felix hominum

two round ups of GS 2007

The Anglican Journal is offering copies of its "Anglican Journal Daily" - a quotidien report from GS 2007 in Winnipeg.  News, photos, tidbits etc.  You can get more info here.

As well, the Anglican Planet has a new issue online, with various takes, interviews and analysis on GS 2007.  You can view it here.

Bishop Jim Cowan (British Columbia) writes his diocese

+ Jim Cowan, Bishop of British Columbia, has written a letter to his diocese with his reflections on General Synod 2007.   I have not yet digested the whole thing, and so I won't post a snippet out of context.

Link to the pdf document here.
other letters from Canadian bishops  can be found here.

thanks to an email tip.

I know that  a number of Canadian bishops have not yet written formal responses to GS.  I look forward to hearing more from them.  As always, our first response is to uphold our leaders in prayer.

 

a letter from John Hodgins & the unity of Eucharist

A Letter to the Canadian House of Bishops

In response to A Statement from the House of Bishops to the Members of General Synod (2007) and the request: “We call upon every member of the Anglican Church of Canada to continue in their faithful discipleship and the work of theological and scriptural reflection and dialogue.”

Feast of Saint Peter and Saint Paul,

June 29, A.D. 2007

“For you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s.”

1 Corinthians 3: 18-24

(Proper 2: Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles )

Dear Friends in Christ,

In the recent Statement from the House of Bishops to General Synod regarding the issue of blessing the relationships of those who share in the sacramental life of Baptism and Eucharist there is an expression of pastoral concern but, unfortunately, there is also a threat to the unique blessing which the Holy Eucharist is for the unity of the Body of Christ.

Anglicans agree that the Holy Eucharist is the sacramental source and summit of our participation, during this earthly journey, in the life of the one eternal Christ Jesus who is the Word of God and God’s singular blessing upon humanity.

All baptized Christians are called to and welcomed at the Table of the Lord. In this great privilege we come as those who repent of our sins and seek the grace of God in our lives. Christ is the Sacrament of God and so, in the Eucharistic celebration of the Sacrament we express our unity with the One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church throughout the world (Solemn Declaration, 1893).

To suggest that in the celebration of relationships between individuals there is an additional blessing to be given or withheld apart from, or over and above the Sacrament of Unity is, I respectfully submit, to derogate from and potentially undermine what is the central act of Christian worship and blessing: the Holy Eucharist.

With respect to the solemnization of marriage, it is the development of Eucharistic doctrine which has given definition to the Celebration and Blessing of Marriage as we now have it. There has always and everywhere been, in the Church, a clear understanding that those who are in a state of grace (having received absolution from God through the confession of sin) are blessed in, by and through the Holy Communion which God shares with us in the one Person of Christ and which we share with one another as members of Christ’s one body.

All relationships, friendships and indeed Holy Marriage find their fullest meaning and blessing, for Christians, in this Holy Communion which is a celebration and renewal of the grace of Baptism. The dominical sacraments of the Gospel, Baptism and Eucharist (Article XXV), constitute the fullness of sacramental blessing which is shared by all those in communion with Christ. Holy Communion for the baptized presupposes that the states of life of those participating are sanctified, affirmed and blessed by God. Nothing liturgically could or should be added without detracting from the unity of these sacraments which convey the life of Christ who in his person is the unique Sacrament of God’s blessing for all humanity.

The instruction to celebrate relationships in the context of the Holy Eucharist, while at the same time withholding the blessing of the Church upon such relationships, is both paradoxical and contradictory. Such celebrations would lead to confusion and leave liturgical acts widely open to misinterpretation.

The celebration of the Eucharist by the baptized community is the greatest sacramental blessing of the Church united, as it is, with the other great Gospel sacrament, Baptism. This teaching is made clear in the Anglican tradition (Article XXV). Withholding a formal pronouncement of blessing while at the same time celebrating eucharistically a relationship within the Christian Church sends mixed messages and denigrates the Sacrament by suggesting that there is another blessing to be had which is somehow disconnected from the Sacrament of Unity, the Holy Eucharist.

In the early Church it is attested that men and women seeking to marry one another would first declare themselves to the social community and then come to share in the celebration of the Eucharist (Notes on Marriage in the Early Church, Robert Berringer). Their participation in Holy Communion was considered to be an expression of and sharing in the single blessing which is the life of Christ in the Church, his body, given for the life of the world. Any blessing pronounced by a bishop or priest is always understood to be an extension or articulation of the single blessing which is Christ, who is one with us in the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

In time, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit and over centuries, the official role of solemnization and recording of vows was assumed by the Church in many places. The Celebration of Marriage was instituted as “a public service of the Church” (BAS p. 526). For the first half of Christian history, however, many contend that the only blessing of Christian marriage and other relationships of professing Christians (holy orders, religious life, etc) was in the context of the Mass.

