From the New West website
Our Bishop Michael Ingham-and other Canadian bishops-called the idea of a
“retrospective moratorium” punitive, unfair or a step backwards. Bishop Michael was elegantly angry, declaring the WCG demonstrated “rigidity and a lack of wisdom.”
The WCG also advanced the concept of an “Anglican Covenant” and an “Anglican Faith and Order Commission,” something sounding ominously like the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; which, in Globe and Mail reporter Michael Valpy’s words, “almost certainly would impose limitations on homosexual inclusiveness.”
Where did this WCG come from, you ask? It was established just last February by Archbishop Williams to “address outstanding questions arising from the Windsor Report”-with the implied assumption that the Windsor Report is now Anglican doctrine and must be implemented. Responses from this corner of the communion were, at best, skeptical.
The Rev. Neil Fernyhough of St. Hilda’s, Sechelt, who went to observe the Lambeth Conference, wryly noted “there’s no uniform opinion with regard to the Windsor Report…but it’s already being accepted as the 39 Articles.”
Even Bishop James Cowan of British Columbia, whose vote at last year’s Canadian General Synod showed he’s more of a “go slow” prelate when it comes to same sex-blessings, doubted that measures now being proposed by WCG to “minister” to churches that have left their dioceses “will have any more sway” than other groups created by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
One has sympathy for the current Archbishop of Canterbury: well-intentioned, gentlemanly, scholarly to the point of obscurity, and clearly someone who does not want the global Anglican Communion to fold on his watch. A fine writer, an accommodating leader, and an admirable man in many ways, but sometimes one wishes for the soldierly toughness of one of his predecessors, Robert Runcie.
The most felicitous words spoken at Lambeth were those of Sir Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregation of the Commonwealth. He recognized that, too often, religious groups have shown conflict “between faiths, and sometimes within faiths.”
But, he continued, “The Anglican Communion has held together quite different strands of Christian theology and practice more graciously and successfully than any other religion I know.”
One hopes this may continue. And yet, one knows the history of the Christian church is full of divisions, reaching back to the animosity between Saints Peter and Paul. Many schisms, separations, dissolutions, new “reformed” churches.
That may happen again, over this issue, but if so, let it happen. As Archbishop David Somerville said of the ordination of women to the priesthood, “If this is what God wants us to do, we must do it.” And the same can be said of this current brouhaha over the blessing of same-sex unions.
My feeling is, if there are parishes and dioceses that cannot accept the full inclusiveness of diverse sexualities, let them go. Staying together is not the most important thing about religious life.
The idea of Michael Ingham being ‘elegantly angry’ is an intriguing one. How does he do it? What does it look like? Does he temporarily conceal his – undoubtedly genetically acquired – bicorne nature with a rainbow mitre? It is a profound relief to know that a bishop of the Anglican church of Canada is not subject to the foot stamping, tooth gnashing temper tantrums of mere mortals.
Instead, he takes it out on the parishoners and priests in his dioscese who can no longer put up with his selling out to the Dark Side. If he were merely ‘letting them go’, he would not be initiating lawsuits, threatening a world famous theologian with trespassing, firing priests and seizing property that doesn’t belong to him – all done elegantly, of course.
