From ACC News:
For his part, Canon Kenneth Kearon, secretary general of the Anglican Communion urged Canadian Anglicans to “take time to stand back from the Anglican Communion,” where the focus has been on schism over the issue of human sexuality, and look instead at its value.
“We do need to take time, stand back and celebrate our membership of that part of the body of Christ which we call the Anglican Communion; to rejoice in the wonderful family of which we are all part and to celebrate the wonderful ministry that is being done in many parts of the world,” said Canon Kearon.
Archbishop Sentamu urged delegates to re-examine “if we aren’t being challenged in our application of canon (church) law and gracious magnanimity in relation to the question of human sexuality.”
God, said Archbishop Sentamu, is “the supreme example of the one who is graciously magnanimous and who deals with others with gracious magnanimity.” He offered the example of the adulterous woman who was brought before Jesus. “He could have applied the letter of the law according to which she should have been stoned to death; but he went beyond justice,” he said. “As far as justice goes, there isn’t one of us who deserves anything other than the condemnation of God, but God goes far beyond justice.”
For a church to be “graciously magnanimous,” he added, it must have “a responsibility to both affirm moral standards and to ensure that its rules don’t seem rigorous to the point of inhumanity.”
Well said, Dr. Sentamu, and the price of that magnanimity is repentance. This is commodity that seems to be lacking, if I may be so bold.
Wow, even Archbishop Sentamu seems to have nothing to offer in terms of addressing the same-sex blessing issue except more encouragement for gracious conversation. Can it be that hard for an Anglican Archbishop to offer some clear moral guidance (beyond “talk nice and be magnanimous”)?
#2
I think your interpretation of Abp Senatmu is the right one, although I differ from you on its quality. I think he – like many, many relatively conservative Anglicans – is completely fed up with this unseemly and immoral obsession with homosexuality to the effective exclusion of things that might actually matter.
# 3. john scholasticus uses the phrase
Hmmmm
So is john scholasticus chastising those who are engaging in the immorality of homosexual eroticism and those trying to push through the blessing of same sex erotic partnerships?
Or is he chastising those who object to the unbiblical innovations as having an “unseemly and immoral obsession with homosexuality”?
IMO:
The discussion of the morality of sexual behavior is not unseemly.
Sexuality is important and discussion of sexual morality is appropriate.
Homosexuality is an obsession and is immoral.
#4
I’m suggesting that, whatever one’s views about the particular issue, the endless, endless focus on it is disproportionate.