Resources

FAQ on the 79th General Convention (August 2018)

Answers from Communion Partner Bishops of the Episcopal Church to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Provisions for Same-sex Marriage

Q: Are all bishops now required to permit same-sex marriages in the congregations under their oversight and care as chief pastors, teachers, and liturgical officers of their dioceses?

A: No. Bishops may continue to lead their dioceses in accordance with the traditional teaching on marriage as found in Scripture and the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, which is also the consensus position of the Lambeth Conference (Resolution 1.10, 1998), frequently reiterated by all the Anglican Instruments of Communion. Congregations that seek to perform same-sex marriages in such dioceses do so under the pastoral care of another bishop. The “Austin Statement” of the Communion Partner bishops recorded just this intention for their dioceses.

Q: Are congregations that proceed with the marriage of same-sex persons no longer part of dioceses led by Communion Partner bishops?

A: These congregations remain within their dioceses both legally and canonically. As in analogous situations elsewhere in the Communion (cf. “The Society” in the Church of England, comprised of congregations who for theological reasons cannot receive the pastoral ministry and spiritual oversight of their canonical bishop), they should continue to share in the councils of their diocese, support it financially, and understand their property to be held in trust.

In terms of important aspects of spiritual oversight and teaching, however, these congregations will be placed in the pastoral care of another bishop. It is this pastoral oversight of another bishop that allows them to perform same-sex marriages. Our expectation is that all congregations within all dioceses will continue to be connected, to the highest degree possible, enabling common life and shared work in witness to Christ.

Q: How settled is the current arrangement?

A: This situation is new and needs to be worked out carefully and wisely, with a view to the greatest possible unity and adaptation to variations in situation. Creativity will be needed as we move forward. This continuing work will be undertaken in part through the Task Force on Communion across Difference, but also in varying ways according to the context of each diocese, and in conversation with colleagues in the Communion, with the Instruments, and with the Archbishop of Canterbury as the center of unity.

Q: Do same-sex couples seeking marriage approach their rector/priest-in-charge or their bishop?

A: They approach their rector or priest-in-charge.

Q: What happens when the rector says no?

A: All clergy have the right to decline to officiate at any marriage. In addition, rectors and priests in charge have canonical authority and responsibility in regard to the use of parish buildings for any liturgy under Canon III.9.6(a). We expect that all clergy will respond pastorally to members of their congregations who desire to be married using the Trial Use marriage rites, and if necessary direct them to clergy who may be able to meet with them to discuss marriage.

Q: Can a bishop prohibit the use of the Trial Use marriage rites in his or her diocese? If not, why?

A: No. As of Advent 1 of 2018, in all dioceses where the marriage of same-sex couples is legal under civil law, no bishop of the Episcopal Church may prohibit the use of the Trial Use marriage rites. This was the clear intent of Resolution 2018-B012, which set specific “terms and conditions” for how the authorized Trial Use marriage rites were to be used.

Q: What are Trial Use rites, and how are they authorized?

A: Trial Use rites are provided for by Article X of the Constitution, where they are defined “as an alternative at any time or times to the established Book of Common Prayer or to any section or Office thereof… duly undertaken by the General Convention.” Article X goes on to say that “nothing in this Article shall be construed as restricting the authority of the Bishops of this Church to take such order as may be permitted by the Rubrics of the Book of Common Prayer or by the Canons of the General Convention for the use of special forms of worship.”

Canon II.3.6 adds that “the enabling Resolution [of a General Convention] shall specify the period of such trial use, the precise text thereof, and any special terms or conditions under which such trial use shall be carried out.”

Although the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music has recommended adding further canons to clarify the issue, the foregoing has generally been taken to mean that Trial Use rites when passed are “special forms of worship” that are subject to “the authority of the Bishops of this Church” in their dioceses as chief liturgical officers (Resolution 1979-A121), unless otherwise specified by “terms and conditions” set by General Convention. Therefore, as chief liturgical officers, bishops direct the way in which such rites will be used in their dioceses during their “trial” period, within the parameters that General Convention sets (if the Convention chooses to set any).

At the 79th General Convention, this view was articulated by Bishop Dorsey McConnell from the floor of the House of Bishops as a point of clarification, during discussion of the trial use of a new inclusive-language version of Holy Eucharist: Rite II. It was ruled correct by Presiding Bishop Michael Curry after consulting with the Parliamentarian, and the bishops then proceeded to vote to approve these rites for trial use with no further objection (Resolution 2018-D078).[1]

If the Episcopal Church is eventually minded to add Trial Use rites to The Book of Common Prayer, it may do so by proposing them as amendments to the BCP, which requires passing at two successive General Conventions. Alternatively, the church may decide during the trial use period that the rites need further modifying, that they be given some other authorized status, that their authorization should be revoked, or simply allow the trial use period to extend indefinitely.

Q: What does B012 require, and what does it allow, when a bishop’s theological position does not embrace marriage for same-sex couples?

A: Several things.

The resolution requires that “the bishop exercising ecclesiastical authority… shall invite, as necessary, another bishop of this Church to provide pastoral support to the couple, the Member of the Clergy involved and the congregation or worshipping community in order to fulfill the intention of this resolution that all couples have convenient and reasonable local congregational access to these rites.”

Two things are required here. First, the bishop, “as necessary,” shall invite “another bishop of this Church” to provide pastoral care to the couple, priest, and congregation, in order that second, all couples (same-sex and opposite-sex) will have reasonable local access to the marriage rites.

The resolution does not specify when such invitation to give pastoral care shall be deemed “necessary” nor by whom. It also does not specify the duration or extent of this pastoral care.

As such, the resolution allows bishops to implement what is required in varying ways. A bishop could, in theory, judge that his or her theological position on marriage simply precludes direct involvement in the marriage of same-sex couples, which can be solved by inviting another bishop to give judgment on the permissibility of a same-sex marriage where one or both of the parties are divorced, as required by canon (this scenario is specified in clause 11 of Resolution B012).[2] Alternatively, a bishop could judge that his or her theological position on marriage requires him or her to invite “another bishop of this church” to provide pastoral care in a thoroughgoing and sustained way to a community that practices same-sex marriage, since that community differs significantly from the position of its bishop as chief pastor, teacher, and liturgical officer with respect to a sacramental rite of the Church. The wording of Resolution B012 is roomy enough to encompass both interpretations, so as to allow space for a variety of responses by bishops with differing theological views. This will result in different judgments as to what arrangement for supplemental episcopal pastoral care is “necessary.”

Moreover, while the resolution requires “convenient and reasonable local congregational access” to the Trial Use rites, it does not require all congregations to provide them. That remains subject to the “authority of the rector or priest-in-charge” under Canon III.9.6(a), as specified in clause 7. B012 therefore allows a rector to refer a couple seeking to marry using these Trial Use rites for pastoral care and the celebration of their marriage to another local congregation and priest.

Q: Why would a Communion Partner bishop and diocese need to judge it “necessary” to invite “another bishop of this Church” to provide supplemental episcopal pastoral care?

A: In the historic catholic polity of the Episcopal Church, it is understood that the whole of the liturgical, teaching, and pastoral ministry of a diocese are extensions of the bishop’s own ministry, as the one in that place who represents the apostolic Church. We see this in our prayer book whenever the bishop is described as chief celebrant at the altar, and especially in the service for the Celebration of a New Ministry, when the new rector is asked by the bishop to “help me baptize in obedience to our Lord” and receive signs of “the ministry which is yours and mine in this place” (BCP, pp. 561-2). Though a bishop is not normally consulted when a priest wishes to perform a marriage, celebrate the Eucharist, or baptize, these sacramental acts are extensions of the bishop’s ministry, delegated by the bishop to the rector, priest-in-charge, or vicar of a congregation. The sacramental life of all congregations in our polity requires the oversight of a bishop in communion with the wider Church, without which there would be no priests or sacraments. For the same reason, a bishop cannot extricate him or herself from the sacramental life of a congregation under his or her teaching ministry and pastoral care.

This is why Communion Partner bishops find it necessary to invite “another bishop of this church” to provide pastoral care for congregations that expand the practice of the sacrament of matrimony to same-sex couples. Since B012 makes same-sex marriage possible in all dioceses where it is legal, we have asked: In order to provide this access, what is theologically necessary in our catholic polity? The answer is oversight and care from another bishop who can provide this access, since any bishop who holds the traditional view of marriage cannot provide it.

Q: Does this mean there are different kinds of supplemental episcopal pastoral care?

A: There are various ways in which B012 is being implemented in different situations but a strong common thread. Congregations and clergy who differ from their bishop in teaching and practice with regard to marriage need pastoral care from another bishop in order to move forward. B012 provides a way of living together as a church that respects the difference in teaching. It is charitable and prudent.

Q: Beyond these requirements, may a bishop give further guidance for the implementation of these rites?

A: Yes. As noted above, Trial Use rites are generally understood to be directed by diocesan bishops, within the bounds set by whatever “terms and conditions” General Convention prescribes. In this case, B012 specifies that bishops cannot deny access to these Trial Use rites in their dioceses as a whole. However, so long as diocesan bishops fulfill the requirements set by B012, they retain the authority as chief liturgical officers to give pastoral direction for their use. This may take a variety of forms, so long as “convenient and reasonable local congregational access” is preserved.

As a general rule, rectors and priests-in-charge who wish to make use of these rites will want to have conversations with congregational leadership and their bishop to judge whether or not this step is broadly supported in their congregation.  As chief pastors and liturgical officers, a bishop may judge that the use of these rites in a given congregation is not pastorally prudent unless genuine conversation and discernment has taken place, and a path forward found that commands the general respect and support of the community, even if not complete agreement.

Q: Does not Resolution B012 say that the rector or priest in charge is the only person capable of giving “direction” for the use of these rites in their congregation?

A: No. Clause 7 says that the trial use rites are “under the canonical direction of the Rector or Member of the Clergy in charge,” but it does not say “only under,” to the exclusion of the further pastoral direction of the bishop that generally pertains to Trial Use rites. This clause makes clear that a diocesan bishop cannot forbid the use of these rites in the diocese as a whole, but does not abrogate the authority of the bishop to make judgments concerning their pastorally prudent trial use, so long as “reasonable and convenient” local congregational access is maintained.

As such, reasonable and non-punitive pastoral direction may be provided by bishops for the use of such rites in a given congregation, such as ensuring that a genuinely consensual and non-divisive process of discernment and study has taken place before their use. This is especially important as supplemental episcopal pastoral care will effect a significant change in the ecclesial and pastoral relationship between that community and its bishop.

Q: Does B012 give us everything we need to walk together in the Episcopal Church?

A: No. It marks an important step in a continuing journey of truth and reconciliation. We need to work toward a “lasting path forward for mutual flourishing” of all Episcopalians, which will require at least a shared understanding of how this will be implemented. Accordingly, General Convention passed Resolution A227: Communion across Difference, which calls for a task force that will bring together on equal footing a diverse group of conservatives and progressives on marriage, in consultation with the Anglican Communion and our ecumenical partners.

Like the call of all Anglicans to walk together along a common road in one communion, however duly differentiated, Episcopalians are seeking a way of living together imperfectly as Christians in the one Body, while respecting differences of teaching and practice. The Communion Partners believe the path upon which we are embarking is both charitable and prudent. Viewed in this way, B012 and the work of the Task Force on Communion across Difference may facilitate both seeking the truth of the Word of God and speaking it to one another in love, and help to heal divisions in the Body of Christ.


[1] See House of Bishops, Afternoon Legislative Session, July 12, 2018, at approximately 2:20: https://www.episcopalchurch.org/general-convention-2018-media-hub.

[2] Canon I.19.3 requires that clergy must receive permission from their bishop before presiding at the marriage of a person or persons who have previously been married.  This normally is the only direct involvement a bishop has in the weddings that take place in his or her diocese.  As such, a bishop may judge that since his or her conscientious position against the marriage of same-sex couples renders him or her unable to give such permission, another bishop must be invited to offer it.  A bishop may then judge that, this being done, it is not necessary to invite another bishop to provide thoroughgoing pastoral care for a congregation that performs same-sex marriages.