Mercifully, The Windsor Report did not see a "moral equivalence" between these events, since the cross-boundary interventions arose from a deep concern for the welfare of Anglicans in the face of innovation. Nevertheless, the Windsor Report said that both innovation and intervention are central factors placing strains on common life. The Windsor Report recognized the problem and invited the Instruments of Communion to call for a moratorium of such actions.

Global South leaders dutifully ignored the recommendations and the calls for a moratorium by the Windsor Report, resulting in continued interventions. This has tensions escalating to now critical levels with the Anglican Mission in America (AMiA) having more than 125 parishes in the U.S., (with dozens more in the pipeline) CANA with 40 and another 15 in the pipeline, the Southern Cone with 38 and Kenya with 13. More will undoubtedly follow with newer jurisdictions and ordinations. There is no sign that such interventions will cease in the immediate future, if ever.

Earlier, in response to a question about Episcopal boundary crossing, Canon Gregory Cameron, Director of Ecumenical Affairs and Studies of the Anglican Consultative Council said, quoting the Windsor Report, that there should be a cessation of those interventions. "But when the Primates got together in Dromantine the feeling was so sensitive in North America that it was not right just to cease them, and part of their intention in founding the Panel of Reference was to try to find a mechanism whereby there could be some partially objective assessment which sought to ease the situation." He said the Primates will not be able to stop such interventions until such time as they are reassured that the parishes they are trying to help have a secure place.

Episcopal Church leaders and individual diocesan bishops have, ever since then, railed against such interventions seeing in it as a violation of their divinely ordered space.

The whole idea of the Episcopal Church's House of Bishops' "Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight" (DEPO) plan which is supposedly aimed at providing alternative Episcopal oversight for disaffected churches, in line with a call from Anglican primates, went nowhere.

The DEPO proposal landed with a resounding thud among conservatives. While it provided that a conservative congregation alienated from a liberal diocesan bishop might have the services of a more acceptable prelate, the implementation of the DEPO provisions and the choice of the visiting bishop still remained in the hands of the diocesan bishop. The provisions were both temporary and revocable. For the most part, DEPO died and sank without a trace.

A Commission established by the church recommended that the Episcopal Church should "express regret for the consequences of their actions," "to affirm their desire to remain in the Communion," and "to effect a moratorium on any further interventions."

The latter was the most egregious of the three - a red flag to an orthodox ecclesiastical bull.

Following the meeting of primates in Dar es Salaam in February, Dr. Rowan Williams issued a statement in which he stated, "Interventions in the jurisdiction of The Episcopal Church will be able to cease once there is sufficient provision within The Episcopal Church for the adequate pastoral care of such congregations." Did he really think it would suddenly stop?"

Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan said that Resolution III.6 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference authorized the Primates' Meeting to include among its responsibilities both "intervention in cases of exceptional emergency which are incapable of internal resolution within provinces, and giving of guidelines on the limits of Anglican diversity in submission to the sovereign authority of Holy Scripture and in loyalty to our Anglican tradition and formularies." At Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, the Primates exercised these mandates in most significant fashion, he said.

Overseas interventions increased after the Tanzania meeting of Primates causing more anguish in one liberal Episcopal diocese after another.

Most recently it has led the HOB Task Force on Property Disputes to catalogue all cases of congregations in all Episcopal dioceses claiming to be overseen by bishops of the Anglican Communion other than bishops of The Episcopal Church. This includes the AMiA, CANA, Uganda, Kenya, Bolivia, the Southern Cone, etc. but not so-called Continuing Churches.

Lexington Bishop Stacy Sauls who heads the Task Force appealed to all bishops to find out who, what and where this is going on so that the screws no doubt could be tightened on any bishop who might be inclined to acquiesce to the "demands" of fleeing orthodox parishes. The bishops were asked to document the information to present to Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, when he appears in New Orleans next week.

Best to have as many guns as possible lined up for the ABC even if they are firing blanks. One hates to inform Bishops Sauls, but overseas Anglican Interventions in TEC will not only continue but will step up in pace after September 30, the whine and shouts of anguish notwithstanding from the HOB.

Interventions are hardly the province of orthodox bishops and archbishops into liberal Episcopal provinces, however. Liberal Episcopal leaders have cottoned onto the idea and are doing it themselves.

House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson promised more than 275 people in the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande "the leadership of the Episcopal Church will never leave you alone, remember that." She appealed specifically to gays and lesbians in the audience, asking them "to not leave this Church."

"Hang in there with us," she said. "We're going to get this right."

Was there an implied threat to her words? "Be prepared and to stay calm amid the current tensions in the diocese, the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion," she said.

At their El Paso meeting in May, the Rio Grande leadership unanimously passed a resolution that would allow a congregation "which is strongly considering departing from the Diocese and the Episcopal Church temporarily to withdraw from the life of the diocese for a season of discernment while maintaining membership in the Diocese of the Rio Grande and the Episcopal Church."

Bonnie Anderson clearly did not like those words. She urged Episcopalians who are opposed to decisions made by Rio Grande's leadership to make their voices heard by means of building coalitions in the diocese to influence elections and actions at convention.

"I will tell your story to other people in other dioceses where there is angst over the diocesan leadership," she said. She also reminded the audience that the Anglican and Episcopal churches were born in dissent. Rio Grande Bishop Jeffery Steenson said nothing about her visit. Anderson took a similar message to the Diocese of San Joaquin, a diocese that may well vote to leave the Episcopal Church in December.

Most recently, Anderson ratcheted up the arguments when she blew into the Diocese of Ft. Worth with her message of "you can't take it with you" to a handful of dissenters. Anderson advised Episcopalians to "saddle your own horse" if they wanted to see changes in their diocese. She advised them to pay attention to the issue of governance, reminding them that parishes and dioceses remain apart of the Episcopal Church even if some members decide to leave.

This time she was met by the formidable figure of the Rt. Rev. Jack Iker, bishop of the diocese, who wrote a blistering letter to his diocesan clergy condemning the visit of Mrs. Anderson citing it as "a breach of protocol and a violation of the basic polity of The Episcopal Church."

He excoriated the liberal Anderson saying her visit was nothing more than "a clear effort on her part to recognize and empower a small group of people who dissent from the stated theological positions of this diocese and who claim that they alone are the true loyal Episcopalians here in Fort Worth."

"This visit by Mrs. Anderson further exacerbates an already tense, adversarial relationship that has developed between national leaders and diocesan officials. Unfortunately, she has sought to further divide the people of this diocese rather than to promote reconciliation. I regret that Mrs. Anderson has chosen to fan the flames of division and to advocate a rather one-sided view of the controversies that have overtaken The Episcopal Church in recent decades. Rather than working with me and other diocesan officials, she has chosen to go around us in a blatant attempt to work with the revisionist opposition known as the Via Media."

"I regard her visit as part of a concerted effort to undermine the existing diocesan leadership in favor of those who support the liberal agenda of the General Convention Church. It is disconcerting to see this deepened alienation fostered by one of the top leaders of The Episcopal Church. However, we will not be deterred or side-tracked from our Gospel mission by this kind of political manipulation."

It was an earful that Ms. Anderson will not soon forget. Clearly what is good for the goose is good for the gander. So, when the Archbishop of Canterbury comes a calling on the HOB in New Orleans next week and is presented with a list of all those parishes who now have ecclesiastical cover from Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda and how they have violated the spirit of Windsor, Bishop Iker can then stand up and explain to the world Anglican leader exactly what the liberal leadership of TEC is doing when they come into dioceses like his, without asking permission, and causing dissension among faithful orthodox Episcopalians.

Perhaps then Dr. Williams will get a clearer picture of boundary crossing in the waning days of September, and it isn't all a one-sided story.

END