Good morning. Resolutions coming up this morning are A023/24/25 which are declarations of principle re bishop ordinary and indiginous bishop.
The one to watch for later this morning St Michael report A184 due at 10am – i.e. where SSB etc are doctrine but not core doctrine. If it passes then SSB should be dealt with as doctrine, if it fails then SSB could be dealt with as pastoral only.
After that is governance stuff, I’ll check those out as we go.
Details on all resolutions here.
Election for deputy prolocutor
First ballot
Heather Dixon 45
Chancellor Robert Falby 112
Matthew Koovisk 40
Captain Rob Marsh 51
Sheila Vanderputten 26
Sheila dropped from list.
Second ballot
Heather Dixon 37
Chancellor Robert Falby 144
Matthew Koovisk 35
Captain Rob Marsh 63
Robert Falby is elected.
Resolution A023 Declaration of Principles – Election, etc. of National Indigenous Anglican Bishop
Moved, seconded. Dio Montreal speaking – asking for resolution to be removed (as well as A025). Asked to approve a new form of episcopal structure (not geographical), this needs to be discussed properly. How to discipline bishop, not sure where authority lies. This is a development of polity, needs to be done properly in 2010. This motion is premature.
Dio Ruperts Land….expressing similar concern, asking questions about this model of governance. Not comfortable with motion.
Chancellor….merely an enabling change….will take 2 synods to do this….just an admin motion.
Dio Keewatin…resolution comes from CoGS….vote in favour to get this reolution moved.
Dio NewWest Richard Leggett…speaking in favour……establishing GS jusristiction….motion allows us to say that we have juristiction.
Question put…..requires 2/3 in all 3 orders……carried almost unanimously.
A024 Declaration of Principles – Membership of National Indigenous Anglican Bishop in General Synod
This is on no debate list. Dio Keewatin speaking….first reading of declaration of principles amendment for National Indigenous Anglican Bishop.
2/3 reqd in each 3 orders…..carried unanimously.
A025 Declaration of Principles – Election, etc. of Bishop Ordinary to the Canadian Forces
Again a change in juristiction for Bishop ordinary…change is to enable us to elect Bishop Ordinary rather than the primate appointing.
2/3 required again…..carried unanimously.
A184 St. Michael Report
Victoria Matthews Dio Edmonton speaking and explaining St Michaels report. Delivered report May 05. How did we reach concensus..by process,papers…all of beleive it is clearly a matter of doctrine. Some thought just doctrine, some wanted to divide further. Addressing 3 aspects.
What is doctrine – the teaching of gospel, core and non-core doctrine (example of last is marriage). SSU will have an effect beyond itself. Talking about doctrine of sanctification – SSU affects this. About teaching of gospel, how Christians live the gospel. The change of teaching with SSU does not affect core, but does other.
Can doctrine change? Yes, we have done this…e.g. baptism. It can change for better or for worse. One true voice of the gospel….reqs church to engage in serious theological discussion. We did not answer SSU question itself….though we would like to do so. Effects of govt change in same sex marriage (SSM). Are we thererfore blessing marriage?
Effect on ecclesiology? Justice issue. Can we afford to wait on others? On the other hand, who do we think we are to make the change ourselves?
How do we delevlop teaching on SSU in relationship to gospel. We need to do this SSU very well theologically. Let us anser that thoroughly and faithfully. We are going to do this work in any case even if not asked.
Dio Ruperts Land. What are the concequences of passing resolution? Apparently not in order yet becasue we are not discussing resolution yet.
Speaker ? What is difference between creedal and non-creedal doctrine? Bp Matthews answering – examples…motion denying divinity of chist is core doctrine….SSU is not…
Dio Keewatin – regarding law in Canada? Bp Matthew talking about SSM (same sex marriage) in Canada – do we need to catch up with ourselves regarding this new development.
Speaker ? Do you regard creedal doctrine as seperate us from non-Christians. Are the creeds defining us as Christians? Bp Matthews – not exactly pertenent to issue at hand.
Dio Kootney – Matter of discipline as well as doctrine? Bp Matthews thinks it might be better if the question was to both discipline as well os doctine.
Dio Calgary – SSU analagous to marriage, we as church have doctrine of marriage. Answer doctrine SSU affects doctrine marriage.
Speaker ? -appreciates SMR.
Dio Montreal – Not sure about two level of doctrine. Can’t have adiaphora doctine. Should be three levels, creedal doctrine, secondary doctrine, adiaphora. Answer – some members of commission who would agree with that – adiaphora doctrine not really adiaphora, better word would be secondary.
Dio Ontario – Lens ground by issues of justice, sense grappling doctrine within lens of the church. Answer – need to look at lens of wider church such as AC. Do we do this as justice, or do we stay at table? Ecclesiology inform justice issue.
4 speakers only remaining before resolution discussed.
Dio Montreal – Disagreement can be tolerated without endangering unity. Talking about Ted Scott. Test it and see if it is of God. Why unity so important? Sexuality is central to who we are as persons. Answer – commission does not believe is should be communion-breaking, does not mean however that it is not communion-breakikng. Synod BC memorial that we need to consider science.
Dio Algoma – Concern about people in pews do not understand all these differences.
Dio Ottawa (Garth Bulmer sp? I think) Membership of commission did not contain anybody to speak on experiences. Did you have this kind of input? Will you? Answer – theological commission not devoid of that voice.
Dio Arctic (Andrew) SMR has told us it is doctrine, all doctrines are interconnected, SMR raises interest in those questions. I would ask synod to allow debate to take place.
Thanking Bp Matthews and her gifts to the church.
Moving to resolution A184, bringing resolution to the floor.
Dio NewWest John Oakes. Rising to strongly support the motion.
There are a lot of speakers here…..this is going to take a while……
Speaking Bishop ? Moving amendment….after the word credal be added ‘should not be a communion breaking issue’ Voting 70% in favour in both houses. Carried.
Bp Ingham….will vote in favour…but does not think it a good piece of work. Doctrine not defined. Logical flaws in the report. I will agree with motion because of the creedal phase. Does not like terms of reference for thological comission.
Richard Leggett Dio NWest…rising in opposition….liberty in doctrine is a hallmark of Anglicanism. We have changed in the manner in which we administer discipline. This approach is the slippery slope, it will come around again. This is a matter of discipline not doctrine.
Dio Niagra – rising in opposition…too broad in definition. Dioceses should decide.
Dio Brandon – Only concern is about the two levels of doctrine.
Dio Algoma – Opposition. Matter of interpretation. Bit disjointed. Further study needed.
Dio Algoma John Harvey. Will vote against motion. Need to be more concerned with harmony than truth. Heh heh heh.
Speaker ? Have some real issues with the motion. Beleive this issue is core doctrine. Think the issue is about marriage, will vote against.
Seven speakers at microphones – debate limited to them.
Dio Arctic. Support motion. Struggle with part of it re core doctrine, mentioning scripture, need to be in full communion with God. Hope re communion that ship does not flounder. Pray we have ears to hear.
Dio Calgary. Will support, struggle with core doctrine as well. Impact on issue of salvation. Saying scripture does not allow this.
Steve London Dio Edmonton. Will vote in favour.
Dio Fredricton. Will vote in favour, brilliant document, produced by diverse group of people.
Paul Jennings Dio Montreal (one of report authors). Clarify question, what does doctrine mean? Making theologican not canonical decision. Should it be decided by GS or diocese?
Dio Quebec – Questions that needed to be addressed. Thank Bp Matthews.
Now to the vote. C/L vote 80-20% passed. B vote 85-15%.
SMR carried with amendment.
This is an encouraging development.
Now we are onto Governance and a video. This is worth keeping an eye on, as it’s a lot about drawing more power to General Synod (abolish provinces) and getting rid of the two General Synod requirement to get things done more quickly. Nothing that will finally pass this time round, but a step in that process.
A021 Declaration of Principles and Constitution – Amending Procedures
The object of the proposal is to make the constitutional provisions respecting the membership and procedures of the Synod easier to amend, i.e. at one session of the Synod rather than at two successive sessions as is required for all amendments to the Declaration of Principles.
Dio Algoma (same guy again) Enabled discussion to take place about the federal nature of the chuch.
Richard Leggett Dio New West. In a procedural muddle, are we just voting to delete earleir motion? A023 and A025….
Dio Athabasca. Will vote against.Will change the nature of ACC.
Chancellor response to Richard, A023 etc are to cover all bases.
