By Jim Coggins
 |
| Victoria Matthews is the Anglican Bishop of Edmonton. |
THE ANGLICAN Church of Canada's House of Bishops issued a pastoral letter May 1 which could pull the church away from blessing same-sex unions.
The statement says, in part, that a "majority" of the bishops believe same-sex unions are not currently permitted by "the doctrine and discipline of our church".
The letter follows statements by 20 Anglican theologians, the Primate's Theological Commission, and the Provincial House of Rupert's Land, all opposed to recent resolutions that had asked the Anglican Church of Canada to endorse same-sex unions.
The House of Bishops includes over 40 bishops who meet twice a year for prayer and study. The pastoral statement was drafted at their most recent meeting, which took place last month in Niagara Falls, and was later finalized by email.
Neale Adams, communications officer for the Diocese of New Westminster, which has authorized the blessing of same-sex unions for the past four years, told CC.com the bishops are "respected leaders" in the church but "the governing body is General Synod" -- a gathering of about 400 bishops, clergy and laypeople who meet once every three years. They vote in three "houses", although the clergy and laity often vote together, with the bishops voting separately.
Core doctrine
In March, the Council of General Synod proposed five resolutions on the topic of same-sex unions, including one stating that "the blessing of same-sex unions is consistent with the core doctrine of the Anglican Church of Canada." The resolutions will be voted on by the next General Synod, which meets June 19 - 25 in Winnipeg.
Victoria Matthews, Bishop of Edmonton and chair of the Primate's Theological Commission, told CC.com that if the five resolutions were passed, "we will have taken a giant step as a church." However, she added that "many of the bishops . . . do not believe the doctrine of the church would permit us to vote in favour of the resolutions."
The bishops' statement, which was addressed to the delegates to General Synod, calls for a study and report on "the theological question [of] whether the blessing of same-sex unions is a faithful, Spirit-led development of Christian doctrine," which would be presented at the next General Synod in 2010.
Rationale
Matthews said it would be premature for delegates to vote on the question without sufficient theological work being done, adding that "not a single theological paper" has been written on the subject. She said that the bishops' letter was asking for a "theological rationale for the blessing of same-sex unions" and that if such a rationale cannot be found, "then we shouldn't pass [the resolutions]."
Although the bishops are unwilling to go as far as blessing same-sex unions at this point, Matthews said they are not denying that this is a real issue in the church. "We want to examine how generous we can be, given the present position," she said. "We are trying to find a middle ground and not be harsh."
Therefore, she said, the statement includes a number of "pastoral" provisions.
First, the letter states, "We certainly hope no child is denied baptism solely on the basis of the sexual orientation, or the marital status, of the parents. It is inconsistent and unacceptable to deny baptism to children as a way of imposing discipline on the sexual behaviour of the parents."
Matthews said this does not imply special consideration for gays and lesbians but is consistent with general Anglican practice. She affirmed that "no one is worthy of baptism," and that an infant coming to baptism should not be denied the grace of God because of the sins of the parents.
Second, the statement says, "We hope no baptized Christian will be denied communion or confirmation because of being in a committed homosexual relationship or because of their marital status."
Continue article >>
|
God's generosity
Matthews said this, too, is in keeping with general Anglican doctrine, which will refuse communion as a disciplinary measure only in very rare cases of notorious sin.
Citing Augustine's statement, "Without God we cannot; without us God will not," Matthews said that since we cannot be righteous without God, it does not make sense to deny God's grace to sinners. While recognizing the biblical caution against eating and drinking unworthily (1 Corinthians 11:27), she stated, "Anglicans always err on the side of God's generosity. We focus on God's grace more than God's judgment."
Third, the statement affirms the ministry of "the gay and lesbian licensed clergy of our church."
Again, Matthews said this is in keeping with Anglican practice over the past 28 years, which has fully opened ordination to gays and lesbians provided that they "live within the discipline of the church." It is assumed they will remain celibate, just like unmarried heterosexual clergy.
Finally, the statement encourages clergy to pray for and celebrate the eucharist with, but not bless, gay and lesbian couples who have been married in civil ceremonies.
Middle ground
The statement was approved by a majority of Canadian Anglican bishops, but not by all. The statement itself recognizes that there are some Anglicans "who fear that these pastoral provisions have gone too far" and some "who experience these pastoral statements and possible pastoral provisions as inadequate or insufficient."
Anglican Essentials Canada issued a statement by Donald Harvey, J.I. Packer, and David Short saying, "We also seek to practice generous pastoral care for persons of homosexual orientation" but that "accepting those in committed homosexual relationships to Communion" erroneously suggests "that gay and lesbian practice is, in principle at least, a form of Christian holiness."
They suggested that the "wiser and more biblical pattern of pastoral care for gay persons" would be to "do everything possible to fortify him or her against the practice of the sin."
On the other hand, Chris Ambidge, a spokesperson for the gay Anglican group Integrity Canada, told the Toronto Star that the Canadian bishops showed a lack of courage and leadership in not voting to endorse same-sex blessings as their American counterparts recently did. "Quite clearly what they want to do is derail the thing yet again," he said.
Matthews said the division is essentially a question of hermeneutics, or how one interprets the Bible, and is thus not easily resolved. "People are very clear on both sides," she said. Those who oppose same-sex blessings say that scripture clearly condemns homosexual practice, while "people in favour say the spirit of the teaching of the New Testament is one of saying all are loved, and the spirit of Christ is to wipe away distinctions and include all people."
Related stories:
Canadian Anglican bishops vote for status quo, reject same-sex marriage blessings
Canadian Anglican bishops issued a pastoral statement Tuesday that essentially rejects the blessing of same-sex unions but acknowledges there will be further votes on the matter when the church's governing body meets next month. The statement was posted on the Anglican Church of Canada website and will be sent to delegates of the church's General Synod in Winnipeg in June 19-25.
Canadian Press, May 1
Anglicans balk at gay blessings
Canadian bishops' surprise move leaves U.S. church alone on same-sex marriage
Toronto Star, May 2
May 10/2007
|
Heaven will be populated with redeemed sinners, but denial is more than a river in Egypt.
Anglican's seem to think that they have the right to add a codicle to the God's holy commnandment of "Love thy neighbor". AND, then teach others to do it too! There are no brackets in my bible that say (except if they are gay, lesbian, transgendered, etc).
It's a simple, easy to understand commandment. Christ even went further to clarify it! The Anglicans need to go back to their bibles and do a refresher course. Two people who love each other and want to be united in holy matrimony, should NOT be told the rules have been changed just for them. Are christians (who are by definition, followers of Christ and his word) doing this? Not according to my bible!
Rev. Connie Howes
Kingston, ON
US & Canadian Anglicans need to realize that their church has grown apart. Traditional or conservative Anglicans are too far apart on central issues from the liberal Anglicans to easily reconcile.
The genius of Protestantism is that it allows various groups of believers to freely live out their beliefs as they see fit; if they really can't agree they can split up and move on. (Not that there aren't weaknesses, too.)
Perhaps the most loving thing that Anglicans could do is to quietly divide themselves into two separate churches -- one for traditionalists, and one for liberals. This would save people from both camps the stress, despair, and ignominy of hammering at each other over the same issue decade after decade, without ever reaching consensus, at the expense of lots of other important issues.
If not, they may weaken Anglicanism in North America to the point of no return.
This has long been Dean Peter Elliott's agenda, from way back when he was still in the closet hypocritically manufacturing the ammunition for Archbishop Michael Ingram to fire in the gay blessings war.
Now, having risen as high in the bureaucracy [Prolocutor to the General Synod 2007] as he will in the current political climate Elliott, whose insatiable ego craves the crozier, is quetly working toward schism.
Equally hypocritically, the ACC turns a blind eye to the fact that Dean Peter Elliott is living in flagrant disobedience to church discipline, while punishing others for exactly the same 'crime'.
Elliott would not be my choice as a leader in any Christian Church; however, I agree that schism would now be the best for all concerned.