In 2005, Perry also was on a roster of nominees for bishop of California. She said she has turned down other invitations, but the Minnesota Diocese’s theology and proximity to Lake Superior, a favorite kayaking destinations, led her to answer this call.
“I am also aware in the current worldwide Anglican climate it may be very difficult for me — an out, partnered lesbian to be elected and/or to receive consents,” she said in her profile for the Minnesota Diocese.
Church conservatives predicted that the swift actions of the two dioceses in response to the recent policy shift would lead to greater division within the U.S. church. And they accused top Episcopal leaders of being disingenuous by suggesting that the denomination had not strayed from traditional beliefs and policies.
“What this represents is a continued in-your-face gesture to the worldwide Anglican Communion,” said Kendall Harmon, a prominent conservative who is chief theological advisor to the Episcopal bishop of South Carolina. “Anyone who is paying attention can see that the Episcopal Church is moving in the direction of the new theology and practice that they have embraced…”
One leading Episcopal progressive, Bishop Marc Andrus of San Francisco, said the nominations of Kirkley and Glasspool were not a significant departure from the church’s recent direction.
“This is really in keeping with the trajectory of our church toward justice and the recognition . . . of the full rights of gay and lesbian people,” said Andrus, bishop of the Diocese of California.
When members of St. Mark’s Episcopal Church, 335 Locust St., voted 2-1 in January to remain in the Episcopal Church of the United States, the Rev. Doug Blakelock, church pastor, and about 40 members separated from St. Mark’s.
“One third of the congregation did not want to stay in the Episcopal Church,” Blakelock said in the Oakland United Methodist Church sanctuary.
“Deacon Marion Kush and I led them out, and the very next Sunday we met here.”
The Methodist congregation graciously opened the doors for their neighbors to hold a Eucharist healing service on Jan. 18, Blakelock explained.
The breakaway Episcopalians founded St. Matthew’s Anglican Church. They have been worshiping Sunday afternoons in the Oakland church at 1504 Bedford St. ever since.
Integrity is delighted that The Episcopal Church has opened the way for dioceses like Minnesota to field the best possible slate of candidates for the episcopate. “We hope that other dioceses will recognize that “discern for all people” really means ALL” said Russell, “and that the actions of our General Convention will put a sad chapter of discrimination against the LGBT baptized behind us.”
Read it all and note that I say the slate is preliminary because there is a petition process so there could be other nominees before the election in late October this year.
From here:
We as a search committee feel confident about our process which was thorough and intentional, and in which we listened intently for the Holy Spirit. The discernment process we followed is fully outlined here. We acted in full accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Minnesota.
We fully stand behind each of these candidates as possessing extraordinary gifts for episcopal ministry. We also see each of them being a good fit for our diocese, bringing a variety of delightful and profound gifts to share at this stage in our life together.
The three candidates are:
The Rev. Mariann Budde Rector, St John the Baptist Episcopal Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota;
The Rev. Bonnie Perry Rector, All Saints Episcopal Church in Chicago, Illinois;
The Rev. Brian Prior Rector, Episcopal Church of the Resurrection in Spokane Valley, Washington.
Read it all and follow the links to the biographies.
In December 2006, members of the original congregation split from St. John’s Episcopal Church as part of a larger national break by conservative congregations over same-sex blessings, ordination of a gay bishop and the authority of Scripture. The breakaway St. John’s Anglican Church continued meeting in the church, an 1890 shingled sanctuary and rectory.
The remaining Episcopal members re-formed under the Rev. Norman Cram, who came out of retirement to conduct services ”” first in a parishioner’s living room and later at Elim Lutheran Church.
A settlement recently was reached with St. John’s Anglican congregation after a unanimous California Supreme Court ruling involving churches in a similar situation in Southern California.
“To be back home means we can reach outside of our border to the community of Petaluma,” said Cram. “Currently, we have been exploring areas in which there are vacuums in ministry.”
“I think the congregation is counting on us to provide an atmosphere of love and acceptance, as well as a message of hope during these tough times,” he added. “There have been rapid changes in our culture, and we think we can provide a safe place for all people wishing to worship.”
In truth, our members overwhelmingly elected to leave the Episcopal Church in August 2004 due solely to long-standing theological differences, specifically regarding the authority of Holy Scripture and the Lordship of Christ.
What do those two phrases mean? Authority of Holy Scripture asks, “Does the Bible say what it means and mean what it says?” At St. James we believe that the Holy Bible is God’s word. We take to heart its teachings and do our best to live by its tenets. The lordship of Jesus Christ asks, “Is Jesus who the Bible says he is ”” the son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, who died for our sins, was resurrected, and is with God in heaven?” The Bible teaches this and we believe it to be true.
Over the course of several decades, the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles and the national Episcopal Church stepped further away from the Bible’s traditional teachings ”” to the point that many Episcopal leaders now deny Christ’s virgin birth and his resurrection from the dead. Just this month, the presiding bishop of the national Episcopal Church, Katherine Jefferts-Schori, proclaimed that having a personal relationship with Christ ”” a core tenet of evangelical Christian belief ”” is the “great Western heresy.”
Rhoades also opined that “the Episcopalians want their Newport Beach property back, but St. James is digging in.” Our legal battle is about religious freedom and property rights. Americans hold dear the right to free speech and freedom of religion. People should not have their property confiscated for exercising their religion even if others do not agree with their beliefs. But that is exactly what is happening to St. James. The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles and the national Episcopal Church have never held title to the St. James property. The people of St. James bought and paid for every square inch of this property with their tithes and offerings. They alone purchased the pews, the hymnals and the Sunday School booklets. The Episcopalians never paid a penny toward the purchase of the St. James’ property or toward building construction.
The California courts have handed the Episcopal Church and the ACNA a mixed bag of legal decisions this month in the battles over parish property. While both sides have trumpeted the importance of their legal victories, neither ruling is likely to settle the property litigation.
On July 21 the Fresno County Superior Court affirmed its May 5 ruling granting summary judgment in favor of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin in its suit against the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin, while an Orange County Court on July 13 dismissed two motions filed by the Diocese of Los Angeles against St James Church in Newport Beach, that challenged the legal sufficiency of the parish’s cause of action in light of the California Supreme Court decision in favor of the Diocese.
On Tuesday, July 28, the Standing Committee, the Deans and the Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina met at the Church of the Good Shepherd. The atmosphere was prayerful, focused, intense, deeply trusting of one another and the Bishop, and with a sense that the stakes are very, very high. There was broad general agreement about the basic direction the Diocese needs to take. The Bishop will give the arguments for this direction and specific suggested steps at the clergy gathering on August 13.
For the record, the meeting went from 10:30 to about 9 p.m.–KSH.
On July 27, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori notified the standing committee that the necessary consents to the ordination and consecration of the Rev. Kevin Thew Forrester as bishop of the diocese were not received within the prescribed time period and therefore his election was “null and void.”
The committee’s statement said, “We invite the wider church to reflect with us on what this experience can teach us about the episcopal search and consent process. Among the issues ripe for discussion are how bishops and standing committees can best be made aware of the particular needs of individual dioceses, and how new communications technologies affect the consent process. We hope that out of our disappointment can come a deeper understanding of the ways in which we can all be accountable to one another as members of the body of Christ.”
The rejection of Thew Forrester comes just a day after Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the spiritual head of the Anglican Communion, criticized the Episcopal Church for departing from church tradition by lifting a de facto ban on gay bishops and allowing blessings for same-sex unions. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the Anglican Communion.
“This could be taken as a strong shout from two different places about the importance of doing theological work on our foundations,” said the Rev. Kendall Harmon, canon theologian for the Diocese of South Carolina, which voted against Thew Forrester.
Thew Forrester, rector of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Marquette, Mich., said in a statement that “I have been extraordinarily blessed and honored to walk with my friends from the Diocese of Northern Michigan over these past months as their bishop-elect.”
