Tag Archives: Episcopal Women’s Caucus

Rejection stinks, but all is not lost: A Day Six message from Bishop Cederholm

07/13/09:  Bishop Bud Cederholm writes:

Bishop Bud Cederholm and deputy Jane Gould compare notes at Day Six's end.

Bishop Bud Cederholm and deputy Jane Gould compare notes at Day Six's end.

“Rejection stinks.  My resolution to change the annual parochial report of the Episcopal Church to include costs and units of energy consumed by a congregation did not make it through the House of Deputies.  Despite my, I hope, stirring plea that global warming (and its effects) is the most critical moral, ethical and justice issue the church faces, delegates could not envision how reporting on energy consumption fits into the parochial report, one argument being that most would simply leave that item blank.  My argument (based on our experience in Massachusetts when we asked our congregations to report, and about one-third did) that it was an attention getter and led many congregations to want to do something to reduce their energy consumption and carbon footprint, did not carry the day. 

“All is not lost.   Continue reading

Advertisements

Holy everybody

07/10/09:  Massachusetts alternate deputy Chris Ashley observes:

“As I mentioned at the end of my Bernard Mizeki post, Convention has been considering a major revision of our calendar of saints.  The new one is to be published under the title Holy Women, Holy Men, in place of the Lesser Feasts and Fasts volume many of us may have seen at midweek services.  This revision passed the House of Bishops this morning and will proceed to the deputies soon.

“I mention the title because people keep getting it wrong, always in the same way.  The bishops in particular have almost always reversed the title’s order.  At first, the chair would correct them, but shortly gave up.

“One of the revision’s goals was to raise the profile and number of holy women in the calendar.  The Episcopal Women’s Caucus has calculated that it raises the proportion of women only 1 percent.  And if the debate among the bishops is any guide, profile is so far no more raised than number.  Changing the book’s title seems so far an ineffective measure, as even our leaders cannot say it right.”