Quite the graphic.

There exist in the Anglican Church, at least in North American, some very deep, fundamental problems that have been pervasive for some time. Among them are:

1. Anglicans in the pew do not know their Bible. They rarely read their Bibles or take them to church services. I know, as I was one of them for years, until I began studying with Bible Study Fellowship International. It is shameful that very few Anglicans can even find their way around the Bible or know what it says exactly. The leaders and shepherds of the church have failed in this regard to teach the Scriptures to the congregants; therefore, they need to encourage Biblical knowledge and study.

Read it all.

“Today we’re in a very different place and today is a day of opportunity,” Bishop MacDonald told First Nations, Metis and Inuit Anglicans gathered at the 6th Indigenous Sacred Circle here.

While some might predict the collapse of the church in indigenous communities across Canada, said Bishop MacDonald, “I would like to predict that we’re going to see great things happen.”

History has shown that the greatest revival of the church in other parts of the world took place when missionaries left and native congregations took up the responsibilities of being church, Bishop MacDonald said in his keynote speech. He noted that American and European missionaries predicted the “total collapse” of churches in Asia and Africa when they left in the 70s due to lack of funds. What took place instead, he said, was “the greatest revival and greatest turning to Christ in any period since the time of the apostles.”

Read it all.

The Anglican Church of Canada’s top aboriginal bishop says formally renouncing the Doctrine of Discovery ”” the historic legal claim underlying the conquest of the New World by Anglo-Italian sailor John Cabot and other early European explorers ”” “is a matter of basic justice” for the First Nations dispossessed by the arbitrary regal pronouncement.

National Indigenous Bishop Mark MacDonald, a U.S.-born cleric who was trained in Canada before becoming the Anglican Church’s principal voice on native issues in 2007, was responding to news the U.S. arm of the church has renounced the doctrine and asked Queen Elizabeth ”” the titular head of the global Anglican community ”” to “disavow and repudiate” it publicly.

Read it all.

For the first time in P.E.I., a married man was to be ordained as a Roman Catholic priest on Sunday.

Martin Carter, 63, said the Pope occasionally grants special permission for married men to become priests in cases where they’ve converted from other Christian churches.

The former Anglican clergyman said the church has made provisions for some cases, but he doesn’t anticipate a shift in the traditional approach to priests marrying.

“Not that there is anything wrong with marriage, it’s a status of life, but for the work of the church, the church becomes your bride in a sense,” he said.

Read it all.

The polls by the Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life provided crucial background to why North American Anglicans have been among those leading the cause for homosexual rights — and why they’re at loggerheads with evangelicals. The Pew Forum polls also helped explain the headline-making vote last week by a solid majority of Episcopalians (as Anglicans are known in the U.S.) to formally allow the ordination of homosexuals.

The issue had been disturbing some of the world’s 75 million Anglicans since 2003, when openly gay cleric Gene Robinson was elected the Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire.

The Pew Forum found seven out of 10 U.S. Episcopalians/Anglicans believe society should accept homosexuality as a way of life.

That compares to only 50 per cent support among the general U.S. population.

Read it all.

Gay and lesbian couples in Niagara will soon be able to have their marriages blessed by Anglican priests, under a new rite introduced by Bishop Michael Bird, head of the Niagara diocese.

“The short answer is we believe God is calling us to move in this direction. There’s a strong sense of that across the diocese.” Bird said in an interview about the Niagara Rite of Blessing.

The Niagara diocese will be the second in Canada where a bishop has allowed parish priests to perform ceremonies blessing the marriages of same-sex couples who are already in a civil union. The New Westminster diocese in British Columbia was the first.

Read it all.

I honestly cannot remember a time in my life in the Episcopal Church where I have read more mistakes in less time than in the last two to three weeks. Please do not believe everything you read and make sure to fact check and research material, a point we have stressed time and again on this blog.

A case in point is this recent piece by Diana Butler Bass. I enjoyed Dr. Bass’ Standing Against the Whirlwind : Evangelical Episcopalians in Nineteenth-Century America which was well written and researched (and is quite relevant to our present time by the way), and so was baffled to see such a poorly written piece by her on Beliefnet.

