Below is some additional information on Montreal from this Journal article. The Bishop has some things to say about being prophetic, nothing directly from Matthew 7v15, which might be more appropriate to the course the diocese is taking. I note too that there’s no ‘might’ about it, they will proceed. Also buried in the article is a confirmation of the SEM rejection, which seems to me to deserve a little more prominence. Here, after all, is a diocese going ahead with SSB’s and at the same time rejecting the Church’s own plan for conscientious objectors. Deserving of more than a footnote in an article, yes?
Montreal bishop will work out rite for same-sex blessing
Harvey Shepherd
Oct 28, 2008
Marites N. Sison
Barry Clarke, bishop of the diocese of Montreal.After this week’s discussions with bishops of the Anglican church from across Canada, Bishop Barry Clarke of Montreal plans to launch a process to work out a rite for blessing same-sex couples in the diocese who have been married in civil ceremonies.In an opening statement Oct. 24 to the annual synod of the diocese of Montreal, the bishop said he believes that in the current debate about same-sex issues some are being called to speak with a prophetic voice, others with a voice of caution.
“For reasons, perhaps known only to God, I believe we, in the diocese of Montreal, are among those who have been called by God to speak with a prophetic voice,” he said. “It is our voice that is called to affirm that all people are loved, valued and precious before God and the Church. It is our voice that is called to affirm that all unions of faithful love and life-long commitment are worthy of God’s blessing and a means of God’s grace. In time our voice will either be affirmed by the body, or stand corrected.”
About a year ago, the 2007 Montreal synod adopted a resolution calling on the bishop to grant permission for clergy, under certain conditions, to bless duly solemnized civil marriages, including same-sex marriages. Bishop Clarke, like the bishops of two other dioceses where such motions were passed around the same time, has not yet implemented it by authorizing such blessings.
Speaking at this year’s synod, the bishop described his decision as one that “does constitute an incremental step forward, which is consistent with the wishes of synod, all the while observing the cautious posture voiced and upheld in other parts of the Anglican Communion” and expressed at the Lambeth Conference of the world’s Anglican bishops this summer.
Delegates to this year’s Montreal synod took no further action on the issue except to debate and vote down, by clear although not overwhelming majorities, two resolutions presented by people opposed to same-sex blessings.
One resolution asked the bishop to refrain from implementing same-sex blessings until there had been extensive consultation with the Anglican Communion worldwide, until the diocese had established a process for consulting its members, until the General Synod of Canada changed the marriage canon, and in any event not before the 2010 Montreal synod.
The other resolution asked that, if the bishop did authorize the blessings, a process called shared episcopal ministry be made available parishes and clergy requesting it. (Basically, this could mean that, with Bishop Clarke’s assent, a bishop opposed to the blessings would provide certain services, probably including confirmations, in similarly minded parishes. Last May, Eddie Marsh, retired bishop of Central Newfoundland, carried out a confirmation service for candidates from two parishes in the Montreal suburban area known as the West Island. Bishop Clarke authorized this, at least with regard to one of the parishes, and the experiment was considered by some to be a trial run for shared episcopal ministry.)
The two motions were rejected, although their sponsors used conciliatory language in presenting them.
David Johnstone, rector’s warden of the evangelical St. Stephen’s Church in Westmount, said the motion on consultation would not reverse the 2007 decision but would help to preserve Anglican unity in a situation where “the diversity once cherished by Anglicanism has been stretched beyond limits.”
Rev. Timothy Wiebe of two churches in the Eastern Townships described the motion on shared episcopal ministry as “creative, generous and fully inclusive of all points of view” and “an Anglican solution, a via media.”
In his opening address Bishop Clarke said that, shortly after the meeting of the House of Bishops (Oct. 27-31), he would establish a commission with the responsibility of drafting an appropriate rite for the blessing and guidelines for implementation.
“In this process, I am committed to an open dialogue, and to this end, I will provide opportunities on a formal basis for listening, dialogue and further discernment,” he said. He added that the diocese would work alongside the faith, worship and ministry committee, which had been charged by General Synod, the Anglican Church of Canada’s governing body, to develop a process to engage dioceses and parishes in study of the Christian perspective on human sexuality in light of scripture, reason, tradition and current scientific understanding.
