The buzz in the Episcopal Church today is, "What heppened in the House of Deputies yesterday?" The answer depends on who you ask. It all revolves around one resolution, B025, which was passed after around two hours of attempted amending and division. The genesis of this amendment was the 14 or so resolutions that came to GC from the dioceses that had to do with B033 from GC2006. That resolution created what many percieve as a moratorium on the consecration of gays and lesbians in relationships to the office of bishop. I tend to agree with the Anglican Centrist that B033 did not create anything - that the moratoria was actually a defacto one that standing committees and bishops enforced on themselves due to concerns about our relationships wihthe rest of the Anglican Communion.
In any case, B033 was felt as hurtful by many in the GLBT community within the Episcopal Church. The 14 resolutions ranged from reaffirming to modifying to repealing B033. D025 as it finally came to the floor was a compromise, intended to state where we are as a church rather than take action. When asked very pointedly by deputies, the committee chair could not say whether D025 repealed B033 or not. It seems to me that since B033 is not mentioned at all in D025 and that the chair could not identify a repeal within it, the default position would be that B033 stands.
While this lack of clarity is very typical for us, what it means in practice is that any time a diocese considers an Episcopal candidate in a same-gendered relationship, there will probably be a fierce debate within that diocese as to what D025 means. Messy. Of course, this all assumes that D025 passes the House of Bishops, which is not a foregone conclusion. The Archbishop of Canterbury has expressed concern over the resolution, and that may be enough to make the bishops vote it down outright, or amend it and send it back to a House of Deputies that is already way behind schedule and might not be able to get back to it.
In any case, both the extremes of right and left are portraying this as an outright repeal of B033, both because it's what they want to believe. The left, because their groups have thrown an incredible amount of resources into this convention as so far have nothing to show, and the right because if it does, it might help them with their realignment efforts. As i've noted before, a careful reading does not bear out this conclusion, but ultimately, perception is more important than content in church politics.
For an insightful commentary, see Nick Knisely's at Entangled States.
Comments