The relevant section of her article for our purposes reads this way:

The Anglican Church of North America, the umbrella group for conservative Episcopalians who have left their denomination over women’s ordination and full inclusion of gay and lesbian persons, has long claimed over 100,000 members. Recently, they admitted that only 69,000 persons in 650 churches in the USA and Canada have joined their association. There are 2.2 million Episcopalians in the United States and approximately 1 million in Canada. Thus, the conservative group–the one that has garnered so much media attention in recent years is a very small percentage of the entire North American Anglican membership–some 2% of the total. And with their rigid opposition to women’s ordination, it is hard to imagine that this group will find much appeal with young North Americans.

Now for the record, I am not in ACNA. Certainly her description of the reason for the departure of ACNA is not one ACNA would agree with just for starters. It is over issues of Christology, marriage, the authority and interpretation of Scripture, the nature of the church, and the standards of Christian leadership that this controversy is fundamentally about.

According to ACNA’s own website, ACNA still claims 100, 000 members. That claim has not changed. The reference to the 69,000 number is for Average Sunday attendance: according to the ACNA site ACNA claims “average Sunday attendance of 69,197 (as of spring 2009)” [and there is a even more about ACNA numbers here]. So follow along. Dr. Bass suggests the claim of membership in ACNA has changed. It hasn’t. Then she suggests ACNA is claiming a number for membership which ACNA is claiming for average Sunday attendance. This is elementary category confusion. As anyone in parish ministry knows membership and Sunday morning attendance are very different.

Having made all these errors, Dr. Bass then compares the wrong category of numbers for ACNA and TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada:

There are 2.2 million Episcopalians in the United States and approximately 1 million in Canada. Thus, the conservative group–the one that has garnered so much media attention in recent years is a very small percentage of the entire North American Anglican membership–some 2% of the total.

Do you see how she got the 2% figure? She took the roughly 69,000 figure, which is for Average Sunday attendance, and compared it to the membership figures for TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada. But this is comparing apples to oranges. The Episcopal Church has not been using average Sunday attendance figures for all that long, but you may know that whereas in the 2004 tables TEC claimed ASA of 833,672, by the 2009 tables that number is down to 768,476.

The 1 million number Dr. Bass gives for the Anglican Church of Canada membership is way off. One of the recent numbers I found was 641,845, but of course, this is again membership not Sunday morning attendance. I would honestly be surprised if average Sunday attendance in the Anglican Church of Canada is more than 200,000 actually (many of you know I lived and worshipped in Canada for two years), but let’s use 300,000 for our purposes.

Now, if you use these figures, and compare apples to apples, the ASA of ACNA is approximately 6.5% of the ASA of TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada combined, more than three times the percentage total Dr. Bass gives.

You would think given the large number of errors that I would be finished. But no. She continues:

And with their rigid opposition to women’s ordination, it is hard to imagine that this group will find much appeal with young North Americans.

Well, this would come as news to my friend Mary Hays, an ordained woman quite involved in ACNA, to pick just one example. ACNA is trying to protect two perspectives on women’s ordination, as anyone in the movement itself could have told Dr. Bass if she had asked.

What an embarrassing effort Dr. Bass has given us in this article. I sincerely hope she will improve in the future–and please, do not believe everything you read–KSH.

The decision by the diocese of Niagara to offer same-sex blessings has drawn mixed reactions from Anglicans in Canada.

Similarly, backlash over the recent decision by the Episcopal Church (TEC) to affirm the openness of “any ordained ministry” to gay and lesbian people and to develop more liturgical resources for same-sex blessings reflects the continuing deep divide over sexuality in the Anglican Communion.

“As a bishop, I cannot recognize the legitimacy of what Niagara is doing,” said Bishop Bill Anderson of the diocese of Caledonia. “I sadly conclude that Niagara has chosen to walk apart, and is therefore in a state of impaired communion.”

Read it all.

The Niagara Rite is intended for the voluntary use of priests who wish to offer a sacrament of blessing regardless of the gender of the civilly married persons who wish to receive the blessing of the church and wish to affirm their life commitment to each other before God in the community of the church.

As such it does not imply nor is it intended to suggest that those who do or do not make use of this rite are excluded from the economy of God’s salvation. The rite is a means for the church to extend affirmation, support, and commitment to those who present themselves seeking a sign of God’s love in response to the love and commitment they express for each other and have already affirmed in a civil ceremony.

Read it all.

A well-respected scholar and theologian is the Anglican Church of Canada’s Bishop of the Diocese of Algoma.

An overflowing congregation in Sault Ste. Marie welcomed Stephen Gregory Weed Andrews as its 10th bishop Monday at a ceremony at St. Luke’s Cathedral.

In addition to 11 of Ontario’s bishops and more from across Canada, the head, or primate, of the church, Fred Hiltz, attended and spoke of Bishop Andrews’ many assets.

“He has a very keen academic mind, and is a very skilled writer and speaker, particularly in the area of New Testament,” said Hiltz at a post-ceremony gathering at the Canadian Bushplane Heritage Centre.

Read it all.

Dr. Stephen Gregory Weed Andrews will be consecreated as the 10th bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Algoma on Monday.

The Consecration Service will take place at St. Luke’s Cathedral in Sault Ste. Marie beginning at 1 p. m.

Bishops from across Canada, as well as lay and clergy representatives from the Diocese of Algoma will attend.

Read it all.

To reiterate my on view of the nature of the church’s blessing, there is a kind of “test” that needs to be m[ad]e, which resolves around answering positively the following kinds of questions:

* Does God “do it”, and does it accord with God’s being and character and will?
* Is it in conformance with creative life?
* Is it obedient according to the common Christian understanding of divine command?

The human blessing of a marriage, understood traditionally, according to this scheme is rather obviously not only congruent but almost necessary. If we take the very language of blessing in the OT as we saw it, the notion of divine blessing is in fact essentially bound to the act of God’s creating human beings as male and female and ordering their existence procreatively within the earth. “And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.” (Gen 1:28). And when, subsequently, we are given the shape of this creative ordering, we are told: “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24). The fact that someone ”“ a priest, the church ”“ “blesses” this reality is but the human reflection of something truly already present. “All your works praise you, O Lord”: one could look at a marriage service as this kind of inevitable praise, “ascribing” to the Lord the honor due to His own work.

The contested issue with same-sex coupling is: is this in fact the “work” of the Lord? If our blessing of something “displays” what God has already more fundamentally enacted in His creative purposes, how would one know, thereby to “bless” it? The question, obviously, has got to get way beyond the silly claims that “the Church blesses all kinds of things ”“ fox hunts and submarines ”“ why not this?” Because, as we have seen, the Church ought not to bless all things, if in fact some things are not aspects of the creative purposes of God’s life-giving and life-extending character and will and do not accord with God’s “command”. If the Church does this, she becomes like the false prophets, trading in lies and ultimately engaging the deep “rebellion” against God: divine blessing and curse are humanly and woefully reversed.

And in this light, I believe that the issue of blessing same-sex unions cannot be construed in terms of whether this is a moral or a doctrinal issue. The distinction between the two, while it may have some canonical bearings within the Church’s decision-making process, has no theological rationale: there is no clear difference, Scripturally speaking, between “moral” and “doctrinal” reality, whether in the OT or NT as a whole.

Read it all.

Supreme Court of British Columbia hearings have concluded in a case that will decide whether the Anglican diocese of New Westminister or parishes that have split away from the Anglican Church of Canada own disputed church buildings and resources. Judge Stephen Kelleher reserved his judgment and did not say when he might announce a decision.

Two lawsuits were filed against the diocese of New Westminster and its bishop, Michael Ingham, by clergy who cut ties with the Anglican Church of Canada and individuals who say they are the lawful trustees of church properties and resources for several congregations that also voted to leave the church. Other hearings have resulted in decisions about interim possession and sharing of Anglican church buildings in British Columbia as well as in Ontario, but this trial will be the first in Canada to rule on which side owns the buildings and resources.

Read it all.

By a vote closer than expected, 142 to 123, Diocesan Synod decided to continue to affirm its decision in 2005 to ask the bishop to impose a moratorium on allowing additional parishes to have the rite performed in their churches.

The moratorium on allowing additional parishes to use the rite came as the national General Synod was considering the issue, and the Windsor Report, done by a group appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, had called for a moratorium on all such public rites.

Read it carefully and read it all.

[George Macintosh] said he didn’t think it was necessary for Mr. Justice Kelleher to determine the status of ANiC’s priests and bishops, except that, in his view, Bishop Harvey and Bishop Ferris and the priests are “very far from the worldwide Anglican Communion”. He quoted from the 2007 statement of the Council of General Synod which denied the legitimacy of the actions of the Southern Cone. He said a letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury to the bishop of Brandon in February 2008, said he could not “support or sanction” cross border interventions and he only recognized “one ecclesial body in Canada”.

