Why Should We Send Alternates to General Convention?

According to the Canons of the Episcopal Church, each diocese elects 4 clergy Deputies and 4 lay Deputies to serve at General Convention [GC], and up to four Alternate Deputies in each order.  In most dioceses, the diocese pays for the eight clergy and lay Deputies to attend GC.  Most (but not all) dioceses also pay for the 1^st Alternate Deputy in each order to attend Convention. 

Attendance at General Convention is very expensive.  It typically lasts about 10 days or so.  There are significant transportation costs.  Hotels typically charge over $100 per night.  And meal/per-diem costs rack up over the days of GC -- $61 per day in Salt Lake City/2015 according to the current GSA rates.  That means each Alternate Deputy will “cost” the diocese about $160 per day to attend GC, plus transportation. 

I have heard one dominant reason for sending the 1^st Alternate Deputy in each order: That they might step in to take the place of a Deputy who cannot serve in one session, or in case a Deputy becomes ill or injured.  …  And, yes, most Deputations also step aside so that their Alternates can have some time on the floor of GC. …  Mostly, the arguments I’ve heard for sending Alternates to GC is so they can step in if need be.

But funds are tight, and some dioceses are questioning the need to spend that much money to send their 1st lay and clergy Alternate Deputies to General Convention.

At least one Bishop has phrased it this way: “When I sit in the House of Bishops, there is no one to stand in as my substitute.  If I cannot spend a moment or an hour or a day, there is no one to stand in for me. Why should we pay to bring to Alternate Deputies to spend some 10 days at GC just in case they are needed?”  I can understand that reasoning, in this time of tight budgets.  That bishop was arguing from a National League baseball perspective:  S/he has no “designated hitter” to run to the HoB floor in his/her place.   

Since I began closely following GC in 2003, my only rationale for sending/supporting our clergy and lay Alternates had been my understanding of something like that “designated hitter ruler.”  I thought we needed a substitute, in case one of the Deputies was indisposed for an hour or a day or more.

Today, I realized there’s another reason – which probably doesn’t occur to many bishops.  It’s leadership development ... or call it "continuity planning." 

When a bishop is elected, s/he has all sorts of training and mentoring.  By the time a new Bishop gets to General Convention, s/he probably has established a network of colleagues.  But it is not so with GC Deputies.  The only way to learn how to serve as a Deputy is to serve as a Deputy.  Bringing eight Deputies, plus two Alternates, gives us two more people who can observe the workings of GC and participate in the governance of our church.  It’s training.  It’s leadership development.  It’s continuity planning. It is not merely having a “designated hitter” in the dugout in case someone wants a little break.  Bishops get years and years to serve in the House of Bishops.  But in the House of Deputies, we have to develop our own leadership.  And bringing Alternate Deputies, I come to see, is one of the significant ways we can do that. 

That’s my insight du jour.  Bishops get careful mentoring and many GCs in which to develop their skills, relationships, and understanding.  Bringing Alternate Deputies to GC is a way to help develop skills, leadership, and relationships among the rest of the clergy and laity.  It’s a way to empower the rest of us to see the bigger picture. 

Next time I hear of a Bishop arguing against bringing the 1^st Alternates to General Convention, I’m going to push back for new reasons.  And I’m going to push back hard. 

Post-GC Reporting Session, Part 2

Here is Part 2 of the General Convention Reporting Session: http://vimeo.com/48023852. It runs about 45 minutes.

Much of the conversation focused on the "restructuring" of TEC and what it will mean to dioceses and congregations.  Deputies offered frank insights for the Diocese of Missouri.

There was a great deal of discussion also about South Carolina's "walking out" from Convention, and about the Anglican Covenant.

Post-GC Reporting Session, Part 1

Back in August, four General Convention Deputies presented a post-Convention program at Grace Episcopal Church in Jefferson City.  I was there, along with Deputies Lynette Ballard (St. Matthew's, Warson Woods), Mike Clark (Christ Church Cathedral), and the Rev. Jason Samuel (Transfiguration, Lake St. Louis).  We talked about the actions of Convention and the experience of being a Deputy.  Beth Felice videotaped the session, which runs to about an hour.  Part 1 is here, and runs nearly 40 minutes. 

