Diocese of Central Newfoundland to ignore marriage canon vote

The Synod of the Diocese of Central Newfoundland has voted to proceed with same-sex marriage.

The presence of “a queer Anglican” from the Diocese of Huron may give the appearance of bias to the whole proceedings but I expect there was representation from the Zacchaeus Fellowship for balance. Or maybe not.

Here is an updated list of dioceses that will marry same-sex couples:
Diocese of Central Newfoundland
Diocese of Eastern Newfoundland and Labrador
Diocese of Western Newfoundland
Diocese of New Westminster
Diocese of Toronto
Diocese of Niagara
Diocese of Montreal
Diocese of Ottawa
Diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island
Diocese of Rupert’s Land
Diocese of Kootenay
Diocese of Edmonton
Diocese of B.C.
Diocese of Huron

22 thoughts on “Diocese of Central Newfoundland to ignore marriage canon vote

  1. When you have an APOSTATE Primate it is not surprising to see how the rest of the ACoC falls into line. One needs to ask if the ACoC will ever return to the TRUTH and uphold the authority of SCRIPTURE. Currently the so-called bishops seem to believe that the word of the primate is superior to THE WORD.

    The time has long since past for genuine Christians to abandoned this den or apostasy and seek out true Christian churches like that is the Anglican Network in Canada.

  2. You can easily see their bias by the words that they use. “Marriage equality”. Who would not be in favour of equality? This is outright manipulation and a blatant attempt to effect the outcome.

    So very sad that they have chosen to use these words from a sinful and fallen world when as an organization that sells itself as a “church” they should be using His Holy Word, that being the King James Authorized Version Holy Bible. If they bothered to read His Word they would see that what they are doing is sin.

  3. I totally agree we need to go back to the biblical understanding of marriage. Things have gotten so messed up since we have fallen into the worldly understanding of romantic marriage. People get so caught up in the idea that they use falling out of love as an excuse for divorce. Leah was in a loveless marriage with Jacob, who clearly preferred Rachel, but she never divorced him. As long as an appropriate dowry can be arranged a marriage should be good and if the one wife doesn’t do it for him, the husband should have rights to her maid or any other woman. Widows are the property of the family and can be passed along to brothers. It was all so neat and tidy. As soon as we allowed the worldly romantic love to enter into the picture, everything became so muddy and we actually have to talk about what love looks like for different people. Biblical marriage is so much easier – the men decide and the women are property. If that were the case today, we wouldn’t have to talk about who’s love is worthy of the sacrament of marriage and all of this would go away.

    • Gord, your comment portrays the “biblical understanding of marriage” inaccurately. What you miss is that many of the marriages described in the Old Testament departed from the “biblical understanding of marriage”. As Jesus pointed out, the only correct biblical understanding of marriage was set forth by God when he created the first human couple, and that standard has never changed though it has often been ignored. See Matthew 19:3-8. While the Old Testament tolerated certain practices such as divorce and polygamy as an accommodation to human sin, it did not endorse these practices. You can’t define the biblical understanding by looking at deviations from it while ignoring the original and sole source of authority for marriage.

      • So are you suggesting that one passage from Jesus (which, incidentally doesn’t mention romantic love which is really a relatively recent cultural concept and has opened the door to conversations about equal marriage) overwrites centuries of Hebrew Testament tradition?

        • God is always honest with us. He tells what actually did happen, even when people did what He said they should not do. And so something mentioned in the Old Testament it is not necessarily any indication of God’s will. Often God shows us that He brings good out of bad, and for that we should all be thankful.

          • Really? “…something mentioned in the Old Testament it is not necessarily any indication of God’s will”? What is there to stop some liberal, same sex marriage sympathiser from using this position to argue that literal interpretations of Old Testament passages condemning homosexuality are not necessarily any indication of God’s will especially given the Jesus is actually mute on the subject! No where does Jesus mention homosexuality specifically. You have basically suggested that it is all relative and left this entire website open to suggestions that it is about your interpretation over a liberal’s.

            • As The Reverend Dr. Michael Youssef Preached from + Genesis ch.18 on ‘Leading The Way’, Sunday, November 3, 2019,(‘VISIONTV’) “the Incarnate Christ” had something both to do and to say about the abominable sins of Sodom and Gomorrah; at the same time reconfirming (as He does in + Genesis chs. 1, 2;+ Matthew ch. 19) GOD’s perfect plan for human marriage:one man and one woman through whose miraculous union of Abraham and Sarah, and its sacred genealogy,The Redeemer Himself would Visit us again…as the Baby of Bethlehem + Luke chs. 1,2;
              Matthew chs. 1,2; not to be our Judge, as He was as at Sodom and Gomorrah,
              but our + Crucified Saviour for our sin, and Risen LORD for our justification;
              – from all sin, homosexual and otherwise
              + John 3:16. Amen.

              • Right, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah: The one where a bunch of men want to rape the holy visitors and Lot gives them his daughters instead. Funny how we interpret that as a condemnation against homosexuality but not against rape. I guess it is all in who is doing the interpreting.

                • Please look at the Masoretic Text of Ez. 16:28 and at what the Old Greek does with that.

                  I first noted the facts in the late 1960s when researching for my Oxford doctoral dissertation. That translation was made between 150 and 50 BC.

    • Jacob’s marriage wasn’t ideal yet Jacob became Israel! You mean to say God has ways of turning something that isn’t perfect into something wonderful? I wonder what might happen if we stopped getting in the way and let God do the work?

      • Everybody seems to dig his or her own grave. Jacob suffered by having two wives at the same time. David and Solomon suffered also by having too many wives at the same time. Polygamy is not God’s design for a Christian marriage.

        • Sorry, I can’t seem to find the Biblical references for how these powerful, wealthy, privileged men of the Bible suffered because they had too many wives. Given that monogamy is actually a fairly recent and Western construct, you may want to tighten your argument lest some liberal, same-sex marriage sympathizer suggest that you have fallen victim to social ideals about marriage.

          • Perhaps, by the grace of God, studying, understanding, practising, and promoting God’s design of marriage can be a powerful weapon against all kinds of unbiblical sexual relationships among humans.

            • Yes, it is vital that we uphold Christian marriage, and other people’s marriages, with our own daily commitment, and if need be with labour, sacrifice and sorrow.

              I’ll send six copies of Holy Homosex? post and insurance paid to any Canadian address for $65.00.

              Please ask me at priscilla dot turner at telus dot net. I’ll need your address and ‘phone no., and payment in advance by cheque or on PayPal.

        • Actually Jacob had children by FOUR wives. It was not fortunate for any of them including Jacob himself, involving heartbreak and murderous anger. The whole lot of his adult sons constitute the strongest possible argument against polygamy.

      • If you are getting in the way in any way there’s still I hope time for you to repent of that. At 81 Ι trust that I do not get in the way by teaching falsehoods publicly or privately. We do not actually need any texts from any sacred book to know about the nature of homosex or any sexual vice. But for what it’s worth, what we all know is endorsed by the Lord Jesus in all his teaching about sex-ethics. Not only did He live and teach fully within the Old Testament sexual ethic, but only about divorce was there any sex-ethical wiggle-room. He told us that πορνεία in all its manifestations defiles.

  4. My book O Love How Deep (Second 2017 edition revised with illustrations) you may read on-line here https://www.anglicansamizdat.net/wordpress/dr-priscilla-turner/ It is available on-line in FIVE formats including pocket softcover and A4 largeprint. It would make an excellent Christmas gift for any serious reasonably well-educated Christian. I can ship TWO beautiful new copies post-paid & insured to any Canadian address as follows:–

    2x trade softcover third printing 6 x 9 $60.00
    2x sewn hardback first printing with paper jacket $100.00 (unobtainable commercially, for you can get only a glued spine)

    I also have a number of copies of the first ‘West bow Press’ Vanity edition, which has more typos, more fictionalisation and no illustrations. It is however quite sound in basic ways, the story being the same. I can ship two of those in 6 x 9 format for $45.00.

    David has read this book and liked it. [I did indeed read it, so should you. Well worth your time. Also true for “Holy Homosex?”- David J]

    Please ask me at priscilla dot turner at telus dot net. I’ll need your address and ‘phone no., and payment in advance by cheque or on PayPal.

Leave a Reply