---

I'm kneeling on the third floor carpet outside the Hyatt Regency ballroom. It's 6:04.

The lines are already starting to form. There are three lines. One for deputies signing up to speak. Another for visitors registering to speak. One just to get in.

Jim Workman+ just came over and pointed out that Susan Russell+ and Michael Hopkins+ are already in line to speak.

He now tells me that bishops Howe and Lipscomb are in line.

I'm in the one to get in. I missed my chance to get a press pass because the registration for these passes began at 3:00pm. The SCECAC afternoon session began at 2 and ended at 4. There were only 50 press tickets issued. They were long gone by the time I got there.

So I'm going in with the "hoi poloi" as Martyn+ likes to say. But I have been assured by the room monitor that there is plenty of in there for a blogger on the floor next to an outlet.

This is really amazing. The hall outside the ballroom is already standing (or kneeling room only).

Raymond Dague is holding my place in line while I write.

I see many many people lined up to speak. I don't see how we'll have time for them all.

Stay tuned to this page (simply keep refreshing it) throughout the hearing tonight. I will be live blogging and adding testimony in real time if possible...

Update: Jim+ comes though again. Jane Gould is in line to speak as is +Bob Duncan and Liz Keaton.

The press has arrived. They are gaggling around my little corner. Lots of cameras. Lots of frenzied reporters. I hope I'm not a "frenzied reporter?"

Susan Russell just passed by and eyed me coldly...or at least eyed my general direction coldly. I think she's upset about something.

This waiting room/ante-chanmber is about twice the size of the Hayes room where the SCECAC met this morning. It is dwarfed by the ballroom beyond these doors. It is carpeted in the same burgandy and gold pattern as the ballroom itself and one whole wall is completely made of class. This wall descends all the way to the first floor. The ante-chamber, I suppose, is more of a fantastical balcony.

Now I am in a small little cubby-hole of people. It is not yet, but nearing standing room only. The three lines above have disintigrated.

More coming. I see it is about seven I am going to unplug, hibernate and get in line so that I can get a good place when the doors open.

stay tuned...

Okay, I’m in. People actually broke into a run when the hall doors opened. I have a seat right next to the plug. I’m on the opposite wall from this afternoon. Just met Peter Frank, communications director for the diocese of Pittsburg.

Andy is bustling about the ballroom taking lots of photos. If you want a description of the interior see my blog of the afternoon committee meeting.

Oh, I was told today by Sarah Dylan Breuer, that this hearing is a Committee hearing not a commission hearing. Between GC's they are called commissions. During GC, they are called committees. Had no idea...stay tuned

Finally, I meet Kendall+. I’ve never met him in person. He’s walking the sidelines and I managed to get his attention and introduce myself. Should have asked him for his autograph.

Everyone I speak to has one question on their hearts. What is the overall direction of things? I don’t know. I think tonight we’ll get a real sense for what sort of fight we’re going to see, if any, in the HOD. As Kendall+ just pointed out, tonight is the committee’s night off. They are here to hear. The thing to watch for is who is going to testify (especially when it comes to bishops) and what are they going to say.

The room is still not settled. It is packed. We're starting...

FW+: Our desire is to have an open event. This is a hearing. That means that we listen. In order for it to be a hearing we all need to hear. So the people who do the work tonight are those who listen and open their hearts. Here are the resolutions to be discussed

A161: the election of bishops
A162: public rites for ssu’s
A163:DEPO
A160: Expression of regret

Those who speak will be invited to speak on any or all of these resolutions. You are also invited to address diocesan resolutions, the C resolutions.

Here are the norms of the committee: engage in respectful listening. This is an important part of the church.

Undivided attention. No phones, no blackberry’s
No, demonstrations of support or non-support. We will be stewards.

If two people agree on everything one of them is not necessary.

The first twenty speakers are deputies and bishops. Then we open up the mikes to registered visitors. Six persons will be called at a time: Two in favor, two opposed, and two undecided.

The timing will be two minutes per speaker. At 45 secs there will be a warning. After a certain point, if you keep talking, your presence will be concluded (laugher)

First 6:
Zoe Cole Diocese CO
Anne Brown VT
Thomas Ely VT
Kendall Harmon SC
Jack Fenwall alt
Michael Hopkins alt

Zoe Cole: I rise to speak in opposition to allresolutions and in favor of the Holy Spirit. Some say committees are not able to discern the spirit. I believe it does and can as it has throughout history. There is no better place for the HS to speak. It is possible for us to err. It is consistent that the HS should speak to and through us; that he spoke in 00, 03 and that the HS will speak here as well. For that reason we cannot turn our back on how we have experienced the power of the spirit

Anne Brown: I speak to A162: Lee and I went home after 03 to be part of the new thing a state approved civil union. Encouraged by 03 that we are part of the Church we wanted to celebrate our love with our church and we got it from our bishop and clergy and all the people in our church. But our celebration could not be celebrated in the way that would have been most reflective of this love. We had a private ceremony. The liturgical rescources for us have been helpful and well received. Today we are facing an opportunity to be leaders. To speak from abundance not from fear.

+Ely: C051: Affirmed restraint and reaffirmation. We recognized both the church standards and local contexts. Res. A162 unecessarily moves us awa from that place of both/and. I realize the language derives from the WR. It is important to note that the language of “private” is dangerous because it means something different here than it does elsewhere. These blessings are not private matters, they are personal. Now is not the time to embrace and either or solution rather it is the time to continue a both/and tradtion.

Harmon: Speak to res A161: Where is the clarity and honesty. The WR uses clear language. What is remarkable about these res. Is that they do not take the specific language of WR seriously. We have been asked to stop doing something very clearly until a new consensus arises. And yet the langage of this resolution is a fudge it is far away from what we have been called to do. The relationship in this communion is like a marriage. We need to be honest. Let’s not play games. If we think this new thing is a move of the Spirit say so clearly. If not say so clearly. Let’s be honest.

Jack F. A162: language unnecessary and unhelpful. We all know that ECUSA has not approved these rites nor has it taken the preliminary steps to do so. It is unhelpful because to pass this resolution is to send a message to thousands of people that the blessing and inclusion of people who are partnered that they are unwelcome in our church. It will be helpful for us who are trying to evangelize to gen X and below who what to be a church who will speak to them. It will cause people to lose hope

Michael Hopkins: If two people are saying the same thing one of them are not necessary. The WR is asking us and its interpretation that we received from NT Wright today says that we must speak in the same way as the rest of the communion. We need each other. I do not support 160 and the expression of regret. We did not create this problem. WE have had broken communion for 30 years since WO. We promised at that time to start a conversation. That conversation has not yet taken place. How can we take seriously the WR when we have not ever been asked to take part in a conversation


Next 6:
Sarah Dylan Breuer: I speak as a member of the commission. I was honored to serve. The res, are not perfect but they are good. It was not politics as usual.Power did not rule. It was a powerful experience of God’s grace as we made room for each other. I was amazed to read on the internet from a committee member a report that reflected political calculation. I was disappointed. Resolutions amended to be less generous to gay people or conservatives will be a defeat. These resolutions represent the middle ground. tHe place where we can come together


Elen C. Neufeld (Albany): It has been my experience that our brothers and sisters in the AC that they understand what we say. I urge that we be as clear as possible. That if we want to repent or regret what we have done, which is my hope, that we will say so openly and sincerely. If it is the mind of theChurch not to do so. Let us do so honestly, openly and sincerely. Let us walk together or apart, but with honesty.


Frederick Richardson: NT Wright issued a statement. He said that A162 highlights the purpose and intent of WR in that which matters can be local and which need to be communion matters. Since you have chosen not to use the language of the WR in this resolution we have decided to turn this into a local decision when WR understands this as a communion decision. Local blessings, which are very common in this nation, are not consistent with what we are being asked before. I ask that we mirror the language of WR Para 144.

Chris Cantrell: A160: I speak to the idea that what we are regretting is the pain of what other people are feeling. This is not what we have been asked to regret. I hope that we can be clear that it was not a failure to consult but a failure to listen to those who warned us before the fact.

