The leader of Midlands and Upstate Episcopalians said this week he remains in prayer and open talks with his fellow bishop in the Lowcountry in hopes of staving off a fracture within the state and the national church over gender issues.

The national church earlier this month approved a same-sex blessing rite and expanded ordination to include transgendered persons.

Bishop W. Andrew Waldo has tried to keep his diverse Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina unified despite theological differences over the controversial issues. He said this week he hopes that his friend, Bishop Mark J. Lawrence, leader of the more conservative and traditional Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, in the Lowcountry, will remain on that same path.

Read it all.

…I want to single out two considerations in my own words that lead me to a conclusion I will draw momentarily.

My first consideration is theological: Is this rite true? When I or any member of the clergy bless anyone, we use the form, “I bless you in the Name of God.” This is what may be called performative language: it performs the action that the words imply. We do not say, “I pray for,” or “I wish,” or “I think that” … God will do so and so. We are only authorized, however, to bless what God, in fact, blesses. And when we use these words, we had better have a clear warrant from Scripture or the theological tradition of the Church to back us up. No individual is competent to decide what God blesses, and no congregation or denomination is competent to do so either. Otherwise, we are merely guessing at best, and misleading people at worst.

My second consideration is closely related to the first: is it really pastoral? How may we give to people the assurance, the comfort and the strength of God’s blessing without the warrant of Scripture or the great Tradition, or even the agreement of our closest brothers and sisters in the Communion to which we maintain we belong? Indeed, how can we do so given the “theological diversity of this church” itself in “matters of human sexuality”? This seems to me to be an incoherent act. A pastoral blessing must rest on a more solid foundation than this. Furthermore, I must point to the “provisional” character of this blessing rite: I must ask our brothers and sisters in Christ who seek this rite if they are really satisfied with a “provisional” blessing? What happens if, or when, this rite is modified, or perhaps even rescinded? What General Convention gives, it can also take away! What kind of blessing is it that is subject merely to majority human vote?

Given these two considerations, my conclusion is predictable: I cannot give direction or permission for the use of the rite in this Diocese. I trust that this conclusion will not be understood to be either capricious or stubborn. The theological and pastoral stakes here are very great indeed. A bishop is ordained to “guard the faith, unity and discipline” of the Church. Given the teaching of Scripture, the Tradition as set forth in our own Book of Common Prayer, the witness of our Communion, and my own theological and pastoral concerns, I find no other alternative.
………..
Where do we stand now after July 12? I answer that we stand where we did on July 3. Our God-given mission remains the same. Our churches welcome all people into our fellowship, proclaim God’s Word, form disciples, strengthen our people for service and ministry, nurture one another in trust and commitment, and pray for one another and our world. We honor one God: the Father who created us, the risen Jesus who calls and transforms us, and the Spirit who strengthens us for mission and enables us to bear fruit that will last.

When people come to us, they rarely ever ask what our General Convention did. Instead they will ask, “Is God real to these people?” And then they will ask, “Is there a place for me here?” By our worship, our study, and our action together we answer that first question. By our openness and welcome we answer the second. “Welcome one another,” St. Paul wrote, “as Christ has welcomed you.” That is our mission. Now, and always.

Read it all and pdf is here

I am utterly serious when I describe myself as a radical centrist. It means that my very first principle as bishop when it comes to life and change within the community of faith is Jesus’ command to the disciple community to love one another as we have been loved, and to be willing to give up even our very lives for one another (John 15:12-13). To be a disciple is to be disciplined: disciplined in discernment, disciplined in theology, disciplined in action, disciplined in love. In his second letter, Peter writes, “For this very reason, you must make every effort to support your faith with goodness, and goodness with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with endurance, and endurance with godliness, and godliness with mutual affection, and mutual affection with love.”

