For marriages to be equal, everyone would have to have to be hitched to a person who is no less or more attractive, capable, wealthy, fertile, sanguine, attentive, understanding, sympathetic or desirable than anyone else.
As with socialism, the only way this works is to compel all to sink to the lowest common denominator. We all have to marry unattractive, bungling, impoverished, impotent, miserable, disinterested, dense, uncaring, ugly and repugnant individuals – the sex of the person wouldn’t matter because there wouldn’t be any.
Of course, what those who tirelessly agitate for marriage equality really want is imbalance not equality: a contrived conjoining of two similarities, a consummation of anti-symmetry, a coitus of hollow infertility.
A Montana man said Wednesday that he was inspired by last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage to apply for a marriage license so that he can legally wed his second wife.
Nathan Collier and his wives Victoria and Christine applied at the Yellowstone County Courthouse in Billings on Tuesday in an attempt to legitimize their polygamous marriage. Montana, like all 50 states, outlaws bigamy — holding multiple marriage licenses — but Collier said he plans to sue if the application is denied.
“It’s about marriage equality,” Collier told The Associated Press Wednesday. “You can’t have this without polygamy.”
TEC and the ACoC don’t haven’t much of a generous pastoral response to offer Nathan, Victoria and Christine because so many North American Anglican clergy have been too busy legitimising their own sexual urges to worry about polygamy – although clerical polygamy may well be on the horizon; as long as it’s gay polygamy.
The Archbishop of Canterbury today expressed deep concern about the stress for the Anglican Communion following the US Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops’ resolution to change the definition of marriage in the canons so that any reference to marriage as between a man and a woman is removed.
While recognising the prerogative of The Episcopal Church to address issues appropriate to its own context, Archbishop Justin Welby said that its decision will cause distress for some and have ramifications for the Anglican Communion as a whole, as well as for its ecumenical and interfaith relationships.
Other than the fact that I am still waiting with considerable anticipation for an archbishop to voice a shallow concern, what I find most interesting about this is that Welby’s worry is not so much whether it is Biblically sound to redefine marriage, but whether TEC’s decision will hasten the demise of the pallid but still twitching carcass belonging to what used to be the Anglican Communion.
In order to remain credible, and in the absence of any more potent stricture on TEC than deep concern from Canterbury, what choice will Provinces that take the Gospel seriously have but to further distance themselves from TEC – and Canterbury?
Incidentally, does anyone doubt that the Anglican Church of Canada will follow in TEC’s footsteps? Anyone?
Canadian Anglicans, having little else to be proud of, paid their annual homage to the Zeitgeist yesterday:
Oakville was represented by St. Jude’s, the town’s posh church:
Someone lamented that there was only one bishop present, Terry Finlay. I think the person may have been mistaken, though: this fellow looks like a bishop to me:
The object on which an Anglican bishop rests his hope rarely fails to confirm my low expectations.
Fred Hiltz could be hoping that the outcome of the debate will align with the Biblical understanding of marriage or, to say it another way, with God’s will for a Christian marriage. Instead, he hopes that there will not be too much squabbling.
Archbishop Fred Hiltz said he is aware that there is anxiety among Anglicans about how the 2016 General Synod will deal with a motion amending the marriage canon (church law) to allow the marriage of same-sex couples.
Hiltz expressed hope that the debates that will precede any decision will be conducted with respect and patience.
He is praying, he added, that people will “know the leading of the Holy Spirit” and that there will be “grace in the midst of what will be a very difficult and challenging conversation.”
In July 2013, General Synod — the church’s governing body — approved Resolution C003, which asked Council of General Synod (CoGS) to prepare and present a motion to change the church’s Canon 21 on marriage “to allow the marriage of same-sex couples in the same way as opposite-sex couples.”
It also asked that this motion include “a conscience clause so that no member of the clergy, bishop, congregation or diocese should be constrained to participate in our authorize [sic] such marriages against the dictates of their conscience.”
It’s hard to take the prayer “know the leading of the Holy Spirit” seriously, since the “conscience clause” (not that anyone takes that particularly seriously since those that exercise it will be ridiculed, ostracised and eventually driven out) anticipates disunity, something that would not be present if the delegates were more interested in being informed by the Holy Spirit than in using him as rubber stamp for their own opinions.
I was under the naïve impression that there was nothing left to which the overused to the point of meaninglessness adjective “inclusive” could be applied – but I was wrong.
The Archbishop of Canterbury today calls on business and market leaders to be less self-serving and to adopt a new model known as “inclusive capitalism”.
“Rather than just seeking a return on investment, there has to be a generosity that reaches out.”
Any model of capitalism that relied solely on self-interest would lead to the collapse of society, he warns, writing in the Telegraph.
“Altruism, the imitation of the God who acts in love that does not seek return, is a crucial part of a stable and functional society.”
To what organisation should we look for inspiration in eschewing financial self-interest and seeking no return on investments? The Church of England, of course:
The Church Commissioners hold investments whose value was approaching £6.7 billion at the end of 2014.
Their long term target is a return of at least RPI [inflation] plus 5% over the long term.
A paradigm of inclusive capitalism: it includes £6.7 billion and 5% return over inflation.
Hamilton’s business voice and a leading social service agency have joined a crusade to make the city a living wage economy.
The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce and the Good Shepherd Centres signed onto the drive Friday, joining a growing group calling for a basic wage that’s tied to what it actually costs to live here.
In Hamilton, the campaign argues a working person needs at least $14.95 an hour to purchase adequate shelter, clothing, food, transportation, child care, health insurance and “social inclusion” needs, such as a city recreation pass and other necessities.
Companies and agencies backing Living Wage Hamilton …….
Anglican Diocese of Niagara
There is only one problem with this: the Diocese of Niagara pays its janitors $12.50 per hour while campaigning for everyone else to pay at least $14.95 per hour; poor chaps will be deprived of their social inclusion needs – whatever that means..
Following the Anglican Church of Canada and TEC’s prophetic lead, the Scottish Episcopal Church is to consider changing its marriage canon to included same-sex couples.
In this context, “prophetic” means abjectly striving to fit into a world to which, the Bible tells us, the church is not to be conformed.
The General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church has today voted to begin a process for change in relation to its Canon on Marriage. It has therefore instructed the Church’s Faith and Order Board to begin the two year process which may lead towards canonical change. That change would potentially allow the marriage of same gendered couples in Church in late 2017. The option which Synod voted for states
Since Anglican churches still maintain a loose connection to Christianity, wishing holiness on a competing religion’s ritual seems a little odd. Anglicans normally reserve the attribute of holiness for gay marriages.
Much like watery Anglicanism, ISIS wishes you a holy Ramadan, too; except, if your children don’t comply, they will be crucified. ISIS, as far as I am aware, has yet to wish anyone a Merry Christmas.