Reverend Glynn Cardy explains why he won’t be officiating at a gay wedding

Much as he would like to, he acknowledged that it is “against Anglican policy”; no doubt his bishop had a quiet word. The wedding in question was in some way “part of a radio competition”, an association that imbued it with ironclad legitimacy.

What is immediately apparent in this interview and, indeed, is apparent in every other instance of a same-sex couple wanting a church – I hate to call it “wedding” – agglutination, is that the desire has nothing at all to do with Christianity. Instead, it is a combination of: a poke in the eye to those who think marriage should be exclusively between people of the opposite sex; a liking of pageantry with ancient roots – a pageantry, though that, while it presents a pleasing aesthetic, has been rendered impotent through being drained of spiritual significance and thus, makes no demands on the participants; and an ecclesiastical stamp of approval on what, deep down, everyone knows is invalid.

Nothing to do with Christianity whatsoever; just like St. Matthews in the City.

Reverend Glynn Cardy leaving Anglican parish of St-Matthews-in-the-city

He is off to join the Presbyterians. I don’t know whether Anglicans or Presbyterians will be rejoicing; Glynn Cardy has been instrumental in erecting heretical – known in Anglican circles as “controversial” – billboards outside his church.

From here:

The Reverend Glynn Cardy is leaving the inner-city Anglican parish of St-Matthews-in-the-city for St Luke’s, a Presbyterian church in Remuera. He takes up the job in October.

St Matthews has gained a profile for its billboards which often challenge ideas about marriage equality, homosexuality and solo mothers.

Rev Cardy says even though his new congregation will be Presbyterian and not Anglican, the job at St Luke’s was too good to say no to. He says that includes welcoming gay and lesbian people into the congregation.

In a recent interview he denied the personhood of God, making nonsense of Christianity and a mockery of his supposed calling:

There is a strong tendency to make God into a being. This “being” God, albeit with super powers, is usually male, with personality and prejudices.

My experience of God is more akin to a source of energy or power. That power is best known in mutual loving relationships.

Hence the phrase “God is love” is not describing a divine being who loves, but is using the word G-o-d to describe a transformative loving energy.

Fred Hiltz thinks marrying same-sex couples is going to be controversial

Very astute.

From here:

The primate said he was not surprised that the resolution asking the Council of General Synod to prepare a resolution for 2016 that would change the marriage canon to allow same-sex marriage “sparked some difficult moments.”

Asked to comment on opinions expressed by some members that there wasn’t enough time to debate on the merits of the resolution, Hiltz said, “It doesn’t matter what kind of resolution you have on the floor that’s going to change the marriage canon of the church so that same-sex couples can be married. It’s going to be controversial.”

Reacting to statements made by some members that allowing same-sex marriage is a big leap from the blessing of same-sex unions, the primate said, “None of that surprises me. There’s nothing new in that perspective; that’s been there in the life of the church for many years.”

Saying “[t]here’s nothing new in that perspective” is evading the point.   For years, the Anglican Church of Canada has been boring everyone – well, Anglicans, most of whom already have one foot in the grave – to death with explanations of why blessing same-sex couples is not the same as marrying them. The former, supposedly, is not against “core doctrine”; no-one is suggesting that the church is going to embark on the latter, we were assured, so there is really nothing to worry about.

Now the ACoC is going to vote on performing same sex-marriages in spite of all protestations to the contrary; naturally no priests would be compelled to perform same-sex marriages. Given the church’s duplicitous performance thus far, does anyone believe that?

The most superfluous exhortation at the Anglican Joint Assembly

14-07-2013 8-44-39 PMAt the end of a Eucharist at the Anglican Church of Canada’s Joint Assembly, Katharine Jefferts-Schori, one of the invited guests, dismissed the congregation with: “Get Up. Get Out. Get Lost”.

Hundreds of people felt excluded by the dismissal: there were, after all, only three people present who were not already lost.

Some loathsome words

Exclusion – to exclude this word through an insufficiency of inclusiveness would be a heinous act of exclusion.

Inclusion – see the above in reverse.

Missional – there used to be no such word; it now exists through ecclesiastical fiat by virtue of its obligatory appearance in every pious pronouncement of today’s church. It means: “the church will die if we continue to look inward, therefore we will we have conversations about looking outward as we continue to look inward”.

Conversation – see above: meaningless Anglican prattle.

Spirit – Anglican meaning: any spirit at all as long as it is not the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit.

Journey – Anglican meaning: “aimless meandering”. In today’s church, being on a journey is an excuse for avoiding making the decisions necessary to becoming a Christian.

Stewardship – real meaning: “the responsible overseeing and protection of something considered worth caring for and preserving”. Anglican meaning: “we want your money”.

Vision – Anglican meaning: “wishful thinking”.

Vision 2019 – wishful thinking after the Anglican Church of Canada has ceased to exist.

Raising awareness – what is wrong with “make people aware of”?

Healing dialogue Anglican meaning: kicking a conservative in the testicles while he is being distracted by conversation (for “conversation”, see above).

People of faith – anyone who believes anything, including (sorry to use that word) atheists who believe that God doesn’t exist.

The Diocese of Niagara will keep asking me for money

Obviously the previous fundraising effort cunningly disguised as a $400,000 lawsuit was not enough. I just received this email from the Diocese of Niagara:

THANKS! and….. please help if you can!‏

A couple of days ago when we asked to “send a kid to camp” we had a wonderful reponse.  Not only did people register children, but we were offered money to help children who needed financial assistance. There are many generous people in the Anglican community and we are very thankful.  There is still room in the camp if you have a child or know of a child who wants to go to this terrific camp…….

We need $1175.00.  We’re hoping that one or more persons can help us with this.  If you can help fund these children in any way, please either contact Canterbury Hills or if you prefer, the Diocesan Treasurer – Jody Beck.  In advance thank you so much for your generosity!

How should I respond to such a heartfelt plea?

Dear  Diocese,

I would love to “send a kid to camp”. Unfortunately, due to circumstances created by someone you know quite well, all my spare cash – and much that isn’t spare – is finding its way into the hands of lawyers.

Jody Beck, if you happen to see this, could you spare a few hundred thousand? In advance thank you so much for your generosity!