Friday, June 22, 2007

Responding to Windsor

Following quite a contentious debate, which ostensibly provided something of a preview of forthcoming discussions on same-sex blessings scheduled for June 23, General Synod delegates voted to approve, June 21, a motion (A183) moved by Bishop Colin Johnson and Archdeacon Peter Fenty of Toronto to "endorse the report of the Windsor Report Response Group, as adopted by the Council of General Synod (March 2007)" and to forward the following statement "to the Anglican Communion Office and the Provinces of the Anglican Communion":

"The Anglican Church of Canada:

1. reaffirms its commitment to full membership and participation in the life, witness and structures of the Anglican Communion;
2. reaffirms its commitment to the Lambeth Quadrilateral, as received by our church in 1893;
3. 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;
4. reaffirms its mutual responsibility and interdependence with our Anglican sisters and brothers in furthering the mission of the church;
5. 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;
6. 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
7. 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."


The motion was only passed after an amendment moved by theological conservatives was defeated by a large majority. The latter would have added to point 1 of the above by committing "to adhere to the principles and provisions of The Windsor Report" through "a. upholding Lambeth [1998] Resolution 1:10 as the current standard of Anglican teaching on the matter; and b. upholding a moratorium on the blessing of same-sex unions." In a special provision clearly directed against the continuation of the blessing of same-sex unions in the Diocese of New Westminster, the amendment would also have added a further provision urging "all dioceses, notwithstanding the previous practice of any diocese, to comply with the moratorium."

Tensions ran high in the course of the debate on Resolution A183, which did not augur well for the remaining days of Synod. On a more conciliatory and encouraging note for theological conservatives, Dr. Stephen Andrews, President and Vice-chancellor of the Anglican Thorneloe University in Sudbury, Ontario, was elected prolocutor of General Synod. Andrews, who joined Thorneloe in 2001, was previously Dean of Saskatchewan and pursued theological training at the evangelical colleges, Wycliffe in Toronto and Regent in Vancouver. A member of the Primate's Theological Commission responsible for the St. Michael Report, he was also one of more than 30 theologians, including this blogger, who issued a letter to Synod members rejecting the Council of General Synod motions that would affirm, among other things, that "that this General Synod resolves that the blessing of same-sex unions is consistent with the core doctrine of The Anglican Church of Canada" (A186), as well as "the authority and jurisdiction of any diocesan synod, with the concurrence of its bishop, to authorize the blessing of committed same sex unions" (A187 - "local option").

(Editor's Note: The wording of the last paragraph above was slightly revised June 23 in light of informal comments received.)




2 comments:

charlie said...

John
Thank you as always for your cogent analysis. It does appear as if debate could get hot, but at the same time I see the distinct possibility of some considerable and effective balance within the GS and its decision making capabilities. My sense is that the Synod as a whole may be coming to realize just what is at stake here, which is the theological balance, integrity and consequent unity of the ACC in particular and the of the Communion as a whole. It may well be that the Synod has more faithful 'common-sense' in its decision-making than we realize. I believe the election of the new Primate may well provide more evidence of this trend. I certainly hope the frankness of debate which you are suggesting is happening, continues, not in anger but for clarity and for underscoring the urgency about the issues at hand.

Raspberry Rabbit said...

Thanks John. I'm sitting over here in Scotland wishing I was back home - at least today - at least with GS going on in Canada. I'm with Charlie in thinking that Synods - especially Canadian synods - might just have the inner gyroscope to get this right.

RR