The resolution states in part “that the 76th General Convention affirm[s] that God has called and may call [gay, lesbian, transgendered and bisexual] individuals, to any ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church, and that God’s call to the ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church is a mystery which the Church attempts to discern for all people through our discernment processes acting in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church.” Resolution B033 approved on the final day of convention three years ago urged restraint in consenting to partnered homosexual persons to the episcopate.
“We understand Resolution D025 to be more descriptive than prescriptive in nature – a statement that reaffirms commitments already made by The Episcopal Church and that acknowledges certain realities of our common life,” the two presiding officers said. “Nothing in the Resolution goes beyond what has already been provided under our Constitution and Canons for many years.”
Bishop Jefferts Schori and deputy Anderson said “Some were concerned that the adoption of Resolution D025 has effectively repealed Resolution B033. That is not the case. This General Convention has not repealed Resolution B033. It remains to be seen how Resolution B033 will be understood in light of Resolution D025.
“Some within our Church may understand Resolution D025 to give Standing Committees (made up of elected clergy and laity) and Bishops with jurisdiction with more latitude in consenting to episcopal elections. Others, in light of Resolution B033, will not. In either case, we trust that the Bishops and Standing Committees of The Episcopal Church will continue to exercise prayerful discernment in making such decisions, mindful and appreciative of our relationship in the Anglican Communion.
“In adopting this Resolution, it is not our desire to give offense. We remain keenly aware of the concerns and sensibilities of our brothers and sisters in other Churches across the Communion. We believe also that the honesty reflected in this resolution is essential if indeed we are to live into the deep communion that we all profess and earnestly desire.”
View the original post
I have great respect for Prof. Katherine Grieb, and have not only enjoyed working with her on the Covenant Design Group that finally produced the Ridley Cambridge Draft, but admired her wisdom and commitment in the many days we spent on this work. I do need however to disagree publicly with her advice to delegates of General Convention regarding action on the Covenant Draft. Dr. Grieb, in an article published on July 11 in Episcopal Life, urged delegates to sit tight on the matter of the Covenant, and to wait for further responses to the draft and the final “revision” anticipated for Section Four of the draft before moving ahead. This would model helpful “restraint” by a church others do not always trust as having such prudent modesty: let the Covenant working group do its work without GC’s preemptive opinions, and then get down to the hard work of discernment regarding the finished text.
I am afraid that the time for such moderated advice has passed, if ever it was pertinent in TEC’s case anyway. General Convention, through both of its Houses, has now moved beyond the clear commitments of “moratoria” informally pressed by the Lambeth Conference a year ago, and specifically upheld by the recent meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council, following very clear and concrete recommendations by the Windsor Continuation Group. In particular, D025 has affirmed permission for the ordination of partnered homosexual episcopal candidates in a way that specifically bypasses the moratoria.
General Convention has no credible character of “restraint” from which to approach the Covenant at this point. Indeed, this particular action raises the question of whether TEC can have any helpful role in the “discerning” of Section Four of the Covenant at all, since the Convention has now preempted in action the possibility of approaching the question of Communion discipline on a common basis with other churches. One may even wonder how North America’s prominent representation on the “working group” can garner the larger Communion’s trust, whatever the personal integrities of those persons entrusted with this task: how does one speak to the formulation of protocols of common discipline when one’s own church has rejected such commitments a priori?
In any case, how TEC and Canada can formally engage in the Covenant process is now deeply confused. The first three Sections of the Ridley Cambridge Draft were already accepted by the ACC, and will not be changed. But what TEC’s and the Anglican Church of Canada’s views are about these three sections, now or later under present actions, are undoubtedly under a cloud in terms of trust, precisely around the matter of “restraint” and therefore a willingness to work with others according to common expectations. What do these churches mean when they “agree” to something? And Section Four, as a whole, has now been taken out of TEC’s purview of credible engagement in discernment and revision. Unless the delegates and bishops renege on what they have just voted for, what then is there left for General Convention to do?
Consistency would demand, it seems to me, a resolution not simply on the Covenant, but on the TEC’s disengagement from the Covenant process that would permit a “minority” stance, identifiable by diocese and bishop – an open vote by orders and by roll—such that the Communion might better determine how to proceed with its own wider discernment, precisely on such matters as diocesan adoption that have proven objectionable to some, but now seem more pressing to clarify and uphold than before. TEC members, as Dr. Grieb notes, took a prominent role at the recent ACC meeting in requiring a period of further discernment regarding the final portion of the Covenant, thereby delaying the Covenant’s dissemination for adoption. General Convention, however, has now taken TEC out of this discernment and delay they demanded. Let the Convention as well, then, have the grace and forthrightness to step aside altogether. Its dioceses and bishops who do not share the Convention’s majority verdicts on this matter will then state their own commitments with equal forthrightness before the Communion.
View the original post
]]>The House of Bishops affirmed the virginity of Mary the Mother of God during its July 16 morning legislative session at the 76th General Convention.
In a jocular debate that spoke to the exhaustion many of the bishops are feeling on the ninth business day of the convention, the bishops amended resolution A099 Lesser Feasts and Fasts: Additional Commons, adding the word “virgin” before the name of the Mother of God in collects offered for the use by the church.
The Rt. Rev. Wayne Smith, Bishop of Missouri, presented the resolution, noting that there had been some concerns expressed in committee hearings about the commons used for the Mother of God. There were “three ways to refer to her: Mary the God-bearer, the theotokos; Mary of Nazareth; and the Blessed Virgin Mary,” he said. Bishop Smith said using these varied terms underscores the theological diversity of views held within the Episcopal Church on the person and charism of Mary.
Bishop Michael Smith of North Dakota stood and said “I rise in defense of our Lady,” eliciting guffaws from the house. Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori noted, “I don’t think she needs it,” to more laughter from the bishops. Bishop Michael Smith then offered an amendment inserting the word “virgin” before Mary’s name where used in the new collects, stating that the church’s teaching on the virginity of the Mother of God should be underscored in the new rites.
The Rt. Rev. Otis Charles, retired Bishop of Utah, spoke in opposition, stating “the term theotokos stands by itself.” Mary the god-bearer was a term of “long tradition and honorable to Our Lady.”
Bishop Wayne Smith accepted the amendment, suggesting that Mary be styled, “the Blessed Virgin Mary, the god-bearer.” The Charles amendment was accepted by voice vote, with limited opposition.
The Bishop of Albany, the Rt. Rev. William Love, rose to support the amended resolution saying he could “imagine all the spin that would come out of this convention” if the resolution was rejected. He said the headline “Episcopal Church Denies the Virginity of Mary” was one he did not wish to read, eliciting cries of shame from the bishops present.
Bishop C. Franklin Brookhart of Montana reminded the house of the words of the Chalcedonian Creed: “Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer, the theotokos,” and urged adoption of the resolution. It passed unanimously.
(The Rev.) George Conger reporting from General Convention in Anaheim.
View the original post
Pleased with the efficiency with which the House of Deputies was able to dispatch with resolutions submitted by the Standing Commission on Prayer Book, Liturgy and Music, the House of Deputies of General Convention voted on Friday afternoon to suspend the rules of order to permit all committees to give their reports at once.
The most significant change eliminated the possibility of a bishop receiving consent by General Convention if the election occurs within 120 days of the start of convention.
Christopher Hart of Pennsylvania opposed the resolution, noting that the deputation from the Diocese of Central Ecuador probably would not have been able to explain the complexity of its situation within the canonical time frame specified for standing committees and bishops with jurisdiction.
Sally Johnson of Minnesota also spoke in opposition. She said the Holy Spirit works at General Convention with respect to bishops as well as it does in other legislative processes. It is important for this body of The Episcopal Church to retain this important form of collective discernment, she said.
Others disagreed and pointed out that a consistent method of granting consent was desirable.
Simon Ross of Michigan said a consistent pattern and process would make it harder for the system to be manipulated. The Rev. Robert S Hennagin of Southwest Florida agreed. The consistency currently isn’t there,” he said.
Deputies approved the resolution on a voice vote.
Among other ministry resolutions adopted after discussion were A176, which broadens the responsibilities of the Church Deployment Board; A051, which is the first reading to amend the constitution so that it does not need to be updated every time The Episcopal Church enters into a new agreement of full communion. Finally, D006 clarifies the methods by which a priest can be removed from a cure by a bishop under Title III.
Steve Waring reporting from General Convention in Anaheim.
View the original post
The House of Bishops of General Convention has rejected a resolution that condemns violence in the Middle East after opponents criticized its language for being unbalanced, anti-Israel and un-Anglican.
Offered by the Committee on National and International Concerns, the House of Deputies endorsed a substitute Resolution B027: Peace between Israel and Palestine. The 12-part resolution called for peace in the Middle East and supported the two-state solution in resolving the crisis in Israel and Palestine.
However, the Rt. Rev. Edward S. Little II, Bishop of Northern Indiana, protested language in the legislation. He singled out Israel as the aggressor and the Palestinians as the victims in the conflict. Bishop Little said he stood not in support of the separation barrier—the wall built by Israel to protect itself from attack—but “to take a stand against terrorism”
The Rt. Rev. Marc Andrus, Bishop of California, disagreed. “The wall does not contribute to the lessening of suicide bombing,” he said, but a “tool” that “supports the illegal settlements” built by Israel on the West Bank.
The Bishop of New York, the Rt. Rev. Mark Sisk, stated that ascribing all the blame to Israel “is incorrect.”
The resolution eventually failed on a show of hands, 43 to 53.
(The Rev.) George Conger reporting from General Convention in Anaheim.
View the original post
General Convention’s House of Deputies declined to concur with the House of Bishops on an amended version of Resolution C061, which states that all baptized persons have equal access to the discernment process of this church. The action took place on Friday at the Anaheim Convention Center, Anaheim, Calif.
However, the House of Bishops removed several phrases which listed specific individuals, including the following phrase: “No person shall be denied access or have his or her discernment process terminated because of race, color, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, disabilities or age, except as otherwise provided by these Canons.”
Diamante A. Tavolaro of Rhode Island, a female to male transgendered deputy, agreed with the committee on world mission which recommended that the amended resolution not be approved. He said he would prefer that convention try again in three years’ time.
Several deputies suggested that it would be preferable to adopt an imperfect resolution rather than none at all, but others pointed out that the language in the current canon is fairly close to the amended language proposed by the bishops.
Eventually deputies using electronic voting devices voted about 60-40 against concurring with the House of Bishops’ version.
Steve Waring reporting from General Convention in Anaheim.
View the original post
General Convention’s House of Deputies suspended rules of order permitting the Standing Commision on Prayer Book, Liturgy and Church Music to submit all resolutions for consideration as a single block during the final afternoon session July 17 in Anaheim, Calif. The special rule was proposed after discussion over a handful of resolutions had already been engaged.
The special rule permitted deputies to approve all additional personnel proposed for Holy Women, Holy Men, an optional compilation of additional commemorations to Lesser Feasts and Fasts. Prior to adoption of the special rule, deputies stumbled over the wording of Resolution A099 which authorized inclusion of “The Blessed Virgin Mary God-bearer, Care of God’s Creation, Goodness of God’s Creation, On the Occasion of a Disaster, On the Anniversary of a Disaster, Prophetic Witness in the Church, Prophetic Witness in Society, Reconciliation and Forgiveness, and Scientists and Environmentalists.”
Deputies questioned the Very Rev. Sam Candler of Atlanta, chair of the commission, as to why the bishops added so many references to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Deputy Candler was unable to offer much insight into the bishops’ decision. Eventually deputies voted in favor of the resolution despite concerns that there might be a typographical error.
Also approved separately from the block of resolutions was Resolution A178 which designates the first Sunday in Lent as Episcopal Relief and Development Sunday. Two other resolutions adopted were A100 which “direct[s] the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music and the Standing Commission for Constitution and Canons to organize a meeting of Liturgists and Canonists to consider and review the language and intent of Title II, Canon 3, Sec. 5, and to report their findings to the 77th General Convention”; and Resolution C078 which calls for development of a liturgy to address the loss of a companion animal.
Steve Waring reporting from General Convention in Anaheim.
View the original post
In a joint letter sent today to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and the President of its House of Deputies, the presiding officers of General Convention acknowledged that that body cannot speak for the whole church in crucial matters affecting the life of the Anglican Communion:
Some are concerned that the adoption of Resolution D025 has effectively repealed Resolution B033. That is not the case. This General Convention has not repealed Resolution B033. It remains to be seen how Resolution B033 will be understood and interpreted in light of Resolution D025. Some within our Church may understand Resolution D025 to give Standing Committees (made up of elected clergy and laity) and Bishops with jurisdiction more latitude in consenting to Episcopal elections. Others, in light of Resolution B033, will not. (Emphasis added.)
This letter thus makes it clear that Resolution D025 releases bishops and standing committees from any commitment and assurances previously given to observe the moratorium on episcopal elections that has been endorsed by all four of the Communion’s Instruments and now implemented in the Communion by vote of the Anglican Consultative Council. Indeed, the official “Explanation” to the final text of D025, which states that it “provides clarification in light of the Windsor Report,” removes any doubt concerning this fact:
Our relationships in the Anglican Communion have been tested by the question of the ordination to the episcopate of individuals living in a same-sex partnership. Resolution D-039 of the 73rd General Convention, in 2000, acknowledged that the membership of the Episcopal Church includes persons living in same-sex relationships; established an expectation that “such relationships will be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God”; and further denounced “promiscuity, exploitation, and abusiveness in the relationships of any of our members.” Three years later, the 74th General Convention reaffirmed this expectation. These standards thus provide guidance for access to the discernment process for ordination to the episcopate. (Emphasis added.)
[url=“http://gc2009.org/ViewLegislation/view_leg_detail.aspx?id=986&type=Final
” title=“http://gc2009.org/ViewLegislation/view_leg_detail.aspx?id=986&type=Final
“]http://gc2009.org/ViewLegislation/view_leg_detail.aspx?id=986&type=Final
[/url]
This is a categorical repudiation of the communion-wide moratorium on the election to the episcopate of anyone living in a same sex partnership. Bishops and dioceses are neither asked nor expected to observe such a moratorium. They are encouraged instead to observe “standards” recognizing same-sex partnerships as reflecting “holy love.” As conceded by today’s letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, some bishops and dioceses will respect the moratorium; others will not. And those that do respect the Communion teaching will do so only because they reject the “guidance” provided by General Convention “standards.”
This explicit recognition that some bishops and dioceses will conform to Communion teaching while others will not requires that the Communion now look to individual dioceses and parishes for communion commitments. The General Convention has decided it cannot speak with one voice in committing to the Communion’s moratoria. The Communion has no choice but to acknowledge those who are ready, willing and able to make these commitments.
View the original post