Tag Archives: same sex blessings

Anglican conservatives: will sinners still be welcome?

Posted on by
1

This article also appears in the National Post:

I am a member of St. Hilda’s Anglican Church, the parish that was recently featured in the National Post article, “Oakville Anglican parish home of profound revolution.”

St. Hilda’s separation from the Anglican Church of Canada was as much about the fact that the Church is drifting away from a coherent belief in Christian basics – such as the Resurrection, Christ’s atoning sacrifice, and the Virgin Birth – as it was about blessing same-sex unions. In spite of this, what always gets the attention is the same-sex blessing issue, with the attendant suspicion that parishes that oppose same-sex blessings are packed with not just the routine run-of-the-mill church hypocrites, but homophobic hypocrites. At the very least, surely no gay person would be welcome in such a place.

Is being a pristinely antiseptic church where only wholesome families and saintly, celibate, straight singles could fit in – a kind of Stepford Church – an accurate picture of a parish like St. Hilda’s?

I hope not, or I will have to leave. I believe that, as William Temple former Archbishop of Canterbury said, “The church exists mainly for those who are not its members.” All parishes should concentrate on attracting people who are not Christians or churchgoers. Whether or not they are shacked up with someone – of the opposite or same sex – is immaterial. The hope, though, would be that their perspective and lives gradually change as they become followers of Christ in his Church.

That is very different from courting gays who are already in the church – or non-gays, come to that. I would much rather attend a church with a high percentage of un-churched gays who are honestly seeking to live according to the Gospel than one with a high percentage of straight cradle-Anglicans who are not. And I don’t think that this would necessarily be unappealing to a gay or straight non-Christian. To say, “we believe in trying to live according to Biblical principles, even though we all may fail to varying degrees” has, I suspect, a more honest ring than the note of desperation in, “come to our church and do what you want”.

St. Hilda’s has always attracted more than its fair share of single mothers, misfits, waifs, strays and assorted eccentrics – especially artists; the more the merrier. Many have passed through gaining sustenance along the way and some have made it their home. Sometimes it is chaotic: the pious have likened it to a circus. But unwelcoming? Never.

The people who gathered around Jesus were not all respectable: he was a friend to prostitutes, beggars and outcasts – sinners of every kind – and his friendship changed them.

Even though the most conspicuous reason cited for parishes leaving the Anglican Church of Canada is opposition to the blessing of same sex-unions, there is no desire on the part of these parishes to become aloof from the lost and broken – gay or straight. The one place that should always welcome all, including society’s misfits, is the Christian Church.

Bishop Michael Bird responds to the “Gaining Respect” article

Posted on by
5

The original article is here, and Bishop Bird’s response is in the Letters section of today’s National Post and on Holy Post:

Re: Gaining Respect; St. Hilda’s Parish Is No Longer An Outpost Of Orthodoxy But A More Acceptable Manifestation Of Anglican Faith, Charles Lewis, June 12.

After reading this article I am left asking the question: What criteria did reporter Charles Lewis use in declaring a small group of conservative Christians a “religious revolution”? What he reported on is, in fact, a process of maturation within the world-wide Anglican Communion. It is a lot like adolescence, as people jostle for position in the midst of a debate. Dioceses, like the one I lead, advocate for the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of our Church.

It’s hard to see exactly what point Michael Bird is making here: is he saying that it has taken 2000 years for the Christian Church to reach adolescence, that acts explicitly forbidden in the Bible become acceptable once those engaged in them have “matured”? It seems incoceivable that anyone could really be daft enough to honestly believe this; but, then, Bird does have some pretty strange ideas – see below.

For many of us, the kind of inclusion that Rev. Paul Charbonneau [who opposes same-sex unions, and who led St. Hilda’s Church out of the Anglican Church of Canada] speaks of is not acceptable.

The kind of inclusion that Rev. Paul Charbonneau believes is uncannily similar to the inclusion God advocates: everyone is welcome, but not all activities are equally good or beneficial to those who indulge in them. This is a pretty basic point: man is sinful and the church’s job is not to condone sin but help people turn away from it. Surely that should not be beyond the grasp of a bishop?

What is so ironic is that he is part of a small splinter group that represents less than 2% of Anglicans in North America. They would have us return to a way of thinking that is much closer to the last Reformation that began in the 15th century, as opposed to moving us toward a new Reformation.

The purpose of a Reformation is to return the church to orthodox Christian belief and discard the man-made accretions that tend to accumulate in the institutional church. The Diocese of Niagara is quickly becoming nothing but man-made accretions.

At the heart of our exciting vision for the Diocese of Niagara is a call for prophetic social justice making, a continuous culture of innovation and a strong desire to engage with the people of this generation and walk with them in their search for God and their desire to change the world.

