via email:
Left the italicized bit out at first, blame my cold muddled head.
The following motion was passed at the Rupert’s Land Synod:
“Be it resolved that the Bishop, upon the passage by general synod of an enabling doctrinal resolution, to allow clergy, whose conscience permits,to bless the duly solemnized and registered marriages between same-sex couples, where at least one party is baptized, in parish churches whose members have, by resolution, authorized such ceremonies to take place; and to authorize rites for such blessings.”
laity, 60 for, 51 against, 3 abstaining
clergy, 32 for, 23 against.
Further, it appears that the Bishop allowed the vote to go ahead because a quorum was present even though a goodly number of delegates were not present due to a snow/ice storm, I guess the right people were there to pass the motion so he went ahead. Further, the vote was one of the last one the last day of Synod when people are tired and wanting to get away.
Such will not take effect until after the next General Synod.
I have not been able to find anything on the net or in the news to confirm this. If you can supply me with a link, please do so in the comments.
Does this mean the hands holding the reigns of “gracious Restraint” have just let go??
Charlie Masters is on 100 Huntley St. – just caught the end of it – will be repeated. Now I have to check my Handbook of The Faith to see where Rupert’s Land is.
Pretty much all of the middle of Canada Pauline. If true this would be very bad, Ruperts land being one of the more conservative areas.
You need to distinguish between the Diocese of Rupert’s Land which is essentially Winnipeg and outlying areas in Manitoba and the Province of Rupert’s Land which goes from the Diocese of Keewatin, all of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta and the Diocese of the Arctic. I think that this resolution was the one that came before the synod of the Diocese of Rupert’s Land, not the Province.
Thanks – the latest edition of the Anglican Faith Handbook doesn’t have that handy map of Canada. How come all the Dioceses voting for SSBs are the ones without financial stability and are likely to shrink to nothing in no time at all? Niagara, Huron, Montreal, Rupert’s Land. I guess New Westminster used to be financial viable – but not now.
Ah, thanks for the clarification Brian.
That should be easy to check – was it the diocese or the province that just had a synod?
It was the diocese, not the province. The Synod was supposed to take place Nov 6 – 8. Apparently it did.
#5 – is any diocese financially comfortable?
The Anglican Diocese of Toronto reported a $574,000 surplus in 2007 and $6.4 million surplus in 2006.
As of December 31, 2007, the Diocese of Toronto’s Consolidated Trust Fund reported net assets of $96 million ($43 million invested on behalf of various parishes and $53 million for the diocese itself).
Spoke to a delegate to the Synod of the Diocese of Rupert’s Land this evening and he corroborated the facts sent in the email. He concurred that many delegates from rural parishes were not able to be present due to freezing rain and most of those would have voted against the motion. The mood is one of sorrow rather than anger.
Toronto is probably one of the few. All we seem to hear in the news regarding Diocese finances is doom and gloom.
Thanks ML #11 for passing on this info. Here in Brandon only a few hours away from the Diocese of Ruperts Land we are still not hearing anything out of the synod.