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.
VGR knows it’s a repeal of B033, but revels in the slippery wording that makes it [i]seem[/i] that B033 isn’t repealed. We shall see if the ABC allows himself to be deceived yet again by these fork-tongued wire-pullers at 815. There seems to be a tiny shred of evidence that he will not.
It is not about simply following the “vetting” process. ECUSA wants to abandon the vetting so that those living lives of notorious immmorality are made leaders of the organization. That’s the point.
Actually I hope he can get the HOB to go along and vote for D025.
“We had finally moved beyond that dark cloud of last Convention’s B033 and into the Church of the future.”
But it begs the question: “Is there a future for the Episcopal Church?
The aesthetic judgments are hilarious. I wonder if it would have been ‘beautifully crafted’ and ‘simply and elegantly stated’ if it had said something (anything) else. After all, a perfectly balanced ledger is beautiful in its own way, even when it shows that you’re operating at a deficit.
Very sad when obfuscation is applauded. TEC should let their “yes be yes and their no be no”, but the leadership is not honest enough to do this.
When I think of “the Church of the Future,” I can’t help but think of [url=”http://theinfosphere.org/Father_Changstein_El-Gamal”]Fr. Changstein el-Gamal and the First Amalgamated Church[/url] from “Futurama” 🙂
Clemmitt
As a matter of sheer numbers, is the presence of actual homosexuals at the GC very large? Are there many in the HOD? Enough to swing a vote? Larry
We shall see if the ABC allows himself to be deceived yet again by these fork-tongued wire-pullers at 815.
Don’t be fooled by the academic, seemingly befuddled manner of ++Rowan. He knows EXACTLY what is what and has all along. He simply chooses to engage by not engaging. Poor leadership style, but not missing the big picture.
VGR has really missed the big picture as regards the church of the future. Hint: eschatology.