Anglican clowns and the menstrual cycle

Posted on by
8

Holy Trinity Anglican Church in Edmonton has decided to make Christ visible through the arts, an endeavour I heartily endorse. Or I would if the church’s efforts bore even a passing resemblance to Christ or art. I’m not much given to optimism, so I didn’t anticipate anything resembling the Sistine Chapel or Bm Mass, but “Beatrice the clown” giving a “wild sex education lesson” manages to sink beneath my most pessimistic expectations.

From here:

The Cool Air Rentals Stage at Holy Trinity Anglican Church

It’s almost impossible to break down all of the elements in this comedic romp let alone write about them. But I can assure laughter was endless and it is worth visiting Beatrice the clown for her wild sex education lesson.

Raunchy at points and most definitely not for everyone, Beatrice delves into reproductive organs, the menstrual cycle and sexual intercourse in a way like never before. And that’s actually literal. In the hour-long show’s most hilarious segment, Beatrice (now an investigative reporter) goes undercover in a man’s body to get the full scoop on what fertilization is like and how long it can take.

Church of England has a course on how to disagree

Posted on by
4

Creating a course on how to disagree makes as much sense as a course on how to engage in sexual intercourse. If you can’t do it without instructions, you probably should find something else to occupy your time.

The meandering path Justin Welby trundled down to take him from the Alpha Course to the Disagreement Course is shrouded in mystery, a fantasy that would be beyond even the fertile imagination of Bunyan and his Byways to places like the Hill of Difficulty or the Slough of Despond.

For those who would like to descend into the Ditch of Disagreement to explore Disagreeing Agreeably, here you are.

Anglican Church of Canada, infertility cult

Posted on by
6

The Canaanites worshipped the fertility god, Baal; they abandoned themselves to orgiastic excesses in order to please their god. And possibly, themselves.

It goes without saying that this did not please the triune God who created the heavens, the earth and all that is in them. It is, however, a step up from the gods before which the Anglican Church of Canada has chosen to abase itself: infertility and death.

Here is the Diocese of Ottawa inviting its members to participate, not in a fertility rite, but in a bacchanalia of orgiastic homoerotic infertility.

Even worse, when, in May, the national March for Life took place in Ottawa to protect the most vulnerable in our society, unborn babies, there was no invitation and no representation from the diocese.

An infertility and death cult.

Queerly beloved Anglicans

Posted on by
10

As night follows day, so the Vancouver Pride Bacchanalia follows that of Toronto. Why Anglicans have become so devoted to it is beyond me; but they have. Instead of staid strawberry socials, we have Cathedral breakfasts celebrating “diverse sexualities and gender identities”.

I’m tempted to conclude that this infusion of homoerotic sexual obsession is demonic, a ploy of principalities and powers that seeks to pollute this world until Christ’s return. But it is so lacking in subtlety that it’s hard to believe that our Enemy would try something so ambitiously crass. Unless, that is, he has concluded that his victims have lost all common sense, all instinctive understanding of what is right and what is wrong.

From here:

Christ Church Cathedral provided the springboard for local Anglicans to become involved in the Pride festival on Sunday, and get involved we did!

In tandem with Dean Peter Elliott, Cathedral parishioner Peter DeGroot organized this year’s Anglican entry in the Pride Parade and made it known that marchers from other parishes were welcome to join in. Peter DeGroot was also the server and leader of prayers at the Cathedral’s 8am Pride Service; the Feast of the Transfiguration (transferred) was celebrated, with Dean Elliott presiding and the Rev. Alisdair Smith preaching. The service began with the rainbow candelabra being lit on the altar as we offered prayers of thanks for all God’s beloved children and lamentations for the harms experienced by people of diverse sexualities and gender identitities [sic – a Freudian slip if ever I saw one].

The service was followed by an excellent breakfast supplied by Cathedral volunteers and a sign-making session in the parish hall, after which marchers found leisurely lunches in various places before gathering for the 1:30 “call time” on Robson Street. Our contingent of roughly 40 people was near the very end of the parade, and thus it was all the more amazing to witness the energy and enthusiasm with which we were greeted by people who had already been standing in the hot sun for hours. As a marcher, it was remarkable to witness the variety of ages and enthnicities in the crowd – Vancouver is truly a vibrant, multi-cultural oasis.

An interview with Archbishop Linda Nicholls

Posted on by
17

Here is an interview with the Anglican Church of Canada’s new Primate.

We have a unique opportunity to witness within the Anglican Communion to what it means to live together in faith. In a world of increasing polarization where differences become reasons to hate, we are a Church that gathers first around our call in Jesus Christ. We have differences – language, culture, race, sexual orientation, liturgical preferences, theological preferences – and we could divide on any or all of these. Yet, our beloved Church seeks a unity in God built on respect, dignity of every person, and the humility grounded in our need for each other as we each seek to be faithful to the Gospel and need to hear how God is speaking to each of us and to the whole Church. Despite the sometimes pain of our differences – we are family in Christ.

As you can see, Nicholls is living in a fantasy world, where a fantasy church is undivided, unified and all live in harmony together. In our world, the Anglican Church of Canada divided in 2008 when parishes left en masse to join the Southern Cone and later ANiC. Those who remain are even less unified than in 2008 and, as we could see from the last General Synod, there was crying, wailing and people rolling on the floor in anguish. Delegates were not getting along with each other.

In fairness to Nicholls, though, she has been striving diligently for unity.

As this report predicts:

the results of a controversial study presented to Anglican bishops five years ago that said that at the present rate of decline – a loss of 13,000 members per year – only one Anglican would be left in Canada by 2061.

In the Diocese of Huron, no one has worked harder to close churches and watch as people flee than Nicholls. Today Huron, tomorrow the rest of the church until, by 2061, only one person will be left. Then we’ll have perfect unity.

New Anglican Church of Canada Primate marches in Pride Parade

Posted on by
9

Here is Archbishop Linda Nicholls along with other Anglicans from the Diocese of Huron getting ready to walk in the 2019 London Ontario Pride Parade.

I don’t recall seeing her predecessor, Fred Hiltz, in a Pride Parade. Such is the march of progress.

That’s a nice TiIley hat she’s wearing.

The State of Biblical Orthodoxy in the Anglican Church of Canada

Posted on by
6

A perceptive article by Rev. George Sinclair:

The Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) was in the news last week. Most reports missed the big story. That the forces of biblical orthodoxy narrowly won a battle was correctly reported. What was missed was that those same forces lost the war. How they lost the war is significant for those of us in orthodox denominations.

For a church to remain orthodox, it needs to change and develop. Keeping the status quo does not work. This sounds counter-intuitive but is true. Orthodox, biblical doctrine has to develop to meet new challenges that come against it. Most key developments in doctrine took place in the first few centuries of the Christian faith. New developments were required with the Reformation and its aftermath.

The last 50 years have seen new challenges to the Christian faith in the wake of massive cultural and intellectual changes connected to abortion, the sexual revolution, the LGBTQ+ movement, and very recently, the transgender juggernaut. At some point in time, a church, to remain orthodox, will have to clarify and/or add to its doctrinal statements to be clear about what the Gospel and the whole counsel of God clearly teach as being of first importance.

What would the FEB do?

I do not know what the specific doctrines of the Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches (FEB) are, but let’s use them as an example. Imagine that over the next year several FEB churches and Pastors started to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. I am sure that there would be calls to discipline those pastors and churches.

However, suppose the offending churches want to remain FEB, so they defend themselves against calls to be removed. The orthodox within FEB point out that the liberals have violated the doctrine of FEB. In their defence, the liberals say that to affirm something does not imply that something else is condemned or forbidden. They point out that the FEB rules/doctrines affirm monogamous heterosexual marriage, but the rules do not forbid other types of marriage.

The leadership of FEB replies that the exclusivity of heterosexual marriage has always been understood. The progressives reply to the effect, well, we now know things that people did not know before; now that same-sex marriage is legal in Canada, it is not the case that anyone reading the rules will assume that the rules forbid same-sex marriage; and, if you read the rules, they do not forbid same-sex marriage.

Now, let us be clear. This is not devious liberals finding a loophole. This is how thinking works, especially when there is a large, broad, powerful intellectual and cultural movement which now thinks differently than people did 50 years ago.

What could the FEB do? One thing is very clear, keeping the status quo will not work. If the FEB does nothing, then everyone can validly say that the FEB now allows same-sex marriages. In fact, if they do nothing, it will mean that they now accept the notion that different beliefs about marriage are valid, and are in fact just second or third-order issues, matters true Christians can disagree with each other over, like whether to sing hymns or praise songs.

We know that if this hypothetical situation ever developed, the FEB will deal with it as quickly as they can given their by-laws. Because they see themselves as being a biblically faithful, orthodox church, they will develop new denominational rules. They will amend their rules to make clear what the Bible and the Gospel teach and require, and it will clearly forbid what needed to be forbidden.

