"The official Anglican representation will be synonymous with the American Episcopal Church and that movement is increasing if Global South traditionalists don't attend. Many believe that if that happens the communion will no longer be Anglican.

"We need a communion meeting that reflects the future of the communion. There is no reason why a priest or congregation is persecuted because they simply want to practice traditional Anglicanism. We cannot go on with an ambiguousness and intolerance that is only increasing.

"The Bishop of Western Louisiana, the Rt. Rev. Bruce McPherson made an impassioned plea at Dar es Salaam, (Tanzania) to give us the space to practice our religion; "Just allow us to practice our faith."

Gomez told his audience, "We have to change the mindset of people in The Episcopal Church who not only resent traditional Anglicanism but want to root it out. We must claim our God given space. God has not given them the right to deny us what the church has believed and practiced. We need a communion meeting and a communion decision on how we move forward, and that might lead us to move beyond the geographic delineations we have imposed on the communion."

According to the Anglo-Catholic Archbishop the communion has no mechanism to deal with the situations that have arisen in the communion. "We must be able to meet and take action collectively."

The erudite archbishop said the Primates meeting in Tanzania was one of the most difficult meetings he has ever attended. "We started in an atmosphere of gloom and no one expected a resolution to the impasse. Traditional Anglicanism is under siege in the U.S. and Canada. We focused on the Anglicans in the U.S. By the grace of God we labored and came out with a good result."

"In our private discussions we decided as primates that the time had come for the Anglican Communion to try to be of assistance to The Episcopal Church in America after hearing from the three U.S. bishops who had been invited to attend and tell us their story on the state of the Episcopal Church." (The three were: Bishops Bob Duncan, Pittsburgh, Bruce McPherson, Western Louisiana, and C. Christopher Epting, the Episcopal Church's deputy for ecumenical and interfaith relations.)

"We sought an amicable solution to a difficult problem. We proposed that there be established a Pastoral Council and provision made for Alternative Primatial Oversight for those provinces under siege. We saw it as a temporary arrangement - a space for all sectors in the church to live and work together until we had achieved a covenant that we could all sign up or sign off onto. This would be with the consent of the American Presiding Bishop and TEC in which the Archbishop of Canterbury would appoint a chairman of this council and the Presiding Bishop would be present in person."

This council was to work with all sectors of the church and all sides were to work and worship without interference, said the archbishop.

"There was no doubt that traditionalist Episcopal priests, parishes and parishioners are under siege. Liberals were not just against them they were oppressing them. It was bad for them and Anglicanism. So we sought to create a space out of interest for all the members of the church. Our proposal and that is all it was, because the Primates had no authority grew out of our concern at large but especially for the church in the US."

Gomez said the Archbishop of Canterbury didn't try to assume a consensus. "For the first time he asked each Primate individually for a 'yes' or 'no.' Every Primate present said 'yes' including the American Presiding Bishop, Mrs. Schori.

"Unfortunately the Presiding Bishop then went around [later] qualifying what she voted for, but in the meeting no such qualification was given."

The West Indies archbishop then blasted Mrs. Schori. "After the House of Bishops met two weeks later, they did two things. They misunderstood (in the sense of charity) our aim and intention and then they acted as if the Primates were trying to force the Episcopal Church into an untenable position. No such thing happened. It was offered up only as a way forward.

"They not only rejected the offer, they then [turned around] and accused the Primates of being colonialists, and outsiders interfering with their church polity. This was very strange because it had to be under the aegis of the Episcopal Church! Mrs. Schori said that only General Convention could make such an offer, said Gomez. "This ended up giving General Convention an authority it does not have. General Convention cannot decide truth or doctrine; it has no background or authority to do that."

"In rejecting the offer, they have requested the Archbishop of Canterbury meet with them so they can share their concerns with them in September in New Orleans.

"We hope and pray that as a result of that meeting there might be a change of heart and direction; that is my hope and prayer." Gomez admitted, however, that that seemed a bit difficult in light of the position taken by the House of Bishops and the Executive Council of TEC.

"If the 30th Sept. deadline fixed for an answer by TEC is not met, answering without clarifications and unambiguity on where they stand on same sex blessings, then it could signal a break up of the communion."

"Their (the TEC's) action was known and done in defiance of the rest of the entire Anglican Communion. The American Church, on its own, and knowing the position held by the rest of the communion acted in defiance of the beliefs and practices of the rest of the Anglican Communion."

Gomez said 12 African Anglican provinces have put out a Road to Lambeth statement saying they could not attend Lambeth if those bishops who consecrated Gene Robinson were invited; it would tear the fabric of the Communion. "It was so torn that they refused to take communion at the primates meeting."

"In planning for Lambeth we don't know who is going or coming, but if there is a large group who will not attend it will change the structure and significance of the Lambeth Conference. The Archbishop of Canterbury wants to focus on spirituality and mission.

"The big question is how can you have a meeting of the leaders of the communion in one place while refusing to address the issues that are tearing the communion apart and preventing the Anglican Communion from moving forward?"

Gomez criticized Episcopal Church liberals and revisionists who blame conservatives over sexuality issues. "The first misrepresentation is about the type of sex - homosexuality, and secondly we are perceived as being against homosexual persons."

