Shall I Speak?

While my view of the communiqué coming out of Tanzania is not positive, I seem to be not quite so pessimistic as some "on our side", because I think that Bishop Katharine's signing the communiqué is perhaps simply a statement that, "Yes, this is what happened at the meetings." She really does not have it in her power to commit to more than that. If she meant more than that, then I am truly disappointed in her. She has said that BO33 needs to be revisited, and the communiqué will, most certainly, be revisited.

Remember, she stayed seated at the meeting, and only seven primates refused the Eucharist with her. I think she might have brought some of those in the opposition around a bit, and that's no small thing. Whether we need to spend a whole lot more time trying to bring these folks around is another matter. Perhaps we don't.

Sooner or later, a gay or lesbian partnered candidate will be elected in another TEC diocese. What happens then? The vote will go in favor of consent for consecration. Then what? Another crisis? This meeting solved nothing.

As for the covenant, no matter what is in the covenant, I am against it. We already have a New Covenant given us by Jesus Christ. Why would we think that sinful human beings could come up with a better covenant than that of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ?

In the end, I am not gay; I am not lesbian. If I were, I'm wondering if my alarm wouldn't be greater, because, if the contents of the communiqué were put into effect, they would much more personally affect me. I don't think there's much chance of that, but we do need to get to work to keep that from happening. It is, in fact, happening in the dioceses of the Windsor bishops.

I can stand in solidarity with my GLTB brotheres and sisters, but empathy only takes me so far. I cannot be them. I hesitate even to express myself here, wondering if what I say is relevant at all. However, I do so because I am a member of the faithful, and my voice should count for something, whether gay, straight, black, white, old, young, whatever, therefore, I speak my small piece, for what it's worth.

UPDATE: Here is the link to Bshop Katharine's reflection on the communiqué and the meetings in Tanzania. I'm not quite clear yet if she is saying, "This is what the communiqué suggests," or if she is saying, "This is what I suggest."

What is being asked of both parties is a season of fasting - from authorizing rites for blessing same-sex unions and consecrating bishops in such unions on the one hand, and from transgressing traditional diocesan boundaries on the other.

She can only recommend this "fasting" to the US bishops, right? She has no power to order this "fasting". My question: "Is Bishop Katharine recommending that TEC follow through on the requests in the communiqué?" If she is, then I am deeply disappointed in her. She has made a grave mistake. Maintaining the Communion is not worth the sacrifice of our brothers and sisters.

As I see it, in the communiqué, GLTB Christians are asked to "fast" from seeking full inclusion in the church, in other words, to "fast" from seeking justice, and the authorities in TEC are asked to "fast" from handing down justice. The bishops who poached outside their territory are asked to "fast" from poaching. How, in any sense, is this equivalent "fasting"? How is this in any sense Christian?

The sacrifice comes on the backs of GLTB Christians. Who else is being asked to sacrifice? This resembles the Pharisees in Matthew 23:4: "They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling to lift a finger to move them."

How long before TEC follows the words of the prophet Amos 5:24, "But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream."

I found this statement to be quite toubling also:

This covenant is a further step in the Windsor process, engaged in the understanding that all human communities need boundaries in order to function.

I was not aware that this was so. When did this come to be?