The Diocese of Niagara has posted this on its web site:
In Vancouver, the Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled against four parishes who have broken away from the Anglican Diocese of New Westminster and had filed suit seeking to keep the church buildings. The four are part of a wider radical group, including four parishes in Niagara, who left the Anglican Church of Canada. This is very good news . Although it is a different jurisdiction, we believe that this decision will have a very important effect upon our ongoing legal efforts with the Network in Niagara.
[.......]
We can say that we are pleased that the Vancouver judge has recognized the structure of the Anglican Church and most specifically, the Diocese of New Westminster. This decision supports our contention that while individuals are free to leave the Church, the property has always been held in trust by the Diocese. We are now anticipating moving this legal case forward here in Niagara and to have this matter settled so that we may continue in our mission and ministry. We also hope and pray that we may continue to find ways to seek healing and reconciliation with those that have left our Anglican Church.
St. Hilda’s ANiC has not received any emails from the diocese for the last couple of years. This morning we received an email from the diocese containing this. I think it was intended as a message – not of healing and reconciliation, though.
“radical group”? They’re getting truculent, aren’t they. Note that +Bird gimself is the contact person for this release. I bet he wrote this himself; “radical group” is reminiscent of his earlier phrase “small group of extremists”.
Someone must hace got under his skin; I wonder who.
No idea.
What mission and ministry? The ACoC doesn’t have a ministry operating out of the four ANiC Niagara parishes.
It should not be surprising that immorality cheers on immorality. And here we have the Diocese of Niagara, which has been on the slippery slope to total heresy since the days of Bishop John Bothwell, cheering on the BC Supreme Court which does not understand either morality or legality that would controvert left-wing socialist liberalism!
Believing that the Bible is God’s word written and right wing politics don’t always go hand in hand. I habitually vote left in elections.
Leftist politicians also habitually go hand in hand with same-sex marriage, the suppression of of public opposition to it in the press
and state funded abortion on demand. Now that’s “unchristian”
And right wing politicians habitually go hand in hand with indifference to the poor, which is also un Christian. My only point was that it isn’t a good idea to assume that all bible believing Christians have identical secular political views. We don’t.
I personally have no problem with secular same sex marriage, as long as my church remains free to preach the Gospel.
Now, let’s get back to the topic at hand, please.
Kate (#5 & #7), you raise a good point. I think this is where American evangelicalism (and to a lesser degree its Canadian counterpart) has often gotten off the rails. Denominations and church leaders have too often aligned themselves with a political party based on a small number of flash-point issues. The result is that many Christians are left feeling somewhat alienated if they don’t fall in line. I would be surprised to hear anything of the sort from the leadership in my church, but it has subtly crept into some discussions in my small group (which isn’t so small – about 70 people). People too easily forget that all political parties are of this world and are not part of God’s Kingdom.
Sorry for continuing the digression.
The church and it’s ability to preach the gospel is under attack. Trying to separate the leftist political mind set from this fact is unrealistic. Don’t take it personally. Blogs are an untidy business, the discussion will often expand to cause and effect and that is a good thing.
#9 I disagree that it is unrealistic.
#8 That is basically what I was attempting to say, and as usual you are far more eloquent than I.
As Kate says, let’s try and keep politics out of our discussions – we do have enough to talk about without sliding into left/right political partisanship.
And I agree, Warren stated the reasons very well in #8.
#8 – Your small group has 70 people?? 70, not 17?
That is not small! At least not in our church.
Kate (#13), the average attendance is about 1400, so the “small groups” tend to be a little larger than I’m used to. They’re handled well, though, and my wife and I feel like we are part of a genuinely caring community.
The small group I was part of started talking about dividing into 2 groups when we reached 13 people.
The diocese as usual got it wrong, they state that “the property has always been held in trust by the Diocese” which is not correct. The property has been held in trust for the congregation so that the purposes of the diocese can be carried out.
The Diocese has control over the sale and mortgage of the properties so that the properties cannot be alienated from the Church. Our various acts of incorporation include these measures so that, as actually happened in the mid-1800s, fallen priests could not sell cemetary reserve land or mortgage rectories to support mistresses or pay gambling debts.
So, the four sets of trustees are now between a rock and a hard place. They are to manage the properties to the benefit of the congregations but consistent with the aims of the Diocese. Not a happy place.
On the other hand, the Diocese cannot force a change in the trust arrangements, but can stop any activity not consistent with their rules.
What I see in the ruling is a judge that is annoyed that we can’t agree on a fair settlement and has ruled in a way that makes both sides lives miserable.
The churches in NewWest offered a settlement (and, from what I have heard, even though the details are not allowed to be made public, an extremely generous one). It has been the stance of the ACoC throughout all of this that they would not sit down at the table and talk. Bishop Don Harvey also, has attempted to meet with Fred Hiltz many times and has been rebuffed at every turn.
The ruling shows that legal is not the same as moral and fair.
Dear Bishop Byrd:
We understand that all parish properties are now to be considered as the Diocese’s alone. As a consequence of this determination, we expect that you will:
1) in future pay out of your own pocket all costs for heating, cleaning, repairing, and otherwise maintaining “your” buildings;
2) pay back, with interest, all the money which we have in the past spent on said buildings in the mistaken belief that they were our responsibility instead of yours.
Signed, the Radical Group
I think that Bill in Ottawa #18 understands the nuances of the ruling. It is not as clear-cut as the diocese of Niagara is suggesting. The press release from New West was very careful not to overstate what the ruling means. The trustees are in a tight place, they need our prayers
Ellie #20
As a member of a congregation that has given the dio over $1000,000 over the years plus paid for the buildings, maintenance and taxes – I love your comments
Unfortunately, I think the ruling is relatively clear:
A parish cannot leave a diocese, therefore the parishes are still a part of the DoNW
Trustees still hold their positions in the Diocese of New Westminster parishes. The rectors of those parishes are no longer employed by the diocese of New Westminster.
Ingham will be appointing new rectors for the parishes. The trustees will have to accommodate to the new rectors – who will undoubtedly be loyal to Ingham – seethe in latent rebellion or quit. This is where the For now, I will leave it to the parties to arrive at a workable resolution part of the ruling comes in.
Congregations and the trustees can stay in the buildings under the new rectors, Michael Ingham and the diocese of New Westminster.
The ANiC parishioners who wish to remain with their ANiC priests can no longer use the buildings.
The notion of the trustees coming to some workable resolution with Ingham and his new Stepford Rectors is a little difficult to believe when they could not do it before all this started.
ith indifference to the poor, which is also un Christian.
Jesus said: the poor will always be with you.
But Jesus says: gays and abortionists and adulterers are dammed to eternity.
Jesus would never have voted for a “left-wing” party.
Sinner,
Let the politics drop, please! And let’s not be consigning people to hell; as your moniker implies – we are all sinners.
And while I’m at it, please use a real email address when you comment.
The workable resolution in a situation where people are reinstated to offfices they can no longer continue to perform for reasons such as incompatability of principle is usually an agreement that the officers resign in exchange for receiving a monetary payment in lieu of legal damages for the illegal dismissal.
Otherwise it would be easy for +Ingham to put the trustees in a position where they are in breach of their fiduciary duty abd we’re back into some kind of expensive legal proceedings again.
Muriel: I’m only half joking. Right now the Niagara Diocese can’t even seem to pay its court-mandated share of expenses for the disputed parishes. If they “win” the properties, Westminster-style, then they can pay the whole shot. Why shouldn’t they, if the properties are “theirs”?
#23 David:
I believe that you have the complete ruling broken down to a few words most accurately. This same ruling from the DoNW will have far reaching implications in the DoN court cases. The Supreme court of Ontario justice(s) will no doubt use the DoNW rulings as “Case law” and will apply it fully to the DoN in ruling. Move on folks, as Archbishop Bob Duncan said “They got the stuff, we got the souls” .
Perhaps now the AniC can get on with evangelizing those who really want to know the truth in the ACoC.
ANiC trust arguments regarding property were always a legal long shot, but in retrospect, well worth including along the way to the Chung bequest (which alone more than justifies the legal cost of this trial, at least for the Chinese Anglican community of Vancouver).
Another benefit of the trial is that the legal weakness of the trust arguments have now been exposed for the benefit of orthodox Anglicans in Niagara, whose litigation expenses are not be offset by a Chung-style sweetener.
I try to not be a vengeful type, but at times…
Wouldn’t it be ironic if a day were to come when the DoNW and DoN had to sell these properties, and it turned out to be the ANiC that purchased them? After all, with so few Parishoners contributing their offerings just how long will it be until these Dioceses come to terms with their financial realities? They may be able to lie about Scripture, but not about paying the bills.
@29 – One of the problems with these cases is that each parish and diocese seems to have had a different enabling act that incorporated them, at least if they are more than 50 years old. The precedent set in New Westminster applies fully only to cases decided under the Diocese of New Westminster Act, which was originally passed by the BC Legislature pre-Confederation, if I recall correctly.
The Diocese of Niagara Act was passed by the Ontario Legislature in 1873. The Diocese of Ottawa Act was passed by the Canadian Parliament in 1896. Some of the parish corporations predate their dioceses or were transferred from another diocese when that diocese split. While the New Westminster decision will have a powerful influence on the logic used by the judges in other cases, it isn’t exactly a precedent.
Please don’t get me wrong, I don’t think we will win at court. In many ways we have all lost, on both sides, by having these cases before civil courts. But because each case has so many peculiarities based on the various acts of incorporation, I don’t think New West actually sets a precedent. The lawyers for Dio Niagara will argue that it does of course and may persuade the judge.
We shall see, and pray, and plan for a future in new buildings that actually have modern conveniences such as meeting rooms and Sunday school space and walls that don’t need constant attention. Where two or three are gathered together in His name we are promised the Holy Spirit. Doesn’t say anything about big stone buildings being the only place that can happen.