Category Archives: Anglican Church of Canada

The Anglican Church of Canada wants to have its cake and eat it

Posted on by
3

Rev. Michael Thompson from St. Jude’s in Oakville has written a rebuttal to an earlier article in the Journal which plainly stated that, if the ACoC is honest, it cannot sign the Anglican Covenant and continue its present course.

Such stark Kierkegaardian either/or propositions tend not to sit well with Western Anglicans; they much prefer interminable Hegelian dialectic garnished with Rowanesque waffle-sauce. Rev. Michael is no exception. Unfortunately, he also seems to inhabit an insular suburban world that has little access to news outside Oakville; he hasn’t noticed that the vast majority of the Anglican Communion are seriously considering – many already have – breaking communion with the ACoC and TEC whether the ACoC likes it or not. The whole article is below, but to summarise, Rev. Michael is saying that the ACoC can sign the covenant, go its merry way, hide behind the ludicrous canard that it is contributing to “diversity”, ignore the protests of 70 million Anglicans – whose priests are wicked interventionists anyway – and pretend everything is just fine. The truly grotesque thing is, he appears to believe it.

In the work that bears his name, Gilbert and Sullivan’s wonderfully imagined Mikado purports “To let the punishment fit the crime, the punishment fit the crime.” In their guest opinion column in the Anglican Journal (May 2010, p. 5), Catherine Sider-Hamilton and Dean Mercer have, on the other hand, already decided the punishment– “a second-tier status in the larger Anglican Communion.” It remains only to conjure up the requisite crime.

Their opening gambit is to accuse our church of a “willingness to walk apart from the universal church.” Never mind the long list of Canadian Anglicans who have served and are now serving the life of the Communion. The Anglican Indigenous Network (Donna Bomberry), The Compass Rose Society (Bishop Philip Poole), Theological Education for the Anglican Communion (Archbishop Colin Johnson), the Anglican Covenant Working Group (Dr. Eileen Scully) and Unity, Faith and Order (Alyson Barnett-Cowan) don’t count. And never mind those bishops who have abandoned almost 2,000 years of Catholic ecclesiology to interfere with the integrity of the local church in this and other provinces because they and they alone know how to receive and interpret God’s word revealed in scripture.

In 2004, General Synod heard both the Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Gregory Cameron, and the Bishop of Colombo, Duleep de Chickera. While Canon Cameron counseled caution, Bishop Duleep reminded us that not all voices in the wider Communion spoke as one and encouraged Canadian Anglicans to cherish our contributions to Anglican diversity. In 2007, the General Synod heard both Archbishop of York, John Sentamu and General Secretary of the Anglican Communion, Kenneth Kearon. Last year, Canon Isaac Kawuki-Mukasa of the Faith, Worship and Ministry Department of General Synod established personal contact among bishops and theologians in Canada and Africa, including a February gathering of Canadian and African bishops to build respect and mutual understanding. This is not a church as unable to embrace “a primary commitment to the universal and apostolic church” or as inimical to “the wider voice of the church.”

Next, the writers imply that the current conflict pits those who love and faithfully receive scripture against those who despise it, who find its teaching “oppressive and outdated.” But we know that those who support the blessing of committed monogamous same-sex relationships include many who know and love the Bible as living witness to the living God. And we know that as we receive and interpret scripture, the truth that emerges is often contested truth–as for example, we come to divergent conclusions about the response that the God revealed in scripture invites to a question of sexual ethics and Kingdom ethos in the 21st century. Conflict and contested truth are not unfamiliar to Jesus’ disciples, and need not tear apart the foundational covenant of our common baptism into one body. We could renew a healthier and more faithful discourse by acknowledging contested truth and engaging in honest and charitable conversation about the practices, values and contextual realities that shape our reception and interpretation of scripture.

In the communiqué issued from their 2000 meeting in Portugal, the Primates of the Anglican Communion said this:

We are conscious that we all stand together at the foot of the Cross of Jesus Christ, so we know that to turn away from each other would be to turn away from the Cross.

