And what a surprise! He supports same-sex marriage:
The Very Rev. Andrew Asbil (answering whether he would vote to change the marriage canon)
I would vote in favour of the motion.
Bishops run in the Asbil family. Andrew’s father is Walter Asbil who was bishop of the Diocese of Niagara from 1991-1997. If son takes after father, Toronto might be in for interesting times considering how the Disaster – sorry, Diocese – of Niagara has turned out.
The Diocese of B.C. should formally enter the real estate business since it spends so much time selling empty churches to all and sundry to pay off its debt. Further diocesan woes include clergy holding views that are unencumbered by any hint of Christian theology and woodpeckers that are eating the cathedral.
No matter, help is at hand in the form of a Pride Eucharist. That should scare the woodpeckers away.
From here:
The officer of General Synod who advises the Anglican Church of Canada on canon law and legal matters says he’s “absolutely confident” that human-rights complaints made against clergy who refuse to perform same-sex marriages would fail.
“Human rights legislation recognizes freedom of religion and of religious organizations, and I am absolutely confident that that complaint would be dismissed,” Canon (lay) David Jones, chancellor of General Synod, told Council of General Synod (CoGS) at a session dedicated to the marriage canon Saturday, June 2.
I am quite sure that eventually there will be a human-rights complaint against a clergyman who refuses to perform a same-sex marriage. David Jones’s confidence that it would fail misses the point: would the Anglican Church of Canada pay the legal bills and fines of the refusing clergyman? Will pigs fly?
If the church is not legally bound to defend an employee who is being hounded by the HRC, all reassurances are worthless since the hapless cleric could be financially ruined.
On a brighter note, Dean Peter Wall plans to leave the church and crawl into a hole if the marriage canon change does not pass. Liberals love to harp on about “walking together” in spite of disagreements. But that only applies if they win.
Peter Wall, dean of the diocese of Niagara and chair of the General Synod planning committee, said with a strained voice he feared he would leave the church if the vote were to fail.
“My fear is that if the resolution is defeated, I cannot stay in the church,” he said. “I really fear that I would walk away and never come back into a church again, and take all my leadership, and all my experience…And I’m afraid I would crawl into a hole.”
In their ceaseless quest for relevance, Anglican Church of Canada clergy are once again dismantling racism by standing on blankets and feeling the pain when they are whipped out from under them.
Once the blankets are all gone, they begin the thumb sucking exercise.
From here:
An interactive learning experience to teach the history of Indigenous Peoples in Canada through colonization and the resulting loss of land, the KAIROS Blanket Exercise involves participants standing on a large number of blankets which are gradually removed, allowing them less and less space to stand on. Throughout the exercise, participants read texts that take them through the experience of pre-contact, the making and breaking of treaties by European settlers, colonization, development of reserves, the residential school system, and ongoing Indigenous resistance.
Following the blanket exercise, council members gathered again in a circle and opened up for discussion. Many related personal life experiences sparked by their participation in the blanket exercise. Some non-Indigenous members expressed feelings of shame at their descent from settlers who had gained from the historical subjugation of Indigenous Peoples. Meanwhile, some Indigenous council members recalled the pain that they felt due to racism and the intergenerational trauma rooted in colonial policies such as the residential school system.
If anyone has any lingering doubts about whether Bishop Michael Curry was peddling anything more than thinly disguised secular platitudes at the royal wedding, here he goes again, this time on his rent-a-bishop circuit introducing Britain’s Got Talent.
It’s all part of being in showbusiness:
I hope it doesn’t disappear altogether: less to make fun of.
From here:
The Anglican Journal’s print edition may be discontinued after a “lengthy transition period” and its mandate as an editorially independent news source may be changed under possible scenarios now being considered by a working group, the Council of General Synod (CoGS) heard Friday, June 1.
The paper is presently editorially independent: in other words, it isn’t the official voice of the church. This doesn’t mean that it is unbiased, of course: it is so biased in favour of the liberal theology of the Anglican Church of Canada that discarding editorial independence would make little difference to the content and would at least be more honest. The reason for maintaining a façade of independence is the yearly $596,627 subsidy from Canadian Heritage, only granted if it maintains editorial independence.
Sixty-five per cent of the 400 randomly surveyed Anglicans said they thought the Anglican Journal should be “the official voice of the Anglican Church of Canada” with only 35 per cent preferring that it retain its current status as “An independent, ‘arm’s length’ observer of the Church.”
Bishops “were asked a different question, but it was a parallel question and less than 50% of bishops think that the current mandate of independence is important, and they estimate that about a third of their folks find it important. And, lo and behold, it was a third of the folks who answered the survey,” said Alexander. “I have the sense that bishops have their finger on the flock fairly closely.”
On the other hand, over half of General Synod members and about 75 per cent of diocesan editors feel the Journal’s editorial independence is important, he said.
“Having an independent editorial policy makes the paper more credible as a news source,” Alexander quoted a respondent of the General Synod survey as having commented; “As an unofficial, and, as it were, non-partisan paper, the Journal acts as a fair dealer, offering news from a variety of perspectives,” wrote another.
The Anglican Church of Canada has developed a neurotic dislike of all things binary: there are no definitive decisions or conclusions. It seems to me obvious that this is because the ACoC is too cowardly to take a stand, preferring obfuscation and ambivalence in the hope that no-one will notice that it no longer believes in anything of import.
The fact that the ACoC is so opposed to binary decisions is a strong indicator that there must be something good about them. Musing along those lines, it occurred to me that the real world which is generally regarded as analogue in nature, may in fact be a digital creation masquerading as analogue. Rather like an analogue quartz watch whose hands don’t move smoothly, but appear to at first glance. This might provide an elegant solution to Zeno’s paradoxes.
I bet the “we” mentioned below typed this on a digital computer using nasty binary logic:
“We’re beginning to realize it’s not a binary discussion… ‘either you’re an official voice, and therefore you’re some kind of Pravda, or you’re independent’,” he said. “Editorial independence and diversity of views are not necessarily yoked together.”
Michael Bird is no longer bishop of the Diocese of Niagara. He has tweeted his last:
Well, apart from Jennifer Andison who is not partial to binary declarations and has opted instead for a stream of consciousness analogue waffle. In Anglican parlance this is known as “spiritual discernment” after “deep listening”.
All the rest are in favour. In Anglican parlance this is known as “diversity”.
From here:
If General Synod were held today, how would you vote on the Marriage Canon amendments?
The Rt. Rev. Jennifer Andison
I have been asked these questions during the course of our Diocesan discernment process and have consistently shared the following.
I understand that the laity and clergy of the Diocese of Toronto will feel supported or disappointed by how their Bishop votes at General Synod 2019 and that how the Bishop votes matters. However, there are a number of reasons why I don’t think it is pastorally helpful to answer this first question, today, with a simple Yes or No.
First, in our Anglican polity, Bishops vote “in Synod.” Synod is where Bishops, along with laity and other clergy, make such decisions. I want to be part of what the Holy Spirit is doing in General Synod 2019, and I am not prepared to pre-judge how I will vote then, and am not “in Synod” now. As a Bishop, I take spiritual discernment seriously. At General Synod in 2019, I intend to cast my vote after completing a process of prayer, scriptural discernment, and deep listening to laity, deacons, priests and other bishops, as well as those outside of the Church. I intend to seek the mind of Christ for the Church on this issue, whether I am voting in my current capacity as Area Bishop for York-Credit Valley or as Bishop of Toronto. The Bishop of Toronto also needs to be mindful that she or he serves on a national stage, both participating in the wider discernment of the Anglican Church of Canada and also acting as a witness of Christ’s love to our culture.
Second, the current wording of the proposed amendment is increasingly unlikely to represent what will be voted on in 2019. As our Primate, Fred Hiltz, has recently made clear, there very well may be amendments to the currently proposed canon change. Some other path may also emerge before 2019 as an alternative to a Yes/No vote, a binary and legislative approach that inevitably creates winners and losers, doesn’t account for culturally different ways of making decisions across our diverse Church, and risks oversimplifying the issue at hand. Although I would not abstain from a vote in 2019, locking episcopal candidates into such binary declarations at this stage is premature and potentially divisive.
The Very Rev. Andrew Asbil
I would vote in favour of the motion.
The Rev. Canon David Harrison
I would vote in favour of the change, as I did as a member of General Synod in 2016.
The Rt. Rev. Victoria Matthews
If the General Synod was being held this week and if I had a vote as the Diocesan Bishop of Toronto, I would vote YES to affirm the amendments to the Marriage Canon. I would do so believing that every Christian is called to interpret Holy Scripture in light of all of Holy Scripture, and I believe the weight of Scripture calls to care for every human person and give special attention and love to the marginalised. Secondly, I believe there are times when the church recognises a teaching in Scripture that has always been there but which has been undervalued. It is the work of the prophet to call the church to read Scripture with fresh eyes. In Luke 2.21-40, Simeon and Anna recognise the Christ in the Temple when everyone fails to recognise the Son of God. May our beloved church have eyes to see and ears to hear.
The Rt. Rev. Kevin Robertson
Unequivocally, I would vote “Yes” to amend the Marriage Canon, just as I did in 2016.
The Rt. Rev. Riscylla Shaw
Yes.
The Anglican Church of Canada, having largely abandoned the idea that Jesus was the propitiation for our sins by taking the punishment we deserve on himself, has no way to shed its liberal Anglo-Saxon guilt other than by participating in vacuous gestures, preferably befogged by clouds of smudging fumes.
Hence, to rid itself of its ancestors’ sins, the diocese is Walking in the Spirit of Reconciliation:
Oops, wrong photo, that was the March for Life.
Here is the Walk in the Spirit of Reconciliation:
It’s all part of protecting the planet from the Kinder Morgan pipeline, which, for Anglicans these days, supposedly signifies a deep Christian faith.
If only Anglican clergy could bring themselves to expend as much energy protecting the future inhabitants of the planet they feel is in such dire peril: unborn babies, 100,000 of whom will be killed in 2018.
From here:
A priest and her parishioner were arrested on Burnaby mountain after they chained themselves to a tree outside the Trans Mountain terminal Friday morning, according to Burnaby RCMP.
The two women began their protest around 7:30 a.m. They were identified by a friend as Rev. Laurel Dykstra and Lini Hutchings, both members of Salal and Cedar, an Anglican church part of the Diocese of New Westminster. Around the same time, a group of protesters from Protect the Inlet began blocking trucks from leaving Kinder Morgan’s Westridge marine terminal in North Burnaby. Some thirty people had gathered on site that morning. Burnaby RCMP arrived at both locations around 8:30 a.m.
[….]
Rev. Emelie Smith, the parish priest at St. Barnabas Anglican Church in New Westminster, said the two women were protesting because of their religious beliefs.
“I think it’s an act of faith. I think people should know they are doing this out of their deep Christian faith and need to protect the planet,” she said.
Rev Dykstra is bisexual, participates in the Vancouver Pride parade, thinks drag queens should be invited to speak to school children, and enjoys chaining herself to trees in her spare time.
