One of the motions before synod this morning was C011:

Request that all Dioceses, ACIP, Military Ordinariate, and Religious Orders engage in theological and scriptural study of human sexuality in the coming triennium.

The ACoC, as Fred Hiltz keeps reminding us, has been studying sex (not doing it, Anglicans are dying out, remember) for about 50 years, so a decision to spend few more years pondering gender plumbing is hardly surprising. In fact, the only way to surprise an Anglican synod would be to propose a motion that recommended all studies on sex stop. That didn’t happen.

Unsurprisingly, a bright spark from the Diocese of Montreal wanted to add “in conversation with gay and lesbian voices” to the motion; few would have the temerity to object. The trouble came when a second amendment was requested: to add “ex-gay voices”, too. After all, there are people in the church who have overcome their same-sex attraction.

The owner of the first amendment did not want his bit sullied with “ex-gays”, though, so he referred to “so-called ex-gays” in his plea to defeat the second amendment. The only people upset by this were the ex-gays and their friends – I scarcely think anyone else noticed. However, I would dearly like to have witnessed the hysterical screeching that a reference to “so-called gays” would have provoked. Very similar to drawing a cartoon of Mohammed on the wall of the Badshahi Mosque in Pakistan, I should think.

I found myself quite irritated by the spectacle, but I am consoling myself with the prospect of calling the ACoC a “so-called church” until my nerves are soothed.