Rev. Eleanor Clitheroe pension increase denied

Posted on by
6

From the CBC:Add an Image

Ontario’s highest court has closed the door on a pension increase for fired Hydro One Inc. executive Eleanor Clitheroe.

Clitheroe sued Hydro One seeking to have her pension raised to $33,644.21 a month — slightly more than the average Hydro One pensioner gets annually.

The lawsuit was originally dismissed, but in appealing the suit to the Court of Appeal Clitheroe noted she worked 16-hour days and earned bonuses for her performance and is the only income earner for a family of four.

In a brief decision released Friday, the court dismissed the appeal saying Clitheroe had made the same arguments at trial and the court agreed with the trial judge’s reasons and conclusion.

Clitheroe’s pension is capped at $25,637.08 a month due to legislation passed by the government that limits executive salaries at the utility.

Clitheroe was dismissed in July, 2002 after weeks of controversy over executive salaries at the publicly owned transmission utility.

Although I am generally against the government interfering with a person’s negotiated pension settlement – and that is what has happened here – I can’t help wondering why, rather than spend a small fortune on lawsuits, Rev. Clitheroe didn’t simply adopt a philosophical, “you win some and you lose some” attitude. It isn’t that hard to live on $25,637.08 per month.

Rev. Clitheroe is now a part-time priest in the Diocese of Niagara; a paid part-time priest. Bishop Michael Bird has written a letter explaining Rev Clitheroe’s financial hardship. Bird points out that “as we are all aware legal matters can sometimes drag on for many years” – and he should know. He appears to be under the impression that Rev. Clitheroe is currently receiving no pension at all, which is, to say the least – odd:

We also understand that the legal matters have been very costly for her and her family, and we do not begrudge her right to seek a peaceful resolution and compensation through the justice system. She has the right to do so, just like all Canadians, and we respect that.

Ellie’s legal issues date back several years, to a time before she was ordained and joined our Diocese as a priest. Naturally, she will want to see those matters concluded, and as we are all aware legal matters can sometimes drag on for many years.

Ellie worked for over twenty‐five years in the private and public sector and received pension compensation for her work. She consistently took her pension with her as she moved from being a lawyer and banker, to deputy minister and then a CEO.

These pension matters have no impact on her compensation for her part time work in the Diocese. She does not currently receive and has not received a pension from Hydro One or the government. She has indicated to me that she hopes that she will receive a pension when she is 65, and that she wishes to use it wisely, in Christian stewardship in support of her family, the community and her church.

This letter is all part of Michael Bird’s Blueprint for Poverty Reduction.

Anglican conservatives: will sinners still be welcome?

Posted on by
1

This article also appears in the National Post:

I am a member of St. Hilda’s Anglican Church, the parish that was recently featured in the National Post article, “Oakville Anglican parish home of profound revolution.”

St. Hilda’s separation from the Anglican Church of Canada was as much about the fact that the Church is drifting away from a coherent belief in Christian basics – such as the Resurrection, Christ’s atoning sacrifice, and the Virgin Birth – as it was about blessing same-sex unions. In spite of this, what always gets the attention is the same-sex blessing issue, with the attendant suspicion that parishes that oppose same-sex blessings are packed with not just the routine run-of-the-mill church hypocrites, but homophobic hypocrites. At the very least, surely no gay person would be welcome in such a place.

Is being a pristinely antiseptic church where only wholesome families and saintly, celibate, straight singles could fit in – a kind of Stepford Church – an accurate picture of a parish like St. Hilda’s?

I hope not, or I will have to leave. I believe that, as William Temple former Archbishop of Canterbury said, “The church exists mainly for those who are not its members.” All parishes should concentrate on attracting people who are not Christians or churchgoers. Whether or not they are shacked up with someone – of the opposite or same sex – is immaterial. The hope, though, would be that their perspective and lives gradually change as they become followers of Christ in his Church.

That is very different from courting gays who are already in the church – or non-gays, come to that. I would much rather attend a church with a high percentage of un-churched gays who are honestly seeking to live according to the Gospel than one with a high percentage of straight cradle-Anglicans who are not. And I don’t think that this would necessarily be unappealing to a gay or straight non-Christian. To say, “we believe in trying to live according to Biblical principles, even though we all may fail to varying degrees” has, I suspect, a more honest ring than the note of desperation in, “come to our church and do what you want”.

St. Hilda’s has always attracted more than its fair share of single mothers, misfits, waifs, strays and assorted eccentrics – especially artists; the more the merrier. Many have passed through gaining sustenance along the way and some have made it their home. Sometimes it is chaotic: the pious have likened it to a circus. But unwelcoming? Never.

The people who gathered around Jesus were not all respectable: he was a friend to prostitutes, beggars and outcasts – sinners of every kind – and his friendship changed them.

