Thinking Anglicans

Canadian chronology

The Anglican Journal has published this Chronology of the same-sex debate in the Anglican Church of Canada from 1975 to 2008, which also includes a number of interesting photos.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
16 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Margaret
Margaret
12 years ago

It is always interesting to see how long this dispute has been going on for — especially given the many people who feel that there has not been an adequate time for studying it or listening to both sides.

Göran Koch-Swahne
12 years ago

It would depend on the Effort made, if at all, not on the Time mis-spent, wouldn’t it Margaret?

Ford Elms
Ford Elms
12 years ago

“listening to both sides” The kinds of things said by conservatives about homosexuality show that they simply have not listened. Worse, even when the things that prove this are pointed out to them, they still don’t get it. They are far more preoccupied with defending their right to remain ignorant of gay people than they are in dispelling that ignorance. So, Margaret, how much time is enough time for listening when one side refuses to listen? Since we’re talking about listening, Margaret, here’s a little test: I haven’t exactly been silent about the things conservatives say that prove they have… Read more »

L Roberts
L Roberts
12 years ago

For me a test of real ‘listening’ would be how many lesbian and gay people do you know ? How many are your friends ?

JCF
JCF
12 years ago

…or to continue, L Roberts, how many ***gay and lesbian couples*** are your friends?

I would contend that NO ONE who spends quality *friendship* time w/ a same-sex couple, would POSSIBLY think it the “Christian” thing to do, to compel that couple to break-up, or risk their salvation (or even vocation!)

kieran crichton
kieran crichton
12 years ago

JCF: here here!

Alison
Alison
12 years ago

The chronology doesn’t mention the commisioning of a national church study group which published and disseminated a workbook and study guide in the early 90’s.

It also doesn’t mention repeated attempts to get human rights principles adopted by General Synod. (The bishops voted them down because the notion of human rights was unbiblical.)

It also doesn’t mention the fact that +++Ted Scott was disciplined for performing a nuptial blessing at our wedding, or that the bishop who disciplined Ted, ++Terry Finlay, was in turn disciplined for the same offense 3 years later.

Margaret
Margaret
12 years ago

‘…or to continue, L Roberts, how many ***gay and lesbian couples*** are your friends?” I don’t follow the logic here — I have many Buddhist friends (because there are lot in this community) but that doesn’t mean I should convert to being Buddhist in my belief nor that I should fail to use those opportunities that present themselves to tell them about the gospel because they are nice, happy and contented people — and that is despite the fact that many are truly exceptionally nice people. You seem to be saying that the criteria for acceptance of the idea of… Read more »

choirboyfromhell
choirboyfromhell
12 years ago

Margaret-What does “being nice” as a test in judging relationships have anything to do with L Robert’s question? Again, changing the parameters and feigning ignorance the question’s logic have nothing to do with Mr. Robert’s curiosity on your personal knowledge of LGBT couples. Stop being so controlling and answer his question. I think the reason your perceived receipt of “hatred of anything conservative” as whined about in a more recent string is stirred up from the fact that you constantly deny straightforward and heartfelt answers to questions put forth to you. Erika Baker has repeatedly asked for clarification on an… Read more »

Pat O'Neill
Pat O'Neill
12 years ago

“I don’t follow the logic here — I have many Buddhist friends (because there are lot in this community) but that doesn’t mean I should convert to being Buddhist in my belief nor that I should fail to use those opportunities that present themselves to tell them about the gospel because they are nice, happy and contented people — and that is despite the fact that many are truly exceptionally nice people. You seem to be saying that the criteria for acceptance of the idea of homosexual couples is whether they are “nice” or not. Is that really the criteria… Read more »

Malcolm+
12 years ago

Margaret: “I have many Buddhist friends (because there are lot in this community) but that doesn’t mean I should convert to being Buddhist . . .” Since the manifest parallel is that we are arguing that you should have gay friends because it would “convert” you to being gay. If you still believe that people “convert” to being gay, that pretty much proves that you haven’t been “listening.” And since you (like most “co0nservatives”) like to pretend that Lambeth resolutions have absolute authority, I can only ask why you have defied the clear direction of 1998 1.10 that you listen… Read more »

Ford Elms
Ford Elms
12 years ago

“No one’s suggesting that you should “convert” to homosexuality, Margaret.” But isn’t it interesting that she would think that? And she isn’t the only conservative to do so. This is part of a larger picture, and applies to many of the conservatives who post here. There is a very strong need for uniformity, to the point that even those who seek the acceptance of diversity are accused of trying to impose their own uniformity. How many times did NP, and others, refer to the listening process propounded by Lambeth as something that was geared to make them agree with the… Read more »

Margaret
Margaret
12 years ago

Why do you deliberately misread my posts?
Is it a cross-cultural problem with the way I use english?
At my work I am employed and promoted because of the clarity of my writing — so why does there seem to be endless problems on this site when there isn’t one anywhere else?

Erika Baker
Erika Baker
12 years ago

Margaret You’ve been very clear in your writing. You said you had many Buddhist friends but that this didn’t mean you should convert to Buddhism. Translated into the context of gay friends, this can only mean “I have many gay friends but that doesn’t mean I should convert to being gay”. This is what people have picked up – an implied belief that being gay is something one can be converted to at will. Or did you really want to say “I have many Buddhist friends but that doesn’t mean that I like their faith and feel they are being… Read more »

Göran Koch-Swahne
12 years ago

Margaret wrote: “… nor that I should fail to use those opportunities that present themselves to tell them about the gospel because they are nice, happy and contented people…” I don’t understand this idea that Margaret should need to tell anybody she associates with which religion she adheres to. Mustn’t it be obvious to everybody. Just as Margaret knows that her “friends” are Buddhist??? Haven’t you ever been at the receiving end of Sectarian “missioning”? Haven’t you felt in hour very bones how wrong and denigrating (for both) a situation it is?? What an affront to God, your maker??? Haven’t… Read more »

Ford Elms
Ford Elms
12 years ago

“I have many Buddhist friends (because there are lot in this community) but that doesn’t mean I should convert to being Buddhist in my belief nor that I should fail to use those opportunities that present themselves to tell them about the gospel because they are nice, happy and contented people — and that is despite the fact that many are truly exceptionally nice people.” How are people misreading this, Margaret? No-one, after all, is asking you to “become” gay, any more than you are asked by your Buddhist friends to become Buddhist. And since religious belief is a lifestyle… Read more »

16
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x