One thing I would like to point out re: the descriptive vs. prescriptive part is the continuing emphasis on narrative and story at this GC, and I believe this resolution has to be read in that context.  Read in the context of the story the majority of The Episcopal Church is telling about itself, D025 basically says something along the lines of “We are a church in which God has called people living in same-sex relationships to all orders of ministry.  Since this is who we are, we’re telling you about it so you won’t be surprised when we continue being who we are.  We gotta be us!”  Because of that, I think that Graham’s reading is closer to the truth—and I know that the deputation from my Diocese was reacting to it as though this were the correct reading.

I have to say, on a separate note, that I find the emphasis on story very interesting in some ways (though I’d been pulling my hair out if I had to sit through it), and also highly post-modern.  The meta-narrative is dying a death of a thousand totally subjective personal narratives.  The difficulty is, while one can critique someone else’s argument, it is impossible (at least in our society and as polite Episcopalians) to critique a person’s story.  There is a parallel here to the “Ask me about Gene” buttons that folks wore at GC 2003.  While we talk about “making things personal” as a bad thing, in actuality making things personal is exactly what has been happening in order to hamstring criticism.