Discussion Begins

John Howe: I want to thank committee, but questions where we are. What about the resolution, odd how we can right a report before we've done it.

PB: Might move us forward in our discussion.

Florida: Primates three requests. First was said no to (Primatial Scheme), say no to request on B033 and no to issue of same sex blessings. Three strikes, we say no.

Northern CA: Some of us would like strengthening of paragraph two - line 104, something more like we call for an immediate end to the incursions.

Florida: eliminate lines that chastise. (We don't have copies of the proposal - which is again so incredibly weird, this would NEVER happen at General Convention). I stand by what GC did. We reaffirm our understanding that B033 complies to Windsor Report.

Connecticut: I think we're trying to do way to much, it's too long, narrative of our time together, but not the challenge such as racism and classism. Wants to add racism and classism.

Europe: Wished ABC asked us to be able to point the visitors to point to the documents that have moved us where we are over the years. This report needs to state trying to find a way to express that mind, it is people who want to know what the HOB thinks.

Ohio: Sections 4 & 5, wondering if whatever we say about B033 is an honest expression of TEC and the subcommittee's report of its sufficiency (which of course BB adds, was REJECTED by the primates, for goodness sake - they are dredging up a report that was rejected by the primates!). Says "it sounds like we're not of one mind about anything."

Next Bishop: par. 145 quotes "Mending the Net" not the Primates in this resolution (Excellent point!)

Next bishop: a bishop who was born in Louisiana, and is alarmed that you know well that the church is going to want to see. Let's put the three questions on the table and have an answer to them.

Bruno: Shorter, delete stuff about what they've done. Sent info to Executive Council and the ACC has affirmed what we've done in the past, be clear to affirm what GC has done in the past.

Next bishop: Wants to soften direction to Canterbury.

Bishop Lee: "There is disagreement ... we believe its adoption by General Convention that bishops ... will not consent to ssu unions." In other words, B033 fulfills Primates Request.

Lousianna: This document doesn't come out of the electric mist, there is a precedent in earlier GCs. Concur with Executive Council, afffirms SUBCOMMITTEE (yet again!) - not Dar Es Salaam.

No wonder Rowan didn't use the word "Dar Es Salaam" because they are pushing the SUBCOMMITTEE report - which was REJECTED by the Primates. Do they think the Primates are stupid? I don't think so. Why are they pulling up a report that was rejected, it did not pass - it was completely redone and that is Dar Es Salaam.

Chane: Concurs with Charles of LA.

Next Bishop: Now they are talking about the Subgroup again. What in the world is going on here?

Wagner, Spokane: Finds it substantive. Has a question. Wants assistance. Line 173. We recognize that this requires real sacrifice of all our members. Concern is that it can be heard as an overstatement. That people is a member of the church, I don't know what the real sacrifice is. It can be received a theological platitude using churchy language when we were really don't know what that means.

Next Bishop: Listening Process - sounds arrogant, wants to remove sentence about receiving reports. And "receive reports" about this process from all provinces. The parts on DEPO and Pastoral Scheme, we are all concerned about incursions - they want to be clear about what is being offered, we're not going to be able to deal with incursions. It's not strong enough to block incursions.

Dorsey Henderson: A remarkable document. Concerned about length, choice of location of concerns in the document he questions; it seems to avoid getting down to what is the primary concern to a lot of people. Line 128-129 where language is used in reference to public rites - shows general feeling written the point of view of a majority report and is a little bit condescending. (BB NOTE: He's very right about that!). Does not show the shock of the conditions in LA and Miss. two years after Katrina.

Applause over his statements regarding the exploitation of LA.

Next Bishop: Lines 43-45 important that we acknowledge problems about racism, etc is a problem of all the world.

Next Bishop: How is this helping us live out our Anglican Communion. The document is descriptive, but doesn't show how we are living it out here.

Long Island Asst. Bishop: missed it, was checking something else.

Irish: Does not commit us against ssu, but against manner of life. Strange locution from my memory and perspective.

Next Bishop: ABC says that there was no deadline, and respond not out of sense of urgency, but out of respect. 79-80 "Our polity" - is that TEC or Anglican Communion? The polity of TEC substitutes. There is no direct reference to Scripture in this document (another excellent point!).

New York: Ecclogical Justice (not sure how to spell that or what it means) - speaks to that; finds himself wondering practice of numbering these in the first place. Blended response with our request, wants the paragraphs numbered not lines.

PB: Wants to end by 12:15.

Ed Little: Paragraphs 4 & 5 and defacto no to the Primates Request. Agrees with Charles of LA and Peter Lee. Para 5 - looking at that section second para should be somewhere else. Para 5 is about authorizing rites for ssu. Offering pastoral care should be in another case. Line 131 be expanded "we wish to offer respect for different and consciously held beliefs, even though the church has not authorized rites ..."

Spanish Speaking Bishop: The text redundant "God in Christ" phrase and even site a verse in a hymn, it seems that that a very specific scriptural reference is missing. I would suggest that those who wrote the text Gospel John 13: 34-35.

Otis Charles: Racism and Classism and poverty is not the equality of classism. That's all he said.

Doss: Struck by ABC gratitude shifting our focus on ecclesiology - acknowledge that white industrial society dominates the church and change the context of the document to answer questions.

Another Bishop: Wants to thank those who gave the stoles given to the House of Bishops. We're talking about listening to dissident voices, includes the stoles regarding that point.

Okay, now the Writing Committee is retreating - and are they just going to go work by themselves or what about all the other resolutions? They seem to be railroaded and golly, now they are all laughing and clapping and sounding very cheerful. Second draft will come out tomorrow.

Now they are thanking Charles Jenkins because the chair of the Writing Committee is going to watch the Saints play rather than get back to work (he didn't of course put it that way, he just wanted to thank Jenkins for having the Saints play) - but for heaven's sake he's just told the entire house that it's more important to go watch football then work on this historic document.

Now there is going to be a small group meeting of another resolution in the corner.