My discipline is this: to listen deeply to the challenges and questions of all, from my position in that radical””and, I’m discovering, somewhat dangerous””center. My long-held and still-present desire to move forward on same-sex blessings has been given a new discipline upon listening to the questions of those who object to it and the questions of those who support it. Being the bishop of all requires of me an internal discipline that I am not free to ignore.

To those who object to same-sex blessings, my questions are these, among others:

– How, exactly, is Christian marriage threatened by the blessing of a relationship between two persons of the same sex?…

Read it all.

[Kendall] Harmon’s comment on holiness is surprising given the recent admission of Alan Chambers, president of Exodus international, that they cannot “cure” homosexuality after all. If I understand Harmon correctly he is saying that Jesus Christ transforms us to a holiness which is defined by the norms of the last two thousand years of Christianity. The problem with that statement is that the Holy Spirit hasn’t done that for me. And I know an awful lot of other people who haven’t been transformed into the shape defined by two thousand years of history; twenty centuries that have been wrought with conflict, war and oppression (I’m thinking Crusades, Inquisition, Thirty Years war, slavery). I have stopped trying to be heterosexual, I have stopped trying to be changed into that restrictive shape of holiness. Instead I look for the fruits of the Spirit in my life and ministry. And I see them.

So does the Episcopal Church. “To Set Our Hope on Christ”, an important theological statement written for the Nottingham meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council in 2005, says, “we note that members of our Church have begun to discern genuine holiness in the lives of persons of same-sex affection”. How much more so now we have experienced the gifts of ministry in the life and person of two bishops, as well as in the lives of the LGBT people we know and love.

We cannot and will not go back into the cookie-cutter holiness that demands that we conform to the social norms of a bygone era. Wasn’t that why Jesus constantly challenged the Pharisees? Wasn’t that why Paul was so opposed to circumcision and a return to the Jewish law?

Read it all.

Although the spiritual leader of Pensacola-area Episcopal churches is conflicted, he has decided to authorize blessing same-sex unions.

The Rt. Rev. Philip M. Duncan II, bishop of the 63-congregation Diocese of the Central Gulf Coast, stated in a letter to his flock of about 19,000 people: “I will consider each request for blessing individually, and I shall permit it where it has pastoral warrant.”

Duncan’s statement followed a decision by bishops at the Episcopal General Convention in Indianapolis this month to approve rites for gay and lesbian relationships….

Read it all.

The Rev. Jeffrey Miller, rector of The Parish Church of St. Helena in Beaufort, and the Rev. Charles Owens III, rector of The Church of the Cross in Bluffton, said they fully support and approve of Lawrence’s letter and views.

“Where we stand is very simple,” Miller said. “We stand foursquare behind the bishop, and we’re in total agreement with the letter that he wrote….”

The fourth area church, All Saints Episcopal Church on Hilton Head Island, staked a more moderate stance, but the Rev. Richard Lindsey, the church’s rector, said the congregation will comply with Lawrence’s views.

“I stand solidly behind the (national) Episcopal Church,” he said. “That’s not to say I’m not loyal to my bishop, but I tend to disagree. … We will honor where he stands because we are part of his diocese and he is our bishop.”

Read it all.

My Dear Brother and Sister Clergy in the Diocese of South Carolina,

The 77th General Convention embraced canonical changes and authorized rites that I, as bishop, felt I could not in good conscience embrace, assent to or pretend in the aftermath that a line had not been crossed. I believe it is important for you, the clergy of this diocese who are actively serving in parishes, to hear from me personally regarding this decision and particularly to know what I shared with the House of Bishops in our Private Session in Indianapolis on Wednesday afternoon July 11th. Certainly it is not for me to reveal what others may have said, as such matters are to be held as confidential. But I believe you are entitled to know what I shared in that session. These are demanding times within the life of the Episcopal Church and increasingly so for this Diocese of South Carolina. Therefore, I believe we need to meet””bishop and clergy to engage in pastoral conversation. I have scheduled a clergy day for this Wednesday, July 25th from 1:00””4:00 p.m. at St. Paul’s Summerville. Please make every effort to attend. I would not summon you on such short notice and during the summer if it were not of high importance. That does not mean, however, you should cancel your vacation plans.