They went on to draw a bright line distinction as the only basis for a province or diocese being excluded from the Communion:

…the unity of the Communion as a whole still rests on the Lambeth Quadrilateral: the Holy Scriptures as the rule and standard of faith; the creeds of the undivided Church; the two Sacraments ordained by Christ himself and the historic episcopate. Only a formal and public repudiation of this would place a diocese or Province outside the Anglican Communion.

The Anglican Church of Canada has not turned away, either from those provinces whose leadership is visibly, even angrily, distressed by the divergence apparent in the current conflict, or from the Lambeth Quadrilateral. And we have not turned away from those among us whose lives of commitment we experience as vessels of God’s blessing.

Ms. Sider-Hamilton and Mr. Mercer argue that if we won’t turn away from those among us whose lives of intimate fidelity are shared with a person of the same sex, we must turn away from covenant revelation with those with whom we disagree on this singular issue. But in the Anglican Church of Canada, we turn away, not from covenant relationship, but from the sin that binds and blinds us, from the structures that impair justice and right relationship, and from the Adversary who resists the inbreaking kingdom of God. And as we turn to Jesus, we find him standing in the midst of the very community one part of which Mr. Mercer and Ms Sider-Hamilton insist we must abandon. There Jesus stands, in a community of divergent truths, worried suspicion, and fear, and begs us not to turn away from any of his sisters and brothers, but to accept the unity he offers up out of his own breath and blood.

One wonders why Thompson even wants the ACoC to sign the Covenant; it couldn’t be because the ACoC enjoys temporal power too much to be willing to let it go for its principles, could it? Surely not.

200 terror suspects in Canada

Posted on by
Reply

From here:

OTTAWA – Canada’s spy agency is keeping tabs on more than 200 people within the country it says are suspected terrorists.

Richard Fadden, the director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, told the parliamentary public safety committee Tuesday that his clandestine organization’s “No. 1 priority” is protecting Canadians from the “threat of al-Qaida, its affiliates and its adherents.”

“In that regard, I can say that as of this month, CSIS is investigating over 200 individuals in this country whose activities meet the definition of terrorism as set out in the (Anti-Terrorism) act,” Fadden said, adding they are also monitoring people abroad.

“It is also worth mentioning that the service maintains an active interest in the threat-related activities of a number of non-citizens who have ties to Canada, whether through former residence here or family links.”

CSIS has confirmed that not all of the suspects are refugees sponsored by the Anglican Church of Canada.

The Anglican Covenant at the Canadian GS2010

Posted on by
Reply

The ACoC has a document to help attendees prepare for the General Synod 2010 discussion – or waffle – on the Anglican Covenant. Read it all here. Section 4 of the Covenant is the potentially contentious part, since it seeks to reign in Provinces such as TEC and the ACoC that have decided to go their own way on issues like same-sex blessings. Conservatives complain that section 4 has no teeth and liberals that it interferes with matters that are internal to a Province. It has no teeth.

In Section Four, affirmations and commitments are offered relating to processes and principles that should be followed in situations of conflict between provinces. The particular issues of potential or present conflict are not named, and the processes laid out work within the present structures of the Anglican Consultative Council, with the standing committee of that council serving as the mediating agent. The standing committee’s power is only to recommend courses of relational consequences to the council’s own constitutionally formed processes.

Member churches of the Anglican Consultative Council are invited to enter into this covenanted relationship, which makes tangible affirmations and commitments about our common heritage, participation in God’s mission, and mutual responsibility in the bonds of affection. When a situation of conflict arises, churches are enjoined to seek the mind of Christ, and the affirmations and commitments in Sections One, Two and Three provide tools for discerning dialogue. The possible outcomes cannot be predicted. Common mind may include, for example, the agreement to disagree on a particular issue, but to keep walking together. What is clear is that Section Four does not supplant the existing authorities, the canons and constitutions of provinces, or the constitution of the Anglican Consultative Council.

So to summarise the document’s preparation for discussing section 4:

  • If a Province breaks the Covenant, the consequences are “relational” resulting, no doubt, in a severe scolding.
  • If there is disagreement after signing the Covenant we’ll have some “discerning dialogue”. TEC and the ACoC have had a lot of practise at this: each could single-handedly bore the balls off a buffalo, let alone shrivel the resolve of all but the most hardy opposition.
  • If TEC and the ACoC fail to subdue the enemy by focussed, concentrated magniloquence, then the “common mind” simply changes its meaning to “we disagree”. Black is white, up is down, and so begins another normal day in the ACoC.
  • Who cares anyway because section 4 has no teeth.

The Anglican Church of Canada is a laughingstock

Posted on by
Reply

Even in Texas:

Ridiculously  False Statement

Tom, of Boomers fame, sent me this quote from Mark Steyn:

“Most mainline Protestant churches are, to one degree or another, post-Christian. If they no longer seem disposed to converting the unbelieving to Christ, they can at least convert them to the boggiest of soft-left clichés, on the grounds that if Jesus were alive today he’d most likely be a gay Anglican bishop in a committed relationship driving around in an environmentally friendly car with an “Arms are for Hugging” sticker on the way to an interfaith dialogue with a Wiccan and a couple of Wahhabi imams.”

There is absolutely no truth, whatsoever, in Mr. Steyn’s absurd analysis of Ms. Jefferts Schori’s thriving Episcopal Church and its tiny cousin, the ACoC (Anglican Church of Canada).

How cruel.

The Anglican Church of Canada wants your money when you die

Posted on by
4

Mike and Fred even sent me a letter – presumably in the hope that I sink into advanced dementia before joining the choir invisible – asking to be remembered in my will.

The first sentence of the second paragraph had obviously been partially deleted; one presumes the ACoC can’t afford a proofreader until someone else dies.

I had assumed it should have read something like this:

As you reflect on your contributions to the church, we encourage you to consider including your parish or diocese in your will or in an insurance policy. By designating the church as a beneficiary, you will be strengthening our ability to fulfil God’s mission by continuing to sue ANiC parishes.

But apparently not; according to the Niagara web site the last part of the sentence should read…. “fulfill God’s mission well into the future”. I expect Fred made Mike change that bit.

Congratulations Bishop Victoria Matthews

Posted on by
Reply

I had no idea that Bishop Victoria Matthews had made life difficult for Michael Ingham; thank you, Bishop Victoria, you and your irenic presence are now on my Christmas card list.

Bishop Matthews previously served in the Anglican Church of Canada. Anyone familiar with how difficult she made life for Bishop Michael Ingham after he and the Diocese of New Westminster approved the blessing of same sex relationships will have a hard time accepting her self portrait as an irenic presence.

Apparently the Anglican Church of Canada is going to change

Posted on by
1

Not for the better, one presumes; in fact, as soon as I read this, I had a vision of the ACoC transforming into the Ungeziefer from Kafka’s Metamorphosis. That’s probably optimistic, though.

From June 3 to 11, 2010, more than 300 delegates will gather in Halifax, N.S. for the Anglican Church of Canada’s national meeting, General Synod, held once every three years. This web forum is a place to discuss the major topics that will arise at General Synod—from governance to sexuality. You are invited to join the conversation.

At this General Synod, there will be change—change in how we gather as a governing body, change in how we dialogue, and change in our vision. Those who gather in June will consider both how God is acting in our midst and what God is calling us to do differently. It may mean changing a light bulb or two. But imagine how much more brightly the light may shine if that happens.

What’s your attitude towards change in the church?

What never ceases to amaze me is that the ACoC appears to suffer from the delusion that the process of change is the problem, not what it is changing into.

The Anglican Church of Canada is not obsessed with sex. At all.

Posted on by
4

Particularly not homosexual sex.