“As we live and move and have our being in Christ, there is truly a Holy Wisdom in all that is unfolding, and as St. John of the Cross affirms, a face in `all that happens,”‘ Thew Forrester said.
Ten days ago, we elves published two blog entries which gave information about how the bishops voted on the various roll call votes (related to Resolutions D025 and C056) during General Convention.
The first post was an unofficial tally of all three roll call votes (For the record, this was a T19 exclusive, the work of T19 readers (with indispensable help from the Rev. George Conger and the live reporting of bloggers at Stand Firm, BabyBlue Anglican and the Lead), NOT an exclusive by David Virtue, in spite of his claim to the contrary when he published our table without so much as even a link or a thank you.) The second blog post was a look at how the Anaheim Statement signatories voted.
We’re wanting to update both tables, but before doing so we really need to get a copy of the official roll call tally for Resolution C056. If any reader can assist us, we’d be grateful.
The other day, David Virtue published a link which appears to be the official roll call vote for D025 (it is a scan of a 4 page fax) We are happy to report that having compared that tally against our unofficial table, the results match perfectly.
It is perhaps worth noting that the two corrections we had made to George Conger’s tally at the Living Church, appear to be valid. George Conger had reported that Keith Whitmore of Atlanta (formerly the diocesan of Eau Clair) voted no on D025, however our review of the audio indicated a YES vote, and that is what the official tally shows as well. Whitmore is a YES on D025. Conger also had not recorded a vote for Scott Mayer, Diocesan of Northwest Texas (his vote was inaudible on the audio). We’d seen a published source claiming Mayer voted NO and so that was what we published. The official tally does indeed record that Mayer voted NO on D025.
It is also worth noting that the current list of Anaheim Statement signatories is up to at least 34 and perhaps 35 (Virtue adds Charles Jenkins of Louisiana as a signatory – can any reader from Louisiana confirm that?). You can see the full list of 34 names as confirmed by The Living Church here.
Again, please let us know if anyone finds the official tally for C056. Thanks.
The meeting started at 10:30. We are still meeting. The atmosphere is focused, intense, deeply trusting of one another and the bishop, and with a sense that the stakes are very very high.
Here is the subtext: “In other words, +Katharine and Bonnie, your way leads to a federation of autonomous churches. I want no part of that. What I lead is a community of churches in the Anglican tradition, and I am not about to let you hijack it. See those words ‘the possibility of a global consensus among the Anglican churches’? A global consensus, ‘such as would continue to make sense of the shape and content of most of our ecumenical activity’? That is what is driving me. It is spelled ‘C – o – v – e – n – a – n – t.'”
Dr. Williams uses the word “ecumenical” no less than eight times in his response. That is no accident. Remember that he had a “friendly meeting” with the Pope in May 2008, and that he arranged for a deliberately strong ecumenical delegation at Lambeth later that summer, including the Vatican’s Cardinal Dias, whom he invited to speak to the assembled bishops. He has his eye on the main ecumenical prize — a greater unity between Canterbury and Rome (not a complete reversal of the Reformation, but a full recognition of Anglican orders would be a good start). The path of ECUSA leads emphatically away from this prize. (The Church of England itself threatens to derail it as well, if it approves women as bishops; but remember that Dr. Williams weighed against the measure in Synod, reminding everyone about the “heavy and serious ecumenical cost” of going forward.)
He not only says that the path of ECUSA is contra-ecumenical; he suggests that bishops of ECUSA will no longer be appropriate representatives for the Communion in ongoing ecumenical talks….
Still, he foresees a future “not in apocalyptic terms of schism and excommunication, but plainly as what they are: “two styles of being Anglican” pursuing their mission “with greater integrity and consistency,” even as they work out issues.
[Susan] Russell was untroubled by this idea. Ever since the Revolutionary War, when the U.S church broke with the Church of England, “American Anglicans are used to re-inventing structures in order to proclaim the Gospel and move forward,” she said.
And Duncan said Communion divisions already “outpace Williams. The speed at which the Archbishop of Canterbury has dealt with the crisis in the Anglican Communion is something faster than glacial ”” but it’s not too much faster. We’ll see where the whole Communion goes, but we are far more interested in doing the mission of the church in society than occupying ourselves with what the old structures will do.”
