Same-sex marriage ‘theologically possible,’ says Canadian Anglican commission

22 September 2015 • Persistent link: iarccum.org/?p=1713

The church may want to look at samesex marriages as partakingin the same covenantas heterosexual unions, buton somewhat different terms,” and possibly involving alternate liturgies, recommends the report of the Commission on the Marriage Canon, released today.

Just as the New Testament describes the Gentiles in the early church as drawn into the people of Israels covenant with God, but not required to observe Jewish tradition, so might the Anglican Church of Canada understand samesex couples as drawn into the same covenant as heterosexual couples, but in a new way, commission member Stephen Martin told members of the Council of General Synod (CoGS), who gathered for a special session in Toronto to receive the report.

Were suggesting this might be the more accurate, faithful and biblical way of thinking about what might be happening in the church today,” added commission member Canon Paul Jennings, who explained the reports section dealing with models for samesex marriage. “That is, its not a question of us redefining marriage in the abstract to be more inclusive and thereby imply, I dont know whatthat the previous understanding of marriage was wrong. But, it may be simply that God is calling samesex couples into marriage and thereby broadening and enriching the institution without denying its previous meanings.”

Jennings added: “Maybe God is intending to graft gay Christians into the institution of Christian marriage, sharing its root meaning yet on somewhat different terms.”

This conception of samesex marriage, the report said, would involve revising the canon using genderneutral language, and probably also new liturgies for samesex couples which wouldshare the same core vowsas liturgies for heterosexual couples.

The commission cautioned that the model the report was proposing was a recommendation only. “This argument is not an attempt to prove something, to prove that this is the way to go forward,” said Jennings. “We are offering a rationale, that is a way of conceiving of it theologically in a way that were suggesting might have integrity. But the church will still have to discern whether this is Gods will for the church.”

It is, he added, one of threelogical possibilitiesbeing put forward by the commission, and something of a middle way between the other two. The other two possibilities, according to the report, are, on the one hand, to see samesex marriages as anundifferentiatedform of Christian marriage, essentially identical to heterosexual marriages; and, on the other, to see them asblessed partnershipsrather than covenants before God.

The commission said it arrived at a conclusion that it istheologically possible to extend the marriage canon to include samesex couples, without thereby diminishing, damaging, or curtailing the rich theological implications of marriage as traditionally understood.”

But, it hastened to add, “to say that it is theologically possible to make this change is not to say that the change is theologically desirable.” What the commission sought out to do wasto show how it may be donenot why or even whether it should be done,” it said in its report. “These questions require more than theological argumentation: they require an act of corporate discernment.”

The commission was formed by CoGS as a result of Resolution C003, a 2013 decision by General Synod to bring a motion allowing samesex marriage to its next meeting in 2016. The resolution asked CoGS to craft the motion, which would amend the churchs Canon 21 on marriageto allow the marriage of samesex couples in the same way as oppositesex couples.”

In its report, the commission also concluded that changing the marriage canon to allow for samesex unions does not directly contravene the Solemn Declaration of 1893, the founding document of the Anglican Church of Canada, which reflects its historic roots in the Church of England and itstheological and doctrinal heritage.”

It noted that when General Synod allowed the remarriage of divorced persons, the ordination of women and the reception of holy communion by children prior to confirmation, they were not deemed to be in contravention of the Solemn Declarationeven though the Church of England had not made those changes at the time they were implemented by the Canadian church.”

Nonetheless, the commission ultimately decided that it was the prerogative of General Synod to determine whether the proposed change to the marriage canon isin harmony with the Solemn Declaration.”

Among others, General Synod 2016 willneed to discern whether this change is sufficiently rooted in thesame Word of Godand discern its relationship toall things necessary for salvation.’”

It is also up to General Synod to determine whether samesex marriageis an area of definition and interpretation of doctrine in which it can make change and, if it, whether it is a change it believes is appropriate.”