“Let me make it absolutely clear that in this process, no cleric and no congregation will be required to participate in any future blessing of same-sex civil marriages,” said Bishop Clarke.
Pray for the diocese of Montreal, and that the diocese will indeed stand corrected.
You could cite Michael Ingham’s book – I forget what it was called, anybody help me on that one?
At the conference last year, Bishop Harvey made a point of announcing that ANiC would ordain women, and Rev. Desiree Steadman is his personal assistant. I think that probably answers your question about his stance on the issue.
I think Peter and I posted at the same time…
“Tip of the Iceberg” reminded me of that interview with Kendall Harmon that was floating around the internet a year or so ago – It can be found here.
AMPisAnglican (#50), I agree with your comment. In the eyes of most Canadian non-Anglican Christians, I suspect it is the ACoC that is viewed as having a singular fixation on SSBs. Most non-Anglican Christians probably don’t even know that the ANiC exists.
Cathy – the comment from Stephen Hopkins was told to me by a few people who were at synod – his interest in it was because he is in charge of a committee to look at updating the liturgy. Other views expressed by the diocese can be seen on the Michael Coren Show of July 31 – it is on the St Hilda’s web site in the archived area. A few interesting comments were made including the fact that we are not sinners!
Cathy (#46)
The most visible person who has provided enough information for your 4 conditions is Michael Ingham. Read his book “Mansions of the Spirit” to understand his heretical claims (Please don’t buy it if you can help it). He has not changed his position (on the uniqueness of Christianity – or lack of uniqueness compared to other religions) as a Vancouver Sun Feb. 21, 2004 article attests.
And about a dozen years ago Ingham preached his last sermon at St. John’s Shaughnessy on Easter Sunday about Jesus “swooning” (not dying and therefore not rising). It did not take a degree in theology to know that Ingham was apostate: Nevertheless, the next Sunday, J.I. Packer preached a sermon explaining what Christians believe and why (1 Cr 15:17). Please check with him and anyone else at St. Johns if you need some witnesses.
Jack, I have searched in vain for that sermon online – I found a copy of it that I thought was for the correct date, and it didn’t have anything like that in it. Either it was changed, or I had the wrong date. Is it online anywhere? Did you hear the sermon preached? I have heard a lot about this sermon, but always second or third hand…
I can’t imagine why anyone at St. John’s would put Michael Ingham’s sermon online. And Dr. Packer actually did not give the formal sermon the following Sunday, it was just a 5 minute “homily”, so probably was not recorded. If you have an email address, I can send you the names of several eyewitnesses.
No, thanks, that’s ok. I just wanted to be able to settle an argument with somebody who insists that it never happened. If he doesn’t believe me, the names of people who were there probably won’t help. It is amazing the lengths folk will go to rather than to believe God, isn’t it. If Jesus only swooned on the cross and didn’t die, he would hardly have been in any shape to inspire the apostles the way he did. Believing in the resurrection makes much more sense.
Kate: You should get your friend to read the Easter Message published by M. Ingham in 2005 in the Diocesan paper ‘Topic’, and entitled ‘Easter is the still point of everything’. It can be found online but it takes a little sleuthing as, for some reason, only the title comes up on the Diocesan Website. (To capture it, I googled: new westminster easter 2005 and in the link appearing at the top of the page which is the New West Diocesan link, I clicked ‘cached’. I’ll send the cache address if you wish but I thought it might send this post to the recycle bin!) The article has been updated probably because the month after it was written its science and theology was politely torn to shreds in Topic by Michael Davenport, a quantum physicist, in an article called “Quantum Unbelief” (Davenport’s brilliant response can still be found here: http://listserv.episcopalian.org/wa.exe?A2=ind0509d&L=virtueonline&P=2016.) Davenport’s critique should be read alongside Ingham’s article as it is helpful for those of us wowed by science or pseudo-science.
Irena [#59], the sermon appears to be at http://www.duomo.ac.nz/acnz/?p=1154 (how it got to New Zealand is a mystery to me…).
