Some of you may have been wondering why I am less than enthusiastic about the goings on at General Convention. Well, take a look. These are the two clowns who run things in the Diocese of Texas. There's also Cowgirl Dena who, to the best of my knowledge, is not wearing headgear at this convention. Dena's a bag of dicks but she dresses well.
Bishop Doyle, that's the fat one, was once rumored to be a change-maker. "He's young," people said hopefully, as if that would also make him less of an asshole. It has not, by the way.
People were once hopeful about Bishop Wimberley too, remember? But, within months of Wimberley's election the kindest thing people were saying was "...disappointing." In the ensuing years he proved himself to be ham-handed and authoritian. Nobody really likes him except maybe a few bishop-ass kissers. But, even they have to know that Don Wimberley's has been a failed episcopate.
Now I am neither a prophet, nor am I the son of a prophet, but I predict that Andy Doyle is headed for the same kind of episcopate that Don Wimberley had. What makes me think that? Well, several things.
- He was born in this diocese
- He attended Episcopal schools in this diocese
- He was called and ordained in this diocese
- He has never served in any other diocese
- He was canon to Don Wimberley
- He has identified himself as a "Windsor Bishop"
You have heard me lament that at the end of General Convention the princes of the church go back to their little fiefdoms and do whatever they damn well please, regardless of any resolutions that are passed. And that is exactly what Cowboy Andy is doing.
Here's what he had to say about D025:
Bishop High, Bishop Harrison and I each voted against the resolution as we have been and continue to be concerned regarding the repercussions throughout the Anglican Communion. And we were concerned with the idea that DO25 repeals BO33 from the 2006 General Convention....
Which, of course, are the same bogus arguments that have been floating around out there since 2003. They weren't real arguments then and they aren't now. These are not-so clever excuses, and unlike in 2003, it is now clear that they are totally false. Our place in the communion is secure, and B033 remains invalid since it violates out canons.
Regarding B033, Andy says
The Diocese of Texas honors the moratorium not because of DO25 or BO33, but because of our belief that the teachings of the church on sexuality have not changed, that the Windsor Report asks the American church to refrain from election and ordination of a bishop who is living in a partnered relationship, from the development of rites for same sex blessings, and our own resolutions and canons currently have reaffirmed our views on the topic.
Do you want me to go over it for you?
1. By definition moratorium has a set ending point. Thus, until such time as a set end point is established, there is no moratorium. Maybe we should call it what it is, a bone-headed refusal to change.
2. One would not honor such a moratorium, if such existed, because of D025. One would do so in spite of it. Because of and in spite of are really two quite different things. I do hope someone will explain this to Bishop Doyle.
3. "The teachings of the church on sexuality have not changed..." What? Ever? I mean, I don't think you can get any dumber than that. But, there it is. From one of your princes.
4. The Windsor Report!!! Egads! The Windsor Report is not a canon, it's has no authority. Even those who worked on it have said that they did not understand our polity and have urged us to move forward. But Andy Doyle, like Don Wimberley before him, has has made it a part of his own identity. They are Windsor Bishops. And soon they will either have to back-pedal out of that identity or resign themselves to a place on the wrong side of history.
5. "...our OWN resolutions and canons..." In other words, we'll do whatever we want, Regardless.
So, there's all the hoop-la in Anaheim, moving past B033 and all that jazz, But, what do you think will really change here in the Diocese of Texas for gay and lesbian Christians? Do you think the trans community will feel the impact of the General Convention welcome here in Texas? What's your guess, would the standing committee of EDoT consent to a gay or lesbian bishop? You know the answers.
So, forgive me if I'm not caught up in the euphoria of the moment. I'm of the opinion that until ALL of us are welcome, none of us are truly welcome. Even you,,,
7 comments:
Lindy, how do you think we are going to get that welcoming church if we don't stay in it and push for change from the INSIDE?
I keep saying: "In my experience, the ONLY thing that changes people's hearts and minds about LGBTs in the church is knowing and loving them."
They can't know and love you---and their hearts cannot be changed---if you refuse to go because you are waiting for the church to be filled with "holy" people.
It sucks. And it ought not to be that way. But it is. If you feel called to be part of a community of faith, you just have to accept that it's going to have the same share of assholes as the rest of the population---and then ignore them as much as you can and work with the rest.
Maybe you don't feel called to be a part of a community like that any more. I can certainly understand why you wouldn't. But things don't change without "change agents"--and there are a lot of us who are committed to "being the change we want to see." That change will go a lot faster when there are more of us to push the envelope.
Pax,
Doxy
Dear Lindy, I agree with Doxy on this. I see your point but still, it doesn't have to be business as usual. Pressure nees to be put on the good ol'boys there. I am sure there are others who are like minded as you are; there is power in numbers as the results of General Convention attests too. When you say that these passed resolutions mean nothing, you denigrate the hard work of people devoted to change and making TEC a better place for all. It never happens over night but it does happen.
Peace to you,
Catherine
Lindy--I can't get you out of my mind today! I've been thinking more about the "bishop issue."
I came into TEC in the Diocese of Tennessee under +Bertram Herlong. Bishop Herlong was very conservative---voted against Gene Robinson's consecration and appeared to be heading in the direction of the schismatics before he retired.
But I came into a parish in Nashville that had an incredibly progressive female rector and a congregation that was half LGBT. Our bishop was a putz, but church was local and it fed me.
The Bishop is not the church. S/he can be wonderful or a total PITA, but s/he is not the church. We are.
The Bishops become an "issue" during GenCon and Lambeth, but mostly they are out of sight and out of mind. Most of what gets done in the world by the church is done by people like you and me---feeding the hungry, building the houses, teaching the kids about the unending, unfathomable love of God.
I may be wrong, but I sense that you miss being a part of a community of faith. I have been rooting around on the web, looking for churches in your area that have the right "code words" on their websites ("inclusive," "diverse," "no outcasts in the Episcopal Church". Have you taken a look lately? Your bishops may be jerks, but I'm pretty sure there is a parish near you where you could find people who will love you for who you are.
Or are you just so sick of institutional religion that you don't care anymore? I would totally understand that, of course...and add it to the mountain of sins that we, as people of "faith," have committed in the name of Christ. Kyrie eleison...
Pax,
Doxy
Glad to see I'm not the only person who came into TEC in Tennessee under Bert Herlong (and that beanie he used to wear under his mitre--the man was always pretentious) and who still managed to find welcoming and inclusive communities of faith in the diocese. I agree with the point that the church is its congregations and parishes, not its bishops in funny hats. We'll all get there some day.
Post a Comment