OK, what are they saying here? Who won?
I don't know, but Point 2 seems to be a masterpiece of word parsing in my book. In the interests of disclosure, I'm not Episcopalian.
Dear McGavin999,
Yeah, especially after reading the fire-breathing denouncement that the Presiding Bishop just gave down in Texas.
This one looks like the ECUSA caving. Look especially #3:
"Those of us having jurisdiction pledge to withhold consent to the consecration of any person elected to the episcopate after the date hereof until the General Convention of 2006, and we encourage the dioceses of our church to delay episcopal elections accordingly."
I'm not sure, but I THINK this means that the House of Bishops is agreeing not to confirm any more homosexual bishops. Thus, if the Diocese of California elects a homosexual bishop in the months leading up to the 2006 General Convention, thus requiring a vote accepting that election by the General Convention (as it was explained to me) does that mean that these folks are pledging to reject that bishop?
I'm confused. 8-p
sitetest
In political terms this would be called a "log-roll." The HOB recognizes that they're in trouble, and this is in a sense a surrender. However, they also took pains to remind the Primates that nothing at all is going to happen until GC06.
The subtext to this is that the HOB is fully expecting GC06 to forge ahead with the public affirmation of same-sex blessings -- so all they've really done is try to kick the can down the street a bit longer.
Note that the HOB quite clearly stated that they would take no action against those bishops and clergy who continue to practice "non-public" rites for same-sex unions. This is the real meat of the statement, and I think the Global South will pounce on it.
I think the HOB made a big mistake by asserting the "no consecrations whatsoever" policy. This is clearly wrong-headed -- it's essentially a confession that the ECUSA no longer has any clear idea of what a bishop should look like. This, I think, will provide fodder for the Primates to state that the ECUSA has utterly lost its way.