View From The Pew
by Gerry Hunter
(Posted Oct. 5th, 1999).
I wrote this on the 7th of September. It's history is in its text.
Fellow Believers,
A few days ago, I posted this message on the Diocesan Intranet chat conference in these parts. It got some reaction, as you will see by the second comment to it which I append.
We face an imposed round of "dialogue" beginning soon, decreed by Bishop Michael Ingham, on the question of "blessing" same sex "unions." The rules around it are, to say the least, somewhat arcane, and prompted the posting.
Friends in Jesus,
Today is September 7. It is the day after Labor Day, the first day of school, and the beginning of the dialogue season. Do not be deceived. Even though for centuries Christians have observed this as the season of Pentecost, there can be little doubt of what is about to dominate us in the coming months.
Dominate? That certainly seems to be the plan. The rules around this endeavor remind me of nothing so much as the training I received in the Royal Canadian Air Force about what I might expect if I were captured during hostilities. If there were other members of the crew captured with me, I could expect to be isolated from the them. Intercommunication would be absolutely forbidden. All information about the process in which I found myself involved would be very carefully controlled by my captors. The objective would be to make me conclude I was utterly dependent upon them for every and any aspect of my well-being. What I could do, when I could do it, with whom I could do it, would be utterly taken out of my hands. There would be absolutely no opportunity for discussion or comparison with anyone who shared my point of view.
The objective, as explained to me, was first to break my will to resist, second to make me call into question whatever my captors chose to have question, and third to make me receptive to what ever they chose to propose to me. In the end, I would, it was hoped, be under complete control of my captors.
As this impending dialogue is structured, the similarities between it and a predicament for which I was trained to, but never had to, resist are striking. All information will be from a single source. There will be no opportunity to reflect on an evaluate the information, no matter how astounding it may appear. The only outlet is to be that provided in a highly structured, strictly controlled setting. Disputation is punishable. Why, I wonder, do I doubt that this will provide a prime opportunity for the working of God the Holy Spirit?
The issue is "blessings" on same sex "unions". There is a group in the denomination which has been advocating this for some time. I cannot but wonder whether this group is going to be required to suspend its meetings during this process. Given the hands which are upon the levers of control, it seems doubtful. And yet, one of the basic ground rules in the plan of this process is that there are to be no outside lobby groups during the process, and no separate meetings.
There are in number of adjectives which could be applied to the techniques which will be employed during this process. Original is not one of them. Nor, does it appear, is even handedness. Perhaps I am wrong. But I will know whether I am right or wrong by simply waiting to see if a meeting of Integrity takes place while the dialogue process is in train.
-These are comments, in chronological order:
-Comment 1-
Thanks Gerry:
I think your analogy is most appropriate and is sure to hit home, but will anyone respond. I am sure that Michael will get a copy.
Yours in Christ
- Comment 2-
I was requested by the Diocese to remove the article in Anglican Chat re: Air Force Training. It was more than controversial, it was inflammatory and certainly not in the best interests of the Diocese.
God well in God's Love
RonW+
The Rev. Ron Wickens
Administrator of NWnet
the official email system of the
Diocese of New Westminster
I do take heart that the basis for deleting the article wasn't that it was untrue.
This was written on 7 August 1999:
The Situation In The Diocese Of New Westminster.
Nous sommes dans un pot de
chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
- Gen Auguste Ducrot, Sedan, 1870 - situation report.
Not for the first time, believing Orthodox Christians in the Diocese Of New Westminster find themselves in a situation where events are proceeding inexorably, and nothing, it seems, can alter them. There is a definite pattern here. Nothing they do, nothing they say, nothing they point to, makes the slightest difference to those in control. The incessant response of "so what?" which they receive to any point they make has led to a widespread feeling best expressed in the question, "what's the use?" Believers in the diocese are battered people. Their responses fit the profile.
One is mindful of the rueful lament of the American soldiers in the Bataan peninsula in 1942:
We're the battling bastards of
Bataan
No mama, no papa, no Uncle Sam.
No aunts, no uncle's, no nephews, no nieces,
No rifles, no planes, or artillery pieces,
And nobody gives a damn.
It would be pointless to simply present the present situation without discussion of how it came to be. In those circumstances, who can know what to make of the situation? But, there is another reason. Near the end of the First World War, the German Kaiser had received a briefing from his chancellor. The news was far from good. Almost in despair, the Kaiser asked his chancellor, " How did it come to this?" "My God," replied the chancellor, "If only we knew." If nothing happens, only the victors will write the history. In New Westminster, believers had better start writing now.
Battery: The Perpetrators.
Sometimes, I work with the Department of Justice. As a result, I came to have a colleague there. He now works almost exclusively in tax law, but had been a crown prosecutor. I asked him if he liked it. Everything, he said, except battery cases.
He related how frustrating it was when the perpetrator was well-established. It was virtually impossible to penetrate the facade of respectability around them to get a conviction. Pillars of the community all, with many to vouch for their sterling accomplishments, and noble ideals, judges or juries ended up simply too baffled and incredulous to credit the case. If you couldn't get them to stop without going to court, the situation was pretty hopeless. If they didn't want to stop, they just kept on making victims.
Battery: The Victims.
The victims fell almost exclusively into one of two categories. There were those who could flee, and those who could not flee. My colleague described the ones who could not flee. If no one came to their aid they withdrew into silence. In their solitude, they continued to be victimized, until usually they were killed, or sometimes, they killed. At best, an opening to flee might be presented to them, and they did, or someone who cared intervened to save them. My colleague never saw any with enough left to save themselves.
The Local Pattern.
Successful perpetrators, of necessity, use façades. There is the façade of dialogue. Constructing such a façade is very simple. First, you hold the conference. Second, you let all speak their minds. Third, you say what you intended to say all along, in spite of what has been said. The variation on the theme is to construct the occasion so your point of view implicitly dominates. Believers here have seen both theme and variation.
Successful perpetrators are subtle. Process is a favorite weapon. Why use the fist, when the drop over water on the forehead will work? Promise and deliver process. Then, set in motion everything you would need if you got your way, even before you get it.
You accomplish two things. Your cover story is intact. No one ever sees you as a perpetrator. No one could believe you ever were, as long as the façade is intact. That's the first thing. The second thing is that the victims end up in such a state that they can no longer even cry out.
A Glimpse Of The Current Situation.
The astounding pronouncements of Bishop Holloway hit believers in this diocese very close to home. In October, this amazing man will have the opportunity to deliver his message to our clergy. Some believers wanted the Most Rev. Moses Tay to address them. This was not permitted. What of the proponent of sadomasochism and promiscuity? One ordained voice asked that question as follows.
"I was of the opinion that one of the foundational pillars of the Diocese of New Westminster was tolerance for other's religious views. How then can Bishop Moses Tay be refused access for a conference and Bishop Holloway welcomed? Am I the only one who sees some inconsistency here?"
Another ordained voice answered.
"Three times I have registered my concerns on [the diocesan intranet] and also with [the archdeacon] too - It would seem that we are the only ones expressing our concerns and maybe the only ones crazy enough to buck the establishment!
Two voices. No others.
Meanwhile, an American Bishop made a speech in which she was less than kind to a sister Bishop in the Canadian house. The text of that speech was not only posted, but received a message of thanks. (As an aside, at this moment, the poster is after this writer's scalp.)
If you batter people long enough, after a while, they just lay there in take it.
The Latest Drop Of Water.
The first voice to cry out did so in writing. To protect the façade, the electronic note was torn up. You could tell the purpose was to protect a façade. Deletion was prescribed by regulation for the illegal, the abusive, or the noncanonical. At the direction of an official, deletion was decreed. The original posting was none of the three things. It was, most certainly, not in keeping with the façade. And at all cost, the façade, it seems, is to be protected.
The Future
There seems little doubt of what comes next. The façade will be maintained. No voices will ever be raised. Eventually, Orthodox Christianity will cease to have an Anglican expression in these parts.
There will be only one mercy left to believers then. When the façade is dropped because it is no longer needed, pray do not come to them asking "How did this happen?" It would not be fair to the victims, who were battered into silence, to call on them to make a sound at that point.
I began with a reference to Sedan. No one intervened there. As for the troops, their general simply said, "Nothing now remains . but to do our best before we are overwhelmed." They were. Sedan, it's true, was but one city. But when Sedan was overwhelmed, France fell.
Readers of "Topic," the diocesan info sheet that appears inside the "Anglican Journal," saw this article in the latest issue, (October, 1999) that came to my mailbox today (5 October 99):
Adjustments under way on NW Net computer system
Users of the diocese's electronic bulletin board system, NWNet, are being asked to access-the system by modem (878-0466) instead of using Internet access until further notice. At its meeting on Sept. 13, the Diocesan Communications Committee expressed concern about how the system is currently linked to the internet, and directed the NW Net administrator to suspend the connection until the issue could be resolved. "According to an assessment of NW Net carried out last year, only six parishes in the diocese currently rely solely on the internet to connect with the system. We believe these churches can be easily accommodated through modem access," said Ray Hudson, chair of the Communications Committee.
The committee also directed the NW Net administrator to temporarily remove the Anglican Chat forum because of complaints about recently-posted messages that have violated the system's policy guidelines on respectful communication.
Ah Topic! All the news that's fit to spin. And here I thought government bureaucrats had a monopoly on plausible denial.
During the brouhaha over clamping down on NWNet, the Diocesan Chancellor was frequently cited as a source of the apparent impetus for the gelding of this diocesan resource. Perhaps it's because the whole business about illegality was just not sustainable as an excuse that no mention is made of his input.
As someone who has been long involved in computers here in the Lower Mainland, I happen to know who the prior Internet Service Provider was for NWNET, before it switched to a cable hook-up. And that presents a problem for the excuse committee. They were worried about a cable connection, but can't go back to their previous provider. That provider, I happen to also know, has switched to cable access! We are left to wonder what their concern was, and why they aren't even quoting the legal advice, which most certainly did not come cheap.
It is also very, very curious that none of the statements, either in Anglican Chat or the Public Notices, came even close to mentioning the point made by the committee chairman. If you are getting confused, it's simply because this whole story tends to shift under your gaze. I'm a bit reminded of one of Murphy's Laws of Science: First draw the curve, then plot the points.
At least one thing seems to be settling down. Gone, it seems, is any pretext that the nature of the postings was such that there could have been suits against the Diocese over them. As for the "temporary" part, well time alone will tell. Meanwhile, a once useful vehicle of communication has been put off the road, in the name of the agenda of inclusivity. This is getting to be the nature of things in New Westminster, as the "dialogue" season begins.