Matt Kennedy: Live Blog of A160 Proceedings

When the ABC gave a mandate to the Windosrt Committee he charged them with finding the way of the highest commuion possible. From the very beginning this process has sought the highest level of communion. NO one is being asked to stop being or believing differently, we are just trying to live together.

Eames said that when we decided what we decided in 2003 we “uncovered” divisions. He did not say we “caused” divisions. He also said that the WR is the beginning of jouirney not a judgement or an ultimatum.

We are seeking the kind of peace and the kind of space that allows us to relate to one another. Our words in these resolutions as they are before you do not reflect the view of any group or subset. They are intended to let us speak from our breadth. The voice of community must of necessity lack the clarity of a single voice. If there is no resolutions stated we will not be able to identify abise when it comes. The words before oyu are imperfect. The people around you are imperfect. God’s love and grace perfects

Katherine: Quotes Ephesians. Our charge was to respond to the Windsor report, the DC and the ACC. The committees strong desire to respond to our charge required us to listen carefully to many different perspectives to achieve the trust necessary to respond. We were able to hold the tension of the opposites together long enough to convey our desire for unity and distinctiveness. This allows us to see the parts and the whole, to move between them and allows us the freedom to view each other honestly and question, listen, hear, respectfully dissent, always discerning God’s will. We tried to model this for all who appeared before us as well. Nothing worth doing can be achieved in our lifetime and therefore we go forward in hope….missed the rest of this quote…may we abide in faith, hope and love and may the Spirit who imbued our work guide us in the process

MH: Fellow deputies this is an important moment in the life of the communion and in the body of Christ. It is with deep humility that I ask that as we move through our deliberations that we are able to surrender ourselves and our agendas to the Spirit who will bring us to the diverse center as we make our statement that will begin our walk toward restoration.

Palmore: for the past week we have been part of the pilgrimage described by ++Eames. That may have the sound of hubris and yet I am so proud of the fact that committee 26 in all of its diversity has engaged in a process of discernment. And that process is demonstrated in A160 which responds to Windsors call. I commend to you and ask for the support of this house of A160.

Harmon: the first step in reconcilaiitonis before us but lets only take it if we mean it. It does reflect the langugea of the WR. This makes clear that it is the actions and the consequencese of what took place in 2003 and this is deep because repentance and regret are expressed as is the request for forgiveness but this repentance will only be incomplete if there are no concrete steps following on this commitment. Those steps would be complying in full with the Windsor requests

Abernathy: I rise in support of this resolution. It is a sincere expression of penitence. It is not an expression of repentance. It does not say the actions were wrong in their own rite. Therefore they highlight the divisions that arose out of our actions. As I reflect personally is that I can cause harm even when my intentions are good I have learned to say I am sorry and that is what we are doing from our church to the world

I urgre rejection of this resolution because the wording could set a precedent that if we make a decision within our polity and if it causes hurt that we are going to be obligerd to apologise and ask forgiveness. It is not impossibke that we could be asked to do the same thing as a result of our PB’s election. Thus it limits our ability to act as the Spirit leads us as an autonomous body.

???: I rise to support this amendment. Greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for a friend. I trust that we are friends. Perhaps we could take the word amend and take the d off of it and set an amen at the end of this resolution and begin this process of humbly laying down now.

McDowell: Being a southerner its hard for me not to get into the language of regret and repent. But when I was a small boy and looked up at the interstate, I needed to have someone look at my culture and my church and what it was teaching and what it was turning a blind eye too. I grew up in a culture where people of color werer not treated equally. When I voted for VGR I was proud to do it. I feel like I would be Peter on the road to Jerusalem if I were asked to repent or regret. Please do not force me to do that

????: I rise to support this amendment. I believe the spirit and wording of this resolution will be acceptable to the wide majoruity of Episcopalians and Anglicans. Can we move from the table of divisive agendas to the table of communion

Eckert: I have the greatest respect for the AC, however I speak in opposrition to this resolution and I have been an ECUSAn for all 18 years of my life and in that time I;’ve never known the church to regret an action taken in love. Since VGR’s consecration he has loved all people and brought more and more people into thte church.IT would be a huge step backwords in our mission to include all people. I cannot agree with a resolution that apologuses to people who voilify and hate him just for being who he is.

Cantrell: My brothers and sisters in Christ . In the past I have been wrong. I say that because in some of those occasions I have discovered it when someone has told me about it. I delight in the AC and long for the day that we are all one. It seems to me that I need to listen to the wisdom of the whole;. tHis seems to be the direction we are headed and I encourage this and pray that we strengthen it

???: It was one of the proudest moments of my life to vote for VGR. I could not and cannot regret this and I imagine that one day we will be asked to

Read: I urge us to adopt all of these resolutions without amendment or watering them down. IF we do not we will say we are not listening and we do not want to listen. We need to give our new PB clout and the only way we can do that is to tell the communion that we are listening to them. I urge us to adopt them how they are and tell the communion that we are listening.

