British Columbia Anglican priest to bless Noncelibate lesbian and gay couples

Posted by Kendall Harmon

From the Victoria Times Colonist:

Father Antonio Osorio is inviting lesbian and gay couples to be blessed at St. Saviour's Anglican Church tomorrow.

"They need to know they are not second-class Christians," said Osorio. "I am going to bless them as a group because they are faithful and beautiful Christians. And if they want to be blessed as individual couples, I will do it too....

The Anglican Church, in my opinion, needs to stop playing games," said Osorio, who attended the national meeting and voted in favour of blessing same-sex unions.

"I am very pleased the national church has said blessing same-sex unions is not in conflict with the doctrine of the church," he said. "I believe blessing these unions is a justice issue. Now is the time to start blessing same-sex couples. I have done it and I intend to keep doing it."

Read it all.



Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal- Anglican: Latest NewsAnglican ProvincesAnglican Church of CanadaSexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion)Same-sex blessings

17 Comments
Posted June 30, 2007 at 1:13 pm [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. Enda wrote:

How much more is necessary for the point to be made?  CoC has no intention of stopping the heresy/apostasy any more than TEC/ECUSA does.  Let us bid farewell.  When you come to your Christian senses, welcome home.  Until then, if you must, use up your inheritance.  The Father is waiting.

June 30, 1:25 pm | [comment link]
2. dwstroudmd+ wrote:

Didn’t take long, did it?  Has it been a week, even?  Go, go ACCanada!  Rather reminiscent of post GC2003 for those nostalgic among EKUSA/TEC for action (other than legal actions, that is).

June 30, 1:25 pm | [comment link]
3. robroy wrote:

Notice how the “in the sense of creedal” distinction is dropped? How very unexpected.

June 30, 1:25 pm | [comment link]
4. robroy wrote:

And I am quite sure that the new Archbishop will come down hard on this. Yeah, right.

June 30, 1:27 pm | [comment link]
5. Charles Nightingale wrote:

“20Woe to those who call evil good
  and good evil,
who put darkness for light
  and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
  and sweet for bitter!
21Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes,
  and shrewd in their own sight! “
Is. 5:20-21 (ESV)

June 30, 1:34 pm | [comment link]
6. DonGander wrote:

“I am very pleased the national church has said blessing same-sex unions is not in conflict with the doctrine of the church,” he said.

Noticed that he dropped the “core doctrine”.

Revisionism is.

DonGander

June 30, 1:53 pm | [comment link]
7. Chris Molter wrote:

“I believe blessing these unions is a justice issue. Now is the time to start blessing same-sex couples. I have done it and I intend to keep doing it.”

The good Father can bless all he wants.  It certainly doesn’t mean he’s bestowing God’s blessing, just his own.

June 30, 2:14 pm | [comment link]
8. freihofercook wrote:

He is willing to sacrifice for what he believes in.  Why are so few reasserting leaders acting this way?

June 30, 2:25 pm | [comment link]
9. Br. Michael wrote:

Well for one thing he is not sacrificing anything.  Unlike the reappraisers, he will not receive one ounce of discipline or sanctions.

June 30, 2:32 pm | [comment link]
10. Enda wrote:

Br. Michael, who will be the disciplinarian?  We have no authority but canons, it appears, that come to life like Dracula in the night, searching for blood.  It’s another form of betrayal, to use a more familiar image, like the one in today’s daily office reading.  A kiss.  We must bear the cross, too, and not look back.  Onward!  For Christ!

June 30, 2:55 pm | [comment link]
11. Philip Snyder wrote:

I am very pleased the national church has said blessing same-sex unions is not in conflict with the doctrine of the church

That is not what the Synod said.  They said that blessing same-sex unions was not in conflict with the “core doctrine” (in the sense of “creedal”) of the Church.  The Doctrine of the Church is more that its creeds.  The creeds are dogmatic.  They are the foundation upon which our doctrine is based.  Blessing same sex unions does violate the doctrine (=teaching) of the Church. 

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

June 30, 3:00 pm | [comment link]
12. azusa wrote:

“They need to know they are not second-class Christians,” said Osorio. “I am going to bless them as a group because they are faithful and beautiful Christians. And if they want to be blessed as individual couples, I will do it too….

And can you bless my ipod and my lucky rabbit’s foot while you’re at it? Please, please! Send us your barakah/good karma/magic etc! It’s aaaaaaaawesome!

June 30, 3:01 pm | [comment link]
13. pamela wrote:

This would be perfect.  I remember, back in 2003, when I converted from evangelcal christianity to ECUSA, the priest told me that I did not need to worry, I was still safe in ECUSA because they could never support “their” new theology by scripture…  I’d love to see a Council convened that would address this once and for all, [oh, yeah, I thought lambeth 1.10 did that…ummm guess not].  Never mind…

June 30, 4:20 pm | [comment link]
14. Larry Morse wrote:

I can only hope that Osorio moves to even more extreme positions. I have asked, “What happens when all standards are dropped?” If Osorio continues on this course, we will actually have this question answered in the real world. The more extremists we can find in TEC, the sooner this issue will come to such a head that even the Wobblies who make up the core of the traditional Anglican church will have to open their eyes and see. As well,  the centrists in TEC will have to make a determination what they can tolerate, and the act.
We should encourage the Osorios and the Muslimpriests and all their ilk to do their damndest.
LM

June 30, 4:41 pm | [comment link]
15. William Scott wrote:

Are their really Wobblies in TEC?

July 1, 3:07 am | [comment link]
16. Larry Morse wrote:

Well, not Wobblies in the old union sense, but in the sense that TEC has a horde of members who are uncertain on their spiritual feet, like drunks in a brewery.  Larry

July 1, 7:50 am | [comment link]
17. Rolling Eyes wrote:

They shouldn’t refer to this man as “Anglican” or “priest”.  His actions prove he isn’t worthy of either title.

July 1, 9:43 am | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): Down Under, Drop in youth religion a matter of interpretation

Previous entry (below): Connecticut Pastor, Flock Face Ouster

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)