Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Talks collapse between Anglican Church, breakaway parishes

The Canadian Press

Latest comment posted at 4:55 PM EDT 28/02/08

Courtroom battle looms after negotiations over ownership dispute break down ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. talk to the hand from Canada writes: and jesus wept.
  2. Karlheinz Pfacharfaster from Never more lucid, Canada writes: I'm not surprised talks collapsed, if the schismatics did anything other than offer to purchase the properties at a reasonable premium.

    Why would they imagine the church should give them property? It's ridiculous.

    Why indeed should the church do anything for them at all?
  3. J S from Toronto, Canada writes: In order to leave your church you need to use the door. If these people don't want to be Anglican anymore, fine, it's thier Right as a Canadian to choose whatever religion they want. The Anglican Church owns the buildings. If you want the buildings, buy/lease them if you can or find another suitable location. I don't see the argument.
  4. Zando Lee from Vancouver, Canada writes: ....they tried to get God to decide, but she was busy and did not return their calls......
  5. Daniel Cunningham from Victoria, writes: Maybe they can join their fellow Coneheads and move to another continent?
  6. No country for old men from This is not America, Canada writes: 'Talks collapse between Anglican Church, breakaway parishes'

    Buh Bye! dont let the door hit you on the way out.
  7. Jeremy K from vancouver bc, Canada writes: WWJD here

    probably grab both parties by th scruff of the neck and say wtf.... you guys have missed the point completely...
  8. George Hall from Canada writes:
    These churches who are leaving are playing God....they refuse to accept their fellow man and woman who are created by God. It is not for them to judge.
    they are missing the whole point of love and forgiveness.
    I wonder what they have been thinking the whole thing was about?
  9. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: We will pray for them.
  10. The Wet One from Edmonchuk, Canada writes: Should these religious folk settle things the old fashion way? Namely draw swords, claim God is on their side and go to war?

    Eh, I suppose we are talking about Canadians here, so that's not all that reasonable in truth, but that's what they used to do in bonny old England back in the day.

    But I digress. Quite cynically at that too... HA!
  11. Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: The debate continues!
  12. E B from Canada writes: Its like the bank and the homeowner. The bank ( Diocese) holds the mortgage of the homeowner ( congregation) The homeowner has defaulted on his mortgage by abondoning his obligations to pay the bank. The bank takes over the house ( church) and the former home owner ( congregation) finds a new place to live. Seems pretty simple to me.
  13. robert quinn from Japan writes: True enough as far as it goes, E B. But is it not also usually the case that, to use your analogy, the mortgage holder, upon obtaining the property, sells it to recoup monies owed, with the difference being returned to the party which worked to pay for the building over the years? Perhaps such an arrangement could be considered in recognition of which party to the dispute actually sustained the properties in question.
  14. Richard Jones from Abbotsford, BC, Canada writes: Jubilant will be the day when the Courts declare the Anglican Church of Canada and the Dioceses the rightful owners of these schismatic Parishes. I pray for the day the Bishop installs moderate, tolerant, inclusive and forward thinking Priests in these parishes so that all moderate, tolerant and forward thinking Anglicans can come back to worship at their local Anglican Parish. Our local Anglican Church was hijacked by rightwing conservatives years ago and many moderate local Anglicans have had to travel some distance to neighboring Towns to worship as our town only has one Anglican Church. Having to drive past the local Anglican Church to worship in the next town knowing that you and your family and countless others would not be accepted, respected or the least bit tolerated in your local Parish not only hurts your heart but also hurts your wallet as the cost of petrol rises. The day when our local Church is back in the fold and OPEN AND TRULY ACCEPTING OF ALL is a day that I think can’t come soon enough.

