Canadian PARL alert

February 19, 2008

In this issue:

Canada :

Five Anglican parishes set to separate from Church

Parish exodus accelerates Anglican rift

Keep Patient Alive: Judge

Lord's Prayer not in tune with times: McGuinty

World:

Getting religious liberty wrong: De Souza on Archbishop of Canterbury and shariah law

Other:

Canadian Adventist Conscientious Objectors

Law Student Intern Position at SDACC

Five Anglican parishes set to separate from Church

Same-Sex Blessings

Charles Lewis, National Post Published: Sunday, February 17, 2008

Bill Keay/Canwest News Service

At least five more Anglican churches -- three in British Columbia and two in Ontario -- are likely to separate from the national Church over the divisive issue of same-sex blessings by the end of the month. Another four will also vote on similar motions this month.

They will be following St. John's, the country's largest Anglican parish, which voted this week to leave the Anglican Church of Canada. The Vancouver parish chose to put itself under the authority of conservative Gregory Venables, the Archbishop of the Southern Cone, which encompasses parts of South America.

Rev. Andrew Hewlett, minister at St. Mary of the Incarnation near Victoria, which will vote tomorrow, received a letter from the bishop of his diocese, James Cowan, that said anyone "found to be acquiescing in or to be actively promoting such a separation" could face "immediate termination of employment without notice or severance."

He said the vote will go ahead despite the threat because it is the will of his congregation that it happen. He expects the motion to leave the Canadian Church will pass.

Rev. Simon Chin of St. Matthias & St. Luke Church in Vancouver said he, too, expects his parish to separate when it votes on Feb. 24.

"For the last six years we have been calling for help [from the diocese and the Anglican Church of Canada], but they've not done anything," he said. "Our people in our church are the ones pushing all of this because they feel we don't have a home here."

He said the mood at his church -- a mix of Chinese-, Japanese-and English-speaking members -- is one of relief. "We finally have someone to give us a home."

Several churches in the Diocese of New Westminster, which encompasses the Vancouver area, have been battling for six years with the local bishop, Michael Ingham, who gave permission to parishes to conduct same-sex blessing in 2002. Churches in the diocese have been told to expect legal action and fights over property if they leave.

Joyce Lee, a member of the Church of Good Shepherd in Vancouver, said her parish would also vote this month and she believed the motion to leave would pass. The church has been in Vancouver for 118 years and is believed to be the largest Chinese Anglican Church in Canada.

"We are torn apart between our conscience and what our diocese is doing," Ms. Lee said.

"There is a very sad feeling here about the Anglican Church of Canada moving further from orthodox teachings."

Both churches have withheld dues to the diocese in protest since 2002. St. Matthew's in Abbotsford, B.C., also part of the New Westminster diocese, is expected to vote tomorrow.

Two other churches that expect to pass motions to separate are St. Alban the Martyr in Ottawa, which votes today, and the Church of the Good Shepherd in St. Catharines, which votes on Feb. 24.

The schism has accelerated since June, when the general synod of the Anglican Church of Canada said performing same-sex blessings did not violate core doctrine.

Since then, the dioceses of Ottawa, Montreal and Niagara have all voted in favour of the rite, but their bishops have yet to decide if they will let them go ahead.

clewis@nationalpost.com

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=314011

Parish exodus accelerates Anglican rift

Gay Rites Issue; Weekend votes fuel division across country

Zosia Bielski, National Post Published: Monday, February 18, 2008

Six more parishes voted to officially separate from the Anglican Church of Canada this weekend, widening a rupture that opened in June after the national church decided to support same-sex blessings.

In Ontario, St. Hilda's in Oakville and St. George's in Lowville voted decidedly to leave over the issue. In a much closer vote, the small Toronto parish of St. Chad's also voted to break off.

Two parishes in Abbots-ford, B.C., voted to leave: the small Holy Cross parish and the larger St. Matthews. On Saturday, St Alban's Ottawa parish also voted to separate.

"I think the national Church is being given the message by the Anglican community worldwide that we have been moving and have moved away from Biblical Christianity," St. George's Canon Charlie Masters said following the decision yesterday.

St. Alban's Pastor George Sinclair said the decision was not political.

"We weren't really trying to send a message to the national church," Reverend Sinclair said. "It was a spiritual decision reflecting our desire to follow Jesus in the Anglican way. It wasn't a political move. It was a conscience move.

