Just want to give you a brief head’s up for this morning. It is my expectation that the bishops’ drafting group, having worked last night and, perhaps, a little this morning as well, now have two drafts prepared for discussion and debate. One is a draft pastoral statement to the people of the Church. The second is a draft response to the requests of the DES Communique.
The bishops’ at last night’s press conference bent over backwards to get their talking points out: the House of Bishop’s response will be “clear” and “unambiguous”
And yet as we have seen, an Episcopalian bishops’ understanding of clarity and forthrightness is not wholly consistent with that of an ordinary person. An Episcopalian bishop, for example, can “permit” countless “acts of pastoral care” in his/her diocese wherein an officially licensed Episcopalian priest, in a “public” ceremony, blesses union of a gay and/or lesbian couple and still claim that he/she has not “authorized public rites for same sex blessings.”
The distinction such a bishop seeks to draw (or the obfuscation behind which such a bishop seeks to hide) is between a “rite” or liturgy authorized for use by the diocesan office and an actual ceremony, public or not, using a liturgy that does not enjoy the bishop’s “official” sanction.
Countless same sex blessings occur in dioceses throughout the country and while the various bishops know of and permit these blessings to take place they can still duplicitously claim that they have not “authorized rites” because they have not authorized a specific liturgy of blessing.
In doing so, the bishops appeal to C051" title="Resolution C051 ">Resolution C051 from the 74th General Convention which says that same sex blessings occur “within the common life” of the Episcopal Church, but does not include any authorization of “public rites” or liturgies.
Meeting in Tanzania, the Primates of the Communion and the Archbishop of Canterbury noting the ambiguity of TEC’s position asked that the Episcopal Church clarify its stance with regard to same-sex blessings.
21. However, secondly, we believe that there remains a lack of clarity about the stance of The Episcopal Church, especially its position on the authorisation of Rites of Blessing for persons living in same-sex unions. There appears to us to be an inconsistency between the position of General Convention and local pastoral provision. We recognise that the General Convention made no explicit resolution about such Rites and in fact declined to pursue resolutions which, if passed, could have led to the development and authorisation of them. However, we understand that local pastoral provision is made in some places for such blessings. It is the ambiguous stance of The Episcopal Church which causes concern among us.
22. The standard of teaching stated in Resolution 1.10 of the Lambeth Conference 1998 asserted that the Conference “cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions”. The primates stated in their pastoral letter of May 2003,
...
While they [the Primates] appreciate the actions of the 75th General Convention which offer some affirmation of the Windsor Report and its recommendations, they deeply regret a lack of clarity about certain of those responses.
In particular, the Primates request, through the Presiding Bishop, that the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church
1. make an unequivocal common covenant that the bishops will not authorise any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through General Convention (cf TWR, §143, 144); and
2. confirm that the passing of Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention means that a candidate for episcopal orders living in a same-sex union shall not receive the necessary consent (cf TWR, §134);
unless some new consensus on these matters emerges across the Communion (cf TWR, §134).
The duplicity evidenced by Bishop Bruno in last night’s press conference (which is not at all unique to Bishop Bruno but simply reflective of the institutional deception that has arisen since 2003) is precisely the sort of duplicity that the Dar Es Salaam Communique seeks to disallow. The Primates want same sex blessings to end.
If what we have seen so far is any indication, the House of Bishops is making every possible effort, making every acrobatic twist, not to be clear, not to be forthright and not to give an honest answer.
It is somewhat embarrassing even for those of us who oppose these things to see Anglican bishops prevaricating like adolescent boys caught throwing a party while dad and mom are out of town. I would hope that they too are somewhat shamed this morning and that those bishops with a sense of honor and integrity who favor and allow same sex blessings will be willing to stand firm, to proclaim with true clarity the revelation they believe they have received from the Holy Spirit.
42 Comments •
Ah, the Naughton-Sisk Loophole! TEC can’t really think that anybody will be fooled by distinguishing between “authorizing” ssbs and “permitting” them.
I am reminded of the Nixon impeachment hearings, in which one congressman accused the President of stretching the truth so far that if an elephant entered the room, the President would say “That’s not an elephant; that’s a mouse with a glandular condition”.
In effect, TEC is saying “Our blessing of same sex unions is not a rite; it’s pastoral care with a glandular condition”.