#julianofnorbitch

[mightypocketcow]

Can you explain what’s happening with the Canadian church? I’m trying to follow from here (Australia) but confused. Wonderful about the new Primate, what happened re same sex marriages? It’s a terrifying/wonderful time to be Anglican (I’m already bracing myself for lambeth next year)

derHello my darling fellow Rainbow Christian.  A fabulous sister in Christ, as I like to say.  I’m sorry that it’s taken a little bit to answer this question because I wanted to be as certain as I could about what the answer was before I said and explained it.  As it happens, I just had a conversation with my Diocese’s congregational development officer (a wonderful spiritual man, a Reverend with a PhD, by the name of Jay) and I asked him as much as I could before he had to take a conference call, so I have more information and more clarification for myself and for you and for anyone else who wants to read this.  Being part of the Communion, you may already understand most of the terms I’m going to use but I will explain them anyways for not only your sake but for others.

To begin with, in the Canon (the “ ‘sacred’rules of the church”; very similar to a story canon, as in “this is how it is and this is how it happens and this is how it goes”), the Sacrament of marriage is not *necessarily* defined as between a man and a woman, but those words are used in discussing the couple at hand when putting forth the rules and conditions and procedures to follow.  There has been discussion for years in the Anglican Church of Canada about allowing same-sex couples to be married in a church, by a priest, as a Holy Sacrament, just in the same way opposite-sex couples are.  In 2016, a motion was brought forward for them to straight up change the wording of the Canon to say “parties of marriage” or something similar, so that it may be gender-neutral and inclusive, and that it may encompass all who wish to be married regardless of sex or sexuality.  They also, for the sake of those who are not ready and who are on the fence about it, proposed an addition to it which lets a priest say no to performing any marriage without being required to disclose a reason; however, that law is basically already in place.  They were still going to specifically add it for those who cannot “morally” perform same-sex marriages, in asking them to direct the couple to someone who would perform it.  It’s called the Conscience Clause. Read more about the initial resolution here.I know that there’s a priest in my city who would most likely not perform a same-sex marriage; he would NEVER turn someone away from the church and has never (and would never) treated me any differently because of my sexuality (I’m openly bisexual at my church, with my friends and with my family, and 90% of them are good with it).  However, I know that he would say to a same-sex couple “I can’t perform this wedding in good conscience, however here’s the name and contact info for [insert basically any other Anglican priest in my city, including my own rector] who would be more than happy to meet with you.”  He is still a wonderful man, a very loving priest, and an incredible man of God.  He simply struggles with the morality because of his own interpretation of certain passages in the Bible.  And I don’t fault him for that.  I love him, I love his wife, I love their church.

Because this was a proposed change directly to the Canon, it had to be put to a vote by Order.  This means that the entire meeting would be separated (not physically, but just by vote) into three sections; Bishops, Clergy (the pastors/ministers/priests who are ordained but not Bishops), and Laity (a “lay” person is someone who is not ordained; people at this level are simply delegates or representatives of their congregation, be it a youth representative or just a random delegate from that Diocese).  The vote to change a canon would need to pass by a 2/3 majority in EACH order, which is 66%.  In 2016, it nearly didn’t pass - one man who was supposed to be counted as clergy was counted as laity by accident with the electronic clickers.   We nearly lost by one vote in the order of clergy, but it did pass by one vote.

Because this is a change to the Canon, it needs to have two readings; it needed to also be put into vote at the 2019 General Synod, which is happening right now.  This one was defeated.  The House of Bishops voted in at 62.2% in favour, which is down from their 71% in 2016.  Both the orders of Laity and Clergy went far higher than their 2016 numbers, but unfortunately that doesn’t make a difference in the outcome.  

Watching the results come live was devastating.  Even Archbishop Fred Hiltz, our Primate (head of the whole Canadian Anglican church), looked upset.  It was deafening silence as we waited, and as the results came up and people processed them... you could hear crying.  Wailing.  The youth especially were devastated; there were several self-proclaimed queer youth there.  A report from the Anglican Journal says that one youth ran out in tears.  My heart is with them.

There are two or three Bishops that were unable to attend the vote for health reasons, and they all were on the side of favouring the change.  One of them posted a comment on one of the Facebook threads and she says that she feels horrible that her absence has changed the course of the Anglican Church in this Synod.  It’s not her fault, and I feel so awful that her guilt is so high.  One cannot help getting invasive tests with a recurring illness.

However, this is not the end.  To start with, some people have brought forth new motions or a proposal to re-vote.  I am not fully certain which of those two things will be done; the sessions resume tonight at 3:15pm PDT which is 6:15pm my time.  So, in three hours.

On another note, it has been pointed out by our Chancellor himself that the current Canon XXI does not specifically exclude same-sex couples.  It allows for marriage by the church of any recognized as legal by the state, technically.  On that basis, most people have been leaving it up to the discretion of each Diocesan Bishop to decide whether or not the priests in his or her charge can perform same-sex marriages or blessings. Read more about that, and about the self-determination of Indigenous Peoples to deal with the proposed changes in their own way with their own cultural approach, here in a document presented to 2019 General Synod a few days ago. 

In a blessing, a couple would go to a Justice of the Peace at city hall or whatever and get them to perform the marriage, but then come get their marriage blessed by a priest to make it official and holy.  The further differences between marriage and a blessing are unclear to me, and in fact are far deeper than just a simple answer as I was told by Rev Dr Jay.  I’m going to have another conversation with him about it at another time.

