Bishops meet to discuss reconciliation

Posted on by
19

Read it all here:

The fourth consultation among Canadian, American and African bishops took place in Cape Town South Africa from Thursday May 2nd to Sunday May 5th 2013. We met in the context of worship, prayer, Scripture reading and the breaking of bread.  Through the presentation of papers, continuing conversation, and growing relationships we engaged in dialogue both in sessions and over meals.

[….]

We recognized that we have inherited the ministry of reconciliation from our Lord Jesus Christ; that God’s mission is not a human achievement. It is something we are called to live into and to share. We observed that the engagement in the ministry of reconciliation is a costly process because it involves facing positive and negative truths about others and about ourselves with courage, honesty and humility.

What a lovely sentiment. Note the Canadian bishops in attendance:

The Rt. Rev’d Michael Bird — Diocese of Niagara, Canada
The Rt. Rev’d Jane Alexander — Diocese of Edmonton, Canada
The Rt. Rev’d John Chapman — Diocese of Ottawa Canada
The Rt. Rev’d Michael Ingham — Diocese of New Westminster, Canada
The Most Rev’d Colin Johnson — Diocese of Toronto & Metropolitan of Ontario
The Rt. Rev’d Michael Oulton — Diocese of Ontario, Canada
The Rt. Rev’d Mark MacDonald — National Indigenous Anglican Bishop, Canada

Polygamous plastic marriage

Posted on by
60

With impeccable logic, Slate points out that, if marriage is good for same-sex couples, it should be good for a polygamous ménage, too.

As the Slate article notes, when it comes to redefining marriage, we’re not done yet.

I feel slightly sorry for both TEC and the ACoC: they struggle mightily to keep up with the foibles and fashions of the culture in which they are so pleased to be immersed, yet they are still fumbling with the, by now, passé blessing of same sex couples. Where is the generous pastoral response for polygamists, where are the polyamorous clergy proudly coming out to be consecrated as bishops in bullet proof vests, where are the Big Love or Die movies? Very disappointing.

Yes, really. While the Supreme Court and the rest of us are all focused on the human right of marriage equality, let’s not forget that the fight doesn’t end with same-sex marriage. We need to legalize polygamy, too. Legalized polygamy in the United States is the constitutional, feminist, and sex-positive choice. More importantly, it would actually help protect, empower, and strengthen women, children, and families.

[…..]

The definition of marriage is plastic. Just like heterosexual marriage is no better or worse than homosexual marriage, marriage between two consenting adults is not inherently more or less “correct” than marriage among three (or four, or six) consenting adults. Though polygamists are a minority—a tiny minority, in fact—freedom has no value unless it extends to even the smallest and most marginalized groups among us. So let’s fight for marriage equality until it extends to every same-sex couple in the United States—and then let’s keep fighting. We’re not done yet.

Anglican Journal: Bishop sues blogger for defamation

Posted on by
22

Leave your comments here; I would be interested to know how long they stay up (or if they even appear):

Bishop Michael Bird of the diocese of Niagara has filed a defamation lawsuit with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice against blogger David Jenkins.

The suit alleges that, in his blog Anglican Samizdat, Jenkins has published comments about Bird that were injurious to his “credit, character and reputation…in his office as spiritual leader and Bishop of the Diocese and in his occupation as priest…”

Hamilton lawyer Graydon Sheppard, who is representing the bishop, told the Anglican Journal that the lawsuit was a last resort measure from the bishop. “He, and to some extent, his wife, have been under constant attack for more than two years by this blogger…” Jenkins, he added, “has gone beyond fair comment and debate about doctrinal matters.”

What is it like, being sued for libel?

Posted on by
12

It is like participating in a poker game while in the middle of a fencing match. There is thrust, parry, bluff, counter-bluff all of which must be executed with one hand because the other is holding your wallet containing money for the bets – and it is open, spewing its contents in all directions.

The legal system is a wonderful thing.

Today is World Press Freedom day

Posted on by
2

From here:

The United Nations General Assembly declared May 3 to be World Press Freedom Day or just World Press Day to raise awareness of the importance of freedom of the press and remind governments of their duty to respect and uphold the right to freedom of expression enshrined under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and marking the anniversary of the Declaration of Windhoek, a statement of free press principles put together by African newspaper journalists in 1991.

There are a number of comments I could make about this but I don’t want to make my lawyer cry.

The Anglican Church of Canada loves the world

Posted on by
14

God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

The Anglican Church of Canada so loves the world that its hierarchy is meeting in an air-conditioned Ottawa convention centre to press the Canadian government to squeeze more taxes from its citizens to subsidise affordable housing. And to try and prevent “resource extraction” companies from drilling for Canadian oil: the same oil that the ACoC’s hierarchy burned on their way to Canada’s capital; come to think of it, perhaps they prefer the more inclusive Saudi oil.

It’s a whole other world.

From here:

More than 800 Anglicans, Lutherans, and partners will gather at the Ottawa Convention Centre July 3 to 7, 2013, for a historic joint national meeting.