???I stand to speak in opposition of A161: It uses this language: In opposition to bishops who strain the communion…these words have no meaning and no value and because they have no value this resolutions should be defeated

Judy Mayo (Ft Worth) I speak against 162. I want to commend the commissions work. One thing we teach our children is that regret leads to an action. Repentance starts with regret but does not end there. Something is either right or wrong. It makes no difference whether an ssu is public or private. These along with non-celibate gay consecrations are clearly against the plain meaning of the scriptures

Clark (Newark) I rise to support the fullest honoring of gay and lesbian people in the church. I found in raising children in a welcoming church that they have learned to love others who are different. My daughter asked me whether she was a lesbian. I asked her who she had a crush on. She said Charles. I said, you are not a lesbian. You are who you love. The gospel is the broadest possible hospitality to those who are least among us.



Henry: These resolutions are reactive not proactive. We must act on what we know to be true. This is the WR that we are responding too. Not the DC, not the ACC, only the WR. Let’s not quote bishops lets use our own language. The WR states the bonds of affection have been broken but we are not the only ones who have broken them. A162: a broader consensus is called for. This is unhelpful. Respond to WR but do not use language that goes beyond is

Nangarow: A161: the language of “caution.” I respect the care of this language. This does not sound like enough to those who want to see a moratorium. To others it sounds like a moratorium in all but name. I suggest that we do not consecrate another bishop until 2009 after lambeth. This is great hardship. But our willingness to endure hardship will say that we value communion and value our GLBT brothers and sisters.

???I am against all resolutions: Some believe the actions of GC2003 are thoughtless reckless and belligerent. The motive behind these actions we the result of people hearing the compelling aduration of the HS. When we are asked to repent and be cautiouse we are asked to turn our back on the HS and blaspheme the HS, the unpardonable sin. It is the churches job to be exposed. We can be saddened by the ramifications, but we cannot turn back from our call.

Peter: A162: Ask that it be modified to remove the word “private” . This will move us from recognition to affirmation. My bishop has recognized the autority of priests to offer ssu’s. These blessings are not officially authorize. But they are not private or hidded, but public. It is an evangelical act of compassion for which we canot apologise

Lydia Evans: A162: There has been much work done. When I read this report. I noticed a disparity between para 53-55. The substance of 53 was left out. I wondered why the spec commission would omit this critical point. What we cannot deny is that the adoption of C151 has led to the increased use of SSU’s. The adoption of this resolution would be deceitful. We must be very clerar and keep our word.

Titus presler: I support full inclusion. 160: addresses the issue of regret for the pain caused by our action, actions I supported. Many who travel in parts of the GS have expreinced the pain others have felt. It is real. It is urgent. One group in E Africa heard one bishop in Burundi say: we wonder why you did not come sooner. The expression of regret is an important step toward reconciliation. I am surprised we did not anticipate the reaction our actions would cause. I believe 160 is an important step in reconciliation

Don: We can’t overestimate the importance of what you do. I ask that you think seriously about what you are asked to do. Ask whether the actions you take move us closer to walking apart or walking together with the AC. Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining. We need clarity. We cannot have the outcome of this on our own terms.We cannot become an institution of hubris and denial

Robert Hannah: I’m a simple gospel guy. Regret doesn’t seem to get it either way. We are looking at the authority of scripture. And we should start with what the scripture says about itself. WE are told not to depart from God’s Word. To hold fast to the gospel. Study the bible. Follow the bible and uphold its authority.

Madina: D030: written to come before your committee. I am here to produce the text for your consideration. In the spirit of the scriptures that say no one is rejected who loves God, we reject the idea that we should repent or regret these actions any more than Galileo should have repented for saying that the earth revolves around the sun. We do regret the ignorance, intolerance, and hatred of the church toward GLBT oppressed.

