OTTAWA CITIZEN REPORTER BLOGS FROM OTTAWA SYNOD

Jennifer Green of the Ottawa Citizen is on the scene of the Ottawa Synod meeting: NAV CANADA Conference Centre, Cornwall, Ontario.  The first entry in her newly inaugurated blog covered Bishop John Chapman's charge to the assembled clergy and laity.

This morning Ms Green reports on the debate on the controversial motion to recommend authorisation of same-sex blessings in the diocese.  The first speakers expressed support for the motion, but then other voices came to the fore.

In Cornwall this morning, delegates lined up at the microphones by the dozens. The first speakers were uniformly in favour of the motion, saying to is an obvious step forward. After all, the diocese offers pension benefits to same sex couples. It seems absurd that it would not bless their existing marriages.

ople spoke out against it and they did not seem like anti-gay Neanderthals.

She sounds surprised.

George Sinclair, pastor at St. Alban's in Ottawa, said that if the church passed the motion, "We are saying we are smarter than Jesus. We are saying Jesus was wrong and we are right."

not mention if anyone has raised the Windsor Report or the Dar es Salaam Communiqué.

The debate goes on.  She promises to let us know the result of the vote as soon as it becomes available.

Next week, Montreal Synod will consider an almost identical motion.

UPDATE: Kendall Harmon gets the news out before Ms Green: The motion was passed 177 to 97.

One Ottawa Anglican appears to think it likely that Bp Chapman will accept the motion and allow SSBs in the diocese.

c/p: Anglican Essentials Canada Blog

Previous related posts:

RLCC Comment: Everywhere, homosexuality rips the churches apart in the process of separating the sheep from the goats. Those who choose no homosexuality will be further refined into those who choose no war and no greed but rather the full spirit of the New Commandment and, therefore, doing the deeds called for by Jesus Christ bringing forth on earth as it is in heaven, feeding the lambs and sheep.

Originally by StatGuy from Magic Statistics on October 13, 2007, 1:14pm

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.