Quick Question: Why Didn’t +Gray Use a Resolution to Change Policy on Same-Sex Blessings?
My theory, but I think it’s sound:
Because doing so would have been a humiliating loss all around for him and the gay lobby.
The clergy order in Mississippi favors same-sex blessings by a margin of approximately 70-30.
The lay order in Mississippi opposes them by approximately 70-30. Maybe 60-40, but there a solid majority against.
So imagine: A resolution goes to the floor, and
hilarity chaos ensues. It would have been, by far, the most rancorous and divisive debating ever done in the diocese’s 180-odd years of existence.
After hours of that, when it came time to vote, without a doubt someone would have called for a vote by orders.
Not only would the resolution have gone down in flames because it couldn’t get a majority from the lay order, but the 60% or 70% of the members of the lay order would have seen quite clearly not just the inversion of support in the clergy order, but they would have seen exactly the individuals in collars who were supporting it, and they would return to their parishes having experienced - and begun talking about - the alienation and deep divide between the clergy and lay orders in the diocese.
Perhaps that sort of talk will begin anyway, but as it is, it will only be ancillary conversation. Right now, the primary topic will be “How do we deal with the fallout of the bishop’s unilateral decision?”
Share this story:
Recent Related Posts
- Liberals to United Methodist Church: Drop Dead (THIRD UPDATE)
- San Joaquin Appeal Rebuffed by California Supreme Court
- Don’t Support the Media’s Memes
- Priest Seeks to Reclaim Pride from Christian Disparagement
- ACLU Leader Quits After Daughters Encounter Men in Women’s Restroom
- Genderqueer, Australian Flags, Trump, Baal; Pots and Kettles
- ECUSA Loses (Again) in Quincy; San Joaquin Seeks Review [UPDATED]
Are you reading this?
Advertising on Stand Firm works!
Click here for details.