It looks as if the push for SSBs at GS2010 will be for the local option.

From The Record:

Leaders hope to avoid heated debate with new format for meeting of governing body

When the Anglican Church of Canada’s highest governing body meets in Halifax next week, the temperature in the room probably won’t be as high as usual.

It seems the heat has been turned down on same-sex talk that has pitted Anglicans against each other for more than a decade.

Bitter debates about whether to bless, or not bless, the relationships of same-sex couples has led to strained relations, the defection of dozens of theologically conservative congregations and to court battles over church buildings in Ontario and British Columbia. (please see chronology in factbox).

Some of the most heated debates have been held at the Anglican Church of Canada’s General Synod — the national church’s highest governing body — which is held every three years.

More than 400 delegates, including bishops, clergy and laypeople, will discuss and debate various resolutions during General Synod in Halifax next week (June 3 to 11).

But unlike most recent General Synods, delegates heading into next week’s meeting don’t have a polarizing resolution to ponder.

In the past, delegates debated contentious questions such as whether blessing same-sex unions was a matter of core doctrine and whether or not to affirm that individual dioceses have the authority to approve same-sex blessings.

But this year, according to Ven. Paul Feheley, instead of debating contentious motions right off the bat, delegates will form small groups and discuss the church’s opinions around human sexuality.

It’s possible that from those discussions, he said, delegates will craft and approve a pastoral statement.

“The hope and the belief is that this may lead to a better level of communication, a better level of understanding,” said Feheley, communications co-ordinator for General Synod.

People in the church don’t agree on same-sex blessings, so they’re working on ways to highlight what they agree on rather than what they disagree on, he added.

“That may be far healthier a way for us as a church,” Feheley said.

That doesn’t mean a contentious motion might not be raised by a delegate on the floor.

But at this point, it seems the new approach is one thing theologically conservative and liberal camps in the church can agree on. Representatives of advocacy groups on both sides of the issue say they’re not planning to raise a specific motion at General Synod.

Ron Chaplin, a delegate from Ottawa, said he’s satisfied with the small-group discussion approach because there isn’t sufficient support to go ahead with a specific motion on same-sex blessings.

“I don’t think there is sufficient consensus for either side to prevail,” he said.

Chaplin is an executive member of the Ottawa chapter of a group called Integrity, which promotes equal treatment for gays and lesbians in the church. He’s also a member of St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church which is the only parish in the Ottawa diocese with the bishop’s approval to conduct same-sex blessings.

Ottawa is one of four dioceses across Canada where the bishop has approved some sort of blessings for same-sex couples.

Integrity is not planning any motions at this time, Chaplin said.

“We’re going into this with a very flexible position. Our feeling is the status quo we can live with,” he said.

Chaplin said adamant opposition to equality for homosexuals is damaging the church’s credibility.

“Young people see the church as a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites,” he said.

And if General Synod issues a pastoral statement, Chaplin said he would like to see it endorse an individual diocese’s right to decide whether or not to establish blessings for same-sex couples.

Such a move is known as the “local option.”

Rev. Murray Henderson is one church member who would like the see the local option denounced.

Henderson is vice-chair of Anglican Communion Alliance, a group of theologically conservative Canadian Anglicans formerly known as the Anglican Essentials Federation.

He isn’t a delegate to General Synod, but he said he will be at the meeting to speak with delegates about various conservative talking points, motions and amendments.

Henderson said many people in the church would like to see a resolution that reflects a compromise between traditional and more liberal groups.

“A lot of people would like there to be some sort of motion that reflected a kind of peaceful compromise, but I’m not sure that that’s going to be an easy one to craft,” he said.

Henderson said there has been a breakdown of trust between people in the national church as well as among Anglicans around the world.

Liberals have broken trust, he said, by going ahead with blessing the unions of same-sex couples and ordaining openly gay bishops in same-sex relationships.

More theologically conservative bishops have broken trust, Henderson added, by offering oversight to disaffected Anglicans in Canada and the United States, thereby breaking the customary respect for another bishop’s jurisdiction.

One way to rebuild trust, he said, would be for everybody to adhere to moratoriums that have been called for by many bishops in Anglican churches around the world: to hold off on same-sex blessings, to refrain from ordaining gay bishops and to stay out of another bishop’s jurisdiction.

“To say ‘OK, let there be a cooling off point,’ ” Henderson said.

Rev. Brett Cane, chair of the Anglican Communion Alliance, also welcomes the process of conducting small-group discussions at General Synod.

“I think it’s better than bringing a motion,” he said in a recent interview.

“It has just been tragic to see the animosity and the anger that has developed and the way Christians have treated one another over this,” Cane added.

But disagreements over same-sex issues are just one of many potential disagreements in the church, he said.

A more important issue at this year’s General Synod is the discussion on a proposed Anglican Covenant because, he said, it would deal with how disputes are settled between churches in the 80-million member worldwide Anglican Communion.

The crux of the issue is which approach to religion will prevail, Cane said.

He said the worldwide church — including the theologically conservative churches in developing countries that oppose same-sex blessings — should be involved in helping Canadian Anglicans discern what Scripture counsels and what the Holy Spirit is calling the church to do.

Restricting themselves to “one narrow cultural perspective” which is currently “fashionable” isn’t in keeping with Anglican tradition, he said.

So Cane emphasizes the importance of the proposed Anglican covenant.

Rev. Greg Smith, for one, said he favours studying the proposed covenant for the next three years.

“A lot of the folks in the body of the church have no idea that this is happening or what the implications of it might be,” he said.

Smith is pastor at Christ Anglican Church in London, Ont., and a member of the organizing committee for Integrity in the Huron Diocese.

He said the Anglican Communion is a “loose federation” of independent churches such as the Anglican Church of Canada.

He’s worried that some provisions in the proposed covenant might give new disciplinary powers to a newly appointed committee in Anglican Communion.

“That sounds very much like it would take away that kind of (national church) sovereignty,” Smith said. “That makes me shiver.”

Feheley, principal secretary to the national church’s primate and communications co-ordinator for General Synod said the proposed covenant is designed to help Anglicans around the world move forward respectfully in discussions during times of disagreement.

But, he added, it will not solve all problems in the Anglican Communion.

“There are some who, I think, look upon the covenant as … a be-all, end-all document that will solve every issue in the communion,” Feheley said. “I don’t believe that.”

He points to comments Most Rev. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, made when the final wording of the proposed covenant was issued Dec. 17, 2009.

“It’s quite important in this process to remember what the Covenant is and what it isn’t,” Williams said. “It’s not going to solve all our problems, it’s not going to be a constitution, and it’s certainly not going to be a penal code for punishing people who don’t comply.”