He said there was no canon of any body that permitted Bishop Venables to consecrate Bishop Harvey outside the Southern Cone and there is no jurisdiction for this to occur. “It is without precedent in the history of the Anglican world. I would submit the ACoC was correct when it called it invalid”, he said. He said Bishop Harvey was not invited to the Lambeth Conference in 2008 when every other bishop from Canada was invited and received communion from the Archbishop of Canterbury. He noted that Archbishop Venables did not receive communion at Lambeth 2008 and said the evidence did not clarify whether the Archbishop of Canterbury refused to give communion to him, or whether it was his decision to refuse it.

Read it all.

In general, the four dissident Anglican congregations argue in their 44-page submission that B.C.’s civil court should give them the right to continue worshipping in the Anglican buildings because they are remaining in “communion” with the wider Anglican church.

In the end, Justice Kelleher is being asked to rule on a moral, religious and ecclesiastical dispute that has for several decades drawn much emotional energy from both conservative and liberal Anglicans.

Read it all.

A three-week trial is underway in Vancouver that will determine who gets the keys to St. Matthew’s Anglican Church in Abbotsford ”“ the Diocese of New Westminster, or the local congregation.

In February 2008 the church voted ”“ by a majority of 186 to four ”“ to break away from the Anglican Church of Canada over the issue of same-sex blessings.

Linda Seale of Abbotsford is a St. Matthew’s trustee, and was the only local person to testify.

Read it all.

Bishop Michael Ingham told the BC Supreme Court on Monday, June 1, that he knew of several Anglican dioceses where same sex unions were being blessed, long before the Diocesan Synod of New Westminster asked him to issue a rite of blessing in 2002.

It was happening informally, he said, in several Dioceses of the Episcopal Church in the US (a member of the Anglican Communion). He named Rochester, NY, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Delaware, and Boston, as places where same sex blessings took place, as well as in England.

But the bishop was opposed to these blessings, he told Mr. Justice Stephen Kelleher, “I wasn’t in favour of unofficial blessings taking place.” He told his priests not to conduct them, although some conservative priests would not oppose blessings done informally””and one even suggested to him this was a way to resolve the blessing issue.

“I felt the blessing should be public if it is right. If it is not the right thing to do, it should not be done at all.”

Read it all.

Counsel for the parishes, Geoff Cowper, QC, showed a screen shot of the ACoC website describing Anglican Identity which lists the Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, the Articles of Religion, and the Solemn Declaration of 1893 (see: www.anglican.ca). Bishop Ingham agreed there were no references to any canons, but claimed these are only resources.

He agreed with Mr Cowper on the following statements:
Ӣ The office of the bishop is to have regard to the unity of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
”¢ The “unity of the church” includes the church beyond the boundaries of Canada.
Ӣ Generally, the structure is for the purpose of advancing the faith.
Ӣ Faith and order are equally important.

He would not agree that there is a “state of teaching” in the Anglican Communion, although he acknowledged his quote in a December 2003 interview in Maclean’s magazine where he said “[t]he official teaching of the Church everywhere, so far as I know, is that homosexual acts are sinful”. He responded “that was the teaching of some churches”.

He admitted that when he was a candidate for bishop, he made it known he would abide by the HOB guidelines until they were changed, and that to this day, the HOB has not changed it policy. In 1994, he wrote a memorandum saying “”¦I do not believe bishops have the right to act unilaterally”¦ I will be governed by these guidelines”¦ (but) I will continue to speak against them.” He said “the process of changing my mind took several years.”

Read it carefully and read it all.

We have to admit that evangelism is not our greatest gift. I say that because we have at least two situations where we have not been successful in evangelizing neighbourhoods and have rented space to other Christian fellowship groups who have gone on to do an amazing job and have quite large, healthy and vibrant congregations. Instead of thinking of the reasons why we didn’t manage it – there is no blame here – let’s find out how we could be more successful in the future. Don’t get me wrong, I am very pleased that through these other communities people have come to Christ, but I refuse to believe that we can’t be just as successful in our mission to make disciples.

Our proclamation is rooted in Christ where we find the power of life and change. Are we trying to keep Christ locked inside our churches? 2 Corinthians 5:17, So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! Do we consider ourselves new creations in Christ?

It is a risky business. I was talking to a young adult who has left the Anglican church about two weeks ago. He said that he liked the church but that he really didn’t know what we were about, so when he wanted answers and direction he felt lost. I was sad that he had not found the people to answer his questions. I have invited him to keep talking to me ”“ I don’t know if he will take me up on the offer but whether I have the answers or not I am called by my own baptismal promises to offer to talk.

