A Contra Perspective By David Thorman I do not intend this to be an argumentative response to Bob Seitz's case study, but I had to add a few things from where I sit. I am friends with people on both sides of the current issues at Grace Episcopal Church in Tampa, Florida. I hope by writing this I have not offended any of them. That is not my intention. As a point of clarification, My wife and I are individual members of the AAC. I was the first of the speakers at the March Vestry meeting where the resolution to join the AAC was defeated in a 6-6 tie. I was and am still in favor of the resolution which would have made our Parish a confessing member of the AAC. Bob Seitz and I are on the same side of this issue, although I am not as well spoken or well read as he. I have remained at Grace where some of my closest friends and brothers in Christ have left. I have been offered and accepted one of the vacated Vestry seats. I see the Episcopal world through different eyes than most of my counterparts in this debate. I was raised Jewish and brought to Christ at Grace just over 3 years ago. It was through the efforts of a loving Rector and the Alpha course that I gave my life to Christ. To both Father Bob Cain and Nicky Gumbel, and others, I owe my salvation and my heartfelt thanks. These teachings molded me into what I now see to be an Anglican, as I can find little similarity between what I was taught and the current position and beliefs of many ECUSA leaders. I know with all my heart and all my soul, that in the darkest moment of my life, God led me to Grace, and there he saved me from myself. Most of the people who ended up fighting for the resolution to make our Parish a confessing member of the AAC were happy members of the blissfully unaware until the events of the General Convention of last year. I too, was oblivious to the actions and beliefs of the leadership of ECUSA before that meeting. I was too busy running the High School Youth Group, singing in the choir, and attending Basic Anglican Discipleship classes in anticipation of my confirmation in a few weeks. What the untrained eye saw as these events developed was a small group of people meeting in private homes, although their purpose was unknown at the time. Secret whispers in private after services on Sunday. These meetings seemed to be almost dubious until I did what most of the congregation at Grace did not do, I showed up at one. I found a group of passionate and caring individuals truly concerned about the future of our church and more importantly the faith family we had come to love. Recently elevated to parish status, and currently starting the search for a new Rector, Grace hardly needed another issue to contend with, but the decision of the General Convention demanded action among some of our congregation. Even after numerous pleas from the retiring Rector to wait until the new Rector was found to address this issue, this group pressed on with getting this resolution before the Vestry to be decided. It was only recently that the urgency of this decision seemed to cool in my mind. We were in such a rush to make a statement, to help the AAC to cause reform in ECUSA that we didn't recognize what I see as two crucial things. If the AAC which was formed in 1995 to give a voice to the members who spoke for orthodoxy and realignment had not in 9 years been successful in stopping the events of General Convention, what made us think that in less than 5 months we could energize the apathetic masses to this cause and get this vote passed in our own Vestry? The only people showing up for the discussions were those who had clearly made a stand, not the people who needed to be informed of the issues and what they meant on a local level. The level of urgency created by this small group led to many unfortunate confrontations and misunderstandings. So although my own common sense said, get the resolution passed now so that an incoming Rector has a clear idea of what we expect, further reflection revealed that this would not be prudent. By slamming this through we would be creating a divide now, during a transitional period, and most likely a divide again later as well when a new Rector is chosen. If we are truly worried about what type of rector will be called to Grace I think we need not worry. If nothing else good came out of the General Convention decisions, now there is a over abundance of orthodox or conservative clergy who no longer feel as at ease serving under their revisionist leadership and seek to be in a more welcoming fold like the one we enjoy here in Southwest Florida. I would venture to guess that our new Rector, whoever he (or she) may be, will be well suited to our flock. Overall I am saddened most by the behavior on both sides. During numerous group meetings to discuss issues in an open and loving atmosphere, anyone sharing an unpopular viewpoint was subject to crowd murmur, snickering and childish gasps of amazement. Misspoken words, statistics based on fantasy, misinterpreted meaning and an emailing frenzy, which I must admit I helped fuel, full of insinuation, anger and frustration an fear further diluted the core issue into an annoyance to the general population of the church. At the Vestry meeting itself I am convinced, unfortunately, that at least one vote was swayed by the inappropriate behavior in the gallery. How sad to get so close to resolving something powerful, and falling short due to emotional outburst. I don't know which is sadder, the discontent in the gallery or the inability of the Vestry to vote on the actual issue. Either way our runaway emotions diluted the purpose we all were so passionate about. Did the Vestry truly vote in support of the revisionists that night? In my opinion, no. I have had numerous dialogues with some of the Vestry members since that night and I believe that if the vote were on the true issue, Biblical authority, not muddied by politics and bullying, and threats of departure if the vote doesn't go one way or the other, that it would have been close to unanimously in favor of the resolution. The only winner here was Satan, who managed to twist the passion of believers into anger and outrage. He managed to use the apathy of the masses to limit dialogue to a few excited individuals and swayed the debate off of the true issue and into the mire of emotional confusion and anger. A small group of concerned, faithful believers that would have been hard pressed to imagine leaving Grace five months ago, did exactly that. A few weeks have passed now, and Grace has returned to that quiet, peaceful place it once was, almost as if the debate had never existed. I don't know if I am happy or sad about that. The day after the vote I found myself reading the current issue of ENCOMPASS, the AAC newsletter where I was struck by the letter from AAC President the Rev. Canon David C. Anderson. In it he wrote, "I implore you: Do not leave your churches, do not give up; do not lose heart. Rather, take heart in the sure and certain knowledge that God will not leave us nor forsake us, if we faithfully seek his presence. Stand firm on and for your faith and await the joy of the Resurrection!" David Thorman attends Grace Episcopal Church Tampa, Florida. He has been a Christian for 3 years and spends his spare time trying to make up for lost time reading scripture and attending theology classes.

Four decades of incremental erosion of Christian faith and morals in the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC) and the Episcopal Church in USA (ECUSA) became evident in 2003 with the consecration to the episcopate of a non-celibate homosexual in New Hampshire and the approval of same-sex blessings (SSB) in New Westminster. An emergency meeting of the Primates called by the Archbishop of Canterbury to deal with this crisis issued a statement requiring the ACC and ECUSA, in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates, to provide for adequate alternative episcopal oversight (AEO) for dissenting minorites unable to accept this innovation. A request by the churches of the Anglican Communion in New Westminster to the Primate of Canada to permit immediate temporary AEO pending the outcome of the Eames Commission was ignored by Archbishop Peers. The Archbishop of Canterbury acknowledged the appeal but has not intervened. The following is a critique by members of the Anglican Communion in Canada (ACiC) of the report of the Canadian Primate's Task Force for the House of Bishops of the Anglican Church of Canada concerning Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities, published on 3rd March 2004. Numbers in brackets refer to points in the report. The Report Legitimizes Local Option for False Teaching and Practice (6.1). This is an unacceptable way for a Province to move forward theologically. The Book of Judges is critical of the situation where "everyone did what was right in his own eyes". To abrogate responsibility as a National Synod to the level of Diocesan synods is a misuse of the principle of subsidiarity. Bp M Ingham's unilateral action in approving the blessing of same-sex unions is given legitimacy. Conservatives are expected to stay in communion, albeit in a form of parallel jurisdiction with a Bishop who has violated the Lambeth Quadrilateral. This is an attempt to add sticking plaster to the wounds created by decades of liberal theology. Parallel jurisdiction is unacceptable as it authorizes what scripture regards as sinful. Replacement jurisdiction is the only way forward. The Report falsely assumes that this is an issue over which Christians can agree to disagree and that the unity of the Church is more important than truth. There is no hint of discipline by the ACC of Bp M Ingham or his wayward Synod. The Report acknowledges a breach in Communion but sees this as something time can heal. (4.1). AEO receives only grudging acceptance and is seen as a last resort to prevent schism. The majority of those consulted "believe that AEO must be interim in nature" Is this what the Primates envisaged in London? (4.2). "AEO must be temporary in nature since to institutionalize it would de facto institutionalize schism". If provision is only to be temporary, how does this honour those of us who see this issue as one which is, in the words of (5.3), "so serious that it can place one's salvation in jeopardy"? It is assumed that over the next six years orthodox parishes will get used to the new reality and cease their protest. (5.5). The Report acknowledges that the division is so strong that "healing and reconciliation can be served best by the implementation of AEO." There is no recognition that reconciliation is contingent on repentance. Having acknowledged that for conservative Christians this is a salvation issue the report assumes it can be overcome and unity maintained despite permitting SSB's. There is no admission that the minority position in Canada is the official position of the Anglican Communion, nor that the approval of Local Option in Canada would lead to a breach in communion with the majority of Anglicans world-wide. Another assumption is that the Canadian conservative Bishops will remain in a collegial relationship with revisionist Bishops without addressing the biblical understanding of koinonia or how to proceed while Bishops are in broken communion with one another over this issue. The Report Offers 3 Models of AEO Model 1 assumes that General Synod approves local option at diocesan level. Model 2 assumes New Westminster continues with local option regardless of General Synod rejecting it. (6.1). "The task Force sees the way forward in the voluntary agreement of the bishops to some temporary ceding of jurisdiction. All of the models are premised on this "generosity of spirit. Is it enough for conservative clergy and congregations that the agreement is both voluntary and temporary when the process to date has not been characterized by generosity of spirit? We are not convinced that this is what was in the minds of the Primates when they met in London in October 2003. (6.4.1 & 6.5.3) These paragraphs make it clear that under Model 3, which it acknowledges is not AEO, the Diocesan Bishop may make "informal arrangements with a retired bishop or a bishop of an adjacent diocese to care for the needs of dissenting or distressed parishes". The danger with this model is that it allows a Revisionist Diocesan Bishop to control the process. This is not what the Primates envisaged and is similar to the ECUSA proposal of Supplemental Pastoral Care. Power is Consolidated in the Hands of Revisionist Metropolitans (6.2.1 ) Dissenting and distressed parishes are to be placed in Trust by the Diocesan Bishop and delivered into the hands of a Metropolitan. This is a worrying trend and new to Canada: that the Metropolitans are accruing power to themselves. We see this as a denial of the clear intent of the Primates from October 2003. AEO Bishops are nominated by the Metropolitans. The parishes have no say in the appointment of their bishop. The AEO bishop is designated as Episcopal Assistant to the Metropolitan This is to be done regardless of the theological position of the Metropolitan at large and his or her stand on the blessing of same-sex unions (SSU's). Dissident parishes could find themselves still inextricably linked to members of a hierarchy who accept the blessing of SSU's. Orthodox Parishes Must Continue to Contribute Financially to Revisionist Dioceses (6.6.4) The AEO parishes' apportionment is payable to the AEO bishop's office. However, there is still a link with the liberal Diocesan Bishop in that an agreed amount of the parish apportionment finds its way back into the local diocesan coffers. AEO parishes sacrifice their vote as to how that money is to be spent. This is taxation without representation. (6.6.5). Some of these funds will continue to finance the Provincial and General Synods. It is unconscionable for orthodox parishes to have to finance heretical institutions. (6.6.9). Property and buildings remain held in trust by the liberal Diocese on a nominal rent. AEO parishes remain subject to the revisionist Diocese's canons and regulations (including property canons) unless an agreement can be reached as to the suspension of those canons and regulations. True AEO should provide for the AEO parishes to be subject to the canons of the AEO bishop's Diocese, not those of the bishop with whom they are no longer in communion. There seems to be a strong