We were each invited to share something about context within which we address the issue of homosexuality. Our Indaba group did a good job of listening as each bishop responded. Still, I must note my deep disappointment that we are talking about gay and lesbian people rather than listening to them. I believe that Bishop Robinson’s exclusion from this Conference profoundly diminished this process.
We addressed challenging questions about the three moratoria. In the course of our discussion, our Bible study group agreed that it is not enough for the bishops and provinces to agree to observe moratoria. Just stopping certain activities is not enough. There is no life in that. We need to know “Why?” and “For how long?” The moratoria should be in the service of a larger project of coming to a shared understanding of the Scripture, of an exploration of theological anthropology and an articulation of sexual ethics. Only by clearing space for those wider discussions will the moratoria speak life rather than threaten death (to echo the Archbishop of Canterbury) to the Communion. We hope that the Conference final statement will spell this out.
We also did a line-by-line reading of the St. Andrew’s Draft of the proposed Covenant. There is broad support for the Covenant, but lots of concern and outright opposition to the Appendix.
[blockquote]Still, I must note my deep disappointment that we are talking about gay and lesbian people rather than listening to them.[/blockquote]
If I’m not mistaken, the bishops heard plenty from gays. From yesterday’s T19 post at 8:52:
[blockquote]At lunch break for the bishops on Thursday, there was a gay demonstration on the lawns outside the big blue tent and their closest lunch cafeteria. Gene was there at the beginning, but when they started kissing and acting out, he left. So did the bishops, hurrying their wives away.[/blockquote]
This was apparently repeated a number of times. I do hope the bishops got the message.