Yours in Christ,

–(The Rt. Rev.) Mark Lawrence is Bishop of South Carolina

In a decision that could strain relations with the Catholic Church and within its own Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church has approved liturgical resources for the blessing of same-sex relationships.

The church’s House of Bishops voted 111-41 July 9 in favor of provisional use of the resources until the next General Convention, held every three years. About 80 percent of the church’s House of Deputies gave their approval July 10.

The secretary of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity called the decision “a huge obstacle on the path to Christian unity,” saying it would affect the Catholic-Episcopal dialogue in the United States.

Read it all. I trust everyone reading the blog to keep up with some basic aspects of General Convention. The phrase “not being on the floor during the vote” is not accurate in reference to the “vote” in question. The majority of the South Carolina deputation and the bishop left General Convention on the second to last day–KSH.

The Episcopal Diocese of Western Massachusetts will allow its clergy to bless same-sex couples, beginning the first Sunday of Advent.

Bishop Gordon P. Scruton and Bishop Elect Douglas J. Fisher made the announcement in a recent letter to clergy and laity.

“Our church has prayed, debated, and sought guidance for this decision for a number of years,” wrote the two bishops. “Same gender couples, committed in love, may now be blessed to enter into a lifelong covenant of fidelity with one another and the living God.”

Read it all.

Read it all.

Make sure to bookmark it and be ready to use it.

The bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Missouri, Bishop Wayne Smith, said in a statement that under his direction “the rites will be implemented carefully and pastorally, parish by parish, person by person.” The diocese, with about 14,000 members, encompasses the eastern half of the state.

Bishop Daniel Martins leads the 5,000 Episcopalians in the Springfield, Ill. diocese, which encompasses southern and eastern-central Illinois and includes congregations in Alton, Belleville, Carbondale, Edwardsville, Glen Carbon, Granite City and O’Fallon.

Martins voted in the minority against the resolution, and told the Post-Dispatch in an e-mail Wednesday that he had been “clear all along that anything like what we just passed” would not be implemented in his diocese.

Read it all.

“We voted on a number of note worthy things[at General Convention 2012],” Jefferts Schori said. “We passed a trial right for blessing same-sex unions. It will be used on a provisional basis in some dioceses, with the Bishop’s permission only, for three years, and then we will consider something like that again.”

Read it all.

Yesterday the House of Deputies concurred with the decision of the House of Bishops to approve resolution A049, “Authorize Liturgical Resources for Blessing Same-Gender Relationships”. There was a roll call vote in the HOB where I voted “no”. In the HOD vote by Orders, the majority in both Orders from Fond du Lac voted against the resolution. However, the resolution passed by about a 75% majority in each of the Houses.

I would suggest you go to the web site and read the text of the resolution yourself, but let me make a few comments here.
The liturgy referenced in A049 is clearly a service of “Blessing”. It may look similar to the marriage service but it is not and cannot be used as a marriage liturgy. In Genesis God created us male and female; at Cana in Galilee Jesus recognized and honored the covenant of the marriage between a man and a woman; and the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin says that marriage is between one man and one woman. The General Convention is clearly stating this is not a marriage, but a blessing of a life-long relationship between two persons of the same sex.

The wording of the resolution was changed to read that this is not for “trial use” but for “provisional use”. “Provisional is defined as “temporary”, “short term” and “conditional”. My understanding is that this means the use of the liturgy is for a period of time, during which it will be studied. It is also conditional in that the use of the liturgy requires the approval of the local Bishop for use in that Diocese. Regarding the approval of the Bishop, the resolution states the liturgy be used “under the direction and subject to the permission of the bishop exercising ecclesiastical authority”.

Read it all.

Read it all.

