Toronto Church is First Anglican Parish in Canada to Approve Weddings for Homosexuals

LifeSiteNews ^ | 1/15/08 | Thaddeus M. Baklinski

[wagglebee]

TORONTO, January 15, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Toronto's Church of the Holy Trinity has presented a direct challenge to the leaders of the Anglican Church of Canada by voting to hold weddings for same sex couples.

Their statement says, "Holy Trinity will continue to exercise its conscience and bless same-sex unions and marry same-sex couples."

While Holy Trinity has been conducting blessing ceremonies for some time, Rev. Jim Ferry, a preist at Holy Trinity clarified, "We also intend, when the opportunity arises, to take the next step, which is a (same-sex) marriage ceremony."

Ferry also claimed that numerous other parishes across Canada are "quietly" conducting same-sex blessings. "We're not the only ones," he said yesterday, according to the Ottawa Citizen. "There are other parishes across the country who have been quietly going ahead and doing same-sex blessings. They're in the major urban centres, wherever there's a significant population of gay and lesbian people."

Holy Trinity parish, in downtown Toronto, is notorious for its heedless disregard for fundamental Anglican precepts, and is known for its pro-homosexual and anti-Catholic activism. During Toronto World Youth Day in 2002, Holy Trinity hosted an anti-Catholic event that included a speaker who advocated violent protest against churches.

While four Canadian Anglican dioceses (Niagara, Ottawa, Montreal and New Westminster, BC) have voted to allow ministers to conduct blessing ceremonies, Holy Trinity has defied the doctrine and normative procedures of its own church by not only endorsing gay marriage, but doing so without seeking the permission of its bishop.

Last week Archbishop Fred Hiltz said in a letter addressed to his clergy, "It is important to note that the Anglican Church of Canada has not altered its doctrine of marriage as outlined in our prayer books and canons," but hedged that statement with the qualification that Canadian Anglicans "live in a country where the federal government in 2005 approved legislation that allows the marriage of same-gender couples."

The Anglican Church of Canada, which is holding its annual synod in Winnipeg this week, will be considering a resolution that would allow individual congregations to decide for themselves whether or not to bless gay 'marriages', but not in fact to 'marry' same-sex couples.

The worldwide Anglican Church is currently deeply divided over the issues of ordaining homosexual clergy and same-sex marriage.

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

ANGLICAN DIOCESE DISASSOCIATES FROM PARISH CONTRIBUTING TO ANTI-CATHOLIC WYD EFFORT
Speakers at Anti-Catholic Event Include Those Advocating Violence Against Churches
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/jul/02071601.html

ANGLICAN PRIMATE AND TORONTO DIOCESE OFFICIALLY REFUSE TO DISASSOCIATE FROM ANTI-CATHOLIC PRESENTATION TARGETING WORLD YOUTH DAY
Now say that they "value the right to ask uncomfortable questions"
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/jul/02072205.html

RESIGNATIONS CONTINUE OVER ANGLICAN BLESSING OF HOMOSEXUAL UNIONS
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/nov/02111906.html

Second Anglican Bishop Leaves Anglican Church of Canada Over Homosexuality Endorsement
Prominent theologian says Anglican Church of Canada "poisoned" by a liberal theology
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/nov/07112304.html

[wagglebee]

While Holy Trinity has been conducting blessing ceremonies for some time, Rev. Jim Ferry, a preist at Holy Trinity clarified, "We also intend, when the opportunity arises, to take the next step, which is a (same-sex) marriage ceremony."

Actually, you will be walking into the gates of hell.

[wagglebee]

Anglican Ping

[wagglebee]

Canada Ping

[wagglebee]

Homosexual Agenda and Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping lists.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[fanfan]

[HoosierHawk]

...Rev. Jim Ferry, a preist at Holy Trinity clarified, "We also intend, when the opportunity arises, to take the next step, which is a (same-sex) marriage ceremony."

Maybe Rev. Ferry will clarify his position of "preist."

