Tuesday, October 02, 2007


What the Bishops Could Have Said

It's no secret that some of us are very angry about the duplicity in the House of Bishops' statement from New Orleans. It's not just the bloggers. Several Deputies are also expressing their anger or disappointment.

Apparently, I am far from being alone in observing the bishops' duplicity. Even Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, writing for Newsweek and the Washington Post, has observed it:

I’m sorry that some Episcopal Bishops are apparently yielding to world-wide and national pressure from conservatives and backing off of their courageous stance on the full equality of homosexuals in the Episcopal Church. The “compromise” position that strengthened the 2006 resolution on “restraint” in consecrating gay bishops and that explained that the Episcopal Church has no official liturgy for same sex blessing is a gentler form of deception. I have to agree with the Episcopal conservatives here (though of course for different reasons) who called this a “legal fiction.” It is fiction and it is unfortunately a step back from the truth that some Episcopalians are gay, but that all are equal in the sight of God. It also is a step back from the truth that some gay or lesbian Episcopalians have the spiritual gifts needed to be a Bishop. Bishop Gene Robinson is one of them. If you know Gene, and I do, you will quickly realize he is one of the most spiritually luminous people you will ever meet. Any church that refuses to recognize spiritual gifts for leadership is, frankly, lying to itself and no good ever comes from that.

What happens when people and societies lie about important things like the diversity of human gender preference? Well, one of the things that may happen is that some people so deny their own sexual orientation that they end up playing footsie in a Minneapolis bathroom instead of leading a healthy, self-aware life.

At the end of the day, being a liar society is fundamentally corrupting to individuals and the whole nation.

A few folks have challenged us: So what would you have wished the bishops to say?

At Telling Secrets, Elizabeth Kaeton relates just such an interchange – in which a dear friend asked/challenged her: "So," he asked, "what would you have done? If you had been in a purple shirt in NOLA, what would you have written as your statement?" She answers the question on her blog [click here], and it's a statement that would have satisfied me. Read it.

Louie Crew has also taken a turn at what the bishops might have said. His version is here. Here is part of Louie's text:
We honor the fact that repeatedly you have shared with us and with the world your disagreements with The Episcopal Church. It is important for all to listen to their critics. We will continue to take your criticism seriously, even when we determine that we disagree. Our final decisions must be our own, not decisions forced on us.
My own edit is much simpler. For the sake of honesty, I wish our bishops had amended their statement to say: "We wish we could – but we don'tproclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God's children including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ's Church."

Then, at least they would have been honest. Cowards, maybe. But at least honest.


Anonymous Linda McMillan said...

I'll go so far as to make it what they SHOULD have said?

"We do not have the authority to act unilaterally. General Convention has spoken.... blah, blah, blah, some lies to appease the homos and, of course, grace and peace."

But, that's not what they said is it?

10/03/2007 3:42 PM  
Blogger Grandmère Mimi said...

It would have been better if the obvious contradictions had not been put in the statement.

They're not fooling anyone.

10/03/2007 9:48 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home