An earlier article today on this upcoming vote was here.

Update: An Ottawa Citizen article is now here.

Bishop John Chapman of Ottawa said Friday that regardless of the outcome of a motion asking him to allow same-sex blessings in the diocese he expects clergy and laity to “continue their work and ministry embracing our differences rather than fretting over them.”

In the bishop’s charge during an opening eucharist of the 125th session of the diocesan synod of Ottawa, Bishop Chapman explained that the motion on same-sex blessings is asking the bishop, not the diocese, to decide on whether same-gender unions should be allowed.

The synod is expected to debate and act on the motion before the end of its two-day synod Saturday, Oct. 13. It is the first diocese to consider the matter since the triennial General Synod, the Anglican Church of Canada’s national governing body, agreed in June that same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with core church doctrine, but declined by a slim margin to affirm the authority of dioceses to offer them.

“The motion is asking the synod of the diocese of Ottawa to make a recommendation to the bishop regarding the blessing of those civilly married according to the laws of the government of Ontario,” said Bishop Chapman. “Please be aware that this motion is calling for a recommendation in the positive or in the negative. The diocese is not being asked to make the decision.”

Read it all.

An Elgin St. church might stop marrying straight couples if blessing same-sex unions isn’t endorsed at the Anglican Diocese of Ottawa’s annual synod in Cornwall later this week.

“If we can’t marry everyone who comes to us in faithful union, we won’t marry anyone,” said Rev. Canon Garth Bulmer, who introduced a motion that Ottawa’s bishop allow clergy “whose conscience permits” to bless same-sex unions.

“If gay people cannot have equal access to the sacraments of St. John’s Church, we won’t do the sacrament of marriage. It’s a symbolic act which would be a gesture of solidarity.”

Bulmer hasn’t yet decided to take that step but his church council has discussed it as controversy swirled around Canadian Anglicans and threatened to split the church.

Read it all.

The diocese of Ottawa’s regularly scheduled synod will decide Oct. 12-13 whether to request its bishop to grant permission for clergy to bless same-sex relationships.

It is the first diocese to consider the matter since the triennial General Synod, the Anglican Church of Canada’s national governing body, agreed in June that same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with core church doctrine, but declined by a slim margin to affirm the authority of dioceses to offer them.

The Ottawa motion, moved by Ron Chaplin, a member of the diocese’s branch of Integrity, a support group for gay Anglicans, and Canon Garth Bulmer, rector of St. John the Evangelist, reads: “Be it resolved that this synod requests that the bishop grant permission for clergy, whose conscience permits, to bless duly solemnized and registered civil marriages between same-sex couples, where one party is baptized; and that he authorizes an appropriate rite and guidelines for its use in supportive parishes.”

The new diocesan bishop, John Chapman, said in a statement that if the motion passes, “it will leave the matter with the bishop to render a decision.”

Read it all.

Bishop Epting blogs about the questions he got at an adult forum at a small parish in Louisiana. Here’s an excerpt:

I presided at the Eucharist and preached at a small mission congregation in the Diocese of Louisiana this morning. Before the liturgy, I led an adult forum with about 15 folks around a table in the parish hall. After an overview of the House of Bishops meeting and a little bit on our ecumenical relations, I opened the floor for their questions.

Lots of concern about the “September 30 deadline” (which, of course, is not a deadline but as the Archbishop of Canterbury has reminded us “perception is reality” in real life). I spoke of my hopes that we will find a way forward, and then said something like:

“Two things I hope you’ll hold in tension: I want you to be concerned about these larger issues, about the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, and all the rest of it. But, bottom line, no matter what happens at this House of Bishops meeting, it doesn’t have to derail your local efforts. The cutting edge of our mission and ministry is the local congregation and you need to build a healthy and vital congregation!”

A 40-something big guy, with a red face and tears in his eyes said, “I disagree with you. What happens does affect our local congregation! I invite people but nobody in this part of the world wants to come to a church where, when you open the paper, is all about gay bishops and being thrown out of the world wide communion!”

