Monday, June 25, 2007

I Don't Get It

The Anglican Church of Canada held their general synod this weekend. On the agenda were 2 resolutions regarding blessing same-sex unions (note that this was not about officiating at marriages, just blessing the relationship).

One was to state that such blessings did not contravene Anglican core doctrine. This was passed by all 3 houses.

The other was to empower dioceses to move toward actually doing the blessings. THis was passed by clergy, passed by lay, but defeated in the House of Bishops (by 2 votes). Under the rules a resolution has to pass in all 3 houses or is defeated.

See the story here

So what is the message? We actually agree there is nothing wrong with these but we aren't going to do anything about it. OR "we don' t have a clue what we should do"?

Well they have confused many of us, and managed to annoy people on both extremes of the issue. All in the name of preserving the Anglican Communion.

I don't get it. Wasn't there something somewhere about let your yes be yes and your no be no? NOt yes but...


  1. Unless either a yes or no is equally unpalatable, it seems.

  2. The California court ruled in a property case today, probably not what people were expecting.

    In the US billions of dollars are at stake. Is it at all possible the Canadian Bishops were not going to allow their yes to be yes because Canadians would split and start fighting over property?

    Bene D

  3. ACtually I think it is more likely that the vote was based on seeking to preserve the unpreservable -- th unity of the Worldwide Anglican Communion.