Wednesday, May 13, 2009

A little preview from Anaheim

It was a beautiful day in the OC ... a foretaste of the General Convention Banquet to come!

Here are a couple of snapshots of a few square blocks that will be VERY familiar turf to General Convention Going Episcopalians by the end of July:

The Anaheim Convention Center ...

The adjacent Hilton ... complete with convenient "happiest place on earth" tram.
The flowers were blooming ...

... and the fountains were flowing.

It was a great day for "webcast day" -- and a cast of dozens gathered in a hotel ballroom to hear a panel of Episcopal Church leaders talk about their hopes for the upcoming General Convention -- and to field some questions from the folks in the room and via email.

[Gregory Straub; Katharine Jefferts Schori; Bonnie Anderson; Jon Bruno]

You can watch the whole webcast here ... but for my money, this was the "take away" quote from Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori -- in response to a question from AP reporter Rachel Zoll about the likelihood of "repealing B033."
My hope is that we not attempt to repeal past legislation at General Convention. It's a bad practice ... a bad legislative practice. I would far more prefer us to say where we are today in 2009 ... to make a positive statement about our desire to include all people fully in this church and that we be clear about who we are as the Episcopal Church.

We can not only live with that ... we can WORK with that. A positive statement about our desire to include all people fully in this church is EXACTLY what we mean by "the full inclusion of all the baptized in all the sacraments" -- and it is exactly what we are going to Anaheim to help our deputies and bishops both craft and implement.

It was a beautiful day in the OC ...

... looking foward to welcoming everybody in just 55 days!


Cany said...

I did send in my question and it was, in fact, on B033. I prefaced my question with some short thoughts. Here was my question:

Will you, Most Rev. Katharine, support or not support our church moving to all rights invested in the baptized in clergy and support gay marriage as Bishop Bruno has?

Your post shows I got the confirming answer.


MarkBrunson said...

I am confused as to why repealing bad legislation, made under duress is a bad thing - unless, perhaps, it's a bad thing because it was the PB who argued for it to begin with.

John B. Chilton said...

Am I over parsing? Our presiding bishop is parsimonious. The audience for her statement includes the ABC, and others. KJS said "desire". Was that just a redundancy for emphasis? I hear it as a qualifier which indicates a desire for something that if it happens would take effect GC 2009 in the undefined future if at all.

For example, God desires our love, but God doesn't necessarily receive it.


John ... Sometimes a cigar actually IS just a cigar. +Katharine does indeed choose her words VERY carefully ... and by indicating her "preference" for "a positive statement about our desire to include all people fully in this church" is a CLEAR signal to those who have been saying "the PB doesn't want us to do ANYTHING."

Not so.

She would prefer a positive statement.

We would prefer a statement that will pass both houses.

1 + 1 = 2 ... and that adds up to progress.

Ergo: I am encouraged.

IT said...

So, when do we start planning the get-together of Fr Jake's friends, Mad Priest's hangers on, and other undesirables and troublemakers from the blogosphere?

Sarah Flynn said...

Seems to me that PBJS is playing a game of chicken. Keep TEC from being the first to flagrantly violate the moratoria, in the rather certain hope that GAFCON and Co will not cease and desist its raiding in the US so that they will be the first to be put up on charges rather than TEC. If they cannot restrain themselves (and thus far they have not been able to do so) they may be the ones in the hot seat losing their standing in the ACC. Were that to happen the gradual swing to ss marriage and election of gl bishops would win the day in the AC. Poetic justice that the repressors get hung by their own rope.

Sarah Flynn

John said...

Susan, you say "She (the PB) would prefer a positive statement." And, "We (Integrity?) would prefer a resolution that will pass both both houses." At this point there are numerous resolutions on the table that would repeal B033. What becomes of them? And what alternative resolution(s) would you support, and more importantly, see as viable in both houses? That is exactly what those of us who think B033 was a bad idea very much want - a better idea coming from GC 2009. John White, Openly Episcopal in Albany.