From Bishop Gene's blog:
Never have I felt more in need of your prayers. As I write this, the opening service of the Lambeth Conference is going on at Canterbury Cathedral. I am a few miles away -- but it feels like a much further difference. I am not appearing at the opening service, as I promised the Archbishop.
....
The most infuriating blow came this morning with news that when the Episcopal Church's House of Bishops meets on Tuesday afternoon (each of the 38 "national" provinces of the Communion will have its own gathering), I will not be allowed to participate, because this would look like I had become a "participant," and the organizers seem intent on enforcing my status as a non-invitee. If nothing can be done to change this decision, it will be a particularly painful blow. At our House of Bishops meeting in March, I pleaded with the House not to let Lambeth separate us. For me to be excluded from my own House of Bishops seems especially cruel and unnecessary.
How can this be? How can Bishop Gene be excluded from a meeting of his own House of Bishops? I said that I would not blog while I was in Kansas City, but I was shocked, angered, and outraged when I read of his exclusion, and I simply could not keep quiet. I say to our bishops of the Episcopal Church, "Please do not allow Gene to be excluded. Speak up. Take a stand for what's right. Cancel the meeting, if no way can be found for Gene to attend."
Please pray for Bishop Gene. Thanks to Fran for the link to Gene's post.
Mimi -- yes -- infuriating. Only good news is that over 30 bishops took a break from Lambeth to attend the Changing Attitude/Integrity eucharist. (would that constitute a "Lambeth Walk?) (would anyone get that referrence)
ReplyDeleteWrong it is, but +Gene and his presence and the presence of Integrity and Claiming the Blessing and so many others, and the powerful film witness from Africa all give me hope. LGBT people have lived lifetimes in the church, I think, as the nameless invisible servants slaughtering the fatted calf, and now we are like the prodigal son returning and being rejected by the jealous brother, but one day I have to believe that the Father himself will welcome us in, and will remind the jealous brother that we take nothing away from him, that we receive only what he has already. Thank you Grandmere Mimi, and so many others like you, who receive us in already, and share in our pain and outrage.
ReplyDeleteBetter yet, maybe they can ALL have a, potluck picnic, on the vast lawn where the Changing Attitudes/Integrity Eucharist was held...looked like a cheerful and healthy enough place to me to frolic with ALL of the BELOVED.
ReplyDeleteAh political expediency, what crimes are committed in thy name!
ReplyDeleteHang in there +Gene! You may be persona non grata with the bishops, but you're with us and in our hearts and prayers always.
Solidarity Forever!
How about if the TEC bishops were to hold their caucus somewhere off-campus so that +Gene could be included?
ReplyDelete"Where would Jesus be?"
- opening salvo of the +ABC, Lambeth 2008
Hi Mimi- oh please, while I was well aware of +Gene before, what would I know of all of this if not for you?
ReplyDeleteLet us all pray together - it is essential.
I sent emails to the bishops of this diocese (and to the executive administrator they are likely talking to) and to a lot of people in the Presiding Bishop's office.
ReplyDeletePlease send emails. Supposedly they can check emails.
The emails for the PBs office are:
pboffice@episcopalchurch.org; nrfox@episcopalchurch.org; crobertson@episcopalchurch.org; sjones@episcopalchurch.org
You can find your own bishop's emails at your diocese's website.
Letters need to be sent ASAP.
From the opening worshp service (Via ELO):
ReplyDeleteBishop Mark Beckwith, of Newark, noted the singing of the hymn "All are Welcome" after communion, but referred to the exclusion of New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson, who is in a same-gender partnership. Beckwith said, "my heart was broken because, in fact, we are all not welcome here."
This is wrong. I will pray for +Gene.
ReplyDelete+Gene has since clarified (and I have seen an internal email from a Lambeth steward to the House of Bishops also to this effect):
ReplyDelete"I learned more about today's planned meeting of the House of Bishops and the official thinking behind my not being able to attend. I don't "get" their reasoning, but here it is: (And the fact is, most of our House of Bishops is probably totally unaware of the "negotiations" going on behind the scenes.) The Lambeth planners do NOT consider this a meeting of our House of Bishops. Rather, they say, this is a part of the Lambeth Conference, and therefore, as a non-invitee, I will not be allowed on the premises where the meeting is taking place. It seems a flimsy distinction to me, but I have decided not to pursue it. It really puts all of us in a lose-lose position: if I abide by their ruling, I am excluded; if I fight it or simply show up, then I'm the troublemaker and rebel. If the House of Bishops takes some action on this, necessitating a vote, then it divides our House -- a further and unnecessary division that I refuse to encourage. So no matter how you slice it, someone loses. I have decided, on my own, to let it go, sad as it is. This is not a ditch I feel called to die in. I will just mourn the sadness of it, and move on. (There's something about shaking the dust off your sandals and moving on that I've read somewhere!)"
susankay asked if anyone would get the reference to the Lambeth Walk. Forgive me for the boast, but last Thursday I did a post that I'm proud of about the Lambeth Walk.
ReplyDelete