This post will cover the last two days of activities at General Convention.
I took the first half of yesterday off and so did not serve on the floor of the House of Deputies, but instead caught up with family, did some work, and went to the grocery store. During the second half of the day, I sat on the floor and we worked our way through resolutions. At 5 o'clock we started a special session concerning 3 resolutions having to do with governance and structure. These resolutions are connected to the work that the Task force on Reimagining the Episcopal Church (TREC) has done over the last 3 years. The hope from TREC was to provide very practical ways of making the church more nimble and less top heavy. After some lengthy explanation of the resolutions, we got into the meat of the first resolution. It was clear there were strong opinions on the first resolution. My largest concern was changing the way the Executive Council and the Presiding Bishop deal with personnel issues. The new resolution would have allowed the Executive Council to direct the Presiding Bishop to fire a member of the PB' staff if there was a 2/3 vote from the Executive Council. If the PB did not do as the EC directed, theoretically, the PB could be brought up on disciplinary charges. This was concerning to me, since I believe the PB should have say over how he or she deals with personnel matters within his or her own staff. Well, an amendment dealt with this whole problem and the resolution passed without any language about the EC being able to direct the PB concerning personnel issues.
The next two resolutions dealt with restructuring the Standing Commissions and Interim Bodies and budgetary issues around structure. Both resolutions passed, as there seemed to be an overwhelming feeling in the House that we needed to support the work of the Task Force on Reimagining the Church. What this means in the long run is that the church will create task forces as needed instead of having committees already in place to tackle issues that arise at GC. In terms of the budgetary resolution, diocese will now be expected to pay their apportionment to the national church if they want to get any support or assistance from the national church. This is important because many diocese do not pay their apportionment, for whatever reason, and now will be forced to if they want to share in the resources that the national church has to offer.
Now a word on how this all took place. While we started the conversation on these resolutions on Tuesday afternoon, we were stopped short of any action because it turned out the resolutions had not been translated for our brothers and sisters from other countries. So, even though we had called a special session to deal with these issues, they had to be postponed until Wednesday. When we returned to regular business, it was discovered that none of the resolutions for the regular session were translated either, and so the whole legislative session was adjourned. This was frustrating, to say the least. I sense a lack of organization and efficiency at this GC that has been driving me crazy since day 1. 10 days is a long time to participate in such a gathering, but add in inefficiency and it feels like forever!
Anyway, we finally passed the above mentioned resolutions yesterday, after having to vote by orders for the budgetary resolution. Voting by orders means that each member of the lay and clergy order actually sign their name to the ballot and each order is voted as one vote. So, if you have 4 clergy and all 4 vote yes, you have one yes vote. If your 4 clergy split their vote, 2 and 2, then you have a divided vote, which is essentially a no vote. Any 3 diocese together can call for a vote by orders.
Once we finished that resolution, we moved on to the two resolutions having to do with same gender marriage. These two resolutions had already been passed by the House of Bishops. We set aside a special legislative session for these resolutions, allowing for more questions and longer debate. As you can imagine, there was a lot to be said by many people. But ultimately, the House of Deputies, turned down any amendments, so as to not send the resolutions back to the House of Bishops, and passed both resolutions through a vote by orders. The first resolution makes available to anyone who wants to be married in the church all of the liturgies for marriage and blessing, including the liturgy "I Will Bless You and You Will be a Blessing." All of these liturgies though can only be used under the direction and with the permission of the Diocesan Bishop. Any Bishop can decline their use in his or her diocese and any clergy person asked to perform a marriage or blessing can decline to do so, without penalty. All Bishops do need to make available these liturgies to those who would like to be married but that availability does not need to be within their diocese. What that means is that Bishops might be sending same gender couples who would like to be married to other diocese to be married, depending on the view of the Bishop.
I am glad we passed all of these resolutions over the last two days. I think that marriage is a wonderful and sacred covenant between two people. If two people want to commit the rest of their lives to one another, why should we stop them from the blessing that is marriage? At the same time, I appreciate that the tent continues to be big. By that I mean, we have left some safeguards in place for people who believe differently. Bishops continue to have ultimate say and I hope that remains the case for the foreseeable future.
During the debate session on marriage yesterday, a young man from the Official Youth Presence, got up to speak in opposition to the resolution. He said he felt that marriage was meant for a man and a woman and he hoped we would vote against the resolution. While my personal views differ from his, I was very proud of his witness to his beliefs. He was an important reminder to the whole church that "traditional" views are not only held by an older generation. Moving into the future, we need to continue making space for theological diversity and room to disagree. Everyone is invited into our tent. That includes those who oppose same gender marriage. It is the differing views of us all that make us the Body of Christ in the world. We can't be perfect as that Body, but we can all be faithful.
