In the Report of the National Bishop to the 2009 ELCIC Convention, Bishop Susan Johnson states “The reality is that no church can exist and function as an independent body anymore.” (Second last sentence on Page E-2, 2009 ELCIC Book of Reports). Her report raises the issue of sharing office space with the Anglican Church of Canada as well as other initiatives to insure that the ELCIC ceases to function as an independent church organization. (Page E-2, ELCIC BOR)

Resolutions to Maintain the ELCIC as an Independent Church will be presented at the 2009 ELCIC Convention. These resolutions relate to the apparent drift of the ELCIC hierarchy to support the merger or takeover of the ELCIC by the Anglican Church of Canada (“ACOC”). The attached rationale for the petition outlines some of the significant differences between the ELCIC and the ACOC.

Eastern Synod Bishop Michael Pryse is one of two keynote speakers at the Trinity College Conference on June 14 – 17, 2009 entitled, “YOUR PEOPLE SHALL BE MY PEOPLE, Anglicans and Lutherans together; Visions for the future.” The conference brochure describes the purpose of the conference as follows:

“Do we anticipate doing at a national level what is already happening locally in some places – the merger of the two churches into one? What are the implications of these options?” (emphasis added)

ELCIC National Church Council’s 2009 convention agenda has designated that a significant portion of the ELCIC Convention will be dedicated to meeting with ACOC delegates. The 2009 ELCIC Convention will likely have a profound impact on the medium and long term survival of the ELCIC. A merger or more likely a takeover of the ELCIC by the ACOC would likely result in the transfer of all congregational assets from individual ELCIC congregations to the ACOC Diocese (Synod) offices. The ACOC places complete control over all congregational property and employment of pastors in the hands of Bishops rather than individual congregations. Although some members of the ELCIC believe that Bishops at both the Synod and National level deserve more power and control over congregational property, this is not the view of all ELCIC members. The four resolutions seek to maintain the ELCIC as an independent confessional Lutheran church

----

Petition To Oppose Merger

Resolutions to Maintain the ELCIC as an Independent Church

Motions:

1. That total annual authorized expenditures of the ELCIC for meetings, conventions or other gatherings of ELCIC employees or ELCIC Synod employees with members of the Anglican Church of Canada be restricted to $ 10,000.

2. That the first sentence of Article XII, Section 1 of the ELCIC Constitution, “There shall be a National Council comprised of the officers of this church, who shall serve as the officers of the council; and additional members from the synods allocated on the basis of proportional representation according to baptized membership; and other representatives from full communion agreements.” be replaced with, “There shall be a National Council comprised of the officers of this church, who shall serve as the officers of the council; and additional members from the synods allocated on the basis of proportional representation according to baptized membership.”

3. That last sentence of Part VIII, Section 2 of the Administrative Bylaws of the ELCIC, “There shall be one additional member appointed by the Council of General Synod (COGS) of the Anglican Church of Canada for a term to be determined by COGS.” be removed in its entirety.

4. That NCC cease and desist from scheduling any future ELCIC conventions in conjunction with the ACOC.

Rationale:

Financial Resource Crisis at ELCIC Head Office

The ELCIC is currently an independent organization. composed of over 620 Lutheran congregations across Canada. Historically, the ELCIC has attempted to represent Lutheran theology in Canada. Only congregations that accept Lutheran theology and the ELCIC organization structure are permitted to be members of the ELCIC.

Many in the ELCIC hierarchy, including National Church Council (“NCC”) believe that the ELCIC head office cannot continue in its present form and structure, due to a lack of resources provided by synods and congregations. In addition, the bulk of the financial assets that were entrusted to the ELCIC at the 1986 merger have decreased significantly in both nominal and real terms. The level of support for the ELCIC head office by synods on an inflation adjusted basis has decreased by approximately 73% since 1986.

In her letter to congregations of April 8, 2008 (http://elcic.ca/From-the-Bishop/documents/April2008.pdf), Bishop Susan Johnson recognizes these challenges by stating:

“It’s a realization that we no longer have the resources to be able to do everything by ourselves, it’s a challenge to encourage us not to do things on our own, and it’s a change in mindset where we want to always ask the question, “Do we need to do this on our own?” If the answer is no, then the next question is... “who is the best partner or partners to work with in this area.”

and

.

“Some of the areas we think we need to look at include the size of NCC, the size and focus of convention, the number and sizes of committees, maybe even the number of synods.”

One solution to the ELCIC hierarchy restricted resource problem is for the ELCIC to merge or be taken over by the Anglican Church of Canada (“ACOC”). This solution ignores the many serious theological and organizational differences between the two churches and would likely not result in reduced costs of the church hierarchy.

Comparison of Two Churches

The following summary outlines some basic fundamental differences between the two organizations, the ACOC Diocese is equivalent to the ELCIC Synod:

ELCIC ACOC

Membership 175,000 800,000 +

Congregation Property Owned & Controlled Owned & Controlled

Ownership by the Congregation by the Diocese

Entity that Controls Church Congregation Bishops

Resources

# of Head Office Staff 16 68

Fundamental Building 620 Congregations 29 Dioceses

Block of Organization

Call of Pastor Individual Congregation Diocese Bishop

Employer of Pastor Individual Congregation Diocese Bishop

Hire Pastor/Priest Individual Congregation Diocese Bishop

Bishop Term Four Year – Elected Lifetime to age 70

By Conventions

Source of Funding Voluntary – Determined Mandatory - Varies by

For Church Hierarchy By Each Congregation Diocese, 15% - 25%

By Congregation Apportionment (Tax)

on Congregation’s

Gross Revenue

Source of Funding of Voluntary – Determined Mandatory Assessment -

Church Head Office by by Synod Normally 27% apportionment

Synod/Diocese (tax) depending on financial

situation of diocese

Title of Clergy Pastor Priest

Description of Employment Called Licensed by the Bishop

of Pastor/Priest

Responsibility to Pay Congregation Normally Congregation

Pastor/Priest

Theological Documents Bible and Book of Bible and Church of

Concord England Documents

Confirmation By Congregation By Bishop

Obedience of Clergy to No Yes

Bishop Required in

Ordination Service

Special Ordination for No Yes

Bishops

Bishops May Set Policy No, highest decision- Yes, for example Bishop of

and Practice Contrary making is ELCIC Montreal plans to introduce

to National Convention National Convention Same-Sex Blessings in his

Decisions Diocese in 2009, in violation

of the 2007 ACOC Convention

Local Option Available No, ELCIC National Yes, by diocese, see above

policies are binding on

synods and congregations

Convention Composition One Group of Both Three Distinct Houses –

Clergy and Laity Bishops, Clergy and Laity

Official Theological No Yes, ACOC is a member of

Connection to Other the Worldwide Anglican

Non-Canadian Churches Communion

Congregation Free to Yes, all property is No, all property is owned

Leave the Organization owned and controlled and controlled by the Diocese,

by each congregation individual members may leave without any claim on

congregational assets or other

church assets

Legal Liability Exposure Divided into 620 Divided into 29 Dioceses

Congregations, and National Office

5 Synods and

National Office

National Convention Elected by Congregation Elected by Dioceses

Delegates Clergy & Lay

Race Based Requirements No Yes – Indigenous persons

For Some Standing (ACOC Constitution

Committee Members VII.39.c) iv)

Name of Head of Church National Bishop Primate

Some Members of Standing No - Committee Yes – Primate appoints

Committees Appointed by members are elected some members of 4 of 5

National Bishop/Primate at conventions Standing Committees e.g. 6

of 21 members for Partners inMission and Ecojustice Committee

(ACOC Constitution

VII. 39.c.) iii))

Administration of National NCC Primate

Church Between

Conventions

Qualification Required Any pastor on Restricted to the Bishop of

For National Bishop/Primate ELCIC clergy roster one of the 29 Dioceses

(ACOC Canon III, II, 10)

Restriction on Nomination No restrictions, all All nominations must be

Of Candidates for ELCIC clergy are submitted by 29 Bishops.

Bishop/Primate eligible Clergy and Laity can only

vote on candidates nominated by the 29 Diocese Bishops

(ACOC Canon III, II, 13)

Cancellation of Pastor/ Congregation Revocation of the license is

Priest’s Employment at the sole discretion of the

Diocese Bishop (ACOC Canon XVII 11. a.)

& j.)

Reporting Requirement National Convention None

of Bishop/Primate

Responsibility for NCC Primate

Administration of

Head Office Activities

# of times “congregation” 39 1

or “parish” is mentioned

in the constitution of

each church

Control of Congregational and National Church Property

Although the two churches may share some common theological concepts, the two organizations function under completely different organizational structures. The ACOC concentrates virtually all the power and control of resources of the entire ACOC in the hands of the Primate and Diocese Bishops. The ELCIC places control of church assets in the hands of individual congregations. ELCIC National and synod resources are controlled by conventions, not individual bishops.

The imperial structure of the ACOC property ownership is consistent with its history as an outgrowth of the the Church of England. Since Henry VIII broke with the Catholic Church in 1536 and created the Church of England, significant assets were controlled by the Church of England. The ACOC structure is based on the Church of England structure which assumes control of both congregational property and other assets used to fund church operations. This structure may have been appropriate in 1536 in an organization with large economic assets, but it is not appropriate, in 2008 for the ELCIC National office that is suffering from a lack of financial resources.

Although some may view the transfer of ELCIC congregation assets to the ELCIC synod or national office as the solution to the ELCIC resource deficiency, this course of action, is not logical given the history, theology and existing structure of the ELCIC. Merger with the ACOC would likely require congregations to transfer all congregational assets to the church hierarchy, it is highly doubtful that the ACOC would follow the ELCIC policy and transfer hundreds of millions of dollars of ACOC assets from the church hierarchy to individual congregations.

Pastor/Priest Employment

Lutheran theology recognizes the office of pastor that exists when a group of people gather in a congregation and extend a call to serve the congregation to an individual qualified for the task.

Anglican theology requires that all priests, in their ordination vow must make a canonical vow of obedience to the bishop of he diocese. The bishop, at his discretion determines the employment terms, duration, etc. of a priest serving a parish.

It is hard to believe that in a ELCIC/ACOC merged church that the ACOC Bishops would willingly relinquish control and administration of all clergy in their territory to congregations. It is likely ELCIC pastors would simply become ACOC priests, by swearing an oath of obedience to the bishop. Administration of clergy would in all probability remain under the authority and control of the territory bishop.

Relation of Congregation to Synod/Diocese and National Church

As a matter of standard policy, ACOC dioceses demand up to 25% of all offerings received by a congregation. In the ELCIC, congregations independently determine the level of financial support to give synods. This difference in policy regarding support for the regional and national expression of the church is a significant difference between the two organizations. If a merger or takeover occurred, ELCIC congregations would likely be forced to conform to the policy of the ACOC since it had over four times the number of members as the ELCIC.

It is highly unlikely that in the event of a merger or takeover of the ELCIC by the ACOC, that the ACOC hierarchy would willingly give up the ability to impose a mandatory tax on congregations to fund the hierarchy’s expenses.

Power of Bishops to Control Behavior of Pastors/Priests

The power of the Bishops to enforce their will is another significant theological difference between the two churches. ACOC Canon XVIII, III Ecclesiastical Offenses includes the following offences by a priest that are subject to discipline:

7. iii) disobedience to the bishop to whom such person has sworn canonical

obedience.

viii) contemptuous or disrespectful conduct towards the bishop of the diocese in matters pertaining to the administration of the affairs of the diocese or a parish.

Since the ELCIC operates under the priesthood of all believers, there is no specific disciplinary provision for either “sworn canonical obedience” oaths or the imposition of discipline on a pastor that exhibits “disrespectful conduct of a bishop of the diocese in matters pertaining to the administration of the affairs of the diocese or a parish.” If a merger or takeover were to take place, it is likely ELCIC pastors would be required to take an oath of obedience to their bishop and would be subject to the same standard of disciplinary responsibility of Anglican priests.

Current ELCIC/ACOC Relationship is Unequal

The ELCIC Constitution has been amended to include an appointee of the Council of General Synod (“COGS”) of the ACOC (ELCIC Administrative Bylaws, Part VIII, Section 2). This means that the ACOC Church Council appoints one member of NCC. The NCC is responsible for the operation of the ELCIC for the two years between conventions. The NCC passes budgets, administers millions of dollars of ELCIC assets, plans conventions, supports the pension liability, makes recommendations on policy changes (e.g. for the ELCIC to accept same-sex blessings), etc. Members of the NCC are very powerful since they are responsible for virtually every significant action of the ELCIC between conventions.

The ACOC reserves many of the activities of the NCC in the ACOC to the Anglican bishops. The only body that fulfills some limited responsibilities of the NCC in the ELCIC is the COGS. The membership of the COGS as described in the ACOC Constitution contains no provision for any member of the ELCIC to serve in either a voting or non-voting capacity (ACOC Constitution VII. 33). The ACOC does not permit a representative of the ELCIC to participate in the critical management and policy issues of the ACOC. This policy of the ACOC is in stark contrast to the policy of the ELCIC which permits the COGS to appoint a full-voting member to the NCC of the ELCIC.

The ACOC Constitution does permit the ELCIC to appoint one of the 21 members of the Partners in Mission and Ecojustice Committee (“PMEC”)(ACOC Constitution VII, 39, c), vi). This committee is one of five standing committees of the ACOC, its responsibilities do not include the broad church policy management and administration decisions made by the NCC in the ELCIC. The mandate of the PMEC is described fully in Appendix 13 Section 4 of the Canons of the ACOC but the first two items are:

a) Engage itself and the wider church in biblical, theological and ethical reflection, listening for the Spirit and discerning God’s mission for the church and the world.

b) Create an ethos of ecojustice and evangelism in our church life.

Based on the relatively restricted responsibility and authority given by the ACOC to an ELCIC representative, it appears that the ACOC does not view the inter-church relationship between the ELCIC and the ACOC in the same light as the ELCIC.

The ACOC states that it has over 800,000 members compared to the less than 175,000 members claimed by the ELCIC. Therefore, if the two churches did merge, or if the ACOC took control of the ELCIC, the resulting entity would be composed of over 80% Anglican members. This new body would undoubtedly adopt the same polices and organizational philosophy that has ruled Anglicanism for the past 400 years.

Anglican Church is in Crisis

The ACOC is currently engaged in rampant infighting between those that support same-sex blessings and those that do not support this initiative. Several groups of individual Anglicans have left the ACOC to start up their own parallel organization that is administered by a Anglican Bishop from South America. The ACOC is currently engaged in several legal disputes with former congregational members over church property. The ELCIC is also engaged in legal actions against congregations at both the national and synod level, but not nearly to the extent of the ACOC. Although ELCIC is not of one mind on the issue of same-sex blessings, the level of disagreement has not reached the level that exists in the ACOC. To merge with an organization that is undergoing significant strife and turmoil is not logical.

Limited ELCIC Resources

ELCIC Bishop Susan Johnson and NCC have correctly determined that the ELCIC has suffered a decline in the availability of financial resources. This situation does not mean that the ELCIC should expend significant resources attempting to merge or develop a closer relationship with the ACOC. On October 31, an ELCIC news release reported that the six ELCIC bishops met with the ACOC House of Bishops for the week of October 27 to 31. Given the cost of the ELCIC bishops salaries and travel costs, it is likely that it cost the ELCIC and synods at least $ 20,000 for this meeting. This action by the bishops is just one small example of the financial and human resources that are expended for little if any return. Tens of thousands of dollars are spent annually by the ELCIC for meetings, etc. with ACOC representatives that have not been justified by measureable benefits to the ELCIC. It may be that congregations have chosen to reduce their level of giving to the synods and ELCIC since they do not agree with ELCIC policy initiatives, including the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of dollars of ELCIC resources on improving relations with the ACOC. Any move towards a closer working relationship or merger by the ELCIC with the ACOC could result in even less support from congregations to synods and the ELCIC or the ACOC in the case of a merger.

The ELCIC has scheduled a day with the ACOC for ELCIC convention participants. If the wage and accommodation costs of the 350 ELCIC participants is added to the costs of the meeting and the organizational costs the total expense of church resources is at least

$ 100,000. The expenditure of these funds appears to be little more than an exercise in public relations. If ELCIC clergy or laity wish to gain a greater understanding of the ACOC, they can, on their own time and their own expense attend ACOC congregations or review the ACOC website to gain an understanding on the structure and operations of the ACOC.

It is likely that any economic savings from any combined initiatives would be consumed by the additional costs of coordinating programs with another organization. The ELCIC head office spends little of its resources on programs, much of its funds are spent on administrative costs for staff and committee meetings. Another layer of bureaucracy with the ACOC would only add to costs of the ELCIC. It is difficult to understand how a “partnership” between the ACOC and the ELCIC could reduce staff or meeting costs if the two organizations were to remain separate entities.

In a time of restricted fiscal resources, it is illogical to spend financial and human resources on meetings with ACOC, unless the ELCIC hierarchy is planning to propose merger with the ACOC in the immediate future.

Commitment to Partnership Between ELCIC and ACOC is Illogical

Aside from merger between the two church bodies or a takeover of the ELCIC by the ACOC, no areas of partnership or resource efficiency between the two churches have been identified by Bishop Johnson or the NCC. It is doubtful that any additional efficiencies would result from spending more economic and human resources to “deepen” the full communion relationship. If anything, the resources required to administer and manage a deepened full communion relationship would likely require significant additional costs, since the two organizations are fundamentally different in operation and structure. Members of the ELCIC and ACOC can now legally take communion in congregations of the ELCIC and ACOC. ELCIC pastors and ACOC priests can serve in congregations of the ELCIC and ACOC. Bishop and the NCC have yet to reveal how closer relations between the ACOC and the ELCIC will result in savings of ELCIC human and financial resources.

Partnership is normally a term used to describe individuals working together for a common goal, the ACOC’s resistance to allow even one ELCIC representation on the COGS, is an indication that it is doubtful that the ACOC is desirous of a true, equal ‘partnership” between the ELCIC and ACOC.

Responsibility for Those Wishing Closer Ties to ACOC

There are members of the ELCIC, including laity, pastors and members of the ELCIC hierarchy who have a sincere to interest in the moving closer to the ACOC. These individuals believe that the ACOC has a superior organizational structure and that the ELCIC should move to the ACOC structure. As a church we must recognize that these individuals may feel that they are called by God to this hierarchical structure based on entrusting the control of all church property and resources to the diocese bishops. We should joyfully release any bishop, pastor, lay member or congregation who wishes to join the ACOC and express their Christianity in the ACOC. Congregations of the ELCIC at the present time can freely leave the ELCIC with their property and if they wish, transfer ownership and control of all their property to the ACOC dioceses in their area. With the approval of the relevant ACOC Bishop, ELCIC pastors can serve ACOC congregations. If congregational members wish to be members of the ACOC they can simply transfer their membership to an ACOC congregation.

The fact that some members of the ELCIC hierarchy wish to merge with the ACOC is no reason for the ELCIC, as a matter of policy, to expend significant human and financial resources on building a deeper relationship with the ACOC, unless the majority of the members of the ELCIC believe this is the best course of action. Many members of the ELCIC want to remain Lutheran and sincerely believe that the ELCIC exists to be a Lutheran church, and that the ACOC exists to be an Anglican church.