[Archbishop Fred] Hiltz is under no illusions about the challenges facing the Canadian Anglican church.
“We’re in the midst of a period of major transition, which is never an easy time for a lot of people,” said Hiltz.
“I think there is a real longing from a lot of Anglicans to come to a resolution of the same-sex blessings debate. It’s nothing new; we’ve been grappling with this issue for 30 years.”
The national church has recommended a moratorium on same-sex blessings for two years, until the matter can hopefully be resolved once and for all at the general synod meeting in June 2010. However, a number of dioceses, most notably New Westminster in the greater Vancouver area, have approved same-sex blessings.
Hiltz says the key to the survival of the Canadian Anglican church may be to agree to disagree.
“I don’t think we may ever be able to come to a consensus on this issue,” said Hiltz.
“It may come down to allowing some space for local options. Then, we need to address the bigger issue of how do we live together with our differences, but do it with grace, not by condemning each other.”
Agree to disagree? Space for local options? There is a deep absurdity here, so great a gap that words cannot bridge it? Homosexual marriage a mere option? Joint masses with the local coven? Priests who are Muslims? Why should these not all be local options, something we can agree to disagree on? This posture will work only as long as there is no core doctrine, no center, no doctrinal identity that cannot be compromised.
Hiltz does not deserve the faintest iota of respect because he stands for everything in general and therefore nothing in particular. How can any Episcopalian in Canada read this sort of thing and not view the bishop with the contempt we grant to every unprincipled opportunist? Larry
[blockquote]
… until the matter can hopefully be resolved once and for all at the general synod meeting in June 2010.
[/blockquote]
Incredible! I assume the reporter interpolated this. What does it mean to “resolve” the issue, once and for all? How about a vast majority giving direction on the issue (Lambeth 1998)? Not enough? Wait, do you mean that 51% in a Canadian General Synod can resolve the issue once and for all? Oh, only if it chooses the liberal direction. Ah, I see.
[blockquote]Space for local options?[/blockquote]
Translation: I’m only going to drill holes in my end of the rowboat.
“Canadian Anglican Leader Seeks to ‘Fire Up’ People of God”
What fire? And for what purpose other than a conventional secular agenda? You can’t light spiritual fires with the tepid waters of Laodicea—and what else does Abp. Hiltz have to offer?
Better to say:
“Canadian Anglican Leader Offers His Flock Another Light Drizzle”
“Hiltz says the decision of parishes to leave the Anglican fold has been personally and collectively wrenching”
The wrenching has been done by Hiltz’s revisionist allies (e.g., Bp. Ingham).
Fire up must be Canadian for the pre-heat cycle. Hilz is running for a figureheadship in the new TEC-ommunion. He might get higher than the ABC if he keeps this up. Then again, the new TEC-ommunion really owes the ABC for running interference so effectively, so maybe not.
Irenaeus, I beg to differ about typology- the ACC is a manifestation of the Church of Thyatira. As in other predominately white western economically privileged “Anglican” churches we have tolerated that woman Jezebel- syncretism, usurping of God given authority and sexual immorality. WRT Absp Hiltz: There is a sad similarity in Hiltz’s words expecting a “new dawn” with the Bishop in Lewis’ The Great Divorce. That Bishop saw the setting sun as the rising. His perspective was 180 degrees, or entirely, wrong. So tragic.