Robert Duncan: I want to thank the Spec Com. You are doing what I think is impossible. Holding together the progressing and conserving wings of our church. Reads from Wrights article: “IF these are passed without amendment ECUSA will decide not to comply with WR. If the resolutions are not amended then with sadness the rest of the communion will conclude that ECUSA has decided to walk apart.” The moment has probably come for us. WE have reached a moment when it is impossible to hold it together


VGR: It seems to me that this debate is about one thing. Do we recognize the life of Christ in the GLBT members of this church. Are we not in this debate now because we have seen the fruits of the spirit in the eyes of our brothers and sisters who happen to be gay. If we see this, what then. We cannot make decisions on the basis of what the AC does or does not decide. Our job is to discern the will of God here. If we sse God in our GLBT members let us say so. The homosexual agenda is Jesus Christ. I know that I am loved beyond my wildest imagining. I am not an abomination but a beloved sinner forgiven by grace. Pilates sin was not that he did not know what is right, but that he did not do it. Let us do right.

Josephine Hicks: A161: This resolution as crafted probably strikes a good balance. The response I’ve gotten from international partners is that they see a great generosity of spirit in this resolution. We cannot go further either way. It will be well received.

Porter Taylor: Thank you for the intent of A161. I heard conversation leads to conversion. The WR is the opening to a conversation. It seems you have found a balance between a moratorium and a response that says we will do what we want to do. I think our communion is evolving. WE are being asked to move into a relationship with each other. Our future will be messy. Walking with Jesus is always messy.

+Ihloff: I think these resolutions reflect a faithful and complete response to the WR. I have taken heart to see bishops of very different minds come together and compromise. I was very pleased to see +Eames reaction to our response last year. Wright disagrees. I am not surprised. Kendall suggested there is only one way. There is always more than one way. We must live gracefully accepting one another

Minns+: I have a story for you. Mary and John were beautiful people . John wanted an open marriage. Mary did not. John was sorry that Mary felt this way but John was sorry that she was so narrow. John, after counseling, was sorry that she was taking it so hard. Mary offered forgiveness if he would stop and repent. John said he felt very bad and would be far more careful and cautious in his affairs in the future…good parable. I missed too much of it but you get the picture

David Roseberry: Last month I organized an online petition asking priests only in ECUSA to make a unified statement to the HOB. We asked the church stop consecrations, ssu’s, that the WR be fully embraced, we asked that we turn the focus of this church to reaching the lost. I speak with 1064 priests from 22, 490 years of service.

Brian Miller: I generally support the resolutions but ask that they become more congruent with the WR. What happens in one part of the communion effects the whole. It is either necessary to affirm the WR’s meaning or reject it outright. Now is the time for clarity. Now is the time to speak the truth in love. I believe unity is a virtue, a private virtue. I have 25 years to serve this church before I retire. Don’t let the next years be as hard as the first 4.

?? At the heart of these resolutions is the idea of living in the tension of Anglicanism. I believe God lives in this tension. I believe our church acted in ways unilateral and we ignored the Communion. We had not done the theological work that needed to be done. These have been hard times for all of us. I live for the day when we can debate poverty not sexuality. I pray that these resolutions will be passed.

Pierre Whalen: The decision we make have global consequences for opeople in ECUSA because we are a global church. WE will effect people in Taiwan etc.. We are a global church. The only global church in the AC. We are also part of a global communion. I serve as a laison to the C of E. They are focusing on what we are doing because they are directly effected. The RC church has no interest in seeing the AC divide. This GC has to persuade only one person, the ABC, that this church wants to participate in the process he established, not the bishop of Durham.

?? In the midst of the clamoring din…I can’t hear this guy. He’s reading poetry. He wants to include and love everybody….and be fastidious??

Peter Cook: I want to speak to those motions which urge full compliance. What is it we are accused of. One thing embarrases all of us. What we did 3 years ago is parallel to what ECUSA often accuses the USA of doing to the rest of the world. We’ve acted unilaterally. We have declared that our understanding of the gospel is more enlightened than those of the global south. We call them primitive and yet in parts of the African world, the number of earned Phd’s are far higher than our own. WE must fully comply with WR

Linda Morris: I disagree with resolves 1 and 2 of 162. We want and need to be in communion. But we cannot allow them to negate the fact that we are loved and deserving of the best the church can give in a pastoral relationship. We deserve and need the churches support. I know not all provinces will be comfortable with this. WE cannot force this on others. However, we must have the freedom to be free ourselves.

Susan Russell: I rise to suggest that the opinions of Durham notwithstanding the WR offers opinions not ultimatums. Not a single GLBT person took part in the creation of the WR. There is much to regret in the AC family and this exclusion must be on the list. We have much work to do. We cannot make an idol of clarity. WE must reject the idea that we are at a deal or no deal moment.

+David Reed: The wording of these resolutions is deceptive. The word “until” is a clear word in 162 means “we know and one day you will catch up. The other one is where we say in 160, we are repentant….I think it would be more honest to say we apologise for our total disregard of lambeth1.10

Andrew Cooley: I commend these resolutions that embrace the spirit of the WR. They create an environment of love. Two people must face each other to talk. There must be something of a distance. The static around them must be reduced. These resolutions create such an environment wehere reconciliation is possible. The WR is not clear. It is nuanced. These resolutions also have nuance. They create space for reconciliation’

Colin Coward: I was the person first invited by ++Capetown to speak with MHopkins of Integrity. But though we were invited, we were not listened too. The debate on 1.10 was vitriolic and not enlightened by the HS. I was there. Wright says the wording of these resolutions does not respect WR. But Wright has gay priests in his diocese and he has done nothing. He also is guilty. Open the church to GLBT people.

Grissel of Texas: I have three sons. I observe a pattern that when the stronger son apologizes he also uses, “IF I have hurt you…” He wished to insert his younger brothers feelings and remove some of his own culpability. We are doing the same thing. The older son when asked not to do it again will say “I’ll do my best” when he needs to say he won’t. Let’s be bold enough either to express our apologies unequivocably

Lebay from Newark: I encourage boldness. My question. Are we chameleons. We are asked to attain a false identity. These require us to lie about who we are. Pain is always needed for growth. WE cannot regret who we are even if it brings pain. For God’s sake lets elect more challenging bishops who expand our knowledge and experience of God. If we have bishops who insist on bonds of abuse, we must free ourselves. Anglicanism requires emotional maturity, We need not be Anglican if we don’t have it.

??? These resolutions have given such an emotional charge. I want to urge us not to read these reports and documents and communiqués as if they are gospel. I hope we invoke the HS to be with us. That he will be with us today like he was with us in 2003. We can express regret over slavery, racism, injustice. It is my hope that we will remember our baptismal covenant.

Lipscomb: The WR is the place where the healing of the communion begins. These were not arm waving aspirations. All agree that these recommendations are the minimum required. I choose to remain an Episcopalian but I hope that we will also remain Anglican.

I’ve missed two speakers now because of computer foul ups sorry…

Urbeck: I speak on behalf of those who are seeing their church being torn apart. We are becoming known as the people of fudge. Be clear in the words you write. Give us honesty. If we cannot abide WR then let’s not do it clearly.

Pat Ladell: I oppose all resolutions because they send the wrong message to the GLBT members of the church. I would point out the the WR is disingenuous in describing the process of WO. Such a flawed response deserves a pompous response. C004 is the best. We do not ask parents: will you raise your children heterosexual. We ask

??? Consider the word repent. I have had that word thrown at me all my life. I have been asked to repent for who I am for being an abomination. I finally repented of this denial of the gift God has given me. Understand that the word repent has power. It does have an impact.

Bishop Skilton: I never dreamed or thought I would find myself here again. I said that the damage would be irreparable. I gathered with international people who said don’t. We did. The church is damaged and hurting, In 2003, the space for conversation collapsed. The WR provides that space again.

Kathy Wise: I rise neither to speak in favor or in opposition. The miracle of community is that a diverse group of Christians come together to feed on Christ. They will know we are his disciples by our love for one another. This is our moment to practice what we preach. What witness will we make

Brad Drell: I want to urge the committee, the proof is in the pudding. Those who say the WR is unclear don’t want to see the actual language of the WR to be brought before the HOB and HOD to be voted on. Dean Luck has proposed a resolution that obfuscates. Get us resolutions on the floor that reflect the WR. People have been waiting for three years.

