NEWS SIDEBAR:  A conversation with Presiding Bishop Browning of the Episcopal Church

c. 1997 Religion News Service NEW YORK _ When the Episcopal Church meets in General Convention in Philadelphia July 16-25, Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning will round out his 12-year term as head of the 2.5 million-member church. In a conversation with RNS correspondent Ed Briggs, Browning reflected on the achievements and disappointments of his […]

c. 1997 Religion News Service

NEW YORK _ When the Episcopal Church meets in General Convention in Philadelphia July 16-25, Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning will round out his 12-year term as head of the 2.5 million-member church. In a conversation with RNS correspondent Ed Briggs, Browning reflected on the achievements and disappointments of his tenure:


SOME DISAPPOINTMENTS

Q: What disappointments have you had since becoming presiding bishop?

A. I guess my disappointments have been seeing so much need in the world, both spiritually and mentally, and not being able to have the church respond. I’m not saying the church doesn’t. But the Presiding Bishop’s Fund (to aid those in need) … always has more requests than it can meet. While I think the Episcopal Church has always been generous, we still have a ways to go.

Q. Overall giving in the church hasn’t fallen back, has it?

A. Well, it did immediately after the embezzlement (of $2.2 million by national treasurer Ellen Cooke). Though it has come back afterwards.

And, I guess another disappointment was a lot of nit-picking and internal strife, which I think takes away from the momentum of the Episcopal Church. I think all too often we’ve gotten tied up with internal differences and spent a lot of time with those, and with struggling through mean-spirited differences. That has been a great disappointment.

ON THE GAY ISSUE

Q. Do the mean-spirited differences involve the gay issue?

A. They haven’t involved the gay issue, as much. They’ve dealt with women and church work.

Q. The church’s gentlemanly approach of the past to resolve such differences hasn’t worked?

A. No, I don’t think so. … And that’s why we continue, even in spite of the disappointments, to work for the accomplishments in terms of the dialogues we’ve had.

But I think there’s much more of a generous and receiving spirit regarding the gay community than there once was. And I think the church is much more open and inclusive to them than it was. And for that, I give a great deal of thanks.

Q. What was the flash point in the past about gays?

A. It’s very similar to the whole question of racism. These are very deep emotional feelings. Those feelings are backed up by history, by doctrine, by dogma. If you’re locked into that, it’s very difficult to be open. I’m not trying to criticize that, I’m trying to understand it.

ON WOMEN AND MINISTRY

Q. The women’s ordination issue has never gone away. But there are those who never see what women do in their ministries.


A. That’s right. In 1976 the church voted to ordain women to the priesthood and the episcopacy. There was a vote and a little over half approved it. … And I would say that because of the experience of women in the ministry, the church has been radically transformed into a very proud and very grateful acclamation of women in the ministry.

ON ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Q. How about the church’s accomplishments during your term?

A. When I was elected presiding bishop, the House of Bishops voted to have me go to the next meeting of primates (of the Anglican communion) with the strong likelihood that we would be electing a woman to the episcopacy. At my first primate meeting in the spring of 1986, I was the new kid on the block. I wasn’t intimidated by the awe of being in the presence of these other primates. I discovered they had never spent much time talking about the possibility of this (women’s ordination). So my bringing that to them was a reality _ maybe not a first, but certainly in the depth of the conversation we had.

Two things happened. One was a pretty overwhelming understanding that each province of the church should feel they have to carry out their ministry in the way they feel they have to. It wasn’t an out-and-out blessing of what we were doing, but it certainly was an understanding of what we were doing.

And the second thing that happened was they asked me to convey to the Episcopal Church not to ordain (consecrate a woman bishop) until after the Lambeth Conference in ’88. We did that. I don’t think I was wrong. But I don’t think any woman was nominated until after ’88.

Q. What were some of the other accomplishments?

A. I’m very proud of the church with its continual struggle to face its issues. … Through the good offices of Pamela Chinnis, president of the House of Deputies, we worked very hard to see that all the national committees and commissions had a good representation of people of color _ a wide representation of the whole life of the church.

The House of Bishops spent a great deal of time developing a pastoral on racism and that led into further dialogue and study in parishes and congregations throughout the United States.


I’m also pleased that over the past several years there has been a rediscovery of the meaning of baptism _ the centrality of baptism in the ministry of the church. The baptism of each person, I think, brings forward a very, very strong development of a ministry of the laity.

ON AIDS MINISTRY

Q. Any other accomplishments?

A. I think the Episcopal Church has been a model for dealing with AIDS _ ministries to not only those persons with AIDS, but also their families _ through care givers and those who are trying to be advocates before Congress for research.

During the (1988) Detroit convention, when that large (AIDS) quilt was laid out … that was a tremendous spiritual experience for me. … And I walked back from there into the House of Bishops. And _ I don’t know where it came from _ but I challenged the House of Bishops to take on the pastoral care of a person with AIDS. I think a large portion of the house did that. And I did that also. We had a member of our staff who had AIDS and I tried to have a pastoral ministry with that person since then.

RELATIONS AMONG BISHOPS

A. May I make one more observation?

It deals with relationships of bishops-to-bishops and the (1991) Phoenix (General Convention) House of Bishops when they went into executive session when there were problems. From there we developed a way of meeting that I think has made a great deal of difference. That new way was in contrast to the debate thing. We sit and converse and have a theological discourse using small groups and presentations.

And, I think what has happened is that we changed our groupings in the House and bishops got to know one another better than they did before.

When we get ready to elect the new presiding bishop, I think we will know those who are presenting themselves for office better than they have been known before.


ON TOLERANCE IN THE CHURCH

Q. One of the mainstays that has held the Anglican Communion together is the concept of tolerance. Do you think the tent’s fabric has been stretched a little too much?

A. I think that’s one of the reasons we come to General Convention, to test that. You know, when we went into Phoenix (in 1991) … I have to confess to you that I wondered at that point … not so much whether the tent would hold; I wondered if there was a center left _ a place where that tolerance and acceptance could be absorbed.

And we came through that with the realization that we had a very strong center.

Now, I think that very same thing will be tested in Philadelphia. And there are a couple of things that will be testing it. (But) I say to those persons who find themselves on the edge, being pushed out, that their gifts are very much needed in the life of this church.

MJP END BRIGGS

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!