The Prayer Book Society of Canada...

The Primates of theAnglican Communion and theModerators of the UnitedChurches, meeting together atLambeth Palace on the 15thand 16th October, 2003, wishto express our gratitude to theArchbishop of Canterbury, DrRowan Williams, for calling ustogether in response to recentevents in the Diocese of NewWestminster, Canada, and theEpiscopal Church (USA), andwelcoming us into his home sothat we might take counseltogether, and to seek todiscern, in an atmosphere ofcommon prayer and worship,the will and guidance of theHoly Spirit for the commonlife of the thirty-eight provinceswhich constitute ourCommunion.

At a time of tension, wehave struggled at great costwith the issues before us, buthave also been renewed and

strengthened in ourCommunion with one anotherthrough our worship and studyof the Bible. This has led usinto a deeper commitment towork together, and we affirmour pride in the Anglicaninheritance of faith and orderand our firm desire to remainpart of a Communion, wherewhat we hold in common ismuch greater than that whichdivides us in proclaiming Good

News to the world.

At this time we feel theprofound pain and uncertaintyshared by others about ourChristian discipleship in thelight of controversial decisionsby the Diocese of NewWestminster to authorise aPublic Rite of Blessing forthose in committed same sexrelationships, and by the 74thGeneral Convention of theEpiscopal Church (USA) toconfirm the election of a priestin a committed same sexrelationship to the office andwork of a Bishop.

These actions threaten theunity of our own Communionas well as our relationships withother parts of Christ's Church,our mission and witness, andour relations with other faiths,in a world already confused inareas of sexuality, morality andtheology, and polarisedChristian opinion.

As Primates of ourCommunion seeking toexercise the “enhancedresponsibility” entrusted to usby successive LambethConferences, we re-affirm ourcommon understanding of thecentrality and authority ofScripture in determining the

NewsletterThe Prayer Book Society of Canada

Christmas 2003

I N S I D E

1Statement of theAnglican Primates

3RecentDevelopments withinthe AnglicanCommunionRegarding theSame-Sex Issue

4A Parish Feels theLash of a HostileBishop

6Icon of St MichaelPainted at St Michael’s YouthConference

7Of the Great andGlorious AccidentsHappening aboutthe Birth of JESUS

10Voices From thePew

The Annunciation, Fra Filippo Lippi (1406-1469).– Continued on Page 2

Anglican Primates Release StatementCondemning the Actions of the Bishop of New Westminster and the Episcopal Church of the USAIn response to the current crisis in the Anglican Church resulting from the actions of the Bishop of NewWestminster and the General Convention of the Episcopal Church in the USA, the Primates of the AnglicanCommunion met at Lambeth in October, 2003. Here is the full text of their statement

“

“These actions threatenthe unity of our own

Communion as well asour relationships withother parts of Christ'sChurch, our missionand witness, and ourrelations with other

faiths...”

basis of our faith. Whilst weacknowledge a legitimate diversity ofinterpretation that arises in the Church,this diversity does not mean that someof us take the authority of Scripturemore lightly than others. Nevertheless,each province needs to be aware of thepossible effects of its interpretation ofScripture on the life of other provincesin the Communion. We commitourselves afresh to mutual respect whilstseeking from the Lord a correctdiscernment of how God's Word speaksto us in our contemporary world.

We also re-affirm the resolutionsmade by the bishops of the AnglicanCommunion gathered at the LambethConference in 1998 on issues of humansexuality as having moral force andcommanding the respect of theCommunion as its present position onthese issues. We commend the report ofthat Conference in its entirety to allmembers of the Anglican Communion,valuing especially its emphasis on theneed “to listen to the experience ofhomosexual persons, and...to assurethem that they are loved by God andthat all baptised, believing and faithfulpersons, regardless of sexual orientation,are full members of the Body ofChrist”; and its acknowledgement ofthe need for ongoing study onquestions of human sexuality.

Therefore, as a body we deeplyregret the actions of the Diocese of NewWestminster and the Episcopal Church(USA) which appear to a number ofprovinces to have short-circuited thatprocess, and could be perceived to alterunilaterally the teaching of the AnglicanCommunion on this issue. They donot. Whilst we recognise the juridicalautonomy of each province in ourCommunion, the mutualinterdependence of the provinces meansthat none has authority unilaterally tosubstitute an alternative teaching as if itwere the teaching of the entire AnglicanCommunion.

To this extent, therefore, we mustmake clear that recent actions in NewWestminster and in the EpiscopalChurch (USA) do not express the mindof our Communion as a whole, andthese decisions jeopardise oursacramental fellowship with each other.We have a particular concern for thosewho in all conscience feel bound todissent from the teaching and practiceof their province in such matters.Whilst we reaffirm the teaching ofsuccessive Lambeth Conferences thatbishops must respect the autonomy andterritorial integrity of dioceses andprovinces other than their own, we callon the provinces concerned to makeadequate provision for episcopaloversight of dissenting minorities withintheir own area of pastoral care inconsultation with the Archbishop ofCanterbury on behalf of the Primates.

The Presiding Bishop of theEpiscopal Church (USA) has explainedto us the constitutional frameworkwithin which the election andconfirmation of a new bishop in theEpiscopal Church (USA) takes place. AsPrimates, it is not for us to passjudgement on the constitutionalprocesses of another province. Werecognise the sensitive balance betweenprovincial autonomy and the expressionof critical opinion by others on theinternal actions of a province.Nevertheless, many Primates have

pointed to the grave difficulties that thiselection has raised and will continue toraise. In most of our provinces theelection of Canon Gene Robinsonwould not have been possible since hischosen lifestyle would give rise to acanonical impediment to hisconsecration as a bishop.

If his consecration proceeds, werecognise that we have reached a crucialand critical point in the life of theAnglican Communion and we have hadto conclude that the future of theCommunion itself will be put injeopardy. In this case, the ministry of thisone bishop will not be recognised bymost of the Anglican world, and manyprovinces are likely to considerthemselves to be out of Communionwith the Episcopal Church (USA). Thiswill tear the fabric of our Communion atits deepest level, and may lead to furtherdivision on this and further issues asprovinces have to decide in consequencewhether they can remain in communionwith provinces that choose not to breakcommunion with the Episcopal Church(USA).

Similar considerations apply to thesituation pertaining in the Diocese ofNew Westminster.

2 Visit our web site: www.prayerbook.ca

Christmas 2003 The Prayer Book Society of Canada Newsletter

Primates’ Statement– Continued from Page 1

“Therefore, as a body we deeplyregret the actions of the Diocese

of New Westminster and theEpiscopal Church (USA)...we

call on the provinces concernedto make adequate provision forepiscopal oversight of dissentingminorities within their own areaof pastoral care in consultation

with the Archbishop ofCanterbury on behalf of the

Primates.”

If [the] consecration [of GeneRobinson] proceeds, we

recognise that we have reacheda crucial and critical point in

the life of the AnglicanCommunion and we have hadto conclude that the future ofthe Communion itself will beput in jeopardy...This will tearthe fabric of our Communionat its deepest level, and may

lead to furtherdivision....Similar

considerations apply to thesituation pertaining in the

Diocese of New Westminster.”

– Continued on Page 8

3Visit our web site: www.prayerbook.ca

The Prayer Book Society of Canada Newsletter Christmas 2003

October 16th, 2003

The Primates of the Anglican Churchthroughout the world meet at Lambeth,England, and issue a statement re-affirming the 1998 Lambeth Conferenceon issues of human sexuality, and express“deep regret” at the actions of theDiocese of New Westminster forendorsing same-sex unions, and of theEpiscopal Church in the USA for itsendorsement of the election of GeneRobinson, a divorced man living openlyin a same-sex union, and cites the“profound pain and uncertainty” theseactions have created: “We must make itclear that recent actions in NewWestminster and in the EpiscopalChurch [of the USA] do not express themind of our Communion…andjeopardize our sacramental fellowship”

The statement is signed by MichaelPeers, Primate of the Anglican Church ofCanada, and by Frank Griswold,Presiding Bishop of the EpiscopalChurch of the USA. The full text of thestatement is reproduced on page 1.

October 17th, 2003

The Chancellor of the Diocese of NewWestminster presses charges against sevenclergy - representing 25% of theworshipping population of the diocese -for “disobedient and disrespectfulconduct” towards the bishop – i.e., foropposing the Bishop’s endorsement ofsame-sex blessings – and “schism”: thisin clear violation of the worldwidePrimates’ explicit direction to theCanadian Church – and to the entireAnglican Communion – that AlternativeEpiscopal Oversight is to be provided toall dissenting minorities confronted by abishop endorsing same-sex unions.

Earlier in the month, David Crawley,Archbishop of British Columbia said hehad begun disciplinary proceedingsagainst Terry Buckle, Bishop of the

Yukon, for offering Alternative EpiscopalOversight to the dissenting parishes inthe diocese of New Westminster.

October 31, 2003

The Canadian House of Bishops wrapsup their meeting with a request toBishop to Ingham to drop chargesagainst seven dissenting clergy, and arequest to Archbishop Crawley to dropcharges against Bishop Terry Buckle.

November 2, 2003

Gene Robinson is consecrated Bishop ofNew Hampshire at a hockey rink at theUniversity of New Hampshire inDurham. The consecration is conductedby Frank Griswold, Presiding Bishop ofthe Episcopal Church. Fifty USBishops joined Bishop Griswold, in thetraditional laying-on of hands on thenew bishop’s head.

The Rt. Rev’d David Bena of theDiocese of Albany reads a protest signedby 38 bishops from the US and Canada:“It is impossible to affirm a candidate fora bishop and symbol of unity whose veryconsecration is dividing the wholeAnglican Communion….Thisconsecration poses a dramaticcontradiction to the historic faith anddiscipline of the Church. We join the

majority of bishops in the [Anglican]Communion and will not recognize it.We declare our grief at the actions ofthose who are engaging in this schismaticact. This action is a departure fromHoly Scripture, from the clear historicteaching of the Church, from the moralimperative of the Lambeth Conferenceof Bishops, 1998, and from the ferventplea of the Primates of theCommunion.”

A further objection read at theconsecration declares it to be “a cowardlyand conforming act of a church that hascapitulated to elite culture…inclusivitywithout transformation is not the gospelof Jesus Christ.”

The Anglican Mainstream Statementdeclares “We find it hard to understandhow the Presiding Bishop [FrankGriswold] could oversee this action aftersubscribing to the unanimous statementof all the Anglican Primates that such anaction would tear the fabric of theCommunion.”

Peter Akinola, Primate of Nigeria,speaking on behalf of the [Anglican]Primates of the Global South expressed“profound sadness and pain”: “We areappalled that the authorities within theEpiscopal Church of the USA (ECUSA)have ignored the heartfelt plea of theCommunion not to proceed with thescheduled consecration, which clearlydemonstrates that authorities withinECUSA consider their cultural-basedagenda is of far greater importance thanobedience to the Word of God, theintegrity of the one mission of God inwhich we all share, the spiritual welfareand unity of the Anglican Communion,our ecumenical fellowship and inter-faithrelationships.”

November 7, 2003

Proceedings against Bishop Buckle andseven New Westminster clergy are stayed.

Recent Developments within the Anglican CommunionRegarding the Same-Sex Issue

“We are appalled that the authoritieswithin the Episcopal Church of the

USA (ECUSA) have ignored theheartfelt plea of the Communion not

to proceed with the scheduledconsecration, which clearly

demonstrates that authorities withinECUSA consider their cultural-basedagenda is of far greater importance

than obedience to the Word ofGod,…the spiritual welfare and unity

of the Anglican Communion, ourecumenical fellowship and inter-faith

relationships.”



The Diocese of New Westminster isoften in the news these days. The actionstaken by this diocese, to sanction blessingthe unions of same sex couples, have beenschismatic far beyond our borders. Thequestion must be asked: has the Bishop ofNew Westminster, Michael Ingham, actedin accordance with promises he maderegarding the doctrine and discipline of theAnglican Church of Canada? At the time ofhis consecration as bishop he was chargedto make these promises: (as per the BAS)

“…To guard the faith, unity, anddiscipline of the Church; to celebrate andto provide for the administration of thesacraments of the new covenant; to ordainpriests and deacons, and to join inordaining bishops; and to be in all things afaithful pastor and wholesome example forthe entire flock of Christ.”

The bishop’s actions also need to beset against the solemn oaths made as apriest at the time of ordination. Even inthe BAS, which in many places seeks todilute the tenets of classical Anglicanism,the priest swears a solemn oath before thecongregation and before God to “be loyalto the doctrine, discipline, and worship ofChrist as this Church has received them”,then states “I solemnly declare that I dobelieve the holy scripture of the Old andNew Testament to be the word of God,and to contain all things necessary tosalvation, and I do solemnly swear toconform to the doctrine, discipline andworship of the Anglican Church of Canada(BAS, p 647) .

Yet the Bishop has broken theGuidelines of the Canadian House ofBishops, flouted the resolutions of theworld-wide Anglican Bishops meeting atLambeth in 1998, disregarded the plainword of Scripture, and departed from thedoctrine, discipline and worship of theAnglican Church of Canada.

Two separate churches have beenwrapped in the same cloak for decades –and suddenly the cloak is drawn aside.There they stand: one seeking to be loyalto the doctrine, discipline, and worship of

Christ as the Anglican Church of Canadahas received it, the other keen to innovate,to revise the ‘faith once offered’,interpreting revelation as progressive,sceptical of the traditional ethos of thosebelieving in the ‘One, True, Holy, Catholicand Apostolic Church’; perfecting thelanguage of ambiguity. The storm has beenlooming a long time.

The situation in New Westminstershould warn us that the “process”, which,having been on its receiving end, we canonly describe as being coercive, will beattempted in many dioceses across thecountry and has already begun in some.The bishop of the Diocese of NewWestminster would have the CanadianChurch use the process of “Dialogue” – amodern substitute for rigorous debate. Thismodern dialogue process allows no testingof contentious ideas; instead a wellorchestrated process of coercion, withdesigned discussions, lead by carefully taught“facilitators” is the order of the day.Employed in New Westminster, thisprocess will likely be proposed as atemplate in your own diocese. We have allwitnessed how successful the process hasbeen in New Westminster.

St. Martin’s, North Vancouver, is atraditional Anglican parish which uses theBook of Common Prayer primarily for itsworship. It has been directly faced with theconsequences of this conflict, and bornethis responsibility with courage,graciousness and perseverance.

New Westminster Diocesan Synods:

The diocese had endured a prolongedprocess of enforced ‘dialogue’ on same sexunions. The process was seen asunsatisfactory by many. The meetings of theDiocesan Synod of 1998 and 2001 narrowlypassed motions authorizing the blessing ofsame-sex unions. Bishop Ingham withheldhis consent, but continued to manage theprocess. He then made an attempt to winthe approval of the parishes and clergy whohad declared their opposition at the synods.Approaching the June synod of 2002 thebishop made a proposal to this group of

clergy: to designate an “Episcopal Visitor”, avisiting bishop to provide pastoral care butone who would have no jurisdiction; and toprovide a “conscience clause” for priests whowould not perform the same sex rite. Thatconscience clause would not be binding onthe bishop’s successor. This proposal wasrejected as unworkable by most of theorthodox clergy. The proposal, now calledMotion 7, was then presented to the Synodof June 2002, even though it had beenrejected by most of the orthodox of thediocese. Many delegates at synod,uninformed of the motion’s history, hailed itas a great gesture of compromise. Theproposal was passed by a 62.5% majority. Atthis point, representatives of eight parishes,including St Martin’s, walked out of Synodin protest. The eight protesting parishessubsequently met and formed a coalitioncalled the Anglican Communion in NewWestminster (ACiNW). It is important torealize that these parishes represent about25% of the active, worshipping populationof the diocese of New Westminster.

Vestry Follow-up at St. Martin’s Church

On Sunday, September 29th, 2002,St Martin’s Vestry convened and, after areport from the Rector, Rev'd Dr. TimothyCooke, and subsequent discussion, votedon three questions:

a) Are you in favour of St. Martin’s activelyseeking Alternative Episcopal Oversight(AEO)? (Carried by 75.96%)

b) Are you in favour of St. Martin’swithholding its financial assessment fromthe Diocese of New Westminster pendingresolution of our request for AEO? (Carried by 78.94%)

c) Are you in favour of St. Martin’s,together with other parishes, contributingresources (financial and otherwise) to thecoalition known as the “AnglicanCommunion in New Westminster”(ACiNW), which is seeking AEO?(Carried by 82.97%)

Resignation of St. Martin’s Rector

However, the subsequent pressures ofthe situation became too great for the

Christian Unity and the coming crisis for The Anglican Churchof North America:Or, How a Prayer Book Parish in the Diocese of New Westminster came to feel the lash of a hostile bishopNorah Johnston, Chairman of the Vancouver Branch of the PBSC




Rector, the Rev’d Dr Timothy Cooke, andhe resigned, effective January 31, 2003. Aninterim Rector, the Rev'd Canon DonWillis, was appointed by the bishop.

St. Martin’s Annual Vestry Meeting, Feb.2003

The wardens proposed a motion,which was amended to:

“Be it resolved that the wardens beinstructed to organize one or moreinformational meetings for the purpose ofoutlining the options available to theparish, together with the legal and otherimplications of each option, and thereafterto call a special vestry meeting, prior toDiocesan Synod, all for the purpose ofdetermining the relationship of this parishwith the Diocese of New Westminster.”(Motion carried)

Reaction in the worldwide church

Many in the Anglican Church ofCanada and the Anglican Communionworldwide watched with concern theevents unfolding in the Diocese of NewWestminster. Several Bishops and Primatesof Africa and southeast Asia visitedVancouver and met with representatives ofthe Diocese and the ACiNW. Theybelieved that reconciliation was nowimpossible, and stated that they wereprepared to provide assistance to theparishes of the ACiNW. Later, they allagreed that a Canadian solution foralternative Episcopal oversight (AEO)would be the ideal way forward.

In February, 2003, shortly after St.Martin’s annual vestry, Bishop Terry Buckleof the Diocese of the Yukon (in the sameAnglican Province as New Westminster)submitted an offer to Bishop Ingham toprovide AEO with jurisdiction (that is,episcopal oversight with full authority) overthe parishes of the ACiNW.

Several Anglican Primates andCanadian Bishops endorsed this offer.Michael Ingham “strongly rejected thisoffer and threatened legal action if BishopBuckle exercised his Episcopal ministry inthe Diocese without permission.” BishopIngham also wrote to all diocesan clergyand parishes stating that he would take“disciplinary measures under the Canons”if any accepted such an offer. With theexception of St. Martin’s, the other 7ACiNW parishes accepted Bishop Buckle’s

offer of AEO. St. Martin’s was not in aposition to make such a decision without aRector.

Information Meetings at St Martin’sleading up to the Special Vestry, May 25,2003

On March 14, the wardensdistributed a 16 page documentsummarizing the issue. Threeinformational meetings duly held. At thefirst meeting, representatives from theACiNW attended, and answered questions.Bishop Ingham along with an archdeaconand the regional dean attended the secondmeeting, and made a presentation. Thediocesan authorities raised the prospect oflitigation regarding church property, shouldthe parish opt to accept Bishop Buckle’soffer. The third meeting was held for thepurposes of congregational discussion. Inthe meantime, Bishop Ingham announcedthat he had approved Bishop Hockin ofFredericton to act as an episcopal visitor tothe diocese for a period of one year. Allauthority was to be left in the hands ofBishop Ingham.

A Special Vestry was scheduled forMay 25 to vote on the issue. Without itsRector, the parish felt its way towardsclarity in a highly difficult situation. St.Martin’s felt vulnerable, particularly overthe issue of possible litigation regardingchurch property. Advance voting forpeople unable to attend the Special Vestrymeeting was held. As the wording on thisballot was deemed by many to be "scare-mongering", a further meeting was held onMay 13, at which the question on theballot was re-worded. The original wordingran as follows: "I give my own support tothe ACiNW to seek Episcopal Oversightby Bishop Terence Buckle. I recognise thatthe Chancellor and Chief Legal Officer ofthe Diocese of New Westminster has statedthat in order to actually obtain suchEpiscopal Oversight ministry from BishopBuckle, I may have to leave the parish ofSt. Martin."

A special Vestry was held on May25th, 2003, with the wording on the ballotas follows: "Be it resolved that this vestryaccepts Bishop Terry Buckle’s offer ofalternative Episcopal oversight with fulljurisdiction, as set out in his letter ofMarch 17, 2003." A motion was madethat no vote less than 60% would bebinding.

The result of the vote (including the

advance ballots with the words deemedobjectionable by some) was116 for and 78against, that is 59.79% in favour.Following the vote, the wardensannounced that the vote would beinterpreted by the diocese as a rejection ofBishop Buckle’s offer of alternativeEpiscopal oversight. At a ChurchCommittee Meeting on May 28, thewardens called for a "process of discerningthe way ahead".

Church Committee Meeting, June 10th,2003

The meeting was well attended, withmany parishioners as observers. TheWardens, Trustees and Treasurer providedthe Parish with a Report on the ChurchCommittee Meeting, June 10th, 2003,dated and distributed June 15th.

Excerpts from that Report follow:

The Trustees, Jim Burns and ChrisVondette, expressed the following concerns:

a) A very friendly private meeting withBishop Hockin confirmed that, with himas Episcopal Visitor, Bishop Ingham wouldcontrol the selection of our next priest.St.Martin’s would be required to bring itscontributions to the Diocese up to date.

b) The financial state of our parish haddeteriorated to a critical point as memberson both sides of the question havewithheld their contributions, awaitingsome clear direction.

c) The vote taken on May 25 showed thatthe parish is split almost 60% in favor ofaccepting Bishop Buckle’s offer, and 40%against.

Therefore at the Church Committeethe Trustees presented this motion:

“The Wardens, with the full supportof the Trustees, accept the recommendationthat the vote of May 25th be accepted asbeing in favour of accepting BishopBuckle’s offer of Episcopal Oversight, andthat Bishop Buckle be so informed.

Accepting Bishop Buckle’s offer, sinceit is the majority’s wish, would logicallyresult in the loss of fewer parishioners andwould be the best solution to providingclosure to the uncertainty, providing apoint from which St. Martin’s can moveforward and begin the process of healingwithin the parish.”

After discussion, the ChurchCommittee passed the motion by a

Christian Unity …– Continued from Page 4




The 2004 Canadian Church Calendar is nowavailable. The calendar includes the Sundays,Holy Days, Saints' Days and seasons of theChurch Year, in accordance with the calendarfrom the Book of Common Prayer (1962) of theAnglican Church of Canada.

The 2004 Calendar is illustrated with attractive original watercolours of Anglicanchurches throughout Canada, painted by Montreal-born artist Peter Bresnen.

Featured for 2004 are churches from Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, Ontario,Quebec, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Alberta.

Orders of 25 or more are only $3.85 each (plus postage and handling). For fewerthan 25, the Calendars are $4.60 each (plus postage and handling). This meansthat the more you order, the lower the price, or the greater amount raised foryour parish or church group (sold for $4.50 or $5.25 each, for instance).

Available from St Peter Publications, P.O. Box 713, Charlottetown, PrinceEdward Island, C1A 7L3

Telephone/fax: (902) 368-8442

E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.stpeter.org

St Bartholomew’s Christmas Hamper Programme

Remember those in need at Christmas!St Bartholomew’s Church, Toronto,

has run a Christmas Hamper programme for 47 years.

• Last year we distributed 400 Christmas hampers, providing approximatelyseven days supply of food with all the “fixin’s” for a Christmas dinner.

• The program costs a minimum of $35,000.• Tax receipts issued for any donation of $10.00 or more.• We always have more requests than we can fill.

St Bartholomew’s Anglican Church, is an inner city church that uses the Book ofCommon Prayer for its devotional and liturgical life.

St Bartholomew’s Anglican Church,509 Dundas Street East, Toronto, Ontario M5A 3V3

Fr. Gordon Walls: telephone (416) 368-0908; e-mail: [email protected]: http://www3sympatico.ca/ohmy/stbarts/

Many, many thanks to readers of the PBSC National Newsletter whocontributed so very generously to our programme during past Christmases!

Icon of St MichaelPainted at St Michael’s YouthConferenceThis year’s St Michael’s Conference atDurham, Ontario featured somethingnew: the painting (or “writing”) of anicon of St Michael the Archangel. As theicon wasbeing“written”(correctlyspeaking,icons are“written”,notpainted), itwas beingused as ateachingtool. Thisis highlyappropriate,as icons areconsideredto be apictorialrepresentation of a doctrinal statementabout God or His saints. Icon “writer”Chris Vandonkelaar, from Hamilton,Ontario, taught Conference attendeesabout icons, their significance, and theart of panting them, as he worked on theicon during one of the classes offered atthe Conference this year.

Once completed, the icon will be placedin the new Chapel of St Michael and StNicholas of the Seafarers’ Mission, at thefoot of Wellington Street in Hamilton,which serves hundreds of sailors fromaround the world. Icons play animportant part in the religious life of theOrthodox and Roman CatholicChurches, and are used by manyAnglicans, and, these days, by manyProtestants as well. Those who use iconsas part of their worship understand thesignificance of these “windows intoheaven”.



From the Life and Death of theEver Blessed JESUS CHRIST theSaviour of the World, by JeremyTaylor, D.D., Chaplain to His MajestyKing Charles I, printed at the Sign ofthe Angel in Ivy Lane, London, 1653.

Although the birth of Christ wasdestitute of the usual excrescencies* andless necessary Pomps which used tosignify and illustrate the birth of Princes;yet his first humility was made gloriouswith presages, miracles, and significationsfrom heaven, which did not only , likethe furniture of a Princely Bedchamber,speak the riches of the Parent, orgreatness of the Son within its own walls,but did declare to all the world that theirPrince was born, publishing it withfigures and representments almost asgreat as its Empire.

But because the heavens, as well asthe earth, are his Creatures, and do servehim, at his Birth he received a sign inheaven above, as well as in the earthbeneath, as an homage paid to theircommon Lord. For as certain Shepherdswere keeping watch over their flocks bynight, near that part where Jacob did useto feed his cattle when he was in theLand of Canaan, the Angel of the Lordcame upon them, and the glory of the Lordshone round about them. Needs must theshepherds be afraid, when an Angel camearrayed in glory and clothed in a robe oflight, great enough to confound theirsenses and scatter their understandings.But the Angel said unto them, fear not, forI bring tidings of great joy which shall be toall people, For unto you is born this day inthe city of David a Saviour which is Christthe Lord. The Shepherds needed not tobe invited to see this glorious sight; butlest their fancy should rise up to anexpectation of a Prince as externallyglorious as might be hoped for inconsequence of so glorious an apparition,the Angel, to prevent the mistake, toldthem of a sign, because it was so remote

from the common probability andexpectation of such a birth, that by beinga miracle, so great a Prince should beborn so poorly, it became an instrumentto signify itself and all the other parts ofmysterious consequence. For the Angelsaid, this shall be a sign unto you, ye shallfind the Babe wrapped in swaddling clotheslying in a manger.

But as light, when it first begins toguild the east, scatters indeed thedarkness from the earth, but ceases not toincrease its flame, till it hath made perfectday, so it happened now in thisapparition of the Angel of light, heappeared and told his message and didshine, but the light arose higher and

higher till midnight was as brightmidday; for suddenly there was with theAngel a multitude of the heavenly host:and after the Angel had told his messagein plain song, the whole chorus joined indescant, and sang a hymn to the tuneand sense of heaven, where glory is paidto God in eternal and never-ceasingoffices, and whence good will descendedupon men in perpetual and never-endingtorrents: their song was Glory be to Godon high, on earth, good will towards men.

As soon as these blessed Choristershad sung their Christmas carol, andtaught the Church a hymn to put intoher offices for ever in the anniversary of

“Angeli Laudantes”, (Angels Offering Praise), Tapestry designed by Edward Burne Jones,woven in wools and silk by Morris and Company, Merton Abbey, England, 1894.

Of the Great and Glorious Accidents Happening about the Birth of JESUSby Jeremy Taylor, D.D.

– Continued on Page 8* excrencies - excesses

“



this festivity, the Angels returned intoheaven, and the Shepherds went toBethlehem, to see this thing which theLord had made known unto them, Andthey came with haste, and found Mary andJoseph, and the Babe lying in a manger:Just as the Angel had prepared theirExpectation, they found the narrativeverified, and saw the glory of the mysteryof the presentment which was made bythe heavenly Ministers, seeing GODthrough the veil of a child’s flesh, theHeir of heaven wrapt in swaddlingclothes and a person to whom the Angelsdid minister laid in a manger. And theybeheld, and wondered, and worshipped.

But as a precious liquor warmed andheightened by a flame, first crowns thevessel, then dances over its brim into thefire, increasing the cause of its motionand extravagancy, so it happened to theshepherds whose hearts being filled withthe oil of gladness up unto the brim, thejoy ran over, as being too big to beconfined in their own breasts, and didcommunicate its self, growing greater bysuch dissemination: for when they hadseen it they made it known abroad thesaying which was told them concerning thischild. And (as well they might) all thatheard it wondered. But Mary, having firstchanged her joy to wonder, turned herwonder into entertainments of themystery, and mystery into a fruition andcohabitation with it. For Mary kept allthese sayings and pondered them in herheart.

…But the Angel brought themessage to Shepherds, to persons simpleand mean, and humble, persons likely tobe more apprehensive of the mystery andless of the scandal, of the poverty of theMessiah: for they whose custom oraffections dwell in secular pomps, whoare not used by charity or humility tostoop to evenness and consideration oftheir brethren, of equal natures thoughunequal fortunes, are persons of all theworld most indisposed and removedfrom the understanding of spiritualexcellencies, especially when they do notcome clothed with advantages of the

world, and of such beauties which theyadmire. GOD himself in poverty comesin a prejudice to them that love richness,and simplicity is folly to crafty persons, amean birth is ignoble stain, beggary is ascandal, and the Cross an unanswerableobjection. But the Angel’s moral in thecircumstances of his address, and invitingthe poor shepherds to Bethlehem is: Thatnone are fit to come to CHRIST butthose who are poor in spirit, despisers ofthe world; and therefore neither did theAngel tell the story to Herod nor to theScribes and Pharisees, whose ambitionhad ends contradictory to the simplicityand poverty of the birth of JESUS.”Jeremy Taylor (1613-1667) was Chaplain toKing Charles I, and one of the most celebratedpreachers of his day. His fame today rests largelyon his devotional writings, which arecharacteristic expressions of Anglican spiritualityin their balanced sobriety and their insistence ona well-ordered piety and reverence. They havebecome classics due to their lucid and vigorousprose and powerful imagery. Jeremy Taylorbecame Bishop of Down and Connor in 1660.

Prayer from Meditation upon the “Great andGlorious Accidents Happening about theBirth of JESUS”, from Jeremy Taylor’s ‘Lifeof Christ’, 1653.

“O Blessed and eternal JESU, at whose birththe Quires of Angels sang praises to GOD,and proclaimed peace to Men, sanctify mywill and inferior affections; make me to bewithin the conditions of peace, that I be Holyand mortified, a Despiser of the world andexterior vanities, humble and charitable: thatby thy eminent example I may be so fixed inthe degrees and prosecution of the ends ofGOD, and blissful Eternity, that I beunmoved with the terrors of the World,unaltered with its allurements and seductions,not ambitious of its honour, not desirous of itsfullness and plenty, but make me diligent inthe employment thou givest me, faithful indischarges of my trust, modest in my desires,content in the issues of thy Providence, that insuch dispositions I may receive and entertainvisitations from Heaven, and revelations of themysteries and blisses Evangelical, that by suchdirection I may be brought into thy presence,there to see the beauties and admire thygraces, and imitate all thy imitable excellencesand rest in Thee forever, in this world by theperseverance of a holy and conformable life,and in the world to come in the participationof Thy essential glories and felicities, Oblessed and eternal JESUS.”

