Who pays and who prays

The Diocese of Texas has long chosen not to pay its full asking to the 'National Church. It is well-known here in the Diocese of Texas, that the main, if not the sole, reason for this is that the diocese has long accommodated and nursed an animosity toward the 'National Church' and about 15 years ago adopted a 'local option' that invited congregations to designate that their diocesan missionary asking would be directed toward specific agencies, thus away from the 'National Church.'

Despite claims to the contrary, there has been little if any discussion among leader lay and clergy about specific misgivings about the way the 'National Church' spends it resources.  It simply has been here in the DoT an official response to the so-called 'liberalism' of the 'National Church,' and nothing else.


Now, of course, we see this poor approach to being community emerging in the absurd proposal that some here are still trying to promote, known as the 'Baker Resolution.' This is a thinly veiled attempt from James Baker, former politician and member of St. Martin's, Houston. Long a bastion of traditional misogyny and now discrimination against LGBT persons, couples, and clergy, St. Martin's leadership and a few allies, even some who claim to be friends of LGBT persons and advocates of their full inclusion, are trying to use the term 'local option' as a way to create a way for exclusivist congregations to declare themselves formally and perpetually opposed to LGBT inclusion.

It is based in the attempt to provide congregations a way to opt out of elements of the Church-wide and diocesan constitution and canons with which they happen to disagree. In this case, the predicted full inclusion of LGBT persons in the life and ministry of the Episcopal Church. In the future, of course, it could apply to which Prayer Book to use, which diocese to affiliate with, with Church of the Anglican Communion to affiliate with, etc., etc.

The proposal has gained no traction anywhere in the Church, except unfortunately here in the DoT, supposedly in preparation for introduction at General Convention. The reason it has gained no traction is that it proposes procedures and processes that are completely antithetical to the polity and practice of the Episcopal Church. The reason it might traction here in the Diocese of Texas is the earlier 'local option' for congregations, and thus this diocese, to disregard our responsibility to the 'National Church.'

Some of us are entertaining a proposal for our upcoming Diocesan Council (convention) that would call for us to voluntarily restrict either the number of our delegates or the participation of our delegates in General Convention in correspondence with our diocese's failure even to attempt to meet its asking. If the Diocese of Texas, or any other diocese, wishes to object to the spending of the 'National Church,' let them claim their right to complain by first paying fully for the privilege.

God's Peace.