General Convention: Signs of Hope

by William Carroll

On the whole, I found the 2006 General Convention to be a profoundly hopeful event. The Episcopal Church reiterated its commitment to our relationships within the Anglican Communion, but we also sent some rather strong signals that we will not capitulate to the ultimatums of the Anglican Communion Network (not to be confused with the Anglican Communion, which it does not represent and in which it has no official status) and its allies.

We embraced the process of developing a covenant to shape inter-Anglican relationships without implying any support for the particular details of the Windsor Report's proposed covenant. Moreover, the surprising strength of the progressive and moderate wings of the Church, given what had been rumored to be a highly conservative deputation, indicates that no simple "compliance" with Windsor is forthcoming. (Any attempt to impose a moratorium on same sex blessings, for example, was rejected.) Rather, there will be a protracted negotiation, in which we will seek to balance the perceived need for more formal commitments to interdependence in the Church with normative Anglican practice, which has a strong presumption in favor of the responsibility of local churches to discern God's will in their context.

Perhaps the most hopeful event of the General Convention was the election of Katharine Jefferts Schori as our next Presiding Bishop. She is smart, articulate, and passionate, and will serve the Church well. Bishop Katharine is known to be a reconciler, and she is committed to a vision of a Church which welcomes all people without exception, including God's children who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered. In this regard, her record as Bishop of Nevada is very promising. Moreover, in an interview after her election, she stated that the "great message of Jesus" is to "include the unincluded." Citing the sermon of Jesus in Luke 4, she speaks eloquently on behalf of justice for the poor in the Global South, but she shows no sign of renouncing the Episcopal Church's responsibility to be true to our discernment of what God requires of us. Her election is historic, because it represents another breakthrough for women in the Episcopal Church. I believe that unresolved tensions over the place of women in Church and society help fuel the present conflict. (Despite the Windsor Report's rather egregious misreading of the history of the struggle for women's ordination.) Homophobia and sexism walk hand in hand, and either one can serve as a surrogate for racism, which has become the "sin that dare not speak its name" in our society. Bishop Katharine's election sends a firm message that we are not turning back on any of these fronts.

I also found it hopeful that the Episcopal Church issued a strong statement about the human rights of immigrants, in a climate in which undocumented workers are under assault. In so doing, we have chosen to obey God's commandment to welcome the stranger, the widow, and the orphan, something far more central to the Bible than anything concerning sex. We also reiterated our position, now thirty years old, that gay men and lesbians are "children of God," worthy of the pastoral care and support of the Church.

Perhaps the least hopeful development of our General Convention was the passage, at the very last minute, of resolution BO33, which calls on bishops and standing committees to withhold their consent from the election of any bishop whose "manner of life presents a challenge to the wider Church." I find this resolution to be a disappointing but predictable reaction to the conflict in the Church following the election of our first openly gay bishop. It is certainly inconsistent with some other affirmations that were made in the course of the General Convention. The process by which the resolution was adopted was highly problematic, and it is quite possible that it should have been ruled out of order in the House of Deputies. Nevertheless, it is nonbinding, and is at worst a temporary setback. I hope that the bishops and deputies will find the grace to repudiate it in 2009.

That said, the reaction of many Network dioceses, both to our response to Windsor and to the election of Katharine Jefferts Schori, speaks for itself. We have proven ourselves to be neither "Windsor compliant" nor "Windsor defiant." Rather, we have used Windsor for its intended purpose, as the first step in a conversation about the kind of Church we want to become. We have shown ourselves willing to work on our relationships with other Anglicans, but not willing to embrace peace at any price. We are headed in the right direction. And what a hopeful direction that is!

[The Covenant Journal, Issue 23, August 2006]