8:30 a.m.
Good morning from Halifax! The foghorn is sounding, so things are about to get underway.
Morning Prayer and Bible Study. Worship is being led by the youth.
Juggling contest results – no, I’m not joking.
Sexuality Discernment Discussion #6 and Decision
June 9th statement read (it is published below). Abp. Hiltz calls for prayer.
Discussions now taking place in small groups
Resolutions
Motion A115 Affirms the June 9 sexuality statement.
Speaker: Important we have a statement for the church. Would like to have gone further. A lot of yakking about “pain”.
Hiltz: the statement reflects the view of the synod. Keep that in mind.
Dio. of Fredericton. Deeply moved and grateful for the process. Draft is an Anglican compromise. In discussion groups there was mutual respec.
Dio. of ??? Doesn’t like “human sexuality” – it’s is too broad. Represents most of the voices.
Dio. of Toronto. Thrilled with statement. Not sure what “full inclusion of gay……” section. Why was aboriginal singled out.
Speaker: Spoke the truth with love. What we’ve done is an honourable and just thing. It presents a true portrait of where we are.
Dio. of Algoma. Fails to acknowledge that inaction is actually an action. It is actually an affirmation of Local Option and that is how it will be seen by dioceses. “Full Inclusion” is not accurate – it’s more like “growing inclusion”
Dio. of Algoma. We have charted a new course.
Dio. of Ottawa. Founding member of Integrity, Ottawa. Supports resolution.
Dio. of Yukon – Terry Buckle. Element of risk in the document. Lot of give and take in staying together. Affirms resolution.
Dio. of Western Newfoundland. Let’s keep moving forward.
Speaker – Responding to the person who thinks a decision is being made. Not legislating in document. This is an enormous compromise.
Speaker – a lot of language in the document that is difficult to understand. What will out bishop do with it?
Dio. of Athabasca. Rest of church needs the experience we had at synod. Should not be used as a licnse to do what you want.
From religious order. Learned 2 new words: Go slow, go careful. Don’t go past the boundaries.
Dio. of Niagara. Disappointed by document. Didn’t like the small groups. Haven’t moved forward.
Dio. of Frederiction. Member of Integrity. Statement doesn’t go far enough. Still support it.
Dio of ??? support resolution. Best we can do for the moment.
Dio. of Moosonee. Need to honour indigenous people.
Speaker – this document doesn’t go far enough. It’s a human rights issue.
Dio. of Rupertsland. Desire to be pastoral – how to communicate it.
Religious orders: doesn’t go far enough, but not prepared to pay the price.
Debate closed – Bp. Colin Johnson meanders on “paradox”.
Motion Passed.
C008 C009, are withdrawn. Still to be presented: C010 C011
Motion C011 Amendment toadd “in conversation with gay and lesbian voices and with the full range of theological opinion in the Canadian Church”
Amendment Passed.
A second amendment to include “ex-gay voices” too. This will be an interesting one.
Speaker: Dio of Montreal – speaks against 2nd motion. All ready includes “so-called ex gays” [good grief]. The ex-gays are too few, apparently – watering things down.
Speaker: agrees with the 2nd amendment – wants to hear the voice of ex-gays – all part of a spirit of generosity.
Second amendment – defeated! So much for inclusion – Galloping hypocrisy.
Speaking on the motion itself:
Dio. of Arctic. In favour of motion. Wants unbiased press – specifically Anglican Journal.
Speaker: Need to look at “full human sexuality” transgender etc.
Speaker: it’s an on-going conversation. Speaker mentioned “vagina” for effect.
Speaker: Specific groups of people are being mentions. Will anyone be engaged further? Is everyone at the same level? For many homosexuality is not a priority.
Speaker: In favour of motion as it stands.
Speaker: Don’t like the words “human sexuality”. Really should be limited to same-sex blessings – another amendment to add same-sex blessing.
Speaker: against amendment.Too limiting – can’t speak about transgender, for example.
Speaker: against amendment. Needs heterosexual advice on co-habiting couples.
Amendment: Defeated
Motion Passed
PWRDF Presentation
Surprised at Terry Buckles statement. It might have been as much as could be done, but it’s not acceptable to me – codifying the local option shenanegans of the past 3 years.
I’m really disappointed in Terry Buckle…and he’s the Zacchaeus Fellowship Chaplain too. What’s he doing affirming this kind of apostate waffle? Maybe Bishop William would be a more appropriate “pastoral care” champion for that disenfranchised group.
I sit in stunned silence that they would so blatantly discriminate against ex-gays. It all starts to make sense now though. The god they worship is human sexuality. Anything that threatens their god must be crushed. I was foolish to think they would have respected the LORD, who protects the weak and downtrodden.
I’m really less interested in the formal meetings (whose outcomes, given the typical cherry-picking of delegates, is completely predictable) than in the “water cooler talk” that must be going on outside of them. David, have you heard any buzzings about the recent actions of the ABC with regard to TEC? If so, do you get any sense that ACoC might finally be getting the idea that there could be consequences for their behaviour too?
Ellie,
Yes, very much so, and I think that the final “sexual discernment” document which was passed reflects the fact that the ACoC doens’t want sanctions slapped on it, yet it wants the wiggle room to carry on with SSBs in dioceses that want to.
The sanctions themselves are still pretty feeble as far as I can see, but it was obvious in the KJS interview that she didn’t like the fact that her people have been removed from a committee or two: She was bristling at being “excluded” – one of the day’s little pleasures for me.
As for the cooler talk, those who place unity above all are happy, those who have strong views on either side are less than happy. Some appear, naively as far as I am concerned, to think that things have gone well – they haven’t actually gone anywhere – the whole thing was a colossal waste of time and money….
David, Could you find out why on earth Bishop Buckle would support such a Motion? Also, could you find out which bishops voted for and against this motion? Thanks.
And Jesse, don’t be so surprised. The very existence of ex-gays gives the lie to everything that Integrity says about their “theological” and “scientific” position. Ex-gays are the biggest threat to their argument – of course they would be excluded deliberately in this motion. Any way they can be silenced has been and is being done in the process that the ACoC has taken. Note who has not got speaking priviledges at General Synod; note that Zacchaeus Fellowship did not have speaking priviledges at GS2007 either.
Seems to me that there are many within ACoC that want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to remain part of WAC, and in good standing at that, while at the same time completely ignore everything that the majority in WAC are saying. Perhaps they think that at some time in the future the rest of WAC will come to see things their way? Just keep talking, just keep talking, just keep talking. Those of us who have come to realize that what they are saying are not the words of God but are in fact the words of evil will no longer listen. We should encourage all true Anglicans to also no longer listen to the words of evil.
Hi all.
Was (am) there. Took notes.
Dealing with it, presently.
Will respond more fully later.
As our Lord lives and reigns,
Daryle.
I haven’t been around these parts in a while, but still read occasionally. Not sure anyone remembers who I am, but oh well …
Just a response to #7 AMPisAnglican that democracy and rule by majority aren’t necessarily biblical ways of making decisions … in that strain of logic, you can’t decry the majority in Canada for wanting something you don’t (whether in church, politics or wherever) by appealing to another majority. Casting lots may be simpler, but I suspect would be less satisfactory.
We can rely on the God who has obviously chosen a lot of people on all sides of the present issues to work through them if we trust Him enough to work through them.
I am also very disappointed with Terry Buckle. His position seems to relate to his backing down from his offer of alternate episcopal oversight to orthodox parishes in the Diocese of New Westminster. At the time I believed he would stand up for the faith but obviously he wants to fade into the background and be swept away by the apostate leadership under Fred Hiltz. Clearly he has abandoned his vows even if that act arose from the general tenure of this synod.
Hello Carl (9)
I may be missunderstanding what you say, so if I’ve got it wrong than please accept my apologyze.
Your post gives me the impression that in practically anything or any issue that people are struggling with the Hand of God is present and guiding, and that in the end God’s Will be done. I do not fully agree with this. I think that whenever people choose to ignore God, God basically stays out of it. Perhaps this is part of the gift of free will.
In order for poeple to work through issues towards the Will of God there must first be a genuine effort to abide by God. This is appearantly lacking at GS as there seems to be many there that are more interested in pushing a secular agenda than in following God.
Additionally, I can’t accept Church as a democracy, at least not on theological items. It would be like having the students (Lay member) and teachers (Ordained members) of a school telling the principal (Episcopate) how to run things. Obviously quite backwards.