There were fun comments about my long-standing engagement on the Bishops/Deputies listserv, and how I came to meet some of my "sparring partners" from that listserv and came to appreciate them.

The Rev. Jason Samuel speaks about building bridges with people who typically vote differently than our Deputies and about how we modelled Christian community that might be a gift to other churches.  He spoke of the sense of "joy and charity" that the Deputies experienced. 

I encourage you to listen to my "testimony" around the 14:00 mark, where I spoke about those who  are opposed to the direction of TEC, but who are faithfully participating.  Those were true words. 

The Deputies talk about the work of being a Deputy. 

And we get into some of the "meat" of General Convention resolutions. 

View the video if you wish.  As far as I know, this is the only post-GC session that was recorded.  I'll share Part 2 in a moment. 

Christian Stewardship

“For where your treasure is, there shall your heart be also.” 

In all the media hype and soundbytes that came out of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church this month, not one of them (as far as I saw) noted this very significant fact: The overwhelming majority of resolutions passed by overwhelming majorities.  Probably 80-90% of the resolutions passed or failed clearly on a voice vote.  We didn’t need to resort to the next steps: holding up our green (“yes”) or red (“no”) cards nor use the electronic voting machines that would tabulate each vote.  Most of our actions related to the mission and ministry of our life as the Episcopal Church and to our witness in the world, and most received overwhelming consensus.  

Of course, the media lives to report on controversy, so they reported on things like our authorization of same-sex blessings, our non-decision on the Anglican Covenant, and so on.


I serve on the Stewardship Committee in my parish. We’re not just about the “annual pledge drive,” but about year-round stewardship activities. Several of our members have attended the TENS conferences, and we are getting better about weaving stewardship themes into the daily life of our parish.


One of the resolutions that came before General Convention was #A088, “Set Expectations for Steward Leaders.”  You can find the resolution text and explanation here. The resolution was put forward by the Standing Commission and Stewardship and Development, and you can read background on their work on pages 529-530 of the Blue Book.  Resolution A088 was one of those that passed easily on a voice vote.


I will be taking this resolution to the next meeting of our parish Stewardship Committee, for it is a powerful document. It sets out expectations of those lay and ordained persons who are “steward leaders.”  It calls us to “Proclaim a Theology of Abundance and Spirituality of Money,” to “Teach Biblical and Theological Principles of Stewardship,” to “Engage and Critique Culture,” and to “Embrace the Interconnected Relationships between all Persons and Creation.” Under each of those main points, it suggests more specific ways we should commit ourselves more deeply to stewardship and lead our parishes into a deeper understanding of Christian stewardship.  It calls us to some very challenging activities – asking that we speak personally about our understanding of stewardship, “articulate the tension between the current consumer culture and following Christ,” and “speak to the impact of our lifestyles on all of God’s creation.”


If you want to help your congregation deepen its understanding of stewardship, I commend this resolution to you. Ponder it. Share it.  See what you and your congregation can do to live into it.  And please don’t rely only on my synopsis here; please read the resolution here, then think about how you and your congregation might live more deeply into Gospel stewardship. I look forward to doing that here in my parish.

What Happens in Indy ...

Sometimes, the Convention Hall was chilly during GC12.  I bought this wrap from one of the exhibitors. Then I encountered a friend outside the Convention Center, and I flung the wrap around him.  I'm not going to reveal the name of this dear friend unless he chooses to do so. But we were both laughing hilariously, and we persuaded a by-passer to snap this photo.  
I only regret the photo is out of focus.  

Bloggers Unite … and Meeting Virtual Friends IRL

One of the blessings of General Convention was that I got to meet some of the people whom I had only known “virtually” through the blogosphere,  through exchanges on the HoBD listerv. or through e-mail exchanges.

This one shouldn’t surprise anyone: On the first day I walked into the gigantic hall in which the House of Deputies met, a big, firm, and friendly hand reached out and grabbed me.  It was MalcolmFrench. Not surprisingly, he was urging me to take a hard line against the Anglican Covenant.  A couple nights later, our paths crossed again, and we spent a delightful (but sweaty!) hour or more talking outside the Marriott.    I would gladly spend many more hours with Malcolm.  He is even more engaging and delightful than I expected.

Among other things, I learned this from Malcolm: The Japanese have a word for “thank you” that translates to “Thank you for doing something that I didn’t really need and that didn’t help much.”  We concurred that that word for “Thank You” should characterize the Episcopal Church’s “thank you” for the bleeping Anglican Covenant.  

On the night of July 6, I returned to my hotel, heading toward the restaurant, hoping for dinner.  But then I spotted Mark Harris and thoughts of dinner flew out of my head.  I managed to shock the hell out of Mark, I think.  Spotting him, I went to his table, dropped to one knee, and offered some silly greeting.  We had a nice conversation, as he was just coming from a legislative committee about the Anglican Covenant.  I was delighted to meet Mark and talk with him. (Thanks, Mark, for letting me horn in!)  He’s as smart, gracious, and engaging as I expected from his blog.

I encountered Scott Allen (of the Diocese of Bethlehem) early in Convention and was blessed to spend much time with him.  Scott was one of the first people who welcomed me when I was a kibitzer on the HoBD listserv, and we’ve kept up an e-mail and Facebook connection for over 6 years.  Much time as we spent together, I wanted more. Scott is even more warm and generous and friendly than he seemed in our virtual communications.

To no surprise, I also had opportunity to spend a fair bit of time with Lauren Stanley.  Though we correspond a bit via e-mail and Facebook, I hadn’t spent time with Lauren for several years.  I was again impressed by her intensity and Gospel fervor.

To my surprise, I also encountered some people who have read this blog, but whose names I had not known before.  I thank you deeply, friends who offered such kind comments about my blog.  I won’t name your names, but I remember them.  Thank you for your encouragement.

I still have much more to write about General Convention . . . but I am still processing. 

Reflecting on General Convention

I hope you all know that I and the other Missouri Deputies to General Convention have been posting at the diocesan blog.
We were carefully guarded by the St. Louis "Rally Squirrel" during our deliberations.

I'm slowly posting more reflections and photos on the Diocesan blog and my Facebook page.  Recovering from GC is taking longer than I expected.  And I was more weary on the nights of GC than I expected.  I only opened my laptop a couple of times during GC, and then just to check on resolutions and legislative calendars; I had no energy for blogging.
Sorry.
I will say this: This General Convention was one of the spiritual highlights of my life.  I am pleased with (most of) the resolutions that were passed and delightfully amazed by the spirit in the House of Deputies. The soundbytes do not capture what it means to serve as a Deputy nor to participate in General Convention.  I was honored to serve with the rest of the Missouri Deputies and to take action on the resolutions that came before us.  Now I have the bug!  I desperately hope to do it all again in Salt Lake City at the 2015 General Convention.

Episcopal Church Development & Endowment: What are the Priorities?

There is a proposal in the Episcopal Church to launch a development campaign that would raise endowment funds to offset congregations’ financial obligations to clergy.  At present, congregations send 18% of their clergy’s salary to the Church Pension Fund to invest in clergy pensions.  I am fully supportive of that.

Of course, whether the Episcopal Church is in a position to launch any major development effort is a valid question.  Smarter people than I are looking at that question.

But I’d like to take a step back.

Let’s say there were a well-organized fund-raising effort to create an endowment for the Episcopal Church.  The proposal now on the table is to help congregations fund the 18% contribution to clergy pension funds.  I’m in a smallish parish with an average Sunday attendance of about 135 people.  We have a full-time priest and some part-time  lay employees (Christian Education Director, parish administrator, choirmaster, and organist).  We manage to pay our full diocesan assessment, salaries, the clergy pension, and all the other employee benefits we are called to make.  All those are part of our core budget.  We budget them before other “discretionary” items.  It’s a moral obligation, in my view.

But I’d like to look at this in a different way.  There is much energy around the topics of the structure and future of the Episcopal Church.  Many people are urging that we “re-invent” The Episcopal Church to be more effective and responsive to the world around us and to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I expect we all have our own wishes, hopes, biases, and hobbyhorses around those topics. Those will all come together at the 2012 General Convention in Indianapolis in July.

Would I like to see our parish reduce its clergy expense?  Sure!  Why not?  But is that the best use of new monies that might flow into The Episcopal Church?  I’m not so sure.

If we were going to create endowments, I’d like to suggest a couple more areas that might be better investments in the future of the entire Church.

Seminary Education 
Many people throughout The Episcopal Church have decried the high cost of seminary education.

The cost of seminary education prevents some great candidates even from beginning the discernment process.  I know some people who didn’t even enter the process because they knew they could not afford to attend seminary. I don’t think “ability to pay” is a reason that Jesus would have used to knock some people out being his disciples.

Too many of our new clergy are burdened with massive debt.  For those who do enroll and graduate, I suspect seminary debt has a subtle (or not-so-subtle) influence about where they will serve.  Or at least it would influence me, were I in their shoes.

What if we had an endowment that enabled every qualified seminarian to graduate from seminary and move to the congregation to which s/he felt called, without having to worry about a mountain of debt to repay?  Would more move into small/mid-sized congregations that now lack full-time clergy?  I don’t know, but I think it’s worth asking.

Campus Ministry

I’ve heard from some marvelous priests – like Tom Woodward, David Fly, and Bill Coats – about how effective Episcopal Campus Ministry was in the 1960s and ‘70s.  Not only did they raise up great priests in our church, but those ministries also helped young adults get involved and excited about the mission and ministry of the Episcopal Church.  Admittedly, that is now a half-century in our past.  But even today in the Diocese of Missouri, most of our young priests have come out of campus ministry.  Unfortunately, though, we have few such ministries in our diocese.  (I expect that’s true of many other dioceses, too.)   Campus ministry seems to be an area in which many dioceses have reduced their spending – or eliminated it altogether.

Admittedly, we are in a time when most young adults are not affiliated with any church.  Surveys show that they eschew church largely because they view Christians as “judgmental,” “hypocritical,” and other negative adjectives.  But what if Episcopal priests were active on college campuses – engaging the issues of the day from our lens of God’s mission on earth?  Might more “spiritual-but-not-religious” young adults see in the Episcopal Church as an expression of Christianity through which they might live out their values?

Priorities

As we move toward the 2012 General Convention, a great many groups with their own agendae are proposing resolutions.  You can see all the resolutions in the massive, 800-page Blue Book available here.   In that report of the current status of the Church, you will find some wonderful reports and many proposals for moving forward.  Some – not well represented in the Blue Book – are trying to think anew about how we go about being  the Church.

It seems to me that the current structure of The Episcopal Church might be depicted as a series of farm silos.  Each is surveying its plot of land and doing what it deems best.  I have no doubt that the various Commissions, Committees, Agencies, and Boards of TEC are faithfully trying to discern a way forward.  Reading through the Report to the General Convention, I find many good ideas and good intentions.

But we – like almost all churches – are in a period of re-visioning.  Our membership and funds are declining.  We can no longer afford to fund all the “good stuff” we would like to fund.  We need to prioritize.  We need to look at all those good ideas and prioritize them – judging which ones are most likely to advance the kingdom of God here.

If we were to create an endowment, where might it best be directed?  Should we direct it to help those congregations that are barely hanging on – barely able to afford a full-time priest?  Or might we direct it toward areas that might bring us energy and growth – areas such as seminary education and campus ministry?

I look forward to conversations with other Deputies.  But, for now, I think seminary education and campus ministry would be better investments in our future.