Re: [DeputyOnlineForum] Actions addressing B033

[Louie Crew <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>]

Your post is very helpful to me, Deputy ************.

You weigh the resolutions on the table right now and search for those with
the greatest precision and clarity.   I think The Episcopal Church has
sometimes been well served -- especially where we know strong differences of
opinion exist -- by resolutions that are studiedly imprecise, by resolutions
that permit different receptions each held in good faith.   We can then more
comfortably live within the same church without the necessity of agreeing
precisely on everything.

Anglicans have rarely had enough people to be a church if we all must agree.
We routinely avoid confessional statements such as those so important to
Congregationalists and Presbyterians.  Even our theology is sometimes at its
best when it is vague enough to allow multiple interpretations -- holy
wiggle room, or the Great Anglican Muddle.   It took us centuries, but we
finally concluded that we don't have to have a winner from among the High,
Low and the Broad.   The hymn that for me expresses our theology best is
"God moves in mysterious ways God's wonders to perform."   I have been to
the Great Vigil, and I respect mystery.  I respect ambiguity.  I enjoy
staying in balance with a high respect for my own ambivalence:   God won't
mind:  God models ambivalence.  Occasionally the God of Scripture changes
God's mind, and so may we.

For example, one of the ways we were able to get enough votes to pass Canon
III.1.2 (that specifically forbids discrimination based on sexual
orientation) was that we dodged the question of whether lbgt persons living
in committed relations should be allowed to be ordained.    We knew that
dioceses which consider  same-sex unions a barrier would make it a barrier;
those dioceses knew that dioceses like mine would not treat it as a barrier.

Several conservative deputies sought out several progressive deputies while
that canon was being debated.  They wanted to vote  against discrimination
but also to live within their convictions of what is appropriate regarding
priests' sexual  relationship.   The canon we passed allows them to do so,
and also allows progressives to live within our convictions of what is
appropriate regarding priests' sexual  relationships.

I respect my conservative friends who fear that The Episcopal Church will
move like a steamroller to require same-sex marriages everywhere by every
priest.   At the moment we leave to any priest the choice of which
heterosexual couples whose marriages she or he will or won't perform.  Why
can't we do these same with regard to lgbt marriages?   I would not want a
priest to marry Ernest and me who did not in her or his heart want to bless
us and solemnize the marriage we have already experienced before God and our
neighbors for over 35 years.   It seems to me wise to push for the
permission of clergy and dioceses who want to, to perform same-sex unions.
It seems to me wrong to make everyone conform to the convictions of those
with whom they in good conscience disagree.

You complain about the wiggle room in C024, yet that wiggle room is part of
what draws me to C024 as a good starting place.  What I am looking for is a
way for GC in Anaheim to pass resolutions that move The Episcopal Church
beyond B033 with integrity, hold us together (or let us wiggle together)
with affection and not manipulation, and forge new commitments to ministry
throughout the Communion.

Louie, L1 Newark

Louie Crew, 377 S. Harrison St., 12D, East Orange, NJ 07018 973-395-1068
http://queereye4lectionary.blogspot.com/  Queer Eye for the Lectionary