FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 24 December 2009
The trustees of four Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) congregations in the greater Vancouver area have filed an appeal of Mr Justice Stephen Kelleher’s BC Supreme Court decision of November 25, 2009, in order to preserve their vibrant Anglican ministries. The four parishes, St Matthew’s (Abbotsford), St Matthias & St Luke’s (Vancouver), St John’s Shaughnessy (Vancouver) and Church of the Good Shepherd (Vancouver), have an average Sunday attendance of approximately 1500 people and are involved in many ministries throughout the week serving their communities.
The trustees of the churches had asked the courts in September 2008 to clarify their responsibilities after the bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster purported to replace the trustees and seize the parish bank accounts in two of the congregations. Mr Justice Kelleher found the bishop had no legal or canonical authority to replace the trustees, but he also said that the trustees owed a duty to use the church properties for the benefit of the diocese and the Anglican Church of Canada. This has left the parties in a difficult and unworkable position since both parties feel they are upholding the principles upon which the Anglican Church of Canada and the diocese were founded, but they have very different views about what that means.
“Our legal counsel have advised our parishes that there are strong legal arguments that warrant an appeal,” said Cheryl Chang, Chancellor (in-house legal advisor) for the ANiC. “Since, the deadline for filing an appeal is 30 days from the date of judgment, and since this Christmas period is the busiest season in the church year with many additional worship services and events, the trustees felt it was necessary to file the appeal now in order to protect their rights and keep their options open. This will also allow the congregations more time to discern together and move forward in unity. It has been difficult over the Christmas season for the congregations to properly consult and determine what course of action is best for their Gospel witness and ministries. They plan to continue looking at their options in the New Year. Filing an appeal now preserves their rights and their ability to maintain their ministries.”
ANiC now has 33 parishes and 8 forming congregations in North America, with more than 3500 people in church on an average Sunday. Members of the Anglican Network in Canada are committed to remaining faithful to Holy Scripture and established Anglican doctrine and to ensuring that orthodox Anglicans are able to remain in full communion with their Anglican brothers and sisters around the world.
ANiC is under the episcopal authority of Bishop Donald Harvey and is a diocese in the Anglican Church in North America which unites over 100,000 faithful Anglicans from across this continent.
Contact:
Cheryl Chang (Marilyn Jacobson is on holidays)
Chancellor, Anglican Network in Canada
I bring this up again, not as a means to create havoc, but to try to find some clarification of a statement made by TORAL on another string, one that unfortunately led to great distress. It is not my desire to have this lead to distress, but rather to find out if indeed such a request or statement as that made by TORAL was looked into.
I am copying TORAL’S previous post and highlighting in bold print that question that I think really needed answering, not bluntly buy civily as it was intended when originally asked.
Toral
Those who are concerned about continuing in the litigation should ask their wardens to ask our lawyers (not the Chancellor, but our hired counsel), for a written opinion stating the likelihood of success in the litigation, and the likely total legal costs of taking this matter to trial, then as high as the Court of Appeal.
Lawyers are under a professional obligation to provide a written opinion as to litigation success when asked. They don’t like to do so, and so usually don’t, unless asked. It’s long past time they should be asked. There may be sensitive matters in the opinion (things we don’t want our adversaries to know), but at a minumum the gist of it should be made available to Parish Council.
Oh, and if we should proceed with litigation, you should advise your wardens that they are entitled to independent advice at the congregation’s expense about their responsibility for legal costs — not by our counsel, who would have a conflict of interest, but by counsel with some experience in advising charitable trustees. Our lawyers aren’t the right folks anyway, since they were apparently caught off guard when faced with the clear legal fact that the wardens, as named defendants, were responsible for legal cost awards if we lose.
I feel that the points outlined by Toral in the above were valid and very important points, ones tht are very seldom, if ever, addressed by legal counsel and advisors. I don’t feel that there was any intent by Toral to slight anyone, especially our Chancellor in his asking of these questions but I do feel that Toral’s questions deserved answering, if at all possible. Perhaps our Chancellor could weigh in on this?
As mentioned in Cheryl’s news release, the appeal will also allow the congregations more time to discern together and move forward in unity. I am sure that the costs and likelihood of success will be factors in their final decision to go ahead or not.
I would like to assure people that the wardens, and plaintiffs in the Bentley vs DoNW case are fully aware of the costs, and have received legal opinions from our lawyers regarding the appeal. We are grateful, and completely satisfied with the work our lawyers are doing at Fasken Martineau, and the work of the ANiC legal team, that includes Chancellor Cheryl Chang.
All 4 churches involved in the dispute have been working through a discernment process with their congregations seeking to know God’s will for the way forward. So far over over 600 people have participated in these discernment meetings, including two seperate discernment meetings where the leaders from all 4 churches met together for prayer and discussion. More discernment meetings are scheduled for January.
In the discernment meetings at St. John’s people have taken part in small group exercises where they discuss options for the way forward in light of the question”what would be best for the Gospel?” The discernment process in the all the churches, and among the church leaders, has been a very fruitful and unity building experience. The issues involved are complex, and take time, energy, and prayer to think through, but as David Short reminded us a few weeks ago “there is no panic in the Heavens.
Please take care with your comments on the “decision to appeal post”. More than anything we need you to pray for the 4 churches: that God would protect the amazing unity he has given us these last seven years, and that our decisions, and, more importantly, the way we make them, would honour God.
In pure moral terms – we would have already retained that which is ours.
In legal wrangling it’s anyone’s game. Pierre’s Charter superscedes morality, and has brought to the brink of death, common law as a living entity.
In this liberal hegemony of political correctness that Canada has become, the chances of success are dependent upon elements that are out of our control.
#3 – Thank you.
#3 Notes from a Plaintiff:
Thank you NFAP, this is the first answer that I have seen to Toral’s questions that has given great credence to the fact that indeed much was and is being considered. Thank you for answering my questions so elequently. I’m sure that if Toral reads this post, that he/she will gain some satisfaction and relief from your answer.
Stuck in Toronto has it right. Pierre’s charter does supercede morality and all is dependent on those things out of our control.
I stand corrected (once again) Gerry, being of limited means, lets call it intellectually challenged, I sometimes (maybe more than that) put the car in gear before starting the motor. As Christians we are never completely “out of control”. As the note “from a plaintiff” clearly requests – we can pray. Secondly, negative thoughts about decisions made by brothers and sisters in our community should have the most careful and prayful scrutiny before being made. In my defence and apology I would have everyone particularly in B.C. know that my #4 was submitted prior to the enlightenment provided by the Plaintiff. – I will be praying loud, hard and often in the coming year – the outcome will be the will of our Father.
HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!!!!!!