In a written statement, the governing council of Anglican Essentials Canada, a coalition of the nation’s three main orthodox groups, says it believes that Anglican Church officials are trying to downplay the meaning and importance of a controversial motion surrounding the blessing of same-sex unions.

“Our greatest concern lies with statements from our national church claiming that passage of this motion does not indicate an endorsement of the blessing of same-sex unions,” the statement reads.

The same-sex motion asks the governing body of the Anglican Church of Canada to state that individual dioceses have the power to create marriage-like blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples.

“In our view… General Synod can only affirm that which it endorses….Accordingly, we expect Canadian Anglicans will rightly see passage of this motion as a plain endorsement of same-sex blessings. … [T]his is primarily a question of Christian ethics and morals. Efforts to reframe the issue as one of institutional jurisdiction are at best unhelpful, and could serve to deepen the disenfranchisement many Anglicans experience with their national church.”

“We call upon our national leaders to embrace a spirit of candor and transparency surrounding this issue and the debate, in plain and genuine language,” adding that church leaders needed to acknowledge the “obvious and well-documented impact” on the future of the national church and the 77-million strong Anglican Communion.

The worldwide Anglican Communion has been in turmoil since June 2002, when the governing body of the Vancouver-based Diocese of New Westminster voted by a 62-per-cent majority to become the first in the world to develop a blessing ceremony for same-sex unions. In August 2003, the U.S. branch of the church narrowly approved the ordination of an openly gay man as Bishop. Both decisions repudiated a 1998 resolution of all 700 bishops in the communion, who voted by a nine-to-one majority against same-sex blessing or ordinations.

In October 2003, the world’s 38 Anglican national leaders said the decision in New Westminster was contributing to a “tear the fabric of our communion at its deepest level”.

The Canadian and U.S. churches jointly represent about 4 percent of the worldwide communion.

-30-

Contact: Chris Hawley, (604) 729-7557
media@anglicanessentials.org
For more information, browse to:
http://www.forsuchatime.ca/
http://www.anglicanessentials.org/

Statement from The Essentials Council of the Anglican Church of Canada

May 5, 2004

Many members of our church have been voicing their views recently regarding the upcoming debate over the blessing of same-sex unions, to take place at this month’s General Synod. Much of this discussion involves the motion drafted by the Council of General Synod, which, simply put, states that individual dioceses have the power to bless same-sex unions.

The motion, and the General Synod process surrounding its debate, has generated considerable controversy in recent weeks. Some have criticized the motion because it appears vague and lacks substance. Others believe these blessings are de facto marriages and ought to be viewed as such. Others have expressed alarm that only two hours of open debate over the eight-day meeting have been allotted to consider the matter.

These and other criticisms are indeed legitimate. But as a Council, our greatest concern lies with statements from our national church claiming that passage of this motion is not an endorsement of the blessing of same-sex unions. The intention seems to be to soften and minimize the implications of this decision and its obvious and well-documented impact on the future of our church, nationally and worldwide.

In our view, and in the view of many Canadian Anglicans, General Synod can only affirm that which it endorses. Accordingly, we expect Canadian Anglicans will rightly see passage of this motion as a plain endorsement of same-sex blessings.

It is also our view that this is primarily a question of Christian ethics and morals. Efforts to reframe the issue as one of institutional jurisdiction are at best unhelpful, and could serve to deepen the disenfranchisement many Anglicans experience with their national church. It is entirely possible that our national church has been preoccupied with this particular issue for decades precisely because it cannot bring itself to address the critical questions directly.

We call upon our national leaders to embrace a spirit of candor and transparency surrounding this issue and the debate, in plain and genuine language. Whatever the outcome, let us not minimize the depth and seriousness of the issue, but face it with a renewed sense of faith and integrity.

The Essentials Council, Anglican Church of Canada

END