St. Aidan’s Windsor loses appeal

I just received this via email:

Canon Tom Carman, rector of St Aidan’s, reports:

“In its decision, the Court of Appeal, upheld the conclusions of the trial court judge, Justice Little, on both the matter of St Aidan’s property and the St Aidan’s bequeathment and finance fund.  In addition, the Diocese of Huron was awarded partial costs in the amount of $100,000.

“St Aidan’s had a strong case, based on trust law.  The Diocese of Huron’s Canon 14 states in reference to church property that the diocese “holds it in trust for the benefit of the Parish or congregation.”  This was strengthened by a letter obtained by the people of St Aidan’s from the Chancellor of the Diocese, Lindsey Ellwood, on November 21, 2001 in which he wrote:

“I further reaffirm our discussion wherein I advise that pursuant to Canon 14 the Incorporated Synod of the Diocese of Huron…  has no beneficial or legal entitlement to parish property…”

“Based on these assurances, St Aidan’s proceeded with the appeal and our lawyer, Peter Jervis, was able to build a strong case.  Sadly, the courts accepted the argument of the Diocese that the parish only exists as an entity within the structures of the diocese and that it is impossible for a “parish” to leave the diocese.

“The people of St Aidan’s are understandably disappointed in this decision, however, we believe that the Lord has a plan for us and are trusting in Jeremiah 29:11, “For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the Lord, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”  

“We are still considering whether to apply for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.  Please keep us in your prayers.”

Sadly, almost every encounter in the courts between the Anglican Church of Canada and the Anglican Network in Canada has gone badly for ANiC – the notable exception being St. Hilda’s first court appearance when the judge ruled that our sharing the building with the diocese of Niagara wouldn’t work. And that ruling was later reversed.

Our prayers should be with St. Aidan’s and Tom Carman. Barring a surprise turnaround from the Supreme Court of Canada, this battle appears to be lost; nevertheless, St. Aidan’s has fought the good fight, one whose true outcome we may not see this side of eternity.

As an aside, I am still flabbergasted that Canadian judges deem it impossible for a parish to leave a diocese in the face of the empirical evidence of around 70 parishes who have done just that – particularly in the light of recent a US ruling where a judge decided that an entire diocese can leave TEC.

In Canada, from a judicial perspective, a “parish” is an abstract entity which doesn’t have to include any people: it is a diocesan owned container into which people may throw their money, talents and energy. When full, the container and the contents belong to the diocese: a health and wealth gospel without the health and you forfeit your wealth. Why would anyone choose to belong to such a church?

Something that makes this ruling even more preposterous is that the Diocese of Huron, when sued over residential school abuse, sought to protect what it regarded as its assets by writing a letter that stated the individual parishes owned their own property, not the diocese.

But Knight said the issue here has other subtleties. Knight said the diocese penned a letter while the Anglican Church was being sued for abuse suffered by Aboriginal children in its residential schools.

Presumably to protect church assets, the letter says the church buildings belong to their individual parishes and the diocese has no claim to them, Knight said.

The diocese might just as well say that it has no claim on the buildings when to have a claim might cause it to lose them and every claim on the buildings when not to have a claim might cause it to lose them.

And now, after this brief sojourn down the rabbit hole with the Mad Hatter, in the spirit of the lucidity of thought that has gone into this judgement,  I’ll let the Dormouse have the last word:

`You might just as well say,’ added the Dormouse, who seemed to be talking in his sleep, `that “I breathe when I sleep” is the same thing as “I sleep when I breathe”!’

13 thoughts on “St. Aidan’s Windsor loses appeal

  1. Our prayers are with the people of St Aiden’s. Having gone through this with the Diocese of Niagara, we know that what may be legal is not moral or right.

  2. No declaration of a constructive or resulting trust for all the money the parishioners have paid for the land and building? No finding of unjust enrichment? Incredible.

  3. It makes very little sense. But in the UK the judiciary has been sieved by political correctness … has the same happened in Canada?

  4. In making reference to the residential schools issue you raise a valid point. The ACoC is attempting to “have it both ways”. It comes across as hypocritical.

    I think it wrong to say that the fight is lost. If you are making a reference to the buildings and excluding all else than you would be correct. But the buildings are not the real fight. I would submit that the real fight must now begin. The fight for souls! Attack on all fronts, and show no mercy. Hold back nothing. Accept that what you are now engaged in is “total way”.

    Get the word out to the public and hold nothing back. If anyone asks make it clear that the ACoC is a group that has lost its way, no longer preaches the true Gospel, and thus is no longer a legitimate “Church”. If the ACoC leadership get upset by any of this than too bad for them. Brats and bullies often get upset when they are unexpectedly challenged. If they accuse of “sheep stealing” point out to them that their perception is outright wrong. What you are doing is not “sheep stealing” at all, but is in fact “soul saving”. That what you are doing is an outright and deliberate effort to save as many as possible from the lost ways of their dead church.

  5. The property belongs to the Anglican Church of Canada. It seems, that the Church always gets to keep the properties. However, it seems like mismanageament from the very beginnings with the Residential Schools. Now, with the doctrinal conditions and the Church Government structures is qeustionable too. First, lets start with the powers of the Archbishop of Canterbury and what the person can do has some shortcomings to stop problems from further festering. When I was in London, England in the 1980s most of the C of E Churches were empty. Where did they go and why did they leave? Something kept the places running for all those centuries and something has to come into agreement as to what this is?

  6. The problem is systemic. I know that this will not sit well with any of you; however, if you engage with the Canadian system at any level politically then you support it!

    The ACoC is part of that system always has been always will be until it [or the system] collapses.

    St. Aiden’s should save their money: you cannot ‘beat’ the system…

  7. The fact is that the ACoC has clearly traded allegiance to our Lord and Saviour to what might be called “political correctness” and have no care or desire to maintain the truth and reject the authority of Scripture to suit their own purposes. Further legally stealing properties that were paid for by others can only be called theft whether done legally or otherwise.

  8. Yes. I rather like your term “legally stealing”; however, I am unconvinced that there is any ‘political correctness” in their agenda.

    The Canadian Government and the ACoC have always been in cahoots.

    Today, they are no longer a church [Christian, or otherwise] and the government should revoke their charitable status [and every other so called church (the RCC, PCC UCC Pentecostal Assemblies and Baptists) who do not use at least 50% of the money that they legally steal for genuine charitable purposes.

    The only megachurch exception that I can see might be the Salvation Army.

  9. For Malachy:-
    This country was build on Christian principles which have been largely discounted due to the deceptive actions of many secularly minded persons who believe everyone should be allowed to do what is right in his own eyes. Genuine Christian churches should not be taxed as they provide many benefits to the community. To be genuine Christians two qualifications are mandatory:-
    1. full acceptance of the authority of Scripture; and
    2. full acceptance of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ.
    Many in the ACoC especially some so-called bishops denouce either or both and therefore can no longer call themselves Christian.

    • Yes. It is very important for Christian believers to accept the authority of the Bible and the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. Malachy, I think you were born in 1945. My dad was born in 1906. If he were alive today, he would say, “Young man, a short comment is good. The more one says the more mistakes one may make”.

Leave a Reply