In order to proclaim the gospel ”“ we need to know the gospel, to study it, to live it ”“all of it not just the parts we like the best or the parts that further our plans. We need an incredibly deep understanding of scripture. In fact, we need to wrestle with the scriptures ”“ it is meant to be work.

—The Rt. Rev. Jane Alexander, Bishop of Edmonton, Canada

Mr Macintosh highlighted the fact that the ACoC remains in communion with the see of Canterbury and continues to participate in the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) and the Primates meetings. In contrast, he said, Bishop Harvey was not invited to Lambeth and ANiC and ACNA are not provinces of the Communion, nor members of the ACC. He also relies upon the fact that the Archbishop of Canterbury said his office only recognizes one ecclesial body in Canada, that being the ACoC.

There was much emphasis on the fact that, within the Communion, there is only one province or diocese in a geographic location and that jurisdictions only overlap where there is consent.

He claimed that provincial autonomy, rather than interdependence, is a fundamental characteristic of Anglicanism and that each province is supposed to respect every other province’s autonomy.

He emphasized that General Synod has jurisdiction over the definition of doctrine in the Church, and has used this power to effect many controversial changes (eg. new hymn book, re-marriage of divorced people, women’s ordination and consecration). He did not refer to the Solemn Declaration, except to say that it was referred to by the Plaintiffs (ANiC parishes).

Read the whole piece.

Tonight you have another opportunity for a similar discussion, not leading to a vote but leading to an opportunity to give advice and feedback. The College of Bishops met together in January at our annual retreat, and just before we began that retreat, we decided that we needed to sit down together and talk out what it might mean in the Diocese of Toronto to exercise generous pastoral care which the House of Bishops of the Canadian church had set as guidelines for the life of the Anglican Church of Canada. Having been together at Lambeth, having engaged in conversations with the House of Bishops in the Canadian church, and having had partnerships with various places across the world, we had a full, frank conversation and discovered that we had a whole lot more consensus than we originally thought.

Part of that consensus was that the way forward at this time, when there is no consensus within the life of the church, was not to engage in a legislative vote that sets policy, that enshrines things in legislation, but rather thatwe needed to recognize that in this period of time as we engage in a period of gracious restraint, when it is quite clear in the teaching of the church that marriage at this time is a holy relationship between a man and a woman in solemn matrimony and that that is a subject for the General Synod and not the Diocese of Toronto to define.

In that period of time when there are pastoral needs that are evident within our parishes amongst faithful people, how might we deal with those pastoral, individual circumstances in the most generous and gracious way possible while holding open the opportunity for further discussion and consideration by the wider church?

Read it all.

After the blessing was approved, the dissident group tried to find a Canadian bishop who would take them in. Bishop of the Yukon Terrance O. Buckle offered episcopal oversight, but Bishop Michael Ingham refused to cede jurisdiction to him.

[David] Short said the conservatives were unwilling to settle for an alternative bishop who didn’t have full power to do all the things a diocesan bishop can do, such as appoint clergy. They didn’t want “a kind of suffragan [assisting] bishop.” Bishop Buckle would appoint appropriate priests.

“The point is you wanted a conservative bishop who held your views,” said the defense lawyer.

“We wanted a bishop who would hold to the doctrine of the Church,” replied Short.

Read the whole article.

…[David Short] described the difference between “communion” – the spiritual and personal reality that exists when we put our faith in Christ and are united with God and with all those who believe the same faith – and “Communion” – which relates to the structures that have evolved to promote and protect our faith. He discussed how the Solemn Declaration of 1893 and the Windsor Report reflect that understanding.

He explained how, when he arrived in Vancouver to attend Regent College in 1991, he found St John’s to be of the same character as Anglican churches in Sydney, “liturgically centrist, broadly speaking”¦ evangelical” and with a number of ministries both in and outside the parish.

He discussed his involvement with the synods, clergy conferences and as regional dean for several years, as well as reaction to Bishop Ingham’s book, Mansions of the Spirit and the pastoral issues it raised in the congregation. He said the vote of the diocesan Synod in 2001 “shocked” him after the clear position taken by the House of Bishops in 1997 and the Lambeth Conference in1998. After the 2001 vote, a number of conservative clergy in the diocese met with Bishop Ingham to indicate the depth of their concern and that this was a “no go area” for them. Just before the 2002 Synod, he delivered a legal opinion to Bishop Ingham that said because the issue of same-sex blessings is an issue of doctrine, it was only within the jurisdiction of the General Synod and any motion would be ultra vires (beyond the authority of the diocesan synod).

