VIRTUEONLINE Digest - 21 Nov 2005 to 29 Nov 2005 (#2005-55) November 29, 2005 There are 20 messages totalling 2776 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. VirtueOnline Viewpoints - November 29, 2005 2. ECUSA: Can Duncan's & Robinson's Worldviews Be Reconciled? 3. PENNSYLVANIA: Diocese Rejects 2006 Budget, Mandatory Assessments 4. FLORIDA: Orthodox Rector Receives Pastoral Directive from Florida Bishop 5. FLORIDA: Attorney Responds to Bishop Howard's Letter to Pascoe 6. MASSACHUSETTS: Bishop Shaw Celebrates Eucharist at Gay Society Wedding 7. LONDON: Sacked Clergyman Appeals to Archbishop 8. BINGHAMTON, NY: Owego rector denies finance allegations 9. LEXINGTON, KY: Maysville Episcopal church leaders resign 10. LONDON: 'Signatories' of Akinola letter say they didn't sign 11. An Open Letter from Association for Church Renewal Leaders 12. STOCKHOLM: Anglican bishop criticizes Vatican over gays 13. ENGLAND: Catholics warn C of E over women bishops 14. FORWARD IN FAITH North America Report - 2005 Assembly 15. SPRINGFIELD, MO: Ozarks group leaves U.S. Episcopalians 16. Most Americans Feel Religion is 'Under Attack,' Poll Shows 17. ROCHESTER, N.Y.: Church refuses to hand over keys to diocese 18. As Eye See It: Battle rages, God winning - by Norman Henderson 19. As Eye See It: The Gay Invention - by R.V. Young 20. Devotional : THE DOORKEEPER - by Ted Schroder ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:38:46 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: VirtueOnline Viewpoints - November 29, 2005 "The lies are just more and more blatant every day. There is one standard of doctrine, and that is the Word of God, which Martin Luther said "cannot lie or deceive", and which Cranmer said "contayneth alle Thynges necessarie unto saluacion and in there is no uenomous Meate." Hooker said, "God doth not lie." Blasphemy is a man and his wife celebrating a special mass in celebration of their divorcing so that he could pursue homosexual relationships. It's a man praying to Hecate and Hermes. The Church is not about process, structure and hierarchy. It's about the Word and the Sacraments." Kenneth Howes, Trinity Theological Seminary, Illinois. By David W. Virtue http://www.virtueonline.org Dear Brothers and Sisters, The heat got turned up a notch on Nigerian Primate Peter Akinola this week when a third Primate, Archbishop Drexel Gomez (West Indies) the Primate of the West Indies, described the letter sent out by the African leader as "an act of impatience and a disrespect for process. Unfortunately we never had a discussion of the letter. It was just circulated along with other documents - we only had 40 minutes to meet and were only told about the background to it." Are we seeing a break in the ranks among orthodox primates over Akinola's impetuosity? No. What we are seeing is the growing pains of Global South orthodox primates emerging out of the shadow of Western liberal captivity, flexing their muscles and bumping into one another as they do so. One should not read more into than that. That Archbishop Akinola is a little mad at the West is now all too predictable, that he wants to disassociate himself from western revisionism is understandable, but clearly he has emerged as the leader of the Global South primates. Less well known is the fact that while he has become the front man for orthodoxy in the Anglican Communion, behind the scene is another leader. Archbishop Gomez is a careful, thoughtful, reflective and articulate Anglo-Catholic who understands evangelicals and knows which way the wind is blowing. He knows Frank Griswold and how he thinks and can articulate his heresies better than most bishops. At the recent Anglican Hope conference in Pittsburgh, it was Gomez along with archbishops Yong Ping Chung (Southeast Asia) and Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda) who were sent to answer questions from the media at a press conference. Akinola was notably absent. Akinola's blast, "you are either in the ECUSA or the Network" had sent the media into a headline frenzy about how the communion was going to split and more. But the idea of two communions is not going to happen. What is being called schism is much more complicated than that. It was Gomez who said in answer to a question about the possibility of schism that Dr. Williams had no legal authority to throw the Canadians or the Americans out of the Communion; his (Williams') power was not that of the pope. Without committing himself or the future of Anglicanism to anything more, Gomez carefully deflected the question. Such is the man's brilliance. He is shrewd, careful and should never be underestimated. He, along with Archbishop Greg Venables orchestrated the new regional body CAPAC - the Council of Anglican Provinces of the Americas and Caribbean which, modeling itself on CAPA - the African equivalent, and together they now form an orthodox pincer movement around The Episcopal Church. Nor should one underestimate the Archbishop of Canterbury. A story from the Church Times ran a headline, "Dr Williams hopes for 'Lambeth-lite'. A group of eight Primates, bishops, and lay people from across the Communion that make up the Lambeth design group along with Dr Williams, will consider radical changes to the 2008th Lambeth conference which could lower the chances of conflict. Dr Williams is already on record as saying that he wants a "Lambeth-lite", with fewer resolutions, Sue Parks, manager of the conference, said this week. Commentators suggested that Dr Williams had to hold his ground concerning the Lambeth Conference and the Anglican Communion. Global South leaders last week argued that the American and Canadian provinces should not be invited unless they "truly repent". Canon Andrew Deuchar, Rector of All Saints', Nottingham, and a former secretary for Anglican affairs at Lambeth, said this week that leaders across the Communion were not reflecting what their people thought. "I think the Archbishop has got to stand firm. Of course there will be people who will walk away; but, from my knowledge of the Anglican Communion, most will want to stay part of it. People certainly don't want a pope. They still believe in a worldwide Communion, with the Archbishop of Canterbury in an iconic role." There you have it. And the fact that Dr. Williams was graciously received in Cairo at the recent South to South Encounter III by orthodox Anglican leaders demonstrates a deep affection for the man even though their subsequent communiqué made it clear that they wanted him not to separate his private views on homosexuality from his stated public views that he sides with the majority of the communion. There's enough ambiguity in all this to keep journalists on edge wondering when and where the next shoe will drop. BUT NOTHING it seems will stop the revisionist primates from wanting their way. In Canada recently, Auckland Bishop and Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) Chair John Patterson, speaking to members of the Council of General Synod (CoGS) said that member provinces and churches of the ACC would not likely approve a motion that would allow 38 primates around the world to become members of the Anglican Consultative Council. He said there was "a great deal of unease" expressed by ACC members at the possibility of the body being dominated by primates. Let me unspin this for you. Patterson, when he was Primate of NZ found himself among the minority of the primates on sexuality issues. He, like his Australian pal Peter Carnley voted always for pansexuality and against the Global South. So for him to see the majority of orthodox Primates on the ACC would dilute the liberal leaning ACC as it is now constituted and he does not want to see that happen. It was Akinola who blasted Rowan Williams recently about how the ACO (Anglican Communion Office) was captive to Western liberalism and Patterson doesn't want to see that edge lost. Now this is where the battles are going to be fought. Who will dominate the instruments of unity? As they go, so goes the Anglican Communion. Watch for liberals like Patterson to step up the pressure on Williams to bend to his will. Also keep an eye on what Akinola does and says. A MAJOR NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT came this week when An Open Letter from Church Renewal leaders from various North American Protestant denominations, wrote to say that the debate within their churches over biblical standards for human sexuality was entering a new phase. "For decades, revisionists have argued that the Scriptures, properly understood, do not prohibit homosexuality as it is practiced today. Indeed, they have insisted that biblical values of "justice" require the acceptance of homosexual relationships. Increasingly, however, the arguments have shifted. We now see, in several denominations, a new strategy to win the church's affirmation of homosexual acts. This new strategy is less direct. It is offered as a "compromise," a "third way." Yet the effect would be the same: to undermine and ultimately to set aside the historic Christian teaching that affirms God's good gift of sexual intimacy solely within the marriage of man and woman." Among the signers were two Episcopalians - Bishop Robert Duncan (Pittsburgh) and ACN moderator, and Fr. Todd Wetzel of Texas based Anglicans United. You can read the full story in today's digest or click here. http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3305 ON THE ECUSA HOMEFRONT, a number of angry congregations and dioceses faced their bishops over property issues and money with the subtext at all times being the Robinson consecration. In the DIOCESE OF ROCHESTER, Bishop Jack McKelvy declared All Saints Episcopal Church "extinct" because of its opposition to the denomination's homosexual rights agenda. But the parish refused to hand over the keys saying it was determined to keep its property -- despite being declared "extinct". Their attorney for the parish says it is "alive in Christ" -- and anything but extinct. Attorney Raymond Dague, who represents All Saints should the congregation be sued by the diocese, says McKelvey came down on the parish like a "SWAT team." "When the bishop came asking for the keys, we sent him packing with nothing but a handshake," the attorney explains. "We're not going to sue the bishop," Dague says. "Will he sue us? Generally Christians are not supposed to be suing one another. I would hope that he would abide by that scriptural admonition -- but I am a little bit concerned because there was a very thinly veiled threat that a lawsuit may be coming. It's not coming from us." Laurie Swain of Standfirmfaith.com writes that the diocese decided that it wanted to have its cake and eat it too. At their convention they passed a resolution asking ECUSA to respond to the Windsor Report in a very specific way. First, Rochester expresses its "deep desire to remain in the Anglican Communion." They then go ahead and say that their understanding of communion is based on communion with Canterbury, and not much else. So, Global South Anglicans -- we really don't need you or your orthodox Christianity -- so there. "Of course, Rochester only wants to remain in the Anglican Communion under its own terms -- which, according to the resolution includes the right to reject any Communion teachings which they may find objectionable -- especially Lambeth '98 Resolution 1.10. The fact that the Windsor Report specifically makes acceptance of Lambeth 1.10 a requirement for not choosing to "walk apart," appears not to matter one whit to the good folks in Rochester. Next, Rochester claims that agreement or disagreement with ECUSA on its non-Biblical teachings regarding homosexuality should not impact Communion unity. Instead, the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral is all we need to maintain unity. The delegates must not have read the C-LQ before they voted, or they would have seen that fundamentalists wrote its first article -- that communion first of all requires a belief that the Holy Scriptures are the "revealed Word of God." Surely, this is not what Rochester meant. Can such a foundation undergird the entire Communion? Of course not, so, I guess we'll just have to go back to Rochester's earlier claim that Communion with Canterbury is the real source of unity. No wonder we're all so confused!" But that's not all, writes Swain. "Rochester accepted ECUSA's voluntary withdrawal from the ACC but then asserted that ECUSA must be invited to the 2008 Lambeth Conference, and must return to the ACC after 2008 -- apparently regardless of what ECUSA says in the end about the Windsor Report. Again, it doesn't matter what the rest of the Communion may have to say about the matter. ECUSA has the money, so we better be at the table! Finally -- and here's the real doozy -- Rochester proposes that ECUSA clearly state that "we have no desire to impose a uniformity of position either in our own church or the Communion itself..." In the DIOCESE OF PENNSYLVANIA, Bishop Charles Bennison got slammed by both conservatives and liberals at its recent convention. Neither group trusts him any more. He lost on mandatory giving and his budget. You can read the full story in today's digest. It is clearly time for him to go. All it requires is for the head of the Diocesan Standing Committee to make the call to Frank Griswold's consigliore Bishop Clayton Matthews and set the wheels in motion. It was Bennison who said that Jesus was a sinner who forgave himself! How much more blasphemy do you need than that! Bennison has also invited Robinson to ordain several of his deacons, one of whom is a practicing homosexual from New Hampshire. There is no end to the outrage apparently. Also in the Diocese of PA, the Church of St. Asaph in Bala Cynwyd announced that the incoming rector the Rev. C. Rodney Hudgen would be bringing his partner Allen Finley an interior designer with him. With St. Mary's having its very own lesbian rector, Philadelphia's Main Line is fast becoming Sodomy Central. At the DIOCESE OF FT. WORTH convention recently, delegates entering the grounds where the Convention was being held, saw six Via Media protesters greeting them with a sign which asked "Episcopal: Yes or No?" They also sought to hand out some literature outside the doors of the Convention. They were assuming that Bishop Jack Iker was going to take the diocese out of the Episcopal Church and wanted to force his hand into declaring his intentions. "The convention went very smoothly with no major resolutions or controversy. No one spoke on anything related to the issues facing the church at this time," said a source. Here is some of what Bishop Iker said: "We have already begun to learn to walk apart. A realignment of the Anglican Communion is already under way. Our Communion is fragmented and broken, and the Anglican Communion as we have known it, no longer exists. There is no evidence that the Episcopal Church is willing to turn back from the innovations of the 2003 General Convention for the sake of preserving the Communion. Some deputies to General Convention are already saying, "Who needs the Anglican Communion?" Many faithful Episcopalians around the country are asking, "Is there any future in the Episcopal Church for us - or must we find another way to remain Anglican?" Is there a future for us in ECUSA if we oppose the ordination of women as priests and bishops? Is there a future for us in ECUSA if we cannot accept same-sex blessings and the ordination of practicing homosexuals? Is there a future in ECUSA for those who uphold traditional language for God and in our liturgical worship, who believe that Holy Scripture is the ultimate authority for morality and theology, who maintain that to be a catholic Christian means believing only what has been believed always, everywhere and by all? In the DIOCESE OF CENTRAL NEW YORK, things got a little out of hand at their convention. A source told VirtueOnline that Bishop Gladstone "Skippy" Adams was conducting a rather acrimonious clergy conference when someone said that 'this is being tape recorded.' It turned out that the local head of Integrity (which is really only about a one-woman organization,) was the offender. When her taping the conference was "outed" the bishop demanded the tape. He got it. But the diocesan parish in the hot seat is St. Paul's in Owego, NY where the rector Fr. David Bollinger continues (now past six months) to await judgment about alleged financial irregularities. In the latest round he says the bishop is retaliating against him for Bollinger's claim that the diocese mishandled a decades-old allegation of sexual abuse from a former parishioner against another rector. While he waits Judgment Day the parish suffers. Sunday attendance has dropped from 125 to 70. "This inhibition (Bollinger's temporary removal) is having a highly detrimental effect on the morale and finances of our parish and we need you to know this," said Bollinger The Diocese of Central New York which is starved for money and in chaos revealed figures that were given at their convention by the diocesan treasurer