I conceded that there are local consequences, but reminded him that I was only arguing for some balance in all this”¦that we shouldn’t be consumed by “the issues” but dedicate ourselves to mission. Then we went on to the predictable argument about “do we believe the Bible or not”¦why won’t the bishops defend the plain Scriptural truth”¦why is the Episcopal Church going against worldwide Christian opinion on these matters, etc., etc., etc.”

The full entry is here.

The diocese of Ottawa’s regularly scheduled synod will decide Oct. 12-13 whether to request its bishop to grant permission for clergy to bless same-sex relationships.

It is the first diocese to consider the matter since the triennial General Synod, the Anglican Church of Canada’s national governing body, agreed in June that same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with core church doctrine, but declined by a slim margin to affirm the authority of dioceses to offer them.

The Ottawa motion, moved by Ron Chaplin, a member of the diocese’s branch of Integrity, a support group for gay Anglicans, and Canon Garth Bulmer, rector of St. John the Evangelist, reads: “Be it resolved that this synod requests that the bishop grant permission for clergy, whose conscience permits, to bless duly solemnized and registered civil marriages between same-sex couples, where one party is baptized; and that he authorizes an appropriate rite and guidelines for its use in supportive parishes.”

The new diocesan bishop, John Chapman, said in a statement that if the motion passes, “it will leave the matter with the bishop to render a decision.”

Read it all.

The Right Rev. John Holland Chapman was installed Sunday night as the ninth bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Ottawa at a service at Christ Church Cathedral.

Elected last March, and ordained bishop in May, the new bishop ceremonially knocked on the door of the 1873 church, to gain entry.

The doors were opened by the cathedral wardens, as the bishop was welcomed by the Dean of Ottawa, the Very Rev. Shane Parker. “We welcome you to your Cathedral Church of Christ, the symbol and centre of your pastoral, liturgical and teaching ministry in this diocese of Ottawa,” he said

Read it all.

Vic West priest Rev. Antonio Osorio has admitted contravening the sexual misconduct policy of the Anglican Diocese of British Columbia and resigned from his position.

Osorio had been suspended from his duties as rector of the parish of St. Saviour’s Victoria West on Sept. 5, pending investigation into an allegation of misconduct.

The diocese issued a statement today saying there will be no further comment regarding the investigation until it is completed. Osorio was unavailable for comment.

Read it all.

Rev. Antonio Osorio, the rector at St. Saviour’s Anglican Church, has resigned his position after admitting to sexual misconduct.

A statement issued by the Anglican Diocese of B.C. said Osorio was suspended from his duties Sept. 5 pending an investigation into an allegation of sexual misconduct. On Wednesday, Osorio admitted to the allegation and offered his resignation, the statement said. It was accepted.

Read it all.

“We’re ready to go,” Rector Emma Vickery said of the church’s preparedness to start blessing committed same-sex unions.

“We’re ready to uphold and give a place for people to feel welcome. And when the time comes, we will be the first ones at the door.”

Maybe, but the identity statement approved by members of St. George’s Sunday doesn’t exactly read like an act of defiance. The document says such a blessing will only happen if the Bishop of the Edmonton Diocese is agreeable. And Victoria Matthews made it clear this week that such a blessing won’t be happening during the time remaining on her watch.

“As a bishop, I make a solemn promise to uphold the doctrine and discipline of the Anglican Church of Canada,” said Matthews, who recently announced she is stepping down from the post she has held for 10 years.

Read it all.

Varying interpretations of the decisions made in June by General Synod about human sexuality have already led one Canadian parish to publicly offer blessings to same-gender unions, and another to say that it would not deny a parishioner’s request for a same-sex marriage.

During its seven-day national meeting in Winnipeg last June 19 to 25, the church’s highest governing body approved a resolution saying that same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with the church’s core doctrine but defeated another that would have given dioceses the power to offer them in churches.

Rev. Jim Ferry, who was fired in 1991 for defying his bishop’s order to end a homosexual relationship, believes there is enough ambiguity in those decisions that it is left open to dioceses and churches to offer same-sex blessings. (Although he lost his licence in the ’90s, he has since been given some duties at Holy Trinity church in downtown Toronto.)

“I think at first there was some confusion (regarding the decisions on sexuality). But after having reflected on them, it seemed that the most important of the two resolutions (the one stating same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with Anglican core doctrine) had passed,” said Mr. Ferry. “It’s very positive. It moves us out of the realm of canon law into pastoral decision making.”

