by Randall Fairey
This Council of General Synod (COGS) will meet for only the third time in November. While there is much important work to be done on behalf of General Synod on matters of defining mission, initiating financial development, building national aboriginal ministry, and developing governance, I believe there will be a need to address the implications arising from the Lambeth Conference. Specifically, the Anglican Church of Canada will need to further articulate its position on a number of controversial issues, particularly as the Anglican Consultative Council meets in May 2009 to discuss strains in the Anglican Communion. Unlike the three other "instruments of Communion," this Council is the only one that does not solely consist of Bishops and Archbishops.
In his Globe and Mail column, our Primate Archbishop Fred Hiltz wrote of a critical question prior to Lambeth; "Is unity [referring to the Anglican Communion] the ultimate value transcending all others, even at the risk of not acting on what we believe to be a gospel imperative in a local context? Or is action on a gospel imperative the ultimate value that transcends all others even at the risk of not maintaining unity?" He was referring to the differences around the ordination of gay bishops, and the blessing of same sex unions. He went on to say that it was his hope, "even in the face of differences held with deep conviction, we will not break communion with one another."
From my close following of the reports from Lambeth, particularly from Canadian sources, and following on Bishop John's Lambeth Pastoral, I believe that with the skilled pastoral guidance of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishops came away deeply enriched and strongly committed to preserving the unity of the Communion notwithstanding continuing challenges and unresolved issues.
But I see that harder theo-political realities emerging from Lambeth are the issues that COGS now has to wrestle with, along with all members of the Canadian Church. First is the work of the Windsor Continuing Group, which has passed the issues that arose from ongoing revisions of the proposed Anglican Covenant to the Consultative Council. Our Province has already responded to the St. Andrew's Draft but by no means is satisfied, particularly with the hard language in its Appendix particularly. Secondly, a "Pastoral Forum" is to be established by the Archbishop of Canterbury as a body charged with determining how the Communion is to resolve internal disputes. Many see it as disciplinary, and pointedly aimed at those provinces, such as the Episcopal Church and Canada, who might yet decide in Synods to disagree with the Windsor Continuing Group's expectation of continuing moratoria on the ordination of gay bishops, allowing same sex blessings, and cross-border incursions by Bishops.
Canada is left with a dilemma since several Dioceses have already accepted the blessing of same sex unions and indeed in some cases have exercised rites of the same. Moreover in Canada and a growing number of U.S. States, marriage of same sex persons is legal.
The critical issue raised by our Primate falls now to the consideration of COGS on behalf of General Synod: to what extent will Canada move to support the unity of the Anglican Communion and the many positives it has accrued, and support the moratoria expected of its leaders? Doubtless the Archbishop of Canterbury has rescued the Communion from outright schism, which we would expect as his duty. However, even he has had to override his personally expressed belief that "an active sexual relationship between two people of the same sex might…reflect the love of God in a comparable way to marriage; if and only if, it had about it the same character of absolute covenanted faithfulness."
I am reminded of a quote from Peter Drucker, "Managers do things right, Leaders do the right thing." Let us pray the Holy Spirit leads our Canadian Province into true grace and righteousness.