For good reason, only those committed to Christ in faith would celebrate their professions or states of life at the Eucharist with the clear understanding that only that which was inherently blessed by God and in conformity with sacred Scripture and tradition was to be celebrated in the Sacrament of Unity. Christ is the Sacrament of God. In the Holy Eucharist we share communion in Christ’s life and blessing. This is the single and unified source of liturgical blessing in the Christian community. No blessing may be added which is not inherently present within the dominical Sacrament of the Eucharist.

The suggestion that a further blessing may be added or withheld from those in a civil union or other relationship, apart from the blessing that is inherent in the Holy Eucharist, is to confuse the issue and to detract from Christ’s unique blessing. To presume that a bishop or priest might somehow add to the Sacrament or withhold pronouncing God’s blessing upon any person, state or relationship beyond what is celebrated in the Eucharist is to suggest a development of doctrine which is not within the jurisdiction of any single body of Christians.

As John W.B. Hill has pointed out in his essay, A Theology of Blessing and Liturgies of Blessing, “The mere pronouncement of a blessing can be seriously misunderstood if we forget that we are a eucharistic people. Blessing is not a power we wield but a gift we celebrate.” To be theologically consistent, then, the blessing of God celebrated in the context of the Holy Eucharist is complete. No other blessing may be added or withheld.

In summary: Provision for a celebration of relationships which presumes or indicates that the Holy Eucharist is lacking in some way and so may allow for or require a further blessing by a priest or bishop is fundamentally contrary to the received teaching of the Church. Such a provision inherently undermines the doctrine of the Church with regard to Sacrament. The concept of ‘blessing’ as set apart from or in addition to the expression of God’s love and friendship in the Holy Eucharist contradicts the nature of the Sacrament.

The notion of an additional blessing pronounced or withheld apart from the Eucharist celebrating a relationship is not in conformity with the formularies of the Church. For example, the BCP and BAS both allow for the celebration and blessing of a marriage outside of the Eucharist but the BAS rubric clearly states that “Where both bride and bridegroom are entitled to receive communion, it is desirable that the form of service in which the marriage rite is incorporated in the celebration of the eucharist be used.” (BAS p. 527). There is no provision, however, for the celebration of the Marriage Eucharist which precludes the blessing of the relationship because blessing is inherent within the Eucharist. To sever or undermine the unity of Eucharist and blessing contradicts the very nature of the Eucharist which is the fullest expression of God’s blessing.

In fact, Eucharistic celebrations of the sort proposed in the Statement would easily be misunderstood as attempting to do indirectly what has not been approved. At the same time, withholding a blessing, would indicate that such an extraordinary blessing (outside of the Eucharistic celebration) is in some way superior to, or in addition to the singular blessing of God in Christ which is celebrated most completely in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.

For these reasons I respectfully request that the instructions for the celebration of the Eucharist for civil unions or other relationships in the Statement to General Synod (2007) be withdrawn.

John L. Hodgins

Chatham , Ontario

+ Victoria Matthews letter to clergy

Note to self:  as we consider the views of our bishops, our first response must be to uphold them in prayer.

UPDATE: 7  +David Ashdown, Keewatin:  pastoral letter

UPDATE : 6  +Anthony Burton, Saskatchewan, has a letter posted here.

UPDATE; 5  +Claude Miller, Fredericton, has a pastoral letter:  link here

[excerpt]:  An editorial in the Winnipeg Free Press at the close of General Synod said "Canadian Anglicans took a hesitant, ambiguous step toward expansion of gay rights on the weekend." The editorial attributed our hesitancy to our desire to preserve the unity of a communion that includes "African and Asian branches [that] condemn homosexuality."

I challenge that stereotype. Our African and Asian churches no more speak with one voice than our Canadian church does, or our own diocese does for that matter. General Synod agreed with the St. Michael Report that blessing same-sex unions does not conflict with core doctrine of the Church and voted against granting permission for each diocese to make its own choice about blessing such unions.

We will continue to struggle with this issue because it is complicated and difficult, but to make it simple would be disrespectful.

UPDATE: 4  + Ralph Spence, Niagara;  press release;

News Releases:

A Message from Bishop Ralph and Bishop-elect Michael regarding the defeated motion on same-sex blessings at General Synod

Dear Friends,

Today, two important resolutions came before the General Synod of our Church.  The first proposed ýthat the blessing of same-sex unions is not in conflict with the core doctrine (in the sense of being creedal) of the Anglican Church of Canada.ý  This motion passed.

The second, proposed to affirm the authority of a synod and its bishop to allow rites for the blessing of committed monogamous same-sex unions.  It passed clearly in the Order of Laity and in the Order of Clergy, but was narrowly defeated in the Order of Bishops.

We share in the profound sense of loss that many in our churches will experience in the wake of this decision, especially gay and lesbian Anglicans along with many of their family and friends.

Please be assured of our prayers and of our commitment to press forward in faith towards an ever more welcoming and inclusive church.

+Ralph, Bishop of Niagara

The Venerable Michael Bird (Coadjutor Bishop-elect)

UPDATE: 3  +Terry Buckle, Yukon, & Archbishop: Scott from Magic Statistics has his letter here

UPDATE: 2 +Derek Hoskin, Bishop of Calgary, writes his diocese: pdf here .

UPDATE: +Colin Johnson, Bishop of Toronto, writes his diocese:  here is the pdf.

+ Victoria Matthews, Bishop of Edmonton, has circulated a letter to her clergy.  It is also intended that a copy will be published in local media.

June 28, 2007

Dear Clergy,

The reporting about the resolutions voted on at the Anglican Church of Canada's General Synod has been confined to resolutions 186 and 187, both of which are narrowly focused on the blessing of same -sex unions,  In actual fact, there was a very interesting development at our Synod which showed remarkable consistency and faithfulness.

Early in the Synod we were asked to vote to accept the Canadian response to the Windsor Report on relations within the Anglican Communion.  Rather than signing on without question, the Canadian response is nuanced and carefully scripted.  We voted that belonging to the Anglican Communion matters to us and we are committed to the ongoing conversation.

Next on the agenda was the St. Michael Report by the Primate's Theological Commission.  Asked to give a theological opinion on whether the blessing of same-sex unions is a matter of doctrine, the answer was a clear "yes" but not of core doctrine.  It was explained that core doctrine, sometimes called dogma, speaks of who God is and God's saving activity.  In short it can be said to speak of the doctrines of the Holy Trinity and of the Incarnation.  This core doctrine is the content of the Apostles' and Nicene creeds.  Thus the Report concludes that the blessing of same-sex unions would be a matter of doctrine but it is not so important as to warrant schism.  (It should not be communion breaking.)  This resolution also passed easily.

Next came a series of resolutions about process.  An attempt was made to require that resolutions 186 and 187 be deemed to have passed only if the received a 60% majority.  However at this point tin the proceedings there was considerable confusion about the voting procedure requirements.  It is possible people did not know what was being voted on.  Whether they understood or not, the resolution to require 60% failed and a simple majority was now required for resolutions 186 and 187.

Resolution 186 states that the blessing of same-sex unions is not in conflict with the core doctrine of the Anglican Church of Canada.  In other words the blessing of same-sex unions is not in the conflict with the proclamation of God as the Holy Trinity and as the Word made flesh.  As one bishop later commented, even the most conservative African primate should be able to agree with that.  This resolution passed by a slim majority.

Lastly, in an atmosphere that seemed more like filibuster than debate, a resolution was presented and passed asking the Primate's Theological Commission and Faith, Worship and Ministry Committee to prepare a report and educational materials in advance of 2010 General Synod about whether the blessing of same-sex unions is a faithful, Spirit-led development of the doctrine of marriage.  Remember, the St. Michael Report said the blessing of same-sex unions is a matter of doctrine but until now no one has been asked to try to actually develop a doctrine of same-sex unions.  It also asked for a theological rationale to accompany the new Canon 21 on marriage, which is come before General Synod 2010.

in short, the Anglican Church of Canada General Synod consistently demonstrated that it is more interested in considering redefining marriage than continuing the debate about blessings.

The outcome of these various resolutions is that our Primate stays at the table of the Primates' meetings; it afford full membership to our Anglican Consultative Council members; and it allows time for further theological reflection at all levels of our church, including all bishop of the Anglican Communion at next year's Lambeth Conference in Canterbury, England.

In addition to the above, pastoral provisions provided by the Bishop's Letter of April 30th, 2007 ensures further inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of the Anglican Church of Canada.

In Christ
+ Victoria
Bishop of Edmonton
Anglican Church of Canada

If any other Canadians know of Bishops' responses, I 'm sure it would be helpful to gather them together as we pray and think through where the Spirit is leading the Church.

This letter in Download letter_to_clergy.pdf

BREAKING: Canadian Bishops Seek Oversight of African Clergy, Laity

[Toronto:  Church House]

In a move that many had predicted, a number of Canadian Bishops have appealed to African Primatial Archbishops to give them oversight of conservative clergy and laity.  The move came in the wake of a contentious vote at the Anglican Church of Canada's recent General Synod.  While a majority of clergy and laity voted in favour of a resolution to allow same sex blessings, the motion was defeated in the House of Bishops by a slim margin.

"What we have here is a situation in which the bishops no longer feel they can oversee such dioceses",  read an official statement from the office of the new Canadian Primate, Fred Hiltz.  "It is unfortunate that the Bishops have decided to go this route, as we thought that the issue could have been decided by a game of street hockey.  I could have remained neutral and simply yelled out CAR whenever the need arose."

There is no word yet as to whether or not their African counterparts will grant the dissenting bishops new clergy and laity, although an announcement is expected later today.

idea seed Mad Priest

A brief list of bloggers who were at General Synod

Despite any theological differences we may have, we are all united in the blogosphere:

No particular order or description; click and look around.

Delegates:

Neale Adams:  Draw the Circle Wide

John Oakes:  General Synod Blog

Nfld & Labrador Youth:  E: \mmaus

Charles Wilson:  my gs07 blog

Steve London:  Our Hearts are Restless

Observers:

Preston Parsons:  Baby Priest

"Essentials Live Blog":  AEC Blog

what does "not in conflict" mean?