"It shows in my parish that there's a very strong unanimity that this is the right step for us to take."

He noted that it was an emotional decision for his congregation: "Nobody enters into the Anglican way with the idea that they would have to separate from their diocese."

The parishes are following the country's largest, St. John's in Vancouver, which voted to leave last week.

The problems of the Canadian churches have crescendoed since June, when the general synod of the Anglican Church of Canada said performing same-sex blessings did not violate core doctrine of the church. Since then, dioceses in Ottawa, Montreal and Niagara have voted for the rite, but their bishops have yet to decide if they will let them go ahead. The separating churches follow a more orthodox branch of Anglicanism, and all are members of the Anglican Network in Canada, a conservative umbrella group.

There are 2,000 parishes in the Anglican Church of Canada. By contrast, the Anglican Network in Canada has 16 parishes aligned with the group.

Now many of those parishes are going through the formal process of deciding whether to remain with the Canadian Church or put themselves under the authority of the much more conservative Gregory Venables, archbishop of the Southern Cone. In November, Arcbishop Fred Hiltz, head of the Anglican Church of Canada, told the National Post that the Canadian Church may have to face the fact it will never find agreement over same-sex blessings. He said that it was strongly possible that some churches would leave.

In Lowville, Canon Masters said he was "very grateful" to the network for giving his parish "a way by which we as a congregation can remain fully connected to the Anglican communion and can continue as Biblical Christians."

Also voting last night was St. Mary's of the Incarnation in Victoria. St. Mary's evening was particularly fraught after the diocese threatened the parish's priests with suspensions when they decided not to halt the vote. Churches have been told to expect legal action and fights over property if they leave the diocese.

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=316960

Keep Patient Alive: Judge

Man On Ventilator; Ruling means family has say in treatment

Tom Blackwell, National Post Published: Thursday, February 14, 2008

A Winnipeg judge has ordered a local hospital to keep an orthodox Jewish patient attached to life support, settling for the moment an emotional dispute that revolved partly around the critically ill man's religious beliefs.

Samuel Golubchuk's children had argued their orthodox faith required the 84-year-old be kept alive as long as possible. Grace Hospital wanted to remove him from a ventilator, saying he was brain dead and that keeping him hooked up longer would be cruel and futile.

Justice Perry Schulman of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench said he was not directly addressing the pros and cons of those issues at this time. He ruled, however, that the doctors' contention that they always have the final say over a patient's treatment is simply not confirmed by the current law.

In taking that position, the judge has rejected not only the hospital's stance, but also an official policy on treating the critically ill that was recently issued by the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons, said Neil Kravetsky, the Golubchuks' lawyer.

"I think this case has huge ramifications," he said. "The decision is just and is another step toward re-establishing democracy when it comes to this type of issue."

Mr. Kravetsky said the patient's children, Percy Golubchuk and Miriam Geller, were "ecstatic" at the result. "My clients are thankful to God ... and thankful to the judge."

Judge Schulman extended an earlier injunction barring the hospital from disconnecting Mr. Golubchuk from the ventilator until the underlying issues are argued at a trial. In a 26-page decision, he said his order must even be included on the patient's medical chart.

He said he would try to move quickly toward a trial that directly tackled the prickly questions around who decides when medical treatment for the very sick should end.

"In my view, the resolution of these questions is wide open," Judge Schulman said. "The legal questions are not frivolous, and it is ... important that they be decided for the good of the parties and in the public interest, and the sooner the better."

Mr. Golubchuk fell and suffered severe brain damage in 2003, after which he lived in a nursing home. Last October, heart problems and pneumonia landed him back in hospital, where his condition deteriorated. Intensive-care unit doctors in November recommended removing him from the ventilator, citing what they called irreversible health problems and lack of brain activity.

The children objected, arguing they had a religious obligation to keep him alive as long as possible. They also later had Mr. Golubchuk's charts reviewed by a U.S.-based neurologist, who concluded "there is no evidence whatsoever that he is brain dead, close to brain dead or dying, from a neurological point of view."

The physicians and some medical ethicists have argued that, while every attempt must be made to negotiate a mutually agreeable resolution in such cases, doctors should have the final word on treatment. The Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, which oversees Grace, said yesterday it would review the decision.

"We do want to say that decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatments are never easy and are not made lightly by medical experts," the agency said in a statement.

