Anglican Samizdat

January 2, 2010

The Anglican Church of Canada: engulfed in relativism

Canon Harold Munn, writing in the Anglican Journal is happy to let people think of God is any way they choose:

“Not,” I was quick to add, “that it’s necessary to believe in God as an external being watching us—there are a variety of ways of thinking about this—for some people it’s more like deep goodness, or deep reality. But however we imagine it, it’s certainly been present and working through us as we re-design systems to serve those in need. What’s happened is quite wonderful. And I just wanted to say so.”

He’s also happy to let people think just about anything can be a “holy book”:

“I stood before the judge, and she said, ‘What’s that?’ I held it out for her to see. ‘Looks like an Act,’ she said. ‘What Act?’”

“It’s the Canada Health Act. It’s my holy book.”

“That is my holy book. It says there is no distinction between rich and poor. Everyone deserves to be well. That’s holy to me.”

And, since the health act is holy and God is any creation of our choosing:

The Canada Health Act is how God is experienced by a senior government administrator.

Altogether a fine summary of the theological sophistication of the ACoC: forget all the trite nonsense like, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. For Anglicans in the 21st C, in the beginning – well around 1984 – was the Canada Health Act and the Trudeau was with the Canada Health act and the Trudeau was with God and the Canada Health act was God.



  1. Canon Munn didn’t say, “It’s the Canada Health Act. It’s my holy book. … That’s holy to me.” He was recounting a story about a meeting he attended, and quoted what somebody else said at that meeting.

    Comment by Noel S. McFerran — January 4, 2010 @ 12:15 am

  2. And after the person declared that the Canadian Health Act was a holy book for him, Canon Munn leapt into action defending the objective truth of the Christian faith and the Bible.

    Wait a moment – no he didn’t, he wrote an article in the Journal expressing his approval of preposterous and illogical relativism.

    Comment by David — January 4, 2010 @ 9:46 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: