At the same time the LDS church seems to be doubling down on it’s position vis a vis gay marriage and the new policy, brandishing the big stick by belatedly describing it as revelation, whilst failing to go through the expected channels to present it as such, the Archbishop of Canterbury this week oversees a meeting of Primates, leaders of the global Anglican Communion, in what has been described as “a make-or-break meeting in Canterbury, where the bitter divides over gay rights and same-sex marriage are expected to dominate discussions” (BBC). The Episcopal church in the US consecrated a gay Bishop back in 2003, whilst leaders in many African nations regard any softening towards acceptance as a depravity, and a departure from “discipline and Godly order” (BBC).
Suffice it to say it is not only in the LDS church that things are coming to a head over this issue, where liberal and conservative factions are each calling the other to repentance.
“More than 100 senior Anglicans have urged the Church of England to repent for “discriminating” against lesbian and gay Christians. The demand is made in a letter to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York ahead of a meeting of 39 primates from the global Anglican Communion.
…
“The rift in Anglican Church over sexuality is even greater than that over women priests and bishops and those against homosexuality on biblical grounds want the liberal wing of the Church to repent over consecrating openly gay bishops and clergy…”
Nevertheless, I can’t help but feel that I prefer the looser ecclesiastical structure and opportunities afforded dissenting voices to come together and be heard over the stiflingly opaque, and high-handed manner in which the issue is being addressed by LDS top leadership. The greater transparency also draws perhaps much-needed attention to the difficulties in steering a global church.
In his opening address on Monday, Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, spoke of Christ addressing fear with a message of peace, and the mission of successors of the first apostles in particular to “to proclaim the good news of the Kingdom of God, to make disciples, to know “nothing except Jesus Christ and Him crucified””. He addressed troubled history, something to be found in all faiths, thus:
“We are all the heirs and beneficiaries of courage, of loss, of suffering and of martyrdom, of wars of independence and conquest, of the search for freedom and of others who have used the church for repression. They all shaped the way we think and feel, and our history influences how we deal with crises.
“As I say that history contains much sin. Often faith was the servant of Empire, and carried in its baggage racism, oppression, contempt for those they met…
“Yet, through it all, God was faithful.”
He spoke of a need for unity in love:
“All of us here need a body that is mutually supportive, that loves one another, that stoops to lift the fallen and kneels to bind the wounds of the injured. Without each other we are deeply weakened, because we have a mission that is only sustainable when we conform to the image of Christ, which is first to love one another. The idea is often put forward that truth and unity are in conflict, or in tension. That is not true. Disunity presents to the world an untrue image of Jesus Christ. Lack of truth corrodes and destroys unity. They are bound together, but the binding is love. In a world of war, of rapid communications, of instant hearing and misunderstanding where the response is only hatred and separation, the Holy Spirit whose creative and sustaining gifting of the church is done in diversity, demands that diversity of history, culture, gift, vision be expressed in a unity of love. That is what a Spirit filled church looks like.”
And raised four points to be considered in “making the church more ready for action, as a body around the world“.
“First, by dealing truthfully and lovingly with each other. … We will not find a way forward, a reconciling, either by avoiding issues or by aggression and power games. True reconciliation is based in truth, and in peace, as Jesus sends us in peace, which means a harmony of heart, even if there is divergence in view. There has never been a time when the church was one in view, but it has often been one in heart.
“Secondly, by a deep focus on Jesus Christ, in our worship, in our meditations…
“Thirdly, by being decisive and clear, even if we cannot agree.
“Fourthly, because we are sent, by being outward looking. Every time we act or conclude an action we must ask ourselves, will this lead a world of lostness nearer to Christ Jesus and His salvation. Even when we disagree, even if we decide we must walk separately, we must not in the way we do that imperil the salvation of one person outside this room.”
What might we learn from the Archbishop’s address, and the meeting this week?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
I think it will be interesting to see how it plays out and if the will of the majority is subverted.
It remains an issue of life and death on both sides.
Is Welby pro gay-ordination or agnostic on the subject, seeking consensus?
As I understand, the archbishop is still opposed to same sex marriage within the Anglican church, while acknowledging that the English and Welch governments have approved it. I don’t envy his position. His call for unity is nice, but the proponents of same sex marriage are very insistent. He was much in favor of women bishops, apparently contrary to the will of the laity, and pushed that through. Given a choice between unity and same sex marriage in the Anglican communion, I think same sex marriage will win and unity will lose.
“Fourthly, because we are sent, by being outward looking. Every time we act or conclude an action we must ask ourselves, will this lead a world of lostness nearer to Christ Jesus and His salvation. Even when we disagree, even if we decide we must walk separately, we must not in the way we do that imperil the salvation of one person outside this room.”
A noble goal but extremely difficult to do because if you act in good faith with what you believe is the influence of the Spirit, you might still influence a person to act in a way that threatens their salvation. And if you don’t act the result might be the same. It actually might be impossible to do.
” His call for unity is nice, but ” the huge voting majority of the convention comes from Africa, where the opposition is the most intense.
The entire conflict between the various groups has been very interesting (and plays out a great deal in Dallas/Fort Worth with the new Bishop here and the movement to African hierarchy in Fort Worth).
The anglican church is having to reconcile its beleifs because it is serving two masters and has no unity over this issue. This division will dilute the conservative base and drive them elsewhere if they are rejected. If the conservative base is accepted the church will grow in countries that arent gentrifying.
The question they are asking is do we want growth in non-white cultures as a world religion or do we want to stay a church for white culture(whatever it is in its day)
Thank you for your comments all.
Stephen: “if the will of the majority is subverted”
ji: “I think same sex marriage will win and unity will lose.”
Seems that didn’t happen guys. News leaked late last night:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35318392,
so statement in full was released ahead of the press conference to be held today:
http://www.anglicannews.org/news/2016/01/statement-from-primates-2016.aspx
Seems the Episcopal Church of America is to be barred from representing the Anglican Communion for 3 years “on ecumenical and interfaith bodies, should not be appointed or elected to an internal standing committee and that while participating in the internal bodies of the Anglican Communion, they will not take part in decision making on any issues pertaining to doctrine or polity.”
I’ve noticed before that LDS members, both here in Britain, and in online discussions, seem to regard the Church of England as a hotbed of what they might describe as “liberal permissiveness”, from which I can only suppose they really aren’t paying attention, as that really is not the case.
Nate #2, as I understand it, the Archbishop’s own views don’t favour SSM, however in his current role I think he is more interested in keeping everyone together.
GBSmith, I agree it’s incredibly difficult, but if you’re at least trying to do that the results have to be better than if you’re prepared to accept collateral damage from the outset I feel. I wish we could see more of that as LDS, where acceptance of collateral damage appears to be the norm.
Stephen, #5.
The Archbishop of the breakaway ACNA (Anglican Church in North America) was invited to attend the Primates meeting for the first time, even though they are not officially part of the Anglican Communion. He posted his response to the outcome in a letter here: http://anglicanchurch.net/?/main/page/1164
ron, what do make of the Archbishop’s call for unity in love, accepting a diversity of views? Why wouldn’t that be possible?
You make a good point about the massive cultural divides globally. I think that is often lost in online discussions on the topic as it applies to the LDS church. I don’t know that global membership of the LDS church is any less conservative than global membership in the Anglican Communion. That’s partly why I thought this a relevant contribution to the wider online discussion taking place at the moment.
Thanks. It seems the Anglican primates have temporarily and partially disfellowshipped the U.S. Episcopalian church for its acceptance of same sex marriage. Perhaps, during this three-year partial disfellowshipment, the U.S. church will reconsider and change its ways, so that full unity can be re-established?
Side question: How is funding handled in the Anglican/Episcopal church? Does this decision affect the day to day workings of either “side?”
Anon: https://www.churchofengland.org/about-us/funding.aspx
for the CofE.
I don’t know how it works for the Episcopal Church, or the breakaway ACNA, or whether that’s going to have an effect. Google is pretty good though 😉
Hedgehog. I’ll be.
Further news update (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35326324). The Archbishop Justin Welby did express his sorrow for the pain the result caused to the LGBT community.
Actually, the archbishop did two things — he did apologize for pain felt by homosexuals, and he also called for unity and supported the decision to sanction the U.S. Episcopalian church for its pro-homosexual stance. Sorta like love the sinner but hate the sin.
He was clear from the outset that he wanted unity, ji.
The latest from the Anglican News site (http://www.anglicannews.org/features/2016/01/communique-from-the-primates-meeting-2016.aspx) is:
“The Primates condemned homophobic prejudice and violence and resolved to work together to offer pastoral care and loving service irrespective of sexual orientation. This conviction arises out of our discipleship of Jesus Christ. The Primates reaffirmed their rejection of criminal sanctions against same-sex attracted people.
“The Primates recognise that the Christian church and within it the Anglican Communion have often acted in a way towards people on the basis of their sexual orientation that has caused deep hurt. Where this has happened they express their profound sorrow and affirm again that God’s love for every human being is the same, regardless of their sexuality, and that the church should never by its actions give any other impression.”
I find the nuance of that rather different to the typical ‘love the sinner, hate the sin’ heard from LDS. They seem to be specifically avoiding labels of sin. My guess is that it is because there is no agreement on that point.
I would also venture to suggest that the sanctions against the Episcopal Church are as a result of their unilateral action, rather than their theological differences. That’s my own personal view though, but would appear to be supported by this section of the above link:
““It is our unanimous desire to walk together. However given the seriousness of these matters we formally acknowledge this distance by requiring that for a period of three years The Episcopal Church no longer represent us on ecumenical and interfaith bodies, should not be appointed or elected to an internal standing committee and that while participating in the internal bodies of the Anglican Communion, they will not take part in decision making on any issues pertaining to doctrine or polity.
““We have asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to appoint a Task Group to maintain conversation among ourselves with the intention of restoration of relationship, the rebuilding of mutual trust, healing the legacy of hurt, recognising the extent of our commonality and exploring our deep differences, ensuring they are held between us in the love and grace of Christ.”
“These recommendations were adopted by the majority of the Primates present.
“We will develop this process so that it can also be applied when any unilateral decisions on matters of doctrine and polity are taken that threaten our unity.”