Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, said he believes that “due process was followed” by the diocese of Ottawa when a majority of its synod members approved on Oct. 13 a motion asking its bishop to allow local parishes to bless civil marriages between same-sex couples.
“I believe due process was followed with respect to the handling of this resolution. The outcome of the resolution is a reflection of the mind of the church local in this matter,” Archbishop Hiltz told the Anglican Journal.
He also described diocesan bishop John Chapman’s statement that he would conduct wide-ranging consultations with the Canadian house of bishops, the diocese, and other Anglicans both at the national and international level before arriving at a decision as “entirely appropriate.”
I have carefully reviewed the proceedings against Jesus before Pontius Pilate and I am convinced due process was followed. While harsh, the judgement was entirely appropriate under the circumstances. It fully reflected the mind of the leadership of the local community. Has the entire leadership of the West now gone certifiably insane? Or am I just not in Kansas anymore?
The North American outposts of the Anglican Communion are all sail and no rudder, worshipping process before (or in place of) Christ.
If by *Due Process*, the good primate means that the Synod followed closely to all the Pharasaical legalism designed to separate the faith from God and focus it rather on humanistic cultural tendencies, why then of course, the Primate hit the nail on the head.
And the results should surprise no one.
I subscribe to “Mars Hill Audio,” a wonderful audio journal out of Charlottesville, that produces six thoughtful issues a year with seven or eight topics each issue, presented as interviews. A few years ago, one of the interviewees, talking about the American justice system, said that, seeking fairness (a commendable goal), our justice system had become focused on due process. Seeking a fair process is not at all a bad thing — but the trouble is that the American court system has lost sight of the reality that the purpose of a trial is to discern the truth about a matter. A concern for process, coupled with an unconcern for truth, leads to injustice.
And so it is with theology — process, without seeking the truth about God’s desires and designs as he has revealed them to us in Scripture, leads to nonsense of a staggering variety.
The outcome of the resolution is a reflection of the mind of the church local in this matter
The mind of the “community local” was reflected in the lynching of Leo Frank – was that all that was needed to make it justice?
‘Whose’ process was followed?
As far as I am concerned, it wasn’t the process of the Church Catholic or in agreement with “the Faith once given.”
It was just a secular “new age” declaration of some sort of process being followed.
“Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, said he believes that “due process was followed†by the diocese of Ottawa when a majority of its synod members approved on Oct. 13 a motion asking its bishop to allow local parishes to substitute tequila for wine during Communion.
“I believe due process was followed with respect to the handling of this resolution. The outcome of the resolution is a reflection of the mind of the church local in this matter,†Archbishop Hiltz told the Anglican Journal.”
Is there a web site out there for those of us for whom TEC is history?
I feel that T-19 has sort of sold out to TEC and itself has become a symptom of the problem, fighting but staying, feminzed but claiming orthodoxy, anything that is evaluative edited…
Somehow I think reading this site is leaving me out of the loop–any advice?
Don – what on earth gave you that idea??
As someone who lives in Ottawa (and attends a Network church), I have only one comment; our Synod is no longer a meeting to discern the will of God, but has become merely a political convention. Lord help us.
[blockquote] He also described diocesan bishop John Chapman’s statement that he would conduct wide-ranging consultations with the Canadian house of bishops, the diocese, and other Anglicans both at the national and international level before arriving at a decision as “entirely appropriate.†[/blockquote]
Oh, I am sure he will do all these things. And at the end of this “due diligence,” he will issue a statement which though very mindful of the objections raised, will allow local parishes to bless civil marriages between same-sex couples. He will also talk about living with our differences, and about how Anglicans disagree on many things, and yet share the same Table. Oh, I almost forgot. He will also mention that some might decide to leave due to conscience, and though he is grieved, he sends them off with his blessing. Yes, the suspense is overwhelming.
carl
No what he actually said was…
We do process ’em, eh.
Due process and the mind of the local conductor was duly followed right up to and including the train wreck.
‘synod followed process”
As I have said, canon trumps Scripture for Revisionists.
To those illuding to whether we are still in Kansas, I would merely add “No heart, no courage, no brains”.
There’s no right way to do the wrong thing.
Churchism at its pinnacle! Neo-gnostic teaching pervades TEC with sentimentality at the core. Does it feel good? Then it must be from the Holy Spirit. TEC can no longer proclaim the Gospel because repentance must proceed redemption. In TEC there is no such thing as repentance. Hence in TEC no redemption is available. The church of the EpiscApostate is what she has become!
The process declaration is simply a gambit. He is seeking to show that Canada, like TEC, is “Doing the right thing.” Since this cannot be shown in fact, then every smoke screen is permissable in their world. Falsehood is fair, foot dragging is fair, obfuscation is fair, and so is process. LM
“due process” = “polity”
As with anything seen in ECUSA in the last decade, the only thing surprising about it is that people are still surprised.
You know the Kingdom of God is not a democracy. And Carl is so right about what will happen.
Oh, well, as long as they followed the [i]process[/i], I guess it’s okay then.
See Don Armstrong’s remarks again. Will no one comment on them? He wants to know why talk has not turned to action. He wants to know why we have not simply turned our backs on TEC and walked away. He apparently wants to know why there is chatter but no leadership. Is he off the mark? I say he is not, that he is in the bullseye.
I have asked before and ask again, where is the leadership? Is there no one – surely not Kendall – who is willing to get his hands dirty and begin the sweaty, trouble-filled work of building anew? Is there anyone with the courage to tell TEC they’re dead meat, and then act that way? Hven’t we anything better to do then go on and on about Schori and her ilk? They’re dying and we want to preserve our union with the dead? Will no one tell the ABC that his tide is out and he is beached because of dry rot in his timbers?
For Heaven’s sake, speak to Don Armstrong’s accusation. Larry