Coyle: I had the honor of being one of the 100 parishes surveyed about whether we are welcoming to GLBT people. Our receptionist said: I don’t see why not. I congradulated her.

?? Your conduct together gives the lie to Duncans claim that this is impossible. It is possible to both stand by what we have done AND apologise. What are we apologizing for? What we have failed to do is what we should focus on: we failed to respect our communion partners. Every church parish and diocese needs to make that connection and bear witness

Henry Scriven: I come from the perspective of the CofE, the Southern Cone, etc..all around the communion I love. I respect the process the Communion has used and the committee here and your work. I would like to say: please take the WR seriously

Mansiger from San Diego: I come from a broad parish. We studied the WR for a year. We wrote a resolution in support of the report for our Diocesan commission. It was passed and sent here. St. Dunstans wants to remain in ECUSA and the AC and not be forced to make a choice. We ask you to do what it takes at a minimum or stronger if needed

Barbara Harris: While it is appropriate for us to consider the WR it is not approprirate to accept or adopt it until we have fiully engaged in the 78, 88, and 98 listening process. This process has not been fully engaged. Neither we nor our partners in Communion have seriously listened to our GLBT brothers and sisters. Until they are listened to any acceptance or recommendations are premature.

Thuner: Bish Ret of NH: A160: I regret deeply the pain and suffering people have felt over this issue. But there is nothing I can do about it. I cannot apologose for it. If I respond to a request I am responding to the person not out of my own heart. I cannot repent I can only repent to God for sin. I have not sinned in this regard. NH did everything above board.

Urbeck: I speak on behalf of those who are seeing their church being torn apart. We are becoming known as the people of fudge. Be clear in the words you write. Give us honesty. If we cannot abide WR then let’s not do it clearly.

Pat Ladell: I oppose all resolutions because they send the wrong message to the GLBT members of the church. I would point out the the WR is disingenuous in describing the process of WO. Such a flawed response deserves a pompous response. C004 is the best. We do not ask parents: will you raise your children heterosexual. We ask

??? Consider the word repent. I have had that word thrown at me all my life. I have been asked to repent for who I am for being an abomination. I finally repented of this denial of the gift God has given me. Understand that the word repent has power. It does have an impact.

Bishop Skilton: I never dreamed or thought I would find myself here again. I said that the damage would be irreparable. I gathered with international people who said don’t. We did. The church is damaged and hurting, In 2003, the space for conversation collapsed. The WR provides that space again.

Kathy Wise: I rise neither to speak in favor or in opposition. The miracle of community is that a diverse group of Christians come together to feed on Christ. They will know we are his disciples by our love for one another. This is our moment to practice what we preach. What witness will we make

Brad Drell: I want to urge the committee, the proof is in the pudding. Those who say the WR is unclear don’t want to see the actual language of the WR to be brought before the HOB and HOD to be voted on. Dean Luck has proposed a resolution that obfuscates. Get us resolutions on the floor that reflect the WR. People have been waiting for three years.

Coyle: I had the honor of being one of the 100 parishes surveyed about whether we are welcoming to GLBT people. Our receptionist said: I don’t see why not. I congradulated her.

?? Your conduct together gives the lie to Duncans claim that this is impossible. It is possible to both stand by what we have done AND apologise. What are we apologizing for? What we have failed to do is what we should focus on: we failed to respect our communion partners. Every church parish and diocese needs to make that connection and bear witness

Henry Scriven: I come from the perspective of the CofE, the Southern Cone, etc..all around the communion I love. I respect the process the Communion has used and the committee here and your work. I would like to say: please take the WR seriously

Mansiger from San Diego: I come from a broad parish. We studied the WR for a year. We wrote a resolution in support of the report for our Diocesan commission. It was passed and sent here. St. Dunstans wants to remain in ECUSA and the AC and not be forced to make a choice. We ask you to do what it takes at a minimum or stronger if needed

Barbara Harris: While it is appropriate for us to consider the WR it is not approprirate to accept or adopt it until we have fiully engaged in the 78, 88, and 98 listening process. This process has not been fully engaged. Neither we nor our partners in Communion have seriously listened to our GLBT brothers and sisters. Until they are listened to any acceptance or recommendations are premature.

Thuner: Bish Ret of NH: A160: I regret deeply the pain and suffering people have felt over this issue. But there is nothing I can do about it. I cannot apologose for it. If I respond to a request I am responding to the person not out of my own heart. I cannot repent I can only repent to God for sin. I have not sinned in this regard. NH did everything above board.

Sam Gould (youth rep): A little boy asked why I was coming here? I told him I was coming here to help the church be fair to everyone. The AC has no power over ECUSA. It never has and never will.

Mike Clark: I am a straight white guy. I feel the WR is threatening to our process. I am worried about the precedent that may be set by our response. In 2003 a man chose a man to be our bishop through proper and legal processs. WE are being asked to regret for our legal process. Now is the time to stand up and be firm about our process.

Howe: I urge the committee to give fuller compliace to the WR. The WR was told to find a way to fix the tear. It said this is what must happen if the tear is to be repaired. No one asked ECUSA to propose a lesser way. None of our resolutions are WR compliant. If they are not we will have decided to walk separately no matter how loudly we proclaim otherwise.

Jane Gould: My brothers and sisters we hold worship weekly in English and Swahili. God’s Spirit is at work in our church.

Vincent Warner: I do not agree with the word regret. I affirm the action we took in 2003. I came into ECUSA because of MLK. Recently I have been inspired by VGR. I am thankful for all of God’s people.

Easton diocese: I oppose 160. The premise of WR is that ECUSA has done something wroing. I reject that premise. To be honest, we all know. We know it, we see it. It is undeniable that GLBT people are a faithful part of our church. WE would be no where without them. I cannot imagine the courage it takes to have your sexuality at issue. They are to be loved and accepted.

Bruce Garner: We all have a place to stand around the altar of God. We will not know who God will exclude. Until then we cannot exclude. However many more imperfections we see in each other, Christ invites us to him. Never refuse the invitation.

Dryer: the will of Christ is Unity. Do you feel that you have discerned the will of Christ in these matters. And if you do not feel this. Postpone the adoption of these resolutions. We have the situation of preserving the status quo. This could be a good thing. I think this process has invited us to pray about our priorities. In terms of the impact of these resolutions…. He’s cut off

Matt Gunter: Thank you I speak in support of the resolutions. They say to the rest of the communion we don’t want to be arrogant. It takes the middle path and takes community seriously. Community is hard. Community forces us to give up our illusions about ourselves. I suspect to hear the HS in the widest communion possible.

++York (really): Para 134 quoting it….the question you must come to is resolution 161 and 160. Will it be sufficient. I am doubtful. Why? These resolutions do not meet the standard. You must be careful. You need to ask, do these resolutions show us Christ. Do they show the marks of our own affliction as part of the body. Do they show us to be those whose tears are wiped awayu when Christ returns. Friends we follow a crucified savior. In Anglicanism truth and unity are not separate. I am not sure that your resolutions will create the space necessary for communion. If they do not you must strenghthen them. He seemed very doubtful about these resolutions passing internatonal muster and being sufficient on the merits.

?? HOD will not accept these resolutions

Andrew Cline: I speak in support of the resolutions generally. I feel led to say that I speak as one who is for inclusion of GLBT people and yet I am one of those orthodox who believe that we are all called to be transformed. I see the light of Christ in my GLBT brothers and sisters. I also see the face of sin as I see it also in myself.

Liz Keaton: I get the last word: I’ve been struggling with the issue of repentance. If we choose repent, then we are choosing the real issue of 2003 which is not scripture, but power and authority. we are on the slippery slope of creating a curia. We are close to a second reformation. I regret the pain we caused. But we did not do anything wrong. We need to hold a moratorium on the WR itself not on our own actions led by the Spirit.

WE are closing now. It’s over. My fingers are numb.