Update:  My conscience has been bothering me about this post – I think the first version was unnecessarily rude, so I edited it a bit. 

..But despite what he called a “strong majority” (65 per cent in favour) and “a clear directive,” the diocesan bishop, John Chapman, cautioned that the approved motion was only “a recommendation and is not binding on the diocese or bishop.”

Anyone who thinks he won’t eventually approve the motion, raise your hand…

 

…After the vote, Bishop Chapman told a news conference he could not say when he would announce his decision on the motion, adding that he would take the matter to the House of Bishops, which meets later this month. He added that there would be more consultations with the diocese, and other Anglicans both at the national and international level. “I really don’t know when I’ll make a decision. I just want to see the ground settle,” he said, adding that his immediate concern was “for those who voted in opposition to the motion; I want to make sure that they’re okay.”

 

Oh Really? Then why the veiled threats against the orthodox priests in your charge?

…Bishop Chapman said approval of the motion does not mean that clergy can now bless same-sex couples. “I would expect the clergy to honour the decision-making processes in the diocese and that continues until a decision is made,” he said. “I expect them to toe the line.”

 

Well, it will be interesting to see your reaction in the event that they don’t.

…He also said that the motion does not set a deadline for his decision. “It could be one day to 10 years,” he said.

So much for clarity.

…Before announcing the result of the simple majority vote, Bishop Chapman told synod members that, “there are no winners or losers in this,” adding that, it’s nothing “to mourn or celebrate; it’s just where we are.”

I think that moving our church from the faith delivered to the saints to a pale copy of Unitarian Universalism is something to mourn, myself.


…Mr. Chaplin[the man who moved the motion] also expressed the hope that “we in North America and England, will really engage our partners in the Anglican Communion in a conversation about how we engage with our culture in bringing the message of the Gospel to our place.”

Don’t you mean, how we change the gospel to reflect our culture?

 

George Sinclair, rector of St. Alban’s, Ottawa, who is a member of the Anglican Network, a grouping of Canadian-Anglicans who believe homosexuality is contrary to Scripture, said that he was disappointed but not surprised by the vote. “It was a wrong decision which will continue to tear the fabric of the Anglican Communion,” he said. “It’s a departure from Anglican teaching.”

You tell ’em, Father George!

 

…In a prepared statement, Bishop Chapman said, “This decision will be welcomed by some but not by others. However, it is the Anglican way to allow diverse opinions to live in the same house. We expect that everyone, whatever their views, will respect this decision and that we can work together in unity.”

It is the Anglican way to allow diverse Christian opinions to live in the same house. See my comment above on universalism.

…He added: “Christians who are opposed to the blessings see this as a fundamental issue of Scripture, while those Christians in favour see it as a fundamental issue of bringing gays and lesbians fully into the full life of the church.” If people decide to leave the Anglican church, “for one reason or another, then they would walk apart … That is their decision and we will grieve their decision,” he added.

Who is walking apart from whom? Take a look at the wider Anglican communion for a hint….

During the debate at the plenary, Rev. Frank Kirby, rector of St. Barnabas church, urged the synod to vote against the motion calling it “a provocation and a serious flouting” of the requests of other members of the Anglican Communion for a moratorium on same-sex blessings and the consecration of gay bishops. “We’re pushing the envelope far beyond what our sister churches can tolerate.”

Good for you, Father Frank!

 

Among the priorities identified[in the strategic plan] are: leadership development, congregational development, communications, infrastructure, “seeking the seekers,” and “serving God’s world.”

Congregational development? I guess the good bishop hasn’t yet noticed that the healthiest congregations in Ottawa are the orthodox ones.

Pray for us folks, we surely need it.

Comments on: "An interesting article from the Anglican Journal" (12)

  1. […] Ottawa’s story; First We’ll Take Ottawa, then We’ll take Montreal. Hairy Eyeball: An interesting article from the Anglican Journal. What Kraalspace said …. […]

  2. I always love this type of episcopal attitude towards collegiality and discipline – you all must conform. I, on the other hand, am a complete law unto myself and not subject to anyone’s oversight. So what if globally (almost) everyone else disagrees, no one may tell me what to do and no other bishops may enter my diocese.

    Come see the Holy Spirit’s musings replaced by a majority vote at a legislative meeting…

  3. Sorry, forgot one thing.

    That the orthodox communities are the healthiest just illustrates the selective vision of the unorthodox.

  4. mrsfalstaff said:

    One of the great problems in our church is that Synod is no longer a meeting for the discernment of the Holy Spirit: it is nothing more than a political convention.

  5. anglicanessentialsmanitoba said:

    Great last comment about a political convention rather than a meeting for the discernment of the Holy Spirit.

    That is right on the mark! Thanks for articulating it so clearly.

  6. mrsfalstaff said:

    Can’t take credit for that observation, I’m afraid – my hubby came up with it.

  7. It is interesting to compare our modern legislative approach to synods with the model presented in Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council.

    At 15:7 we’re told there was much debate…the Greek text suggests quite an animated discussion. A little different than our tight timelines and controlled debate…future of the church at stake? We should be able to fit that debate in the 35 min between the morning liturgical dance and mid-day tea.

    At 15:25 that the response that was sent forth was sent with one accord. No simple majority or 2/3, or 60% or whatever bar we’ve seen set, but a resolution ‘with one accord’. That sounds to me like a mode of function in which the Holy Spirit would move.

    We’ve sold the farm down the road of political process, and replaced Scripture with Robert’s Rules of Order. Is it no wonder our primate can comment on a communion-breaking resolution in Ottawa by saying, ‘due process was followed’?

  8. mrsfalstaff said:

    No wonder at all, no wonder at all….

  9. Henry Troup said:

    “toeing the line…” sounded to me more like a warning against any unsanctioned blessings in the near-term, than cautioning the orthodox.

  10. mrsfalstaff said:

    Yes, well it will be interesting to see where the line is eventually drawn. By the way, Henry, glad to see you read my blog. I know you very well! I’ll buy you a coffee if you can guess who I am…..

  11. very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
    Idetrorce

  12. I would like to see a continuation of the topic

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: