A long and acrimonious struggle
A long and discouraging battle has been waging in Vancouver in the Anglican Church over the issue of blessing same-sex unions.
The Presbyterian, Lutheran and United Churches in Canada have also been debating how they will deal with same-sex unions, and whether they will solemnize same-sex marriage.
The latest in the Anglican Church is a decision in the British Columbia Supreme Court on November 25. Justice Stephen Kelleher methodically detailed the painful history of acrimonious debate in Vancouver and, indeed, in the global Anglican communion over the treatment of homosexuals.
The United Church of Canada had a similar long and acrimonious debate a decade earlier. Ultimately, the United Church changed its doctrine and large numbers of adherents left the church. A Bermuda court released a local congregation from the control of the United Church of Canada on the basis that the denomination had deviated from its own doctrinal statements.
But that is not how the British Columbia Supreme Court saw the issue as it unfolded in Vancouver.
The debate in Vancouver has been proceeding slowly since the early 1990s. One needs to note that in the Anglican Church, decisions are hierarchical in the sense that individual congregations do not determine their own practices. Decisions are taken at the diocese, presided over by a bishop—in this case, Michael Ingham.
The Diocese of New Westminster comprises a large area, including the lower mainland of B.C. This is a very diverse area and it includes both very conservative and very liberal churches.
The discussion and debate over the Church's doctrine on homosexuality became very political, very ugly and very public.
To his credit, Ingham appears to have tried to find common ground among the various views, appointing commissions and task forces that included both conservative and liberal views.
In 2002 Ingham decided to allow churches to bless committed same-sex unions.
Several large Anglican churches in the diocese, including St. John's Shaughnessy, the largest Anglican church in Canada, had been opposing this move for years. These churches had discussions with the bishop of another diocese in Canada about coming under his leadership but this approach was denied by Ingham. They then separated themselves from the Anglican Church of Canada to come under the oversight of an archbishop from the southern hemisphere.
The debates over changing doctrine on the issue of homosexuality are set in the larger context of the global Anglican communion. The global South, comprising 80 per cent of Anglicans worldwide, is theologically conservative and does not approve of any change in doctrine regarding sexuality.
Considering that the Anglican Church is global, it seems reasonable to think that this could provide a solution to the competing theologies in the Anglican Church of Canada, allowing part of the church to identify with dioceses in other parts of the world.
But the church buildings are the thorny issue. The churches in the Vancouver area are worth millions of dollars. Who gets them? That was the issue really in dispute.
Ingham doesn't mind if clergy and congregations want to leave his oversight—they just have to leave their buildings behind. To accomplish this, he removed the trustees elected by the congregations and substituted his own appointees.
We all know that church splits raise these thorny problems. And when things get ugly and acrimonious, it usually comes down to a court deciding what is in the constitution, by-laws or other founding documents. And sadly, there is a well-established body of legal cases on just these issues.
Justice Kelleher went straight to the Constitution and Canons of the Anglican Church of Canada. Quite honestly, the case put the judge in an untenable position, asking him to decide questions of theology dating back to Thomas Cranmer in the 16th century. Judges are equipped to deal with law, not theology.
In the end, Kelleher came down the middle. He ruled that Ingham could not replace the trustees of each congregation but that the existing trustees had to act in accordance with Canon law and could not take the congregation out of the diocese.
This is not encouraging for conservative clergy and congregations in mainline churches across Canada. It is a very difficult decision to separate from one's denomination, but to then leave behind the church home—the place of baptisms, marriages and funerals—is even more difficult.
Dear Readers:
ChristianWeek relies on your generous support. please take a minute and donate to help give voice to stories that inform, encourage and inspire.
Donations of $20 or more will receive a charitable receipt.Thank you, from Christianweek.
