|
By Jim Coggins
THE ANGLICAN CHURCH is going through a divorce, and the secular courts
need to assign custody of the church property even if they cannot take
sides on the theological arguments that led to the divorce, four Anglican
parishes argued in a BC
Supreme Court case that concluded last week.
The parishes of St. Matthew's (Abbotsford), St. Matthias and St. Luke's
(Vancouver), St. John's Shaughnessy (Vancouver) and Church of the Good
Shepherd (Vancouver) are suing the Diocese of New Westminster over the
ownership of the buildings in which they meet.
The essence of their case revolves around 'trust' law, said Cheryl Chang,
chancellor for the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC). The assets of a
church or other charity are never owned by persons or even institutions,
she said, but are held 'in trust' for the purposes for which the church
was established.
In this case, the 'Solemn Declaration' made by the founders of the
Anglican Church of Canada (ACC) committed the church to the historic
beliefs of Anglicanism, including the authority of scripture, and to
remaining "in full communion with the Church of England throughout the
world." The four parishes contend that the diocese has changed its
doctrine while the parishes have remained true to historic Anglicanism,
said Chang, and this could mean that the parishes have the right to all
the buildings in the parish.
However, that is not what the parishes are asking for. Rather, they are
asking the court to recognize that there is a significant theological
division within Anglicanism and that what is happening is not the
"departure" of a few dissidents, but a "divorce" -- and, as in any
divorce, they contend that there should be a fair division of the assets.
Technically, the parish case rests on a legal principle. When it becomes
"impossible or impractical" for a trust to be operated in accordance with
its original terms, the courts have the authority to order that the trust
be operated in a way that is "close to" the original purpose.
The parishes argued that the theological division is such that the trust
cannot be carried out by a united diocese as originally intended, and
therefore the court should order it to be carried out in a way that is
close to the original intent -- which would allow the parishes that leave
the ACC to keep their buildings and operate as Anglican parishes under a
different diocese.
For its part, the Diocese of New Westminster argued that the 'Solemn
Declaration' has no legal standing and therefore there is no trust. The
courts should not get involved in judging theological issues, argued the
diocese, and as long as a charitable institution follows its own rules in
changing its theology, the courts should not intervene.
This is where the case becomes precedent-setting, Chang said -- not just
for the Anglican Church, but for other churches as well. "If the ACC can
change doctrine and kick out anyone who doesn't agree with them, then any
church can do the same thing," she said, adding that trust law clearly
defends "faithful minorities" against majorities taking a charitable trust
in a new direction.
In the end, the case may turn on whether the court determines that the
four parishes are still Anglican. By the nature of a trust, Chang said,
the four parishes cannot take the parish properties with them to join
another denomination or religion. They can claim a right to the buildings
only because they remain Anglican parishes.
The four parishes voted in 2008 to leave the diocese and the ACC and be
part of the ANiC under the jurisdiction of Gregory Venables, the
Archbishop of the Southern Cone (South America). They are among 100,000
Anglicans who have left the ACC and the Episcopal Church in the US over
the blessing of same-sex couples and other theological issues.
The diocese argued in court that those who left the diocese are not
Anglicans, because the ACC is the only Anglican body in Canada recognized
by the 'instruments of unity' of the worldwide Anglican communion: the
Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference (a gathering of bishops
held every 10 years), the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates
Council (a gathering of the heads of the 38 national Anglican churches
from around the world).
However, Venables said one of the difficulties is that none of the
'instruments of unity' seems to have the authority to decide who is and
who is not part of the Anglican communion.
He noted that a majority of the communion, perhaps 70 to 80 percent of
Anglicans worldwide, agree with the theological conservatives, who are a
minority in Canada. "Far from being dissidents, these people are classic
Anglicans," said Venables.
Continue article >>
|
Venables said that on behalf of the worldwide majority, he agreed to
provide "a holding place" to allow conservative Anglicans from North
America to remain part of the worldwide communion, until a permanent
solution can be found. He added that he has had a communication from the
Archbishop of Canterbury assuring him that those North American bishops
who have come under his authority remain "in communion." Otherwise, he
said, there would have been no point in offering oversight.
The beginnings of a more permanent solution will be put into place in late
June when various groups that have left the ACC and the Episcopal Church
will meet to found a new Anglican province, the Anglican Church of North
America (ACNA). However, because of the lack of a central Anglican
authority, it may take years before if it is known whether the ACNA will
be accepted as an Anglican province. "Anglicanism makes a tortoise look
like a hare," quipped Venables.
The diocese has consistently referred to the plaintiffs in the case as "a
few individuals." However, Chang noted that the four parishes that left
the Diocese of New Westminster, along with other parishes that left
earlier, represent well over a quarter of the diocese's active members.
George Cadman, chancellor for the diocese, told CC.com that the diocese
has "not sued anybody," and is merely responding to litigation brought by
"a group of individuals" who want to leave the diocese and take church
property with them. Cadman also said the diocese has never asked anyone to
leave the diocese except the clergy from the four parishes who
"voluntarily relinquished their orders" in the ACC.
However, he also said that the diocese asked the trustees of two of those
parishes to bar the clergy from the parish pulpits. When the trustees
refused, the diocese invoked its Canon 15 to replace the trustees with new trustees -- who
would in effect take control of the parish buildings and bank accounts in
the name of the diocese.
According to Chang, it was this action that led the trustees and clergy of
the parishes to launch their legal action.
Cadman said the diocese hopes the congregations will stay; but if they
decide to follow the clergy out of the diocese, "that is their choice."
The case finished after using all but one day of the three weeks allotted
to it. It could have taken months, but the lawyers agreed to submit the
bulk of the evidence in written form. This left the judge with about a
metre of documents to plow through before he renders his decision,
expected about late fall. That may not be the end, because any decision
could be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The office of the Archbishop of Canterbury declined an opportunity to
comment on the case. Similarly, Paul Fehely, principal secretary to ACC
primate Fred Hiltz, said Hiltz would not comment on the case. While he is
"fully supportive of the diocese," he said it is a matter for the diocese
and parishes to decide and "it would be a mistake for us to intervene."
Venables was not so reticent. "It is so sad when the church gets to the
place where it is arguing publicly," he said. "What's so sad is the
inability to sit down and talk to one another" -- even if, in the end,
people agree to disagree.
Venables said he is also disturbed by the attitude sometimes presented
that belief is unimportant and that "what matters is the money." It is
hard for people to leave behind church buildings that their parents built,
and where their grandparents are buried, he said.
"It would be a tragedy if they lost those beautiful buildings, but it
wouldn't be the end of the church," he added. "Buildings are not the
church. What matters is a relationship with God. Believers are the
church."
Related stories:
Anglicans
ponder same-sex protocols Anglican Church of Canada parishes
in Waterloo Region should soon be able to hold services to celebrate the
relationships of gay parishioners, but they won't be blessing same-sex
marriages for at least another year -- if ever. During his opening
statement to more than 500 delegates at the annual synod (governance
meeting) for the Diocese of Huron, Rt. Rev. Robert Bennett, diocesan
bishop, said he is taking a cautious but pastoral approach. The
Record, May 29
It's
all church property -- but which church? Millions of dollars of
real estate is at stake in a lawsuit that pits 'dissident' congregations
against the Anglican Church of Canada Douglas
Todd, Vancouver Sun, June 3
What
is "orthodox" Christianity? The crowd attending the B.C.
Supreme Court trial in which four dissident Anglican parishes are claiming
ownership of the multi-million-dollar places in which they worship has
received some entertaining lessons in the meaning of "orthodox." . . .
There was a surprise in store, however, when Regent College professor John
Stackhouse, an evangelical theologian called as an expert witness by the
conservatives, was asked what he believed was the definition of
"orthodox." Douglas Todd, The Search, Vancouver Sun, June 4
June 18/2009
|