Glorious Accidents…– Continued from Page 7

We have noted that the LambethConference 1998 requested theArchbishop of Canterbury to establish acommission to consider his own role inmaintaining communion within andbetween provinces when gravedifficulties arise . We ask him now toestablish such a commission, but that itsremit be extended to include urgent anddeep theological and legal reflection onthe way in which the dangers we haveidentified at this meeting will have to beaddressed. We request that such acommission complete its work, at leastin relation to the issues raised at thismeeting, within twelve months.

We urge our provinces not to actprecipitately on these wider questions,but take time to share in this process ofreflection and to consider their ownconstitutional requirements asindividual provinces face up to potentialrealignments.

Questions of the parity of ourcanon law, and the nature of therelationship between the laws of ourprovinces with one another have alsobeen raised. We encourage the Networkof Legal Advisers established by theAnglican Consultative Council, meetingin Hong Kong in 2002, to bring tocompletion the work which they havealready begun on this question.

It is clear that recent controversieshave opened debates within the life of ourCommunion which will not be resolveduntil there has been a lengthy process ofprayer, reflection and substantial work inand alongside the Commission which wehave recommended. We pray that Godwill equip our Communion to be equal tothe task and challenges which lie before it.

“Now I appeal to the elders of yourcommunity, as a fellow elder and awitness to Christ's sufferings, and as onewho has shared in the glory to berevealed: look after the flock of Godwhose shepherd you are.” (1 Peter 5.1,2a)

Primates’ Statement– Continued from Page 2

”We wish all our members and friends a truly blessed Christmas.



significant majority. The vote was 12 to 8,or 60% to 40%, mirroring the earlierParish vote. In spite of some talk of thevote being “illegal” a letter was duly sent toBishop Terry Buckle of the Yukon.

The Report concluded with anearnest plea “that we all join in the task ofreuniting the St.Martin’s family....andensure that we are up to date with ourfinancial contributions.....”

First Meeting with Bishop Ingham

On June 23rd Bishop Michael Inghamsent a letter to the Wardens and Trusteesinviting them to a meeting to discuss the“turmoil” in St. Martin’s. He proposed twooptions:

1. proceed with the process of getting aparish priest, using the services of BishopHockin as Episcopal Visitor, if deemeduseful; or

2. he would invoke Diocesan Canon 15,which empowers him by cause of a“pastoral emergency” to establish a new oralternative form of organization andthereby move to the appointment of a newpriest

This meeting was held at theDiocesan Offices with Chancellor GeorgeCadman (the Bishop’s legal counsel), theVenerable Archdeacon Lou Rivers,Regional Dean the Rev'd Sarah Tweedale,and Priest-in-charge the Rev'd Canon DonWillis. The Church Wardens and Trusteesrepresented St. Martin’s Parish. WardenPaul Clarke presented the Parish’s positionthat time was needed to discuss theBishop’s options especially as summerholidays made meetings difficult to puttogether. Bishop Ingham did not acceptthis view but suggested another meetingshortly.

Second Meeting with Bishop Ingham:

On July 3rd there was another meetingwith Bishop Ingham and his two advisors,Chancellor Cadman and ArchdeaconRivers. The mood was much morecontroversial and acrimonious. St. Martin’swanted more time to bring the churchtogether and deal with its difficulties. Inspite of considerable pressure, the Wardensand Trustees would not revoke the Vestry’sdecisions on alternative Episcopal oversightwithout putting the question beforeanother Vestry meeting, possibly in

September. When the meeting broke up St.Martin’s representatives fully expected theBishop to invoke Canon 15 within a fewdays. However, on July 10th the Bishopagreed to postpone any further meetings oraction until after the August holidays.

Aborted Church Committee Meeting ofAugust 12, 2003:

On July 21 2003 the Rev'd DonWillis, Priest-in-Charge, sent two letter toall Parishioners. The first called for anExtraordinary Meeting of the ChurchCommittee set for Tuesday, August 12,2003. The second letter noted the financialdifficulties of the Parish. There was a flurryof activity and opinion for several weeksfollowing the announcement of thismeeting. However, on August 11th theExtraordinary Church Committee meetingfor August 12th was cancelled, with no clearreason given.

The Bishop Acts:

On Saturday afternoon, September6th, two Diocesan officials, together with alocksmith, arrived at St. Martin’s to changethe locks. Women in the kitchen and ayouth group meeting with the Youth Pastorquickly notified the Trustees and others,who came to the scene and prevailed uponthe Diocesan people to cease this activity.The locks were returned but a vigil wasmaintained all night.

Diocesan Archdeacon Ron Harrisonwas present for both Church servicesSunday September 7th. At the end of each,he stood and read a letter, already in themail to all parishioners, from the Bishop.Due to the troubles in St. Martin’s, and theapparent “unwillingness of some membersof the parish to search for a permanentIncumbent through the normal diocesanprocess”, the Bishop had invoked DiocesanCanon 15, and consequently, had removedall officers and members of the ChurchCommittee, and replaced them with three“Bishop’s Wardens”, confirmed the priest-in-charge until further notice, andappointed a Diocesan official as treasurer.The next day the Youth Director, whosesalary was paid by a special fund, was “letgo”. He and his family are now in theprocess of reorganising their lives. Theseactions received wide publicity in the local,national and international media, much ofit critical of the Bishop’s “attempt to lockout his parishioners”.

Continuing Work of Parish Groups:

In the letter to parishioners from theBishop’s Wardens dated September 18ththe Bishop’s Wardens state that parishgroups were not discharged under canon15, and that “St. Martin’s needs thesegroups to continue doing their duties.” Ingood faith, the Newsletter Committeecontinued the production of the newsletteras usual….

“…On Friday afternoon [Sept. 26th],we were informed by our Interim Rectorthat after consulting with Diocesan officialshe could not allow the newsletter to beproduced. We find this position to bedifficult to understand. We as editors nevercensored the content of the newsletter.Michael Ingham has publicly stated thathis actions were not intended to stifledebate. Since we feel the newsletter reflectscorrectly the current situation at St.Martin’s, and that those who submittedarticles have a right to be published, wehave continued”. Ironically, it is from thatvery newsletter has come the timeline ofevents compressed for this article

You can read elsewhere in this editionof the PBSC Newsletter the worldwideevents taking place at the meeting atLambeth of the Anglican Primates, and thesubsequent meeting of the CanadianHouse of Bishops. How these events willaffect us here at St Martin’s remains to beseen.

Some Conclusions

The crisis we are presently suffering inour Church seems to centre on questionshaving to do with ‘jurisdiction’ and‘authority’. Anglicanism really has noauthoritative hierarchical structure. InsteadAnglican structure is that of a communionof bishops, a group held together bycollegial respect as servants of Christ. Oneof the responsibilities made formal by vowsat the consecration of an Anglican bishopis to safeguard unity of the Church. Theessence of true Christian unity, and abishop’s promise to guard that unity, is wellexpressed by Fr. Robert Crouse, herespeaking at the consecration of AnthonyBurton as Bishop of Saskatchewan, inOctober, 1993:

“…No doubt, the functions of abishop are manifold; but, above all, he is tobe the shepherd of Christ’s flock in thisplace, the overseer or steward of God’shousehold here; and to him especially is





Every parish that uses the Book ofCommon Prayer – and wishes topreserve its way of worship – needs to bevigilant when there is a change of priest.Our parish priest was moved in October,2002. That was the beginning of a lot oftrouble for us.

When the Archdeacon came to visit ushe advised there were only two clergyavailable for Interim duties. We chosethe one whose income request we couldafford. The first service he conductedwas according to the Book of CommonPrayer. However, on the second Sundaywe were advised that the AnglicanChurch had “moved forward” to a morepersonal form of prayer than that in theBCP, and that new inserts for the servicewere included in the bulletin. After theservice I said that we were not interestedin having a BAS service. He informedme that the inserts were from a LutheranService Book. As things progressed, itbecame clear that his idea was to have ususing the BAS and the new hymnalbefore the new rector was appointed.

I complained to the Archdeacon, whosaid that no instructions to change theservice traditional in our parish hadcome from his office, or from thebishop's office. Just when I was about toaccept this as an honest statement, theArchdeacon advised me that perhaps Iwas going to need to grow accustomedto this type of service. It was then that Irealized that the Interim had not beenadvised that our parish has always been aBCP parish, and wished to remain thatway. Accordingly, I wrote to the bishop,and received a reply that this should beresolved between the wardens and theinterim priest. Things only got worse.

We made our concerns known to theSuffragan Bishop when he came to visitand give us the names of clergy who

were interested in being interviewed forour new full-time priest. In reply, hesaid that every parish experiences a bit ofa set-back when there is an interimpriest. We advised him that we hadexperienced a very serious set-backindeed! He wondered aloud why ourproblems with worship had not beenresolved between the wardens and theinterim clergyman. Our people's wardeninformed him that, as our interim hadhis own agenda and would not listen toanything we said, there was no way forus to resolve the issue.

I had obtained the financial statementsfor the parish the years 2001 and 2002,and provided them to the ParishSelection Committee. In the months ofNovember and December - the periodimmediately after the Interim had cometo us - the envelope offerings and opencollection had dropped by so much thatthe shortfall for two months was greaterthan the shortfall for the rest of wholeyear. After the meeting I knew that theonly way to open the bishop's eyes wasto supply him with these figures. Hewas also to learn that, because of theshortfall and our need to have money onhand to pay for the incoming rector’smoving expenses, and to renovate therectory, we would not be able to pay anyof our apportionment in 2003.

I wrote a second letter to the bishop, andincluded the following additionalconcerns:

1. At Clericus, our Interim had boastedthat he would “straighten out thisbunch” – (that’s us!) - for the newRector.

2. His methods would soon have usfinancially bankrupt, as our parishwanted services from the BCP.

3. The Interim bastardized the BCPservices to suit his own liturgicalagenda.

4. When our previous rector wished tohave someone assist at HolyCommunion he had this approved bythe Board of Management. Theinterim just invited someone to come– without any discussion with theBoard.

5. The new Interim used hymns fromthe new book – which has somepretty questionable hymns in it!! Hehad our parish volunteer photocopythese on our machine, telling her tobuy coloured paper to have themprinted. Our warden vetoed thecoloured paper, and the Incumbentdidn’t offer to pay for it. (All ourService Books and Hymnals arememorial gifts).

6. He also instructed the choir to use adifferent chant because he didn't likethe one our parish uses – and likes.

The main issue, it seemed, was that theinterim had been given the authority tobrow-beat our wardens andcongregation. We wanted to know why,because his actions were destroying ourparish.

The interim also wanted to move thealtar forward, so he could stand behindit, and conduct the service facing thecongregation, the way it’s done in theBAS. We didn’t want this, and anyway,the physical structure of the churchwould not permit it. The people'swarden told him this, and that was theend of that!

Our only hope was to be a get on theSelection Committee for the new rector,

Voices From the PewParishes Need to be Alert when Changing their PriestBy Billie Farmer




and to make clear what we as a parishwanted in the way of worship. Amember whom I have always considereda peacemaker was absolutely adamantthat we have clear in our minds exactlywhat services we wanted, and make thatperfectly clear to the bishop and anyprospective incoming priest. We werealso to make it clear that if we were toregain our numbers at each service theincoming priest must respect – and caterto – the needs of our parish, and not tryto change us.

So that’s exactly what we did. When wewere interviewing we were adamant that

the Book of Common Prayer is ourservice book, and we did not wantinserts for every service. After eachinterview the priest was given a tour ofthe church itself. One priest checked thealtar to see if it could be moved. Thatperson’s name was dropped by theselection committee immediately. In theend we got what we needed, and ourhappy with our choice.

Here are my recommendations for anyparish in our position: The selectioncommittee must be of one mind aboutwhat things are of prime importance,and make sure all these things arediscussed thoroughly with anyprospective new priest. Each dioceseprobably has a different procedure. Ourshas forms to be filled by all members ofthe congregation. The selectioncommittee then condenses these into a“parish profile”, which states the realrequirements of the parish, and which ismade available to all clergy who wish toapply. In turn, the selection committeeis given a profile of those wishing to beinterviewed. The selection committeecan accept or refuse these people forinterviews. For this reason it is veryimportant that you choose the selectioncommittee carefully. In our diocese, aselection committee consists of the fourwardens, the two lay delegates to Synod,and two other people from the parishroll.

One of the important points is that thewrong interim can lower the parishincome very drastically in a short time.So, be careful about whom you accept asinterim—the lowest amount requestedfor a salary is not really the best way tochoose.

Nevertheless, it is foolish to make aquick decision about the person who isto become the next incumbent—there isalways a great deal of time needed for thenew person to adapt to the parish andfor the parish to accept the person.

One further thing I do need to stress.Because I am a Lay Delegate to Synod,my fellow parishioners seemed to thinkthat I had the power to change things.Of course, I didn’t. Because I couldn’t doanything, I gave the bishop’s address toanyone who was interested and caredabout our parish, and told them to writeto him directly. I stressed to them thatonly the bishop has the power to make apriest change his ways, so the only personto whom you should complain is thebishop himself. (At the meeting with theSuffragan Bishop, I told him that I haddone this, and his reply: “The bishop isquite aware that you did this”, indicatedto me that many people had written.)

I also explained that every parishionerhas the right to tell the bishop that theyare unhappy for this reason, or happy forthat reason. (The only time a complaintis going to cost a priest the license topreach is if a committee which includesthe wardens of the parish visit the bishopwith a parish complaint, so parishionersworried about getting their priest “intotrouble” don’t need to worry about that:even then, it may only mean that thepriest will be reprimanded).

The thing to remember is this: If yourparish is unhappy with a priest –especially an Interim - making changes:Write to the Bishop! If enough unhappyparishioners write letters, the bishop willtake note. Because the Bishop alwayswants a parish to be able to pay itsapportionment.

Voices From the Pew…– Continued from Page 10

directed the challenge, ‘If you love me, feedmy sheep’. And that must be anintimidating challenge in these days of atroubled Church in a troubled world. Thebishop must somehow be a focus of unityin a Church threatened by the Scylla andCharybdis of radical schism on the onehand, and a vacuous bureaucraticuniformity on the other. He will be underconstant pressure to conform to the faddishstandards and inclinations of the presentage in the Church and in the world…

… There will be only one real answer,and that one won’t always be easy. St. Paulsays it, in First Corinthians: “It is requiredin stewards that a man be found faithful”.And as St. Irenaeus, the great exponent ofApostolic Succession in the midst of theGnostic crisis of the Second century, clearlysaw and said, the bishop can serve as afocus of unity only inasmuch as he himselfis faithful to the tradition of the truthdivinely given; only thus can he hold thefreedom and integrity of mind which canresist the pressures to conform to the spiritof the present age.”

In telling this story I mean toencourage you to be vigilant, to watch forthe coming battle in your own parish. It ismy hope that the courage of this Parish ofSt. Martin’s, North Vancouver will inspireothers to persevere. It is with that kind ofcourage that we will have to rebuild theChurch.

“…for those classical Christians whostay in their own mainline church — thisrecovery is predicated on elbow-grease,tears, determination, prayer, speaking out,and suffering. Here we have no abidingcity; here we find no ease or comfort; it hastaken years to steal and seize and demolish,it may take a long time indeed to rebuildthe foundations and walls and towers andgood places of our ecclesiasticalinstitutions. However, as classicalChristians we speak for all past generationsof faithful folk; we claim the purloinedtreasures and hijacked institutions; ours byright and title are the good things of thechurch.” (Quoted from the PBSC newsservice CaNN (Classical Anglican Net News)

For more information, see St. Martin’swebsite at: http://www.st-martins.cc/


OFFICERSNational ChairmanMr. Michael Edward, R.R.#1, Belfast P.O., Prince Edward Island, C0A 1A0

Episcopal VisitorThe Rt Rev’d Harold Nutter, Retired Archbishop of Canada

HonoraryChairman/PresidentThe Rev’d Dr. Robert Crouse, Professor Emeritus Dalhousie University

Past ChairmanMr. Ted Siemens

Vice ChairmenThe Rt Rev’d Anthony Burton,Bishop of Saskatchewan, 1308 5th Avenue East,Prince Albert, SaskatchewanS6V 2H7

The Rev’d David Curry, Anglican Rectory, 531 King St, P.O. Box 2661, Windsor, Nova Scotia B0N 2T0

The Rev’d Dr. James I. Packer, Regent College,5800 University Blvd, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 2E4

Correspondence SecretaryThe Rev’d Stephen Sharman, 374 River Road, St. Andrews, Manitoba R1A 2Y1

TreasurerDr. Edgar MacDonaldComlongon FarmBox 57 WinsloePrince Edward Island C1E 1Z2

Branch ContactsSt John’s Mr. Michael Donan (709) 753-5193

Conception Bay North Mrs. Marilyn Murrin (709) 786-6270

Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island Mrs Marie Gibson (902) 835–8210

Annapolis Valley Sr. Margaret Luke (902) 798-3782

Moncton Mr. Peter Johnson (506) 857-8500

Fredericton Mr. Wilfred Alliston (506) 450-9584

FundyMr. William Holder (506) 648-0682

Gaspé CoastMr. Cyrus Journeau (418) 752-3609

Montréal Mr. Richard Lord (514) 938-5349

Ottawa Mrs. Joan Wilson (613) 749-5058

Quinte Dr. James Loudon (613) 966-7571

Port Hope-Cobourg Mr. Pat Bryan (905) 885-0518

TorontoDr. Diana Verseghy (905) 303-4490

Niagara NorthMr. Walter Raybould(905) 971-7863

St. Catharines-Niagara Mrs. Laura Dodson (905) 468-5202

Grand Valley Miss Billie Farmer (519) 583-0475

London Mrs. Suzie Dann (519) 473-2132

Lambton Miss Naomi Luth (519) 336-7874

North Bay Mrs. Dorothy Chabot (705) 472-1937

Manitoba The Rev’d John Stennet (204) 383-5327

Regina Cicely Pritchard (306) 586-9668

Saskatoon Dr. Jane Doig (306) 374–7208

Calgary Mr. Ted Owens (403) 242-1727

Edmonton Mr. David Bertsch(780) 458-1194

Vancouver Mrs. Norah Johnston (604) 224-8986

Vancouver Island Dr. Pat Radcliffe (250) 758-5771

NATIONAL ADDRESSP.O. Box 380601430 Prince of Wales DriveOttawa, OntarioK2C 3Y7

PBSC Web sitewww.prayerbook.ca

Online ResourcesPBSC Critique of the new hymn bookwww.prayerbook.ca/newhymn1.htm

PRAYER BOOK SOCIETY OF CANADANEWSLETTER Editor Mr. Desmond Scotchmer, 40 Homewood Avenue, Apt.401Toronto, Ontario M4Y 2K2email:[email protected]

Editorial CommitteeMr. Wilfred AllistonMrs. Laura DodsonMs. Nancy Gall Miss Naomi LuthThe Rev’d Dr. J. I. Packer Mrs. Carol SchiavettoMr. Richard Spalton

If you wish to join PBSC,please e-mail your nameand address [email protected] mail it to:The PrayerBook Society of Canada,Box 1435, Port Dover,Ontario. N0A 1N0.

Publications Mail Agreement Number 40042571

The Prayer Book Society of CanadaNational Officers and Branch Contacts

The Prayer Book Society of Canada...

Documents

Transcript of The Prayer Book Society of Canada...