I suppose that I will join the 3 dozen other Anglicans in Canada who will wish to ponder this one out.  The rest of them are probably having a nap, as the legislative spirituality of General Synod can be draining to the soul.  So what exactly is one supposed to make of this statement?

• I am not in conflict the President of France.  That doesn't mean a whole lot.  It might mean that we don't have much to do with each other, or simply that we have never met:  we are neither friends nor enemies, and so we don't have a chance to be in conflict. (I'm sure we would be if we ever had to share a cab together).
• It might mean that one can be a Christian and yet hold that the practice of SSB does not contradict the basic "core doctrine" of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Resurrection.  Some folks might have trouble with that, but then again some folks might not.  It is sort of the MC Hammer "Can't touch this" version of doctrine.  We can be fellow Christians, but disagree on secondary doctrine.
• It might mean that SSB is not in conflict with core doctrine, but it might be in conflict with secondary doctrine.  It might be shown to be in conflict with the doctrine of marriage, for instance.
• It might not be in conflict with core doctrine, but be in conflict with good "order and discipline".  Maybe it is a category error in the resolution.  As one person said to me after the vote:  "It's like saying that pineapples are not in conflict with picket fences".  Don't know on that one.
• It might mean that it can't be in conflict with ANY subsequent doctrine:  surely the walls of a house cannot be in conflict with the foundation. 
• It might mean that we have no idea what we are talking about.

Those are just a few possibilities.  I'm sure there will be more.

Ingham, homophobia & the apostles' fellowship

Canada's only Anglican bishop to authorize the blessing of homosexual unions said yesterday the refusal by his fellow bishops to approve the rite for the national church is the product of institutional inertia rooted in homophobia.

Bishop Michael Ingham of the Vancouver-area diocese of New Westminster said homophobia, hiding behind interpretations of scripture, remains an acceptable prejudice in Canadian Anglicanism.

"There are members of our church who staunchly defend that. In my view, [it] is a total misreading of scripture and a misuse of the Bible to oppress people. But they clearly want to continue to do that."

From the Globe & Mail
which also has an interesting online poll

It is this sort of response which prevents us from being able to "agree to disagree".  Those who uphold traditional teaching on marriage are simply reduced to the ad hominem "homophobic".

If bishops are not core doctrine

As they were considered a matter of adiaphora by Hooker in the Laws,

then might one also argue that episcopal crossing of boundaries is not in conflict with the core doctrine (in the sense of being creedal) of the Anglican Church of Canada?

Just a thought that came to me on the plane ride, with a variety of scenarios ensuing.

New West Resolution withdrawn

Moved by: Mr. Stephen Schuh from the Diocese of New Westminster

Seconded By: The Rt. Rev’d Michael Ingham from the Diocese of New Westminster

Note: The mover and the seconder must be members of the General Synod and be present in the House when the resolution is before the synod for debate.

BE IT RESOLVED:

Notwithstanding any decisions taken by this its 2007 Synod, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada affirms that the present practice of the Synod and Bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster in authorizing the blessings of covenanted same-sex unions in eight (8) Parishes of that Diocese shall continue in the Diocese of New Westminster pending further resolution by General Synod.

The motion has just been withdrawn

At the end of the vote, what Edmonton did

It's about 4:45 at the end of a long day.  The motion to allow same sex blessings was defeated.

In our group there are different perspectives and people voted differently.  And so I asked all of our delegates to simply hold hands as a table, and pray together

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit,
be with us all, evermore, Amen.

There were tears in every eye.  I voted against the motion, but if my heart does not break for those who weep, then I am no follower of Christ.

More later...

Sunday morning at General Synod

We are getting underway here as our morning Eucharist has finished.  We will be looking at the resolution srelated to same sex blessings.

keep us in your prayers.

and ps, for play by play stuff go here or for video go here

Reflections on Conflict & Core Doctrine motion

What we have before us now is that we declare something to be not in conflict with core doctrine.

The important question to ask is whether it is in conflict with Secondary Doctrine, that is, doctrines which give shape to the particular form of discipleship known as Anglican Spirituality.  In my work on a large university in Campus ministry, I worked alongside and with several faith groups and at least 9 different Christian denominations on a regular basis; I also worked with students from a number of what are called “independent” and non denominational churches.  In our various Christian gatherings we could all agree on saying a creed together – that is one way we are united in Christ. 

Baptismal doctrine has been raised at this synod several times.  Yet I could not agree with the Baptists about the secondary doctrine of baptism.  I could not agree with my roman catholic friends about the nature of certain of their doctrines.

And in eucharistic fellowship, there is a limit within our Anglican variety which distinguishes the celebration at the Eucharistic table from, in some significant sense, the meal of saltines and grape juice which may or may not have words of institution accompanying it.

Within our Anglican tradition there are varieties, but within certain boundaries and parameters which distinguish us and our particular vocation as a church from our sisters and brothers who share with us core doctrine, but who are from other , or non – denominational churches.

