The revisionist clergy want this to be the focus. Their reasons are many and varied. Some it appears are driven by an agenda of social reform. Others I think end up becoming confused due to a real and legitimate compassion they may have for someone close to them. An example of this is a former Priest (who is now retired and I still respect) who ended up with a lesbian daughter who would not give any consideration to the possibility that her lifestyle is against the Holy Word of God. But how does a Priest, who is also a loving father, choose between God and his daughter? But I am going off on a tangent.

The news media are interested in readership and (let us be realistic here) sex sells.

All this being said, let us be honest. If we lie to ourselves about why the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) exists and why it does what it does, than we only delude ourselves and fail to address the real issue. In order to better understand ANiC we need to listen to ANiC. According to them, the issue is not same sex blessings. The issue is about being faithful to God, and His Holy Word as He had spoken it through the prophets.

Bob essentially accuses ANiC of practicing a selective religion. This seems to me to be the typical “pot calling the kettle black”. The practice of accusing ANiC of “ignoring” those passages that call for a death penalty while at the same time being zealots about others is an often used tactic of the revisionists, and is one that frankly does not hold up to scrutiny. While at the same time the revisionists within ACoC are most certainly and deliberately picking and choosing which passages they will comply with. I think that it would be agreed by all that proceeding with a Blessing of a same sex unions, as well as our very liberal rules of divorce, is a direct violation of Matthew 19:1-12 and Mark 10:1-12.

If a person were to objectively examine the decisions made by ANiC it would be seen that a considerable and genuine effort is made to be Faithful and obedient to God in all things. There is an effort to not “follow too much the devises and desires of our own hearts” (from the Prayer of Confession, Morning Prayer Service, Book of Common Prayer). What should be understood by all is that ANiC perceives that ACoC is following too much the devises and desires of its own heart and consequently is straying away from the way of God like lost sheep. It is observed that ACoC is allowing secular forces to influence its practices and even its beliefs. But now I am droning on. To fully make the point would require a “paper” similar to what I would have handed in to a Professor at University, which is obviously not practical here. Instead, I would like to direct you to an opinion piece I wrote that appeared on page 5 of the December issue of the Huron Church News. It can be viewed online here: http://www.diohuron.org/news/huron_church_news/Christmas%20HCN%202008small.pdf

Ever since the early church we have struggled to define what orthodoxy is. My orthodoxy is not Richard’s orthodoxy. Within our Anglican communion we have disagreed about the ordination of women, as well as women Bishops. People of good will can disagree on important matters and share the same faith.

It seems to me the current situation is caused by the Network and other dissident groups using the blessing of same sex unions as a wedge issue–playing on prejudices which have developed over years. They also depend on a selective literalism which does not help us understand what the Bible teaches. Why are we to ignore many of the other Levitical code restrictions which call for the death penalty—while paying special attention to the one on same sex behaviour. So it is literalism, not liberalism which is really at issue.

Are we to become like the fundamentalist evangelicals, embracing a literalist interpretation of the Bible which sees the earth as only six thousand years old? And humans on earth at the same time as Dinosaurs?

I’m afraid the literalists can’t have it both ways. They can’t selectively ignore parts of the Bible which contradict each other, and have different interpretations, and also use a few proof texts on homosexuality as a wedge issue to break up an almost 500 year old communion.

I believe the Anglican Church is still very much the Anglican Church I grew up with. Of course it isn’t frozen in time. Liturgies have evolved. Our understanding of how to be the church has evolved.
Believers in each age must build on the legacy of the past to be faithful to the needs of the present and future.

The problem of unity is not new. One has but to look back to the ’50s in the U.K., read the novels of Susan Howatch, or even research writings from several hundred years ago.

Unfortunately, in trying to face up to a culture that is being secularized, the Anglican Church of Canada is itself becoming secularized. The Anglican Church of Canada needs to stop submitting to secular pressures and prejudices, and stop trying to modify Christianity in secular terms. That is what the unity issue is all about.

Because liberal theology is so firmly entrenched in the Anglican Church of Canada leadership and administration, I do not see how one can bring the Church back to orthodoxy from within, even though many are trying. The Anglican Church of Canada is no longer the “Anglican Church” which I cherished, and spent most of my life in. With great regret, I have left.