Read it all.

The final wording was not identical to the House of Deputies. The vote was overwhelming: 99-45-2

The Bishops had a roll call vote–you can see who voted which way here.

Just watch and listen at General Convention, especially to the leadership. Where does the problem lie? Almost always elsewhere. Other people or Provinces in the Anglican Communion, the reasserters in the Episcopal Church, and on and on it goes. Say what you want about Katharine Jefferts Schori’s opening sermon (and I found many of the critiques wide of the mark), but the locus of blame was elsewhere.

Now these are only examples, and many more can be given. But do listen closely to the absence of TEC’s self-criticism at General Convention 2009. The silence is deafening–KSH.

Update: The media briefing from today, July 13, had Bishop Michael Smith of North Dakota, Bishop Stacy Sauls of Lexington, Sally Johnson of Minnesota, Ernie Bennett of Central Florida, and Emily Morales of Puerto Rico. It is in this briefing in that you can hear Bishop Saul’s comments. Go to this website then find the “On Demand” section and thereafter look for the “July 13, 2009 Media Brief” picture and click on it.

Perhaps this serves as a model of how the Episcopal Church now does theology. The friend’s priest was ignoring ordination, the rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer and the bishop’s direction. The person talking to me was also ignoring all that, but she had “reflected” upon the question at hand, and, mirabile dictu, she came to the very conclusion that she wanted to come to!

I suppose that when people find that Scripture and the Tradition place limits on what General Convention can do, the General Convention majority must think to themselves, “Well, if you don’t get it, you just don’t get it.”

Read the whole thing.

The big news of the day is that the House of Deputies approved resolution D025, a response to B033, the resolution passed at General Convention in 2006 that placed a moratorium on the election of gay bishops.

Sorry to boggle you with all that convention-ese of resolution names and numbers.

I think it’s important to point out what this resolution does and doesn’t do, before we all start wringing our hands and doing the Chicken Little thing. The sky has not fallen. Even one of the deputies who crafted the bill said, “This is not a great leap forward.”

Read it all.

Check it out (16 page pdf).

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

We have reached the mid-point, and I want to give you some impressions. This is a remarkably different General Convention than any of the previous six I have attended as a Bishop. I would characterize all the previous Conventions as highly contentious. This one is not. We still have the same recurrent issues ahead of us, but the “conservative” wing is so greatly diminished that its voice is almost irrelevant.

I made that comment to one person who questioned whether I really meant it, “Irrelevant? Don’t you mean “hated?” No, there is no sense of animosity here. The conservatives state their position(s) respectfully and they are treated with respect in return. It is just that they are so hugely outnumbered that it doesn’t matter.

At the open hearings on the sexuality questions the “progressives” outnumber the “conservatives” somewhere between six and ten to one. I have been proud of the members of the Central Florida deputation entering into the debate, but often they have been nearly the only ones speaking on behalf of a “traditionalist” position. (Some of our folks have been approached and questioned by members of the “Youth Presence” that is here who seem never to have heard a “traditionalist” position articulated previously.)

All of which is to say that passage of some sort of authorization of same-sex blessings seems nearly a foregone conclusion. Two main arguments have emerged for doing so.

The first is “all the sacraments [and access to all offices and positions of leadership] for all the baptized.” This is the new basis for the position of the “Consultation” – a coalition of “progressive” activist groups including Integrity, the Oasis, Beyond Inclusion, etc. I think it is a complete misunderstanding of the nature of baptism, conversion, salvation, and what it means to be a member of the Body of Christ, but it has now become pervasive: “If I am unworthy of being ordained – or having my relationships blessed – why did you baptize me?”

The second is that we need to be “generous” in providing access to blessings in those (currently six) states where same-sex “marriage” is now authorized. It is being said that as many as twenty states may have authorized such “marriages” by the end of this triennium [how can anyone know this?], and the Bishops in those states need to be given the right to authorize their clergy to bless such unions.

There are over 30 resolutions addressing these matters in a variety of ways. My own sense at this point is that B033 from three years ago, pushed through at the last minute by the heavy endorsement of +Katharine Jefferts Schori, will not be formally rescinded or repealed, but rather we will “move beyond” it by giving some kind of limited authority to Bishops to make their own decisions about these things.

