wfn.org | Episcopal convention defeats call for non-marital union rite

[PCUSA NEWS <PCUSA.NEWS@ecunet.org>]

Note #6118 from PCUSA NEWS to PRESBYNEWS:

12-July-2000
00253

Episcopal convention defeats call for non-marital union rite

Debate centers around same-sex couples

by David Skidmore and James H. Thrall
Episcopal News Service

DENVER —  An attempt to provide a liturgical rite in the Episcopal Church
that would support committed unions other than marriage was narrowly
defeated in the denomination's House of Deputies July 11. While a definitive
tally was not expected until the next morning's session, initial results
announced in the house showed the recommendation failing in both lay and
clerical orders by only a few votes.
	The call for a rite made no specific reference to either homosexual or
heterosexual unions, but debate before the vote focused almost entirely on
the rite's application to same-sex couples.
	According to the initial results of the vote by orders, the deputies turned
down the recommendation for a rite "to support relationships of mutuality
and fidelity other than marriage" by just three votes in the lay order and a
single vote in the clerical order.
	The proposal was the last of eight resolves in a resolution painstakingly
crafted by the legislative committee of the 73rd General Convention charged
with considering most of the convention's resolutions addressing sexuality.
	In an earlier voice vote, the deputies overwhelmingly passed the first
seven resolves of the compromise resolution. The resolution had been crafted
from a working paper produced by committee members and a resolution from
Bishop Geralyn Wolf (Rhode Island).

	Strong support for first seven resolves

	Fewer than 50 deputies opposed those first seven resolves. The resolves set
out the church's standards for both marriage and "other life-long committed
relationships," acknowledging the church's traditional teaching on the
sanctity of marriage and reaffirming
the imperative to promote conversation between people of different
perspectives on these issues.
	Instead, nearly all the testimony offered in the half-hour of discussion
before the vote focused on the final resolve, which would direct the
Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music (SCLM) to prepare rites that
support persons living in non-marital committed relationships.
	The near passage, a virtual replay of the deputies' last foray into this
issue in 1997, was marked by passionate pleas from those opposed to same-sex
unions. Including the last resolve, they said, would destroy the unity of
the church. Supporters of the final resolve argued just as fervently that
gay and lesbian Episcopalians in committed relationships should have access
to the "public liturgical support" of the church.
	Without the last resolve, the resolution is expected to receive less
resistance when considered by the bishops later in convention (the Episcopal
Church has a bicameral form of church government). If the bishops concur
with the deputies, the decision to express support for non-marital committed
relationships without establishing a liturgical rite could be seen as
leaving the Episcopal Church somewhere between such denominations as the
United Church of Christ on the one hand, and the United Methodist and
Presbyterian churches on the other. The United Church of Christ has approved
explicit measures for ordaining gay and lesbian ministers and blessing
same-sex unions, while the Methodist and Presbyterian denominations recently
reaffirmed prohibitions against both.

	Debate is a longstanding one

	The differences voiced in the debate stretch back nearly 25 years to the
65th General Convention, which passed the first resolution supporting gays
and lesbians "as children of God." In nearly every convention since then,
the church has made some affirmation on matters relating to homosexuality
and same-sex unions. These statements include a 1985 resolution adding
sexual orientation to the list of criteria by which persons cannot be denied
access to ordination, and a 1994 resolution directing the House of Bishops
Theology Committee to study "theological considerations" in developing rites
honoring same-sex relationships.
	For the Rev. Barnum McCarty (Florida), one of two deputies on the committee
to speak during the debate, the church is not yet and may never be at the
point of approving an official blessing of same-sex relationships.
	McCarty, the only deputy on the committee who voted against the eighth
resolve during the committee's deliberation, observed that same-sex rites
are already being performed at the discretion of bishops and dioceses.
Regardless of how the convention votes, he said, those rites will continue.
Having the SCLM develop an official rite for the whole church
"would be an unnecessary if not an untimely action to those who are not
ready for this."
	The Rev. Peter Cook (Western Louisiana) said that no matter where one stood
on the issue, an affirmative vote would be destructive not only of the
church's unity, "but of the effectiveness of our mission." In his Southwest
Louisiana parish, he said, approval of rites for same-sex unions "would lead
to the alienation of many parishioners for whom the blessing of same-sex
unions represents the crossing of a watershed."
	The possible loss of members was also a concern for the Rev. David Ottsen
(Northern Indiana). A rite for non-married couples, whether homosexual or
heterosexual, is not an act of inclusion, said Ottsen, but of exclusion
against "those who affirm the biblical basis of marriage between a man and a
woman." While providing rites might increase attendance at
parishes that serve communities with gay and lesbian members, that would not
be true for his congregation, he added. "I can tell you that in my own
congregation we will lose many families."
	But the Rev. Brian Baker (Idaho) saw any effort for supporting same-sex
relationships as a strong card for his parish to play "in the center of what
is arguably the most politically conservative state in the union." In Idaho,
where the Mormon church and the religious right hold sway, the Episcopal
Church stands out as the only denomination "that emphasizes inclusion and
grace over purity and judgment," said Baker.
	"My parish is growing in large part because of its stand as a beacon of
Christ's welcoming love," he argued. Statements like that of the committee,
he added, will allow the ministry of his diocese to flourish.
	Quoting a line from a hymn in the 1940 Hymnal — "new occasions teach new
duties" —  the Rev. William Doubleday (New York) said he supported "this
grace-filled resolution in its entirety." Scripture and tradition, which are
used as leverage for those opposed to same-sex unions, have a history of
being used as tools of discrimination, he noted.
	Both "have been used to excommunicate divorced people, to support canonical
barriers to interracial marriage" and for other acts of exclusion. "It is
time for all of us to come in and be brothers and sisters in Christ's name,"
Baker implored.
	The "painful history" of biblical support for slavery and other injustices
stands in opposition to Anglican ethos and practice, said the Rev. Stan
Runnels (Mississippi). "There comes a time when faithful people must risk
for the radical gospel of love, justice and grace —  the Gospel of Jesus
Christ," said Runnels, arguing for the last resolve. "For me now is the
time."

	No love without justice

	While clergy voices predominated during the debate, lay deputies also
argued forcefully on both sides of the issue. Christopher Hart
(Pennsylvania) said the last resolve "speaks for justice, and it is time for
this church to speak with justice. There can be no love without justice."
	With equal conviction, Susan Hansell (Central Florida) warned that any
approval of rites for same-sex unions, even if just in the Book of
Occasional Services, would be a precursor to including them in The Book of
Common Prayer. That would have catastrophic consequences for her parish, she
said.
	"If this resolution is passed, my parish family will be devastated," she
warned. "They will be asked by their church to abandon their lifelong moral
and Christian beliefs. In essence the Episcopal Church will be throwing my
parish away."
	Members of Integrity — the Episcopal advocacy organization for gay and
lesbian interests — have pinned their hopes on something coming out of this
convention to recognize and support their relationships, said the Rev.
Michael Hopkins (Washington), president of Integrity. Thanking the committee
for its "hard and faithful work," Hopkins urged the house not to dilute the
resolution by voting down the last resolve.
	For gay and lesbian couples living in committed relationships, some form of
prayer "is simply a pastoral necessity," said Hopkins. To establish such
standards for relationships as those set out in the resolution's first seven
resolves, without providing liturgical support, he said, deprives gay and
lesbian couples of the church's pastoral care.
	Those who warn of schism forget that unity is a two-way street, he said.
"This resolution is a compromise as much for gay and lesbian people as for
others."

	Threat of schism downplayed

	In a short press conference following the vote, representatives of the
house downplayed the role that the threat of schism played in the debate.
	The schism card has been played before in earlier debates in the church
over the ordination of women, acceptance of black bishops and clergy, and
the Civil War and slavery, noted the Rev. Gayle Harris (Rochester). "So the
threat of schism is well used for anyone who wishes to have their way," she
noted. Wielded as a last resort, "it doesn't help the conversation," she
added.
	Herbert Gunn (Michigan) said schism had little to do with the vote against
preparing rites for same-sex couples. "I think it failed because the church
is not ready. I think that is what we heard today, and it is hard for some
of us to hear."

_______________________________________________
pcusaNews mailing list
pcusaNews@pcusa.org

To unsubscribe, go to this web address:
http://pcusa01.pcusa.org/mailman/listinfo/pcusanews