I just took a look at the wording of their resolutions. Take a look at this -
BACKGROUND/INFORMATION NOTES: By resorting to the civil courts so readily, the bishops of those dioceses where there are dissident parishes and clergy have displayed so visibly that, to them, the issue is power, not the will of God. None of these churches that have associated themselves to the ANiC and the Southern Cone have taken their decisions lightly. Also, all of these churches have by their decisions stayed within the Anglican Communion. Conflicts over property should be settled with prayerful negotiation considering the best interests for all parties involved.
Couldn’t have said it better myself!
I think we need to to pray for Bishop Clarke and the Clergy in the Diocese of Athabasca for the stand that they are taking and that it will give other Bishops and Clergy (conservative) the courage to stand up as well
Kate,
A quick look at the geography shows that, in nearly every case where the ACoC has litigated to retain property, there are parishes minutes away.
It is hard to see the actions of the ACoC in dragging these deeply faithful communities into Civil Court as anything other than power and control.
“Also, all of these churches have by their decisions stayed within the Anglican Communion”
In deciphering the above, would I be incorrect in saying that the Diocesan Synod of Athabaska has just said quite clearly that the Anglican Church of Canada is NOT within the Anglican Communion. I find the wording quite crafty but to me it speaks volumes.
Yes Wendy, we must pray for Bishop Clarke and all the clergy in the Diocese of Athabasca, I have a feeling that they may feel some heat from Primate Fred and the renegade bishops who are following him.
“Thank You Lord for raising up men and women of courage within the anglican Church of Canada. Men like Bishop Clarke. Lord we pray that You will protect him and his Diocese through these perilous times. In Jesus Name we pray, Amen”
I notice that the ACoC Homepage and the Journal have a number of stories dated Apr 28, but nothing on this.
Just another thing that makes you go hmmm…
I notice that both the ACoC home page and the Anglican Journal have a number of stories dated April 28 (today) but nothing on this one. Just another thing that makes you go, “Hmmm…”
Gerry, thank you for drawing my attention to the wording of the motion. It does seem to infer that the ANiC parishes are within the Anglican Communion and the ACoC is not.
I’m sure the Chancellor of Athabasca gave his assent to the wording which makes the passing of such a motion even more awe inspiring for those of us waiting in the wings, so to speak, for something to happen that will carry some authority and weight in the hallowed halls of the church.
I wish to note that at this hour of the evening no news has come to me via the Anglican Journal about the motions passed at the Synod in Athabasca. I wonder how they will spin this.
Liz,
I have been wondering that myself how the ACC will spin this
I am also wondering how Our Bishop elect in Edmonton will respond to this.
Gerry,
I think you are right in that Bishop Clarke will be feeling some heat from the Primate
Time will tell
This is just a test. I have had two attempted comments disappear into the ether.
Ed – I recovered them, Askimet thought they were spam.
Well, that one made it through. Perhaps it was because my others attempted links. I was merely pointing out that, although both the Anglican Journal and the ACoC homepage contain stories dated today, April 28, neither one mentions this one, which is rather a major news event, I would think, in the Canadian Anglican world.
Could it be possible that the letter that Bishop Harvey wrote to the House of Bishops is starting to bear some Fruit.
I am hoping that Bishop Clarke will be making a statement of some kind shortly.
There’ve been a couple of other comments disappear into the spam catcher recently, I don’t know why. Sorry John!
#10 – Is Edmonton in Rupert’s Land?
Rupert’s Land as a province includes the dioceses in Alberta (3), Saskatchewan (3), Manitoba (2), the Arctic and Keewatin. Essentially it is all of the old Hudson’s Bay Company land and territory of Rupert’s Land. Also under the Letters Patent creating the original bishop, there are some very interesting authorities given to him and his successors, both as a bishop and as a metropolitan.
#13 – Well, don’t leave us hanging – what are they?
Curiously yours….
If Athabasca is declaring itself in communion with the ANiC, and the ANiC is not in communion with the ACoC, where does that leave Athabasca?
ML ~ “If Athabasca is declaring itself in communion with the ANiC, and the ANiC is not in communion with the ACoC, where does that leave Athabasca?”
Hi ML –
just offhand (My thoughts only) it would leave the Diocese of Athabaska in Communion with 70% of the Anglicans Worldwide and I may be incorrect, but would it not open Athabasca’s Parishes up to inviting and having ANiC Priests & Bishops to come into their parishes to talk about ANiC in frank, totally open dialogue (something that has been denied a great many including my former Diocese of Eastern Nfld. and Labrador (I am a member of ANiC NOT the ACoC).
KATE: Edmonton is in Rupert’s Land but not in the Diocese of Athabasca (The Southern Boundary of Diocese of Athabaca passes across Alberta just North of Edmonton).
Bishop Clarke needs all the Prayer that we can send up at this time.
Bishop Clarke is also Archbishop of Rupert’s Land, though, which is why I asked. What interesting times we live in…
Kate
It is very complex and goes back to a Privy Council decision in the 1860′s. But it appears that the Bishop of Rupert’s Land and possibly the Metropolitan has what is known in law as “coercive jurisdiction”. This means that his jurisdiction is not reliant on the voluntary acceptance of those in the organization, but is enforceable regardless of their wishes. The same court decision removed any coercive jurisdiction from every other bishop in Canada and made compliance with their jurisdiction a matter of voluntary acceptance. It also defined quite clearly the limits of the oath of canonical obedience.
Kate, I wish to add that those powers given the Metroplotan of Rupert’s Land were given prior to the establishment of the ACoC. Rupert’s Land prexists the ACoC. Up until the 1960′s the Primate of Canada was ALWAYS the Metroplitan of Rupert’s Land as well. The decision to move the seat of the Primacy and “head office” to Toronto was only made in the mid 1960′s.
The Diocese of Brandon web-news reported that Athabasca aligned with ANiC. That might cause a stir considering the use of align in this context. But it is still there he hasn’t fixed it. And if Bp Jim wants to rant it will be inside his office where ++Clark won’t hear it.
I went on the Diocese of Athabaska website and read the synod reports and motions and think the Diocese of Brandon should be a bit more careful with the descriptive words they use.
I understand that the province of Ruperts Land (of which I am part), because it pre-exists ACoC, has the ability – should it so desire – to dissolve General Synod as GS is a subsidiary creation to the province of Ruperts Land. Unlikely to happen, I know, but I believe it is theoretically possible….
Might be fun to try at our Provincial Synod next June, Pete!
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…..All of the foregoing really has me wondering just where the Anglican Church of Canada fits into the Anglican Church OR Church of England that was here before Newfoundland & Labrador joined Canada in 1949…..
Maybe the ACoC has no real authority here at all…..no wouldn’t that cause a stir for Bsp. Pitman and A/Deacon Peddle.
Gerry, a look through the Newfoundland church archives might be interesting to see what the deal was when you joined Confederation.
I’m sure the law known as “coercive jurisdiction” was only left in place because the assumption was the Primate’s seat would always be in Rupert’s Land. Somebody obviously forgot to change the law when they moved the Primacy. There are probably lawyers working on that at this moment in Toronto … or they will be shortly.
Is that it then? From what I have read here the ACoC is going to fall apart because without Rupert’s Land it technically doesn’t exist. Who would have thought? Goodbye Hiltz, goodbye and fare…………er, as well as you can.
Obituary: Your pen name fits this topic well, doesn’t it?
I don’t quite think that the ACoC is yet going to fall apart….I think that we should indeed pray that it will not fall apart. We should be praying that Primate Fred Hiltz and others will have their ears opened and their eyes opened and that they will see the error of the way that they have taken.
It is time for the ACoC to quickly distance itself from TEC and from the Liberal Anglican World if indeed that is at all possible. We must remember that with prayer “ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE” even the straightening out of a church running wild….IF it doesn’t straighten out, then yes, it would be fair (in my opinion) to say that the ACoC is falling apart and perhaps even faster than thought possible.
Gerry at #3 and #27 – I read it as Athabaska saying that at present, it would still be possible for the ACoC to remain in the Anglican Communion. But if the ACoC firmly declares it is out of communion with the Southern Cone, then the alignment of Athabaska is not with the ACoC. “Don’t push that button.”
As I’ve noted elsewhere, there’s a fair likelihood that the courts will hold the ACoC to the Solemn Declaration – so the Archbishop of Rupert’s Land might again be the primate of the ACoC, as clear in communion.
And for some definitions of “distance”, I agree with your last paragraph. I have disagreeements on particular issues, though.
Henry Troup at 28. It is becoming quite complicated and beyond one’s wildest imaginations! No wonder the Niagara situation has not been cleared up by the judge. She may have found a whole nest of possibilities and is waiting for all this to settle out before she makes judgment, as it is rapidly becoming an even bigger issue, as it seems Clarke may be the true Archbishop of Canada soon. How fast this has spiraled out of Hiltz and his bunch’s control. Or am I getting beyond myself?
Arch – Bishop – Clarke = ABC
Arch – Bishop – of Canada = ABC
(just a co-incidence?)
Now I know my ABC , next time won’t you sing with me
As Colin Johnson, Bishop of Toronto said,”Crisis in the Anglican Church of Canada? I think not!”
Recycle – Even more of a coincidence is that the Primate who moved to the east in the 1960′s was also a Clarke…Archbishop Howard Clarke.
Henry Troup #28 “But if the ACoC firmly declares it is out of communion with the Southern Cone,”
Henry: If I am not mistaken, has the Southern Cone not aligned itself with many of the Global South Provinces that have declared themselves to be out of communion with the ACoC? What does the ACoC have to do to look “firmly” out of communion with the Southern Cone?
If such is the case, then the ACoC cannot really declare itself “In Communion” with the Southern Cone or with ANiC…..certainly the way that the ACoC is projecting itself down upon ANiC it certainly would not appear that they are in communion with each other.
As the old saying says, “The ACoC cannot have it’s cake and eat it too”.
Still no Athabasca story in the Anglican Journal – must be stuck in the “spin cycle”.
#34
Tom
“…must be stuck in the “spin cycle”.
Good one!