On from the open letter posted by Zacchaeus Fellowship, we notice VOL has a comment left on the same story, saying:
The Anglican Church of Canada has refused to post this letter on it’s “Setting Sail” forum; what is supposed to encourage dialogue before her General Synod, this coming week.
The link for Setting Sail would be here. This is unsubstantiated right now, any conformation from readers would be welcome.
We note this did happen in General Synod 2007 – where the Zacchaeus Fellowship was denied voice. Wherever General Synod 2010 would like to set sail to, one suspects that the Zacchaeus Fellowship won’t be welcome onboard.
UPDATE: Received by email:
The comment by ZachD on the Virtue on Line page must be a separate rejection. I tried to post a link in the comment thread on the topic “Considering Sexuality – Once Again.” I had seen the Zacchaeus posting on your blog and thought it would be good if liberal readership saw it too, on “their” blog about GS issues. Simply providing the link for information was refused as “promoting a group” rather than accepted as a contribution to the discussion. Granted the discussion was going in a different direction, but it was rather an odd refusal. The discussion question was: What do you think about this different method of discernment for controversial issues at General Synod? However, the second comment by Gillian Wallace is in direct opposition to the contents of the Zacchaeus Fellowship letter, so I thought I was good to go putting it in the comment thread. I wonder if it would have been rejected if I had put it directly in the reply section to her comment?
There’s a certain hypocrisy in calling for inclusion whilst excluding others. The problem, of course, is the very existence of the Zacchaeus Fellowship is a thorn in the side to some folks. Because their yardstick is experience, there is no easy reply to the stories that the Zacchaeus Fellowship tell. It appears that it is preferable to muzzle the Fellowship and shove them into a cupboard – the very one that the same folks appear dead set against when they see it applying to themselves. Double standards….
I can just hear the synod planners now …… darnit how did they find out so soon.
When is everyone going to get it? The “lib” ruse is to dupe believers (Conservative Christians) into a “listening process.” But when ACoC is asked to “listen” to the other side of the story they refuse and disallow those voices. The ACoC is a hating Church that tries to eliminate everything that does not go along with their heretical directions. Insincerity, duplicity, and subversion certainly seem to have become the hallmarks of this declining organization.
The proof is in the pudding and this pudding has been out of the fridge too long.
This has made it on to the Setting Sail comment stream in a reply to a comment by “brian”:
“Discussion only trends to what is known” – An excellent point Brian. How many people know of the stance of the Zacchaeus Fellowship – a group formed in the Anglican Church of Canada to speak on behalf of those who struggle with and/or have overcome same sex attraction and yet still uphold the Biblical requirement that sex be only between one man and one woman in marriage? See http://www.anglicanessentials.ca/wordpress/index…. for their plea to Synod delegates who will be voting on this contentious issue. They have actually written that the Anglican Church of Canada is “unsafe” for them. Who remembers those who do not wish to embrace same sex desire when they are demanding the right to bless sinful sex? The squeaky wheel is definitely getting the grease in the ACoC. It seems people like Gillian have forgotten that there are those whose desire to follow God is greater than their desire for a form of sexual relationship which He forbids. We have reached an impasse. I agree with Brian that a decision based on scholarly Bible study, not “discussion” is what is needed.