Seriously, I just don't understand any of this. Beyond the homosexual issue, (which I never understood), why is the Anglican Church taking up the homosexual banner and the corresponding anti-Catholic activism? What version of the Bible do they have and do they read it at all?

Do they ever pray for guidance from the Almighty?

Not to offend anyone on the forum, but it seems obvious to me that Satan has worked his way into their congregations, IMHO.

[thehumanlynx]

at least its in Canada and not here.

I know its coming more and more here though. Which is sad, I've lately been so distraught looking at the bleak future of my country.

We have very few options for President that have any differences. Its hard to note the distinction btw the "Republican" frontrunners and the Dims.

People with conviction are glossed over for more of the same empty words. Duncan Hunter gets no attention even though he appeals to Christian Conservative values. Its sad...

The very serious homosexual issue is just one of many that would make the framers roll in their graves.

[elpadre]

“We have very few options for President that have any differences. Its hard to note the distinction btw the “Republican” frontrunners and the Dims”

With all due respect I couldn’t disagree more. Can you name one issue in which the R’s and D’s have similar positions/

right to life, tax cuts, the war on terror, immigration, sanctity of marriage = one male + one female, federalism (states rights), big government versus small government, and on and on.

The two parties are miles apart on these fundamental issues.

[joebuck]

"What version of the Bible do they have and do they read it at all?"

It's not their Bible it's their exegesis. You should hear the kooky sophistries they use to explain away Biblical condemnations of homosexuality. In Genesis 19 (the destruction of Sodom) it is rape not homosexuality being condemned. In Romans 1 Paul is condemning promiscuity not homosexuality. (I kid you not). I'm not sure how they explain away 1 Corinthinans or 1 Timothy much less Jesus' condemnation of "pornea". It's clear they use deductive reasoning and backwards exegesis - they decide in advance the conclusion they want to reach and then selectively and deceptively quote scripture to get to where they've already decided they want to be. Just like their liberal Judges.

[HoosierHawk]

It's not their Bible it's their exegesis.

Thank you so much for your reply

Not being of Anglican faith, I thought maybe their biblical translations had "grown," (like liberal judges), over the centuries. You have corrected me in that regard.

[thehumanlynx]

McCain, Immigration.

Big Government vs. small?

The people with R by their name are supposed to support the latter option right? All I see is that the gov't has grown and grown during the R controlled congress days.

Mitt Romney is a Johnny come lately regarding sanctity of marriage.. abortion.. immigration and on and on and on.

In my relatively short political awareness, 26 yrs old, I've seen the R move further to the left. The Republican party is a shell of what it used to be.

I wish I could believe what you say about being miles apart but it looks to me like they are a few yards apart and steadily getting closer. Rino is an apt name for a lot of them, I see that the party is going to go through a major overhaul if it wants to get back to legitimate conservative principles. It saddens me.

[Antioch]

I live not too far from this church and a couple of years ago I wandered into it to be horrified by the following sight. All the pews had been stacked in the transepts and the entire Church floor was covered in yoga mats. About 200 white saried and turbaned Kundalini Yoga freakazoids were rythymically swaying in some trance state and channeling some demonic force. This was supposed to be going on for a continuous 48 hour period. I had the overwhelming feeling of an evil presence there.. I snapped a few pictures and hightailed it out of there. Whats happened now in this article seems tame by comparsion.

[Mrs. Don-o]

It's all part of the grand tradition of private interpretation of Scripture. "I listen to no man, only to my God. And this is what my God is telling me this Scripture means."

Want to know how to explain away the more difficult Scriptures? Here's a Gay Christian Website that'll make it all plausible.

And they don't feel they need their arguments to be anything more than "plausible."

[Mrs. Don-o]

Actually, it's the logical outworking of the theological principle of "We don't need no steenkin Magisterium, we don't need no steenkin Tradition." If every believer has the right and the competence to interpret Scripture as it seems right to him, who's to tell these guys they're wrong?

[joebuck]

"It's all part of the grand tradition of private interpretation of Scripture. "I listen to no man, only to my God."

