Here is one:
RESOLVED, that the Diocese of Maine calls for the repeal of B033, passed at the 75th General Convention and be it further
RESOLVED that the Diocese of Maine calls upon the 76th General Convention to refrain from restricting the field of potential candidates for future episcopates on the basis of gender or sexual orientation and to reject interference from outside the Convention that would attempt to affect its parliamentary process or negate the polity of The Episcopal Church, and be it further
RESOLVED that the Diocese of Maine maintain its commitment to participation in the Anglican Communion and to the listening process described in the Windsor Report. And be it further Resolved to direct its deputation to the 76th General Convention to submit a resolution to this effect. (“RESOLVED that the 76th General Convention will refrain from restricting the field of potential candidates for future episcopates on the basis of gender or sexual orientation and will reject interference from outside the Convention that would attempt to affect its parliamentary process or negate the polity of The Episcopal Church.”)
Explanation
Our Lord is not one to show partiality (Acts 10:34-35) and calls us to go and make disciples of all nations (Matt 28:19);
Our baptismal covenant calls us to respect the dignity of every human being;
Undue discrimination limits the ability of the faithful to elect qualified persons to leadership, including the position of bishop;
Title III, Canon 1, Section 2 of the Canons of The Episcopal Church clearly states that No person shall be denied access to the discernment process for any ministry, lay or ordained, in this church because of race, color, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, disabilities or age;
Resolution B033, if interpreted to mean that a person living in a same-sex partnership should be excluded from consecration, stands in conflict with Title III, Canon 1, Section 2 of the Canons of the Episcopal Church;
As a result of the Windsor Report, bishops and deputies at the 75th General Convention were under a great deal of pressure to enact measures relating to the consecration of gay or lesbian bishops living in same-sex relationships. On June 20, 2006 the House of Deputies rejected Resolution A161, which would have prohibited the consecration of such individuals. However, using parliamentary procedure, the former Presiding Bishop and the Presiding Bishop-Elect brought forth Resolution BO33, which instructed “Standing committees and bishops with jurisdiction to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on the communion.” While we believe this was done with the best intentions in an effort to prevent disharmony in the Communion, it was widely understood that “candidate”¦ manner of life” was a coded euphemism for gay and lesbian persons, and this interpretation was later validated by the House of Bishops. However, as was promptly pointed out following its passage, BO33 is in violation of the ecclesiastical laws of the Episcopal Church. In particular, Title III, Canon 1, Section 2 of the Canons of the General Convention prohibits discrimination based upon sexual orientation. While BO33 has had the intended chilling effect on the consecration of otherwise qualified gay and lesbian priests to the episcopate, with many such candidates declining nomination for fear of withheld consent, it has done little to mollify the increasingly strident voices throughout the Anglican Communion. As such, it has proven both unjust and ineffective in its aims.
Being that it is in violation of canon law, inconsistent with the scriptural message of God’s immeasurable and unconstrainable love for humanity, and an impediment to the work of the Spirit in the Church, we call for the revocation of BO33.
The total force of this strikes me as a Declaration of Independence from the Anglican Communion. Maybe Bishop Duncan was right about the AC being the last vestige of British Colonialism. The frightening part is the reference to Acts about making disciples of all Nations. There is something somehow imperialistic about that to me. With regard to the spin on the Baptismal covenant, what happened, btw, to a sense of reverence and humility toward the vow we took at Confirmation “Will you continue in the Apostles teaching…”? This sort of radical make-over of a church also somehow reminds me of the times surrounding the French Revolution with its new calendar and transformation of cathedrals into Temples of Reason.
I’m curious to hear the reactions from the conservative Christians who have been advocating staying the course inside of TEC as a witness and agent of change.
BlueOntario,
If God did not give up on the people of Israel when they were in their apostacy, if God did not give up on the Church when she became to focused on material wealth and power, if God did not give up on me when I was his enemy, and if God does not give up on those in prison whom I visit, then God will not give up on the Episcopal Church – even when it seems that she has given up on God.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Lets see now… Opening with a pagan ceremony, accession to secular goals and ideals, defiance of the mind of the Communion and endorsement of sodomy. Did I miss anything?
[i]As goes Maine, so goes the Nation[/i]
BTW, Canon Law says noting about sexual activity, but sexual orientation. I would not support a person who is a serial polygamist (one spouse at a time) or a person who is sexually active outside of marriage (between one man and one woman) regardless of his or her sexual orientation. The issue of III.1 is that we won’t stop people from being ordained for who they are, but we can stop them (and should stop them) for what they do and what they believe.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Of course this is entirely predictable. The got their invitations to Lambeth by stating the vague B033 does indeed apply to homosexuals knowing full well that they could and would repeal it.
When it gets repealed, they will have been asked four things by the DeS communique: Accept the alternative oversight plan, stop ordaining homosexual bishops, stop blessing SSU’s, cease the lawsuits. There final grade? A big, fat zero, zilch, nada. Yet, the arch-enabler of Canterbury lets them play this game. Rowan, what about those the pre-Lambeth
lettersphone calls you made? What about the sham(e) of the JSC report giving these guys a Windsor pass? I am sorry, but it is hard not to be disgusted with the man.Philip Snyder, why wouldn’t God give up on the Episcopal Church? Did God covenant with the Episcopal Church?
Phil Swain,
Looking at the history of God and His people, I do not see where God gives up on them. He may chastise them. He may send them into exile. He may withdraw from them for a season. He may start a famine for the Word of the Lord. But He does not give up on them. He continues to call them into relationship with Himself. Even in Hosea where God calls Israel “Not my People,” God promises that He will tenderly woo them again in the desert.