As it stands right now, the church has voted against specifically putting forth a canon that is all-inclusive and accepting of same-sex marriages.

If there is a NEW motion brought forward, with Totally Legal Slightly-Different-Wording, it must follow the same path that this motion did with two readings and a 2/3 majority vote by Order.  It could not pass until at least 2022, even if they did a reading before 2019 General Synod is over, because there would still need to be a second reading of the amendment.

If there is a motion brought forth to do a RE-VOTE, that must first pass as a majority vote.  The majority of the General Synod Members -- not by Order, just as a whole -- must vote in favour of allowing them to revisit the proposed amendment.  If that goes through, then it will be re-voted on... I am nearly certain that it would fall back to being by Order again, but I heard from someone else that a re-vote doesn’t have to be by Order.  I do not know if that is true or not, or if I simply misunderstood them.  If this is the procedure that will be followed, I think it is supposed happen before 2019 General Synod is over.  

As far as what the results of the new motions brought forward to reconsider this, I think we’ll hear more about that after they come back from Vancouver parish visits, Sunday morning Eucharist, and lunch.

I hope and pray that if it is called back to a re-vote that there will be people who change their mind from Opposed to In Favour, that they see how heartbroken they have made countless people, especially the youth - who are the future of the church.  There’s a very good Twitter thread by a Queer Christian Youth by the name of Noah that points out the cruel irony and hypocrisy of turning away the very demographic that they want to draw in - read it here.

There was an Indigenous Bishop who got up and spoke right after the vote results came through, and he simply said, “What have we done?  What have You done?  Our children are crying.  You have made our children cry.  Is this what you wanted?  Is this the future of our Church?”  And his emotional state was heart-wrenching, but he spoke nothing but the truth.  You could see and hear the sorrow in not only the Youth but others as well.  I was told by his mother that the youth delegate from my Diocese was really upset at the results.  She was glad that he was there with someone he knew because apparently he got quite emotional.  I don’t know his sexuality and it’s not really my business since I’m not close with him (I’m better friends with his sister), but I know he is a supporter and I know he’s a very sensitive and empathetic kid.

There are two queer youth, from the Dioceses of Toronto and Huron, who have stood their ground about this, and have told the House of Bishops that they will not take the Eucharist for the rest of General Synod.  One of them said, “If you say I am not worthy to receive one sacrament then I’m not worthy to receive any of them.”  That’s very, very bold, and I would like to think that if I had been the Delegate from my Diocese that I would have stood with them on that.  I don’t know if there are more that stand with them on that, but I read about that on the twitter of one of the priests who are there with them.

TL;DR The change did not go through, but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen.  And to be honest, there’s nothing really stopping queer marriages from happening now.  But we are fighting for it.  Love is Love, and God is Love, and there will be NO hatred in my Faith.

@queerlychristian if any of your followers want to know about this or know any more about it than I do, feel free to share this!

[iredreamer]

I never knew our Anne met the Ladies of Llangollen!!!! My brain did a backflip when I read that!

I know right??? 

Anne meeting the Ladies of Llangollen like:

[internetcatholicism]

Can you tell us about your prayer vigil?

There’s not much to tell, really! It’s 40 days for life so we are praying and singing outside of the local abortion provider. And getting screamed at by angry people. A lot. We’re doing our best to keep it round the clock for the full 40 days, so some of us are out there in the wee hours of the morning.

[kitchenalia]

What woman covers there is a light???

dee dee/kristin kontrol of the dum dum girls! i reblogged it earlier but you can listen to it here

[grub-s]

whatever else you might think of me, remember that i and @julianofnorbitch have matching “hysteria” tattoos that i did

[mightypocketcow]

Thank you so much for your detailed and moving response about the Church in Canada. It brought me to tears - to be so very close to change and have it slip away by such a narrow margin. I hear a lot of hope in your response though - and I’ll be praying very much for your part of the Communion. I am heartened to hear that Blessings of marriages are already a reality for gay couples - here that’s still forbidden, even if done eg outside church grounds. Again I really appreciate your time & insigh

I’m so sorry to hear that it’s so far away for you.  I will keep your part of the Communion in my own prayers.  Hope is still very much alive, in all of this.  I firmly believe it.  And there’s always the possibility of change!

I’m always happy to help... if you ever want to talk let me know ♥

[grub-s]

@julianofnorbitch made my wildest memes come true

[grub-s]

some more foundationless comb for @julianofnorbitch

[grub-s]

yesterday was a year since moving to this house, the first room to myself since i moved out of my parents’ house at 19. this is the wall above my desk, a collection of things that make me happy: the transfer of the duck tattoo i did for H; a note from a bunch of flowers @julianofnorbitch sent me; a faded four-leaf clover attached to the myki receipt S drew her persephone on, which now lives inked into the skin on the back of my right arm; a photobooth picture taken from my first year living out of home, with S, T, and G, eternal friends; the cryptic crossword A devised and drew for my 25th birthday; a note that @dscgshauntingground wrote me when we first became friends, tucked into a yellow envelope. many many more beautiful things - i want to see these everyday and remind myself how loved and loving and lucky i am!

[grub-s]

i napped intensely this afternoon and then @julianofnorbitch came over and napped with me and were both lying in bed just having a sleepy great time. fuck politics, naps only from now on