There may well be some sort of “conscience clause” saying that those who cannot accept such an innovation will not be required to do so. (The problem with that, of course, is that it can be over-ridden in the future, as was the case with regard to women’s ordination.)

Even a limited authorization BY THE GENERAL CONVENTION would put The Episcopal Church officially at variance with one of the key provisions of the Windsor Report and the Dar es Salaam Communique, and the Communion Partner Bishops will oppose it as vigorously as possible. (Not that our opposition will prevail.)

+KJS’s opening sermon provoked much discussion. To many she seemed to be saying that there is no such thing as personal, individual salvation. I think that is a misreading of what she was trying to say. I THINK she meant there is always a corporate dimension to the work of Christ, i.e., to be reconciled to God is to (have to) be in a new relationship to other people, as well. The “first and great” commandment has “another, like it.” “Whoever says, ‘I have come to know him,’ but does not obey his commandments is a liar…” (I wish she had said it a bit more clearly!)

Southern California is beautiful this time of year, and I am told it is about ten degrees cooler than usual – mid 70s, a nice break from Central Florida’s 90s! It is very weird to look out my hotel window and see Space Mountain about a block away (and smaller than it should be!) The prices are outrageous – a Continental Breakfast is $13, room service includes both an 18% gratuity AND a $3.00 service charge.

The atmosphere of Convention is cordial, the hours are long, and the heavy lifting is still ahead. The good news is this will all be over in another five days.

Love to all of you,

–(The Rt. Rev.) John W. Howe is Bishop of Central Florida

This is a paraphrase, she was speaking very fast:

1.SCLM in consultation with HOB theological committee”¦collect and create liturgies for presentation at the next general convention

2. That the SCLM devise an open process for its work in this matter seeking input from all interested diocese and individual throughout the Anglican communion”¦

3. Further”¦that resolved, that”¦all bishops noting particularly those within diocese within civil jurisdiction where civil unions and marriages are legal may provide pastoral response”

4. Honoring the theological diversity no bishop or clergy shall be required or compelled to participate in any liturgy or pastoral response

5…missed it

Question called

Bishops: All vote yes”¦.

Henry: I would like to make a minority report on the third resolve”¦if I can do that I will vote yes.

6 yes to 0 no

House of Deputies

1 no vote and 26 yes

Read it all.

Under the heading, “How to get married in an Episcopal Church….”

“Episcopalians love weddings. We see them as an earthly representation of the mysterious union between Christ and Christ’s Church. The love of two people that leads them toward a life-long commitment to one another reflects God’s commitment to always be by our side. And since God accepts all of us, some of our parishes offer the blessing of same gender couples. So the bottom line is, if you’d like to get married in an Episcopal Church, contact the parish you’re interested in and ask about their particular guidelines. They differ slightly from place to place, but each is intended to help the marriage succeed, flourish, and outlast any church building.”

—The Episcopal Handbook (Morehouse Publishing), p. 69

Read it all.

Check it out.

Dr Rowan Williams made clear his concern after clergy and laity in The Episcopal Church voted at the General Convention in California to overturn a moratorium on gay ordinations.

Clergy and laity in the US backed a motion that “acknowledges that God has called and may call any individual in the church to any ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church, in accordance with the discernment process set forth in the Constitution and Canons of the church.”

This means that anyone can be ordained regardless of sexuality.

If the US bishops back the move when they vote on it later today or tomorrow, a formal split in the Anglican Communion seems inevitable.

Read it all.

What’s the buzz? Perhaps the first thing to note is that the absence of those who left the church to form ACNA has been felt. The conservative presence, many delegates say, is noticeably smaller, and somewhat muted in tone. It is, perhaps, the natural resignation of a group that feels a Rubicon has already been crossed, and which does not feel anymore that its causes will find much agreement at the Convention. But although that may well be true, it is not the whole story. Dioceses such as South Carolina and Dallas have their eyes trained toward larger Anglican Communion matters””although the largest portion of the Episcopal Church may well choose to walk apart from the rest of Anglicanism, for their part they intend to stay the course and stick with Canterbury and the Communion. Rowan Williams, for his part, attended the Convention and signaled his support for their cause.

