Marriage as the union of a man and a woman

Discussion in 'Anglican and Christian News' started by CRfromQld, May 13, 2022.

Tags:
  1. CRfromQld

    CRfromQld Moderator Staff Member

    Posts:
    120
    Likes Received:
    65
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    The General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia has voted on a statement that Marriage [is] the union of a man and a woman.

    Despite being supported 143 to 98 overall the motion was lost on the vote of the bishops; showing that the Anglican bishops are out of touch with their congregations.

    The vote was.

    Laity 63 Yes 47 No
    Clergy 70 Yes 39 No
    Bishops 10 Yes 12 No



    Now the details.


    20.3 Statements as to the Faith, Ritual, Ceremonial or Discipline of
    this Church made under Section 4 of the Constitution
    (Diocese of
    Sydney)


    In accordance with Rule V, the text of this statement, together with an
    Explanatory Memorandum, was sent to all members of the General
    Synod prior to the Synod. The Statement and Explanatory
    Memorandum are available at https://anglican.org.au/wpcontent/u...alceremonial-or-discipline-of-this-Church.pdf


    Rule V outlines the procedures for submitting, circulating and
    considering Statements


    Statement 1 - Marriage as the union of a man and a woman

    Archbishop Kanishka Raffel moving, The Rev’d Natalie Rosner seconding


    The motion is presented below in its amended form at the end of the
    business session Tuesday 10 May 2022.


    Pursuant to the authority recognised in s.4 and s.26 of the Constitution
    to make statements as to the faith, ritual, ceremonial or discipline of this
    Church, and in accordance with the procedures set out in Rule V, the
    General Synod hereby states:

    1. The faith, ritual, ceremonial and discipline of this Church reflect and
    uphold marriage as it was ordained from the beginning, being the
    exclusive union of one man and one woman arising from mutual
    promises of lifelong faithfulness, which is in accordance with the
    teaching of Christ that, “from the beginning the Creator made them
    male and female”, and in marriage, “a man will leave his father and
    mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh”
    (Matt 19:4-5).

    2. In 2004 (Resolutions 62/04, 63/04) General Synod did ‘not condone
    the liturgical blessing of same sex relationships’ nor ‘the ordination
    of people in committed same sex relationships’ recognising that both
    matters were subject to ‘ongoing debate in this church and that we
    all have an obligation to listen to each other with respect.

    3. In 2017 the Commonwealth Parliament amended the definition of
    ‘marriage’ in the Marriage Act (1961) to mean ‘the union of 2 people
    to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life’, thereby
    making lawful the marriage of two persons of the same sex and
    presenting this church with a profoundly altered missional and
    pastoral context.

    4. The solemnisation of a marriage between a same-sex couple is
    contrary to the teaching of Christ and the faith, ritual, ceremonial
    and/or discipline of this Church.

    5. Any rite or ceremony that purports to bless a same-sex marriage is
    not in accordance with the teaching of Christ and the faith, ritual,
    ceremonial and/or discipline of this Church.

    The Rev’d Nigel Fortescue moved, Mr Robert Wicks seconding that the
    motion be put. Carried

    The Ven Angela Webb requested a Vote by Houses and was supported
    by at least 10 clergy members.

    That the motion be agreed to:

    Electronic voting:
    Laity 63 Yes 47 No
    Clergy 70 Yes 39 No
    Bishops 10 Yes 12 No
    Lost
     
    Elmo likes this.
  2. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    479
    Likes Received:
    415
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    It's the same story all over these days. Protestants, RC, EO -- progressive leadership is far out of step with the rank-and-file clergy and their congregations. It's an astonishing development, really -- an outright rejection of Biblical authority from the very same people tasked with enforcing it. From an Anglican perspective, I expect that GAFCON Australia will gather in the orthodox believers as it has elsewhere.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2022
  3. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,669
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    So I don't understand, did the motion fail? As in, do all 3 houses have to to pass, for the motion to pass?
     
  4. Clayton

    Clayton Member

    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    47
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Catholic
    I’m not sure how that system works, except to say that it looks like the bishops sit in a senate of sorts, which acts like an aristocratic body and has veto power over the more democratic bodies.

    in a normal, non-mirror universe, the senatorial chamber is supposed to act as a conservative brake on the usually more progressive rabble, but in this case the reverse is true. It’s the senate that is doing its best to drag the people into a revolution.
     
  5. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    846
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    The Australians unfortunately copied the flawed American model in which a strong Senate with veto power is somehow seen as a good thing. There’s a reason most democracies limit the power of the upper chamber, when they have one at all.
     
  6. Clayton

    Clayton Member

    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    47
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Catholic
    But is the Anglican Church of Australia performing same-sex marriages? Is it amending their BCP to use gender neutral language on the table? It looks like any attempt to regularize same-sex marriage there would be checked by the clergy, even if a majority of bishops wanted it.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2022
  7. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    846
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    It sounds like they have the ability to bless SSMs that have been recorded by the State. I guess it would be up to the local bishop. The apparent lack of logic in a tricameral system in which one house outweighs the other two, is most puzzling. I wonder why it is setup that way (unanimity rule between houses but majority rule within them), with no veto override provision. It is a situation only our Australian brothers and sisters can explain.
     
  8. Annie Grace

    Annie Grace Active Member

    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    138
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican (Australia)
    I am very pleased about this. The laity who voted don't represent all of us - I wasn't asked my opinion for example. So I suppose it is only those laity who actually attend that get a vote. I think more of us would support what the bishop's have voted, so in my mind, they ARE in touch with us.
     
    Niblo and Invictus like this.
  9. CRfromQld

    CRfromQld Moderator Staff Member

    Posts:
    120
    Likes Received:
    65
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    At this stage the official position is that the Anglican Church will not perform same sex marriages nor bless same sex civil marriages.
    In the past there have been motions to allow Anglican Clergy to bless same sex civil marriages but these have not passed,

    This motion was to affirm the traditional view that marriage was a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman. This was voted in favour of by a clear majority of the lay and clergy. It appears the 22 bishops have effective veto power over the vote of the other 220 General Synod representatives.
     
    Invictus likes this.
  10. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    846
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    Wow…less than 10% is one heck of minority veto! If “one man, one woman” was the status quo, what would a new resolution have added (just curious)? It seems like there wasn’t a clear winner here. If the status quo remains unchanged now, what happens next?
     
  11. CRfromQld

    CRfromQld Moderator Staff Member

    Posts:
    120
    Likes Received:
    65
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I just found this explanation in QNews.

    ‘Tears and confusion’ as Anglican bishops go rogue on same-sex marriage

    At the Synod, the conservative Sydney diocese brought on a vote on a statement to affirm the church’s traditional position on marriage – a man and a woman only – and declare blessings of civil same-sex marriages within the church as “contrary to the teaching of Christ”.

    However in November 2020, the Appellate Tribunal, the church’s highest court, disagreed in a ruling and permitted the blessings of same-sex marriages in Anglican churches.

    This week’s vote at the General Synod easily passed through the houses of clergy and laity (unordained delegates).​

    However the Anglican bishops voted against the statement by 12 votes to 10. It needed to pass through all three houses to be successful.​
     
    Invictus likes this.
  12. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    846
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    The Appellate Tribunal part was the missing element I was looking for. That definitely helps in understanding what’s going on.