Prichard: we have taken two actions that tell about who we are. The election of VGR an the eletion of our new PB. I imagint the majority here would not go back on those decisions. It is disingenuous of us to do these things affirm these choices among ourselves and then tell the world something different. WE need to tell the truth.

Mayo: I speak for ths res and I wish to commend the committee. I speak for it on several counts.
I am an educator of young people. Impact is one of the key words in this resolution. Our actions have impact on others. In this case people around the world are watchingf. What we do or don’;t do will impact millions. This resolution offers sincere apology and recognizes that we have hurt others and that we are truly sorry and ask forgiveness so we can be a family.

Watkins: I do not favor this resolution. I do not believe we have broken the bonds of affection. These bonds are stretchy and supple. I also reject the notion that the AC is of one mind and voice and they are collectively pointing the finger at us. They are not.

Coyle: I speak in favor of 160. If I am a church that is no stranger to making apologies and I am. I urge us to make this apology. IF there is a tear in the fabric and there is, this is an important first stitch in repairing the tear

Meyers: I cherish the relationshios I have formed with collegues across the globe. I regret the strain that has resulted from our decisions but I am concerned about the language of breaking the bonds of affection. This is not true world-wide as Watkins reminded us. I understand that this is WR language and yet we were reminded that this language is found in a report that is the start of a process. WE need to speak in our own words and I believe we should reject this resolution.

Beckwith: We are here because of actions taken in NH to raise up a new bishop and at that convention a prayer was offered to invoke the HS. That prayer was answered and the suporse was that it was VGR who was chosen. The greater the distance from that moment the more difficult it is for some to discern the spriit. WE cannot apologise for what the spirit has led us to do.

Marshal: Three years ago I appealed to this body to reject resolutions that would cause great division. Unfortunately that prediction has come to fruition. We are divided and we are faced wiuth the WR that demands a response. In the opening words I heard that the WR is not an ultimatum. I think just the opposite. I strongly support these resolutions and ask your support.

Worth: I want to offer the following as a reason I cannot support a call for regret. He quotes Robert F. Kennedy for a long long time beginning with: “A tiny ripple of hope…..” The actions of GC2003 swept down a mighty wall of oppression and we are experiencing the inevitable pushback and persecution but this should not send us to retreat. We have been called to new life. As this new life calls us back from the dead it calls us away from regret. This will allow our actions to be ripples of hope.l

Jennings: I move an amendment, On lines 10 and 11 to strike “breaching the proper constraints of” and replace with “straining”

Second

What are these proper constraits. Who decided what they were and how would we ha ve known? These are vague. Strain is simple and does not buy into the notion that the AC is broken. If it were broken then why would 5 primates from other provinces be our guests. Let us avoid fear and regret.

Jennings: I move an amendment, On lines 10 and 11 to strike “breaching the proper constraints of” and replace with “straining”

Second’

What are tehse proper constraits. Who decided what they were and how would we ha ve known? These are vague. Strain is simple and does not buy into the notion that the AC is broken. If it were broken then why would 5 primates from other provinces be our guests. Let us avoid fear and regret.

Waddell: I rise to support the amendment. The analogy of breaking or breaching is far more extreme than the facts. Straining is far more reflective affairs. It is improved by this.

Goldstack: I rejoice that I belong to a church that has VGR but I believe that we are still part of the AC and I want that relationship to continue. This amendment recognizes the strain and allows us to move forward in the discussion without diminishing the great things we ahave done.

Alexa: Clark from central florida: I urge us to reject this report and restore the original language and a simple reminder from a movie you might remember. It says love means never saying your sorry. Those who have been in love know that this is not true. Reject this amendment and restore the language

Fontain: I want to offer an amendment to the amendment: The amendment would be leaving the straining and on libne 12 striking everything after “2003” to “as we” and adding “seek to live into deeper levels of communion one with another”

This is a separate amendment. You must hold this until later.

????I speak in favor of the amendment. I did not receive the memo that outlines the proper restraints and bonds. I don’t think we should do something we will regret tomorrow.

Yabov: I speak against the amendment and for the main motion

1. I call on us to reject because the committee worked hard asa diverse group and they put this forward unanimously
2. read this carefully. We express regret for the brokenness. We seek to forgive and be forgiven and the depthof the trouble.
3. Consider the spirit of humility in this. I pray for our consideration and our moving ahead to support the original resolution.

Richardson: I speak against the amendment. We are offering back to the communion the language that has been asked of us. I speak against the amendment and for the languahe of the original

Mark Harris: I cannot see your face, but when I wave like crazy nothing happens.

Chair: Exner first, Harris second

Exner: I can tell you that our relationships are strained but they are not broken. Our pastoral bonds have been stretched and we are sorry for the pain we all share but to say we are sorry is not something we can do. To say that we have strained he relationships is a good thing

Mark Harris: I suppoer the amendment because I do not believe the crisis as great as the WR imagines. Some removal from the language fo breach is in order.

Chair: time for debate on the amendment is over

Call

Vote: Voice count inconclusive. They will count heads

Chair: time for debate on the amendment is over

Call

Vote: Voice count inconclusive. They will count heads.

The vote is closed:

Dice Southern OH: I would like to make a motion to extend debate on the main motion by 30 minutes.

Second

Dice: how about 15 minutes?

Let me give you the vote tally

Yes 530

No 305

Amendment passes

Amendment passes.

Matter before the house is the main motion as amended.

In lines 10 and 11, delete the words “breaching the proper constraints of” replace with “straining”

All those in favor of the original motion as amended

Yes has it. I will ask for a vote by machines.

While we are waiting for that vote, the chair believes that if we stay to 7:00pm then we will adjourn and leave here at 7:00pm.

Vote results

Yes 563

No 267

Here are the presentations for A161:

Dan Martins: Committee 26 is made up of a wide diversity of TEC. Ultimately we came back to something very close to the language of the special commission. At all times we have come as close as possible to the language of the WR. There is something here that everyone will not like but it adheres very closely to what we have been asked to do. That’s why I ask this house to vote for this resolution. When the proper time comes. Hold your nose if you have to but vote for this.

Ian: Mutual responsibility and interdependence in Christ. Anglicans across the world have been learning to live into this vision. A161 enables ongoing conversations across divides and despite differences. This is not perfect and there are no winners. But it does keep us at the table in honesty and faithfulness and staying at the table is what we need. If we do not pass this then our detractors will say that we do not want to walk together. Passing it will say we ant to walk together.

????: In the various documents of the AC documents the word oblige is key. It says that we are obliged in a relationship to care deeply with one another. I realize the word has a variety of meanings for many people. But in the words of the primary documents the words have to do with preserving a relationship that has community meaning. I pray you will accept these words and the entire resolution.

Snow: There are many things that are hard to swallow for those of us who are waiting to be affirmed by the church. It feels like we are being singled out with no promise of this ever coming to an end. But I am mindful of York’s words: where are the marks of crucifixion? I think “refrain” is our mark. I think this is the way forward: denial as a prelude to enlargemebt. This will help us create the space that will allow us to bear witness to the wider church. This is a mark of sacrifice to me and to my partner of 25 years. But I recognize that this is necessary for bearing with one another in Christ though I recognize that it will deprive us of the move and work of the spirit in and through some of our people.

Melnyk: (missed alot) WE realize that this resolution cost everyone, but it buys space as we live into the WR.

Chair: we now have before us A161. We have a 30 minute total. This will put us up around 7. You are sticking with us and working hard.

Sam Gould (youth rep): I speak against this res. It is presenting two contradicting ideas. In the first resolve it questions the manner of life of a man living in a partnered relationship. The second is apologizing for this. For me it feels like this resolution struggles with the same problem I struggle with every summer. I am a camp counselor for 8 year old. One of them knew he was not supposed to climb on the rocks. One day when he was caught he decided to apologize while he was on the rock. We are still on the rock.

Drell: I speak in favor of this resolution. After 2 years of dialogue we have a resolution that accurately reflects the WR requests for a moratoria. That is what refraining is and that is what we have been asked to do.

Jane Gould: It was my privilege to be a candidate for bishop of CA. Discusses her experience of the process of running for bishop and says that she and her gay fellow candidates used their ministries and sacrificed equally. Jesus regularly upset the religious community of his time….she is cut off for breaching the time limit

Holmgren: Remember that we are talking about the sacraments of the church. The celebration of the sacrament is never an autonomous act. It is always an act of the entire church. The whole church has a stake in the use of the sacraments. Let us put first our unity in the body of Christ for we all have one faith and one baptism and one lord

Babcock: I rise to urge defeat of this res. I believe it is unfair to shun brothers and sisters who are baptized into full ministry in the body of Christ. I do not believe this would heal the hurt. It would make it worse. As a woman in orders I remember that it was only through action that understanding grew.

Clark: On behalf of the clerical orders of SC FW, TN and CFL: I call for a vote by orders on the entire perfected resolution

Chairs so it will be done.

Russell: today I want to share what my mother told me. When I think I might have to apologize for doing something then I just shouldn’t do it. IF we are providing care for GLBT people then how can we apologize for doing it or refrain from doing what is necessary to care for them. We do not have to apologize for all the good things we have done for the GLBT people in our midst. With all the things that they endure around the world. For this house to shrink an inch from what we did in 2003 would be an unforgivable injustice.