Finally, there is potential for a constitutional crisis of major proportions should anyone in the Church even try to proceed under the new Title IV with respect to anything that the Diocese of South Carolina or any of its clergy may do. The reason for that statement is simple: the Diocese of South Carolina has not adopted, and will not adopt, the new Title IV because it regards those Canons as beyond the powers of General Convention to enact and remain consistent with ECUSA’s Constitution. And as noted many times before on this blog, the Canons of General Convention are without any binding force on any Diocese that refuses, on constitutional grounds, to recognize their validity.

And short of a Constitutional amendment to make General Convention the supreme legislative and judicial authority in the Episcopal Church (USA), there is nothing that anyone in ECUSA can do about that situation. It is the same situation we had in the United States when it was under the Articles of Confederation; Congress had no power to impose any of its laws on an individual State against its will — because there was no Supremacy Clause in the Articles. (It was by reason of their experiences with the stalemates thus generated between Congress and the several States that the Founders included a Supremacy Clause in the new Constitution drafted in 1787, and finally ratified in 1789. And tellingly, some of those same Founders chose not to include a Supremacy Clause for General Convention when they participated in 1789 in drafting ECUSA’s Constitution, also adopted by the several Dioceses in that same year.)

If a collision is coming, it will have to be one that the national leadership has actively sought by its actions to date, and that it will seek by its actions to come. Will that leadership be wise enough to pull back before it commits itself to still more? We shall have to bide our time, and see.

Read it all.

Yesterday Bishops Mark Lawrence and most of the South Carolina deputation left the Convention….

Bishop Mark is a dear friend of our diocese. Our prayers go out to him and his wife Allison and all of our friends in South Carolina. We met and counseled with them often in our Communion Partners caucus, and they were of great help in planning our legislative work. Their deputation spoke eloquently and with great conviction. We miss them today….

Read it all.

The bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina circulated a letter to his Lowcountry congregations today condemning the actions of the national Episcopal church on same-sex blessing and gender issues and said he would open talks this week about the future of the diocese in the U.S. church.

The letter from the Rt. Rev. Mark J. Lawrence is the clearest indication yet that he does not believe the conservative diocese can tolerate the latest changes in church doctrine approved at the 77th General Convention of the Episcopal Church that just concluded in Indianapolis….

…[The South Carolina diocese] had earlier sought alternative leadership… contending U.S. leaders did not represent the beliefs of [their] congregants. The Sunday letter seemed to significantly heighten that unease with the U. S. church. [Bishop Lawrence] said he plans to meet Monday with his Council of Advice and on Tuesday with the Diocesan Standing Committee. Beginning July 1, Lawrence said he would open meetings with deans and clergy.

Read it all.

[This post was originally’made ‘sticky’ at the head of the blog list of posts – with new posts below it – for a good while during the summer of 2012 (see also index)]
July 15, 2012
7th Sunday After Pentecost

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

Some of you have actively followed the decisions of the 77th General Convention of the Episcopal Church. Others have been blissfully unaware that our denomination even had a General Convention. We have. And the actions taken mark a significant and distressing departure from the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.

In conversations with clergy, and from the emails I have received, I know there is much uneasiness about the future….
Some of us are experiencing the well-known stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, and depression. And, of course, I must acknowledge there are those for whom the recent decisions are a cause for celebration. For me there are certainly things about which I was thankful at the convention in Indianapolis. I might even have taken encouragement from the resolutions that were passed regarding needed structural reform, and for the intentional work in the House of Bishops on matters of collegiality and honesty. Unfortunately, these strike me now as akin to a long overdue rearranging of the furniture when the house is on fire. Why do I say this?

There are four resolutions which were adopted that bring distressing changes to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church that every ordained person in this church has vowed “to engage to conform,” and which stand in direct conflict with the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this church has received them.

First, let me mention resolution C029. While this was amended during the debates in a more temperate direction, it still moves the Church further down the road toward encouraging the communion of the unbaptized which departs from two thousand years of Christian practice. It also puts the undiscerning person in spiritual jeopardy. (I Corinthians 11:27–32)

Plainly, the resolution that has received the most publicity is A049 which authorizes rites for Same-Sex Blessings. This resolution goes into effect in Advent 2012, but only upon the authority of the bishop of each diocese. It hardly needs to be said, but for the record let me say clearly, I will not authorize the use of such rites in the Diocese of South Carolina. Such rites are not only contrary to the canons of this diocese and to the judgment of your bishop, but more importantly I believe they are contrary to the teaching of Holy Scripture; to two thousand years of Christian practice; as well as to our created nature. Many theologians down through the centuries speak of what we are as human beings by Creation; what we are by the Fall; what we are through Redemption (that is in the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ); and what we shall be in our Glorification. Our marriage service in the Book of Common Prayer is rooted in this understanding. Because of this, it is biblical, it is Christian, and it is Anglican. I would also add, it is beautiful and it is true. Therefore the Episcopal Church has no authority to put asunder this sacramental understanding of marriage as established by God in creation and blessed through the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. It has no authority to do this either by revising the marriage rite to include same sex partners or by devising some parallel quasi-marital sacramental service. I remind you of the elegant words of our Prayer Book which echo the teaching of our Scriptures:

“The bond and covenant of marriage was established by God in creation, and our Lord Jesus Christ adorned this manner of life by his presence and first miracle at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. It signifies the mystery of the union between Christ and his Church, and Holy Scripture commends it to be honored among all people.”

This speaks of a “given-ness” in this age that is good, and is emblematic of our Christian Hope. It prepares us for the age to come; when God the Father summons his Church to the marriage supper of the Lamb.

There is however an even more incoherent departure from the teaching of Holy Scripture and from our Episcopalian and Anglican Heritage to be found in the General Convention’s passage of resolutions D002 and D019. These changes to our Church’s canons mark an even further step into incoherency. They open the door to innumerable self-understandings of gender identity and gender expression within the Church; normalizing “transgender,” “bi-sexual,” “questioning,” and still yet to be named ”“ self-understandings of individualized eros. I fail to see how a rector or parish leader who embraces such a canonical change has any authority to discipline a youth minister, Sunday school teacher, or chalice bearer who chooses to dress as a man one Sunday and as a woman another. And this is but one among many possibilities. Let me state my concern clearly. To embrace an understanding of our human condition in which gender may be entirely self-defined, self-chosen is to abandon all such norms, condemning ourselves, our children and grandchildren, as well as future generations to sheer sexual anarchy. So long as I am bishop of this diocese I will not abandon its people to such darkness.

Some have said to me, “But bishop the culture is accepting this. To continue to resist these innovations is to put ourselves on the wrong side of history.” I say to such thinking, you cannot be on the wrong side of History if you are on the right side of Reality. Archbishop William Temple was correct when he wrote over 70 years ago: the Church needs to be very clear in its public teaching so it can be very pastoral in its application.

This Monday afternoon I will be meeting with my Council of Advice. On Tuesday I will be meeting with our Diocesan Standing Committee. Then during the remainder of July I will be meeting with the deans and with clergy in various deaneries. Given these changes in the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church the question that is before us is: “What does being faithful to Jesus Christ look like for this diocese at this time? How are we called to live and be and act? In this present context, how do we make Biblical Anglicans for a Global Age?”

On the penultimate day of General Convention, in a Private Session in the House of Bishops, I asked for a point of personal privilege and expressed my heartfelt concerns about these changes. I listened to the words of others and then departed with prayer and charity. I left at that time because at least for me to pretend that nothing had changed was no longer an option. Now that I have returned to South Carolina it is still not an option. I ask that you keep me and the councils of our diocese in your prayers as you shall be in mine. We have many God-size challenges and, I trust, many God-given opportunities ahead.

Faithfully yours in Christ,

–(The Rt. Rev.) Mark Lawrence is Bishop of South Carolina

(Please note that if you wish to see a signed copy of this letter, you may find it there)–KSH.

Read it all.

Oklahoma Episcopal Bishop Edward J. Konieczny will take no action on the Episcopal Church’s approval this week of same-sex ceremonies until he meets with state priests and leaders.

The Episcopal Church, which has been a leader in the movement for full inclusion of gays and lesbians, on Tuesday approved an official liturgical rite to bless same-sex unions. The rite includes the exchange of vows and rings but is not being called a marriage ceremony.

“Once I return to Oklahoma, my intention is to gather the diocese, and we will discern together how we will respond to this resolution,” Konieczny said.

Read it all.

Linked in the Christianity Today article below. Jaweed Kaleem, national religion reporter for the Huffington Post uploaded this liturgy on 10th July 2012 which appears to conform the SCLM liturgy appearing in The Episcopal Church General Convention Blue Book as it was enacted and amended by Resolution A049 on 10th July 2012 by General Convention but please be aware this is not an officially released version so should be treated with caution until the official version is released.

The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant
Liturgical Resources for Blessing Same-Sex Relationships

Read it all.

Note: the resource “The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant” linked in this article [more on this to follow]
The Episcopal Church approved church-wide blessings of same-sex unions, stopping short of approving rites for same-sex marriage but approving liturgy for official rites for same-sex couples. Bishops can begin using “The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant” on December 2, when same-sex couples can exchange vows and rings. Each bishop will decide whether to allow the rite within each local diocese, and a conscience clause bars penalties for bishops who oppose the rite.

Tuesday’s debate lasted for about 90 minutes. Proponents offered stories of gay friends who would benefit from the rites, while opponents suggested the denomination was contradicting its own doctrine.

Some predicted that General Convention would not be able to legally authorize the trial rite because it would require a supermajority vote in the House of Bishops. Denominational leaders changed the wording in the resolution from “trial rite” to “provisional” rite, where a simple majority vote was needed.

Read it all.

The first mistake the author makes in this story is in not defining his terms. What is a General Convention? What are its powers? This question currently is the subject of litigation before the Texas Supreme Court and lower courts in California and Illinois. Grounding the article by stating the powers exercised by this gathering are in dispute amongst Episcopalians would have been a better start.

However, the problem with the Episcopal Church is not cocktail swilling bishops or a power-mad gargoyles peering down at the church from a penthouse in Manhattan. Problems with alcohol and homosexuality, money and power are derivative issues that arise from the divide over the interpretation of Scripture and an understanding of the person of Jesus Christ. The fight may take the form over secondary issues such as morality of homosexual behavior or the role of women in the leadership of the church, but it is based upon a division over who Jesus Christ is and how Christians read, interpret and live out the teachings of the Bible.

While I am sympathetic to much that has been said, the article was a wasted opportunity to explain what really is going on. Reading “What Ails the Episcopalians” will not leave you any the wiser ”” and that is a shame. Just think what could have been done with this story, and was not.

Read it all.

At The Episcopal Church General Convention in Indianapolis on Monday, the full delegation approved new anti-discrimination language for transgendered clergy candidates and church members. This action comes after years of schism in the denomination over its teachings on same-sex relationships.

By adding “gender identity and expression” to its nondiscrimination canons, the denomination made clear that people who undergo sex-change operations or otherwise behave in a fashion contrary to their biological sex are welcome to the ordination process and shall not “be denied rights, status, or access to an equal place in the life, worship, and governance of this church.”

Some Episcopal dioceses already ordain transgendered people or elect them to positions of parish leadership.

Read it all.

Read it all.

July 12, 2012

On July 10th, 2012 the 77th General Convention of The Episcopal Church authorized A049, the Resolution to Authorize Liturgical Resources for Blessing Same-Gender Relationships. Bishops William Love and Daniel Herzog and the Albany Deputation to General Convention were united in voting against this Resolution. By both our vote and the testimony we sought to graciously oppose this resolution while at the same time speaking the truth in love as the Church has received that truth. (Ephesians 4:15).

The Diocese of Albany, through its Bishops and Deputation, sought to uphold the biblical and traditional definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. In doing so, we were obedient to Holy Scriptures, The Book of Common Prayer, The Episcopal Church Constitution and Canons, and own our Diocesan Canons. It is important to note that the new rites are not to become part of the Book of Common Prayer or any other liturgical publication of the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Love and other bishops, traditional and liberal, worked to include provisions in the resolution that protect bishops and priests who cannot for the sake of conscience authorize or use the liturgy. Dean David Collum was able to speak to the resolution in the House of Deputies before the limited debate was terminated by pre-arranged parliamentary rules. In his comments Dean Collum offered that, among other theological problems created by the resolution, its adoption by the General Convention would further divide the Episcopal Church and the worldwide Anglican Communion and compromise our ecumenical relationships.

On July 11th, 2012 a group of bishops including Bishop Love and Bishop Herzog issued a statement which was read on the floor of the House of Bishops. This same statement was read from the floor of the House of Deputies on July 12th, 2012. Those deputies who supported the statement stood in place as it was read.

For over a decade the Diocese of Albany has been working to persuade theological traditionalists to remain in the Episcopal Church and to persuade theological liberals to remain in the Anglican Communion. We remain committed to these efforts, though they are made much more difficult by the adoption of Resolution A049. We ask you to join us in prayer for God’s One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The level of support for C029 when it was presented to the House of Bishops on 12 July 2012 was markedly different. The Rt. Rev. William Gregg, Assistant Bishop of North Carolina, was the first to rise and offered a strong statement of rejection of the resolution.

It was “not up to one denomination” to change the universal church’s teaching on baptism, Bishop Gregg said.

The Bishop of Southern Ohio, the Rt. Rev. Thomas Breidenthal, agreed the issue needed further study and urged defeat of the resolution….

The Rt. Rev. Pierre Whalon, Bishop of the Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe, urged his colleagues not to refer the matter to committee but to vote for adoption. There were large numbers of non-baptized people in Europe, he noted, and by recognizing the need for pastoral sensitivity this permitted bishops to address local needs. Without this recognition the hands of bishops were tied, he said….

Read it all.

…the party may be over for the Episcopal Church, and so, probably, its experiment with democratic governance. Among the pieces of legislation that came before their convention was a resolution calling for a task force to study transforming the event into a unicameral””that is, a one-house””body. On Wednesday, a resolution to “re-imagine” the church’s governing body passed unanimously.

Formally changing the structure of General Convention will most likely formalize the reality that many Episcopalians already know: a church in the grip of executive committees under the direct supervision of the church’s secretive and authoritarian presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori. They now set the agenda and decide well in advance what kind of legislation comes before the two houses.

Bishop [Jefferts] Schori is known for brazenly carrying a metropolitan cross during church processions. With its double horizontal bars, the metropolitan cross is a liturgical accouterment that’s typically reserved for Old World bishops. And her reign as presiding bishop has been characterized by actions more akin to a potentate than a clergywoman watching over a flock.

Read it all.

The Episcopal Church in the United States has voted overwhelmingly in favour of allowing the ordination of transgender people.

At its 77th General Convention, it approved an amendment to its non-discrimination canons to include “gender identity and expression”. The amendment makes it uncanonical to bar “transgender” people from the priesthood….

A member of the delegation from the UK, Christina Beardsley, said that the debate was “wonderful”. One of the most “profound” contributions, she said, came from the Bishop of Rochester, New York, the Rt Revd Prince Singh, who said: “Just by being people of faith we inevitably occupy liminal space and identity, and so embracing trans people would take us into deeper depths of what it means to be a pilgrim people.”

Read it all.