This ends up being little more than leftist political activism.

As Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu has stated: “God just wants us to love each other.” Many, however, say that some kinds of love are better than others. But whether a man loves a woman or another man, or a woman loves a man or another woman, to God it is all love, and God smiles whenever we recognize our need for one another.

I don’t remember God’s injunction for us to love one another including optional genital activity: I must have missed those verses in the Bible.

I will leave it to your readers to decide what a religious revolution really looks like in this day and age.

I’ve decided.

Bishop Michael Bird, Anglican Diocese of Niagara, Hamilton, Ont.

The fanciful delusions of the Anglican Church of Canada

Posted on by
3

From here:

Human sexuality statement produces historic moment in the life of the church

Archbishop Colin Johnson, Diocese of Toronto, presents resolution A115: Affirmation of Sexuality Discernment to General Synod.

Through conversations, “marked by grace, honesty and generosity towards one another,” members of General Synod 2010 affirmed on Thursday, June 10 a resolution (A115: Affirmation of Sexuality Discernment) encapsulating discussions that took place through the work of various commissions and committees over the last triennium and at General Synod 2010 on human sexuality.

The statement acknowledges that there is no one view, perspective or experience within the Anglican Church of Canada. “For some, even this statement represents a risk. For some the statement does not go nearly far enough,” states the document.

“The statement reflects to the best of its ability the work of this Synod,” said Archbishop Fred Hiltz. “It is a statement that has a range of views within it and acknowledges the reality within our church.”

“Historic moment”? How can a moment when absolutely nothing has changed possibly be historic? After 3 years of studies, reports, reflections and theological position papers, the conclusion was that the Anglican Church of Canada can’t agree on whether to bless same-sex unions or not. The final document that was agreed on acknowledges that, calls for more study, by implication permits dioceses that are performing SSBs to continue and talks about how wonderful “conversation” is.

An historic moment where nothing has changed in the ACoC’s monotonous descent into a toxic soup of omnisexual neurosis.

I was so pleased to be present at the historic moment.

The Anglican Church of Canada is not obsessed with sex. At all.

Posted on by
4

Particularly not homosexual sex.

As Bishop John Chapman says:

It may be a hot-button topic in the mainstream media but the issue of human sexuality – including homosexuality – hardly saw the light of day at the gathering in England Feb. 24-26 of six African bishops and five Canadian bishops, including Bishop John Chapman. “We had an initial conversation on human sexuality on the first evening together and that was the last time we talked about it,” said the bishop in a recent Crosstalk interview.

It’s true that Bishop Michael Ingham has a web site dedicated to the subject and John Chapman hit the headlines of the Ottawa Citizen – but that was just a media plot to make him look as if he thinks about little else. The Anglican Church of Canada has a similar problem; this extensive Wikipedia article is clearly part of the same plot.

To show how far the enemies of the ACoC are prepared to go to make it look ridiculous, here is a remarkably lifelike simulacrum of Fred Hiltz describing how he went all the way to the UK to discuss unnatural sex with Rowan Williams. In spite of the patent absurdity of this hoax, it presents conclusive evidence that the concocters of this devious conspiracy have reached a worrying level of technical sophistication. You can see from this video that the counterfeit is almost as dull as the real thing; an astonishing achievement.

And so it begins

Posted on by
1

The UK government, under the guise of it’s Equality Mania, has lifted the ban on same-sex marriages in churches. What will happen next?

Traditionalist bishops and peers fear that vicars could be taken to court and accused of discrimination if they turn down requests to hold civil partnerships on religious premises.

Their concerns have been raised following a landmark vote by peers that will allow the ceremonies for same-sex couples to be held in places of worship for the first time.

In the interests of pressing home my advantage, if I were a gay man determined to legitimise my lifestyle, I would organise a series of gay church “marriages” as test cases; and sue the vicars if they refused to comply.

Anglican Church of Canada. General Synod 2010: doing the Indaba?

Posted on by
Reply

The Journal reports:

Issues of sexuality: At its last meeting, CoGS appointed a working group to recommend a process to discuss issues of sexuality. “I think…people feel the process should be driven more by conversation and discernment than by resolution and debate,” Archbishop Hiltz said.

These conversations will begin, he added, with updates from a Faith, Worship and Ministry committee as  well as the Primate’s Theological Commission and the House of Bishops.

This probably means that Hiltz will use some kind of Indaba-style diversionary tactic to prevent attendees addressing the same-sex blessing problem directly: more conversation, more discernment, more listening, more slipperiness. Since a number of dioceses are already blessing same-sex unions, they will continue and others will probably follow; and Hiltz will be able to claim he has not actually given them permission. This is known as leadership in the ACoC.

One might hope that the few conservatives still in the ACoC will see through the ploy and force the issue; a vain hope, I fear.