The status of B-033 is clearly becoming one of the major issues on the horizon. Another will be the disposition of resolutions regarding the blessing of same sex unions. Nearly all of those resolutions have been referred to the Committee on World Mission, largely because of the communion-wide impact of those issues. It has also been speculated that the World Mission Committee was chosen because legislation emanating from it is sent to the House of Deputies first. It has been further speculated ”“ and I think accurately so ”“ that the House of Deputies is much more amenable to these resolutions than the House of Bishops.
It is clear to me that the dynamics of the House of Deputies have changed. There is an absence of the very conservative voices which once were present in the former leadership of dioceses such as Pittsburgh and Fort Worth. I think this will mean a less contentious house, but also a house which is less restrained by a very conservative wing. This places more pressure on the House of Bishops to maintain some sense of balance.
I’d love to read something by a progressive that does not preface the word conservative with the words ‘very’ or ‘extreme’.
Isn’t it strange – GC is now what the revisionists always hoped for, but the HoB (of all places) seems to feel a sense of foreboding. Is that the roar of adulation or the sound of falls that they hear?
What is remarkable to me is how the use of blogs allows those not in attendance to really get a sense of what is going on, not the sanitized versions that used to come out in TEC press releases. Compliments to all the bloggers. Great reporting and valuable perspective.
I’d also wager that the experience of Lambeth 2008 made a real impression on many of the bishops. It was the consensus, I believe a strong consensus, that the moratoria had to continue. The HOD never agreed to the moratoria in the long term, but the bishops who went to Lambeth did experience many discussions as to the importance of the moratoria’s continuance. The third presidential address by the ABC also made that clear. So it will be very interesting and very telling when we see what the HOB does.
In GC in Philadelphia in 1997, there was some proposal that would loosen up what LEM-2s (LEVs) could do. In the HOD we wanted, if I remember correctly, that LEVs could take communion from the reserved sacrament pretty much any time, if so licensed by the ordinary. Let me tell you that the HOB did not concur. And then there was the proposal in 1997 that retired bishops not have the right to vote in the HOB. The HOB passed this, and it went to the HOD. It was given some vigorous debate by the deputies. When the HOD did not concur and it was reported to the bishops, there were bishops whose faces were the color of most of their shirts, and I don’t mean black. There were a number of statements in the Convention Daily that we in the HOD had no right to tell the bishops who could vote in the HOB. So there are ever so often times and proposals that pass in one house and, despite predictions that the other house will concur, the other house fails to concur. I am hoping that the bishops will keep the moratoria in place. They are fully aware that the large majority of bishops in the Anglican Communion support the moratoria.
Too bad the HOB abdicated their power to the GC, isn’t it? I hear their lack of authority clearly………………………………………….
i think they should just go ahead and do it and then be done with it; let the chips fall where they may and no one can be left sitting on the fence. if the moratoria continues this church will continue on this slow agonizing death. let them do what they wish to do, it can only help the ACNA. it’s inevitable anyway.
Hey Wait a Minute There!!
Albany, South Carolina, Springfield, Central Florida and Dallas (and a few others) are here and we are NOT second class conservatives! And we know how to speak up, and we have begun speaking up. Some of us are on committees and have been trying to do what we can there.
The “big ticket” resolutions are just beginning to come up.
You will hear from us!!
hi no. 7, i don’t mean to sound like a downer or impolite but who do you think is going to listen to you? sure didn’t seem like they did in 2003 and your numbers are even less now are they not? i am only going by these various blogs but it doesn’t sound like you are going to be able to do much. i am sorry for it, i truly am and i pray that you will prove me wrong! but they seem very hot and heavy for this to happen; that moratoria barely passed last time didn’t it?
“The “big ticket†resolutions are just beginning to come up.
You will hear from us!!”
Ok, Lumen Christie. Sure. Wonderful and great.
But, MY personal test will be when your dioceses fail and you are shamed in front of these psuedo-Christians who will dissect marriage (and anything else), whether or not you immediately walk out of the place when you see this institution of Christ mocked and destroyed by man. Is that important enough? Has ANYTHING ever been important enough to show a firm disgust about, or are we going to just see pained smiles…which BTW is what revisionists are content for you to have?
When marriage gets redefined, the delegates of the so-called Orthodox dioceses need to just leave. Announce that you are going and just leave the place to those who have destroyed your Church. Else, you are just there decorating their victory.
I would rather that the liberal agenda pass. I appreciate the orthodox resistance, but it’s time to end the advancement of the GLBT agenda through the backdoor. If it is going to happen, it is far more preferable that it be openly done. They want to advance it, but avoid the consequences.
The worst thing that could happen is to officially preserve a non-binding moratorium (that’s all B033 is) so that they can claim compliance and still allow local option on the sly.
Ezekiel 2: “Say to the house of Israel, son of man, ‘thus says the Lord’ and [b]whether they hear or they refuse to hear[/b] they will know that a prophet has been among them ….for they are a rebellious house.”
Read the whole section — it’s great.