tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post3588964479000789344..comments2023-08-10T01:27:22.370-06:00Comments on Insert Catchy Blog Title Here: Marriage Canon ReduxAlan T Perryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-79786402587168989862019-07-24T06:45:25.581-06:002019-07-24T06:45:25.581-06:00I think the Word to the Church expressed it best, ...I think the Word to the Church expressed it best, as a Church, we are not of one mind on marriage. The key question is how we move forward together, living with the ambiguity of our differences. But that is a question that can't be answered in the canons.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-45706432774000109092019-07-24T06:41:50.496-06:002019-07-24T06:41:50.496-06:00No worries, Jacques. I suspect it's the way id...No worries, Jacques. I suspect it's the way identity is gathered by the blog site. But your name did appear in your post, as you say, so that's fine.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-66738206665847322592019-07-23T19:01:17.392-06:002019-07-23T19:01:17.392-06:00Not sure why the above is listed as "unknown&...Not sure why the above is listed as "unknown", as I clearly stated my name in full.Jacques Diottenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-72661209845154479472019-07-22T06:53:31.593-06:002019-07-22T06:53:31.593-06:00Thank you for those thoughts. Have you found the o...Thank you for those thoughts. Have you found the other directives on the rubrics? I am familiar with the "these or similar words" rubrics as I've used them before, but I don't believe that is applicable in the case of the BAS marriage service apart from the blessing of the ring. So apart from that section, I'm not seeing rubrical permission to change the text of the service in the ways that would be needed to accommodate a same-sex couple.Edwardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-13614561256141873622019-07-20T12:28:00.103-06:002019-07-20T12:28:00.103-06:00Hi Alan. Not sure if you get a duplicate of this, ...Hi Alan. Not sure if you get a duplicate of this, as I was cut off mid-way of my previous message. Anyways I was saying that the outcome of the latest Synod and this Canon, add more confusion. Its no wonder people can't agree. You are obviously what I would call an expert in the Canon, and perhaps you and loads of others get it. This is far to complicated for my little head. For me the bible is clear on the topic of mariage between and man and a woman, and I understand that the bible was written years and years ago, but it was written by people inspired by God, for whom the bible says God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. I think these scholars and religious people have tried so hard to take the bible apart, that they are adding more confusion, and as a result create division amongst God's people. The scholars dont even agree amongst themselves. If we cannot believe the bible for what is then what are going to believe? Anyways this is my 5 cents worth, as pennies were taken out of the market. Peace. Jacques Jacqueshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17270726162376514026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-41901303400495237632019-07-18T22:50:51.779-06:002019-07-18T22:50:51.779-06:00Thanks very much for your writing Alan. If I'm...Thanks very much for your writing Alan. If I'm understanding the current situation correctly, it appears that there is now no canonical or liturgical impediment for any clergyperson in the Anglican Church who desires to conduct a same sex marriage service. Is that correct? Or, is there still a requirement for clergy to obtain the consent of their bishop before conducting a SSM service? Also, is it now correct to say that the motions passed by GS2019 have effectively moved SSM into the accepted/approved doctrine and practice of the Anglican Church of Canada?Steve Koningnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-2202089088366340882019-07-18T11:06:45.995-06:002019-07-18T11:06:45.995-06:00Many places in the BAS say "in these or simil...Many places in the BAS say "in these or similar words". And the BAS is in general more inclusive than the BCP in language. There are a couple of places where there is no freedom to change wording, including the baptismal formula and the eucharistic prayers. I'll have to look for the directive that rubrics are permissive.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-46425666006946170672019-07-18T10:18:11.638-06:002019-07-18T10:18:11.638-06:00I can attest that Alan has been saying this for a ...I can attest that Alan has been saying this for a decade plus. We had extensive conversations about this in 2007 and 2008 when we were each prolocutors of our respective Provincial Synods (me Ontario, Alan Prov of Canada). He was not quiet about this opinion and it was well known he had it.Chris Millernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-52252159303660644432019-07-17T16:27:44.443-06:002019-07-17T16:27:44.443-06:00At Synod, which means this is not automatic. Every...At Synod, which means this is not automatic. Every bishop so far that has announced they will be exercising local option has done so with a notice of authorizing a new liturgy (one assumes based off the American liturgy). As for the permissive rubrics, that is a new one for me: is there some documentation on that in the BAS or elsewhere? Perhaps I should bring this to my bishop? I was unaware we were permitted to change the language when we desired.Edwardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-82905789527066193052019-07-17T11:06:12.093-06:002019-07-17T11:06:12.093-06:00Rubrics in Canada are generally are permissive, no...Rubrics in Canada are generally are permissive, not prescriptive. One may, for example, change "men" to "us" in the Creed to make it gender neutral. Given that the vows in the BAS are identical, having two spouses of the same sex take the vows shouldn't be a problem. Changing "this man and this woman" to " this couple, or these persons or some such formula would be fine. And changing the BAS would not take multiple Synods with complicated voting. We just authorized rites by simple majority.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-79344842942178255192019-07-17T06:46:48.158-06:002019-07-17T06:46:48.158-06:00It would require every Diocesan authorizing it, th...It would require every Diocesan authorizing it, though, wouldn't it? I don't see how what has happened allows for same-sex marriage automatically in every Diocese. The rubrics of the currently authorized rites don't permit it. What would the procedure be for making the marriage rite in the BAS (and BCP) gender neutral? Wouldn't it require multiple acts of Synod in votes by order? Edwardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-35791768458742728792019-07-17T00:43:46.323-06:002019-07-17T00:43:46.323-06:00Making the BAS marriage liturgy gender neutral wou...Making the BAS marriage liturgy gender neutral would be easy. You don't need a different rite.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-65581767800591055342019-07-16T19:22:45.101-06:002019-07-16T19:22:45.101-06:00There is no nationally authorized liturgy (in the ...There is no nationally authorized liturgy (in the BCP or BAS) for the marriage of two people of the same sex. How can a bishop not prevent same-sex marriage within the diocese when they are not required to authorize liturgies that would permit it?Edwardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-59731768207794605232019-07-16T16:29:19.820-06:002019-07-16T16:29:19.820-06:00Not under the Canon as it stands.Not under the Canon as it stands.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-34699633839419322572019-07-16T13:56:48.658-06:002019-07-16T13:56:48.658-06:00Trying to understand. Do bishops have the power to...Trying to understand. Do bishops have the power to prohibit clergy they license from solemnizing same sex marriages?Carolyn Sharp (nspei)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06526552949094971592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-59062009684755545132019-07-16T11:00:25.819-06:002019-07-16T11:00:25.819-06:00Commenters please note the blog comments policy:
...Commenters please note the blog comments policy:<br /><br />Comments are welcome, but moderated. Please use a name, any name or alias, or your comment will be deleted. I welcome constructive criticisms, profusive praise, and intelligent interjections. Abusive, nasty or libellous comments will be ruthlessly deleted. Hey, it's my blog and I get to be as arbitrary as I want!<br /><br />Deleted comments above were anonymous.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-84279743071646633202019-07-16T07:53:46.562-06:002019-07-16T07:53:46.562-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15586062586594016880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-91647453078028144502019-07-15T21:47:12.730-06:002019-07-15T21:47:12.730-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-76803919698612750192019-07-15T21:12:47.721-06:002019-07-15T21:12:47.721-06:00So under the current canons no Bishop has the abil...So under the current canons no Bishop has the ability to refuse to allow willing clergy to preside at a same sex marriage?<br />Reverend Tara Livingstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11289982561152341493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-85743474411431496442019-07-15T20:58:55.571-06:002019-07-15T20:58:55.571-06:00@Jonathanturtle
The declaration in section 1 is n...@Jonathanturtle<br /><br />The declaration in section 1 is not a change to the Canon.<br /><br />My views were published in 2005, and I have never hidden them. And the same views were expressed openly an dpublished by the Chancellor in 2016. I don't understand your curiosity.<br /><br />@any commentary, please note my comments guidelines below.Alan T Perryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11700037716579004059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-73321865817330752822019-07-15T20:10:41.484-06:002019-07-15T20:10:41.484-06:00Help me understand this Alan because I’m genuinely...Help me understand this Alan because I’m genuinely having trouble. <br /><br />The motion itself reads in part:<br /><br />“1. Declare that Canon XXI (On Marriage in the Church) applies to all persons who are duly qualified by civil law to enter into marriage.”<br /><br />Everyone plainly knew that this is what we were voting on. The clear implication of the motion failing is that Canon XXI—governing marriage in the church—does not apply to all who can be civilly married but only to male-female unions. I don’t see how any amount of logical gymnastics make this argument from silence convincing. <br /><br />It’s curious to me that you (and others?) purport to have known this since 2005 (!!) but said nothing until the motion was defeated. jonathanturtlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15083804695644086536noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5951416214263462025.post-62863956427387314502019-07-15T18:45:31.966-06:002019-07-15T18:45:31.966-06:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17375734076648429759noreply@blogger.com