Anglicans in Crisis
Canada: What is the Issue?This is the third in a series of articles on the looming crisis in the Anglican Church, brought on by attempts to promote homosexual clergy into the upper reaches of the Anglican hierarchy.
The first article described both the specific and general issues at the heart of the crisis and three recent events from around the world that are precipitating a confrontation. The second article elaborated the crisis in England and its resolution by examining the players involved. Today, the focus is on Canada and a decision by a diocese in New Westminster, British Columbia to bless homosexual cohabitants.
The controversy in Canada simultaneously goes further and not as far as that in England. On the one hand, it provides for blessing homosexual couples, which has not been done before in the Anglican Church. On the other hand, it was done by a lone Diocese and does not represent the elevation of a homosexual into the high authority of the Church, as was the issue in England.
Following the Diocese of New Westminster's recent announcement that it has authorised a rite for the blessing of homosexual cohabitants in six of its parishes, a �same-sex marriage� was performed at St. Margaret's Cedar Cottage in Vancouver, British Columbia on May 28, 2003.
That event did not happen suddenly and without warning. The change in the Anglican Church in Canada and in North America, more generally, has been happening for some time. A brief history of the events in Canada that led up to the New Westminster decision is sufficient to develop at least part of that context.
Although the debate on homosexuality in the Anglican Church is now over a quarter century old, some of the key precipitating events began the early 1990s. At the end of 1994, shortly after Michael Ingham became the Bishop of New Westminster; he condemned the Canadian House of Bishops for their stand against homosexual priests. However, he said he would abide by the 1979 guidelines until they were changed. In 1997, the House of Bishops re-affirmed their position saying, �our acceptance of persons with homosexual orientation is not an acceptance of homosexual activity�, and �we do not accept the blessing of homosexual unions�.
In 1998, the Anglican Journal reported on a talk given by Bishop Ingham to a homosexual lobby group in which he spoke of the need �to get around the House of Bishops.� This prompted a partial denial and strong objections by Bishop Ingham, subsequent exoneration of the Journal�s claim, and a repeat of the account of his statement in the Journal the following year.
Also in 1998, a motion to bless same-sex couples was put forward by two churches of the New Westminster diocesan synod. The Bishop withheld his consent and called for a two-year period of dialogue on the issue. Over the course of those two years (1999-2001), Ingham�s �dialogue� failed to bring the Diocese together on the issue and appears to have created even greater division and disharmony than previously existed. Part of the reason for such discord is the apparent heavy-handed attempts at coercing members into accepting the legitimacy of blessing homosexual cohabitants.
The year 1998 seems to have been a watershed for Anglicans when delegates to the Lambeth Conference overwhelmingly voted in favour of a resolution rejecting �homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture� and prohibiting the �legitimising or blessing of same sex unions [and] ordaining those involved in same gender unions�. Bishop Ingham characterized the Lambeth resolution as a consequence of a vast right-wing orthodoxy in which rich American conservatives had �wooed African and Asian delegates with chicken barbeques [sic]� to assure its passage. The accusation was in support of Bishop Richard Holloway of Edinburgh, who garnered most of the press for what amounted to the same accusation. Such accusations were categorically denied and added to the growing resentment of many of the African delegates.
Two years ago, the motion from the 2001 Synod for a rite to bless same-sex cohabitants received a little over 56% support in New Westminster. Bishop Ingham again withheld his consent until there was at least 60% support for the motion. This occurred the following year despite a number of pleas both from within Canada and outside the country.
As a consequence, delegates from eight parishes walked out of the Synod, along with representatives from six other parishes. An appeal to John Carey, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, produced a response in which the Archbishop described the actions of New Westminster as schismatic, undermining the sanctity of marriage, and an ecumenical embarrassment.
In his farewell address, Archbishop Carey sounded another alarm when he said that the Anglican Church, �is being steadily undermined by dioceses and individual bishops taking unilateral action, and as a result steadily driving us towards serious fragmentation and the real possibility of two distinct Anglican bodies emerging�.
Bishop Ingham immediately attacked Archbishop Carey�s views, calling them "inappropriate", an "oversimplification", and a "great disservice to truth".
The current Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, even before taking over from Archbishop Carey, reaffirmed the 1998 Lambeth resolutions on human sexuality and stated, �any individual diocese or even province that officially overturns or repudiates this resolution poses a substantial problem for the sacramental unity of the Communion�.
As indicated, at the end of September of last year, Bishop Ingham, claiming to have consulted widely on the issue, voted for the resolution to bless homosexual cohabitants passed by the Anglican Church of Canada. The next day, Archbishop Carey challenged Bishop Ingham�s claim when he stated, �he says he has had regard � due regard � for the rest of us, but in fact he hasn't. He hasn't spoken to me about it, and I'm one of the key points of unity in the communion. He hasn't referred it to the Primates' meeting. You see, in other words, he hasn't really consulted ... as a bishop in the church, he has a wider responsibility.... He's not simply accountable to his people�.
Bishop Ingham�s action brought swift reaction from within Canada and from around the world; the fallout from of his decision has been enormous. Dr. Jack L. Edwards, President
Canadian Communications Coalition, Inc.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
August 5, 2003
Christian Coalition International Canada Inc.
P.O. Box 6013, Station A
Toronto, Ontario
M5W 1P4
Phone: 1-905 824-6526
Fax: 1-905 785-0091
Email: [email protected]