The archbishop attended the convention for two days and specifically asked delegates not to approve either of the two measures.
Now he is suggesting in “Communion, Covenant and Our Anglican Future,” that the Anglican Communion might move to a two-tiered structure under which certain of its members, including the Episcopal Church, could not participate in certain ecumenical meetings or official gatherings.
And in a nod to breakaway groups such as the roughly 100,000 former Episcopalians who have joined the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), he wrote that if a province — such as the Episcopal Church, though he did not specify in that paragraph — decides not to adhere to Anglican mores, “any elements within it” can sign on instead, he wrote.
He also criticized the Episcopal Church’s decision to nullify the Anglican Communion’s ban on gay bishops.
“Their chosen lifestyle is not one that the Church’s teaching sanctions,” he wrote, “and thus it is hard to see how they can act in the necessarily representative role that the ordained ministry, especially the episcopate, requires.”
Williams’ article drew a mixed response in the U.S.
The Rev. Susan Russell, president of Integrity, the Episcopal gay advocacy group, said she was disappointed that Williams portrayed the U.S. moves toward inclusion for gays and lesbians as “solely a political or rights-based position” when the Episcopal Church has cited a theological basis. But she welcomed keeping the communion together in a way that would not classify branches as superior or inferior.
“What the archbishop is really stating is the reality: that the structures that have served the Anglican Communion historically need some work,” Russell said. “The 21st century is different than the 16th century.”
Canon Kendall Harmon, a traditionalist leader in the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, said while there are positives in Williams’ latest attempt to hold the Communion together, the Anglican leader left unanswered key questions about how a two-tiered system would function.
“It’s going to increase the chaos in the province of the American church, and in the Anglican Communion,” Harmon said.
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori on July 27 notified the standing committee of the Diocese of Northern Michigan that the necessary consents to the ordination and consecration of the Rev. Kevin Thew Forrester as bishop were not received within the prescribed time period and therefore his election was “null and void.”
The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion of which it is a part (at least for now) bear all the marks of dictionary-defined tradition. The Church of England is the oldest Protestant denomination in the English-speaking world, ancestor and antagonist of Methodists, English Baptists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, and Quakers. The Episcopal establishment in Virginia and surrounding colonies was every bit as old and firmly rooted as the Congregational establishment in New England. From stately signs out front to elegant windows behind the priest, countless Episcopal churches exude nobility, with the overtones of high ideals and high status intended. And yet the church is embroiled in an ugly, messy, knock-down drag-out fight. As MacIntyre would have it, this, too, is a hallmark of tradition.
If that is the case, if a living tradition not only must weather arguments but in fact is a sprawling argument, then who needs tradition? Haven’t Americans, with their penchant for leaving behind Old World identities, denominational ties, and boring hometowns chosen the wiser course? Not so fast. MacIntyre posits that traditions provide context and meaning for human practices while also identifying goals””goods””toward which to strive. These are things worth thinking about, and worth arguing about. People who shrink the circle of their connections until it is scarcely larger than themselves still have to find satisfying answers to these questions, but they have to do it alone.
I find it very useful to think of churches, institutions, and traditions of all sorts as historically extended, socially embodied arguments. I like any interpretive lens that incorporates history, of course, and I also like the way this formula embraces real people and their often angular opinions. I am not a theologian or a philosopher, and my brain doesn’t process abstractions well. But I certainly notice a brawl, on the evening news or in the archives of the periodicals I study, and I’m driven to figure out who is arguing what, and why, and what they believe is at stake. Conflict makes institutions flex muscles they would otherwise lose to atrophy, and it forces individuals to articulate beliefs that can turn to mush beneath presumed consensus. The saying goes, “It’s all over but the shouting,” but as I observe history unfolding, the shouting proves that “it,” the living tradition, has a ways to go.
