The Diocese of Toronto has recognised that the Anglican Church of Canada is in trouble:
The Anglican Church of Canada has been experiencing decline in its membership for some time. A report to its House of Bishops in 2005 showed that between 1961 and 2001, Anglican parish membership dropped from 1.36 million to 642,000, a decline of 53 per cent. The decline was quickening. Membership fell by 13% between 1981 and 1991 and by a further 20% from 1991 to 2001. The report
warned the House that the Anglican Church was currently losing 2% of its members per year and that ‘if you take that rate of decline and draw a line in the graph, there’ll be only one person left in the Anglican Church of Canada by 2061. The Church is in crisis. We can’t carry on like its business as usual.’……
The diocese of Toronto faces a stark reality: grow or die.
It is about to adopt the same solution as the Diocese of BC:
A report from the diocese of British Columbia, which faces similar issues to Toronto and is also seeking to stimulate new growth, notes that: ‘The Achilles heel of organizational transformation is resource allocation’ and so ‘the Diocesan Council will need to demonstrate fierce resolve if the Diocese is to shift financial resources from marginal activities to mission-critical initiatives’.
The italicised section is easily recognised for what it is: a euphemism for closing marginal parishes, selling the buildings and using the money to prop up more promising – or diocesan compliant – specimens. As this admits:
There has been a general welcome within the diocese for the sustainable and strategic policy. The diocese has been applauded for finally doing something about the subsidy of declining parishes and there was widespread acceptance that ‘growth requires pruning’.
Perhaps foreseeing a future exodus to more orthodox pastures, the diocese has pronounced by fiat:
° All church property in the diocese is held for the purposes of the whole Church, irrespective of the name of the registered owner, and the proceeds realized from any sale or other disposition of surplus property or any land by any parish are to be shared with the diocese for the purposes of the Church.
° On disestablishment of a parish, all proceeds are designated as diocesan share.
° It is inappropriate to use proceeds for ongoing operating expenses of the diocese.
° The diocesan share of any sales proceeds shall be placed in the Ministry Allocation Fund.
So, no matter what the deeds say, the diocese is laying claim to building ownership.
My favourite part is:
The conclusion is that self-funding Churches are essential. St Paul was self-funding and the primitive Churches were largely financially independent.
Who could argue with that? Bishops, you had better take some tent-making classes.
Just as in any secular enterprise, there is a great deal of tergiversation about “mission”, but entirely absent from the document is any recognition of the importance of bringing people to salvation and reconciliation to God the Father through Christ: it is all about surviving as an institution – somehow – anyhow.
Is a church that is so preoccupied with its own welfare worth preserving?
no
David
The strategic and sustainable ministry policy that you refer to has been in place in the DoT since 2004. It is a prudent and effective vehicle for ensuring that the proceeds from the sale of surplus property are reinvested in ministry.
You are not shedding new light on the situation and your effort to sensationalize the actual experience is ridiculous.
I find the policy as implemented by the DoT an exercise in the good stewardship of God’s abundant gifts.
DoT? My first thought was Department of Transportaion. I know, foolish of me. But I was still able to laugh at myself for it.
On another note:
When the day comes that St. James Cathedral in downtown Toronto is no longer self financing, will it be sold? The land it sits on must be worth millions!
But of course, if the ACoC where to actually do the job that Jesus Christ gave all of us in the Great Commission there should never be any need to close so much as one Parish! Especially when demographics change. An influx of the unchurched should be seen as a great opportunity for us to reach out and encourage new converts, and a resultant increase in Church membership. But perhaps the ACoC is afraid that this might upset the muslims.
Dept of Transportation was the first thought that came to my mind too.
If all we’re doing is maintaining the institution instead of preaching Jesus – then we should all pack up and go home. The institution won’t save anyone – and neither will any priest for that matter – only Jesus.
since it has now gone to the dogs why bother?
Gawk – since ANiC is an institution too – – –
I am sure the ACoC did not start out the way is has now become.
I think this is a worrisome sign. Organizations do this. They get to a point where they forget their original mandate and focus instead on simply self preservation. I think it almost always predicts the meaningful end of that organization. It’s also strange that there is no mention of why membership is declining. Maybe that comes in other church documents but it would seem that an understanding of why this is happening and whether that can be turned around should be the issue that demands our attention.
– But remember, many people (eg. in the MSM) believe (or at least proclaim) that “Liberal” churches are healthy and strong, they are the majority, growing, moving, etc. The-cold-water-in-the face reality that this site would give them is something they are blind to; but truth flourishes, error rots.