    Richard A. Jones
    Abbotsford, BC
  15. Blind InTheSun from Canada writes: So it goes. The church based on division and divorce is stuck in a divisive battle in an unreconcilable divorce. Poetic justice?
  16. Shawn W from Toronto, Canada writes: I find it astounding that people actually still care about mainstream Christian religion. Mind you, at least the Anglicans are a big step up on the social ladder from the Roman Catholic church, or, as I like to think of it, the Wal-mart of spirituality. Hopefully this mess can be settled out of court and we can avoid a bit mess where only the lawyers (like this Chang person) profit.
  17. David Simon from Canada writes: The winning side here will be the one that has more children. The Anglican establishment supports same-sex marriages. Any guess as to which side will win?
  18. D K from Calgary, Canada writes: David Simon, I support same-sex marriage...and yet I'm a hetrosexual...but you're right, I'd probably lose a baby race, seems to painful to run!
  19. Diane Major from Chester, Canada writes: What happened to the 'middle way'?
  20. Grant Janzen from Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada writes: I can see how the 'breakaway' Anglicans have come to view their local church as their own; after all, it has been their money that has been helping to keep the doors open, and many will likely have invested their time and effort into keeping the church going. (Of course, the same can also be said of the 'non-breakaway' Anglicans.) I will be interested to see how many people wind up leading the denomination, and how many churches the denomination will wind up having to shed.
  21. Blind InTheSun from Canada writes: Shawn W- Anglicans are a 'big step up on the social ladder' as compared to Roman Catholics the way anarchists are socially progressive. If you want to be cynical, at least the Catholic Church is consistent.
  22. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: The Anglican Church began when King Henry VIII decided he wanted an annulment from the Queen, Catherine of Aragon. Her brother (king of Spain) held Pope Clement VII in Rome (i.e., Spanish troops occupied Rome, including where the pope lived, which, uh, limited the pope's options). So even though past popes had given annulments to kings and those willing to pay big dough . . . Pope Clement VII said NO. So King Henry VIII declared 'the English Church' to be separate from papal control, put the right type of compliant churchmen in positions of power and -- PRESTO ! -- he got his annulment. . . . This is the origin of the Anglican Church, which is now agonizing over 'family values' and the like. The current crisis is a Big Nothing, with both sides quoting from Scripture and pretending to be on the 'Biblically correct' side of things . . . [yawn].
  23. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: I don't mean to pick on the Anglicans . . . ANY church/religion/creed/cult can have a dispute, split up, etc., and argue over the same 'holy book' (citing different passages thereof, of course . . . or citing the same passages but claim that one's own side 'really knows what God meant') in support of its position. The Anglicans are hardly alone in this.
  24. Eric of Windsor from Canada writes: If you want into Gods Kingdom and enjoy all the benefits there is no middle way, no fence sitting, you are either in or out. God set the way thousands of years ago, 'OBEY', and any moderate, tolerant, inclusive and forward thinking Priests cannot change that. In Gods own words he says that He is the same yesterday, today and tommorrow, what don't you understand. Israel even wanted to go their own way and do their own thing and Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jewish Nation was scattered. They abandoned God. You don't go to Church or God telling Him to accept, respect or at least tolerate what you believe. Your the one that is seperated from God by your sin and to be reunited with Him must do what He says. Man does not like being told what to do of course, look around, every one out for themselves. Love and compassion is not an excuse to ignore the the rest what God says. The splinter Anglicans are right to split away and have a right to the property since they have paid to maintain the buildings over all these years. J>E>S>U>S
  25. Mr. Justice from Canada writes: Eric: . . . You illustrate my point. Thanks.
  26. Zando Lee from Vancouver, Canada writes: ....too bad Kofi Anand is tied up in Kenya at the moment.....
  27. Bill Needle from Canada writes: Eric of Windsor from Canada writes: The splinter Anglicans are right to split away and have a right to the property since they have paid to maintain the buildings over all these years.

    They didn't only pay for building maintenence - they paid for whatever capital cost has been paid off the original loan for the creation of the property. They are entitled to that sum in common civil law.

    All churches authorities play the same shell game for control over local congregations. I hope the departing congregations fight it out for justice.
  28. Rolloff deBunk from Calgary - Centre of American wannabe's, Canada writes: My God is more correct than yours hmm Crusades anyone?
  29. John McCaffery from Australia writes: There is nothing new in such conflicts of the heart. Christ was not inline with the established religious leaders of His time. You can't always expect to act in a way that pleases both the world and God. In saying this, I think the congregation should give up the buildings, move on, and think about where they could best serve God without the worldly trappings.
  30. robert quinn from Japan writes: Richard A. Jones. You have to attend church in another town because you and your family 'would not be accepted, respected or the least bit tolerated' at your previous church? Granting the famously savage nature of 'rightwing conservative' Anglicans, what the h#ll did you all do to invite blanket congregational censure (if it can be revealed in a family paper)?
  31. Able Bodied Man from Colony of Van Isle, Canada writes: The Wet One from Edmonchuk, Canada writes: ... but that's what they used to do in bonny old England back in ...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    W.O. The wurrd 'bonny' is moar apprroprrriately used tae descrribe Scotland. Using it tae describe orr rrreferr tae the land o' the bloody sassenachs and wankurrs (England) is completelae inexcuisable. Werre this anothurr age sorrcerurrs may have commanded yuir tongue tae cleave tae the roof o' yurr mooth, orr yurr fingurs tae stick th' gethurr.
  32. Brenton Spyker from Abbotsford, Canada writes: What I do not understand is why the Queen does not step in and settle this whole issue for once and for all. She is the head of the Anglican Church, and thus has the final word on matters, especially when a dispute is so deep as this. Of course, that may very well lead to a far greater schism, where the Anglican Church of Canada splits off, save for those parishes who are currently splitting off. Although it would be interesting to see if the church buildings belong to the dioceses in Canada or to the Church of England.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top