Comments on: Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/ "I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension." -- Robertson Davies Sat, 13 Dec 2008 07:05:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Magic Statistics - “I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies » Montreal Synod votes tonight on same-sex blessings http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20570 Magic Statistics - “I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies » Montreal Synod votes tonight on same-sex blessings Fri, 19 Oct 2007 22:57:13 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20570 [...] Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision  Print This Post This entry is filed under Christianity, Anglican Church of Canada, Anglican. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Leave a Reply [...] [...] Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision  Print This Post This entry is filed under Christianity, Anglican Church of Canada, Anglican. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Leave a Reply [...]

]]> By: Magic Statistics - “I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies » Primate sees no problem with Ottawa Synod resolution http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20551 Magic Statistics - “I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies » Primate sees no problem with Ottawa Synod resolution Fri, 19 Oct 2007 00:56:57 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20551 [...] Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision [...] [...] Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision [...]

]]> By: Magic Statistics - “I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies » Canon Charlie Masters sees Common Cause plan as the way forward http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20255 Magic Statistics - “I accept no responsibility for statistics, which are a form of magic beyond my comprehension.” — Robertson Davies » Canon Charlie Masters sees Common Cause plan as the way forward Sat, 06 Oct 2007 01:52:08 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20255 [...] Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision [...] [...] Montreal Diocese to consider motion at odds with General Synod decision [...]

]]> By: Alan http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20233 Alan Thu, 04 Oct 2007 01:53:23 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20233 As I have said in the past - these are moves worthy of a Romulan! As I have said in the past – these are moves worthy of a Romulan!

]]> By: None http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20229 None Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:10:25 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20229 Its very sad to see the Anglican Church sink deeper and deeper into sinful teachings. I pray that they return to the Word instead of secularism. Its very sad to see the Anglican Church sink deeper and deeper into sinful teachings. I pray that they return to the Word instead of secularism.

]]> By: StatGuy http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20228 StatGuy Wed, 03 Oct 2007 13:15:33 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20228 This is the text of the rejected motion, A187: <blockquote>That this General Synod affirm the authority and jurisdiction of any diocesan synod, a) with the concurrence of the diocesan bishop, and b) in a manner than respects the conscience of the incumbent and the will of the parish, to authorise the blessing of committed same sex unions.</blockquote> So, General Synod rejected the authority of diocesan synods to authorise SSBs. Sounds like a rejection of SSBs to me. Be that as it may, GS clearly denied the authority of diocesan synods in this matter. Montreal and Ottawa are about to consider motions contradicting that rejection. Your further argument that approval of A186 renders A187 moot makes General Synod sound rather stupid. In passing motion A186, GS removed its own power to reject SSBs and made A187 dead on arrival. Your argument implies that GS, in even entertaining A187, acted in a pointless and self-contradictory manner. In any case, isn’t GS the supreme decision-making body of the Anglican Church of Canada? Where is it written that it cannot accept or reject motions pertaining to non-core (i.e., non-creedal) matters? If GS were to pass a motion saying that episcopal governance is not a matter of core doctrine, would that mean that GS could not prevent diocesan synods from enacting motions overturning governance by bishops? This is the text of the rejected motion, A187:

That this General Synod affirm the authority and jurisdiction of any diocesan synod,
a) with the concurrence of the diocesan bishop, and
b) in a manner than respects the conscience of the incumbent and the will of the parish,
to authorise the blessing of committed same sex unions.

So, General Synod rejected the authority of diocesan synods to authorise SSBs. Sounds like a rejection of SSBs to me.

Be that as it may, GS clearly denied the authority of diocesan synods in this matter. Montreal and Ottawa are about to consider motions contradicting that rejection.

Your further argument that approval of A186 renders A187 moot makes General Synod sound rather stupid. In passing motion A186, GS removed its own power to reject SSBs and made A187 dead on arrival. Your argument implies that GS, in even entertaining A187, acted in a pointless and self-contradictory manner.

In any case, isn’t GS the supreme decision-making body of the Anglican Church of Canada? Where is it written that it cannot accept or reject motions pertaining to non-core (i.e., non-creedal) matters? If GS were to pass a motion saying that episcopal governance is not a matter of core doctrine, would that mean that GS could not prevent diocesan synods from enacting motions overturning governance by bishops?

]]> By: Terabithian King http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-20226 Terabithian King Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:15:39 +0000 http://magicstatistics.com/2007/10/02/montreal-diocese-to-consider-motion-at-odds-with-general-synod-decision/#comment-20226 With all due respect, I have seen much written about the motions passed at General Synod this morning. And I think it's incorrect to say that "General Synod rejected a motion to allow SSBs in the Anglican Church of Canada." The motion was not whether GS approved or disapproved of SSB, but whether it affirmed (i.e. recognized) the authority and jurisdiction of diocesan synods. That said, I have also seen the canonical interpretation that since SSBs are not a matter of core doctrine (as determined by A186) that it is no longer in the canonical power of General Synod to either allow or block SSBs. I don't know enough to agree or disagree with that position, but I have seen some people who I believe to be knowledgeable about canons make that argument. With all due respect, I have seen much written about the motions passed at General Synod this morning. And I think it’s incorrect to say that “General Synod rejected a motion to allow SSBs in the Anglican Church of Canada.”

The motion was not whether GS approved or disapproved of SSB, but whether it affirmed (i.e. recognized) the authority and jurisdiction of diocesan synods.

That said, I have also seen the canonical interpretation that since SSBs are not a matter of core doctrine (as determined by A186) that it is no longer in the canonical power of General Synod to either allow or block SSBs. I don’t know enough to agree or disagree with that position, but I have seen some people who I believe to be knowledgeable about canons make that argument.

]]>