On Wednesday church leaders spoke of “building by consensus” and “reaching for compromise.” But at the same time, there was a growing sense from people on both sides of the issue that the conversation about a divided church is starting to focus more on “when” than “if.”We’ve had years of meetings with no movement,” said Bishop Martyn Minns of Fairfax, Va., a leader of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a network of churches that are considering severing ties with the U.S. church to form a network with an international body. “Sooner or later, we’re going to have to acknowledge that the current approach isn’t working.”
At issue is the ordination of gays and the blessing of gay unions, a controversy that was inflamed with the appointment in 2003 of the Rev. Gene Robinson, who is openly gay, as bishop in New Hampshire. In February, the worldwide Anglican Communion, of which the United States church is part, issued an ultimatum to U.S. bishops demanding that they officially pull back their support for gays and lesbians by Sept. 30.
On Tuesday, the House of Bishops issued its response after a week of meeting in New Orleans, and while the vaguely worded statement is open to interpretation, most insiders boiled it down to: No.
Kirk Smith wrote in his spin letter that he wanted to change the headlines of the NY Times article from “Episcopal Bishops Reject Anglican Church’s Orders” to “”Bishops Bend Over Backwards to Hold Communion Together.”
Now another mainstream media writes, “On Tuesday, the House of Bishops issued its response after a week of meeting in New Orleans, and while the vaguely worded statement is open to interpretation, most insiders boiled it down to: No.”
The media gets it!
The “Response” statement of the HoB responds negatively to two of the three requests and the third “positive response” is couched in terms of B033. So when B033 disappears in less than two years, they will have told the primates to go soak their mitres completely and fully.
1) I was rather struck by how much air time Bishop Minns got here. I mean of all the people to interview and quiz about this. (Note – I am not anti-Minns. Or at all thrilled with HOB. I am making observations about the news report.) What about conservative [i]Episcopalians[/i]?
2) Budde+ appeals to (drum roll please) polity! Again! “They don’t understand our political process”. And most of us know +Jenkin’s retort. “They do get it. They don’t buy it”. Is Budde+ really trying to tell us that HOB is so danged toothless? impotent? and can only sit around and jabber until GC comes up? Then why the slime do we have bishop’s at all?!? Perhaps Budde+ is right. Perhaps that is TEC polity. Then it’s pretty screwed up if you ask me.
3) But of course… 815 and HOB and bishops in dioceses have gobs of power. When it is power exercised for the liberal cause. Rank disingenuity.
Drat that internet! Drat that 3rd estate not on our side! Love, HOB
Rick asks, “What about conservative Episcopalians?” Do you really want to know.
Answer: They are now Catholic, non-denominational, four-square, continuing Anglican, or realigned Anglican.
With all the unwelcoming that is going on, those of us that have stuck it out till now are just an eensy, weensy, teeny, tiny minority.
This was a remarkably balanced piece from a notoriously unbalanced (to the left) newspaper. One can’t help but wonder if Bp Bruno’s too-clever-by-half answers about SSBs, complete with his self-satisfied smirks, didn’t wake up the mainstream media that 815 was trying to use them, and assume that being liberal also they would participate in the lie. There is in Bp Bruno’s dishonesty also quite an insult to a reporter–the assumption that they are too stupid to realize what was happening, or the assumption that they would of course help him in his dishonest little ploy. Neither assumption was likely to be taken well, and perhaps he’s the reason the mainstream press seems more willing all of a sudden to be more critical and more even-handed.