Find them all here. Of special interest is this one:
R-4a: Blessedness of Covenanted Relationships
Adopted as amended.Resolved, that the Diocese of Virginia recognizes our responsibility to respond to the pastoral needs of our faithful gay and lesbian members in a spirit of love, compassion and respect, and in so doing seek to fulfill our baptismal commitment to respect the dignity of every human being; and, be it further
Resolved, that accordingly the 214th Annual Council of the Diocese of Virginia affirms the inherent integrity and blessedness of committed Christian relationships between two adult persons, when those relationships are “characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God” (Resolution 2000-D039 of the 73rd General Convention of the Episcopal Church).
Submitted by:
The Rev. James A. Papile
The Rev. Jacqueline C. Thomson
The Rev. Denise A. Trogdon
The Rev. A. Patrick L. Prest
John Schwarz, Lay Delegate, St. Anne’s, Reston
Carol Grish, President, Region V
Thomas J. Smith, Lay Delegate, St. Anne’s, Reston
Charles Sowell, Lay Delegate, St. Anne’s, Reston
Martha Furniss, Lay Delegate, St. Anne’s, Reston
Terry Long, Lay Delegate, Holy Comforter, RichmondEndorsed by:
Region V
The Vestry of St. Anne’s Episcopal Church, Reston
The Vestry of the Church of the Holy Comforter, Richmond
The Vestry of St. Mark’s Episcopal Church, Richmond
This is momentous, given the Diocese of Virginia’s reputation as a moderate (or even slightly conservative) diocese. Of course, that was in the past, especially before at least 17 congregations departed the diocese and TEC.
I’m saddened, even heart-broken. “How are the mighty fallen!”
But I’m not shocked. The handwriting has been on the wall for a couple years now, at least. The Titanic was fatally crippled, but it’s still sad to see the great luxury liner slipping beneath the waves, taking lots of innocent lives down with it.
I’ve recently commented on the demise of this formerly great diocese on the thread having to do with +Peter Lee’s announcement of his hastened retirement, so I won’t say much more now.
Except this: IF EVEN VA has swallowed the “gay is OK” delusion hook, line, and sinker, and jumped onto the SSB bandwagon, then General Convention in Anaheim this summer is apt to be catastrophic.
I think the remaining conservative dioceses: not least South Caroline, but also my home diocese of Albany, plus Western La, Western KS and so on, should take this as a wake up call. The inside strategy is futile.
I’m reminded of Gandalf’s final words to the shocked and dismayed Fellowship of the Ring as the Balrog pulls him down into the abyss there in the mines of Moria:
“Fly, you fools!”
David Handy+
So essentially, marriage as an institution is “finished” in the DioVA. This language leaves the door open for blessing incest (as long as both are adults, etc.) and also common law and co-habitation.
Time for South Carolina to break with the Nicolaitans.
So much for a moratorium. Primates, are you watching? How will you vote on the new province knowing Colorado, North Carolina and Virginia are all giving you the one-fingered salute with accompanying razzberry?
From the VA Windsor Report to the Diocese (see article below this one) page 13:
“Since the issuing of the Windsor Report (2004), the Diocese of Virginia has observed the three moratoria. We recognize that to continue to do so will be painful and difficult for some members of the Diocese. Yet we urge that we continue to do so, understanding that action to be in conformity with the charge from the Bishop, the statements of the 2006 General Convention, and the urging of the four instruments of communion of the Anglican Communion.10”
Hahahahahahahahahaha! There is word for this “truthiness”.
I’m reminded of Jack Dawson’s near-final words to Rose, before their swim:
“The [TEC] is going to suck us down. Take a deep breath and kick for the surface. Do not let go of my hand. We’re going to make it, Rose. Trust [Jesus].”
How pray tell do the framers of this resolution know that such relationships are blessed? We know that sacraments afford a blessing to be received or not by those who corporately ask for and receive such grace. Rites described as sacraments or as being sacramental are those which have Dominical and or Scripture attribution. A service doesn’t become a sacrament or a sacramental rite by Act of a synod.
For some reason I keep thinking about those Jews who stayed true to the Covenant while they were slaves in Babylon.
I think we Christians are facing a very similar choice. I am sure there is a more in depth explanation but I believe it can be summed up by Matthew 6:24: “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon”
Perhaps I am a bit broad in my understanding but I never thought of mammon being just money but of all the temptations of the world which draw us away from God. And every day there are choices to be made which either will keep us captive to The World, The Flesh and The Devil or that will open our hearts to the Grace that breaks those bonds. Only in Christ is there true freedom. The scary part is that the call of Grace is often drowned out by mammon.
And when churches turn to false gods and by such lead many innocent souls astray I can not imagine our freedom coming anytime soon. I believe we are under Judgment.
Who is the spiritual head in a relationship like this?
In all seriousness SpringsEternal I doubt the people who endorse this nonsense are much in favor of the idea of Spiritual Headship. Far too Biblical for their liking.
Besides which it actually assumes there are differences in our roles based on our sex. Which to them means men and women are seen as unequal to each other. Not that God has ordained us to be fully united to one another when we are married with each having roles that support, complete, and fullfill the other.
They mistake sameness for equality and if they found a cow in a flock of chickens would amputate the poor things front legs so it could be equal to the chickens. They then would express anger that the poor cow not only did not lay any eggs but had ceased giving any milk as well.
Paula, not too broad an understanding. Mamon could refer to anything that has “currancy”, that could be exchanged for something else: money, status in the community, power, etc. It is “unrighteous mamon” if it is acquired by unrighteus means or used toward unrighteous ends. FS Scott
Once the conservatives left the denomination, this was bound to happen. There was no incentive for the progressives to listen to the traditionalist viewpoint.
I think they might have added the list of “fruits of the spirit.”
I think this throws a new light (for me at least) on his role in the recent court case. It had always been thought that KJS forced Lee to take the case — I rather doubt that now. His approach of having a long series of “dialogues” about how a parish could leave, and then turning around and doing something completely different at the last moment has overtones of the Presiding Bishop’s signatures at Primates meetings — ie it was designed to mislead and stall for time, and was by no means an indication of the intended direction.
They weren’t listening to conservatives in the first place! Look at the Dio of Florida, supposedly a moderate diocese — the Bishop hand picked the delegates to the General Convention, and the delegates to DioCon were routinely those of more liberal theological persuasion.
I know, I have friends who have tried to get sent only to be told, ‘so-and-so would better represent our parish’.
At the last DioCon I followed in DoFla, every vote required a standing vote, and (I heard from a participant) the Bishop or his canon would ‘take names’ of those standing who voted ‘against the ECUSA’ positions or against revisionist resolutions.
In the Dio of Central Gulf Coast, that was the situation there, as well. No matter how many times I and my conservative friends got on the ballot for DioCon, the same people would be sent each time.
Thanks, #12, I laughed and laughed at that post.
In 2006, the Times Dispatch reported that SSBs were conducted by the clergy of St Paul’s Richmond back in 1994. All this has been going on for quite sometime.
That said, I must say, that when I last visited family in the Reston, without knowledge of this legislation, for some reason I got chills when driving by St, Anne’s. I could be wrong, but it struck me as a dark place from the road.
🙄