Speaker? – Are we moving to do changes to become more open or becasue of crises?
Suspend debate for now, on to announcements.
Procedural motion. C003 resolution be moved on order paper so debate after committee of the whole. This one asks theological comission to look at SSU. Refering to assessors for decision on this.
We will be back at 2pm for the commitee of the whole on the blessing of same sex unions…….
Good morning Peter, Hope you slept well after yesterday!
our prayers are with you all for today, may God’s Will be done……
The governance stuff has huge implications for the way the Anglican Church of Canada will make and implement future decisions. I’m afraid that the focus on SSB means these motions will be slipped in quietly without folks realising what’s happening.
I have to agree with Sharon, but it seems to me that when we are dealing with politics and such that anything and everything can get “slipped by”, much as the new Primate Elect got “slipped by”. I have a feeling that this is not going to be a good day for the Anglican Church of Canada, that being from a supporter and member of Essentials anyway. We are called to pray that God’s Will will be done…….I am sure that His Will will be done, however, it may not appear as such at this time.
I feel we must trust in the Holy Spirit to guide our leaders and by that I mean people like Bsp. Don Harvey and all the others in ANiC and Essentials Canada.
Kendall Harmon is looking for the final language of the passed resolution. Do you have that, Peter?
bb
I see that you got it on T19 now….
So that final line was amended to the resolution, that it should not be a communion-breaking issue? How do you feel about that?
bb
Hmm, well just fuzz really, we can say what ‘should be’, won’t affect what will be. Not too sure about this core doctrine stuff, but it is good to get agreement that SSU are dotrine.
Peter, thanks so much for the blogging of what is happening at Canadian General Synod 2007 on the ground. It is very valuable.
I guess this American reads it as “same sex unions” are no big deal – it may be doctrine, but it’s not a big deal, certainly not enough to warrant the global Anglican crisis or tearing apart the fabric of the Anglican Commnion. I am concerned this is laying the foundation for moving forward with an official endorsement, since it’s not a communion-breaker. What do you think?
bb
RE amendment line: It’s meaningless. It just says that “we” don’t think it’s a big enough deal for anyone else to get worked up about. It isn’t a directive or a decision, just an opinion. It’s like saying it shouldn’t rain tomorrow – that would be nice and convenient for us, but our hoping it doesn’t make it so.
PS: Unity is NOT more important than Truth!
The ACC may not consider it to be “communion-breaking” but that is a matter for the rest of the Communion to decide.
What happens to Bishop Ingham now that the Resolution has been passed?
I agree, I think the amendment was innocuous really, more like a child saying ‘I really don’t think this should matter’ to a parent
. Yes, it is trying to say it is no big deal, but it hardly matters what we think on that one at the end of the day.
It’ll all come down to the resolutions this afternoon and this evening, and how CoGS is dealt with. Canadians tend to be more conformist than Americans therefore are more likely to accept resolutions as given. However, this one is a bit special so all bets really are off!
PS, you are welcome Kendall, glad this helps some….
Peter,
Thanks from Edmonton for your thorough reporting. I’ll be prepared for the many questions at services tomorrow because of your efforts. God be with you and the Synod this afternoon.
I agree with an earlier comment, we will be praying ” Thy will be done”. We will all need to pray as to what we ought to do next. It will be a very solemn time for many of us.
[...] ESSENTIALS BLOGGER: General Synod morning session 23/6/07; a Solid Ground video … [...]
“1 Corinthians 5, 1-2: It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father’s wife.
And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.”
So doesn’t this mean that based on the wording of the final amended resolution as passed, Saint Paul was mistaken in this passage to recommend the action he did?
Just another manifestation of the oldest besetting sin – “you will be like gods” – slightly paraphrased. Basically we define our reality, thank you knidly…..
Again I say, we are to pray “Thy Will be done” and know that The Lord’s Will shall be done, just not in the manner that most were wanting it to be done. I again stress that I believe we will all be looking to the Southern Cone or the Global South before this weekend is finished. I just cannot understand why men and women in positions of authority supposedly placed in those positions by God’s Will (Church Politics) can go ahead and desecrate the Word and the Church in the manner that they are. I look to tomorrow and the coming days as ones of great promise, for the Wheat and the Chafe are being seperated.