Passage of D025 May Place TEC Outside Communion: TLC 7.13.09

The House of Bishops’ adoption of Resolution D025 on July 13 was an honest act that fairly stated the mind of the majority of the House of Bishops, progressive bishops argued. But members of the minority stated the vote ends the Episcopal Church’s compliance with the pledge made by the 2006 General Convention in Resolution B033 to abstain from consecrating more gay bishops, ends the Windsor Process, snubs the Archbishop of Canterbury, and places the Episcopal Church outside the Anglican Communion.

The Bishop of Rhode Island introduced D025 to the house as chair of the World Missions Committee, noting the bishops on the committee had recommended by a vote of 3-2 to reject adoption. Bishop Geralyn Wolf then enumerated the committee’s reasons for urging its rejection, saying “some” of the Episcopal Church’s overseas dioceses, while privately welcoming of the ministry of gays and lesbians, were “not theologically or culturally ready” for the innovation.

Adopting D025 “rejects” the Windsor process and jeopardizes the Anglican Covenant, and “doesn’t reflect the voices” of the wider Anglican Communion, Bishop Wolf said. It presumes a “theological understanding” of the question that has not, however, been reached, and while it may describe the “mind of the House,” the resolution “lacks clarity” and is open to a “variety of interpretations that will not be helpful in the Anglican Communion.”

The resolution “should be seen through the lens of world ministry,” Bishop Wolf continued, and sometimes it is necessary to “sacrifice for this ministry,” she said in urging its rejection.

Bishop Jeffrey Lee of Chicago asked for twenty minutes table time for the bishops to discuss the resolution, which was extended for a further ten minutes. Once the bishops reconvened, the Bishop of Upper South Carolina, the Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson, offered an amendment to the sixth resolved, asking substitution for the phrase that stated God “has called and may call” gays and lesbians to the ordained ministry with the statement that this call to ordained ministry was a “mystery” that was discerned by the church “for all people” in accordance with its constitution and canons.

“This is family talk,” Bishop Henderson declared, adding that “what we do affects a larger family.” He said that by being circumspect, we “can both pledge our commitment to the Anglican Communion” and continue to “debate the issues before the Anglican Communion” in the spirit of the Windsor Report.

Debate began on the amended resolution, with the bishops quickly dividing on their interpretation of what it meant. The Suffragan Bishop of Maryland, the Rt. Rev. John Rabb endorsed the Henderson amendment, urging the church to “continue the process of discernment.”

Bishop Michael Curry of North Carolina felt the amendment was helpful as it affirmed that “God’s call is God’s call; for us it is a mystery.” The language of the amendment presumes that “gay and lesbian people may be called” to the ordained ministry. Bishop John Bauerschmidt of Tennessee also supported the amendment, noting that its language was “descriptive” rather than “prescriptive” and “moves the resolution further along.”

But Bishop Nathan Baxter of Central Pennsylvania said he had “mixed emotions” about the Henderson amendment as he was seeking a way “to rescind or override B033.”

Bishop Baxter said he “really would like to see us honoring sacramentally same-sex unions,” and “honor what we see as holy in our experience.” While the Episcopal Church should be “concerned with its covenant with the Anglican Communion,” it should also be “concerned about our commitment to gays and lesbians.”

Bishop J. Neil Alexander of Atlanta rose in opposition, saying the amendment “renders things muddier.” Bishop Stephen Lane of Maine also urged rejection, saying the bishops should speak honestly about what they believed.

Bishop Thomas Ely of Vermont argued that “God has affirmed and will continue to call gays and lesbian people into the ordained ministry. That is not a mystery to me.

“The mystery is the person,” Bishop Thomas Ely said. If the amendment means the church will be open to the ordination of gays and lesbians, he said it had its support. “If it in any way questions that call to God, I would find that a great disappointment.”

Bishop J. Jon Bruno of Los Angeles said that if “we baptize people of all sexualities” we should be able to ordain them. “We don’t need any more study on this issue,” he said, and urged the Episcopal Church to be clear on this point. “Gays and lesbians have a right to the ordination process under our canons.”

“It is God who calls” an individual to the priesthood, Bishop George Counsell of New Jersey said, stating he preferred not to use the “language of rights” in describing ordination. He contended the amendment served to “put God at the center of all this.”

