This week Andrew Goddard has published a stern critique of the possibility of "Pastoral Accommodation" in respect of SSB, with specific reference to the situation in the CofE. Effectively his critique strikes two important blows (at least from my perspective):
- against notions that hitherto accommodation of remarriage/blessing of marriage of divorcees is a straightline analogy to the possibility of accommodation of SSB
- (more or less) against proposals such as the submission I have recently made to our Archbishops (viz. that we might be a church that acknowledges its differences on these matters and neither offers an official liturgy for SSB nor prohibits liturgies for SSB being offered).
Two sites with a range of comments about Goddard's piece are Thinking Anglicans and Psephizo.
The last two paragraphs of Goddard's article are these:
"In summary, how the Church of England has responded to remarriage during the lifetime of a former spouse is the best example to consider in relation to forms of pastoral accommodation that might be extended to same-sex couples. However, there are many serious problems in so doing. In particular, the practical changes only occurred with official sanction once it had been shown how they were compatible with the church’s teaching on marriage and agreement reached on such compatibility. The Church of England has not done this in relation to same-sex unions and it is difficult to see how it could do so given its current teaching.
The appeal to pastoral accommodation as a way forward has now been analysed both in principle and in relation to three examples. This has shown there are major problems with appealing to pastoral accommodation to justify commonly proposed developments affirming of sexual same-sex unions without either changing the church’s teaching or demonstrating and getting agreement that the developments are in principle consistent with that teaching. This does not rule out such developments as clergy in same-sex sexual unions (including marriages) or the liturgical recognition of such unions. It does though mean that if they are to be proposed (by the bishops or anyone else) then some other justifications than simply an appeal to pastoral accommodation are needed and these other rationales will need to be developed and weighed by the church. An appeal to pastoral accommodation properly understood and as we have used it in the past simply will not work."
In other words, Goddard is appealing for a better depth of justification than currently offered for where the CofE (and ACANZP) seem to be heading.
Now read my lips:
I will NOT PUBLISH COMMENTS HERE on this thread which generally comment on "the issue" or on my submission or anyone else's submission or on the fate of ACANZP or the CofE of the Anglican Communion if such and such does or does not happen. (You can always go back a few posts to post a comment along those lines, but you will almost certainly be repeating comments already made).
I WILL CONSIDER publishing comments which discuss specific point(s) Goddard makes. My consideration will be helped if you actually cite something Goddard writes!!!