This week, many of the bishops of the Episcopal Church, along with those who see them as God's particular voices on Earth, gathered to talk about gun violence. When I use the terms "Episcopal Church" and "talk" in the same sentence, that means a group of people have gathered to agree with one another and with whatever secular political voice it is that they consider closest to God's own. Everyone says variations of the same thing; the rest who are gathered simply nod with enthusiasm. At such occasions, the bishops reminisce about their experience at arriving at the natural or human-made disaster scene, dressed as they always seem to be in the apparel of authority, and seeking to present themselves as relevant to a society in which they are increasingly tangential.
Having attended such gatherings many times, I know that any slight disagreement with the established narrative is unwelcome, uninvited, and will result in a tatty notation being placed in one's "permanent record". It is not a place for nuance.
"Gun violence" is the current topic trend for all Episcopalians in the know. Personally, I wish it were more about the relationship of psychotropic medication and mass shootings, but for some reason no one, and I mean no one, from the government to the church wishes to discuss this in any serious manner. So, we talk about how to provide for more laws for the law-abiding, repeat in slightly different ways what the previous speaker has said, add some sentimental story of witness, and nod to one another, conveniently forgetting that criminals and lunatics, by definition, exist outside of laws.
Oh, and we applaud one another's honesty and witness. Unmentioned at the recent gathering is that there were Episcopalians present at the shootings in Newtown, present not to find stories of personal relevance, but because they were first, second, and third responders. They did not wear clerical collars. They are Republicans and Democrats, members and non-members of the NRA, gun owners and non-owners. They do not fit into easily labeled boxes. Their witness was silent as they sat with grieving parents, helped to direct traffic, and mopped the blood and residue from classroom floors.
In a related topic, a few small voices did say something at our last diocesan convention about drone warfare and its questionable morality, but they were quickly appeased and there was little, if any, further discussion. As with the plague of psychotropics, the greater Church will not discuss drone warfare in any serious manner unless a Republican is elected to the White House and he or she continues the current administration's odd non-policy policy about the use of such devices.
However, drone warfare is a practice that should trouble anyone who considers him- or herself a Christian moral agent in the world.
"Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen born in New Mexico, was whacked by a Predator not on a battlefield but after an apparently convivial lunch at a favorite Yemeni restaurant. Two weeks later, al-Awlaki's son Abdulrahman was dining on the terrace of another local eatery when the CIA served him the old Hellfire Special and he wound up splattered all over the patio. Abdulrahman was 16, and born in Denver. As I understand it, the Supreme Court has ruled that American minors, convicted of the most heinous crimes, cannot be executed. But you can gaily atomize them halfway round the planet. My brief experience of Yemeni restaurants was not a happy one but, granted that, I couldn't honestly say they met any recognized definition of a "battlefield."
Al-Awlaki Junior seems to have been your average anti-American teen. Al-Awlaki Senior was an al-Qaida ideologue and a supposed "spiritual mentor" to everyone from the 9/11 murderers to the Fort Hood killer and the thwarted Pantybomber. On the other hand, after September 11th, he was invited to lunch at the Pentagon, became the first imam to conduct a prayer service at the U.S. Congress, and was hailed by NPR as an exemplar of an American "Muslim leader who could help build bridges between Islam and the West." The precise point at which he changed from American bridge-builder to Yemeni restaurant takeout is hard to determine. His public utterances when he was being feted by the New York Times are far more benign than those of, say, Samira Ibrahim, who was scheduled to receive a "Woman of Courage" award from Michelle Obama and John Kerry on Friday until an unfortunate flap erupted over some ill-phrased Tweets from the courageous lass rejoicing on the anniversary of 9/11 that she loved to see "America burning."
The same bureaucracy that booked Samira Ibrahim for an audience with the First Lady and Anwar al-Awlaki to host prayers at the Capitol now assures you that it's entirely capable of determining who needs to be zapped by a drone between the sea bass and the tiramisu at Ahmed's Bar and Grill. But it's precisely because the government is too craven to stray beyond technological warfare and take on its enemies ideologically that it winds up booking the First Lady to hand out awards to a Jew-loathing, Hitler-quoting, terrorist-supporting America-hater."