It is precisely our vocation which calls us to be thoughtful in these secondary doctrines - this is the thrust of the St Michael Report.  And it is those secondary doctrines which are important as we discuss SSB's.  Otherwise, in the name of unity we might as well join up with the biggest show in town with which we can say the creed.  Or alternatively collapse into a thousand islands of interpretation.

This church has not done the work of testing the ecosystem of secondary doctrine – we have not as a church discovered where the pulling of the circle in this new direction would leave us with an ellipse.

Quote of the day #2

"They are so far into the closet, they can almost see Narnia."

spoken during the presentation of the St Michael Report

A voice on the Synod floor from one Aboriginal Youth

My name is Dean Sewap from Cree Pelican, the Diocese of Saskatchewan.  If this is passed I would feel that to be faithful in my walk with Jesus, I would need to leave the Anglican Church.  I don't want to leave.  I love my church.  First nations parishes feel strongly about this but I feel that our voice is not being heard.  Please be patient with us.  Now is not the time to go ahead with this.  God bless you.

Update: Dean has been elected to the Council of General Synod

Anglican Church of Canada becomes Municipal Gov't

Resolution C002:

That this General Synod:

• Ban the use of tobacco products, exclusive of ceremonial use, in and around all venues for national meetings of the Anglican Chruch of Canada
• Strongly encourage the diocese of the AC of Canada to ban the use of tobacco products at all levels
• Encourage Anglicans in all physical, psychological and spiritual ways to cease their personal use of tobacco products

I assume this is going on the agenda tomorrow.

On the other hand, the votes on the SSB resolutions will be coming up soon, about half an hour or so.

for those looking for play by play bloggin'

The you can check what Peter is doing at this blog.

we are currently dealing with receiving the St Michael Report, so I will try to give updates at appropriate times. keep us all in your prayers.

The resolution on the St Michael's Report (amended to include the phrase that SSB should not be communion dividing issue) passed before lunch.  My guess is about a 75-25 split.

It's about 2 pm and we are getting ready to have  a committee of the whole discussion of SSB.  Interestingly, there was a motion to have a piece of the agenda moved up to today:  a motion to mandate the Theological Commission to do more study.  The motion was defeated.  In the house of bishops, it appeared that all the Rupert's Land bishops voted in favour of the motion.

The instructions to house include: 

• we have clear motions before us; they are not ambiguous
• we are being asked to calrify whether we approve or disapprove of SSB's
• it is time to address the issue in a clear way at the GS

AFter a bit of presentation by some Council of General Synod members, the floor is now open to free discussion.

The live webcast should be on the anglican.ca website as we proceed.

We ask you to keep us all in your prayers as the discussions continue...

4 p.m.-ish:

It often seems ot me that the same kinds of discusion have been continuing, but one speaker from the Dioc of Calgary got the the heart of one of the major issues:  we have come to be a house divided on how we interpret Scripture.

The Anglican Planet General Synod party

Need I say more?  Not much blogging right now... got , ummm,  other things to do.

A reminder before going to a microphone...

Craig Romkema lives with his family in a log house in the Midwest. He types his poems on a computer, with physical support to stabilize his body.  Craig is a person living with autism and cerebral palsy.  After graduating from high school with honors, Craig spent a year writing, and is now attending college part-time.

Encounter

“Answer!”
I told my mouth
but the message
froze,
while seconds dragged into minutes
and the restless woman
said fast
goodbyes
swiftly dashing
assumptions of
intelligence
behind her.

Words are
power;
speechlessness,
an endless abyss;
garbled speech,
a target for dishonor;
persistent rotten storytelling,
a huge annoyance;
boring tapes that demean my image.

You whose language flows
coherently,
whose ideas sparkle like wine
on the tongue,
remember your gift
and use it well,
for me.

From Craig's collection "Embracing the Sky:  Poems Beyond Disability" .

ps to Dr. Mabuse:  Our Sarah Joy (she'll be 6 next month) lives with Down Syndrome.

Neale Adams of New Westminster is blogging

His blog is Draw the Circle Wide

Update:  Also from New West comes blogger John Oakes

A day with the Lutherans...

Could ye not watch with me one hour?

And so our Lord found the disciples asleep on the ground...

But back to our "joint day" with the ELCIC.  The day is basically an all-day eucharist, with time for questions, presentations, discussion and lunch.  I must confess I left just after the exchange of the peace. which took place just after dessert and coffee.  It's still going on.  There was a presentation by Sallie McFague of the Vancouver School of Theology.

Quote of the Day:

"We are not our own:  we belong to the earth." 

I must give McFague credit for bringing our attention to the rather gluttonous manner in which many of us live, and the less than adequate stewardship of creation which results from this.  The theme of the whole day is "water";  in the context of justice, the global economy and global warming. 

I decided to immerse myself in the subject, hence I am skipping out of the rest of the afternoon and going to the pool at the hotel.

See you at the sessions this evening, where will be voting on:

Resolution Number: A226

Subject: Principles for Revision of Common Worship Texts

Moved by: The Rev. Dr. Richard Leggett from the Diocese of New Westminster

Seconded By: The Rt. Rev. Michael Bedford-Jones from the Diocese of Toronto

Note: The mover and the seconder must be members of the General Synod and be present in the House when the resolution is before the synod for debate.

