General Crazy

There was no morning legislative session today. Instead, we started learning something called Public Narrative. The general idea is that we all will learn a method to tell stories intended to engage the listener in our personal commitments to mission. For the first time around I thought it went pretty well. All the tables have coaches; ours is The Rev. Bonnie Perry of the Diocese of Chicago. Love her!

At lunch I attended another First-time Deputy forum. This one was on the denomination-wide health care plan. Some of the questions were things we’ve heard before: what about dioceses in which health care costs may increase under the new plan, and what about dioceses that will see decreases in services or coverage under the new plan. These are real problems, and I don’t know how or if they will be fully resolved. I think the more vexing challenge is how Church Pension Group is going to find coverage in non-domestic dioceses and in those parts of the U.S. where the seven major insurance providers are not present. Also, I’m personally concerned about the possibility of church employers coercing their employees to “opt out” of coverage whenever possible as a means to manage costs. We’re doing this to help save money, yes, but we’re also doing it to expand heath care coverage to more of our employees. We’re a church, after all; we should be about caring for folks before we’re about the bottom line.

In the House of Deputies afternoon legislative session we tried to elect 12 seats on the CPF board of trustees. I say “tried”, because the electronic voting machines were not working. We ended up passing a motion to reschedule the vote to another time. We then re-elected Bonnie Anderson to another term as President of the House of Deputies (yay Bonnie!). We then moved into special session to discuss B033.

B033 was the resolution passed in the very last minutes of the previous General Convention (2006), whereby the Convention agreed to moratoria on elevating persons in same-sex relationships to the episcopate and from approving rites of blessing for same relationships. The chair of the World Mission Committee read a history of the issue, and then we were advised to find another deputy whom we didn’t know and discuss three questions (paraphrased, because I can’t remember the exact wording):

1. What is my story about B033?

2. What is the church’s story about B033?

3. Where is God calling us now?

I met a really lovely man from a diocese in the south. I won’t mention which one so that I can say more about what he told me. He mentioned he has a gay brother who has been in a relationship for 11 years. They have three daughters; Mr. Deputy is godfather to one of them. In a very unassuming way he made it quite clear to me that he felt strongly that it is time for the church to make a new statement about its position on the issues germane to B033, to the effect that we will not continue the moratoria.

The House will have further discussions tomorrow morning. I understand that the House of Bishops was asked by one of its membership to consider requesting an invitation to the House of Deputies as silent observers for that discussion. I understand also that the measure was defeated. Bishop Gene Robinson has expressed some dismay on his blog at his perception that some of the bishops are feeling a rather inflated sense of their own importance and function in the church.

It fits in well with some of the developments on the Anglican stage, particularly when Anglican bishops asked our House of Bishops for a further assurance (post B033) that they would not consent to any more gay bishops. It continues to be obvious that The Episcopal Church’s inclusion of priests, deacons, and lay people in the highest level of its governance is simply not understood or accepted by other provinces in the Communion. As much as I may be open to arguments that TEC’s “innovations” fly in the face of the precepts of catholicity, I will not abide other provinces’ refusal to accept our polity. It particularly describes Ubuntu, and I think it is a gift to the Communion.

ABC: The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Rowan Williams, MA, DPhil, DCL, DD, FBA, the 104th Archbishop of Canterbury, Metropolitan of the Province of Canterbury and Primate of All England. Most certainly the most influential person in the Anglican Communion and probably the most influential person in the world who I might ever meet.

And I was invited to meet him. One of the deputies from the Diocese of California organized a request to the presiding bishop and the president of the house of deputies that they invite the Archbishop to have a private meeting with a small group of LGBT deputies during his visit to General Convention. Surprisingly enough, he agreed, and miracle of miracles I was invited to be part of the group.

One of the wonderful things about this meeting was that we were not driven by anyone else’s agenda. Since it was not an official meeting between the Archbishop and any church body or other organization, we were not coached or guided or beholden to anyone but ourselves. The group’s roster is available elsewhere online, but let me just comment briefly. This group of priests and laypeople, theologians and scholars, ministers and God’s beloved children was truly extraordinary and I am so blessed to have been able to meet and know them, much less the Archbishop.

In planning what we wanted to do and say, we worked through a number of possible formats and ideas. After much discussion we decided the most effective use of our time with the Archbishop would be to tell our stories. We knew that even though there were eminent theologians in our group, we wouldn’t likely have anything new or critical to say in those terms that the Archbishop hadn’t already heard or known. We felt that telling stories would be the best way to share ourselves with him.

So we did that. In thirty minutes we prayed three times, told eight personal and powerful stories of LGBT ministry and experience, and heard the Archbishop’s response. Since this was a private meeting, I will not divulge details of the conversation; we all agreed that it was in all our best interests (and the Archbishop’s) to keep it private. Doing so also allowed for a depth of vulnerability and detail that would not have been possible if we knew that what we were to say might be later reported in any news media.

I know that the Archbishop heard us. He specifically reflected back the theme of my story in his remarks. So I know that he was taking me seriously and that he is extremely perceptive and thoughtful. Everyone says this about him, largely based on his published work, but I now know it from experience. What I don’t know is whether or not our meeting will inspire any further response. We left him with the message that we wanted to be put to work by him. We did not come to air grievances, but to describe our experience and offer to work with him to change hearts and minds. I hope he calls on us someday.

This afternoon I walked around the exhibit hall of the Convention Center. Hundreds of organizations and groups; I’ll have more pics to share. My camera said it was out of memory after about 12 pics. I’ll have to figure that out later.

Later we attended orientation for the legislative process – lots of Robert’s Rules. They did a nice job. Tomorrow starts the first legislative session. We learned how to vote with the little electronic voting devices, and we heard from Michael Battle about Ubuntu, the theme of GC2009. I would have included a link here to a page describing Ubuntu, but the official General Convention website only has a description of the logo, so here’s what I’ve been able to glean thus far:

Ubuntu is a deeply embedded concept in sub-saharan Africa. If you think about the Western outlook on rugged individualism and every man for himself, Ubuntu is diametrically opposed to that. Someone operating in an Ubuntu paradigm knows nothing about herself save what she learns from others. It is a way of thinking about community that is rather difficult to grasp if you’re not born to it. Theologically speaking, you could say that salvation of any one of us is only possible when all of us are saved. Some of the pithy adages that have been tossed about include “I am because you are”, and “I in you and you in me”.

After the orientation session I had another planning meeting for tomorrow’s soiree with the Archbishop. I’m feeling much better about that than I was. We will have a powerful witness to share with him.

Later tonight around 9:00 we’ll all gather in the bishop’s room to debrief and have some fellowship. We’ll probably do that almost every evening, keeping in mind the need to let the bishop get adequate rest.

There may be some late breaking news about B033. If I get any news on that I’ll try to post it late tonight or early tomorrow.

I got up bright and early to go to new deputy orientation, scheduled for 8:00am – 12:00pm. Got there to find out that it was cancelled. I could have stayed in bed! But the good thing about that was I now had time to attend the organizing meeting of my assigned legislative committee, National and International Concerns. I’m not a member of the committee, but our deputation is trying to “cover” some of the committees that handle interesting or significant legislation, and I was assigned this one. They mostly spent the morning doing mutual introductions and then broke into subcommittees.

I took a couple of pictures. I’ll try to do more; I’m not good at remembering to pull out the camera at opportune moments.

I arrived in Anaheim today after a two-day visit with friends in Los Angeles. As much as I missed LA, I remember why I don’t live there anymore. Even so, it was so good to see Gwendolyn and all my friends at St. Mary’s.

As I write this post, I’ve just gotten back from a reception given by Integrity. President Susan Russell gave some rousing remarks, and I met the Integrity “whip”. All signs are good for the Integrity platform at this Convention. Time will tell.

The ABC group decided, sort of, to make some changes to our original plans for our meeting with the Archbishop. Folks noticed that we have generated too much content for our 30 minute meeting, so now we’re going to focus not so much on theology and context but rather on our personal stories. This makes sense to me, since it’s not likely we’re going to say anything that the Archbishop hasn’t already heard, in terms of theology and context. However, we know for certain that he hasn’t heard our stories. So I need to spend some time now reworking that.

I also ran into the former director of EUIP. I’m very glad to be cosponsoring a resolution commending the work of the newly formed Episcopal Service Corps. I’ll post a link to the resolution after I find it.

As predicted I was reticent to jump into the fray on the phone call. It was just too intimidating. I did appreciate the professional facilitation of The Rev. Eric H. F. Law of the Kaleidoscope Institute. Another member of the group and I were assigned to come up with something useful to say to the Archbishop about basic human dignity. My initial thoughts:

I think I have to ruminate for a moment why basic human dignity is germane to the discussion. In my mind “dignity” evokes the words of the baptismal covenant. I cannot get away from the imperative in those vows. The promises my godparents made for me (I was baptized in 1976) and which I reaffirm at several opportunities annually are not optional observances. Any question as to why I do ministry in Christ’s name is answered by those promises. I would like to convey to the Archbishop that it is not out of any political agenda, or elitism, or economic opportunity, or any other related motivation that I feel compelled to call the church to full inclusion. Rather it is out of the bonds of covenant and conviction of the gospel that I can do nothing else. My “story” would discuss the way in which the church’s hypocrisy in its treatment of LGBT people has translated into silent complicity in the abuse and neglect of young people. The teachings of the church are consisently held up in my community as a defense each time a young person is thrown out of his or her home when his or her sexuality is discovered. These are not radical agitators attempting to overthrow the quiet order of our rural community. They’re just young people trying to come to grips with their God-given selves. If the church could “come out” on their side, so much pain and loss would be healed, and further losses prevented.

Am currently discussing resolutions with my deputation. Some concerns came up around 815’s decision to change the publishing schedule of Episcopal Life, the Episcopal Church’s monthly newspaper. A problem for my diocese is that we are one of the 30 or 35 dioceses that publish our own newspaper as a “wrap around” with Episcopal Life. This change represents a significant cost increase for us.

In a few minutes I’ll be on a conference call with 5 other LGBT deputies and a consultant to discuss our July 8 meeting with Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. We’ve been granted an audience with the Abp. during GC09. I don’t know yet what we’re going to talk about, hence the conference call. I’m mostly worried that my cell phone is not up to the task, but it’s all I have.

And I’m sort of intimidated by this call. Included in this group are some giants in the world of Episcopal advocacy for LGBT rights and inclusion, such as Dr. Louie Crew and The Rev. Tobias Haller, BSG. I’m just a deputy from a small, not very well-off diocese. I have no record of advocacy or work on these issues. I’m not a theologian or a member of the clergy. What I bring to the table I’ve yet to discover.

I originally started this blog as a place to post musings and such on General Convention 2009.  Shortly thereafter I lost interest as there wasn’t much of substance going on at the time. 

That has certainly changed.  I pledge to start posting regularly about GC09 and all the craziness it creates.

Let’s start by posting this.

This is a fantastic interpretation of the current version of the Anglican Covenant as presented by Deputy Gracey of the Diocese of Ohio. Now, as I understand it, GC09 will not be asked to vote on consenting to this document. The reasons why not are not clear to me; I think has to do with a timing issue. Some taskforce created by some body has to do more work on it? I don’t know. But the linked document does so much work for the reader; I highly recommend it if you want to understand what it all means. Article four is the contentious bit. Grateful acknowledgment to the Lead at Episcopal Cafe for linking this.

I guess I think this Covenant is unnecessary if you don’t think that Article four is a good thing. Article four is the punishment piece, thus: if one province of the Anglican Communion (say, The Episcopal Church) does something that another province doesn’t like (say, consecrate bishop someone openly partnered with a member of the same sex), then this (new?) body called the Joint Standing Committee can sort of, well, kick out the province, officially or non-officially. You know, sort of but not really, maybe? Very Anglican.

What I don’t know is how popular this thing is outside of the global South. Provinces like Nigeria and the Southern Cone are all for it, but what about others?

Meh.

The last time I checked, there were 238 pieces of legislation to read.  Some of the them are procedural and quite brief.  Some are contentious and deserve reflection and prayer.  This is going to be a trip.