For this reason, I believe that God will not give up on TEC. We may face our exile. It may be that only when we have seen the complete absence of God from our midst that we will be ready again to seek His face and listen to His Word and obey His commandments.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
At least they are open about their agenda. Canterbury can’t ignore something like this.
Wow! Talk about boldly insisting on having it both ways!
#3, your point is taken. God was ready to spare even Sodom and its burbs from His wrath if Abraham’s numbers had proved true. Then again, Jesus warns us about rejecting His disciples using just that example.
God go with you in your callings.
#9
Ah, but he will. Just watch.
#3 But will TEC and the Diocese of Maine heed the message? I’d like to believe that they will, but at this point, it’s not likely!
“RESOLVED, that the Diocese of Maine calls for the repeal of B033”
The lemmings are restless.
“Refrain from restricting the field of potential candidates for future episcopates”
No Islamopalian left behind!
I am in a parish in the Maine Diocese. I am where God called me to worship. I will stay until He bids me leave. Pledging again this year is another story.
Cennydd – If neither Israel nor Judah heeded the messages of the prophets, why would we expect TEC to heed messages from today’s prophets. Still, God did not give up on His people and I don’t believe He will give up on TECUSA. Like I said earlier. We will go through an exile and it will not be pretty nor will it be fun. But God will call TEC back to Himself.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
I was there. I won’t say it’s a total “non-story,” but probably not worthy of some of the apoplectic reactions above.
Speaking as a member of the clergy in the Diocese of Maine, this resolution epitomizes my frustration with ECUSA and its attempts to circumvent moral and theological discernment through personnel policy legislation at diocesan and General Conventions. The whole thing sticks in my gizzard…
…resolutions and canons that say “gender” when referring to the male or female sex
…resolutions and canons that forbid discrimination on the basis of “orientation” (a way of experiencing sexual attraction, something not chosen) when the intention is to privilege a voluntary sexual behavior prohibited by Scripture (same-sex relationships)
A vote against this resolution would suggest that B033 was some masterpiece of policy or theology. It wasn’t. It didn’t deliver what the Windsor Report or the Primates asked for– not even close! It was weaselly (“…manner of life might be a challenge to some..”) So what would its “repeal” change?
On the other hand, a vote for this resolution means, to the Diocese of Maine, at least, that ECUSA need never again revisit the reasons for the original call for moratoria. So in that sense, if seconded by other diocesan conventions and carried to its logical conclusion at next year’s GC, it can justly be called a Declaration of Independence from the Communion.
As far as the “pagan ceremony” is concerned:
Some gesture the Maine Indians has become pro forma at our annual Convention. Last year we had a resolution instructing the Bishop of Maine to tell the Archbishop of Canterbury to tell the Queen of England to tell the Dairy Maid, etc… to revoke some 17-century charter given to the Cabots having to do with discovery and possession of lands in the New World.
Maine’s Episcopalians don’t have much of a ministry to the Maine Indians, but at least once a year we try to insert ourselves into the story of how disgracefully the Indians have been treated, and to show that we are doing something about it. So the smudging ceremony was this year’s visible gesture.
I wonder what some readers of this, with experience in the mission field, would say. I think the worst thing about the smudging ceremony was the potential harm to scrupulous Christians.
But I attend Christian services where incense is offered– not in accordance with any Old or New Testament commandment, but a pagan custom (incense for the Emperor) “baptized” by its offering to the Real King.
Is an Indian “smudging ceremony” the same sort of thing. Could a Christian Indian participate in it? I have no idea whether the Penobscot elder is a Christian or not. We weren’t told, either way. Offering fragrant smoke to the Great Spirit doesn’t strike me as a problem. And if Mother Earth is being honored not as a god(dess) but as a fellow-creature, then I hold off on leaping to condemn it. But things are not always what they seem. It wouldn’t be the first time some innovation in worship was part of a Marxist-style project of softening resistance, shifting the community’s core values.
Pax Christi!
Chuck Bradshaw
Rector, Church of Our Father, Hulls Cove, Maine
Greetings to Old Soldier and Father Bradshaw from Holy Trinity in Fairfield. Come visit us sometime. There will be no chip-on-the-shoulder we’ll-do-what-we-please chatter here. How is it that Maine became as blue as Mass. in so short a time? Larry
“Canterbury can’t ignore this.” Right. He will give serious thought to withholding invitations to Lambeth ’18.
Phil, God did save a remnant, but He also executed horrible judgment on Israel and sent them into exile. I really doubt that He will be more lenient to TEC.
Happily, we don’t have to decide or predict what God’s judgement will be. We can leave that to Him.
Larry Morse: Please watch the sweeping statements, thanks. Being ‘blue’ does not ipso facto make one part of the organization formerly known as The Episcopal Church. For example, I generally (not always) wind up voting for candidates of the Democratic Party — and have also left TEC. I am not alone.
[blockquote]#9
Ah, but he will. Just watch. [/blockquote]
My exact thought, just as he will when B033, toothless as it is, is repealed at GC09.
22, then that leves you free to ignore it and it’s consequences. The exile was a horrible thing with much death and destruction.
Little Cabbage
Methinks you misunderstand. Larry was making a comment about Maine going blue,not the TEO. And he is right. Maine, to the chagrin to all patriots has gone blue. It is nothing more then a suburb of the Peoples Republic of Mass. Sad but true.
Exactly., Old Soldier, that is what I have meant. Maine is, in fact, surprisingly hostile to religion generally, I don’t know why. But it ain’t wasy being and Agnlican surrounded by religion-haters. My guess is tha the group called the Christian Civic League, which is radically fundamental, has given Mainiacs the notion that ALL religious organizations are like this. Larry