BE IT RESOLVED:

That this General Synod direct the Faith Worship and Ministry Committee to prepare principles and an agenda for common worship texts revision.

Resolution Number: A183

Subject: Report of the Windsor Report Response Group

Moved by: The Rt. Rev. Colin Johnson, Diocese of Toronto

Seconded By: The Ven. Peter Fenty, Diocese of Toronto

Note: The mover and the seconder must be members of the General Synod and be present in the House when the resolution is before the synod for debate.

BE IT RESOLVED:

That this General Synod endorse the report of the Windsor Report Response Group, as adopted by the Council of General Synod (March 2007), and that the following be forwarded, along with the report, to the Anglican Communion Office and the Provinces of the Anglican Communion.

The Anglican Church of Canada:

reaffirms its commitment to full membership and participation in the life, witness and structures of the Anglican Communion;
reaffirms its commitment to the Lambeth Quadrilateral, as received by our church in 1893;
expresses its desire and readiness to continue our participation in the ongoing life of the Communion through partnerships and visits, theological and biblical study, in order to foster Communion relationships, including the listening process and the development and possible adoption of an Anglican covenant;
reaffirms its mutual responsibility and interdependence with our Anglican sisters and brothers in furthering the mission of the church;
notes that, in response to the Windsor Report, the Diocese of New Westminster expressed regret, and the House of Bishops effected a moratorium on the blessing of same-sex unions;
calls upon those archbishops and other bishops who believe that it is their conscientious duty to intervene in Provinces, dioceses and parishes other than their own to implement paragraph 155 of the Windsor Report and to seek an accommodation  with the bishops of the dioceses whose parishes they have taken into their own care; and
commits itself to participation in the Listening Process and to share with member churches of the Communion the study of human sexuality which continues to take place, in the light of Scripture, tradition and reason.

"Orthodoxy is transformative" - Archbishop Sentamu to General Synod

UPDATE:  the full text is here.

A bit from this morning's address:

The word orthodoxy, from Greek, means teaching what is right and true; and in Christian tradition, this leads to glorification - 'being changed from glory to glory' - orthodoxy is transformative.

That is why I am persuaded that our sexual affections can no more define who we are than our tribe, ethnicity or nationality.  At the deepest ontological level, therefore, there is no such thing as 'a homosexual' or 'a heterosexual, or a 'bisexual;  there are human beings, male and female, called to redeemed humanity in Christ, endowed with a complex variety of emotional potentialities and threatened by a complex variety of forms of alienation.  In Christ - and in him alone - we know both God and human nature as they truly are;  and so in Christ alone we know ourselves as we truly are.  There can be no description of human reality, in general or in particular, outside the reality in Christ.

...Jesus was telling his disciples that if you want to meet God face to face, the nearest you are going to come to it on this planet is to look into the faces of your brothers and sisters - and especially your sisters and brothers who have been declared unrighteous, unclean, unacceptable.
It isn't that we find God there, it's that God finds us there.  [orig emphasis]

from the text of the address of Archbishop John Sentamu to the session of the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada
June 20Dr. John

I have a hard copy of Sentamu's address in my hands.  If I run across a scanner or an online version, I'll let y'all know.

A few others blogging from General Synod

I came across a few others who are blogging GS:

• E: \mmaus
  A meeting place for Anglican Youth, sponsored by the Diocese of Eastern Newfoundland & Labrador

• Our Hearts Are Restless
  To The Greater Glory of God - An Anglican Blog of Faith and Life (Rev. Steve London, delegate)

• my gs07 blog (Charles Wilson, delegate)

what is inclusive (reminder to self)

What is “inclusive”?

The most inclusive community I have been privileged to be a part of is one in which brokenness is most up front and obvious.  It is the faith community of the mentally disabled as I have encountered it in L’arche.  What makes for inclusiveness?  True Christian inclusiveness admits two things:  an acceptance and profound awareness that each human being bears the image of God, and an acceptance and awareness that each human being lives with a brokenness which can only be healed by the person of Jesus Christ.

If we take the first thing seriously, we cannot but offer that reassuring truth to each human being we meet.  To see another human being is to see that which is nearer to myself than anything else in creation.  A fellow human being is the most glorious thing I will encounter outside of God.  I have more in common with a fellow human being than with anything else in the universe.  I am kindred to every person.  That is the beauty of the faith community of L’arche.

We need also to take the second point seriously.  For that is the heart of the Christian faith.  True Christian community happens when we acknowledge our brokenness before God and one another, and and are centred around Jesus.  The most fully inclusive Christian community I have been a part of is one where brokenness is most acknowledged and lived with and through.

Lift high the Cross.

Robert Gagnon: A Reply (or 2) to Dr. John Thorp on Same Sex Blessings

A paper entitled "Making the Case: The blessing of same sex unions in the Anglican Church of Canada" was published by Dr. John Thorp recently and distributed to General Synod delegates.  You can download a pdf of the paper  here.

Robert Gagnon has published a reply to Dr. Thorp, "Case Not Made:  A Response to Prof. John Thorp's 'Making the Case' for Blessing Homosexual Unions in the Anglican Church of Canada".  The pdf is here.

In addition there are these thoughts:

About a month before General Synod all Synod delegates received in the mail a copy of John Thorp’s Paper, Making the Case, the Blessing of Same-Sex Unions in the Anglican Church of Canada. There was no covering letter, no indication of who was distributing this and why, no explanation of how the complete mailing list was obtained, etc.  Nevertheless it is a superb discussion paper. It would have done so much good to distribution this paper a full year before General Synod, to allow a thoughtful exploration of the issues it raises. At any rate, here are a few comments that immediately were made in a discussion group around the Thorp article. This discussion group included folk on both sides of the issue. The point is not to argue for or against – but to consider Thorp’s arguments – has he really ‘Made the Case’ in a convincing way? Perhaps GS delegates will find the following comments helpful? You will quickly see that these notes are scattered and not properly ordered (embarrassingly so such that we do not our names to be attached to these notes!) – some are incomplete thoughts and bare suggestions. But the bizarre and unfortunate manner of distribution of John Thorp’s paper to all GS delegates suggests that some response – inadequate and last minute as may be, is required...

•    The centre of Thorp's argument is that both sexual difference and sexual orientation are morally neutral. This might well be true, but it what needs to be shown, not assumed. He does not actually demonstrate this but merely provides a history with this view as the contemporary result.

•    Thorp’s paper is misleading because it avoids talk of same-sex marriage as the only legitimate Anglican form, at least in Canada, where the legal apparatus is in place to allow this. Thorp does mention in a footnote that the blessing of same sex unions in Canada makes sense to apply to those who are civilly married, but the paper itself exclusively speaks of ‘unions’. Thorp’s motive seems to be political: a) because it will be more problematic for some and b) it would require the "slow" process to actually institute it and Thorp is convinced of the need to recognize gay and lesbian relations now, even if inadequately. Everyone is impatient for this question to be settled. But it must be done with integrity...  [click for more:]

Primate Hutchison's Address to General Synod

At this Paul said to him, ‘God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting there to judge me according to the law, and yet in violation of the law you order me to be struck?’ Those standing nearby said, ‘Do you dare to insult God’s high priest?’

And Paul said, ‘I did not realize, brothers, that he was high priest; for it is written, “You shall not speak evil of a leader of your people.” ’

[Acts 23]

I must admit that I admire Paul's humility, correcting himself from the very Scriptures with which he corrects others...

A few highlights: 

First, from the national website:   the official text of the Primate's address can be found here.

I took a few notes during his address, which I will review and compare with the official text from anglican.ca when I get a chance.

Some excerpts from the official text:

The theme for this 38th General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada is "Draw the Circle Wide." It is from a song by Bishop Gordon Light, and is consistent with the intention of the Lord of the Church to draw all people to himself. Since Christ was lifted up from the earth the circle of his love has grown ever wider through the centuries, now encompassing every continent and island on the planet. And from our beginnings as Anglicans our circle has grown ever wider -- geographically certainly, as we are now present in 164 countries of the world, but also spiritually, culturally and socially. From the time of the Elizabethan Settlement we have been an inclusive Church, holding together the convictions of both Puritans and Episcopalians in a single ecclesial body...

Certainly one of the most difficult items for our discernment will be the question of how to proceed on the issue of same-gender relationships. Related to it are other questions. One is the deeper question of how Anglicans receive and understand Scriptures in the light of modern scholarship and contemporary experience. Another is how our decisions will impact our sister churches in the Anglican Communion. And beside that is a question as to the nature of the Communion, and the appropriate relationship between provincial autonomy and global interdependence.

Another way of putting that is, how do we wish authority to be exercised or limited within our family of churches? And perhaps most important, how will our decisions witness to the Good News of God in Jesus Christ for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters within the Church and outside it. There are of course many other questions to consider in the hard work of discernment over this issue. We are taught that the first principle of moral theology is obedience to conscience, and I ask each of you to embrace that principle, and with it the ethic of respect for the conscience of those who disagree with your own. The second principle of moral theology is to inform your conscience to bring it, if possible, into line with the teaching of the Church. And here careful listening using the Anglican approach of Scripture, Tradition and Reason will be helpful.

At the end of the day, when decisions are made, they will not be unanimous. Differences will remain, but the unanimous opinion of the Theological Commission (and of many other sources) is that the question of same-gender blessings should not be a communion breaking issue. So the alternative to that is that in keeping with a long Anglican tradition, we make room at the table for those whose views we do not share. For the table is the Lord's and not our own. And it is He who invites us to share the life that is offered there for the sins of the whole world.

