The Most Rev Fred HiltzArchbishop Fred Hiltz (at right), primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, tells Anglican Journal what he thinks of Ottawa Synod’s vote in favour of same-sex blessings (SSBs): The procedure was just fine.  Apparently he has no opinion on the content of the motion, for none is reported.

“I believe due process was followed with respect to the handling of this resolution. The outcome of the resolution is a reflection of the mind of the church local in this matter,” Archbishop Hiltz told the Anglican Journal.

As long as the correct process is followed, the outcome must be true and righteous.  Our new primate is a libertarian.  I had no idea.

Is “due process” now the cardinal virtue of the Anglican Church of Canada?  Whatever happened to fidelity to our Lord’s teachings and the Word of God?

And, once again, there’s the ambiguity created when General Synod passed Resolution A186 declaring SSBs do not conflict with “core doctrine” right before it rejected Resolution A187 that would have allowed SSBs anywhere in the Anglican Church of Canada (if the diocesan bishop approved).

Some bishops have stated that the defeat of the motion affirming the authority of dioceses to offer same-sex blessings bars dioceses from going forward on the matter. Some canon law experts opined, however, that there is nothing in the church’s canons or constitution that prevents a diocese from acting on the matter now that General Synod has said that the blessing of same-sex unions are “not in conflict” with core church doctrine.

Are we to assume that lawyers rank higher than bishops in today’s Anglican world?

Robin MacKay, chancellor (legal advisor) of the diocese of Ottawa, said the motion approved by diocesan synod was legal. He said that although General Synod did not approve the motion affirming the authority of dioceses to offer same-sex blessings, “it doesn’t affirm the opposite.” The motion, he added, “doesn’t deny the jurisdiction of bishops to (allow) same-sex blessings; it’s just that General Synod failed to act in that area.”

I’m not a lawyer and I admit I’m not interpreting A186 and A187 legalistically, but General Synod was clearly offered the opportunity to “affirm the authority and jurisdiction of any diocesan synod” to permit SSBs and turned it down.  Sounds like a rejection of SSBs to me.

Mr MacKay’s claim that rejection of a motion authorising SSBs is not tantamount to affirmation of a motion rejecting them seems to me a textbook example of the old “letter versus spirit” thing.  But, like I said, I’m not a lawyer.

2007 Anglican Blog Award winner Christopher Johnson demonstrates the vacuousness of Abp Hiltz’s comment.

The photo of our primate is one of several spiffy new official photographs posted at the ACC’s web site.  Credit: Michael Hudson for General Synod Communications.

c/p: Anglican Essentials Canada Blog 

Previous related posts: