This Holy Estate

I am set apart from most of the contributors here by the fact that I was and continue to be supportive of queer sexualities and have never tried to hide this fact. I want to explain here why I was so troubled by the General Synod of 2016 and its aftermath when I was supportive of same-sex marriage, and why it troubled me to the point that I seriously considered leaving the Anglican Church entirely. All of these problems have, most regrettably, only gotten worse, and I write this letter in deep ambivalence, pain, and desperation.

The report suggests a desire to explore the possibilities of a parochial “dissonance,” rather than a Catholic harmony.

What a gift it would have been if First Nations and Inuit elders were directly consulted and their words transcribed (and translated, if need be) for all to read.

In discussions of same-sex marriage, we end up with a strange (and strangely popular) historicist interpretation of the “Council of Jerusalem” in Acts 15.

The report seeks a unique definition of marriage for same-sex partners, but never provides it. Instead, it resorts to an unrelated analogy.

Paul refers to a fallen humanity tragically caught up in rebellion against God and his created order, whether a person is beset by covetousness, gossip, or sexual sins.

The most disheartening section of This Holy Estate comes in its treatment of the words of Jesus in Mark 10:1-10 and Matthew 19:1-9.

This Holy Estate engages only two Old Testament texts, Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, deeming them largely irrelevant. But we must attend to the whole of the Old Testament, not least for how the Word speaks in and through it.

To walk through the biblical narrative is to discover that marriage in God’s purpose has a particular shape.

'This Holy Estate' represents an exercise in removing scriptural barriers, rather than allowing Scripture to lead. This is no via media.