For those who are shocked by the crack-up of the Episcopal Church, let me explain: The answer was on a T-shirt I saw last month while traveling to the Presbyterian Church USA General Assembly in Birmingham and the Episcopal Church General Convention in Columbus. It read, “I’m Making It Up As I Go.” Exactly.

Both denominational meetings were characterized by division, polarization, and discord as conservatives and liberals attempted to discern and approve God’s will on issues ranging from divestment from companies doing business with Israel to gay clergy to the doctrine of the Trinity (“Mother, Child, and Womb”?). As left and right argued their cases, the real issue emerged. It is not the opposing opinions on assorted overtures and resolutions that divide left and right; it is the underlying understanding of truth, and how we know it.

The left—also known as progressives, liberals, revisionists, and (in some circles) heretics—base their convictions on individualism, subjectivity, and majority vote with passing references to Scripture and creeds. The right—also known as traditionalists, conservatives, evangelicals, and orthodox (not necessarily said as a compliment)—insist on submission to the authority of the Bible and of historic confessions, regardless of contemporary preferences. It is this division that makes the conflict between the two sides so rancorous. Compromise on issues is possible. Compromise on the fundamental questions of truth and authority is not.

In a debate about whether the Presbyterian Church should divest from companies doing business with Israel, former Moderator Rick Ufford-Chase noted that the Israelis had their passion and the Palestinians had their passion. The solution, he said, is to affirm and embrace both. The fact that Hamas controls the Palestinian government and that Hamas’s passion is to kill Jews and wipe Israel off the map never entered the conversation. Passions are the touchstone, not reason and analysis. [KH: this is one of the main differences between liberals and conservatives.] His suggestion, thankfully, was rejected.

In the same session, several speakers—mostly pastors—argued in favor of divestment, explaining that they had visited the Palestinians, “engaged in dialogue,” and were “deeply concerned. No one informed these undoubtedly well-meaning people that the plural of “anecdote” is not “data.” After all, with all that sincerity, who would want to call their judgment into question? In the end, the PCUSA did the right thing and voted to end divestment, but not without a very unusual debate.

As for gay clergy, the denomination elected to leave the rules against ordaining practicing homosexuals on their books while permitting a local option of ignoring the rules. This, of course, permits local churches to ordain polygamists or polyamorists—or just about anyone else—as well.

IN COLUMBUS, when Katharine Jefferts Schori preached her first sermon to the Episcopal Church General Convention as presiding bishop-elect, she announced, “Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation and we are his children.” No doubt many in attendance thought this was wonderfully profound—as undoubtedly Bishop Schori and her handlers did. The conservatives, however, heard this gibberish as, well . . . gibberish and heretical gibberish at that.

In contrast to Christians through the ages, the denominational left has substituted sentiments for facts, passions for authority, and subjectivity for reason. Their belief seems to be that if they “create space for dialogue” it will allow them to emote and vote with the result that a simple majority determines the new revised standard version of God’s truth and will.

Having so emoted and voted, the PCUSA has begun experimenting with reformulations of the doctrine of the Trinity. “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” will be substituted with “Mother, Child and Womb,” “Rock, Redeemer, Friend,” “Rainbow, Ark, and Dove,” and other assorted triads. Again, the left is satisfied that dialogue and a vote have revealed God’s truth. God names Himself anything a majority of delegates—presumably lead by the Holy Spirit—say He names Himself.

No wonder the left and right can’t get along. They live in parallel universes and can barely communicate with each other.

THIS SAME CONFUSION OVER TRUTH is rapidly infecting the evangelical world as churches drink the “emerging church” Kool-Aid. Emerging or post-modern church leaders insist that truth is relational and must be experienced. I agree, but to leave it there is to fall into the same subjectivist error in which the mainline/old-line denominations are mired. The traditional Christian understanding is that truth is true even if it is not experienced. It is true objectively and absolutely. This is an assertion for which modern people have little patience.

In a speech given in 1898, Dutch theologian, pastor, politician, and professor Abraham Kuyper diagnosed modern problem with understanding the nature of truth: “Everyone who thinks he can abandon the Christian truths, and do away with the Catechism of Reformation, lends ear unawares to the hypotheses of the modern world-view and, without knowing how far he has drifted already, swears by the Catechism of Rousseau and Darwin.”

Having abandoned a Christian epistemology and, thus, Christian truths, the mainline/old-line denominations will continue their inexorable drift to the sideline. The current breakdown in the Episcopal church is the natural result of this crisis in authority and truth. The results will be a liberal vestige with lovely buildings and lots of endowment money, but few people.

Left and right represent radically different understanding of faith and truth. It’s the difference between “Making It Up As I Go” and “Thus saith the Lord.”

Jim Tonkowich is president of the Institute on Religion & Democracy.

==============================

**Virginia parish demands leader ‘repent’ (Washington Times, 060123)

Virginia’s largest Episcopal parish, in a letter to the church’s 2,200 members, yesterday called on Virginia’s the Rt. Rev. Peter J. Lee to “repent and return to the truth” over supporting the ordination of the openly homosexual bishop of New Hampshire.

Leaders of the Falls Church Episcopal said in their eight-page, single-spaced letter that “no compromise on this issue is possible,” although they refrained from specific threats. In the past, the parish’s rector has threatened schism.

“A Christian leader does not approve of sin, or purport to declassify it,” the letter said to Bishop Lee, who backed the 2003 consecration of the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. “Rather, he calls sinners to repentance and proclaims the Good News that sin can be forgiven and new life can be obtained in Christ.”

The letter was sent to Bishop Lee on Oct. 4 but was not made public until yesterday. Calls to the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia yesterday for comment were not returned. Bishop Lee, however, did meet with parish leaders soon after the letter was sent.

The letter is modeled after Matthew 18:15-17, which advises Christians that “if your brother sins against you,” one is to first privately show him his fault, then repeat the message accompanied by “two or three witnesses.”

If the exhortation still is ignored, Christians are to “tell it to the church,” the pattern that church leaders followed yesterday. If still nothing happens, the offender is to be treated “as you would a pagan or a tax collector,” the verses say.

But church leaders made no threats from the pulpit yesterday about the letter, just a casual mention by one of the priests that congregants might be interested in picking up a copy of it after the service.

The letter was signed by Falls Church senior warden Sam Thomsen and junior warden Teri Ballou.

The church, the letter said, wished to express its “grief at your complicity in the errors of the 2003 Episcopal General Convention,” which approved the election of Bishop Robinson, a divorced homosexual man living with a male lover.

Bishop Lee and all but one of the lay delegates from the Diocese of Virginia, the country’s largest at 90,000 members, agreed to the election.

The letter next cited numerous Scriptures for the bishop to “bring you back to the standard that God has always called His people to uphold” in terms of sexual purity.

The bishop not only fell short of calling Virginia Episcopalians to that standard, it said, but he later defended his decision about Bishop Robinson.

The letter reminded the bishop of his public statements that homosexuals should be included in church life just as Gentiles were by Jewish leaders 2,000 years ago, then slapped down that reasoning as “selective and careless exegesis that could be invoked to condone and sin, sexual or otherwise.”

The letter, which pleaded for the bishop to affirm “unequivocally” that sex is reserved for marriage between a man and a woman, was released six days before the Diocese of Virginia’s annual convention in Richmond.

It was the culmination of a series of private discussions between diocesan officials and the Rev. John Yates, rector of the Falls Church Episcopal who last summer took 20 clergy to confront the bishop.

“He [needed] to know there are many of us who will not accept the new morality,” Mr. Yates said in a Nov. 13 sermon. “We will not go [along], and it may mean major schism.”

Leaving the diocese would mean a huge battle between the diocese and the Falls Church Episcopal for the church’s $17 million in assets and historic property in the middle of downtown Falls Church city. The church, whose $4.26 million budget just edges the diocese’s $4.21 million budget, was founded in 1732.

Church law says that a departing church must cede all of its assets to the diocese.

==============================

**Los Angeles Diocese Loses Again in Court (American Anglican Council, 060112)

L.A.: Church split suit again denied

Source: Long Beach Press Telegram

An Orange County judge on Thursday struck down a final attempt by the national Episcopal Church to sue for the property of three breakaway churches, including All Saints Church in Long Beach.

Orange County Superior Court Judge David Velasquez dismissed suits by the Protestant Episcopal Church USA against St. James Church in Newport Beach, All Saints in Belmont Shore and St. David’s in North Hollywood.

Velasquez had dismissed those claims in October, but allowed lawyers to amend the complaints.

In his ruling Thursday, the judge deemed the national church “has not added anything legally material” to the original action.

In December, the judge struck down a similar suit by the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles against All Saints and St. David’s parish of North Hollywood. In August, the judge made a similar ruling in favor of St. James parish in Newport Beach.

The Episcopal bodies have said they will appeal.

In his rulings, Velasquez has consistently refuted attempts by the larger church bodies to claim the parishes’ properties were held in trust for the Episcopal church.

Under California property law, because the smaller churches hold their own deeds and titles and their articles of incorporation do not specify a trust, the national church has no claim of the property.

In 2004, All Saints, St. David’s and St. James made national news by announcing their split from the Episcopal Church over “core doctrinal issues,” including the consecration of an openly gay bishop and the blessing of same-sex unions.

The three churches have since aligned themselves with an Anglican diocese in Uganda. The Episcopal Church is the United State arm of the world-wide Anglican Communion.

==============================

Nigerian Church Disowns Gay Activist (Christian Post, 060106)

The Anglican Church in Nigeria disowned a famed gay activist, marking the latest development in the international Anglican division over the role of homosexuality in the church.

According to a report by the Lagos-based Vanguard newspaper, the Church of Nigeria disowned Davis Mac-Iyalla with a statement saying the activist had ceased to be a member of the communion since 2003.

“He is not registered in any of our more than 10,000 local parishes as of the past two years. None of our more than 6,000 priests recognize him as an active member in any of their parishes,” said the statement, signed by the Rev. Canon Akintunde Popoola, the church’s director of communication.

The year 2003 coincides with the time the U.S. Episcopal Church endorsed the ordination of an active homosexual man as bishop of New Hampshire. The move sparked a firestorm of criticism from orthodox Anglicans, mainly from the Global South and particularly from Nigeria.

Mac-Iyalla is the director of Changing Attitude of Nigeria, a group that claims to be made up of gays and lesbians in the Anglican Communion in Nigeria, and has vocally criticized the Nigerian church’s conservative stance on homosexuals. In recent weeks the media has identified him as a victimized homosexual who was chased out of the Anglican Church because of his sexual orientation, according to Vanguard.

However, the Nigerian church disputed the claim, and instead alleged that Mac-Iyalla used the notion of his supposed victimization to defraud unsuspecting victims. According to a Dec. 30, 2005 statement, Mac-Iyalla received large sums of money from the Diocese of Otukpo, where he once staffed.

The statement also noted that the church is open to all members.

“The Church of Nigeria wishes to emphasize that she continues to minister to all her members regardless of the problems they have,” it said.

“Our priests are adequately trained to counsel and pray with all manner of persons who go to them for help.”

==============================

Senior Church of England Bishop Rebukes Civil Partnership Policy (Christian Post, 060119)

LONDON – One of the most senior bishops in the Church of England has issued strong condemnation of the House of Bishops’ statement on Civil Partnerships, calling it “unbiblical.”

In a letter written to clergy in his diocese, the Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, criticized his fellow bishops for failing to consult with the wider Church before issuing their statement, which allows clergy to enter into civil partnerships if they first assure their bishop they will abstain from sex.

The policy was presented as the unanimously agreed position of the House of Bishops last year, but both conservatives and liberals privately expressed their misgivings.

Nazir-Ali predicted the statement would be a “recipe for confusion.”

In the letter, the bishop rebuked the statement for undermining traditional teaching on marriage in a letter, according to The Church of England Newspaper.

“I fear that the change in church law will have the effect of undermining that very teaching on marriage which the bishops are wishing to uphold and that it introduces another category of ‘partner’ covertly without any public or synodical discussion,” he said.

Nazir-Ali expressed concern for the way in which the statement will “severely test the Church’s discipline and stretch pastoral relationships to the breaking point.”

The bishop continued his attack on the Church of England’s leadership of the civil partnership controversy, criticizing the permission it gave to the Government to change church legislation by order, so that the term “civil partner” was automatically added wherever the term “spouse” appeared.

Nazir-Ali argued that the legislation was not needed on the grounds that the ambiguity of the Civil Partnerships Bill is not consistent with core Christian teaching on marriage and would be unacceptable to a substantial number of its members.

He warned that the statement compromised pastoral discipline at the local level and pre-empted the relevant canons in the context of preparation for baptism and confirmation, as well as for the purposes of receiving Holy Communion.

The Bishop of Rochester added: “The statement has given bishops the task of ensuring that clergy who enter into these partnerships adhere to church teaching in the area of sexuality without giving the bishops the clear means to do so,” reported The Church of England Newspaper.

“I dare to hope that bishops will find better ways of relating to such couples than seeking assurances, and I believe many of us will. If our difficulty as Church with particular life-choices means that we cannot speak hopefully about what are clearly signs of commitment and responsibility, perhaps it would have been better to say nothing,” he said.

The attack by the Bishop of Rochester is likely to liven up the debate on gay civil partnerships within the Church once again.

==============================

Episcopalians Gone Wild: NBC’s “Book of Daniel” didn’t get much right about the Episcopal church. (Weekly Standard, 060127)

NBC’S lame-duck series Book of Daniel kicked up a lot of controversy during its brief run, but perhaps not for the right reasons.

Starring Aidan Quinn as Daniel, the program centers on an Episcopal priest in a posh Connecticut suburb. His wife is infatuated with martinis, one of his sons is homosexual, the other is sleeping around, his daughter is selling dope, the Jamaican housekeeper is smoking it, his brother-in-law has stolen $3.5 million from the church (after having a threesome with his wife and Daniel’s secretary), and the lady bishop is having an affair with Daniel’s father, who is the presiding bishop of the Episcopal church. Meanwhile, Jesus periodically appears to Daniel to dispense non-judgmental advice, except when it comes to Daniel’s addiction to pain killers.

Sleeping around. Homosexuality. Thievery. Ecclesial chaos. Abuse of prescription drugs. Lots of people with more money than common sense. Is this what the U.S. Episcopal Church really looks like?

The American Family Association, an evangelical group, organized a boycott against the program because of its perceived smarmy stance towards Christianity. The AFA helped persuade 11 NBC affiliates not to broadcast Daniel. And three of the show’s four major sponsors also withdrew.

Daniel director Jack Kenny was enraged by the “bullies” at AFA and went public with his outrage. He made his plea on blogofdaniel.com, a blog set up by the liberal Episcopal Diocese of Washington, D.C.—without any apparent sense of irony—to exploit the show as an evangelistic tool for the church.

“Ordinarily, I would never ask anyone to do this, but the AFA and bullies like them are hard at work to try and prevent you from seeing these beautiful shows, and that is censorship—pure and simple,” wrote. “And that is both un-Christian and un-American.”

According to Aidan Quinn in an interview on Beliefnet.com, Kenny deliberately chose to set the program in the Episcopal Church. “His being impressed with the Episcopalian church and their inclusiveness and the conflict that’s going on within it as far as social issues, I think, is what attracted him to set this family in the midst of that church,” said, Quinn, who is Roman Catholic, but who professes admiration for the Episcopal Church’s “inclusiveness.”

Kenny told the Washington Times he may join the Episcopal Church, to which his male partner of 24 years belongs. His partner’s WASPish family was in fact a model for Daniel’s repressed and dysfunctional household. According to Kenny, he got guidance for the program from a leader of the Episcopal Church’s homosexual caucus and from other members at All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California.

All Saints Church was recently flagged by the IRS for a strongly-worded anti-war sermon there that ostensibly threatened its tax-exempt status. The IRS threat seems silly, but the congregation is far-left even by Episcopal standards.

CLEARLY, Kenny did not cast a wide net when looking for insights about Episcopalianism. Despite his ideological myopia, Kenny’s product does seem to encapsulate some of the most common stereotypes about the denomination.

Everybody in Daniel is well dressed and white (except for the maid and Daniel’s adopted son); they live in huge and exquisitely furnished colonial houses, belong to the country club, and are slightly snobby. When Daniel’s adopted teenage Chinese son has sex with a parishioner’s under-age daughter, the girl’s mother is upset not because of the sex but because the boy is being Asian. Daniel is upset that the boy landed on his Jaguar when he jumped from the girl’s bedroom window. Discrete racism and the snooty materialism . . . how Episcopalian!

Daniel’s sister-in-law relates that her husband, the one who stole $3.5 million from the church’s coffers, induced her into having a threesome with his secretary. The secretary is introduced to us as a “Methodist.” Of course! The third party in a threesome is bound to be both of a lower social class and not Episcopalian.

As for that stolen $3.5 million, nobody in Daniel’s church is intimidated by the sum. It seems to have been raised with a few phone calls to friends at the country club. The real problem is the potential embarrassment of the theft to Daniel, who hired his thieving brother-in-law to build the church’s new school. Daniel decides to mortgage his lovely home to replace the money. Clearly, the enormous house’s value will cover quite a bit of the $3.5 million.

Luckily, a Catholic priest comes to the rescue with his Mafia contacts, who locate the stolen money, but will return it only if their construction firm is hired to build the new Episcopal school. Ah, the Catholics and the mob.

But the funniest aspect of the Book of Daniel is the portrayal of Daniel as a rebel confronting a conservative church hierarchy. Daniel nervously postpones telling his stuffy father, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal church, about his homosexual son. In fact, real-life Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, an enthusiastic supporter of his denomination’s first openly homosexual bishop, would probably warmly embrace a gay grandson.

After Daniel delivers an especially liberal sermon dismissing the threat of temptation, an angry Bishop Beatrice (played by Ellen Burstyn) warns him to be careful. “Canterbury” (as in the Anglican Archbishop of) is “spanking” the American church for getting too theologically loose, she threatens. In real life, of course, it is not the relatively liberal Archbishop of Canterbury who has been chastising the U.S. Episcopal Church, but rather the orthodox Anglican bishops of the Global South—especially Africa.

Unlike the fictional Bishop Beatrice, the real-life Episcopal bishop of Connecticut is acting punitively against six of his priests for their attempts to protest against their denomination’s liberal policies. A truly provocative program about the Episcopal Church might showcase one of these orthodox priests trying to stand against the liberal church hierarchy. Perhaps that would be too edgy.

THERE IS ANOTHER DETAIL in Book of Daniel which rings untrue: Daniel’s church is packed with people every Sunday. The Episcopal Church is actually dwindling in size, a decline accelerated by recent controversies over sex and theology.

Episcopalians are an increasingly tiny minority in America. But because the church of the chronically well-heeled has been on top of the American social, economic, and political heap for much of the last 400 years, Episcopalians have always been considered fair game for mockery.

Book of Daniel only accelerated that mockery. Canceled after only a few episodes, the aborted series at least chronicled one of America’s most famously failed experiments in liberal religion.

Mark D. Tooley directs the United Methodist committee at the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

==============================

Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Rochester Issues Inhibition Against Rector of Embattled Church

The Rt. Rev. Jack McKelvey, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Rochester, with approval of the diocesan Standing Committee, today inhibited the Rev. David Harnish, Rector of All Saints, Rochester, charging the priest with “abandonment of communion.” The inhibition attempts to prevent Father Harnish from fulfilling his role and “priestly functions” as rector of All Saints, but it is unenforceable as Father Harnish is currently under the jurisdictional authority of the Anglican province of Uganda, and not under the Diocese of Rochester.

“The Bishop’s action is a little like a nasty employer who claims to be firing an employee after that employee quit last year to work for another company where he would be treated better,” said Raymond Dague, the attorney for the parish. “A priest works for his parish, and not the bishop, but the idea is similar.”

Bishop McKelvey’s actions follow a trend in dioceses across the country in which revisionist bishops misapply and abuse canon law in order to take disciplinary action against clergy who oppose their revisionism. The charge of “abandonment of communion” is a church law provision applicable in cases of clergy who leave the Episcopal Church to join a different denomination or religion, a step usually accompanied by a renunciation of their Episcopal ordination vows. Serving under the Anglican Church of Uganda, Father Harnish remains a priest in good standing within the Anglican Communion anywhere in the world. In declaring Father Harnish out of communion with the Diocese of Rochester, Bishop McKelvey and the Standing Committee appear to be declaring themselves out of communion with Uganda.

Bishop McKelvey’s inhibition of Father Harnish is the latest punitive action the diocese has directed toward All Saints and their rector. During the diocesan convention November 18-19, 2005, delegates voted to declare All Saints Episcopal Church “extinct.” In so doing, the diocese violated both its canon [church] law and a New York a statute.

Canon 13 of the Diocese of Rochester provides for a parish to be declared extinct if and when “it shall appear to the Bishop and the Council that a congregation organized as a parish has ceased to fulfill the requirements under the Religious and Corporations Law of the State of New York…”. The religious corporations law outlines clear criteria for determining whether or not a church can be declared extinct: the church has failed to maintain services for two consecutive years. The statutes specify an additional criteria for Episcopal parishes to be declared extinct: when they have an insufficient number of individuals qualified to serve on the vestry [church board] for two consecutive years. All Saints in Rochester has maintained continuous religious services since it was founded 80 years ago, and held elections last month electing new members to its vestry.

“All Saints is an ongoing parish which in no way meets the requirements of law to be declared extinct,” said Dague. “The bishop has abused his power and run roughshod over canon and civil law in his attempt to destroy a biblically faithful congregation.”

The Episcopal Church is currently recognized as a member of the Anglican Communion, but that status is threatened given the current crisis within the Anglican Communion. Twenty-two of 38 primates have declared broken or impaired communion with the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA), and the vast majority of the Communion believes ECUSA has abandoned the faith and practice of Anglicanism as well as historic Christian teaching.

==============================

An Open Letter to Bishop Peter James Lee, Diocese of Virginia

The Rt. Rev. Peter James Lee

Diocese of Virginia

Richmond, VA

USA

Dear Bishop Lee,

The Rt. Rev. Benezeri Kisembo, Bishop of Rwenzori Diocese, has my full blessing and support in receiving the Rev. Phil Ashey from Fairfax, Virginia, as a priest of his diocese. Rev. Ashey is now canonically resident in Rwenzori Diocese and he is a priest in good standing of the Church of Uganda. We have asked him to continue the good work of church planting he has been doing in the South Riding community in Virginia.

I must object, in the most strenuous terms, to your characterization of Rev. Ashey’s decision to resign as a Missioner of the Diocese of Virginia as a renunciation of his holy orders. I have seen his letter to Bishop Jones. Even those of us for whom English is a second language understand his plain English to mean that he has resigned from the staff of the Diocese of Virginia, but not from his priestly orders.

This kind of re-inventing of the plain meaning of a text is the same problem we are facing today throughout the Anglican Communion with regard to bishops and leaders in ECUSA reinventing the plain meaning of Scripture. Rev. Ashey resigned from his position in your diocese, but in no way can his letter be construed to mean that he has renounced his holy orders. Like all of our clergy ordained in the Church of Uganda, Rev. Ashey was ordained into Christ’s one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. He requested our ecclesiastical oversight as a priest, which we gladly extended to him, and we recognize his continuing holy orders.

Your refusal to recognize Rev. Ashey’s holy orders in the Church of Uganda has huge implications for your understanding of the interchangeability of holy orders and the nature of the Anglican Communion. Accordingly, we accept your written press release of 20th December 2005 as your notice that the Bishop and Diocese of Virginia have broken communion with the Church of Uganda.

We are grieved by the continued unbiblical actions of the leadership of ECUSA that has led it to walk apart from the majority of the Anglican Communion. We pray for your repentance and the repentance of all the ECUSA leadership, and for your return to the historic faith and communion of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

Yours in Christ,

The Most Rev. Henry Luke Orombi

ARCHBISHOP OF CHURCH OF UGANDA.

Date: 1/5/2006

==============================

Inhibited North Florida Priests Will Continue Their Ministries

From the Anglican Alliance of North Florida

Contact information: The Rev. Neil Lebhar

redeemerrector@bellsouth.net (904) 642-8803

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Jan. 12th, 2006

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

On Wednesday, January 11th, seven priests in the Anglican Alliance received notice from the Bishop of Florida that they had been “inhibited from officiating in the Diocese of Florida” under Canon IV.10 of the diocese. The inhibitions followed the recommendations of the Diocesan Standing Committee. The reason given was “abandonment of communion of this church.” The priests inhibited were: the Rev. Neil Lebhar, Church of the Redeemer, Jacksonville; the Rev. Samuel Pascoe, Grace Church, Orange Park; the Rev. C. Alexander Farmer, Servants of Christ, Gainesville; the Rev. James Needham, St. Luke’s Community of Life, Tallahassee; the Rev. James McCaslin, All Souls, Jacksonville; the Rev. David Sandifer, Calvary, Jacksonville; and the Rev. Robert Sanders, Jacksonville Anglican Fellowship, Jacksonville.

The priests concerned are saddened and perplexed by this unnecessary and unhelpful action taken by the Bishop and the Standing Committee. Each of them has continued to serve as a priest in the Anglican Communion since disassociating from the Diocese of Florida and the Episcopal Church, and has made it clear that they were not resigning from Holy Orders. Their hope had been to simply be canonically transferred to the Anglican provinces under which they now serve, as had been requested of Bishop Howard in a December 12 letter, and as has been done in several other dioceses of the Episcopal Church.

The inhibitions are clearly a misapplication and abuse of canon law, here used punitively against priests who have disassociated with the Episcopal Church as a matter of conscience because of its actions at General Convention 2003. The canon in question is intended as an administrative procedure for priests who leave the Episcopal Church for another denomination or religion, a step usually accompanied by a renunciation of their Episcopal ordination vows.

It is ironic that the charge brought against the seven priests is “abandonment of communion,” since one of the major reasons they felt they had no choice but to separate from the Episcopal Church was to stay in communion with the vast majority of the world’s 80 million Anglicans who have condemned the Episcopal Church USA’s unbiblical actions. In a letter to his congregation, the Rev. Neil Lebhar, whose church has come under the Province of Uganda, wrote that “by inhibiting me, I believe that the Bishop and Standing Committee have effectively agreed that they are not in communion with Uganda, one of the largest provinces of the Anglican Communion” (the full text of the Rev. Lebhar’s letter is available at anglicanalliancenf.org).

The priests will continue their ministries in the congregations where they now serve, since these congregations have been received into other provinces of the Anglican Communion and are no longer part of the Diocese of Florida. Their prayerful hope is that the Bishop and Standing Committee will reconsider their action and recognize that it only exacerbates existing differences and further isolates them from the rest of the Anglican Communion.

The Anglican Alliance of North Florida will continue to support the ministries of these seven priests and work toward growing a vital and Biblically faithful Anglican presence in North Florida, in partnership with Anglicans in the United States and throughout the world.

The Anglican Alliance of North Florida was formed in the fall of 2005 as a way to begin gathering together Biblically faithful congregations in the Anglican tradition. It includes fifteen member congregations and thirty-five clergy in the North Florida area.

Date: 1/12/2006

==============================

Anglican Alliance Gains Steam In North Florida

Ten churches have now left Episcopal Diocese, with more to follow

From the Anglican Alliance of North Florida

Contact information: The Rev. Neil Lebhar

redeemerrector@bellsouth.net (904) 642-8803

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Jan. 17th, 2006

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA

The number of Anglican congregations which have separated from the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Florida has now risen to ten. All of these churches are part of the Anglican Alliance of North Florida, and remain a part of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The churches include the six congregations which had previously appealed for alternative oversight, sometimes referred to as the “Florida Six.” Five of these—Grace Church, in Orange Park; All Souls and Church of the Redeemer, in Jacksonville; St. Michael’s in Gainesville; and St Luke’s Community of Life, in Tallahassee—announced that they were no longer under the Episcopal Church as of January 1 (the sixth, Calvary, in Jacksonville, had already pulled out in November).

For several of these churches the move was precipitated by a continued threat by the Bishop of Florida, the Rt. Rev. John Howard, to reduce them from parish to mission status in January on account of their refusal to give direct support to the diocese financially—an action not mandated by church law (each of the congregations had continued to support diocesan ministries).

One of the churches, St. Michael’s in Gainesville, also adopted a new name and moved to a new location. The new Servants of Christ, under the leadership of the Rev. Alex Farmer, had its first service in a shared space with the Vineyard Christian Fellowship of Gainesville on Sunday, January 8th, with 242 worshippers in attendance.

These six congregations join St Peter’s Anglican Church in Tallahassee, which was formed with the clergy and most of the congregation of St John’s Episcopal Church in October, as well as the Anglican Fellowship of High Springs, whose rector and congregation left the diocese in October of 2004. In addition, two other churches have announced they have taken the same step, also as of January 1: St James, in MacClenny (now St. Peter’s Anglican Fellowship), and Church of the Nativity, in Jacksonville.

Four other churches have announced that they are also making preparations to leave the Episcopal Church. In a letter sent to Florida Bishop John Howard and released to his congregation on January 8th, the Rev. Bob Coon, rector at Church of the Advent in Tallahassee, wrote that “it is time for Advent to begin the process of disassociation with the Episcopal Church.” The three others churches—Church of the Epiphany, in Jacksonville, Good Samaritan, in Orange Park, and St. Teresa in Wakulla County—are planning to break with the Episcopal Church if it does not reverse course at its next General Convention in June. The Rev. Mark Eldridge, Rector at Epiphany, said “we have no expectation of repentance.” Several other churches are making similar plans, but have not yet made formal announcements.

While four of the congregations which have left so far have already vacated their property and buildings, five others are staying and laying claim to them (St Luke’s will continue to occupy rented space). The latter are Grace, All Souls, Church of the Redeemer, Church of the Nativity, and St James. In a letter to Bishop Howard dated Dec. 31st, the Mission Board of St. James indicated that their church had been “self-supporting since its inception” and that “we have no intention of leaving our beloved and historical building.”

All ten of the congregations either already have or will be receiving alternative oversight from another bishop in the Anglican Communion. So far churches in the Anglican Alliance have come under the Provinces of Uganda, Rwanda, Kenya, and the Southern Cone (in South America). On Friday January 6th, on the Feast of the Epiphany, Grace Church in Orange Park held a special service to mark its transference to the Church of Rwanda, and a Bishop of Rwanda, the Rt. Rev. Thomas Johnston, participated in Grace’s services the following Sunday.

Last week Bishop Howard inhibited several of the priests of these congregations from performing priestly duties in the Diocese of Florida. The Anglican Alliance does not consider the inhibitions to be relevant, since the priests in question are no longer pastoring congregations which are part of the Diocese of Florida (please see 1/12/06 AANF press release for a fuller response).

The members of the Anglican Alliance look forward with eager and prayerful anticipation to developments in the coming months, as a new, Biblically-centered Anglican movement takes shape in North Florida. In addition to churches with Episcopal roots, which are members of the Anglican Communion Network nationally, the Anglican Alliance also includes several congregations which are part of the Anglican Mission in America, and is working toward joining with other Anglican churches which are represented by the “Common Cause” movement. Planning for an Anglican version of the “Cursillo” weekend is already underway, along with several youth events. The steering committee of the Anglican Alliance will be meeting on January 29-31 to make plans for the rapidly expanding role of the Alliance.

The Anglican Alliance of North Florida was formed in the fall of 2005 as a way to begin gathering together Biblically faithful congregations in the Anglican tradition. It includes sixteen member congregations and thirty-five clergy in the North Florida area.

Date: 1/17/2006

==============================

Statement from Anglican Mainstream and the Church of England Evangelical Council and others in Support of Bishop Michael Nazir Ali’s Statement Ad Clerum

We warmly welcome the Ad Clerum issued by the Bishop of Rochester on the matter of the Civil Partnership Act and the Guidelines issued by the House of Bishops.

In particular he has pointed out that the Church could have ‘derogated,’ from this legislation, on the grounds that its ambiguity was not consistent with fundamental Christian teaching on marriage.

The legislation is both ambiguous about marriage and unjust in excluding many people who should have benefited from its provisions, such as siblings. He has stated clearly that the legislation is inconsistent with Christian teaching, and that the bishops’ own guidelines have compromised pastoral discipline in the local church.

We are grateful that he pledges to support those who will bring ‘the fullness of faith’ to bear on these pastoral situations. We pray for the Bishops and ask other Bishops who hold to orthodox biblical teaching to support his stand and make a clear statement of their position. We pray also for clergy seeking to uphold Scriptural teaching in matters of human sexuality.

On behalf of Anglican Mainstream and the Church of England Evangelical Council:

Dr Philip Giddings, Convenor, Anglican Mainstream

Rev David McCarthy Scottish Anglican Network

Rev Dr Richard Turnbull Chair, CEEC

Rev Nick Wynne Jones, Secretary CEEC

Rev George Curry, Chair, Church Society

Rev David Banting Chair, Reform

Rev John Coles, Director, New Wine

Rev Simon Vibert, Chair of Fellowship of Word and Spirit

Bishop David Pytches, former Bishop of Chile

Rev Paul Perkin, Vicar, St Marks Battersea Rise

Rev Richard Bewes, OBE

Rev Alyson Davie,

Rev Hugh Palmer Rector All Souls Langham Place, London

Rev Vaughan Roberts St Ebbes Church Oxford

Rev Angus MacLeay Rector St Nicholas Sevenoaks

Archbishop Peter Jensen, Sydney

Canon Dr Chris Sugden, Executive Secretary, Anglican Mainstream

Date: 1/19/2006

==============================

NEW ANGLICAN CHURCH BEGINS MEETING IN LIVONIA

LIVONIA, MICH (January 19) – What does a parish do when its parent denomination no longer follows the teachings of the faith? That was the dilemma faced by more than 200 members of St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church in Livonia. Ultimately their orthodox beliefs led to their separation from the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan and launch of the Anglican Church of Livonia earlier this month.

“We are excited to continue as a biblically-orthodox Anglican church in Livonia,” said Rev. C. Allen Kannapell, pastor of the church. “Now we can focus on our mission of sharing the love of Jesus Christ with our neighbors again.”

Anglicans are part of a worldwide body of believers founded by the Church of England. The 77 million-member church is growing in Africa, Asia and South America, while its Western provinces such as the Episcopal Church USA are in sharp decline. After being implored by the Anglican Communion not to depart from biblical faith, it did by consecrating a practicing homosexual as bishop and persisting in its preaching of pluralism. It has now been declared in broken or impaired communion with 22 provinces, representing more than 90% percent of worshipping Anglicans.

“We didn’t leave the Episcopal Church, it left us,” Kannapell continued. “It has embraced a new gospel that is not recognizably Christian. We believe that we are broken and need to be fixed. Jesus transformed my life. Why would I want to deny his love and power to anyone else?”

In an all-church vote held October 2, 2005, the congregation asked Diocese of Michigan Bishop Wendell N. Gibbs, Jr. to transfer them to the jurisdiction of another Anglican bishop because of his endorsement of the unbiblical actions of the Episcopal Church. Bishop Gibbs said that he would not and could not do that, and ultimately he removed Rev. Kannapell and the local church Vestry from their offices.

The church has been meeting at the Holiday Inn hotel on Laurel Park Drive since January 8. The service begins at 10:30 a.m.

==============================

St. James ANGLICAN church, Newport Beach,

withdraws lawsuit against episcopal diocese

after court victory

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. – January 26, 2006 – After a series of court victories ruling that the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles and the national Episcopal Church in the U.S.A. had no right to confiscate its property, St. James Anglican Church, Newport Beach, today voluntarily withdrew a lawsuit it had filed against the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles in June 2005.

The lawsuit alleged that the Diocese of Los Angeles breached a written promise made in 1991 that it would not attempt to claim St. James property. The lawsuit alleged that by initiating the lawsuit against St. James Church and its volunteer vestry members in September 2004, the Diocese and Bishop J. Jon Bruno breached that promise to the severe detriment of St. James.

“We have been vindicated in our fight to preserve the property St. James members have sacrificially contributed to build and maintain,” said Father Praveen Bunyan, Rector of St. James Church. “As a growing, vibrant church, we want to stay focused and use our resources on our core ministries instead of being distracted with continuing a lawsuit where we already have the victory. We call upon the Diocese of Los Angeles and the Episcopal Church to do the same, and not drag their church through endless appeals that will bear no fruit for them or God’s Kingdom.”

“While St. James is certain that the Diocese of Los Angeles failed to honor the written promise made in 1991 that they would not seek to impose a trust over St. James property, the Orange County Superior Court has repeatedly ruled that the Diocese cannot do so as a matter of California law. Hopefully, it will not become necessary to refile the lawsuit at a later date,” said Eric C. Sohlgren of Payne & Fears LLP, Irvine, the lead attorney for St. James Church.

==============================

Panel of Reference Receives First Referrals

The Living Church

12/14/2005

The Panel of Reference has received its first batch of referrals from the Archbishop of Canterbury, according to sources in London familiar with details.

Petitions have been distributed to the 13 members of the Panel of Reference for review. The particulars of each case have not been disclosed by the panel, which has taken an oath of secrecy and pledged not to reveal details of any petition for relief.

Several primates have voiced concern over the slow pace of proceedings. At a press conference Nov. 11 during the “Hope and a Future” conference in Pittsburgh, the Most Rev. Drexel Gomez, Archbishop of the West Indies, said the primates were “not only unhappy” but “very disappointed,” as “our requests have not been taken as seriously as we intended it to be.”

“We were promised that the panel would be established as a matter of urgency. That was in February. And the panel has yet to respond to the first case,” he said. “Just two weeks ago, in Egypt, we took this concern to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who promised that work on the panel would increase. But as of yesterday the panel still had not yet to consider any of the matters placed before it.”

The Diocese of Fort Worth in the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Recife in the Anglican Province of Brazil, as well as parishes in Australia, Canada and the Episcopal Church, have submitted appeals for arbitration.

The petitions for review have passed through several hands prior to their distribution to the panel members. Parishes and dioceses that wish to avail themselves of the process must first petition Archbishop Rowan Williams for relief. After being vetted by the archbishop’s staff, led by Christopher Smith, the petitions are then forwarded to the panel chairman, Archbishop Peter Carnley.

According to its charter, after the panel receives a referral, Archbishop Carnley distributes the petition to the 12 other members and solicits the views of the primate of the province affected.

The guidelines state that Archbishop Carnley is to form a subcommittee comprised of at least two members, one clergy and one lay, to examine the dispute. The rest of the panel will then be asked to submit their responses to the case within 14 days of receipt of the petition.

The subcommittee will then initiate an investigation, gathering evidence and hearing the arguments. Upon completion and submission of the initial finding, the panel members will be given 14 days to offer comments, critiques and suggestions.

A revised finding, prepared in light of the comments received, will then be circulated to the full panel. Should there be “significant dissent,” the subcommittee is directed to “discuss the matter with the dissenting members with a view to achieving consensus.”

Once an agreed report is prepared, it will then be sent to the petitioner and respondent for comments. The final text of the report will then be distributed to the panel for final approval.

An agreed statement and recommendations will be forwarded to Archbishop Williams.

Date: 12/14/2005

==============================

EVANGELICAL CLERGYMAN APPEALS TO ARCHBISHOP

The Anglican clergyman whose licence was removed by the Bishop of Southwark following legal but irregular ordinations by a South African Bishop, has exercised his right of appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams.

Rev. Richard Coekin, Senior Pastor to the fast-growing “Co-Mission” churches of South-west London, claims that although his relationship with Bishop Tom Butler has been “impaired” by the House of Bishops’ recent statement on Civil Partnerships, which led him to seek help from a foreign Bishop, this does not legally or morally justify the removal of his licence. He still does not know of any valid reason for his licence being revoked.

This dispute has erupted over the authority of the Bible in the modern Church of England. Rev. Coekin said: “We were forced to seek valid but irregular ordinations for the staff of our growing congregations after more than two years during which our Bishop persistently refused to do so and because we are now distanced from our Bishop since he refuses to uphold basic Biblical principles of sexual morality. We did so with the wide support of both local and national “Mainstream” Evangelical leaders. I still haven’t been told why this can legally or morally justify the removal of my licence. I am now being included with those who have been proven guilty of gross immorality or heresy because of my loyalty to the Bible and traditional Anglican doctrine.”

In his appeal, he makes four main points. First, that the Bishop has formalised “schism” by removing his licence rather than accepting “impaired communion” over theological differences; secondly, that the Church of England report, “Issues in Human Sexuality” has already clarified that in the Bible, “Sexual activity of any kind outside marriage comes to be seen as sinful” and therefore, he is obliged, like all clergy and Bishops, by their ordination oaths, to oppose this controversial House of Bishops statement on Civil Partnerships as contrary to Holy Scripture; thirdly, that his previous “planting” of new congregations, which have never undermined other parish churches, should be welcomed rather than regarded as grounds for removing his licence and fourthly, that the South African Bishop who performed the ordinations is specifically excluded from church rules in this area and that no-one is guilty of organising anything illegal or improper.

While the Church of England proudly claims to tolerate a great diversity of doctrine and practice, this orthodox Evangelical is being targeted for his loyalty to traditional Anglican and Biblical doctrine by those intent on removing politically incorrect pages from Scripture. Rev. Coekin’s appeal to Dr. Rowan Williams comes in the context of questions raised by Archbishops of the global south, representing the majority of Anglicans world-wide, about the Archbishop’s ability to defend traditional Church of England doctrine because of his personally more liberal views.

==============================

Global South Leadership Team Established

Source: Global South Anglican

November 19, 2005

My dear bothers and sisters,

I am writing to you to tell you about some exciting developments in our Global South community.

At the third South South Encounter hosted by the Diocese of Egypt October 25th/30th in Ain El Sukhna the Primates met and decided that we needed to establish an ongoing leadership team. We were convinced that we needed to continue the important work of strengthening our community and implementing the decisions taken during our Encounter.

We elected a leadership team consisting of the Most Rev’d Peter J. Akinola, Primate of All Nigeria as President, the Rt. Rev’d John Chew, Bishop of Singapore as General Secretary, assisted by the Venerable Oluranti Odubogun and Canon Martyn Minns, and the Rt. Rev’d Mouneer Anis as Treasurer. We also established a Primates Advisory Group consisting of the Most Rev’d Emmanuel Kolini, Province of Rwanda, the Most Rev’d Bernard Malango, Province of Central Africa, the Most Rev’d Drexel Gomez, the Province of the West Indies the Most Rev’d Gregory Venables, the Province of the Southern Cone. We will also shortly be announcing the name of a Primate from Asia to complete the Group.

We are developing a number of initiatives that will strengthen our common life, the first of which will be a Global South Consultation on Economic Empowerment that we are planning to hold during 2006. We are also pleased to announce the establishment of our new website at www.globalsouthanglican.org which will not only provide up to date information but also provides online access to many of the reports given at the third Encounter and a growing photo gallery here.

It is our hope that the Global South community of Provinces and those who share our commitment to historic Anglicanism will continue to demonstrate a radical commitment to Jesus Christ, a profound love and respect for the Word of God and a passion for the work of mission to the world round us.

Global South Leadership Team

==============================

RE Covenant Between The Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) and the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America.

In an historic moment, as part of the realignment of global Anglicanism, on November 12, 2005 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the Most Rev. Peter J. Akinola, Primate of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Most Rev. Leonard W. Riches, Presiding Bishop of the Reformed Episcopal Church, and the Most Rev. Walter H. Grundorf, Presiding Bishop of the Anglican Province of America, entered on behalf of their three Churches a Covenant Union of Anglican Churches in Concordat.

The purpose of the covenant of concord is to work together in the common cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, pledging to each other their mutual cooperation, support, discipline and accountability. Recognizing that all three Churches share a common heritage of faith and order within the Anglican tradition, they are united by saving belief in Jesus Christ as the Way, the Truth and the Life, and by their commitment to the Faith once delivered, based on the irrevocable Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the final authority for faith and life.

It was agreed that ministers of these Churches, subject to the respective regulations within the jurisdictions, may be eligible to exercise pastoral ministry in each Church. Archbishops and bishops of the Churches in concordat may also be invited to conduct episcopal duties within the other jurisdictions with the blessing of the appropriate provincial authorities.

The three Churches have united specifically for joint mission in North America. Archbishops Riches and Grundorf welcomed the Church of Nigeria’s CANA initiative. They assured Archbishop Akinola that, wherever possible, individual congregations of all three jurisdictions, within proximate geographic locations, would work closely and cooperatively together to demonstrate their commitment to one another and their desire to witness to a consistent Biblical, Evangelical and Catholic expression of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

——

COVENANT UNION OF ANGLICAN CHURCHES IN CONCORDAT AMONG

THE CHURCH OF NIGERIA (ANGLICAN COMMUNION)

THE REFORMED EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AND

THE ANGLICAN PROVINCE OF AMERICA

Whereas the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America share a common heritage of faith and order within the Anglican tradition; be it understood that:

Article 1: The Churches, recognizing the fact that they are working together in the common cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, pledge to each other, their mutual cooperation, support, discipline and accountability.