The recent General Convention of the Episcopal Church in Anaheim, CA, held few surprises. As we expected, actions taken by the bishops and representatives of the remaining Episcopal dioceses continue to support teaching and morality that is contrary to Christian Scriptures and practice. The convention’s actions place them further outside the norms and fellowship of the Anglican Communion. We had hoped The Episcopal Church would listen to other Anglicans, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, and turn back. They have not.
Even the claim of Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori that a focus on individual salvation through a relationship with Jesus was “heresy” is not surprising, considering her past statements suggesting there are many ways to salvation apart from Jesus Christ.
What most concerns us are our friends in local churches who decided to stay in the Episcopal Church after our diocese realigned last fall. We know many of them object to the actions taken by their General Convention. We are saddened that those who tried to stand against the tide are now pushed further to the fringes of their own church. Our hope is that all faithful Anglicans in central Illinois will feel welcome in the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) which our diocese helped found, and move forward together with us in local and world mission in the ACNA.
We invite all in our communities to visit our churches, learn more about the Anglican Communion, and join us in bringing the world to Christ.
The Standing Committee
The Diocese of Quincy, Anglican Province of the Southern Cone/ACNA
The Church of the Redeemer in Squirrel Hill is a gay-friendly parish that had felt marginalized in the original diocese.
“We are really happy in this new configuration,” said the Rev. Cynthia Bronson Sweigert.
But she stays in touch with friends in the Anglican diocese, and they compared notes on their diocesan conventions.
“We had all experienced a convention that was much more positive and happy than in the past,” she said. “Schism is a negative thing. I really agree with that. But yet, it feels like an abstraction. The reality is that we were in an unhappy marriage for so long that we needed to divide before there could ever be any hope of reconciliation.”
Bishop Johnson said he believes that God is at work in all of it.
“We don’t always know for certain just how. I don’t, and Bishop Duncan doesn’t,” he said.
“But we have to believe that we’re called to do the work that our Lord wants us to do, each in his own way, and not look back.”
Surprisingly, the court’s decision to grant the motion is no longer the bad piece of news it would have been had it happened on February 25, or shortly thereafter. I write this post immediately after receiving word of the court’s ruling, in order to forestall the impact of the trumpet-blaring from Bishop Lamb, his supporters, and the Episcoleft blogworld that will now inevitably follow.
The reason why the ruling is not bad news for the defendants any longer is quite simple: the case itself has moved on. The parties are no longer concerned with the second amended complaint, which was the subject of the court’s ruling. The plaintiffs have now filed, and the Schofield defendants have now answered, their fourth amended complaint in this case. That fourth amended complaint contains whole new theories about the alleged collusion between the various defendants (including the Bishop’s law firm) to remove property from the Episcopal Church (USA) and its allegedly still-existing diocese.
A motion for summary adjudication of a single cause of action, just like a motion for summary judgment on an entire complaint, is framed by the pleadings that are at issue in the case — meaning the most current pleadings. It is, therefore, in my view a meaningless act to grant adjudication with regard to the second amended complaint, since it is no longer the operative pleading.
Like all people, I am susceptible to the occasional situational depression. Along life’s journey, it is inevitable that we will encounter disappointment, suffering and hardship. It is natural to be emotionally impacted by painful things. But apart from the ordinary ebbs and flows of life, I am by nature an optimist. Like the old farmer who was asked if he could explain the theology of the Book of Revelation, the simple answer God wins is a sufficiently adequate response for most of life’s persistent questions. For that reason, I certainly take church “politics” and General Convention shenanigans seriously, but I don’t think that I allow them to dwell oppressively in my heart. My friend Keith Lackey, having endured decades of watching the futility of Georgia Tech football, remarked to me not too long ago, I have reached the stage in my life where I do not allow 19 year olds to ruin my weekend. We Gamecock fans have not reached that point of maturity and spiritual growth, but I am delighted for Dr. Lackey! And if I can borrow his phraseology, I have reached the point where I will not allow General Convention to ruin my faith! I do not believe that it is simplistic to believe that God still plans great things for his church. Jesus wins and indeed has won. The Church of the Holy Communion is an exciting and vibrant place to worship, serve, and proclaim the Gospel, and it will continue to be so. You may all be comforted and assured of that.
Having stated my cheery optimism in our ultimate destination let me say just a word or two about the present situation. First, it is important to declare that our disagreements are not primarily about human sexuality. Have you watched the little television interview with Bishop Lawrence I sent via e-mail? If not, please do so. It is excellent. His diagnosis is that the Christian Church is losing the culture wars because we have often spoken against certain behaviors as if they occurred in isolation. The divorce rate among Christians is not statistically different from the divorce rate among non-Christians. The same goes for the percentage of abortions, infidelities, etc. etc. So when one group of Christians seeks “acceptance and accommodation” for their own behavior while denying such acceptance for the behavior of others, is it any wonder that our tone sounds preachy and hypocritical? On that front, we will never gain an inch of ground until we are honest about the reality of sin, our own compromises with Christian moral standards, and the grace of God alone which can heal. Then, and only then will our witness to the Biblical and theological principles that undergird our understanding of human sexuality make any sense to a hurting and broken world.
So, if sex isn’t precisely the problem, what is? The answer: Authority and Ecclesiology. What is the Church? Where does it get its authority? That is where the fault line actually is to be found. Do you remember the complaint and criticism of American foreign policy a few years ago (at the beginning of the war in Iraq)? You Americans have imposed your will without consideration of the thoughts and feelings of the rest of us! I think it is fair to say that whether one agrees or disagrees with the strategy, we would all have to admit that the perception was that Americans had acted unilaterally and with arrogance. Whether or not that is actually the case, I will leave to your private opinion and History to determine. But if you will, I would like to suggest that the same potentially problematic methodology is in play here. In politics, it was generally those with left-of center sympathies who were the loudest critics of unilateralism. But in church affairs, those with a decidedly left-of-center emphasis have employed precisely the same tactics that once outraged them”¦and may I say, with disastrous consequences.
Protestant Congregationalists can have all the diversity they please, because there is no “higher” authority than each local congregation. Catholic Christians are “Catholics” precisely because they believe in a Catholic or universal and common faith held by all people, at all times in all places. The American Church cannot have it both ways. We cannot claim to be a part of the world-wide Anglican Communion, and at the same time reject with callous impunity the feelings and sensibilities of the vast majority of the family”¦ or if we do, we should not be surprised if there are consequences.
So what next? A response from the Archbishop of Canterbury will surely follow. When? I could not say. +++Rowan, like God and St. Peter does not count slowness as some count slowness. But even the parousia is still expected.
Secondly, Bishop Lawrence will meet with the Deans and Standing Committee.
Thirdly, he will meet with all the Clergy on August 13 (even vacation will not prevent me from attending that!)
And finally, I am calling a Congregational Meeting for September 20 (after 10:30 Mass) so that we all may share our hopes, concerns and opinions.
In the meantime, we shall do as we ever do, celebrate the Holy Mysteries, preach the Word urgently, in season and out, love God with all our heart”¦ and try as very best we can, to love all our neighbors as ourselves.
With prayers, love and blessings,
–The Rev. Dow Sanderson is rector, Church of the Holy Communion, Charleston, South Carolina
Given those realities (again, from TEC’s own reports and stats), the loss of just a person or two can have a major impact:
* + The loss of one major financial donor, by death or departure, can cripple the budget of a small church. It can be the difference between full- or part-time clergy, paid or volunteer secretary or music leader, hiring staff or keeping a building up to code for use.
* + The loss of one major “doer” in a small or aged congregation means that some ministry will not be done, or not done well. No usher greets the visitors. Nobody makes coffee for fellowship time. Nobody has a strong enough voice to lead the hymns and they are mumbled. Nobody tries to do programs for the few kids or teens who might be left.