The FEB would view this as a first-order issue. After they had changed their rules/doctrine, they would go to those who dissent and call them to repentance and amendment of life, and if this, tragically, is refused, then I am sure the FEB would remove those churches and pastors who do not affirm the central, biblical, orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality.

What the Anglican Church of Canada did

My FEB example makes clear what has really happened with the Anglican Church of Canada. The forces of orthodoxy in the ACoC won a battle, but the most important thing about that Synod is that it is now very clear that the “war” is over, they are no longer orthodox and cannot become orthodox.

First some background. The ACoC had its triennial General Synod July 10-16 in Vancouver. Let me translate this for non-Anglicans. A “Synod” is a duly called authoritative meeting of Bishops, clergy and laity that can make authoritative decisions. A “General Synod” is the national synod that can make decisions affecting the whole church. It happens every three years.

To change the national “Canons” (think by-laws on steroids), requires that the proposed change gets approved by a minimum two-thirds majority in each “house” in two successive synods. In other words, two thirds or more of all Bishops, clergy, and laity vote in favour of the change.

At their meeting in 2016, the General Synod of the ACoC passed changes to the Canons that removed the heterosexual language of the Marriage Canon. In 2019, an overwhelming majority of the laity and clergy voted for the changes. But in the house of Bishops, they came two votes shy of passing the two-thirds mark. So the change failed. By the way, the courage of those who argued for the biblical teaching on marriage should be noted and applauded.

In 2016 the Chancellor of the ACoC made clear that just because something is affirmed does not mean that alternatives are rejected. He pointed out that there is nothing in the current Canons that forbids same-sex marriage. He said the same thing this year.

The General Synod then overwhelmingly passed a series of affirmations which made clear that it agrees with the Chancellor’s ruling. Listen to this, “We affirm that, while there are different understandings of the existing Marriage Canon, those bishops and synods who have authorized liturgies for the blessing of a marriage between two people of the same sex understand that the existing Canon does not prohibit same-sex marriage.” The House of Bishops made a similar statement.

It gets worse. The Synod overwhelmingly passed “Affirmations” that say that both views on marriage are held “with prayerful integrity;” that all sides on this issue hold their convictions “in good faith” and that “we hold dear their continued presence in this church;” and that “we affirm our commitment to walk together and preserve communion.” In other words, different views on marriage are at best a third-order issue.

This means that biblical orthodoxy has lost the war. To make the Canons clearly biblical, the ACoC will have to change the Canons to add something to the effect that they reject same-sex marriage as biblical and that this is a first-order issue. This is not possible.

It is a little known fact that 85% of Canada lives in a Diocese (Anglican speak for “region”) that is in favour of same-sex marriage – and actively supports Gay Pride parades. Only 2.5% of Canadians live in a Diocese that has both affirmed that the Bible teaches monogamous heterosexual marriage and that it rejects same-sex marriage. There is no way for the 2.5% to get over two-thirds of the votes in each house for two consecutive synods.

What is more, if you go online and read the different resolutions that were passed, you will not see an orthodox church in action. They deleted a prayer from their official Prayer Book which involved praying for the conversion of Jewish people and replaced it with a prayer that could have been written by a Unitarian. They affirmed and encouraged the programmatic use of The Arusha Call to discipleship from the World Council of Churches. They expressed gratitude for the Muslim document “A Common Word Between Us and You; ”directed that it become a signatory to the document; and encouraged Christian-Muslim engagement to be based on the document.

I was not at this General Synod, but if it was at all like the ones I have attended as an observer, you would have also heard the Holy Spirit regularly referred to as “she,” and a very careful removal of all male pronouns for God. I could go on. For over 22 years I was an ordained minister in the ACoC. I could truly say that while their practice was often not orthodox, at the official level of doctrine they were orthodox, and I could affirm its doctrine in good conscience, and so remain. This option is clearly not available any longer for 97.5% of the ACoC, and maybe for all 100%.

The Bible is very clear. Jesus is very clear. All sexual knowing and stimulation are reserved for those in the holy estate of the matrimony between one man and one woman. All people outside of marriage are to live a celibate life. Sexual knowing and stimulation outside of the covenant of heterosexual marriage is sin. This is so deeply and clearly taught in the Bible, and so clearly taught that it is important on many levels, that it is a first-order issue. A church which says otherwise is not a biblically faithful, orthodox church.

The Whole Ball of Wax acquires a new meaning

Posted on by
7

The Anglican Church of Canada is devoted to championing the marginalised in our society. Before anyone hastily jumps to the conclusion that the ACoC is against murdering babies in the womb, let me reassure your that they are not that prophetic. The ACoC prefers to campaign on behalf of LGBTQ (you can add any more characters, including special or numeric characters, that you like – it’s a bit like choosing a new password) individuals. The “T” for Transgender, is an interesting one. What would our learned bishops who, in addition to the L,Q,G and Bs, support and affirm the Ts because they are too cowardly not to, make of this?

From here:

There’s an important category in logic known as reductio ad absurdum, according to which you contradict an argument by showing that its general application will produce absurd results. It has been in my mind over the past fortnight or so, as I’ve followed a human-rights tribunal in British Columbia, Canada, and watched it deal with complaints made by trans woman Jessica Yaniv (or “Jonathan Yaniv”: The person apparently goes by both names) against three aestheticians. When it comes to the notion that “gender identity”—the self-declared, subjective feeling of being a man or woman—can reasonably be taken to trump biological sex in law and daily life, Yaniv presents us with a reductio ad absurdum on two legs.

For those who have not been following the case (which, oddly, has been covered by the international media, but mostly ignored by Canada’s own press), the details will sound unbelievable. Last year, Yaniv used social media to contact 16 female aestheticians in the Vancouver area, most working out of their own homes, who advertized Brazilian waxing—the removal of some or all of a woman’s pubic hair by applying and then yanking off strips of heated wax.

Sometimes, Yaniv would use the name Jonathan and a clearly male profile pic. Only then, upon being told that Brazilian waxing is for women only, would Yaniv reply to the effect of “I am trans.” The women would then convey that they were unwilling or unqualified to wax male genitalia. At this point, Yaniv would put in a complaint to the human-rights tribunal, alleging discrimination on the basis of gender identity, a protected characteristic under British Columbia’s human-rights code.

Diocese of Athabasca will abide by Marriage Canon vote

Posted on by
4

The Diocese of Athabasca is one of the few dioceses that is taking the failed vote to change the Marriage Canon seriously: it will not be marrying same-sex couples.

The diocese has also stated that the “Word to the Church” resolution, which did pass, is not an endorsement of a local option; most other bishops have the opposite view. Confusion and ambiguity walking together.

From here:

The one item of discussion that drew most of the attention and energy was the second reading of proposed changes to Canon XXl (the Marriage Canon). A change to this canon requires passage by a 2/3 majority in each of the orders (laity, clergy, and bishops) voting separately at two successive general synods. The proposed change achieved this in 2016 and thus was presented for the second time on July 12th. The resolution failed to pass in the Order of Bishops and was therefore defeated. This means the canon has not changed, and the church did not decide to part ways with the church’s doctrine. As had been foreseen, both the consideration and decision were very difficult and brought pain to those involved and those affected. The day before the resolution was considered, a “Word to the Church” from the Council of General Synod was adopted by the meeting, and this was reflected in a statement issued from the bishops on the Monday following the vote. These both recognize that we do not have unity in our thinking about marriage, understanding of scripture, or pastoral response. These also indicate a commitment to work together and to treat one another with dignity. These statements include an acknowledgement that some bishops, with their dioceses, have chosen to allow for some expression of same-sex marriage (what has been called “local option”). While some have interpreted this as affirmation or endorsement of “local option”, this is not accurate. The Diocese of Athabasca will continue to live within the bounds of the current canon and doctrine of the Church Catholic. While doing so, it is with the expectation that every person who comes to the church or who we encounter is treated with grace and honour. All who wish to live as disciples of Jesus are welcome as part of our Christian family.

Pastoral statements from the Dioceses of Central Newfoundland and Algoma

Posted on by
4

Mainline churches used to fear the Charismatic movement because of what they considered overly emotional displays seen during worship. Just as the liberal church has stolen much of the language of successful conservative churches – as if success is somehow embodied in the language – so, finally, liberals have appropriated Charismatic emotionalism. Except the emotions are throbbing waves of shock, pain, deep hurt, sobbing, anger, frustration, confusion and fear as you can read in the following pastoral statements. Along with enough hand-wringing, cloying, obsequious, grovelling apologies to be the envy of Uriah Heep.

Central Newfoundland’s  complete statement is here:

And Algoma’s complete statement is here:

Neither diocese has decided to proceed with same-sex marriage yet but, from these statements, it seem likely that they will. Among the many absurdities in the statements we find the inevitable “walking together”. Just as it is physically and spiritually impossible for two people of the same sex to marry, so it is physically impossible for two people to “walk together” when they are going in different directions.

Perhaps the bishops are relying on quantum entanglement to remain connected with each other as they drift further into the abyss.