• Authorized blessings for same-sex unions in dioceses with the agreement of bishop of the diocese.
• Explicitly included transgender people in the work and witness of the Episcopal Church and as candidates to the ordained ministry.
• The Rev. Canon Gay Jennings elected President of the House of Deputies.
• Byron Rushing elected Vice President of the House of Deputies.
--------------------
About the legislation on restructuring, we'll see who is appointed to the task force and how that goes. What I do not want to see is more power yielded to the bishops. The hierarchical structure of TEC is entirely a good thing, but our shared governance by laity, clergy, and bishops is, I believe, our great gift to Anglicanism.
The budget? That's not my area of expertise or even understanding, so I'll leave the commentary to others more knowledgeable.
--------------------
Legislation passed at General Convention which saddens me.
The resolution on the Anglican Covenant at its core says, "as a pastoral response to The Episcopal Church, the General Convention decline to take a position on the Anglican Covenant.”Both Elizabeth Kaeton, who was present at GC, and SCG, who, like me, observed from afar, write with excellence about the failure of the Episcopal Church to take a position on adoption of the Covenant.
Elizabeth:
I understand the politics. Honestly, I do. But, I think the statement is inherently dishonest.SCG:
We could have easily said "no" to the Anglican Covenant in the House of Deputies.
I think we could have even released ourselves from being held hostage from a very few purple shirts in the House of Bishops and let our 'yes' be 'yes' and our 'no' be 'no'.
The folks on the legislative committee, however, chose to be careful. I keep hearing a line from the Sondheim play, Into the Woods, "....and I was so careful, I forgot how to care...."
I don't know when "pastoral response" became synonymous with "weak" and borderline duplicity. We kicked the can down the road on this one, sacrificing a great chunk of our integrity on the altar of expediency.
I can't imagine that our friends around the Communion can't see right through this one.
Given the other acts of courage in which this convention has engaged, this one is an embarrassment.
Le sigh.
It's as if we are on a game show of "Who Wants the Anglican Covenant?" and the Episcopal Church is sitting on the hot seat, saying, "Gee, Meredith.... ummm... we think it's "No," but, well, gosh, "Yes" means we get to go meet with important people. Ah, gee, ummmm...maybe, well, maybe we could ask the audience, but ummmmm...."Please read both posts in their entirety.
Meanwhile, those of us sitting at home are screaming at our computer screens: "No!!! The answer is No!!!!"
Perhaps they needed the "Phone-A-Friend" option. Call Scotland. Call the Anglican Church of Aotearoa, New Zealand, and Polynesia. Heck, call the 26 diocese in the Church of England who had the guts to say "No"!
From everything I've heard from those who were there and from what I've read here at home, the representatives of No Anglican Covenant Coalition, moderator, Malcolm French, and US convener, Lionel Diemel, both did a terrific job of advocacy at GC for a polite but firm "no" to adoption of the Anglican Covenant, and I thank them from my heart for their hard work. The results were not what we hoped, but that is no fault of theirs. Well done!
Those of us in NACC who walked with our English friends (virtually speaking) through their courageous vote to defeat the Covenant in the dioceses in the Church of England and with the Scots through their clear vote against adoption at General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church, so wanted TEC to support their brave stands against the odious Covenant with a polite but firm vote against adoption. That TEC was unable to demonstrate support of our friends causes me shame and disappointment. The legislation that was passed smacks of hypocrisy, since there is no money in the budget for the "task force of Executive Council to continue to monitor the ongoing developments with respect to the Anglican Covenant" (whatever that means). Does it mean we'll sit and watch while other churches have the courage to make a decision one way or another?
Meanwhile, General Synod of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia passed legislation stating that the church is "unable to adopt" the Covenant. Congratulations!
