Anglican Church of Canada at same-sex crossroads

“We simply don’t know,” said Archdeacon Paul Feheley, principal secretary to the church’s national leader, Archbishop Andrew Hutchison.

Even the head of a group that opposes same-sex blessings is taking nothing for granted, despite a May bishops’ statement that essentially rejected same-sex blessings.

“We don’t know what’s going to happen,” said Rev. Canon Charlie Masters, national director of Anglican Essentials. “The Anglican Church of Canada is at a crossroads.”

Delegates will be voting on a motion that would leave it to each diocese to decide whether priests will bless same-sex couples. Of Canada’s 30 dioceses, only the British Columbia diocese of New Westminster allows the practice.

“Both sides have their teeth into the bone and they’re not prepared to give it up,” said Chris Ambidge, president of Integrity Canada, an advocacy group for gay and lesbian Anglicans.

“As a gay man, I want a place in my own church and I don’t want to be downgraded to second- or third-class Christianity.”

Even if the motion passes, Ambidge pointed out that individual priests couldn’t be forced to comply.

“Every clergyman, in the Anglican Church anyway, always has the option of saying ‘no.’ If you really, really don’t like remarrying divorced people, and for that you can make a strong argument out of scripture, then Rev. Joe Blogs can say ‘no,’ ” Ambidge said.

“If this were to pass, it would never be the case of people being forced to marry people if they felt this were the wrong thing.”

Read it all.

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Church of Canada, Anglican Provinces, Canadian General Synod 2007, Same-sex blessings, Sexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion)

5 comments on “Anglican Church of Canada at same-sex crossroads

  1. carl says:

    “Both sides have their teeth into the bone and they’re not prepared to give it up,” said Chris Ambidge, president of Integrity Canada, an advocacy group for gay and lesbian Anglicans.

    Two dogs. One bone. And what happens when one dog gains possession of the bone? I think this is where we cue the mantra about inclusion and the Big Tent.

    Even if the motion passes, Ambidge pointed out that individual priests couldn’t be forced to comply.

    At least not yet in any case. But even so, it establishes dissent as exceptional and anachronistic – behind the times even. And, as we all know, time is a critical variable in determining morality.

    carl

  2. Paula Loughlin says:

    “As a gay man, I want a place in my own church and I don’t want to be downgraded to second- or third-class Christianity.”

    I think Jesus had something to say to those who would be first. But as a sinner it is only by the grace of God that I have been upgraded to any measure of worth at all. So I really am in no place to make demands. My place is submission to the Will of God with humility and love. His saving death upgraded me from being barred from heaven that is enough for me.

  3. Deja Vu says:

    #2 Yes, sounds like for some, this is about public status and honor, doesn’t it?

  4. Henry Troup says:

    #3 – Yes, it’s about not sending people to the back of the bus.

  5. Tom Roberts says:

    #3+4
    Perhaps the question might be asked then, “Which end is the ‘back’?”