Resistance has grown within the House of Bishops to adopting Resolution C056: Liturgies for Blessings which would authorize local pastoral rites for the blessing of same-sex unions.
 
The hesitation over endorsing gay blessings comes not from a lack of votes for passage, or from fears of an international backlash from the Anglican Communion or the Archbishop of Canterbury. Rather, there is a sense that the progressive agenda can only go so far before a second conservative exodus takes place.
 
From the tenor of the debates this week, and the evidence of the house’s 99-45 vote on Monday to overturn the ban on gay bishops, support for gay blessings has a solid base of political support. This marks a political shift of the house over the past five conventions, such that when he spoke on July 10, former Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold found himself on the conservative wing of the house.
 
Gay blessings were raised during the 2003 General Convention, Bishop John Chane of Washington told The Living Church, but the vote to confirm the election of V. Gene Robinson as bishop, coupled with the press of other business, made it clear “the time was not right.”
 
However, “now is the time to proceed with these rites,” Bishop Chane told the house on July 14. The debate that followed indicated a majority of the bishops were ready to go.
 
The first sign that all was not well arose when Bishop Dean Wolfe of Kansas rose at the start of the C056 debate and cautioned the house against offering aggressive amendments. “Sometimes it takes very little” to “move us from agreement to division,” he observed. He asked the bishops to practice a “generous orthodoxy” to the conservative minority who might be troubled by same-sex blessings.
 
After twenty five minutes of debate, with only the acting Bishop of the Rio Grande, the Rt. Rev. William Frey, rising to speak in opposition, Bishop Clifton Daniel of East Carolina told the house the lack of input from the conservative side made him uneasy. The “silence is ominous,” he observed, adding “I need your voice to inform my conversation.” Bishop Peter Beckwith of Springfield responded by asking “Why waste time? Why waste my time? Why waste your time?”
 
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori prorogued debate to the afternoon, and the afternoon’s debate was then postponed to Wednesday. Suggestions that delay could be postponed such that the convention would not be able to take up the resolution sparked outrage from Bishop Marc Andrus of California.
 
In an afternoon closed session, the bishops organized a self-selected ad hoc group to discuss how best to go forward with the resolution. Bishop Andrus told The Living Church at a July 15 press briefing he could not say who took part in the deliberations, but did stress the pastoral importance of C056 to his diocese. Whether C056 passes General Convention or not, California will keep its “focus on pastoral care and marriage equality,” Bishop Andrus said, and we “will continue to do blessings.”
 
While scheduled for discussion today, the matter has not yet been set down for business by the Dispatch Committee of the House of Bishops.
 
(The Rev.) George Conger reporting from General Convention in Anaheim.
 
 A one-year subscription to The LivingChurch Online also gives you convenient access to more than a year of archived issues, all for just $25! Click here to start your subscription to the TLC Online Edition today!