What is in Kelvin's Head?

The Anglican Covenant and Communion Motions

30/05/2012
The General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church will debate and decide on the Anglican Covenant next week on Friday 8 June 2012 during a session that is timed to last from 0915 until 1045.

The General Synod will debate two motions.

Anglican Covenant

Motion 26: That this Synod agree in principle to adopt the Anglican Covenant and instruct the Faith and Order Board to arrange to bring forward appropriate canonical provision for consideration for first reading at General Synod 2013.

Anglican Communion
Motion 27: That this Synod
- Give thanks for the part played by the Scottish Episcopal Church in the early stages of the evolution of the Anglican Communion through the consecration of Samuel Seabury in Aberdeen;
- Affirm its desire to continue to be part of the Anglican Communion as it seeks closer union while celebrating its diversity;
- Call on the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Primatesâ€™ Meeting, the Lambeth Conference and the Anglican Consultative Council to encourage the development of bonds of shared mission, respect and mutual support through which the Anglican Communion can help spread the love of Christ across the world;
- Affirm the work of the Anglican Communion Networks, bodies and initiatives through which those bonds can be nurtured.
The notes from last year’s General Synod ‘indaba’ process are available.

There is also a paper from the Faith and Order Board.

7 responses to “Well-meaning but homophobic”

June Butler

26/08/2014

Seems to me “well-meaning but homophobic” in these days and times implies vincible ignorance and is no longer useful as an excuse for homophobic language. The leaders of the C of E seem paralyzed, unable to articulate policies to move forward on equality for LGTB persons that are other than laughable. Think “deer in the headlights”.

Reply
Lawrence Rosenfeld

26/08/2014

I suppose @RevArun might say that women are welcome for the same reason, eh?

Reply
1. margaret of the sea of galilee
  
  27/08/2014
  
  Exactly what I thought.
  
  Reply
Kelvin

26/08/2014

I’ve removed a previous comment. I’d prefer to retain the focus on the institutional elements of this rather than speculating about an individual.

Reply
Dharma Nicodemus Cuthbert

26/08/2014

As society changes many people are not sure of the new, and therefore condemn it, without thought. I am safe, with the Devil l know. It’s a way of life, not dealing with changes. If we think about how much has changed; homosexuality was illegal until 1969 in England; Scotland caught up in 1983; women have a right to equal pay; the only job that is still excluded from them is working down a mine:
There are men who are prepared to wait to see a male doctor, especially if it is the genitals.
Racism is not tolerated by most, but it is still used by people who want a reaction. There was, when the world and I were young, a shoe polish, called nigger brown. This wasn’t considered at the time as being wrong.

Reply
John O’Leary

27/08/2014

I take your point, and I don’t disagree. If we look at another person and only see the gay part as ‘broken’, then that’s homophobic, no matter how well intentioned. Plus I always find something disturbingly patronising when people say ‘We’re all broken’, as if the speaker doesn’t quite believe it of him/herself, while seeing it very clearly in the other.

However, there’s another way of looking at it. The very fact that we are human means that we are broken. If being gay is part of that humanity, then it’s part also of that brokenness. It’s all part of the messy mixture that we struggle with, and build our rickety lives with, but for which we also should praise and thank God.

Reply
Allan Ronald

27/08/2014

‘Thinking Anglicans’ has a post up about Vicky Beeching’s coming out but does not link to the discussion here. I asked why but they did not reply let alone publish my question.

Reply