"The issue is about homosexual practice. The Bible addresses not the existence of homosexuality. No one is preaching in the abstract but about the homosexual lifestyle about which the bible speaks negatively. Everywhere in the bible homosexual practice is always spoken of negatively - it is contrary for God's will for the human race."

Gomez said the reason it was so important is that the issue is not simply about sexuality but the meaning attached to homosexual practice, its context and biblical revelation.

"In the church's long history the uninterrupted consensus is that physical intercourse is only intended for man and woman within marriage in a life long commitment. Anything else is contrary to God's will for humanity. The ground for the church taking this stand is the bible and it is transparently clear about homosexual behavior."

Gomez praised the writings of theologian Dr. Robert Gagnon, author of the book "The Bible and Homosexuality", as "the best book on the subject."

Citing various New Testament passages on explicitly homosexual practices, he said it was treated as a negative. "Any sexual practice outside of marriage reflects a way of life and lifestyle that is doomed to perish. Christ by his death and resurrection has set us free."

Gomez condemned the failure of those who opposed traditional teaching and underrated the text. "They have failed to produce an interpretation of the text and its fuller understanding to the satisfaction of the larger church."

Gomez cited passages from the Book of Romans, I Corinthians and I Timothy condemning sodomy. "God gave them over to a depraved mind. Homosexual acts are contrary to God's will. It is not just the sexual act being criticized but deliberate rebellion against what God has revealed and stands for. It is a revolt against the gospel. The Apostle Paul singles out homosexual intercourse as reprehensible because it is a fundamental denial of what God has created.

"The challenge of the church is the fundamental question of the nature of reality. Which relationship corresponds to God's ordering of life and which violates it?"

Gomez said the Canadian church, in questioning homosexuality, had said that while it had doctrinal roots it was not core doctrine. "If something is about God's ordering of life how can it be not be core doctrine. Our sexuality must conform to the divine ordering. By endorsing homosexuality we are going against God's ordering of life. Gomez said that Rochester Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali had adequately criticized the Canadian position.

"What can be more fundamental than to follow God's way; that is the issue we are wrestling with? Is it God's will or is it not? I represent the traditional mind of the Anglican Church and we have been maligned and called all kinds of names. But we are to stand for what God stands for and God's ordering...that is the issue."

"The new agenda for the church is not consistent with God's agenda. We don't believe that there can be any other agenda for the church."

"We traditionalists had been accused of being homophobic which is a bit like saying if we condemn adulterers we are should all be called adulterophobic. The word homophobia has become a blunt weapon in an acrimonious campaign to overturn the unanimous conviction of the church that homosexual practice is used to repudiate and malign the traditional position and persons who hold the position."

Gomez said homosexuals were using names and slogans on the position we hold accusing us of bigotry, prejudice without any just cause. "Worse still when you quote Romans Chapter 1 you are accused of being a Fundamentalist to dismiss what we stand for.

"We have leading Biblical scholars who address the text using all the expertise available. When they refer them to the text they use these terms because they are unable to deal with technical evidence we are able to present."

Gomez found fault with Jeffrey John, the Dean of St. Alban's who accused orthodox bishops of using selective texts FOR being 'fundamentalist.' "But using quotes of the bible to try and refute it is just as fundamentalist. We have to be consistent. We believe that the teaching of the Bible is core doctrine because it is about the divine ordering of life; it is about the human condition. By introducing a new anthropology they forget about Genesis. Now we are being asked to look at human beings in a new light. There is no justification or solid evidence. We believe that it is wrong and we are determined to fight it. The Anglican Communion continues to uphold the position decided in 1998 (Lambeth 1:10) - it is the position of the overwhelming number of Christians across the globe."

DURING a question and answer period that followed his speech Archbishop Gomez answered a number of questions put to him by this reporter and those from the floor.

Here is his answer to several questions on what Christians believe in other denominations about homosexuality:

Gomez: "The vast majority of Christians believe the position we put forward. The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox family of churches all teach the same and most of the denominations in the Western world teach what we are upholding.

"They, the liberals, represent only a small number who believe differently. They do not reflect the belief of the vast majority of Christians even though they like to give the opposite impression.

On Scripture:

Gomez: "We wrestle not against flesh and blood but against the principalities and powers. It is a fight we are engaged in and we will see it through to the end, and we intend to see the Anglican Communion maintain its orthodox position. We will end up on the right side of the debate."

On how the Global South will respond:

Gomez: Bishops and archbishops will respond to Sept. 30 whatever TEC puts forward by way of response

On money:

Gomez: The Episcopal Church is the largest contributor donor within the Anglican community. We cannot end up hostage to money. Some Africans have said they won't take any action if we become hostages to money.

On Boycotting Lambeth and decisions they make without traditionalists present.

Gomez: If Lambeth happens with a large boycott, liberals could try and vote to overthrow previous resolutions. Archbishop Williams wants a different type of Lambeth. There are two main areas of concern - The Windsor Report and the Covenant that he wants the conference to address.

Gomez: If bishops of CAPA and their 12 Primates they don't show up or only a small portion, it means that half of the bishops representing two-thirds of the communion won't be represented. Nigeria alone has over 100 bishops representing 18 million Anglicans. Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda all have large constituencies. That is why the whole future of Lambeth is so important. The decisions of Lambeth represent the mind of the communion. We are seriously challenged by the present situation.

On the Covenant:

Gomez: Discussion on the Covenant has only just started.

END