Naah, that has nothing to do with it. It is part of the itching ears syndrome. The "magisterium" gets it just as wrong as the poofters.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Perhaps you have little experience with the so-called Gay Christian movement. They're quite convinced that they are the true Christians and that "the Bible tells them so".

Yeah, follow those links and read along. If you're like me, you'll be amazed and appalled.

Every church is full of sinners, and mine (Catholic) is no exception. For real. But the Magisterium has never approved gay sex relations, nor the dissolubility of a Sacramental marriage, nor contraception, nor abortion, and never will. Not in a million years. And frankly, there are not many churches which could say that.

All that comes down to is this: we sin, but when we sin we know darn well we're in the wrong.

[thehumanlynx]

Can you name one issue in which the R’s and D’s have similar positions/

Heres another little breakdown which is a microcosm of the problem as a whole, re: mortgage "crisis".

Hillary Rodham Clinton

* $2 billion federal fund to help homeowners
* 90-day moratorium on foreclosures
* Minimum five-year rate freeze on all ARM subprime loans
* Legislation to force lenders to modify loans without investor consent

John Edwards * A 'Home Rescue Fund' (financed by taxpayers) to help borrowers into more affordable mortgages * An immediate halt on foreclosures until lenders offer some sort of mortgage assistance to borrowers * Seven-year freeze on interest rates

Barack Obama * Federal fund to help homeowners refinance or sell * Reform of bankruptcy laws to allow for mortgage renegotiation * Mortgage interest tax credit for people who don't itemize

and now for the Republicans.

Rudolph Giuliani * Government help for borrowers who were 'cheated' * Lender initiated work-outs

John McCain * Target assistance for borrowers who have been 'taken advantage of' by lenders * Expansion of the FHA to support the development of 'innovative mortgage loans'

Mitt Romney Federal assistance to help homeowners refinance. Even Duncan who is typically staunchly conservative and has the record and credentials to back it up is supportive of Govt help, albeit less help than others have suggested. Nanny statism in different doses is still a bigger than should be gov't regulating We the People. Which is the exact opposite of what was intended, We the People should be regulating them, and there shouldn't be near as much as there is now for us to worry about regulating. If you can't see that the Govt has expanded, will continue to, and that the politics as a group are moving to the left.

also, need we bring up 2nd amendment issues and abortion against the past records of some R frontrunners and look at those against the D side. I'm sure you've seen the video of Mitt, running as a R against Ted Kennedy, arguing about how he is for abortion, gay marriage, and so on. Trying to convince the constituents that he is as liberal or moreso than Ted "leave the scene" Kennedy. The party is due for an overhaul.

[joebuck]

"They're quite convinced that they are the true Christians and that "the Bible tells them so".

So were the Libertines, the Gnostics, the Cerinthians, the Pelagians and all the other heretical movements of the first and second centuries. This is nothing new. I'm sure this is why every book in the NT (except maybe Phileman) stresses rejecting false doctrine. The books of Galations and Jude are almost totally devoted to this issue. So who do we rely on for proper interpetation? The book of John specificly tells us this is the job of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit will "teach" us ALL THINGS and help us to remember Jesus words. (Jn 14:26)

[Mrs. Don-o]

"So who do we rely on for proper interpetation? The book of John specificly tells us this is the job of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit will "teach" us ALL THINGS and help us to remember Jesus words. (Jn 14:26)"

But of course! Exactly! That's precisely what the Gay Christians believe.

Did you read any of the three links I gave?

[joebuck]

"Did you read any of the three links I gave?"

Yes and while they were disgusting I didn't see anything nearly as reprehensible as the inquisition or crusades, which is where your way takes people. I'll trust and have faith in God.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I think you have swallowed the Muslim interpretation of the Crusades; for a little more reading on this, I invite you to take a look at This Free Republic discussion, starting with the article at the top.

You might want to look into the Inquisition a little more deeply, too. Thomas F. Madden, professor and chair of the department of history at Saint Louis University, makes the point that the Inquisition actually saved the lives of many people who would otherwise have been torn apart by politically-motivated lords or mob hysteria.

It was not unheard-of for accused criminals held on charges by secular courts, to intentionally commit some technical blasphemy in order to get their case transferred to the Inquisition, where they could hope for careful inveestigation, greater procedural justice, and more clemency in sentencing.

In addition to the link I had above, here's a second Thomas Madden link.

Intriguing quote:

"After the reforms, the Spanish Inquisition had very few critics. Staffed by well-educated legal professionals, it was one of the most efficient and compassionate judicial bodies in Europe.

"No major court in Europe executed fewer people than the Spanish Inquisition. This was a time, after all, when damaging shrubs in a public garden in London carried the death penalty. Across Europe, executions were everyday events.

But not so with the Spanish Inquisition. In its 350-year lifespan only about 4,000 people were put to the stake. Compare that with the witch-hunts that raged across the rest of Catholic and Protestant Europe, in which 60,000 people, mostly women, were roasted. Spain was spared this hysteria precisely because the Spanish Inquisition stopped it at the border.

"When the first accusations of witchcraft surfaced in northern Spain, the Inquisition sent its people to investigate. These trained legal scholars found no believable evidence for witches’ Sabbaths, black magic, or baby roasting. It was also noted that those confessing to witchcraft had a curious inability to fly through keyholes.

"While [Protestant] Europeans were throwing women onto bonfires with abandon, the Spanish Inquisition slammed the door shut on this insanity. (For the record, the Roman Inquisition also kept the witch craze from infecting Italy.)"

---

Interesting as all this may be, it has no direct bearing on the concept of "teaching authority." While rejecting the claim of apostolic succession and Catholic-style teaching authority, Protestant groups carried out the large-scale burning of supposed witches in Germany, and even Anabaptists carried out massacres. So Inquisition and Crusade have no intrinsic or necessary connection with Church teaching authority, a.k.a. Magisterium.

If there's no "teaching authority" in the Church as such, then St. Paul is very much in error for saying that God appoints teachers; and if the same Holy Spirit teaches equally through the Gay Christian advocates, then by whose authority can anybody say they're wrong?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Right. But the Spirit teaches the Church; and not everyone in the Church is appointed by God as a teacher:

1 Corinthians 12: 28-30
Now you are the body of Christ,
and each one of you is a part of it.
And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles,
second prophets,
third teachers,
then workers of miracles,
also those having gifts of healing
, those able to help others,
those with gifts of administration,
and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.
Are all apostles?
Are all prophets?
Are all teachers?
Do all work miracles?
Do all have gifts of healing?
Do all speak in tongues?
Do all interpret?

[joebuck]

"But the Spirit teaches the Church; and not everyone in the Church is appointed by God as a teacher"

The Spirit teaches the individual as Jesus specifically said. In a society where the vast majority of the people can't read of course someone will have to read it to people and explain the basics as a part of evangelizing. This explains why the same greek word translated as "teacher" in the passage you quoted is also translated as "pastor" throughout the NT. Please show me a single passage that says the teaching of the Church is necessary to understand the Bible or the Spirit - I know of none. I know of several which say the presence of the Holy Spirit in the individual is necessary to understand and know Christ.

Look, I am hard core Sola Scriptura. You obviously are not. Neither of us is going to change the other's opinion. I agree to disagree.

[Mrs. Don-o]

The Council of Jerusalem? Acts 15:28
"It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us..."?

Ephesians 3:5
"...which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets"? There are things which were not made known to all men, but only to Apostles and prophets?

Since you are hard core Sola Scriptura, who would you refute the arguments made here by these gay Christians?

Try Passage 1. I'm interested in your answer, because Ihave a close relative who is a gay Christian and I would like to save him from his delusion, but I've made no progress because he is convinced that the Holy Spirit has said nothing to condemn "loving" homosexual relations,and he justifies his argument on th basis of "Gay Bible Studies" such as these.

[kaehurowing]

Homosexual cult alert.

[fanfan]