<div dir="ltr">From Henry Walker<br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Gibson Prichard<div>Nashville, TN</div><div><a href="mailto:gibson@prichard.tv" target="_blank">gibson@prichard.tv</a></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Walker, Henry</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:HWALKER@bradley.com">HWALKER@bradley.com</a>></span><br>Date: Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 6:14 PM<br>Subject: ASAP report on the Convention<br>To: <br><br><br>
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_-1590237061245200693WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Attached is the resolution passed two weeks ago at the Diocesan Convention. It is certainly not what we had hoped it would be but it’s still progress, laying
the groundwork for next year’s Convention.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Background. There were three resolutions introduced on the subject of same sex marriage at the Convention. We had the endorsements of the vestries of St. Ann’s,
St. Paul’s Franklin, St. Augustine’s, St. Phillip’s, St. David’s, and Christ Church Cathedral for the resolution drafted by St. Paul’s Franklin (which was very similar to the one introduced by St. Ann’s) . The resolution called on the General Convention to
take appropriate steps to allow individual clergy to conduct same-sex marriages without having to obtain the permission of the bishop.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Despite the endorsement of those six vestries (and some very eloquent arguments from Bill Barton, Charlie Grimes, Indie Pereira, Connally Davies Penley, and others)
we did not have the votes to get our resolution passed. Here’s what happened: All resolutions are referred to the “resolutions committee” which the Bishop had appointed. The committee hears testimony and then, after hearing arguments from both sides, produces
a “substitute motion” which is then voted on by the entire convention. If it passes—which it did—all the other resolutions become moot. The key, therefore, is getting the committee to recommend your resolution, or one close to it, since whatever the committee
recommends is almost always going to be approved by the convention. Since the Bishop appoints the committee, that gives him considerable leverage. Of course, the committee’s substitute can still be beaten on the floor if you have the votes. But I learned two
things about that. First, just because a parish vestry votes to support a resolution does not necessarily mean that the delegates from that parish will support it or speak in favor of it. Second, if it’s a close voice vote, people vote by raising hands.
The clergy constitute about 40 % of the votes, and they tend to support the Bishop (or just keep quiet; Bill Barton of St. Paul’s Franklin being a notable exception this year.) In other words, in order pass a resolution which the Bishop does not want
passed, you have to have the support of a super-majority of lay delegates. That’s hard to get, especially when you have members of the clergy telling the delegates that what we are doing is “undermining” the Bishop’s authority as well as the work of the
last General Convention.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Nevertheless, the other side could not simply disregard a resolution that had the support of so many parishes. It soon became apparent that their strategy
was to refer our resolution to the Task Force that was created last year (pursuant to another ASAP resolution ) to study the same-sex marriage issue. When the rector of St. George’s (who led a delegation of eight priests) stood up and proposed that, it
was (in retrospect) clear that was what was going to happen. What remained was to see what kind of language the resolutions committee came up with, especially after a number of people expressed suspicion that the Task Force might not do anything at all.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">That’s where we achieved some success. Read carefully the language of the attached resolution. As much as possible, it “directs” the Task Force to hold “Diocesan-wide
gatherings” for the specific purpose of investigating the impact of the Bishop’s refusal to allow local clergy in this Diocese to officiate at same-sex marriages. It “directs” them to make periodic updates and to make a final report by November 1. The final
report shall include any recommendation for action by the next General Convention on this issue.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">We owe a debt a gratitude to the members of the resolutions committee who, meeting in private, crafted this language. It goes further than anything we would
have gotten in a floor vote.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">We now have a forum. It’s not another opportunity to confront the Bishop on the ssm issue; that has been tried for a year and we know that’s not going to get
us anywhere. It’s a forum of reasonable people (the members of the Task Force) who will consider whether the Bishop’s position is “<u>providing a compassionate response to those LGBTQ members who would seek access to ecclesiastical rites for marriage</u>”
within this Diocese.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">It’s a question that answers itself.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Because of the criticism of the Task Force for having failed to get organized during the last year (they met once, in December), the co-chairs of the Task Force
and its members pledged to the convention that they would carry out faithfully the directions of the resolution. I believe them. That means meetings—lots of meetings—for them to hear how the Bishop’s decision has impacted clergy and parishioners in local churches.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">This is our opportunity. Once again, we are not going to change the Bishop’s mind. But we have a second chance (at the next Diocesan Convention) to petition the
General Convention in 2018 to remove the Bishop’s veto power. That has always been our goal. Once again, we will make sure that this issue does not go away.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Henry Walker<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">PS. So as not to flood people with unwanted emails, please do not his “reply all” unless it really is something everyone should hear. Please feel free to email
me personally if you have any questions. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<table class="m_-1590237061245200693MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0" style="margin-left:9.0in">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="94" valign="top" style="width:56.4pt;padding:7.5pt 6.0pt 0in 0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</td>
<td valign="top" style="padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<font face="Arial" color="Gray" size="1"><br>
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail is from a law firm and may be protected by the attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and then delete it from your computer.<br>
</font>
</div>
</div><br></div>