Posted on 06/22/2006 12:34:12 PM PDT by sionnsar
We, the undersigned Bishops of this 75th General Convention, in the confidence of the Gospel and out of love for this great Church, must prayerfully dissent from the action of this Convention in Resolution B033 (on Election of Bishops). We do so for the following reasons:
* The process used to arrive at Resolution B033 raises serious concerns about the integrity of our decision-making process as a Church. In particular we note that we discussed a resolution, A162 , on Tuesday, but were never given an opportunity to act upon it. Instead, we were presented with a different resolution this morning, and were given only 30 minutes for debate and discussion. This resolution bears great consequences both for the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church and unfortunately was not adequately discussed.
* Our conversation has been framed in a flawed paradigm, forcing us to choose between two goods-the full inclusion in the life of the Church of our brother and sister Christians who happen to be gay or lesbian and our full inclusion in the life of our beloved Communion.
* The process that brought about the reconsideration of this matter failed to honor the integrity of the House of Deputies by bringing undue pressure to bear on that body.
* Our witness to justice has been prophetic in this nation and in the wider Anglican Communion on the issues of the full inclusion of people of color and persons who are differently-abled. For more than 30 years women been permitted to be included in the councils of this Church as lay deputies to this Convention and as deacons, priests and bishops. This witness to full inclusion has borne the fruits of the Spirit and is incarnate in the faces and lives around these tables and throughout the Church. The language of this resolution too much echoes past attempts by the Church to limit participation of those perceived to be inadequate for full inclusion in the ordained ministry.
* Any language that could be perceived as effecting a moratorium that singles out one part of the Body by category is discriminatory.
We are absolutely committed to the future of this Communion and the process of healing the strain that we readily admit and regret exists, and has been exacerbated in our own house by events today. We must participate in this process with our own integrity intact and thus we are obliged to make this dissent. We intend to challenge the rest of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion to honor the promise to include the voices of gay and lesbian in the conversations about the future of the Communion. We pray for the Church, for our Communion, and for our lesbian and gay brothers and sisters.
**We are not able to publish "the undersigned" bishops names because the bishops demonstrated their assent by standing after it was read in a closed session of the House of Bishops and it is uncertain exactly who stood up. However, the group at least includes the Bishops of Chicago, Newark, Northern Michigan, Rochester, Vermont, Washington and Wyoming.
END
FOOTNOTE: As at this posting we do not know the names of the bishops who signed this minority report. When VirtueOnline learns of them we will post them immediately.
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. Hmmm...you'd think they'd be okay with having their names associated with this.
It does not read well to see it asserted but have no actual identifiable sponsor.
That would be a faulty paradigm if I ever read one, IMHO.
This is no different from the lying rhetoric of the UCC.
The Episcopal Church in America dragged behind the Anglican Communion when it came to issues of racial integration and the Anglican Communion has never in its history discriminated against the disabled.
The attempt to compare specific sexual acts that are unequivocally condemned in Scripture with ancestry is repugnant.
So I guess they are saying to the world wide anglican community, "You got your resolution demanded by the Windsor meeting, but we are telling you that we are in control here and it means nothing."
Interestingly, the large majority of people in the Communion who oppose these gentlemen happen to be "of color." But I suppose that doesn't really count....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.