. You are born an Episcopalian, you should die one, too.

All in all, not a bad strategy. Otherwise, you can spend your life “church shopping”—looking for the “perfect” church and always being dissatisfied. This side of heaven, it does not exist.

Okay, so Frank Griswold lied to the Primates in October of 2003 and my eyes were opened that the church wasn’t perfect (hey, I’m a slow learner). Just as the one act of consecrating +Gene Robinson as a bishop should not determine an entire church, so one person of an untrustworthy character should not either. After all, look at some of the popes in the Middle Ages and some of the Protestant preachers who have crashed and burned.

But these events made me consider what else might ECUSA be involved in. I had seen some of this in the news coverage of the General Convention in 2003 where I saw a bishop saying that the Bible was “just a book.” At the time, I thought it was an aberration and the media were just picking the most salacious comments, but now I began to wonder.

So, for the first time, I took a look at some of the contentious issues in the church.

First, the history of women’s ordination. I knew that was a divisive issue but I didn’t really know why—I had always figured it was just part of the whole turmoil around women’s rights in the ‘60s and ‘70s. But discovering that the first women ordained were ordained against the canons in an “illegal” ceremony only bolstered my concern that those who were called to uphold the faith and the rules of the church were institutionally uninterested in doing so.

I also found it pretty telling that the church had come to this new “understanding” of the role of women in ordained ministry just as the entire country was rethinking the role of women in the workplace. Not exactly being “prophetic”—rather being “of the world” and trying to be trendy. And the fact that it was presented as a fait accompli at the next General Convention and so voted in made me very suspicious.

My doubts about the direction of the Episcopal Church were growing. But in 2004 they became more than doubts, they started becoming real concerns. And because I was, for the first time, really paying attention to what the church nationally was doing, I saw this:


This is the official banner of the Episcopal Church in the 2004 March for Women’s Lives in Washington, D.C.

March for Women’s Lives—that sounds good, doesn’t it? Not when you realize that they specifically picked the name to sound like the annual March for Life but that this rally is pro-abortion. The Episcopal News Service reported on the march at the time [boldface mine]:

Episcopalians joined more than one million people, representing 100 religious and religiously-affiliated organizations and congregations, to march on Washington, D.C., April 25 in support of women’s reproductive rights at home and abroad. The march recorded the largest ever crowd count for women's rights in the nation's capital.

The "March for Women's Lives" was co-sponsored by the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), an alliance of national organizations from major faith groups, local affiliates, the national Clergy for Choice Network, Spiritual Youth for Reproductive Freedom, and the Black Church Initiative. According to its mission statement, RCRC supports the constitutional right to abortion and solutions to problems such as the spread of HIV/AIDS, inadequate health care and health insurance, and the "severe reduction" in reproductive health care services. The Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Women's Caucus are both members of RCRC.

The Rev. Katherine Ragsdale, a member of RCRC's Council of Governors, welcomed the gathering with assurances that the religious community is behind them. "You can't sustain a movement on outrage," she said. "We are here to support the providers, politicians, women and activists, and let them know that we respect them for their work and their commitment.". . .

Also marching behind the Episcopal Church banner were the Rev. Margaret Rose, director of the Episcopal Church Office of Women’s Ministries; Executive Council members Louie Crew and John Vanderstar; long-time women's rights activist and General Convention deputy Marge Christie; and Maureen Shea, director of the Government Relations Office.

Before the march, the RCRC also held a "Prayerfully Pro-Choice Interfaith Worship Service.". . .

“General Convention resolutions have expressed unequivocal opposition to any legislation abridging a woman’s right to make an informed decision about the termination of pregnancy, as well as the pain and possible support that may be needed for those making difficult life decisions,” Rose said, adding that participating in the march shows that supporting women's rights is “essential to our call for justice.”

“By publicizing this march and other events through our network, we are able to enlist and inform Episcopalians about important events,” explained Mary Getz, director of the Episcopal Public Policy Network (EPPN). “This is one of the ways we are continuing to build our grassroots advocacy network.”. . .

After seeing this, I had two questions: how could we as a church be participating in something that advocated and supported the taking of innocent life, and what in the world was the “Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice”?

The answer to the first was that ECUSA seemed to be concentrating completely on what they defined as “justice” issues, although why the rights of the unborn are not seen as a justice issue is beyond me.

The answer to the second was that the RCRC is a group, using religion as a front, that advocates for abortion, up to and including partial birth abortion. One of their position papers calls abortion “self-defense” by a woman. I have come to realize in looking through their literature and their website, that while they try to make the issue palatable, they truly see the unborn child, the fetus, as the enemy, as an organism that somehow has invaded the mother’s body and must be eliminated. And the Episcopal Church Women’s Ministries group was affiliated with the RCRC.

