DWTX from Anaheim — Deputies returned to their work as a “Committee of the Whole” Friday morning, July 10, as they heard from each other on what steps The Episcopal Church (TEC) should take next in regard to human sexuality.
On Thursday afternoon, deputies spent an hour talking one-on-one about their experiences. At the close of that session, deputies were each given a numbered token, and on Friday morning 50 of those token holders, chosen by lottery, were given two minutes each at a microphone.
In general, speakers lined up on either side of the question of what to do about resolution B033, passed at the 75th General Convention in 2006. That resolution asked TEC to “exercise restraint” in consenting to the election of openly gay bishops. The purpose of Friday morning’s discussion was to “inform” the World Mission Committee, to which several resolutions calling for the repeal of B033 have been assigned. Following today’s discussion, the World Mission Committee must still determine what it will do with several resolutions around the topic of human sexuality.
Basically, the arguments for or against repealing B033 fell into one of two lines of reasoning – is it a justice issue or is it a relationship issue? Those in favor of repealing B033 consider it a justice issue.
“I voted in favor of B033 three years ago,” said a deputy from North Carolina, “but only out of respect for [then] Presiding Bishop Griswold and [then Presiding Bishop elect] Bishop Jefferts Schori. “But I have changed my mind and my heart. B033 allows the church to discern who might have the gifts to teach the faith in this Church.” New Hampshire did not elect a gay bishop, he said, “It elected the best person for the job.”
Another deputy told of her life growing up in the church, when the doors were open to her until her mother declared her lesbian orientation. “Then the doors slammed shut,” said the deputy. They again slammed shut when the deputy discovered her own lesbian orientation. “B033 was another door slamming shut for me,” she said.
Deputy Louie Crew of the Diocese of Newark said that passing B033 “destroyed the credibility of every sign that says ‘The Episcopal Church Welcomes You’.” Several deputies admonished that the gay and lesbian community has sacrificed sufficiently, and that they should no longer carry the burden for the entire church.
But other deputies were not ready to repeal B033 or take any other action that would further split the Anglican Communion. “The irony of it is that this Convention seeks to celebrate ubuntu (togetherness) and yet is poised to rupture the communion even more,” said a Deputy from the Diocese of El Camino Real. He added that TEC has not made a theological case for the blessing of same-sex unions. “We take pride in our three-legged stool of tradition, reason, and scripture,” he said, “but we are going against scripture and using canonical procedures instead.”
Deputy David Luckenbach, formerly of St. Luke’s, San Antonio, and now in the Diocese of the Rio Grande, said in marriage counseling he was asked if he wanted to be right or wanted to be married. “In our part of the world,” he said, “B033 has been the catalyst for a cease fire. Not to throw anyone under the bus, but I would like to refrain from driving the bus over all of us.”
A deputy from Northern Indiana disputed the claim by some that B033 has accomplished nothing since it was passed. “It got our Presiding Bishop to the Primates Meeting, it got our bishops to the Lambeth Conference,” he said. “It has accomplished everything it was designed to accomplish.”
Committee work on all of the resolutions that address the topic of human sexuality continues in the days ahead with no indication of when resolutions might come to the floor of either house.
In my view and in the teachings I have recieved; the message I think of on this matter is this. I dont think Christ would have turned anyone away from him who was yearning to hear the word and believe in ones own salvation. I seem to think of the stories of I beleive Mary Magdeline and others. These were not the most upstanding citizens in town and they were not turned away for who they were. They were embraced and welcomed in to hear the word. I know some will disagree with me but I dont think we should (check your card at the door) prior to giving you communion. Even on a business side of the church. With numbers barely hanging on and even dropping according to some reports; churches need to welcome any and all persons they can. Isnt it our duty to welcome all and spread the word of christianity.
Amen again, Jes. Thank you for your eloquence and truth.
Forgive me, Jes, I meant Jes, not Les!
Les,
Amen! As baptized members of the eternal priesthood, we are obligated to stand for all, as Christ did. We cannot walk up to the altar and receive communion knowing that we are causing others to suffer; it is what is in our minds and our hearts that affects everyone in our churches. We need to remember that.
