Tag Archives: ANiC

St. Aidan’s Windsor loses appeal

Posted on by
13

I just received this via email:

Canon Tom Carman, rector of St Aidan’s, reports:

“In its decision, the Court of Appeal, upheld the conclusions of the trial court judge, Justice Little, on both the matter of St Aidan’s property and the St Aidan’s bequeathment and finance fund.  In addition, the Diocese of Huron was awarded partial costs in the amount of $100,000.

“St Aidan’s had a strong case, based on trust law.  The Diocese of Huron’s Canon 14 states in reference to church property that the diocese “holds it in trust for the benefit of the Parish or congregation.”  This was strengthened by a letter obtained by the people of St Aidan’s from the Chancellor of the Diocese, Lindsey Ellwood, on November 21, 2001 in which he wrote:

“I further reaffirm our discussion wherein I advise that pursuant to Canon 14 the Incorporated Synod of the Diocese of Huron…  has no beneficial or legal entitlement to parish property…”

“Based on these assurances, St Aidan’s proceeded with the appeal and our lawyer, Peter Jervis, was able to build a strong case.  Sadly, the courts accepted the argument of the Diocese that the parish only exists as an entity within the structures of the diocese and that it is impossible for a “parish” to leave the diocese.

“The people of St Aidan’s are understandably disappointed in this decision, however, we believe that the Lord has a plan for us and are trusting in Jeremiah 29:11, “For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the Lord, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”  

“We are still considering whether to apply for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.  Please keep us in your prayers.”

Sadly, almost every encounter in the courts between the Anglican Church of Canada and the Anglican Network in Canada has gone badly for ANiC – the notable exception being St. Hilda’s first court appearance when the judge ruled that our sharing the building with the diocese of Niagara wouldn’t work. And that ruling was later reversed.

Our prayers should be with St. Aidan’s and Tom Carman. Barring a surprise turnaround from the Supreme Court of Canada, this battle appears to be lost; nevertheless, St. Aidan’s has fought the good fight, one whose true outcome we may not see this side of eternity.

As an aside, I am still flabbergasted that Canadian judges deem it impossible for a parish to leave a diocese in the face of the empirical evidence of around 70 parishes who have done just that – particularly in the light of recent a US ruling where a judge decided that an entire diocese can leave TEC.

In Canada, from a judicial perspective, a “parish” is an abstract entity which doesn’t have to include any people: it is a diocesan owned container into which people may throw their money, talents and energy. When full, the container and the contents belong to the diocese: a health and wealth gospel without the health and you forfeit your wealth. Why would anyone choose to belong to such a church?

Something that makes this ruling even more preposterous is that the Diocese of Huron, when sued over residential school abuse, sought to protect what it regarded as its assets by writing a letter that stated the individual parishes owned their own property, not the diocese.

But Knight said the issue here has other subtleties. Knight said the diocese penned a letter while the Anglican Church was being sued for abuse suffered by Aboriginal children in its residential schools.

Presumably to protect church assets, the letter says the church buildings belong to their individual parishes and the diocese has no claim to them, Knight said.

The diocese might just as well say that it has no claim on the buildings when to have a claim might cause it to lose them and every claim on the buildings when not to have a claim might cause it to lose them.

And now, after this brief sojourn down the rabbit hole with the Mad Hatter, in the spirit of the lucidity of thought that has gone into this judgement,  I’ll let the Dormouse have the last word:

`You might just as well say,’ added the Dormouse, who seemed to be talking in his sleep, `that “I breathe when I sleep” is the same thing as “I sleep when I breathe”!’

The Primate of the Southern Cone preaches in Burlington

Posted on by
6

I’m just home from the opening service of the ANiC regional assembly where the Primate of the Southern Cone, Archbishop Tito Zavala, delivered an interesting sermon.

He believes that postmodernity has infected the church, specifically, the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada which, he says, are teaching a false gospel.

How tactless. How direct.

How refreshing.

On losing a church building

Posted on by
2

The Diocese of Niagara and the three ANiC churches that left the diocese have come to an agreement where the buildings will be handed over to the diocese on June 1st. The agreement has not yet been signed; I will have more to say about it when it is.

Nevertheless, for all intents and purposes, the final disposition of the buildings has been settled and that, along with a few things that happened recently, has caused me to ruminate on what I think about the situation. Of course, how one feels about what happens is what is in vogue, so when someone made an enquiry of me on Saturday, the invitation was to elucidate how I felt, not what I thought.

It goes without saying that feelings are entirely subjective: that’s why, in an age that likes to pretend that objective reality is, at best, irrelevant and at worst non-existent, feelings are so popular. Feelings do have an existence of their own though, so how do I feel about losing the building that has been my church home for the last 34 years?

Shortly after I joined the church, I was confirmed by Bishop Kent Clark – or was it Clark Kent – whose halitosis left a lasting impression on my first communion. I was there when the mortgage was paid off, experienced charismatic renewal in the early 80’s, saw healing miracles, saw my children confirmed, my grandchildren baptised and many hundreds of people blessed by being part of a loving community. The reality of this cannot be taken away; just the place where it happened. I believe that my dominant feeling on May 27th, our last Sunday in the building, will be what it is now: sadness at losing the place where most of the significant events of my Christian life have occurred.

Some in the church believe that there is a degree of anger in the congregation at what has happened; I’m not so sure I agree, but I do agree that it would be unproductive if it were present. In the interests of expunging any latent hostility against the church hierarchy, one person suggested that individuals might like to send a letter to Bishop Michael Bird expressing personal forgiveness to him. I briefly considered this but decided that, on seeing my signature, the bishop might succumb to a fit of apoplexy or spend sleepless nights worrying that I was setting an obscure trap for him. So I thought better of it.

Another suggestion was that, as a congregation we leave a note “blessing” those who will be using the building in the future. I think (back to thinking) that this is a less than stellar plan. If we believe that the Diocese of Niagara is actively working against the gospel – and I certainly think it is – the last thing we should be doing is giving assent to their activities by blessing them. Perhaps a note to the effect that we are praying that the diocesan hierarchy will come to a saving faith in Jesus Christ might be more honest and productive.

It goes without saying that I think that, by all that is sensible, moral and intuitive, the congregations are the rightful owners of the buildings, not the diocese. The law didn’t agree but, in the final analysis, your heart is where your treasure is: my treasure is in my community – and ultimately in Christ Jesus; the diocese’s treasure is where moth and rust doth corrupt. That’s not such a bad deal.

Another heartfelt response to Rowan Williams’ retirement

Posted on by
27

From here:

Good riddance to Dr Williams.

So the Archbishop of Canterbury, has finally announced his resignation. I believe the operative word is “Hallelujah”. I have long felt that the incumbent of this illustrious office has been what we nowadays call a “waste of space”. An airy-fairy academic out of touch with the feelings of common folk and a spouter of politically correct twaddle, a man of zero leadership qualities at a time when we require strong direction from the head of this country’s official religious establishment. Under Dr Rowan Williams’ watch the British have been in danger of utterly devaluing their ancient Judaeo-Christian tradition, which would have been tragic for both the religious and secular alike.

Poor Rowan Williams: he tried to please everyone – or, perhaps more accurately, tried to upset no-one, and, in doing so, earned almost universal opprobrium. Those who said kind things about his efforts, did so because they are his friends and even they struggled to find something good to say about Dr. Williams’ ten year quest to find unity through incoherent indaba babbling.

From a Canadian perspective, not only did he not protest at the deposing of one of the world’s most respected evangelical theologians, Dr. J. I. Packer, but his refusal to grant even a sliver of recognition to ACNA and ANiC effectively scuttled any attempt by ANiC parishioners to hang on to their buildings. The legal argument that crushed ANiC’s chances went along these lines:

  • Anglican church buildings are held in trust for Anglicans to use as places of worship.
  • The Anglican Church of Canada has strayed from being Anglican as defined by the Solemn Declaration of 1893.
  • ANiC members hold to the Anglicanism of the Solemn Declaration and, therefore, are the true Anglicans for which the buildings are intended.

Counter argument:

  • Anglican theology is not static.
  • The Anglican Church of Canada is the only recognised Anglican organisation in Canada – recognised by Lambeth and the Archbishop of Canterbury, that is.
  • The Anglican Church of Canada must, therefore, define what is “Anglican”.
  • The Anglican Church of Canada gets the buildings because the buildings are for the use of Anglicans.

Admittedly, those of us in ANiC, including the lawyers – especially the lawyers, perhaps – who thought it might have gone otherwise exhibited a superficially charming other-world naïvety, but, ultimately, it was Rowan Williams who delivered the coup de grâce to any possibility of success.

Good riddance.

African bishops coming to Canada to “to engage in building better relationships”

Posted on by
2

From here:

This June, close to 20 bishops from Africa, the United States and Canada will converge on Toronto to engage in building better relationships between national churches.

They are part of a gathering called the Consultation of Anglican Bishops in Dialogue, a rather fluid group that had its origins in the 2008 Lambeth Conference.

At the time, there were tensions between the churches over same-sex relationships, and Archbishop Colin Johnson hosted a fringe event for some African and Canadian bishops that focused on mission in a post-colonial world.

In addition to Archbishop Johnson, the Canadian contingent will comprise Bishop Michael Bird of Niagara, Bishop Michael Ingham of New Westminster, Bishop Terry Dance, suffragan bishop of Huron, and Bishop Janet Alexander of Edmonton.

Meanwhile, Bishops Bird and Ingham are striving to build their very own better relationships with former parishioners who fled to ANiC, by taking over their buildings through litigation. I don’t suppose that will be something they will hold up to the African bishops as a sterling example of  “how to mend relations”, though.

I am Anglican

Posted on by
Reply

But first and foremost, I am a Christian and don’t normally feel inclined to harp on about something that is peripheral to the kingdom of heaven, salvation, eternity and the forgiveness of sins.

I am going to make an exception for the moment, though. I belong to an ANiC parish that is a part of ACNA, the Anglican Church of North America. ACNA has not yet been recognised by Lambeth as an official Anglican body but, on February 10, 2010, the Church of England Synod passed a resolution that recognized the desire of ACNA to remain within the “Anglican Family.” This was not all ACNA hoped for, but it paves the way for full communion with Lambeth at some point.

While the Anglican Church withers in the West, it flourishes in Africa and most African Anglicans have declared full communion with ACNA: ACNA is in communion with 70% of the world’s Anglicans.

Does any of this really matter? As I remarked above, it is not of lasting significance, but I decided to make the point, nevertheless, because an Anglican priest from the Diocese of Niagara – who will remain nameless for the moment – on noting that the Niagara ANiC parishes intend to hang on to their prayer books, intoned: “you don’t need those, you are not Anglican”.

Contrary to the wish-fulfillment wet-dreams of this priest, ACNA is Anglican; ANiC is Anglican; I am Anglican.

The more important question is: “is the Diocese of Niagara Christian?”

An editorial error at the Anglican Journal

Posted on by
8

The Journal calls ANiC parishioners Anglicans. It has to be a typo.

A group of Anglicans from St. John’s Shaughnessy in Vancouver, the largest of four dissident parishes in the diocese of New Westminster, will begin Sunday services at Oakridge Adventist Church beginning  Sept. 25.

What will the Diocese of Niagara do with the ANiC buildings if it gets them?

Posted on by
1

Something like this, probably:

A 140-year-old church downtown is at the heart of a local debate around heritage, neighbourhood development and poverty.

The Synod of the Diocese of Niagara and the Hamilton nonprofit corporation Options for Homes want to demolish All Saints Anglican Church on Queen Street South at King Street West to construct a 12-storey, affordable housing apartment. The main level would be used for worship and ministry by congregation members.

But a group of heritage advocates and citizens is fighting two “minor variances” that would exempt the project from the area’s zoning bylaws for parking and building height.

The developers’ requests for a minimum of 69 parking spaces instead of 87 and a maximum height of 12 floors as opposed to six were granted by the city’s committee of adjustment last year.

The good news is that, in St. Hilda’s case, the promise the diocese made to pave the parking lot 50 years ago will finally be kept.

More on the BC court of appeal ruling

Posted on by
1

On Monday November 15th, the legal wrangling between the Diocese of New Westminster and parishes that have left the diocese because of theological disagreements reached another milestone.

The highest court in British Columbia ruled not to overturn an earlier court decision that said the parishes could not continue to use their buildings for non-diocesan purposes: the buildings remain with the diocese and the departing congregations must vacate them. No decision has yet been made to pursue one more possible appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Ostensibly, this Anglican squabble began with the Diocese of New Westminster’s decision to proceed with the blessing of same-sex civil marriages in selected parishes. The disagreements run far deeper than that, though. Liberal Anglican dioceses – New Westminster is one of the most liberal – have been slowly eroding the basic Christian faith for decades. Bishop Michael Ingham, in interviews and his book “Mansions of the Spirit”, has questioned the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, his Virgin birth, his divinity and his uniqueness. What, as a bishop, he should defend, he has undermined.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, sought to calm the storm created by the vehemence of such disagreements by trying to find an Hegelian middle ground between the diametrically opposed positions taken by Anglican liberals and conservatives. At the Lambeth conference he used indaba groups – small groups where everyone has a chance to speak – to accomplish this. Although his technique made everyone moderately unhappy, it at least held things together, so it was hailed as a success and adopted by the Anglican Church of Canada at its recent synod.

The result was a statement on human sexuality which declares that the Canadian national church has not officially approved the blessing of same-sex civil marriages, but dioceses are free to make their own decision. It’s an Anglican version of “don’t ask, don’t tell”. Dioceses are proceeding apace with same-sex blessings while the national church quietly averts its gaze: the dioceses that are performing same-sex blessings are doing so in the closet.

Although the Anglican Church delights in trying to find doctrinal middle ground, when it comes to who owns church property, the quest for compromise is strangely absent. As one of the trial judges noted: “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.” There were no courtroom indaba groups; when it comes to buildings, winner takes all.

The judges perceptively noted that: “[p]resumably 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.”  As the number of people attending an Anglican Church declines, many dioceses, including New Westminster, are busy merging parishes and closing unused buildings. If there is a final legal victory for the diocese, it will be a pyrrhic victory won at the cost of taking fellow Christians to court to obtain possession of buildings for which they have no real use – other than to sell to the highest bidder.

In former times, a sustained decline in church attendance would have been cause for self examination, a time to ask the question “are we doing something wrong?” – particularly when evangelical churches who have a less fluid view of what constitutes Christian doctrine are growing. Not so here. In a move that in business would be seen as a sign of mental instability, the strategy appears to be to win the hearts of potential parishioners by suing the largest congregation in Canada, evicting them from the building for which they have a legitimate use and proceeding full steam ahead with the agenda that caused the rift in the first place.

There are numerous similar court cases in progress with other dioceses. This decision by the BC court of appeal does not bode well for parishes that have left their diocese. The consolation that these parishes have, though, is that a church is a community of people whose allegiance cannot be dictated by a court. A church building can change hands but, when standing empty, it will be nothing more than a rather sad reminder of the folly of a church hierarchy that has lost its way.