The Diocese of New Westminster has just completed its Synod. This was one of the motions put forward:
Motion #1
Whereas we being a Christian Community are obligated to prevent the very public and acrimonious legal dispute between the Diocese of New Westminster and the Churches in dispute from further embarrassing and diminishing the whole Christian Community; and because such disputes are:
- Contrary to Scripture.
- Detrimental to Christ’s Salvation Gospel to the world.
- Confuses and saddens our Brothers and Sisters in both the world wide Anglican Church and other Denominations.
- Trivializes our voice in the World.
- Are both irrelevant and counter-productive in a time of actual and planned Church closures in this Diocese.
- Are a total waste of scarce Time, Talent and Treasure, better used in other activities.
Therefore it is moved that the 2010 Diocesan Synod respectfully direct the Bishop to, faithfully and earnestly negotiate a just and timely solution that will allow the Churches in dispute to indefinitely continue Ministry and Worship in their existing Facilities’.
Moved by: George Goater
Seconded by: Lyn StringerNumerous Members of Synod spoke to this resolution with the majority speaking against the motion. Two youth members of Synod responded to the motion by suggesting that the motion may open doors to understanding in the future and suggested shifting our perceived focus on buildings to respect for, and acceptance of, the priests who lead the ANiC congregations as they haven’t left the “church” but have chosen a different path.
The motion was defeated by a substantial majority.
Ah, it’s only a perceived focus on buildings.
That the motion was even made and seconded is a surprise. That it was defeated by a substantial majority is not.
I think that the leadership of the DoNW are in a very bad way financially. The buildings and lands are worth money, something of which the DoNW is in short supply of.
There may also be an agenda of vindictiveness. Don’t let those who left have anything. Fight them and drive them into bankruptcy and oblivion. But even if the DoNW wins the battle (legal fight for ownership of land and buildings) they are loosing the war. The DoNW and the ACoC are in steep and serious decline. Meanwhile the ANiC and the ACiNA are growing by leaps and bounds. It’s only a matter of the Grace of God and time until the former becomes the lesser, and the latter becomes the greater.
This motion shows there are still some within the Diocese of New Westminster who want the diocese to serve the Master. The tragedy is that the so-called bishop and others within the diocese who serve a different master prevailed. That is not surprising as their master is a master of deceit and deception and the leadership in the diocese are determined to serve him regardless of the Truth. Perhaps we will see an uprising by the orthodox Anglicans – as they are the only true Anglicans – to challenge the apostasy.
As I have said before the issue in the ACoC is NOT liberalism versus conservatism. It is APOSTASY versus ORTHODOXY. God’s word is NOT subject to the authority of so-called bishops or a majority vote at synod or elsewhere. Clergy and laity that are true believers need to ask the question, “Who is on the Lord’s side?” It is not a time to sit on the fence to see what might happen. There is absolutely no possible union between apostasy and orthodoxy. Apostates serve the master while the orthodox seek to serve the MASTER, our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.
I agree with the motion that was made, but I did not vote for it… I abstained.
Three youth delegates supported the beliefs behind the motion at the mic, but one said he would not vote for it, as litigation was in process and he did not agree with some of the wording of the motion.
I as another youth delegate, and the youth delegate to Diocesan Council and (formerly) Lay Secretary of the Diocese, abstained.
Thanks for the update, Isaac.
Isaac, could you elaborate as to what in the wording was considered objectionable? Also, was this the same reason you chose to abstain? I’m pretty curious now.
In my own opinion, the mover of the motion did not do a very good job of presenting it and the fact the seconder was not present at Synod, started things off on the wrong foot.
I personally would have worded the motion much differently, as it only served to antagonize those who may have supported a similar motion worded more as a `mind of the house` resolution.
I see no possibility of an out of court settlement sadly, and only hope that those who have joined ANiC can continue spreading the Gospel outside of the ACoC, as well as those of us who are members of the ACA can do within the ACoC.
Please pray for all in this Diocese.
A “mind of the house” resolution would have had no teeth. Better a plain spoken resolution that fails, than a wishy washy one that passes.
If nothing else at least all the cards are on the table. It is obvious that there is not enough Christian Love and Charity within the DoNW. Little motivation to even try to be nice to other Anglicans.
Isaac,
May God keep you in His care and protect you from any harm and ill will that might be directed towards you.
Mr. Thorpe, at first I thought your abstaining was a waste, But the Lord brought this phrase to mind – nothing like having “boots on the ground” to get better perspective. With that I urge you to watch your back, hmmm your front, top and bottom as well. Expand your faith in the knowledge of righteousness and pray and pray again, as I and many of us will do also. Please know that you have a church full of brothers and sisters who will welcome you as conqueror regardless of outcome.
In the name of our Lord Jesus