Then, the Prayer Book and Litury legislative committee brought to the floor of the House of Bishops (where such legislation originates) a resolution that called for the development of liturgical resources for the blessing of same gender unions, along with a generous flexibility in the use of rites in those civil jurisdictions where marriage equality is already (or may become) a reality. The debate was vigorous and positive. It looked as if we were going to move forward. Then a bishop rose to propose that legislating this issue was counterproductive. It was moved to send this to a small working group to come up with a “better way.” This motion passed, and I feared that this move was an attempt to get us to do nothing, or worse, to make our own statement as bishops, completely sidestepping the fact that we were meeting, not as a lone House of Bishops, but as the General Convention, which includes laity and clergy.
In an effort to forestall this move, I signed up to be a part of the small working group (Presiding Bishop Katharine had invited any who wanted to be a part of the group to volunteer). What followed was perhaps the most signficant “moment” of the Convention for me.
We met late into the night on Wednesday night. Some 25 bishops representing the entire spectrum of opinion, from the most conservative to the most liberal. On Wednesday night, using the style of the African Indaba process from the Lambeth Conference, we each simply spoke about where we were on this issue. NEVER in my six years as a bishop have I experienced the holy speaking and holy listening I experienced that night. Each bishop in turn spoke their truth — the pain and difficulty they’ve experienced in their dioceses as a result of the controversy, the personal burdens they’ve shouldered, the pain of gay and lesbian people in their dioceses who are not sure whether they are valued as full members of this church and their pastoral needs as children of God. Each spoke of what they needed to go home with. Each was honest and vulnerable about what they could give up for the good of the whole. It is hard to describe the vulnerability and honesty with which each bishop contributed.
We took all this to our prayers and to bed, and returned at 7:00 the next morning to decide what all this meant for the resolution before us. The vulnerability and honesty continued in this working session. What resulted was a resolution to bring back to the House that represented that group’s “best way forward,” although there was no attempt to lock anyone into voting for it or to commit to every word.
At our afternoon session, the resolution was presented, along with a brief account of our precious time together. Then we talked about the resolution at our tables of eight, for close to half an hour. Then the debate began. There were a few amendments offered — some passed, some failed. But the resolution we had crafted remained reasonably intact.
Just as we were nearly ready to vote, a bishop rose and proposed “discharging” the resolution (in effect, NOT voting on it and making it “go away”). This move to not deal with the issue failed by a substantial (3 to 1) margin. It seemed clear that the Bishops knew that we could not duck out of this one. A roll call was requested, so no bishop could hide behind a voice vote. The time had come to declare ourselves. When the resolution came to a vote, it passed by a whopping 3.5 to 1 margin. Interestingly, some of the bishops who had voted to make the whole issue go away, when finally having to vote, voted “yes!” There were some bishops who voted “yes” who had NEVER voted “yes” on any gay-affirmative resolution before. This vote was overwhelmingly positive. Everyone seemed stunned.
Thanks to the work of a number of T19 readers, led by Karen B., here is an unofficial tally of all the Bishops’ roll call votes from GC09.
It includes the roll call votes for:
— Resolution D025 (basically overturning B033 which urged restraint on consecration of further non-celibate homosexual bishops, etc.)
— Rowe Amendment to discharge, (i.e. “kill without voting”) Resolution C056
— Resolution C056 (allowing development of SSB liturgies and “generous pastoral response”)
— Also, the currently known signatories to the “Anaheim Statement” are noted.
The listing is based on vote by vote review of the audio files of the roll calls for D025 and C056, and also draws heavily on the Rev. George Conger’s report for the Living Church. (however the tally does not exactly match Conger’s tally. There are 3 or 4 differences based either on what was heard on audio, or other published reports of how a bishop voted.) There are detailed notes and links to sources at the bottom of the table.
Note: the totals for D025 match the published totals. However the totals for the Rowe Amendment and C056 are slightly off by 2-3 votes. There are several votes which are impossible to hear clearly in the audio files. So these tallies should be used with caution, although they are believed to be 99% accurate.
Please send Kendall or us elves any corrections. We will of course post the official tallies from TEC once they are released.
You can download/view the PDF version of the roll call tallies table here
We’re going to try to post the full table here on the blog, but that may be difficult. Check back in a little while.