Clark: On behalf of the clerical orders of SC FW, TN and CFL: I call for a vote by orders on the entire perfected resolution

Chairs so it will be done.

Russell: today I want to share what my mother told me. When I think I might have to apologize for doing something then I just shouldn’t do it. IF we are providing care for GLBT people then how can we apologise for doing it or refrain from doing what is necessary to care for them. We do not have to apologize for all the good things we have done for the GLBT people in our midst. With all the things that they endure around the world. For this house to shrink an inch from what we did in 2003 would be an unforgivable injustice.

Yabrov: I came to this GC not anxiously because I believe that God is in charge of our church and I believe he is leading us here and that what happens here will not diminish his love for us. I do believe we are struggling with mysteries. We cannot please everyone and we will offend members of our family. I urge the adoption of this resolution in full and without amendment because it has been worked on by a diverse committee. Moreover it does not reject VGR nor does it reject ++Schori. It affirms them both. I believe we should vote for this.

Fifteen more minutes of debate and then we will close. We will open the debate tomorrow and perhaps those of you on either side can

<>Peter Cook: Since the Watergate era the phrase non denial denial, the WR asks us to give a clear and unambiguous answer. In this resolution we give a non response response. Our regrets fail to acknowleged what we have done. The second resolve does not say we will not do so again and finally our apologies to our GLBT brethren are far more sincere than our apologies to the AC. Here we are a declining church in a growing communion and we presume to speak to the world. The resolution will not keep us in the Anglican Communion

Jones: I want to say sorry to Jim and to Mark and to Mary, homosexuals who are friends of mine. I could not bless their unions if they were to come to me because of my reading of the scriptures. I do not apologize but I do grieve for the pain that exists between us.

Hart: Over 200 yrs ago CT sent Seabury to England to be consecrated for our church. He was not consecrated because he would not take an oath to the crown. He went to Scotland and ECUSA was born. Now we are being asked to vow a new oath of conformity. I urge you to reject this amendment

Leed: I am urging the adoption of A161 exactly as written. There is an expression called “terms of art” that is appropriate here. This committee has worked long and hard. It is incumbent upon us to respect this work and to pass this because it will be acceptable to the AC. The words of this resolution will put us in a position where the dialogue can continue. And this does not say that GLBT people are not welcome. Notice this is only one order of ministry that this effects….time limit

????: I urge you to defeat this resolution. I came here and brought my baby because I believe that this church will change the world. If my baby falls in love with a woman she cannot be a bishop. That is why I am here.

Lous: In Latin American countries we still need time. We do not agree with this. This resolution can help give us time to prepare our people for this new Christian teaching

Stokes: in its failure to address the issue of justice, this document is theologically flawed. Dialogue and discussion and free conversation allows assent and allows truth to emerge. I do not believe that 161 is the product of unhindered dialogue but of coercion from Canterbury, Durham, York and Nigeria. I cannot express regret for these decisions or withhold care from people and give them an apology in its place.

????: I know it is important for us to create space. To demonstrate that we are serious about the WR. Today this is the right thing to do. Please do not amend to death a careful resolution and I urge the acceptance of this without amendment

Meyers: I rise to speak against this amendment. Snow spoke of being crucified. I will not and cannot be a part of hammering nails into the hands and feet of my brothers and sisters. I have experienced being cut out of ministry on the basis of my gender. I cannot do that to my GLBT brothers and sisters.

????: I am a conflicted moderate: think this resolution gives us room to work, room to let the spirit work. I realize that me standing here as a white privileged male may be difficult for my GLBT brothers and sisters to hear, but I pray that we will accept these resolutions

Perry: From the word “openly”, Are we to infer that had VGR or myself of any of our other GLBT people will deny or lie about our relationships then are we more acceptable to the AC in positions of leadership. I urge you to defeat this resolution.

????: I see this resolution as a hopeful and helpful step toward reconciliation and I speak as someone who has had a number of parishioners leave for another church that calls itself an Anglican church as well.

Harmon: I cannot vote for this res. The language is totally unclear. The water is murky, mucky, it is turgid and I cannot say. I cannot imagine my wife say that I am obliged to…My first question would be what are you asking me to do. Three verbs on top of each other. The WR language is very clear. This resolution moves us far away from the WR language. This cannot be done as a house in good conscience because we do not know what we are doing.

Ligget: I come from a small parish that is badly beaten up and a small diocese. I rejoice in what we did in 2003 but this is not about me. I come with great hope and a great hunger to move forward together. It will come at a cost. But we must go forward together. We may be right but we could be right at the expense of our communion.

The house is stopping things to make a communion