Anglican Planet interview with Bishop Patrick Yu
Mar 25th, 2009 by David
I have friends in the Toronto Diocese who used to assure me that the diocese is conservative and would never allow same-sex blessings. One of the supposed conservative bishops is Patrick Yu, the area bishop for York-Scarborough. He was interviewed recently by the Anglican Planet; in the interview he reveals that he is not quite as conservative as we thought, after all. From the Anglican Planet:
TAP: At General Synod in 2007 you voted against a local option (by diocese) for same-sex blessings (SSBs). Today you are supporting a local option for SSBs in parishes in the Diocese of Toronto. What has changed?
Patrick Yu: I have struggled with the issue since the 70’s. Looking back, it has been a mixture of resistance and support. I did resist a hasty, non-reflective revisionism but I also resisted a narrow and non-reflective conservatism as well. Recently I find myself resisting schism, particularly wholesale condemnations of the kind Jesus warns against which often violate the ninth commandment! [Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.] Perhaps less known is my support for a public place for gays and lesbians which is distinct from marriage. I also work hard to secure a place for those people, priests and parishes who, in conscience, cannot pronounce same-sex relationships blessed as marriages. If you look at my voting record at GS2007, and more importantly, my activity in the House of Bishops around that time, you will see this combination, which often feels like tension. That has not changed. What has changed is a growing conviction that God is calling the Diocese of Toronto to a renewed sense of mission, particularly in the area of owning and sharing our faith in Jesus with others, and growing churches. I see our effort as a way to break the logjam around sex which threatens to paralyse us in our mission, particularly in public discussions like Synod.
TAP: Do you feel that it is ironic that your motion at General Synod which was later adopted by the House of Bishops for “the most generous pastoral response possible within the current teachings of the church” on same-sex blessings should lead directly to same-sex blessings? Is that what you intended with your original motion?
PY: I did contribute the phrase “the most generous pastoral response possible within the current teaching of the church.” I said that to the Toronto Synod in 1995. My ongoing discernment about this issue involves many factors. Even in the scriptures, I have to consider the nature of marriage in Genesis, the proscription on homosexuality in Leviticus and Paul, and God’s generous love towards all of us so radically shown in Jesus. Tradition loses its authority when a lot of people no longer see the issues clearly. I don’t think we have clarity now, not in Canada, and not in the Communion. The Toronto bishops got it right when we identified the many conversations on the subject: What is homosexuality? What is marriage? What is a blessing? Rather than assuming some kind of prophetic inspiration, we admit, as the House of Bishops said in 2006, that we have no consensus. The action that is contemplated is intended to be an appropriate pastoral response for us in the middle of this confusion. You will not find any theological preamble for our action even though, I admit, all actions have an implied theology.
TAP: Why can something that is morally wrong (or socially unjust) in one parish be morally right (or socially just) in another? (We are not talking merely liturgical styles such as for or against incense.)
PY: If you look carefully at what is being proposed, and measure them against the alternatives that are proposed or currently available in other jurisdictions, you will find them quite cautious, even restrictive. What is contemplated in a few parishes are celebrations of commitment. I am resigned that they will be called blessings or even marriages. I fail to see a moral inconsistency. The framework which governs all parishes in the Diocese of Toronto is pastoral generosity which is not confused with marriage. Paul’s treatment of eating idol meat (1 Corinthians 8 ) is relevant. There are very important theologies that this practice touches on: the power of other gods, doctrinal knowledge, Christian freedom, is it from rules or from idolatry? Paul got into those issues but at the end of the day instructed the Corinthians to put their conscience and theologies aside and act in a way that will help their brothers and sisters. I very much like people from all sides to consider that in how they react.
TAP: Doesn’t the Toronto plan defy the moratorium asked for by General Synod 2007, Lambeth 2008, the House of Bishops last November and the last three Primates’ Meetings?
PY: I, with a large number of Canadian bishops, would very much like the moratorium to hold. But it is already broken, on the one hand, by our immediate neighbouring dioceses [Niagara, Huron] who made public announcements to proceed; on the other hand, by a very determined effort from the Primate of the Southern Cone to continue to accept breakaway dioceses and parishes. The Lambeth bishops made it very clear that the only way a moratorium would work is when all three clauses are adhered to. It becomes clear only weeks after the conference that it will not happen. It is hard to ask one party to hold to a moratorium if the other party is not even willing to talk about it.
I think you have lumped the requests of the bodies you mentioned into one. General Synod did not authorise the option by local diocese to bless, Lambeth made a theological determination, the House of Bishops statement said that ‘a change of canon is not appropriate at this time.’ We are not changing any canons and finally, the authority claimed by some primates about the Primates’ Meeting is not consistent with their stated purpose and is disputed by many, I would think a majority, of primates.
TAP: The Diocese of Toronto will be the first Canadian jurisdiction to allow SSBs without a synodical vote. Do you feel this is right?
PY: You will remember that there was a synod in 2004 and that decision was postponed until after 2007. A synod motion is still possible but the bishops do not believe it is wise to go that route for the following reasons:
* The model motion from Niagara, Montreal, Huron and Ottawa made civil marriage a condition, and we want to stay very clear of marriage, which is a General Synod jurisdiction.
* They ask the bishop to do something. The bishop can do it or not, the result is no different from a simple pastoral action.
I also believe the motion will pass. The debate, however, will detract from the bishops’ agenda, which is mission and evangelism.
The word that comes to mind is ‘casuistry’. This is said with great sorrow.
Yet another Wolf in Shepherd’s clothing!
And what a horrible perversion of scripture (1 Cor. 8 ) where Mr. Yu claims “Paul got into those issues but at the end of the day instructed the Corinthians to put their conscience and theologies aside and act in a way that will help their brothers and sisters”.
Paul implores the reader NOT to do something to cause the weaker brethern to stumble. Clearly Yu wants to DO something to appease one brother (the practising gays & lesbians?). Of course, it doesn’t seem to matter to him if he causes the biblical believers to stumble……
Thing is though, it causes the same sex attracted people to stumble too…
The practice of the same-sex blessings in the Diocese of Toronto (when it happens) will diminish the church’s mission and evangelism.
I empathize with Bishop Yu. I can see how he has struggled with this issue through the past decade although do not agree with his final conclusions. As I listen to the words he speaks in this interview I ask,
“Is he a wolf in sheeps clothing, or a sheep surrounded by devouring wolves?”
Patrick’s “conversion” to the schismatic, heretical, and non-Scriptural positions of the Anglican Church of Canada in the name of “unity” saddens me greatly. When he was elected to the episcopacy in that renegade and fallen pretender church-like organisation he was a ray-of-hope in my mind. However, in order to retain his regal position and to avoid the vehement attacks that would otherwise come from the heretics, he seems to be turning to Satan in the rejection of the Will of the Holy Trinity as clearly expressed in the Holy Scripture.
His rationale is typically convoluted and illogical. But it touches the bell-weather points of the anti-Scriptural heresies that are rampant within the ACoC. I suggest this former conservative hope needs the sincere prayers of faithful true Christians that he will come to that which is foreign to the liberal vocabulary - REPENTANCE! I will be praying for him and looking for his penitent return to the Salvation in Jesus Christ.
#3 Kate:
Absolutely! The ACoC leadership appears deaf the cries of those who want to come out of the lifestyle. Groups like Living Waters and The Zacchaeus Fellowship are largely ignored.
#5 Liz
I can agree that Bishop Yu may be a sheep. But then he is in the wrong job: A bishop should be a shepherd of the flock and is called (at least in the BCP) to drive out erroneous doctrine.
I have been thinking about how we chose our bishops lately. I don’t know +Yu, so this isn’t a comment on him personally. It does seem to me, though, that the traditional Anglican method of choosing bishops seems to select for “nice” people, rather than for people who are actually suited to be bishop. I have no clear ideas on what could be done about that, though.
Kate - I beleive the “nice” are elected Bishop largely because the clergy are fearful of those who would take seriously the power given them as Shepard’s and exercise it. Is it wise to allow employees to pick their employer?
Preach the truth boldly and without compromise. Those with ears to hear will come. You may have read this account of a letter from Nicky Gumbel of Alpha fame regarding the diocese of London (England) plan to close and sell a church. He writes, regarding another of Holy Trinity Brompton’s church plants,
Does that sound paralysed? I know for sure that Nicky didn’t achieve this growth by compromising in the same way +Yu and the diocese of Toronto think they have to.
Then Yu says,
Definitely the words of a sheep and a follower, not a shepherd or a leader.
#9 I don’t think it is wise. So what is the answer? I don’t know.
Hi Kate,
I think more weight should be given to the laity vote at an electoral synod. Don’t know how to do that. Maybe a larger percent needed in the Laity than Clergy? Possibly two of our (laity) votes counting for every clergy vote? Someone could come up with a formula I’m sure. But the bottom line is that most clegy will not vote to elect someone they feel will exercise the power of the office for fear that power might cramp their style of ministy.
Won’t make any difference. To elect, one needs a majority in both houses - clergy and laity. The problem as I have experienced it lies in the caliber of people we send to electoral Synods (quit sending people simply because they volunteer and have the time; these people should be of higher caliber even than our Wardens; and many good clergy are hampered by poor synod delegates) and do your research ahead of time - so often the Bishop who is elected is the lesser of many evils; nominate good people for the position. As for the clergy, if the people in the pew took their Christianity seriously they would be a great influence on the clergy and with a lot of prayer might even “convert” the unbelieving.
