Three young voices
From a Young Woman
Last week, I turned twenty-one. I have wanted to be a priest at least since I was four. When I was that little, I
used to wear a winter scarf like a stole, take a stool up to the bathroom sink, fill it with water, and baptize my stuffed
animals in the sink. Needless to say, I ruined plenty of perfectly fine stuffed animals that way.
No one has ever told
me that I couldn't be a priest.
I thank you, all you women (and men) who have worked for that change. As I sat in
the House of Deputies after the announcement of the Presiding Bishop's election, I looked around. I saw women crying tears
of joy, silently thanking Gd with all that they are. You have worked so hard for this change, and I am the one who is blessed
to live in a world in which the church I love accepts me as Gd created me, and affirms my calling because of, not despite
of, the fact that I am a woman. On Sunday I learned truly for the first time it wasn't always that way. What I have taken
for granted has been worked towards for many, many years. The atmosphere was one that must have been like the Israelites coming
into the Promised Land for the first time-we came out of Egypt thirty years ago with the ordination of women, and now we have
a woman Presiding Bishop. It will not be easy for her, as it wasn't easy for Joshua, but I believe that these words from
Gd to Joshua are pertinent: "Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged,
for the Lord your Gd will be with you wherever you go." (Jdgs. 1:9).
I thank all the strong and courageous women
who have made it possible for me to partake fully in the wedding feast, to work toward my calling. I thank you from the bottom
of my heart. Well done, good and faithful servants!
Rebecca A. Zartman
Dear Bishop Duncan,
Six years ago in a small town north of Pittsburgh, you confirmed me. During the sermon, you talked about not knowing
what gifts we would receive from the Holy Spirit when you laid your hands on our heads as we committed ourselves to a life
of faith as members of the Episcopal Church. You told us that we wouldn’t notice a change right away, but that one day
we would know and see the fruits of the spirit in those gifts.
I am here at General Convention knowing that my current gift can be articulated best as a desire to welcome you back
into the communion from which you have removed yourself. Bishop Scriven spoke to how much he loves the Anglican Communion
while you have warned us of how the Communion will break as a result of our response to the Windsor report. However, this
Communion is already partially broken. We all need to share the bread at the altar. When we passed the peace on Saturday morning
at the Eucharist, you barely acknowledged me as I extended my hand. You, who with your hands through the Holy Spirit, welcomed
me into this Church. Then you did not come to the table with us to partake in the sacrament.
I have spent the past four years at the Chapel of the Cross in Chapel Hill, North
Carolina as a student, hearing stories about your time as a chaplain there. I have prayed where you have prayed and walked
where you have walked.
Please don’t
walk away from us as a result of the response to Windsor. We know what has been foreshadowed to happen at Lambeth in two years,
but that is in fact two years from now. We can’t know what might happen in that amount of time.
I don’t want to see you walk away from this communion
into which you welcomed me six years ago. Pray with us. Hope with us. Stay.
Please, don’t walk out.
Yours in Christ,
Lisa Shugert
Bevevino EPF Young Adult Presence
On The
Arab Palestinians in Israel and Israel as a "Jewish and democratic state"
There are six million and three hundred thousand people living
in Israel, the majority of them are Jews. I'll give you a short briefing, from my point of view as a citizen of Israel,
about some of the acute problems with which the Arab Palestinians who live inside the territory of the state of Israel have.
There are one million and three hundred thousand Arab Palestinian living in Israel today. About two hundred thousand of them
are Christians, one hundred thousand are Druze and one million are Muslims, and they all have Israeli citizenship; unlike
the Arab Palestinian, who live in east Jerusalem, the west bank of the Jordon river and the Gaza strip, and have been living
under Israeli occupation since 1967. Both Palestinian Arabs citizens of the state of Israel and the Palestinian Arabs who live
under occupation are the indigenous people of greater Palestine before the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. The
only difference between an Arab Palestinian who is an Israeli citizen and a Palestinian who lives in Palestine under Israeli
occupation, is that the Palestinians who live in Israel hold Israeli citizenship—this citizenship is the only difference.
The declaration of independence in 1948 defined Israel as both a Jewish and democratic state, committed to the "ingathering
of the exiles", and to guaranteeing equality to all its citizens, yet insofar as Israel defines itself as Jewish, it
overrides and compromises the extent to which it can be democratic. Israel as a democratic state has been legally defined
as resting on three minimum conditions: where Jews from the majority, where Jews are entitled to especial treatment and where
a reciprocal relationship exists between Israel and the Jewish people in the Diaspora. Yet in all these conditions the Palestinian
Arab minority is both excluded and hence discriminated against: by privileging Jews, the state treats others as second class
citizens. I would like to focus on Israel's basic law, that the state of Israel is a "Jewish and democratic"
state, which is upheld by the Supreme Court as having status above other constitutional laws, and explain why this basic law
creates discrimination of the Palestinian citizens.
Discrimination in the Israeli law:
Despite Israel's ratification of the ICCPR
and its citizens against discrimination, Palestinian Arab citizens in Israel are discriminated against in a variety of forms
and denied equal individual rights because of their national belonging. This discrimination offers limited provisions for
equality or political participation to members of the Palestinian Arab minority. The law in Israel subjects Palestinians to
three types of discrimination: direct discrimination against non-Jews within the law itself, indirect discrimination through
"neutral" laws, and criteria which apply principally to through a legal framework that facilitates a systematic
pattern of privileges.
Direct
discrimination
One example
of a law that discriminates against Palestinian Arabs by directly distinguishing between Jews and non-Jews is:
Citizenship rights and the law of return: national identity is the main factor in deciding the acquisition of citizenship in
Israel. The law of return grants every Jew the right to immigrate to Israel. The nationality law automatically grants citizenship
to all Jews who have done so, and also to their spouses, children, grandchildren, and all their spouses, this privilege is
for Jews only. Palestinian Arabs can only get citizenship by birth, residence or naturalization.
"Jewish" sounds good, "democratic"
sounds good- so give me both "Jewish and democratic". As if to say vanilla ice-cream is good, mocha ice cream is
good, so give me vanilla mocha. Maybe it is possible to have one scoop of vanilla and one scoop of mocha, separate from each
other, in one ice cream. But "Jewish and democratic" blends two things of different kinds, since democracy is not
dedicated to a way of life that's so inclusive and locked to one kind or another, but it safeguards the right of different
ways of life. In this equation "Jewish and democratic", the "veto" given to Judaism undermines democracy
and vice versa.
In light
of all I have spoken about, the demand of the Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel is that the state of Israel should be a
secular, democratic state for all its citizens with all the differences of their ethnicity. Religion and the state must be
separated in a concise manner to ensure that the Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel enjoy democratic rights in their land.
I ask you to join us in this stand for our right to live freely and democratically in our homeland.
Neven abu rahmoun Diocese
of Jerusalem Global young adults team
From one of our regular voices
Clouds
of Witnesses Rejoice
Saturday night I dreamed that Katharine Jefferts
Schori was elected presiding bishop. In my dream I was in a busy newsroom working on the story. People kept interrupting me
and my deadline was getting closer and closer and . . . my 6 a.m. wakeup call arrived.
“Darn,” I thought. “It was just a dream.”
But the joy of that dream lingered into Sunday and began to
inform my day. It drifted after me to the Episcopal Women’s Caucus breakfast, to the Eucharist and tagged along into
the House of Deputies.
There, in the
place where pragmatism too often shoves grace aside, my dream-generated joy gave birth to a wild little hope that set aside
all the pragmatic cautions I’ve heard people express: yes, Jefferts Schori is the best candidate BUT – the church
isn’t ready for this; the bishops would never have the courage; they’ll go for a choice that won’t make
waves.
But that wild child named Hope
kept whispering: “Why not now?” Why not here?”
I realized Hope was standing on the shoulders of generations of visionary women and men who had struggled to bring
women and marginalized men fully into the life and ministry of the church.
By the time the announcement was made, hope had prepared me enough that I was not stunned into
speechlessness – but just barely. It literally took my breath away, as it did that of the men and women around me. As
people tried to maintain a bit of decorum as the process of confirming the election proceeded, giggles kept breaking out.
Little spontaneous dances kept happening. I saw two very dignified women bump tummies with each other and then collapse into
laughter.
Images of generations of women
such as Pamela Chinnis, Sally Bucklee, Marge Christie, the Philadelphia 11 and the Washington 4, Barbara Harris, and thousands
of others rose before my eyes and I could not even begin to imagine what this day meant to those who had lived to see it.
The Episcopal Women’s Caucus can and should be justifiably proud of their part in this event.
If they had caved in after the 1976 vote to ordain women to priesthood and episcopate
when conservatives threatened to split the church, this day would not have happened. If they had caved in after the election
of Barbara Harris, which conservatives called “the final crisis,” this day would not have happened.
If the church had caved into the frequent and loud demands
of conservatives to repent of those prophetic actions, this day would not have come.
When the new presiding bishop was escorted into the HOD, hope and joy exploded into
the room. People were cheering, standing on chairs, waving their arms in the air. Happy pandemonium reigned for at least three
full minutes.
I could feel the joy of
the clouds of witnesses of all the women and men who had been set aside, told to wait, told that the time wasn’t right
for them to be fully included in the life and ministry of the church because of their color, their ethnicity, their gender
or their sexual orientation.
My rejoicing
at this election is tempered by the knowledge that some in this church are still quite willing to “create space for
healing” by throwing my brothers and sisters out of the boat.
They are quite willing to buy unity by sacrificing gay, lesbian, transgendered and bisexual brothers and sisters.
But Integrity won’t cave in. And The Episcopal Women’s
Caucus will hold to its vision of the church as a place that honors the ministry of all women. We know that such a church
will honor the ministry of all people. All people. May the church also hold fast to that vision.
And we pray that God will hold Katharine close, give her vision, courage, grace,
strength, laughter, and, most of all, love. Our prayers are with her.
Katie Sherrod
Lunch Time Speakers
under
The Consultation
banner
Today
at 1:15 -- EPF Young Adult Team with Winnie Varghese
Gentle hints may not be enough!
None
of our constituent groups have deep pockets; they are all dependent on the kindness of friends. ISSUES, particularly, is intended
to help our friends see the work of Convention in a different way, and to perhaps shine light on an overlooked aspect of the
discussions. There is no angel funding ISSUES, life would be easier if there were. So, we need your contribution, large or
small.
Please drop by The Consultation booth in the Exhibit Hall and tell us what you think; at the same
time you can make a contribution; Envelopes are available there. YOUR help will make a difference.
The
Editors
