Tag Archives: same-sex marriage

Asking the wrong question about the conscience clause

Posted on by
2

There is a “conscience clause” that will permit clergy to opt out of marrying same-sex couples if a change is made to the marriage canon. The question was asked at synod whether legal action could be taken against a cleric who refuses to marry a same-sex couple:

t1 t2

This was the wrong question to ask. What should have been asked was: “if I do get sued will the Anglican Church of Canada pay for my defence?” The law will  not protect a clergyman – an expensive defence lawyer will. That will be the real test of the ACoC’s commitment to the conscience clause.

Preparing the fudge at General Synod

Posted on by
2

A plot is afoot to prepare delegates for something other than a yes or no decision for the marriage canon vote – resolution C003 – on Monday. The liberals fear that the vote will not go their way so machinations are underway to produce the desired result no matter what the outcome of the vote. Something less “binary”.

From here:

panel

But he [Dean Iain Luke] added that given the deep divisions that exist within the Canadian Anglican church on matters of doctrine, the church should look at new ways of framing its decision-making process that do not inevitably lead to a binary of winners and losers.

It was a position Ambidge agreed with.

“I don’t think the Westminster parliamentary system is serving us well for things other than budgets,” he said. “For things that hit us not in the head or the heart but the soul, I think we need to learn a whole lot from the Indigenous people, because Westminster is really not helping us at all.”

Here is the fellow on the left after he slipped into something more comfortable – less binary, perhaps – for the Pride Parade:

QueenChris

Same-sex marriage discussions begin at General Synod

Posted on by
5

Synod delegates have asked to discuss three seemingly innocuous questions:

After an introduction to the report of the commission on the marriage canon  presented by some members of the commission, General Synod members, seated at roughly 30 tables, were asked to discuss three questions with the others at their tables: What is your overall impression of the report? What does marriage mean to you? Has your understanding of marriage changed in your lifetime?

Whether same-sex activity is right or wrong is not being discussed. That is because the ACoC has already decreed that same-sex activity can be holy. Once you have gone that far, marriage is a small next step; conservative Anglicans have been fighting a rearguard action ever since and, short of a miracle – a commodity in short supply in the ACoC – the liberal juggernaut will roll on until it gets its way.

Since General Synod 12 years ago already affirmed the sanctity of adult, committed, same-sex relationships, Jennings said, “we did not see it as our job to reopen the debate as to whether homosexuality is fundamentally sinful or whatever—that is no longer the teaching of our church. I realize that for some of you, this might seem unsatisfactory, but it was not the question before us.”

For the thing which I greatly feared is come upon me

Posted on by
4

And that which I was afraid of is come unto me. Job 3:25.

What do Anglican Church of Canada clergy fear most? Losing their stipend.

General Synod 2016 has begun and a vote to change the marriage canon is scheduled for Monday. In the unlikely event it passes, the few remaining conservatives will have yet more incentive to leave. If it fails to pass, many dioceses are determined to proceed with same-sex marriages without the approval of synod. For the national church this would be ideal, since it accomplishes what their leaders want while allowing them to protest that no official approval has been granted. Either result signals further division resulting in more people leaving and less revenue for clergy salaries; a tragedy of biblical proportions. That which the bishops fear most is about to come upon them.

Hence, hot off the press from the synod ostrich farm, we have the quote of the day:

Fear

Diocese of the Arctic rejects changing the marriage canon

Posted on by
3

A small oasis of sanity in the vast desert of ACoC sexual neuroses.

Read it all in the Journal:

As the Anglican Church of Canada prepares for a controversial vote on whether or not to change its laws to allow for the marriage of same-sex couples, the diocese of the Arctic has sent a memorial to General Synod stating its commitment to maintaining the status quo.

The memorial, passed at the Arctic’s 2016 diocesan synod in May, also notes that the diocese seeks to “preserve the unity of the church,” and expresses a “sincere hope that [the diocese] can remain in fellowship and ministry with the Anglican Church of Canada, while standing with the larger Anglican Communion.”

Holy Matrimony “is a creation ordinance which is restricted to, and defined as, a covenant between a man and a woman,” the memorial says. “We seek to protect and promote this sacrament for the strengthening of the family, the stability of society, the unity of God’s church, and the common good.”

[….]

The diocese has been outspoken on matters of human sexuality in the past. In 2005, the Arctic’s diocesan synod amended its canon on the order and eligibility for licensing and banned employment of anyone involved in a sexual relationship outside of heterosexual marriage, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and those who willingly engage in sexual activities with a minor.

At the time, then Arctic Bishop Andrew Atagotaaluk and Bishop Larry Robertson (then suffragan of Mackenzie and Kitikmeot) explained that the law was passed to ensure diocesan employees maintained a lifestyle congruent with the diocese’s understanding of biblical sexual ethics.

While the memorial states that the diocese is “committed to human flourishing, equal opportunities, dignity and justice for all,” it is not clear whether this commitment to “equal opportunities” indicates a change in official diocesan hiring practices.

Bishop of Montreal will vote for same-sex marriage

Posted on by
11

Bishop Mary Irwin-Gibson will vote in favour of same-sex marriage at the July General Synod. It’s hard to see how she could do otherwise since she has a number of clergy in her employ who are civilly married to other men.

The reasons she gives for her decision live up to the high standard of language-twisting set by other Anglican Church of Canada bishops. The church, she says:

“has the right and obligation to prayerfully consider new things and not simply to march in lockstep with society,” said Gibson. But, she added, “neither are we to remain stuck by interpretations of Biblical principles, which not everyone shares.

Except, of course, the new thing here requires precision marching in lockstep with society and to discard 2000 years of biblical understanding because not everyone agrees is to discard the entire bible since, well, not everyone agrees.

She continues by claiming the vote in favour makes her an ambassador[s] of reconciliation:

“If we are to be ambassadors of reconciliation, disciples of Christ, I see the potential in ministering grace and sacraments to more people and in calling all married couples to be models of Christian discipleship and hospitality.”

Except, the Anglican obsession with homosexuality has already shattered the Anglican communion so it can hardly be a reconciling influence.

She claims that:

We will not all agree but we are one body.

And:

it is possible to achieve unity in diversity

Except that we have not been one body since Gene Robinson was consecrated and the diocese of New Westminster began blessing same-sex couples. Even Justin Welby has had to admit that there is no unity.

It sounds as if the Diocese of Montreal has decided to perform same-sex marriages even if the vote fails:

Several dioceses are more than ready to go ahead and some don’t ever see that day coming. The chancellor of General Synod is being consulted and we will see what happens after General Synod concludes.

The Shared Episcopal Ministry has withered away, as, surely, the conscience clause allowing clergy to refuse to marry same-sex couples would, too:

The bishop also confirmed that since she assumed the episcopacy almost nine months ago a compromise arrangement known as Shared Episcopal Ministry, instituted by her predecessor, Bishop Barry Clarke, in 2011, to accommodate six clergy and several parishes who saw him as too favourable to same-sex marriage has been allowed to lapse.

Taken together, in context, Mary Irwin-Gibson’s charge to synod was, even allowing for the fact that she is an Anglican bishop, a masterpiece of prating twaddle.

Primate Fred Hiltz suspects there might be stress at General Synod over same-sex marriage

Posted on by
3

Fred Hiltz, as perceptive as ever, has realised that, whichever way the vote over same-sex marriage goes in July, some people will leave aggravated. A vote for will upset the few remaining conservatives and a vote against will upset the disproportionately high number of homosexual clergy. This is all a repeat performance of the lamentations and appeals for unity that accompanied the voting over same-sex blessings in prior synods. Then, as now, the so-called unity is bogus. Also bogus were the assurances that same-sex blessings would not lead to same sex marriage. Does anyone truly believe that priests will not be compelled to perform same-sex marriages if the vote goes that way?

Hiltz has as much as admitted that the whole synod exercise will be a vacuous farce since, even if the same-sex marriage motion is voted down – as it probably will be – dioceses will go ahead with it anyway.

Still, at least the synod will be green, that’s the main thing.

From the Anglican Journal:

“No doubt in this synod there will be some stress and some strain, but I hope and pray that in the grace of the waters of baptism in which we have been made one with Christ, that we will be able to continue to do our work in synod and that we’ll know that in the midst of it all, we are, in fact, members one of another.”

This General Synod, the 41st in the history of the Anglican Church of Canada, is expected to be momentous, involving as it does a vote to change the church’s canon (law) on marriage.

“That’s a fairly huge issue for our church, so I think people who come to this General Synod will rightly have some anxiety about that,” says General Synod Deputy Prolocutor Cynthia Haines-Turner, in another video released by the office of General Synod.

It also seems likely that, whichever way the estimated 269 delegates assembling in Thornhill, Ont., July 7–12 vote, the impact will be felt in Anglican churches across Canada. In an April 12 interview, Hiltz told the Anglican Journal that bishops are concerned that clergy and parishes may decide to leave the church if the vote is not acceptable to them. (Avowals to this effect have also been made by followers of the Journal’s Facebook page.) Hiltz also said he believed some clergy, if faced with a “no” vote, might decide to marry same-sex couples anyway.

As a fitting summary of the mess, Hiltz utters two tautologies followed by an appeal from the Beatles:

Hiltz said that as he reflected recently on the upcoming General Synod, the words from an Anglican night prayer came repeatedly to mind: “What has been done has been done. What has not been done has not been done. Now let it be.”

Diocese of Rupert’s Land plans to proceed with same-sex marriages

Posted on by
9

The bishop of Rupert’s Land has issued the following statement that clearly says – amidst the usual faux-pious gobbledegook – that he intends to go ahead with marrying same-sex couples in spite of the fact that the motion to approve same-sex marriages won’t be voted upon until the next general synod, that it is unlikely to pass anyway and that it could not receive final approval until 2019.

Fred Hiltz has already received an oracle  that this was bound to happen; I suppose Phillips, having seen that, thought to himself: “Why wait?”

An Update from the Bishop on Same-sex Marriages in our Church May 23, 2016.

It is my hope that this brief pastoral update will be helpful to members of our Diocese. Since the communication from the House of Bishops and the response from the Council of General Synod regarding the proposed change to the marriage canon back in March, 2016, I have noted both the interest and concern around how I view same-sex marriage in our Diocese, as well as the confusion and anxiety about what my approach to same-sex marriage might be.

Through continued prayer, listening to many voices, studying the Commission’s report, This Holy Estate, and much conversation, I am able to offer the following, hopefully straightforward, statement: I am convinced that the time has come for the provision for same-sex marriages in our Diocese to become reality. I am committed to working toward making that happen both as soon as responsibly possible, and in a grace-filled manner that minimizes the impact for those who struggle with this issue – both within and beyond our Diocese.

How this needs to take place is yet to be determined and it is important that I, our other delegates to General Synod, and all of the members of our Diocese, remain open to the leading of the Holy Spirit in discerning that path.

Yours [not in any way, shape or form – editor] in Christ,
Donald Phillips, PhD
Bishop of Rupert’s Land

Some priests likely to marry same-sex couples even if marriage canon change fails to pass

Posted on by
4

Fred Hiltz has suggested that even if the vote to change the Marriage Canon fails to pass at General Synod, some priests will ignore the fact and go ahead with same-sex marriages anyway. Although Hiltz frames it as “civil disobedience”, I am left with the impression from the article below that, by mentioning it at all, he is dropping a broad hint to liberal dioceses as to how they should proceed.

The same strategy was adopted by the national church in 2010 when at the General Synod, while approval was not given for dioceses to start blessing same-sex unions, it was understood that many dioceses would still do so. And they did. An easy solution for Hiltz, since he was absolved of responsibility and liberal dioceses got what they wanted.

In 2010 we had the local option for same-sex blessings, along with the assurance that there would be no same-sex marriages.

In 2016 we will have the local option for same-sex marriages along with the assurance that no priests will be compelled to perform them.

In 2022 we will have…. well, you get the drift.

Some bishops have expressed concern about the possibility that some priests may go ahead and marry gay couples in the event that a resolution changing the marriage canon to allow same-gender marriages is rejected at General Synod this summer, said Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada.

“If it’s not approved, then, as we sometimes, say…there could be some ‘civil disobedience’ on the part of clergy and parishes, and the bishops are going to have to handle that, because all of us that are ordained make a solemn promise to conform to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Anglican Church of Canada,” Hiltz told the Anglican Journal April 12. Hiltz made the comments during an interview on the House of Bishops meeting last week, April 4–8.

Asked to clarify if by “civil disobedience” he meant same-gender marriages in defiance of a “no” vote, Hiltz replied, “That’s a possibility. Bishops are aware of that. We’re mindful of our need to reach out to those who are going to be hurt or offended by a decision of General Synod.”

Canadian bishops all get a copy of Michael Coren’s new book

Posted on by
5

Coren’s book about how he came to support same-sex marriage has been distributed to all Canadian bishops – as if they needed any encouragement in that direction. Here is Michael Bird’s response:

book

Coren hopes it will do “some good”, as if such a thing were likely to result from a rather disgusting betrayal of his former principles:

Capture