By the way, eminent physicist Murray Gell-Mann came up with a delightful term for this kind of misapplication of Quantum Physics some years ago: Quantum Flapdoodle.
Cathy (#48) I was a delegate at the 2007 synod and one of the saddest moments that I recall was after the Windsor report was given, Bishop Victoria Matthews took questions on whether the blessing of Same Sex couples was or was not core doctrine in the sense of being creedal. Doctor John Rye stood up and asked the question of whether or not we believed what we said when we recited the creed. I recall a giggle swept through the room and there was an awkward pause in which she was clearly uncomfortable. Her answer was …….to defer that question to the chair who did not give an answer. I know this is just another case of what is not being said, but what was not being said was heard by hundreds.
Sorry, a correction to my comment 62 – it was the St. Michael’s report not the Windsor report.
I have heard that story about Ingham saying Jesus did not die on the cross before, and it is a very good example, but as has been pointed out, there doesn’t seem to be a copy of the sermon around either printed or recorded. If I (or any of us) are going to be giving somebody 3 or 4 examples of the spreading heresy in the church, to get people to start opening their eyes and looking around, then we must be able to prove the what was said or done actually happened. Or, as in the debate Kate is having with somebody, they aren’t going to believe us.
As for Ingham’s book I do not have a copy of it and I don’t want a copy. At least the few excepts I’ve read of it are so carefully worded, that if you don’t know what’s going on, you’re going to miss the underlying problems. I’m trying to find examples suitable for somebody who only has a Sunday School knowledge of Christianity.
Somebody told me there was an interview with him in the Globe and Mail which was ‘good’, but I haven’t found a copy of it yet.
I know it is a difficult task I’ve set for myself, but I do have a few more months before I need to have this document done.
You know, I think the evidence is pretty clear for those of us who want to see it. The person I have been talking to about it on and off seems pretty determined not to.
Many a prophet of old (not that I would ever lay upon myself the mantel of prophet) has stood up, telling people the truth about what was really going on, even though most people didn’t want them there. But, for the sake of the few people who would listen, the prophet still needed to be there.
Cathy (#64)
.
I am very glad that you don’t want a copy of Mansions of the Spirit; however, it is a very good source of information regarding Ingham’s position. Bob Brow wrote a good review of it that you can find here: http://www.brow.on.ca/Articles/InghamReview.html
And if you take out a copy of the book from your library (or interlibrary loan – I found that 16 libraries in BC’s lower mainland carry the book) you will be both saving money and making the book unavailable for others to read
“It must be simple and easy to understand. Imagine somebody who has not had any Christian education beyond what they learned 30 years ago in Sunday School..” (#46)
Cathy: We’ll try to get you a copy of the Easter sermon if it is still available. Its heresy was plain enough for my four young children to understand at the time -totally unprompted- so it should satisfy the criterion quoted, but it did take much longer than your prescribed three minutes -sadly. My email is jarofclay-at-shaw.ca if you would like us to follow up on this.
I just finished reading both Inghams Easter 2005 sermon, and Michael Davenport’s response ( see links at #60 and #59 respectively). My respose to Ingham’s sermon was an anguised cry of prayer for God to restore truthful teaching of his word in the Anglican Church of Canada. Ingham’s sermon does nothing but breed confusion and mistrust of God’s word. I would love for Rev. Randy Lockyer to give an honest appraisal of this sermon and ask if this is the kind of teaching he longs for in ACoC.
I read Ingham’s Easter message linked above and my first response was huh? I showed it to my husband, he saw who wrote it and said “God help me”. That message is so ….. odd … I’m not even sure what to call it or where to start with the theological error.
As a side joke, my husband occasionally makes a particular point to stress that our last name is Ingram, NOT Ingham.
Thank you Irena, I will sent you an e-mail.
That can’t be the original sermon we were talking about, as Jack said it was preached about 12 years ago – If anybody ever finds an extant copy of that, I would be very interested in seeing it.
#71: No, Kate, that’s another one!!! (The one you read was written as the Easter message in Topic, the Diocesan newpaper, the other was something that he preached on Easter Day at St. John’s Shaughnessy.)
Erm…. Haven’t actually read it yet…. Just noticed the date…