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 CouplesPASSED
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 4The 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).
Notice how “pastoral” is almost becoming a code word for letting reappraisers take actions otherwise inconsistent with church teaching.
Reappraisers have already pulled off a similar change in “prophetic”: i.e., breaking rules to carry forward the reappraisers’ agenda.
Yet reappraisubg leaders’ professed concern for things “pastoral” evidently does not incline them to mercy toward reappraising clergy and congregations.
In #1, the last sentence erroneously spells “reappraising” as “reappraisubg.” Although radical reappraising leaders take Orkish actions, they have not adopted the Black Speech.
But speaking of Orkish actions by ECUSA’s ruling reappraisers, we might reflect on how Frodo and his companions, upon returning to the Shire, find their gentle homeland subverted by intruders who oppress loyal Hobbits and impose “a lot of rules and orc-talk.”
Notice that this also covers heterosexual couples living together.
Or maybe not. I guess it depends if “gay or lesbian married or committed couple” means a gay or lesbian committed couple or any committed couple.
A190 is confusing, since ‘ACC’ has 2 meanings. The Anglican Church of Canada is ACC, though many of us have been using ACoC for clarity since Nottingham. The instrument of unity that includes lay people (and met last at Nottingham) is also ACC, and the Primates want to be ex-officio members of that instrument instead of having to displace someone else to participate. The ACoC does not want the Primates to be in the ACC because the ACoC does not like the way the Primates vote. (The instruments of unity must not be unified??)
The message labeled A190 refers to both entities, but I am not sure that the writer knew that. The final usage could mean either entity.
The writer knew that, but he does like using TLAs 😉