The commissions recommendation of the middle way in understanding samesex marriage comes nearly at the very end of the report, following about 30 pages of reflection on biblical and theological issues intended to provide the rationale for allowing samesex marriages.

This reflection is located in what commissioners called twoclusters of meaningaround marriage: on the one hand, creation accounts in the Book of Genesis, which refer to the goodness of the union of male and female, and the creation of new life out of that union, and, on the other, New Testament descriptions of the churchparticularly in Ephesians 5as the body of Christ. The latter points to the concept of Christian marriage as a way of living out the divine command to love one another, so that the basis of marriage is not procreation and the union of male and female but rather its ability to point to Christs relationship to the church as a model of love.

In practical terms, understanding samesex covenants asa differentiated form of Christian marriage covenantis alsocompatible with the revision of the canon to include samesex couples (as called for in the resolution of the General Synod),” said the report. “It would suggest a liturgy that allows for variation in the theological background and symbolism between sameandoppositesex marriages, while retaining identical core texts, such as the vows.” The draft resolution drawn up by the committee calls for, among other things, amending the wording of Canon 21 to be genderneutral, substitutingpartnersforhusband and wife,” for example.

Seeing samesex and heterosexual marriages as essentially the same has a number of advantages, the report states, such as simplicity and formal equality. However, it continues, simplicity may not necessarily be desirable; “with respect to theological understanding richness, complexity, and differentiation are desirable traits.” Also, the report states, “this model would seem to change to some extent the definition of marriage for heterosexual couplesby removingthe rich symbolism of heterosexual love from the definition of marriage, leaving the institution more abstract.”

Jennings also articulated the commissions view that, “it may be that samesex relationships have specific gifts to offer the church which would not be celebrated if we tried to fit them into a onesize fits all [category].”

Considering samesex unions merely asblessed partnershipsalso has some advantages, the report states. For example, itruns no risk of redefining traditional heterosexual marriage…. No one need fear that marriage has changed.” On the other hand, the report states, “as a blessing without vows, this model does not acknowledge the relationships potential to be a place in which the couple exercises their vocation of Christian love by striving to be as Christ to one another in covenanted love.” The question, said the commission, would be whether the church can discern in these partnershipsan instance, of Christs love for the church?”

In its report, the commission also drafted a motion that includes a provision allowing dioceses, bishops and congregations to optout of performing samesex marriages. Along with formulating the biblical and theological rationale for allowing samesex marriages, the commission was charged with developing aconscience clause,” included in the amendmentso that no member of the clergy, bishop, congregation or diocese should be constrained to participate in or authorize such marriages against the dictates of their conscience.”

Commissioners took turns in introducing various sections of the voluminous report. Bishop Linda Nicholls introduced the report, the Solemn Declaration and the conscience clause; Patricia Bays discussed the background and terms of reference; Jennings explained the Biblical and theological rationale for the proposed change in the marriage canon; Martin tackled the authority of scripture, definition of marriage and the theology of marriage; and Archbishop John Privett presented the reports conclusion.

The commissions work included a consultation process, in which it invited opinions on the issue. It received a total of 223 submissions from individuals representing 26 dioceses, two from theological colleges, three from specialists, three from full communion and ecumenical partners, and six from institutions and organizations. Several submitters argued against allowing samesex marriages, although whether to allow them or not was beyond the commissions mandate.

The commission has dedicated the report to its chair, Canon (lay) Robert Falby, who died In June. “His unexpected death prior to completion of this report saddened us deeply,” they said. “His knowledge of the church and deep commitment to its life and ministry, born of his many years of dedicated service as a diocesan chancellor, member of General Synod and its prolocutor, were gifts to our work.”

Anglican Journal editors note: Portions of this story have been corrected. Some comments were misattributed to Stephen Martin instead of Canon Paul Jennings. Both Martin and Jennings also emphasized that they were not simply presenting their own ideas, but rather of the entire commission. “Our report was very much a collaboration of the entire commission,” said Jennings.