Comments on: Diocese of Montreal rejects SEM

By: Matt Harrington

Matt Harrington — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:06:31 +0000

The SEM should be rejected for it is nothing more than a way for parties to avoid their responsibility to stand up for the Gospel. If a bishop chooses to ignore the 2000 year history and practise of the church, then parishes should either stand up and demand his resignation or they should leave. Saying that one is going to stay in communion with a heretic as long as one is allowed to keep the property and have one’s own special bishop is nonsense. SEM allows parishes to ignore their responsibility to take action to stand up to bishops who refuse to remain faithful to the historic faith of the church.

By: Gordon Arthur

Gordon Arthur — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 23:51:56 +0000

I can only speak for myself, not the Federation or a Federation parish, but I have always seen this idea as a non-starter. No one was really happy with it as a means of reducing tensions over the ordination of women in England, where it was proposed as a temporary measure. File alongside “moratorium”.

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 22:02:36 +0000

I hope he will address the issue in a positive way, but it does rather seem as if the diocese has spoken. Praying for you guys!

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:53:28 +0000

Speaking for myself, in Montreal, I have been waiting, watching and praying. Not wanting to do anything too precipitous or antagonistic. Our bishop has, until this synod, been fairly quiet on the topic, “prayerful listening.”
The “our way or the highway” is from an inside power clique close to the bishop.
Let’s face it, it also comes from a “yes” or “no” vote. I will be interested to see if other alternatives can be offered.
The bishop said that the issue of SSB’s is a “pastoral” one, well, he now has two “pastoral” issues if he wants to continue to value true diversity and tolerance in his diocese.

By: Ellie M.

Ellie M. — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:42:01 +0000

I, too, look forward to comments from those on both sides of the conflict who proclaimed this as a solution.

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:48:12 +0000

I have a question, and this is intended respectfully. I believe there are Essentials Federation parishes in Montreal who have looked to go the SEM route (feel free to correct me if I am wrong). Would anybody from a Federation perspective (from Montreal, or wider afield), like to comment on this? This is not a Federation-bashing question, I simply do not know what the inside strategy can be when the options seem to be “our way or the highway”?