Some of our guests at General Synod: Sentamu, Schori, Kearons, Bonnie Anderson

It's just after 2 pm and we are all gathered in the Plenary Hall (up on the 8th floor of the Marlborough Hotel).  Apparently we will be given some overview of the remainder of the Synod.  A few of the guests we will be welcoming  over the course of the next few days include: John Sentamu (Bishop of York & Primate of All England);  Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori of the Episcopal Church, as well as Kenneth Kearons,  Bonnie Anderson and some other guy whose name I forgot - maybe it was  Gregory Stephen Straub. 

I'll try to have play by play as they each come up to bat...

Tonight our Primate will deliver the "presidential address" at our opening Eucharist.

Also, here's the official lunch of GS 2007:

You may also want to catch some of the official webcast here. 

I got interviewed a few moments ago.

I wonder how good their video editor is?

Holy Trinity Toronto to go ahead with SSB's

Toronto's historic Church of the Holy Trinity says it will defy any attempt by the Anglican Church of Canada to stop the blessing of same sex unions, and may even start performing the wedding ceremonies themselves.

In a resolution released late Sunday, members of the activist downtown church voted to "continue to exercise its conscience and bless same-sex unions and marry same-sex couples."

From the Toronto Star

On the eve of our General Synod some may wonder (on both "sides" of such an issue): why bother?  Those who will, will, and those who won't, won't.  Will update with an answer when I have one...

Update:  Why bother?

Because it is the Body of Christ.

General Synod Loot Bag: Item #1

You know kids, you might think that stuff like General Synod is all drudgery and reports and people feeling hard done by.  But that's simply not the case.  Just to prove it, the good folks at General Synod have put together a GS Loot Bag - you know:  your tithe at work.  Each day I will dip into the bag and pull out a featured item, which will restore your hope and revive your spirits.

Today's item:  the Anglican Journal Coffee Mug.

I'll try it out tomorrow morning.  Stay tuned for more exciting episodes of General Synod Loot Bag.

Resolution B-001

Subject: Blessing couples in covenanted same-sex unions

Moved by: Mr. Stephen Schuh from the Diocese of New Westminster

Seconded By: The Rt. Rev’d Michael Ingham from the Diocese of New Westminster

Note: The mover and the seconder must be members of the General Synod and be present in the House when the resolution is before the synod for debate.

BE IT RESOLVED:

Notwithstanding any decisions taken by this its 2007 Synod, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada affirms that the present practice of the Synod and Bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster in authorizing the blessings of covenanted same-sex unions in eight (8) Parishes of that Diocese shall continue in the Diocese of New Westminster pending further resolution by General Synod.

EXPLANATORY NOTE/BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The Diocese of New Westminster’s engagement with issues of human sexuality, extending over many years and numerous Diocesan Synods, has resulted in a rite for blessing couples in covenanted same-sex unions. 

This process has involved:

Votes at three Diocesan Synods (1998, 2001, 2002), each with an increasing majority in favour; with the Bishop withholding his assent until 2002;
The affirmative conclusion of a national legal consultation into the authority of a diocesan bishop to authorize a rite of blessing of covenanted same-sex unions;
A three-year program (1998-2001) of extensive, diocese-wide parish dialogues to explore theological issues surrounding human sexuality and to hear the stories of gay, lesbian and ex-gay Anglicans, and to consider a proposed rite of blessing;
The careful development of a rite for blessing couples in covenanted same-sex unions;
The provision that no individual, clergy or lay, must participate in any such rites;
The development of a process and protocol for parishes to seek the Bishop’s authorization to conduct such blessings;
The provision of an episcopal visitor for parishes and individuals opposed to the blessing of same-sex unions.
The provision of this rite has enabled gay and lesbian people to feel safe, respected, and included in the full life of the church and that the sudden withdrawal of this rite would seriously undermine the progress that has been made.

In view of the deliberative process leading to a rite of blessing couples in covenanted same-sex unions in the Diocese of New Westminster, and the potentially damaging effects if this rite is abruptly withdrawn, and given affirmation ¶12 of the St. Michael Report that “history … demonstrates that clarity emerges when thought and action occur simultaneously,” the Diocese of New Westminster needs to provide ongoing pastoral care and continuity for its people and parishes within its existing practice.

It will be interesting to see how people approach this particular resolution.  In a way it encapsulates at least part of the difficulty of trying to be a "communion" of churches.  Is it possible for something to be declared "blessed" in one geographical context, and at the same time to have another geographical context say that the same thing is not to be blessed?  In other words, can a church maintain that a certain expression is blessed here, but not there.  It is one aspect of the so called "local option". I'm not talking about North America and Africa here.  I'm talking about two sides of Vancouver.  Or one side of the Rocky Mountains and the other side.  Just within Canada, can we maintain our fellowship if something is declared blessed and pleasing to God in one diocese, but not another.

Then there is the question of the freedom of the clergy and laity to express what they believe is the direction in which the Spirit is leading them.  Can a church have members and leaders who say that something is both blessed and good, and yet have other members and leaders say that the same thing is a hindrance to life in Christ?

Had a few interesting conversations this evening.  Andrew Goddard spoke at two events today - there should be a vodcast sometime.  I'll link when it's up.  Also met up with Winnipeg blogger Preston and his wife this evening.

Must pray and sleep.