And what will come of it all? Of course, at this point, it’s hard to say. The Convention is divided into two houses, the House of Bishops and the House of Deputies (made up of laypeople and clergy), both of which must agree if any legislation is to be passed. The House of Deputies, from all reports, seems quite strongly committed to passing same-sex blessings in some form, and also to changing the church’s present position of restraint on homosexual bishops. The House of Bishops, however, may be another story. Many bishops are fresh from the Lambeth Conference of a year ago, with minds more attuned to the Communion-wide and ecumenical implications of their actions. So, too, many bishops have looked closely at survey data and demographic reports that show a sharp decline in membership following the consecration of Gene Robinson in 2003, as well as high levels of parish-level and diocesan conflict. Neither the Episcopal Church nor the wider Anglican Communion may be ready for further changes, they may reason. And initial reports are, indeed, that many bishops are reasoning just this way. Gene Robinson, for his part, has expressed consternation that the bishops seem not be marching in step with the House of Deputies.

Read it all.

The Rev. Gay Jennings (Ohio), chair of the Committee on World Mission, said the committee chose this resolution as its vehicle to describe the mind of the church. “It is the best reflection of where we are today as a church on episcopal elections and the Anglican Communion,” she said at the start of debate.

The question of whether or not this resolution overturns Resolution B033, passed at the 2006 General Convention, that called for The Episcopal Church to “exercise restraint” in ordaining practicing gay and lesbian persons to the Episcopate was not clear. When a deputy from Central Florida asked if it did, Chairman Jennings said only that the resolution is “operating within the canons of the church.”

The deputy replied that he took that “as open to interpretation. Some will regard this as ending B033 and some will not; the two bodies that must interpret it are diocesan standing committees and bishops.” He added that when “we send fuzzy signals” to the Anglican Communion, “they get confused about our relationship.”

Read it all.

The big news, of course, is that the House of Deputies considered D025 — a beautifully crafted resolution which did not expressly repeal the ban on gay partnered people from being called, elected and consecrated bishops, but simply and elegantly stated that we have canonical processes for the selection and “vetting” of nominees and bishops-elect, and this Church means to follow those processes. They have served us well, the resolution implied, and we intend to follow them WITHOUT extra-canonical promises or restrictions. All attempts to alter the proposed resolution failed. In effect, this resolution ends the informal ban on such bishops-elect. Its power is that it returns us to the canons of the Church, which have always served us well and which allow the Holy Spirit to call those whom the Spirit calls.

I was in the gallery when this vote (which was overwhelming, with a 2/3 majority in EACH of the orders of laity and clergy!) was announced. Rules of the House prevented any display of emotion, support or non-support. But the exuberance of the Deputies could be felt in the air. We had finally moved beyond that dark cloud of last Convention’s B033 and into the Church of the future.

Read it all.

Halfway point. Daunting list of decisions not yet made. They are the most complex. We feel as if we’ve been straining at gnats and still must swallow camels. We feel like we’ve been here a long time.

We’ve settled into a routine. Parliamentary decisions are making more sense. The shuffle between legislation and worship; liturgy and politics mean the same thing ”“ the work of the people. We say “Aye” in one hall and “Amen” in the other hall. They are the same.

This is where we ought to be. It takes time to let the big decisions percolate. Our uncertainties are among the most familiar themes in scripture.

Read it all.

Here’s something interesting. We are handed out carbon copy forms the chair of the delegation has to fill out officially recording the delegations vote. If these forms are incorrect your vote will not count. See if you can spot what’s wrong with the first form that South Carolina got handed….

Read it all.

The Episcopal Church sits at a crossroads. The Church, on several fronts, must choose between a static, centuries-old portrayal of Jesus and the Bible, a perspective increasingly remote from twenty-first century American life, and a dynamic portrayal of Jesus, retelling his story in images and language relevant and comprehensible to post-moderns. Cutting-edge challenges exist not only with respect to human sexuality but also at other points at which theology collides with advances in science.

