What I didn’t say in the letter is that I have spoken with the head of our General Convention Deputation, Cookie Clark, and that with her I will be forming a diocesan study group on same-sex blessings. (Issues of the nature of Christian marriage, and the relationship of Church and State with regard to marriage, will be explored as well.) This group will not be expected to make a report to Diocesan Convention, or present me with a proposal for action. Rather, I see this group as doing the work we all need to be doing, in order to prepare for the debate which our Convention has asked to have happen next summer in Anaheim. I hope that, by doing that work, they will become a resource for all of us.
I know in practice what this group is for. But let me, for a moments amusement, take the bishop at his word. He’s forming a study group but it will not make a report to diocesan convention and it will not make a proposal for action. What will it do then?
It will continue the ‘dialogue’. In other words, continue to grease the skids for same-sex weddings in his diocese. No surprise here. This bishop already encourages the picnic ‘theology’ of the Holy Communion, despite the canons. Another committee, ho-hum. From what I hear, the revisionist agenda long ago took over in NCal, via the CDSP clergy who now populate it. Sad.
Kendall … I think you meant “to form” not “to from” in the title for this post.
This group of frog giggers will make sure the frogs are already dead before they throw them into the pot on the stove.
Hey, it’s serious business making sure the frogs are dead. They don’t die easily. Been there, done that. Messy business.
[size=1][color=red][url=http://resurrectioncommunitypersonal.blogspot.com/]The Rabbit[/url][/color][color=gray].[/color][/size]
Hey, if this group decides that gay marriage is verbotten by the Windsor Report, the Tradition, and the canons of the Episcopal Church and the 1979 Prayer Book, do they get a special visit from other Californians who head up Integrity to change their mind? or just a lawsuit from the PB? And will there be a limit on the number of marriages or divorces a bishop can have of either sex or is it both/and not either/or?
This group may have some work to do after all…………………..
One might wonder which side exactly that it is which is “not listening” during the “listening process.”
We did a commission on Communion without Baptism, which did report to diocesan convention. Each member published their own report (including some great orthodox voices), under a general report that I summarize as follows: “We all agree that we disagree. We don’t agree TO disagree….necessarily. But we agree THAT we disagree. We asked other people around the Church and the ones who bothered to respond seemed to disagree too. Oh, and we’re the first to really study this issue and so our conclusion (THAT we disagree) is groundbreaking. Good for us.”
I’d volunteer for this study group, but I’d rather have unnecessary dental surgery.
Alta Californian: And I take it that any cleric who breaks the canons on communion for the unbaptized is severely censored, right?!!? What the heck, it’s only Holy Sacrament of Communion! Bleah.
I’m told that the Bishop will censure any priest if there is a complaint from a member of the congregation. I haven’t seen that tested yet, and I’m not sure I believe it (or that if it came it wouldn’t be a censure with a wink and nod). That +Beisner doesn’t offer an open invitation on his visitations is at least an improvement over +Lamb, who would actually overrule an orthodox parish’s canonical invitation and issue an open one of his own. “Bleah” is precisely the right sentiment.