What's Next in Our Cluster Churches Regarding Marriage of Same Sex Couples

The documents shared here and on Facebook and by email to members can be a bit overwhelming to digest. Here's the “highlight reel” and what we might expect to happen here in our own churches:

National church has passed the first reading of a motion to change the rule to allow for same sex marriage for any couple legally qualified to marry (which includes same sex couples).

Since it is a matter of doctrine it needs to pass at two successive meetings of synod by a 2/3 majority in each of laity, clergy and bishops groups. So, it has to come to the next meeting which is 2019. If it passes then, on Jan 1, 2020, it will become new church law. As currently written it will require the explicit approval of the diocesan bishop for a cleric to officiate at such a marriage. Traditional marriages also need episcopal approval under some circumstances, but not many. So this would be a bit more restrictive than traditional marriages. I think, in time, this clause might be discontinued but for now it's a way for dioceses who are against to permit the vote to pass since their bishops can choose not to opt in.

++Colin in Toronto diocese has responded to this interim period, prior to the next meeting and vote, in a way that won't prohibit SSM while we wait for church law to catch up. There is enormous pressure in some places to move ahead immediately, LGBTQ people feeling they've been shut out of marriage in the church for too long already. Some diocesan bishops have already published that their priests can officiate at these weddings immediately with no impediments. Others who are strongly opposed are saying no change can proceed until and unless the next vote passes; strongly  holding the traditional line. Our bishop is saying that he anticipates allowing this to proceed in a similar way to what he permitted when blessing of same sex unions was instituted (before SSM became legal in Ontario). That was, if a cleric and a congregation agree (by vestry vote) to become a church where SSM is offered, then this would be presented to the bishop by the priest for his consideration. If he decides that this option will be of benefit to the community and not create undue strife because of local convictions against, then he would approve SSM in that place. This way, if a cleric is opposed or if a congregation is opposed they would remain with the traditional, and currently legal by canon law, stance.++Colin has not yet given this direction, but this is the process he referred to in his pastoral letter dated July 15, 2016, which is posted on this site.

In the churches of Huronia Cluster my plan at the moment (if ++Colin does proceed with the above approach) is to include the question at our annual vestry meetings in February. If it passes there, then I would ask the bishop for permission to become an affirming congregation regarding SSM. If the need were to arise before February I would call a special vestry to vote on the question. At this time I have received no such requests. Each church in the cluster would be independent through their vestries to decide what is best in that church.

In the meantime, until Archbishop Johnson provides us with new direction, no SSM are yet authorized in the diocese of Toronto. As this situation develops I will post new information here, under Latest News on the website.

Sermon July 17 on Vote to Change Marriage Canon

Article: Click for PDF →

The Ninth Sunday after Pentecost

July 17, 2016
by The Reverend Maureen Hair, Preacher St. Paul, Washago & St. Luke, Price’s Corners (and text circulated to the other churches in the cluster: Good Samaritan, Port Stanton, St. John, Matchedash and St. George, Fairvalley)

RCL Readings: Proper 16: Amos 8:1-12; Psalm 52; Colossians 1:15-28; Luke 10:38-42 (opening prayer)

Last week our national church met in Richmond Hill for General Synod that is held every 3 years. I’m sure most of us are aware of the motion regarding changing the Marriage Canon to allow for marriage of same sex couples. The public interest in the topic and the unfortunate difficulty with counting the votes when there was an extremely narrow margin, thus first not passing and then passing the motion, created frenzied coverage in the secular media.

So, this morning I’m going to share with you the pastoral letter of Toronto’s diocesan bishop, Colin, sent to the diocese on Wednesday, and then a brief reflection of my own.

I will be posting the Primate ++Fred’s letter on the bulletin board and it can also be found on the anglican.ca website.

(Read ++Colin’s letter)

For my own part, this week was a roller coaster ride of emotions. As do many of us, I have gay people in my own personal circle, both married, partnered and single. This includes family members and friends as well as neighbours. To me these people, including their sexual orientation, are just as much children of God as I am or anyone else is, and therefore, as a matter of justice, ought to have full rights and privileges.

Over the years I’ve become persuaded that the gospel values taught by Jesus to love one another, and to include rather than exclude, take precedence over most other passages including admonitions in Hebrew scripture or Paul’s letters that refer negatively to same sex activity. My reason for this is that the admonitions in scripture were written long before the nature of innate sexual attraction was understood – something that we’re born with and therefore God-given, rather than a sinful behaviour or lifestyle choice that must be resisted or punished.

And besides, we’ve already decided as a church that some prohibitions from biblical times are not applicable today. We don’t insist on circumcision. We eat pork and shellfish. We don’t require the separation of meat and dairy in food preparation or serving. We don’t have rules against tattoos. We do have rules against adultery but the penalty is not death. We don’t allow slavery or polygamy or substitutional wives for procreation as in Sarah’s servant Hagar who was given to Abraham. All these practices and prohibitions were evident in ancient Israel and are told about in Hebrew scriptures, with no interdict against them. They’re no longer culturally relevant or even thinkable in our modern context and church. So, not every prohibition mentioned in the Bible is still observed as such today. Many are irrelevant to us and we read them as historical and cultural anomalies, not binding commandments or rules for us to follow.

Most of us can recall when we used to try to correct left handedness in children because we thought it was wrong. Then we learned that dominant handedness was innate and we stopped harming children by forcing them into using their right hand. Same for being gay or transgendered now – innate and to be respected.

And besides, the number of references that Jesus made in the gospels about homosexuality is zero. That’s enough for me. 

On Monday evening as I watched the live stream from the floor of synod on my iPad, after 60 people spoke, sometimes with eloquence, sometimes with very hurtful words, the fraction of a percentage in the house of clergy that the motion failed by was high drama to be sure. It was one clergy vote shy of passing. It was a painful moment for both sides, I think. Those voting against would have been saddened by how many people, a wide composite 74% majority, voted for the motion. Those voting for, heartbroken at losing by just one vote.

A Facebook site that was started about a two weeks ago is called EquallyAnglican and it is a place for Anglican LGBTQ people to post their picture, speak of their sexual orientation, and say something about their lives including where they minister/worship. These are from all across Canada. About 48 profiles have been shared in just this short time, many of them clergy and lay leaders in this diocese, one is a candidate in the upcoming Toronto episcopal election. The experience of reading these profiles has solidified my own identity as an ally of LGBTQ people living, working and worshipping among us. As one bishop wrote this week, “It is time. It is past time.”

As ++Colin said, there are differences of conviction on this matter in virtually every congregation. Therefore, we will need to be sensitive and loving towards each other in this congregation and cluster as we navigate this new territory together.

The Archbishops’ letters will be posted on the bulletin board. I am also sending a cluster-wide email including them, as well as posting on the cluster Facebook page later today. It will be on the website on Monday or Tuesday.

And to reflect briefly through the prism of today’s gospel passage, in a few words Luke draws the picture of these two sisters. Martha receives Jesus into the house, showing that she’s hospitable and constantly busy. Then, in a single memorable image, Mary is presented to us. She sits listening, passive in contrast to Martha’s incessant activity.

Last week we heard the story of the Good Samaritan, Jesus told the disciples to emulate the Good Samaritan. He said: go and do likewise. “Do this and you shall live.” It all boiled down to one little word: “this.” “Do this.” Do this one thing: love the Lord your God completely, and your neighbour as yourself. This story says go and do.

This week we meet Martha, a woman who is doing up a storm. But this time, doing doesn’t seem to be the key according to Jesus. “Sit and listen” as Mary does, seems to be the right answer. Jesus says there is need of only one thing. But some days it is hard to figure out what that one thing is.

Go and do, sit and listen, in all these ways of being with and for the Lord, it is about loving God and our neighbour. I believe that this means all of our neighbours; it includes our LGBTQ friends and loved ones. All are welcome, and all are to be offered the ministrations of the church. That was already passed as a motion of the national church in 2004 and in our diocese later that year, when we affirmed “the sanctity and integrity of monogamous, adult, committed same sex relationships.” Our church already acknowledges this and has for 12 years, even though I know some members don’t agree with it. Now I believe we have come to a time of including in this affirmation the provision of the sacrament of marriage for all who are legally qualified. I think Jesus meant this in his command to his followers to “do this (love your neighbour as yourself), and you will live.”