Even though the most conspicuous reason cited for parishes leaving the Anglican Church of Canada is opposition to the blessing of same sex-unions, there is no desire on the part of these parishes to become aloof from the lost and broken – gay or straight. The one place that should always welcome all, including society’s misfits, is the Christian Church.

The Anglican Church of Canada continues its scorched earth policy

Posted on by
1

As it loses more and more people, the ACoC is consolidating parishes, selling empty buildings and laying off staff at head office just to stay solvent. Regrettably, this frugality does not extend to negotiating outside the courts with parishes that have left the ACoC. Rather, large sums of money are being paid to lawyers in order to seize buildings for which dioceses have little use – other than to sell – from congregations who are using them for their intended purpose: worship.

The latest salvo is being directed at the Ottawa churches, St. Alban’s and St. George’s; both left the Anglican Church of Canada for ANiC in 2008.

In 2008, the Centertown News published this:

Ross Moulton, executive archdeacon to Bishop John Chapman of the Anglican Diocese of Ottawa, said the break has brought sadness and sorrow to the Anglican community.

Moulton said it’s too early to tell whether St. Alban’s will be able to keep its church building…..

But Moulton said the Anglican Diocese of Ottawa is adamant about the wish to settle this property dispute in the most cordial manner possible.

“I think it is everybody’s hope that some amicable arrangement could be made,” said Moulton. “To get into long court battles, it consumes a lot of resources, time, and money. And at the end of the day, nobody wins.”

In spite of this welcome intrusion of common sense from Moulton in 2008, the lawsuits are now forging ahead, naming volunteer wardens in the suit – a vindictive, take no prisoners strategy that was also used in Niagara and New Westminster.

In Niagara a clumsy disinformation campaign was also launched to convince parishioners still in ACoC parishes that the lawsuits were instigated by the ANiC parishes. An acquaintance in a local Diocese of Niagara parish walked out of a service when a letter claiming this was read from the pulpit.

Now, as the Hairy Eyeball reports, a similar manoeuvre is being attempted in Ottawa:

Well, it seems that there are rumours circulating around the Diocese of Ottawa about the latest rounds of  lawsuits between the Anglican Church of Canada and ANiC parishes.  Specifically, there’s a rumour circulating that the latest lawsuits involving St. Alban’s Ottawa and St. George’s Ottawa were started by ANiC.  This is absolutely untrue.  The Diocese of Ottawa sued St. Alban’s, not the other way around.

The cliché of the month for the Anglican Church Of Canada is that it is becoming a “missional” church – the word was to be found in every second sentence at the recent Anglican Synod. The precise meaning of “missional” is unclear, but it must have something to do with trying to appeal to those who do not presently attend a church.

Perhaps “missional” means “join now, be sued later.”

The “We will throw them into the sea” aid flotilla

Posted on by
Reply

Here is some new video showing the occupants of the Turkish aid ship being whipped up into the kind of frenzy that every good aid worker needs to experience before delivering food.

From the Jerusalem Post:

New footage from the Mavi Marmara was released by the Foreign Ministry on Friday afternoon, this time showing IHH head Bülent Yildirim inciting to violence against Israeli commandos hours before the encounter that claimed the lives of nine Turkish passengers.

The slippery slope to real bacon

Posted on by
1

We all have our temptations: for some, today’s turkey titillation could become tomorrow’s bacon binging.

From the BBC:

A Coventry farmer has insisted he is reacting to demand from traders in trying to give Muslims a taste of pork by producing bacon-style rashers from halal-slaughtered turkeys.

Rod Adlington’s attempts to imitate the meat, which Muslims cannot eat because of their religion, has seen a Muslim scholar voice concerns that it could lead to people eating real bacon from pork.

Maulana Naveed Ashrafi, a Muslim scholar from Blackburn, said he was concerned as to where eating the turkey bacon rashers could lead to for other Muslims.

“It can ultimately lead to people who only eat halal food ending up eating the real bacon – bacon from pork,” he said.

I enjoy getting under someone’s skin

Posted on by
5

Particularly when it’s the skin of a person who revels in  this kind of extraordinary delirium:

I would have thought that the American Episcopalians who are attending the ECNA services already knew the hideous truth about Archbishop Akinola, but now I am not so sure. It is hard for me to believe that the Archbishop of Canterbury actually knows the details about the career of this terrible, evil man. How could he not know that this man is accused of ordering the rape and murder of hundreds, if not thousands of innocent Muslim victims–hacking children to pieces, raping pregnant women, burning bodies in the streets?

The corybantic denunciations don’t stop there: in the fevered imagination of this contributor to the Tucson Liberal Christian Examiner (obviously there is at least one liberal in Tucson), yours truly has become plural; perhaps, in her exasperation the author is seeing double:

and they describe me as erroneous here: www.anglicansamizdat.net/wordpress/. I wonder when the ECNA will decide to do research and inform themselves–or have they done it already, but they think that rape, murder and torture of Muslims is fine with them, as well as persecuting homosexuals.

