Tag Archives: same sex marrage

Anglican Church of Canada wants to know what you think about a proposed change to the marriage canon

Posted on by
8

The Anglican Church of Canada’s recently formed Commission on the Marriage Canon wants to know what you think about changing canon law to permit same-sex couples to marry in the church. To make submissions, you have to be member of the ACoC (I feel so excluded) so, if you are, let them know what you think. Apparently, they are obligated to publish all submissions as long as they don’t contain anything “objectionable”; I’m sure no one reading this would say anything objectionable.

I am reasonably certain of two things: 1) it’s going to happen no matter what anyone says; 2) thousands of words will be penned in an effort to obscure the truth of 1).

If I were of a cynical disposition, I might make the point that by submitting opinions that run contrary to the inevitable, you will merely be granting the commission the smug satisfaction of employing the well rehearsed strategy of declaring that they listened to diverse opinions – before ignoring those they didn’t like.

Submissions are made by filling out the form here.

From here:

Input from members of the Anglican Church of Canada is vital as the church enters this time of discernment. Commission chair, Canon Robert Falby, encourages broad participation in this process. “Commission members are aware of the strong feelings that many Anglicans have on the issues which it is looking at and we hope that we will receive input which reflects that spectrum.”

Submissions are welcome in both written and video form and must include the author’s name, parish or institution, diocese, and contact details. All of the commissioners will read or view each submission as they prepare their report.

The terms of reference for the Commission on the Marriage Canon require that all submissions to the Commission be posted on the national church’s website (www.anglican.ca). They will be reviewed prior to posting on the national church’s website. Submissions failing to conform to the Anglican Church of Canada’s existing code of conduct for online contributions will not be posted. Those making such submissions will be contacted and invited to revise their content accordingly.

Justin Welby vacillates about gay marriage

Posted on by
1

From here:

“We are struggling with the reality that there are different groups around the place that the Church can do — or has done — great harm to,” the Archbishop says. “You look at some of the gay, lesbian, LGBT groups in this country and around the world — Africa included, actually — and their experience of abuse, hatred, all kinds of things.” But he says: “We must both respond to what we’ve done in the past and listen to those voices extremely carefully. Listen with love and compassion and sorrow. And do what is possible to be done, which is not always a huge amount.”

The Archbishop adds: “At the same time there are other groups in many parts of the world who are the victims of oppression and poverty, who we also have to listen to, and who find that issue an almost impossible one to deal with.

“How do you hold those two things [in balance] and do what is right and just by all? And not only by one group that you prefer and that is easier to deal with? That’s not acceptable.”

The most senior bishop – the first among equals – in the Anglican Communion can’t make up his mind whether or not the church has, for the last 2000 years, mistakenly taught that homosexual activity is wrong.

The problem appears to be that, rather than do what the church has done for centuries – take its moral cues straightforwardly from the Bible – Welby is “struggling” with the fact that different groups of people have different opinions on the issue. This astonishing development has completely flummoxed him.

Clearly what is needed is a series of facilitated conversions on the next problem that will face the first among equals: if, for fear of upsetting one side or other, the Archbishop of Canterbury is unwilling to take a side on the issue that is tearing his church apart, why bother to say anything about anything; no-one is going to listen – not even if it’s facilitated.

Anglican Church of Canada marriage canon commission commences “listening”

Posted on by
2

Not necessarily hearing, though.

From here:

marriagecanoncommissionIn a few weeks, the Anglican Church of Canada’s commission on the marriage canon will invite Anglicans in Canada and across the Communion, as well church ecumenical partners, to offer their views about changing the marriage canon (church law) to allow same-sex marriage.

“…One of the things the commission wants to make clear is that everyone [in the commission] has an open mind,” said its chair, Canon Robert Falby, in an interview.

What this really means, of course, is that the commission will be working hard – very hard; it is their main task – to present the illusion of having open minds. After all the talking, alleged listening, indabas and theological papers that we have already been subjected to, any member of the clergy who has not yet made up and closed his mind on the issue has been living in a cave in Afghanistan.

Asked whether the commission reflects the “theological diversity” that the primate, Archbishop Fred Hiltz, had promised, Nicholls said, “I think the group reflects the ability to hear the theological diversity of the church.” She added that each member has demonstrated “an ability to hear, to listen, to reflect from all perspectives.”

To confirm my suspicion that the outcome is a forgone conclusion, Bishop William Anderson had this to say in a comment:

How reassuring that the promise of theological diversity has been replaced by the “ability to hear the theological diversity of the Church”. What this really means is that they will go through the motions of listening, and then present their own already expressed beliefs as representing a ‘fair’ outcome.
The Primate and the members of this panel should be ashamed for having so blatantly perverted a process that was intended to be balanced. All should be ashamed for being involved in this travesty.

Church of England decline halted

Posted on by
3

And that is the reason the CofE is considering blessing same-sex unions and allowing clergy in a same sex relationship to marry: to get it going again.

From here:

Official statistics issued recently suggest that attendance at C of E churches may have levelled out after decades of decline.

A report by the Archbishops’ Council, Statistics for Mission 2012, released on Friday 21 March suggests that, on an average Sunday in 2012 (the latest year with available data) about 859,000 people attended a C of E church. This compares with 901,000 in 2003.

World Vision to hire married same-sex couples

Posted on by
5

From here:

The prominent Christian relief agency World Vision said Monday it will hire Christians who are in same-sex marriages, a dramatic policy change on one of the most divisive social issues facing religious groups.

Oddly, the same article goes on to say:

“I want to be clear that we have not endorsed same-sex marriage, but we have chosen to defer to the authority of local churches on this issue,” Stearns said.

World Vision requires employees to affirm, through the agency’s statement of faith or the Apostle’s Creed, that they follow Christ. Stearns said the agency will continue to follow that policy, including requiring employees to remain celibate outside of marriage. World Vision says it hires staff from dozens of denominations with different views of gay relationships.

Stearns seems to be contradicting himself: he claims not to be endorsing same-sex marriage yet he is employing people in a same-sex marriage while requiring employees to remain celibate outside of marriage. Surely recognising same sex “marriage” as a true marriage is endorsing it.

Franklin Graham’s view of World Vision’s decision is here:

I was shocked today to hear of World Vision’s decision to hire employees in same-sex marriages. The Bible is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman.

My dear friend, Bob Pierce, the founder of World Vision and Samaritan’s Purse, would be heartbroken. He was an evangelist who believed in the inspired Word of God.

World Vision maintains that their decision is based on unifying the church – which I find offensive – as if supporting sin and sinful behavior can unite the church.

From the Old Testament to the New Testament, the Scriptures consistently teach that marriage is between a man and woman and any other marriage relationship is sin.

I stopped supporting World Vision in 2010 after its ambivalent attitude to abortion became apparent.

Fred Hiltz soft pedals changes to the marriage canon that will allow same-sex marriage

Posted on by
5

It’s nothing to worry about because: there can be no final decision before 2019 and who knows what could happen by then – Hiltz could retire, Jesus could return (a real shock to the ACoC, since it believes in the parousia as fervently as I believe in unicorns); other parts of the communion will be “consulted” (and ignored if they disagree); it will be discussed in dioceses (over and over and over again until the opposition weaken from exhaustion).

Anyway, no priest who is indifferent to his career prospects will be compelled to perform same sex marriages.

From here:

That question might be particularly relevant when it comes to controversial matters such as the resolution passed by General Synod in Ottawa, which asks the Council of General Synod to draft a motion to be considered by the next General Synod, when it meets in 2016, to amend the marriage canon to allow same-sex couples to marry, with a conscience clause that gives any clergy, bishop, congregation or diocese that objects the option of not participating. The primate said he had heard from bishops across the theological spectrum that they had experienced “a sense of peace” about the issue after General Synod 2010 published its pastoral statement, following its meeting in Halifax, which they did not experience after the resolution was passed this summer in Ottawa.

The issue is not for the House of Bishops to resolve; it is a matter for the Council of General Synod and the order of bishops in General Synod, Hiltz acknowledged, but he said he opened the discussion with the bishops, understanding that there are tensions and concerns around the issue.

“There’s been a huge effort in the life of the church to talk about this as a pastoral response, not a change of doctrine, and now it feels like the ground has shifted,” Hiltz said. The change to a question of doctrine creates difficulties in dioceses where bishops “have worked really hard to hold all voices and all people together,” and where some people are asking how this shift happened. The motion, he noted, came from individual members of General Synod, not the Council of General Synod or a diocese.

While the issue has been divisive, the primate said he did not have a sense of lines hardening within the House of Bishops. “We reminded one another that, because it is a doctrinal matter, it will take two successive general synods to do anything in terms of a final decision anyway, and between the first and second reading it would be discussed in provinces and dioceses.” The bishops considered the international reaction and said, “we ought not have this conversation in isolation, that we should be consulting with other parts of the Communion,” said Hiltz, who will relay the bishops’ input to CoGS.