Read it all.

[Linda] Seale, who has been a warden and a trustee at St. Matthew’s among many other positions, said that even before the issue of same sex blessings came to the fore, she had been disturbed by what she called Bishop Ingham’s “pluralist approach to religion, that there are many ways to God.”

She recalled once at the Sorrento Retreat Centre near Kamloops, BC, while taking a course taught by the bishop, she had been alarmed by the direction of his thought.

Walking beside him to a meal one day, she asked him about the passage in John’s Gospel which says “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)

She told the court the bishop replied: “There are some things you have to let go of.”

Read the whole article.

Bishop Don Harvey was under cross-examination for the first half of the morning session. Mr George Macintosh, counsel for the diocese, asked questions focused on the “legitimacy” of Archbishop Venables’ intervention in Canada, the response of the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) and the Archbishop of Canterbury to this intervention, and whether Bishop Harvey had been invited to the 2008 Lambeth Conference – to which Bishop Don replied, “no, but nor was Bishop Gene Robinson”. Another line of questioning revolved around how Bishop Don has changed his mind on the issue of women’s ordination over the last 30 years; previously against it, he is now for it. There were also extensive questions about the conscience clause in respect of women’s ordination and the one offered by Bishop Ingham to the parishes in New Westminster as well as discussion of Shared Episcopal Ministry.

Bishop Ron Ferris then took the stand for the rest of the day, although his cross-examination will continue tomorrow morning. He is another cradle Anglican who was baptized, confirmed, married, ordained and consecrated in the church. He was Bishop of the Yukon from 1981-1994 and Bishop of Algoma from 1995 until he retired in 2008 and moved to Langley, BC for family reasons. He joined ANiC in 2009 and is currently planting a church in the Langley area.

Read it all.

The Supreme Court of British Columbia began hearing arguments this week to decide who owns disputed church buildings and resources: the Anglican diocese of New Westminster or parishes that have split away from the Anglican Church of Canada.

Two lawsuits were filed against the diocese of New Westminster and its bishop, Michael Ingham, by clergy who cut ties with the Anglican Church of Canada and individuals who say they are the lawful trustees of church properties and resources for several congregations that also voted to leave the church. Other hearings have resulted in decisions about interim possession and sharing of Anglican church buildings in British Columbia as well as Ontario, but this trial, which is scheduled to last three weeks, is the first in Canada to rule on which side owns the buildings and resources.

One suit was filed by Rev. David Short, Rev. Trevor Walters, and Rev. Simon Chin who lead congregations at St. John’s (Shaughnessy) in Vancouver, St. Matthew’s in Abbotsford, B.C. and St. Matthias and St. Luke in Vancouver, respectively, and 14 other individuals. The other was filed by Rev. Stephen Leung of Good Shepherd Church in Vancouver and four other people.

The clergy left their ministries with the Anglican Church of Canada in 2008 over theological differences, including issues such as the blessing of same-sex unions, and they were asked to vacate their former parishes. …

Read it all.

Bishop Colin Johnson is encouraging Anglicans to take part in the national church�s Vision 2019 initiative, saying that one person�s voice can make a difference.

�As a unique voice, you might say something that sparks an idea in somebody else and it just takes off,� he says. �In Christian theology, Mary�s voice that said �Let it be� allowed for the Incarnation of Christ. One person makes a difference.�

Vision 2019 is a nation-wide exercise to discern, dream and decide where Anglicans think God wants the Anglican Church of Canada to be in 2019. The national church has designated June 7 as Vision 2019 Sunday and is sending out a resource kit to all parishes.

Read it all.

Bishop Michael Ingham asked the retiring bishop of Algoma, Ronald Ferris, to consider assisting him last year by serving as a pastoral bishop to conservative parishes in his diocese under the shared episcopal ministry plan set out by Canadian House of Bishops.

However, in BC Supreme Court Tuesday, May 26, the former Canadian bishop said he felt strongly that he couldn’t serve as a bishop within a diocese that, in his opinion, had departed from biblical teaching and blessed same sex unions.

Read it all also.