We are Christians
We proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord. We are baptized into his death and resurrection. We strive to follow him in all things.
We are Catholics
Our faith and practice is grounded in the tradition of the Church–that is, what has been handed on to us– going back to Jesus and the apostles. (No, we’re not Roman Catholics, though we have much in common with our friends in that tradition.)
We are Anglicans
Our spiritual ‘DNA’ comes from the Church of England, and we are part of the family of 38 churches, all over the world, in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.
We are Episcopalians
The Episcopal Church, established in 1789, is the American expression of Anglican Christianity. We are one of 110 dioceses that mutually support one another in a common doctrine, discipline, and worship.
We welcome you …
… to walk with us, worship with us, work with us, and otherwise share our life. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to use the Contact Us link above.
As a bishop, I am a quasi-public figure, occupying a place on the long arc that eventually bends in the direction of celebrity. Within the constricted world of the Diocese of Springfield, and the slightly less constructed world of the Episcopal Church, and in some bits of Anglicanism beyond TEC, there are lots of people whom I do not know, but who know of me and a good bit about me.
Public figures from time to time make public pronouncements on matters that are either presumed to affect them peculiarly, or about which one might expect them to hold specialized information or unique knowledge, or about which their views might be considered generally significant. A few of my colleague bishops in the Episcopal Church, including the Presiding Bishop, have already “issued a statement” on the situation emanating from Ferguson, MO. It is entirely likely that more such statements will follow.
Mine will not be among them.
It’s not that I don’t have thoughts, feelings, and convictions regarding the tragic death of Michael Brown and the decision of the grand jury not to charge anyone with a crime in connection with his death. I have rather passionate opinions, as a matter of fact. But that’s just the point: They’re my opinions. The opinions of Dan Martins, private citizen. Not the opinions of the Bishop of Springfield. The Bishop of Springfield has a teaching office, but—and I say this with utter respect and affection for my colleagues who have chosen to weigh in publicly on the situation as it emerges—while my teaching office has a great deal to say about the love of God made known to us in Christ, about the redemption of suffering through the mystery of the cross, about the dignity of every human being, about the reconciliation of those who are at variance and enmity, and about the eventual final triumph of justice and peace, it has nothing to say about whether the grand jury made a correct or incorrect decision, or about the conduct of the St Louis County prosecutor, or about the behavior of law enforcement authorities since Mr Brown’s death last August.
Dan Martins might have some things to say about all these matters, but the Bishop of Springfield does not—and, I will go so far as to say, ought not. Neither Dan Martins nor the Bishop of Springfield has any specialized knowledge about what really happened on that fateful afternoon last August. Fortunately, virtually no one cares what Dan Martins thinks. and that is as it should be, because, while he’s a reasonably smart guy, there’s a lot more that he doesn’t and never will know than he actually does know. A few more might care what the Bishop of Springfield thinks, because he is, after all, a quasi-public figure, a microcosmic celebrity. But pretty much all the Bishop of Springfield is either qualified or authorized to say about this or any other matter of public consequence is, “Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death, and upon those in the tombs bestowing life.”
There’s nothing new in that, and even less that is original. Some might consider it a cop-out. I look on it as my job. Christians of goodwill and an informed conscience can and do hold an astonishingly diverse range of views of matters of public policy and concern. The views of Dan Martins lie within that range. The view of the Bishop of Springfield is more singularly focused, and that is to bear witness to the resurrection of Jesus the Christ from the dead, because any aspect of human experience not seen in that light is not really seen at all. The private opinions of Dan Martins pale in significance next to it.
Anyway, that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it. No statement to follow.