Bishops discuss fallout from same-sex vote at General Synod

Posted by Kendall Harmon

They also reviewed their statement from their most recent meeting, last April, which said that the bishops “hope” that the sacraments of baptism, communion and confirmation would not be denied due to sexual orientation. Several bishops said they received criticism over the use of the word “hope” and the word should be stronger. However, they decided not to begin editing their statement and agreed each bishop could issue statements to their clergy that more strongly-worded. Some bishops have already done so.

The statement also urged bishops “to develop the most generous pastoral response possible (to same-sex couples) within the current teaching of the church” then cited such examples as celebrating a eucharist with a civilly-married gay couple; they may not perform a nuptial blessing.

“I have no problem with a ‘generous pastoral response’ but I don’t and cannot accept homosexual behavior,” said suffragan bishop Larry Robertson of the Arctic. “What got missed is people who are same-sex attracted but choose not to pursue it. They feel totally left out and misunderstood,” said Archbishop Terrence Buckle of the Yukon.

However, Bishop Burton said that “part of what bishops do” is “respond pastorally to different situations.”

Read it all/.



Filed under: * Anglican - EpiscopalAnglican ProvincesAnglican Church of CanadaCanadian General Synod 2007

9 Comments
Posted June 29, 2007 at 8:40 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. Northern Plains Anglicans wrote:

Archbishop Fred Hiltz, the new primate, noted that the consensus of the group was “take it (the pastoral statement) and use it around our context.

Anybody read Garrison Keilor’s Woebegone Boy ?  This Hiltz quote reads like the Episcopal priest in that story. 
Does anybody hear even the slightest echo of Jesus when clergy talk like this?  Really, really sad…but he’s the one they elected to lead them into the processed land.

June 29, 9:08 am | [comment link]
2. Larry Morse wrote:

I know this is off the thread but there is no place else for a comment. I just picked up a Standfirm email that said that Robinson will indeed be invited in some special category. And this is +++Williams say so. What the %$&***# is going on? Have we lost our common sense, or spine, or courage of our convictions? What do you get when you invite your enemy into you livingroom? And who’s to blame?
I am reminded again and again of the parable of the girl and the frozen snake. I can’t believe this. We are emasculating ourselves and we are allowing TEC to provide us with a scapel. No wonder The Anglicans have become a church for women, for it has turned into talk and sensitivity, conferences and vacillation and indecision, manipulative pieties
and…... Vicar of Bray-ishness. Meanwhile the African church makes us look simply decadent and corrupt. Great. Just great. LM

June 29, 9:17 am | [comment link]
3. MattJP wrote:

““I have no problem with a ‘generous pastoral response’ but I don’t and cannot accept homosexual behavior,” said suffragan bishop Larry Robertson of the Arctic. “What got missed is people who are same-sex attracted but choose not to pursue it. They feel totally left out and misunderstood,” said Archbishop Terrence Buckle of the Yukon.”

It’s nice to see an Archbishop who gets it. It’s a sad thing when the church decides to abandon those who choose to live lives of self-sacrifice in faithfulness to Christ.

June 29, 9:20 am | [comment link]
4. midwestnorwegian wrote:

But come on….its soooooo COLD up here in the Arctic…can’t we just all snuggle???

June 29, 9:32 am | [comment link]
5. Ross wrote:

#2 Larry Morse:

If you check the StandFirm story, I believe this is Ruth Gledhill reporting on an e-mail response by someone speaking for +++Rowan while he’s on sabbatical, and it says that the ABC is “exploring” inviting +Robinson in some kind of other “status.”

In other words, so far it’s at least half rumor and speculation.  If I were a reasserter, I’d hold off getting too upset about it until it’s more definite.

June 29, 2:06 pm | [comment link]
6. Larry Morse wrote:

Oh you’re right Ross, but even then…. Why would anyone even “explore”? In practical fact, doesn’t this mean that the invitation as a whatever has virtually gone out? But why? He has shown himself to be scriptural and social poison. And now they will all be drinking out of same glass, even though he has become John Smith for a while? Has occured to you that at some point we have to defend ourselves? Did someone say, “Relax. What harm can he do us?” Oh, please.

  Here comes Alaric. Pope Leo stops him, saying, “We are sensitive to your concerns, and we would like to institute a listening process so that we can better discern your needs.” And Alaric said,“Discern this, Round Eyes.” And the Pope responde,. “We understand the stress you are under but the discenment process should open up new avenues for discussion and insight, for this is something new the Holy Spirit is doing.” And Alaric then said, “....”

June 29, 3:34 pm | [comment link]
7. MargaretG wrote:

However, Bishop Burton said that “part of what bishops do” is “respond pastorally to different situations.”

And the role of Bishops in leading their flock to the Truth is ....

June 29, 4:11 pm | [comment link]
8. Enda wrote:

More listening, right?

June 29, 7:47 pm | [comment link]
9. Enda wrote:

LM #2,6, You GO, Boy!  Say it, say it all!  I’m with you and feel your pain.  And if we don’t all wake up, better duck:  Alaric’s about to swing.  He won’t miss!

June 29, 7:54 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): Notable and Quotable

Previous entry (below): Jane Shilling: It’s criminal the way they pick on the middle class

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)