Yeah, right!
Globe and Mail religion writer Michael Valpy hoists his partisan flag high. From the opening sentence of today’s column, it is crystal clear which side in the Anglican affray he deems worthy of support. No pretence of journalistic objectivity here.
The spiritual leader of Canada's 800,000 Anglicans warned them yesterday they face the same risk as their U.S. counterparts of being booted out of the world Anglican Communion unless they slam their church doors against full acceptance of homosexuals.
The Anglican primates said nothing about slamming any doors on anyone. Everyone is welcome to hear the gospel proclaimed at any Anglican church (or, at least, those that still do that sort of thing). The issue, of course, is whether a favoured group of sinners is to be celebrated and/or elevated to leadership without a prior credible profession of repentance and faith.
Predictably, one of the chief instigators of the Current Unpleasantness doesn’t like the primates’ communiqué.
Bishop Michael Ingham of B.C.'s Anglican Diocese of New Westminster where same-sex blessings are authorized, predicted in an interview yesterday that the primates' action would "further the disaster" for the Christian church in the West.
What disaster might the bishop be referring to? The precipitous declines in Anglican membership, attendance, and giving? Can’t be: Bishop Ingham himself is on record attributing those to falling birth rates, so the disaster he speaks of must lie elsewhere. (The attribution is erroneous, but that’s beside the point here.) Perhaps, in Bp Ingham’s eyes, the “disaster” is threatened budget cuts to Anglican Journal? Or could it be increasing numbers of Anglican Church of Canada bishops? Who knows?
Mr Valpy’s column includes several unattributed nasty attacks against certain primates. (Guess which ones.) Undisclosed sources call the Tanzania summit “venomous”. And then there’s this:
Senior Canadian clerics, speaking for background, suggested that the targeting of the Episcopal Church was largely fuelled by anti-Americanism. They also noted that Global South Anglican leaders are getting money from rich conservative Episcopalians to intervene in the U.S. church's affairs.
I’ve been following the Anglican dispute for a good while now, and I’ve never before seen anti-American prejudice suggested as a root of alleged animosity. Who are those “senior Canadian clerics” anyway? And what does “speaking for background” mean, exactly? It looks like it’s just cover for making anonymous personal attacks.
The charge that sinister but unspecified “rich conservative Episcopalians” are funding the whole thing is an irrelevant ad hominem argument. The cowardly mysterious Canadian clerics appear unable to disprove the arguments brought by the primates and so must resort to innuendo and character assassination.
Archbishop Hutchison, the Canadian primate, reportedly threatened to talk about the illicit blessings of same-sex unions and acceptance of gay priests in the British, Australian and other churches if the Canadian church came under attack.
First I’ve heard of that, too, and it strikes me as an empty threat. My response—if per impossibile I were a primate—would be, “Bring it on”, or words to that effect.
Archbishop Hutchison said in an interview after the meeting with his church's newspaper, The Anglican Journal, that the primates' action on the U.S. church is something Canadian Anglicans "will have to look at seriously."
As both Binky and I pointed out yesterday, it’s big of our primate to suggest taking the communiqué seriously, given that he signed it.
Previous related posts:
Posts
