Archives

By Sarah Carter   JUICY ECUMENISM March 13, 2025   Although the Protestant Reformation may seem historically far removed from the modern church, the reformational nature of Anglicanism is crucial to understanding its practice. The Reformation has incredible effect upon how Anglicans practice liturgy, the sacraments, and prayer. The Falls Church Anglican  (TFCA) Rector Sam Ferguson spoke on doctrinal reforms and expounded upon the history and practice of the English Reformation at  History and Hope: Reformed Theology in the Anglican Tradition . The February 4  Reformed Theological Seminary  collaboration with TFCA focused on the reformational roots of Anglicanism and its doctrinal convictions. (Readers may access part one History (English Bibles, Refuted Clericalism, and Reformation Anglicanism)  here  and part two, Scripture in Reformation Anglicanism,  here ). Book of Common Prayer    The Reformation led to Christianity being practiced through the  Book of Common Prayer . Compiled by Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer, it made prayers and liturgies accessible and available to common people in their vernacular. While the Medieval Church performed liturgies in Latin, and prayers were said on behalf of the congregation, the people did not understand the words. For the Reformers, it was crucial that both the Bible and church liturgies were in the vernacular. Through the prayer book and worship, God’s people were able to hear His voice in a language that they understood. Additionally, liturgies set out in the  Book of Common Prayer  allow flexibility in worship. Article 34 from the  39 Articles  articulates the normative principle of worship, allowing various expressions of Anglican worship across “diversity of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word,” once again emphasizing the wide-tent expression of the Anglican tradition. Sacraments    As Protestant Reformers moved from the  doctrine of transubstantiation , the nature of the Lord’s Supper was hotly debated. Cranmer and other Reformers believed that Christ’s presence in the Lord’s Supper was a dynamic spiritual presence that was effective when participating in faith. When administered in the vernacular, both the liturgy and the sacrament preached the gospel.   Ferguson noted that communion liturgy in the  Book of Common Prayer  speaks of this dynamic spiritual presence of Christ. During the communion liturgy, the celebrant states “The gifts of God for the people of God. Take them in remembrance that Christ died for you, and feed on Him in your hearts by faith.”   Likewise the post-communion prayer states, “Almighty and Ever-living God, we thank you for feeding us in these Holy Mysteries with the spiritual food of the most precious body and blood of your Son Jesus Christ.” This liturgy and these prayers speak of the dynamic spiritual presence of Christ. The Reformers’ understanding and reform of the nature of Christ in the Lord’s Supper is not an intangible idea but affects how Anglicans understand the nature of the Lord’s Supper. Prayer    The Reformation also impacted the Anglican tradition’s understanding and practice of prayer. The  Book of Common Prayer  was created to guide Christ-followers in prayer. Most laity in the Reformation era could not understand the Latin prayers of the church. While religious leaders prayed on behalf of the congregation, lay persons did not pray on the same level as religious leaders. Cranmer wanted prayer to be for everyone, not primarily for priests and monks. Crucial to this goal, the  Book of Common Prayer  guides through prayer that involves the whole of life. It assumes that people could read Scripture and pray through the prayer book. Daily morning and evening office made a layperson’s home into a prayerful monastery with accessible scripture, meditation, and lay services dedicated around the average work day. Cranmer made it possible for the regular secular person to enter a biblical rhythm of prayer for “whole life discipleship.” Liturgy Cranmer changed the church liturgy to prioritize grace. He moved confession to collective worship. After the priest announced the absolution of sins, he recited to the congregation “ comfortable words ” from scripture. Ferguson ended his talk with several of these “comfortable words”:   “Come to me, all ye, who trival and are heavily laden, and I will give ye rest. “For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish, but have eternal life. “This is a trustworthy saying, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.” END

Dr. Alice C. Linsley https://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/ March 15, 2025 What is the difference between a living faith and a dead faith? A faith that works by which we are justified, according to Scripture, hangs on the God-Man Jesus Christ. This is why it is essential to get Christology (the study of Christ) right.James and Paul approach this central truth, but from different angles. Both refer to the Mount Moriah narrative to present the relationship of faith and works. We are challenged to consider the relationship of faith and works not as  either-or , but instead as  both-and . For Christ followers, faith and works point to consideration of more complex matters including grace, justification, and eternal life.The story of Abraham on Mount Moriah illustrates how  both-and  reasoning expands our consideration of the faith-works relationship. The narrative speaks of Abraham’s obedience to God, divine revelation, human understanding, righteousness, absolute grace, and justification. James explains in 2:21-24 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. Paul explains in Romans 4:2-3 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”. In Judaism, the Mount Moriah story is called “Akedah” (ah-kay-DAH), or “The Binding of Isaac”. This powerful narrative has been interpreted differently by Jews and Christians. For Jews, who  regard Abraham as the first Jew , the story speaks of Abraham’s absolute obedience. For Christians, the narrative has Messianic meaning, and indeed, the Christian interpretation is closer to what the early Hebrew believed concerning the High God who has a son.    Among the early Hebrew the High God was known by various names depending on where they lived. Some Hebrew clans called the High God El, or Yahweh, or Adonai. Some called the High God Re, which means “father” in  ancient Egyptian . The  Hebrew who lived along the Nile  called the son of the High God HR, which in ancient Egyptian means “Most High One”. The Greeks referred to HR as Horus. The Hebrew were devotees of the Father and the Son. Their prayers and writings have been collected from the walls of royal monuments and tombs and translated to English. They can be read in the Pyramid Texts (2400-2000 BC).Abraham lived around 2000 BC so the beliefs of the Horite and Sethite Hebrew were familiar to him. According to Genesis 10, some of Abraham’s ancestors, such as Nimrod, came from the Nile Valley. The earliest known site of Horite Hebrew worship is at  Nekhen (Hierakonpolis)  on the Nile (c. 4000 BC). Genesis 36 lists some of the Horite Hebrew rulers, including Seir the Horite, Zibeon, Esau, Dishan, and Uz. Job was of the Hebrew clan of Uz. In the symbolism of the early Hebrew the Divine Father-Son were represented by the Sun and the solar arc. HR often was shown riding on the solar boat. Some images show HR as a falcon perched on the mast of the boat. Among the early Hebrew, the boat of the morning hours was called Mandjet and the boat of the evening hours was called Mesektet. While HR was on the Mesektet, he was in his ram-headed form. HR rose as a lamb and set as a ram, mature in strength. The east represented the past and the west represented the future, as with many indigenous peoples even today.As Abraham and Isaac ascended Mount Moriah, Isaac asked his father, "Where is the lamb for the sacrifice?” Abraham replied that God would provide the sacrifice. The climax of the story is the divine provision of a ram rather than a lamb. It appears that Abraham discovered that God the Father would provide his own Son in the future. Abraham believed that promise and he was declared justified. All are justified on the same basis: belief that God provides the Son for our salvation. (See Matt. 16:15-16; Rom. 10:9-10; Jn, 20:31, 1 Jn 5:13.)The Mount Moriah event is best understood according to the early Hebrew beliefs concerning the expected  Righteous Ruler  who would die and overcome death. They expected him to rise on the third day and to lead his people to eternal life. Paul uses this royal procession language in Ephesians 4:8. “When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.” (See also Ps. 68:18; Ps. 7:7.)Horus is the single figure shown in ancient iconography with the body of a man and the head of a ram. There is an interesting linguistic connection between the words for ram and soul in the ancient Egyptian language. Both are the same word -  ba . No wonder the Egyptians did not sacrifice rams! (Consider Gen. 46:32.) Yet on Mount Moriah God provided a ram. The faith of the early Hebrew is rooted in a Messianic Tradition that existed at least 1200 years before Egypt became a political entity. Related reading:  Abraham's Faith Lives in Christianity ;  The Hebrew were a Caste ;  BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY: Horite and Sethite Mounds ;  Righteous Rulers and the Resurrection ;  What Abraham Discovered on Mount Moriah ;  Why Nekhen is Anthropologically Significant Alice C. Linsley has been pioneering the science of Biblical Anthropology for over 35 years. She is a founding member of Christian Women in Science and a member of the American Scientific Affiliation. She taught Philosophy, Ethics, and World Religions for fourteen years at Midway University in Kentucky. Now retired, her writings appear at Just Genesis, Biblical Anthropology, Ethics Forum, and Philosophers’ Corner.

