Welcome to Stand Firm!

DioNewark Clergy Gathering to Discuss ‘Best Practices’ in Same-Sex Blessings

Wednesday, June 6, 2007 • 10:10 am


I’m reading the words, but they just don’t make sense… In Tanzania, Archbishop Rowan Williams endorsed the sub-group report declaring that TEC was in compliance with the Windsor Report, and yet the Diocese of Newark is doing… this:

Dear Colleagues,

The Diocesan Task Force on Civil Unions invites all clergy of the Diocese to gather at St. Peter’s Church, Essex Fells, on Wednesday, June 20th from 10 AM to 12 Noon.  Members of the Task Force will host a conversation in which we ask you to bring questions and share concerns that you would like the Task Force to address as we move forward with our work. We also hope that clergy who are performing civil unions will share their experiences, sample liturgies and best practices.

We are looking forward to an open and evolving conversation that will assist the Task Force to provide recommendations to the Bishop and Convention regarding our praxis of civil unions in the life of our faith communities.

PLEASE RSVP: To assist us in planning please RSVP via REPLY email (not REPLY ALL unless you wish to share your response with the entire listserv).  We will look forward to seeing you on June 20th from 10 AM to Noon at St. Peter’s Church, Essex Fells.  Do bring a bag lunch; we’ll provide beverages.

Joseph A. Harmon+
For the Diocesan Task Force on Civil Unions


20 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

It’s good to see TEC leadership finally addressing the important issues like the proper use of “Reply All.” Of course the bets practice here is to blind copy a large list of addressees.

[1] Posted by texex on 06-06-2007 at 09:22 AM • top

Is this another parody, Greg?  Didn’t you know there aren’t any authorized liturgies for SS blessings?

[2] Posted by Phil on 06-06-2007 at 09:27 AM • top

He a relation?  Is there something we should be told?

[3] Posted by Pageantmaster [Free Archbishop Cranmer] on 06-06-2007 at 09:31 AM • top

Why Greg, ++Rowan made it clear that TEC was not performing same sex blessings.  These are not same sex blessings, these are civil union blessings, don’t you see the obvious difference here?
Well, ok, so I don’t see it either. 
I keep looking for the place in the Bible where Jesus turned water into wine to celebrate a civil union and no matter which translation I use, I just can’t find it.  What is “civil union” in Greek?  Maybe the translators missed something.

[4] Posted by tjmcmahon on 06-06-2007 at 09:36 AM • top

Here is the “best practice manual” for “civil unions” or “same sex blessings.” 

DON’T

end of manual.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

[5] Posted by Philip Snyder on 06-06-2007 at 10:06 AM • top

Dear Phil,
I think one of the resolutions of GC2006 removed the word DON’T from TEC canons and authorized use dictionarys.

[6] Posted by Capt. Father Warren on 06-06-2007 at 10:54 AM • top

DON’T is DO without the NT.

[7] Posted by Pageantmaster [Free Archbishop Cranmer] on 06-06-2007 at 10:58 AM • top

As long as General Convention doesn’t authorize such blessings, ECUSA remains in compliance with the request of the Dromantine communique.

Such is the reasoning of our bishops, and such was the reasoning of the Pharisees (and Jesus had a few things to say to them: Mt. 15:3-9).

[8] Posted by AnglicanXn on 06-06-2007 at 11:00 AM • top

“As long as General Convention doesn’t authorize such blessings, ECUSA remains in compliance with the request of the Dromantine communique.

Such is the reasoning of our bishops, and such was the reasoning of the Pharisees (and Jesus had a few things to say to them: Mt. 15:3-9).”

And that attitude (which I perceive (gotta be careful with perception) is what RW is using, as is GC.  It complete disregards the Tanzania Communique which was specific to the HoB, NOT GC

What to make of that?

Grannie Gloria

[9] Posted by Grandmother on 06-06-2007 at 11:13 AM • top

Very good, Pageantmaster!!  I may plagiarize that one! (After all, as long as we’re getting rid of commandments, I assume this also applies to “thou shalt not steal,” right?)

[10] Posted by Johng on 06-06-2007 at 11:32 AM • top

as we move forward with our work

It’s easy to go forward when you’re going downhill.  Soon they will be at the precipice of the abyss.

[11] Posted by Piedmont on 06-06-2007 at 01:06 PM • top

When is authorization not authorization, When Vickie Gene says it isn’t!  Or is that power granted to all ECUSA/TEC bishops?  Is it when the bishop graduates from “new bishops school” with a correctly worn miter or exactly what conditions must be fulfilled to say one thing and do another?

[12] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 06-06-2007 at 02:13 PM • top

Phil and Pageantmaster…thanks for the smiles from your comments!

[13] Posted by Lori on 06-06-2007 at 02:48 PM • top

The Monty Python scene from the Holy Grail comes to mind:

SCENE: Lambeth Palace
ABC: Schori! Make sure TEC doesn’t leave the communion
Schori:Not to leave the communion even if we perform same sex blessings
ABC: No, not at all. You stay in the communion and make sure TEC doesn’t perform same sex blessings
Schori:Until we are ready to perform same sex blessings, we’re not to stay in the communion.
ABC: No, no No. You stay in the communion, and make sure TEC doesn’t leave.
Schori: And you’ll say if we can perform same sex blessings
ABC:Right
Schori: We don’t need to do anything apart from TEC leaving the communion
ABC:No,no. Stopping from leaving the communion
Schori: Leaving the communion. Yes.
ABC:Right?
Schori: Right!
Schori:Oh, if—if—if, uhh—if—if—w—ehh—i—if—if we—
ABC:Yes? What is it?
Schori:Oh, i—if—i—oh—
ABC:  Look, it’s quite simple.
Schori:Uh..
ABC:You just stay in the communion and make sure TEC doesn’t peform same sex blessings
Schori:Oh, I remember, Can we peform same sex blessings if they are civil unions?
ABC:N—no, no. No. You just keep TEC in the communion and make sure—
Schori:Oh, yes. We’ll stay in the communion obviously, but if we had to leave perform same sex blessings and—-
ABC:No, no, no, no. Just stay in the communion—-
Schori:Until till we perform..
ABC:No, don’t perform same sex blessings
Schori:Not same sex
ABC:Blessings…
Schori:Blessings
ABC:All Right?
Schori:Right. We’ll stay in the communion.
ABC:And uh, make sure there are no same sex blessings.
Schori:What?
ABC:No same sex blessings.
Schori:Oh, yes, of course.
ABC:Right. What are you doing?
Schori: Performing civil unions.

[14] Posted by wooly on 06-06-2007 at 03:38 PM • top

Wooly- I think you have a future.  “Monty Python and the Anglican Communion.”  Could I put in to be one of the monk’s banging themselves in the head?  I can chant a bit of Latin and I am getting plenty of practice with the head banging during vestry meetings.

[15] Posted by tjmcmahon on 06-06-2007 at 03:49 PM • top

You’re saying that Jesus didn’t authorize same-sex blessings? Didn’t you go to seminary, or at least take EfM?

See John 2:1-11. According to my new lexicon, “gamos” can mean male-male, male-female, female-female, or various other combinations. Furthermore, in consulting the Nestle-Kwik edition of the Greek NT, and the Countryguy commentary on John, I find that 1) there is no mention of a bride (numphe) at all, and that 2) “numphios” in the secular Greek of that era was not a term necessarily reserved for heterosexual men.

(Dodge lightning bolt that just shot through the house. Obviously, a warning shot since it missed.)

May God show mercy to the Episcopalians of New Jersey, their priests, and their bishop. Amen.`

[16] Posted by Ralph on 06-06-2007 at 05:18 PM • top

St. Peter’s Essex Fells?!  Oh my.  The church I grew up in (though we actually lived in Montclair, 2 towns over.  It was my grandparents who lived in Essex Fells…, we went to church with them)
Bet my grandparents (faithful churchgoers, but not particularly voluble about faith, not “evangelicals” by any means) are rolling over in their graves.
Essex Fells is seriously rich.  Country Club.  Would have once identified it as bastion of old money, and conservative republicans.
My my my…

[17] Posted by Karen B. on 06-06-2007 at 07:36 PM • top

Karen—You may take at least some comfort in the fact that St. Peter’s still seems OK from the outside—not exactly faithful, but not embracing every innovation, either. The rector is a very nice lady, and before her, they were blessed with a wonderful interim.  I don’t have any intimate knowledge of the parish, but I’d guess that this wasn’t their idea; they were probably “invited” to host.

There is more and more pressure from the Diocese to bow before the Baal of same-sex relations, and more and more clergy seem to be falling into line.

[18] Posted by In Newark on 06-06-2007 at 08:25 PM • top

dwstroudmd
Please read the comment rules.  Using Mr. Robinson’s first name in such a manner is off limits.

[19] Posted by commenatrix on 06-06-2007 at 08:38 PM • top

In Newark, yes, I agree with your impression of St. Peter’s, though I have now mostly lost touch with folks there.  My last direct contact was in 2001, had a memorial service for my mom up there.  (That was when Gordan Tremaine+ was still there before he moved to Dio. Florida… )

Thanks for your witness of perseverance and faithfulness in a hard place.  It’s appreciated and inspiring.

[20] Posted by Karen B. on 06-08-2007 at 06:34 AM • top

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.


Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere about the crisis in our church. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.