In 1997, in the diocese of
Quebec, I was part of a conversation regarding the name of our church. Certain individuals wanted to send a memorial
to the General Synod (governing body) of the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC) to
change the name of the church from ACC to Episcopal Church of Canada. Their rationale was very simple yet important
that ACC translated in French means Church of the Anglophones; thus, equating
an ethnic group with the church which can be a hindrance and barrier to other
ethnic groups in general and French Canadians in particular. There was absolute resistance to the name
change from other members of the group as they believed and upheld that ACC is
indeed a church of anglophones since its inception and will always be a church
of anglophones regardless of context and the membership. I was newly ordained (two years) at the time
and was lost for words or reaction at the reasoning. Moreover, as a visible minority, for the very
first time, I felt to be an outsider in my own church.
By 2040, there will not be identifiable givers
and attendees in the ACC is the finding of a study commissioned by the ACC. The
author examined the subscription to the Anglican monthly newspaper (Anglican Journal),
members on the parish rolls as well as Sunday attendance and reported that ACC
membership has declined from 1.3 million in 1961 to 357,123 in 2017. Incidentally, Canada’s population was 18.27
million people as compare to 36.54 million in 2017. While ACC lost 942,877 members since 1961, the
Canadian population almost doubled in the same period. Juxtaposing the church’s number with Canadian
population makes a bad situation worse, particularly when we realize that since
1991 two thirds of Canadian population has increased because of emigration
while one third has increased because of natural birth. Situation indeed is dire to say the least. An important question which should be asked,
in the midst of this report and uncertain future, is what went wrong and subsequently
what can be done?
What went wrong, particularly from
the visible minority perspective, is the attitude and the arrogance of the church
as it relates to the governance and leadership of the church. I realise that it is a harsh indictment. This indictment is justified when we look at
the membership of the councils and committees right from the General synod to
local parishes. Leadership is entrusted
to very few Caucasian members of the church, who in some cases are members of
five to six committees and are recycled from one committee to another based on criteria
obviously unknown to many. The implicit
message in these appointments and elections is that it is a culture of entitlement
based on an exclusive private club and the outsider regardless of his/her
ethnicity is expected to follow and support.
Limited and specific numbers of individuals can be the leaders of ACC at
various levels is the epitome of entitlement and arrogance because it denounces
or fails to recognise the gifts and talents of individuals outside of the
circle.
Lord of the Rings, trilogy by J.
R. R. Tolkien, is a story of humanity’s resolve to fight against evil and to protect
and preserve goodness in the middle earth.
In one of the scenes, just before the battle, Aragorn tells a little boy
that there is always hope. Like Aragorn,
I believe that there is hope for ACC beyond 2040. This hope, unfortunately, is inter-dependent
on the desire of the leadership to make substantive changes to the structures
of the church. I used ‘unfortunately’
because sharing power and authority with ‘the other’ is challenging and
threatening at the same time. Following are
some of the ways, revival of ACC can happen:
First, to critically examine the governance
structures which is membership and their mandate to determine if it mirrors
Canadian population and culture. This is
extremely important and integral as it will bring ‘the other’ to not only share
their experience but also lead the church in devising policies and mission strategies
to address the struggles of the other. So
far, ACC has spoken for ‘the other’. It is
time that the ACC listen to ‘the other’.
Second, to believe that our unity is in
diversity. Since 1991 (year I emigrated
to Canada), it seems to me that the church is trying to convert one another on
every issue. It is as silly as to stand
or kneel for the prayers to as serious as equal marriage and everything in
between. Accepting, embracing and
encouraging diverse voices and opinions will fulfill Jesus’ prayer that we may
be one as Jesus is one with God.
Third, to make a place for the
New Canadians in the liturgy, mission and ministry of the church. New Canadians
are coming from Anglican Communion churches and provinces. Why are they not coming to the ACC churches
is an important question and discernment?
An open conversation and dialogue will engender ways for them to be
members of our churches.
Fourth, to engage with and to
learn from the millennials. They are the
prophets of our time as they have emerged as the stewards of God’s creation
through Climate action, visionaries of just and equitable world as portrayed by
their support of the developing world and are the destroyers of barriers of
race, religion, creed, sexuality, gender and social status.
2040 is not too far away; there
is always hope if the ACC can discover the ways to learn from ‘the other’, with
a desire to change and grow.