By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org March 17, 2025   The Episcopal Bishop of New York, the Rt. Rev. Matthew Heyd, has condemned the Trump administration's attempt to deport a Palestinian student Mahmoud Khalil, who holds a green card, for his involvement last year protesting the war in Gaza while he was a graduate student at Columbia University.   Khalil, 30, was arrested and is being held in a federal facility in Louisiana while he fights deportation.    According to the liberal bishop, the Trump administration has produced no evidence that Khalil engaged in criminal activity, and as a green card holder, his lawful permanent residency can only be revoked for specific causes with approval of an immigration judge.   “The Episcopal Diocese of New York rejects the detention and threat of deportation of Mahmoud Khalil,” Heyd said in a  statement posted to Facebook . “In accordance with our faith and civic creed, we uphold the belief that difference and dissent should be safe. We reject deportation based on political viewpoint – whether we agree or disagree.”   However, British Israeli journalist and author Melanie Phillips said the uproar over the arrest and detention of Khalil — the Syrian-born student agitator who orchestrated the anti-Israel mayhem at Columbia University and now faces losing his green card and being deported— is profoundly ill-judged.   “Democrats and other liberal useful idiots have been screaming that Khalil is being persecuted for expressing his support for “Palestine”. This is rubbish. He’s a foreign visitor who organized a violent takeover of campus with Hamas-linked activities and who conspired to commit civil rights violations.”   “The protests against his arrest aren’t just morally bankrupt. They also obscure the fact that Khalil and his ilk are active participants in a highly organized Islamist uprising against the West. Western liberals who think such people are supporting the “oppressed Palestinians” have been played for suckers,” she said.   Antiwar protests at Columbia University and other campuses across the United States  generated widespread headlines and controversy   in spring 2024 as the Israel-Hamas war dragged on, decimating the Palestinian territory of Gaza, killing thousands of Palestinians and displacing many of the densely populated territory’s 2 million residents, nearly all of whom support Hamas.   In the US, campus authorities faced pressure on both sides: to protect students’ right to peacefully protest while also ensuring the safety of Jewish students when those protests cross the line by threatening and attacking Jewish students--as  happened during the Columbia demonstrations .   Since taking office on Jan. 20, President Donald Trump ,  saying he is combating antisemitism ,  has threatened to deport foreign-born campus protesters who opposed Israel’s war on Hamas, which Israel launched in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israeli communities,  and threatened or attacked Jewish students. The Trump administration has specifically scrutinized Columbia University’s handling of the protests, and on March 7, the administration announced it would  cut $400 million in federal grants and contracts  to the university.   Khalil appears to have been targeted for arrest by the Trump administration because of his involvement in a group known as Columbia University Apartheid Divest, which has been accused of glorifying Hamas’ attack on Israel. Before his arrest,  Khalil told the Associated Press  that much of the focus on him was related to the group’s social media posts, in which he has not been involved.   Then on March 8, Khalil was in his university-owned apartment when Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents showed up and took him into custody, his attorney, Amy Greer, told the Associated Press. His wife is eight months pregnant.   A Homeland Security spokesperson later alleged that Khalil had “led activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization.”   The bishop also affirmed the Diocese of New York as a “sanctuary diocese” in which “we care for our neighbors.”   “Today, we stand with our neighbors at Columbia University. We also encourage Columbia to protect its students when they are threatened. Higher education depends upon the ability to speak honestly and freely, without fear of retribution; and on attracting people of diverse and international viewpoints. As Christians, we’re calling on our neighbors to be neighbors.”   Unimpressed by this Phillips, a well-respected UK newspaper columnist said the aim of Palestinians is no secret. Jihadi warriors from both the Sunni and Shi’ite Islamic world in Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran have repeatedly threatened that, after they have destroyed Israel and the Jews, they’re coming for the West.   That’s why the uproar over the arrest and detention of Mahmoud Khalil — the Syrian-born student agitator who orchestrated the anti-Israel mayhem at Columbia University and now faces losing his green card and being deported— is so profoundly ill-judged.   People in the West are constantly being shocked by developments inspired by the Islamic world. They were shocked by the October 7 atrocities. They have been shocked by the violent “pro-Gaza” demonstrations. They have been shocked by the recent terrible scenes from Syria, said Phillips.   “Such indifference to the outrageous lawbreaking, harassment and intimidation that has consumed universities, which have echoed for months with chants for Israel’s destruction and the murder of Jews, throws into even sharper relief the shocking revelation that support for Israel in America has fallen to below 50 per cent for the first time.”   The latest Gallup polling revealed only 46 percent of Americans say their sympathies lie more with Israel than the Palestinians, while 33 percent sympathize more with the Palestinians, up by 6 percentage points from last year.   How could this have happened?   American support for Israel has long been as reliable as the sun rising in the morning. Israel is not only regarded as America’s indispensable bulwark in the Middle East; Americans’ support for it has been more full-throated and emotional than among many Jewish communities around the world.   The huge drop in support overall has been caused by Democrat supporters, who have registered a stunning 59 per cent support for the Palestinians versus only 21 per cent for Israel. In sharp contrast, Republicans support Israel over the Palestinians 75 per cent to 10 per cent.   