Traditionalists in the US are already making plans to set up their own independent church.

Wow, you’d think the BBC would know more about church polity than to make a statement like that.  The church(es) being set up are hardly “independent.”

Why focus only on VGR as bishop? What about GLBT priests? Are bishops the only ordained leaders in the church?
What of the core issues: The PB (and others) on the uniqueness of Christ, the parishes where the creed is said but not believed, the denial of the cross of Jesus as our redemption. Why no uproar about all that? How about giving the body and blood of Christ to the unbaptized? What about a bishop of the church publicly lying? Is there no one in the church leadership going to ask for a public apology? There is so much more going on than homo-erotic activity.

WE are now in the “damaged at best” choice of the HOB of the ECUSA/TEC.  Congratulations, bishes!

#2:  all of the topics you bring up have been discussed on this blog and others extensively.

#4 agreed they have been discussed. But I think it is not true that VGR was considered a “communion ripper” prior to his election.
Also, with all do respect, I am not concerned with what T19 discusses, I am concerned that the ++ABC did not mention it, that it is not trumpeted by orthodox bishops at every TEC bishops’ meeting and, lastly, since 2003 the headlines about this great debate seem to be about 96% (not scientific; and the use of 95% has been recently sullied) focused on “gay bishop” or “gay marriages.” (see the article headline above) Seems to me that this has been a huge overemphasis in many quarters. That seems to be the primiary focus of the three Primates’ statement (read the three recent posts).

jeff marx #2: “Why focus only on VGR as bishop? What about GLBT priests?”
Indeed! What about us? And deacons? And the fourth order, the laity?

Padre Wayne,
The homosexual laity should be embraced as we are all sinners.  The church should not be ordaining persons whose manner of life is significantly in direct contravention of its teachings.  Cleptomaniacs, serial divorcees, adulterers, persons living outside of marriage with persons of the opposite sex, persons who commit crimes of moral torpitude, and raging alcoholics would be other examples of persons which should not be ordained because they are not living up to the mark.  Homosexaul laity’s efforts to change the teachings of the church to accomodate their lifestyle should be strongly resisted.

VGR+ is not the root of the problem but a symptom - the real fight is about whether or not homosexaulity is a sin.  The left is attempting to change the church’s teachings by creating new facts on the ground.  As in homosexuality is not a sinful state because we have Gay bishops and priests - it is a backdoor effort.

Actually, I think the authority of scripture is the deepest issue.  VGR, among others, have come out (no pun intended) and said the Bible is wrong.

And long-term refusal to discipline in accordance with scripture is what has gotten TEC and other mainline denominations in this mess.

Newbie #9: “VGR, among others, have come out (no pun intended) and said the Bible is wrong.”
That is simply not true. We have come out (puns are OK) and said that our interpretation and use of the “clobber verses” is contrary to the overarching message of God’s inclusive love for all humankind.

We don’t say, chips #8, that homosexuality is not a sinful state because there are gay people (or bishops and priests)—we say that homosexuality is a state of being that is morally neutral, and that the expression of our homosexuality in the context of a faithful committed relationship is not sinful, that it may, even (*gasp*) be holy.

That’s the disagreement. And perhaps we will never meet.

Interesting sidelight in another site today, the comment that GenXers say that this is all a “Boomer” fight, that they could care less, have plenty of GLBT friends, support SSBs, rejoice when we come out. Interesting. Doom for schismatic churches? Probably not, but certainly something to think about.