England has an appointments system. It isn’t perfect - but it sure beats the popularity poll.
ML,
I realize we need a majority in both houses. I am suggesting a change in that system that gives the laity more weight.
Yes of course we need good people attending synods and lots of information about candidates available to delegates. And a good search committee to screen candidiates.
But sometimes the clergy have already decided who they want for whatever their reasons and reach a majority vote long before the laity capitulate and fall into line.
If we feel we have a high caliber of laity representing the Diocese at an electoral synod, why do the clergy sometimes think that they are right in their selection and wait for us to change our votes?
What We need in the Anglican Church right now is Born again spirit filled born from above clergy and Bishops,those who have had an overpowering encounter with the living God. When a Person has had such an overpowering experience they will not want to live to serve man or according to the flesh,but would be seeking a city who’s builder and maker is God.I have heard a familier phrase to heavenly minded to be any earthly good,today it seems they’re to earthly minded to be any Heavenly good.Ican assure you there’s noone going to lead Me astray. My Prayer is that the Fire of the spirit would fall from Heaven and burn up the dross.
The idea of having Clergy and Laity vote for who is to Bishop seems rediculous to me. It is like having the teachers and students at a school voting for who will be principal. What makes far more sense is to have the involvement of Anglican Bishops from all Provinces participate in the selection. We are after all supposed to be in Communion with them, and what we do (as has been so often reported and stated) does effect them.
AMP - I would have agreed with you 20 years ago but fear now we have so few orthodox Bishops left it would be a bit like closing the stable door after the horses have bolted.
I am sure I am a voice for many. With great hopes for an orthodox voice Bishop Patrick was elected. Now,
aghast, we are dumbfounded.
The scriptures talk about territorial spirits that control. Those who are in the ivory tower sometimes, get carried away by their own powers of intellect and reasoning. Instead of the Spirit, the mind leads.
God have mercy.
Maya (#19), based on my three and half short years of exposure to Canadian Anglicanism, Bishops Yu’s comments do not surprise me and actually align well with what I expect to hear from ACoC Bishops. My simplistic take on things is that the door to becoming a Bishop in the ACoC has been tightly shut for many years to those who hold truly orthodox views and are willing to make a public stand for them. I’m curious as to your view on why my perspective would be so different from the “many” that you are a voice for.
You can’t even get ordained Deacon in the diocese of Ottawa if you are too vocal about being orthodox, much less become a bishop.
Warren #19, because in all these years of knowing him, he has come across as very orthodox, even in the Bible Study he just completed at Little T. in TO. Folks that we know also have been totally taken aback, you could feel some of that in the interview. Minority encouragement is one of the Diocese of TO’s strengths.
Actually #20, we would never know if a bishop were truly orthodox or willing to take a stand for orthodox views in the ACoC due to the apparent removal of the backbone and other vital organs at consecration. However, since 2001 it seems the liberal bishops have found a way to transplant new spines and vitals and have taken a stand and then some for their views.
LOL
“Behold, your house is left unto you desolate” Mat 23.38
“Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plaques.” Rev 18.4
Christopher (#25), I’m sympathetic to what I think you are trying to communicate, but some context would be helpful. Throwing out a couple of verses without explanation can give people the impression that you are a “proof texter” (something I’ve likely been guilty of from time to time). Proof texting is a popular approach in the faith tradition I was raised in.
I started my faith journey as a Pentecostal and now find myself in the Anglican Church, right in the eye of the storm, in the Diocese of Niagara. This issue truly pains me, but what hurts more is the mudslinging that I have witnessed by both sides each deeming the other unchristian and calling the other to repentance. I know Bishop Yu and he is godly man and loves the Lord. For some of you to call him a wolf and to question his ability to lead I believe is uncalled for. The issue has gone beyond the Biblical text to personal attack. We should pray for one another and not a prayer that wishes to win the other to your side of the issue. This issue is multilayered and I agree with the good Bishop that we should “…resist a hasty, non-reflective revisionism [and] also … a narrow and non-reflective conservatism as well.” Blessing on all of you and please keep the Anglican Church of Canada in your prayers that the Lord’s will be done even if it doesn’t fit our categories of understanding.
Jonathan (#27), I spent my childhood and early adulthood in the PAOC (and that’s where most of my family still is). I’m curious as to whether you tired of Pentecostalism, had a doctrinal disagreement, or the Anglican church just offered something better? For me, I parted ways for both doctrinal reasons and practice (i.e., worship style).