showing that a forensic audit of St. Paul's, Owego cost $30,000 where the bishop found nothing amiss, and P.R. Services (Eric Mawer & Associates) - between $4,300-4,400. And in the DIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES, Bishop J. Jon Bruno has allegedly hired a priest who practices astrology to be his new in-house legal counsel. Her name is the Rev. Pamela Tyler, former associate rector of St. George's Episcopal Church, Laguna Hills. "She is a former lawyer and professional astrologer and author," a source told VirtueOnline. "She was in the ordination process in Southeast Florida but Bishop Schofield at the time would not ordain her, as she would not repudiate her astrology background. She came to Los Angeles and was ordained there." She still practices and advises people, although not professionally, VirtueOnline has learned. Here are some links. Mercury, The Astrological Anatomy of a Planet by Pamela H. Tyler. http://www.caerclud.vscotland.org.uk/articles/astro2.html Astrological Psychology Institute (UK) http://www.claruss.demon.co.uk/apae/memberspages/api.htm And you wonder why three orthodox parishes fled that diocese with more to follow. And the BISHOP OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, V. Gene Robinson made Out (a gay magazine's) top 100 list, where he was described as "2005's most intriguing gay man..." next to his picture was the commentary-- "In his first full year as Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire, Robinson faced daunting pressures as conservative Episcopalians denounced him and threatened schism over his elevation. But Robinson stood firm in his faith, as did the 77-million member Anglican Communion, which rejected attempts by traditionalists to punish the US branch of the church for supporting him." In the same issue he appeared again (photo) in an ad for Lexiva, a medicine to fight AIDS. That's our Vicki. REFLECTING growing Common Cause the Anglican Mission in America (AMiA) was on hand at the recent South to South talks in Egypt. Three delegates from the Anglican Mission-Bishop Chuck Murphy, Canon Tim Smith and Mr. Bob Devlin-were invited to participate as part of Rwanda's delegation that also included Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini, Bishop Geoffrey Rwubisissi and the Rev. Ernest Maharo. "There was no resistance or consternation caused by our presence," stated Bishop Murphy, the Anglican Mission's Chairman. "We were fully included in the activities of the plenaries and small group sessions, and welcomed with graciousness." The Anglican Mission members were included at the invitation of Archbishop Kolini and the approval of the working committee that provided leadership for the historic event. That committee, which issued all invitations, included Archbishop Akinola of Nigeria, Archbishop Yong of SE Asia, Bishop John Chew of Singapore, Archbishop Gomez of the West Indies, Archbishop Venables of the Southern Cone, and The Rt. Rev. Dr. Mouneer Hanna Anis of the Episcopal Diocese of Egypt. The AMiA's presence underscored a strategy, courageously initiated by the Archbishops of Rwanda and SE Asia, that has now been adopted by much of the Global South. The creative and prophetic strategy that birthed the Anglican Mission five years ago-of providing canonical residency off-shore, crossing boundaries for the mission of the Gospel, and establishing parallel jurisdictions-has clearly been recognized, embraced and affirmed by the Global South, as evidenced by the eight Anglican Global South provinces that now offer some sort of protection and mission in the United States and Canada. "It is very clear that the Global South is fully aware of the crisis of faith and leadership in North America," observed Bishop Murphy. "They affirm that the way forward is with a clear and specific adherence to our historic faith and to the Scriptures. This is evident as an across the board commitment of the Global South leadership. They are speaking with one voice." The AMiA's Chairman also expressed appreciation for the ongoing support of Rwanda. "It was very helpful, in strengthening relationships, to meet many of the Global South leaders I had yet to meet. I'm also personally grateful for the confidence shown in us by Archbishop Kolini and the Rwandan delegation by including us so fully and completely." ALSO AT the third South South Encounter the Primates decided they needed to establish an ongoing leadership team. Elected were 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. They 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. A number of initiatives were developed that will strengthen their common life, the first of which will be a Global South Consultation on Economic Empowerment planned during 2006. Also established was anew website: globalsouthanglican.org which will provide information and online access to many reports. A SURVEY OF BRITAIN'S elite reveals they are half as likely to believe in God than the general population, and far less likely to believe in life after death, writes Ruth Gledhill of The London Times. Michael Irwin, a retired GP and former chairman of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society, wrote to 1,600 randomly selected people listed in Who's Who. To his surprise, 761 took the time to write back. One Anglican bishop said that he did not believe in the survival of individual "souls" after death. The bishop did admit, however, to the possibility of a non-specific "life force" energizing everyone on Earth. In the DIOCESE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA the defection of clergy and the collapse of parishes in the diocese is continuing apace. Two more resignations were offered and accepted, including one from the vicar of Christ Church Cathedral, Victoria. In accordance with the canons, when the vicar resigns the Bishop fires all the cathedral clergy, so that the new vicar can appoint his/her own people to work with. Pretty much all the conservative clergy in the diocese have taken early retirement or resigned, and the bishop has systematically pushed out the rest, replacing them with New Age creatures of his own creating, wrote a source to VirtueOnline. The bishop is having to recall retired clergy to fill the gaps left by those defecting. "Even I never anticipated that the Diocese of BC would unravel this fast," he wrote. ON A BRIGHTER NOTE Boston's Roman Catholic Archbishop told homosexuals, "because we love you, we cannot accept your behavior." Archbishop Sean O'Malley wrote a pastoral letter last week calling on Catholics to show true love to persons with homosexual tendencies. This is done he said by telling them that homosexual acts are sinful, he said. Otherwise, the bishop continued, we are dangerously "deceiving people." Read the full post: http://www.christian-underground.com/blog/read/index.php?aid_=754 CORRECTION. In my last digest I said that Bolivian Bishop Frank Lyons was refused ordination by Washington Bishop Ron Haines, the previous bishop to John Chane. That was inaccurate. Lyons was refused ordination by the Standing committee under Bishop John Walker in 1980 until they learned that Ecuador wanted him and they wouldn't have to have him actually in the diocese. That standing committee included such "outstanding liberals" as William Swing of United Religions Initiative fame, a grab bag of Gnostic religions looking for a one world religion and peace on earth. VIRTUEONLINE enters December as busy as ever. Even with Advent upon us the news continues unabated. I do hope that many of you will consider a tax deductible donation to this vital ministry, as you contemplate your end of year giving. Every week, 52 weeks of the year you receive the equivalent of a small book (75 pages) of copy. That's a lot of work, so please, if you have never made a donation, please think about it. You can send your check to: VIRTUEONLINE 1236 Waterford Rd., West Chester, PA 19380 Or you can make a donation at my website www.virtueonline.org through PAYPAL. Please be generous. All blessings, David W. Virtue DD A REMINDER: I hope you will consider attending the Mere Anglican Conference in Charleston, SC., Jan. 19 - 21. The list of theologians and planners who have signed on to the concept of Mere Anglicanism is substantial. You may view that list of theologians -- along with others and sign up for the conference: http://www.MereAnglicanism.com/contact.htm#resourcedevcommittee ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:40:24 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: ECUSA: Can Duncan's & Robinson's Worldviews Be Reconciled? CAN DUNCAN'S AND ROBINSON'S WORLDVIEWS BE RECONCILED? News Analysis By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org A recent cover story in The Living Church (November 20) pictures the faces of Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan and New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson set in the Episcopal Church shield emblazoned over which are the words, Can These Two Bring Us Together? The article is written by a David P. Jones who, fittingly, has had a foot in both dioceses, first in the Diocese of Pittsburgh where he served three different congregations, later as archdeacon of the diocese and now he is the rector of a church in New Hampshire. His credentials then, for speaking about both bishops would seem, on the surface, to be impeccable. His article begins by saying that both men seem to have accepted the fact that the Anglican Communion is going to split and that there isn't a whole lot either of them can do about it. But then he goes on to say that "the problem we Anglicans are facing is being caused by the bishops - our own as well as those elsewhere." On that point it is hard to argue with Fr. Jones. But lest one blame the bishops entirely for the problem, it should be noted that they did take vows to uphold the doctrine and discipline of the church and so the onus for the church's direction and theological stability rests on them. It was, after all, a layman in the person of Dr. Louie Crew who got the ball rolling on legitimizing sodomy more than 30 years ago, and the end result, after a brilliant tactical career in maneuvering his behavior out of the sewer and into the pulpit and seminaries, has been to see his homoerotic dreams come true in the elevation of Robinson to the episcopacy. It is virtually impossible for a bishop to discipline a layman, they have very little leverage. So don't blame the bishops entirely for the mess we are in. Dr. Crew had been pushing his agenda to change the church's teaching on sexuality long before Bishop Duncan picked up a purple shirt. Jones continues: "I am also aware that the House of Bishops seems paralyzed and dysfunctional and unwilling to ask for the help it seems to need". Of this statement there is absolutely no doubt, but it begs the question as to whom one should ask for help. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Robin Eames, Peter Akinola - an Affirming Catholic, a Liberal, an Evangelical? Clearly the Pluriform One - Frank Griswold has failed miserably in holding the HOB together, he has betrayed his hand, and the mythical "diverse center" only exists because they either don't want to know what is going on, or prefer to stick their heads in the sand and wish the church would just get along without all the fuss. That wish is dying fast as orthodox churches continue to break away from revisionist bishops and the ECUSA and the Internet exposes their venality. Jones then says that while the orthodox bishops feel marginalized they violate their ordination vows by boycotting HOB meetings, but then he scores Robinson and his agenda which, he says, "is all about gay and lesbian issues....and not much else." The New Hampshire rector either misses the point or doesn't get it. The HOB has two sets of bishops who have very different understandings of the 'faith once delivered to the saints'. One group actually believes that the church is about the faith, sound doctrine, biblical teaching on sexual morality while the other group believes in diversity, inclusivity, pluriformity, multiple understandings of human sexual behavior, and no longer has confidence in Holy Scripture as God's Word written and is true on all matters of faith and practice. So the orthodox believe that it is the other group who have violated their ordination vows and therefore having Eucharistic fellowship with such apostate bishops might indeed be blasphemous, perhaps even impair their souls, a possibility that has apparently not occurred to Mr. Jones. Jones then writes, "both of these bishops love Jesus, both believe the creeds, both have experienced the transformational power of the Holy Spirit in their lives, both owe everything they have to God." Really. Now Jesus made it clear that to love Him meant keeping his commandments, so one is hard pressed to know how a man who was married to a woman with whom he had two children, then divorces her after announcing he was really a homosexual, then takes up with a man and lives with him in sexual sin is "loving Jesus." Where is the "transformational power of the Holy Spirit" in the life of Bishop Robinson with that historical scenario? Fornicating teenagers have a better shot at entering the Kingdom through repentance and amendment of life than Robinson who DEMANDS that his lifestyle be accepted when Holy Scripture and 2,000 years of church teaching say the exact opposite. Jones argues, with some persuasiveness, "Is it not time some leaders put a stop to the venerable but suicidal tradition of Mother Church to condone split after split after split, whenever we disagree about things, and to pretend that slicing up the body of Christ doesn't really matter?" He has a point, the splits among Anglo Catholics in the US now number about 40, but most of these have less to do with doctrine than with personalities and the fever by certain men craving purple power. Jones then calls up as an example President Jimmy Carter, an orthodox Christian who said that within the body of Christ "no differences are important enough to prevent reconciliation." One should remind Jones that President Carter left the Southern Baptist Convention and went over to the liberal Baptist Cooperative Fellowship after falling out over the SBC's rejection of women's ordination and other matters. Carter might not be the best example under the circumstances to support his argument. Jones then calls on the Apostle Paul to strengthen his case that the two men's differences are not worthy of the salvation he proclaims, but then blames both Robinson and Duncan for "damming up or fragmenting the great stream of evangelism for Jesus Christ." That's nonsense. It is Robinson who has dammed up evangelism by invoking the new fangled Episcopal doctrine of inclusion, it is Duncan who has repeatedly called for transformation and renewal as the way forward, based, as he says on repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. As far as the apostle Paul and the House of Bishops is concerned, Frank Griswold's ears would tingle and his body shake, along with 80 percent of his fellow bishops at the wrath the Great Apostle would pour out on this apostate and heretical body. It would be a reporter's heaven. Jones then offers his solution to both men: Reconciliation. He writes: "Both of them should spend the rest of their episcopates primarily to the ministry of reconciliation no matter what the cost." Jones says that for both men to say that their positions are irreconcilable is "rank heresy" and say their failure to do so makes us the "laughingstock in most places." Jones' failure to understand the depth of differences between the two men is theologically appalling. Apart from Robinson's public utterances that includes such morsels as the church will split, it's inevitable, that "Pope Ratzinger is the best thing to happen to the Episcopal Church", and that sooner or later, if not in his life time, lesbitransgays will be fully absorbed, lifestyle and all, into the bosom of The Episcopal Church, flies in the face of the very "reconciliation" he calls for. Jones would like the two men to find a "safe place" where they can meet face to face and talk and pray together. That is not going to happen. The pathology of homosexual behavior demands acceptance, it will brook no other conclusion. Duncan would have to conclude that he was wrong, that biblical teaching is flawed, that Jesus' affirmation of heterosexual marriage and the Torah are wrong about sexual behavior outside of marriage, and every evangelist from St. Paul to Billy Graham had no business condemning fornication, adultery and homosexuality would need themselves to repent of their preachments. That too, is not going to happen. The law of non-contradiction means that one or the other bishops would have to concede they were wrong and that is NOT going to happen. Never in a thousand years or 2,000 years is that going to change. Jones' second proposal is that they should issue a joint proposal calling on all faithful Anglican/Episcopal Christians to commit themselves to find a "better and more radical way...to bear witness to the reconciling and disciplined calling of Christian discipleship." Fine words, but pure fantasy. How can one possibly find a "radical way" if the two men can never agree on what is appropriate sexual behavior? Can you imagine Duncan saying to Robinson, "I agree with you Gene, when the Apostle Paul said that 'neither fornicators, adulterers or homosexuals will enter the kingdom' (I Cor. 6) he could never have envisaged a more enlightened 21st Century approach to homosexual commitment. That is not going to happen. Or take Robinson's latest blast out of Stockholm where he ripped the Vatican document barring practicing gay men from becoming Roman Catholic priests. He said it showed a profound misunderstanding of homosexuality and said the Vatican, or whoever wrote this statement, should spend a little more time listening to its gay and lesbian members rather than putting out statements. "This strikes me as language from people who profoundly do not understand gay and lesbian people ... who know next to nothing about being gay or lesbian," said Robinson. The truth is The Episcopal Church has been listening to the whine of gays and lesbians for nearly 40 years; it has been the lifetime preoccupation of Dr. Louie Crew. Robinson is the fruit of Crew's labors. Finally Jones says the two men should travel around dioceses listening (there's that word again) and heal the wounds of "marginalization, exclusion and judgment". This begs the question as to who has been doing all the marginalizing. It has been the juggernaut of revisionist hegemony that at one General Convention after another gay and pro gay activists have pushed unbiblical resolutions that have swiftly moved from something done illegally, to becoming permissive, but at the end, mandatory. It is the orthodox Forward in Faith folk and later Evangelicals, who have been driven to the margins and who, if Via Media get their way, will blow them right out of the church. One of the worst examples that this reporter personally witnessed, occurred in the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania when Bishop Michael Creighton blasted an Anglo-Catholic parish for wanting to affiliate with the traditionalist organization, Forward in Faith and then refused them that right. His actions forced them all out the Episcopal Church! Jones says the Church needs Robinson and Duncan "to lead us together," and concludes by saying he has no intention of choosing between them. He may not, but hundreds of parishes around the country are doing precisely that, and almost every day more than 100 people leave, because they believe in moral absolutes and they fear their children's behavior and moral character would be twisted and violated by the acceptance of Robinson's worldview. No, Duncan and Robinson's views of truth are irreconcilable; they can never be harmonized based on vague, undefined notions of reconciliation. Robinson has made it abundantly clear that the homosexual train is unstoppable, and Duncan has made it equally clear that he will not compromise or forsake biblical truth. A church divided itself will fall. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:41:45 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: PENNSYLVANIA: Diocese Rejects 2006 Budget, Mandatory Assessments PA DIOCESE REJECTS 2006 BUDGET, MANDATORY ASSESSMENTS. BENNISON OFFERS TO RESIGN News Analysis By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org PHILADELPHIA, PA (11/28/2005)--In an appeal for sympathy, in his opening address to the 222nd Diocesan Convention, Bishop Charles E. Bennison volunteered to resign from his position. While no one publicly took him up on his offer, all of the major initiatives he supported were completely defeated. It was, in essence, a vote of no confidence in the bishop. The defeat of mandatory assessments (taking from the richer orthodox parishes to keep poorer liberal parishes open) and the defeat of the 2006 budget were seen as massive blows to Bennison's leadership of the Diocese of Pennsylvania. It is now apparent that both liberals and conservatives no longer appear to trust him. "It was a 'poor me' tactic rather than a genuine bona fide offer to resign," said a rector who knows the bishop well. It was a bitter blow to the revisionist bishop when a coalition of clergy and lay delegates to the diocese sent a clear message that Bennison's leadership had failed, trust had been lost, Diocesan finances were a mess, Camp Wapiti, viewed by many as a financial albatross around the diocese' neck, unrestrained spending yielding few results, and mounting legal fees over unresolved litigation. The delegates rejected a $4.8 million diocesan budget program and forced the issue of funding daily operations back into the lap of diocesan council. They also rejected diocesan use of unrestricted net assets (UNA) in the budget. In a telling move about how finances are handled in the diocese, the delegates approved a resolution calling for the election by Convention of Finance and Property members. Up till this time the Finance and Property Committee had been appointed by the bishop, and he appointed those who were committed to helping him get whatever he wanted. By making it an elected board with the Standing Committee in control it would therefore make it more accountable. This strips Bennison of his power over how money will now be spent. The issue of mandatory assessments which would have seen larger orthodox parishes footing the bills for ailing liberal parishes was soundly defeated, with the Rev. Gregory Brewer, Evangelical rector of the Church of the Good Samaritan, Paoli, summing up the mood by saying the resolution had no roots in Scripture, and asking parishes to swallow "a coercive tax" despite "rampant distrust of diocesan spending habits" was "a pastoral disaster." The irony here is that a number of liberal rectors also lined up with orthodox rectors to defeat mandatory giving, which could rebound financially on marginal parishes that depend on diocesan handouts to stay open. Many now face the possibility of closure. Some 40 parishes have less than 40 members. David Hammons, a parishioner of Gloria Dei in Philadelphia told The Pennsylvania Episcopalian newspaper that the assessment would hinder his parish's ability to do its own work and that giving should remain a choice not a mandate. Bill Powell, a member of the Standing Committee said he found the budget unrealistic and ripped the bishop saying, "the large cash balances are gone. On the income side, we are counting on increased parish pledge giving but we've only collected 54 percent of parish pledges. How realistic is that?" he asked. "What holds this budget together is the amount from the unrestricted net assets." And a source told VirtueOnline that Bennison and the Diocese have had legal bills of about $250,000 for the lawsuit by Fr. David Moyer and Bennison's attempt to take over Fr. David Ousley's parish of St. James the Less. In his speech Bennison responded saying that if delegates could not support the Program Budget proposed by Diocesan Council that depended on a draw down of $1.2 million in unrestricted assets it would be "the dumbest thing our diocese has ever done." Bennison then whined, "If you feel I'm not leading you effectively, tell me, and if I feel it is God's will, I'll resign." Bennison said there was one thing he would not tolerate and that was cutting the diocese's pledge of 21% to the national church pledge, "because for us as a diocese to live to ourselves is to die to ourselves, just as a congregation that cuts its pledge to the diocese to advance its own mission does to itself. I'm just here to embrace and serve." While Bennison was defeated over money, there was clearly a subtext message on his ability to run the diocese and his leadership skills. At convention, Bennison tried putting his best spin on things saying, "in terms of the level of engagement, it was a rich time and the "best Convention" he had presided over in his episcopate?" Say what? The man's leadership skills and budget calls had been roundly rejected and he calls it the "best convention" ever! But even as he was called on the carpet at his own convention, Bennison seems bent on self-destruction. At a time when the national church and his diocese are being torn apart over the consecration of V. Gene Robinson, the homosexual Bishop of New Hampshire, "Chuckles" Bennison, as he is fondly known, has invited The Sodomite One to the cathedral on December 17 at 10:00 AM for ordinations to the priesthood! Among the ordinands is a homosexual Deacon Mark Kozielec from the Diocese of New Hampshire who is currently serving at St. Andrew's, Yardley, PA. In an Advent II sermon he delivered at St. John's Episcopal Church in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, Kozielec said, "There are wedding plans for Chuck and me and plans for a trip to England." This sacrilegious ceremony will take place in the same Cathedral where Bennison was defeated over issues of MONEY. Will the same "orthodox" priests who voted no, show up at the Cathedral to protest and "vote no" on matters of FAITH? The Christmas Carol of the Clergy of the Diocese of Pennsylvania could read like this: "We better not pout; we better not shout. Vickie Gene is coming to town. We know if he is good or bad; but don't ask us to be even sad. We gave Charles a big fat smash when he tried to take our cash, but don't ask us to be rash." Earlier in the year Bennison invited John Shelby Spong the heretical former bishop of Newark to speak at the cathedral. And this is "visionary" leadership? The catalogue of Bennison's heretical utterances is legendary: Bennison is on record as saying to members of The Church of the Good Samaritan in Paoli that, "we wrote the Bible, we can rewrite the bible." Bennison also wrote in the April, 2003 Easter letter in the Pennsylvania Episcopalians that, "He (Jesus) acknowledges his own sin. He knows himself to be forgiven." In his January, 2004 letter in the Pennsylvania Episcopalian Bennison wrote, "Moses smashed the tablets brought down from Mount Sinai to free the Word of God to be herd not seen." In a conversation between the rector, vestry and congregation of St. Luke's Church, a Forward in Faith parish in Newtown, PA Bennison admitted that the Diocese of Pennsylvania is over churched in terms of buildings since many parishes were built before modern transportation. He indicated that 40 parishes have less than 40 members. Asked if Jesus was the only way to salvation? Bennison said this: Yes. For us Jesus is the only way to salvation because He shows us God's love. Christianity is a unique religion. Through the Incarnation God is one for us. But is Christ God's final act? We can't say that because we cannot see the future. We don't know what God will do next to redeem us. The Bible tells us that the Kingdom of God has not yet come. (Comment by parishioner. Perhaps the bishop has forgotten Luke 11:20). Bennison: "The Scriptures are internally contradictory on the surface. Their interpretation varies according to the needs of the hearer." Asked by a parishioner at St. Luke's the question by one of Jesus' disciples as to "who do you say that I am?" and if Jesus was not sure who he was whether he was the Messiah or not - that he had to turn to those around him to discover his identity, Bennison replied, "Yes, that's the new thinking..." Asked by another parishioner if Jesus is not the only way to salvation then why are we here? Why should the church exist and you have a job? Why should I believe the Bible and trust Christ for my salvation, Bennison replied: "Hallelujah. Thanks for sharing your story. We all have different stories. All are valid." Later, Fr. Larry A. Snyder, rector of the 700-member traditionalist congregation near Philadelphia, said that during a meeting in the bishop's office, in April, Bennison said that Jesus was not the only Messiah, nor the unique means of salvation for the world; and that each of us becomes a Messiah. "Your teachings are in conflict with the biblical message, and therefore do not carry the power of the Gospel, nor present the faith and worship of the Book of Common Prayer as expressing traditional Anglican theology with its appeal to Scripture, the Creeds and the Councils of the undivided Church. Although you have been elected to an apostolic office, your teachings do not bear the authority of apostolic witness," wrote the vestry to Bennison. The rector, wardens and vestry prepared a 14-page indictment of Bishop Bennison that included failed reconciliation talks, broken promises over the Parson's agreement for alternative episcopal oversight and more, which they sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, as well as to Frank Griswold, ECUSA's Presiding Bishop, Irish Archbishop Robin Eames of The Lambeth/Eames Commission, Archbishops Peter Akinola, (Nigeria); Drexel Gomez, (Nassau); Gregory Venables, (Southern Cone); and US Bishop Robert Duncan (Pittsburgh). Clearly the only response left now for the Diocesan Standing Committee is to take up Bennison's offer and ask him to resign. The Rev. Bill Wood, rector of St. Christopher's in Gladwyne, PA and head of the Standing Committee should send a letter to Bishop Clayton Matthews, Frank Griswold's consigliore for bad boy bishops and press for Bennison's resignation. It has happened many times before and it will happen again. The sighs of relief would be visibly heard on all theological sides of the diocesan divide. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 21:42:47 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: FLORIDA: Orthodox Rector Receives Pastoral Directive from Florida Bishop ORTHODOX RECTOR RECEIVES PASTORAL DIRECTIVE FROM FLORIDA BISHOP By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org JACKSONVILLE, FL:(11/23/2005)--The orthodox rector of Grace Church, Orange Park in the Diocese of Florida has received a Pastoral Directive from Bishop John Howard telling him to cease and desist fundraising for a new church he was planting as it had not received his blessing or encouragement. The Rev. Dr. Samuel C. Pascoe had posted a document at Grace Church's website urging his parishioners to fund a new non-profit organization called "New Grace Church", the money to be used to start a new Anglican Church. He also said it had the "blessing and encouragement of the Bishop." VirtueOnline obtained a copy of the letter from a source in the diocese in which Howard tells Pascoe to "retract in full your statement concerning funding of this new congregation as outlined in the October 27, 2005 letter and to inform each donor to this fund that contributions do not have my permission, blessing or acquiescence. Howard also told Pascoe that he had to inform the vestry that this "New Grace Church" was not created with my "blessing" or "encouragement" as stated in your October 27th letter, and that he was to have no further involvement whatsoever with the fund or its sponsoring organization". Pascoe had written a tract titled: Transformation: The reformation of Grace Church, Orange Park." In it he stated that with the blessing and encouragement of the Bishop, he had created a new non-profit 501(c) 3 corporation temporarily called "New Grace Church." Gifts to this new fund are tax-deductible were a charitable contribution, he had written. "This fund is completely separate from the Diocese of Florida. Money in this fund will be used to start the new Anglican Church here in the Orange Park area." "Any money given to Grace Church as a parish within ECUSA will belong to the diocese, whether NGC stays in the current building or not. If you would like to give to this new "New Grace Church" fund, you may do so starting Sunday, October 30." "Within the near future we will be taking pledges for 2006 for both the "old" ECUSA Grace Church and the "New Grace Church." This will give both entities a better feel for what the next year will look like and how much money each group (church) will have to operate." Howard saw this as a betrayal. "Your lawyer, David Dearing, represented to me when we met on Wednesday Oct. 19th, that no action would be taken by Grace Church, or any of the other churches, to fund future ministries as congregations no longer in the Diocese of Florida, except by mutual agreement. You have never received my agreement to create a new entity nor permission to solicit donations. I do not give you or Grace Episcopal Church that permission or consent." Howard then warned Pascoe that he was not to use the church facilities to raise funds for the new venture, make announcements in church, send letters use e-mail distribution lists or give to others to utilize mailing or e-mail lists, or take any action which would diminish your responsibilities of current loyalties to the Episcopal Church. "If you wish to begin a new Episcopal congregation, you must first seek my permission and that of the Congregational Development Committee; If you wish to begin a church of another denomination, you must voluntarily renounce your orders and resign your position as rector of Grace Church." Howard then accused Pascoe of a serious breach of his ordination vows in the statements he had made. The bishop said Pascoe could discuss with his congregation departing from the Episcopal Church (and from Grace Church property) in preparation of beginning a new church not affiliated with the Episcopal Church but he warned Pascoe that he did not have authorization to participate in any money raising for this venture. "This Pastoral Directive addresses core concerns of the doctrine and discipline within our Episcopal Church and this Episcopal Diocese of Florida." Howard concluded his letter to Pascoe saying the Pastoral Directive was a "solemn warning" telling him that it was directed to matters which concern the doctrine and discipline of this church, "your manner of life and behavior." He then gave Pascoe three days to comply with the Pastoral Directive. Pascoe told his parishioners that the situaiton was "rapidly evolving" and to stay tuned. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:07:18 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: FLORIDA: Attorney Responds to Bishop Howard's Letter to Pascoe FLORIDA ATTORNEY RESPONDS TO BISHOP HOWARD'S LETTER TO PASCOE By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org JACKSONVILLE, FL (11/26/2005)--An attorney for the Rev. Dr. Samuel Pascoe, rector of Grace Episcopal Church, Orange Park, has written a letter to Florida Bishop John Howard, excoriating him over charges that the orthodox priest had violated an agreement he had with the liberal bishop. Fr. Pascoe had been accused by Bishop Howard of setting up a new church entity "New Grace Church" and raising funds for it through a non-profit corporation while still legally and ecclesiastically bound to the Episcopal Church and his parish Grace Episcopal Church. Howard also accused Pascoe for violating his ordination vows. http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3293 In his letter of November 17 to the bishop, David P. Dearing said Fr. Pascoe would retract his previous statement, will advise each donor that their donations do not have the bishop's permission, blessing or acquiescence, and he will inform the vestry that the "New Grace Church" was not created with his blessing or encouragement and he will take steps to distance himself from the "New Grace" fund and its sponsoring organization. Dearing said Pascoe will not seek to redirect any contributions made to Grace Episcopal Church. "As rector, he does not have the power anyway for it is reserved for the vestry. Further, Fr. Pascoe has no present intention of creating either a new Episcopal congregation or a church of another denomination. Fr. Pascoe and I believe these actions and assertions fulfill the requests made in your pastoral directive." "I strongly disagree with your assertion that Fr. Pascoe has in any way breached any vows of ordination by the statements of his October 27th letter. The primary purpose of our previous agreement was to provide both clergy and laity with an orderly and above-board departure from the Diocese so as not to detrimentally impact the diocese, its member churches and, most importantly, its parishioners. In order to comply with your request, provisions have to be made in short order. Such provisions necessarily include the dissemination of crucial information to interested persons." Dearing said that when he was with Fr. Neil Lebhar, the bishop and Canon Dunkle, that he (Dearing) spoke openly about the existence of a fund like the one Fr. Pascoe mentions in his October 27 letter. "Neither you nor Canon Dunkle expressed any objection or reservation about such a fund." "I also take exception to your assertion that this pastoral directive in any way addresses the doctrine or discipline of the Episcopal Church or Fr. Pascoe's manner of life and behavior, as required by Canon IV. On the contrary, as a member of his parish, I can personally assure you that all of his actions have been ethical, open and without concealment of any kind." "Frankly, your issuance of this directive breaches our previous agreement wherein you stated you would not take any disciplinary action against any of the sox clergy as they made appropriate preparations for departure from the Diocese." Dearing concludes: "I trust this directive will not interfere with the progression of our discussions as previously outlined. It is in all our interests to not let this issue to side-track us from our collective goal of a just and charitable resolution of these issues without recourse to litigation." END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:07:57 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: MASSACHUSETTS: Bishop Shaw Celebrates Eucharist at Gay Society Wedding MASSACHUSETTS BISHOP CELEBRATES EUCHARIST AT GAY SOCIETY WEDDING By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org BOSTON, MA: (11/23/2005)--The Bishop of Massachusetts, Thomas Shaw, SSJE, a leading contender to replace Frank Griswold as Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, celebrated a "nuptial Mass" for a gay couple immediately after their wedding attended by State Senator Jarrett T. Barrios. The wedding made the society pages of the New York Times. The two men, John Finley IV and Stan McGee met at a service at the Society of St. John the Evangelist in Cambridge Massachusetts, also known as the Cowley Brothers. "Our first date was at a monastery," McGee told Laura Zigman of the New York Times. "Stan thought it was a very bizarre gay date, but we were both interested in theology," said Finley, 35 and a candidate for ordination in the Episcopal Church. "When the monk came by with the holy water I saw Stan take what I assumed was a deep and profoundly pious bow. Later I realized it was because he was wearing a suede waistcoat which he didn't want to get stained," he told the Times. The reporter described Finley as an "affable preppy" from a blue blood Massachusetts family that was staunchly Republican "until the second Bush administration." McGee is a Harvard Law School graduate and a former Rhodes scholar who works as a junior partner in the Boston offices of WilmerHale. He has a passion for Democratic politics rooted in the Deep South and has long been interested in the "pernicious connection" between church and state, he told the Times. McGee said that Finley had more of a sense of faith being a positive force. "He is more impetuous, more Gestalt, more big picture. We're more yin-yang, more complimentary, than opposites. John's all sugar and I'm all lemon zest." The day after their first date McGee sent Finley a dozen red roses; Finley sent McGee two dozen, reported the Times. During a visit to the Finley family in Brookline, Stan's mother commented on a family portrait of Finley's grandmother: "Your grandmother is very beautiful." Finley replied, "With a fur and pearls I could look just as beautiful." From behind the bar came a crash. Stan had dropped a tray of oysters. Both men moved into an apartment in Boston and made plans to wed under Massachusetts law. A civil marriage ceremony paired with a religious service was planned at the Church of the Redeemer in Chestnut Hill, the Episcopal parish where Finley's family are longtime members. On the day of their wedding State Senator Barrios, who officiated at the ceremony, pronounced the couple "fully and legally married". Bishop Shaw then presided over the Eucharist. VirtueOnline wrote an e-mail to Bishop Shaw asking about his involvement in a Eucharist for this gay couple and if this was in violation of the Windsor Report that asked that such rites and actions not be undertaken as the Episcopal Church has been asked to withdraw itself from the Anglican Consultative Council to discern its future. Would you please tell me why you performed this act in contravention to the expresses wishes of the Eames Commission report? Bishop Shaw did not reply. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:08:31 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: LONDON: Sacked Clergyman Appeals to Archbishop SACKED CLERGYMAN APPEALS TO ARCHBISHOP He has brilliant track record, described as "church planting genius" News Analysis By David W. Virtue www.virtueonline.org LONDON (11/23/2005)--An evangelical Anglican clergyman whose licence was removed by the liberal bishop of Southwark after he sought ecclesiastical oversight from a South African Bishop, has a brilliant track record as a church planter, and is "de facto leader of Britain's younger evangelicals." A source in London told VirtueOnline that the Rev. Richard Coekin is a church planting genius, whose church produces more ordinands for London's Oak Hill College than almost any other congregation. "He organizes an annual Men's Convention and Women's Convention, both of which pack out their very substantial venues (the Men's Convention occurs in the Royal Albert Hall - the London equivalent of the Carnegie Hall), and it is vast." Coekin has exercised his right of appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams after being ordained in what was described as a "legal but irregular ordination" by a South African Bishop. "It should be said that he is the de facto leader of the younger evangelicals, and attacking Coekin is, basically, taking on Evangelicalism. The Bishop, the Rt. Rev. Tom Butler, is too intelligent not to know this," said the source. A press release said the Rev. Richard Coekin was Senior Pastor to the fast-growing "Co-Mission" churches of South-west London, and claims that his relationship with Bishop Butler had been "impaired" by the House of Bishops' recent statement on Civil Partnerships. This 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," said the statement. The dispute erupted over the authority of the Bible in the modern Church of England. "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," said Coekin. 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. 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. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:10:12 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: BINGHAMTON, NY: Owego rector denies finance allegations BINGHAMTON, NY: Owego rector denies finance allegations Episcopal church leader says retaliation is diocese's motive BY NANCY DOOLING Press & Sun-Bulletin November 28, 2005 An Episcopal parish in Owego has been without its long time rector for nearly six months while church leadership in Syracuse pursues an investigation into allegations of misuse of money at St. Paul's Church. David Bollinger, St. Paul's rector for more than 20 years, said central New York diocesan officials broke into his personal bank account using identity theft and that Bishop Gladstone Adams' allegations of financial impropriety against him are without merit. Bollinger also said the investigation is being conducted in retaliation for Bollinger's claim that the diocese mishandled a decades-old allegation of sexual abuse from a former parishioner against another rector. "I maintain my innocence," Bollinger said of the diocesan investigation. "And I want this nightmare to end." And at St. Paul's, where Bollinger has been temporarily banned, membership is dwindling while the rector is unable to celebrate the Eucharist and the bishop fails to resolve the issue, parish leaders said. Most parishioners and its vestry -- the leadership chosen democratically from parishioners -- back Bollinger in the dispute and are unhappy with the way they say Adams handled the investigation into Bollinger's discretionary accounts. "We are very much in support of our priest," said Patty Ellis, one of two parish wardens representing the 10 members of the parish's vestry, which handles parish finances and acts in the absence of the rector. She declined further comment, citing legal issues. But in a Sept. 8 letter to Adams, the vestry, including Ellis, said parish membership and morale was strained by the rift. Regular Sunday attendance numbered about 125 before Bollinger was removed as rector on May 31. Now the number has fallen to about 70, the letter states: "This inhibition (Bollinger's temporary removal) is having a highly detrimental effect on the morale and finances of our parish and we need you to know this." The parish is paying a supply priest to conduct services on Sundays. Adams, who oversees about 22,107 Episcopalians in central New York, said he and other diocesan leaders are awaiting an investigation conducted by a private attorney they hired to look into church finances before any decision is made about Bollinger's future. "My hope in the whole thing is that by being diligent, that we'll find out what the truth is and respond to that," he said. The wait has been devastating to Bollinger, who continues to receive his salary from St. Paul's, he said. One of his three daughters is suffering from thyroid cancer, and the stress of the accusations against him has taken a toll on his heath, Bollinger said. Bollinger's wife, Kelly, is a former mayor of the Village of Owego. Bollinger said the trouble began when a former parishioner came forward in 2002 making allegations of sexual abuse against another rector no longer in New York state. Bollinger said he reported the abuse to the bishop, but that no action was taken. Bollinger pushed unsuccessfully for an investigation, he said. Adams said that the alleged victim never came forward to meet a diocesan response team that investigates such allegations, nor was the committee provided with a name -- a process that's a requirement for an investigation. The committee was created since 2002 in the wake of priestly misconduct in the Roman Catholic Church, Adams said. Bollinger claims that the diocese, in retaliation for his complaints that the bishop refused to pursue the abuse allegation, began improperly prying into his personal finances -- a claim Adams denies. The investigations are into accounts handled by Bollinger. The diocese conducted an audit that has not been made public. Financial matters in Episcopal parishes are handled not by the rector, but by the wardens and vestry. The leadership at St. Paul's has been hurt and angered by the accusations of financial wrongdoing because they believe the accusations reflect on their own conduct. They say in the September letter to Adams that they can prove Adams' allegations to be without merit, but that Adams has refused to meet with them. Bollinger's removal from the parish as rector was recently extended for a third 90-day term. Under Episcopal policy, Adams could restore Bollinger to the parish or he could have him defrocked. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:11:01 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: LEXINGTON, KY: Maysville Episcopal church leaders resign LEXINGTON, KY: Maysville Episcopal church leaders resign Action Follows Dispute with Lexington Bishop By Frank E. Lockwood HERALD-LEADER STAFF WRITER 11/24/2005 The leadership of Maysville's Church of the Nativity resigned this week after sparring with Episcopal Bishop Stacy Sauls over ownership of Nativity's 150-year-old house of worship. It's the third time that the vestry (governing board) of a Kentucky congregation has broken ties or been removed after clashing with the bishop of Lexington. Former vestry members yesterday expressed frustration with Sauls and with the 2.2 million-member denomination. "We're hitting icebergs and the seas are pretty rough," said J. Basil Mattingly, Nativity's former senior warden (board chairman). Six of Nativity's seven vestry members quit. Mattingly and secretary Louis N. Browning have also resigned as members of the congregation. Sauls had warned in a Nov. 16 letter to parishioners that the vestry was taking "steps to make it possible for the church building to be removed from the Episcopal Church and from those of you who wish to remain Episcopalians." Mattingly and other former vestry members deny the allegation. Under the terms of a 1989 legal trust, the building currently belongs to the Maysville parish, but would become the property of the Lexington diocese if Nativity ever ceases "to affiliate with the Diocese of Lexington or with the Episcopal Church." In January members of the vestry signed a document terminating the trust. In a "notice of termination" filed with the Mason County Clerk, vestry members said the termination was needed "to safeguard the property of the Parish." They also expressed concern about the Episcopal Church's direction and about the denomination's "future teachings and doctrines." A majority of the board later voted to transfer the church building's title to a new non-profit corporation, 31 East Third Street Inc. (the corporation takes its name from the church's street address.) Most Nativity members were not told about the title transfer. When the new deed was filed, a note was attached stating: "This is a conveyance from a church corporation to its real estate holding corporation. Please do not publish as it just causes confusion in the public." In his letter to parishioners, Sauls said the vestry's legal moves "constitute a breach of their fiduciary duties to the parish and to the diocese. I wish to assure you that steps will be taken to correct the title to the church property and return it to its rightful beneficiaries (the people of Nativity)." In a letter to Sauls days before they resigned, the vestry said it "has never discussed or considered any plans to leave the Diocese." The goal, former vestry members say, was to shield the church and its assets from Sauls. Former vestry members say Sauls and his deputies had threatened to revoke Nativity's parish status, a move that would allow him to fire Nativity's democratically elected governing board and stack it with his allies. In an interview, Sauls said such a move, while possible, would only be a last resort and, he added, would not allow him to take the congregation's assets. The Lexington bishop has removed only one vestry, at St. John's Episcopal Church in Versailles. The vestry at Church of the Apostles in Lexington voted to leave the Episcopal Church. Relations between Sauls and some conservative members of his diocese have been tense, especially since the church's general convention voted to approve the ordination of openly gay priest Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire. Sauls supported Robinson. Many in the Maysville, Lexington and Versailles congregations disagreed. Sauls expressed regret that the Nativity vestry members had stepped down. "It wasn't necessary. It causes pain and I'm sad about that," he said. Mattingly, the former senior warden, says Sauls was difficult to work with, adding, "I don't want to have anything to do with him." The resignations are a setback for Nativity, where average attendance is 15 to 20 people. Among those who remain, Mary Frances Marshall, a Nativity member for 27 years, says the split is painful. "We have worked with them, grieved with them, celebrated with them and we're sorry to see that they're gone. And we certainly welcome them with open arms if they wish to come back," she said. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:11:40 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: LONDON: 'Signatories' of Akinola letter say they didn't sign 'Signatories' of Akinola letter say they didn't sign By Pat Ashworth THE CHURCH TIMES 11/26/3005 A LETTER from Global South Primates to the Archbishop of Canterbury has been denounced by three of its alleged signatories as having been neither commissioned, discussed nor approved. The Primates of the West Indies, the Southern Cone, and Jerusalem & the Middle East have all objected to the letter. One described it on Tuesday as "an act of impatience", one as "scandalous", and the other as "megaphone diplomacy". The confidential letter, a response to Dr Williams's address to the Global South Encounter in October, questioned his leadership. While thanking him for his "unequivocal words" on the human-sexuality consensus, the letter continued: "We wonder, however, whether your personal dissent from this consensus prevents you taking the necessary steps to confront those Churches that have embraced teaching contrary to the overwhelming testimony of the Anglican Communion and the Church. We urge you to re-think your personal view and embrace the Church's consensus and to act on it." The Primates charge the Church of England with "giving the appearance of evil" by not seeking an exemption from the Civil Partnerships Bill. They continue: "We are troubled by your reluctance to use your moral authority to challenge the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. . . We do not see why you cannot warn these Churches now, based on the Windsor report, and your own convictions about unity, that they will not be invited to Lambeth 2008 unless they truly repent." Accusing Dr Williams of "deferring to process", they declare: "You seem to keep saying, 'My hands are tied.' We urge you to untie your hands and provide the bold, inclusive leadership the Communion needs at this time of crisis and distrust." They go on to call Europe a "spiritual desert". Signatories were listed as the Primates of Nigeria, West Africa, Congo, West Indies, Rwanda, Jerusalem, Central Africa, Sudan, Kenya, Uganda, Indian Ocean, Philippines, Southern Cone, and South East Asia. The remaining three Primates present at the meeting - Tanzania, Burundi, and South India - were listed as "Present but had to leave before the final draft was circulated." It seems clear that no final draft was ever circulated. A first draft was given to the Primates with other documents five minutes before the end of a hasty, 40-minute meeting on the final night of the Encounter, Saturday 29 October, as the delegates prepared for an evening planned by their hosts. Nothing more was heard of the letter - the response of one individual to Dr Williams's address - until it arrived at Lambeth Palace in its original form on Wednesday of last week, while Dr Williams was addressing the inaugural meeting of General Synod. Before he had had a chance to open it, its contents had already been circulated on conservative Evangelical websites. The Bishop in Cyprus & the Gulf, the Most Revd Clive Handford, was the first to protest at the letter and the use of his name without permission. In a full press statement posted on the Anglican Communion website on Thursday of last week, he said that he had attended the Encounter with reluctance, but in his capacity as President-Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem & the Middle East, which includes Egypt. "While I saw a first draft of the letter, I was not involved in any subsequent discussion of it. Several other Primates shared my unease. In no way did I give permission for my name to be associated with the letter," he said. "The Archbishop of Canterbury came very graciously to a meeting to which in a sense he could not have looked forward. He gave a sensible and searching Bible study. . . He then answered clearly and straightforwardly questions put by the Conference. We witnessed a man of God responding in a clear and pastoral way with a desire for understanding and reconciliation." The Primate of Nigeria, the Most Revd Peter Akinola, issued an immediate response in the light of "one or two Primates alleging wrongful inclusion of their names in a document they were privy to its formation". Archbishop Akinola insisted: "While every person is entitled to a change of opinion, the incontrovertible and indisputable fact remains that at our meeting in El Sukhna, the first draft of the response was circulated to all present to peruse, and give us any additional input or objection. It is pertinent to say NO ONE objected. All those that responded will see that the final draft reflected their inputs." He described the document as "our collective response" and continued: "We find it pitiable that the media spin is drawing attention away from the deep biblical discussions contained in our response." The controversy, he said, had been brought "by those who would undermine all that we stand for in preserving the sanctity of our One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic faith. They are the ones who are dividing the Church. Of course, anyone who wishes to have their name removed from this letter is free to do so. All formal requests to dissociate will be immediately effected." The Primate of the West Indies, the Most Revd Drexel Gomez, described the letter on Tuesday as "an act of impatience and a disrespect for process". He said: "Unfortunately we never had a discussion of the letter. It was just circulated along with other documents - we only had 40 minutes to meet and were only told about the background to it." He and the Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone, the Most Revd Gregory Venables, had agreed together after the meeting that they could not be associated with it, Archbishop Gomez said. "We were never told it would be made public. I am not at all happy with the present situation." Bishop Venables confirmed that he had been in touch with Archbishop Akinola to express his objections. He said on Tuesday: "I went along to Egypt as part of it all because I wanted to affirm the positive nature of Christianity within Anglicanism, and to see if we can find a way forward together. "I certainly didn't go to have a go at Rowan, who's a good friend and a man I respect enormously. I certainly don't see any point in setting up an alternative Anglican Communion because that in itself would be a contradiction. Anglicanism isn't like that. Even if one side here wins, it stops being Anglican. That isn't our way; it's what keeps us from being a sect." Bishop Handford also confirmed on Monday the haste that had surrounded the presentation of the letter, whose tone he described as "megaphone diplomacy". He said, "We only very briefly saw it, supposedly as a first draft, and indicated that we were unhappy with it both in content and not least in tone. . . A number of us will feel there has been a real betrayal of trust. That doesn' t help at all: it means you have another hurdle to get over before you can do real business again. "But I don't think it's a real setback. I would hope it might even be used positively in that we do establish some ground rules for operating and a little more respect for one another." The controversy over the letter has added to the emerging question whether the Global South is defined by geography or theology. Australia was absent from the Encounter, except for the Archbishop of Sydney, Dr Peter Jensen, who was present as an observer, and has expressed "sympathy with the central tenor" of the letter. Central America, Mexico, North India, Pakistan, and large parts of the Far East - Japan, Korea, Melanesia, Myanmar, and Papua New Guinea - were also absent. "It is impossible to avoid the impression that the term Global South does not necessarily carry the approval of all the people normally associated with that grouping," said one insider this week. Unease about what are seen as Archbishop Akinola's maverick tendencies and growing lack of consultation with Global South partners was also being expressed in several quarters, some ascribing it to his temperament, but others to pursuit of an agenda believed increasingly to be steered by conservative lobbyists in the United States. Lambeth Palace responded to the letter with a statement on Thursday of last week, which affirmed Dr Williams's commitment to the debate called for in the Windsor report, and said: "If this letter is a contribution to that process of debate, then it is to be welcomed, however robust. If it is an attempt to foreclose that debate, it would seem to serve very little purpose indeed." END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:12:29 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: An Open Letter from Association for Church Renewal Leaders An Open Letter from Association for Church Renewal Leaders And you, who once were estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he [Christ] has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him, provided that you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which has been preached to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister. (Colossians 1:21-23, RSV) Sisters and Brothers in the Lord: We, renewal leaders in various North American Protestant denominations, write you with thanksgiving for Christ's great work of reconciliation and sanctification. It is our only hope in life and death. We encourage you to remain steadfast in your faith in Christ's work, looking to him as the sole source of unity and purity within his church. There are constantly shifting alternatives that offer a false, cheap peace. But we urge you not to let go of the true and costly peace won by Jesus Christ. As many of us gathered October 17-18 in Arlington, Virginia, we noted a shifting situation in several denominations. This letter is our attempt to alert you to these new developments. The debate within our churches over biblical standards for human sexuality may be entering a new phase. For decades, revisionists have argued that the Scriptures, properly understood, do not prohibit homosexuality as it is practiced today. Indeed, they have insisted that biblical values of "justice" require the acceptance of homosexual relationships. Increasingly, however, the arguments have shifted. We now see, in several denominations, a new strategy to win the church's affirmation of homosexual acts. This new strategy is less direct. It is offered as a "compromise," a "third way." Yet the effect would be the same: to undermine and ultimately to set aside the historic Christian teaching that affirms God's good gift of sexual intimacy solely within the marriage of man and woman. We stand opposed to this false "third way," with the same firmness with which we opposed the earlier attempts to re-interpret the Bible. We warn you to beware such "compromises" that give away too much. The essence of the new strategy is this: to leave in church law books the orthodox standards calling Christians to fidelity in marriage and sexual abstinence in singleness, while inventing procedural devices permitting church bodies and officials to disregard the standards at will. This strategy has been proposed-and, in some cases, functionally adopted-in the Episcopal Church, the American Baptist Churches, the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Insofar as it succeeds in some of those denominations, the strategy will likely be replicated elsewhere. This strategy marks, in some ways, a retreat by the pro-homosexuality advocates. Tacitly, they are conceding that the weight of biblical and traditional Christian teaching is against them. They have not been able adequately to answer the powerful exegesis buttressing that teaching, represented especially by Robert Gagnon's masterwork The Bible and Homosexual Practice. The pro-homosexuality advocates have not persuaded most church members to abandon the historic teaching. For this indirect vindication of the truth, we must all be grateful to God. Yet we cannot be content with standards that remain on paper while being emptied of all force. This false "compromise" would be, in some respects, more damaging than a straightforward blessing of homosexual relations. Not only would it convey tolerance of sin in the important area of sexuality, but it would also set the church adrift more generally. This "third way" would sever the church's practice from its doctrine. It would set a terrible precedent of a church openly acknowledging a biblical command and then treating obedience to that command as optional. If denominations start granting exemptions from church discipline in one area, it will be very difficult to maintain any kind of covenant of mutual accountability within the church. No promise of ecclesiastical peace and unity can justify these distortions of the church's theology and polity. Advocates for this "third way" make arguments that strain credibility to the breaking point. They claim that they are "proposing no changes" to the church's standards. But in fact they are seeking a radical change-to demote the standards to "non-essential" status. They claim that their "compromise" would split the difference between traditionalist and revisionist views on sexuality. But in fact it would yield exactly the result desired by the revisionists-moral approbation of non-marital sex-on a slightly longer timeline. "Third way" proponents also claim that their solution would strike a balance between different interpretations of the Scriptures. When two interpretations are mutually contradictory, these proponents want to accept both the one and the other as equally valid. They urge the church to "get beyond yes/no polarities" that force it to make painful choices. Their "third way" would avoid such choices by affirming all individuals interpreting the Bible as sincere and faithful Christians. This approach is utter nonsense. The Bible is filled with unavoidable yes/no choices: "I set before you life and death, blessing and curse" (Deuteronomy 30:19); "Choose this day whom you will serve" (Joshua 24:15); "He will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left" (Matthew 25:33); "Listen! I am standing at the door, knocking; if you hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to you and eat with you" (Revelation 3:20). A church that systematically refuses to choose between truth and error has no place left to stand. To the extent that any church declines to distinguish the better from the worse biblical interpretations, it undercuts its own ability to teach clear doctrine from the Scriptures. The existence of different interpretations does not imply that all those interpretations are equally valid. Nor does it imply that all interpreters are equally faithful. On the contrary, it is more likely that every interpreter falls short of complete faithfulness-to a greater or lesser degree. The church cannot give unconditional affirmation to all its members' personal views of Scripture. It always has the responsibility to seek the most faithful interpretation and to act upon it. We are convinced-by the consistent testimony of the Scriptures and the Church Universal, through the ages and around the world-that the fidelity in marriage and abstinence in singleness standard remains the most faithful interpretation of God's will for human sexuality. This is an essential component of our calling in the Lord Jesus and our sanctification through the Holy Spirit, who purposes to "present [us] holy and blameless and irreproachable before him." We ask you to stand steadfast with us in rejecting any compromise that would shift Christ's church away from that godly endeavor. * Sara L. Anderson, Executive Vice President, Bristol House, Ltd. (United Methodist) * The Rev. James D. Berkley, Interim Director, Presbyterian Action for Faith & Freedom * Verna M. and Dr. Robert H. Blackburn, National Alliance of Covenanting Congregations (United Church of Canada) * The Rev. Karen Booth, Executive Director, Transforming Congregations (United Methodist) * Pastor Mark C. Chavez, Director, WordAlone Network (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) * The Rev. Susan Cyre, Executive Director, Presbyterians for Faith, Family, and Ministry * The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Episcopal Bishop of Pittsburgh, Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network * The Rev. Thomas J. Edwards, Executive Director, New Wineskins Initiative (Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)) * The Rev. Dr. Ira Gallaway, Confessing Movement (United Methodist) * Dr. Scott M. Gibson, President, American Baptist Evangelicals * The Rev. Dr. Donna Hailson, pastor, author, former professor (American Baptist) * The Rev. James V. Heidinger, President, Good News (United Methodist) * The Rev. Arthur Hiley, Vice President, National Alliance of Covenanting Congregations (United Church of Canada) * The Rev. Harold S. Martin, Editor, Brethren Revival Fellowship (Church of the Brethren) * Craig Alan Myers, Chairman, Brethren Revival Fellowship (Church of the Brethren) * The Rev. Bill Nicoson, Executive Director, American Baptist Evangelicals * Dr. Thomas C. Oden, board member, Confessing Movement (United Methodist) * The Rev. David Runnion-Bareford, Executive Director, Biblical Witness Fellowship (United Church of Christ) * Terry Schlossberg, Executive Director, Presbyterian Coalition * Faye Short, President, RENEW Network (United Methodist) * David and Jean Leu Stanley, Chairman and Steering Committee member, UMAction (United Methodist) * The Rev. Vernon Stoop, Executive Director, Focus Renewal Ministries in the United Church of Christ * The Rev. Michael Walker, Executive Director, Presbyterians for Renewal * The Rev. Roland J. Wells, Jr., Vice President, Great Commission Network (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) * The Rev. Todd H. Wetzel, Executive Director, Anglicans United * The Rev. Parker T. Williamson, Editor and Chief Executive Officer, Presbyterian Lay Committee * Alan Wisdom, Interim President, Institute on Religion and Democracy, elder in Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:12:58 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: STOCKHOLM: Anglican bishop criticizes Vatican over gays STOCKHOLM: Anglican bishop criticizes Vatican over gays By Daniel Frykholm 11/24/2005 STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - Gay U.S. Anglican bishop Gene Robinson said on Thursday a Vatican document barring practicing gay men from becoming Roman Catholic priests showed a profound misunderstanding of homosexuality. The document, due to be published next week, says men with "deep-seated" gay tendencies cannot become priests and that only those who have overcome their homosexuality at least three years before ordination can do so. "I think the Vatican, or whoever wrote this statement, should spend a little more time listening to its gay and lesbian members rather than putting out statements," said Robinson, having read media reports on the document. "This strikes me as language from people who profoundly do not understand gay and lesbian people ... who know next to nothing about being gay or lesbian," Robinson, whose ordination as bishop in 2003 plunged the Anglican Church into crisis. The document reinforces existing Roman Catholic policy that many in the Church believe has not been properly enforced, but Robinson told Reuters during a visit to Stockholm it would only force people to lie about their sexual orientation. "It's very clear here that if you want to be a priest in the Roman Catholic Church and you know you're gay, you have to lie about it," he said. DEEP DIVISIONS Robinson was the first openly gay man to be ordained as a bishop in the U.S. Episcopal church, sparking deepening divisions among the world's 77 million Anglicans. Earlier this month, almost half the world's Anglican archbishops demanded action from Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams over "unrepented sexual immorality" in the church. Williams has always been personally tolerant of gay clergy. Robinson said there were probably many Roman Catholics like himself. "There are plenty of gay men who have faithfully served the Roman Catholic Church, who know themselves to be gay and who are faithful to their vow of celibacy. To exclude them from the ordained ministry is a real mistake," he said. "It appears that being celibate is not good enough." The document, parts of which were read to Reuters by a Vatican prelate on Tuesday, differentiates between "deep-seated" gay tendencies and a "transitory problem", but also says homosexuals cannot relate "correctly to men and women". "That's offensive to me, and this language just strikes me as profoundly separated from the real lives of gay and lesbian men and women that I know," said Robinson. During his visit to Stockholm, Robinson met leaders of the Lutheran Church of Sweden, which allows gay clergy and recently decided to hold formal blessing ceremonies for registered same-sex partnerships. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:13:35 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: ENGLAND: Catholics warn C of E over women bishops ENGLAND: Catholics warn C of E over women bishops By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent THE TELEGRAPH 11/23/2005) The Roman Catholic Church has issued a scathing critique of Church of England plans to admit women bishops, warning that the reform would "radically" impair their relations. In an official paper, the Catholic bishops said that consecrating women was "a tremendous and intolerable risk" that could cause "irreparable damage", both within and outside the Anglican Church. It said that while the Church of England was free to do as it wanted, such a step was at odds with the "texts and spirit" of recent statements on unity drawn up between the two Churches. While the Catholic Church's opposition to women priests and bishops is well known, the blunt tone of the 10-page document will disappoint the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams. Dr Williams has made no secret of his desire for greater unity with the Catholic Church, from which the Church of England separated during the reign of Henry VIII. He became the first serving archbishop to attend a papal funeral in April and he led an Anglican delegation to meet Benedict XVI the day after the new Pope's inauguration. Despite tensions over issues such as homosexuality, Dr Williams has also built up a warm rapport with Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, his Catholic counterpart. Drawn up by the Department of Dialogue and Unity, headed by the Archbishop of Southwark, the Most Rev Kevin McDonald, it is the bishops' official response to the Church of England Rochester report, published in 2004. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:14:10 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: FORWARD IN FAITH North America Report - 2005 Assembly FORWARD IN FAITH North America Report - 2005 Assembly November 22, 2005 A Hope and a Future Conference Realizing A New Day in the West by the Revd Keith Acker Communications Director, FiFNA The first day of a Hope and a Future was marked by Bishop Robert W. Duncan, the Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network & Episcopal Bishop of Pittsburgh, telling a story of meeting the Archbishop of Canterbury three weeks prior. Archbishop Rowan Williams tapped him on the shoulder and greeted him. And in their conversation said, "I recognize the bishops, priests, and people of the Network as full members of the Anglican Communion...no matter what the jurisdiction." This leads the way forward for a new life of Anglicanism in the United States and North America. "It's a long way to the promised land," said Bishop Duncan, "but we must follow behind the cloud of the Lord who leads our way." He warned that we must not give into impatience, idolatry, or self-righteousness. It is easy to murmur in the wilderness, to make false gods of buildings, pensions, and the familiar, and most importantly to think that we didn't play a role wandering down the wrong path - we all need to repent and return to the Lord. It is Jesus Christ whom we must trust and follow, no matter what the path looks like, feels like, or how we are challenged along His path. There are three choices we must make and in which we must stand, continued Bishop Duncan: truth over accommodation; accountability over autonomy; and mission over sullen inaction. There is but one truth that leads to eternal life who is Jesus Christ. There is one body who is Jesus Christ; we must find ourselves in Him. Our Lord himself has given us the great commission (Mt 28); obedience to Him means going out and making disciples for Jesus Christ. Whether evangelical, catholic, or charismatic, we are at a new beginning for Anglicanism in this country. We have a hope and a future in Jesus Christ alone. Archbishop Henry Luke Orombi, Primate of the Anglican Church of Uganda, echoed by the other primates and bishops speaking, reminded us that we will suffer for the faith. But be of good cheer. The suffering is for a short while and the reward is heaven. Don't lose hope. After Jesus death Peter went fishing and caught nothing, but Jesus came and told him to let down the net, fed him with breakfast, and then sent him to Feed His Sheep. The time for debate and talk is over. We need to get on with preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Though it may cost us dearly, we need to rejoice in this important work. Fix your eyes on Jesus. "See what He is doing and get there, be where He is!" The primates made it clear, the Network needs to walk with the Anglican Communion and not be held back or be distracted by the Episcopal Church USA in its endless talk and delay. Archbishop Peter J. Akinola, Primate of All Nigeria, told about the explosive growth of the Church in his country. We do it by "seeking to give our neighbor the best gift, Jesus Christ. I encourage you [do the same.] You have everything going for you [in your country]. How long will by waiver. You need to take a stand." Anglicans in this country let too many things get in their way of taking a clear stand for the Gospel. From a great nation we make a weak stand for the faith. "We are with you. But you have to tell us what we can do to help you." The first day of speakers was anchored by Bishop Keith L. Ackerman, president of Forward In Faith North America and the Episcopal Diocese of Quincy. The new Anglican sitting next to me was thrilled to hear that we are not about compromise if we are to preach the Gospel. God's arms are open with a clear message, and yes it contains guidelines - God is comprehensive. But the Episcopal Church USA is has change the message to be inclusive, subjectively selecting by their own definition, who is "in," as if it were the selector instead of the "author of our salvation." We have a firm foundation, Jesus Christ. We must not fail to proclaim the divinity of Jesus Christ. The Gospel isn't incomplete, with something lacking, some missing truth. Jesus is the full revelation of God to man. We must not fail to proclaim the Holy Trinity. "You need to know the original," God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." Not part. Not some aspect, but the real thing. We have failed in our accountability to the Church. Bishop Ackerman apologized for our failure to our brothers and sisters of the Anglican Communion. Today we are "biblical fundamentalists" and there are "canonical fundamentalists. I know the author of each. And I know which I want to be!" We are called back home, back to our Anglican Communion where we are the Body of Christ. This is our Hope and our Future - to be in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior. Primates gathered with Moderator Duncan at 'the Hope and a Future altar', surrounded by bishops of the Network, Common Cause Partners, and the Continuum The first day concluded with Moderator Duncan concelebrating with eight Primates of the Anglican Communion, surrounded by dozens of bishops from the many Common Cause Partners of Anglicanism in North America. There was the new Anglicanism for the West, in union with Anglicans from the Global South, setting aside differences that we all might be one in Jesus Christ. Here was an historic moment, a rebirth of Anglicanism in love and obedience to Jesus and His command to "be one." The second day of the Hope and a Future conference, focused on the interwoven fabric of diverse ministries, organizations, and jurisdictions who have come together in their common faith in Jesus Christ. Jesus, in his death for sin and resurrection, is his being the way of salvation. This inclusivity spoken of by Bishop Ackerman on the first day, was not about being comprehensive, the type of all inclusive new religion of today's Episcopal Church USA. Our commonality is in our one Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, who died for our sins upon the cross that we each might turn to Him and be saved. Moderator Donald Harvey, Anglican Network in Canada, preached that our witness to the truth comes with a price which is born out of love for souls needing to be saved. He said, "the talk is finished." Stand firm in the Gospel, don't compromise the truth; and thank God when you're counted worthy to suffer for Jesus' sake. From his own suffering and that of his diocese, Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti, from the outcast diocese of Recife, Brazil, urged those of the Network to "not be afraid of losing position, status, job, or licenses in your proclamation of Jesus Christ. You are the world's strongest nation, but your message of the gospel is weak." He and his diocese refused to give into the revisionist and have now come under the protection of Archbishop Gregory Venables, Primate of the Southern Cone. "There is an urgent need to reform Anglicanism, and it begins with us," said Cavalcanti. In dealing with the institutional church, "It may be necessary to break man's law that we may follow the law of God. Please don't be afraid. Go and tell!" 2005 FiF North America Assembly Eucharist David Anderson, president of the American Anglican Council, a group promoting biblically orthodox Anglicanism, described the upcoming General Convention of the Episcopal Church USA as a last deciding moment: "'Choose today whom you will serve.' Walk with or walk apart." Until this meeting in June 2006, he urged those still within the Episcopal Church USA to "stay as long as you can." But it was the common consensus of most attendees that the 2006 General Convention was the last chance to respond with repentance in the spirit of the Windsor Report. The move to ensure an Anglican Communion presence in North America expanded beyond Archbishop Rowan Williams' original concept of network of confessing dioceses. What began with the Archbishop of Canterbury, historically the cornerstone in the Anglican's proclamation of Jesus Christ, grew to a much broader coalition of many groups of Anglicans which have distanced themselves from one another over the last hundred years. The chairman of the Common Cause Partnership, Presiding Bishop Leonard Riches, used his own Reformed Episcopal Church as the oldest example having separated over baptismal regeneration some 132 years ago. Most of the fragmentation has occurred in the last 40 years. It's like 40 years in the wilderness. We each may have been trying to remain faithful in our proclamation of the Gospel, but we were walking separately. "We are making common cause to proclaim the Gospel. Difficulties remain, but we have a common Gospel purpose." The Primates Panel received questions from the audience. The conference was told, "Time is not on your side. Tell us where you stand." The "fudging" of the ECUSA in its delays and justification of its action is not sufficient. "The final answer lies with the Primates." The Primates expressed their disappointment in the failure of the Panel of Reference, appointed to hear cases of oppression of orthodox Anglicans, has not even heard its first case. "The urgency is not evident" in the action. The Primates all talked of our need to minister to the young. They need to hear the Good News of Jesus Christ and accept Him as their Savior. This has to be the focus of a growing church. "When we lose the youth, you lose the church. To turn our backs is suicide. Leadership should start with the youth." Notably, one moment was marked by its failure to talk about Holy Scripture and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. When asked by the audience, "How the Primates mangage to get along with differing opinions on the ordination of women to the priesthood?" Biblical and historical reference went out the window. It was like stepping into a different conference which reminded many of an ECUSA meeting. This was an important question given the diverse coalition of the Network. Obedience to Jesus Christ, Holy Scripture, and historic Anglicanism was completely absent in their responses except in Archbishop Datuk Yong Ping Chung, Primate of South-East Asia. Instead it was commercials, personal experience, and feelings oozing through a crack. What the people wanted to know was how we can get along while we study this issue. Archbishop Yong Ping Chung commended the biblical study done by the Anglican Mission In America as a place to begin, recognizing that we must approach ministry and priesthood from the ground of Holy Scripture. An encouraging highlight of the Conference was Pastor Rick Warren, author of the best seller, Purpose Driven Life, and his involvement in Anglican evangelism in Africa. He commended the Archbishops present as models of grace and truth. Using Revelation 2 ("I know how much you suffer for the Lord...) as a framework for moving forward in the Gospel proclamation, he said, "God is interested in you, not your building; the church is people, not the steeple. It is about faith in Jesus Christ." He encouraged everyone to serve Jesus in their fellowship, knowing the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Quoting Isaiah 14:18-19 (I am doing a new thing...) "Something new in Anglicanism is happening!" He challenged to ask ourselves, invite others to ask: "What did you do for My Son?" And as with staff of Moses, God is asking us "What do you have in your hand?" And in letting go God creates a miracle with life in it. Taken up in to Moses hand again, it the miracle disappears, the life is no longer seen. "Lay it all down to me [says God], and I will make it alive; but if you pick it up it will just be a staff. It became the Rod of God." In laying down your rod, God will create the miracle of growth, of life - its God's blessing. One of the challenges Rick Warren set before "western" Anglicans was the challenge to break the bond of materialism. Just like "The church is people; not the steeple," so too we need to let go, to give, to use our influence to speak for those who have no voice. "Who are your widows, orphans, homeless...There is real spiritual emptiness; share your faith with them. There is egocentric leadership; be servants, not power gatherers. Say 'It's not about me.'" Make a gospel difference to poverty, to illiteracy, to pandemic disease. "To have cures we need to have real leaders." Only the world wide church, in all of its local expressions, will this new leadership be seen. We need to be working planting, equipping leaders, assisting the poor, caring for the sick, and educating the next generation. His next book, 40 days of Peace, is about making that happen in the live of the Church. Warren put forth an agenda, God's agenda - taken from the Bible, to be lived in our lives. "Will anybody be in church because of you?" 1. Do what God is blessing; building a kingdom of every nation. 2. Abandon all distractions; seek first the kingdom, "thy kingdom come, thy will be done." Be wherever Jesus is King. "What is keeping you from God's agenda?" 3. Appropriate God's power; go in the Great Commission and the Great Commandment; Mission and Obedience. "Will you be divided by politics or driven by purpose? What is in your hand?" Archbishop Yong Ping Chung, the soon retiring Primate of South-East Asia, was honored. In speaking he praised Moderator Robert Duncan for always being an encourager and having a smile. Speaking about the Hope and a Future Conference, he said, "I've been praying for this kind of gathering in the USA for a long time. This is a big event; North and South in one, holy catholic and apostolic church." We need to affirm our leaders who do God's will; submit to God's plan; work together so that God's way is upheld. "God is saying today, to each group here which has been raised up by God - the Common Cause Partners - Look to Him for renewal and authority. Our authority is the Bible. Jesus is our leader. Uphold and protect your leaders. Honor God and lift up the Name of Jesus." Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of Billy Graham, spoke about who is Jesus. "As if the Archbishop of Canterbury, [or some other leader], could tell us what the Bible does not! We need to know Jesus. We need to know Him personally as our Lord and Savior. She reminded us of that personal relationship made known in the Incarnation as we hear it in John 1:1-18 - and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. The concluding day began with a bible study by Short on Acts 4. Jesus is the center of the church's mission, seen in the work of the Holy Spirit after Jesus' ascension. He's always pointing to Jesus. Acts speaks to a church under attack. "False teaching, tyranny, and violence are Satan's tools to destroy the church." You've seen it in the "issues of power, crushing by law, and force them into silence. If you serve Jesus, you will be an offence. The disciples were brought before the same people who put Jesus to death. 'By what authority do you do this? How dare you go out of our jurisdiction!" Verse 12 reminds us: There is no other Name under which we might be saved, but the Name of Jesus. How can you act in opposition to God? How can you build a religion without God? In doing so you reject the only salvation! You may be told not to teach in His Name, but we must be faithful to God. Short concluded with, "We need to speak the truth with boldness, submit to God's sovereignty, aim to glorify Jesus, and 'Do not fear' - Rely on His grace!" Cox spoke of the persecution of Christians occurring today. "We are losing ground in many places, places where others die for our Christian faith." Islam rejoices when the West affirms immorality because if feeds the fire of Islamic growth. There is an urgency in the prayers of Christians under persecution, those battling against the oppression by Islam, against the fastest growing religion. In Burma, there is ethnic cleansing; In Northern Nigeria, there are shiria courts and a move to an Islamic constitution; In Indonesia, there is an Islamic jihad. Christians are imprisoned and killed for their Christian faith, for our Christian faith. Cox encouraged us to "look out", to look around the world, and to pray. Joni Eareckson Tada moved the whole crowd in her reality of living with suffering by the constant help of Jesus' grace in her life. A member of the Reformed Episcopal Church, a Common Cause Partner, she became a quadriplegic in a diving accident. "I cried for His help and He asked me to rely on Him. I still need him - my disability isn't getting better. I need His grace, to be His friend, and to suffer with Him. Lord, lend me your smile." She encourage those gathered, who would be facing, in the words of Bishop Duncan, their "Good Friday," a time of persecution. "Your cross to bear is not your wheelchair, but you're grumbling about it. Anxiety, fear, worry - our sins are revealed; we can share his gladness; we can thank and praise Him!" Moderator Robert Duncan concluded the conference saying, "We've been given a choice today for Jesus Christ. We've been sent out by the Primates to do the work He has given us to do. Are we ready to give it all up for our Lord? This is a new day! A choice for one another; even in our differences. It is a choice for God's plan, not ours. Will you choose less? Choose this day "a Hope and a Future!" END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:14:47 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: SPRINGFIELD, MO: Ozarks group leaves U.S. Episcopalians SPRINGFIELD, MO: Ozarks group leaves U.S. Episcopalians About 60 people quit national body to form Ozarks Anglican Council. By James Goodwin News-Leader November 22, 2005 A group of Springfield area Episcopalians upset over decisions by the U.S. church is breaking away to form their own congregation. Among their complaints is the 2003 confirmation of an openly gay bishop, which has splintered the Episcopal Church across the country. The Springfield group of about 60 members will join a network of congregations loosely overseen by the symbolic leader of the world Anglican Communion. The Ozarks Anglican Council, as the new group is called, plans to hold its first weekly service Sunday in a borrowed Lutheran church. The head clergyman will come from Tulsa. "We're doing what we feel we have to do," said John H. Simmons, who resigned in August from the governing board of St. James' Episcopal Church. He had been a member of the church at 2645 E. Southern Hills Blvd. since 1972. "It's not been an easy and certainly not been a pleasant situation," Simmons said. "It's been a very painful one." He and other members of the Ozarks Anglican Council are the latest of an unknown number of Episcopalians - individuals, groups and entire congregations - who have defected since the 2003 election as bishop of the Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, an openly gay priest in a long-term relationship. The exodus concerns the Rev. Kenneth L. Chumbley, rector of Christ Episcopal Church. Chumbley, head of Springfield's oldest and largest Episcopal congregation at 601 E. Walnut St., voted against Robinson's confirmation during the church's 2003 General Convention in Minneapolis. But he disagrees with those who have left what he calls his "spiritual home." "I think God weeps over what people inside the Episcopal Church and outside, now, the Episcopal Church are doing to the church," Chumbley said. Human sexuality is but one of many concerns within the Episcopal Church and others, he added - issues that include cuts to social welfare programs and the deaths of U.S. and Iraqi soldiers. "We're all in conversation right now about a variety of matters ...," Chumbley said. "I believe that it's important for people of different points of view to remain within the same church and committed to that church and to express those views in an honest and charitable way and in a prayerful way, and seek to know the mind of Christ." The Rt. Rev. Barry R Howe, bishop of the Diocese of West Missouri, and the Rev. Ross W. Stuckey, rector of St. James' Episcopal Church, were not available for comment. Last week, an Episcopal congregation in Virginia voted to break with the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia, the Washington Post reported on Sunday. Defectors have taken different routes. The Virginia congregation left as a whole and has joined the Anglican Church of Uganda, according to the Post. The Anglican Church of Uganda and the Episcopal Church in the United States are both members of the world Anglican Communion. Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion has no administrative leader, and national churches are autonomous. The archbishop of Canterbury is viewed as the symbolic leader. Worldwide, the Anglican Communion counts about 80 million members. About 2.3 million live in the United States, where the Episcopal Church is the 14th largest Christian denomination, according to the 2005 Time Almanac. Simmons said some members of the Ozarks Anglican Council also are upset at what they see as an "overly harsh authoritarian position" taken by some church bishops, chiefly concerning ownership of a congregation's property. Simmons' group maintains that a congregation's governing board, not the bishop, should control property. Combined, the changes justify his departure and that of other members of the Ozarks Anglican Council, Simmons said. "Everyone's going to do what they feel God's leading them to do," he said. The Ozarks Anglican Council will meet Sunday at 6:30 p.m. at Immanuel Lutheran Church, 2756 Blackman Road. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:15:48 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: Most Americans Feel Religion is 'Under Attack,' Poll Shows Most Americans Feel Religion is 'Under Attack,' Poll Shows By Melanie Hunter, Senior Editor CNSNews.com November 21, 2005 (CNSNews.com) - A new survey shows the majority of Americans think religion is "under attack" and "losing its influence" in American life. According to the poll, American Attitudes Toward Religion In the Public Square, 64 percent agreed with the statement that "religion is under attack" in America, and 80 percent of those who identify themselves as fundamentalist/evangelical/charismatic Christians, were in agreement. "The findings suggest that American public opinion is starkly divided when it comes to the role of religion in the public square, and that our nation's proud tradition of church-state separation is threatened as never before," said Anti-Defamation League national director Abraham H. Foxman. The poll of 800 adults was conducted between Oct. 25 and 30 and released by the Anti-Defamation League. "Unfortunately, too many people believe that religion is under attack in America, when in fact according to all measurements, religion is stronger in the United States than in any other Western country," said Foxman. The poll also found 53 percent of respondents believe that religion is "losing" influence in American life, while 35 percent said it is "increasing influence." Among those who think religion is "losing" influence, 60 percent are evangelical/fundamental/charismatic Christians, while 33 percent of that same group said religion is "increasing" in influence. As far as Ten Commandment cases go, 64 percent of those polled agreed with the statement that "it is important that religious symbols like the Ten Commandments be displayed in public buildings such as court housed. Eighty-nine percent of fundamentalist/evangelical/charismatic Christians agreed. On the topic of intelligent design, the theory that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher being, 56 percent favor the teaching of intelligent design or creationism, alongside the theory of evolution in public schools. Among fundamentalist/evangelical/charismatic Christians, 70 percent favor creationism, compared to 28 percent who opposed it. And 57 percent said "the Bible" was "a more likely explanation for the origins of human life on earth" instead of Darwin, compared to 31 percent who believe Darwin is a more likely explanation. Eighty-seven percent of evangelical/fundamentalist/charismatic Christians favored the Bible over Darwin as a better explanation of the origins of human life. END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:16:34 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: ROCHESTER, N.Y.: Church refuses to hand over keys to diocese Church refuses to hand over keys to diocese 11/21/2005 by Ty Chandler, WROC-TV The Episcopal Diocese of Rochester warned All Saints Church in Irondequoit it was coming for the keys Monday morning. However, diocesan leaders were greeted by the parish's attorney. After the two groups exchanged words, diocesan leaders left empty handed. "They're refusing to honor the diocese's request," said Philip Fileri, attorney for the Episcopal Diocese of Rochester. The diocese voted to dissolve All Saints on Saturday after it failed to pay its $16,000 assessment fee for 2005. Parish leaders said they held on to the money to honor a higher power. "It's about the church, larger in the United State and particularly in the Diocese of Rochester just willy nilly rewriting the Bible the way they want it rewritten," said All Saints' attorney Raymond Nague. The leadership of the parish believes the Episcopal Church violated biblical authority when it consecrated a homosexual bishop in New Hampshire. As a result of this conflict, All Saints is now the first church ever kicked out by the Episcopal Diocese of Rochester. "We've continued worshipping here despite the conflict with the Diocese," said parishioner Horace Robinson. "It's sad. Some people have left, others have come and joined our community." While All Saints has vowed to continue to hold services, it can no longer operate under the Episcopal Church. Parish leaders say the deed to the building is in the church's name. The Episcopal Church argues all parish property is held in trust to the diocese and since All Saints no longer exists in the eyes of the diocese, church property belongs to the diocese. Fileri said he doesn't want to pursue legal action, but it is an option. http://www.wroctv.com/news/story.asp?id=20729&r=l END ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:17:28 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: As Eye See It: Battle rages, God winning - by Norman Henderson Battle rages, God winning by Norman Henderson There are several recent developments in the battle for the soul of the Anglican Church of Canada for which we can thank God whilst continuing to pray fervently. Two weeks ago, the Archbishop of Canterbury (ABC) spoke and then answered questions during the third Anglican Global South Encounter in Egypt. Bishop Don Harvey of the Anglican Network in Canada and Bishop Bob Duncan of the American Network participated; the "official" Canadian and US (and Brazilian) Anglican churches were not invited. The conference communiqué is excellent and inspiring reading at: http://www.anglicanessentials.ca/readarticle.php?article_id=98 The ABC's comments are also quite encouraging at: http://www.anglicanessentials.ca/readarticle.php?article_id=101 During the Q&A session the ABC was asked (as reported in the above item and as I heard directly from someone who was present): "When are you going to recognize the Networks in the US and in Canada as part of the Anglican Communion?" to which he responded by looking at his watch and saying, "Oh, I'd say at about 5 to twelve - there is no doubt in my mind that these Networks are full members of the Anglican Communion". He went on to say that formal recognition as Provinces was not his to give but would have to be determined at the next Lambeth Conference of all Anglican bishops in 2008. He also said that a committee had recently been struck to consider who should be invited there, "with input from the Provinces". Pray that this input will appropriately reflect the influence of the 2/3 of the Communion that is conservative in interpretation and in commitment to Scripture. The event in Egypt happened only a few days after Michael Ingham, false bishop of New Westminster in Vancouver and his Diocesan council banned participation in the Network - the direct opposite of the affirmation subsequently expressed by the ABC. (http://www.vancouver.anglican.ca/Default.aspx?tabid=1&mode=Story&StoryId=237&) The Network parishes in BC are not, however, dismayed by Ingham's stance: less than two weeks later, conservative Bishop Terry Buckle was elected Metropolitan Archbishop of BC & Yukon, thus Ingham's superior. Although his direct powers are limited, ++Buckle is now the immediate point of appeal for any action that Ingham might take against conservative parishes and in particular their assets, possibly his main point of interest. Ingham's "banning" move was matched by other liberal bishops. The Bishop of the Diocese of BC (i.e. Vancouver Island - a much smaller jurisdiction within the "ecclesiastical province of BC & Yukon" which ++Buckle now heads) allegedly stated recently that clergy associating with the Network would be fired. Bishop Jim Njegovan of the Diocese of Brandon, Manitoba made it clear that neither Anglican Essentials literature nor The Anglican Planet, Canada's alternative to the officially-sponsored Anglican Journal newspaper would be tolerated in his diocese. (http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/10/24/anglican_051024.html) It is reported that there was a move at the Canadian House of Bishops two weeks ago to make these sanctions national - however, after the minority intervention of three God-fearing Bishops, no motions regarding Essentials were passed, praise God. "On the ground" around the country I hear that there is a great deal less focus in conservative parishes on the same-sex issue or even on the theological apostasy of so many Canadian Anglican leaders. This is not a question of relenting nor of accommodating, but rather a feeling that the debate is over, positions are clear and it's time to concentrate on the work of the Gospel. This is certainly my observation in several Ottawa churches with strong Alpha programs, Biblical preaching, house groups, and other evangelistic and discipleship programs under-girded by a culture of prayer. Yet there is no doubt that if and when the time comes that the Diocese of Ottawa stops vacillating and finally "walks apart" from the Anglican Communion (with our national primate, New Westminster, Niagara, Toronto and others) those that are faithful to Scripture will choose to remain in the Communion and in the church universal. I was encouraged by the message Sunday at St. John's (Shaughnessy) Anglican Church in Vancouver - in many ways the nexus of the Anglican controversy in Canada - where the youth director preached on 2 Tim. 2:22 and recounted how in the past two years he has cancelled most of the youth activities: young people are already too busy and distracted by too many choices. Instead he now has 50 high school students participating in 9 weekly Bible study groups as their principal thrust for this age group. This reminded me of a summer I spent as a teenager in 1970, with a few friends and a bible college student who led us in a series of Saturday afternoons studying the Bible outdoors in High Park, Toronto. That was then - and is now - really exciting stuff! ---Norman Henderson is an Anglican layman living in Ottawa, Canada. Despite a childhood commitment to Christ, missionary parents and a godly wife, he spent many years far from God. Business reverses in the "dot com" meltdown made it clear that success is only possible through repentance and renewal under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and he is now engaged in "Business as Ministry" as servant leader of The IT Department, Inc ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:18:15 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: As Eye See It: The Gay Invention - by R.V. Young The Gay Invention Homosexuality Is a Linguistic as Well as a Moral Error by R. V. Young Touchstone Magazine For thousands of years, until the late 1800s, our ancestors were completely oblivious to the existence of a fundamentally distinct class of human beings. Indeed, during the long period of Greco-Roman antiquity and more than a millennium and a half of Christian civilization, man did not even have a name for this class. Or so asserts an almost universal assumption fixed in the language almost everyone uses: that "heterosexuals" and "homosexuals" are two permanently and innately different kinds of human being, and that "sexual orientation" constitutes a difference comparable to the difference between male and female. Widespread acceptance of "homosexuality" and associated terms thus biases discussion of the subject before an argument is even formulated. Terms Lacking What might be called the philological evidence calls this notion into question. If it were true, someone would long ago have given this class a name. That no one did until very recently suggests that the notion is not true. In the first footnote of the first chapter of Greek Homosexuality, which is generally regarded as the definitive treatment of its subject, Oxford classical scholar K. J. Dover points out that the ancient Greek language "has no nouns corresponding to the English nouns 'a homosexual' and 'a heterosexual'." Such an observation would seem to call for more notice than is accorded by a single short footnote, but even the apparent concession is misleading, insofar as it suggests that the absence of these terms is a peculiarity of Greek. In fact, Latin also lacks these terms and the same is true of Old and Middle English. Among modern European languages the word that corresponds to the English "homosexual" is generally a variant on the same word: in Spanish homosexual and in Dutch homoseksueel, for example. German also offers gleichgeschlechtlich, which is simply a combination of two Germanic roots, gleich and Geschlecht, that correspond to the Greek ( homo = same) and Latin ( sexus = sex) of the English word. This English word is itself a very recent coinage. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, both "homosexual" and "homosexuality" first appeared in English in 1892, along with "heterosexual" and "heterosexuality," in an English translation of Richard von Kraft-Ebing's Psychopathologia Sexualis (1886) and turn up again five years later in Havelock Ellis's Studies in the Psychology of Sex. To read all of The Gay Invention, please click on the link below: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-10-036-f -- R. V. Young is Professor of English at North Carolina State University. His most recent book is Doctrine and Devotion in Seventeenth-Century Poetry (Boydell & Brewer), and he is currently at work on a book on Shakespeare and on a translation and critical edition of the Flemish humanist Justus Lipsius’s De Constantia. He and his wife, who are parishioners at St. Joseph’s Catholic Church in Raleigh, have five grown children and eight grandchildren. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 23:18:51 -0500 From: "David W. Virtue" Subject: Devotional : THE DOORKEEPER - by Ted Schroder THE DOORKEEPER by Ted Schroder November 27, 2005 The theme of the Advent season (the four Sundays before Christmas), is preparation for the coming of Christ. Jesus tells the parable of the homeowner going away and leaving his house in the care of his servants, each with his assigned task, and tells the doorkeeper to keep watch for his return. Jesus says, "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know when the owner of the house will come back - whether in the evening, or at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or at dawn. If he comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping. What I say to you, I say to everyone, 'Watch!'" (Mark 13:34-37) We have been left in charge of God's household. Each of us has an assigned task. We are to go about our lives fulfilling the assignment God has given us. We are given the task of standing by the door. We are to watch and not to sleep on the job. Sleeping is a metaphor for inattention, of irresponsibility, of disloyalty. To sleep while on duty, on the watch is considered a capital crime. "A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest – and poverty will come on you like a bandit and scarcity like an armed man." (Proverbs 6:10) Sleeping is denial - shutting down our senses so that the reality of our responsibilities do not have to be faced. Sleeping is the temptation to avoid our assigned task in life - to fail to represent Christ in the world until he returns for us at the end of life. It is the refusal to use the time we have been given to extend his kingdom. Jesus says that we have to wake up, to pay attention to, being a doorkeeper in the house of the Lord. What does that mean? Let me illustrate my answer from the life of Sam Shoemaker. Sam lived from 1893 to 1963. He was an Episcopal minister who had influential ministries at Calvary Episcopal Church in New York City, and Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. He was responsible for many of the ideas that were incorporated into the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous, and ministered to some of the founding members of AA. This is what someone wrote about him. First, he was ceaseless in his desire to bring people to a deep personal experience of Christ. Second, he wrote twenty-eight books and innumerable sermons, as well as pamphlets. He always expressed himself with rhythmic phrasing that carried a punch and a challenge to anyone who would read his message. Third, I admired him for his great courage, for there was no man he feared to challenge on behalf of his Lord and Savior. Fourth, he had an undying conviction that every man should be converted to Christ. Such conviction cannot help but win people, and his impact was worldwide. Fifth, he had an incorrigible sense of humor. I have never laughed more heartily with anyone than with this great man. Sixth, he had a unique personality which had a built-in kind of electricity which fairly crackled with vigor, energy, and magnetism. Seventh, he was a man of great faith in the power of prayer, and he was able to communicate this faith, through others, to the ends of the earth. Eighth, he was one of the founders of Alcoholics Anonymous. He knew men in their depths of despair and he has helped an almost unlimited number of men and women who have had alcoholic problems. He had simple cards placed in the vestibule of his church for distribution. They read as follows: Calvary Church Fourth Avenue and 21st Street Rev. S. M. Shoemaker, Jr. Rector Personal Religion Straight Preaching Good Music A Friendly Atmosphere The staff of Calvary Church like to talk with people in search of vital religious experience. Sam Shoemaker saw himself as a doorkeeper in the house of the Lord. He wrote an apologia for his life entitled, I Stand By The Door. This is what he said in it. I stand by the door. I neither go too far in, nor stay too far out. The door is the most important door in the world – It is the door through which men walk when they find God. There's no use my going way inside, and staying there, When so many are still outside and they, as much as I, Crave to know where the door is. And all that so many ever find Is only the wall where a door ought to be. They creep along the wall like blind men, With far outstretched, groping hands. Feeling for a door, knowing there must be a door, Yet they never find it..... So I stand by the door. The most tremendous thing in the world Is for men to find that door - the door to God. The most important thing any man can do Is to take hold of one of those blind, groping hands, And put it on the latch - the latch that only clicks And opens to the man's own touch. Men die outside that door, as starving beggars die On cold nights in cruel cities in the dead of winter – Die for want of what is within their grasp. They live, on the other side of it - live because they have not found it. Nothing else matters compared to helping them find it, And open it, and walk in, and find Him.... So I stand by the door. There is another reason why I stand there. Some people get part way in and become afraid Lest God and the zeal of His house devour them; For God is so very great, and asks all of us. And these people feel a cosmic claustrophobia. And want to get out. 'Let me out!' they cry. And the people way inside only terrify them more. Somebody must be by the door to tell them that they are spoiled For the old life, they have seen too much: Once taste God, and nothing but God will do any more. Somebody must be watching for the frightened Who seek to sneak out just where they came in, To tell them how much better it is inside. The people too far in do not see how near these are To leaving - preoccupied with the wonder of it all. Somebody must watch for those who have entered the door, But would like to run away. So for them too, I stand by the door. I admire the people who go way in. But I wish they would not forget how it was Before they got in. Then they would be able to help The people who have not yet even found the door, Or the people who want to run away again from God. You can go in too deeply, and stay in too long, And forget the people outside the door. As for me I shall take my old accustomed place, Near enough to God to hear Him, and know He is there, But not so far from men as not to hear them, And remember they are there too. Where? Outside the door – Thousands of them, millions of them. But - more important for me – One of them, two of them, ten of them, Whose hands I am intended to put on the latch. So shall I stand by the door and wait For those who seek it. 'I had rather be a doorkeeper.....' So I stand by the door. Jesus tells us to stand by the door and watch. We all have an assigned task to fulfill while we are on this earth. While we are waiting for Jesus to return for us we are given the opportunity to help others in through the door. If Sam Shoemaker is right, and that the most tremendous thing in the world is for men and women to find that door - the door to God - then we should be helping them to find it. If he is right, and that the most important thing any man or woman can do is to take hold of one of the blind, groping hands, of one of our friends or acquaintances, and guide them through the door - then we should get about doing it. If he is right, that nothing else matters compared to helping them find it, and open it, and walk in and find God - then we should direct them, invite them, encourage them to do so. There are many people you know who are living outside the door of faith in Christ. They are there because they have not found the way. You and I have the responsibility to do something about it. We must not fall asleep on the job. Let us pray for guidance as to how we can fulfill our assigned task. We are doorkeepers. Let us not be gatekeepers that guard the door and prevent others from entering. Instead, let us be like Sam Shoemaker, and be dedicated to helping people find the door and go through it. An audio version of this sermon may be found on www.ameliachapel.com Amelia Plantation Chapel Amelia Island, Florida ------------------------------ End of VIRTUEONLINE Digest - 21 Nov 2005 to 29 Nov 2005 (#2005-55) ******************************************************************