Very astute.
From here:
The primate said he was not surprised that the resolution asking the Council of General Synod to prepare a resolution for 2016 that would change the marriage canon to allow same-sex marriage “sparked some difficult moments.”
Asked to comment on opinions expressed by some members that there wasn’t enough time to debate on the merits of the resolution, Hiltz said, “It doesn’t matter what kind of resolution you have on the floor that’s going to change the marriage canon of the church so that same-sex couples can be married. It’s going to be controversial.”
Reacting to statements made by some members that allowing same-sex marriage is a big leap from the blessing of same-sex unions, the primate said, “None of that surprises me. There’s nothing new in that perspective; that’s been there in the life of the church for many years.”
Saying “[t]here’s nothing new in that perspective” is evading the point. For years, the Anglican Church of Canada has been boring everyone – well, Anglicans, most of whom already have one foot in the grave – to death with explanations of why blessing same-sex couples is not the same as marrying them. The former, supposedly, is not against “core doctrine”; no-one is suggesting that the church is going to embark on the latter, we were assured, so there is really nothing to worry about.
Now the ACoC is going to vote on performing same sex-marriages in spite of all protestations to the contrary; naturally no priests would be compelled to perform same-sex marriages. Given the church’s duplicitous performance thus far, does anyone believe that?
No one would be compelled to to participate should this become part of the marriage canon you say. It would be interesting to know then how much real protection and legal support, at the national church level, would be offered to said bishops,clergy and dioceses who demur and are subsequently targeted by activists. Rather hard to support both views at the same time in front of a Human Rights Commission. “What exactly is your company policy?” would be a legitimate question from the tribunal and a hard one to answer in such a case. The newly promulgated rule or the founding charter – which has precedence?
Hiltz, above all, is the leading Anglican ‘spin doctor’ and ‘smoke and mirrors’ expert.
I do not believe that he cares a fig what happens just as long as he gets to ram his homosexual marriage agenda through the Synod in 2016. By then, the politics will be so intense that any Anglican priest or bishop who opposes Hiltz, Elliott et al will be collecting Unemployment Insurance.
The absolute waste of charitable dollars by the ACoC is a crime that God will never forgive [at least the new pope makes the right noises about the poor, but unfortunately that is about all so far] but Hiltz and his GLBT crew spend the bare minimum to keep the Charities Commission off their backs and blow millions on hijacking the ACoC.
The ACoC should have its charitable status revoked forthwith.