13 July 2019
A letter from Bishop John Chapman regarding the Marriage Canon XXI. Clergy are encouraged to read this in your parishes on Sunday morning.
Dear Sisters and Brothers in Christ,
You will be pleased to know that our delegates are representing the interests of our diocese ably and well. On behalf of our diocese, may I thank The Right Rev. Michael Bird, The Venerable David Selzer, The Rev. Canon Beth Bretzlaff, Kim Chadsey, The Rev. Mark Whittall, The Rev. Monique Stone, John McBride, Lizzy Jones and Ann Chaplin.
While the work of General Synod continues, including the election of a new Primate, I think it is safe to say that many of you have followed with interest the conversations, debate and vote concerning the proposed change to the Marriage Canon to allow same sex couples to be married in the church. What follows outlines my pastoral response to this long-standing struggle among the people of God and to the result of the vote on the resolution.
Yesterday the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada voted on the proposal to amend the Marriage Canon XXI in our church. In order to be approved, this motion required a 2/3 majority in all three Orders – Bishops, Clergy, Laity. The proposal did not receive the necessary majorities required in all three Orders to approve the proposed amendment.
As many of you know, this decision will weigh very heavy upon many of our hearts and certainly mine as a bishop of the church and as bishop of the Diocese of Ottawa. Many of us are sharing a deep sense of disappointment today. Like many people, I have been engaged in seeking the full inclusion of ALL people seeking the sacraments and ministries of the church these last four decades. Many in the church and certainly in the Diocese of Ottawa have been seeking the same.
However, while the changes to Canon XXI did not achieve the required supermajority, a very significant step forward has been taken by our church which I celebrate. The General Synod adopted a document, with 85% support, called A Word to the Church. This document effectively allows dioceses (and bishops) to offer marriage to same sex couples. This is no small achievement. Previously, dioceses were obligated to function on their own in this matter. Now, the whole church affirms the right of each diocese to function, regarding same sex marriage, in a manner that best suits their theological understanding, practice, and tradition.
It is my intention, with the affirming support of the whole church with the passing of Motion A101-R1, A Word to the Church, to continue the practice of allowing same sex marriages in our diocese with the bishop’s permission and following our normal protocols.
My sisters and brothers, I continue to pray for our church and for our diocese as we strive to respond faithfully to the great work that we are called to do in the name of Jesus in these changing and challenging times. I remain,
Yours in Christ
The Rt. Rev. John H Chapman
Bishop of Ottawa
As we know, canons in elitist revisionist provinces apply only to the seizure of church buildings from orthodox parishes and the deposing of orthodox clergy for the “crime” of upholding the Creeds, Scripture, and the ancient doctrines of the Church. Those same canons are flaunted by pagan bishops without concern for discipline. Now the Anglican Church of Canada has adopted the TEC practice in which canons are meaningless, resolutions trump Scripture and the very words of our Savior, and Chancellors create doctrine and history to suit themselves and their legal fictions.
Canons for thee, not for me.
I note Mr. Chapman made no reference to Christ, no reference to the Gospel.
And yet if they passed it would have been shouted from the rooftops how important it is that all dioceses must fall into line.
Honestly, he reminds me of a toddler throwing a tantrum because he wasn’t allowed another cookie.
They are not really ignoring it. The General Synod also voted to adopt a resolution which says that each diocese can decide its own diocesan policy on whether or not to bless or perform legal same-sex marriages.
The adoption of resolutions that override canon law is a TEC innovation from 2012 (IIRC- the first I can think of). By this route, any canon can be effectively revoked by 50%+1 vote at one convention rather than by 2/3 vote over 2 conventions (as required by the constitution for changing a canon). Clearly unconstitutional (as canons have constitutional authority), but won’t matter, since in the Canadian case (as with the US), the authority that will rule on constitutionality has already ruled that the canon does not apply (hence the majority of Canadian bishops allowing same sex marriage since 2016, and many prior to that).
However, now that the precedent is set (that one time resolutions with 50% thresholds overrule canons), the ancient canons as well as the modern no longer govern any of the churches that adopt this radical ecclesiology (I was about to say Marxist, but actually, more Leninist). Essentially, there is no longer a rule of law, but a rule by “leadership survey”. Canadians can now expect to see the same thing seen in TEC- where meetings of the Executive Council actually govern, bishops are not accountable, and you end up with different religions in different dioceses.
The threshold may very well have been 50% plus one, but the resolution passed with 85% support. Also, according to the Chancellor, the canons do not prohibit same-sex marriage. So, the marriage canon cannot be amended without a 2/3 majority in each house, but that also means that same-sex marriage ceremonies can’t be prohibited without amending the canons to prohibit them. Church polity is an interesting subject indeed.
The percentage is not really relevant. A lot of conservatives felt they had to vote for it, or else the marriage canon (if passed) would have been forced on them. But the precedent is what is important. It has been ruled by the Chancellor and by the archbishop and the Synod rules committee that a simple resolution overrules canons. And so it shall be.
Also note that the vote in Synod is in no way representative of people who actually go to church. Many jurisdiction that were divided 60-40 or even 51-49 progressive to conservative sent delegations that were 100% progressive.