My prayer is for all of us to continue in our walk with Jesus in the way that our informed consciences guide us. I close with ++Colin’s reminder, “We need to be tender with one another, recognizing in each other the image of God redeemed by our Saviour Jesus Christ, a beloved child, the desire of God’s heart and will. And we need to remember that what unites us is far more central than what divides us: our baptism into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and our service together in his mission in the world.”

And for that teaching today we say, thanks be to God. Amen. 

Primate on General Synod Motion on Marriage Canon Motion

Article: Click for PDF →

By Fred Hiltz, Archbishop and Primate on on July 14, 2016

In light of decisions made at General Synod 2016 concerning the solemnizing of same-sex marriage, I pray our Church can and will take to heart Paul’s plea with the Christians living in Ephesus, “I beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”. (Ephesians 4:1-3)

Going into General Synod, the delegates knew there would be pastoral implications whether the Resolution to amend the Marriage Canon passed or not. In order to pass it would, according to the Declaration of Principles (General Synod Handbook), require a two-thirds majority in each of the three orders voting: bishops, clergy, and laity.

On Monday, July 11 the result of the vote was that in the orders of bishops and laity there was the required two-thirds majority but not in the order of clergy. The vote was very close. The pastoral implication was that LGBTQ2S persons and those who have accompanied them were disappointed and saddened. Many wept. The Synod sat in silence.

Because the vote was so very close, on Tuesday morning there was a request that the record of this vote be made public and Synod concurred. Analysis of the actual vote revealed that one clergy member’s vote was not properly recorded. The Chancellor then advised the Synod that according to the numbers we in fact did have a two-thirds majority vote in the order of clergy, and I announced the resolution had therefore passed in all three orders. The pastoral implication was that a number of members of Synod were disappointed and saddened. Many wept. The Synod sat in silence.

We have been deeply divided over the solemnizing of same-sex marriage for a very long time. That has not changed. In the midst of this division, I need to take to heart Paul’s counsel and I encourage our whole Church to do the

same. “Lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called,” writes St. Paul. He reminds us of our fellowship in Christ Jesus, through our baptism, and in the eucharist. He reminds us that we are “the Body of Christ, members one of another”, and that we in fact need each other, and need to find ways to make room for one another.

In keeping with the theme of Synod, “You are my witnesses” the question with which we must now wrestle is this, “For what kind of pastoral and prophetic witness can and will we be known?”

I pray that witness not be marred by fraction and breaking of communion with one another, but rather that “forbearing of one another in love” that “eagerness to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”. More than ever we must make efforts not to turn away from one another but rather to one another, not to ignore but to recognize one another, not to walk apart but together. We need as a Church to work hard at maintaining our communion in Christ, for in his reconciling love is our hope and our life.

The Synod passed on first reading an amendment to the Marriage Canon to allow for same-sex marriage in our Church. Because it is a Canon about doctrine, consideration of the matter is required in “two successive sessions of the General Synod”. So the matter will be before the General Synod in 2019. In the meantime, it is referred “for consideration to diocesan and provincial Synods”.

I call the Church to seize this opportunity. I commend the General Synod’s reaffirmation by resolution of the 2004 General Synod Statement on the integrity and sanctity of same-sex relationships, and its call for a much wider and deeper engagement with the report, “This Holy Estate”. I will ask the Council of General Synod (CoGS) to give immediate attention to the matter of translation, at least of the executive summary of the report and frequently asked questions. I will ask CoGS to consider what other resources might be helpful. I will be asking the House of Bishops at their fall meeting to consider how we encourage “further consideration” of the matter, and to show strong leadership in their dioceses in hosting events, dialogues, and studies.

In all these conversations I want to encourage much more engagement with people who identify as LGBTQ2S. We have spent a lot of time talking about them. I believe we need to take much more time to talk with them and to

learn of their lived experience of covenanted love in relationships that are monogamous and life-long. I know that will require of all of us a good deal of courage and grace.

Finally, I ask that without ceasing, we pray for one another, mindful always of the counsel of Paul.

“I beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Ephesians 4: 1-3)