Okay, now we were moving past individual sin and poor judgment to corporate sin. The support for abortion was not just one individual, it was a decision made at the national level of the Episcopal Church and there was no compunction about displaying the church’s banner for all to see at this event.

We were, I was, supporting abortion. I had no idea.

I knew then that there was something deeply wrong and resistantly evil about this and about the workings of the Episcopal Church. As a church, we should be working for the most innocent and vulnerable among us, and that is definitely the unborn. We should be helping girls and women who find themselves with unexpected pregnancies, scared, alone, and without resources, so they don’t have to compound their problems by making their situation worse, thinking abortion is their only option. Research of post-abortive women shows increased drug and alcohol problems, more depression, etc. Abortion is not an easy answer—it is a lifelong sentence.

Then, in January 2006, the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church voted to officially affiliate the entire Episcopal Church with the RCRC. No longer could we say, well, only the Women’s Ministries group is associated with this and the church as a whole is not. No, a small group of people had just committed the entire church to the advocacy of infanticide. At the February San Diego diocesan convention, we passed a resolution asking that General Convention that summer bring this membership up for a vote so that all clergy and deputies to the GC could vote and come to a mind of the church on this. Other dioceses passed similar resolutions. All resolutions dealing with membership in the RCRC or with abortion were killed in committee, with the exception of one that made it to the House of Bishops for a vote, but not to the House of Deputies.

By the end of General Convention 2006, the Episcopal Church could not bring itself to vote on a resolution confirming Jesus as the only way to salvation or on a resolution condemning abortion (or even resigning from the RCRC).

This was no longer a church, this was a political organization.

And this was my (growing) list of issues/concerns/events in the order I became aware of them:

• Disrespectful comments on the Bible by bishops of the church (General Convention 2003)


• Breaking the trust of the Primates by Presiding Bishop Griswold through dishonest actions (October 2003)


• Consecration of a non-celibate, divorced bishop (November 2003)


• Illegal “prophetic” ordination of women (1974)


• Participation on the March for Women’s Lives (pro-abortion) (April 2004)


• Official affiliation of the Episcopal Church through the Executive Council with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (January 2006)


• Refusal to pass resolutions on fundamental Christian faith (General Convention 2006)


• Refusal to allow vote on membership in the RCRC by the entire church (General Convention 2006)

The flood waters were rising.

Coming: Part 4: The end

Wadmalaw Island

I wish I had a better picture - but this is the place I miss the most.

Puppy update

Well, the puppy just turned 1!

Here he is at four weeks, when we first went to see him at the breeders


And at eight weeks, on the day we brought him home - 11 pounds


And now, 62 pounds and counting!

Slow blogging

Family in town, blogging light!

Shoe Thursday: Southern California edition I

Today the shoe selections are not mine, but chosen by someone much more in the "know" than I am on what is now cool and in, at least for boys/young men.

The current Southern California trend is definitely focused on skate shoes, whether you skateboard or not. These are considered everyday, casual shoes. But if you're scheduled to run the timed mile in P.E. today, do not wear any of these - skate shoes are absolutely flat-bottomed (to get more surface on the board) and not good for running.

So for now, the shoe that is the most "in" - the new shoe, and the coolest (for the moment) is the Adio Kenny V.1:


These next shoes are labeled "awesome" and "the cool ones are leather" - the Osiris Troma. In fact, a pair of these in this color should be arriving at our house today:


For the true skateboard fanatic, "when you think of skates shoes, you think of DC or Vans." A classic DC shoe is the Court Graffik SE:


Considered "commonplace, casual," I'm told "everyone probably has a pair of Etnies."


And you can't be a true "SoCal" skater without a pair of Vans, the San Diego skate shoe:


My source for these skate shoes is so ahead of the curve that he lists a shoe that Zappos.com doesn't even carry yet - Fallen, a U.K. company with a line of "ultra new" shoes. "They’re just in, ya know. They’re cool."


Many thanks to my guest blogger this week, who used to wear shoes like these:


(And, yes, growing up is hardest on mom!)

Church in an auditorium

So, in our continuing discernment process, my family tried another church this Sunday. No, no tears from me this time – it’s kind of hard to get too worked up when your 12-year-old says, “Mom, where’s the altar??”

A place that is so totally different from a liturgical, Anglican church, in physical appearance and worship form, creates somewhat of a feeling of “willing suspension of disbelief.” I have to admit, the sermon was very good - although I don’t think it was called a sermon, maybe a “talk” or “teaching”? (I can’t remember.) That was all there was except for some praise songs and two prayers (I think there were two – I might have missed one). They did, however, have a Bible in every seat (and tons of kids).

And now I have a better idea of why at this church I didn’t react like I did previously – with an overwhelming feeling of grief.

We have no interest in going to another “mainline” church – the Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, etc. are all at various points along the path that ECUSA has already stumbled down and we’re not going through that again. But even if we did, I would still regard myself as an Anglican, just going to a Methodist or a Presbyterian church as a survival plan. And going to a community Christian church would be the same thing – I’m still an Anglican, just not able at this time to go to an Anglican church.

If, however, we discern that we are being led to a Roman Catholic or Orthodox church, I would have to become Roman Catholic or Orthodox. They are not going to let me stay in my comfort zone of “I’m really an Anglican but am just hanging out here for a while.” No, I would actually have to put aside any identity (generational, personal, theological on some doctrine) that I may have as an Anglican and put on another Christian identity. That is what was so upsetting to me in our earlier visit – realizing that I would not be able to just hang out for a while, but I would be called to actually embrace a new manifestation of my faith.

So, am I prepared to do that? Not yet. Should we move to a community Christian type of church, knowing that we might be using it for refuge and not completely truly invested in becoming part of that? Not yet on that either.

To be continued. . .

A time to tear and a time to mend

I know a lot has been going on this weekend in Pittsburgh and elsewhere, but I haven't really posted much on it. You can find information at all the usual places. I do appreciate Bishop Duncan's response to the presiding bishop--it's a relief to read something succinct and to the point for a change.

But how much is wheels churning and how much is actual movement forward?

My family went to another church today--not Anglican or ECUSA--as we are in the process of discernment (something that I predict will take many more months), and out of nowhere during the processional hymn I started crying, much to the chagrin of my 11-year-old.

All that was in my mind was why do I have to think about leaving the only church I've ever known? And am I upset because God wants me to stay in the Anglican Communion and we're looking outside, or am I upset because I'm trying to hold on to something that God wants me to let go?

How cute is this?

Yes, we now have a new puppy, a little (but rapidly growing) boxer. We, of course, think he's the cutest dog ever. So far, he usually sits on command, and sometimes seems to know his name. If he smells that you are holding a treat, he will do anything you say! So we are putting up higher fences and making sure all gates are secured to make the backyard dog-proof (and started puppy classes).

His favorite go-to-sleep music is Chant: The Benedictine Monks of Santo Domingo de Silos - within a few minutes, he is sound asleep and snoring.

Thank you, Marcia!

Spent four hours yesterday trying to make plane reservations with USAir for summer vacation. Usually I do this through their website (which is quite good) with no problems, but yesterday, after completing all the info, including my credit card info, the message came back that the site was unavailable--and I tried this several times. So I decided to use the old fashioned way: telephone. Unbeknowst to me, USAir and America West are one and the same (or maybe not exactly one and the same, but close enough).

I called the USAir 800 number but ended up with an America West reservation clerk, who made my reservations for me, but said I couldn't purchase them just then, even though she gave me a confirmation number and a price.

At that point (after 4 hours), I said fine, I'll purchase them tomorrow. Well, you can guess what happened. Today I call to purchase them, only to be transferred four times as USAir palms me off to America West who says they can't purchase the tickets because their computers won't let them, and the price is double what it was yesterday!

Even I eventually realize when it's supervisor time. So a supervisor duly asked for, I am on hold for an hour and a half, waiting...and waiting....and waiting. Finally I hear Kathy (who's been helping me and was really very nice) say, "I'm transferring you now" and then I hear "Hello, how can I..."

and then I hear click, click, and dead air. By this time, I admit it, I'm yelling at the phone, but the dial tone continues.

Thirty seconds later, the phone rings, and salvation arrives in the person of Marcia, the uber supervisor, who seems to have untold powers in her grasp, as she confirms my reservation, lets me actually purchase the tickets!, and best of all, honors the price I was given verbally yesterday over the phone.

So summer is back on, and all is well. Of course, later today I have to tackle seat selection so this elation may be premature...but I figure I can always call Marcia.

Home again

Well, that was a quick trip back to the east coast. Nice to see family and friends, but not so nice circumstances (funeral). Still recovering from jet lag and catching up on work.

Light blogging

Blogging will be light over the next few days as I head out of town for a family funeral. Also, I want to take the time to think through what I want to concentrate on with this blog. Religion? Politics? Books? Whatever I find interesting on any given day? Hummmm. . . Things to think about as I fly cross-country.