I have supported our bishops’ attendance despite Bishop Robinson’s lack of an invitation because I felt it was and is important that we “be at the table.”
I still lean in that direction, but I also think it is important that someone play “devil’s advocate” here. What if the table is in itself so distorted that nothing good can come of it? What if the table is, by design, not credible. And it is clearly not given that despite three previous Conference’s promise to listen to the experience of lesbian and gay persons, there is no evidence whatsoever that the next Conference intends to do so.
If nothing else, the one person who could be there as an active participant in such a listening process from the side of gay and lesbian persons is not being allowed to participate. If our bishops’ are to go to the Conference are they willing in no uncertain terms, to protest strongly this state of affairs and state that they will do everything in their power to see that the conversation happens at the Conference?
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Michael Hopkins weighs in ...
Be sure to read Michael's excellent piece, "The Archbishop's Credibility Gap and the Destruction of Anglicanism." Here's a quote and a question: