Why can’t the Atlanta process be the norm?

I just posted some thoughts about the Atlanta meeting led by the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music on Friday and Saturday. You can read the full post over at the Episcopal Cafe on the Lead. Here’s a bit of a taste.

“I want to give the leadership of the SCLM major kudos for putting together a process supported by appropriate technology and outside financial resources that I think will make this coming General Convention decision over what to do with their report easier and more palatable to many. What this process has done extremely well is to listen to the diverse voices in the Episcopal Church. I participated in the small group conversations. I saw the scribe for our group carefully keeping track of our conversation. Our group arrived at some very interesting insights, some of which were new to me. The group process worked; and when we disagreed, that was recorded too. Later in plenary sessions, the disagreements were recognized and honored. There is not a clear consensus on what the Episcopal Church should do with the report it will receive. There is a shared recognition that either way the decision goes on authorization, there will be some parts of the Episcopal Church that will not be able to bear the decision. But there was no sense that anyone was walking away. They had been heard and everyone was committed to staying in relationship with one another somehow, someway.

That’s what reconciliation actually looks like.”

Read the full article here.

I’m a huge believer that we make the best common decisions when there is the broadest possible consultation. I saw that happening in Atlanta. And I want to ask the Episcopal Church at all levels, why this sort of thing is exceptional and not commonplace.

Author: Nicholas Knisely

Episcopal bishop, dad, astronomer, erstwhile dancer...

One thought on “Why can’t the Atlanta process be the norm?”

  1. “outside financial resources ” Hmmmm. Hardly from a disinterested source.
    And think about how the left wing leaders of our church have complained about the IRD (Sisk), which is hardly IMHO an objectionable organization, or said that the African Lambeth delegation was bought ‘fried chicken’ (Spong). Yet now we have funding from a strong special interest group and it commendable. Go figure.
    And this:”I’m a huge believer that we make the best common decisions when there is the broadest possible consultation” counts, except when that consultation is the broader Anglican communion and Lambeth.

Comments are closed.