When a division was called, the Hollingsworth amendment was adopted 78 to 60 on a show of hands.

The Bishop of Arkansas, the Rt. Rev. Larry Benfield then rose to read a prepared statement in support of the original resolution saying that as the Trinity was a mystery, so was sexual love. It was fearful to say “we will restrict love because of a chromosomal make-up,” he contended, and argued that the theology was already in place by a reinterpretation of the creeds to permit honoring same-sex attractions as being holy.

But Bishop Michael Smith of North Dakota warned that endorsing the resolution would be a “negative response to the Windsor report,” and asked for a roll call vote. Five other bishops rose to endorse his motion, and it carried.

Bishop Gary Lillibridge rose in opposition to the resolution, but turned to the last resolve that stated “Christians of good conscience” may “disagree about some of these matters.” He told the house he did “not want to lose” that promise of forbearance of toleration of the minority.

The Rt. Rev. Clifton Daniel of East Carolina endorsed the resolution, saying it affirmed that the Episcopal Church was a member of the Anglican Communion. He disputed the statement that Lambeth 1.10 “represents the mind of the Anglican Communion on human sexuality,” saying it was the mind merely of the bishops at Lambeth in 1998. He proposed an amendment to the opening paragraph of the resolution that stated the Episcopal Church remained a “constituent” member of the Anglican Communion. There was no debate on the motion and it was adopted unopposed.

On the resolution as a whole, and the Bishop of Massachusetts, the Rt. Rev. M. Thomas Shaw, urged adoption. “I don’t know how much more we can ask of people,” he said. “It is time now to act.” Bishop Mark Beckwith of Newark concurred, saying this resolution removed the taint of B033 and “offers a statement as to who we are.”

The Rt. Rev. Stacy Sauls of Lexington, speaking in favor, said the resolution made no canonical changes and “does nothing other than to state what is true.” The Constitution and Canons “govern the discernment process,” he said, adding that “what this does is correct any misconception that B033 changed our canons.”

The Bishop coadjutor of Virginia, the Rt. Rev. Shannon Johnston, said he “personally agrees with every word of the resolution,” but would vote against it as it “breaks faith” with the Anglican Communion. The Anglican Consultative Council “gave us a great gift” in postponing consideration of Section 4 of the Anglican Covenant draft. “Now we are shooting the gap” created by the delay, and changing the debate by rejecting the Windsor process.

“We can affirm all we want,” that we are constituent members of the Anglican Communion, but that does not make it so, Bishop Johnston argued. The “Communion is too much to lose,” he said, urging its defeat.

“If the resolution passes, the Episcopal Church will cease to be part of the Communion,” said Bishop William Love of Albany. He read out to the house the Archbishop of Canterbury’s statement to the July 13 session of General Synod, which urged the bishops to defeat D025. Adopting the resolution would not simply “stress or tear the fabric” of the Communion, he said, “it would totally shred it.”

But Bishop Edwin Gulick of Kentucky disagreed, telling the house that the “passing of the resolution will not end the moratorium.” Distinguishing between intentions and actions, Bishop Gulick said the moratorium would be broken when the Episcopal Church consecrated a new gay bishop. He then turned to Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori and asked if this was not so. Bishop Jefferts Schori said that was “my understanding of it. We have been asked to exercise restraint, and we have done so.”

Bishop Mark Lawrence of South Carolina turned to natural law and church teaching in support of rejecting the resolution.

Bishop William Gregg, Assistant Bishop of North Carolina, noted that “God was not calling us to consensus.” He stated that “when synod has made a decision, the decision becomes real when the whole body receives the decision.”

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori noted the lateness of the hour, and called the question. A roll call vote was taken and the house adopted the amended resolution 99 to 45 with two abstentions.

Unlike the scenes surrounding the affirmation of the election of Bishop Robinson at the 2003 General Convention, the bishops filed out of the House in somber mood, and no applause came from the gallery. While some bishops left the Robinson vote in 2003 in tears or singing the doxology, the July 13 vote ended with most exhausted.

Resolution D025 now goes back to the House of Deputies for concurrence.