Will the Episcopal Church succumb to fundamentalist pressures from within and without the Anglican Communion to become a Church that seeks creedal uniformity? The cost of choosing that direction is to concretize Jesus’ charisma, the vital Spirit of the living God. This displaces risky personal encounters that can lead to life-giving transformation with safe and standardized creedal orthodoxy. Such formulas are like good Christian art: appropriate to a particular moment in the spatio-temporal matrix and not eternally definitive.

Read it all.

The Six Bishops Are:

Blackburn
Winchester
Europe
Rochester
Beverley
Burnley

An Email from overnight:

Here’s how I would analyze inconsistency with B033 under general principles of law.

A legislative body can repeal an old resolution (or, for that matter, an old law) BY IMPLICATION, without naming and explicitly repealing the old resolution

If GC 2009 adopts a resolution inconsistent with B033, the rule of thumb would be that the new resolution implicitly repeals B033 TO THE EXTENT of the inconsistency.

The effect of the new resolution on the old one is ultimately a question of legislative intent.

The Archbishop of Canterbury told General Synod today that he ‘regrets’ the decision by The Episcopal Church house of deputies to overturn the moratorium on the ordination of gay bishops. At the same time, the Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori has warned the Church of England that it should not recognise the new Anglican Church in North America, arguing ‘schism is not a Christian act.’

Responding to a question by Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstream, Dr Williams said: ‘As for General Convention it remains to be seen I think whether the vote of the House of Deputies will be endorsed by the House of Bishops. If the House of Bishops chooses to block then the moratorium remains. I regret the fact that there is not the will to observe the moratorium in such a significant part of the Church in North America but I can’t say more about that as I have no details.’ Dr Williams also responded to concerns about the funding for the ‘listening process’ saying that he had been personally involved in securing that funding and had been completely unaware of any ‘agenda’ attached to the funding.

Read it all and note for the umpteenth time, this is not my headline, it is theirs. Also note that Ruth Gledhill has an audio link to what the Archbishop has said and you need to take the time to listen to it yourself–KSH.

Note also Ruth Gledhill’s own comments: This is all pretty scarily serious and it is difficult to see where else it is going to end apart from in schism.

Having had a night to ponder and pray on it, this is my read of the attempt of D025. I think the reference in the floor debate to the “craft” of the resolution by the committee was revealing.

Whatever happened to principled theological liberalism [and blog readers know I do not like nor do I use this term]? If the House of Deputies leadership believes B033 should be repealed (and everyone knows that is the case), they should have the courage to repeal it.

They should also have the honesty to say what they are doing in unmistakably clear terms. The more frayed relationships get, and the more trust is in tatters, the more careful attention to precise communication matters.

The presiding bishop of the U.S. Episcopal Church warned the Church of England not to foment schism in America, responding to a threat made over the possibility that the U.S. church will start ordaining actively gay bishops.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori said Sunday, in response to questions from The Washington Times, that calls by conservatives in the Church of England for recognition of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) over gay-related issues would wound her church, already split by the secession of conservative dioceses and congregations to form the ACNA.

She urged Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to remember the “pain of many Episcopalians in several places of being shut out of their traditional worship spaces, and the broken relationships, the damaged relationships between people who have gone and people who have stayed.”

“Recognition of something like ACNA is unfortunately likely only to encourage” further secessions, she said, reminding the Church of England that “schism is not a Christian act.”

Read it all.

The Church of England has condemned the Church of Sweden’s authorization of rites for the blessing of same-sex unions, saying the decision will impair relations between the two churches and threatens the “fragile unity” of the Anglican Communion.

Copies of the June 26 letter, written by the Church of England’s Archbishops’ Council to the Archbishop of Uppsala, began circulating among members of the Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops on July 12, and may factor into the bishops’ debate on same-sex blessings at General Convention.

Adopting same-sex blessings, one bishop told The Living Church, would put the Episcopal Church in the same place as the Church of Sweden and could lead to a breach with the Church of England and wider Anglican Communion.

Written by the Rt. Rev. Christopher Hill on behalf of the Council for Christian Unity and the Rt. Rev. John Hind on behalf of the Faith and Order Advisory Group, the letter said the adoption of same-sex blessings by the Church of Sweden was “problematic.”

“Although there is continuing debate among Anglican about human sexuality, the teaching and discipline of the Church of England, like that of the Anglican Communion as a whole as expressed in the Lambeth Conference of 1998, is that it is not right either to bless same-sex sexual relationships or to ordain those who are involved in them.”

Read it all.

The next resolve, which is arguably the most significant in terms of its impact on B033, states that convention recognizes “that gay and lesbian persons who are part of such relationships have responded to God’s call and have exercised various ministries in and on behalf of God’s one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church and are currently doing so in our midst.”

When questioned by Charlie Holt of Central Florida as to the meaning that particular section implied, deputies Jennings and Douglas declined to speculate on how it would be interpreted by standing committees and bishops with jurisdiction.

At a press briefing after the House of Deputies recessed for the day, deputy Jennings said that Resolution B033 “urged restraint,” but did not impose any new canonical requirements. While acknowledging that the passage of Resolution D025 removed the recommendation for exercising restraint, she said the majority of standing committees and bishops with jurisdiction would in all likelihood continue to vote their individual conscience as defined in the church’s constitution and canons.

Read it all.

Rebecca Snow (Alaska) said that adopting D025 doesn’t compel action by anyone in the Anglican Communion. “It does not require anyone to do anything except to acknowledge the reality on the ground and to accept our polity, which we are so proud of, and the fact that we are governed by our Constitution and Canons and a discernment process that allows us to be open to God’s calling of all baptized persons.”

Several speakers who urged defeat of D025 feared what it would do to conservative voices within the Episcopal Church. The Rev. Ralph Stanwise (Quincy) said, “If we overturn the B033 moratorium we will in effect be urging many remaining conservatives and moderates among us and in our home dioceses, especially our most fragile ones, to search for the exit signs.”

Read it all.

It is going to pass, the only question is by how much–so it seems.

To me this section of the debate was important:

Holt from Central Florida: It appears that the answer to my question is neither yes nor no — that it is open to interpretation. Some will say B033 is ended and some not. There are two audiences that will need to interpret this resolution — our Standing Committees and bishops, as well as our Anglican partners. Both need clarity.

As was this:

Johnson of Minnesota: I stood before you three years ago intending to speak against B033, and found myself asking to give it to our PB as a gift. I ask now to give D025 as gift reflecting our messiness to the Anglican Communion but as authentic statement about who we are. Sometimes gifts aren’t appreciated when they are received. Sometimes later, you appreciate the gift. Sometimes never. This does not repeal B033. It states where we are now, clearly. We will do our discernment processes in accordance with our C&Cs, and Standing Committeees, discerning whether . . . I ask to please give ourselves as a gift to the Anglican Communion.

A now a vote by orders requested Central Florida Albany and South Carolina

Jim Naughton is liveblogging it. I have no video feed available which is bizarre.

Sarah Hey is liveblogging it here.

Then later, Bonnie Perry called me twice and told me that I had to testify this evening when the B033 testimony process happened. I confirmed that would testify and was early to sign up. I again sat near the front, and just before the session started, Gene Robinson came and sat right behind me. This time he was second to speak, and was very eloquent. I spoke maybe tenth out of the 35+ speakers. When I returned to my seat, Gene Robinson squeezed my shoulder and thanked me. After the whole session was over, several people I didn’t know thanked me for my statement.

Both sessions were recorded, maybe live TV (not sure) and there were several hundred people in the audience. The committees were probably 25+ in total both sessions – totally different members. Both the afternoon and evening sessions were filled with emotions, sad stories, talks about suicides, talks about 8 year old children worried because their rector told them their gay sibling was headed to hell because they were gay, talks by both gay and lesbian couples about being denied various rights of TEC because of their sexual orientation; people talking about how the wished the TEC would openly recognize them as full members of God’s community. The ratio of pro speakers to con speakers was dramatic – probably 4-5 to 1 on the pro change side of the equation.

The biggest uncertainty is where the House of Bishops will decide later in the GC process. Some question whether the House of Deputies will support the change, but many feel that the House of Deputies will eventually go for change. Much less confidence that the Bishops will support the change. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Read it all.