As Bishop John Chapman says:

It may be a hot-button topic in the mainstream media but the issue of human sexuality – including homosexuality – hardly saw the light of day at the gathering in England Feb. 24-26 of six African bishops and five Canadian bishops, including Bishop John Chapman. “We had an initial conversation on human sexuality on the first evening together and that was the last time we talked about it,” said the bishop in a recent Crosstalk interview.

It’s true that Bishop Michael Ingham has a web site dedicated to the subject and John Chapman hit the headlines of the Ottawa Citizen – but that was just a media plot to make him look as if he thinks about little else. The Anglican Church of Canada has a similar problem; this extensive Wikipedia article is clearly part of the same plot.

To show how far the enemies of the ACoC are prepared to go to make it look ridiculous, here is a remarkably lifelike simulacrum of Fred Hiltz describing how he went all the way to the UK to discuss unnatural sex with Rowan Williams. In spite of the patent absurdity of this hoax, it presents conclusive evidence that the concocters of this devious conspiracy have reached a worrying level of technical sophistication. You can see from this video that the counterfeit is almost as dull as the real thing; an astonishing achievement.

The Anglican Church of Canada tackles poverty

Posted on by
Reply

By sponsoring a film in which people love paying taxes and business is the villain. The reason for this sponsorship is made no less recondite by the fact that the ACoC is running out of money and is appealing to business to sponsor its forthcoming synod.

The most memorable scene in Poor No More, a documentary that premiered this week in Toronto, takes place on the shop floor of a large truck manufacturer in Sweden.

A female employee, talking while she works, says it’s “okay to pay taxes because our system takes care of all the people.” She explains that if she became sick or had an accident, she would get 80 per cent of her wages. Like all Swedes, she is entitled to subsidized child care, elder care, high-quality health care and 10 days of parental leave a year.

A delegation of Canadian visitors — host Mary Welsh and two Canadian workers trapped in insecure, low-wage jobs — listens in disbelief.

The trio moves outside to a Stockholm street. “I love paying taxes,” a passerby affirms.

It seems as if the Canadians have stepped into fantasyland.

That is what the filmmakers intend. “If we can’t imagine a world without poverty, we probably can’t get there,” says executive producer David Langille.

The documentary, a three-year effort, is Langille’s first foray into the world of filmmaking. He is a part-time university professor with an extensive network of contacts in the social justice movement.

Fifty sponsors — from the Society of Energy Professionals to the Anglican Church of Canada — paid for the $550,000 film.

The goal of the documentary is to break the barriers that prevent Canadians from acting to eliminate poverty.

The first is a belief that only a small minority cares. The second is a belief that the cause is futile. The third is burnout. After 25 years of lobbying, organizing, demonstrating and preaching, the poverty rate has barely changed.

This time, Langille and his colleagues want to send a message of hope: Poverty can be beaten, without bankrupting the national treasury or reducing the country’s standard of living.

The documentary is polished, interesting and well-paced. But it is one-sided. Every commentator in it — professors, authors, union leaders and heads of think-tanks — blames big business and its friends in government for turning Canada into a land of poverty amidst plenty.

Anglican Church of Canada busy ridding the world of nuclear weapons

Posted on by
1

Having failed to find the money needed to run its own synod, the ACoC has decided to tackle something easier:

Subject: Toward a World Free of Nuclear Weapons

Moved by: The Rev. Canon Dr. William E. Prentice, Diocese of Ottawa

Seconded by: The Rev. Dr. Linda Privitera, Diocese of Ottawa

Be it resolved that this General Synod:

Expresses its support for a world free of nuclear weapons, and asks the General Secretary to convey our position to the Government of Canada, requesting:

  1. from the Government information about Canadian activities to support nuclear disarmament, and
  2. from the Prime Minister a public affirmation of Canada’s commitment to a world free of nuclear weapons.

Many are rejoicing as the ACoC does its bit to disarm the West: