[ASAP] Fwd: ASAP report on the Convention

Fri Feb 3 03:59:20 UTC 2017

>From Henry Walker
Gibson Prichard
Nashville, TN
gibson at prichard.tv

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Walker, Henry <HWALKER at bradley.com>
Date: Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 6:14 PM
Subject: ASAP report on the Convention
To:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 “*providing
a compassionate response to those LGBTQ members who would seek access to
ecclesiastical rites for marriage*” within this Diocese.

It’s a question that answers itself.

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.

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.

Henry Walker

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.

------------------------------

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://episcopallists.com/pipermail/asap/attachments/20170202/413f70fb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: TaskForce.pages.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 42868 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://episcopallists.com/pipermail/asap/attachments/20170202/413f70fb/attachment-0001.pdf>