"The past several months have been very difficult for the Golubchuk family, as well as the staff who have been caring for Mr. Golubchuk."

The case has been an emotional one, with the patient's family saying they believe the hospital willfully ignored their wishes. Juliet Guichon, a medical ethicist at the University of Calgary who follows such cases, said she is dismayed that the court has not yet tackled the main issues in the dispute, leaving them to a full trial at some point in the future.

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=306605

Lord's Prayer not in tune with times: McGuinty

Calls For Study; Suggests more inclusive custom in legislature

Jordana Huber, Canwest News Service Published: Thursday, February 14, 2008

TORONTO - The Lord's Prayer, recited by the Speaker at the beginning of each Ontario legislative session, does not reflect Ontario's diversity, Premier Dalton McGuinty said yesterday as he called for a new approach to begin daily proceedings.

Mr. McGuinty said it was time to "move beyond" the Lord's Prayer to a more inclusive custom that better reflects Ontario's multiculturalism. In a letter to opposition leaders, the Premier called for an all-party legislative committee that would seek input from citizens and religious groups before making recommendations to the legislature.

According to the 2006 census, one-third of Ontario's population was born outside Canada. In the Toronto region, more than half the population was born in another country.

Mr. McGuinty said the province has not changed its daily recitation since 1969, while other jurisdictions have moved to adjust their customs to better reflect changing times.

The Premier denied the changes were proposed to smooth tensions left over from election rhetoric that saw faith-based school funding hotly debated.

"No, like the modernization of the house itself, I think it's a reflection of the times," Mr. McGuinty said. "We're much more than just Protestants and Catholics today. We have all the world's faiths represented here. If they're represented outside the legislature, I think we ought to find a way to ensure that their diversity is reflected inside the legislature as well."

Earlier this week, the Liberals proposed to start daily proceedings in the upcoming session at 9:30 a.m. instead of the current 1:30 p.m., while eliminating evening sittings to make the legislature more family friendly.

Progressive Conservative leader John Tory said his party was open to looking at new morning customs but Mr. McGuinty's letter implied the Lord's Prayer would be replaced altogether. "That is completely unacceptable to us," Mr. Tory said. "Part of respecting the tradition of the legislature is keeping the Lord's Prayer. That doesn't mean we wouldn't be open to other prayers being added."

New Democratic House leader Peter Kormos said the NDP would also take part in the discussions, but warned the Premier might see a movement to remove any reference to religion. "The premier is trying to show how pluralistic he's prepared to be when it comes to faith communities," Mr. Kormos said. "But I think he'd better be careful because there are going to be folks from the humanist perspective who are going to argue well, if you open that box, then let's not have any prayer at all."

A federal all-party committee agreed on the wording for a new non-sectarian prayer for the House of Commons in 1994. It was first used in 2004 while the Senate formalized rules around prayer in 1991. Newfoundland and Labrador has no daily prayer while Quebec has a daily moment of reflection. Alberta uses a selection of nondenominational prayers and on certain occasions uses special prayers. In British Columbia the practice is to rotate among members who can use a set list of non-denominational prayers.

Saskatchewan has used the same prayer, which was established by an all-party committee in 1931, while Manitoba also has a daily prayer that was established years ago.

The Speaker of the Nova Scotia assembly recites a prayer written in 1972 followed by the Lord's Prayer. In New Brunswick's legislature the same prayer has been recited since 1801 by a chaplain or the Speaker, followed by the Lord's Prayer. The Lord's Prayer is also recited in P.E.I's legislature before doors are open to the public.

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=306658

Getting religious liberty wrong

Father Raymond J. De Souza, National Post Published: Wednesday, February 13, 2008

On Monday, the Archbishop of Canterbury' took back what he said last week about the "inevitability" of accommodating shariah law in Britain. In a long and complex lecture, Dr. Rowan Williams had argued that space had to be left for plural identities before the law (e.g., both British and Muslim) and therefore that some limited accommodation of shariah tribunals might be apt for Britain's growing Muslim minority. The remarks set off a conflagration over the weekend, including a public rebuke from Dr. George Carey, Dr. Williams' predecessor.

"Accommodation would lead to further demands," wrote Lord Carey. "That is absolutely inevitable, since questions to do with the separation of 'church and state' are largely new to Islam. While Christianity and Judaism recognize the truth in 'rendering unto Caesar,' it is resisted by mainstream Muslim countries. Shariah law trumps civil law every time."

Indeed, in the course of his lecture, Dr. Williams was defending religious believers in general against the real and potential tyranny of legal secularism. He employed a Christian example: the closing of Catholic adoption agencies after the government decreed that they could not operate unless they agreed to place children with gay couples. Such violations of conscience are an extension of state power beyond its competence, and perhaps Dr. Williams was attempting to think about how similar principles might be applied to Islamic communities desirous of shariah tribunals. Here, the Archbishop seems to have confused two principles of religious liberty.

First, religious liberty requires that the state not intrude upon the religious beliefs of its citizens, demanding of them what they cannot do in good conscience. The Catholic adoption agency is a case in point; the state was forcing Catholics to do what Catholic teaching cannot countenance.

As this example shows, religious freedom is generally a negative liberty; it requires the state to not restrict a set of activities. The Catholic agencies were not asking for the state to enforce religious obligations -- that the children be baptized for example. (Accommodation of shariah law requires state sanction for jurisprudence which, by Dr. Williams' own acknowledgement, is rooted in divine revelation. That too is beyond the secular state's competence, if in the opposite direction.)

Second, religious liberty cannot be merely procedural, an agreement for civility's sake not to interfere with people going about their religious affairs. The classic development of religious liberty is that the state must respect what God commands, for man's relationship with God is prior to his relationship with the sovereign or the state. Religious liberty therefore has a substantive content; it

George Carey must be respected because there are certain obligations from which we cannot exempt ourselves. How does the sovereign recognize such obligations? It is the fruit of culture, history, tradition and, above all, reason. (Hence Pope Benedict XVI's repeated insistence that faith needs reason to purify it, and reason requires faith to open it to wider horizons.)

That recognition requires that a judgment must be made. I shariah law requires what is contrary to reason -- what we might call political philosophy in its pure sense -- then claiming religious liberty is not sufficient for the state to respect it, let alone enforce it. Today, this goes under the banner of human rights. Lord Carey's objection to shariah law is that it does not respect freedom of religion, freedom to marry, equality of women, and due process of law. He has, in short, a substantive objection to the content of shariah law.

That Christians and Muslims would disagree about the substantive content of religious freedom is not surprising -- those conflicting views will significantly shape the century just now begun. It explains why Christian nations grant Muslims freedoms not available in Islamic countries without demanding reciprocity as a prior condition.

Canterbury's lecture and subsequent climbdown brought forth this intervention from Downing Street: "The Prime Minister is very clear that British laws must be based on British values and that religious law, while respecting other cultures, should be subservient to British criminal and civil law."

That "subservient" has the ring of Tudor tyranny about it; since the Magna Carta guaranteed the liberty of the Church, British law has been based on the foundation that not all things should be subservient to the state. Religious liberty requires the state to respect what God requires; what God requires of the state in turn, one might say, must be in accord with reason.

That is the long fruit of Christian thought on religious liberty. Islamic thought is quite different on this point. Dr. Williams got in trouble for not explicitly siding with the Christian approach; surely a fair criticism to make against an archbishop.

Source: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=304152

Canadian Adventist Conscientious Objectors

A majour project is now underway to tell the story of Adventist Conscientious Objectors in WWII. If you, or your father was a CO and are willing to share your story we NEED to hear from you now. We are looking for pictures, film, stories on your experience in the labour camps, in military training and service overseas. Your story is important to the next generation. Please contact us today.

Contact: Tina Keys; ph. 905-433-0011, ext 2078; email: tkeys@sdacc.org; mail: 1148 King St. East, Oshawa, Ontario, L1H 1H8

Law Student Intern Position at SDACC

The Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada is currently accepting applications of Adventist law students for a summer position with the office of General Counsel, Public Affairs and Religious Liberty. The work will include research and writing in the areas of religious freedom in Canada; assisting churches and church members with legal matters. Interested applicants need to complete the application form below:

Application Form The above application form is a fillable .PDF. Once you download it, you can fill out the fields using Acrobat, then print your completed form, sign it and submit it along with the required documentation.

Interested Seventh-day Adventist law students should return this application along with applicable disclosures to:

THE PARL SUMMER INTERNSHIP

Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada

1148 King Street East

Oshawa, Ontario L1H 1H8

Canada

Phone: 905-433-0011

Fax: 905-433-0982

Deadline is March 31

Sign In

Canadian PARL alert

Recommended Posts

Stan

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity