For the above reasons and more, the two of us believed that not moving forward on the issues raised in resolutions DO25 and CO56 would have provided the church with additional space in which to abide with one another as we wrestle with the whole range of views and practices in these matters. We believe that this theological homework needs to be done at this critical time in the life of the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church.
Declining to move forward in these matters would have also sent a strong message to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the wider Communion that we know this is a long, difficult road and that we respect our relationships with them enough to continue to offer restraint in these areas. At the same time, we acknowledge the reality that many in this church believe we have already waited long enough and the time to move forward is now. This was reflected in the debate and conversations that the most important thing at this moment was to “state clearly and honestly” where the majority of the Convention believes this church to be.
In all of this, we are hopeful that the work of the Theology Committee, given a fair hearing, will be an important contribution to our walk together, and especially as the Diocese of West Texas continues to have these conversations. As you may remember, we have a Reconciliation Commission developing a framework for discussions in these and other areas.
Clearly, we are living in a time of great change in society and in the Church. Clearly, we have gays and lesbians in the Diocese of West Texas who are hurting because of their experience in the Church, and because we have voted the way we have on these matters. Clearly, we have conservatives in West Texas who continue to be frustrated by the actions of the General Convention. Clearly, your bishops have the pastoral responsibility for all of the members of our diocese as well as a responsibility to and with the wider Church. Clearly, balancing all of this is a challenge for even the most gifted of leaders. We want to assure you all that we are committed to your service in the Name of Christ, our own clay feet notwithstanding.
The article states:
[blockquote]Technically speaking, the moratoria will stand until a partnered gay bishop is elected and ordained, but the spirit of the resolution clearly moves The Episcopal Church into new territory. The Instruments of Communion will have an interpretation on whether this is a rejection of one of the moratoria requested of The Episcopal Church.[/blockquote]
This is clearly the prescribed talking point.
A moritorium is defined as:
[blockquote]1 a: a legally authorized period of delay in the performance of a legal obligation or the payment of a debt b: a waiting period set by an authority 2: a suspension of activity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moratorium%5B/blockquote%5D
Here there is “no waiting period set by an authority” (any observance of B033 is entirely voluntary, and always was) and there is “no suspension of activity” unless not doing something until you do it and you are free to do it any time you want, is considered a suspension of activity.
This is an absurdity. To claim that there is any sort of moratorium, technical or otherwise, strips the word of any meaning whatsoever.