Inspired by the theme “Together for the love of the world,” members of the Anglican Church of Canada and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada will gather for worship and decision-making on areas of shared work, including mission and development.

Several key events will highlight the churches’ commitment to God’s mission in the world. Anglicans and Lutherans will be invited to make statements on two priority social justice issues: affordable housing and responsible resource extraction. On July 6, Anglican and Lutheran youth from Ottawa are to lead people at the assembly to Parliament Hill where they will participate in an act of public witness and worship.

Pedants of pornography

Posted on by
1

From here:

The new academic journal Porn Studies, due to start publication in spring 2014, has called for submissions of articles, scholarly papers and book reviews.

U.K. publisher Taylor & Francis says it will be “the first dedicated, international, peer-reviewed journal” devoted to the study of pornographic products and services in the contexts of culture, history, economy, society and the law.

Content will explore the “intersection of sexuality, gender, race, class, age and ability.”

Several educators and authors have provided endorsements for the journal, which will be edited by two women – British academics Feona Attwood and Clarissa Smith.

“Porn Studies is a wonderful and much-needed resource for anyone interested in pornography and its relationship to wider cultural contexts,” Ronald Weitzer of George Washington University said. “The journal addresses virtually every aspect of porn and will challenge readers with novel, cutting-edge articles on the topic.”

In 1964 when Justice Potter Stewart made the famous observation that, although he could not define pornography, he knew it when he saw it, he could not have anticipated that in 2013, academics would still be trying to figure out just what it is “in the contexts of culture, history, economy, society and the law”.

I suppose the heartening thing about this is that there must still be a vestige of shame left in academia. After all, everyone knows that these prurient pedants simply want to look at naughty magazines but at least they have the decency to erect a smoke screen of respectability to conceal their scholarly concupiscence.

On Satire

Posted on by
Reply

G. K. Chesterton said: “A man is angry at a libel because it is false, but at a satire because it is true.”

But what is satire? The ever helpful Wikipedia tells us:

Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

While satire originated in Egypt, it became more fully developed in Ancient Greece where it took one of two forms: Satire after the style of Horace: humorous, self-deprecating commentary that laments contemporary follies; or after the style of Juvenal. Juvanalian satire is scornful, sarcastic and polarised.

Unbeknownst to me I have unwittingly succumbed to the influence of Rowan Williams whose ten year stint as Anglican in Chief has insidiously infused my thinking with via media muddle. I have concocted an Hegelian middle ground between Horatian and Juvenalian satire, one that is both excruciatingly funny while being bitingly sarcastic. I have empirical evidence of this: my 11 year old granddaughter roars with laughter at my musings (no, I don’t show her all of them), confirming the former and I find myself deep in the mephitic bowels of an ecclesiastical lawsuit, confirming the latter.

For those who think some of the things I have written are a trifle tasteless, I recommend a quote from Malcolm Muggeridge – whom I met briefly in the 70s and, you will be relieved to know, I irritated by asking impertinent questions:

Good taste and humour are a contradiction in terms, like a chaste whore.

Same-sex blessings in the Diocese of Rupert’s Land

Posted on by
2

In spite of assurances given during the 2010 Anglican General Synod that the ACoC was not approving the local option (each diocese decides for itself) for the blessing of same-sex unions, many dioceses have done just that. The latest to do so is the Diocese of Rupert’s Land.

Here (page 5), you will find a regurgitation of the, by now, familiar litany explaining why the diocese feels compelled to do something that 60 million Anglicans believe they should not do. The Diocese has prepared a “protocol”:

The Bishop and clergy of Rupert’s Land have completed preparation of a protocol for the pastoral practice of blessing same-sex unions. The protocol says why same-sex unions may be blessed in Rupert’s Land parishes and how this should be done.

The “protocol” is quick to point out that:

Different Anglicans and different parishes hold different convictions on this point, arising from differing interpretations of scripture and tradition.

It omits to mention that the number of Anglicans – or, indeed, Christians – worldwide  that agree with the diocese’s interpretation is miniscule.

“Diversity” is honoured – probably because conservatives contribute most of the money and, for that reason, the diocese can’t afford to chase them out – much as it might secretly want to:

Diversity of views is honoured and appreciated. Congregations and individuals are called to show pastoral generosity to one another. No cleric and no parish is required to participate in same-sex blessing.

Clergy opposed to blessing same sex couples will have to refer them to the bishop who will then refer them to clergy who have seen the light and are not opposed. So recalcitrant clergy might just as well get with the program since it’s going to happen anyway:

Clergy opposed to same-sex blessing should refer couples to the bishop.

Let’s be clear, though, that this is not a “marriage”, even though it bears an uncanny resemblance to one:

In order to be clearly distinguished from a marriage liturgy, the rite of blessing for a same-sex union will not include an exchange of legal consents, an opportunity for objections, a declaration of union, a rite of civil marriage, a signing of the parish marriage register or a nuptial blessing.

Repeat after me: “this is not a marriage.”