In 2014, the Anglican Church of Canada set up a commission to consider whether the marriage canon should be changed to include marrying same sex couples. The chair of the commission announced that “everyone [in the commission] has an open mind”. It’s hard to believe, I know, but some were suspicious of this declaration of openness; after all, in Angli-speak, an “open mind” is code for “we’ve made up our minds but we want to lull the gullible into a false sense of security”. “Open mind” is just so much more succinct.
To bolster the façade, the commission invited Anglicans to submit their opinions and many have done just that.
Now the report is ready for at least internal consumption, it appears that the sceptics were right. Bishop Linda Nicholls has clearly stated that the commission did not try to determine whether there is any Biblical or theological warrant for marrying same-sex couples. Its task, she says, was to squeeze from the Biblical texts a justification for marrying same sex-couples whether one exists there or not: Anglican sophistry at its finest. Apparently, this revelation is “still not being heard”. This can only mean that the level of deceit has reached such proportions that the few remaining members of the ACoC have turned off their hearing aids in disgust.
My emphasis:
Bishop Linda Nicholls, commission member, spoke about the content of the report and initially about the commission’s mandate. “Our task was to provide the support for a change to the marriage canon. It wasn’t a debate whether a change was necessary or right to do, that will be the determination of General Synod,” she said. “It is a fine point but it is one we have to keep telling people because it is still not being heard.”
The report will include a consideration of the Solemn Declaration of 1893 (which established the Anglican Church of Canada), a consideration of the biblical and theological rationale for same-sex marriage, the wording of an amendment to the marriage canon to permit same-sex marriage, including a conscience clause. “We gathered a legal opinion on the conscience clause and how it might be worded so that it could provide the space for all members of the Anglican Church of Canada if it this were too pass,” said Nicholls. “The largest section will be the biblical and theological rationale,” she added.
Despite protestations that there are more important factors in being an Anglican than sex, Fred Hiltz has finally admitted that sex really is the uppermost thing on the minds of pastorally sensitive clergy. We all knew that. Even Michael Coren knows that.
“What’s churning in my gut and rumbling through my soul is that this matter is one of the most critical and crucial matters before our church”
“… a consideration of the biblical and theological rationale for same-sex marriage”. They’ve got their work cut out, because there isn’t any. As I told them plainly.
Yes, Dr. Turner, you did. Thank you for the clarity that you provided.
Thanks so much for your submission. Unimpeachable, I think.
Thanks for that. Sadly one can never hope to argue someone out of a position that he was never argued into in the first place. Prayer is vital now. I say as I have said before, the Lord is not surprised by any of this, hard though life may be for those who have to deal with it.
They were seeking to find out whether ” change was necessary or right to do” but how can we do what we want and still make it sound “Christian” whether or not God would agree with it or condone it.
Finding ways to endorse vice… ew.
But the Green party in the UK has just endorsed polygamy. So much work incoming for these people (although it beats working for a living, hey?)
Whoa…………hang on now. Judging from the average age of the Anglican Church congregant, hearing aids are just one of many items that need ‘turned up’!
Considering the actions that the ACoC has taken against orthodox Christians by not only evicting them from properties but legally stealing those for which they made no contribution, I am not in the least surprised at the attitude of the apostates that are leading this drive to pervert the authority of Scripture. The time has long since past for these apostates to recognize it takes more than a purple shirt and a white collar to make a bishop. Every single one of them should be defrocked.
Hear! Hear!
Please understand that when they say “everyone [in the commission] has an open mind” it must be understood in the following context:
– by definition, people who disagree with them do not have open minds
– people who disagree with them would not, of course, be chosen for the commission
– thus everyone on the commission certainly has an open mind.
Those of you who think this is circular reasoning probably don’t have open minds.
I’m so thankful to be out of that mess.
David, that is exactly how I read the Anglican Journal article. The status quo was never a consideration for the commission. Their work focused solely on how to justify making the change in the marriage canon.
Hang on now………….none of my best friends are Anglican Bishops.
So if am reading this correctly what is going on is a decision has already been made to do something and they are now trying to change God so that He will agree with them. Sad.
Again I say it is the civil servant mentality. The answer has already been made…..the rest of it is just window dressing. Its all part of the ‘via media’ concept.
No matter how many canon lawyers dance on the pinhead of progressive revelation
there can be no “conscience” clause for Christ, The Living WORD.
+ Mark 10
“From the beginning of the Creation,GOD made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his
wife……”
Here is Jesus Christ’s “conscience” clause:
“And if any man hear My Words, and believe not, I judge him not;
for I came not to judge the world, but to Save the world.
He that rejecteth Me, and receiveth not My Words, hath one that judgeth him:
The WORD that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” + John 12.
There you go again blaming lawyers. Why isn’t it the treasurers…….or the public relation spin doctors…………or ………….. Geez, always with the lawyers. Enough already.
I believe the reference to blaming lawyers is a bit of a pun. The fact is the only persons to blame are the apostate so-called bishops that are determined to pervert the Scriptures under the guise of “political correctness” – a deceptive term in itself. The ACoC has decended so far into the pit of apostasy I doubt it will survive another ten years. I am confident there are many orthodox lawyers within the Anglican Communion and perhaps in the ACoC in which case it is time for them to stand up and speak out.
Frank, might I suggest that getting lawyers to agree on anything would be in and of itself akin to re-inventing the wheel. The very nature of law and its practice is not conducive to consensus building. I do agree that the ACoC is unlikely to survive another 10 years.
When was the last time you heard a criminal lawyer actually ask the client: “did you do it”?
Canon lawyers: the Scriptural equivalent of the post-Exilic, extra-Scriptural ubiquitous class of Scribes – our LORD’s most relentless and inveterate of enemies, summoning their extra-Scriptural “ultimate authority on faith and practice” over against His Supreme Authority as The Living WORD of GOD. In his penultimate inquisition, they take their leading part, + Matthew 21, 22(35):more careful to cavil for a “conscience clause” for Caesar than one for Jesus Christ.
The most current, yesterday, May 16, example: the anti-Scriptural Scribes of The General Assembly of The Church of Scotland whose anti-Scriptural counsel has permitted its Commissioners to vote in favour of actively gay Clergy (2013:369+ 189-); and in favour of gay Clergy in civil partnerships ( vote on ssm on May 21, 2015 ) 2015:309+ 182-) thereby de-constituting its Church. How? The Glasgow ‘Herald” heralds this as a triumph “since its inception in 1560”.
Its inception is set out in the 19th Article of its Scots Confession (1560) constituting “the true Kirk”‘s One, Sola Source of Authority to be The Eternal Living WORD of GOD, + Genesis 1 + John 1 + Revelation, said “Authority nether to depend on men or angels”.
To do otherwise is not “always to hear and obey the Voice of her own Spouse and Pastor”. Hereby “the true Kirk” has become the false Kirk.
And her spouse and pastor?? Perhaps some angels + Isaiah 14.
Definitely some men + Genesis 19!
What import for the Anglican Communion? Every, for the Reformed root of both grows from the same tree – a tree about to be lopped again
in the PCC here in Canada by another “Scribe” ( of a conjugal misalliance with the ACC) and his at first online anonymous open letter of July 2014; now “out” as an (even by observed polity, irregular) “proposal” – indecent at that!
I did not know that Scots were like that.