Article 2: Wherever possible, individual congregations within proximate geographic locations will work closely and cooperatively to demonstrate their commitment to one another and their desire to witness to a consistent Biblical, Evangelical and Catholic expression of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Article 3: As evidence of our union in Christ and the Common Standards of the faith existing among the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Reformed Episcopal Church and the Anglican Province of America, a delegation of ministers and laity may be sent to attend each other’s Provincial and General Synods or Councils. As a further demonstration of our union, bishops of the Churches may attend each other’s episcopal meetings with the expectation that they will be invited to speak but not cast votes.

Article 4: The Ministers of the Churches may, subject to the respective regulations of the Churches, be eligible to exercise pastoral ministry in each Church. Archbishops and Bishops of the Churches in the concordat may also be invited to conduct episcopal duties with accountability, discipline and the episcopal blessing of the local appropriate provincial authorities.

Article 5: Communicants of the Churches may be received into the other Churches on presentation of letters of transfer, or their equivalent.

Article 6: It is also our declared intention to initiate a process that will permit us, in due course to enter into an agreement of full communion with a clear and common understanding of all of its implications.

Date: 11/16/2005

==============================

Priest, deacons ordained to serve Episcopal splitoffs

At a closing Eucharist for those unhappy with liberal theology in the Episcopal Church, the Anglican bishop of Bolivia ordained three deacons and a priest to serve newly formed congregations in the United States.

“These men have been ordained to minister to those who cannot remain in communion with the Episcopal Church,” said Bishop Frank Lyons of Bolivia.

The 2.3-million member Episcopal Church is the Episcopal wing of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which has more than 70 million members. Bishop Lyons belongs to the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, which broke ties with the Episcopal Church over differences exemplified by the 2003 ordination of an openly gay Episcopal bishop.

Because of such issues, some African, Asian and Latin American bishops were sending priests to serve conservative U.S. congregations that would not accept a liberal Episcopal bishop. The Windsor Report, intended to address the international crisis, called on the Episcopal Church to refrain from further actions affirming gay relationships, and called on foreign archbishops to halt mission work in U.S. dioceses.

At this week’s conference Downtown of the conservative Anglican Communion Network, many overseas bishops said they did not believe the Episcopal Church would halt gay ordinations and same-sex blessings.

The priest ordained yesterday, the Rev. Eliot Winks, a deacon of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, was ordained for the Diocese of Chile, but will serve in Baltimore.

“This is in violation of the Windsor Report, which called on bishops in various other parts of the Anglican Communion not to interfere in local matters. This is clearly an indication of an interference,” said Bishop Robert Ihloff of the Diocese of Maryland. He described Father Winks’ Church of the Resurrection as “a group of dissidents” meeting in a home.

Because it is not an Episcopal parish, the bishop said he could not directly intervene. But as president of the Episcopal province that includes Pittsburgh, and as an adviser to the presiding bishop, he will insist that other Anglican bishops have no right to send priests to his territory, he said.

“In Anglicanism there is only one accepted bishop within a diocese. To introduce churches that claim to be Anglican means that this church ... cannot be recognized in the Anglican Communion, despite the posturing of the bishop of Pittsburgh,” he said.

Father Winks had been a deacon of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, moderator of the Anglican Communion Network, said he had no supervisory role over the new priest and deacons, who now answer to the dioceses of Chile and Bolivia. He said he believed those bishops had acted because the Episcopal bishops had not backed off from ordinations of gay priests and same-sex blessings.

“If the Episcopal Church turned back, I’m sure they’d be delighted to turn these churches over to the Episcopal church. They are doing their own missionary work, and of course we are supportive of them. I make no bones about that,” Bishop Duncan said.

The three deacons were ordained for a ministry among the poor in Washington, D.C., and congregations in Greenwich, Conn., and Raleigh, N.C.

Father Winks said his ordination came about because a group in Baltimore had called him to do campus ministry, but Bishop Ilhoff refused to grant him the license required for a priest from one diocese to minister in another. He believes he was refused the license because he is theologically conservative and came from the Diocese of Pittsburgh, which is viewed negatively by bishops in other theological camps.

In the meantime, he said, the group of which he is now pastor had formed on its own, and he was put in contact with them. They wanted to call him but, “The only way I could be involved was to step out of the Episcopal Church,” he said.

Bishop Ilhoff said he had not granted the license “because he proposed a ministry that we did not feel was either necessary or wanted here.”

Date: 11/13/2005

==============================

Episcopal Churches Split on Gay Bishop

Friday, November 11, 2005 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CLEVELAND - Four northeast Ohio congregations upset over the consecration of an openly gay bishop have split from Episcopal Church USA and have affiliated with a diocese in South America.

St. Luke’s in Fairlawn, Holy Spirit in Akron, St. Barnabas in Bay Village and St. Anne’s in the Fields of Madison voted Sunday to break with the Episcopal Church USA and affiliate with the Diocese of Bolivia led by Bishop Frank Lyon.

The church has been rocked for consecrating Bishop V. Gene Robinson. In 2003, the Episcopal General Convention confirmed his election as bishop of New Hampshire.

John Niehaus, a Cleveland attorney who represents the congregations, said the vote means the parishes are no longer part of the Diocese of Ohio based in Cleveland or the national church.

On Monday, clergy leaders of the churches met with diocese Bishop Mark Hollingsworth Jr. Niehaus said there was no specific discussion about church property and assets.

Hollingsworth said in a letter sent to people of the diocese that he was committed “to working collaboratively with these congregations toward a faithful and just resolution.”

Hollingsworth said clergy of the four churches agreed with him not to discuss the situation publicly, and he asked people of the diocese to do likewise.

“We are given in this an opportunity to move forward in a way that is worthy of our common vocation as Christians,” the bishop said.

Robert Williams, director of communication for the Episcopal Church USA in New York, estimated 15 or 20 other congregations across the nation are dealing with the issue of a possible split with the church.

The Episcopal Church, with 2.4 million members, is the U.S. province of the 77 million-member Anglican Communion, which traces its roots to the Church of England.

Date: 11/11/2005

==============================

Calif. Episcopal Diocese Nominates Gay, Lesbian Ministers as Next Bishop (Christian Post, 060222)

The Episcopal diocese of California nominated an openly gay man and a lesbian woman to be its next bishop, reigniting the flame over homosexuality that has nearly divided the worldwide Anglican Communion.

According to the Church of England Newspaper, the Diocese of California included the Rev. Robert Taylor, Dean of Seattle, and the Rev Bonnie Perry, Rector of All Saints’ Church in Chicago, on the list of five nominees for election in May.

The gay-rights group “Integrity” welcomed the nomination, saying that “Whether or not Robert or Bonnie is elected by the Diocese of California, it is inevitable that another gay or lesbian person will eventually elected, confirmed and consecrated.”

The controversy surrounding homosexuality exploded in 2003 when the Episcopal Church USA elected an openly gay man as bishop of New Hampshire. Since then, the worldwide communion nearly split over geographical lines – the more conservative “Southern” churches in Africa, Asia and Latin America versus the more liberal “Northern” churches in North America and Europe.

Under the direction of the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the communion also produced a 100-page study called the “Windsor Report” that was meant to serve as a guideline for dialogue between the opposing parties. Among the recommendations was for the ECUSA to place a moratorium on the appointment of gay bishops in the Anglican Communion.

Taking note of this recommendation, Williams expressed his unease over the Diocese of California’s new move.

“If there is ever to be a change on the discipline and teaching of the Anglican Communion [on homosexuality] it should not be the decision of one church alone,” he said.

“The Church must have the highest degree of consensus for such a radical change,” Williams argued, saying he was uneasy about how the ECUSA has handled this issue.

To be elected as bishop the nominee must first win the majority of votes within the California diocese in May. The winner must then have their election affirmed by the Church’s General Convention in June.

==============================

Anglican Consultative Head Apologizes for Ostracizing Episcopal Church (Christian Post, 060307)

[KH: He does not represent the majority; he has no right to apologize for the council.]

The head of the Anglican body that told the U.S. Episcopal Church to temporarily rescind its membership from key international Anglican gatherings apologized Monday and said the global communion “needs the Episcopal Church.”

“The Anglican Communion needs the Episcopal Church,” said John Paterson, bishop of Auckland and chair of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC). “I would be so bold as to say that the reverse is also true. The Episcopal Church needs the Anglican Communion. The ACC needs the Episcopal Church.”

Speaking at the ECUSA Executive Council meeting in Philadelphia on Mar. 6, Paterson also apologized for the ACC’s decision to limit the participation of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada during the last ACC meeting in Nottingham, England in June 2005.

“I apologize and at the same time I commend your representatives for the manner in which they managed to somehow stay with the body that was treating them so badly,” Paterson said.

His comments come at a time of heightened tension for the global Anglican Communion which has faced a serious threat of schism since the ECUSA ordained an openly homosexual bishop in 2003. They also come less than a month after the diocese of California nominated two openly gay candidates for bishop, rejecting an international plea to place a moratorium on ordaining any more homosexuals.

Despite such actions, Paterson ended his speech on a positive note, saying he hopes the Communion can be declared as a “living Communion.”

“Let ACC-13 declare to our watching and rather anxious church that our Communion is indeed a living Communion, that God lives, that God loves, and that we can continue to worship and serve God from our many different perspectives, while still proudly calling ourselves ‘Anglicans,’” he said.

==============================

Anglican Head Warns Against ‘Visible Rupture’ over Homosexuality (Christian Post, 060306)

The Archbishop of Canterbury warned that divisions over homosexuality may soon rupture the Anglican Communion, causing wounds that may take decades to heal.

“If there is a rupture, it’s going to be a more visible rupture, it’s not just going to settle down quietly into being a federation,” Archbishop Rowan Williams said in an interview with BBC News. “I suppose my anxiety about it is that if the Communion is broken we may be left with even less than a federation.”

Canterbury’s comments were his strongest yet on the topic and came only a few months ahead of the U.S. Episcopal Church’s General Convention, slated for June in Ohio.

The Anglican split over homosexuality began in 2003 following the ordination of an openly and actively gay bishop in the U.S. church. Since then, the ECUSA has been excluded from key decision-making Anglican bodies and its leaders have been urged to place a moratorium on ordaining gay bishops and prohibit the blessing of same-sex unions.

A key component of the June meeting will be the election of new bishops. In a controversial move last week, the diocese of California included two openly gay candidates in its list of five nominees for the position of its next bishop. Canterbury opposed the move.

==============================

Anglican Teachings on Homosexuality Unchanged, Canterbury Says (Christian Post, 060310)

Despite the controversial election of a gay bishop in the U.S. Episcopal Church and the confirmation of gay unions in the Canadian Anglican Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury said the global communion has not changed its teachings rejecting homosexuality and does not plan to “reopen the discussion” at its next decennial gathering in 2008.

“I do not hear much enthusiasm for revisiting in 2008 the last Lambeth Conference’s resolution on this matter,” Archbishop Rowan Williams wrote in a pastoral letter to the 38 Primates of the Anglican Communion on Thursday.

Canterbury’s comments serve to ratchet up pressure on the U.S. Episcopal Church for its upcoming 2006 General Convention, during which it will be forced to uphold a moratorium on the consecration of non-celibate homosexuals or choose to walk apart from the global communion.

The Episcopal Church has already been excluded from key international Anglican meetings, and the majority of churches in Africa have cut all ties with their U.S. counterpart. A complete division is likely to occur if the U.S. church ordains as bishop active homosexuals – two of whom were nominated last month in California.

In his pastoral letter, the Archbishop referred to such “bitter controversy over sexuality” and urged the top Anglican leaders to use the time of Lent to reflect on the challenges facing the Communion.

“The season of Lent is about penitence, and penitence always requires us to see ourselves more clearly in the light of God’s holiness and justice,” he said. “...and during this period I hope that we shall be continuing to think and pray about the challenges that face us as a worldwide church.”

However, he said, such discussion should be held on the basis that the Anglican viewpoint on homosexuality has not changed since the Communion held its last Lambeth Conference in 1998.

“In my judgment, we cannot properly or usefully reopen the discussion as if Resolution 1.10 of Lambeth 1998 did not continue to represent the general mind of the Communion,” Williams said.

Resolution 1.10 upholds marriage as a union between a man and a woman and rejects the homosexual lifestyle as “incompatible with Scripture.” It also calls against the “legitimizing or blessing of same-sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions.”

The Rev. Canon David C. Anderson, head of the conservative American Anglican Council, praised the Archbishop for upholding the tradition of the Anglican Communion, but acknowledged that “potentially explosive issues” remain.

“Archbishop Williams has sent a hopeful message that Lambeth 2008 will stand firm in upholding apostolic faith and practice, but potentially explosive issues must still be addressed,” Anderson said. “If General Convention does not clearly and definitively choose Anglican orthodoxy, will Lambeth make the hard decisions necessary to preserve the Communion? … These questions are critical to the survival of Anglicanism.”

==============================

Anglicans Address Key Issues of Identity, Authority, Relationships (Christian Post, 060302)

Top Anglican theologians and bishops are beginning a new round of talks on “key issues” that threaten to break apart the 77-million-member Anglican Communion, such as varying viewpoints on homosexuality and the changing structure of the global church.

In a letter issued late last month, the Inter-Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission (IATDC) called on “all bishops and theological education centers” to offer their answers to “some of the key questions troubling the Anglican Communion.”

“I realize that you have many calls upon your time, but am sure that you agree with me about the need for the widest possible participation in the conversation that is now being resumed,” wrote the Rt. Rev. Professor Stephen Sykes, Chair of the IATDC.

The new round of dialogue comes during a time of heightened tension in the Church over issues of the autonomy, authority and subsidiarity of national denominations. While such conflicts developed through several decades, they were thrust to the fore in recent years following the ordination of a gay bishop in the U.S. denomination, and the subsequent frustration among “global south” churches over what they viewed as an inadequate punishment of their northern counterpart.

Accordingly, late last year, the Anglican Church in Nigeria changed its official name from “The Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion)” to “The Church of Nigeria.” The church also made significant changes to its constitution by erasing references to “communion with the see of Canterbury” – the traditional method with which the members of the Anglican Communion related to each other.

The IATDC, which was originally formed in 2001 to describe the nature of the communion that exists between Anglican churches around the world, was suspended over the last two years because its funding was channeled to the Lambeth Commission, which produced the Windsor Report on same-sex relationships.

In continuing its work, the IATDC will be addressing the wider theological framework of the Anglican identity and inter-Anglican relations. The IATDC will also include responses to the Windsor Report.

==============================

Episcopalians Proposes ‘Caution’ in Electing Gay Bishops (Foxnews, 060408)

NEW YORK — An Episcopal Church panel studying the furor over the denomination’s first openly gay bishop proposed Friday that dioceses use “very considerable caution” from now on in electing bishops with same-sex partners, but stopped short of the moratorium critics demanded.

The commission also recommended that the American church offer “apology and repentance” for the turmoil its actions caused within the global Anglican Communion, and said dioceses should stop creating blessing ceremonies for same-gender couples, at least temporarily.

The suggestions are among several that will go before a June meeting of the top Episcopal legislative body, called the General Convention, which can revise or reject the proposals. The outcome of their debate will be critical, shaping not only the future of the American church, but also its role as the U.S. representative of world Anglicanism.

The Communion has been in disarray since 2003, when delegates to the last General Convention approved the election of V. Gene Robinson as New Hampshire bishop. Robinson lives with his longtime male partner, and his consecration was greeted by many Episcopalians as a triumph for gay acceptance.

However, the majority of overseas Anglican leaders are conservatives who believe the Bible bars homosexual relationships. They are demanding that the Episcopal Church adhere to that interpretation or leave the Communion.

The 14-member Episcopal commission will ask General Convention delegates to recommend that dioceses “exercise very considerable caution” in electing bishops “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church.” The panel said in an explanatory note that some of its members had advocated for tougher wording, suggesting dioceses “refrain from” electing gay bishops.

The commission also proposed that the General Convention offer “our sincerest apology and repentance” for the pain the church has caused other Anglican provinces.

The panel also wants a moratorium on bishops authorizing liturgies for same-sex blessing ceremonies. Still, the commission affirmed the need for “individual pastoral care for gay and lesbian Christians” — wording that leaves open the possibility that individual priests could conduct such ceremonies.

Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, head of the 2.3 million-member Episcopal Church, and the denomination’s House of Bishops, have repeatedly expressed their desire to remain within the Communion. The commission underscored that goal in its proposals.

But their efforts could be undermined even before the convention begins.

On May 6, the Diocese of California is scheduled to elect a new bishop and three of the seven candidates for the post have same-sex partners. The winner of that election cannot be consecrated without approval from the General Convention, which has a long history of deferring to dioceses’ choice of leader. Griswold said last month it would create “definite difficulty” between the denomination and Anglicans if the California Diocese elects an openly gay bishop.

==============================

Episcopalians consider freeze on gay bishops (Washington Times, 060405)

U.S. Episcopal leaders will try to safeguard their membership in the worldwide Anglican Communion by holding back, at least until 2008, on electing new homosexual bishops and on allowing same-sex unions, according to two Episcopal bishops.

Church leaders are even considering “repentance” for the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, an active homosexual, according to Arizona Bishop Kirk S. Smith.

He and Rio Grande Bishop Jeffrey Steenson divulged these details in e-mails to their dioceses describing a March 17-22 summit of Episcopal bishops in western North Carolina.

“Very considerable caution” will be used in electing more homosexual bishops, Bishop Smith said in his March 24 e-mail, “until a wider consensus emerges.” Bishop Smith is identified with the church’s liberal wing; Bishop Steenson is a conservative.

There is no consensus in the 70-million-member Anglican Communion, where 22 Anglican provinces have partially or totally severed relations with the Episcopal Church over its 2003 consecration of Bishop Robinson, a divorced man living with his homosexual lover.

Until now, the 2.2-million-member Episcopal Church has only used the word “regret” for its actions. But with its legal standing as the U.S. representative of worldwide Anglicanism at peril and dozens of parishes fleeing the denomination each year, its leaders are having second thoughts.

An official statement on the matter is due out around April 10 from a church “special commission,” but Bishop Smith predicts authorization of same-sex unions would likewise be frozen and bishops who have allowed such unions will apologize.

Bishop Steenson told his diocese March 28 that talk was of freezing both same-sex blessings and “discouraging” the election of homosexual bishops at least until the 2008 Lambeth Conference of the world’s Anglican bishops in Canterbury, England.

“Our continued membership in the Anglican Communion can no longer be taken for granted,” he wrote. “There is now evidence that a majority of bishops are beginning to rethink the position staked out by the General Convention 2003, when it approved the election of the bishop of New Hampshire.

However, on May 6, the Episcopal Diocese of California will elect a bishop and three of its seven candidates are open homosexuals. A majority of bishops and delegates meeting in June at the Episcopal General Convention in Columbus, Ohio, would have to approve such an election.

But it’s questionable now whether the General Convention will allow another homosexual bishop. Bishops Steenson and Smith said a warning given March 22 to the bishops in North Carolina by the visiting Anglican Bishop Michael Langrish of Exeter, England, was clear that punishment would result.

“Any further consecration of those in a same-sex relationship; any authorization of any person to undertake same-sex blessings ... will be read very widely as a declaration not to stay with the Communion as it is,” Bishop Langrish said.

If the Episcopal Church were disenfranchised as a member of the Anglican Communion, Episcopal churches around the country could leave the denomination with their property without the fear of lawsuits.

“That must have served as a wake-up call to many: the Anglican Communion will not permit the Episcopal Church to have it both ways,” Bishop Steenson wrote. It cannot be “blessing the homosexual lifestyle and enjoying the benefits of full communion.”

On Monday, Integrity, the Episcopal Church’s homosexual caucus, posted a blog entry calling the Arizona bishop’s statements “purely speculative in nature” and “?’spin’ designed to heighten anxiety and fear.”

“The Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops has demonstrated no stomach for any ‘moratoria’ that impacts only [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] vocations, and I expect the recommendations of the special commission will affirm that position,” said the Rev. Susan Russell, Integrity president, in an e-mail to The Washington Times.

==============================

Panel Calls for Apology, Repentance from Episcopal Church for Gay Row (Christian Post, 060408)

NEW YORK (AP/CP) - An Episcopal Church panel studying the furor over the denomination’s first openly gay bishop recommended Friday that the American church offer “apology and repentance” for the turmoil its actions caused within the global Anglican Communion, and said dioceses should stop creating blessing ceremonies for same-gender couples, at least temporarily.

The commission also proposed that dioceses use “very considerable caution” from now on in electing bishops with same-sex partners, but stopped short of the moratorium critics demanded.

The 14-member Special Commission on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, comprised of American bishops, clergy and lay people, was formed to lay the groundwork for the church’s response to what is known as the 2004 Windsor Report.

That report came from Anglican leaders seeking ways the 77 million-member Communion could stay unified despite the rift over homosexuality.

The Episcopal panel will ask General Convention delegates to recommend that dioceses “exercise very considerable caution” in electing bishops “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church.” The panel said in an explanatory note that some of its members had advocated for tougher wording, suggesting dioceses “refrain from” electing gay bishops.

The commission also proposed that the General Convention offer “our sincerest apology and repentance” for the pain the church has caused other Anglican provinces. [KH: note that the repentance is not for anti-Biblical teachings and actions.]

Integrity, an advocacy group for gay and lesbian Episcopalians, welcomed the proposals, saying the panel had made a “strong statement that this church will not scapegoat its lesbian and gay members for a threatened schism.”

Canon Kendall Harmon, a leading conservative from the Diocese of South Carolina, said the report read like the church is “trying to figure out what they can get away with” while maintaining its place in the Communion.

But their efforts could be undermined even before the convention begins.

==============================

Conservative Episcopalians Cautious of Calif. Election (Christian Post, 060508)

The Episcopal Diocese of California avoided widening the rift in their denomination over the role of gay bishops this past weekend, rejecting three openly gay candidates for bishop while electing a white, heterosexual, Southern, male nominee instead.

The Rev. Mark Handley Andrus of Birmingham, Ala., won on the third ballot to replace the retiring Rev. William Swing, during a diocese-wide meeting in San Francisco’s historic Grace Cathedral.

The California diocese caused a stir earlier this year when it announced that three of its seven candidates for bishop are actively and openly homosexual.

No gay or lesbian bishop has been elected since the consecration of Eugene Robinson in 2003 as bishop of New Hampshire. Robinson’s appointment stirred a worldwide revolt by traditional and conservative Anglicans who view homosexuality as incompatible to scripture.

By 2004, the majority of the world’s Anglican denominations threatened to halt relations with the U.S. Episcopal Church, calling on the North American church to place at least a temporary moratorium on electing gay bishops.

Therefore, the mere nomination of two gay and one lesbian bishop in the California diocese discontented conservative Anglicans, who had been watching closely the results of the race.

The Anglican Consultative Council, one of several traditional groupings within the Episcopal Church, released a statement questioning the ballot immediately after Andrus’ name was announced.

“How will activists respond to the fact that a diocese which has for years been a bastion of amorphous Christianity and aggressive revisionism chose a white, heterosexual, Southern male as bishop?” the statement read.

“Did the diocese succumb to reported pressure from the national Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA), including Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, to avoid electing a partnered homosexual?” it asked. “Is such pressure in fact part of a coordinated strategy intended to mislead the Communion?”

However, the Rev. Mark Spaulding of Holy Cross Church in Castor Valley, one of the delegates at the California assembly, said he didn’t know if sexual orientation was a factor in the vote.

“It was really clear after meeting these seven individuals that the gay factor wasn’t an issue,” Spaulding said, according to AP. “This diocese would’ve been fine with any one of the seven.”

Andrus emerged as the favorite of the first ballot, and ended up with 72 percent of the clergy vote and about 55 percent of the law vote. He must be consecrated by the General Convention, the highest legislative body of the EC(USA), which is held every three years, to be officially recognized as the spiritual head of the Episcopal Church in California.

Conservatives said they will turn to the General Convention next month in Columbus, Ohio in making a judgment about Andrus’ election.

“All eyes now turn to Columbus, where General Convention is expected to continue its obfuscation of the issues and present an unacceptable fudge to Episcopalians and Anglicans worldwide,” the AAC stated. “It is imperative that the Anglican Communion follow Christ’s exhortation in analyzing General Convention 2006: ‘Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment (John 7:24).’”

==============================

Tenn. Episcopalians Fails to Elect New Bishop after 36 Votes (Christian Post, 060508)

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) – A search for a bishop for the Episcopal Diocese of Tennessee will begin anew after a convention of 203 voting delegates could not reach a consensus on four candidates Saturday.

It is unlikely that a successor for the retiring bishop, the Right Rev. Bertram Herlong, will be in place when he leaves in October, the Rev. Tom Hotchkiss, spokesman for the diocese, told The Tennessean.

“The atmosphere was one of mixed emotion and resigned disappointment,” Hotchkiss said. “When the clergy votes did not change substantially during the day, it looked like it was going to be difficult to elect a bishop.”

After 36 ballots, the Rev. James B. Magness of the Diocese of Kentucky and the Rev. Canon Neal Michell of the Diocese of Dallas had received most of the votes. Also being considered were the Rev. Canon Brian Cox of Santa Barbara, Calif., and the Rev. Winston B. Charles of Raleigh, N.C.

The search process took 18 months, and delegates failed to elect a candidate during two previous conventions on March 18 and March 25. Organizers delayed the third vote more than a month in hopes that a consensus would emerge.

“This is happening in God’s time and not our time,” said Suzanne Cate, a voting delegate from St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Murfreesboro. “Perhaps God sees a need for us to spend more time talking to one another.”

The diocese requires a two-thirds consensus for a candidate from two voting bodies: the church members and the clergy members.

Delegates have said that the divide reflects deep national disagreements over the future direction of the church and the consecration of an openly gay bishop.

Magness supported the consecration of V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire in 2003. Michell’s diocese has allied itself with a network of U.S. Episcopalian churches opposed to the Robinson’s consecration, although Michell himself has not supported that alliance.

Herlong has not yet announced plans for a new election but is expected to reconstitute an election committee, Hotchkiss said.

If a bishop is not elected when Herlong retires, a group of seven church and clergy members, will lead the church.

==============================

Anglican Head to Appoint Advisory Team for Gay Row Resolution (Christian Post, 060509)

The spiritual head of the worldwide Anglican Communion, Dr Rowan Williams, is set to appoint a team of advisors to aid him in the resolution of the homosexuality crisis engulfing the church body.

Although the four people have not been identified yet, it is generally believed that the four will include the Primate of Wales, Archbishop Barry Morgan, who is a known liberalist within the Church, as well as the Primate of Central Africa, Archbishop Bernard Malango, who is more traditional in his biblical views.

The group has been established to play a vital role after June’s General Convention of the Episcopal Church of the USA (ECUSA). The group could be influential in whether the worldwide structure of the Anglican Communion can stay as it is, or whether it will split.

The Communion has avoided the divisive matter for the moment after the Diocese of California decided against electing a gay bishop this past weekend. But next month looks to bring the debate to the forefront once again as the ECUSA looks to find a solution to the controversy.

On Saturday, Episcopalians in California elected the Rt Rev Mark Andrus from seven candidates – of which, three were openly homosexual. It had been feared that another gay bishop would be chosen, which would have potentially been more damaging than the previous consecration of Gene Robinson in 2003, as the Anglican Communion’s first ever gay bishop in its 450 year history.

A Special Commission of the Episcopal Church has also been created, consisting of clergy and laypeople, with the goal to recommend a way for the church body to tackle the problem. In April 2006 it reported back that the denomination should be extremely cautious about making any new consecrations of homosexual clergy, and that it should make a fresh statement of repentance, and apologize for the trouble it had caused the worldwide Communion.

Specifically the group explained that it was split over whether it should go a stage further and tell the 2.3 million-member church body to “refrain” from consecrating gays at all. Instead it has settled on telling members to use extreme and “considerable caution” before committing another consecration such as Gene Robinson’s.

Anglican leaders across Africa and Asia have called for the ECUSA to be expelled from the Communion unless it repented for its consecration of Bishop Robinson, and also to fall in line with traditional Church theology on the matter.

==============================

Canada Bishops Criticize Nigeria Church Gay Ban (Christian Post, 060511)

[KH: Canada’s apostate church]

Canada’s Anglican bishops unanimously endorsed a motion expressing “grave concern” about proposed legislation in Nigeria that “would prohibit or severely restrict the freedom of speech, association, expression and assembly of gay and lesbian persons,” Canada’s national Anglican newspaper reported recently.

The motion, according to the Anglican Journal, also criticized the Anglican Church of Nigeria for its support of the legislation, which the bishops said is inconsistent with the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The bishops said they were “especially grieved” by the support for the legislation given by the Church of Nigeria, noting that the 1998 Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops called upon churches to “listen to the experience of homosexual persons,” the Journal reported last Thursday.

The proposed laws, said the bishops, “criminalize civil and religious same-sex marriage as well as the public and private expression of same-sex affection, all public affiliation between gay persons and even publicity, public support and media reporting of the same.”

The proposals “would make the very act of listening to homosexual persons impossible,” they added.

In what the Journal described as “unusually strong” language, the bishops said they “disassociate” themselves from the actions of the Church of Nigeria and called upon Anglicans around the world to listen to and respect the human rights of gay people.

The Canadian bishops’ motion, passed at their spring meeting held Apr. 22-27, comes as the Anglican Communion, represented in the United States by the Episcopal Church, remains torn over the issue of gay clergy after years of heated debate.

In 2003, New Hampshire Episcopalians elected the Rev. V. Gene Robinson, who has a longtime male partner, as their bishop. A year later, in an attempt to keep the Communion from splitting, an international Anglican panel asked U.S. dioceses to stop installing bishops in same-sex relationships for now, and requested that the Episcopal Church show “regret” for the turmoil its actions had caused.

The head of the Episcopal Church — Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold — has repeatedly expressed the desire to remain part of the Communion. Last month, prior to a critical election for the new head the Diocese of California, Griswold said that if California elected the church’s second openly gay bishop, it would create “definite difficulty” between Episcopalians and the rest of the Anglican Communion.

An Episcopal panel studying the issue, in line with Griswold, proposed last month that dioceses use “very considerable caution” in electing bishops with same-sex partners, but it stopped short of a moratorium. In last Saturday’s election in California, three of the seven candidates were openly gay.

==============================

Episcopalians want trial for homosexual bishop: Urging clergy to uphold Episcopal Church’s law, doctrine (WorldNetDaily, 060512)

Declaring the “true church of Jesus Christ now must prevail,” a group of Episcopalians has launched a campaign calling for all clergy involved in the consecration of an actively homosexual bishop to be put on trial by the church.

The selection three years ago of Rev. V. Gene Robinson to head the Diocese of New Hampshire further deepened divisions that have been growing for more than three decades between liberals and traditionalists in the 2.2 million-member branch of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The national organization of Episcopal members behind the campaign – Lay Episcopalians for the Anglican Communion – is asking 37 bishops who opposed Robinson’s consecration to file for church-law indictments against Robinson and 42 bishops who consecrated him.

The group has asked for an answer from the traditionalist bishops by May 22. Ten or more bishops are needed to initiate such “presentment” proceedings.

The lay group, organized this year, presents five “distinctions” that make charges against Robinson and his consecrators “uniquely different from allegations in all past presentments.”

The church members say their purpose is to determine the meaning and validity of church law, doctrine and practice, and to punish any bishops who have violated their ordination and consecration vows or committed other “grave offenses.”

Last month, the group asked Robinson and his consecrators to “recant, repent, resign or retire” but received no response.

The traditionalist group has launched a petition drive that will continue at the Episcopal Church’s general convention exhibit in Columbus, Ohio, in June.

As WorldNetDaily reported last week, fears of a split in the global Anglican Church were eased when the Episcopal Diocese of California voted to elect Rev. Mark Andrus of Alabama as its next bishop.

The election, held by 700 lay people and priests in San Francisco’s Grace Cathedral, was to find a replacement for longtime Bishop William Swing, who is retiring. Three of the seven candidates under consideration were openly “gay” clerics living with their partners.

Andrus, nevertheless, endorses ordination of homosexual clergy and same-sex “blessings.” A spokesman for Integrity, the national homosexual organization, proclaimed its pleasure with the California election, saying Andrus is a “great champion … for equality for [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered] people.”

The Episcopal lay group says liberal bishops recently “have met traditionalists’ defense of Scripture with seizure and attempted seizure of churches and dismissal of parish clergy.”

The group criticizes “revisionists” for “reckless pursuit of a gay agenda that is hostile to Scripture and to the historic order of our church.”

While homosexuals are welcomed in local parishes, the group says, “there are clear Scriptural and operating prohibitions concerning ordainment of priests practicing homosexual lifestyles, and certainly bishops in that lifestyle are prohibited.”

The lay group argues rank-and-file Episcopalians back the church’s traditional beliefs but have been overwhelmed by “revisionist leaders, their captive seminaries and their intimidation of priests.”

“That our beloved church was hijacked by gay agenda promoters in 2003 must not be confused with the popular will of America’s Episcopalians in the pews, who are still theologically in line with the worldwide Anglican Communion.”

The “chasm” in the church, the group says, is largely between factions of bishops and the “side now in control is deeply influenced by advocates of the radical gay agenda.”

“The true church of Jesus Christ now must prevail, by using judicial tools already available.

Failing that, there will be no alternative but the Anglican Communion’s jettisoning the revisionist U.S. church and establishing a new traditional American province of the faithful.”

==============================

Episcopal Church Debate Over Homosexuality Heats Up (Christian Post, 060518)

Kendall Harmon has to monitor his blog these days, so he can delete insults and offensive language from the comments section.

His topic: the Episcopal Church.

As a critical church meeting nears over homosexuality, the debate online and in public comments has grown so intense that one publication has dubbed it “blood sport.”

“I think people are dreading possible outcomes and when you’re dealing with the unknown, fear kicks in in a big way,” said Harmon, a minister and conservative leader in the Diocese of South Carolina. “And I do think things are more polarized now.”

The Episcopal General Convention, which begins June 13 in Columbus, Ohio, must respond to fellow Anglicans worldwide who were outraged by the 2003 consecration of the first openly gay Episcopal bishop – V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. The votes will shape not only the church’s future, but also its role as the U.S. representative of the Anglican Communion.

The emotion of the moment is visible in the explosion of blogs since the convention three years ago, when delegates voted to confirm Robinson’s election. A quick Web search yields at least 20 dedicated to the plight of the 2.3 million-member denomination. The Living Church, an independent magazine, compared the tone of the discussion to “a wrestling cage match” in an editorial titled “Blood Sport.”

Some bishops have complained of being flooded with hateful e-mails and of being personally attacked on the Web. Harmon, who runs the widely read titusonenine blog, has had to take down comments he said were “cynical, angry and alas, even petty.” He now reviews all statements before they are posted. Some liberal-leaning blogs have had to do the same.

“The Internet and blogs do give megaphones to anonymous bigots, but they also allow you to organize more quickly and, in some instances, trade opinions across ideological lines,” said Jim Naughton, a liberal who runs the blog for the Diocese of Washington and has had to warn people about the language they use there. “It intensifies the conversation for better and for worse.”

But the debate goes beyond the Internet. Episcopalians with traditional beliefs on homosexuality, a minority in the denomination, feel persecuted and silenced by the majority – and their public statements reflect a deep anger over their circumstances.

A conservative group called Lay Episcopalians for the Anglican Communion is pressing for a church trial of Robinson and the dozens of bishops who consecrated him. A spokesman for the advocates, James Ince, said his group was engaged in “a fight to the death of our church.” The debate is becoming more direct and truthful, not harsh, he said.

“You can expect the liberals not to appreciate the clear, straight language from lay organizations because they’re used to this goody goody two-shoes pantywaist stuff,” Ince said.

The Rev. Paul Zahl, dean of the conservative Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pa., said in a May 10 letter posted on the school’s Web site that an “army of Brown shirts” was falsely interpreting Scripture to fuel “the gay-agenda steamroller.”

Some moderates and liberals have responded by accusing traditionalists of being more concerned with power than with faith. In a recent edition of The Washington Window, the newspaper of the Diocese of Washington, Naughton wrote a two-part report called “Following the Money,” linking conservative Episcopal advocates to right-wing donors intent on fighting the political stands of liberal Protestants.

Perhaps the most inflammatory commentary can be found on the Web site virtueonline, where founder David Virtue offers his own and others’ traditionalist views in ways that even some fellow conservatives find offensive. For example, Virtue refers to one of the church’s first openly gay priests as the “First Sodomite.” Virtue caused an uproar at the 2003 General Convention when he published last-minute claims of impropriety against Robinson that bishops quickly deemed baseless.

Delegates will be entering the convention in Columbus under a heavy burden. They will decide whether to fulfill a request from Anglican leaders for a moratorium on electing partnered gay Episcopal bishops and on creating blessing ceremonies for gay couples.

Anglicans worldwide will be watching closely. The Communion teaches that gay sex is “incompatible with Scripture,” and if overseas archbishops think the General Convention has not moved far enough toward following that teaching, it could split the 77 million-member Communion.

“I definitely think the tenor of the conversation is a little stronger right now, primarily because both sides of the political issue think there’s a lot to lose and there is,” said Brother Karekin Yarian of Every Voice Network, which works with moderates and liberals in diocesan groups called Via Media. [KH: no moderates!] “Both sides are concerned about the church splitting and no one wants to see that happen.”

==============================

Churches Stand Against Federal Marriage Amendment (Christian Post, 060529)

WASHINGTON – Two Episcopal bishops were among a host of religious leaders who petitioned against the passage of the Federal Marriage Amendment on Capitol Hill last week.

“Marriage is a theological matter of first importance for the church,” retired New Jersey Bishop Joe Morris Doss said at a press conference last Monday. “Such issues demand the church’s most careful and profound deliberation, and that is to take place in our parishes, councils, seminaries, publications, and places of theological reflection.

“Congress, on the other hand, is not the proper forum for this sort of study, debate, and decision-making [on marriage],” he continued. “The state is not to dictate doctrine to the church, or pre-empt a lively and extensive debate by precipitously deciding it for us

The bishops were speaking as part of the “Clergy for Fairness” – a coalition of progressive Christian groups that oppose the passage of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman only.

Debate over the Federal Marriage Amendment has been heating up among religious circles as the Senate prepares for a vote on June 6 or 7.

Most of the effort has come from the conservative side, with some churches declaring June 4 “Marriage Protection Sunday.” On that day, Southern Baptists pastors are encouraged to preach about marriage from the pulpit and congregants are called to contact senators in support of the amendment.

The Washington-based Family Research Council has also collected over 37,800 “marriage petition signatures” they plan to send to Senators before the congressional vote.

In the opposing side, the Clergy for Fairness enlisted 1,600 clergy in a petition against the amendment. They have also sent an open letter to the U.S. Senate that expresses concern over the restriction of “civil rights of an entire group of Americans” in the proposed amendment.

“Misusing our nation’s most cherished document for this purpose would tarnish our proud tradition of expanding citizens’ rights by Constitutional amendment, a tradition long supported by America’s faith communities,” the letter states. “These concerns alone merit rejection of the Marriage Protection Amendment.”

Many of the churches that claim membership in the Clergy for Fairness, such as the United Church of Christ and the Unitarian Universalist Association, approve gay marriage within their walls, and fear that such an amendment would impost restrictions on such blessings.

“This amendment would endorse one religiously biased view over all others and impose it on all Americans by constitutional fiat,” the open letter stated.

However, for some member churches, the gay marriage issue is a threat to denominational unity and stability.

The U.S. Episcopal Church is a prime example of that internal divide. Since the election of an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire in 2003, the denomination has lost dozens of churches as well as the rights to participate in some global Anglican meetings.

The church has also been asked by Anglicans around the world to place a moratorium on all gay union blessing ceremonies and gay ordinations – a decision it will take up during its General Convention meeting in mid June.

Already some 900 Episcopal clergy have signed a petition urging church bishops to respect the international request and refrain from approving gay bishops or blessing same sex unions.

“It is our hope to demonstrate to the House of Bishops with absolute clarity that the clergy of this church want to return to our historical, biblical roots,” said the Rev. David Roseberry, a priest from Plano, Texas, who started the Web-based petition.

Despite the controversy at home, the Episcopal bishops joined the Clergy For Fairness in calling against the Federal Marriage Amendment, addressing gay marriage as an “issue of justice.”

“The people that we’re talking about are human beings with all the human dignity that God has endowed them with — children of God — and we are to see them that way and treat them that way,” said Doss. “…let me tell you, the church itself, when it sorts out all of the various issues that come before it in history, always lands on the side of justice, because that’s where God is.”

==============================

Anglican church in crisis debate (BBC, 060616)

The Anglican Church in the United States is holding what is arguably the most important meeting in its history.

The Episcopal Church has been given until the end of its governing Convention to toe the traditionalist line of the rest of the Anglican Communion or face expulsion.

The crisis in the worldwide Anglican Church - which claims 75 million members - started when the Episcopal Church ordained the first openly gay bishop, Gene Robinson, in November 2003.

Since that event traditionalist Anglicans - many of them in the populous churches in developing countries - have been trying to get rid of the Episcopal Church.

Compromises

There is a compromise plan on the table at the meeting in Columbus, Ohio.

It goes some way to meeting the three key demands of the rest of the Communion - that the Episcopal Church should repent its decision to ordain Gene Robinson, that it should introduce a moratorium on future gay bishops and that it should end the blessing of same-sex unions in church services.

But there is already high-level criticism of the Episcopal Church’s response - including from the UK’s Archbishop of York, John Sentamu.

Dr Sentamu - second only to the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams in seniority in the Church of England - queued for the microphone at a packed open meeting to argue that it was insufficient to repair “a broken friendship”.

The rest of the Communion demands repentance from the Americans for ordaining Gene Robinson, that is, an acceptance that the act itself was wrong.

Instead, the wording so far proposed by the Episcopal Church offers repentance only for the effect on the wider Communion, including the pain other Anglicans are suffering.

Attendees listen to the debate at the meeting of the Episcopal Church

The traditionalists and moderates could split the church

They fail to acknowledge - as traditionalists demand - that it was inherently wrong to ordain a gay man as bishop, and Archbishop Sentamu said: “I’m not sure your resolutions create a space for communion.”

In church terms, this was strong stuff from such a senior figure, and on the face of it, represented robust support for the traditionalists.

Dr Sentamu had even read out a message from Dr Williams, burnishing his appearance as a representative of the mainstream Church.

But all sides are keen to stress that Dr Sentamu is in Columbus in a personal capacity, and traditionalists are suspicious.

They fear he is part of an attempt to get a compromise voted through the Convention, and that his criticism on Wednesday night was designed to bolster his credibility as a stern critic so he can later deem a slightly amended American response to be sufficient.

The Archbishop’s criticism was not the only contribution from England.

The Convention was buzzing after another highly influential figure, the Bishop of Durham Tom Wright, had written to criticise it for using slippery language capable of multiple interpretations.

He criticised the wording of proposals to end official church blessings of same-sex unions and another to “exercise extreme caution” before ordaining gay bishops.

Moderates versus traditionalists

Traditionalists want water-tight language.

They suspect the Americans of playing for time, making sufficient apparent concessions to buy off more moderate conservative opinion around the world, and stave off robust action to expel the Episcopal Church.

Dr Wright, a key influence in devising the demands made of the Episcopal Church, said baldly that if the current proposals were passed, then the Americans would have “specifically, deliberately and knowingly decided not to comply”, and was in effect, choosing to “walk apart” from the rest of the Church.

Perhaps the greatest significance of Dr Wright’s 11th-hour broadside is his influence with exactly those moderate conservatives in developing countries whose reaction to the outcome in Columbus could be so important.

One of the special commission that drew up the proposals for the Episcopal Church told me his intervention was “unhelpful”.

But none of this means the American Church are necessarily about to respond to the traditionalist call for “clarity”.

Gene Robinson himself was at the same meeting as the Archbishop of York and also approached the microphone to tell the Episcopal Church that its convention was “not about saving the Anglican Communion”.

He said the Church should see the face of Jesus in gay and lesbian people as it had in black and disabled people.

“We cannot make decisions about what the Anglican Communion will or will not do,” he said.

That observation may not be strictly correct.

What the Episcopal Church decides to do about sexuality will have a pretty strong effect on what the Communion does, and most of the delegates here in Columbus know that.

==============================

Episcopal Church Prepares for Convention amid Widening Anglican Rift (Christian Post, 060609)

In an Easter season letter to leaders of the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury set out their priorities for a once-a-decade summit planned for 2008. The note was all about survival: How do we heal the feuds over gay clergy and other rifts and manage to hold together 77 million followers around the world?

But a deeper question – being asked with increasing urgency – is whether it’s worth the effort.

Some critical judgments may emerge when the Episcopal Church – the American branch of the embattled Anglican family – begins its General Convention on Tuesday in Columbus, Ohio.

What’s at stake seems profound: A nearly 500-year-old religious tradition going back to King Henry VIII’s famous break from the Vatican to establish the Church of England. But the modern reality is much more messy.

Factions have engaged in theological combat since the 2003 consecration of the first openly gay Episcopal bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. Conservative dioceses are withholding money, congregations are looking for leadership – and the Anglican Communion has no central authority or doctrine to try to rally around. In short: Many bricks but not much mortar.

Some are tired of unity, if all it means is more fighting, and a formal rupture would effectively mean little in the pews. Priests and followers have generally picked their sides. But theologians worry an Anglican disintegration would set a worrying example to other mainline Protestant denominations struggling over gay clergy and same-sex unions – the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) among them.

“There’s a de facto split now,” said Andrew Carey, a British-based commentator on Anglican affairs. “We can’t say it’s broken beyond repair, but it’s effectively impaired. Everyone is watching what will come next.”

The delegates heading for Ohio have the opportunity to seek calm or more confrontation.

In crafting a message to other Anglican churches, they could send an olive branch to conservatives worldwide fuming over same-sex blessings and Robinson’s widespread acceptance in the West. A snub, however, would reinforce perceptions that the communion is locked in a fatal battle over what it should stand for.

Liberals, including many in the Episcopal Church, say issues of social justice and anti-discrimination are the priorities for the 21st century. Traditionalists, led by Africans and the so-called “Global South,” insist on strict interpretations of the Bible and point to a 1998 Anglican declaration calling homosexuality “incompatible with Scripture.”

Keeping them all under the Anglican tent is the goal of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Rev. Rowan Williams. He has used his position as spiritual leader of the communion to constantly appeal for unity.

“We cannot give up,” he told a global conference of Christian churches in February. In this March letter, he asked the Anglican leadership to “think and pray about the challenges that face us as a worldwide church” in preparation for the 2008 conference in England.

But there’s no guarantee the communion can hobble along until then. It’s already a hothouse for many of the pressures facing all Christianity – such as the growing strength and assertiveness of African churches in shaping the faith.

The Anglican tensions are even sharper because no one is really in charge. Its bishops operate with wide autonomy and can either accept or ignore guidance from Williams and his advisers.

This has given conservatives the confidence to attack.

Combative Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola and other Africans have come close to full-scale mutiny. Some have refused to accept financial aid from U.S. Episcopal churches and have offered a spiritual home to parishes and seminarians in the West opposed to the liberal moves. They have numbers on their side: There are more Anglican Communion members in Africa than in Britain and North America combined.

Ironically, Africa and other impoverished points could pay the highest price if their complaints end up tearing apart the communion. Church-administered aid channels from the West could dry up. At the same time, the communion would further disintegrate into a hodgepodge of practices.

It’s already happening to some extent. The Episcopal diocese in Fort Worth, Texas, refuses to ordain women despite a General Convention order in 1997 making it mandatory. In Connecticut, six parishes asked to be removed from oversight by the bishop because of his support for the gay priest Robinson. The dispute remains unresolved.

“Is the communion worth saving?” asked Carey, whose father, the Rev. George Carey, served as Archbishop of Canterbury from 1991 to 2002. “These days, it comes down to who you ask. But, if it splits up, it will be seen as a total betrayal of the idea of Christian unity. You could say there’s at least a theological imperative to keep it together.”

And, some argue, important cultural common ground also hangs in the balance.

In an essay in Britain’s The Guardian newspaper, a philosophy professor at Wadham College answered his own question: “Who cares about the commonwealth at prayer?”

“The Anglican Communion provides a vehicle through which smaller churches in often-ignored parts of the world can have an international voice,” wrote Giles Fraser, who also is an Anglican vicar. “The fracturing of Anglicanism puts a huge network of aid, goodwill and mutual understanding at considerable risk ... (and would) create yet another fault line to set believers against each other.”

The outcome of the Episcopal meeting may help set the tone.

On the table is a request from some Anglican leaders for a moratorium on electing partnered gay bishops, among other things. But it could turn its back on traditionalists and invite more attacks – such as a blistering declaration in October by “Global South” Anglicans meeting in Egypt.

“We’re seeing very little compassion from people who claim to be compassionate,” said Louie Crew, a retired professor of English at Rutgers University in Newark, N.J., and a prominent gay Episcopal activist.

Despite the hand-wringing, no one is even certain how the communion could collapse. There is no formal structure for expulsion. But many conservatives are taking a different path: strongly backing a proposal by Archbishop Williams to set some ground rules for membership.

The “Anglican Covenant” would provide clearer rules for governing the communion and impose some specific guidelines on doctrine – which until now has been based on general Christian tradition and gives great latitude on how it’s celebrated.

“It’s a terrible commentary on institutional Christianity of any kind” that after 2,000 years of tradition, the rules have to be set, said the Rev. Paul Zahl, dean of the conservative Trinity Episcopal for Ministry in Ambridge, Pa. “It’s disturbing ... sort of theological shellshock.”

==============================

Episcopalians to Address Fallout over Gay Bishop (Christian Post, 060613)

Three years after confirming its first openly gay bishop, the U.S. Episcopal Church must decide whether to appease irate Anglicans by promising not to do it again — at least for now.

The choice puts a heavy burden on the Episcopal General Convention, which starts Tuesday in Columbus, Ohio: If Anglican leaders don’t like the outcome of the American meeting, the world Anglican Communion could break apart.

“Whether it will end up being two camps that still sit in the same tent, or whether they will finally decide to walk in different paths, I don’t know,” said David Steinmetz, a Duke University expert in Christian history. “Nobody knows at this moment.”

New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, who lives with his longtime male partner, became an icon for gay acceptance after the 2003 General Convention, where his election was approved.

His supporters contend the Bible does not bar monogamous gay relationships; detractors hold that Scripture explicitly condemns gay sex.

Anger over Robinson’s elevation has echoed throughout the 77 million-member communion, where conservative views dominate. The Episcopal Church, the U.S. arm of Anglicanism, has scrambled to calm the worldwide furor.

New York Bishop Mark Sisk, co-chairman of an Episcopal panel guiding the convention debate, believes that many bishops and parishioners have no regrets about Robinson’s consecration, “but are not anxious to exacerbate a crisis.”

The “hope is that something will get passed that will signal to our communion that we actually are trying to listen carefully” to overseas concerns, Sisk said.

Circumstances inside the American denomination are less dire. Conservatives are a minority within the 2.3 million-member church, which has been shaken by infighting, but remains intact.

Four predominantly conservative dioceses — Dallas, Pittsburgh, Quincy, Ill., and San Joaquin, Calif. — have withheld payments to the national church, according to Canon Robert Williams, a national Episcopal spokesman.

And several parishes have voted to leave the denomination, prompting lawsuits over church property. Williams puts the number of departing congregations at 30 out of 7,679; the American Anglican Council, a conservative advocacy group, says the figure is closer to 140.

The biggest change, however, and the largest threat according to liberals, is the formation of the Pittsburgh-based Anglican Communion Network.

The association represents 10 U.S. dioceses and more than 900 traditional parishes that oppose ordaining gays. The network remains part of the Episcopal Church for now, but has separated from Episcopal leaders and is working closely with conservative archbishops overseas.

Network leaders won’t give details of their post-convention plans, but they are maneuvering over the long-term for greater status within the Anglican Communion. They could ultimately attempt to replace the Episcopal Church as the American member of the communion.

“None of us wants the communion to break up,” said the Rev. Peter Moore, former dean of the conservative Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pa., “but we realize we’re talking different languages.”

While hoping for reconciliation, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the Anglican spiritual leader, has held meetings to prepare for any negative world reaction to the Columbus assembly, which ends June 21. One concern is that the rift will become so bad that frustrated conservative churches, particularly in the developing world, will leave the communion.

The Episcopal House of Bishops, meanwhile, recently started a defense fund that will help dioceses in legal battles against parishes that want to leave and take their property with them.

The key decision before delegates is their response to the 2004 Windsor Report.

That document was written by an international panel on Anglican unity, which asked for a moratorium on electing partnered gay bishops and a temporary ban on creating official prayer services for blessing same-sex couples. The Episcopal committee co-led by Sisk crafted legislation based on these requests — but stopped short of backing a moratorium.

Instead, the committee proposed that dioceses “exercise very considerable caution” in bishop elections from now on. The panel also suggested a temporary bar on same-gender liturgies, but used wording that leaves an opening for individual priests to conduct the ceremonies informally.

Convention delegates can revise or reject the proposals.

Separately, a new leader for the Episcopal Church will be elected at the convention from a field of seven nominees. Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold’s nine-year term ends this year and church observers say none of the nominees would take the church in a dramatically different direction. Delegates will also vote on whether to consider reparations for black Episcopalians over the church’s past support for slavery and segregation.

==============================

General Convention 2006: “Stepping Back” Toward Revisionist Victory? (American Anglican Council, 060500)

THE FUTURE of the U.S. Episcopal Church (ECUSA) and its standing within the Anglican Communion now appears set to be determined chiefly by the June General Convention’s decisions on compliant-sounding resolutions that, as presently written, would nonetheless leave ECUSA “pointing in the same direction.”

This, after the Diocese of California averted a second major convention struggle—and probable schism in the Communion—by passing up the chance to elect another actively gay bishop on May 6.

The election of a second such prelate would have presented an opportunity for considerable drama: Some claimed—and some did not believe—that the House of Bishops would this time narrowly refuse to back a non-celibate homosexual, and if so, that gay activists and their supporters would gather willing bishops to consecrate the candidate illegally.

The California diocese, however, chose a liberal, pro-gay, but married man with two grown children—Alabama Suffragan Bishop Mark Handley Andrus—to succeed Bishop William Swing. In so doing, delegates bypassed by a wide margin six other candidates, three of them partnered homosexuals, and one of those a lesbian. Placing second, and more favored among the laity, was the Rev. Canon Eugene Taylor Sutton, a black cleric serving at Washington National Cathedral, who also was not among the gay nominees.

The election of any one of the homosexuals would have forced the June 13-21 General Convention in Columbus, Ohio, to register a stark up or down vote on the consecration of the candidate, one that either failed the church’s pro-gay stand or handed Anglican primates (provincial leaders) a clear-cut means of declaring that ECUSA is “walking apart” from the Communion.

That would have been a lose-lose situation for more moderate liberals, those deputies or bishops who likely want continue support for homosexuals, but also want to try to, or feign trying to, patch things up with the wider Communion for unity’s or expediency’s sake.

These include bishops—there are said to be some—who want to “maintain unity” because they are “genuinely sorry” that the Communion was so disrupted by General Convention 2003 decisions approving same-sex blessings and the church’s first openly gay bishop V. Gene Robinson (now a recovering alcoholic), even if they supported those decisions. But moderate liberals also appear to include those prelates prepared to slow their pro-gay agenda in a bid to retain Communion credentials and secure invitations to the 2008 Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops, in anticipation of further revisionist gains in the decade between Lambeth ‘08 and ‘18.

ON THE SURFACE, the election of Andrus, 49, which aided the moderates, may seem to suggest that the diocese yielded to pressure from the Archbishop of Canterbury and others not to widen the Communion’s conflict, and thereby handed a defeat to radical liberals who want ECUSA to be honest about its stand and accept the consequences (as evidenced by their efforts to pack the California slate with homosexuals).

Remarkably, such pressure came even from Episcopal Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold—the same man who agreed with fellow primates in 2003 that Gene Robinson’s consecration would have devastating consequences for the Communion, and then acted as Robinson’s chief consecrator, setting those consequences in train. In the run-up to California’s election, however, he said the diocese “needs to respect the sensibilities of the larger Communion.” When it makes its “wise” decision, it “will then be up to the House of Bishops to give or withhold their consent”—a thinly veiled warning that the House might this time nix another homosexual bishop.

However, such official “encouragement” looks unlikely to have been determinative in California, given the level of support Andrus received (on the third and final ballot, he garnered the backing of over 72 percent of the clergy and 54 percent of laity). None of the gay nominees received more than a handful of votes. Reportedly, some members of the diocese felt that Andrus significantly outshone homosexual nominees at the episcopal candidates’ “walkabouts” before the election. As well, church gay activists know that there will be other opportunities to put forward their candidates for the episcopate: although it has not announced its nominees yet, the Diocese of Newark’s episcopal election in September is one to watch.

NEVERTHELESS, the California election seems to have put more moderate liberals in the driver’s seat for General Convention. Their “vehicle” for getting where they want to go looks to be the report and recommended resolutions of a special ECUSA commission which go a bit farther than some predicted—but not nearly far enough, conservatives say—in trying to meet the expectations of the 2004 Windsor Report and Anglican primates.

Recent press reports that ECUSA was preparing to step back from its pro-homosexual policies—a claim that dismayed some liberals and gay activists—were soon declared unfounded by conservative leaders, particularly as the resolutions do not urge the moratorium on non-celibate homosexual bishops sought by the Windsor Report, only the exercise of “very considerable caution” in putting them forward. (More on the resolutions in a bit.) The convention could act to strengthen the resolutions in Columbus, but that remains to be seen. As things stand, though, the “step back” seems a largely tactical and illusory one actually designed to enable liberals to go forward with their Communion status and their revisionist agenda.

As well, moderate liberals seeking to appear compliant with Communion expectations are still likely to get a hard run for their money in Columbus from homosexuals in the church. To be sure, the longstanding gay group Integrity welcomed the special commission report and proposed resolutions, saying that the panel had made a “strong statement that this church will not scapegoat its lesbian and gay members.” But Integrity and other “lesbitransgay” advocacy groups also plan a big presence and ambitious legislative program at General Convention, under the umbrella of “Claiming the Blessing.” Integrity says it wants to “keep the momentum it has gained through 30 years of respected, successful advocacy and witness.” What perhaps said it all, though, was the title of an article by John Clinton Bradley in Integrity’s spring magazine: “No Turning Back.”

At this writing, too, the church’s left wing had begun “massive media campaigns of disinformation, half-truths and spin” aimed at conservatives, painting them as schismatic, destabilizers of ECUSA, and bankrolled with millions of dollars from right wing foundations, reported Episcopal e-journalist David Virtue. A centerpiece of the initiative was a two-part series by Washington (D.C.) Window Editor, James Naughton, titled “Follow the Money.” The accuracy of “bankrolling” claims aside, Virtue wondered why it would be “wrong for the orthodox to have serious financial backers when liberals have professional bagmen like George Soros who have poured billions of dollars into liberal organizations.”

ALL THINGS (at the moment) considered, U.S. conservatives see little chance that the convention will adequately meet the minimal requests made of it, and—more importantly—no chance that it will answer the call underlying them, which is for real repentance and a broad return to scriptural fidelity and orthodoxy.

“Anybody with any sense knows that ECUSA is not going to repent,” said Canon Bill Atwood of the Ekklesia Society. He recalled a survey in 2000 which showed that 42 (out of some 110) Episcopal dioceses had practicing homosexual clergy serving, 32 dioceses would ordain active homosexuals, and 22 dioceses were performing same-sex blessings. “They’re not going to stop that,” he maintained. “If Nineveh comes to us in Columbus, God will be glorified and we can rejoice and be reconciled. But I’m not holding my breath.”

“Slowing down is not stopping,” said Cynthia Brust, Communications Director for the American Anglican Council (AAC). She thought that the resolutions as proposed could create a perception that ECUSA is conforming, but said “the key...is, are there moratoria?” Clarity could be gleaned, she said, by examining whether the convention really agreed to the two types of restraint asked of it.

Still, some conservatives are worried that General Convention, bolstered by California’s internationally-watched election, may do well in appearing accommodating and obscuring areas in which it falls short of expectations—thereby creating the kind of post-convention confusion and muddle in which liberals thrive, and conservatives flounder.

“The battle going into Columbus is obfuscation versus truth, and generalities versus specifics,” said Canon Kendall Harmon of the Diocese of South Carolina.

Some sources said the impression of compliance could be augmented if the convention opts for a more conservative-leaning candidate for presiding bishop, though on the whole most do not expect the choice of successors to Bishop Griswold to make much difference for ECUSA.

Whatever happens, many will look to Communion leaders for clarity. But perhaps surprisingly, there are mixed opinions among those consulted by TCC on whether the conservative majority of Anglican primates and Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams would be able or willing to identify the inadequacies of ECUSA’s position and judge the U.S. Church’s status in the Communion accordingly.

-Pressure-

One would not conclude this from recent developments, however. Indeed, as liberals and gay activists prepared to head determinedly into General Convention, international pressure on them was ratcheted up by Archbishop Williams.

Though he is known to have some liberal sympathies, Dr. Williams has lately issued some significant warnings and statements upholding Communion policy, and begun a series of private consultations with senior Church of England bishops and advisors to consider potential fallout from ECUSA’s General Convention.

In his series of utterances, the Archbishop stated, for example, that the Communion is in danger of a “visible rupture” that could take decades to heal. Responding with “deep unease” to the list of nominees for Bishop of California, he also called on ECUSA to uphold a moratorium on the consecration of non-celibate homosexuals, reiterating that the mind of the Communion on sexuality matters cannot be changed by one province alone.

Williams’ series of private consultations with senior English bishops and others, including representatives of the conservative Anglican Mainstream, began at Lambeth Palace on April 24, with discussions reportedly including how to deal with a range of possible outcomes of General Convention, how the international Anglican “instruments of unity” should respond, and what impact there would be on the C of E. One report said Williams was believed to be taking advice on whether he indeed has the power to “disinvite” bishops to the 2008 Lambeth Conference, though he has long been recognized as having authority to decide who to invite to Anglican meetings.

The issues at stake in these “next critical months” in the Communion’s life are “too important...to allow events to overtake us,” said a leaked letter of invitation to the April 24 consultation from Dr. Williams’ head of staff, Chris Smith.

“The wording of the invitation makes it fairly clear that Lambeth [Palace] is expecting no backtrack from ECUSA and is therefore working out how to manage the oncoming schism,” wrote The Times of London.

One source with a line into the consultations claimed, however, that participating bishops have agreed that whatever effort ECUSA makes to comply with the Windsor Report will be acceptable (a position that would seem to relieve Williams of having to “disinvite” Episcopal bishops to Lambeth).

But Dr. Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstream said: “We are very concerned that a fudge isn’t good enough. What we’re looking for is repentance and the rescinding of decisions of the General Convention 2003.”

And, it is Anglican primates who look to be the primary determinants of whether or not ECUSA has separated from the Communion. (There are, of course, disagreements over whether they have “authority” to do this, though it would seem that there is likewise no “authority” preventing them from declaring an opinion about ECUSA’s Communion standing and governing their future actions accordingly.)

Bishop Griswold also revealed that he had a private meeting with Dr. Williams in Canterbury to discuss measures that ECUSA proposes to defuse the current crisis. Meanwhile, however, Williams has declined an invitation to make an appearance at the eight-day General Convention, citing pre-existing obligations. And in March, he sent the Bishop of Exeter, Michael Langrish, to deliver some sobering words to the Episcopal House of Bishops meeting (on which more in a minute).

And, in a signal move, Williams recently dashed hopes that liberals evidently had of overturning or undermining the 1998 Lambeth Conference’s sexuality resolution (1.10) when the Conference meets again in 2008. He said in March that, while provinces will offer reflections at Lambeth ‘08 stemming from the process of listening to homosexuals called for in 1.10, he saw no “enthusiasm” or reason for reopening debate on the resoundingly-adopted resolution, which deems homosexual behavior “incompatible with Scripture.” He stated that, despite “bitter controversy” over the issue, it remains clear that Lambeth 1.10 represents the mind of the Communion on sexuality.

The AAC said this left ECUSA with an “even more strongly defined choice.” It must not only uphold Lambeth 1.10 but “abandon its agenda to revise Scripture and 2,000 years of teaching and practice on human sexuality, and...affirm the foundational tenets of Christian faith... Any other course represents a decision to walk apart.”

-The Proposed Resolutions-

It has been three tumultuous years since ECUSA’s General Convention consented to the consecration of New Hampshire’s gay bishop-elect and agreed that rites for the blessing of same-sex unions are within the bounds of church life. It was, said the AAC, the culmination of a “revolution in stages” against the apostolic faith; notably, the same convention defeated a resolution (B001) affirming the authority of Scripture and basic tenets of Christian faith. The convention actions and the subsequent consecration of Gene Robinson (along with the implementation of same-sex blessings in the Canadian Diocese of New Westminster) plunged the Communion into turmoil.

And to the obvious surprise of ECUSA liberals—who were indulged by Communion leaders in pioneering earlier innovations that also lacked broad consensus, the ordination of women priests and bishops—the crisis has not blown over. Among other things, 22 of 38 Anglican provinces have reduced or broken communion with ECUSA. Additionally, the realignment of conservative North American Anglicans has quickened and become more organized, notably with the formation of the Canterbury-recognized Anglican Communion Network (ACN), consisting mostly of faithful still in ECUSA, and its links to various faithful associations and extramural Anglican bodies. The realignment also has taken some unprecedented turns, as more congregations have fled ECUSA and come under the oversight of foreign Communion bishops.

In 2004, the Lambeth Commission issued the Windsor Report, which—as Commission member, the Bishop of Durham, N.T. Wright, put it—”was about how the...Communion can continue to operate when a province or diocese acts directly against the stated mind of the Lambeth Conference, Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), the Primates, and the Archbishop of Canterbury” (the Communion’s four advisory “instruments of unity”). The Report called (among other things) for ECUSA to express its “regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached in the events surrounding the election and consecration of [Gene Robinson] and for the consequences which followed”; it also called for a moratorium on the “election and consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same-gender union until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges”; and a moratorium on all public rites of blessing same-sex unions.

The 2005 the Primates’ Meeting held at the Dromantine Center in Northern Ireland, and subsequently the ACC meeting in Nottingham, England—where U.S. and Canadian representatives defended their homosexuality policies—gave a general welcome to the Windsor Report and reaffirmed Lambeth Resolution 1.10. And both bodies asked ECUSA (and the Anglican Church of Canada) to withdraw its members from the ACC in the run-up to Lambeth ‘08, and respond through its legislative body to questions posed to it in the Windsor Report, while considering its “place within the Anglican Communion.” In other words, ECUSA was effectively suspended from the global church, and asked to choose between its support for homosexual practice and its Communion membership.

ECUSA leaders have so far expressed regret only for causing pain to the wider Communion, not for the unbiblical action of consecrating Robinson. And, in a move widely seen as vindictive, Episcopal bishops agreed to a temporary halt on the consecration of any bishop, gay or straight, and to authorizing public same-sex union rites (though the ban is not binding on clergy in all cases, or on private ceremonies). A final answer, however, is still expected from ECUSA’s General Convention.

NOW, IN A REPORT titled “One Baptism, One Hope In God’s Call,” released April 10, the Special Commission on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion proposes to make what initially looks like a conciliatory response to the wider Communion.

Appointed by Bishop Griswold and House of Deputies President, the Rev. George Werner, the mostly liberal special commission was charged with “[preparing] the way for a consideration by the 75th General Convention of recent developments” in ECUSA and the Communion “with a view to maintaining the highest degree of communion possible.” Griswold and Werner said the commission’s document is first and foremost “theological,” and secondarily “a beginning” and not the end point for conversation and legislative decisions.

The report includes six sections covering topics arising out of the current feud, plus a brief conclusion, and offers 11 recommended resolutions. The resolutions could undergo revision as they are prepared for debate in Columbus by an 18-member special legislative committee.

But among the resolutions as they stand now are some deferential-sounding calls for the convention to: commit to “interdependence” in the Anglican Communion and to the “fellowship of churches that constitute” it; commit to the Windsor process as it relates to communion and discerning “the nature and unity of the Church,” and to the (Lambeth 1.10) listening process; commit to the process of developing an Anglican “covenant,” recommended by the Windsor Report as a way to help ensure unity among provinces that adopt it ; endorse “effective and appropriate pastoral care for all”; demonstrate support for Anglicans around the world by supporting the Millennium Development Goals, including regular giving to support international development work; and approve a curious canonical amendment that seems intended, in part, to ensure, after many long years, the end to discrimination against orthodox clergy and aspirants to ordination.

But while there are several significant caveats to be noted in those first motions, the rubber really meets the road in some of the few remaining ones.

Over the course of two proposed resolutions, ECUSA would express “regret” for pain caused by the actions of General Convention 2003, for contributing to the “strains on communion,” and causing “deep offense” to many faithful Anglicans; it would also apologize and repent for breaching the “bonds of affection” in the Communion “by any failure to consult adequately with Anglican partners before taking these actions.” But this appears to miss the mark again. According to Bishop Wright, the Windsor Report’s reference to breaching the bonds of affection equates not with a failure to consult but with “going against the stated mind of the instruments of unity.”

The commission’s offerings include “no rejection of the decisions of the 2003 General Convention,” the official Episcopal Life admitted.

More significantly, as earlier noted, one resolution urges merely that “very considerable caution” be exercised in “the nomination, election, consent to, and consecration of bishops whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church” and will further strain communion. (Reportedly, some commission members had wanted to use “refrain from” in the advice on future episcopal consents, but obviously they did not prevail.) The resolution also makes no promises about not ordaining gay deacons or priests—because the Windsor Report did not ask for any, and the primates did not expand on its requests.

Another resolution concurs with the Windsor Report request that the convention not authorize public rites of blessing for same-sex unions. But the same resolution allows “a breadth of private responses to situations of individual pastoral care for gay and lesbian” church members; in other words, private same-sex blessings could continue. But some say there is a loophole that would allow public rites to continue as well.

As proposed, the resolution on same-sex blessings appears to be in compliance with the Windsor Report, which sought only to proscribe public ceremonies. However, the commission’s claim that General Convention has never yet authorized public gay blessing rites is disingenuous, as, in 2003, it gave a blanket okay to whatever liturgies that “local faith communities” wish to use for same-sex blessings: such communities “are operating within the bounds of our common life as they explore and experience liturgies celebrating and blessing same-sex unions,” the convention said. AAC’s Mrs. Brust maintained that these local rites are still being used publicly.

“It’s happening all the time,” she said, pointing, for example, to the recent lesbian union ceremony involving the head of Claiming the Blessing, the Rev. Susan Russell, and her partner.

Remaining resolutions would have the convention reassert positions the church has already taken in support of homosexuals, with which few would argue, e.g. that they are entitled to equal protection under the law, and “are by baptism full members of the Body of Christ” and ECUSA. But one clause would ask the church to commit to the communion of all the baptized “despite our diversity of opinion and, among dioceses, a diversity of pastoral practice with the gay men and lesbians among us.”

-Brake, But Keep Going-

ECUSA “should slow but not halt its push for gay bishops and blessings,” was one conservative writer’s summation of the commission’s recommendations.

Mr. Virtue called the 11 proposals “a carefully nuanced fudge that, when examined closely, offer nothing about returning to ‘the faith once delivered to the saints’ and therefore pose no threat to ongoing revisionism of the Episcopal Church. It also offers nothing to orthodox Episcopalians who had hoped [for] some relief or reprieve in...the church’s 11th hour.”

Writing on standfirminfaith.com, Fr. Matt Kennedy marveled that the “truly moderate” Windsor Report requests are still “far too stringent for the rebellious and schismatic Episcopal Church.”

“What is being...proposed by ECUSA is not truly sufficient to show that [it] is intent on being a biblically-based, orthodox province,” said the Rev. Dr. Peter Toon of the U.S. Prayer Book Society.

Even the moderate Living Church magazine was under-whelmed. “At first glance, the proposed resolutions included with the report seem to be in concert” with the Windsor recommendations, it said, “but instead it looks as though the commission was determined to change the words of these proposals to suit their own needs.”

THAT WHAT U.S. CRITICS ARE SAYING is what Communion leaders might say as well was the clear message of the Church of England’s Bishop of Exeter, Michael Langrish, to the March 17-22 House of Bishops (HOB) meeting at North Carolina’s Kanuga Conference Center, where the prelates were given preliminary information on the commission’s report and resolutions.

Langrish basically “told the U.S. bishops that the language of the special commission is not adequate,” and “that if they consecrate another gay bishop or authorize same-sex relations, the Anglican Communion will break apart,” and dialogue with Roman Catholics and Muslims will be finished, said The Times religion reporter Ruth Gledhill.

Significantly, Langrish spoke at the episcopal retreat as a representative of the Archbishop of Canterbury, which strongly suggests that the views he stated are those of Dr. Williams. As well, he was among bishops invited to the private Lambeth Palace consultations in April. And, he has, from past experience, some knowledge of the wider Communion, particularly the global South.

In his remarks to the HOB, Langrish noted the pivotal importance of the convention’s response to the Communion. But he said that for starters, he had, and the wider Communion was likely to have, “real anxieties” about the call for “very considerable caution” in electing actively gay bishops. It is not clear what that means, “how it would be judged, and who would decide,” he said. “Can you exercise extreme caution and still act in a way that injects further difficulty into the life of the Communion?”

Langrish also effectively said that regrets expressed for “pain” caused are insufficient. At issue, he said, was the creation of a bishop for the Church Catholic “who was in a relationship not liturgically sanctioned by the Church” and without seeking the assent of the wider Church.

He warned that, while “no one can force another province or diocese either to go or remain (in the Communion)... no diocese or province can enforce its own continued membership simply or largely on its own terms. There has to be engagement. There is no communion without a shared vision of life in communion.”

Concluding with a flourish, Langrish said: “So it does seem to me, as I listen to those other parts of the Communion that I know best, that any further consecration of those in a same-sex relationship, any authorization of any person to undertake same-sex blessings, any stated intention not to seriously engage with the Windsor Report, will be read very widely as a declaration not to stay with the Communion.”

How well did the U.S. prelates listen?

After the HOB meeting, Arizona Bishop Kirk Stevan Smith still seemed to think the proposed resolutions offered a way forward. That, because they signal ECUSA’s pledge to “work to conform” to the Windsor expectations, “[w]ithout backing away from decisions we have made.”

California’s Bishop Swing said “we are fighting over freedom, among other issues,” and that there is “a mad dash to create a worldwide final arbiter—a Windsor Report or an archbishop or instruments of unity—which would...put an end to all of the mischief caused by freedom.”

Conservative Central Florida Bishop John Howe noted that some of his colleagues at the meeting immediately sought to clarify that the resolutions were not “forbidding” sexually active gay bishops. He added that, while “many...bishops would not vote to authorize same-sex blessings at this moment...they will not forbid them...And we all know they are being performed all over this country. Not to forbid is to authorize.”

As shown by a recent survey of Episcopal bishops, some bishops are prepared to say that they would vote differently than they did three years ago. “But (I believe) that is because of the consequences of that vote, not because they have actually changed their minds on the substance of the question,” Howe said.

Most ECUSA bishops are “genuinely sorry” for having damaged the Communion and “do not want to see [it] destroyed,” he said, but are “not repentant for the decision to confirm Gene Robinson’s election...for they do not believe it was wrong.”

And this, he predicted, will not be “enough to satisfy the primates and the Archbishop of Canterbury.”

“If General Convention fails to adopt a stance of genuine compliance with the Windsor recommendations (which I am certain it will not do), I don’t see how the Archbishop has any alternative but to declare that the majority of ECUSA has decided to ‘walk apart’ from the Anglican Communion.”

-The Primates And U.S. Conservatives-

But that, according to some sources, remains to be seen.

One well-placed conservative leader says there are varying views among the conservative majority of primates on the resolutions as they stand, and that some could by swayed by the perception of compliance that ECUSA wishes to give, or are looking for any excuse to get past the conflict. He thought that, while 12-15 primates will not be satisfied with anything but orthodoxy, others would be willing to accept something less.

His lack of confidence about solidarity among the primates extends to Archbishop Williams, whose actions he believes have had the net effect of supporting the liberals—as shown, for example, by the dilatory Panel of Reference charged with helping embattled faithful clergy and laity, which the Archbishop appointed and put under the leadership of a primate hostile to orthodox views. Williams has “killed” the Panel, and thereby encouraged liberal bishops to continue oppressing the faithful, by allowing his staff to filter information to it, the leader told TCC.

Further, he said there is a “big fight” underway over whether or not the primates should meet within a few months after General Convention, rather than wait until their scheduled meeting in February, as he claims Archbishop Williams wants the leaders to do.

The Archbishop of the Southern Cone (of South America), Gregory Venables, also contended that Dr. Williams and some other officials do not wish the primates to meet early, an idea he thought ridiculous. “If one of my children fell down a hole I wouldn’t say I’ll deal with it next Tuesday,” he remarked.

Venables maintained, however, that if such a meeting can be managed (though it may require private funding) and there is opportunity for the primates to freely discuss the ECUSA response, they would likely reach “solid” consensus on U.S. Church’s status in the Communion.

For his part, Venables sees ECUSA’s resolutions as “a very elaborate U-turn which leaves ECUSA pointing in the same direction it was before. It doesn’t change anything at all. It’s an attempt at conciliatory language that doesn’t change the underlying intention of ECUSA to keep on doing the same thing. It’s just trying to gain time...”

Venables sees a post-convention muddle as likely. Everyone will want to “pretend that things will be all right...Nobody wants to face the truth, but we have to,” he said. The only possible hope, the only means of “shining a light into the cellar,” is for the primates to step in, he said.

HOW SOON THE PRIMATES can shine such a light will be critical to conservatives in ECUSA, and especially to the movement led by the Anglican Communion Network. It seeks a united, biblical, orthodox American Anglicanism, one that, ideally and ultimately, would be expressed in an institutionally-distinct, Communion-recognized body.

The Network’s progress toward its objective will be especially hindered if the convention fails to produce clarity about ECUSA’s position—perhaps because it has done a good job of selling the idea that it is conforming, or because legislative machinery or timing prevent a vote on a key matter by the whole convention.

But even in a clearer situation—wherein Anglican primates determine that ECUSA has quit the Communion, but continue recognition to its faithful remnant—Network-aligned bishops feel that they face heavy choices on how best to lead a mass of people to the promised land through uncharted ecclesiastical territory.

In a recent commentary, Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker contended that either leaving or staying in ECUSA could incur serious costs and consequences that should be considered. Indeed, at this writing, Network bishops were still not agreed on a unified, post-convention strategy, though there were plans for them to meet with the Bishop of Durham, N.T. Wright, at Nashotah House Seminary on May 17, to try to decide among different proposals. Even so, it may be that Network affiliates in different situations may wish to or have to pursue their common objective by different routes.

Among apparent possibilities, though, is that, if ECUSA is deemed out of the Communion, the Network may not spearhead a separation from ECUSA as part of the push toward a separate province, as many expected. Rather, some or all of the ten ACN-aligned Episcopal dioceses could sit tight, taking the position that they have not gone anywhere, but ECUSA has.

Contacted by TCC, ACN Chancellor Wicks Stephens stressed that this approach would just be the start of response, but might be a “smart place to begin.” He noted that, even as things stand now, if a diocese said it was leaving, ECUSA seems to lack “a good legal argument that the property of a diocese belongs” to the national church. But if that same diocese said ECUSA left it, “no one has ever litigated that question,” Stephens told TCC. In such a case, he believes, a court considering the disposition of property would have to weigh the burden placed on a diocese that had not changed. Add to that the fact that ECUSA’s separation from the Communion would be a violation of its constitution, and one may find significant changes in the legal perspective that has obtained in a number of past church property cases.

Some conservatives have already scored the “stay put” approach as a strategy for slow but sure death, a loss of credibility and integrity as orthodox Christians, and a plan that —though conservatives agree that ECUSA’s injustice in this area should be redressed—is still entirely too wedded to property and money. One bishop among the ACN-linked Common Cause Partners told TCC he gets the impression that most Network bishops are “trying to hold on until retirement and protect their dioceses and then it will be up to somebody else. “

Several conservative leaders TCC consulted maintained that people are “fed up with waiting,” and that if the Network does not move en masse soon, or has no plan for joint movement, such movement will happen in pieces.

The exact flow of people and parishes leaving ECUSA after June remains to be seen, though some predict “chaos and hemorrhaging.” While most are likely to seek oversight from a foreign Communion bishop, some could opt for one of the leading orthodox Anglican bodies outside ECUSA: the Anglican Mission in America, Reformed Episcopal Church, Anglican Church in America, Anglican Province of America, Anglican Province of Christ the King, or the Anglican Catholic Church.

One can appreciate, then, the great weight that Network bishops feel. Whatever they decide will have a big impact on the future of the conservative movement.

Equally so, however, it is crunch time for ECUSA leaders, from whom many in the Communion are seeking signs of real transformation and reformation, both of which look to be in decidedly short supply in Columbus.

==============================

Episcopalians Choose First Female Bishop in Anglican History (Foxnews, 060618)

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The Episcopal Church on Sunday elected Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as the first female chief pastor of the denomination and the first female leader in the history of the world Anglican Communion.

The choice of Schori as presiding bishop complicates the already difficult relations between the American denomination and its fellow Anglicans.

Only two other Anglican provinces — New Zealand and Canada — have female bishops, although a handful of other provinces allow women to serve in the post. Still, there are many Anglican leaders who believe women should not be priests.

Schori was elected during the Episcopal General Convention, where delegates have been debating whether to appease Anglican leaders by agreeing to stop ordaining gay bishops — for now. In 2003, the Americans angered the Anglican world by electing the first openly gay bishop — V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

Episcopal bishops elected Schori on the fifth ballot in a 95-93 vote then presented her to delegates for confirmation. That consent is nearly always given, however some delegates may voice objections.

The presiding bishop represents the Episcopal Church in meetings with other Anglican leaders and with leaders of other religious groups. But the presiding bishop’s power is limited because of the democratic nature of the church. The General Convention is the top Episcopal policy-making body and dioceses elect their own bishops.

Schori will inherit a fractured church. The Pittsburgh-based Anglican Communion Network, which represents 10 U.S. conservative dioceses and more than 900 parishes within the Episcopal Church, is deciding whether to break from the denomination. The House of Bishops recently started a defense fund that will help fight legal battles against parishes that want to leave and take their property with them.

Membership in the Episcopal Church, as in other mainline Protestant groups, has been declining for years and has remained overwhelmingly white. More than a quarter of the 2.3 million parishioners are age 65 or older.

==============================

U.S. Episcopalian Leaders Reject Temporary Ban on Gay Bishops (Foxnews, 060620)

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Episcopal clergy and lay delegates Tuesday rejected a demand from fellow Anglicans that they temporarily stop electing gay bishops, leaving little chance the proposal could be revived at a national church meeting.

Anglican leaders, angered by the 2003 consecration of an openly gay Episcopal bishop, had asked the Episcopalians pass a moratorium — at least for now — on homosexuals leading dioceses.

But in a complex balloting system, a majority of the Episcopal House of Deputies voted against the measure, which church leaders had seen as critical to keeping the embattled Anglican Communion together.

The critical debate in the Episcopal Church came on a day when another American Protestant denomination, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), coincidentally planned to decide on whether to allow leeway on the ordination of gay clergy and lay elders and deacons.

Mainline Protestant groups, including the Methodists and the largest U.S. Lutheran branch, have been struggling for decades over the traditional Christian prohibition on gay sex as lesbians and gays push for full inclusion in their churches. The issue has frequently dominated debate at national Protestant assemblies.

The Episcopal General Convention ends Wednesday, and the House of Bishops could still try to resurrect the ban on gay bishops. But such a measure would still need the approval of the very same deputies who have now rejected it.

==============================

Episcopal Approval of Gay Bishop Resolution Draws Relief, Disappointment (Christian Post, 060622)

Conservatives reacted with a mixture of disappointment and relief Wednesday after the U.S. Episcopal Church passed a resolution calling for restraint in consecrating bishops “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church.”

Both houses of the 75th Episcopal General Convention concurred on the final language of Resolution B033 after Episcopalians voted down a tougher resolution Tuesday which asked diocese to “refrain from” ordaining gay bishops or developing rites for the blessing of same-sex unions. The weaker nonbinding resolution asks church leaders “to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate … whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion.”

Bishop Dorsey Henderson of Upper South Carolina, co-chair of the Special Committee on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, described the resolution as “an appropriate and blessed way forward, strengthening the Episcopal Church, strengthening the Anglican Communion, without closing any doors unnecessarily.”

Bishop Geralyn Wolf of Rhode Island, a member of the committee, said it is “the best that we can do,” conveying hope that the Anglican Communion realizes the process has been the result of a compromise.

“It’s a relief to me because my hope is that we can stay in communion and continue the conversation and affirm the Windsor process,” she said, according to Christian Today. “Having this vote in both houses says to the Anglican Communion that we are very serious about our relationship.”

The resolution responds to the invitation of the Windsor Report to the Episcopal Church “to effect a moratorium on the election and consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same gender union until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges.”

Many conservatives feel however that the compromise resolution does not go far enough to meeting the demands of the Windsor Report and the wider Anglican Communion.

The Rev. Canon David Anderson, president of the American Anglican Council, was doubtful that the resolution represents the “sincerity” that is required by the Windsor Report.

“I don’t think there’s the willingness to actually enforce it and carry it out,” he said, according to Christian Today.

“The best prediction of what a person will do is what they have done before, and a number of the very revisionist bishops have very honestly said, ‘We’ve been doing same-sex blessings, we’ve been ordaining homosexual persons and we’re going to keep right on doing that,’ and I applaud them for their honesty, although I disagree with them.”

It was also greeted cautiously by the Archbishop of Canterbury, spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, said in a statement released Wednesday, “It is not yet clear how far the resolutions passed this week and today represent the adoption by the Episcopal Church of all the proposals set out in the Windsor Report.

“The wider Communion will therefore need to reflect carefully on the significance of what has been decided before we respond more fully.”

Most parts of the 77-million strong Anglican Communion still regard homosexuality as a sin and have continued to reject the ordination of women as bishops. Many provinces severed or restricted ties with the Episcopal Church – the U.S. arm of the communion – after it consecrated the openly gay Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003.

The election of Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as the Episcopal Church’s Presiding Bishop on Sunday was an additional sting to many conservatives throughout the Anglican Communion.

Fort Worth Diocese in Texas has already sent what is expected to be the first of numerous appeals to Dr Rowan Williams requesting “alternative primatial oversight.”

==============================

Church Lite (Townhall.com, 060622)

by Cal Thomas

The new leader of the Episcopal Church in America, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, says she does not believe homosexuality is a sin and that homosexuals were created by God to love people of the same gender.

As the Episcopal leadership continues to huff and puff to catch up with the world, it would be helpful if it could tell its members what it regards as sinful behavior, or will the very concept of sin soon be up for negotiation in order to avoid giving offense to anyone?

Truly what Paul, the Apostle, warned would happen in the “end times” is coming true in our day: “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine, instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn away from the truth and turn aside to myths.” (2 Timothy 4:3-4 NIV).

Meeting at the Episcopal General Convention in Columbus, Ohio, the denomination passed a resolution expressing “regret” for consecrating a homosexual bishop three years ago, but it declined to repent of its action. On Tuesday, they voted to continue consecrating homosexual bishops and to permit same-sex unions. But, just 24 hours later, they reversed themselves yet again and adopted a resolution to avoid consecrating additional gay bishops. Apparently, they are so wishy-washy; they are even wishy-washy about their wishy-washiness.

Bishop Schori, a former oceanographer for the National Marine Fisheries Service in Seattle, says, “The Bible tells us about how to treat other human beings and that’s certainly the great message of Jesus - to include the unincluded.”

This is so outside orthodox Christianity that only biblical illiterates or those who deny the supreme authority of the only book that gives foundation to the faith will accept it.

Anglicanism has suffered from probably irreversible corruption since the days of the late C.S. Lewis and John Stott, who is still with us. These men combined intellectual heft with orthodox belief and had little regard for trends, fads or cultural diversions. They have been replaced by theological dim bulbs that are less concerned about proclaiming truth and conversion than in not offending anyone.

Maybe the question for Bishop Schori and her fellow heretics should be: if homosexual practice is not sin, what is? And how do we know? Or is it a matter of “thus saith the opinion polls” and lobbying groups, rather than “thus saith the Lord”? With the bishop’s “doctrine” of inclusion, why exclude anyone? How about applying the religious equivalent of “open borders” and let everyone into the church, including unrepentant prostitutes, murderers, liars, thieves and atheists. If the Episcopal Church denies what is clearly taught in scripture about important matters like sexual behavior, why expect its leaders to have any convictions about anything, including directions to Heaven? How can anyone be sure, if the guidebook is so full of errors?

The leader of Anglicanism, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has promoted this doctrinal wishy-washiness. Williams, who has acknowledged ordaining a priest who is a homosexual, says he opposes cohabitation by heterosexuals because it has a harmful impact on family stability. But the same book that speaks against what we used to call “fornication” before such words died along with the accompanying doctrines, also speaks against the “sin” of homosexual practice. So how can anyone be sure one is true and the other not true, or the reverse, or neither, or both? And who is to say if the church leaders don’t know or are afraid to say because they might be criticized as “exclusive.”

The Episcopal Church isn’t the only denomination having trouble deciding what it believes. The Presbyterian Church (USA) has voted to “receive” a policy paper on sex-inclusive language for the Trinity. Instead of the traditional (and biblical) Father, Son and Holy Spirit, these liberal Presbyterians will consider using “Mother, Child and Womb,” or “Rock, Redeemer, Friend,” among others. Never mind what God calls Himself. These people want a name change without asking permission.

No wonder liberal denominations are losing members while the conservative ones are growing. The liberal ones don’t seem to care. Seeking only to be “relevant” they face condemnation from the One they are supposed to represent, whose attitude about such things is anything but “inclusive.”

Conservative Episcopalians are too few in number to stop the theological drift. If they intend to preserve their congregations without further theological seepage, they should “come out from among them and be separate.”

==============================

Report on the ECUSA General Convention (Anglican Communion Network, 060614)

N.T. Wright: “Communion is bound to conclude ECUSA has specifically chosen not to comply with Windsor.”

The Rt. Rev. Tom Wright, Bishop of Durham, U.K., has just released a comprehensive and thoughtful response to the proposed resolutions dealing with the Windsor Report that are currently being considered by General Convention committees. His conclusion: ECUSA’s response simply does not do what the Windsor Report has asked the Episcopal Church to do.

The full text of Bishop Wright’s statement is below.

The Choice Before ECUSA

By the Bishop of Durham, Dr N. T. Wright
June 2006

Introduction

1. There is already a burgeoning literature on the subject of the 61–page Report of the Special Commission on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. As might be expected, comments, criticisms, suggestions and pleas have been flying around from and in all directions. Having tried to keep up with this over the last few weeks, I have reached the conclusion that the crucial issues are comparatively simple, and that attention must not be diverted from them by the plethora of sub-questions which will no doubt run this way and that in General Convention. What follows is in the spirit of what I said at the English House of Bishops nine days ago: that there are more or less equal and opposite dangers in (a) some people being eager for ECUSA to show its true liberal colours and go its own way, and therefore hinting that Windsor raised the bar higher than it in fact did, and (b) others being eager to paper over the cracks and to accept any expression of regret as Windsor-compliant even if it obviously isn’t. Faced with this situation, the only way forward which will command assent from the Communion and enable us to proceed together is to be careful and exact about what precisely Windsor said and meant. That is the aim of the present paper.

2. What follows now emerges both from my own prayers for ECUSA over the last years and months and, particularly, from my participation in the Lambeth Commission which produced the Windsor Report. I cannot stress too highly that this was a unanimous report produced by a Commission of widely differing views. The Windsor recommendations were not general, arm-waving aspirations; they were precisely focused, thoroughly thought through and carefully worded. Many on the Commission wanted to say more, many would have preferred to say less, but all were agreed that these recommendations were the essential requirements if ECUSA were to continue in full communion and fellowship with the rest of the Anglican Communion. I write not only as one of the authors of the Windsor Report but as one of those who discussed, prayed over and debated, phrase by phrase and line by line, the whole document, not least the specific recommendations. I then had the task of presenting the Report to the Church of England General Synod in February 2005, where it was endorsed by an overwhelming majority. I speak therefore, not as an Englishman telling my American cousins what to do (I am well aware of the dangers of that position!) but as a member of an international and multicultural team which produced a unanimous report for the benefit (we hope) of the whole Anglican Communion.

3. We cannot and must not forget (a) that the reason the Lambeth Commission was called into being was that the Primates (including the Presiding Bishop of ECUSA) had become convinced that if the consecration of Gene Robinson went ahead this ‘would tear the fabric of the Communion at the deepest level’; (b) that the Commission was thus the chosen way of discovering how to mend a tear that had already happened, an emergency measure for a specific purpose rather than a general ‘doctrine commission’ charged with musing on possible futures, and that the Commission’s recommendations were drafted with this specifically in mind; (c) that the Primates at Dromantine last spring, and ACC at Nottingham last summer (and, of course, the C of E General Synod in February 2005), specifically endorsed the Windsor Report and its recommendations, so that these very specific and particular recommendations now come before ECUSA with such weight as the whole Anglican Communion can muster. It is not, in other words, as though ECUSA has been asked to stand on stage and make a speech of its own choosing about some issues of general concern; it is, rather, that the rest of the Communion, having discovered in sorrow that one of its members has chosen to act specifically and knowingly against both the letter and the spirit of the instruments of communion which are the characteristically Anglican bonds that hold us together, has asked ECUSA to make certain statements which are the least that can be done that will restore the unity that has already been lost.

The Report of the Special Commission: Introduction

4. The Commission has produced a document which, in its opening, is solid and impressive. There are all kinds of signs of careful, prayerful and thoughtful work and drafting. In particular (references are to paragraphs of the Report), there is a strong note of sorrow for the way in which ECUSA has ‘contributed to division in the Body of Christ’ (7) and followed the pattern of America’s imperial actions in the world (10). But a careful reading of the opening section raises questions. It is surprising to see that in its account of the history of the current issue there is no mention of what the Primates said in October 2003 (15) and hence of the fact that the consecration of Gene Robinson had gone ahead in full knowledge of the consequences. (One response to this, of course, will be that since General Convention had already endorsed the New Hampshire election this was unstoppable. This raises, for the rest of the Communion, two further matters: (a) that the Presiding Bishop led the consecration having just signed the Primates’ report, and (b) that General Convention 2003 had already been told (e.g. by Archbishop Josiah of Kaduna), before endorsing the New Hampshire election, precisely what consequences would follow.) It is also surprising that, in its summary of Windsor sections A and B (24–32), it makes no mention of the key interlocking themes of autonomy and subsidiarity, ‘adiaphora’ and – flowing from these – the all-important question of how the church can discern the difference, so to say, between those matters which make a difference and those matters which don’t make a difference. Since this is the point upon which the current problems turn, it is worrying that they are not mentioned, still less discussed.

5. The Commission then rightly turns its attention to the key questions, ‘expressing regret and repentance’ (33–44). This section is crucial as an introduction to the key recommendations. It focuses (34) on Windsor para 134, quoting its introductory sentence (‘Mindful of the hurt and offence that have resulted from recent events, and yet also of the imperatives of communion – the repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation enjoined on us by Christ – we have debated long and hard how all sides may be brought together’). It does not, however, quote the next part of Windsor 134, but contents itself – vitally, as will emerge in a moment – with a summary in terms of ‘a statement of regret for breaching the bonds of affection’ and ‘moratoria on particular actions’ (34, end). It notes that ‘statements of regret have been made by the House of Bishops and the Executive Council’ (35), though without noting that these have not been the ‘statements of regret’ asked for by Windsor, but rather statements of regret that some people were hurt by ECUSA’s actions, and a statement (from the House of Bishops in March 2005, anticipating the phraseology now used in the Commission’s proposals) of regret for breaching the bonds of affection ‘by any failure to consult adequately with our Anglican partners before taking those actions’, which as we shall presently see is clearly and specifically not what Windsor asked for.

6. The section continues to speak in general terms of ‘statements of regret’ without quoting, or addressing, the specific statements asked for in Windsor 134. Instead, para 38 says (at the end), ‘We also believe that the General Convention’s consideration of such expressions of regret and repentance will provide clear evidence of our desire to reaffirm the bonds of affection that unite us in the fellowship of the Anglican Communion.’ This is a puzzling statement, whose implications become clear in the resolutions that follow. Certainly the fact that General Convention will consider expressions of regret and repentance will demonstrate that most in ECUSA want to remain within the Anglican Communion. But the important question is whether that desire will lead to the specific and particular expressions of regret and repentance asked for by Windsor 134, or whether ECUSA will try to attain the goal of staying within the Communion without travelling by the only route that will get there, namely that of the road mapped by Windsor and endorsed by the Primates and ACC.

7. Once more, in para 43, the key question seems to be avoided. The paragraph asks, ‘How, then, is the General Convention to express regret and repentance? What counts as an adequate response to the requests of WR?’ But, instead of quoting Windsor 134, which would seem to be the obvious answer to this double question, the paragraph refers to ‘a number of statements of regret’ that have already been made, for instance that ‘regret has been expressed that the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire was “out of sequence”, given the unresolved question of the blessing of same-sex unions’. Likewise, ‘moratoria have been effected, and these have been understood as expressions of repentance for decisions made without time for consultation’. It has to be said that, from a Windsor perspective, both of these sentences are bound to appear as ways of avoiding the issue. At no point in the Commission’s report is it even mentioned that the real problem is not that actions are ‘out of sequence’ or taken ‘without time for consultation’, but that the actions in question went exactly, explicitly and knowingly against the expressed mind of Lambeth, ACC, the Primates and the Archbishop of Canterbury. There had, in fact, been plenty of consultation at several levels, and ECUSA chose to ignore the results of that consultation.

8. The report then says (44) that it will be for General Convention to determine ‘if and how to effect moratoria as a continued expression of the desire to live into the vision of the communion we share, described in WR’. It notes (45) that ECUSA ‘has been asked to respond to several requests in ways that would express our regret for having breached the bonds of affection’, but once more without saying what WR actually asked it to do. It mentions (46) ‘five specific requests’ that have come from WR, Dromantine, and ACC-13, of which the first two are for moratoria on elections to the episcopate of those living in same-gender unions and on public rites of blessing for such unions, but again doesn’t quote the specific request of WR 134. Instead, the report discusses these moratoria in para 48 in terms of the usefulness of such times of waiting in giving time for a new consensus to emerge, and instances gratefully the indications from various parts of the Communion of a ‘commitment to diversity and inclusivity with respect to current conversations about human sexuality’. I fear it is not cynical to decode para 48 to mean ‘moratoria can be helpful if they give time for the rest of the Communion to catch up with what ECUSA has already decided to do’. In fact, it would be naïve not to read it in that way. That does not give great hope for what is to come.

9. The report then says (51) ‘We acknowledge and regret that by action and inaction, we contributed to strains on communion and “caused deep offense to many faithful Anglican Christians” as we consented to the consecration of a bishop living openly in a same-gender union.’ This quotes directly from Windsor 127, though it is not yet a statement of what Windsor 134 asked for in response. The paragraph then goes on, ‘Accordingly, we urge nominating committees, electing conventions, Standing Committees, and bishops with jurisdiction to exercise very considerable caution in the nomination, election, consent to, and consecration of bishops whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strain on communion, until a broader consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges’. A footnote to the report states that some members of the Commission had wanted to say ‘refrain from’ rather than ‘exercise very considerable caution in’. Knowing how Commissions work (there is constant give and take about wording, but this doesn’t normally show up in footnotes), the fact that this discussion resulted in an explicit statement of dissent indicates that some Commission members insisted on their minority view being expressed. It also shows that the Commission knew very well that its main statement, resulting in the Resolution A161, was not complying with the specific thing that Windsor had asked for (see below). (The Bishop of Exeter had also pointed this out when he spoke to the American House of Bishops just before their Commission reported.)

10. When it comes to public rites of blessing of same-sex unions, the Commission suggests (53) that its previous resolution (2003—C051) has been misunderstood. That resolution recognized that ‘local faith communities are operating within the bounds of our common life as they explore and experience liturgies celebrating and blessing same-sex unions’; but the Commission denies that this means that such rites were ‘authorized’, since the only ‘authorized rites’ are those in the various prayer books. This then clears the hermeneutical space for paragraph 54 to recommend that no ‘authorization’ (in this rather narrow sense) of such liturgies should happen, which is then reflected in Resolution A162. From a Windsor perspective, this sounds like a straightforward attempt to have one’s cake and eat it, using a narrow definition of ‘authorized’ (= ‘printed in an official prayer book’) to deny that local liturgies come into that category, while explicitly encouraging their development and use. See (17) below for the outworking of this, where it becomes clear, as noted in Windsor 144, that General Convention is seen as ‘making provision’ for, and individual diocesan bishops can then ‘authorize’, such blessings.

11. There are several other matters dealt with in the Report. Some of these raise interesting and important issues in their own right, not least the questions of the care of dissenting minorities and the problem of episcopal border-crossing. But for the sake of brevity we must turn at once to the proposed Resolutions, and specifically to those which appear to address the central concerns of the Windsor Report.

The Key Resolutions

12. The benchmark against which the key resolutions must be measured is of course Windsor 134 (for Resolutions A160 and A161) and Windsor 144 (for A162). The report quotes the preamble to Windsor 134 (see (5) above), but never quotes the recommendations themselves. The reason for this, sadly, becomes all too clear: the Commission clearly had the Windsor Report before it throughout, and decided to decline Windsor’s request and to do something else instead, using some words and phrases which echo those of Windsor while not affirming the substance that was asked for. This, with real sadness, is my basic conclusion: that unless the relevant Resolutions are amended so that they clearly state what Windsor clearly requested, the rest of the Communion is bound to conclude that ECUSA has specifically chosen not to comply with Windsor.

13. Windsor 134 makes three recommendations. The second concerns the voluntary withdrawal of the consecrators of Gene Robinson from representative functions within the Anglican Communion; that has happened at ACC-13. It is the first and third recommendations which now concern us.

14. The first recommendation reads as follows: The Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to express its regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached in the events surrounding the election and consecration of a bishop for the See of New Hampshire, and for the consequences which followed, and that such an expression of regret would represent the desire of the Episcopal Church (USA) to remain within the Communion. The Commission, in their ‘explanation’ of Resolution A160, says that this Resolution ‘addresses the invitation of the Windsor Report that “the Episcopal Church be invited to express regret” for breaching the proper constraints of the bonds of affection. It does not point out (and at this point, reading and re-reading what they wrote, I have to say with sadness that the word ‘duplicity’ comes unbidden to my mind) that while this Resolution does indeed address the invitation of the Windsor Report, what it basically says to this invitation is ‘No, thank you.’

15. Instead of expressing regret for breaching the bonds of affection in the events surrounding the election and consecration of Gene Robinson, the Resolution, following the alternative route already set out by the House of Bishops in March 2005, expresses regret ‘for the pain that others have experienced with respect to our actions at the General Convention of 2003’, and says that ‘we offer our sincerest apology and repentance for having breached the bonds of affection in the Anglican Communion by any failure to consult adequately with our Anglican partners before taking these actions.’ A comparison with the Windsor request shows what has happened. The Commission has specifically declined to recommend to General Convention a Resolution in which ECUSA would comply with Windsor by expressing regret that the bonds of affection were breached by what was done. Instead, (a) it has simply expressed regret that the bonds of affection were breached by non-consultation, which was not mentioned at this point in Windsor, and indeed is irrelevant since there was in fact widespread and public consultation throughout most of 2003, before, during and after General Convention that year, which resulted in the Primates’ clear statement that to go ahead with the consecration of Gene Robinson would tear the fabric of the Communion; and (b) it has not even affirmed that there was fault in that respect, since the wording ‘by any failure to consult’ seems to mean ‘we’re not sure that there was anything wrong, but if there was, we apologise’. Thus the appearance of Windsor-compliance, and the powerful impact of ‘apology and repentance’, are, alas, only skin deep. To put it bluntly: Resolution A160 is not, as it stands, Windsor-compliant, and the Commission must have known that only too well. Granted that, the statement in the ‘Explanation’ that this Resolution is ‘thus signalling our synodical intentions to remain within the Communion’ must, sadly, be seen as essentially cynical. Windsor said that ‘such an expression of regret’ – i.e. the one that Windsor requested, not the one that the Resolution offers – ‘would represent the desire of ECUSA to remain within the Communion.’ The fact that the ‘explanation’ quotes this latter phrase demonstrates a desire, not apparently to comply with Windsor, but to give the appearance of doing so to those who glance at the text but do not look carefully at what is actually said.

16. The same is true, sadly, of the third recommendation of Windsor 134 in relation to Resolution A161. Windsor recommended (and the Primates and ACC endorsed the recommendation) that ‘the Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to effect a moratorium on the election and consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same gender union until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges.’ As we saw at (9) above, in line with the Commission’s Introduction para 51 and its tell-tale footnote, and as appears also in the ‘explanation’ to this Resolution, there were some on the Commission who clearly wanted to comply with this Windsor recommendation, but, equally clearly, a majority who did not. Instead of adopting the Windsor recommendation, Resolution A161 says ‘we urge nominating committees, electing conventions, Standing Committees, and bishops with jurisdiction to exercise very considerable caution in the nomination, election, consent to, and consecration of bishops whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion.’ At the risk of stating the obvious, this Resolution has done two things, both of which point away from Windsor: (a) it has only recommended ‘very considerable caution’, rather than a moratorium; (b) it has broadened the reference to persons in same-gender unions into a general statement about persons whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church – which, as various commentators have pointed out, and as the ‘explanation’ offered by the Commission itself indicates, could mean all sorts of things. Again, therefore, if Resolution A161 is passed without amendment, and still more if it is not even passed, it will be impossible to draw any other conclusion but that ECUSA has chosen not to comply with the Windsor recommendations.

17. Resolution A162, on Public Rites of Blessing for Same-Sex Unions, looks at first sight as though it is more Windsor-compliant than A160 and A161. (The relevant section of the Windsor Report is paras 136–146.) It comes in three parts: first, a resolution affirming ‘the need to maintain a breadth of private responses to situations of individual pastoral care for gay and lesbian Christians’, which presumably means that local churches can celebrate private and home-grown services of various kinds. Second, it concurs with Windsor’s call not to authorize public rites of blessing for same-sex unions (though it oddly says that this was an exhortation to ‘bishops of the Anglican Communion’, whereas Windsor 144 specifically referred to ECUSA; this presumably is in line with the double meaning noted above in (10), namely that ECUSA has chosen to interpret its own decision in General Convention 2003 not in terms of ‘authorization’ of such blessings but of ‘permission’). Third, it proposes to ‘advise those bishops who have authorized public diocesan rites that, “because of the serious repercussions in the Communion,” they heed the invitation “to express regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached by such authorization”. This is indeed much closer to the relevant Windsor paragraph than in the cases of A160 and A161. However, there is still some slippage, here as well, between what Windsor asked for and what the Resolution proposes. Windsor asked for a moratorium on all such public Rites, and did not mention at all the possibility of a new consensus emerging which would curtail this moratorium; the Resolution exhorts bishops to honor the Primate’s injunction, referred to in Windsor 143, ‘by not proceeding to authorize public Rites of Blessing for same-sex unions, until some broader consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges’. Windsor further recommended, though the Resolution does not mention this, that ‘pending such expression of regret, . . . such bishops be invited to consider whether . . . they should withdraw from representative functions in the Anglican Communion, and that provinces take responsibility for endeavouring to ensure commitment on the part of their bishops to the common life of the Communion on this matter.’ As I say, there is not so much distance here between Windsor and the relevant Resolution, but still some sense that ECUSA is choosing to look at the matter from a different perspective. This in turn sends us back to the prior question which Windsor addresses throughout, namely the question of which matters can, and which can not, be decided locally; and that question (‘is this or is this not a matter which can be decided locally) is itself one which, logically, can not itself be decided locally, but only by the whole church.

Further Matters and Resolutions

18. The meaning, intention and spirit of the Commission’s report and the proposed Resolutions already discussed have to be seen in the light of other matters and resolutions. In particular, we note Resolution A167, whose second and third parts have been widely, and in my view rightly, seen as reaffirming previous ECUSA commitments to work in the opposite direction to the main thrust of Lambeth 1.10 (there is no controversy, I think, about the commitment of that resolution to the ‘listening process’). These resolutions, sadly, provide the context within which the puzzles of the earlier resolutions (why don’t they say what Windsor asked?) can be understood; in other words, they indicate that the reason why the Commission has not recommended actual compliance with Windsor’s recommendations is because some Commission members at least believe that to comply would prevent ECUSA developing further the policies of which the consecration of Gene Robinson and the authorizing of same-sex blessings were symptoms. In other words, it is bound to look to the rest of the Communion as though these agendas, which were not of course the explicit subject of the Windsor Report, are driving ECUSA’s attitude to questions of global ecclesiology.

Conclusion

19. It is very important not to let the plethora of material, in the official document and in all the various commentaries on it, detract attention from from the central and quite simple question: Will ECUSA comply with the specific and detailed recommendations of Windsor, or will it not? As the Resolutions stand, only one answer is possible: if these are passed without amendment, ECUSA will have specifically, deliberately and knowingly decided not to comply with Windsor. Only if the crucial Resolutions, especially A160 and A161, are amended in line with Windsor paragraph 134, can there be any claim of compliance. Of course, even then, there are questions already raised about whether a decision of General Convention would be able to bind those parts of ECUSA that have already stated their determination to press ahead in the direction already taken. But the Anglican principle of taking people to be in reality what they profess to be, until there is clear evidence to the contrary, must be observed. If these resolutions are amended in line with Windsor, and passed, then the rest of the Communion will be in a position to express its gratitude and relief that ECUSA has complied with what was asked of it. Should that happen, I will be the first to stand up and cheer at such a result, and to speak out against those who are hoping fervently for ECUSA to resist Windsor so that they can justify their anti-ECUSA stance. But if the resolutions are not amended, then, with great sadness and with complete uncertainty about what way ahead might then be found, the rest of the Communion will have to conclude that, despite every opportunity, ECUSA has declined to comply with Windsor; has decided, in other words, to ‘walk apart’ (Windsor 157). My hope and earnest prayer over the coming week will continue to be that that conclusion may be avoided. May God bless the Bishops and Delegates of ECUSA in their praying, thinking and deciding.

==============================

Bishop Duncan Testifies on ECUSA’s response to the Windsor Report

Bishop Robert Duncan offered testimony tonight to the committee dealing with the Episcopal Church’s response to the Windsor Report. The committee took testimony for nearly three hours from scores of individuals in a packed ballroom at the Hyatt Regency in downtown Columbus.

STATEMENT OF BISHOP ROBERT DUNCAN

To the Special Committee Hearing
Wednesday, 14th June, A.D. 2006

I thank the Special Commission and the members of the Committee for the impossible work that you have attempted to do in keeping the conserving and progressive wings of this Church together: a task I fear that became impossible with the 2003 tear in our fabric.

I stand to speak about the inadequacy of the resolution as presented. I do so chiefly in the words of my friend and colleague N.T. Wright, the Bishop of Durham and a member of the Lambeth Commission:

It is very important not to let the plethora of material, in [the Special Commission Report] and in all the various commentaries upon it, detract attention from the central question: Will ECUSA comply with the specific and detailed recommendations of Windsor, or will it not? As the resolutions stand, only one answer is possible: if these are placed without amendment, ECUSA will have specifically, deliberately and knowingly decided not to comply with Windsor. Only if the crucial Resolutions, especially A160 and A161, are amended in line with Windsor paragraph 134, can there be any claim of compliance….If the resolutions are not amended, then, with great sadness and with complete uncertainty about what way ahead might be found, the rest of the Communion will have to conclude that, despite every opportunity, ECUSA has declined to comply with Windsor, in other words, to ‘walk apart’ (Windsor 157).

I believe, with the greatest of heartbreak and sadness, that the day has arrived where those who have chosen the Episcopal Church because of its catholic and evangelical reliability, and those who have chosen the Episcopal Church for its revolutionary character, can no longer be held together. For which Episcopal Church will the Committee, and then this Convention, decide? The future in Communion rests only with the former of the two. It cannot be both ways into the future.

==============================

Network Bishops and Affiliates Urge Full Compliance with Windsor

On Wednesday night, June 14, in the Hyatt Ballroom in downtown Columbus, more than 1,500 people came to hear those who wished to testify before the Special Committee 26 on the resolutions of the Windsor Report concerning the blessing of same-sex unions, expressions of regret, election of bishops in same-sex relationships, and the appropriateness of same-sex blessings. Seventy people were given two minutes each to speak to the committee. Nearly 40% of those who testified were conservative voices.

Network bishops and affiliates as well as others who care deeply about our ties with the broader Anglican Communion are united in the belief that these resolutions fall far short of what the Windsor Report actually requires and pleaded for clarity and honesty as the church chooses to walk with or apart from the Anglican Communion.

The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network and Bishop of Pittsburgh - “I believe, with the greatest of heartbreak and sadness, that the day has arrived where those who have chosen the Episcopal Church because of its catholic and evangelical reliability, and those who have chosen the Episcopal Church for its revolutionary character, can no longer be held together. For which Episcopal Church will the Committee, and then this Convention, decide? The future in Communion rests only with the former of the two. It cannot be both ways into the future. We’ve reached a moment where it is very difficult, indeed I think we’ve reached an impossible moment, in holding it together.”

The Rt. Rev. John Howe, Diocese of Central Florida – If our resolutions are not in fact Windsor-compliant, we will in effect be choosing to walk separately, no matter how loudly we protest otherwise.”

The Rt. Rev. William Skilton, Bishop Suffragan of the Diocese of South Carolina – “I said in 2003 that the damage would be irreparable. Now, the church is damaged, hurt, in this country and beyond. Here I am in 2006, and what I plead for is that this church affirm completely the Windsor Report so that we can come back together.”

The Rt. Rev. John Lipscomb, Diocese of Southwest Florida – “The Windsor Report’s recommendations are the place where healing can begin.”

The Rev. Canon Kendall Harmon, Canon Theologian for the Diocese of South Carolina – “Where is the clarity? Where is the honesty? Windsor uses clear language like ‘moratorium’ which are not present in these resolutions. Our relationship with the Anglican Communion is in separation, moving towards divorce. Let’s be honest, let’s be clear.”

A deputy from the Diocese of Albany – “If we want to truly repent, which is my hope and the hope of many, let us say so. If it is the mind of the church not to repent, say that. Together or apart, but honestly.”

Of the representatives from the Anglican Communion present at the Convention as visitors who were able to bring a perspective from the larger communion worldwide, Archbishop John Sentamu made the most emphatic plea: “Will it be sufficient?” Archbishop Sentamu, asked. “I am doubtful. Why? These resolutions do not meet the standard. You must be careful. You need to ask, do these resolutions show us Christ? Do they show the marks of our own affliction as part of the body? Do they show us to be those whose tears are wiped away when Christ returns? Friends, we follow a crucified savior. In Anglicanism, truth and unity are not separate. I am not sure that your resolutions will create the space necessary for communion. If they do not, you must strengthen them.”

The Windsor Report is the product of a special commission called for by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, in response to the actions of the Episcopal Church USA’s General Convention in 2003. The Windsor Report recommendations call for a moratorium on the blessing of same-sex unions, a moratorium on the election of bishops in same-sex relationships, and a statement of regret for having taken these actions which have “torn the fabric” of the Anglican Communion.

==============================

Statement at the Election of the Bishop of Nevada to be the 26th Presiding Bishop

I want to assure Katharine Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop Elect, of my prayers for her, for her husband Dick, and for their family, as Katherine assumes the impossible task now assigned to her.

As to the implications for the Episcopal Church and for the Anglican Communion, in many ways the election speaks for itself. While many of us have supported women in holy orders, this election puts three Network dioceses within the Episcopal Church in an untenable situation. The same is true for one of the Convocations of the Network (Forward in Faith) and for countless orthodox souls in every part of our nation who have endured with us despite their pain in doing so. For the Anglican Communion worldwide, this election reveals the continuing insensitivity and disregard of the Episcopal Church for the present dynamics of our global fellowship. This election asserts once again that it is our autonomy and revolutionary character that is most dear to us. Any words the General Convention might speak about compliance with the Windsor Report will have to be read in light of this election.

Many of us had prayed for clarity to come out of this 75th General Convention as regards the true intentions of the Episcopal Church vis a vis the Anglican Communion and the orthodox in North America. Sometimes, in God’s permissive will, our prayers are answered in ways we had not anticipated.

The Anglican Communion Network will continue to gather into fellowship and mission orthodox Anglicans from within the Episcopal Church, from the Common Cause Partnership and from the Continuing Anglican Churches in North America. The Network Dioceses will remain the dioceses they have been, constitutionally and legally, while at the same time assessing how to give ever more pastoral care and protection to those who have been shut out. The election of the 26th Presiding Bishop is a stunning development. Nevertheless, it remains our analysis that the decisive moment in contemporary Anglican history was the confirmation vote on the Bishop of New Hampshire in August of 2003, the consequences of which continue to unfold.

The Rt Revd Robert Duncan
Bishop of Pittsburgh
Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network

==============================

Church regrets, won’t repent for gay bishop (Washington Times, 060620)

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Episcopalians passed a resolution expressing “regret” for consecrating a homosexual bishop in 2003, but not “repentance” as many of the world’s Anglican archbishops have urged.

The resolution that apologized to other Anglicans for not taking into account “the impact of our actions” was passed the same day as the newly elected presiding bishop played up the divisions within worldwide Anglicanism by saying homosexuality is not a sin.

Meanwhile yesterday, a key conservative bishop responded to the election of Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori by asking the worldwide head of the Anglican Communion for “alternate oversight” under a foreign archbishop who holds the traditional church teaching on homosexuality and female ordination.

The resolution of regret, which passed the Episcopal House of Deputies 563-267, also must pass the House of Bishops, which will consider it today at the denomination’s triennial General Convention meeting in Columbus, Ohio.

It said Episcopalians expressed their “regret for straining the bonds of affection in the events surrounding the General Convention of 2003 and for the consequences which followed; offer its sincerest apology to those within the Anglican Communion who are offended by our failure to accord sufficient importance to the impact of our actions on our church ... and ask forgiveness as we seek to live into deeper levels of communion with one another.”

Deputies wrangled for hours over that resolution, which, in the minds of some, called into question the consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, who left his wife and children and lives with a male lover.

“I don’t want to do any apologizing for the work of the Holy Spirit,” said one deputy, referring to the denomination’s selection of Bishop Robinson. [KH: This is equivalent to blaspheming the Holy Spirit!]

“I can cause harm even if my intentions are good,” said Diocese of Washington deputy Paul Abernathy. “I’ve learned by God’s grace to say ‘I’m sorry.’?”

Meanwhile, the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, which opposes women’s ordination, appealed to Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury for an alternative to Bishop Schori of Nevada, who was chosen Sunday as the denomination’s new presiding bishop.

Their request, for “immediate alternative primatial oversight and pastoral care,” asks Archbishop Williams to provide a substitute male archbishop for Fort Worth’s 18,000 Episcopalians. If granted, it would be unprecedented in the 70-million-member worldwide Anglican Communion.

Fort Worth Bishop Jack Leo Iker said that Canterbury had acknowledged receiving his request and that he was confident it would be granted.

“If a congregation can get a substitute bishop if they have a substitute in the event of a dispute with their diocesan bishop, why can’t a diocese?” he said in an interview. The choice of Bishop Schori to head the U.S. church “was an in-your-face gesture to the entire Anglican Communion.”

Because Bishop Schori never worked as a parish priest and has been a bishop only since 2001, he said, “We were very much surprised” by her election.

“Of all the women bishops they could’ve elected, she was the least electable.”

There was no immediate response from Archbishop Williams. However, he said he had spoken to Bishop Schori by phone early yesterday “to assure her of prayers.”

In an interview yesterday, Bishop Schori added more fuel to tensions over homosexuality between the U.S. church and 37 other Anglican provinces. To date, 22 provinces have partially or totally broken ties with the Episcopal Church over the Robinson consecration.

Bishop Schori was asked on CNN whether it was a sin to be homosexual.

“I don’t believe so. I believe that God creates us with different gifts. Each one of us comes into this world with a different collection of things that challenge us and things that give us joy and allow us to bless the world around us,” she said. “Some people come into this world with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender, and some people come into this world with affections directed at people of the other gender.”

In fall 2004, an 18-member panel of Anglican leaders advised the 2.2-million-member Episcopal Church and its Canadian counterpart in a document known as the Windsor Report to cease ordaining homosexual bishops and blessing same-sex unions until a “greater consensus” arises in the Anglican Communion.

Another 18-member committee, co-chaired by Frank Wade of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, has spent the past seven days coming up with several resolutions that would satisfy other provinces yet not alienate the U.S. denomination’s mostly liberal membership.

Deputies also wrangled over Resolution A161, which urges dioceses to “refrain from the nomination, election, consent to, and consecration of bishops whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church.”

It did not mention the word “homosexual.”

An earlier version of the resolution, proposed by Virginia Bishop Peter Lee, asked for a “moratorium” on such future consecrations. It was voted down in subcommittee.

“The language of the resolution is totally unclear,” protested the Rev. Kendall Harmon, a South Carolina deputy. “We’re piling three verbs atop of each other: ‘obliged’ ... ‘to urge,’ ‘to refrain.’ The water in this resolution is murky, mucky, turgid, and I can’t see.”

Members of Integrity, the church’s homosexual caucus, said the Episcopal Church will not back down from its advocacy of same-sex unions and homosexual bishops.

“I see no energy in this house to turn back the clock,” said the Rev. Susan Russell, Integrity president. “The vote [for Bishop Schori] yesterday is a sign the House wants to move forward.

“Offering a challenge to the Anglican Communion is not a negative thing. Hopefully, 30 years from now, I’ll be back here in my wheelchair to see them elect a gay and lesbian presiding bishop.”

==============================

Presiding Bishop-elect Schori Calls on “Mother Jesus” (American Anglican Council, 060621)

Presiding Bishop-Elect Schori Calls on “Mother Jesus”

Quote from the Morning Eucharist Sermon on June 21, 2006 (at General Convention 2006) by Presiding Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori:

“Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation — and you and I are His children.”

Full Text of Sermon from Episcopal News Service

June 21, 2006

Presiding Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori preached the homily at the Closing Eucharist June 21 at General Convention in Columbus, Ohio.

The text of Jefferts Schori’s homily follows:

Homily preached the General Convention’s Closing Eucharist Wednesday, June 21, 2006 The Right Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori

Grow in All Things into Christ

Lections for the Reign of Christ

Colossians 1:11-20

Canticle 18

John 18:33-37

This last Sunday morning I woke very early, while it was still dark. I wanted to go for a run, but I had to wait until there was enough light to see. When the dawn finally began, I ventured out. It was warm, and still, and very quiet, and the clouds were just beginning to show tinges of pink. I ran by the back of the Hyatt just as two workers were coming out one of the service doors. They were startled, I’m afraid, but I nodded at them, and they responded. I went west over the freeway, and encountered a man I’d seen here in the Convention Center. Neither of us stopped, but we did say a quiet good morning. Then I found a lovely green park, and started around it. There was a man with a reflective vest, standing in the street by some orange cones, as though he were waiting for a run or a parade to begin. I said good morning, and he responded in kind. Around the corner I came to a bleary-eyed fellow with several bags who looked like he’d just risen from sleeping rough. I said good morning to him too, but I must admit I went past him in the street instead of on the sidewalk. Then I met a rabbit hopping across the sidewalk, and though we didn’t use words, one of us eyed the other with more than a bit of wariness. Around another corner, a woman was delivering Sunday papers from her car. She was wary too, and didn’t get out of her car with the next paper until I was a long way past her.

Back over the freeway, and a block later, two guys seemingly on their early way to work. We nodded at each other.

As I returned to my hotel, I reflected on all those meetings. There was some degree of wariness in most of them. There were small glimpses of a reconciled world in our willingness to greet each other. But the unrealized possibility of a real relationship — whether in response of wariness, or caution, or fear — meant that we still had a very long way to go.

Can we dream of a world where all creatures, human and not, can meet each other in a stance that is not tinged with fear?

When Jesus says that his kingdom is not of this world, he is saying that his rule is not based on the ability to generate fear in his subjects. A willingness to go to the cross implies a vulnerability so radical, so fundamental, that fear has no impact or import. The love he invites us to imitate removes any possibility of reactive or violent response. King Jesus’ followers don’t fight back when the world threatens. Jesus calls us friends, not agents of fear.

If you and I are going to grow in all things into Christ, if we’re going to grow up into the full stature of Christ, if we are going to become the blessed ones God called us to be while we were still in our mothers’ wombs, our growing will need to be rooted in a soil of internal peace.

We’ll have to claim the confidence of souls planted in the overwhelming love of God, a love so abundant, so profligate, given with such unwillingness to count the cost, that we, too, are caught up into a similar abandonment.

That full measure of love, pressed down and overflowing, drives out our idolatrous self-interest. Because that is what fear really is — it is a reaction, an often unconscious response to something we think is so essential that it takes the place of God. “Oh, that’s mine and you can’t take it, because I can’t live without it” — whether it’s my bank account or theological framework or my sense of being in control. If you threaten my self-definition, I respond with fear. Unless, like Jesus, we can set aside those lesser goods, unless we can make “peace through the blood of the cross.”

That bloody cross brings new life into this world. Colossians calls Jesus the firstborn of all creation, the firstborn from the dead. That sweaty, bloody, tear-stained labor of the cross bears new life. Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation — and you and I are His children. If we’re going to keep on growing into Christ-images for the world around us, we’re going to have to give up fear.

What do the godly messengers say when they turn up in the Bible? “Fear not.” “Don’t be afraid.” “God is with you.” “You are God’s beloved, and God is well-pleased with you.”

When we know ourselves beloved of God, we can begin to respond in less fearful ways. When we know ourselves beloved, we can begin to recognize the beloved in a homeless man, or rhetorical opponent, or a child with AIDS. When we know ourselves beloved, we can even begin to see and reach beyond the defense of others.

Our invitation, both in the last work of this Convention, and as we go out into the world, is to lay down our fear and love the world. Lay down our sword and shield, and seek out the image of God’s beloved in the people we find it hardest to love. Lay down our narrow self-interest, and heal the hurting and fill the hungry and set the prisoners free. Lay down our need for power and control, and bow to the image of God’s beloved in the weakest, the poorest, and the most excluded.

We children can continue to squabble over the inheritance. Or we can claim our name and heritage as God’s beloveds and share that name, beloved, with the whole world.

==============================

Anglican Head Suggests Two-Tiered Church System (Christian Post, 060628)

Groups with nontraditional views, such as the U.S. Episcopal Church, would end up with a lesser role.

LONDON (AP) - The leader of the world’s feuding Anglicans suggested Tuesday that the divided fellowship of churches could stay together under a system in which members with nontraditional views on issues such as gay clergy accepted a lesser role in the group.

“Some actions - and sacramental actions in particular - just do have the effect of putting a church outside or even across the central stream of the life they have shared with other churches,” Archbishop Rowan Williams wrote to the Anglican Communion’s 38 leaders, called primates.

His proposal could eventually compel the U.S. Episcopal Church and other Anglican provinces to decide whether they should maintain full membership in the Anglican Communion by adhering to the views of a majority of its leaders, or accept a lower-level status.

Most Anglican leaders believe gay relationships violate Scripture, though that is the minority opinion in the U.S. church.

Williams’ letter was billed as a “reflection” on where the Anglican Communion stood after last week’s General Convention of the Episcopal Church, the U.S. branch of Anglicanism. Episcopalians brought Anglican differences over sexuality to a crisis point in 2003 by elevating V. Gene Robinson, who has a male partner, to bishop of New Hampshire.

Rejecting demands from conservative Anglicans overseas and at home that they elect no more gay bishops for now, Episcopalians voted instead to call for “restraint.” And in a communion where female bishops are the exception, Episcopalians ruffled some Anglicans by electing Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who supports ordaining gays, as their first female presiding bishop.

Williams suggested a two-tiered model of full-member churches that would “limit their local freedoms for the sake of a wider witness” and other “churches in association,” which would have no restrictions on actions such as ordaining gays but would have “no direct part in the decision-making” of the communion.

“There is no way in which the Anglican Communion can remain unchanged by what is happening at the moment,” he said.

Williams said the same two-tiered model could work within national churches, including the Episcopal Church, where some parishes are in open revolt against their liberal leaders. The Anglican Communion Network, which represents 10 U.S. conservative dioceses and more than 900 parishes within the Episcopal Church, is deciding whether to break from the denomination.

Departing Episcopal Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold cautioned that Williams’ statement was complex and that it should not be read as an ultimatum to the Episcopal Church.

“The statement is so extensive and in many ways dense, people with different points of view are going to pull out of it whatever they find useful and say this is what he means,” Griswold said.

Williams, he said, “in no way prejudges the outcome.”

==============================

Texas Episcopal Megachurch to Leave Denomination (Christian Post, 060627)

‘... we regret their departure from biblical truth and the historic faith of the Anglican Communion.’

PLANO, Texas (AP) — Christ Church Episcopal has announced that it will leave the denomination because it can no longer abide by the national church’s decisions.

Leaders of the conservative Plano congregation announced their plan Monday, a week after the Episcopal Church elected Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as its first female presiding bishop.

Jefferts Schori supported the 2003 consecration of V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop. She also supported the creation of locally authorized blessings for gay unions.

“The mission of Christ Church is to make disciples and teach them to obey the commands of Christ,” said a statement approved by Christ Church’s leaders this weekend. “The direction of the leadership of the Episcopal Church is different and we regret their departure from biblical truth and the historic faith of the Anglican Communion. ... We declare our intention to disassociate from ECUSA as soon as possible.”

A spokesman for the Episcopal Church did not immediately return phone messages left by The Associated Press early Tuesday.

The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the international Anglican Communion. Anglican leaders and some churches overseas broke ties with the American church over Robinson’s elevation, which also disturbed conservatives in the American church.

Members of a conservative network within the national church have scheduled a meeting for the end of July to consider a response this month’s convention.

The Plano church is one of the largest Episcopal churches in the nation, drawing about 2,200 worshippers each weekend to the Dallas suburb.

The church’s pastor, the Rev. David Roseberry, has been a vocal critic of the decision to consecrate a gay bishop. He turned in his credentials at the 2003 national convention after the decision, and the church hosted a conference of conservative Episcopalians later that year.

Under Episcopal Church rules, the parish’s property belongs to the diocese rather than the congregation. But Dallas Bishop James Stanton, who also opposed the vote confirming Bishop Robinson, said he intends to allow the congregation to continue to use the facility.

“They bought it. They paid for it,” Stanton said.

Christ Church said it still regards the Dallas bishop as its “apostolic leader.”

==============================

Letter from the AAC President Following the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church (AAC, 060623)

Dear Friends,

We have just returned from the 75th Convention of the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA). The American Anglican Council (AAC) went to Columbus to work for clarity, and I believe we witnessed ECUSA make their choice. The worldwide Communion asked for simple, unambiguous compliance with the Windsor Report, specifically an expression of regret for decisions made in 2003 and subsequent actions, as well as moratoria on consecrations of non-celibate homosexuals and same-sex blessings. The Episcopal Church did not deliver. Instead, both the House of Bishops and House of Deputies bowed to intense pressure from the Presiding Bishop to pass B033, a resolution characterized by ill-defined language with no provision for enforcement or accountability. The legislation “called upon” standing committees and diocesan bishops to “exercise restraint” by not consenting to the election of individuals whose “manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church.” Why was this legislation not cast in Windsor language? It was clear that neither house would have approved Windsor compliance wording.

Biblically faithful bishops denounced B033, accurately assessing the resolution as “misleading the rest of the Communion by giving a false perception that they intend actually to comply with the recommendations of the Windsor Report.” According to Associated Press reports, John Chane, Bishop of Washington, immediately declared that the resolution was “non-binding” and that “he would not follow it.” This is no surprise. If past performance is the best indicator of future behavior, we can expect the Episcopal Church to continue its revisionist trajectory with no regard for the Anglican Communion.

In addition to the unsurprising fudge on consecrations of bishops, the Episcopal Church simply refused to address the matter of same-sex blessings. Dodging the issue with a claim that ECUSA has not authorized official rites, General Convention ignored the fact that same-sex blessings are occurring on a regular basis all around the country, performed in churches by Episcopal clergy and bishops. In addition, numerous dioceses have developed, or are in the process of developing, rites of same-sex blessings.

The election of Katharine Jefferts Schori as presiding bishop – arguably the least experienced as priest or bishop, and possibly the most liberal – is an affront to the Anglican Communion. Before the election, her record was clear. At the 2003 General Convention, she voted against a resolution affirming basic tenets of Christian faith and the authority of Scripture, and supported V. Gene Robinson’s confirmation as well as blessings of same-sex unions. In the days following her election as presiding bishop, her personal theology has been exposed even more clearly. In her first sermon as presiding bishop-elect, she referred to “our Mother Jesus.” In interviews, she expressed her version of the Gospel: “Now the Bible tells us about how to treat other human beings and that’s certainly the great message of Jesus. To include the un-included.” She has also stated that homosexuality is not a sin. When the global primates were gathered in October of 2003 in Lambeth Palace to deal with the chaos resulting from Gene Robinson’s confirmation as bishop, she was in her Nevada Diocesan Convention pushing a same-sex blessing resolution for her diocese. This does not argue well for her having a sensitivity to the larger Communion, or even caring.

When asked about life after death, Jefferts Schori responded: “But what’s important about your life? What is it that has made you a unique individual? What is the passion that has kept you getting up every morning and engaging the world? There are hints within that, about what it is that continues after you die.”

Such statements indicate clearly that Jefferts Schori is committed to a belief system which is fundamentally contrary to Scripture, Christian teaching and Anglican doctrine. There is no other way to interpret her words.

What will be the Communion’s response? The Archbishop of Canterbury issued a brief statement, noting that the Communion will have to carefully review the decisions of General Convention 2006. Primates of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA) also issued an open letter saying, “…reports to date of your elections and actions suggest that you are unable to embrace the essential recommendations of the Windsor Report and the 2005 Primates Communiqué necessary for the healing of our divisions.” Global South primates will meet in September and will offer their “concerted pastoral and structural response.”

CAPA primates also sent a strong message to the orthodox in America: “We assure all those Scripturally faithful dioceses and congregations alienated and marginalised within your Provincial structure that we have heard their cries.”

Brothers and Sisters, despite their best efforts to feign Windsor compliance, ECUSA has made its choice, and now we must unite and act to ensure a biblically faithful expression of Anglicanism in America. Whether you are in ECUSA, are in the process of disaffiliating, or are under oversight of another Anglican province, we are committed to assisting you to go from strength to strength. The war is over; it is time to build the church.

In Christ,

The Rev. Canon David C. Anderson

CEO and President, American Anglican Council

==============================

Statement of the Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry & the Christ Church Vestry

Source: Christ Church Plano

June 24, 2006

My Dear Friends,

I am thankful for the many prayers and expressions of support that you have offered Fran and me during these past two weeks. The General Convention of the Episcopal Church, as difficult as it was, achieved clarity and showed a direction and corporate mission for ECUSA that is unmistakable. I would invite you to read the daily posts I wrote from Columbus found on our website. By God’s grace, the Convention has given your Vestry and me clarity as well.

Over the past three years many laypeople, clergy (including myself) and bishops have worked zealously to communicate the clear choice that was before the General Convention; however, the Episcopal Church has not only broken the faith and apostolic witness but appears determined to continue in that path. We cannot go with them.

Christ Church has been a mission of Jesus Christ for the last 21 years. In those years we have seen a blessing from God and an energy that continues to this day. We are very thankful for this and we also sense a deep call to be right stewards of this mission and ministry. Our commitment to this biblical faith and apostolic ministry is secure thus that we find it necessary to take bold steps to protect our mission and provide for the future of our ministry on our property.

Therefore, at a specially called session on June 23 and 24, the Vestry unanimously agreed to the following statement:

The mission of Christ Church is to make disciples and teach them to obey the commands of Christ. The direction of the leadership of the Episcopal Church is different and we regret their departure from biblical truth and the historic faith of the Anglican Communion.

As the vestry of Christ Church, we declare our intention to disassociate from ECUSA as soon as possible. We are thankful for the shepherd role of the Right Rev. James Stanton and his standing in the Anglican Communion, and we regard him as our apostolic leader.

We assure the clergy, staff and congregation of Christ Church that throughout this process we will continue to worship, teach, pray and study as we have in the past with renewed and vibrant commitment to the mission of Christ Church.

Over the next few weeks we will explore the ways that this separation will be best realized. Both the vestry and I will keep you informed and updated as needed, and you can be assured of our prayer and definite actions. We likewise would request your patience and prayers. But rest assured that our church is Anglican now… and will always be within the great historic family of the Anglican Communion.

You should know that our bishop is aware of our decision and is very supportive. As we move forward together I ask for your prayers, support and blessing on the work ahead of us.

In Christ,

The Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry, Rector

==============================

Archbishop of Canterbury - ‘Challenge and hope’ for the Anglican Communion

27th June 2006

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams has set out his thinking on the future of the Anglican Communion in the wake of the deliberations in the United States on the Windsor Report and the Anglican Communion at the 75th General Convention of The Episcopal Church (USA). ‘The Challenge and Hope of Being an Anglican Today, A Reflection for the Bishops, Clergy and Faithful of the Anglican Communion’, has been sent to Primates with a covering letter, published more widely and made available as audio on the internet. In it, Dr Williams says that the strength of the Anglican tradition has been in maintaining a balance between the absolute priority of the Bible, a catholic loyalty to the sacraments and a habit of cultural sensitivity and intellectual flexibility:

“To accept that each of these has a place in the church’s life and that they need each other means that the enthusiasts for each aspect have to be prepared to live with certain tensions or even sacrifices. The only reason for being an Anglican is that this balance seems to you to be healthy for the Church Catholic”

Dr Williams acknowledges that the debate following the consecration of a practising gay bishop has posed challenges for the unity of the church. He stresses that the key issue now for the church is not about the human rights of homosexual people, but about how the church makes decisions in a responsible way.

“It is imperative to give the strongest support to the defence of homosexual people against violence, bigotry and legal disadvantage, to appreciate the role played in the life of the church by people of homosexual orientation…” [KH: oxymoron?]

The debate in the Anglican Communion had for many, he says, become much harder after the consecration in 2003 which could be seen to have pre-empted the outcome. The structures of the Communion had struggled to cope with the resulting effects:

“… whatever the presenting issue, no member Church can make significant decisions unilaterally and still expect this to make no difference to how it is regarded in the fellowship; this would be uncomfortably like saying that every member could redefine the terms of belonging as and when it suited them. Some actions – and sacramental actions in particular - just do have the effect of putting a Church outside or even across the central stream of the life they have shared with other Churches.”

Dr Williams says that the divisions run through as well as between the different Provinces of the Anglican Communion and this would make a solution difficult. He favours the exploration of a formal Covenant agreement between the Provinces of the Anglican Communion as providing a possible way forward. Under such a scheme, member provinces that chose to would make a formal but voluntary commitment to each other.

“Those churches that were prepared to take this on as an expression of their responsibility to each other would limit their local freedoms for the sake of a wider witness: some might not be willing to do this. We could arrive at a situation where there were ‘constituent’ Churches in the Anglican Communion and other ‘churches in association’, which were bound by historic and perhaps personal links, fed from many of the same sources but not bound in a single and unrestricted sacramental communion and not sharing the same constitutional structures”.

Different views within a province might mean that local churches had to consider what kind of relationship they wanted with each other. This, though, might lead to a more positive understanding of unity:

“It could mean the need for local Churches to work at ordered and mutually respectful separation between constituent and associated elements; but it could also mean a positive challenge for churches to work out what they believed to be involved in belonging in a global sacramental fellowship, a chance to rediscover a positive common obedience to the mystery of God’s gift that was not a matter of coercion from above but that of ‘waiting for each other’ that St Paul commends to the Corinthians.”

Dr Williams stresses that the matter cannot be resolved by his decree:

“ … the idea of an Archbishop of Canterbury resolving any of this by decree is misplaced, however tempting for many. The Archbishop of Canterbury presides and convenes in the Communion, and may … outline the theological framework in which a problem should be addressed; but he must always act collegially, with the bishops of his own local Church and with the primates and the other instruments of communion.”

“That is why the process currently going forward of assessing our situation in the wake of the General Convention is a shared one. But it is nonetheless possible for the Churches of the Communion to decide that this is indeed the identity, the living tradition – and by God’s grace, the gift - we want to share with the rest of the Christian world in the coming generation; more importantly still, that this is a valid and vital way of presenting the Good News of Jesus Christ to the world. My hope is that the period ahead - of detailed response to the work of General Convention, exploration of new structures, and further refinement of the covenant model - will renew our positive appreciation of the possibilities of our heritage so that we can pursue our mission with deeper confidence and harmony.”

The Primates of the Anglican Communion will meet early next year to consider the matter. In the meantime, a group appointed by the Joint Standing Committee of the ACC and the Primates will be assisting Dr Williams in considering the resolutions of the 75th General Convention of The Episcopal Church (USA) in response to the questions posed by the Windsor Report.

ENDS

The audio version can be found here at:

http://db.astream.com/cofe/060627%20Archbishop’s%20reflection%20on%20communion.mp3

Archbishop’s letter to Primates:

“Following last week’s General Convention of the Episcopal Church (USA), I have been preparing some personal reflections on the challenges that lie ahead for us within the Anglican Communion. I have addressed these reflections to a wide readership in the Anglican Communion and they are being made public today on my website. I wanted to bring them to your attention accordingly, for you to draw to the attention of members of your Province in whatever way you see fit.

These reflections are in no way intended to pre-empt the necessary process of careful assessment of the Episcopal Church’s response to the Windsor Report. Rather they are intended to focus the question of what kind of Anglican Communion we wish to be and to explore how this vision might become more of a reality.

I am also sending you a copy of the press statement I issued at the close of General Convention, which you will see mentions the Joint Standing Committee working party that will be assisting in evaluating the outcome of the 75th General Convention.

I shall be writing to you again later this week, to invite your own response to me to various questions as the Communion’s discernment process moves ahead.

Rowan CANTUAR:”

Text of reflection

The Challenge and Hope of Being an Anglican Today: A Reflection for the Bishops, Clergy and Faithful of the Anglican Communion

The Anglican Communion: a Church in Crisis?

What is the current tension in the Anglican Communion actually about? Plenty of people are confident that they know the answer. It’s about gay bishops, or possibly women bishops. The American Church is in favour and others are against – and the Church of England is not sure (as usual).

It’s true that the election of a practising gay person as a bishop in the US in 2003 was the trigger for much of the present conflict. It is doubtless also true that a lot of extra heat is generated in the conflict by ingrained and ignorant prejudice in some quarters; and that for many others, in and out of the Church, the issue seems to be a clear one about human rights and dignity. But the debate in the Anglican Communion is not essentially a debate about the human rights of homosexual people. It is possible – indeed, it is imperative – to give the strongest support to the defence of homosexual people against violence, bigotry and legal disadvantage, to appreciate the role played in the life of the church by people of homosexual orientation, and still to believe that this doesn’t settle the question of whether the Christian Church has the freedom, on the basis of the Bible, and its historic teachings, to bless homosexual partnerships as a clear expression of God’s will. That is disputed among Christians, and, as a bare matter of fact, only a small minority would answer yes to the question.

Unless you think that social and legal considerations should be allowed to resolve religious disputes – which is a highly risky assumption if you also believe in real freedom of opinion in a diverse society – there has to be a recognition that religious bodies have to deal with the question in their own terms. Arguments have to be drawn up on the common basis of Bible and historic teaching. And, to make clear something that can get very much obscured in the rhetoric about ‘inclusion’, this is not and should never be a question about the contribution of gay and lesbian people as such to the Church of God and its ministry, about the dignity and value of gay and lesbian people. Instead it is a question, agonisingly difficult for many, as to what kinds of behaviour a Church that seeks to be loyal to the Bible can bless, and what kinds of behaviour it must warn against – and so it is a question about how we make decisions corporately with other Christians, looking together for the mind of Christ as we share the study of the Scriptures.

Anglican Decision-Making

And this is where the real issue for Anglicans arises. How do we as Anglicans deal with this issue ‘in our own terms’? And what most Anglicans worldwide have said is that it doesn’t help to behave as if the matter had been resolved when in fact it hasn’t. It is true that, in spite of resolutions and declarations of intent, the process of ‘listening to the experience’ of homosexual people hasn’t advanced very far in most of our churches, and that discussion remains at a very basic level for many. But the decision of the Episcopal Church to elect a practising gay man as a bishop was taken without even the American church itself (which has had quite a bit of discussion of the matter) having formally decided as a local Church what it thinks about blessing same-sex partnerships.

There are other fault lines of division, of course, including the legitimacy of ordaining women as priests and bishops. But (as has often been forgotten) the Lambeth Conference did resolve that for the time being those churches that did ordain women as priests and bishops and those that did not had an equal place within the Anglican spectrum. Women bishops attended the last Lambeth Conference. There is a fairly general (though not universal) recognition that differences about this can still be understood within the spectrum of manageable diversity about what the Bible and the tradition make possible. On the issue of practising gay bishops, there has been no such agreement, and it is not unreasonable to seek for a very much wider and deeper consensus before any change is in view, let alone foreclosing the debate by ordaining someone, whatever his personal merits, who was in a practising gay partnership. The recent resolutions of the General Convention have not produced a complete response to the challenges of the Windsor Report, but on this specific question there is at the very least an acknowledgement of the gravity of the situation in the extremely hard work that went into shaping the wording of the final formula.

Very many in the Anglican Communion would want the debate on the substantive ethical question to go on as part of a general process of theological discernment; but they believe that the pre-emptive action taken in 2003 in the US has made such a debate harder not easier, that it has reinforced the lines of division and led to enormous amounts of energy going into ‘political’ struggle with and between churches in different parts of the world. However, institutionally speaking, the Communion is an association of local churches, not a single organisation with a controlling bureaucracy and a universal system of law. So everything depends on what have generally been unspoken conventions of mutual respect. Where these are felt to have been ignored, it is not surprising that deep division results, with the politicisation of a theological dispute taking the place of reasoned reflection.

Thus if other churches have said, in the wake of the events of 2003 that they cannot remain fully in communion with the American Church, this should not be automatically seen as some kind of blind bigotry against gay people. Where such bigotry does show itself it needs to be made clear that it is unacceptable; and if this is not clear, it is not at all surprising if the whole question is reduced in the eyes of many to a struggle between justice and violent prejudice. It is saying that, whatever the presenting issue, no member Church can make significant decisions unilaterally and still expect this to make no difference to how it is regarded in the fellowship; this would be uncomfortably like saying that every member could redefine the terms of belonging as and when it suited them. Some actions – and sacramental actions in particular - just do have the effect of putting a Church outside or even across the central stream of the life they have shared with other Churches. It isn’t a question of throwing people into outer darkness, but of recognising that actions have consequences – and that actions believed in good faith to be ‘prophetic’ in their radicalism are likely to have costly consequences.

Truth and Unity

It is true that witness to what is passionately believed to be the truth sometimes appears a higher value than unity, and there are moving and inspiring examples in the twentieth century. If someone genuinely thinks that a move like the ordination of a practising gay bishop is that sort of thing, it is understandable that they are prepared to risk the breakage of a unity they can only see as false or corrupt. But the risk is a real one; and it is never easy to recognise when the moment of inevitable separation has arrived - to recognise that this is the issue on which you stand or fall and that this is the great issue of faithfulness to the gospel. The nature of prophetic action is that you do not have a cast-iron guarantee that you’re right.

But let’s suppose that there isn’t that level of clarity about the significance of some divisive issue. If we do still believe that unity is generally a way of coming closer to revealed truth (‘only the whole Church knows the whole Truth’ as someone put it), we now face some choices about what kind of Church we as Anglicans are or want to be. Some speak as if it would be perfectly simple – and indeed desirable – to dissolve the international relationships, so that every local Church could do what it thought right. This may be tempting, but it ignores two things at least.

First, it fails to see that the same problems and the same principles apply within local Churches as between Churches. The divisions don’t run just between national bodies at a distance, they are at work in each locality, and pose the same question: are we prepared to work at a common life which doesn’t just reflect the interests and beliefs of one group but tries to find something that could be in everyone’s interest – recognising that this involves different sorts of costs for everyone involved? It may be tempting to say, ‘let each local church go its own way’; but once you’ve lost the idea that you need to try to remain together in order to find the fullest possible truth, what do you appeal to in the local situation when serious division threatens?

Second, it ignores the degree to which we are already bound in with each other’s life through a vast network of informal contacts and exchanges. These are not the same as the formal relations of ecclesiastical communion, but they are real and deep, and they would be a lot weaker and a lot more casual without those more formal structures. They mean that no local Church and no group within a local Church can just settle down complacently with what it or its surrounding society finds comfortable. The Church worldwide is not simply the sum total of local communities. It has a cross-cultural dimension that is vital to its health and it is naïve to think that this can survive without some structures to make it possible. An isolated local Church is less than a complete Church.

Both of these points are really grounded in the belief that our unity is something given to us prior to our choices - let alone our votes. ‘You have not chosen me but I have chosen you’, says Jesus to his disciples; and when we gather to celebrate the Eucharist, we are saying that we are all there as invited guests, not because of what we have done. The basic challenge that practically all the churches worldwide, of whatever denomination, so often have to struggle with is, ‘Are we joining together in one act of Holy Communion, one Eucharist, throughout the world, or are we just celebrating our local identities and our personal preferences?’

The Anglican Identity

The reason Anglicanism is worth bothering with is because it has tried to find a way of being a Church that is neither tightly centralised nor just a loose federation of essentially independent bodies – a Church that is seeking to be a coherent family of communities meeting to hear the Bible read, to break bread and share wine as guests of Jesus Christ, and to celebrate a unity in worldwide mission and ministry. That is what the word ‘Communion’ means for Anglicans, and it is a vision that has taken clearer shape in many of our ecumenical dialogues.

Of course it is possible to produce a self-deceiving, self-important account of our worldwide identity, to pretend that we were a completely international and universal institution like the Roman Catholic Church. We’re not. But we have tried to be a family of Churches willing to learn from each other across cultural divides, not assuming that European (or American or African) wisdom is what settles everything, opening up the lives of Christians here to the realities of Christian experience elsewhere. And we have seen these links not primarily in a bureaucratic way but in relation to the common patterns of ministry and worship – the community gathered around Scripture and sacraments; a ministry of bishops, priests and deacons, a biblically-centred form of common prayer, a focus on the Holy Communion. These are the signs that we are not just a human organisation but a community trying to respond to the action and the invitation of God that is made real for us in ministry and Bible and sacraments. We believe we have useful and necessary questions to explore with Roman Catholicism because of its centralised understanding of jurisdiction and some of its historic attitudes to the Bible. We believe we have some equally necessary questions to propose to classical European Protestantism, to fundamentalism, and to liberal Protestant pluralism. There is an identity here, however fragile and however provisional.

But what our Communion lacks is a set of adequately developed structures which is able to cope with the diversity of views that will inevitably arise in a world of rapid global communication and huge cultural variety. The tacit conventions between us need spelling out – not for the sake of some central mechanism of control but so that we have ways of being sure we’re still talking the same language, aware of belonging to the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ. It is becoming urgent to work at what adequate structures for decision-making might look like. We need ways of translating this underlying sacramental communion into a more effective institutional reality, so that we don’t compromise or embarrass each other in ways that get in the way of our local and our universal mission, but learn how to share responsibility.

Future Directions

The idea of a ‘covenant’ between local Churches (developing alongside the existing work being done on harmonising the church law of different local Churches) is one method that has been suggested, and it seems to me the best way forward. It is necessarily an ‘opt-in’ matter. Those Churches that were prepared to take this on as an expression of their responsibility to each other would limit their local freedoms for the sake of a wider witness; and some might not be willing to do this. We could arrive at a situation where there were ‘constituent’ Churches in covenant in the Anglican Communion and other ‘churches in association’, which were still bound by historic and perhaps personal links, fed from many of the same sources, but not bound in a single and unrestricted sacramental communion, and not sharing the same constitutional structures. The relation would not be unlike that between the Church of England and the Methodist Church, for example. The ‘associated’ Churches would have no direct part in the decision making of the ‘constituent’ Churches, though they might well be observers whose views were sought or whose expertise was shared from time to time, and with whom significant areas of co-operation might be possible.

This leaves many unanswered questions, I know, given that lines of division run within local Churches as well as between them - and not only on one issue (we might note the continuing debates on the legitimacy of lay presidency at the Eucharist). It could mean the need for local Churches to work at ordered and mutually respectful separation between ‘constituent’ and ‘associated’ elements; but it could also mean a positive challenge for Churches to work out what they believed to be involved in belonging in a global sacramental fellowship, a chance to rediscover a positive common obedience to the mystery of God’s gift that was not a matter of coercion from above but of that ‘waiting for each other’ that St Paul commends to the Corinthians.

There is no way in which the Anglican Communion can remain unchanged by what is happening at the moment. Neither the liberal nor the conservative can simply appeal to a historic identity that doesn’t correspond with where we now are. We do have a distinctive historic tradition – a reformed commitment to the absolute priority of the Bible for deciding doctrine, a catholic loyalty to the sacraments and the threefold ministry of bishops, priests and deacons, and a habit of cultural sensitivity and intellectual flexibility that does not seek to close down unexpected questions too quickly. But for this to survive with all its aspects intact, we need closer and more visible formal commitments to each other. And it is not going to look exactly like anything we have known so far. Some may find this unfamiliar future conscientiously unacceptable, and that view deserves respect. But if we are to continue to be any sort of ‘Catholic’ church, if we believe that we are answerable to something more than our immediate environment and its priorities and are held in unity by something more than just the consensus of the moment, we have some very hard work to do to embody this more clearly. The next Lambeth Conference ought to address this matter directly and fully as part of its agenda.

The different components in our heritage can, up to a point, flourish in isolation from each other. But any one of them pursued on its own would lead in a direction ultimately outside historic Anglicanism The reformed concern may lead towards a looser form of ministerial order and a stronger emphasis on the sole, unmediated authority of the Bible. The catholic concern may lead to a high doctrine of visible and structural unification of the ordained ministry around a focal point. The cultural and intellectual concern may lead to a style of Christian life aimed at giving spiritual depth to the general shape of the culture around and de-emphasising revelation and history. Pursued far enough in isolation, each of these would lead to a different place – to strict evangelical Protestantism, to Roman Catholicism, to religious liberalism. To accept that each of these has a place in the church’s life and that they need each other means that the enthusiasts for each aspect have to be prepared to live with certain tensions or even sacrifices – with a tradition of being positive about a responsible critical approach to Scripture, with the anomalies of a historic ministry not universally recognised in the Catholic world, with limits on the degree of adjustment to the culture and its habits that is thought possible or acceptable.

Conclusion

The only reason for being an Anglican is that this balance seems to you to be healthy for the Church Catholic overall, and that it helps people grow in discernment and holiness. Being an Anglican in the way I have sketched involves certain concessions and unclarities but provides at least for ways of sharing responsibility and making decisions that will hold and that will be mutually intelligible. No-one can impose the canonical and structural changes that will be necessary. All that I have said above should make it clear that the idea of an Archbishop of Canterbury resolving any of this by decree is misplaced, however tempting for many. The Archbishop of Canterbury presides and convenes in the Communion, and may do what this document attempts to do, which is to outline the theological framework in which a problem should be addressed; but he must always act collegially, with the bishops of his own local Church and with the primates and the other instruments of communion.

That is why the process currently going forward of assessing our situation in the wake of the General Convention is a shared one. But it is nonetheless possible for the Churches of the Communion to decide that this is indeed the identity, the living tradition – and by God’s grace, the gift - we want to share with the rest of the Christian world in the coming generation; more importantly still, that this is a valid and vital way of presenting the Good News of Jesus Christ to the world. My hope is that the period ahead - of detailed response to the work of General Convention, exploration of new structures, and further refinement of the covenant model - will renew our positive appreciation of the possibilities of our heritage so that we can pursue our mission with deeper confidence and harmony.

ENDS

==============================

A Pastoral Letter from the Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network

TO ALL THE BELOVED OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION NETWORK:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

A new day is dawning. It is a new day for all of us who understand ourselves to be faithful and orthodox Anglicans, whether within the Episcopal Church or gone out from it.

It is with sadness, but also with anticipation, that I write to you now that the General Convention of the Episcopal Church has provided the clarity for which we have long prayed. By almost every assessment the General Convention has embraced the course of “walking apart.”

I have often said to you that the decisive moment in contemporary Episcopal Church and Anglican Communion history occurred at General Convention 2003. At that time, in the words of the Primates, the Episcopal Church took action that would “tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level.”

Since that time, the tear has widened. While we had hoped that this Church would repent and return to received Faith and Order, General Convention 2006 clearly failed to submit to the call, the spirit or the requirements of the Windsor Report. The middle has collapsed. For that part of the Network working constitutionally within ECUSA as over against the dioceses represented by the thirty progressive bishops who issued their Statement of Conscience, we are two churches under one roof.

Even before the close of Convention, Network and Windsor bishops began disassociating themselves from the inadequate Windsor resolution, and thus far one Network diocese has formally requested alternative primatial oversight.

More initiatives are underway. Pastoral and apostolic care has been promised without regard to geography. All I can tell you is that the shape of this care will depend on a very near-range international meeting. Other actions will follow upon continuing conversations with those at the highest levels of the Anglican Communion. Over the course of the month of July, many of the things we have longed for will, I believe, come to pass or be clearly in view for all.

The Anglican Communion Network has never been more united. We are gaining strength, both domestically and internationally. This is the time for biblically orthodox Anglicans to hang together, supporting one another in solidarity, in prayer and with expectancy.

My prayers are with you all, especially those whose plight is most difficult and whose patience is most worn. Pray for me and for all the leadership in Network, Episcopal Church, and Anglican Communion, and most especially for the Archbishop of Canterbury in this crucial moment in modern Anglican history. Again I say to you that a new day is dawning.

Faithfully in Christ Jesus,

Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network

(The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan)

==============================

Anglicans Set for ‘Divorce’ over Gay Issue (NewsMax.com, 060702)

SAN FRANCISCO — Six conservative Episcopalian bishops opposed to the liberal drift in the U.S. branch of the Anglican Communion are asking for a trial separation, a move hinting at an eventual divorce over irreconcilable differences, some analysts say.

The bishops of the dioceses for Pittsburgh, Fort Worth, Texas, South Carolina, Central Florida, Springfield, Illinois, and San Joaquin, California, appealed this past week to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to be assigned somebody other than Katharine Jefferts Schori as their leader.

Conservative Episcopalians say Schori, presiding bishop-elect of the Episcopal Church, would continue to steer the church away from its traditional teachings. She backs church blessings of gay relationships and voted to confirm Gene Robinson, the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop.

The move by the bishops underscores the tension within the 2.4 million-member Episcopal Church USA between its conservative and liberal clergy, a schism rooted in views on scripture and church politics concerning homosexuality.

Their appeal suggests the gap between the two sides has grown too wide to bridge.

“It’s overdue,” said Steven Randall, who resigned as an Episcopalian priest in Maryland to protest Robinson’s election. “They believe completely different things.”

The appeal coincided with the nomination of the Rev. Canon Michael Barlowe, who is gay, as a finalist to become bishop of the Diocese of Newark, New Jersey, and came as Williams proposed conservative dissenters in the U.S. church be allowed to stand apart from it as associate members.

“We’ve essentially got two different churches living in the same house,” said the Rev. Van McAlister of the San Joaquin diocese. “We’re identifying that there is a problem and it needs to be addressed.”

A few other dioceses may join the six bishops who appealed to Williams as well as many individual congregations, said Cynthia Brust, a spokeswoman for the American Anglican Council, a group for Episcopalians at odds with the U.S. church.

“We’re in uncharted territory,” Brust said, noting there is no precedent for the bishops’ appeal.

The request is troubling but Williams has offered the U.S. church a middle ground, said Bishop William Swing for the Diocese of California.

“The Archbishop of Canterbury has asked all of us in the Anglican Communion to enter into a deliberate process over time to see what an Anglican covenant should look like,” Swing said.

There are about 77 million Anglicans worldwide, making it the third-largest communion after the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. National or regional Anglican churches are autonomous, but are all in communion with the Church of England and its primate, the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Introspection may only harden divisions, said Archbishop Robert Morse, who helped found the conservative Anglican Province of Christ the King in the late 1970s in a break with the U.S. church over scriptural and cultural issues.

“What’s happening today is an increasingly confused picture,” Morse said. “Thirty years ago, we predicted this would happen.”

The U.S. church may again be “pruning” itself, said Rev. Susan Russell of All Saints Church in Pasadena, California and president of Integrity, a group for gay Episcopalians. “Episcopalians like to think of themselves as being a broad, generous church,” she said. “We may have reached the point where some can no longer live within the tent.”

==============================

Episcopal Rift Over Gay Bishops Widens (Christian Post, 060701)

NEW YORK (AP) - Two more Episcopal dioceses that consider gay relationships sinful are distancing themselves from the denomination by seeking oversight from fellow Anglicans overseas instead of the American church.

The Dioceses of Springfield, Ill., and Central Florida have joined three other dioceses in rejecting the authority of the Episcopal presiding bishop-elect — a step short of schism — and asking Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to assign them another leader.

Springfield Bishop Peter Beckwith said in a statement Friday that his diocese objects to Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who will be installed Nov. 4, because she supports ordaining partnered gays and blessing same-sex couples, among other reasons. Earlier this week, the Dioceses of Pittsburgh, South Carolina and San Joaquin, Calif. made similar statements.

The Episcopal Church, with more than 100 dioceses, is the U.S. branch of the global Anglican Communion, the association of churches that trace their roots to the Church of England.

As the communion’s spiritual leader, Williams has been struggling to keep the fellowship unified despite deep differences over the Bible and sexuality.

He said this week that the divisions have become so deep that member churches who support ordaining gays may have to accept a lesser role in the communion to prevent a permanent break.

==============================

African Anglicans Criticize Two-Tier Church Plan (Christian Post, 060703)

Africa’s largest Anglican church is criticizing a proposal from the archbishop of Canterbury for two-tier membership in the global Anglican fellowship, a plan aimed at keeping the group together despite differences over homosexuality and the Bible.

The bishops who lead the 17.5 million-member Church of Nigeria announced their stand in postings Sunday on a pair of Anglican Web sites.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams — Anglicanism’s spiritual leader — suggested last month that two levels of participation for the 38 branches of the Anglican Communion could be created.

Under that system, America’s Episcopal Church, which consecrated an openly gay bishop in 2003, would accept a lesser role to prevent a total break with a majority of Anglican churches, which are conservative.

The Nigerian bishops said Williams’ “brilliant” concept sought to “preserve the unity of the church by accommodating every shred of opinion no matter how biblical, all because we want to make everyone feel at home.”

But the Nigerians also indicated that total exclusion of the Episcopal Church may be required: “A cancerous lump in the body should be excised if it has defied every known cure. To attempt to condition the whole body to accommodate it will lead to the avoidable death of the patient.”

The statement depicted the Williams plan as a “novel” design that’s “elastic enough to accommodate all the extremes of preferred modes of expression of the same faith.” Instead, it said, Williams should urge churches that chose to “walk apart” to return to authentic Anglicanism.

The Nigerians’ statement is particularly noteworthy because their church is the biggest Anglican denomination outside the Church of England and is often seen as a leader among Anglican provinces in the developing world.

In a related move, Nigeria’s church plans to consecrate Canon Martyn Minns, rector of a prominent conservative parish in Fairfax, Va., as its bishop to lead a United States mission that serves Nigerians in America and others dissatisfied with the New York-based Episcopal Church.

Meanwhile, six dioceses unhappy with the Episcopalians’ rejection last month of an outright moratorium on consecrating more gay bishops have asked Williams for oversight from a bishop outside the Episcopal hierarchy.

Integrity, the caucus for gay and lesbian Episcopalians, released a weekend statement that expressed frustration with the Anglican wrangling over gay issues.

“We cannot live up to our call to be the body of Christ in the world if we’re spending all our time, energy and resources arguing about how to be the Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion” over the next few years, it said.

Integrity said the discussion provoked by Williams should include calling Anglicanism “to account for 30 years of failure to implement an authentic listening process” on the gay issue.

==============================

“World Anglican” (Anglican News, 060702)

The Dean of Sydney, Phillip Jensen, writes in ‘The Cathedral Courier’

Australia’s appearance at the World Cup was marred by referees’ decisions. It was not just the questionable final moments of the Italian game. The earlier game against Croatia showed the fallibility of referees.

In the heat of confusion the English referee Graham Poll gave a Croatian player Josip Simunic a third yellow card. The rule that “A player who receives 2 Yellow Cards is given a Red Card and ejected” was lost in the mayhem of the last few minutes of the game. Mr Poll has reportedly retired from refereeing.

Another English referee who is finding it difficult to deliver the red card is the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Episcopal Church of the United States of America has been warned repeatedly, but has remained impenitent. The final warning from the world body came last year but at the recent 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church there was a clear and unmistakable refusal to accede to the warning.

So it was time to show the red card. But the Archbishop chose to consider the possibility of a new green card.

The Archbishop of Canterbury wants to explore the possibility of a new Covenant by which different national churches would make a formal but voluntary commitment to each other.

So there would be two kinds of Anglican churches: constituent and associated. The “constituent” churches would “willingly” accept a new covenant under the threat of relegation to “associated” status. The new covenant, which has so far not seen the light of day, would by definition limit the local witness of constituent churches for the sake of some unspecified “wider witness”. So by restricting witness of the churches that have done nothing wrong we are able to continue in relationship with those who have continually, intentionally and unrepentantly flouted our fellowship.

Here is the Archbishop’s new green card. It will allow the offending player to stay on the field and participate in the game. However it will mean that at the party after the game (i.e. the Lambeth conference) he will have to stand instead of sit and will eat a fixed menu instead of being given the privilege of ordering a la carte.

The cost of this new green card is to be borne by the other players on the field. They must agree to harsher new laws especially designed by the referees’ committee.

The new laws have not yet been announced but are widely expected to force players to give more recognition to the referees and their decisions and to acknowledge that referees are the most important (in fact the only essential) part of the game.

Players who do not willingly (without any coercion) accede to the new referees’ rules will be given an automatic green card.

Of course being a church game instead of a football game these decisions have taken decades to develop, and even now have not been made. It will take several more months before the referees’ committee will gather to think out the possibility. In the meantime the offending Episcopal Church will continue to play without any censure. They will continue to oppress and persecute those faithful Anglicans whose only crime is to uphold orthodox Christian belief.

Christian unity is not forged in constitutional structures. Christian unity is a unity of mind and understanding. It is “being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind” (Philippians 2:2).

It is ridiculous to pretend that the Anglican Communion has such unity. A new non-theological covenant of constitutional unity, created by the bishops who have caused so much of our present unhappy divisions will inevitably be a new tyranny.

If the Archbishop wants a theological covenant – we have one already called the 39 Articles of Religion. It was agreed upon “For the avoidance of diversities of opinions and for the establishing of consent touching upon true religion.” Rather than getting the bishops to write a new one, why not call them back to the observing the old one. It is called repentance. It is something that the Episcopal Church has repeatedly refused to do.

After the referee’s decision in the Australian-Italian game, one newspaper correspondent referred to the legendary commencement of Rugby: “No wonder William Webb Ellis picked up the ball and ran.”

==============================

Fast and furious (Anglican News, 060715)

by Edward E. Plowman

Conservatives and liberals have responded quickly to last month’s tumultuous Episcopal Convention. With the world’s Anglican primates set to meet in September, the long Episcopal war over liberals’ homosexual agenda seems likely to end in denominational splintering

Over time, church denominations come and go, but one, now known as The Episcopal Church (TEC)—formerly part of the Church of England, and then the Episcopal Church, USA—has had a special spot in American history.

Its first congregation: Jamestown, Va., 1607. Its prominent members: George Washington and one-fourth of all U.S. presidents, as well as many of the country’s most notable and influential citizens. Its social prestige: high.

And now, in the aftermath of last month’s triennial Episcopal Convention in Columbus, Ohio, (see “Nothing resolved,” July 1/8), denominational unity that has been cracking for years now seems shattered. Among the post-convention moves by theological conservatives:

Want to read more? Get news and commentary each week from WORLD Magazine and up-to-the-minute news and features from WORLDMag.com. Click here to find out how!

• Seven TEC dioceses, dismayed by the election of pro-gay-agenda Bishop Katharine Schori as the church’s next presiding bishop and primate (top leader), say they are looking for “alternative primatial oversight.” Several other dioceses are poised to join them. All are distressed by TEC’s failure to repent for consecrating a partnered gay, Gene Robinson, as a bishop in 2003.

• Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, leader of the two-year-old, theologically conservative Anglican Communion Network, told supporters that “pastoral and apostolic care has been promised without regard to geography. . . . The shape of this care will depend on a very near-range international meeting.” The Network’s members include 10 dioceses and nearly 1,000 parishes.

• One of the largest Episcopal churches, Christ Church of Plano, Texas, announced it will leave TEC “as soon as possible.” The church, whose rector is evangelical activist David Roseberry, has nearly 5,000 active members. Bishop James Stanton of Dallas, also an evangelical, said he supports Roseberry and the church. As for the church property, “It’s theirs,” he said, “They paid for it.” TEC may fight for the property in the courts.

• At least two other TEC megachurches, Truro Church and The Falls Church in northern Virginia, have been negotiating with the local diocese over their properties (worth $27 million combined). This month both churches announced plans for a 40-day “discernment” period in the fall for prayer, fasting, and discussion over whether to leave TEC. “There’s no predetermined outcome,” said Rev. John Yates of The Falls Church. Two dozen other Virginia churches also are reportedly discussing a possible exit.

• Archbishop Peter Akinola, primate of the Anglican Church of Nigeria who considers TEC’s “revisionism” of Scripture and doctrine a blight on Anglicanism, appointed Truro rector Martyn Minns as “missionary bishop” to a cluster of churches known as the Convocation for Anglicans in North America. Akinola established the churches as a safe haven from TEC for African immigrants, but he may have bigger things in mind.

Foreign bishops aren’t supposed to trespass on TEC’s turf. Akinola said he “deliberately held back from the move” but decided to go ahead after the convention showed TEC was committed more than ever to an “unbiblical revisionist” agenda. (Among other actions, the convention declined to address the matter of clergy offering same-sex blessings, called on church members to oppose any state or federal amendments that would prohibit same-sex marriage or civil unions, and rejected an amendment putting the church on record as affirming biblical authority.)

Meanwhile, theological liberals are not backing off. The diocese of Newark, N.J., announced the candidates for its next bishop, among them a partnered gay, Rev. Michael Barlowe of San Francisco—despite the convention’s call for no more consecrations of non-celibate gays for at least three years.

Left trying to glue together the pieces of a badly-cracked shell is the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. Several days after the convention ended Williams issued “reflections” that included a rebuke of TEC for unilaterally consecrating a partnered gay bishop in 2003. Lacing his paper with references to Scripture and Anglican teaching, he also warned against accusing churches of blind bigotry when they say they cannot remain fully in communion with TEC because of what it did in 2003.

Williams clearly was trying to buy time to keep the Anglican Communion from unraveling. He called for an Anglican Covenant to which all members could subscribe. He also suggested the Communion could have two tiers of membership: constituent and associate (for those who couldn’t go along with everything the majority decided). The proposals would take years to implement; others weren’t waiting.

Williams also noted that “actions have consequences—and that actions believed in good faith to be ‘prophetic’ in their radicalism are likely to have costly consequences.” Outgoing TEC Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold cautioned people not to read too much into Williams’ statement. Much discussion remains, he said.

Many outside TEC also will be talking. Theologically, Anglican Communion churches in England and America tend to be predominantly liberal, but those in the global south are overwhelmingly conservative. It doesn’t sound like the global south archbishops want to wait for years of talk and pulse-taking to make their call. Judgment Day for The Episcopal Church may be just weeks away.

==============================

The Nigerians Are Coming! The rift in the Anglican Church comes to Northern Virginia. (Weekly Standard, 060720)

THE ACCELERATING RIFT over homosexuality in the nearly 80 million member global Anglican Communion has finally reached directly into the Washington, D.C. area.

A conservative Episcopal priest in suburban Fairfax, Virginia, has been elected a bishop by the 18 million member Anglican church of Nigeria. The Rev. Martyn Minns of the 1,700 member Truro Church in Fairfax City will preside over the handful of churches for Nigerian expatriates in the United States. But more may ultimately be involved.

Also last month, Truro Church informed Virginia Bishop Peter Lee that it is entering a 40 day time of “discernment” over its relations with the U.S. denomination. Other large Episcopal churches in Virginia besides Truro, including the historic 2,000 member Falls Church, are likewise considering their ties to U.S. Episcopalianism.

“We will be seeking God’s will about whether continued affiliation with the Episcopal Church is compatible with Scripture and with our affiliation with the global Anglican Communion,” Senior Associate Rector Frederick Wright announced to the Falls Church congregation. “As Anglicans, we would not expect to become an ‘independent’ congregation,” he explained, but would affiliate with “another Anglican body.”

More than 20 other Virginia congregations may belong to what Rev. Wright called a “coalition of churches” seeking discernment. Both Truro and the Falls Church date to the mid-1700s—George Washington joined in the creation of both. The Falls Church, for which the surrounding city was later named, also retains its sanctuary, which was built in the 1760s. The Declaration of Independence was read from its steps. During the Civil War, Union soldiers desecrated the sanctuary, using it as a stable.

Truro Church lost its earlier sanctuaries to the Civil War and fire. But its current office space housed Union General William Stoughton until that he was abruptly awakened and captured by the Confederate partisan John Mosby, who also made off with a gaggle of Union horses. (“I can replace the general, but I cannot replace those horses,” Abraham Lincoln is said to have remarked.)

WHY ARE THESE venerable old Episcopal congregations pondering a departure from their denomination after 200 years? And why is the Anglican Church of Nigeria in the picture?

Three years ago the U.S. Episcopal Church elected its first openly homosexual bishop, Gene Robinson. Forty percent of the denomination’s bishops voted against Robinson. But Virginia Bishop Peter Lee supported him and has likened the acceptance of homosexuality in the church to the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Conservative dioceses and congregations appealed to the global Anglican Communion, which is headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury in England and includes Global South bishops. Unlike the declining U.S. church, which has lost 1 million members over the last 40 years, these Third World churches are surging. Anglicans in Nigeria alone outnumber U.S. Episcopalians by nearly 10 to 1.

The global Anglican Communion had asked the U.S. church to abstain from electing more homosexual bishops. But the Episcopal General Convention, meeting last month in Columbus, Ohio, elected a new presiding bishop who is firmly committed to homosexual clergy and church rites for same-sex unions. Conservative Episcopalians realized that compromise had become impossible. Many of them now hope that the Archbishop of Canterbury will eventually acknowledge a new Anglican church in North America that would exist alongside—or perhaps even supercede—the old Episcopal Church.

Churches like Truro and the Falls Church, along with other conservative congregations in Virginia, are robustly evangelical—and growing. They do not wish to remain indefinitely in an increasingly liberal U.S. Episcopal Church.

Surely George Washington, George Mason, and other prominent Northern Virginia Anglicans never conceived of Episcopal debates over homosexuality when they founded their churches. The Episcopal Church even managed to avoid schism over slavery and during the Civil War. Anglicanism in Virginia has survived since Jamestown in 1607.

But conservative Episcopalians have chaffed for decades under liberal church leaders who disregarded historic Christian beliefs about sexual ethics, the Bible, and even the identity of Jesus Christ. To continue an orthodox Anglican presence in Virginia, many conservatives want to de-align from the declining liberal religion in the United States and re-align with growing Christianity in the Global South.

The end result may be that much of Virginia Episcopalianism will end up looking to Nigeria, rather than Richmond, for leadership. The slave-owning Episcopal gentry of 18th century Virginia would be shocked. But the irony is an enjoyable one.

Mark D. Tooley directs the United Methodist committee at the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

==============================

U.K. Anglican Group Calls for ‘Imperative Action’ Against U.S. Episcopal Church (Christian Post, 060727)

LONDON – A conservative evangelical group in the Church of England has called on the heads of the 38 provinces of the Anglican Communion to take “imperative” actions to “formally break” ties with the Episcopal Church, USA.

The call from U.K.-based Church Society follows the U.S. church’s decision last month to reject a resolution to halt further ordinations of homosexual bishops, approving instead a compromise resolution that urged U.S. church leaders to “exercise restraint” when considering the ordination of homosexual candidates.

“With the Primates due to meet early next year it is imperative that action is now taken,” the society stated in a press release. “Since the Anglican Communion is a loose affiliation of national or provincial churches rather than a monolithic structure it is important that action taken is appropriate.

“In line with Biblical teaching and historic Christian practice Church Society has called on the Primates to formally break fellowship with ECUSA.”

After the consecration of New Hampshire’s Gene Robinson as the first openly gay Episcopal bishop in 2003, many overseas Anglican leaders broke ties with the U.S. Anglican arm as a majority believes gay relationships violate Scripture.

Last month, conservative Anglican bodies, such as the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), followed “with great interest” the ECUSA’s triennial meeting in Columbus, Ohio, and “earnestly prayed” for the development of U.S. church’s response to The Windsor Report – a 2004 document in which Anglicans asked the Episcopal Church for the prohibition on homosexual bishops, a temporary ban on developing official prayers for blessing same-sex couples and an apology for the turmoil caused by Robinson’s consecration.

However, Episcopal delegates snubbed Anglican leaders’ request that they temporarily stop electing openly gay bishops, a vote that prompted the church’s leader, outgoing Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, to call a special session in hopes of reaching a compromise to preserve Anglican unity.

Although ECUSA delegates approved Griswold’s last-ditch attempt to salvage worldwide Anglican unity – voting to adopt a resolution that calls on U.S. church leaders to “exercise restraint” when considering gay candidates for bishop – conservative Anglicans, including the Most Rev Peter Akinola of Nigeria, made it clear that resolution did not go far enough.

“As you know, our Churches cannot reconcile this with the teaching on marriage set out in the Holy Scriptures and repeatedly affirmed throughout the Anglican Communion,” stated a letter Akinola wrote on behalf of the CAPA late last month.

In Church Society’s released statement, the group also expressed disappointment over the decision of the Episcopal Church.

“At the recent ECUSA General Convention it became clear that they have no intention of turning back from the course they have taken,” they stated.

According to David Phillips, General Secretary of the Council of Church Society, “It should be clear to all that ECUSA and others have stepped well beyond the boundaries of orthodox, apostolic Christianity.

“We believe that postponing action any longer can only damage the Communion and the witness of Anglican churches worldwide,” Phillips wrote to the Primates of the Anglican Communion in a letter that accompanied Church Society’s statement.

While calling on Anglican primates to formally break fellowship with ECUSA, Church Society noted the “large minority” within the ECUSA that is “opposed to the errors of their church and many more who have themselves separated from ECUSA because of error.”

The “large minority” includes Episcopal Dioceses in Texas, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Florida, South Carolina and California, which have made requests to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, for a “direct pastoral relationship” from overseas instead of being under the American church and its newly elected leader, Katharine Jefferts Schori of Nevada, who supports same-sex relationships.

Also within the Episcopal Church, conservative members have banded together to form the Pittsburgh-based Anglican Communion Network, which represents 10 Episcopal dioceses and more than 900 parishes that opposed Robinson’s election in 2003. The network remains part of the Episcopal Church for now, but could ultimately attempt to replace the denomination as the American member of the communion. It has a meeting set for this weekend to discuss its plans.

In his letter, Phillips urged for a mechanism to be developed to establish fellowship with “those in the United States who remain faithful to orthodox, apostolic Christianity and thus reject such innovations as the acceptance of same sex sexual activity.”

“We suggest that a Commissary be appointed by the orthodox Primates who will work with the various bodies and individual churches in the U.S. so that they can establish some means by which they can be welcomed formally into fellowship,” he wrote.

The Church Society stated that “it is important to embrace these dioceses, churches and denominations within the Communion.”

==============================

Praying Left: The Episcopal church elevates the liberal bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori. (Weekly Standard, 060801)

THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH’S ELECTION of its first female presiding bishop has made a split with the Anglican Communion even more likely. Katharine Jefferts Schori delighted Episcopalians who support gay bishops, same-sex unions, and other liberal social policies. But her victory also confirmed what church conservatives have long feared: The liberal majority is going to keep pushing until the leftward drift of the past few decades is complete.

Jefferts Schori embodies the Episcopal evolution. While bishop of Nevada, she voted for a gay bishop’s consecration and allowed same-sex blessings. She was also noted for her political activism. In letters to Nevada politicians, she quoted Scripture and used the power of her office to lobby for liberal policies.

On April 21, 2004, she wrote to Nevada senators Harry Reid and John Ensign on the subject of immigration: “The Bible repeatedly enjoins people of faith to remember the stranger, to care for those without family or roots in a place, and to ensure that they are fed, housed, and shown hospitality.” She then chastised the United States for “[forgetting] that mandate, especially since September 11th,” because “the fear-mongering of late has eclipsed the demand to treat our neighbors fairly and humanely.”

In an October 31, 2005 letter to Nevada’s entire congressional delegation, Jefferts Schori opposed the FY 2006 federal budget reconciliation, which provided funding for Hurricane Katrina relief. “The budget process provides the opportunity for Congress and the President to work together to address the poverty that exists in this nation,” she explained. “Congress must not exacerbate poverty . . . by passing a budget that further impoverishes one group of already poor people in our nation in order to help those newly or more deeply impoverished by the recent hurricanes . . . . We must not ask the poorest among us to bear a burden which should be borne by this entire nation.”

The new presiding bishop is no doubt to the left of most Americans. Speaking in vague, poetic language, Jefferts Schori exudes a West-coast liberal aura. “I’ve always found a great sense of spirituality in the out-of-doors,” she recently told PBS’s Religion & Ethics Newsweekly. “The wilderness is a place of great gifts. It may be threatening to some people; it ought to be threatening, I think, in some important way. But it is a place where I discover God, and what God is calling me to do and be.”

She also aims to have a universal appeal. In a recent interview with Time, she was asked, “Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?” Her response: “We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.” In a homily right after her election at the general convention, Jefferts Schori casually referred to “our mother Jesus.”

Telling a national magazine that there could be ways to heaven other than Jesus is, of course, contrary to what Jesus himself said on the matter: “I am the way, and the truth, and the light. There is no way to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). As for “mother Jesus,” when questioned about it, Jefferts Schori responded that she was merely echoing the thesis of the 14th century mystic Julian of Norwich.

Nebulous language and politically correct theology have not endeared Jefferts Schori to conservatives who feel that clarity, not ambiguity, is needed from the church’s new leader. She has stated, “I will bend over backward to build relationships with people who disagree with me.” If the new presiding bishop really wants to “build relationships” with conservative Episcopalians, she has a long way to go.

Jamie Deal is an intern at The Weekly Standard.

==============================

Head of Conservative U.S. Anglican Group Says Hope for Unity Depends on Williams (Christian Post, 060804)

PITTSBURGH (AP) - The leader of a network of conservative Episcopal dioceses says the global Anglican Communion will unravel unless the archbishop of Canterbury helps U.S. conservatives distance themselves from the Episcopal Church.

Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan said that if Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams fails to address the concerns of U.S. conservatives “any hope for a Communion-unifying solution slips away, and so does the shape and leadership of the Anglican Communion as we have known them.”

Duncan made the remarks Monday at a meeting of the Anglican Communion Network, which represents 10 Episcopal dioceses and more than 900 parishes with traditional views of the Bible.

Conservatives oppose the 2003 consecration of the first openly gay Episcopal bishop — V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. They also oppose the June election of the new Episcopal presiding bishop, Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, either because they reject ordaining women or because Jefferts Schori supports ordaining gays and blessing same-sex relationships.

Seven of the 10 network dioceses have appealed to Williams as the spiritual head of the world’s Anglicans to appoint another U.S. national leader for them. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. arm of the 77 million-member world Anglican Communion.

Williams has suggested that a two-tier Anglican fellowship, with traditionalists on gay clergy issues having a stronger voice, might be a way to preserve unity within the faith. But he has not appointed a leader for U.S. conservatives.

Separately, the Union of Black Episcopalians met Tuesday in Richmond, Va., with speakers telling the group that the denomination’s focus on gay issues was distracting it from fighting social problems such as racism and poverty.

“We waste our time trying to figure out who’s sleeping with whom, instead of being about doing the work of mission and ministry,” the Rev. Sandye Wilson, the group’s immediate past president, told an applauding crowd. “Don’t get sidetracked.”

==============================

Conservative Anglicans Commit to Reformation of Behavior, Unsure of Unity (Christian Post, 060804)

Conservative Anglicans and Episcopalians who were to decide whether or not to officially break from the Episcopal Church, USA, this week concluded an annual council meeting Wednesday still unsure of “what God is going to do.”

The Anglican Communion Network convened 80 delegates together from around the United States, affirming their central need for the “reformation of behavior” as Anglicanism in the United States has been on the rocks for the last three years.

“No one can any longer say that ‘nothing is happening,’ though some, despite all this evidence to the contrary, remain prisoners to that mantra,” the Rt. Rev. Robert Wm. Duncan, moderator of the ACN, told the delegates. “These last three years have seemed interminable...”

Since the consecration of the first openly gay Episcopal bishop – New Hampshire’s Gene Robinson – in 2003, divisions within the U.S. Anglican arm broke out with most Anglican leaders worldwide saying gay relationships violate Scripture – a minority position in the U.S. church. The ACN, representing 10 conservative U.S. dioceses and more than 900 parishes within the Episcopal Church, was soon birthed and is now in the midst of dealing with the nuts and bolts of building and maintaining “an orthodox Anglican witness and ministry.”

The conservative Anglican leaders have appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, for an alternative primatial oversight to affirm their strict stand with the worldwide communion and to “be that part of the ECUSA that has ‘not walked apart’ from the Communion – that has sacrificially and faithfully stood for what is the Communion’s articulated teaching and for what are the accepted boundaries of its order,” Duncan stated in his address at the council meeting.

Unless Williams addresses the concerns of U.S. conservatives to distance themselves from the Episcopal Church, Duncan said the global Anglican Communion will lose shape as a unified body.

Although the network has called on the majority of the Episcopal Church to repent, Duncan told the network’s delegates, “We too, are every bit as much in need of repenting.”

“Our struggle is not about sexuality,” he continued, “it is about sin. The ‘fix’ is not about them, it is about us. The whole world is drawn to the Body of Christ when the Body of Christ looks like Jesus, nothing more, nothing less, nothing else.”

The dioceses discussed what the reformation of behavior would look like in such areas as holiness in personal life, worship, constitutional and legal positions and church planting. The network is also continuing its work on a Covenant Declaration of the Common Cause Partners” to outline basic and unifying theological commitments that the dioceses join together in making. The document will be further refined at the Common Cause Roundtable meeting Aug. 16-18 in Pittsburgh.

The recent council meeting follows ECUSA’s 75th General Convention in June, where the church expressed regret for straining the bonds of affection in the events surrounding the 2003 convention and decided to “exercise restraint” in the consecrating of homosexuals – a move that disappointed gay advocates and brought relief to those opposing homosexual ordination but still wanting to stay in the communion.

While acknowledging the major changes visibly occurring within the Anglican body and expressing concern over an unraveling communion, Bishop Duncan told delegates, “We don’t know what God is going to do. We do know that God is faithful to His people and that God has a purpose for Anglicanism in the World.”

==============================

Anglican Head, Episcopal Bishops to Resolve Gay Dispute (Christian Post, 060819)

NEW YORK (AP) - The spiritual leader of world Anglicanism has asked six Episcopal bishops to meet in New York next month to try and resolve differences over homosexuality tearing at their church.

The gathering is part of a broad effort by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to preserve the global Anglican fellowship despite a hardening conservative-liberal divide over whether the Bible bars gay relationships. The Episcopal Church represents Anglicanism in the United States.

The Anglican Communion Office in London announced the summit in a brief news release Friday, but did not give specifics about the date and location. The six invited bishops reflect the spectrum of belief across the American church, including conservatives who disagree about whether their dioceses should break from the national denomination.

Virginia Bishop Peter Lee, who is among the six U.S. invitees, said the participants “have agreed not to talk at length with the press” about the gathering.

“The archbishop of Canterbury is encouraging American bishops to try to work on these questions,” Lee said in a phone interview. “We’re trying to hold together people who have differing views and to respect those differing views.”

Williams is not expected to attend, though Canon Kenneth Kearon, secretary general of the 77 million-member Anglican Communion, will participate, along with outgoing Episcopal Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold and Presiding Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori, who takes office in November.

The other participants are Bishop Jack Iker of Fort Worth, Texas; Southwest Florida Bishop John Lipscomb; and Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan, head of the Anglican Communion Network, an association of 10 conservative Episcopal dioceses and more than 900 parishes considering splitting from the national church.

Tensions within the American denomination have increased since the June meeting of its top policymaking body, the General Convention.

Anglican leaders had asked delegates for a moratorium on confirming any more openly gay bishops, in light of the uproar over the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, who lives with his longtime male partner.

But Episcopal delegates could not agree on the wording of the resolutions after days of painful debate. Instead, the convention adopted a last-minute, nonbinding measure asking church leaders to “exercise restraint” in electing future bishops. Williams has said the Episcopalians have “not produced a complete response” to Anglican concerns.

The same convention elected Jefferts Schori, who supports gay relationships.

Since then, seven conservative dioceses, including Pittsburgh and Fort Worth, have rejected Jefferts Schori’s leadership and asked Williams for oversight from someone else. The Fort Worth diocese believes women should not be ordained.

Some individual parishes have also announced plans to leave the church, which has about 2.3 million members.

Williams has proposed a two-tier system of membership in the world communion, giving churches with nontraditional views on gay clergy and other issues a lesser role.

Separately, a group of conservative bishops, led by Texas Bishop Don Wimberly, is scheduled to meet Sept. 19-22 in Navasota, Texas, to discuss their future in U.S. church. Wimberly said in a statement that “my intention is to stay within” the denomination.

Church of England Bishops N.T. Wright of Durham and Michael Scott-Joynt of Winchester are expected to attend the conservative gathering “with the blessing of the archbishop of Canterbury,” Wimberly said.

==============================

Judge: Episcopal Dispute Should Be Settled By Church, Not Courtm (Christian Post, 060824)

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) — The Episcopal bishop of Connecticut may not be sued over his actions in a struggle over the role of gays in the church, a federal judge has ruled.

U.S. District Judge Janet Bond Arterton in New Haven dismissed a legal challenge against Bishop Andrew D. Smith, leader of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut.

“Whether Bishop Smith acted contrary to, or outside of, the diocese’s own rules is a question of canon law, not a question of constitutionality of the challenged Connecticut statutes,” Arterton wrote in the ruling Monday. “A declaration of unconstitutionality by the court would not redress the plaintiffs’ actual grievances or their theological disputes” with Smith, she ruled.

The lawsuit, which was filed in 2005, accused Smith of violating the civil and property rights of the six priests and the churches they led. The churches had sought to break away from Smith’s authority because of his support for the election of an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire.

The dispute between Smith and the so-called “Connecticut Six” has attracted national attention since his vote in 2003 favor of Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. The conflict was one of several court battles in the United States between the church and conservative parishes.

The lawsuit said Smith acted illegally when the diocese seized control of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Bristol in July 2005 after its priest, the Rev. Mark Hansen, was stripped of his duties by Smith. Smith later removed Hansen from the priesthood.

The lawsuit also named Most Rev. Frank T. Griswold III, presiding bishop of the U.S. Episcopal Church, and state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal as defendants.

“I am gratified by the decision of Judge Arterton that it is inappropriate to seek federal intervention in a matter of church life and governance,” Smith said in a statement.

“Noninterference by civil authorities in religious matters is a constitutional foundation of our nation and I trust that those members of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut who appealed to the courts will recognize the significance of this ruling and will seek to live in communion with their bishop, and this church,” he said.

One of the six Connecticut priests, Rev. Ronald Gauss of Bishop Seabury Church in Groton, was quoted by the Hartford Courant in editions prepared for Wednesday that he was disappointed in Arterton’s ruling and that the priests will decide on their next step.

Five of the six priests, including Gauss, remain in their posts. They were found to be “out of communion” with Smith by a committee of the church following a breakdown in negotiations that would have allowed the churches to operate under the authority of a conservative bishop.

==============================

Anglican Head: American Church has ‘Pushed the Boundaries’ (Christian Post, 060824)

The American Church has “pushed the boundaries” in terms of decision-making, stated the spiritual head of the worldwide Anglican Communion in an interview with a Dutch newspaper.

“It has made a decision that is not the decision of the wider body of Christ,” Archbishop Rowan Williams told Nederlands Dagblad.

Anglican dioceses and parishes have been urging Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to respond in a meaningful way to ensure no groups are alienated by the stances on homosexuality taken by the Episcopal Church, USA, at their General Convention earlier this summer. As part of his response, Williams recently called for a mid-September meeting with top U.S. Episcopal leaders to find ways to resolve the divisions within the U.S. branch of the Anglican Communion.

“In terms of the issue under consideration, there are enough Christians of good faith in every denomination – from evangelical to Roman Catholic – to whom it is not quite so self-evident … who are not absolutely sure that we have always read the Bible correctly,” Williams said in his interview last week.

“They are saying, ‘This is an issue we must talk about.’ But if we are going to have time to discuss this prayerfully, thoughtfully, we really don’t need people saying, ‘We must change it now.’ The discussion must not be foreclosed by a radical agenda,” he added.

The Anglican head described the situation with the Episcopal Church as highly complicated and said he has delayed responding to conservative dioceses that have appealed for an alternative primatial oversight because he does not want to “make up church law on the back of an envelope.”

Williams also has “great concern for the vast majority of Episcopal Christians in the U.S. who don’t wish to move away from the Communion at all, but who don’t particularly want to join a separatist part of their Church either.”

“I want to give them time to find what the best way is,” the archbishop stated.

Williams is aware, however, that the Anglican Communion Network – the conservative network of 10 U.S. Episcopal dioceses and more than 900 parishes that opposed the election of the first gay Episcopal bishop in 2003 – won’t “hold out” under the present circumstances indefinitely.

“‘If Canterbury doesn’t help, there will be other provinces that are very ready to help,’” he imagined them saying.

Although the Pittsburgh-based Anglican Communion Network remains part of the Episcopal Church for now, it could ultimately attempt to replace the denomination as the American member of the communion – an event that Williams wants to avoid.

“I don’t especially want to see the Anglican Church becoming like the Orthodox Church – where in some American cities you see the Greek Orthodox Church, the Russian Orthodox Church and the Romanian Orthodox Church,” he said. “I don’t want to see in the cities of America the American Anglican Church, the Nigerian Anglican Church, the Egyptian Anglican Church and the English Anglican Church on the same street.”

According to Williams, a split in the Episcopal Church would likely have effects on the Church of England as clergy and congregations may be forced to decide where their loyalties lie.

“My nightmare is that action is now going forward that will tie us up in law courts in 10 years, in disputes about property,” he added.

“That would take so much energy from what we’re meant to be doing…. We can prevent those endless lawsuits, I think, if there is enough cooperation in the central mission of the Church.

“If that work continues it may also help us in finding those structures.”

==============================

Dallas Episcopalians Mull Break from Denomination (Christian Post, 060824)

DALLAS (AP) - As a moderate Episcopalian in the conservative Diocese of Dallas, Dixie Hutchinson doesn’t find her strength in numbers.

“Nobody around here would elect me to anything,” she says.

Soon, she may find herself even more isolated.

Dallas Bishop James M. Stanton is among the leaders of seven Episcopal dioceses who have rejected the authority of the denomination’s incoming national leader, Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, as the debate over the Bible and gay relationships tears at the church.

The move, prompted partly by Jefferts Schori’s support for gay relationships, falls just short of a complete break. But in October, Dallas-area Episcopalians will meet to more fully consider their future in the denomination.

The six other dissenting dioceses - Central Florida; Fort Worth, Texas; Fresno, Calif.; Pittsburgh; Springfield, Ill., and South Carolina - are having similar internal debates.

And even though the Diocese of Dallas is overwhelmingly conservative, anxiety about what’s ahead is apparent throughout its 77 churches.

Christ Church Episcopal in suburban Plano, one of the largest Episcopal parishes in the country with about 2,200 worshippers each weekend, is not waiting for the fall diocesan convention; it has already announced plans to leave The Episcopal Church.

Via Media Dallas, which represents liberals and moderates including Hutchinson who want to remain part of the denomination, issued a statement from 15 local priests who say they will not participate in any “disassociation” from the actions and leadership of the church.

Splitting from the national leaders would create spiritual orphans throughout the region - moderates and liberals who may have to leave the churches where they worshipped for years.

But some local Episcopalians say it’s time to go.

Ann Peeler, a longtime member of St. Thomas Episcopal Church in Ennis, a tiny mission that is one of the original churches in the Dallas diocese, says The Episcopal Church has been inching away from biblical truth for more than 40 years.

Peeler is among those who embrace the traditional Christian view that the bible prohibits gay relationships. She called Stanton “a defender of the faith in every sense of the word” and said she would support whatever direction he takes the diocese.

“Bishop Stanton is a man who does not move hastily,” Peeler said. “He thinks things through.”

Episcopal supporters of gay relationships contend that Scripture on social justice and equal treatment should take precedence over what they consider outdated teachings on sexuality.

In 2003, the denomination consecrated its first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, sparking an uproar that is splitting the 77 million-member world Anglican Communion. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. arm of the Anglican fellowship.

For now, Stanton has asked Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the spiritual leader of the world’s Anglicans, for oversight from an Anglican leader instead of being under the American church. Jefferts Schori will be installed as presiding bishop on Nov. 4.

Stanton is visiting each parish in his 40,000-member region to gather opinions. “What I’m hearing is growing anger and frustration with the direction of the Episcopal Church,” he said.

At the same time, Williams, working from London, is struggling to keep Episcopalians and the entire Anglican family together.

He has proposed giving members with nontraditional views on issues like gay clergy a lesser role in the communion under a two-tiered system to prevent a global Anglican schism.

He has also asked a group of Episcopal bishops with conflicting views to meet in New York next month to try to resolve their differences.

Conservatives are a minority in the 2.3-million-member U.S. denomination, but a split could still damage the church. Among the biggest concerns is the potential for expensive, bitter legal fights over parishes that want to leave the denomination and take their property with them.

The Diocese of Dallas withheld payments to the national church after Robinson was confirmed. Asked about his policy on church property in a possible diocesan split, Stanton said congregations will not be held as “slaves.”

“I think it’s a matter of what the church is. Some were purchased with money from the diocese, some are historical churches and became part of the diocese when it was formed,” he said. “It would be hard to say there’s one policy for every situation. I’m not even close to looking at that taking place.”

David Holmes, a religion professor at the College of William & Mary, said he sees The Episcopal Church heading toward separate branches similar to those of Conservative and Reform Jews, or Lutherans, whose two largest U.S. denominations are the more liberal Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the conservative Missouri Synod.

“If things move the way they’re moving,” Holmes said, “it’s not necessarily going to be one major tent anymore, but it may be a smaller tent with projections off of it.”

Parishioners in the Diocese of Dallas are uneasily awaiting the outcome.

“You hear all these rumors such as who is going to own property, what’s happening to the pension fund,” Peeler said. “It’s sort of like reading the National Enquirer in the grocery store line.”

==============================

Network Welcomes Consecration of Bishop Minns (Anglican Communion Network, 060824)

The Anglican Communion Network (ACN) today welcomed the consecration of Bishop Martyn Minns in Abuja, Nigeria.

“We in the Anglican Communion Network offer our unreserved support both for Bishop Minns as he begins this new phase of ministry and to the Church of Nigeria which has once again offered concrete help and leadership to us in the United States during difficult times,” said Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator of the ACN.

A member of the ACN’s cabinet since that body’s formation, Bishop Minns received a heartfelt and well deserved standing ovation at the just-concluded Third Annual Council of the Network. Bishop Minns is one of the movement’s “most gifted and respected leaders,” said Bishop Duncan.

Bishop Minns, who serves as the rector of the ACN-affiliated Truro Church in Virginia, will be ministering as the missionary bishop for the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA). That body was created by the Church of Nigeria in 2005 both for Nigerian Anglicans in the United States and for American Anglicans seeking safe harbor and an unimpaired relationship with the worldwide Anglican Communion. CANA was recently invited to join other bodies in the Anglican Tradition as a partner in the Common Cause Roundtable.

“In the days ahead, we look forward to working with Bishop Minns and CANA in our shared task of building a biblical, missionary and uniting Anglicanism in the United States,” said Bishop Duncan, “We pray that God will bless and prosper his ministry as a bishop of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.”

==============================

Exodus Ministry Applauds Anglican Head’s ‘Stand for the Truth’ (Christian Post, 060902)

One of the world’s largest Christian referral ministries addressing homosexual issues and helping individuals “recover” from homosexuality applauded the Archbishop of Canterbury who recently said homosexuals must change their behavior to be welcomed in the church.

Anglican Head: Homosexuals Need to Change Their Behavior

(August 29, 2006)

Lauding the Rt. Rev. Rowan Williams, one-time liberal advocate of same-sex relationships, Exodus International president, Alan Chambers, said “We applaud the archbishop’s courageous stand for the truth.”

“The lack of biblical clarity on the issue of homosexuality is rampant in far too many congregations. Ours is a passionate call to the global church to extend the love and kindness of Jesus Christ, the hope of freedom for those who seek it and the steadfast truth of the Scriptures,” he added.

Like many mainline denominations, the Episcopal Church, USA, remains divided over homosexuality in the church since the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson – an active homosexual. Opposing homosexual ordination, more than 900 parishes now constitute the Anglican Communion Network and conservative leaders have appealed to Williams for an “alternative primatial oversight,” or a new overseer of the Episcopal Church.

Meanwhile, the Russian Orthodox Church, which severed ties with the Episcopal Church, has offered to restore ties with the conservative Episcopal dioceses, which is a minority in the U.S. Anglican arm.

Episcopal and Anglican leaders scheduled a meeting this month to resolve the division and address the request for a new overseer by the conservative leaders. Bishop Frank T. Griswold had indicated that the denominational leaders had made clear that Williams “has no direct authority over the internal life of the Provinces that make up the Communion.”

In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Williams said, “Ethics is not a matter of a set of abstract rules, it is a matter of living the mind of Christ. That applies to sexual ethics.

“I don’t believe inclusion is a value in itself. Welcome is. We don’t say ‘Come in and we ask no questions’. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviors, ideas, emotions.”

Exodus International and traditionalists have pointed to Williams’ change of position from defending same-sex love to backing a resolution which says homosexual practice is incompatible with the Bible.

His reversal has dismayed liberals who see him moving into “the conservative camp,” as the Rev. Giles Goddard, chairman of the Inclusive Church, stated.

Exodus International, a resource and referral organization since 1976, has over 135 ministries across North America and is a network of former homosexuals who share the message of Jesus Christ.

==============================

Anglican Head: Homosexuals Need to Change Their Behavior (Christian Post, 060829)

LONDON – The spiritual leader of world Anglicanism has told homosexuals that they need to change their behavior if they are to be welcomed into the Church, emphasizing that the tradition and teaching of the Church has in no way been altered by the consecration of the Anglican Communion’s first openly homosexual bishop.

In a newspaper interview last week, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams denied that it was time for the Church to accept homosexual relationships. “We don’t say ‘Come in and we ask no questions’. I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviors, ideas, emotions,” he told a Dutch journalist.

“Ethics is not a matter of a set of abstract rules, it is a matter of living the mind of Christ. That applies to sexual ethics.”

The archbishop also tried to distance himself from a controversial essay he wrote 20 years ago, in which he defended same-sex love. “That was when I was a professor, to stimulate debate,” he claimed. “It did not generate much support and a lot of criticism – quite fairly on a number of points.”

Williams has previously distanced himself from his one-time liberal support of gay relationships.

While liberals who had previously hailed William’s appointment said they are dismayed that he appears to have turned his back on an agenda that he previously championed, the archbishop’s comments received strong support from traditionalists.

The Rev Rod Thomas, a spokesman the evangelical network Reform, said: “There is no doubt that he is distancing himself from the views that he has previously expressed. He’s right to want to see people converted. The fact that he’s saying this is a hugely welcome development.”

However, the Rev Giles Goddard, the chairman of the liberal Inclusive Church, said the archbishop’s comments revealed an “astonishing” change in his position. “The implication is that there is no justification in scripture for the welcome of lesbian and gay people. It appears that he has moved into the conservative camp,” he added.

Chris Bryant, a homosexual Labour MP, said that many people would feel betrayed by the archbishop’s comments. “The Church of England wouldn’t survive without gay clergy in inner cities,” he stated.

“People will feel this is a huge betrayal. Rowan has refashioned the Church of England into a narrow-minded, conservative sect.”

The archbishop has said that he is determined to preserve the unity of the Church from being destroyed by the warring factions in the gay crisis. Williams has asked six Episcopal bishops to meet in New York next month to try and resolve differences over homosexuality tearing at their church. The six invited bishops reflect the spectrum of belief across the American church, including conservatives who disagree about whether their dioceses should break from the national denomination.

==============================

Anglican Leaders: Conservatives, Liberals ‘Cannot Go Together’ (Christian Post, 060906)

Talks should continue within the divided Anglican Communion over homosexuality, a conservative Anglican bishop said this week, but the dissenting groups “can’t necessarily walk in the same direction.”

“I think a division is inevitable,” the Rt. Rev. John H. Rodgers, a bishop with the conservative Anglican Mission in America, told The Christian Post. “I think the division is already there, but it will be expressed institutionally.”

Rodgers, also chairman of the Society for the Propagation of Reformed Evangelical Anglican Doctrine (SPREAD), recently helped draft and sign a petition letter addressed to the Global South Primates to clarify the current state of the Anglican Communion and to advise what actions are needed to defend the Anglican faith. The letter was released on Aug. 30 and is currently being sent out to all bishops in the worldwide communion.

At the request of the Rt. Rev. John K. Rucyahana, bishop of the Diocese of Shyira in Rwanda, Rodgers and other conservative Anglican leaders including Rucyahana wrote the 44-page document in efforts to preserve the Anglican faith and uphold the sovereignty of Scripture amid increasing liberal stances on homosexuality taken by the Episcopal Church, USA – which represents Anglicanism in the United States.

Unless a leadership team led by the Most Rev. Peter Akinola, primate of the Church of Nigeria, is set up, “the Anglican faith will ultimately either be extinguished or rendered ineffective in the Communion and all of its churches; those persons who still hold on to the Anglican faith will be reduced to scattered flocks struggling to survive and greatly weakened in their efforts to take the Gospel to the world; and that millions of persons who might otherwise be saved will be lost,” stated the petition letter.

Congregations in the Global South and Southeast Asia, which comprise over half of the worldwide Anglican body in terms of the number of people, agree with the conservative stance, according to Rodgers.

“We are aware that the burden of preserving the Anglican faith has necessarily fallen upon churches in Africa and Asia,” said the letter. “Western churches once carried the faith to Africa and Asia, and now churches in Africa and Asia are needed to carry it back to the Western countries, much as the grapevines of Europe were carried to America and back again to Europe.”

The bishops divided the Anglican Communion into three groups based on their research: the “Anglican group,” led by Akinola; the “revisionist group,” led by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams; and the “traditionalist/pragmatist group,” led by George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury.

The first group of churches and bishops holds that the Church is subordinate to the sovereign authority of Scripture and thus is compelled to oppose the Church’s approval of same gender sexual relations. The “revisionist group” is composed of churches and bishops which teach that the Church should approve of same gender sexual relations and that the Church is not subordinate to Scripture’s sovereign authority.

According to Rodgers, the petition letter was written before Williams’ surprising reversal on homosexuality. Dismaying liberals and pleasing conservatives, Williams said homosexual practice is incompatible with the Bible and that they need to change their behavior.

“We were very pleased to hear that,” said Rodgers, who pointed out that it was “a strange place for Williams to make such a major policy statement. Williams had made his comment in an interview with a Dutch journalist.

Carey’s group of churches and bishops, meanwhile, hold that the Church is not subordinate to the sovereign authority of Scripture and therefore may approve of homosexual relations, but presently teaches that the Church should not do so for traditional and pragmatic reasons.

The letter made clear that the issue of whether the Church should propound a doctrine such as the approval of homosexual relations is “a defining [matter] for the continued unity of the churches and bishops in the Anglican Communion.”

Recalling Akinola’s letter in August 2005, the conservative leaders repeated that the persons who hold Scripture as the sovereign authority over the Church “cannot go together” with those who hold otherwise.

Time is of the essence, the letter indicated, and to delay resolving the issue would undermine the teaching of the Global South and weaken the Church.

“Waiting to act until the 2008 Lambeth Conference or the 2007 Primates’ Meeting is very dangerous,” the bishops wrote in the letter. “Most importantly, every day that goes by, more souls will be lost.”

Conservative U.S. churches are looking to form a whole new Orthodox Anglican province as an alternative to the Episcopal Church, said Rodgers. He said “it’s a very real possibility and maybe even a real likelihood” that the Episcopal Church will be asked to leave the Anglican Communion.

“It’s what we think if they’re (Episcopal Church) not going to be faithful to Scripture,” he added.

“While these things are somewhat sad, we certainly don’t have to be unkind to each other,” Rodgers commented. “We need to show Christian love to each other. We do have to agree on the basics...it’s a problem when we differ around the basics.”

Episcopal and Anglican leaders are scheduled to meet on Sept. 11-13 in New York for an urgent meeting to resolve the divide over homosexuality. Around the same time, Global South Primates will hold a meeting in Kigali, Rwanda, where leaders are expected to also address the divide as they have concern for the unity of the worldwide Anglican body.

==============================

Say It As It Is (Christian Post, 060830)

As the world’s 77 million Anglicans wait in anticipation for the critical meeting next month that will attempt to resolve differences over homosexuality which are tearing at their church, the spiritual leader of the worldwide denomination has been making unusually bold statements against the liberal stances taken up by the Episcopal Church. And it’s about time.

In an interview earlier this month with the Dutch newspaper Nederlands Dagblad, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams said the Episcopal Church, USA – which represents Anglicanism in the United States – has “pushed the boundaries” in terms of decision-making.

Furthermore, Williams dismissed suggestions that the time has come for the Church to accept homosexual relationships. “We don’t say ‘Come in and we ask no questions,’” he told the journalist interviewing him. “I do believe conversion means conversion of habits, behaviors, ideas, emotions.”

The archbishop also tried to distance himself from a controversial essay he wrote 20 years ago, in which he defended same-sex relationships.

Although Williams’ latest moves will surely rankle liberals who had hailed the archbishop’s appointment because of his previous support of gay relationships, what he said needed to be said for the good of the church body.

As the spiritual leader of one of the larger Christian denominations in the world, Williams’ first and foremost duty is to keep the Anglican Communion grounded on and united through the Word of God. A Church not built on this will most certainly fall “with a great crash” (Mt 7:27) and any attempts to reconcile a breaking body with anything other than the Word of God will be made in vain.

At this critical time, what the Anglican Communion needs most is a leader who can guide them according to what God says and not what men (or liberal churches for that matter) want. As an ambassador of Christ, Williams needs to proclaim very clearly the right message. If the archbishop is not clear about what the Scriptures tell us and/or fails to relay the right message, then members within the Anglican Communion can’t help but look to the left and to the right – each determining a path according to its own thoughts.

Then, the Church will not be able to avoid a global Anglican schism and the casualties thereafter. Williams needs to “say it as it is” and do so unwaveringly.

==============================

Episcopal, Anglican Leaders Gather to Address Gay Divide (Christian Post, 060911)

A group of Episcopal and Anglican leaders will be meeting this week to resolve the conservative-liberal divide over homosexuality that has threatened to tear apart the worldwide Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church, USA.

The Sept. 11-13 gathering is part of a broad effort by Anglicanism’s spiritual leader, the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, to preserve the global Anglican fellowship despite a hardening conservative-liberal divide over whether the Bible bars gay relationships. The Episcopal Church represents Anglicanism in the United States.

Tensions within the American denomination have increased since the meeting of its top policymaking body earlier this summer.

Conservative Anglican leaders worldwide had asked U.S. delegates for a moratorium on confirming any more openly gay bishops, in light of the uproar over the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, who lives with his longtime male partner.

But Episcopal delegates could not agree on the wording of the resolutions after days of debate. Instead, the convention adopted a last-minute, nonbinding measure asking church leaders to “exercise restraint” when considering gay candidates for bishops. The resolution stops far short of the moratorium on gay bishops that Anglican leaders demanded to calm conservative outrage, but left open the chance for discussion between leaders of the Episcopal Church and other members of the Anglican Communion, who are badly at odds over gay clergy. Traditionalists hold that the Bible specifically prohibits homosexuality.

The same convention elected Katharine Jefferts Schori of Nevada, who supports gay relationships, as the first female presiding bishop for the Episcopal Church. One day after her election, Schori said that she believes homosexuality is not a sin and that homosexuals were created by God “with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender.”

Since then more conservative Anglican leaders have rejected Jefferts Schori’s leadership and appealed for an “alternative primatial oversight” in opposition to the Episcopal Church’s stance on homosexuality. This week’s summit will address the difficulty of responding to the appeal.

“Canon [Kenneth] Kearon’s point was that such requests needed to be discussed and a resolution be sought within the Episcopal Church itself,” stated the Rev. Frank T. Griswold, the U.S. Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop, referring to statements made by the Secretary General of the Anglican Communion. After the Episcopal Church USA’s 75th General Convention in June, Kearon informed Griswold of the conversations he had with the Archbishop of Canterbury regarding the notion of “alternative primatial oversight.”

“We agreed that the most helpful next step might be to have a candid conversation to include the Presiding Bishop-elect (Jefferts Schori) and me together with bishops who have expressed a need for ‘alternative primatial oversight,’” he stated in a clarification issued late last month.

Griswold has called the upcoming meeting “an opportunity for those of differing perspectives to come together in a spirit of mutual respect to exchange views.”

Although Williams is not expected to attend, Kearon will participate, along with Griswold; Jefferts Schori; Bishop Jack Iker of Fort Worth, Texas; Bishop Robert Duncan, head of the Anglican Communion Network; Bishops Edward Salmon of South Carolina; James Stanton of Dallas; Don Wimberly of Texas; Dorsey Henderson of upper South Carolina; Rob O’Neill of Colorado; Mark Sisk of New York; John Lipscomb of Southwest Florida; and Peter Lee of Virginia.

Lee told The Associated Press in a phone interview, “We’re trying to hold together people who have differing views and to respect those differing views.”

Separately, a group of conservative bishops, led by Texas Bishop Don Wimberly, is scheduled to meet in Navasota, Texas, next week to discuss their future in U.S. church. Wimberly said in a statement that “my intention is to stay within” the denomination.

Church of England Bishops N.T. Wright of Durham and Michael Scott-Joynt of Winchester are expected to attend the Sept. 19-22 conservative gathering “with the blessing of the archbishop of Canterbury,” Wimberly said.

==============================

Episcopal, Anglican Leaders Come to No Consensus on Homosexuality (Christian Post, 060913)

NEW YORK – Episcopal and Anglican leaders were unable to come to a common agreement on how to move forward with the controversy over homosexuality in the church. A group of leaders had convened at an undisclosed location in New York for a closed meeting this week to address the liberal and conservative divide.

“We could not come to a consensus on a common plan to move forward to meet the needs of the dioceses that issued the appeal for Alternate Primatial Oversight,” read a statement issued this morning on the Anglican Communion News Service.

The three-day meeting, which began on Monday, was held to “review the current landscape of the church in view of the conflicts within the Episcopal Church.” The meeting came at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who had received requests from seven dioceses for a new overseer. The conservative dioceses had made the request in opposition to the increasing support for homosexuality in the U.S. Episcopal Church.

After it was made clear that Williams had no direct authority over the internal life of the Provinces in the Communion, Episcopal leaders scheduled the meeting to have a “candid conversation,” as Presiding Bishop Frank T. Griswold described it, and to discuss a resolution within the U.S. Anglican arm over a divide that conservative leaders had called “inevitable.”

“We had honest and frank conversations that confronted the depth of the conflicts that we face,” said the statement today. “We recognized the need to provide sufficient space, but were unable to come to common agreement on the way forward.”

Participants in the meeting included Griswold, Presiding Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori, Bishops Peter James Lee of Virginia, John Lipscomb of Southwest Florida, Jack Iker of Fort Worth, Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, James Stanton of Dallas, Edward Salmon of South Carolina, Mark Sisk of New York, Dorsey Henderson of Upper South Carolina, and Robert O’Neill of Colorado. Canon Kenneth Kearon, the Secretary General of the Anglican Communion, was also present at the gathering.

Tensions within the Episcopal Church had mounted after the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, an active homosexual, and the adoption of a last-minute resolution earlier this summer that called church leaders to “exercise restraint” when considering gay candidates for bishops. More opposition arose as Jefferts Schori, an advocate of gay relationships, was elected to be the first female presiding bishop for the U.S. denomination. Shortly after her election, Jefferts Schori said that she believes homosexuality is not a sin and that homosexuals were created by God “with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender.”

Such actions led conservative dioceses, which hold the Church subordinate to the sovereign authority of Scripture, to appeal for an “alternative primatial oversight.”

Conservative leaders drafted a petition letter late last month on the current state of the Anglican Communion for distribution to all bishops in the worldwide communion. The 44-page document was written by several Anglican leaders including the Rt. Rev John H. Rogers, a bishop with the conservative Anglican Mission in America, and the Rt. Rev. John K. Rucyahana, bishop of the Diocese of Shyira in Rwanda. It made clear that the issue on homosexuality and whether the Church should propound its approval is “a defining [matter] for the continued unity of the churches and bishops in the Anglican Communion.”

This week’s meeting did not conclude in any resolution or agreement. But the statement assured talks will continue until a consensus is reached.

“The level of openness and charity in this conference allow us to pledge to hold one another in prayer and to work together until we have reached the solution God holds out for us,” it stated.

==============================

Your Local Church of England Hindu Priest? (Mohler, 060911)

It seems that an Anglican priest has converted to Hinduism — but is being allowed to continue as a priest in the Church of England. This sounds like a new BBC comedy series, but it is all too true.

The Anglican priest, Rev. David Hart, currently lives in India, where he officiates as a Hindu priest in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala. He has taken the Hindu name “Ananda” and offers fire to a Hindu snake god, Nagar, and other idols.

This past April, he published a book about his conversion. Nevertheless, the Diocese of Ely later extended his clerical standing for another three years.

As Ruth Gledhill of The Times [London] explains:

Mr Hart is the international secretary for the World Congress of Faiths, the world’s oldest interfaith organisation, and is a strong advocate of pluralism. He says in his book that Hinduism accepts the divinity of Jesus and is an especially tolerant and open faith. He adds that he changed his name to Ananda because of its Sanskrit meaning, happiness.

In an interview with today’s edition of Church Times, Mr Hart admits that he had not told Dr Russell that he had converted, but said that he would be amazed if his conversion were treated with any suspicion.

“I have neither explicitly nor implicitly renounced my Christian faith or priesthood,” he said. The renewal of his licence was sponsored by the Rural Dean of Colombo in Sri Lanka.

Mr Hart believes that his change to Hinduism would be “read in the spirit of open exploration and dialogue, which is an essential feature of our shared modern spirituality”.

He also said that he would continue to celebrate as an Anglican priest when he visited England, but he would also visit a Hindu temple while there. “My philosophical position is that all religions are cultural constructs,” he said. “I am acting out God’s story in local terms.”

That’s my favorite line in all this mess — “acting out God’s story in local terms.” The fact is that Rev. Hart’s point is made all too seriously. He is the poster-priest for the worst and most mindless form of theological relativism. You would be hard pressed to find two more radically distinct theologies than those of Christianity and Hinduism. He is an idolater who has repudiated Christianity and biblical theism. And now he expects the Church of England to allow him to continue as a priest.

A woman priest in the Ely diocese said that she would oppose any effort by Rev. Hart to officiate in a local church. “We do tend to use Christian priests, surprisingly enough,” she explained. Surprisingly enough? Why not surprise all of us and respond to this apostate priest with the full measure of Christian conviction?

Where is Queen Elizabeth II, the Church of England’s constitutional Defender of the Faith, on this? The Archbishop of Canterbury?

Prince Charles, who has announced his intention to change the coronation oath from Defender of the Faith to Defender of Faith (any faith, all faiths . . . whatever) should take careful note of Rev. David Hart. He would be the perfect postmodern priest for the court of Britain’s future postmodern king.

==============================

Texas Episcopal Megachurch Breaks from Denomination (Christian Post, 060918)

One of the largest Episcopal churches in the nation announced late last week their disassociation from the denomination with a payment of $1.2 million for its title to the parish property.

As the Episcopal Church remains divided over homosexuality, the Rt. Rev. James M. Stanton, bishop of Dallas, concluded “over time that there were irreconcilable differences between Christ Church and the Episcopal Church, differences that would necessitate their separation from the Episcopal Church and, consequently, from the Diocese of Dallas.”

The Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry, founding pastor and rector of Christ Church in Plano, Texas, and the megachurch’s vestry commended Stanton’s acknowledgement of their desire to separate and his granting of what he called a “godly judgment.”

Still, Stanton called it “a sad occasion for our Diocese” in many ways.

Currently, a contract for withdrawal is in place and the Plano megachurch secured their title to the property with a sum payment of $1.2 million to the Diocese of Dallas, assuming the “full indebtedness” of the parish which is a total of $6.8 million, according to Stanton.

Stanton also invited Bishop Bill Godfrey, the Bishop of Peru, to provide oversight of Christ Church and the clergy as the local parish takes its next steps.

“This temporary arrangement allows our parish to, out of necessity, separate from the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas but to remain in communion with our Anglican brothers and sisters in Christ,” said a statement by Roseberry and the Vestry of Christ Church.

Christ Church in Plano, which draws about 2,200 worshippers each weekend to the Dallas suburb, had been in ongoing conversations over the conflicts between their mission and the tensions arising in the Episcopal Church, moving toward its realignment with members of the Anglican Communion that share a common vision of mission. A public statement had been made by the local parish in June stating their intention to sever ties from the Episcopal Church.

Conservative Dioceses in the Anglican Communion Network which have already left the Episcopal Church are seeking an alternative primatial oversight, in disagreement with the actions taken by the U.S. Anglican body supporting homosexuality.

The Rt. Rev. John H. Rodgers, a bishop with the conservative Anglican Mission in America, spoke for the conservative bodies saying that beyond a new overseer, they are seeking to form an orthodox Anglican province as an alternative to the Episcopal Church.

Episcopal leaders had come out of a closed meeting last week with no consensus over the homosexual issue.

With continued conversations planned for and the separation of Christ Church in place, Stanton noted that “the decision of other parishes to remain in the Diocese of Dallas must not be seen as an endorsement of those same policies [of the Episcopal Church].”

==============================

Anglican Leaders Disagree on Global South Communiqué (Christian Post, 060926)

An Anglican archbishop of South Africa clarified his position on a communiqué issued last week by the Global South, saying he is “deeply disturbed” by the approach of the leaders especially over homosexuality.

In a statement released Sunday, Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane of Cape Town said he was not made aware of the communiqué that the Primates of the Global South had put their name to – a document that had confirmed their support for orthodox Anglicans against homosexuality.

“...there is no doubt that the tensions within the Anglican Communion, arising from actions within North America, raise serious and problematic concerns for our future,” said Ndungane in the statement. “Yet I am deeply disturbed by the tenor of our approach, as reflected in this communiqué.”

Leaders of 20 Anglican provinces at the Global South Primates meeting last week released a communiqué on Friday commending conservative leaders in North America for their “faithfulness” and proposing a separate orthodox Anglican structure in the United States.

Since the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, an active homosexual, The Episcopal Church – the U.S. Anglican arm – has remained divided and many conservative leaders believe a division is inevitable. The Rt. Rev. John H. Rodgers, a bishop with the conservative Anglican Mission in America, had said conservative U.S. churches are looking to form a separate Orthodox Anglican province as an alternative to The Episcopal Church.

Ndungane, who had attended the primates meeting last week in Kigali, Rwanda, expressed wariness over some of the proposals stated in the recent communiqué, including a suggestion for another presiding bishop to represent The Episcopal Church at the Primates meeting in February 2007. Presiding bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori, who will be installed Nov. 4, is a supporter of homosexuality.

“This [proposal] introduces a completely new dimension into our relationships within the Communion, the reciprocal implications of which we have not considered,” he said of the proposal. “I would feel more confident if we addressed this question as a part of the more comprehensive reassessment of the nature of the Communion for our times, which is underway not least through the work of the Covenant Design Group.

A leader of the Anglican Province of Southern Africa since 1996, Ndungane has been notoriously known for his liberal voice among conservative African Anglicans.

“While I may well concur with some sections of the text, there are others which are certainly not consonant with the position of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa,” he said in the statement.

Ndungane also criticized the Global South for allowing their agenda to be dominated by an influence from the U.S. rather than concentrating on the priorities of their own people and Provinces. Archbishop Desmond Tutu had also called it “little short of outrageous” that church leaders should be obsessed with issues of sexuality when AIDS and poverty is so prevalent. In his book “Rabble-Rouser for Peace,” the Nobel Peace Prize winner expressed shame at the Anglican Church’s rejection of gay priests and shame to be an Anglican.

Some Episcopal leaders, however, have said otherwise. Conservative dioceses in the Anglican Communion Network, a group of 10 U.S. dioceses that left The Episcopal Church, welcomed the statement by the Global South Primates. Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator of the Anglican Communion Network, recognized the threatening issues the Global South face such as poverty and disease and was humbled by their continued support and guidance to the U.S. dioceses remaining faithful to Scripture – a stance that has encouraged the leaders represented in the communiqué, which are said to represent more than 70 percent of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

Despite the disagreements within the worldwide body, many Anglican leaders including Ndungane remain hopeful of the unity of the Anglican Communion. Ndungane, however, sees more flexibility needed in keeping the body united.

“It is certainly the case that we need changes within the life, and structures, and processes of the Anglican Communion. Yet part of the strength of our heritage is that intrinsic to our life, structures and processes is a considerable flexibility and openness to change that has allowed us to evolve – creating and amending Instruments of Unity,” he said.

==============================

Episcopal Head: Two U.S. Churches Would Cause More Global Divisions (Christian Post, 061002)

The head of the Episcopal Church, USA, said the denomination is still in a “process” toward reconciliation over homosexuality issues and that creating a separate church would cause more difficulties and divisions even outside the U.S. arm of Anglicanism.

In a formal response released Thursday, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold raised questions about some of the statements that came out of recent Anglican meetings, especially a suggestion by bishops in the Global South who called for the formation of another Anglican body in the U.S. – a body for those opposed to the consecration of homosexuals and gay “marriage.”

“The suggestion of such a division raises profound questions about the nature of the church, its ordering and its oversight,” stated Griswold. “I further believe such a division would open the way to multiple divisions across other provinces of the [Anglican] Communion, and any sense of a coherent mission would sink into chaos.”

The head of U.S. church was not alone in his concerns. Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane of Cape Town and the Most Rev. Ignacio C. Soliba, prime bishop of the Episcopal Church in the Philippines, said they did not endorse the Kigali communiqué that was drawn up by African, Asian and Latin American Anglican bishops last week, which had affirmed support to U.S. conservative leaders against homosexuality.

While the dissenting bishops from the Global South said they did not sign the communiqué or was even made aware of it, Archbishop John Chew, primate of the Church of the Province of South East Asia countered their words saying a draft agenda had been sent out to the Primates ahead of the Global South meeting and that a communiqué drafting committee chaired by Archbishop Bernard Ntahoturi of Burundi was “unanimously appointed.”

There were no signatories on the communiqué. Instead, the document was followed by a list of 20 “Provinces Represented.”

Griswold also raised questions about the Global South leaders’ request for another representative of the Episcopal Church other than Presiding bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori, a supporter of homosexuality, at the next global Primate meeting in February.

“I have sought to bring to the primates’ meetings the wide range of opinions and the consequent tensions within our own church. I have every confidence that Katharine will do the same,” he stated.

The installation of Jefferts Schori on Nov. 4 will be broadcasted live on the Web.

As the issue of homosexuality has continued to wrack the Episcopal Church since New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson’s consecration three years ago, Griswold, who supported the choice of Robinson, clarified the significance of the 2004 Windsor Report – a list recommendations on how to best maintain unity throughout the worldwide Anglican Communion.

“I believe the ‘Windsor process’ is a process of mutual growth which calls for patience, mutual understanding and generosity of spirit rather than stark submission.”

But a suggestion for a separate ecclesial body, Griswold indicated, within the North American province appears to be an effort to undermine the “process” toward healing.

Conservative leaders, including Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator of the Anglican Communion Network, have stressed that a divide is inevitable and that a separate Orthodox body is what they are ultimately seeking for.

He and other Windsor bishops had recently met in Camp Allen, Texas, to continue with efforts to resolve the homosexual divide.

“[T]he Texas meeting was in no way held at the Archbishop’s initiative nor was it planned in collaboration with him,” Griswold clarified.

The “Windsor bishops” had committed to try to maintain unity in the church while also recognizing the needs of the conservative dioceses that desire a new overseer.

While expressing appreciation for the concerns raised by the Camp Allen attendants, Griswold made clear that “such encouragement does not necessarily imply affirmation of or agreement with points of view expressed in the course of such exchanges.”

==============================

Diocese of Quincy Special Synod Approves Alternative Primatial Oversight Request (AAC, 060918)

Diocese of Quincy Concludes Special Synod In Galesburg

The clergy and elected leaders of the Diocese of Quincy, a diocese of 2200 Anglicans headquartered in Peoria [Illinois] under the leadership of Bishop Keith Ackerman, has taken action to further distance themselves from the troubled Episcopal Church in the U.S.

At a special Diocesan Synod on Saturday [September 16, 2006] that was planned just after the Episcopal Church’s General Convention in June, the Quincy Diocese passed a strong resolution affirming the historic faith and practice of the Christian Church and repudiating actions of the Episcopal Church’s national leadership that have sent the denomination into turmoil over the last three years and has driven many Episcopalians around the country to other churches.

“This Special Synod was marked by a spirit of harmony, unity and grace,” said Bishop Keith Ackerman. The clergy and delegates passed all resolutions by a wide margin. An air of mutual respect filled the church at Grace Church, Galesburg, where the synod met, Ackerman said.

The Synod reaffirmed its relationship to the Archbishop of Canterbury in England, the spiritual head of the 80 million member Anglican Communion. As both an evangelical and catholic church, the Diocese made clear that it upholds historic Christianity grounded in the Bible. The Quincy Diocese, along with the wider Anglican Communion, has rejected revisions of faith and revisions of moral teaching on sexuality and marriage that have splintered the Episcopal Church over the last several decades.

The Diocese of Quincy also joined seven other dioceses of the Anglican Communion Network in asking the Archbishops of the Anglican Communion to provide someone other than Episcopal Presiding Bishop-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori to preside over the Network dioceses. Quincy and the other dioceses are unwilling to accept the leadership of the controversial Schori, who in 2003 agreed to the election of Gene Robinson, a practicing homosexual living with another man, to become Bishop of New Hampshire. Schori has also approved blessings of homosexual marriages in the Diocese of Nevada where she serves until taking office as Presiding Bishop in early November.

The Diocese of Quincy will gather again for its regular Synod in October at St. Paul’s Cathedral in Peoria to consider what further actions may be needed at that time.

==============================

Christ Church, Plano, Formalizes Break with Episcopal Church (AAC, 060915)

Source: Christ Church, Plano

Statement of the Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry & the Vestry of Christ Church Plano Concerning Formal Dissolution of Relationship with Episcopal Church

September 15, 2006

Since the General Convention of the Episcopal Church (USA) in June 2006, Christ Church has been moving steadily toward its realignment with members of the Anglican Communion that share a common vision of ministry and mission. This process began with a public statement by the Christ Church vestry on June 24, 2006 stating our intention to disassociate from the Episcopal Church.

Today, Bishop James Stanton of the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas has issued a “godly judgment”, an authority granted to him by the Canons of the Church, acknowledging our desire and need to disassociate, and has also signed a legal agreement granting us the title and ownership of our land and buildings. As consideration for the property, and to secure our title and allow the Diocese of Dallas to maintain their programs and ministries, we have agreed to pay $1.2 million to the diocese and to continue to service the existing debt on our property.

In addition, Bishop Stanton has extended his personal invitation for Bishop Bill Godfrey, the Bishop of Peru, to provide oversight of Christ Church and her clergy as we take our next steps. Bishop Godfrey is a long term friend of Christ Church. This temporary arrangement allows our parish to, out of necessity, separate from the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas but to remain in communion with our Anglican brothers and sisters in Christ.

We are very thankful to the Bishop of Dallas and his staff for their cooperative and clear efforts to assist in this process. In announcing this agreement, Bishop Stanton wrote to his diocese today: “The ministry of Christ Church has been an important part of our witness and its clergy and people are our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. I maintain a great affection and admiration for this congregation and its leadership, and I wish them only God’s blessing.”

In God’s perfect timing, these positive steps have cleared the way for Christ Church to find a new home within the Anglican Communion. This is all part of “Chapter Two” at Christ Church, and we are thankful that God has provided a way forward in mission.

###

Statement of Bishop James M. Stanton, Diocese of Dallas

September 15, 2006

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

As your bishop I have sought to lead this Diocese and its many parishes to build up the Body of Christ and fulfill the mission of His Church. As you may know, I have been in ongoing conversations with the leadership of Christ Episcopal Church in Plano and its rector, Fr. David Roseberry. Since their public statement of June 25th, they have strongly and consistently felt that their mission was being adversely affected by the conflicts and tensions resulting from actions and policies of the Episcopal Church.

I have worked to understand their situation and to seek a way forward with integrity. I came to the conclusion over time that there were irreconcilable differences between Christ Church and the Episcopal Church, differences that would necessitate their separation from the Episcopal Church and, consequently, from the Diocese of Dallas.

After much prayer, and laying the matter before our Standing Committee, and with their advice, I have issued a godly judgment permitting them to separate from our diocese. I have believed that this is essentially a pastoral matter, and as such should be dealt with in a genuine spirit of Christian charity and mission. I am pleased that all parties and every phase of our discussions have exemplified that spirit.

By action of the Trustees of the Corporation of the Diocese today, a contract for withdrawal is in place and will be respectfully honored by both Christ Church and the Diocese of Dallas. In consideration for their property they have agreed to assume the full indebtedness of the existing parish ($6.8 million) and made a lump sum payment to the Diocese of $1.2 million. This arrangement secures their title and helps our Diocese continue to pursue its mission over the next few years.

In many ways, clearly, this is a sad occasion for our Diocese. The ministry of Christ Church has been an important part of our witness and its clergy and people are our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. I maintain a great affection and admiration for this congregation and its leadership, and I wish them only God’s blessing.

I bear a pastoral concern for all our congregations, of course, and especially for some of our younger and smaller ones. The action of Christ Church to sever ties with the Episcopal Church is due to their particular circumstances. While they clearly do not support the actions and policies of the Episcopal Church, the decision of other parishes to remain in the Diocese of Dallas must not be seen as an endorsement of those same policies. All of us remain committed to bearing witness to the Lord Jesus Christ and to building up His Church.

Please continue to work and pray for all that God has called this Diocese to do. And pray for the whole Church.

In Christ,

The Rt. Rev. James M. Stanton

Bishop of Dallas

==============================

Global South Primates’ Meeting (AAC, 060922)

The Anglican Communion

Kigali, Rwanda

September 2006

Communiqué

1. As Primates and Leaders of the Global South Provinces of the Anglican Communion we gathered at the Hotel des Mille Collines in Kigali, Rwanda, between 19th and 22nd September 2006. We were called together by the Global South Steering Committee and its chairman, Archbishop Peter J. Akinola. Twenty provinces were represented at the meeting*. We are extremely grateful for the warm welcome shown to us by the Right Honorable Bernard Makuza, Prime Minister of the Republic of Rwanda, and the hospitality provided by Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini, members of the House of Bishops of the Church of Rwanda and all of the members of the local organizing committee.

2. We have gathered in Rwanda twelve years after the genocide that tragically engulfed this nation and even its churches. During this time Rwanda was abandoned to its fate by the world. Our first action was to visit the Kigali Genocide Museum at Gisozi for a time of prayer and reflection. We were chastened by this experience and commit ourselves not to abandon the poor or the persecuted wherever they may be and in whatever circumstances. We add our voices to theirs and we say, “Never Again!”

3. As we prayed and wept at the mass grave of 250,000 helpless victims we confronted the utter depravity and inhumanity to which we are all subject outside of the transforming grace of God. We were reminded again that faith in Jesus Christ must be an active, whole-hearted faith if we are to stand against the evil and violence that threaten to consume our world. We were sobered by the reality that several of our Provinces are presently in the middle of dangerous conflicts. We commit ourselves to intercession for them.

4. We are very aware of the agonizing situation in the Sudan. We appreciate and commend the terms of the Sudanese Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the North and the South. We dare not, however, close our eyes to the devastating situation in Darfur. We are conscious of the complexities but there must be no continuation of the slaughter. We invite people from all of the Provinces of the Anglican Communion and the entire international community to stand in solidarity with the men, women and children in Darfur, Sudan.

5. We are here as a people of hope and we have been greatly encouraged as we have witnessed the reconciling power of God’s love at work as this nation of Rwanda seeks to rebuild itself. We have been pleased to hear of positive developments in the neighboring country of Burundi as they have recently completed a cease-fire agreement between their government and the Palipehutu-FNL. We are also beginning to see an end to the conflict in Northern Uganda and we note that the Democratic Republic of the Congo is approaching a historic election that offers promise for a peaceful future. All of these developments are occasions for hope for the future.

6. We have met here as a growing fellowship of Primates and leaders of churches in the Global South representing more than 70 percent of the active membership of the worldwide Anglican Communion. We build on and reaffirm the work of our previous meetings, especially our most recent gathering in Egypt in October 2005. We are mindful of the challenges that face our Communion and recommit ourselves to the abiding truth of the Holy Scriptures and the faithful proclamation of the whole Gospel for the whole world. We recommit ourselves to the vision of our beloved Communion as part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

7. We recognize that because of the ongoing conflict in the Communion many people have lost hope that we will come to any resolution in the foreseeable future. We are grateful therefore, that one sign of promise is the widespread support for the development of an Anglican Covenant. We are delighted to affirm the extraordinary progress made by the Global South task group on developing an Anglican Covenant. For the past year they have labored on this important task and we look forward to submitting the result of their labor to the rest of the Communion. We are pleased that the Archbishop of Canterbury has recognized the exemplary scholarship and leadership of Archbishop Drexel Gomez in asking him to chair the Covenant Design Group and look forward with anticipation to the crucial next steps of this historic venture. We believe that an Anglican Covenant will demonstrate to the world that it is possible to be a truly global communion where differences are not affirmed at the expense of faith and truth but within the framework of a common confession of faith and mutual accountability.

8. We have come together as Anglicans and we celebrate the gift of Anglican identity that is ours today because of the sacrifice made by those who have gone before us. We grieve that, because of the doctrinal conflict in parts of our Communion, there is now a growing number of congregations and dioceses in the USA and Canada who believe that their Anglican identity is at risk and are appealing to us so that they might remain faithful members of the Communion. As leaders of that Communion we will work together to recognize the Anglican identity of all who receive, hold and maintain the Scriptures as the Word of God written and who seek to live in godly fellowship within our historic ordering.

9. We deeply regret that, at its most recent General Convention, The Episcopal Church gave no clear embrace of the minimal recommendations of the Windsor Report. We observe that a number of the resolutions adopted by the Convention were actually contrary to the Windsor Report. We are further dismayed to note that their newly elected Presiding Bishop also holds to a position on human sexuality – not to mention other controversial views – in direct contradiction of Lambeth 1.10 and the historic teaching of the Church. The actions and decisions of the General Convention raise profound questions on the nature of Anglican identity across the entire Communion.

10. We are, however, greatly encouraged by the continued faithfulness of the Network Dioceses and all of the other congregations and communities of faithful Anglicans in North America. In addition, we commend the members of the Anglican Network in Canada for their commitment to historic, biblical faith and practice. We value their courage and consistent witness. We are also pleased by the emergence of a wider circle of ‘Windsor Dioceses’ and urge all of them to walk more closely together and deliberately work towards the unity that Christ enjoins. We are aware that a growing number of congregations are receiving oversight from dioceses in the Global South and in recent days we have received requests to provide Alternative Primatial Oversight for a number of dioceses. This is an unprecedented situation in our Communion that has not been helped by the slow response from the Panel of Reference. After a great deal of prayer and deliberation, and in order to support these faithful Anglican dioceses and parishes, we have come to agreement on the following actions:

(a) We have asked the Global South Steering Committee to meet with the leadership of the dioceses requesting Alternative Primatial Oversight, in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Network and the ‘Windsor Dioceses’, to investigate their appeal in greater detail and to develop a proposal identifying the ways by which the requested Primatial oversight can be adequately provided.

(b) At the next meeting of the Primates in February 2007 some of us will not be able to recognize Katharine Jefferts Schori as a Primate at the table with us. Others will be in impaired communion with her as a representative of The Episcopal Church. Since she cannot represent those dioceses and congregations who are abiding by the teaching of the Communion we propose that another bishop, chosen by these dioceses, be present at the meeting so that we might listen to their voices during our deliberations.

(c) We are convinced that the time has now come to take initial steps towards the formation of what will be recognized as a separate ecclesiastical structure of the Anglican Communion in the USA. We have asked the Global South Steering Committee to develop such a proposal in consultation with the appropriate instruments of unity of the Communion. We understand the serious implications of this determination. We believe that we would be failing in our apostolic witness if we do not make this provision for those who hold firmly to a commitment to historic Anglican faith.

11. While we are concerned about the challenges facing our Anglican structures we are also very much aware that these issues can be a distraction from the work of the Gospel. At our meeting in Kigali we invested a great deal of our time on the day-to-day challenges that confront our various Churches including poverty eradication, HIV/AIDS, peace building and church planting. We were enormously encouraged by the reports of growth and vitality in the many different settings where we live and serve.

12. We received a preliminary report from the Theological Formation and Education (TFE) Task Force. We were pleased to hear of their plans to provide opportunities for theological formation from the most basic catechism to graduate level training for new and existing Anglican leaders. We request that all Global South provinces share their existing Catechisms and other educational resources with the TFE Task Force for mutual enrichment. We were pleased by their determination to network with other theological institutions and theologians in the Global South as well as with scholars and seminaries who share a similar vision for theological education that is faithful to Scripture and tradition.

13. We were blessed by the presence of a number of Economic Officers (Advisors) from around the Communion. Their determination to find creative ways to offer means of Economic Empowerment at various levels throughout the provinces of the Global South was an inspiration to all of us and resulted in the issuing of a separate summary statement. We note especially their proposed Ethical Economic and Financial Covenant that we adopted as Primates and commended for adoption at all levels of our Provinces. We were impressed by their vision and fully support their proposal to convene an Economic Empowerment consultation in 2007 with participation invited from every Global South Province.

14. We received ‘The Road to Lambeth,’ a draft report commissioned by the Primates of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA) which they have commended to their churches for study and response. It highlights the crisis that now confronts us as we consider the future of the Lambeth Conference. We commend this report for wider reflection.

15. We were challenged by a presentation on the interface between Christianity and Islam and the complex issues that we must now confront at every level of our societies throughout the Global South. We recognized the need for a more thorough education and explored a number of ways that allow us to be faithful disciples to Jesus Christ while respecting the beliefs of others. We condemn all acts of violence in the name of any religion.

16. Throughout our time together in Kigali we have not only shared in discussions such as these we have also spent time together in table fellowship, prayer and worship. We are grateful that because of the time that we have shared our lives have been strengthened and our love for Christ, His Church and His world confirmed. Accordingly, we pray for God’s continued blessing on all members of our beloved Communion that we might all be empowered to continue in our mission to a needy and troubled world.

To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy — to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. (Jude 1:24-25)

==============================

Calif. Diocese Seeks to Sever Ties with Episcopal Church (Christian Post, 061003)

A California diocese is considering proposed amendments to its constitution to transfer communion from the Episcopal Church to an Anglican Province in the wake of homosexual divisions.

The Diocese of San Joaquin postponed its annual convention to Dec. 1-2 as it intends to remain in good standing with the worldwide Anglican Communion amid recent Episcopal actions over homosexuality that have wracked the church. The diocese proposed 13 amendments and additions to its constitution for consideration at the December meeting.

Much of the amendments were crossing out relations with the Episcopal Church – the U.S. representative of Anglicanism – and stressing its full communion with the head of the Anglican Communion, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, and all Anglican provinces faithful to Scripture.

Despite the constitutional changes, the diocese made clear that it “remains true to the Apostolic teaching and practice of the Episcopal Church that it received by being part of the Anglican Communion.

“The constitutional changes currently being proposed by the diocese affect neither this faith nor practice but rather perpetuate the historic Faith of the Church in a time when these things are being challenge by others,” said a released statement.

One amendment stated, “The Church in the Diocese of San Joaquin accedes to the Faith, Order and Practice of a province of that branch of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church known as the Anglican Communion.”

“The Anglican Communion” replaces “the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.”

The proposed changes come after a series of meetings were held in Texas and Kigali, Rwanda, where bishops addressed the homosexual divide. Episcopal bishops in Texas committed to recognize dioceses requesting a new overseer other than Presiding Bishop-Elect Katharine Jefferts Schori, who supports homosexuality, while maintaining unity. Many leaders in the Global South agreed to support conservative leaders against homosexuality and made controversial suggestions such as taking initial steps to form a separate Anglican body in the U.S.

While some, including Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, disagreed with such suggestions, the Diocese of San Joaquin found the outcome of the meetings “encouraging to those who have anticipated redefined relationships within the Anglican Communion.”

Currently, eight dioceses have asked the Archbishop of Canterbury for alternative primatial oversight, rejecting the leadership of Jefferts Schori, who will be installed Nov. 4.

The Episcopal Church approved the consecration of openly gay New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson in 2003 and elected Jefferts Schori this year to lead the U.S. church. While the Anglican Communion asked for assurance that the U.S. church will no longer consecrate gay bishops, the Episcopal Church adopted a resolution in June that fell short of the promise.

The Diocese of San Joaquin pointed out that the Episcopal Church is “no longer a member in good standing” of the Anglican Communion. And “with appropriate consultation,” the diocese determines to transfer all relationships and communion from the Episcopal Church to an Anglican Province.

==============================

Illinois Episcopal Church Seeks Leadership Change (Christian Post, 061016)

Church officials at St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church in Edwardsvill, Ill., think the overseeing bishop is too conservative

CHICAGO (AP) - An Episcopal parish in Edwardsville is asking for a temporary change in leadership because church officials think the overseeing bishop is too conservative.

St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church is making the request under a 2004 option that was initially intended to allow Episcopalian parishes new leadership if they considered their bishop too liberal.

While approximately 20 parishes across the country have changed leadership under the option, St. Andrew’s could become the second to seek new leadership because the church thought the bishop was too conservative.

The conflict between Bishop Peter Beckwith of the Episcopal Diocese of Springfield and St. Andrew’s Rev. Virginia Bennett reached a boiling point this week when Bennett says she requested that a lesbian be brought into the church and Beckwith responded by refusing to confirm any new members.

Beckwith also revoked the licenses of the parish’s 15 Eucharist ministers and is planning to have the diocese put under the authority of an overseas Anglican church.

According to Bennett, the dispute between her and Beckwith began three years ago at the Episcopal General Convention, where Bennett voted for Rev. V. Gene Robinson, who is openly gay, for New Hampshire’s bishop.

She told the Chicago Tribune this week that she believes the request for temporary alternative pastoral leadership is the only way her parish can function.

“We are at peace in believing that we have gone the extra mile, done all that we can do to try and reconcile with our bishop,” Bennett told the newspaper. “We hope that he believes, as we do, that this is what we need in order for us to be able to get on with our ministry.”

Phone calls to Beckwith’s Springfield office were not returned immediately. Messages seeking comment were left at two telephone listings for a Peter Beckwith Thursday night. Two other telephone numbers were disconnected.

Bennett told the Edwardsville News Democrat that a church official informed her that Beckwith is out of the office until later this month.

==============================

Head of Episcopal Diocese OKs Same-Sex Blessings (Christian Post, 061023)

Bishop Andrew Smith’s decision does not allow Episcopal clergy to officiate at civil union ceremonies but permits priests, through a blessing ceremony in the church, to acknowledge gay and lesbian couples who have had a civil union granted by the state.

“At the heart of the matter is whether we as a Church will welcome and embrace, serve with and care for and bless persons who are homosexual and partnered as cherished and fully accepted members of the body of Christ,” Smith said in a speech at Christ Church Cathedral in Hartford at the diocese’s two-day annual convention that ended Saturday. “I believe it is right to change our current policy, which prohibits our clergy from blessing same-sex relationships.”

Smith said he acted because Connecticut recognizes civil unions, which became law last year, and that there has been no movement on the issue at the national level of the Episcopal Church. A report in 2003 to the archbishop of Canterbury, leader of the worldwide Anglican communion, called for a moratorium on the consecration of gay clergy and same-sex blessings by the U.S. Episcopal Church.

“What I have permitted is a pastoral ministry of blessing, which does not mimic a wedding ceremony,” Smith said in an interview after the convention, The Hartford Courant reported Sunday.

“I felt the time had come for the church to say ‘Yes’ since there has been no movement on the question that was emerging. And, knowing many faithful gay and lesbian folks are leading lives seeking to serve Christ, I felt that now is the time I move to say ‘Yes.’”

The decision was greeted with joy by the Rev. Pat Gallagher, who leads St. Paul’s Church in Willimantic. “I couldn’t be happier,” she said. “I’m just so excited about it. It’s a right we should have.”

Other church leaders, however, were not supportive of Smith’s decision.

The Rev. Christopher Leighton, rector at St. Paul’s Church in Darien, called Smith a “perpetrator of false teaching.” Smith’s decision was “defiant of Scripture and worldwide Christianity,” he said.

Leighton is one of five priests who have been in a theological battle with Smith since his 2003 vote in support of the consecration an openly gay bishop of New Hampshire.

==============================

Departing church gives up land (Washington Times, 061024)

An Episcopal congregation in Woodbridge whose members were unhappy with liberal trends in the Episcopal Church suddenly dissolved itself last week, leaving the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia with a $420,000 bill from the property’s mortgage.

The members of Christ Our Lord Episcopal Church, a mission congregation founded in 1992, has since reconstituted under the Anglican Diocese of North Kigezi in Uganda as Christ Our Lord Anglican Church. It is the third mission to leave the diocese because of the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson as the world’s first openly homosexual bishop, but the first to abandon its property.

“I am saddened by this departure and by the mission’s apparent failure to thrive,” Virginia Bishop Peter J. Lee said. “I am also disappointed to not have heard of plans for this action directly from the leadership of the congregation prior to their taking this action.”

Christ Our Lord’s vicar, the Rev. George Beaven, said his congregation tried in April to strike a deal with the diocese to depart with its property, but the diocese refused.

“I would have loved to have done this whole thing in consultation with the bishop, and I’ve appreciated Bishop Lee’s restraint in dealing with the aftermath of this crisis,” Mr. Beaven said, “but you have to realize our environment in which we’re operating here.”

He added that his congregation has lost one-third of its members since the Robinson consecration and that would-be members are turned off by the denomination’s liberal stances.

“When people find out you’re involved in perpetual battles about foundational truths, they say, ‘There are three churches up the road that aren’t involved in that,’ “ he said. “They’re looking for a safe place for their family, and there’s a lot other options that are more attractive.”

The congregation is one of dozens across the country that have fled the denomination since 2003. Several have left since June, when the Episcopal General Convention elected as its presiding bishop Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who favors ordaining active homosexuals and performing same-sex unions.

By August, the congregation was making plans to leave, and on Oct. 15, 95 percent of its 200 members voted to dissolve. The next day, it informed the Rev. John Guernsey, rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Dale City, the mission’s sponsoring congregation, of the vote. But it was not until Thursday, four days after the vote, that Mr. Guernsey informed the diocese via e-mail that Christ Our Lord had left.

“I got the letter done as expeditiously as I could and meant no disrespect by it,” said Mr. Guernsey, adding that he was out of the office part of last week and that his governing board had to approve it first.

Diocesan spokesman Patrick Getlein said diocesan officials, all of whom were away on a clergy retreat from Monday to Wednesday of last week, got an anonymous phone call about Christ Our Lord during the retreat. A suffragan bishop with the Virginia Diocese, Bishop David Jones, called Mr. Beaven on Tuesday.

“He was sad. He was hurt,” Mr. Beaven said of their conversation.

The bishop came by the church Thursday to secure the abandoned property. Mr. Beaven, 62 — who is leading the reconstituted congregation, which will meet at Woodbridge Seventh-day Adventist Church — plans to retire from the Episcopal priesthood soon.

The diocese, which will continue services in the old building, says the former members left behind a $420,000 mortgage on which no payments had been made since May. The building on Omisol Road was purchased in 1997 for $700,000, with the help of a $500,000 loan from the diocese, which is considering making All Saints pay the bill.

Mr. Guernsey did not comment on that possibility, especially because his own church is in negotiations with the diocese about leaving.

Mr. Beaven said his church had made “extensive improvement” to the property, which has appreciated in value to $1.82 million.

The departing church chose North Kigezi because its members had visited the Ugandan diocese on mission trips and Bishop Edward Muhima has visited Christ Our Lord.

==============================

Dallas Diocese Delays Split from Episcopal Church (Christian Post, 061024)

Despite a majority opposition to gays, the Dallas diocese of the Episcopal Church voted to stay in the denomination, at least for now.

Leaders of the diocese heeded to a plea from their bishop James Stanton at an annual convention Saturday to refrain from immediately leaving the Episcopal Church. The decision to stay, however, is seen as a delay to the diocese splitting from the U.S. body as soon as next year.

More than half of local church leaders said the denomination had gone seriously wrong by ordaining gay priests and blessing same-sex unions and 42 percent said they were ready to leave over the pressing issues, according to a survey commissioned by Stanton. Almost a third said they want to take the word “Episcopal” from the church signs, letterheads and literature.

Still, there was a “loyal minority,” according to the Dallas Morning News, with a quarter of the leaders saying the Episcopal Church had not gone seriously wrong.

More than 700 leaders were surveyed.

More than 300 delegates were at the convention, according to the local news, and many hope that the delay in splitting will allow the global Anglican Communion to create a new home for conservative Episcopalians in America. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. representative body of the Anglican Communion.

While there is no immediate split, the convention voted to amend its constitution to create a system to disengage with the U.S. body if it loses its status in the communion. The amendment must be approved at next year’s convention to take effect.

“Separation is never a strategy,” said Stanton. “Those who depart the church are not, I think, fulfilling Christ’s call but are fulfilling the expectations the world has about the church, that we cannot really get along.”

Just last month, one of the largest Episcopal churches in the nation – Christ Church of Plano, Texas – disassociated from the denomination. It was a “sad occasion” for the Dallas diocese, Stanton had concluded. He said that “irreconcilable differences ... would necessitate their separation.”

The divide over homosexuality issues in the Episcopal Church began in 2003 with the consecration of openly gay bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. More controversy arose when Katharine Jefferts Schori, who supports same-sex “marriage” and homosexual ordination, was elected to head the U.S. church body.

The survey, which reached three-quarters of local church leaders online, found that about 70 percent of them disagreed with the right granted by the Episcopal Church for the ordination of “people living in homosexual unions” or for local clergy to perform same-sex marriages.

While the majority showed opposition to the national body’s recent actions, Stanton said the survey results did not necessarily indicate the diocese would split with the denomination, reported the Dallas Morning News. He noted that some of those who oppose do not want to leave.

Stanton further noted that the 76 leaders he met with requested more for time than separation.

The convention follows just weeks after Anglican leaders from the Global South confirmed their support for orthodox Anglicans and proposed the formation of a separate orthodox Anglican body in the U.S.

Conservative U.S. leaders have also expressed their desire to form a whole new Orthodox body as an alternative to the Episcopal Church.

==============================

Episcopal Parish Gains Second Overseer Amid Gay Row (Christian Post, 061025)

WASHINGTON – The Episcopal bishop of Washington appointed a more conservative leader to provide supplemental oversight to his church, All Saints Church in Chevy Chase, Md.

In efforts to maintain communion with his parish, Bishop John Bryson Chane, who supports homosexual ordination, arranged to have retiring bishop the Rt. Rev. Edward L. Salmon of South Carolina oversee the process of ordination.

“Under this arrangement, Bishop Salmon has agreed to visit the parish from time to time, to confirm on my behalf and to supervise the process of discernment of individuals who wish to explore their potential call to ordination,” said Chane in a letter to All Saints on Monday, according to the Diocese of Washington.

The additional overseer was appointed in response to theological disagreements that arose between Chane and a majority of the congregation.

Earlier this year, Chane had criticized conservative Archbishop Peter J. Akinola, primate of the Church of Nigeria, for backing a law that criminalizes same-sex “marriage” in his country and denies gay citizens the freedoms to assemble and petition their government.

Chane expressed his support of homosexuals, including the ordination of openly gay bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, saying, “The victimization or diminishment of human beings whose affections happen to be ordered towards people of the same sex is anathema to us,” according to The Washington Post.

Conflicting with most of his congregation, Chane invited Salmon – a vocal opponent of gay ordination – to provide supplemental pastoral oversight.

“I have sought to provide a path toward continued relationship,” said Chane. “The goal before us remains, as the Archbishop of Canterbury has said, for us to seek to be in ‘the highest degree of communion’ with one another.”

Chane described his personal relationship with Salmon as one of respect and warmth. The two had met when they joined the House of Bishops in 2002.

“I believe you will find him to be a reconciling figure in your midst and I bid you to welcome him to your community,” he told the parishioners in his letter.

Accepting the invitation, Salmon commented, “It has put me in a place where I can be of help and pastoral support to both the parish and the bishop of Washington.”

Both bishops will hold a meeting with the parish on Oct. 29 to discuss Salmon’s role at All Saints Church.

“This decision by Bishop Chane simply reflects the open recognition in both the House of Bishops and the House of Deputies at General Convention 2006 that ‘we are two [theological] minds within one body,’” said the Rev. Zadig, Jr., rector of All Saints Church. “The events on the international and national stage are now playing out on the local level. Despite all that, this generous act by Bishops Chane and Salmon will help us continue a thriving, growing and loving orthodox ministry in Washington.”

==============================

Massachusetts Episcopal Diocese to Give Up on Marriages? (Mohler, 061009)

Here is an interesting take on the crisis in the Episcopal Church — the church’s Massachusetts diocese may just quit marriage altogether.

As The Boston Globe reported Sunday:

In a novel approach to the tensions that have accompanied the same-sex marriage debate in many religious denominations, the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts this month will consider getting out of the marriage business.

A group of local Episcopal priests, saying that the gay marriage debate has intensified their longtime concern about acting as agents of the state by officiating at marriages, is proposing that the Episcopal Church adopt a new approach. Any couples qualified to get married under state law could be married by a justice of the peace, and then, if they want a religious imprimatur for their marriage, they could come to the Episcopal Church seeking a blessing from a priest.

The approach, radical for the United States, is commonly practiced in Europe. The Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts, which covers the eastern part of the state, has scheduled a vote in three weeks, at its 221st annual convention. A similar proposal was tabled at the Episcopal Church’s general convention this summer; in Massachusetts, it is thought to have a better chance of passage because the clergy is more liberal.

Episcopal priests in Massachusetts have been particularly engaged in the issue of gay marriage, because the diocese here has been strongly supportive of gay rights, but the national church’s regulations define marriage as a heterosexual institution. The local bishop, M. Thomas Shaw , a supporter of same-sex marriage, has decreed that local Episcopal priests cannot sign the marriage licenses of same-sex couples, but can bless those couples after they are legally married by clergy of another denomination or by a civil official.

“I feel this is a way to equalize an inequity in what Episcopal clergy can do for gay folks and straight folks,” said the Rev. Margaret (Mally) E. Lloyd , rector of Christ Church in Plymouth. Lloyd is one of five Episcopal priests sponsoring the resolution.

The most interesting twist in all this is the fact that those pushing for this division of marriage and church blessing are not opposed to the state’s definition of marriage. To the contrary, they are opposed to their own church’s definition of marriage. They want to hand marriage to the state alone in order to rescue marriage from their own church. Then, given the permissive policy of their bishop, they can “bless” the marriages their own church does not allow to be performed.

A split between the secular and ecclesiastical dimensions of marriage is conceivable on many grounds and is an interesting question for both sides in the same-sex marriage debate. But who would have guessed that the first move on this front would come from church leaders who prefer the state’s definition of marriage to that of their own church?

==============================

Episcopalians to consecrate female bishop (Washington Times, 061102)

Episcopal Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, a former oceanographer who still pilots her own plane, will be consecrated the world’s first female presiding bishop Saturday morning at the Washington National Cathedral.

Since her election June 18 at the Episcopal General Convention in Ohio, an unprecedented seven Episcopal dioceses have declared that they will not accept her leadership because she allowed same-sex blessings during her 2001-06 tenure as bishop of Nevada.

Her 2003 vote in favor of V. Gene Robinson, the denomination’s first openly homosexual bishop, and her statement that “our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation” in a sermon three days after her election, elicited protest as well.

But that expression “was thoroughly orthodox,” she said in an interview Tuesday. “I was surprised at the reaction. I was simply using an image that seemed most appropriate to the text.”

About 3,200 people will attend the installation ceremony of a woman whom Glamour magazine named one of its 12 “women of the year” for her place as “world’s most prominent female religious leader.”

“The bulk of this church is healthy and vibrant,” the bishop said Tuesday. “A small portion is concerned about issues of sexuality at this instant.”

Bishop Jefferts Schori’s consecration will elevate her to the status of the most senior woman in the 77-million-member worldwide Anglican Communion. She will represent the Episcopal Church at international gatherings, including a February meeting in Tanzania of the world’s 38 Anglican archbishops. Twenty of these archbishops have released a statement saying they will not recognize her and suggested the U.S. church appoint an alternate.

Nevertheless, Bishop Jefferts Schori, 52, has “high hopes” for the Tanzania meeting, adding that Kenyan Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi — one of the 20 — received her in his diocese three years ago.

“I imagine we will start by greeting each other and learning about each others’ contexts,” she said. “Unless we can build some kind of human relationship, it’s very difficult to build the trust necessary for real dialogue.

“It’s very easy to characterize someone wherever on the spectrum from what one reads in print and on the Internet. One gets a fuller perspective face to face, an incarnate encounter. I hope we can build three-dimensional pictures of each other.”

However, Archbishop Nzimbi will be one of four Anglican prelates conducting a Nov. 15 meeting in Falls Church for leaders of seven U.S. dioceses refusing to recognize Bishop Jefferts Schori’s leadership. Those dioceses have also asked Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to name an alternate.

“I think the archbishop of Canterbury is clear that is not his role,” said the presiding bishop-elect, who met with the archbishop last week in London, “and that he expects this church to resolve its own issues.”

She hopes to concentrate on winning the young back to the church, citing Bronx musician Timothy Holder’s “hip-hop Mass” and a Eucharist ceremony based on music by the pop group U2 as examples.

From 1993 to 2003, however, her Nevada diocese only grew 2.3 percent while the state’s population mushroomed by 66.2 percent. Only 2,500 people attend Sunday services in her diocese, she said, because its church planners concentrated their energies on rural parishes instead of the booming suburbs of Reno and Las Vegas.

Also, “it was a place in significant conflict when I arrived,” she said. “There were major challenges in terms of resources and geography.”

However, a Hispanic mission she oversaw during her time in the late 1990s as an associate rector at the Episcopal Church of the Good Samaritan in Corvallis, Ore., collapsed during her tenure there. Jane Stoltz, the parish secretary, attributed its failure to a rival Catholic parish willing to siphon off members who were not enthusiastic about female priests.

“We love Katharine,” said the secretary, who is one of 39 members of Good Shepherd planning to attend Saturday’s ceremony. “The truth is that she is eminently qualified. She is a gifted, brilliant, talented person. She has wonderful leadership qualities. She is absolutely the person the Episcopal Church needs at this particular time.”

==============================

Gay Controversies Overshadow Installment of First Female Episcopal Head (Christian Post, 061106)

WASHINGTON – Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori took office as the first female presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church on Saturday amid controversies over her views of homosexual relations and the Ted Haggard scandal.

An elaborate investiture ceremony at the Washington National Cathedral that included flying streamers, multicolored robes, and organ accompanied hymns welcomed Jefferts Schori as the top Episcopal leader as well as the first woman priest to head an Anglican province.

Jefferts Schori’s installment has caused further division in the already divided Episcopal Church with seven conservative Episcopal dioceses rejecting her leadership. The dioceses oppose the new presiding bishop’s support of ordaining gays and permitting blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples among other reasons.

She had said in an interview with the Associated Press that she believes homosexuality is “how one is created” and the Church should help gays and lesbians find “holy ways of living in relationship.”

In 2003, she voted for the election of the denomination’s first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

During Saturday’s installment ceremony, Jefferts Schori recognized the division within the U.S. Episcopal Church and responded, “If some in this church feel wounded by recent decisions, then our salvation or health as a body is at some hazard.” She called for members to seek “healing and wholeness.”

Meanwhile, the Ted Haggard sex scandal has shocked the nation. Haggard, who is the president of the influential National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), was accused by a male escort last week of paying him for sex for three years and for use of methamphetamine to enhance the experience.

Haggard was forced to permanently resign from his position as senior pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs on Saturday after the church’s independent investigation board found him guilty “without a doubt” of “sexually immoral conduct,” according to AP.

As the head of NAE, Haggard had been a spokesperson for traditional marriage and had condemned homosexuality. Haggard stepped down as NAE president on Thursday.

The 14,000-membered New Life Church, founded by Haggard, said that it will continue to investigate the extent of Haggard’s sexual misconduct.

The former NAE president had denied the accusation and said he paid for a massage and for methamphetamine but did not have sex with the male escort nor used the drug.

==============================

Pope, Anglican Head to Hold Historic Meeting (Christian Post, 061107)

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, spiritual leader of the world’s more than 70 million Anglicans, will make his first official visit to Pope Benedict XVI on Nov. 23 at the Vatican, Church sources announced last Friday.

The meeting will have particular significance as this year sees the 40th anniversary of the historic meeting between former Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey and Pope Paul VI in 1966.

That was the first formal meeting between the heads of the two church bodies since England’s King Henry VIII broke with Rome in the 16th Century.

The recent decades have seen both church bodies make considerable efforts to reconcile their differences, although during the last 10 years relations have been strained over the issue of women priests and homosexual bishops.

In particular, the blessing of same-sex unions in Canada’s Anglican Church and moves to ordain women bishops in the Church of England are two issues that have driven a wedge between Anglicans and Catholics in recent times.

The Catholic Church has been working since the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) to try to overcome the splits in Christianity with Anglicans, Protestants and Orthodox.

Williams in his last visit to a pontiff in 2003 was warned by the late Pope John Paul II that allowing openly homosexual clergy in the Anglican Communion was a “serious difficulty” on the path to Christian unity.

The consecration of the openly gay Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003 by the Episcopal Church has brought the Anglican Communion to the brink of schism. Meanwhile Global South primates have suggested that liberal Episcopalians form their own church.

The ordination of women priests has long been a sore point in Catholic-Anglican relations. The Church of England, mother church of world Anglicanism, approved the ordination of women priests in 1992 while the governing body of the Church of England voted to allow women to be bishops last July.

The Episcopal Church approved the ordination of women priests and bishops in 1976. It installed its first woman primate on Saturday when Bishop of Nevada Katharine Jefferts Schori was made presiding bishop.

==============================

Conservative Episcopalians Moving Toward Break with Church (Christian Post, 061117)

FAIRFAX, Va. (AP) — Two of the most historically significant parishes in the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia are moving toward breaking with the national church because of differences over the Bible and sexuality.

The vestries, or boards of directors, of Truro Church in Fairfax and The Falls Church in Falls Church have voted independently to recommend the parishes split from The Episcopal Church, according to spokesmen for each parish. Congregants in both parishes will vote between Dec. 10 and 16 whether to approve a break.

Truro Church and The Falls Church both grew from Truro Parish, which was created in 1732. George Washington served as a lay leader in both congregations.

The Episcopal Church is at the center of a fight within the global Anglican fellowship over whether Anglicans should stick to the traditional view that gay sex violates Scripture.

In 2003, Episcopalians consecrated the first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, causing an uproar throughout the 77 million-member Anglican Communion. Robinson’s supporters believe the Bible’s social justice teachings allow committed gay relationships.

The Episcopal Church is the U.S. wing of the communion, which is now at risk of splitting apart. While conservatives are a minority in the U.S. church, their protests have had an impact.

Between 2003 and 2005, The Episcopal Church lost nearly 115,000 members nationally and nearly half those losses stem from parish conflicts over Robinson’s consecration, according to Kirk Hadaway, the denomination’s director of research. Membership in the church is now about 2.21 million, said Hadaway, who was quoted by The Christian Century magazine.

Meanwhile, the conservative Diocese of San Joaquin, based in Fresno., Calif., will vote at its convention Dec. 1-2 whether to fully break from the national denomination and align directly with an Anglican branch overseas. If the convention votes yes, it will be the first Episcopal diocese in the United States to completely split from the U.S. church.

The San Joaquin diocese rejects ordination of gays and women. On Nov. 4, The Episcopal Church installed its first woman presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori.

==============================

New Anglican Parish Birthed Outside of ECUSA (Christian Post, 061121)

An interdenominational church in Richmond, Va. started a new Anglican congregation under the oversight of an offshore bishop. The church plant is one of a number of new congregations that was never a part of the Episcopal Church.

Eternity Anglican Church had its first official worship service early this month with more than 75 people representing over 25 nations. Its vision is “Many Nations, One Communion” and is now part of the Anglican Communion Network’s International Conference under the Anglican Diocese of Luweero in the Province of Uganda.

The daughter church of Eternity Church, the new Anglican parish is one of some 20 to 30 new church plants that the conservative Network has made in the last 18 months.

“We have a lot of church plants that have left ECUSA,” said Anglican Communion Network spokesperson Jenny Noyes, who added that the church plants have been reformed as Anglican parishes with oversight from bishops in the worldwide Anglican Communion. “This plant (Eternity Anglican) never was a part of ECUSA.”

Although the Anglican Communion Network - now comprised of over 900 parishes apart from the ECUSA -was established early 2004, church plants did not start until the issue of Episcopal oversight was resolved. Once Anglican bishops from overseas such as Uganda began offering oversight, the Network started the work of carrying on their mission and extending God’s kingdom.

“A lot of people want to continue to worship ... and carry on the mission of the church faithful to the gospel,” said the Rev. Tom Herrick, director of the Church Planting Initiative for the Network. “In the Episcopal Church, they feel they can’t do that.”

“We’re just trying to pursue the work of extending God’s kingdom,” he added.

Eternity Anglican Church is unique in that it shares its lead pastor with the parent church and its facility with two other congregations - one being interdenominational and the other, African-American. And they all consider themselves part of the same family, according to a news release.

The head pastor is the Rev. David Singh, an Anglican priest ordained in the Diocese of Madras, Church of South India. Although he started an interdenominational congregation three years ago, Singh wanted to function again within the Anglican Communion, as Herrick said, while bringing different congregations together.

With a desire to plant an Anglican parish under the conservative Anglican Communion Network rather than the Episcopal Church currently wracked over homosexuality, Singh contacted Herrick early this year and conversations led to the birth of Eternity Anglican Church months later.

Meanwhile, two parishes are set to vote on splitting from the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia.

==============================

Episcopal Head Warns Bishop of Hazards in Split (Christian Post, 061121)

Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori warned the leader of a California diocese of the consequences of his moving toward a split from the U.S. Anglican body.

The conservative Diocese of San Joaquin is on the verge of a vote, Dec. 1-2, that may make it the first Episcopal diocese in the United States to completely separate from the U.S. church. Less than two weeks before the vote, newly installed Jefferts Schori addressed a letter to the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield of the diocese asking him to consider the hazard that he will be putting many people, including himself, in.

After hearing reports that Schofield urged delegates to take action to leave the Episcopal Church, Jefferts Schori wrote that the bishop would be violating his ordination vows. In a letter dated Nov. 20, she noted that he took vows three times over the past 30 or more years to uphold the “doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church.”

“Your public assertion that your duty is to violate those vows puts many, many people at hazard of profound spiritual violence,” she wrote, according to the Episcopal News Service. “I urge you, as a pastor, to consider that hazard with the utmost gravity.”

While acknowledging Schofield’s personal disagreements with some of the decisions made by the General Conventions during that time period, Jefferts Schori recommended that he instead renounce his order in the Episcopal Church and go elsewhere.

The General Convention approved the consecration of an openly gay bishop of New Hampshire in 2003 and the election of Jefferts Schori, who supports homosexuality, in 2006 as the new presiding bishop for the body.

“We now have two separate religions in the Episcopal Church,” Schofield told parishioners last week, according to Bakersfield Gazette. “The Episcopal Church has become an apostate to the point of heresy.”

“You people need to be prepared for the battle of a lifetime,” he added, noting that a split could mean protracted lawsuits over church property within the diocese and general harassment by leaders of the national body.

Addressing the issue of church property, Jefferts Schori wrote, “As you contemplate this action I would also remind you of the trust which you and I both hold for those who have come before and those who will come after us...Our forebears did not build churches or give memorials with the intent that they be removed from the Episcopal Church.”

The San Joaquin diocese oversees 50 Episcopal churches in the Central Valley.

Nevertheless, the Episcopal head said the U.S. church body will “endure whatever decision” he makes. The members of San Joaquin, however, she added, will “probably suffer unnecessarily.”

“Jesus calls us to take up our crosses daily, but not in the service of division and antagonism,” she said in the letter. “He calls us to take up our crosses in his service of reconciling the world to God. Would that you might lead the people of San Joaquin toward decisions that build up the Body, that bring abundant life to those within and beyond our Church, that restore us to oneness.”

Some in the San Joaquin diocese objected to the split. Many have also expressed support for Schofield.

Schofield has planned to meet with leaders of the worldwide Anglican Communion to discuss aligning with an Anglican province.

==============================

New Bishop show bankrupcy of ‘religious left’ (townhall.com, 061122)

By Michael Medved

The Democratic takeover on Capitol Hill provides new energy and aggressiveness for the nation’s Religious Left – that faction of clergy and activists who seek to associate organized faith with the liberal agenda in cultural, economic and foreign policy debates. While deriding Christian conservatives for their alleged “intolerance,” “ignorance” and “fanaticism,” the religious leftists manage to turn off most religious believers of even moderate outlook with their own displays of arrogance and radicalism, and their smug dismissal of traditional values.

The controversial new leader of the Episcopal Church in the United States provided a prime example of these alienating attitudes in a startling interview in the New York Times Magazine on November 19th with Deborah Solomon. When Solomon asked about the current numbers of Episcopalians, for instance, Bishop Jefferts Schori took it as a point of pride that her church experienced declining membership.

Q: How many members of the Episcopal Church are there in this country?

A: About 2.2 million. It used to be larger percentagewise, but Episcopalians tend to be better educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than other denominations.

In other words, it’s just those uneducated, unsophisticated Evangelicals and Catholics and Mormons and Orthodox Jews who are bothering with the messy, dirty work of producing and raising kids. Naturally, the Presiding Bishop defends the low Episcopal birthrate as a sign of enlightenment:

Q: Episcopalians aren’t interested in replenishing their ranks by having children?

A: No. It’s probably the opposite. We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth, and not use more than their portion.

In other responses, Bishop Jefferts Schori showed far more sympathy for Muslim extremists than she did for “fundamentalists” within the Christian tradition:

Q: As a scientist with a Ph.D., what do you make of the Christian fundamentalists who say the earth was created in six days and dismiss evolution as a lot of bunk?

A: I think it’s a horrendous misunderstanding of both science and active faith tradition…

Q: Pope Benedict…became embroiled in controversy this fall after suggesting that Muslims have a history of violence.

A: So do Christians! They have a terrible history… I think Muslims are poorly understood by the West, and it is easy to latch onto that which we do not understand and demonize it.

Note that when the good Bishop speaks of the shameful record of violence by Christians, she says “they have a terrible history” – not we. In other words, she instinctively excludes herself when she talks of Christian tradition.

At a time when Muslim fanatics seek to influence politics and mores around the world, conducting tireless conversionary efforts in the European and North American heartland of Christendom, it’s deeply disturbing that the leader of one of the most influential Christian denominations refuses to recognize what many thoughtful Muslims freely acknowledge—that Islamic culture, today and yesterday, has been marred by uniquely warlike and violent elements. The idea that Christians (or even Muslim reformers) who seek to identify and confront those ugly influences merely “latch onto that which we do not understand and demonize it” is to diminish the significance of the worldwide Islamic terror campaign that’s claimed literally tens of thousands of victims from Mumbai to Madrid, from Nairobi to New York.

Finally, Bishop Jefferts Schori casually dismisses the familial and marital norms that most believers embrace and defend as the very essence of Judeo-Christian faith. Instead of traditional pride in a husband and wife building a home together, making heroic efforts and even significant sacrifices to share a life, the Bishop happily announces that she and her spouse occupy opposite ends of the continent.

Q: You were previously bishop of Nevada, but your new position requires you to live in New York City. Do you and your husband like it here?

A: He is actually in Nevada. He is a retired mathematician. He will be here in New York when it makes sense.

In other words, it doesn’t “make sense” for a retired mathematician to be at his wife’s side when she takes on the leadership of one of the nation’s most significant Christian denominations? It doesn’t make sense for the first female Bishop to head this denomination to try to model marital togetherness?

The questions and answers with Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori eloquently (if inadvertently) demonstrate the bankruptcy of the Religious Left. If the movement’s attitudes toward marriage and child-bearing reflect the trendy ideas of secular environmentalists rather than timeless Biblical truth, then who needs religion? Most Americans understand that the purpose of organized faith is to bring unchanging values to bear in challenging and modifying the fads and temptations of the moment. Religion means nothing if we rather begin with fashionable contemporary ideas and use them to alter the fundamentals of faith. Moreover, what’s the point of maintaining any sort of organized Christianity if one of its most prominent leaders will instinctively condemn her own faith tradition while excusing or dismissing the violent excesses of the deadly Muslim enemies of the Christian world?

As with most leaders of the Christian Left, Bishop Jefferts Schori appears be very Left, but not very Christian. Her example shows the way that this new movement of religious liberals amounts to little more than a desperate effort to use the language of faith to repackage the tired ideas of secular, utopian leftism and moral relativism that have failed so spectacularly wherever they’ve been tried around the world.

==============================

Episcopal Bishops Preparing for Potential Lawsuits Over Property (Christian Post, 061122)

CHICAGO (AP) - The Episcopal task force on property disputes related to the church fight over the Bible and sexuality is monitoring the Pittsburgh diocese and others it considers “problems” for the church.

Bishop Stacy Sauls of Lexington, Ky., head of the House of Bishops Task Force on Property Disputes, says his panel is maintaining contact with Episcopalians in those dioceses who wish to “remain loyal to The Episcopal Church.”

Among the dioceses are Pittsburgh; Quincy, Ill.; Springfield, Ill.; Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas; San Joaquin, Calif.; and Rio Grande, which covers parts of New Mexico and Texas. They have each, to different degrees, distanced themselves from the national denomination.

Since the 2003 consecration of the first openly gay Episcopal bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, some traditionalist parishes have split from the U.S. denomination. Church leaders are trying to prepare for any legal fights over the properties.

Sauls says that lawyers, including several diocesan chancellors and a judge on the 11th U.S. District Court of Appeals, are helping the bishops prepare.

The task force has developed a “brief bank” of court filings and legal research to help dioceses with litigation and has also identified potential expert witnesses.

The panel is also working on a position paper “setting forth possible common grounds which could be sought so that the split in The Episcopal Church which is feared by the task force might be avoided.”

Sauls gave the update on the task force’s work during a Nov. 15-18 meeting of the Episcopal Executive Council in Chicago.

The Executive Council - comprised of clergy and lay people - oversees the work of The Episcopal Church between meetings of the denomination’s top policy-making body, the Episcopal General Convention, once every three years.

The Executive Council also approved creating a working group to consider forming an “Anglican regional convocation of the Americas” that would include the Anglican Church of Canada, the Anglican Council of Latin America and the Province of the West Indies.

The Episcopal Church is the U.S. wing of the 77 million-member Anglican Communion. The only other Anglican regional convocation is called the Global South, which includes Anglican leaders from African nations and other developing countries. Global South members are mainly conservatives who have been very critical of the direction of the U.S. church.

==============================

Overriding the Protection of Life? A Shocking Development in England (Mohler, 061115)

The British media reported shocking news in recent days as a major bioethics report is to be released, offering guidelines for the medical care of severely disabled infants. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics will release the report later this week, and will argue that extraordinary measures to save the life of premature and severely disabled infants are not always ethically necessary.

The report from the Council is troubling enough, but the really troubling development is the involvement of the Church of England. From The Observer [London]:

Church of England leaders want doctors to be given the right to withhold treatment from seriously disabled newborn babies in exceptional circumstances. The move is expected to spark massive controversy.

The church leaders’ call for some children to be allowed to die - overriding the presumption that life should be preserved at any cost - comes in response to an independent inquiry, which is to be published this week, into the ethics of resuscitating and treating extremely premature babies.

The decision by religious leaders to accept that in some rare cases it may be better to end life than to artificially prolong it is a landmark for the church. The Rt Rev Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark and vice chair of public affairs of the Mission and Public Affairs Council, states in the church’s submission to the inquiry, that ‘it may in some circumstances be right to choose to withhold or withdraw treatment, knowing it will possibly, probably, or even certainly result in death’.

The church’s report does not spell out which medical conditions might justify a decision to allow babies to die but they are likely to be those agonising dilemmas such as the one faced by the parents of Charlotte Wyatt, who was born three months prematurely, weighing only 1lb and with severe brain and lung damage.

This is genuinely shocking — even coming from the Church of England. Will this church really advise doctors and parents to deprive severely premature and disabled babies of medical care intended to give them an opportunity for life?

From the BBC:

According to the newspaper the Church of England’s submission was made by the Bishop of Southwark, Reverend Tom Butler.

It reportedly said that while it could not accept the argument that the life of any baby is not worth living, there were “strong proportionate reasons” for “overriding the presupposition that life should be maintained”.

“There may be occasions where, for a Christian, compassion will override the ‘rule’ that life should inevitably be preserved,” Rev Butler was quoted as saying.

“Disproportionate treatment for the sake of prolonging life is an example of this.”

Disproportionate to what? This is a tragic, life-denying logic. Why would the Church of England offer such advice? This proposal reverses centuries of Christian moral wisdom — wisdom that has insisted on the responsibility to offer aid and treatment to those most in need and least able to care or to speak for themselves.

We have now reached some kind of end stage in ethical confusion. What else can we think when the Church of England is involved in a proposal like this?

==============================

Jesus Christ is “Our Vehicle to the Divine?” The Episcopal Church is in Big Trouble (Mohler, 061110)

Dr. Katherine Jefferts Schori has now assumed office as the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church USA. A former oceanographer, Bishop Schori is the first women to serve as Presiding Bishop. Her election is one of the most divisive developments within the world-wide Anglican Communion — and just wait until the global communion gets wind of her theological statements.

In an interview with CNN’s Kyra Phillips, Bishop Schori was asked, “So what happens after I die?” Her answer:

What happens after you die? I would ask you that question. But what’s important about your life, what is it that has made you a unique individual? What is the passion that has kept you getting up every morning and engaging the world? There are hints within that about what it is that continues after you die.

There is nothing even remotely Christian about that response. This woman is now the leader of the Episcopal Church in America, and she can do no better than this?

It gets worse.

Here is her answer when TIME magazine asked, “Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?”:

We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.

Jesus Christ is now only “our vehicle to the divine?” Her astounding answer to that question led an interviewer with National Public Radio to ask, “What are you: a Unitarian?” Here is the exchange:

Robin Young [NPR]: TIME asked you an interesting question, we thought, “Is belief in Jesus the only way to get to heaven?” And your answer, equally interesting, you said “We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box.” And I read that and I said “What are you: a Unitarian?!?” [laughs]

What are you– that is another concern for people, because, they say Scripture says that Jesus says he was The Light and The Way and the only way to God the Father.

Bishop Schori: Christians understand that Jesus is the route to God. Umm– that is not to say that Muslims, or Sikhs, or Jains, come to God in a radically different way. They come to God through… human experience.. through human experience of the divine. Christians talk about that in terms of Jesus.

Robin Young: So you’re saying there are other ways to God.

Bishop Schori: Uhh… human communities have always searched for relationship that which is beyond them.. with the ultimate.. with the divine. For Christians, we say that our route to God is through Jesus. Uhh.. uh.. that doesn’t mean that a Hindu.. uh.. doesn’t experience God except through Jesus. It-it-it says that Hindus and people of other faith traditions approach God through their.. own cultural contexts; they relate to God, they experience God in human relationships, as well as ones that transcend human relationships; and Christians would say those are our experiences of Jesus; of God through the experience of Jesus.

Robin Young: It sounds like you’re saying it’s a parallel reality, but in another culture and language.

Bishop Schori: I think that’s accurate.. I think that’s accurate.

A “parallel reality” to the Gospel of Christ? This is a direct refutation of the Gospel. Consider the fact that the Articles of Religion (often popularly known as the “Thirty-Nine Articles”) of her own church obligates her to believe that there is salvation only in the name of Jesus Christ. Here is Article XVIII:

They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature. For Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.

No lack of clarity there.

As Bishop of Nevada, Bishop Schori supported the election of Gene Robinson as the openly-homosexual Bishop of New Hampshire and she also supported homosexual unions. Here is her response to the issue in the NPR interview:

Well, as a scientist and as a person of faith, I– I understand that sexual orientation is a given, for almost all people; it’s not a matter of choice, and in that case, if this is how people are created, then our job as a community of faith is to assist people in finding holy ways of living in relationship, and, uh, that’s what we’re about.

She does not even attempt to reconcile her position with Scripture, the Christian tradition, or the creed and teaching of her church — and she is the presiding bishop!

Many Episcopalians and Anglicans around the world will recognize that the logic of subverting Scripture in order to ordain women to the preaching ministry opens the door to all these aberrations. This is a church in deep trouble.

==============================

New Episcopal Head Believes Bible Does Not Condemn Homosexual Relations (Christian Post, 061103)

NEW YORK (AP) - The Presiding Bishop-elect of the Episcopal Church said she doesn’t believe that the Bible condemns “committed” gay and lesbian relationships.

Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori, who’ll be installed Saturday at Washington National Cathedral, supports ordaining gays and allowing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples.

In 2003, she voted to confirm the denomination’s first openly gay bishop.

For that reason and others, seven conservative Episcopal dioceses have rejected her leadership.

In an Associated Press interview, Jefferts-Schori said she believes homosexuality is “how one is created,” so the church should offer what she calls “a sacramental container” to help gays and lesbians find “holy ways of living in relationship.”

Meanwhile, the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas said it’s not one of the conservative dioceses asking the archbishop of Canterbury to appoint a conservative national leader to oversee them.

Dallas Bishop James Stanton said in a statement Monday that he still disagrees with the direction of The Episcopal Church, which in 2003 ordained its first openly gay bishop and this year elected a new presiding bishop who supports ordaining gays and blessing same-sex couples.

But he said the language in the request from the seven other dioceses rejecting incoming Jefferts-Schori and seeking an alternate leader had “caused confusion and some anxiety” in his diocese.

Jefferts-Schori is scheduled to be installed as presiding bishop on Saturday in Washington.

==============================

Episcopal Property Dispute at Standstill (Christian Post, 061019)

The Episcopal Diocese of Virginia authorized an agreement Monday with those who voted to split with the Episcopal Church to hold off on the transfer of church property ownership.

Departing members of the national church body agreed not to attempt to transfer church property for 30 days, the diocese stated, and both sides promised not to initiate any litigation concerning the departures during that time period.

The diocese’s news release on the agreement, however, came as a “surprise” to Truro Church in Fairfax and The Falls Church in Falls Church – two of the largest and most historic congregations in Virginia that separated from the Episcopal Church, according to Jim Pierobon, spokesperson for the two churches. He said Tuesday morning that no further comments could be made at the time.

After a weeklong vote, at least seven Episcopal parishes voted overwhelmingly to break from the national church body. The U.S. arm of the 77 million-member worldwide Anglican Communion has experienced widening rifts since the consecration of an openly gay bishop in 2003. Further opposition from conservative parishes came with the installment of Katharine Jefferts Schori, a supporter of same-sex unions and the consecration of homosexuals, this year as head of the Episcopal Church.

Some of the breakaway parishes plan to place themselves under the leadership of Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, who staunchly opposes the growing acceptance of gay relationships.

Bishop Robert Duncan, head of the Anglican Communion Network - a growing network of parishes apart from the Episcopal Church, commended the Virginia churches re-affiliating with another branch of the Anglican Communion.

“There is no question that the clergy and people of The Falls Church, Truro Church, Church of the Apostles, Christ the Redeemer, St. Stephen’s, Church of the Word, St. Margaret’s and Potomac Falls remain fully and faithfully Anglican,” said Duncan in a statement.

Regarding possible litigation coming out of the split, Duncan commented, “It is now up to the leadership of the Diocese of Virginia to choose between embracing a charitable parting of ways or pursuing destructive litigation. I pray they can see their way to selecting the first course.”

In addition to the 30-day agreement, the Executive Board, Standing Committee and Bishop Peter Lee of the Diocese of Virginia established a Property Commission charged with addressing matters of real and personal property on behalf of the Diocese. The committee is set up to meet with departing members to discuss property matters on a case-by-case basis.

According to Fairfax County records, Buildings and land at Truro and The Falls Church alone are valued at about $25 million, the Washington Post reported. The two congregations had also voted for a resolution saying that they should keep the property.

In the midst of the standstill, Jefferts Schori released a statement saying the Episcopal Church is not splintering.

“This is a handful of congregations of a total of nearly 7,200, the vast majority of which are engaged in healthy and vital ministry,” she said Monday, alluding to the Virginia parishes that left. According to parish leaders, four other Virginia parishes previously left and two more will decide on a split.

==============================

Breakaway Anglicans Confident of Property Ownership (Christian Post, 061220)

Despite an agreed standstill over church property between the Episcopal Church and Virginia parishes that left the American church body, the breakaway congregations say they have a strong case for the ownership of their properties.

Six of the eight congregations that voted Sunday to join the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) – the splinter group led by The Falls Church in Falls Church and Truro Church in Fairfax – announced Tuesday that they have officially reported the voting results in the circuit courts of their respective counties.

The churches were “complying” with Virginia law, which states that if a division occurs in a church, congregants may determine by vote which branch to belong to and report it to the circuit court of the county. And if approved by the court, it “shall be conclusive as to the title to and control of any property held in trust for such congregation.”

The Diocese of Virginia was informed of the congregations’ actions well before the agreement – weeks prior to the weeklong vote, according to the announcement.

“We have kept the Diocese of Virginia fully informed of our actions and we continue to communicate with them,” said Jim Oakes, senior warden of Truro Church, in a statement.

Filings made to the local circuit court were not “adversarial proceedings,” the announcement clarified.

In an agreement made Monday, the congregations and the state diocese promised not to initiate any litigation or canonical action for at least 30 days. The parishes also agreed not to attempt the transfer of church property in that time period, according to a news release by the diocese.

The congregations, however, expressed some reservations about the “Property Commission” that the Executive Board, Standing Committee and Bishop Peter Lee of the diocese established to address property matters on behalf of the diocese.

“We look forward to negotiating the property issues,” said Oakes. “It is important for us, however, to be able to negotiate with someone who has the authority to reach a final settlement on behalf of the Diocese and the national denomination. It is not clear to us whether this Commission would have the authority to do that.”

Despite the “surprising” commission set up to settle property disputes, the Virginia parishes expressed confidence in the case for ownership.

The church buildings at issue – including The Falls Church, one of the largest congregations that split from the Episcopal Church – were built with gifts from members and not grants from the denomination, according to the church announcement. And the deeds to the properties are said to be in the name of trustees for the congregations rather than for the diocese or the national body.

In the case for Falls Church, the building was completed well before the Episcopal Church formed in the United States.

Meanwhile, there are still members from some of the churches that split who opposed the recent vote. Some 30 members at St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church in Heathsville say they want to continue to operate as an Episcopal Church.

The Diocese of Virginia had announced their support for those remaining with the denomination, especially as some of the churches now have significantly reduced membership.

Regarding resolutions on the possession of the St. Stephen property, one member, Margaret Cox, said they only hold the property in trust for the denomination. The new CANA congregations argue that Virginia law does not recognize denominational trust interests in congregations’ property.

St. Stephen’s Church is one of the six congregations filing a report with their local circuit court.

==============================

When The Blind Lead (Christian Post, 061127)

Editorial

A conservative diocese in California is on the verge of a vote that may make it the first in the United States to completely separate from the Episcopal Church. And with less than two weeks before the vote, newly installed presiding bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori has asked the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield of the Diocese of San Joaquin to consider the hazard that he will be putting many people, including himself, in.

“Jesus calls us to take up our crosses daily, but not in the service of division and antagonism,” she wrote in a letter. “He calls us to take up our crosses in his service of reconciling the world to God.”

While efforts to maintain unity within the body of Christ are indisputably encouraged by the Words of the Lord, so also is the cutting off of sin and those body parts which lead us to sin – as Jesus explains in his sermon on the mount. For “it is better to lose one part of the body than for the whole body to be thrown into hell.” (Mt 5:29)

Jefferts Schori, on numerous occasions, has embraced sin rather than condemn it. When asked by CNN if it was a sin to be homosexual, she said, “I don’t believe so” and added that “[s]ome people come into this world with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender.”

In the days leading up to her investiture, Jefferts Schori further riled Christian conservatives, saying homosexuality is “how one is created” and that Jesus Christ is not the only way to God.

“The Episcopal Church has become an apostate to the point of heresy,” Schofield told parishioners this month, according to the Bakersfield Gazetter.

No doubt.

If there is anyone who is putting their flock in a hazardous position, it’s the Episcopal Church’s new head, not the head of the San Joaquin diocese. A leader, more than anything, must follow and obey the commands of the Lord – not turning from them to the right or to the left.

Unless Jefferts Schori sticks to the Scriptures, the Episcopal Church is bound to fall into a pit – as is expected when the blind lead the blind.

==============================

Episcopal Diocese Votes to Secede From Church (New York Times, 061203)

An Episcopal diocese in California overwhelmingly passed a series of resolutions yesterday that position it to secede from the Episcopal Church and affiliate with conservatives in the global Anglican Communion.

If the Diocese of San Joaquin affirms the move in a second vote next year, the small diocese, with 48 parishes and 7,000 members, would be the first to try to break from the Episcopal Church, which has been torn by conflict since the consecration of a gay bishop in 2003. Until now, only individual parishes have severed ties.

The vote by the diocese is one more step in a carefully planned strategy by conservative Episcopalians in the United States and primates of Anglican provinces, many in the developing world, to unite the conservatives, claim the mantle of Anglicanism and isolate the Episcopal Church, the 2.3-million-member American branch in the Anglican communion, which claims 77 million members worldwide.

The San Joaquin diocese, which does not ordain women, has long been one of the most conservative of the church’s 110 dioceses. It is among seven dioceses that were so disturbed by the church’s decision to consecrate a gay bishop that they have refused to accept the authority of the church and its presiding bishop. They have also appealed for “alternative oversight” to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who as head of the Church of England is considered the “first among equals” among the Anglican primates.

“This is the separation,” said Craig Petz, a lay delegate to the diocese’s convention in Fresno, Calif., where the vote took place. “It’s done. There’s no equivocating.”

Mr. Petz, from St. Mary’s Church in Manteca, Calif., said he was delighted by the resolutions, but an active caucus of clergy members and laity who strongly oppose separation from the church were despondent.

“There is a schism, and it’s a sin,” said the Rev. Rick Matters, a co-founder of Remain Episcopal, the caucus favoring unity. “To secede, we are like one of the Southern states that led to the Civil War.”

The step is likely to provoke legal battles in civil and ecclesiastical courts over whether the diocese has the right to divorce itself from the denomination and over who owns the diocese’s assets. Another pressing issue is what will happen to parishes and clergy members in the diocese who do not want to disassociate from the church.

“This is unprecedented territory and will take the careful consideration of all parties involved,” a spokesman for the Episcopal Church, Bob Williams, said yesterday.

Mr. Williams said one possibility was that the church’s presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, could declare the diocese vacant, and have it elect a new bishop and other leaders.

One resolution passed yesterday changes the diocese’s constitution, removing a line about membership in the Episcopal Church and replacing it with, “The diocese shall be a constituent member of the Anglican Communion and in full communion with the See of Canterbury.”

Other references to the church throughout the diocese’s constitution are removed, and replaced with “the Anglican Communion.”

The Bishop of San Joaquin, John-David Schofield, told the convention on Thursday, “This amending process is the first step in the removal from our constitution of any reference to the Episcopal Church because, in our opinion, they have decided to walk apart from the Anglican Communion.”

The wording of the resolutions was changed at the last minute, leading to widespread confusion among the delegates. But Bishop Schofield told the convention that the wording was changed after a recent meeting in Virginia between conservative American bishops and other leaders and conservative primates from other provinces in the Anglican Communion. The global primates advised the Americans to “remain flexible and allow them to provide the necessary leadership for us,” by holding off on specifying what structure, or bishop or province, would replace the church’s relationship with the diocese.

One crucial amendment effectively erases the borders of the diocese so that it could eventually absorb parishes in other parts of the state or elsewhere in the country that wish to break with the church, Mr. Petz said.

Another amendment says that if the bishop and his coadjutor bishop are absent, unable to act or removed, the standing committee, a lay group, would become the “ecclesiastical authority.” The thinking behind this provision, Mr. Petz said, is that it could prevent the church from taking over the diocese by removing the bishop and coadjutor.

Last week, before the vote, the church offered a compromise for “alternative primatial oversight” to the seven disaffected dioceses. After lengthy talks, a committee of bishops proposed that these dioceses could answer to a “primatial vicar,” and not the presiding bishop, but that vicar would be appointed by and answerable to the presiding bishop.

The conservatives, however, immediately rejected the proposal and called it a ploy by Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori to give them an offer they would have to refuse.

“It’s dead on arrival,” said the Rev. Canon David Anderson, president of the American Anglican Council. “It’s a nonstarter. First of all, who picks the primatial vicar? She does.

“She holds onto all the power, all the authority, and the people who are finding her ministry impossible to remain under are left still under her total thumb.”

But the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, greeted the proposal for alternative oversight with cautious enthusiasm, saying it represents “a very significant development” and that he would give it “careful consideration.”

==============================

Bishop Howard Attempts to Depose Six of “Florida Seven” Priests (AAC, 061217)

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA—The Anglican Alliance of North Florida is saddened to announce that six of the original “Florida Seven” priests have received a letter of deposition from Bishop John Howard of the Episcopal Diocese of Florida on the grounds of “abandonment of communion” (the letter is available here in electronic format). The deposition of a priest or a deacon is an ecclesiastical measure which strips someone of clergy status by nullifying his or her ordination.

All of the priests in question had requested that Bishop Howard provide alternative episcopal oversight in 2005, and were refused. All but one had applied to the Panel of Reference and the Archbishop of Canterbury for protection. All of them are now members of the Anglican Alliance of North Florida and are faithfully serving as priests under archbishops in other parts of the Anglican Communion. Not only have they not abandoned the communion of the Church, they have come under the authority of orthodox Anglican bishops precisely because of their desire to remain in that communion.

In addition, Bishop Howard sent out a letter announcing that he had accepted letters of renunciation of ministry from seven clergy. At least three of these clergy have never renounced their orders, either verbally or in writing, but rather have been accepted as clergy under an overseas Anglican authority and serve in parishes within the Anglican Alliance of North Florida; they have no intention of renouncing their orders and ask Bishop Howard to rectify his mistake.

The priests who received letters of deposition are the Rev. Alex Farmer, the Rev. James McCaslin, the Rev. James Needham, the Rev. Samuel Pascoe, the Rev. Robert Sanders, and the Rev. David Sandifer. The priests and deacon purported to have renounced their orders have asked that their names not be disclosed at this time at the request of their overseas province.

All of these clergy are in good standing in the dioceses to which they belong and are serving under the authority of their respective bishops; by the grace of God, they intend to continue to serve Christ and His Church as ordained ministers and are looking forward to working together for a common Anglican witness.

The Anglican Alliance of North Florida was formed in the fall of 2005 to gather together biblically faithful churches in the Anglican tradition for a common witness. The Alliance currently comprises 17 churches in North Florida, including Jacksonville, Tallahassee, Gainesville, and other cities. The goal of the Alliance is to represent orthodox Anglicanism in our area, and to work to increasingly combine our resources for common ministry and mission under the worldwide Anglican Communion.

==============================

The Falls Church and Truro Church Vote Overwhelmingly To Sever Ties With The U.S. Episcopal Church and Join the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, CANA (AAC, 061217)

FAIRFAX and FALLS CHURCH, Va., Dec. 17 – The Falls Church and Truro Church reported today that both congregations voted overwhelmingly to sever ties with The Episcopal Church in the U.S. and join the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, or CANA.

Of the 1,348 eligible voting members casting ballots at The Falls Church this past week, 1,228, or 90 percent, voted in favor of the first question, or “resolution,” on the ballot about whether to sever ties. On the second and final resolution, 1,279 of 1,350 eligible members, or 94 percent, voted in favor of retaining the church’s real and personal property.

Of the 1,095 eligible voting members casting ballots at Truro Church, 1,010, or 92 percent voted in favor of severing ties. On the second resolution, 1,034 of 1,095 eligible members, or 94 percent, voted in favor of retaining Truro’s real and personal property. Both churches used essentially identical ballots. The specific text of each resolution at The Falls Church follows at the end of this release.

Each of these churches conducted their votes as part of a congregational meeting. They followed steps recommended by a “protocol” for departing congregations unanimously recommended by a Special Committee of the Diocese of Virginia and supported by Bishop Peter Lee.

That protocol calls for a “70% majority of the votes cast” to support separating from the Episcopal Church. It also calls for a second 70% majority vote for departing congregations to be able to leave with their “real and personal property” at a price to be negotiated later.

“This is a new chapter for The Falls Church and other congregations voting thus far and early next year,” said the Rev. John Yates, Rector, The Falls Church. “While we look forward to continuing a productive role in the Anglican Communion, we harbor no ill will to our colleagues in the Diocese of Virginia. And we agree, as Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori has indicated, that when two groups have irreconcilable differences, the pastoral thing to do is find a gracious way to separate.”

“Our churches conducted our congregational votes by following the straight-forward procedures established by the Virginia legislature,” said Jim Oakes, Senior Warden of Truro Church. “Our churches have also held congregational votes in line with the protocol established by Bishop Lee’s Special Committee. We fully expect to amicably resolve all questions regarding the status of our clergy and our property.”

CANA is missionary initiative of the Church of Nigeria and the Anglican District of Virginia. It will provide oversight and a U.S.-based structure for these northern Virginia churches leaving the Diocese of Virginia.

“This has been an extraordinary journey,” said Tom Wilson, Senior Warden of The Falls Church. “It was heartening to see so many of our people take part in this process and speak clearly where we stand. We look forward to our future as active members serving Christ in the Anglican Communion.”

The churches contemplate officially reporting their votes in accordance with the requirements of Virginia law.

The text for each resolution at The Falls Church was as follows:

Resolution 1: “Resolved, that a division has occurred within the Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church, and the Diocese of Virginia; that The Episcopal Church has departed from the authority of the Holy Scriptures and from historic Christian teaching on the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the only Lord and Savior of humankind; The Falls Church shall sever its denominational ties with The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia and affiliated with the Anglican District of Virginia, an association of churches under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a branch of the Anglican Communion; and that the Vestry and trustees of The Falls Church are directed to take such actions as are necessary or appropriate to carry out these resolutions, effective immediately.”

Resolution 2: “Resolved, that if a majority of The Falls Church severs its denomination ties with The Episcopal Church and The Diocese of Virginia, the real and personal property of the Falls Church should be retained by the majority of the Congregation.”

==============================

Statement by Bishop Martyn Minns on Day of Virginia Congregations Voting to Join CANA (AAC, 061217)

Fairfax, VA, 2:00 P.M.

17 December 2006:

This is a day of very mixed emotions for me. Yesterday I saw Sadie Eller come to cast her vote. Sadie is an elderly lady who has cancer of the mouth. She is under hospice care. Sadie is so weak that she can hardly stand but she was determined to come and take part in this historic occasion. Her daughter drove her to Church and we took a ballot to her at the sidewalk. She was thrilled to be able to cast her vote for the future of her church. I felt like crying. There are lots of people like Sadie who make up Truro Church.

I have been a member of the Episcopal Church for almost forty years. It is the church where my wife Angela and I have raised our family, and where I was ordained deacon and priest. We now have one son-in-law serving as an ordained Episcopal priest in South Carolina and a son who is at Seminary preparing for ordination. This has been our spiritual home and separating from it is very hard. But there is also the promise of a new day. A burden is being lifted. There are new possibilities breaking through. I am getting excited about all of the new ways in which we can do mission and ministry. So there are these two conflicting emotions.

It feels very much like a pastoral situation that I confronted around this time last year. The daughter of one of our members gave birth to twin baby girls. There were complications and one baby died within months but the other lived and Rebecca is now a very healthy little girl. Conducting the funeral for Abigail, the baby who died, was hard – they always are – but there in the front row was Rebecca, the baby who lived, and she was full of smiles as she began her new life. I felt a profound mixture of sadness and joy and that is how I feel today. This isn’t really a day to celebrate … that will come later … today is a day to give thanks.

First of all I want to give thanks for those intrepid Anglicans who came to this Commonwealth almost 400 years ago. They came for any number of reasons but they brought with them a faith that was newly formed as both catholic and protestant. They held their first Anglican Worship in 1607 … interestingly there were no clergy present … they came later. It is also worth noting that for more than a hundred and sixty years they existed as a missionary outpost under the Bishop of London. I am grateful that they persisted and helped shape the life and faith of this great nation.

I am thankful for the people who established Truro Parish more than 270 years ago and since then built all the various churches that continue to be beacons of hope. I am especially grateful for the people of Truro Church today who have shown remarkable faith, courage and resilience during times of enormous stress. I am particularly thankful for the Truro Vestry and the Wardens and Staff who have invested enormous amounts of time and sacrificial effort to bring us to this point this afternoon. There are no words that can adequately express my gratitude for the love and support that they have shown to my family and me.

I also want to give thanks for our friends, bishops and archbishops, in the Global South who have prayed for us and stood with us as we have struggled to find a way forward during these challenging times. They were the recipients of missionary zeal in earlier years but now they are returning the favor. They are reminding us of a Gospel in which there is abiding truth and real power to transform lives. It is a Gospel for which they are willing to give their lives. I am very thankful for their faithful witness and robust faith.

I am also thankful for our many friends here in the Diocese of Virginia. This is a family struggle, no question about that, and it is a very painful one, but we have managed to conduct the struggle in a way that has sought to honor those with whom we disagree. That hasn’t always been easy because there is a lot of passion around the central issues –

2. • What does it mean to be Church?

3. • How do we understand Truth and the exclusive claims of Jesus?

4. • How do we best love and care for homosexual persons?

5. • How do we appropriate the power of God to transform lives?

I am thankful that we have been able to wrestle with these essential questions with grace and mutual respect.

I am also very thankful for Peter Lee, Episcopal Bishop of Virginia. This has been a very difficult time for him. I know that these past three and a half years have been very costly. Until some of the more recent exchanges Bishop Lee has always been gracious and has left space for those who can no longer follow his lead. I am especially thankful that he found a creative way for me to continue to provide pastoral leadership here at Truro during this transition time after I was consecrated as a Bishop of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion). I am hopeful that this attitude of civility and creativity will continue as we enter into more detailed negotiations for a way forward.

I am also very thankful for the founders of CANA (the Convocation of Anglicans in North America) – for Chief Delano and the other trustees. I am grateful for Archbishop Peter Akinola and all those who have provided insight and counsel. CANA was birthed as a pastoral response to the crisis in The Episcopal Church. It was designed to provide safe harbor for those who could no longer find their spiritual home there. But now it is much more. CANA allows us to get on with the work of mission without apology. CANA is not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ and the unchanging truth of the Scriptures. CANA is a gift for all orthodox Anglicans in America and it comes with no strings attached. It is a gift that allows us to stay firmly connected to the rest of the Anglican Communion, and the heritage that we treasure, while responding to the particular challenges of mission and ministry in our own context.

CANA allows us to be Church and build gospel communities that reflect the radical inclusion and profound transformation that are the hallmarks of God’s love for the world today.

CANA has a clear Gospel to present and will seek to do it in gracious and loving way so that many will be brought into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.

CANA is not interested in maintaining the status quo but will plant new churches so that we might reach and disciple a new generation for Christ.

CANA is a place where we can celebrate an equal partnership with our friends in the Global South – we have a great deal to learn from them as we share something of our own lives and experience.

CANA is a vision for a church where people of diverse backgrounds, rich and poor, black and white, young and old, can show the world that true unity is possible when we are connected by ONE LORD, ONE FAITH, and ONE BAPTISM.

==============================

News Update from the Diocese of Virginia (AAC, 061218)

Source: Diocese of Virginia

December 18, 2006

Yesterday, Sunday, December 17, eight churches in the Diocese of Virginia announced that a majority of the voting members of the congregation had voted to separate from the Episcopal Church and to join the Church of Nigeria or the Church of Uganda. They also cast a separate vote indicating that they would seek to retain church property. You can read the Bishop’s response to these developments in the newsroom at

http://www.thediocese.net/press/pressroom.shtml.

Churches who announced this decision yesterday are:

Church of the Apostles, Fairfax

Church of the Word, Gainesville

Truro, Fairfax

The Falls Church, Falls Church

St Stephens, Heathsville

St Margaret’s Church, Woodbridge

Potomac Falls Episcopal, Sterling

Christ the Redeemer, Centreville

As of this morning the status of the following congregation, which had been expected to make an announcement, was unclear:

St. Paul’s, Haymarket

Prior to yesterday’s announcement, the following congregations had taken similar action:

All Saints’ Church, Dale City

Christ our Lord, Lake Ridge

Church of the Holy Spirit, Ashburn

South Riding Church, Fairfax

In addition, the following churches are in a period of “40 Days of Discernment” and will schedule similar votes in January:

Church of the Epiphany, Herndon

Our Saviour, Oatlands

The 15 churches above represent just over 7% of the churches in the Diocese. In terms of membership numbers, the 15 churches represent 11% of baptized membership and 18% of the diocesan average Sunday attendance of 32,000 as reported in annual parochial reports. In terms of financial support for the Diocese, in 2006 the 15 churches pledged $41,000 to the diocesan operating budget, nearly half of which came from one church, All Saints’, Dale City.

As Bishop Lee wrote in his statement yesterday, he has called a special meeting of the Executive Board and Standing Committee today where they are expected to review the full range of options, paying particular attention to the pastoral care of those Episcopalians who remain in these churches following the congregational votes and who do not wish to leave the Episcopal Church.

==============================

Diocese of Fort Worth Convention Approves APO Request & Withdrawal from Province VII (AAC, 061218)

Diocese of Fort Worth

Source: Diocese of Fort Worth

November 18, 2006

Election Results of the Diocese of Fort Worth’s 24th Diocesan Convention

Friday and Saturday, Nov. 17 & 18, 2006

at St. Peter & St. Paul Episcopal Church, Arlington

Resolution 1: The Appeal for Alternative Primatial Oversight • adopted

Clerical order: 51 for (80%)• 12 against • 2 not voting

Lay order: 102 for (82%) • 21 against • 1 abstention

Be it resolved this 24th Annual Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth endorses and affirms the appeal made to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates of the Anglican Communion by the Standing Committee and Bishop of our diocese for Alternative Primatial Oversight and pastoral care.

_________

Resolution 2: Withdrawing Consent for Membership in Province VII • adopted

Clerical order: 51 for (80%)• 12 against • 2 not voting

Lay order: 98 for (79%) • 25 against • 3 abstentions

Be it resolved this 24th Annual Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth endorses, affirms and ratifies the decision of the Standing Committee of this diocese on July 24, 2006, to withdraw its consent, pursuant to Article VII of the Constitution of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, to be included in the Seventh Province of the Episcopal Church.

==============================