In the ‘Charge’ he delivered last September to the 139th Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Toronto, Bishop Terrence Finlay stated, “I need people who will reach out and listen to someone on the other side, to act with care, to know how to give and take.”

Such care and sensitivity were required, he thought, in “an effort to understand how the church can be inclusive and just both to gays and lesbians and for people who are skeptical about homosexuality.”

“The Church is enriched by their presence, both as laity and clergy, he added.  (The Anglican, November 1991).

The issue came to the fore in connection with the removal last July of Rev. James Ferry from his position as rector of St. Philip’s-on-the-Hill Church in Unionville, a town just north of Toronto.  He was dismissed because of his decision to “remain in a continuing relationship with another man.”  (See “Dismissal provokes ‘Outrage’”, The Interim, September 1991).

“Discrimination’

The action provoked cries of “discrimination”, expressed in letters to the major papers; strong protests from Integrity, an organization of homosexual Anglicans; stories in the daily papers about a “hateful smear campaign,” of which Mr. Ferry was the victim; and a highly emotional column, “Revelations cause inner pain,” by Bill Glisky in the Anglican Journal for October 1991.

Gilsky quoted Ferry as saying, “I had expected compassion; I had hoped for justice.  I experienced neither.”

“I believe it is a sin against human dignity and against the gospel of Jesus Christ to force someone to choose between a loving relationship and their commitment to God and the Church,” Mr. Ferry offered.  “They don’t do it to heterosexuals, why should they do it to homosexuals?” Mr. Ferry also said.

At the Synod, the Bishop had said that the decision to remove Mr. Ferry was one of the most agonizing of his episcopate.

Nevertheless, he pointed out that a statement of the House of (Anglican) Bishops issued in 1979 said that all persons as equal before God, this did not mean an acceptance of homosexual activity.  Neither would the church accept the blessing of homosexual unions.  And a homosexual person could be accepted for ordination only if he or she had made a commitment not to engage in sexual acts with a person of the same sex.

These guidelines were reaffirmed by over 40 Anglican bishops at a meeting in November.  However, Mr. Ferry has gone to court to seek reinstatement as a priest in the diocese, restoration to his rectorship of St. Philip’s, and half a million dollars in damages.

In the meantime, Archbishop Finlay has put him back on the diocesan payroll and submitted the matter to a bishop’s court.  Mr. Ferry cannot resume work as an Anglican minister before it comes to a decision.

Bishop Finlay says that he continues “to be pastorally concerned for him (Ferry) as a priest of the diocese,” and that he hopes the church will give further study to the issue of homosexuality and ordained ministry from both a moral and pastoral perspective.

It is difficult to see how this “further study” can mean anything other than a further undermining of traditional Christian strictures against homosexual practice in light of what is going on elsewhere.

In October 1991 Anglican Bishop John Spong of Newark, N.J., well-known for his “progressive” views, ordained a non-celibate homosexual man to the priesthood less than a week after a non-celibate homosexual priest whom Bishop Spong had ordained earlier, renounced the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Spong noted that the July 1991 General Convention in Phoenix, Arizona “refused to amend the canons to prohibit the ordination of qualified gay and lesbian people” and did not pass any resolution that would place hurdles in their path.  (Anglican Journal, November 1991).

Bishop Spong will testify at the February 3 trial.