Rather, if you read this story, the author concludes with a paragraph describing how praiseworthy Archbishop Akinola is.

To make sure I was under no illusions about the sense of welcoming inclusion I could reasonably expect to find in the excitable Margot’s version of church, she sent me an email:

Thanks for the accurate and factual assessment of my position. Akinola is a maniac; the ACNA is based on no doctrinal issue at all. ACNA stands for bigotry in the Anglican Communion, that’s my line. Has Akinola become your prelate yet? Good riddance to you!

That cheered me up for the entire day.

Covering up in the UK: the Camera Burka

Posted on by
2

From the BBC:

Bags are to be put over scores of surveillance cameras in parts of Birmingham with large Muslim populations, after local objections.

Safer Birmingham Partnerships (SBP) said 216 cameras were put up, including hidden ones, mainly in the Washwood Heath and Sparkbrook districts.

The cameras were financed through a counter-terrorism fund, but the SBP said they would tackle all crime.

This is the new approach to combating terrorism. Psychological warfare: confuse potential terrorists by ignoring them, confident that they will become so befuddled that they will all spontaneously give themselves up.

Mitregate

Posted on by
6

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori was not allowed to wear her pointy hat when celebrating communion in Southwark Cathedral during her recent trip to Add an Imagethe UK. This, apparently, is because the Church of England does not allow women to be bishops. The reaction of Archbishop Jefferts-Schori was predictably humble and demure as she accepted the ruling from the Archbishop of Canterbury:

‘The Most Rev Katharine Jefferts Schori has described as “nonsense” and “bizarre” the edict from the Archbishop of Canterbury that forced her to hold her episcopal hat when she preached and presided at Holy Communion this week.’

I attended a press conference with  Bishop Jefferts-Schori when when she was in Canada for the ACoC general synod. When I asked her whether the spectacle of all the lawsuits that TEC is prosecuting furthers the desire of TEC to be a “missional” church, her response was measured, but in her demeanour, she bristled. She bristles well – even more so when she is mitreless.

Bishop Michael Bird responds to the “Gaining Respect” article

Posted on by
5

The original article is here, and Bishop Bird’s response is in the Letters section of today’s National Post and on Holy Post:

Re: Gaining Respect; St. Hilda’s Parish Is No Longer An Outpost Of Orthodoxy But A More Acceptable Manifestation Of Anglican Faith, Charles Lewis, June 12.

After reading this article I am left asking the question: What criteria did reporter Charles Lewis use in declaring a small group of conservative Christians a “religious revolution”? What he reported on is, in fact, a process of maturation within the world-wide Anglican Communion. It is a lot like adolescence, as people jostle for position in the midst of a debate. Dioceses, like the one I lead, advocate for the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of our Church.

It’s hard to see exactly what point Michael Bird is making here: is he saying that it has taken 2000 years for the Christian Church to reach adolescence, that acts explicitly forbidden in the Bible become acceptable once those engaged in them have “matured”? It seems incoceivable that anyone could really be daft enough to honestly believe this; but, then, Bird does have some pretty strange ideas – see below.

For many of us, the kind of inclusion that Rev. Paul Charbonneau [who opposes same-sex unions, and who led St. Hilda’s Church out of the Anglican Church of Canada] speaks of is not acceptable.

The kind of inclusion that Rev. Paul Charbonneau believes is uncannily similar to the inclusion God advocates: everyone is welcome, but not all activities are equally good or beneficial to those who indulge in them. This is a pretty basic point: man is sinful and the church’s job is not to condone sin but help people turn away from it. Surely that should not be beyond the grasp of a bishop?

What is so ironic is that he is part of a small splinter group that represents less than 2% of Anglicans in North America. They would have us return to a way of thinking that is much closer to the last Reformation that began in the 15th century, as opposed to moving us toward a new Reformation.

The purpose of a Reformation is to return the church to orthodox Christian belief and discard the man-made accretions that tend to accumulate in the institutional church. The Diocese of Niagara is quickly becoming nothing but man-made accretions.

At the heart of our exciting vision for the Diocese of Niagara is a call for prophetic social justice making, a continuous culture of innovation and a strong desire to engage with the people of this generation and walk with them in their search for God and their desire to change the world.

This ends up being little more than leftist political activism.

As Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu has stated: “God just wants us to love each other.” Many, however, say that some kinds of love are better than others. But whether a man loves a woman or another man, or a woman loves a man or another woman, to God it is all love, and God smiles whenever we recognize our need for one another.

I don’t remember God’s injunction for us to love one another including optional genital activity: I must have missed those verses in the Bible.

I will leave it to your readers to decide what a religious revolution really looks like in this day and age.

I’ve decided.

Bishop Michael Bird, Anglican Diocese of Niagara, Hamilton, Ont.