All photos here.
Niagara ANiC Churches get-together
1
Category Archives: ANiC
ANiC loses appeal in BC
The legal battle between ANiC and the Diocese of New Westminster reached another milestone today. The appeal was against the last ruling in favour of the diocese; the whole appeal ruling is here.
A lot of it seems to be a rehash of what has already been said. Some parts of interest included the following sentence where the judges seemed keen on displaying their perceptual acuity:
I could not help but feel that counsel’s respective submissions were like two ships passing in the night, as were the legal authorities on which they relied.
Imagine that: no indabas going on here.
This next section is an illustration of why a secular court is probably never going to side with the theologically conservative. From a secular perspective, doctrine is changeable – ephemeral – and it is up to the officially recognised Anglican Church in Canada to set doctrine as it pleases: doctrinal change is a matter for the General Synod. The conservative view that some doctrine is unchangeable, having been instituted by God, is not even believed by the Anglican Church of Canada, so it’s never going to wash with a secular judge.
And clearly, the judges recognise only one official Anglican Church in Canada – the one recognised by Lambeth – and that body has control of all the diocesan Mammon:
I am not convinced that Anglican worship or ‘Anglicanism’ can be separated in Canada from the notion of the ACC’s episcopal authority. As Mr. Dickson observed, the Anglican Church of Canada is a “quintessentially hierarchical” body. It sends bishops to international conferences and its members accept certain creeds and beliefs shared by other Anglicans around the world, but in terms of substantive decision-making power, the organizational structure in Canada is clear: the ACC is autonomous and doctrinal change is a matter for the General Synod. That body has chosen to permit same-sex blessings, albeit in the rather unenthusiastic wording of the 2007 resolution, and the Bishop and Diocesan Synod of New Westminster have chosen to pursue the matter to the extent they have – despite the opposition of many of their parishioners.
I prefer to rest my conclusion that the appeal must be dismissed, however, on the basis that the purpose of the trusts on which the parish corporations hold the church buildings and other assets is to further Anglican ministry in accordance with Anglican doctrine, and that in Canada, the General Synod has the final word on doctrinal matters. This is not to say that the plaintiffs are not in communion with the wider Anglican Church – that is a question on which I would not presume to opine. I do say, however, that members of the Anglican Church in Canada belong to an organization that has subscribed to “government by bishops.” The plaintiffs cannot in my respectful opinion remove themselves from their bishop’s oversight and the diocesan structure and retain the right to use properties that are held for purposes of Anglican ministry in Canada.
One small consolation is the recognition that Michael Ingham will find himself ministering to empty churches; he could become – as we like to say in business – a free floating apex:
Presumably the Bishop and the Synod have chosen to take the risk that the policy allowing same-sex blessings will indeed prove to be ‘schismatic’; or that clergy in the Diocese will for the foreseeable future find themselves ministering to vastly reduced or non-existent congregations. That, however, is their decision to make in the structure that the Anglican Church takes in Canada. Anglican ministry in Canada is “as defined by the ACC.”
Like or Share this:
The Diocese of New Westminster does a flag plant in St. Matthew's, Abbotsford
Not a church plant.
The Diocese of New Westminster is determined to hold a service in St. Matthew’s Abbotsford – a parish that has joined ANiC and whose building is in dispute – not because a diocesan congregation is needed there or to create a new outreach, but to stake a claim in the building. Considering the diocese is busy closing, consolidating and selling buildings, and it will almost certainly not have a viable congregation at St. Matthews, it is doing little more than playing dog in the manger; except dogs are more friendly.
From here:
On Sunday, August 29th at 8am in the Parish Hall of St. Matthew’s Abbotsford there will be a service of Holy Communion celebrated by the Reverend David Price, a priest licensed by Bishop Michael Ingham.
All are Welcome
On June 11th, 2010 counsel for the Diocese of New Westminster appeared before Justice Stephen Kelleher of the BC Supreme Court in the case concerning church properties seeking an Order as to costs arising from the Judgment [sic] granted November 25, 2009, as well as further Directions as to compliance by the trustees of the Parish Corporations with the Orders granted at that time.
St. Matthew’s Abbotsford is one of the contested church properties.
The Plaintiffs (Trustees) have appealed that earlier decision and this will be argued in the BC Court of Appeal commencing September 13, 2010.
In supplementary Oral Reasons for Judgment issued on June 29, 2010, Justice Kelleher awarded costs to the Diocese of New Westminster (the Defendants) and upheld the directions sought by the Diocese. In doing so, Justice Kelleher reiterated that trustees are required to exercise their powers in accordance with the Diocesan Constitution and Canons. This means that, pending the election of new trustees, the trustees at St. Matthew’s Abbotsford must respond to the Defendants’ request to hold one service per week celebrated by a priest chosen by the Bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster.In mid-July, 2010 Bishop Michael Ingham and Officers of the Diocese of New Westminster stated their intention to offer Anglican Church of Canada worship at St. Matthew’s Abbotsford beginning August 29th, 2010 and informed the Counsel for the Plaintiffs (the ANiC clergy and trustees).
In response they applied for a “Stay of Execution” of Justice Kelleher’s June 29th, 2010 direction and a hearing was scheduled to take place in front of the Chief Justice, Friday, August 27th.
Early in the week of August 22nd Counsel for the Diocese sent a letter to Counsel for the Plaintiffs suggesting that the diocesan service take place in the Parish Hall of St. Matthew’s Abbotsford and not in the sanctuary.
On August 26th Counsel for the Plaintiffs advised the registry that they are not proceeding and that the application for the “stay” is adjourned generally.
The Diocese of New Westminster, Anglican Church of Canada worship service will take place as scheduled Sunday, August 29th in the Parish Hall of St. Matthew’s Abbotsford.
Having experience the joys of sharing a building – in our case it was reversed, we had the hall – with a diocese that we felt compelled to part from, I feel considerable sympathy for the real St. Matthew’s and trust that Col 1:11 will apply.
Like or Share this:
Bishop Don Harvey and the “Offensive” word
Everyone seems to be upset by this article from the Toronto Star.
ST. CATHARINES–An invitation from Rome to join the Catholic Church is “offensive in the extreme,” the head of a breakaway group of Canadian Anglicans says.
“Apart from being an intrusion at the very highest levels of one major church into the internal affairs of another, under the guise of being ecumenical, this invitation offers very little that is new,” Bishop Don Harvey, moderator of the Anglican Network in Canada, told the group’s annual synod Thursday morning.
Well, it is an intrusion at the highest level and it does offer little that is new: if I had wanted to become a Roman Catholic – in the unlikely event that they would take me – I would hardly have needed to wait until this offer. I seem to recall that the operative word was actually “distressing”, not “offensive”, but I could be wrong. I don’t find the fact that Bishop Don is distressed or offended by what some see as a “generous offer” and others as opportunistic poaching particularly…. offensive. It may not be tactful or politically correct but that is entirely in its favour; which brings me to the other politically incorrect sentence in the article:
David Jenkins of Oakville said he likes the Catholic Church’s opposition to abortion and homosexual rights.
Much as I like to be politically incorrect, I am not about to say something so idiotic to a newspaper reporter; what I actually said was that I liked the Catholic Church’s opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage. Still, I am not offended or distressed by the misquote, although the next time I see Stuart Laidlaw we will be having a little chat.
Like or Share this:
St. Hilda's Free Carwash
St. Hilda’s Anglican Church, ANiC has a Free Car Wash!
It is an outreach to the community to illustrate the love, grace and salvation of God which is offered to us free through Jesus Christ. For all photos, go here.
The Bait:
The Wash:
Chief Wheel Scrubber:
Sharing the Gospel:
The Mastermind behind it all:
Like or Share this:
Michael Ingham just doesn’t get it
Some more interesting comments from Michael Ingham in court yesterday:
Turning to Bishop Ingham’s insistence that no one is being asked to leave any parish except priests who are still in place after having relinquished the bishop’s license, Cowper asked how—not from a legal but “a human point of view”—the bishop could expect members of the dissident parishes to remain in the diocese if they fail to win the lawsuit?
“It’s not likely they will stay, is it?” the lawyer asked.
“I’m not convinced of that,” replied Bishop Ingham. “One should never underestimate the attachment of Anglicans to their buildings.” The reply elicited groans from some in the court supporting the dissident congregations.
The bishop went on to suggest that some people will want to remain where they have been baptized, married, or where relatives are buried. He said it was his understanding that members of dissident congregations had been told by their leaders they could have the Anglican Church of Canada and take their buildings with them. However, he admitted he had not been at any of the meetings of these congregations where these matters were discussed.
Ingham’s belief that ANiC parishioners would return to the ACoC just to keep their buildings can only mean:
Ingham hasn’t read Proverbs 26:11 recently;
He is judging Christians by his own – rather dim – moral lights;
It hasn’t occurred to Ingham that for some people, principle is more important than a building;
He radically underestimates the level of disagreement he is facing both in Canada and world-wide;
He thinks ANiC leaders have lied to their parishioners;
He has completely lost touch with reality and just doesn’t get it.
Perhaps all of the above.
The Diocese of Niagara’s bishop, Michael Bird seemed to suffer from a similar delusion: he invited ANiC parishioners to return (well, except for me). Not much came of it, though: the diocese is occupying ANiC parish buildings on Sunday mornings, but there are no congregations. Even one of their own priests declared in a flash of uncharacteristic insight that the Diocese of Niagara parishes are not viable.
Like or Share this:
What is the difference between Jesus Christ and Superman?
When I was but a callow youth I went to see the original “Jesus Christ Superstar” in London. I enjoyed it immensely; but, then, I also went to see “Hair” and enjoyed it just as much – I was not a Christian at the time.
The association of Jesus with a super-something is a beguiling notion but, actually, he is 100% human, 100% God and 0% Superman. As God he could have chosen to bring down fire from heaven, decimate his enemies and vindicate his followers. I confess there is a part of me that would like to see that but, instead, he knew his calling was to be that of the suffering servant, the Redeemer of mankind. By accepting the path that was laid before him he has shaped history and civilisation in a way that he could not have as Superman – and he has redeemed those of us that choose to accept him.
And so it is has been for the last 2000 years: those who have truly influenced the course of history have not been celebrities, winners of Britain’s Got Talent or even people who have been apparently successful; the real shapers of history have been people who have been prepared to sacrifice themselves for what they believe.
Interestingly, an evolutionary anthropologist has noticed this:
WHAT is the difference between Jesus Christ and Superman? The content of religions and popular tales is often similar, but only religions have martyrs, according to an analysis of behavioural evolution published this week.
When religious leaders make costly sacrifices for their beliefs, the argument goes, these acts add credibility to their professions of faith and help their beliefs to spread. If, on the other hand, no one is willing to make a significant sacrifice for a belief then observers – even young children – quickly pick up on this and withhold their own commitment. “Nobody takes a day off to worship Superman or gives money to the Superman Foundation,” points out Joseph Henrich, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada.
Although I would not place the aggravation that ANiC parishes have been subject to at the hands of the ACoC in the same category as martyrs who have died or otherwise suffered for their faith, nevertheless, it is instructive to note the difference in ANiC and ACoC supporters. Those who support ANiC are often not paid and do so because they are passionately convinced of the rightness of its cause; those who are paid have placed their conviction above financial security. In contrast, ACoC bishops support their employer rather than the truth because their career, salary and pension are at stake; the moribund Federation are at home in the comfort of a familiar institution and the rest just follow like sheep.
And therein lies the difference that I believe will determine the final outcome of the current struggle.
Like or Share this:
Freebie Friday at St. Hilda's
A baby girl was baptised at St. Hilda’s ANiC this morning. Her mother is a young Christian woman who has been attending St. Hilda’s during the last year or so. A little less than ten years ago, every Friday lunchtime she used to walk from the high-school she attended to St. Hilda’s building for a free lunch at Freebie Friday. Part of the free lunch is a short talk on the Gospel by St. Hilda’s Pastor Paul; seeds sometimes fall on fertile ground, take root and grow, resulting in a saved sinner and great joy in heaven. The student who used to come for free lunches is now a fine young Christian who has baptised her baby and brought other Freebie Friday alumni to Sunday worship.
The last court ruling on the dispute between the Diocese of Niagara and St. Hilda’s ANiC, was that – until final ownership of the building is settled – the building must be shared between the diocese and St. Hilda’s. The diocese was given the Sunday morning time slot, so St. Hilda’s is meeting in a school gymnasium for Sunday worship. But St. Hilda’s ANiC is still present in the church building during the week and, for the moment, Freebie Friday continues.
Freebie Friday began just over ten years ago. St. Hilda’s building is located close to a high-school; every lunchtime there was a steady trickle of children past the church on their way to the mall. We wanted to try and convey to the children the idea of the free gift of salvation that Jesus offers us as the result of his atoning death on the cross: just as salvation is free, so is lunch.
The lunch is run and paid for by volunteers from St. Hilda’s and it quickly became popular: there are two sittings which attract about a hundred children every Friday. The principal of the high school regularly expresses his gratitude for this ministry.
The children sponsor two World Vision kids with their own money and buy yearly Christmas gifts for them. Recently they paid for three wheelchairs for the Free Wheelchair Mission, an organisation that provides wheelchairs as a gift of mobility for the physically disabled poor in developing countries.
Which brings me to the reason why we are fighting in the courts to keep our building. The diocese of Niagara has a congregation of about five people using St. Hilda’s building; it is managed by two priests. If they win ownership of the building, Freebie Friday, along with other ministries will stop. St. Hilda’s ANiC would not be able to continue it because it has to take place at a location close to the school; the diocese will not continue it because, even if they had the inclination, they do not have the people needed to keep the building open, let alone engage in time consuming ministries. Even their own priests admit that their congregation is not viable.
If the diocese wins the court battle for the building, after a decent interval it will be sold and bulldozed; God’s work in that place will cease.
This is why we fight.
Like or Share this:
Chatting with J. I. Packer
I first met Dr. Packer about 28 years ago. I was a fairly new Christian with all the naivety, enthusiasm and questions common to this affliction. I was fortunate enough not only to be next to the great man in the lunch line, but to sit opposite him during lunch. Having seen the fate suffered by someone who disagreed with him, I decided for the most part to keep my opinions to myself and simply ask questions. A lot of questions. One was this: the Anglican church appears to be bent on a course of self destruction; why stay in it? Dr. Packer is a gracious man, even to impudent whippersnappers, so he patiently explained to me the richness of the Anglican heritage and worship. So I stayed.
One of the things he said then stuck in my mind: I asked what had gone wrong. He said that, as a result of the Enlightenment, people had ceased to believe in God’s propositional revelation. I reminded him of this last Friday; he said “hmm, I would probably put it differently now”. Which leads me to last Friday.
I was sitting in the first ever ANiC synod listening to financial statements, when I was asked if I would like to interview Dr. Packer or continue listening to the financial statements. With the enthusiasm of a man who has been reprieved from a tooth extraction without anaesthetic, I chose the interview. There were 3 journalists interviewing Dr. Packer – and me.
A lot was said; so much that there was a concern that it might be too much for Dr. Packer. He said, no, a professor likes talking to his students. Although physically a lot more frail than the last time I saw him, he has lost none of his mental acuity, nor his sense of humour, nor his graciousness. I referred to one of his arguments as “compelling”, something which, apparently, was kind of me.
Time passed and dinner arrived; we ate together. Dr. Packer was pretty insistent on procuring chairs for everyone, but he was persuaded to sit down and let others do it. Eventually, the other journalists left and I had him all to myself.
Nevertheless, so many questions, so little time.
I reminded Dr. Packer of his ‘propositional revelation’ remark of 28 years ago. Here is the argument today: Jesus is God in the flesh; did he use words to communicate? Yes, therefore, God uses words to communicate; can that be extended to Scripture? Yes, because Jesus did. How do liberals wriggle out of this? They refuse to engage the argument at all. They are implicitly Unitarian.
How can liberals keep referring to the Holy Spirit and yet get everything so wrong? Because they do not view the Holy Spirit as a person: to a liberal, the Holy Spirit is another way of saying “God in action”. Therefore, once consensus is reached, the liberal declares it to be a work of the Holy Spirit.
Theologians today tend to suffer from parochialism: they know more and more about less and less. Their minds have been narrowed.
I have a habit of referring to the ACoC as an organisation that is no longer Christian. What does Dr. Packer think? He puts it like this: many dioceses and the ACoC itself have leaders that are sub-Christian. As a result, many of those they lead are also sub-Christian.
What about Tom Wright? It seems to me, I said, that he has placed church hierarchy above the gospel. You are not the first to say that, said Dr. Packer; nevertheless, he is a brilliant man. His large books are better than his short ones, apparently. He said more that I would rather not go into, but it included the words: ‘ego’ ‘blog’ and ‘Tom Wright’. And had Rowan not been given the ABC job, Tom Wright would probably have been next in line. Power corrupts – that’s my comment, not Dr. Packer’s.
Every week, Malcolm Muggeridge used to declare that Western Civilisation was about to collapse; what does Dr. Packer think? He agrees. We are living in a post-Christian era whose roots have been destroyed. We used to believe in the validity of Christianising an institution because we believed in the truth of Christianity; no more.
Does Dr. Packer really think that Rowan Williams should resign? He was not happy with David Virtue’s headline “J. I. Packer calls on Rowan Williams to resign”, later to be picked up by every other miscreant in blogger land. What he actually said was “he is not qualified to lead the Anglican Communion and enforce the rules laid down at the Lambeth Conference in 1998”. The reason for this is that he is attempting to publicly uphold the 1998 Lambeth ruling while privately disagreeing with it. At the very least, said Dr. Packer, on this issue he should defer to someone who is not subject to that dichotomy.
Another journalist asked Dr. Packer if he believes in demons. Yes, in the same way that C. S. Lewis did. And does he believe in spiritual warfare? There was an interesting answer: he does not believe that demonic forces engineer cultural trends, but that they take advantage of them. Dr. Packer thinks that a lot of damage has been done by those that believe otherwise. We didn’t have time to probe this further.
A lot more was said; I was the only person there without a tape recorder – an omission that led to a lot of self kicking.
J. I. Packer is now Theologian Emeritus to ANiC. We are in good hands.
Like or Share this:
The truth is out there
On July 31st the Diocese of Niagara – who are suing the pants off parishes that voted to join ANiC – agreed to a debate with ANiC on the Michael Coren show.
The Rev. Lynn Corfield from the diocese offers her impressions of the Michael Coren ANiC Diocese of Niagara debate
I have extracted a few choice morsels for your delectation:
In July I had an invitation from The Very Rev’d Peter Wall to join him in a panel discussion on the topic “The Future of the Anglican Church.” Peter explained that the conversation was to be with two members of the Anglican Network of Canada and was for the Michael Coren Show. We would be taped and then later that day (July 31st) it would be broadcast on Vision TV. The invitation came in the midst of my sabbatical leave and I was somewhat out of touch with recent developments, but I said yes!
…
Basically it went well. But It felt like Peter Wall and I didn’t get much ‘air’ time in compared to the views of the ANC..
Translation: we were not allowed to bring up the ‘homophobia’ word.
Michael did say that one hour is not enough and that we could only scratch the surface of the topic – and I can agree with him. It was said several times by Paula and Ray that the Bible is black and white on the issue of homosexuality and this is simply not up for negotiation. In my view the Bible is the living Word of God; it has a heart that beats passionately into each new generation. It was frustrating to hear the same arguments that I and other people who believe in the blessing of same sex unions do not understand the Bible, nor the canons of the Anglican Church.
Stripped of the flowery ‘beating heart’ metaphor, what we are left with is Humpty Dumpty in Alice Through The Looking Glass: `When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
What is at stake is how we treat people who are different in some way from ourselves. The Anglican Network in Canada – feel that they are starting a new church which expresses the true tenants (sic), formularies and tradition of the Anglican Church.
ANiC starting a new church? 70% of the world’s Anglicans are saying that TEC and the ACoC are the ones who have started a new church; you need to listen to the beating heart of Anglicanism, Lynn.
c/p Essentials blog