If what someone calls theology becomes more important than love, then we are changing the ultimate commandment, which is to love one another.
Tina
Perfect love cast out fear. We can’t let it go on. We’ve got to stand up. We’ve got to say, we have differences of opinion, but we both hold to the word of God. We’re not going to get mad but here we stand together. We will not allow others to take away the rights and the dignities of human beings. We just won’t let it happen.
Because I want to tell you something, after you say you can’t live in my community, after you’ve said you can’t teach in my school, after you’ve said you can’t go to my church and after you’ve said you can’t come to my college, after you’ve said all of this stuff – don’t think for one moment it’s going to wash when you smile that plastic smile that I see in the Christian community and say, “But we love you in the name of Jesus.”
You cannot exercise hatred and discrimination and talk about love in the same breath without coming across as a shear hypocrite. So take your choice.
Take your stand and be bold for Christ and say this, that whether we agree or do not agree on this issue, we will not allow discrimination and hatred and meanness to be directed at people who did not choose their identity, number one, and cannot choose to get out of an orientation as simply as those evangelists who preach so blithely suggest. We’ve just seen too many people hurt and we’ve just experienced too many people who have suffered.
The latest study on sexuality was done by the University of Chicago, says 1 percent of males in America practice homosexuality, 1 percent. But 5 percent have homosexual orientations. What does that mean? It means that 4 out of 5 homosexuals don’t practice anything sexual at all in terms of physical relationships. You know what that means? That means they sit in class next to you quietly. That means that they come to your churches. They’re in every congregation in America. They are there. Five percent of the population, in the general population; 7 percent in the church.
They come and they sit and they hear obscenities directed at them, things said about them, they hear themselves described in horrible ways. Let me just remind you of one thing in closing. We do have a tendency to play the ball game two ways. We say we’ve got to be faithful to the Bible. Well I want to ask you, how many of you belong to churches, how many of you belong to churches that allow people who are divorced and remarried into membership. How many of you belong to churches which say if you’re divorced and – well, you know, they’re got a problem and we’re going to accept them into the fellowship.. Well, let me just remind you of something. When it comes to homosexuality, Jesus never mentioned it. I mean, it wasn’t on his big hit list. He never mentioned it. But he did talk about divorce and remarriage and he said people who are divorced and remarried are in sexual sin. Did he not? Now the question. If the church is so gracious in accepting people who are divorced and remarried, i.e., accepting people who according to Jesus are living in a sexual sin that he specifically condemns, then why can’t they be at least that gracious to our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters?
I am not preaching approval. I am preaching acceptance because I contend that if there is going to be any change of behavior, it is always in the context of love. My friend Jane says so eloquently that when we sing Just As I Am when people come down the isle, we mean it for everybody except for gays and lesbians. Everybody else can come as they are to be healed. We say get healed first and then come.
You don’t have to understand it all and you don’t have to have the answers to all the questions and you certainly don’t have to agree with me to demonstrate the love of Jesus, but we must accept living with our differences because we know that the one who created us already knows that we won’t agree on lots of important things. The Bible tells us that we will see things down here through a dark glass.
But Jesus does say that the world will know we are Christians by our love and there isn’t any other way for anyone to know whose children we are.
I beg to differ from Mr. Honeycutt’s position. Let’s uphold Christ and not give in to fear.
Do I precieve a general wavering on resolution B033? Our Bishops and delegates must stay firm in our commitment to upholding the three part foundations of the Episcopal Church; scripture, tradition and reason.
I find the “not made a theological case” argument particularly galling. How much more than Christ’s summation of the Law does one need? That was sublime minimalism at its best. It seems to me that the burden of “making the theological case” should fall upon those opposed to full inclusion. How does one theologically support apartheid?
As far as our commitment to the wider Anglican Communion, those of us who support full inclusion live in acceptance of the conservatism of other churches within the context of their cultures, values, and evolution. I do not support their renderings of the Heart of Christ, but in no way would I seek their exclusion. Why should our difference be considered beyond the pale?