Read it all.

Davies-Flindall has not always felt strongly in favour of same-sex blessings. She started “with the question” and soon associated advocating for this issue with her humanitarian work through the Primate’s World Relief and Development Fund.

“I hear stories of people who feel deeply about a church they think of as their own, but don’t feel accepted in it,” she said. “People said ‘I love this

church but I can’t stay.’ It made me understand that I need to look more seriously at the argument.”

The issue is around same-sex blessings rather than same-sex marriage because when it first arose, the latter was not legal in Canada, Oulton said. Same-sex blessings involves the church blessing a civil union that was legalized elsewhere. The issue has affected many Protestant denominations, he said.

Oulton will not say if he is for or against same-sex blessings, only that the church should proceed “very carefully.” Any movement needs broader consensus, he said.

“The push is very divisive at this stage of the game,” he said. “My feeling is that we need to continue to have the conversation. It’s trying to sort out the mind and will of God, which is complicated at the best of times.”

He also felt that people were frustrated with the votes at General Synod.

“I don’t think we did what we were asked to do at all,” he said. “People were very frustrated. I really believe it’s critically important we encourage diverse people with diverse viewpoints to stay at the table.”

Read it all.

Among the questions that have arisen are: What does the approved motion stating that “the blessing of same-sex unions is not in conflict with the doctrine of the Anglican Church of Canada” mean? Can clergy and dioceses now conduct same-sex blessings? Some bishops have issued pastoral letters asking clergy not to conduct same-sex blessings — can priests be disciplined if they ignore this directive? How can clergy be disciplined if General Synod already declared that same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with the core doctrine of the church? What does the defeat of the motion affirming the authority of dioceses to offer same-sex blessings mean?

And, for the Diocese of New Westminster, which approved such blessings in 2002: Do the decisions mean an end to the moratorium on blessings? (In response to the House of Bishops’ agreement in 2005 not to encourage nor initiate same-sex blessings “until General Synod has made a decision on the matter” New Westminster had voted to impose a moratorium on allowing any new parishes to permit same-sex blessings; those parishes which already received the bishop’s approval were permitted to continue.)

At least seven of the church’s 30 diocesan bishops have issued pastoral letters stating that General Synod has decided that same-sex blessings are still not permitted. Thirteen have not yet issued pastoral letters; the rest offered reflections or reiterated the pastoral response issued by the House of Bishops in April. (The pastoral response stated in part that civilly-married lesbian or gay couples may, with the bishop’s permission, celebrate a eucharist that includes intercessory prayers, but not an exchange of vows and a nuptial blessing.)

Ronald Stevenson, General Synod chancellor (legal advisor), declined to comment on the questions when reached by the Anglican Journal.

The Rev. Alan Perry, an expert on canon law from the Diocese of Montreal, said the motion that blessings are not in conflict with the church’s core doctrine is a “declarative” but not an “enabling” motion, “which would contain some mechanism or permission to act in a certain way.” It does, however, “clear the decks for future action on blessing of same-sex unions by some body or other, ” he said.

It all feels like they are living in a world where it comes down to what the meaning of “is” is. I find the muddledness and confusion baffling. If one is going to do something, then do it clearly and unambiguously, and if not, then make it clear you are not forthrightly. This miasma of a cacophony of different interpretive voices drowns out, in my view, any real common life for the church as a whole in question, in this case the Anglican Church of Canada. At a time when the whole Anglican Communion is struggling, this is most unfortunate. Read it all–KSH.

With about seven weeks to go, hope for a unified Communion is not any brighter than it was seven months or ten years ago. Rather, the intransigence of those who reject Biblical authority continues to obstruct our mission and it now seems that the Communion is being forced to choose between following their innovations or continuing on the path that the church has followed since the time of the Apostles.

We have made enormous efforts since 1997 in seeking to avoid this crisis, but without success. Now we confront a moment of decision. If we fail to act we risk leading millions of people away from the faith revealed in the Holy Scriptures and also, even more seriously, we face the real possibility of denying our Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ.

