From here:
The House also discussed the next steps in the process for conversations around Human Sexuality. In its discussion the House noted that the process of shared conversations needed to demonstrate primarily how the Church of England could model living together with issues of tension, where members took opposing views whilst remaining committed to one another as disciples of Jesus Christ – members of one church in both unity and diversity. The House agreed to a proposed process and timescale for the conversations with regional discussions taking place over the next two years. The House also authorised its Standing Committee to sign off the final arrangements and materials.
Canadian Anglicans should have a feeling of déjà vu reading this; the mindless repeating of empty clichés while “living together with issues of tension” doesn’t work. Conversations about same-sex blessings will lead to many dioceses performing them as a generous pastoral response. Then, after the initial strenuous assertions that this is all about blessings and not marriage have been largely forgotten, further conversations will begin about altering the marriage canon to include same-sex couples.
The liberal juggernaut is in motion and conversations are not going to stop it.
This is just a statement that they are going to carry on ignoring what behavior is going on in the church or what anyone believes.Tolerance is these peoples highest virtue. Paul removed people that had perverted behavior and taught wrong doctrine,that is how you lead and protect a church, a little leaven leavens the whole lump.The church is a family and a family without discipline in unsustainable
It seems a long while ago (10 years?) but I recall attending a parish “talk” hosted by our bishop when the “ordination of practicing homosexuals” issue was imposed on the Anglican Church of Canada. I feel foolish having attended; I felt like a Stalinesque “useful idiot”. The bishop displayed his talent for beating parishioners into submission with a wordy but entirely unmemorable performance. It had the effect of an anaesthetic. I suspect he had no sincere interest in the topic but was forced to comply. Hard questions like: “where does the church derive the authority to abolish sin”? were adroitly handled and politely ignored. The meeting lasted about two hours and immediately afterwards they took the show on the road to the next parish.
In a way I’m glad it happened. It’s parted the Tiber and revealed the R.C. Church to me. I say this without a bitter heart but a new found appreciation for the old anti-Catholic, Protestant jeer: “Rome never changes”. With the greatest reverence I say: “Thank God she doesn’t”.