The Anglican Church of Canada and The United Church of Canada have been engaged in a national bilateral dialogue since the 1970s, to deepen our unity in Christ. The two churches remain close partners in many areas of mission and ministry today. As such, decisions and developments in one church are always a point of interest in the other. For this reason, the members of the Anglican-United Church Dialogue of Canada have issued the following communiqué, on their latest round of meetings in February 2019.
The Anglican-United Church Dialogue of Canada held its most recent meeting February 20-22, 2019, at the Queen of Apostles Renewal Centre in Mississauga, ON. Many items of ecumenical relevance in the life of the two churches were addressed on the agenda.
Among these, the Dialogue devoted a portion of time to a discussion of the November 2018 decision of the Toronto Conference of The United Church of Canada to enter into a settlement with the Rev. Ms. Gretta Vosper which allows her to remain in her current ministry at West Hill United Church.
The implications of this decision have been a point of question and concern for a number of The United Church of Canada’s ecumenical partners. In the interest of advancing greater clarity and understanding in ecumenical relations, the Dialogue has judged it important to note the following points:
- The decision that the Rev. Ms. Vosper may remain in ministry at West Hill United Church was a decision taken by Toronto Conference, a regional governing body with the responsibility and authority to act in this matter. This decision was not made by the national United Church of Canada; the national United Church of Canada did not have authority in the matter.
- The Conference and the Rev. Ms. Vosper chose to settle the matter between themselves during the preliminary stage of a Formal Hearing on the matter. As a result, the Formal Hearing itself did not take place and therefore no testimony was heard from expert witnesses.
- The terms of the settlement, beyond the fact that the Rev. Ms. Vosper may remain in ministry at West Hill United Church, are confidential.
- This decision, made by a regional body with authority in the matter, does not set a precedent either for that region or for the rest of the United Church of Canada.
- The United Church of Canada’s major restructuring that took effect January 1, 2019, means that now all disciplinary decisions about ministry personnel in the United Church of Canada are made by a national committee in the newly created Office of Vocation.
- This decision does not change United Church of Canada Doctrine in any way. In United Church of Canada polity, changes to Doctrine require a decision during a General Council meeting to approve a change, a vote in favour of the change by the governing board of a majority of the United Church of Canada’s Pastoral Charges and also by a majority of its Regions, and then an affirmative vote by the subsequent meeting of the General Council to ratify the change.
We offer these clarifications to our churches to assist our ongoing dialogue and cooperation in faith and service to the Gospel.
Bishop-Elect Lynne McNaughton
Anglican Co-Chair
Rev. Dr. Sandra Beardsall
United Church of Canada Co-Chair
Quotes:
“I commend to you a communiqué from the national dialogue of the Anglican and United Churches to address potential concerns or misunderstandings following the November 2018 decision of the Toronto Conference of The United Church of Canada to enter into a settlement with the Rev. Ms. Gretta Vosper.
This communiqué has been given to members of the Anglican Council of General Synod and the Anglican National House of Bishops.”
– The Rev. Dr. Lynne McNaughton, Bishop-elect of the Diocese of Kootenay, Co-Chair of the Anglican-United Dialogue
“I am grateful that the Anglican-United Dialogue has spoken to this issue, and has done so sensitively and out of love. Because of the attention that this situation has generated, it is important for Anglicans to ensure that they are properly informed about the context and meaning of the settlement between the Rev. Greta Vosper and the Toronto Conference of the United Church of Canada. We ask that Anglicans across the country uphold our sisters and brothers in the United Church of Canada in our prayers at this time, as they seek to continue to move forward together as a church of Christ.”
– The Rev. Canon Dr. Scott Sharman, Animator for Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada
–30–
Allowing an atheist to continue in the ministry may be a decision of the Toronto Conference rather than the
national United Church of Canada, but the UCC apparently recognizes their decision.
The Anglican Church of Canada also apparently recognizes the decision. But nothing new there, as the ACoC has a long history of dioceses and/or bishops going completely off the rails, and taking no action at the national level. Heresy is a local option for Canadian dioceses. So, now, theoretically, a the (arch)bishop of Toronto can license the atheist UCC minister to do anything in a ACoC parish, except presiding at a Eucharist service (if I understand the current relationship between the two churches).
Junk Food with empty calories.
Hello Mr. Mcmahon (if that is your name). I don’t think the ACoC recognizes the UC to the extent that UC ministers can get work in the ACoC. Now, back in 1972 or so, there was serious talk about a merger between the Canadian Anglicans and the United Church of Canada. But, a vote at the House of bishops stopped it. Since then, Canadian Anglicans have moved to recognize the Lutheran Church, so Lutheran ministers can get work in an Anglican diocese, and vice versa. (that happened, I think, around 1985-1990).
I found the above statement odd. I thought it was political mumbo jumbo, typical talk we get from church leaders these days, leaders who spend too much time going to meetings. If the United Church had managed to fire Greeta Vosper, it would have improved the image of that Church.
DaveVancouver,
My information comes from the ACoC’s own “Anglican Journal” (not to be confused with Anglican Ink). In hopes that this falls within the new linking policy per Edgarson (above)…
https://www.anglicanjournal.com/changes-united-church-canada-might-ease-cooperation-anglicans-sources-say/
So, while “shared ministries” and other cross licensing may be rare, it does happen.
Yes, this is exactly the kind of link that falls within the new policy.
tjmcmahon. Hello. You are quite right about these joint congregations. It was common back in the 1960’s and 70’s, here in rural British Columbia.
I don’t know enough about this Gretta Vosper to make any intelligent comment, but she has made it into the public newspapers over the last 8 or 10 years.I share your concern for good Christian orthodox teaching, and I bemoan the inability of Bishops to discipline clergy who innovate too much, who are mavaricks.. Your line “Heresy is a local option” in Canadian dioceses was funny and clever. And I am afraid in some cases it is all too true.
Who is/was the Queen of the apostles?
It seems that it’s OK to have an atheist minister leading a congregation so long as there is a “settlement”.
It’s a retreat centre of the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate (established in 1816), so nothing to do with the UCC or the ACC.
Does that mean that some people regard Mary as the Queen of the apostles? If so, that’s a very strange idea.
From the Roman Catholic Saints website:
A feast of Mary under the title Queen of Apostles is observed in Pallottine Redemptorist churches and other churches.
Art and literature on the theme of Queen of Apostles is scant. The first picture of Mary, Queen of Apostles, was executed by Overbeck at the request of Palloti. It shows the Descent of the Holy Ghost with Mary as the center of the group. Today it is in the International College of the Pallotins in Rome.
All fancy stuff. Thank you for the information.
Mary’s title “Regina Caeli” (Queen of Heaven) is an ancient title. The title “Queen of the Apostles” is in the Litany of Loreto dating from the twelfth century.
Mary is “Queen of the Apostles” by virtue of her being the mother of the King, whose authority they carry. In the Davidic kingdom, the Queen was not a wife of the king (since they had lots of them), but his mother. Since Jesus inherited the throne of David, Jesus is our King and Mary, His mother, is our Queen. Peter, and his successors, being His Royal Stewards who hold the keys.
Marian doctrine – the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, her Queenship, and her intercessory power – illustrates how God wants to share His glory with humanity. It is a testimony to how awesome and powerful someone becomes (through Christ) when they say “Yes” to God and give their whole lives to Him. God honours the woman who gave her body and life to cooperate with Him to bring salvation to the world. Mary shows us just how glorious a life given totally to Christ can be. It shows us how generous God is with His glory. Mary is just a human that God has chosen to share His glory with. God will deny nothing to a soul who holds nothing back from Him.
Who is/was the Queen of the apostles?
It seems that it’s OK to have an atheist minister leading a congregation so long as there is a “settlement”.
I won’t post a link, but if you want an interesting read, google the West Hill United Church’s website. It’s exactly what you’d expect from a church led by an atheist. No mention of God. Christ is absent except for one passing reference to Christmas. Couldn’t find the word “Jesus” anywhere. They have “gatherings” on Sunday (no mention of worship) followed by conversations. Their religion is completely horizontal, so to speak. Flat as a pancake. Is this where “Progressive Christianity” is going?
As a matter of fact, we’ve JUST updated the Comment Policy on the subject of links.
From the Comment Policy page linked above: “We have reflected on the part of the Comment Policy that says: ‘The only links we allow are links to online Bible sources.’ This was intended to keep extraneous matter out of our discussions. On reflection, though, the links our readers tend to post are to thoughtful articles that are not commonly encountered and do actually enhance the conversation. Therefore we have decided to remove that line from the Comment Policy. We will judge the links for suitability the same way we judge any content by the Comment Policy, in that it cannot link to material that is name calling, is characterized by hostility, is off-topic or trolling. It can be wrong, heretical, angry, happy, on topic, and especially Godly.”
Thank you, AI!
Hm, I see what you mean..
I won’t post a link, but if you want an interesting read, google the West Hill United Church’s website. It’s exactly what you’d expect from a church led by an atheist. No mention of God. Christ is absent except for one passing reference to Christmas. Couldn’t find the word “Jesus” anywhere. They have “gatherings” on Sunday (no mention of worship) followed by conversations. Their religion is completely horizontal, so to speak. Flat as a pancake. Is this where “Progressive Christianity” is going?