A letter in Abbey News manages to misinterpret the New Westminster vs ANiC court ruling with such wilful plodding determination that it is difficult to se it as anything other than a clumsy spin:

“I intend to invite these congregations to remain in the buildings where they worship.” So wrote Anglican Bishop Michael Ingham in his recent open letter. Yet two letters to the editor printed during the first week of December suggested the diocese would be turning people out of St. Matthew’s in Abbotsford. Not so.

But the diocese has turned the priests out of the churches. When St. Matthew’s voted to join ANiC, 186 were in favour, 4 against and 5 abstained; the 186 people would hardly abandon their priests after they have taken such a stand, so Ingham has effectively turned the congregation out of their church.

Highlighted recently in local media have been the views of clergy and lay leaders who in May 2008 voluntarily left the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC). For the past 20 months these non-ACoC clergy and lay leaders have excluded ACoC clergy from the building. They have also spent a great deal of money on the unsuccessful lawsuit they started in 2008

Not entirely unsuccessful, since ANiC won the $2.2M bequest.

Not highlighted in local media have been the views of another group with an affiliation to St. Matthew’s. I refer to Abbotsford residents who are members or supporters of the ACoC. For 20 months these people have had nowhere to go in Abbotsford to attend public worship presided over by ACoC clergy. Some have continued to worship at St. Matthew’s at services led by non-ACoC clergy. Some worship in sympatico non-ACoC churches in the city. Some, like me, drive to an ACoC church in a nearby community. Others have stayed home.

One must assume that those who feel that attached to the ACoC would have turned up to vote: 4 people voted to stay in the ACoC, so this “group” MacAdams refers to is comprised of 4 people including him.

Mr. Justice Stephen Kelleher in his decision of Nov. 25, confirmed ACoC clergy should be allowed to resume using St. Matthew’s. He called on both the officers of the Diocese of New Westminster and the current leadership of the congregation to arrive at a workable resolution. I understand Bishop Ingham and diocesan officers will invite the current congregational leaders to start talking. Presumably this means a resolution which meets the needs of all concerned. Both those who are wanting to worship under the leadership of ACoC clergy and those who are not.

The trustees at St. Matthew’s were unwilling to continue under Ingham’s leadership when they had orthodox priests who could at least act as a buffer against Ingham’s heresies. Once Ingham moves his pick of priests in, for the trustees to return would be a practical application of Pr. 26:11.

Your readers should be spared incorrect allegations about people being turned out of St. Matthew’s. My hope is many of those who have stayed at St. Matthew’s will respond to Bishop Ingham’s invitation. And I hope as well they will be kind enough and generous enough to welcome newcomers, returnees and ACoC clergy to participate in public ACoC worship.

Douglas MacAdams

It didn’t work in Niagara, it won’t in New Westminster.

Although there is more than a note of rejoicing, even a gay website subconsciously knows who owns the New Westminster ANiC parish buildings:

Good luck stealing your churches: Four Canadian churches who split the Anglican Church of Canada (because they’re willing to tolerate the gays) for the more conservative Anglican Network in Canada will not get to keep their property, the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled.

You can’t steal something that is already yours.

Canadian Christianity on the court ruling in New Westminster:

The court decision means that the diocese owns the buildings; but they are still being administered by the parish trustees. Kelleher decided to “leave it to the parties to arrive at a workable resolution” to this problem.

Hutchinson suggested that the court was essentially challenging both parties to cooperate and find a mutually acceptable solution. He noted the “clear scriptural injunction about reconciling with your brother,” and said there are Christian mediation resources which could resolve the issues with less expense and less division than the court system.

However, leaders of the Diocese of New Westminster suggested that the issue has already been decided. Ingham contended that “the entire conflict has been unnecessary,” blaming it on a few “extreme conservative leaders.” He has written to the parishes, inviting them to remain in the buildings and work with him to appoint new conservative clergy acceptable to both him and the parishes.

That is not likely to happen, said Chang. The people in the parishes who voted by strong margins to leave the diocese “knew we could lose our property . . . At the end of the day, if forced to choose, we will choose our faith over our buildings.”

Much as it pains me to agree with the Diocese of New Wesmtinster, I think they have it right: whatever the trustees do, the buildings are Ingham’s. Kelleher’s leaving it to the parties to arrive at a workable resolution has simply placed the trustees in a position where they will either have to compromise every principle that they have fought for this far, or resign. Kelleher must have realised this unless he is a complete idiot. The Kelleher leave it to the parties decision – or why can’t you both just get along – smacks of Rowanesque syncretism, frustration, malevolence or stupidity; perhaps a combination of all four.

The Niagara judge, Milanetti, had the same attitude when she ruled – after snorting her disgust at Christians suing each other at Easter – on the sharing arrangements for the three Niagara ANiC parishes: you are all Christians so why can’t you sort this out for yourselves; her error was in viewing both sides as Christian.

Michael Ingham is holding out a carrot to ANiC parishioners:

Dear Friends in Christ:

By now you have probably heard that the Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled clearly in favour of the Diocese in the matter of parish property ownership.

This is the outcome of a law suit brought by the leaders of four congregations who have sought to take church property away from the Anglican Church of Canada.

The Anglican Church in this country and throughout the world is a big tent. We have a long history of welcome and respect for all people. What unites us is a strong commitment to Jesus Christ and the Christian faith, a tradition of beautiful and sacred worship, and a compassionate response to people in many kinds of need and hardship.

I intend to invite these congregations to remain in the buildings where they worship and to move forward together with us in the Diocese as one people under God. I intend to appoint new clergy who will respect and continue the worshipping style of the congregations, who will also work cooperatively with me and the Diocese.

My prayer is that we might all put this sad conflict behind us and get on with the mission of Jesus Christ. No good is served by bitterness or triumphalism. The decision of the Court is clear. And the purpose of the Church is equally clear. We are here to serve the mission of God and the well-being of all God’s children.

This is a day when we pray “to put away the works of darkness and put on the armour of light.” May it be so with us. Be assured that, whoever you are, you are welcome here.

Kindest regards,

The Right Reverend Michael Ingham

Bishop

I can’t help noticing that no invitation has been made to ANiC clergy, including J. I. Packer. So Ingham’s offer to the congregations is, abandon your priests, come home, learn to live with new cooperative priests that I will choose and will be loyal to me – and you can keep your buildings.

I have this eerie sense of déja vue. Ah, yes, the third temptation of Christ: “Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.”

And Jesus replied, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’ ”

Good answer.