attempt by the Bishops to keep their power base and not to see parochial or Diocesan boundaries transgressed. Orthodox Parishes Remain Vulnerable The actual nature of AEO with jurisdiction is never really explained. eg. Can they appoint new conservative priests to parishes without consulting the Diocesan? Under whose license? Can they ordain conservatives from Regent and Wycliffe without the insistence on attendance at a liberal college as well, as is required in the Diocese of New Westminster at the moment There is no provision for the selection, mentoring, formation and ordination of new clergy. Without this, orthodox clergy will be eliminated by attrition. That which is not explained in detail is open to Revisionist interpretation and the spirit of AEO from the Primates meeting of 'adequate to the dissenting parish' will be lost. (6.2.2) "The appointment of an AEO bishop must be temporary, we suggest that the appointment be for a six month term, renewable but not exceeding six years, with a review every two years". Every six months a conservative parish must vote by an unprecedented majority of 80% of those present at a meeting (see 6.6.3) to accept AEO. There is no continuity of care in this arrangement. Presumably, only a simple majority is required for a parish to perform SSB's. (6.6.7) The Diocese would be able to have a representative for every 5 parishes on the AEO Council. This would inevitably stifle the openness of AEO Council meetings as presumably a report of the proceedings would go directly to the Revisionist Diocesan. The Great Commission is Violated (6.5.1) While receiving AEO a parish agrees not to Church Plant. This means that for six years, and possibly thereafter, unless revisited by the HOB, no Church Planting can be undertaken by orthodox parishes. How can a conservative parish agree to this and yet remain true to Matthew 28? The local church is the basic unit of ministry. Only by planting new churches will the Church at large, and the Anglican expression of this, be able to reach an unchurched generation with the gospel. Conclusion We understand temporary adequate alternative episcopal oversight to mean: "temporary" is as long as necessary. (i.e. until either the Diocese of New Westminster and the ACC repent OR are evicted from the Anglican Communion, accompanied by the establishment of a Replacement Jurisdiction.) "adequate" is to be defined by those receiving it. "alternative" entails no juridical or institutional connection with apostate bishops. Episcopal oversight requires full jurisdiction. The offer from the International Primates meets these criteria. The Task Force report does not. It is for these reasons that members of the ACiC thank God for the provision of Temporary Adequate Episcopal Oversight (TAEO) that has allowed them to leave the ACC while remaining connected with the vast majority of Anglicans throughout the world. We ask for TAEO to be made permanent as soon as is it is evident that the ACC has no intention of re-affirming the historical Christian Faith. END

Special Report By David W. Virtue Five orthodox priests and a deacon in the Diocese of New Westminster resigned from the Diocese late last week over Bishop Michael Ingham's approval of same-sex unions and his support of the consecration of gay American Episcopal bishop V. Gene Robinson. Yesterday the five parish priests woke up and got on with their collective ministry despite the fact that the revisionist bishop now regards the priests as having left his diocese and the Anglican Church of Canada and says their properties belong to the diocese. The priests involved are the Rev. Barclay Mayo, rector of St. Andrews, Pender Harbour, the Rev. Silas Ng, rector of the Church of Emmanuel, Richmond, the Rev. Ed Hird, rector of St. Simon's, North Vancouver, and the Rev. Paul Carter, a priest on leave from the diocese. Four of the priests stated in letters to Bishop Ingham that they have left the Anglican Church of Canada, and now consider themselves missionaries in North America under the ecclesiastical authority of the Archbishop of Rwanda, Emmanuel Kolini. "We have not joined the Anglican Mission in America, despite what Ingham has written," said spokesperson Paul Carter. "We have formed the Anglican Communion in Canada (ACiC)," said Carter. "We have accepted the offer from the Primates of the Provinces of Congo, Central Africa, Rwanda and South East Asia of temporary Adequate Episcopal Oversight made available to the clergy and congregations of New Westminster, and to other Canadian clergy and congregations who seek such covering," said Carter. This included temporary Adequate Episcopal Oversight, as contemplated by the Primates Meeting of October 2003 offered in consultation with the Primates and the Archbishop of Canterbury. "Our administrative head is missionary Bishop T. J. Johnson of the Diocese of Rwanda who is also a bishop with the Anglican Mission in America," Said Carter. The bishop no longer considers the priests in good standing, but the wardens and the vast majority of the parishioners are solidly behind their priests, Virtuosity was told by phone late last night. In a letter to the Bishop the Rev. Ed Hird said, "I am writing to inform you that I have accepted the offer of Temporary Adequate Episcopal Oversight from the Primates of SE Asia; Congo; Rwanda; Central Africa and Kenya. I am now canonically resident in the Province of Rwanda. The Primates have invited Bishop TJ Johnston from Little Rock Arkansas to act on their behalf as my Bishop. I have now come under his authority." "As I have left the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC) terminating all my benefits, I would be most grateful if you could instruct your Diocesan Officers to close my file and return any documents to the address above." Hird then blasted the bishop saying, "your leadership and the decisions and actions of the Synod of the Diocese of New Westminster in relation to the issue of the blessing of same-sex unions, coupled with your own open support of and participation in the Consecration of a practising homosexual for the office of Bishop in the Anglican Communion, have regrettably brought the congregation of the Anglican Parish of St. Simon's Deep Cove to the place where a very difficult decision has become necessary." Bishop Ingham said that the parishes served by three of the priests remain parishes of the Anglican Church in the Lower Mainland, and those parishioners who wish to remain Anglicans in the Canadian Church will be provided with pastoral care, he said in an official diocesan statement. "While a parting of the ways is always sad, I am glad that they have finally clarified the situation and made it clear they are leaving the Anglican Church of Canada of their own volition," said the bishop. "I have been trying unsuccessfully to obtain clarification for the last two years," he added. The orthodox rectors maintain that the Bishop and Diocesan leadership have willfully and unrepentantly disobeyed Article 1 of the Constitution of the Synod of the Diocese of New Westminster, in that they no longer hold and maintain the Doctrine of Christ as the Lord has commanded and the Anglican Church has received them, and have changed, without the authority or approval of the Anglican Church of Canada and the formularies of the church. "Bishop Michael Ingham has not guarded the faith of the church, and has therefore set aside his ordination and consecration vows," said Carter. The four parishes have hired the lawyer who won the Trinity Western University case involving the accreditation of their four year teachers. END

"The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken. Behold, they have rejected the Word of the Lord; so what wisdom do they have?" Jeremiah 8:9 Dear Brothers and Sisters, These words of Jeremiah could be written over the doorposts of the entranceway to Camp Allen, Navasota, Texas as the current holders of apostolic succession - The Episcopal Church's House of Bishops - weighed their recent actions. These words might also be their epitaph. The vast majority of ECUSA's bishops have rejected the Word of the Lord, and so they lack wisdom and knowledge, preferring compromise and the heavy legal hand of the canons and constitutions to keep everyone in line. There is, furthermore, no grace, no joy, no love that drives these men and women, just vitriol,ast and compromise. And it would also seem to be that no matter what tokenism and nonsense the HoB hands out to the orthodox, they always take it and say, "come let us work together and let us see what God can do." As Albany Suffragan Bishop David Bena, a thoroughly orthodox bishop put it in his summation of the events that transpired in Texas recently, "some of the bishops thought the document went way too far in granting alternative episcopal oversight to traditional parishes. One bishop wanted to so obfuscate the document that it would make no sense at all. He was shouted down. And some bishops felt the document went nowhere near far enough to provide oversight." So what is being sought here is not the mind of Christ, or the Word of the Lord, or the wisdom that comes from the very mind of God, but deal making, so no one goes away empty handed. Put orthodox bishop Bob Duncan and homoerotic bishop Gene Robinson in a small group and see what they can come up with. "Find a way forward gentlemen, and we'll hold the champagne glasses till you do." There is no one truth, "it seemed good to us and the Holy Spirit", merely, "find a way through the mess and we'll all meet on a plain with Sufi Rumi and celebrate victory together." And that is the sorry state of the House of Bishops in the US Episcopal Church as we begin the 21st Century. I have written at length about the recent actions of the HOB in today's digest. AND THINGS AREN'T ANY BETTER IN CANADA. The following is a critique by members of the Anglican Communion in Canada (ACiC) of the report of the Canadian Primate's Task Force for the House of Bishops of the Anglican Church of Canada concerning Adequate/Alternative Episcopal Oversight for Dissenting Minorities, published on 3rd March 2004. The Report Legitimizes Local Option for False Teaching and Practice ran the headline. "This is an unacceptable way for a Province to move forward theologically. The Book of Judges is critical of the situation where "everyone did what was right in his own eyes". To abrogate responsibility as a National Synod to the level of Diocesan synods is a misuse of the principle of subsidiarity. Bp Michael Ingham's unilateral action in approving the blessing of same-sex unions is given legitimacy. Conservatives are expected to stay in communion, albeit in a form of parallel jurisdiction with a Bishop who has violated the Lambeth Quadrilateral. This is an attempt to add sticking plaster to the wounds created by decades of liberal theology. Parallel jurisdiction is unacceptable as it authorizes what scripture regards as sinful. Replacement jurisdiction is the only way forward. The Report falsely assumes that this is an issue over which Christians can agree to disagree and that the unity of the Church is more important than truth. There is no hint of discipline by the ACC of Ingham or his wayward Synod. The Report acknowledges a breach in Communion but sees this as something time can heal. So there you have it. Compromise. Find a way forward together, time heals all wounds, but the casualty, dear friends, is truth. AND THIS WEEK FOUR VANCOUVER PRIESTS who had had enough, finally told New Westminster Bishop Michael Ingham they were out of there and resigned from the diocese. This is a not a matter of the wheat and the tares, which the owner will decide which is which 'on that day'. This is Galatians 1:8 "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let that person be eternally condemned." They are words that should strike fear into the heart of every bishop. Apparently they don't. These words of the Apostle Paul can never be compromised or pluriformed away. Never. They are cast in stone, set in Holy Writ, forever emblazoned on the foreheads of every person who calls him or herself a servant of the most of high God. And it is the standard God himself has set and He will not compromise or change it for anyone, even and including a bunch of American Episcopal bishops in purple shirts and fancy gold crosses who think they can change God's mind for Him. They are fooling themselves all the way to Hell. The good bishop of Albany is wrong. It is not, as he writes, a case of half a loaf being better than none. It is a either the full loaf of God's truth, or no loaf at all. Once mold has penetrated the loaf it is good only for the birds and squirrels, no sensible human will eat it. You cannot hope to receive God's blessing by brokering in apostasy and heresy and believe God will either blink, wink or turn a blind eye. This is not a discussion on which view of the sacraments is the most biblical or your view of baptism; it is about parishes that do not believe that God has changed his mind about how human beings should behave with their bodies, or have the right to do as they will, and to marry whomever they please. These boundaries have been crossed at the peril of souls being lost for all eternity (1 Cor. 6: 9-10). Truly the Preacher of Ecclesiastes was right: "Whoso breaketh a hedge a serpent will bite." ECUSA lies wounded, perhaps mortally, its people perishing or fleeing, and all we will have left are beautiful buildings and no one in them. One only has to look at the English scene to see the devastation of formalism, a lost gospel and the dry rot of ecclesiasticism. No life, no hope. No vision. The people look up and are not fed, and the husks of inclusion and diversity, ual perversion and doctrinal denial ring hollow with each passing day. THERE WAS SOME DRAMA LEADING UP TO THE HoB meeting this week. Both the Presiding Bishop and representatives of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes were in regular consultation with Archbishop Williams right up to the eve of the meeting. The Archbishop counseled charity on everyone's part, as well as encouragement to go as far as possible in providing adequate Episcopal Oversight for traditional parishes in non-traditional dioceses. Bishop Bena said the Archbishop was instrumental in the development and implementation of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes, because he realized the need the Episcopal Church has for such an organization to act as an advocate for persons and parishes who hold to orthodox Anglican teaching." Interestingly enough Bishop Griswold denied that the NACDP had such approval from Williams. He was wrong. But now we know that he regularly consults with the Presiding Bishop AND with leaders of the Network. Obviously, writes Bena, his consultation had a positive effect on the House of Bishops meeting. While no one got the whole loaf, both sides got half a loaf. The document "Caring for all the Churches," was passed which hopefully offers a way through with the title, Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight. It won't, and most of the orthodox branches of the Episcopal Church have spoken out and said so. But the one question no one is asking is this. WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN? What do parents say to teens coming into puberty? What do mothers and fathers say to their sons and daughters as they watch a moral periwinkle like Michael Jackson with his false face and falsetto voice declaiming about children. Or the Rev. Michael Hopkins or Louie Crew or Otis Charles proclaiming the joys of homoerotic behavior, with every parent wondering if his or her son or daughter won't one day walk through the front door and say, "hey ma, the Rector says that should leave my wife to live with Fred." It will soon be a crime to even suggest reparative therapy. It is in Canada. What do parents say and or do when their daughter discovers that the Diocesan Youth leader in the Diocese of NJ is a pregnant lesbian and conducts "happening" weekends. That's cool? The hell it is. Everybody has forgotten the children, except those who prey upon them. At the last General Convention in Minneapolis a father wrote and told me that his son was constantly being solicited for right under the noses of the bishops and no one cared because of the beloved doctrine of inclusion and "my right" to do as I please and God be damned. One of the "negatives" that Bishop Bena pointed up in the DEPO document was this. "There are no teeth in this document; it can be easily abused by a diocesan bishop indisposed to sharing power." He's got that right. PA Bishop Charles E. Bennison has already gone on the record saying he will never honor DEPO…not now, not ever. So what chance do orthodox parishes have in the Diocese of Pennsylvania of getting around having Bennison force himself on them? The answer is none, unless you want to face fraudulent charges of "abandoning the communion of the church" Bennison tried (unsuccessfully) to use on Fr. David Moyer. AS A SIGN OF THE TIMES, an evangelical family of a large prosperous metro Washington parish noted that the guest book which lies open in the Narthex had barely a visitor since Dec. 2003. "They have only had 2 visitors a month in 2004 to sign the guest book. In previous years there would have been as many as a dozen," he noted. People are not flocking to the new doctrine of inclusion; many of them are going to upstart church plants with the REC and AMIA. ONE HOPEFUL SIGN ON THE INTERNATIONAL FRONT THIS WEEK WAS that Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti of the Diocese of Recife was found not to have violated the constitutions or canons of the Brazilian Church by performing Episcopal acts outside of his diocese in an unauthorized confirmation service in Ohio on March 14 in defiance of the local diocesan, the Rt. Rev. J. Clark Grew II. There HoB met at approximately the same time as the Episcopal House of Bishops. The episcopal college of the Anglican Church in Brazil rejected a call by its primate, the Most Rev. Orlando Santos de Oliveira, to discipline the Bishop of Recife. The Bishops' Chamber of the Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil (IEAB) made their ruling on March 23. Not everybody rolls over. UBERPURPLE BISHOP WALTER RIGHTER WHOSE ECCLESIASTICAL activities were reported on in the last digest has been a busy little bishop. He has not only been functioning illegally at Calvary but at five other parishes, Virtuosity has learned. They are; Church of the Redeemer, Squirrel Hill, Pittsburgh PA, Holy Cross Church, Pittsburgh PA, St Brendan's Church Franklin Park PA, St Stephen's Church Wilkinsburg PA and St Andrew's Highland Park, Pittsburgh PA. Bishop Duncan was well aware of these actions but was waiting for the "right" time to play his hand, a source told Virtuosity. The question is when is it the right time? The five dissenting bishops just got their knuckles rapped for performing allegedly illegal acts in Ohio and now the orthodox bishops have a golden moment to come down on Righter with a ton of bricks. The question is whether the orthodox bishops will bring Righter's actions officially to the attention of Griswold! If they do and Griswold does nothing and fails to act against Righter it is "selective prosecution" and "denial of due process" when the revisionists bring charges against the orthodox bishops the next time they cross Diocesan lines. BODY LIFE MOVEMENTS. The Anglican Mission in America announces that one of its bishops will relocate to the northeastern United States in order to help plant a new church and grow a new region for the Anglican Mission. The Rt. Rev. Thaddeus Barnum and his wife, the Rev. Erilynne Barnum, a deacon in the Anglican Mission, will move to Fairfield, Connecticut to assume a leadership role with the newly-named Church of the Apostles and establish an office that will encourage the growth of new churches throughout the northeast corridor. Archbishop Kolini of Rwanda asked the couple to consider this move. They will provide leadership and care to developing new churches in the Northeast, from Washington, D.C. to Maine. This is one dynamic duo. THE AMERICAN ANGLICAN COUNCIL recently saw two new staff additions at their headquarters in Washington, DC. Another dynamic southern duo, the Rev. Canon Ellis E. Brust and his wife Cynthia have landed with a bang inside the Beltway. He has landed the title of COO and Chaplain to the President of the AAC. Brust was formerly Canon to the Ordinary for the Episcopal Diocese of Florida for five years. Cynthia has taken up the position of Director of communications for the AAC. They are two fireball evangelicals. The south is rising again and heading north to convert the highly secularized northeast region. Interestingly enough the Roman Catholic Church learned a long time ago that if you evangelize the centers of intellectual and political power, you will impact the rest of the nation. Recent priestly scandals in Boston, Ct. and New York have opened a door of opportunity for a gospel driven alternative. AS A SIGN OF A SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVOLT at All Saints, Attleboro, Ma. the parish has put a sign out front stating Anglican-Orthodox. CANON JOHN PETERSON, Secretary General of the Anglican Consultative Council is moving to Washington, DC where he will take up his new post as Canon for Global Mission at Washington National Cathedral when his term expires, according to the Anglican Communion Office in London. Peterson spent most of his time working against orthodoxy in the nine years he was in the ACO and was accused by this writer of manipulating two Archbishops of Canterbury with his leftist views and working against the vast majority of global orthodox Anglicans in the Communion. At Lambeth 1998 he was roundly criticized by several Global South Primates including Moses Tay for suspending the Communion's Office of evangelism two years before the Decade of Evangelism ended. Following the historic passage of the resolution saying that homosexual practice "was incompatible with scripture," Peterson said he would work to make sure that future Lambeth Conferences would never be run by bishops and would include clergy and laity to offset the bishops. He was also accused by this writer of attempting to manipulate the annual Primates' Meetings that provided his support. That he has wound up in one of the most revisionist of ECUSA's diocese speaks volumes. He will fit right in. One hopes his successor will be an African, but it is up to the Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican primates and the Anglican Consultative Council that chooses the secretary general. Predictions are that it will not be an American or a Brit. The calls from some quarters are for his successor to come from the global South, where Anglicanism is strongest and growing. THE CLAIMING THE BLESSING crowd is having a celebration event called 'It's About Love' in May. Billed as a "blockbuster" event and engineered by Ed Bacon, rector of All Saints Church in Pasadena, California, the honoree will be none other than Vicki Gene Robinson. Jon Bruno, the ex-cop bishop of Los Angeles will also participate and they are also throwing in Norman Lear, Maya Angelou, Dionne Warwick, et al. The 'Rev.' Susan Russell of 'Claiming the Blessing,' will round out this assemblage of Christian Faith deconstructionists. And here's the kicker, you can sit with Vicki Gene at his "platinum" table for a cool $10,000. The event flyer says it's an evening benefit that will bring together voices from both the sacred and secular community speaking in favor of love and justice and against the proposed amendment that threatens to write discrimination into our Constitution. Of course. Now think what $10,000 would do to fight AIDS in Southern Africa. BUT FOR A TRULY UPLIFTING OCCASION GO TO COLORADO SPRINGS April 20-23 to hear some of Anglican's best known theologians and Dr. George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury. It's not too late to register for the Anglican Communion Institute Conference, Anglicanism, History and Hope: The Future of Anglicanism in North America. Your scribe has been asked to speak at the banquet, so you won't be bored. Along with The Most Rev. Dr. George Carey, is Professor Edith Humphrey, the Rev. Dr. John Karanja, the Rev. Dr. Robert Prichard, the Rev. Dr. Jeremie Begbie, the Rev. Dr. Christopher Seitz, the Very Rev. Dr. George Sumner, the Rev. Dr. Ephraim Radner, and the Rev. Dr. Ashley Null. They will offer their perspective, encouragement, and theological basis for thinking Anglicanism does indeed have a future in North America. (See details in the digest.) I AM POSTING A NUMBER OF STORIES TODAY including late breaking news that Nigerian Bishop Peter Akinola has come out slamming Frank Griswold saying that the future of true Anglicanism in the United States lies with conservative groups within the Episcopal Church that oppose gay marriage and the church's approval of an openly gay bishop. Akinola said he will never attend a meeting with the ECUSA leader or attend the 2008 meeting of the world's Anglican bishops if the U.S. hierarchy participates. That's a right hook to the revisionist Presiding Bishop's chin. (See full story in today's digest.) WELCOME TO VIRTUOSITY. Please feel free to forward any story to your friends that you think might interest them and invite people to join VIRTUOSITY or go to the website at www.virtuosityonline.org. To keep this ministry going Virtuosity does need your support. Please give generously. Make the long days and nights worth it to keep you informed. You can make a donation at PAYPAL at the website: www.virtuosityonline.org, or you can send a snail mail Check to VIRTUOSITY, 1236 Waterford Rd., West Chester, PA, 19380. If you are in the UK you can send your tax deductible cheque to: VIRTUOSITY c/- Brycedale 105 Ridgeway Northaw Herts EN6 4BG Thank you for your support. All Blessings David W. Virtue DD

RICHARD N. OSTLING Associated Press The spokesman for bishops who claim leadership of a majority of the world's Anglican Christians denounced the gay-rights policies of America's Episcopal Church on Saturday, following a two-day caucus in Atlanta with U.S. conservatives. Archbishop Peter Akinola said the future of true Anglicanism in the United States lies with conservative minority opposition groups within the Episcopal Church who oppose gay marriage and the church's approval of an openly gay bishop. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the Anglican Communion. Akinola also said in a telephone interview that unless conditions change, he will not attend meetings alongside the leader of the Episcopal Church, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, or attend the 2008 meeting of the world's Anglican bishops if the U.S. hierarchy participates. Akinola leads Nigeria's Anglican church, with its 17.5 million members, and the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa, a continent that includes half the world's 77 million Anglicans. He is also spokesman for "Global South" archbishops who have severed normal ties with the Episcopal Church. Episcopal Church spokesman Daniel England said Saturday that Griswold understands that Akinola has strong feelings on the issue. "I'm sure the presiding bishop will be disappointed if the archbishop cannot join him at the communion table," he said. Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane of Cape Town has criticized Akinola's strong stand against the U.S. church. But the archbishops announced jointly March 29 that they agree with the stand against gay clergy and blessing of same-sex couples taken by the world's bishops at their 1998 meeting. The dispute over the American church's acceptance of gay activity became a major world issue when it approved an openly homosexual bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. Akinola underscored his support of the conservative minority over the weekend when he met in Atlanta with leaders from the two main U.S. organizations that oppose toleration of homosexual activity: the American Anglican Council and the recently formed Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. Akinola said the Episcopal Church "is trying to redefine Christianity and rewrite Scripture, and we have no right to do that. The historic faith of the church is what we stand by, and there is no going back." In the archbishop's view, although those who favor liberal policies on homosexuality have a clear operating majority in the U.S. church, he strongly backs the minority and its new network. "It's either repent and come back to the fold, or give up on the Anglican family," he said. But England, the Episcopal Church spokesman, said the church's position stands. "If he's waiting on the network to replace the Episcopal Church, I think he's in for a long wait," he said.

By The Rev'd Canon John Heidt April 2, 2004 An Open Letter to the Presiding Bishop and House of Bishops Dear Bishop Griswold, It has come to my attention that since the recent meeting of the House of Bishops there are those who claim that the more "liberal" bishops led by yourself were eager to find out what the more "orthodox" bishops really want and would have come up with a stronger statement if more of them had attended the meeting. This is a serious indictment, and knowing several of the bishops involved I have asked myself why they did not attend and what would have been gained if they had. It seems to me that all of us who sincerely want to maintain "the greatest possible communion among us" must try to understand sympathetically their decision before criticizing it. And we must ask what more the HOB could have learned from them about their needs that has not already been made quite clear. I find three interrelated groups who have either decided not to attend any more HOB meetings or, for strategic purposes, to attend only some of the sessions. First is a broadly based group who feel socially marginalized, ecclesiastically disenfranchised, and theologically excommunicated by a large majority of their fellow bishops. That this has happened raises the whole question of how we think we appoint bishops - by popular election or by the guidance of the Holy Spirit? Or have we come to assume that the two are the same: "Vox Populi, Vox Dei" - as those seemed to believe who argued that New Hampshire should have whatever bishop the people elected. This group of bishops find the HOB meetings a waste of time and only attend all or some of the sessions in the hope of still wielding some influence on the rest of the House. I believe these bishops will only be won back, if at all, when the rest of the bishops show outward signs of genuine respect for their convictions, and admit that the majority may be wrong. They will not be won back by accommodation, compromise or toleration. Who, after all, wants to be tolerated? Within this group is a more cohesive group of bishops, represented by many of those taking part in the new "Network of Anglican Churches." These bishops believe it is morally wrong to take part in any future meetings of the HOB. Their argument is simple but clear: Homosexuality is condemned by scripture; the House of Bishops has approved the consecration of a practicing homosexual; therefore the House of Bishops is condemned by scripture. To participate in the house's future deliberations would be guilt by association. The issue for them is not about the Episcopal Church and how it chooses its bishops, but about the primary work of the Church itself - saving souls. This is a so-called "salvation issue" which cannot be compromised. Only a corporate act of repentance by the HOB acknowledging that it was wrong to disregard scripture in allowing the consecration of a public practicing homosexual, can possibly bring them back. Until that unlikely event, they look to the greater Anglican Communion for support. Because they believe they are in a state of "impaired communion" with the rest of ECUSA's bishops they require some form of guaranteed episcopal oversight from those bishops who cannot accept the actions of the last General Convention. Thirdly are the few bishops left who believe that the HOB went into serious error in 1976 when it agreed to permit the ordination of women. Believing such ordinations are invalid, as supported neither by scripture, tradition nor any established catholic authority, they are unable to accept the priestly and episcopal ministries of ordained women and therefore consider themselves in a state of impaired communion with the rest of the bishops. (There are others, and I am surprised at how many there are, who believe that though the 1976 decision was mistaken can still live with it. If they do not go to HOB meetings it is for other reasons.) These few bishops continued to participate in the meetings of the HOB so long as their position was respected. But now that this is no longer the case they have aligned themselves with many of those in the above group. Like them, these bishops want to be in step with the rest of the Anglican Communion, but not so much because they think of themselves simply as Anglican but because they see the Communion itself primarily as a provincial or ethnic portion of the Catholic Church united and authenticated by common faith and sacraments. For them valid sacraments as well as true faith are "salvation issues" because they are the covenanted means by which the church mediates Christ's salvation to each generation. They see no point in being part of a HOB that thinks of the Episcopal Church as one denomination among many with a right to determine its own faith and practice apart from the vast consensus of Christendom. I do not see any possibility of them again becoming involved in the deliberations of the national episcopal church at any level unless the ecumenical dimension of the church is taken into account and their own position is respected by repealing the punitive canons now in force. At the moment what do these groups want apart from respect for their position? I think they have made this quite clear. They want priests and laity to be ministered to by bishops who do not accept the HOB's approval of Robinson's consecration. And they want this ministry guaranteed rather than dependent upon the whim of individual diocesan bishops, and to be assured that priests and laity of their persuasion will not be threatened or harassed legally, politically or economically. (I have learned that one bishop has already sent letters to his clergy warning them that anyone who brought in another bishop would be liable to presentment.) To secure this they want any such oversight to be guided by the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the primates, and not just by someone like yourself who is not of their persuasion. Finally, adequate episcopal oversight is not primarily about jurisdiction but about communion. The juridical is meant to support communion, and when it becomes divisive and/or immoral it sometimes has to be ignored. The Rev'd Canon John Heidt, M.Litt., D.Phil. (Oxon) is Canon Theologian to the Bishop of Fort Worth the Rt. Rev. Jack Iker.

CofE Faces Evangelical Failures and Backlash to Woman Archbishop Appointment//ACNA leadership failures//Continuing Church Mergers   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org December 30, 2025   Dear Brothers and Sisters,   2025 was not a year to remember or repeat. The steady drumbeat of “reset” and “realignment” continued with a fractured communion. The West and North moved further away from the gospel, even as the Global South embraced the faith with greater intensity.   As the West embraced the culture and ditched the Bible, provinces like Nigeria embraced the gospel and the pain of persecution while adding 15 new dioceses, even as their people were being slaughtered by Islamic terrorists. By contrast The Episcopal Church merged dioceses as their numbers fell and parishes closed.   Western Anglicanism is not worth dying for; there is nothing in it worth saving. It has been hollowed out by years of compromise with the culture over (homo)sex and a refusal to believe that Jesus is the only way to the Father. The Great Commission has long been decommissioned. One is reminded of the words of Jesus; “Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. …” Western Anglicanism is frightened of its own spiritual and theological shadow. It fears rebuttal… if you stand for nothing you will fall for anything and that is the state of our Anglican churches in the West today.  Western Anglicanism pays lip service to the creeds, refuses to accept the full authority of scripture and wonders why its pews are empty. Sodomite marriages have not filled pews.   ALL IS NOT LOST   On October 16, 2025, the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) issued a bold statement declaring "the future has arrived." In this declaration, GAFCON announced it had single handedly reordered the Anglican Communion, rejecting the traditional Instruments of Communion and establishing itself as the authentic expression of global Anglicanism.   The GAFCON reset of the Anglican Communion aims to restore biblical authority and has declared that the Anglican Communion will be reordered as a fellowship of autonomous provinces.  Many orthodox provinces have expressed dissatisfaction with the direction of the Anglican Communion, particularly following the election of Sarah Mullally as the first female Archbishop of Canterbury.   Global South leaders claim to represent up to eighty-five percent of practicing Anglicans worldwide with GAFCON positioning itself as the guardian of biblical orthodoxy against the revisionist agenda of Canterbury and the Western provinces.   While there is talk of a formal schism with the West, that seems not to be on the cards. The Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA) has been clear in its disapproval of Western Anglican innovations particularly in response to the Church of England's decisions regarding same-sex blessings and the appointment of Sarah Mullally as Archbishop of Canterbury, the first woman leader in the church’s 1,400-year history. She is viewed as progressive (revisionist) on a number of issues but especially sexuality, which has alienated her from the vast majority of the Anglican Communion’s bishops.   However, the GSFA, which has overlapping bishops with their GAFCON brethren, are committed to maintaining the unity of the visible church and the fabric of the Anglican Communion. They will remain true to the historic faith, the Anglican formularies, the authority of Scripture and sexual morality, honoring the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution 1:10.   GAFCON will represent the future of Anglicanism in terms of numerical strength and global reach.   If it wasn’t enough to rain on the Anglican parade over same sex marriage, one Anglican province did the unthinkable . The Church in Wales elected an avowed lesbian archbishop to run its affairs, a more in your face act cannot be imagined. Is a transsexual archbishop waiting in the wings?   Among the blows and woes the Church of England suffered, none did as much damage to its evangelical wing as the John Smyth, Jonathan Fletcher and Mike Pilavachi sexual predation over abuse of power and authority issues. The fallout is still being felt after the then Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby resigned following an independent review that found he and other senior church leaders had covered up the abuse of over 100 boys and young men by Smyth.   There was a lot of hype and talk about a quiet revival in the Church of England which turned out not to be the case. New attendance stats released by the Church of England were in marked contrast to the Bible Society’s report of a quiet revival in the UK.   It was touted that attendance at Church of England churches rose for the fourth year in a row, was a headline on the official Church website. “The overall number of regular worshippers across the Church of England’s congregations rose to 1.009 million in 2024, a rise of 0.6 per cent, according to the annual Statistics for Mission findings,” the Church of England “Statistics for Mission” report says.   But Madeleine Davies of the Church Times contradicted the official optimism. “The data, published, record that in 2024 attendance rose for the fourth year, but that recovery since the Covid-19 pandemic has slowed. Increases in attendance since 2023 were smaller than in previous years. In 2019, a “middle-sized” church had an all-age average weekly attendance (AWA) of 34.5; in 2024, the equivalent figure was 26. The median church has just one child in attendance, compared with three in 2019.”  The moral of this story is don’t believe what the church turns out as official news.  A different reading could be that any revival in the UK is occurring outside the Church of England.   EPISCOPAL CHURCH WOES   The Episcopal faced two major issues this past year. The first was its numbers as it decreased its footprint on American soil and the violation of its canons by bishops and clergy alike.   As of 2023, the Episcopal Church had approximately 1,547,779 active baptized members and about 2.4 million total members. The church has seen a decline in membership over the past decade, with a total membership drop of around 21% from 2013. In 2023, the average Sunday attendance was nearly 411,000, reflecting a recovery from the pandemic.   However, a deeper look at the church’s numbers revealed that in 2024 Episcopal Church’s Baptismal number dropped to 19,624 down from 20,247 in 2023. Resulting in a -3.1% drop of 623.   The other issue was the calls for criminal investigations into the Episcopal Church’s failure to fulfill mandatory child abuse reporting obligations, reported by Anglican Watch , the unofficial watchdog of the Episcopal Church. They have called on state attorneys general to investigate the denomination’s ongoing refusal to comply with state mandatory child sex abuse reporting obligations. Of particular concern is the refusal of Episcopal Church officials to report historic child sex abuse cases, notably in New York, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Maryland.   “Anglican Watch is appalled by the fact that senior Episcopal Church officials, including former Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, former Bishop for Pastoral Development Todd Ousley, and retired Bishop Alan Gates all failed to report the allegations that Episcopal priest Richard Losch took one or more boys across state lines for the purpose of raping them,” says Anglican Watch official Eric Bonetti.   “The states in question — Massachusetts, Michigan, and New York — all expressly require reporting of historical abuse and impose criminal penalties for failing to do so. The failed safeguarding performances which reared its head at St. Thomas Fifth Avenue was perhaps the most egregious of all the parish failures. You can read more here: https://www.anglicanwatch.com/anglican-watch-files-title-iv-complaint-against-saint-thomas-rector-carl-turner-believes-lawsuit-against-parish-is-warranted/   and here: https://www.anglicanwatch.com/heres-the-truth-about-the-saint-thomas-church-fifth-avenue-sexual-assault-and-defamation-lawsuit/   But the church that got the biggest public headlines of the year was the Anglican Church in North America.   A major article in the Washington Post accused ACNA Archbishop Stephen Wood of sexual misconduct, abuse of power, plagiarism and much more. Some 3,500 words were written blowing up the orthodox archbishop of the small 100,000-member denomination by one of America’s leading newspapers. He now faces a trial for his behavior which could result in his being tossed out of the church.   ACNA Bishop Stewart Ruch III, accused of mishandling abuse allegations and failing to safeguard parishioners in his care, was found not guilty by a church court on all counts after a tumultuous trial that spanned more than four months.   The decision came more than six years after a 9-year-old child in the Upper Midwest Diocese, which is led by Ruch, first came forward with sexual abuse allegations against a lay minister, who has since been convicted of felony sexual assault and felony child sexual assault. More than 10 clergy and other lay leaders in Ruch’s diocese have been accused of misconduct, a pattern that abuse advocates say resulted from Ruch’s leadership failures.   But the case that could well be the financial undoing of the denomination came from Bishop Derek Jones of the Special Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (SJAFC). The complaints include allegations of ecclesiastical power abuse, wrongful use of disciplinary processes, backdating or fabrication of church documents, interference with external employment opportunities, wrongful release of a priest from orders, and infliction of financial, emotional, and psychological stress upon persons in Jones' care.   Jones was inhibited. He went on to split from the ACNA and formed his own church - The Anglican Reformed Catholic Church – which includes those bishops ousted from the ACNA. Millions of dollars in lawsuits are at stake here. Leaders describe the new alignment as "Classic Anglican." You can read more here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/jafc-bishops-form-new-anglican-denomination-the-anglican-reformed-catholic-church-will-be-led-by-bi   To cap off the church’s troubles, another article appeared in the Washington Post claiming that the interim ACNA leader Bishop Julian Dobbs was involved in financial scandal.   Dobbs, who suspended the denomination’s archbishop over allegations of sexual misconduct — was himself previously investigated over two separate allegations of financial impropriety, according to a federal lawsuit and a global charity’s internal records. You can read more here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/he-suspended-the-archbishop-but-faced-his-own-probes-financial-ones   The road ahead for ACNA appears rocky, and further schism cannot be ruled out. Whether these developments are isolated events remains to be seen.   On the plus side, The Anglican Church in America reunited with The Anglican Catholic Church.   The House of Bishops and The Executive Council of The Anglican Church in America voted unanimously to reverse a historic schism with The Anglican Catholic Church. Thirty-four years ago, at a meeting in Deerfield Beach, Florida, a failed merger with the American Episcopal Church, resulted in a schism that has lasted until the present. Over the past twelve years, many ecumenical meetings have been convened to discuss how to repair this damage, which is often regarded as the most unfortunate event in the history of the Anglican Continuum.   Early efforts at reunification resulted in the historic communio-in-sacris (shared participation in the sacraments) agreement which was signed in Atlanta, Georgia in 2017. This agreement united the Anglican Church in America, The Anglican Catholic Church, The Anglican Province of America and The Diocese of the Holy Cross in a communion of Anglican jurisdictions. Subsequently, The Diocese of The Holy Cross joined The Anglican Catholic Church. In October, 2023, the General Synod of The Anglican Church in America voted unanimously to join with other Continuing churches at the earliest possible time. On April 8, 2025, the House of Bishops of The Anglican Church in America voted “unanimously and irrevocably” to reunite with The Anglican Catholic Church. The Executive Council in its meeting of April 29, 2025, affirmed and ratified the decision by the House of Bishops.   There are still outstanding issues but a synod will be held within the next seven months to finalize the reunification of the ACA and the ACC.   ****   We are going down to the wire as we prepare VOL for its biggest and best year yet, but we need your support to make it happen.   With my new Substack davidvirtue2.substack.com on the Middle East, we are expanding our coverage in 2026 to include:   ·       The rise of Anglicanism in the Global South as it separates from the Global North. ·       The decline of liberalism and progressive theology, and the growing threat of Islam to our faith. ·       The increasing decline of the Anglican Church of Canada, The Episcopal Church, The Church of England, the Church in Wales and the Scottish Episcopal Church. ·       The rise of GAFCON and the GSFA to counter the threat of western liberalism and secularization. ·       The financial influence by TEC to pressure the Global South with money aimed at persuading African Anglicans to accept pansexuality. ·       How oil-rich Middle Eastern nations use their wealth to shape Western minds and promote Islam while systematically undermining the Christian West. ·       The persecution of Christians throughout the world. ·       We need to raise $30,000 by December 31st to continue our coverage of the Anglican Communion. We are bringing on board new writers with clear insights into Scripture and culture.   VOL has no mega-donors and no grants—just faithful readers like you who believe we tell the truth however difficult it may be. Tens of thousands of enthusiastic VOL readers trust us to expose the most pressing issues facing Anglicanism today.   Please give before December 31st to ensure your gift is tax-deductible this calendar year.   Your partnership allows us not only to continue our work but to grow and do even better with more writers and commentators.   How to Give: Online: PayPal donation link at https://www.virtueonline.org/donate By check (tax-deductible):  VIRTUEONLINE  P.O. BOX 111  Shohola, PA 18458 Thank you for your support,   David

Julian Dobbs, interim leader of the Anglican Church in North America, denied claims and said he was cleared of alleged financial wrongdoing.   EXCLUSIVE   By Ian Shapira THE WASHINGTON POST December 30, 2025   The interim leader of the Anglican Church in North America — who suspended the denomination’s archbishop over allegations of sexual misconduct — was himself previously investigated over two separate allegations of financial impropriety, according to a federal lawsuit and a global charity’s internal records.   Bishop Julian Dobbs was appointed on Nov. 15 as the dean of the Anglican Church in North America, assuming the duties of Archbishop Stephen Wood. The next day, with the consent of five other bishops, Dobbs, 57, “inhibited” or suspended Wood for 60 days after allegations of sexual misconduct surfaced by two women, one of whom was a church employee. The woman said Wood, a married father, put his hand on the back of her head and tried to kiss her inside his South Carolina office in April 2024, shortly before he was elected archbishop.   Dobbs’s appointment, approved by the denomination’s College of Bishops, comes at a critical moment for the conservative church of 128,000 members and 1,000-plus congregations across the United States, Canada and Mexico. Its bishops gathered this month for a quickly arranged meeting in Texas, where they addressed how they’ve “lacked attentiveness or care for the flock committed to us,” according to a church report. “It was clear throughout our deliberations that there is a significant deficit of trust toward the College of Bishops,” the letter said.   But the bishop tasked with leading the church out of turmoil has faced his own allegations of wrongdoing. A recent federal lawsuit against the Anglican Church in North America accused Dobbs of having “absconded” with about $48,000 from a chaplaincy that has long endorsed Anglican chaplains to the military and other institutions.   In a separate matter, Barnabas Aid, a global Christian charity based in Britain, investigated Dobbs and his wife in 2018 over more than $28,000 in questionable expenses, according to the internal records of the charity, for which Dobbs and his wife worked. The charity also accused Dobbs and his wife of running a “secret and undisclosed” nonprofit with a similar mission out of a Barnabas Aid office. That nonprofit received donations from supporters on the Barnabas Aid mailing list, Barnabas Aid contended.   Dobbs told The Washington Post that all the financial misconduct allegations against him are “unsubstantiated.” He said the chaplaincy’s claims were “false” and were refuted by multiple investigations — one by his diocese’s attorney and treasurer, another by an independent auditor hired by his diocese, and a third by the denomination. The denomination’s inquiry into the Barnabas Aid allegations, he said, also absolved him of any wrongdoing.   “All of the allegations against me have been thoroughly investigated and proven to be unsubstantiated,” Dobbs said in a statement. “I have never misappropriated funds and any such claims that I have done so are baseless, feckless, and without merit.”   Asked about the Barnabas Aid allegations, his wife, Brenda Dobbs, provided The Post with a statement: “The highest standards of financial integrity were maintained throughout my tenure both professionally and personally.”   Dobbs, who lives in Manassas, Virginia, is one of the denomination’s more high-profile figures, in part because of his public warnings about Islam over the years. In a 2022 letter on his website marking the “Islamic terror attacks” of Sept. 11, 2001, he wrote that the violence was carried out “in the name of a religion that is still intolerant” of people practicing different faiths. He also has appeared on a radio show formerly hosted by Sebastian Gorka, an ally of President Donald Trump who is now his senior director for counterterrorism.   Dobbs helped lead Barnabas Aid USA, then based in McLean, Virginia, from 2006 to 2018 — first as executive director, later as a board member and then as chair or president, according to tax filings and his resignation letter. His wife worked there as an office manager. The nonprofit raises money for its global umbrella organization.   The charity compiled a 102-page investigative file — a memo, emails and other records — that was sent in early 2019 to the Anglican Church in North America and obtained by The Post. According to the memo, the charity asserted that Dobbs and his wife engaged in “deliberate acts of misusing Barnabas Aid liquid assets to benefit either themselves or another ministry.” The memo also alleged that they misused funds for travel and other expenses, some linked to Dobbs’s duties for the church and his personal life.   Foley Beach — who served as archbishop when both sets of financial misconduct allegations surfaced — told The Post that all the claims were “thoroughly investigated” and that the inquiries determined that Dobbs “did nothing wrong.” Beach circulated a letter on Dec. 12 to the College of Bishops saying the accusations were deemed “without foundation.”   Turmoil at the top Born in 2009 after a split with the Episcopal Church over its 2003 confirmation of an openly gay bishop, the Anglican Church in North America brands itself a refuge from the “state of brokenness” of its former theological home. The denomination’s official stance on sexuality calls same-sex relationships a sin. It also doesn’t permit women to become bishops or archbishop.   Now, the 16-year-old denomination is grappling with a leadership crisis.   This month, a church board of inquiry found probable cause to put Wood, the archbishop, on an ecclesiastical trial. Wood, 62, also faces accusations that he bullied and demeaned colleagues and plagiarized sermons. He has denied trying to kiss the female employee and declined to comment on the second woman’s accusation. He has called the other charges meritless. If found guilty, he could be defrocked.   Separately, Stewart Ruch III, a Chicago-area bishop, was acquitted this month by an ecclesiastical court after being accused of mishandling a sex abuse case and allowing men with criminal convictions to worship, work or take leadership roles in his diocese. In the trial’s run-up, Ruch denied the canonical charges, which ranged from violation of ordination vows to bringing “scandal.” The court’s seven members ruled that the prosecution didn’t provide sufficient evidence. ACNAtoo, a watchdog group, declared in a blog post that the court’s final order — which sidestepped some core elements of the case against Ruch — was “rife with easily refutable claims” and “confirms survivors’ fears that the [denomination] will give bishops a free pass.”   Bishop Stewart Ruch III leads worshipers in 2017 at a church in suburban Chicago. (Obtained by The Washington Post)   The denomination is also contending with a federal lawsuit filed by the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy, an Alabama-based nonprofit religious organization that for years has endorsed chaplains to the military. The suit, which seeks at least $7 million in damages, accused the denomination of staging “a failed corporate takeover” when Wood suspended the chaplaincy’s longtime lead bishop, Derek Jones, “without authority” in September. Wood announced that the suspension came after accusations that Jones abused his ecclesiastical power and after he refused to cooperate with an investigation — allegations Jones denied to The Post. Jones now faces an ecclesiastical trial on four church charges.   A British charity’s allegations Dobbs, the denomination’s new interim leader, was born in New Zealand, where he served as a rector, hosted a Christian television show, and helped run Barnabas Aid’s local office. In 2006, he immigrated to the United States and began helping oversee Barnabas Aid USA, whose mission was to aid persecuted Christians. By September 2011, Dobbs was consecrated as a bishop to lead a diocese in the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a founding “jurisdiction” of congregations in the Anglican Church in North America. About 2½ years later, Dobbs was appointed the convocation’s head bishop.   Even as Dobbs led the convocation, he continued to help run Barnabas Aid USA.   In 2018, the British-based Barnabas umbrella organization began investigating Dobbs and his wife for claiming unauthorized, unjustified or unexplained expenses, in some cases related to their phones, travel or meals, according to the memo and correspondence in the Barnabas investigative file.   In an August 2018 email to Dobbs and his wife, the charity’s then chief executive, Hendrik Storm, wrote that the expenses over the previous two years totaled about $28,200.   “If left unexplained, it breaches the faith inherent in the working relationship and certainly appears to be fundamentally and directly inconsistent with the obligations you had to Barnabas Fund, perhaps could even be construed as tantamount to fraud,” Storm wrote, using the charity’s older name.   Nearly three weeks later, Dobbs replied: “Never has there been any deception in any of our expenses. We have been completely forthright with these submissions and are committed in being individuals of honesty and integrity in our personal and public lives.”   He said his expenses were discussed in advance and regularly submitted. He noted that his diocese “was solely responsible for the majority of these costs over many years, significantly benefiting” the charity.   The next day, Storm replied: “We have no record of what you are claiming.”   Reached by phone, Storm, who now helps run another global nonprofit, declined an interview but confirmed the authenticity of the emails and memo.   The memo also accused Dobbs and his wife of running another Christian aid charity called Katartismos Global out of the Barnabas office without informing Barnabas officials. The memo characterized the arrangement as “dishonesty and deception by not declaring this clear conflict of interest.” It said Katartismos’s donations came from supporters on Barnabas Aid’s mailing list, “almost certainly diverting away to their own charity donations that would have been given to Barnabas Aid.”   In February 2019, the charity’s investigative memo and emails were sent to the Anglican Church in North America. Eight months later, Beach, then the archbishop, wrote to Barnabas trustees defending Dobbs and citing the conclusion of the denomination’s inquiry:   “As to the Right Rev. Julian Dobbs, we do not find any [credible] evidence of willful wrongdoing by him, and therefore find no basis for any disciplinary action against him under the canons of this Church,” Beach’s letter said. He defended Dobbs’s expenses, saying “each reimbursement was reimbursed with fund[s] which were written and signed by someone in your organization,” according to the letter, obtained by The Post.   But the charity pushed back, according to an email obtained by The Post. Chris Sugden, an Anglican priest acting as a liaison between the denomination and Barnabas, wrote Beach reiterating that the Dobbses had not obtained authorization from the head office for “all their expenses and other payments.” Although the charity accepted Beach’s decision to consider the case closed, Sugden also said that the charity would like its disagreement with the church’s conclusion “noted for the record” if the IRS or another authority investigated.   Sugden confirmed to The Post the authenticity of the email exchange.   Asked about the allegations against Dobbs, a Barnabas Aid spokesperson said: “None of the current executive team were around when these matters were alleged to have taken place.” Michael Hewat, the board chairman of Barnabas Aid International, said he was a trustee when the allegations surfaced. But he said he hasn’t seen the charity’s internal records that supported its claims of wrongdoing. “On the basis of what I have seen and know, I have no cause to doubt Julian’s integrity,” Hewat wrote.   Claims from a chaplaincy Shortly before Beach cleared Dobbs in the Barnabas matter, Dobbs faced separate scrutiny for his leadership of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America.   In the latter half of 2019, the convocation’s chaplaincy requested an investigation of Dobbs “for missing funds not reported on the financial statements” of the convocation, according to the chaplaincy’s lawsuit against the Anglican Church in North America. Shortly afterward, the denomination said it appointed three people to investigate the chaplaincy’s allegations about the convocation’s financial accounting, including a bishop, a denomination lawyer and a forensic accountant.   Although Dobbs is not a defendant in the chaplaincy’s lawsuit, the allegations concerning him are chronicled in a document attached to the court file known as a “declaration,” written by Derek Jones, the bishop who helped establish the chaplaincy.   The chaplaincy had donated tens of thousands of dollars to the convocation from 2014 to 2019, but the convocation could not account for the money, Jones told The Post.   By April 2020, according to Jones’s declaration, the chaplaincy contacted the IRS concerning Dobbs. When the denomination’s investigation wrapped up, it found “no financial impropriety, misappropriation of funds, or misuse of designated gifts” by Dobbs, according to Beach’s letter to the College of Bishops.   In March 2021, the lawsuit alleges, Dobbs “was found to have absconded with approximately $48,000” of the chaplaincy’s money — a determination made by the chaplaincy, Jones clarified to The Post. But Beach, then the archbishop, told The Post that the allegation was “false and unfounded.”   Dobbs said that he tried to reconcile with Jones in a formal statement addressed to Beach. Jones told The Post that the letter, dated March 22, 2021, was part of an agreement between the denomination and the chaplaincy to move on.   “I regret and apologize for my part and on behalf of my staff, for the confusion in [the convocation’s] financial accounting practices … and for any harm brought to the ministry of the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy,” according to Dobbs’s letter, which the denomination provided.   The letter, Dobbs said, was “not an apology or acknowledgement about my alleged mishandling of finances.” Instead, he said, his letter was meant to “acknowledge the inconvenience that resulted from a perfectly legal” change in his convocation’s accounting practices.   Dobbs’s step toward reconciliation was pivotal. That same day, according to a letter the denomination provided The Post, the chaplaincy’s attorneys told Jones that Dobbs’s apology met their requirements to move on: “We will consider this closed and agree not to initiate an investigation of, or action against Bishop Dobbs with any federal or state authorities.”   END

Rowan Williams: To Understand Believers, Understand Unbelievers By Robert Stowe England The Christian Challenge Washington, DC March 30, 2004 WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams told a packed house at a lecture delivered at Georgetown University that one can better understand believers in other faiths and even atheists by understanding what others disbelieve about one’s own faith. In turn, their understanding of your unbelief can help them. The lecture was delivered as part of a “Building Bridges” interfaith seminar between Muslim and Christian scholars that began last night and will continue through Wednesday. It is the third such “Building Bridges” conference, following on the heels of similar gatherings in London in 2002, hosted by Williams’s predecessor, Lord Carey, and Qatar in 2003. Williams, who delivered his lecture in an authoritative, polished style, argued that interfaith discussions can be helpful if they find “the appropriate language in which differences can be talked about rather than used as an excuse for violent separation.” His learned discourse illustrated why so many consider him a towering intellect. The Archbishop used the occasion to criticize a proposal in the United Kingdom to require that religious instruction in schools include the “non-belief systems” of atheism and humanism. While he agreed religious instruction and faith can benefit by looking at criticisms of the faith, he rejected the notion that atheism is a fully developed system of its own outside the context of the faith systems it rejects. Williams began by recalling the story of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, who was arrested, charged with being a Christian, and brought before a magistrate in 156 A.D., when he was an aged man in his 80s. The magistrate admonished Polycarp he could save his life by renouncing his faith and acknowledging the divine spirit of the emperor by saying ‘Away with the atheists.’ In this instance, “atheists” was used to refer to Christians and others who did not take part in the civic cult of the Roman Empire, and did not perform public religious duties and take part in the Roman festivals, Williams explained. Polycarp, though, looking around at the noisy mob in the amphitheatre gathered to witness the fights of the gladiators and public executions said, ‘Away with the atheists.’ The magistrate grasped what Polycarp meant and he condemned him to be burned alive. Various atheistic approaches in Western societies are “not intelligible apart from a specific context of thought and image, representation and misrepresentation of specific religious doctrines,” Williams said. The Archbishop then described several varieties of modern atheism to illustrate his point that they are simply responses to a belief system and not a system in and of themselves. He named, among others, the “protest atheism” of Bertrand Russell, who found Christianity conceptually inadequate, and the “supreme intellectual detachment” of atheists who see the intellect “as a mechanism for processing checkable information only, with everything else reduced to emotive noise.” The Archbishop also noted that atheists like Marx and Nietzsche who claimed that religious talk is ideological and “an instrument of social control whose surface conceptual structure is designed to obscure its real function and to divert thought, emotion and energy from real to unreal objects.” The Archbishop faulted the UK proposal to teach atheism and humanism as belief systems, noting such proposals are based on “the pervasive assumption of modernity that the intellectual default position is non-religious.” Williams warned that such instruction could “end up treating atheism as the only position not subject to critical scrutiny and the construction of a proper intellectual genealogy: not a welcome position for a rationalist to be in.” Even so, Williams argued, religious faith can be strengthened by intellectual skepticism and criticism. The Archbishop, however, questioned the tendency in current religious instruction to teach about “finished systems for which questions have been answered rather than (to borrow Alastair Macintyre’s phrase) ‘continuities of conflict,’ in which the moral, spiritual and intellectual tensions constantly press believers towards a fuller, more comprehensive statement of their commitments.” To build his case for a more critical assessment of faith, Williams cited the Zen dictum, “If you meet the Buddha, kill him.” Such a command is made to illustrate the point that “any shape given to enlightened awareness (the Buddha) will take its shape from the unenlightened awareness.” The Archbishop transferred the analogy to the Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. He cited the work of Simone Weil, who, he says, concluded that “when the human ego says ‘God’, it cannot be referring to any reality to which the name might be truthfully applied. Because the ‘I’ that says ‘God’ is always self-directed and so wedded to untruth, God cannot properly be spoken of.” Continuing the analogy from Weil, Williams added, “Any God my selfish mind can conceive is bound to be a false, non-existent God. The true God is known only in ways that cannot be reduced to theory or third-person language. If you meet God (in the language of systematic theology or metaphysics), kill him.” Williams then began a tutorial in how certain statements from each of the Abrahamic faiths that are disbelieved by one or both of the other two can illuminate each of the faiths. He noted, for example, that Jews disbelieve the proposition that “God is free to disregard or rewrite the solemn promise made to a specific people at a point in history.” Christians disbelieve the proposition that “God needs to be persuaded by our virtue to love us or to act on our behalf,” Williams said. Muslims disbelieve the proposition that “god is the compound of several distinct divine agents,” as in the Trinity, Williams said. The Archbishop noted that it is important to understand that the belief systems of one of the Abrahamic faiths is not a rejection of an opposite point in each of the other two faiths. “[O]ne of the darkest and most tragic parts of our history in relation to other faiths… is the construction of the other as the opposite,” Williams said. Williams argued that the differences between groups in dialogue can help those participating in the dialogue to clarify their fundamental points of view. For example, he noted, Christians view the church as a separate body from the political community while Muslims see the religious and political world intertwined. “But this does not at all mean that [Muslims believe that] ‘religious’ authorities must dominate the state, or that the free exercise of different faiths is unthinkable,” Williams said. Williams contended that “the issue of voluntary abandonment of Islam is a subject that needs to be looked at with nuance.” He noted that to Muslims, this is a political offence, but he added that it was not clear that Muslim jurisprudence required an extreme political penalty, such as death. Christians see this Muslim view as a denial of human liberty. Discussions between Christians and Muslims on the issue of voluntary abandonment of Islam, he suggested, could lead to “a deeper recognition of the logic of free submission, and the unavoidably paradoxical nature of a political community governed by law which also assumes that loyalty and obedience to this community cannot be secured by external sanctions that seek to constrain the will by threat.” The Archbishop said the interfaith dialogue does not have to be condemned “to the sterile and abstract task so often envisaged for it, of identifying a common core of beliefs.” This approach is built on the misunderstanding that the points of agreement are, indeed, the important points of the three faiths, Williams said. “The exercise I have been describing is not about finding a common core at all; it is about finding the appropriate language in which difference can be talked about rather than used as an excuse for violent separation.” Williams said. “[I]n the interfaith conversation, we can continue to make the claims we make out of conviction of the truth, but seek to break through the assumption that everything can be reduced to whether people say yes or no to a set of simple propositions,” Williams said. “Only in the wake of such a move can true dialogue proceed.” Williams’s Letter to Griswold (first reported by VIRTUOSITY) THE AUTHOR BRIEFLY TALKED with Rowan Williams at a reception after the lecture. While Williams was cordial and discussed topics not currently in the news, he declined to answer any “hard questions” about alternative episcopal oversight in the United States or the state of the Anglican Communion. Williams’s press secretary, the Rev. Jonathan Jennings did, however, provide some comments about the ongoing claims and counterclaims about a recent letter Williams sent to Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold. Jennings confirmed that Williams sent a letter to Griswold ahead of the recent meeting of the House of Bishops in Texas, urging that an effort be made to provide alternative Episcopal care for parishes at theological odds with their bishops. He said that the verbatim quotations Griswold read to the bishops in Texas was an accurate reading from the letter. However, no transcript of those quotations has been made public, so the exact text is not widely known. According to various news reports, Griswold claimed the letter stated that Williams said that alternative Episcopal oversight should occur within the parameters of the Province’s canons. But, it still remains unclear if the news reports accurately reflect what Griswold read from the letter since it was a closed meeting, and all reports have been reported second hand. Jennings did make it clear that the quoted remarks read by Griswold from Williams’s letter could not be construed as a direct comment on the confirmations by five visiting bishops in Ohio in the week ahead of the House of Bishops meeting. “The [Archbishop’s] letter went out before that happened,” Jennings noted. Jennings stated the Williams’s position is that ECUSA authorities and those who wish to set up alternative Episcopal care should work together to find a solution. Beyond that, he would not comment. END

WIDENING RIFT, GROWING ANARCHY IN ECUSA’S HOUSE OF BISHOPS News Analysis By David W. Virtue If the armed sheriffs who stood outside the gates of Camp Allen, Navasota to greet ECUSA’s House of Bishops is anything to go by; either the mostly revisionist bishops feared a vast right wing orthodox conspiracy requiring an armed put down, or worse, that the unbiblical decisions made by the HOB might be overturned by a Nazarene wearing prophetic robes with nail prints in his hands, carrying a large crook, announcing the judgment of God. The Lamb of God would never have gained admittance however, because he would have failed the photo identification test at the gate. “Behold I stand at the door and knock, if any one hears my voice…” takes on a whole new meaning. In any event Frank Griswold and Vicki Gene Robinson felt safe enough with armed guards at the gate not to wear bullet proof vests (they both did at Robinson’s consecration), a leftist paranoia designed to scare the orthodox, in the same way ECUSA’s pansexualists occasionally scream “they are trying to kill us” when all the evidence points to the exact opposite. It is this writer’s contention that God will keep Louie Crew and Jack Spong alive long enough to see the damage they have wrought over 35 years—a more fitting end cannot be imagined. One can imagine that, at the Last Judgment, both informing the One who died for their sins (here God will pause and replay the Passion in heavenly DVD) that all they were trying to do is update His sexuality clauses in the 10 Commandments. In Spong’s case, he will tell the Father of Light that the Apostle Paul was really a self-loathing homosexual and could not be trusted to tell the truth about human sexuality anyway. Behind them both, waiting his turn for judgment will be the fey figure of Frank Griswold in deep “conversation”, talking “graciously” with Sufi Rumi and 61 revisionist bishops trailing behind both men. His and their fate sealed long ago. The words “depart from me I never knew you” waiting to be uttered with all due solemnity. By all accounts, news of what actually transpired at Camp Allen signaled growing anarchy among the House of Bishops. Four bishops from the Network of Anglican Communion Diocese and Parishes (NACDP)—the Rt. Rev Keith Ackerman, Bishop of Quincy, the Rt. Rev Jack Iker, Bishop of Fort Worth; the Rt. Rev. Terence Kelshaw, Bishop of the Rio Grande and the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of San Joaquin—did not attend the august gathering of purple. Two other orthodox bishops, Peter Beckwith of Springfield and James Stanton of Dallas left before the debate on the oversight plan began. Only Western Kansas Bishop James M. Adams and Central Florida Bishop John W. Howe stayed for the duration and voted for DEPO. One bishop, Ed Salmon of South Carolina left after voting no on the Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight plan and Bishops Daniel Herzog of Albany and Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh left before the vote was even taken, according to The Living Church magazine. But among the orthodox bishops there was no unanimity. Howe described the document as “workable” while Bishop Schofield said it was “a sham” and the meeting of the bishops “four wasted days.” Albany Suffragan Bishop David Bena said it was “half a loaf” and therefore better than none. What we now know is that DEPO basically keeps power in the hands of the diocesan bishop with jurisdictional rights for the diocesan. On the plus side, an orthodox priest can argue and appeal his case for months, possibly years thus keeping a revisionist bishop out of his parish indefinitely. Truly God is not mocked. That the HOB is showing increasing strain and disarray might also signal a fatal implosion waiting to happen. How long can this false “unity” continue without some layperson, or maybe an archbishop who can see over Lambeth walls yelling, “look the ECUSA bishops have no theological clothes”? That the House of Bishops is largely a house of smoke and mirrors held together by a vague bonhomie when most of them cannot affirm the Nicene Creed, agree on the substance of the ‘faith once delivered’, the Lambeth Quadrilateral, and believe sodomy is good and right in the eyes of God, points up the fiction that they are united. What disunites them is greater than what unites them. An Insane Asylum is more unified. Consider how impotent they really are. They are incapable of disciplining any bishop either orthodox or heterodox. I wrote, over a year ago, that it would require the equivalent of a blinding transfiguration to raise up any bishop or group of bishops to bring an action of presentment against erring episcopii. The canons are now so unwieldy as to bring doctrinal charges against a bishop and making them stick, almost impossible. Since the 1970s, John Shelby Spong (Newark ret.) has consistently flouted the House of Bishops with one repudiation after another of the historic faith culminating in his 12 Theses which repudiates everything the Christian Church has stood for, for over two millennia. Nothing collectively has ever been done to even attempt to bring Spong to trial even though individual bishops have taken a swing at Spong. In fact the Presiding Bishop, when asked why he has not acted against Spong, told the retired Bishop of South Carolina, the Rt. Rev. Dr. C. FitzSimons Allison that Spong was responsible for many people staying in the Episcopal Church. So Spong’s outrageous repudiation and regular trashing of the witness of Scripture and 2,000 years of church history goes undisciplined by an impotent House of Bishops. And a third rate theological wart called Bishop Walter Righter was presented against but the case never went to trial because the charges were dismissed against the thrice-married bishop, based on a massive legal fudge—no one could agree whether the canons spoke to the issue of homosexuality. The church’s canons were clearly held to a higher standard than Scripture. More recently the former Bishop of Iowa has been performing ecclesiastical acts in some six parishes in the Diocese of Pittsburgh without Bishop Duncan’s approval. We will wait and see if the HOB will act this time. Don’t hold your breath. But the HOB could not even act when Pennsylvania Bishop Charles E. Bennison and Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan were asked to explain themselves to the HOB over a “deposed” Anglo-Catholic priest Fr. David Moyer. Bennison has been trying to unseat Fr. Moyer by fraudulently using the wrong canon and then using a variety of bullying tactics. Bishop Duncan took the priest temporarily under his wing, and when a number of international primates were brought into the arena the whole thing wound up at a HOB meeting where each bishop was asked to explain himself. After a mea culpa from Duncan and the refusal of Bennison to back down, the HOB just whisked the whole thing away in a pathetic display of “we don’t know what to do, because we don’t know whose side to take because we don’t want to hurt collegiality.” But then the HOB said that bishops’ valid depositions should be recognized by all. They stuck it to Duncan but then did nothing to Bennison who then felt vindicated by what they said and didn’t do. Bennison claimed victory, but it was not a victory at all. No one is recognizing the “deposition” except Bennison. And the end result? Nothing happened. The whole thing was fobbed off onto a committee where it disappeared without trace. Most of ECUSA’s bishops are absolutely convinced that either God has changed his mind about sexual behavior, or they are changing it for Him, snubbing Holy Scripture as largely dated or irrelevant. The former Bishop of New York, Richard Grein divorced his wife with other women cited. This same bishop gave the word “abuse” a new meaning in the way he dealt with orthodox priests, firing one woman priest from a parish to put his close “personal friend” in her place. And the bishop walks away from 39 charges against him! Frank Griswold saw to that. And then there was Jane Dixon the former suffragan Bishop of Washington known as “jack boot Jane”, who violated the plain reading of the canons in the Accokeek bludgeon of a single Anglo-Catholic priest and escaped any penalty for it. In fact the review panel concluded that both Dixon and Christ Church, Accokeek’s interpretation of the canons was reasonable. Then Bennison reappeared on the radar screen and said Jesus was a sinner—against all the witness of history and the testimony of Scripture, and no bishop has ever issued a presentment against him. When I inquired of an orthodox bishop as to why not, he said simply and truthfully, that it would never stick and probably never make it out of the Title IV Review Committee. He’s probably right. The Pennsylvania Standing Committee is also impotent and won’t act against Bennison, most of them wouldn’t know Jesus if he walked across the Schuylkill River with a sign saying I AM THE MESSIAH. The House of Bishops is sick unto spiritual death. They may dress up in fine clothes, strut their stuff like so many turkeys, parade around in embroidered gowns even, and on occasion look pious, while dancing the Circle Dance of Dispossession—but it is all a big sham and lie. And the worst offender sits at the top of the purple heap—Frank Tracy Griswold—whose theological opinions have been labeled by the Rev. Dr. Robert Sanders as “mystic paganism”—a man out of theological touch with the Faith as revealed in time, space and history and with historic Anglicanism. And neither Griswold himself nor a single bishop has stepped forward to repudiate one word of Dr. Sander’s brilliant analysis of the Presiding Bishop. How could they? It is a terrible and sad indictment of a once proud church that boasts 11 presidents, dozens of senators and community leaders, but has over the course of 40 years trashed its spiritual heritage for immorality, perverse sexual behaviors and plain doctrinal unbelief. And what is deeply troubling is that there is absolutely no sense of the judgment of God by these bishops. None. All the talk is about accepting whatever sexual perversion you may choose, of feeling good about yourself and fulfilling yourself, with nothing about dying to the self, repentance and faith, justification, sanctification or the Last Judgment. Truth is now defined as ‘my story’ and ‘my experience’ it is no longer faithful affirmation or objective. It is “thinking good thoughts” not prayer. The gospel, in most dioceses, is barely recognizable, while anti-racism training supplants true repentance for such sin, while anti-Semitism creeps in by the back door. And there’s a $2 million dollar fiction circulating around ECUSA that the church will double by 2020. The only question is where and when will it all end? Frank Griswold has one job, as he sees it, to keep ECUSA together come hell or high water, and he will do it by lying, playing off sides against each other, ducking and weaving, prevaricating and occasionally raising his voice in temper tantrums and self-righteous anger. But the glue will not hold forever. Sin cannot hold a group of men and women together if lies and subterfuge lie at the core of an institution. The center cannot hold when truth is severely compromised. In March 2002 the House of Bishops met in Camp Allen, Texas, and the call went out for sustained pastoral provision and Episcopal care to be made for those conservative parishes primarily of evangelical and Anglo-Catholic churchmanship. Two years later not much has changed. Now we have DEPO and it is still a basic win for revisionist bishops, especially Bennison who says he plans to ignore it anyway. The cry has gone up, lead by the AAC and NACDP, “How long, Oh Lord, how long”. The answer is no longer blowing in the wind, it is blowing through the House of Bishops, which, like a Baghdad bomb will implode one day leaving the HOB with body parts scattered all over the Retreat floor. And when it happens no one can blame a Vast Right Wing Orthodox Conspiracy, the HOB will have done it to themselves. END

Episcopal churches see cut in donations By Carolyn Thompson The Associated Press BUFFALO — Some Episcopal parishes opposed to the confirmation of a gay bishop last summer are withholding financial gifts to the diocese, causing a budget deficit that has already forced one layoff, Bishop J. Michael Garrison said Friday. “The protest is real. It affects real people and that’s sad,” said Garrison, who said parishes had withdrawn an estimated $100,000 in pledges to the Episcopal Diocese of Western New York. Nationally, donations to the Episcopal Church are down about $3 million, or 6 percent, since the confirmation of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, officials said. Elsewhere in New York, dioceses reported none of the hardship being felt in Buffalo, where at least five parishes are withholding most or all of their financial pledges. An additional 22 parishes have not yet submitted pledges or have pledged less than the diocese had hoped for. Coupled with the poor economy, Garrison said the diocese’s $1.1 million budget has a $200,000 hole. An office manager was let go this week. “By June we will have to cut a couple more positions,” Garrison said. In Rochester, diocesan spokeswoman Carolyn Lumbard said giving was down in some parishes hurt by the hard times befalling Eastman Kodak Co. and other employers, but no parish has withheld or reduced their gifts in protest of Robinson. “It’s not that we’re not having the discussion,” Lumbard said. “We do have some folks who have left the church. But more have come into the church.” In Albany, diocesan treasurer Jerry Carroll said there had been no financial fallout from the confirmation of Robinson, who was first confirmed by the Episcopal General Convention in August. A call to the Diocese of Central New York in Syracuse was not immediately returned. Garrison attributed the action in his diocese to an older, more conservative population. “But I know that what we’re facing is a collision of a couple world views, that more conservative Biblical interpretation and a more progressive, I believe,” he said. He added that the majority of the diocese’s 63 parishes are continuing to give “and are welcoming and affirming of gay and lesbian Christians in their midst.” The more than 7,000 congregations of the Episcopal Church receive $2.14 billion in offerings a year and forward a portion to the national church. Individual dioceses are asked to send 21 percent of their income. As of February, about half of the dioceses who had made their financial pledges to the national church pledged less than 21 percent. The Rev. Jan Nunley, a spokeswoman for the national church, said it was difficult to tell how much of the drop is attributable to protests by parishioners and their dioceses and how much the economy has affected giving. END

By Jonathan Petre, and Graham Tibbetts Daily Telegraph 3/23/2004 British Muslims reacted with anger yesterday at an attack on Islamic culture delivered by Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury. Muslim leaders said his claim that moderates had failed to condemn suicide bombers was totally unjustified, and rejected his assertion that Islam, over the past 500 years, had displayed a “strong resistance to modernity”. Dr. George Carey: claim totally unjustified. In a public lecture in Rome on Thursday evening, Dr. Carey had also criticised the “glaring absence” of democracy in Muslim countries and said Islamic culture had contributed “no great invention… for many hundred years”. Manzoor Moghal, chairman of the Federation of Muslim Organisations in Leicester, said Dr. Carey’s statement was “disastrous” for relations between Christians and Muslims. “He has fallen prey to the campaign tactics of racists in this country,” he said. As to the suggestion that Muslim leaders were not doing enough to criticise terrorists, Mr. Moghal said it was “nonsense”. “We condemn suicide bombers, we go on radio, on television, we have made statements. What more can we do? We cannot be responsible for the criminal actions of others—they are not under our control. The former archbishop has got it wrong.” Dr. Zaki Badawi, regarded as a moderate voice in Muslim circles who has been consulted by Tony Blair on a number of issues, said he was “quite upset” by the comments. “I think Dr. Carey made a rather unfortunate statement at a time when there is about to be dialogue between Muslims and Christians in America,” said Dr. Badawi, principal of the Muslim College in Ealing, west London. He said that Dr. Carey’s view of Islam was historically inaccurate and failed to recognise that the West had undermined democratic revolutions in Iran and Egypt in the 19th and 20th centuries. The speech also omitted any mention of the British Empire, which colonised Muslim countries, said Dr. Badawi. He added that the West’s recent dominance of technology was more to do with geography and development than religion. “I have great affection for Dr. Carey but it is unfortunate he delivered this lecture,” he said. Iqbal Sacranie, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, was swift to dismiss the former archbishop’s words, denouncing them as “myopic”. He said: “Frankly, one is dismayed by Lord Carey’s comments. One is surprised to find Lord Carey recycling the same old religious prejudice in the 21st century.” Ahmed Versi, editor of Muslim News, said: “We hope that the current Archbishop Rowan Williams—who is very different—will condemn these views.” But Lord Carey defended his speech yesterday on BBC Radio 4’s The World At One programme. “It is meant to provoke a reaction. In the same way I look at the West and Christianity and am equally critical,” he said. “I’m looking at the way we build stereotypes of each other and the way we must transcend this and I think that a person looking objectively at the entire speech—five and a half thousand words—will see there’s a balance there… So to twist it as an attack on the Islamic world would be far too simplistic and sadly it does suggest how polarised the world is at the present moment. The positive is that I believe we can do more together. Two great faiths, Christianity and Islam, working together against extremists on both sides. That, in fact, was the thrust of my message.” Dr. Carey’s remarks came just before his successor as Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, leads talks between Christian and Muslim scholars in New York, which start on Monday. Although Lambeth Palace would not be drawn into a reaction, the Bishop of Southwark, the Right Rev Tom Butler, attempted to calm emotions. He said: “Sometimes opinions will be expressed robustly in either direction; if this can be handled with maturity and mutual respect, understanding can be deepened and our dialogue can emerge strengthened.” Dr. Carey received encouragement from the leader of an organization which supports Christian missionaries working in Islamic countries. Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Barnabas Fund, said that Dr. Carey’s lecture had taken “great courage”. “He has spent years establishing dialogue with Islam. Now he recognizes that the core of Islam must be radically changed if there is going to be any change in their attitude towards suicide bombing and so on. This is a departure for the Church,” he said. “He is going to get a lot of flak from the Muslim community, who will feel that he has betrayed them, and from the liberal wing of the Church of England who will feel that he has stepped out of line.” END