The leadership of The Episcopal Church USA (TECUSA) and the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) seem to have concluded that the Bible is no longer authoritative in many areas of human experience especially in salvation and sexuality. They claim to have ”˜progressed’ beyond the clear teaching of the Scriptures and they have not hidden their intention to lead others to these same conclusions. They have even boasted that they are years ahead of others in fully understanding the truth of the Holy Scriptures and the nature of God’s love.

Both TECUSA and ACoC have been given several opportunities to consult, discuss and prayerfully respond through their recognized structures. While they produced carefully nuanced, deliberately ambiguous statements, their actions have betrayed them. Their intention is clear; they have chosen to walk away from the Biblically based path we once all walked together. The unrelenting persecution of the remaining faithful among them shows how they have used these past few years to isolate and destroy any and all opposition.

We now confront the seriousness of their actions as the year for the Lambeth Conference draws near..

Read it all.

Update: Simon Sarmiento has very helpfully provided a more user-friendly version of this document.

Another Update: Stephen Noll has a comment here in response which includes the following:

…In terms of the present crisis, I think he is clear that he sees it has culminating in seven weeks, not at Lambeth 2008. Indeed, he has been quite clear about this for at least 18 months since commissioning “The Road to Lambeth.”

I hope against hope that Canterbury will heed Abp. Akinola’s call and take the necessary disciplinary steps against those who have openly defied God’s Word in Scripture and the fundamental articles of the Communion’s identity. I say “hope against hope” because I fear Rowan Williams does not see the situation with the same eyes. But even beyond his personal views, I think he probably represents the Church of England’s inability to accept the reality that a new day has dawned, not ruled from the Anglo-American centers of power. As I have written elsewhere in “The Global Anglican Communion: A Blueprint,” I do not think the Communion can or should be governed as it has in the past. The sacred “Instruments” themselves are of relatively recent origin and overlapping in authority and function. A Communion Covenant is a good thing, but only if it addresses the issues and structures that have led to the present disruption.

At one of the first plenary sessions, the organizers announced (to much applause) that no official statements would come from the meeting. Instead, lots of time was scheduled for conversation, including meals, siestas, and “marketplace” encounters. “It was a great opportunity to have time to talk to African bishops who it would take me many months to go to,” said Dr. Johnson. “To have them all at the same consultation, with enough time to sit and have conversations, was an absolute gift.”

Ellie Johnson gave one of the few formal presentations of the week, on the findings of the Inter-Anglican Standing Committee on Mission and Evangelism. She also led a workshop on reconciliation. Hot topics of the week included the millennium development goals, HIV/AIDS, women’s empowerment, and the same-sex issue dividing the Anglican Communion. Bishops could also organize sessions around topics of their choice.

Rev. Dr. Isaac Kawuki-Mukasa, a native of Uganda and a congregational development consultant at the diocese of Toronto, came to assist Bishop Poole in his cross-cultural conversations. “The enthusiasm of African bishops was very uplifting. They are full of hope,” he said, adding later that, “the time is now to begin exploring alternative ways of relating.”

Read it all.

The pioneering and much-respected bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Edmonton will formally announce her resignation from the post this weekend after 10 years on the job.

Bishop Victoria Matthews, Canada’s first female Anglican bishop, had planned to inform the diocese of her departure via a pastoral letter to be read at services this Sunday. A copy of the letter, however, was leaked on the Internet.

“Some will wonder if I have health concerns, and others will ask if I am angry at the Anglican Church. The answer to both questions is no,” Matthews said in the letter, published in part by The Anglican Journal.

Read it all.

Read it all.

Some will wonder if I have new health concerns, and others will ask if I am angry at the Anglican Church. The answer to both questions is no. I am well and I love our Church. I am an Anglican and hope to always minister in accordance with the grace and mercy of Christ our Saviour.

An electoral Synod will be held at All Saints’ Cathedral, Edmonton on March 8, 2008. To begin the preparations for that Synod there will be a special Executive Council meeting on August 14th at 7:00 pm at the Cathedral. The Chancellor is writing a memorandum on what needs to be done to ready the Diocese for the electoral synod next year.

Read it all.

Tania Rolland has always been fascinated with old churches.

Their character, the way they feel inside, the warm atmosphere, beautiful wood, open ceilings, simple construction and history have all drawn her to churches and created a burning desire to renovate and live in one some day.

That day has come and Ms. Rolland is living her dream.

She and her family are now living in the newly renovated St. Albans Anglican Church in Lequille, Annapolis County, a small rural community just south of Annapolis Royal.

“It has an absolutely wonderful feel to it,” she said in an interview inside the building.

Read it all.

From a letter in the Parksville Qualicum News:

For a few years the marriage of same sex partners to live together as a unit is allowed in our country by the law.

There are people in our country who adhere to different faiths, who pay homage to their gods and they too are expected, and required to subordinate their religious practices to Canadian law.

Therefore, who and what are these 21 bishops who, as their Catholic partners in this same faith did for 2,000 years, terrorize and tyrannize the faithful by preaching that their God loves them all. Then by human judgement they reject great numbers, condemn them despite their innocence, ostracize them as being unworthy to socialize with ”” but still taking their tithes to make a living off ”” and beyond all this are unaware, or in demonstrated disregard, that they thereby remove themselves out of the bounds of the protective, but into the sphere of punitive criminal law.

Read it all.

Sadly, we are now faced with a much less clear situation. Events are now likely to unfold in a way that is piecemeal in a context that is very uncertain. All this means that it is going to be harder, not easier, to maintain peace and unity within the church.

The synod has left us in a confusing and parlous state. On the one hand, it has been unwilling to affirm the right of dioceses to make pastoral provision for the blessing of same-sex unions where they might need or wish to do so. Although, technically, this does not take away the right of a diocese to proceed on the grounds that the defeat of a motion is not the affirmation of its contrary ”” it seems unlikely that many dioceses will not proceed as dioceses.

On the other hand, the synod has also ruled that the blessing of same-sex unions in not contrary to “core doctrine.” Further, in its response to the St. Michael report, it has affirmed the conclusions of that report, which stated that blessings were not core doctrine but rather had the status of “adiaphora,” meaning a matter that is not essential to salvation, or not essential to our identity as Anglican.

If this is true, it becomes unclear what could be the basis of a decision to discipline any priest who in blessing a same-sex union acts on the basis of a matter indifferent even if he or she does so, on a matter of significant controversy, and without the authorization of the church.

Read it all.

Bishop Tony Burton of the Diocese of Saskatchewan in Canada has written his clergy following Canada’s General Synod. Here’s a key section:

We talked a lot at the General Synod about the implications of baptism, that Christ has grafted us into a whole new set of complicated relationships in his body to which we needed to respond. Nobody was in doubt that the body is fevered and disoriented at the moment. Our place in the Anglican Communion was never very far from our minds.

From one perspective this was a General Synod at which nothing happened””at least nothing of obvious consequence, blazing illumination or historic moment. The Synod tidied and tweaked and consolidated earlier initiatives, rekindled some old missionary loves, and decided, somewhat grudgingly, to give its troubled marriage to the Anglican Communion another chance. A few trial balloons were floated and referred away to committees. We elected an honorable man as Primate in a vote for continuity. We welcomed a new National Indigenous Bishop as a harbinger of good things to come but he had already been with us for a while and was already a much-loved member of the family. We had lunch with our Lutheran relatives. No nettles were grasped, no Rubicons were crossed, no sacred cows were slain, no blood was left on the floor, nobody stormed out.

In short, it was a miracle.

It takes only one match to begin a conflagration in a dry forest. [1] Our Communion has been drying out for a long time. In Winnipeg, we were all smokers, and a few of us lit up, but we went home with the old growth intact, hoping for rain.

This was a disappointment to many people for a variety of reasons. On the left and the right, there were plenty of people who wanted to witness the final rupture, the definitive apostasy, the moment of liberation, the beginning of a new world, clean and free from that bearded old wood.

It came close. After having passed a much-amended procedural motion which ended up stating the obvious (that same-sex blessings are not in the Creeds), the bishops defeated by two votes a motion to allow local dioceses to authorize the blessing of committed same-sex unions. Whether one agreed with this decision or not, there is no question that it bought time for the Anglican Church of Canada to find a way to walk together with the Anglican Communion. Encouragingly, from the beginning of this debate to the end of it, there was nothing but good will shown to Anglicans with same-sex attractions. Their full membership and inclusion in the Church, which derives from baptism, was simply not at issue.

Our condition as a Church and Communion remains grave. The doctors quarrel among themselves. We agree on neither diagnosis nor cure. Can the doctrine of Christ be separated like a yolk from its egg? Perhaps on our knees, in fear and trembling, in a theological environment galaxies away from the aridities of this present generation, but surely not by a vote of hands in a political forum.

The full letter is here.

The dust has barely settled and already, different interpretations of the decisions General Synod made last month about human sexuality have led one parish to publicly offer blessings to same-gender unions, and another to say that it would not deny a parishioner’s request for a same-sex marriage.

During its seven-day meeting in Winnipeg, the church’s highest governing body approved a resolution saying that same-sex blessings are “not in conflict” with the church’s core doctrine but defeated another that would have given dioceses the power to offer them in churches.

There is enough ambiguity in those decisions that it is left open to dioceses and churches to offer same-sex blessings, said Rev. Jim Ferry, who was fired for being involved in a homosexual relationship in 1991. He has since been given some duties at Holy Trinity church in downtown Toronto.

Read it all.

A kind reader e-mailed us the link to a new entry on the diocese of Saskatchewan website. It is a letter to the Canadian House of Bishops concerning its statement on pastoral care to same-sex couples in response to the Canadian General Synod’s call for further theological reflection on these matters.

Here’s how the diocese of Saskatchewan website introduces the letter:

In a letter that is likely to lead to calls for review within the House of Bishops of its April Statement on pastoral care to same-sex couples, theologian John Hodgins argues that celebrating Holy Communion for civilly married same-sex couples, while withholding a nuptial blessing, severs and undermines the unity of the Eucharist. Fr. Hodgins’ courteous letter is exceptional both for the force of its argument and its impartiality regarding the same-sex issue. His concern is with the nature of the Church.

Here’s an excerpt from the letter:

In time, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit and over centuries, the official role of solemnization and recording of vows was assumed by the Church in many places. The Celebration of Marriage was instituted as “a public service of the Church” (BAS p. 526). For the first half of Christian history, however, many contend that the only blessing of Christian marriage and other relationships of professing Christians (holy orders, religious life, etc) was in the context of the Mass.

For good reason, only those committed to Christ in faith would celebrate their professions or states of life at the Eucharist with the clear understanding that only that which was inherently blessed by God and in conformity with sacred Scripture and tradition was to be celebrated in the Sacrament of Unity. Christ is the Sacrament of God. In the Holy Eucharist we share communion in Christ’s life and blessing. This is the single and unified source of liturgical blessing in the Christian community. No blessing may be added which is not inherently present within the dominical Sacrament of the Eucharist.

The suggestion that a further blessing may be added or withheld from those in a civil union or other relationship, apart from the blessing that is inherent in the Holy Eucharist, is to confuse the issue and to detract from Christ’s unique blessing. To presume that a bishop or priest might somehow add to the Sacrament or withhold pronouncing God’s blessing upon any person, state or relationship beyond what is celebrated in the Eucharist is to suggest a development of doctrine which is not within the jurisdiction of any single body of Christians.

As John W.B. Hill has pointed out in his essay, A Theology of Blessing and Liturgies of Blessing, “The mere pronouncement of a blessing can be seriously misunderstood if we forget that we are a eucharistic people. Blessing is not a power we wield but a gift we celebrate.” To be theologically consistent, then, the blessing of God celebrated in the context of the Holy Eucharist is complete. No other blessing may be added or withheld.

In summary: Provision for a celebration of relationships which presumes or indicates that the Holy Eucharist is lacking in some way and so may allow for or require a further blessing by a priest or bishop is fundamentally contrary to the received teaching of the Church. Such a provision inherently undermines the doctrine of the Church with regard to Sacrament. The concept of ”˜blessing’ as set apart from or in addition to the expression of God’s love and friendship in the Holy Eucharist contradicts the nature of the Sacrament.

The notion of an additional blessing pronounced or withheld apart from the Eucharist celebrating a relationship is not in conformity with the formularies of the Church. For example, the BCP and BAS both allow for the celebration and blessing of a marriage outside of the Eucharist but the BAS rubric clearly states that “Where both bride and bridegroom are entitled to receive communion, it is desirable that the form of service in which the marriage rite is incorporated in the celebration of the eucharist be used.” (BAS p. 527). There is no provision, however, for the celebration of the Marriage Eucharist which precludes the blessing of the relationship because blessing is inherent within the Eucharist. To sever or undermine the unity of Eucharist and blessing contradicts the very nature of the Eucharist which is the fullest expression of God’s blessing.

In fact, Eucharistic celebrations of the sort proposed in the Statement would easily be misunderstood as attempting to do indirectly what has not been approved. At the same time, withholding a blessing, would indicate that such an extraordinary blessing (outside of the Eucharistic celebration) is in some way superior to, or in addition to the singular blessing of God in Christ which is celebrated most completely in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

For these reasons I respectfully request that the instructions for the celebration of the Eucharist for civil unions or other relationships in the Statement to General Synod (2007) be withdrawn.

John L. Hodgins
Chatham , Ontario

You can read the full letter here.

From this morning’s perusal of Anglican Mainstream, we find this.

“Marriage is to do with the church’s relationship to her redeemer. What could be more core doctrine than that?” Nazir Ali

At the fourth Chavasse Lecture at Wycliffe Hall on July 4, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali of Rochester responded to a question about the recent motion at the Canadian General Synod.

Q. Can you comment on the motion that the Canadian General Synod has passed asserting that blessing of same-sex relationships is not a matter of core doctrine?

A. First, the Book of Genesis affirms that humanity is made in God’s image, male and female together, and is given a common mission which they fulfil in distinctive ways. As Karl Barth said, this makes marriage and the family the most visible sign of that image.

Secondly this is clarified further in the teaching of Jesus. Mark 10 1-9 (“The two will become one flesh”) is set as the gospel for the wedding service, and when I preached at wedding services in Pakistan many Muslim women used to come to enquire further about it as they had never heard about this way in which the relationship between men and women is ordered.

Thirdly, Ephesians 5.32 (“This is a profound mystery, but I am talking about Christ and the church”) is the only place where the word ”˜sacrament’ which is the translation of the Greek word ”˜mysterion’, is used in the New Testament. It affirms that marriage is a sacrament of Christ and the church. Fundamentally this is to do with the Church’s relationship to her redeemer. What could be more core doctrine than that?

The motion for further study and conversation was passed by clergy and laity, 129 to 99 and by the bishops, 19 to 17.

“This provides a way for this badly-divided church to dialogue about these important matters,” said Martin Taylor of the diocese of Montreal. George Power of British Columbia said, “What I heard (on the permission issue) was not a ”˜no,’ but a ”˜not yet but very soon.’ This will encourage people who are opposed and need to start a process of discussion.”

“We are asking to develop a process to engage the church,” said Bishop Cowan, who said the conversation must include human sexuality as a whole.

Opponents said the church has already produced many studies on the topic in the last 30 years. “We don’t need another study on human sexuality. There are libraries on this topic. We need people to read them,” said Bishop Ingham, who added that the theological commission was intended to “stimulate theological thinking,” not be a “theological watchdog.”

Among other motions touching on the issue, synod also defeated calls that the issue be decided by a greater margin than usual ”“ 60 per cent or 66 per cent. The usual synod rule ”“ a simple majority of 50 per cent plus one ”“ applied, although a tie would have defeated a motion. The addition of a “conscience clause” that would have protected clergy and parishes who do not agree with same-sex blessings was also defeated.

Read it all.

Well this is the second time we have found ourselves in this predicament. Three years ago the General Synod said that the doctrinal status of the blessing of same-sex unions needed further discussion and then affirmed the sanctity of same-sex relationships. Now the synod avows that the blessing of same-sex unions is not a matter of creedal doctrine and yet defeats a motion authorizing it. It is no wonder so many are confused by the church’s stance; indeed, not a few are angry that we have failed to give an unequivocal yes or no to this vexing issue.

The anxiety people are now feeling in the wake of Winnipeg is part of the roller-coaster ride of being a Canadian Anglican these days. We get ramped up for the next significant ecclesiastical event, in the hopes that a General Synod or a Lambeth Conference will put us out of our misery by declaring that our differences are irreconcilable, and then we are plunged into disappointment when we discover that the church is susceptible to timidity and muddleheadedness. Why are we so inconsistent? Why do our beliefs and actions so often contradict each another?

Political pundits will have their cynical answers to these questions, but I want to try to be generous and charitable. I think that we are genuinely perplexed about these matters, and that the plea for more time to study them was in earnest.

Read it all.

Peter, from the Age to Come blog, who provided such wonderful service live-blogging the Canadian General Synod for the Essentials blog, continues his excellent work re: the Canadian Synod.

His latest post at Age to Come is a roundup of the Canadian Synod resolutions with brief commentary. Most of the attention here and other US-based Anglican blogs was on two resolutions. So, give Peter’s roundup a quick perusal to see what else happened.

Here are two items that caught our attention:

A224
House of Bishops Statement on Pastoral Care of Same-Sex Couples

PASSED

The pertinent part of the pastoral response is as follows:

We are committed, as bishops in Canada, to develop the most generous pastoral response possible within the current teaching of the church. We offer the following examples of possible pastoral responses:
When a civilly married gay or lesbian couple seeks our church’s reception of their civil marriage and asks their parish’s recognition, it may be possible, with their bishop’s knowledge and permission, to celebrate a Eucharist with the couple, including appropriate intercessory prayers, but not including a nuptial blessing.
When a gay or lesbian married or committed couple seeks to hold a reception or celebration in a church for their life in Christ, again intercessory prayers for their mutual fidelity, the deepening of their discipleship and for their baptismal ministry may be offered, not including the exchange of vows and/or a nuptial blessing.

My question is whether this assumes the answer to the question of ”˜a gay or lesbian married or committed couple’ in a pastoral form? I.e., if it was assumed that these relationships were contrary to Gods purposes then the pastoral response would take different form.

A190
ACC-13 Resolution 4

The intent of this motion was to deny the Primates membership in the ACC, and was passed quite easily. Again, perhaps last day fatigue setting in.

The Primates are not known for being favourable to the ACC ”˜new thing’, and as such the ACC as a whole is not favourable to the Primates. Hence, the resolution refusing to ratify their membership in the ACC (2/3 of provinces have to ratify for the change in membership to be effective).

Earlier today we posted Bp. Terry Buckle’s (Yukon) clergy letter in response to the Canadian General Synod. One of our commenters very helpfully let us know that Felix Hominum blog is tracking other bishops’ statements.

Here’s the link: http://joewalker.blogs.com/felixhominum/2007/06/victoria-matthe.html

Bishop letters are posted for:
+ Victoria Matthews, Bishop of Edmonton
+Colin Johnson, Bishop of Toronto,
+Derek Hoskin, Bishop of Calgary,

Great work Joe. Thank you.

A Columnist in the Calgary Sun has an interesting op-ed about how the press and elite who opine that churches must change with the times or die has it exactly backwards:

Anyway, we saw it all again last week after Anglican bishops by a vote of 21-to-19 decided their church would not bless same-sex unions. The laity and the lesser clergy had approved of them, but without the OK of the bishops, the church’s answer was no. The Evangelical Lutherans came to the same conclusion.

“Wise leaders know,” intoned one Toronto editorial, “that no institution can remain impervious to social change if it also remains committed to being a key piece of the social fabric. Homosexual unions are an accepted legal fact of life in Canada.”

Whatever else might be implied here, the writer himself is apparently “impervious to statistical fact.”

About 40 years ago, the Anglican Church hired Pierre Berton to critique the church from an atheist viewpoint. Berton recommended it change its traditionalist ways and become instead what he called “relevant.” It embraced his advice, and followed the march of mankind.

From that time onward, its membership has been going straight down. Today, while some two million people tell census-takers they are Anglicans, only 800,000 appear on the church’s rolls, and less than 300,000 show up on Sunday. Meanwhile, the United Church, which eagerly followed exactly the same path, has seen its membership drop from two million to 500,000. Three quarters of the members have gone.

Full article

Scott at Magic Statistics, one of this elf’s favorite bloggers, adds some excellent commentary and background links.