In other words, Israel has become a partisan issue. So why have the Democrats turned against the Jewish state?   Gallup suggests the reason is the Israel-Hamas war, as well as the polarization of attitudes toward  President Trump .  These are hardly likely to be the main causes, though, since such trends have been developing over many years.   The main reason is surely the Democrats have turned against Israel because the left in general has turned against Israel, concluded Phillips.   This is principally the outcome of the massive Palestinian propaganda campaign that’s been running for decades in the universities and across all the institutions of the culture, indoctrinating successive generations in a false and malicious narrative that’s scarcely been challenged.   It’s also because this Palestinian cause has become in turn the centrepiece of the “intersectionality” agenda of interlocking “victim” groups based on race, ethnicity, sexuality, gender and other categories of identity politics.   These campaigns of grievance and resentment are all based on attacking the western nation-state as having been born in the original sins of colonialism and racism, with its inhabitants guilty of white privilege.   Israel, the Jewish people’s nation-state and regarded as an outpost of American power occupied by white Jews — though most Israeli Jews are brown or black-skinned and 20 percent of the population are Israeli Arabs — is therefore held to be multiply damned.   The liberal-progressive world’s embrace of all these radical agendas has moved the dial, so that what was once considered far-left is now deemed the centre ground and what was once considered the centre ground is now deemed right-wing or even far-right.   END

March 15, 2025 The Gafcon Primates Council met in Plano, Texas on Tuesday, 12 March 2025 and during the rest of that week held G25, a conference for Gafcon leaders with a special focus on the next generation of global bishops. Over 170 leaders from 25 countries were present, including 10 primates and 83 other bishops and archbishops. Gafcon continues its commitment to reorder the Anglican Communion in joyful submission to Holy Scripture. The theme of the Conference was ‘Leading the Renewal.’   We were graciously hosted by Christ Church Plano (CCP), a cathedral church of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), whose Rector and Dean, Bishop Paul Donison, also serves as the General Secretary of Gafcon. The staff and many volunteers of CCP and surrounding churches provided generous hospitality and gladly served our needs.   The Conference began with an uplifting and inspiring service of Holy Communion, with a sermon by the Primate of the ACNA, Archbishop Steve Wood. Each day began with Morning Prayer led by bishops from Nigeria, Rwanda and Myanmar, with clear and stimulating Bible teaching from the early chapters of Joshua by the General Secretary that encouraged us in our personal walk with Christ. We ended our time together with another service of Holy Communion, where the Primate of All Nigeria, Archbishop Henry Ndukuba, encouraged us from the word.   The first session provided an insight into how the Gafcon movement began, as a panel of founding fathers were interviewed. The Conference was reminded as to why and how the first GAFCON was held in 2008, under the leadership of Archbishop Peter Akinola, producing the Jerusalem Statement and the Jerusalem Declaration, our foundational documents which continue to guide our movement.   Gafcon has sometimes been criticised, even vilified, as a sectarian and schismatic movement that has sought to undermine the unity of the Anglican Communion. But that is simply untrue. We cherish the worldwide fellowship that we enjoy through the Anglican Communion. We have not left it, but have sought to renew it, as it was in 1998, when the Bible was at the centre of our life and we submitted to its authority. We represent the Anglican Communion as we stand for the orthodox Anglican theology that is upheld by a vast majority of the Communion. It is those who have promoted unbiblical teachings who have torn the fabric of our Communion and shown themselves to be out of step with the apostolic faith.   Revisiting our history is essential to understand the ongoing challenges facing the Anglican Communion today, especially as many of our conference participants were bishops who have been consecrated within the past five years. Gafcon continues to stand firm against error, re-stating and celebrating the truth of the gospel, recognizing authentic Anglican provinces and dioceses, and renewing the Anglican Communion for mission to the nations.   Through a mixture of presentations and small group consultations, the participants considered four defining features of Gafcon.   Gathering Authentic Anglicans   ‘Do not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching’ (Hebrews 10:25). Gafcon began as a gathering of bishops, clergy, and laity, united in their commitment to affirm true Anglican identity around a shared understanding of the gospel and a commitment to the authority of Holy Scripture, rather than through communion with the failing office of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Gafcon is a confessional fellowship of Anglicans held together by the theology, liturgy and vision of the Reformation Formularies. We rejoice in our theological unity and cultural diversity as we all ‘work and pray together in the common mission of Christ’ (Jerusalem Statement 2008).   Guarding God’s Gospel   ‘Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you’ (2 Timothy 1:14). The gospel of Christ is precious as the good news of salvation, but it can easily be obscured or corrupted. Sadly, the Canterbury-based ‘Instruments of Communion’ have failed to guard this gospel against such corruption, or to exercise needed discipline within the church. Gafcon has taken up this responsibility by reaffirming the gospel of Christ, rebuking false teaching that undermines it, and providing theological resources. Where Anglican leaders in some regions have departed from the truth of the gospel, Gafcon has rejected their spiritual authority, and recognised new expressions of faithful Anglicans, in order to guard and boldly proclaim the life-giving gospel of Christ throughout the world.   Growing Orthodox Leaders   ‘What you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful persons, who will be able to teach others also’ (2 Timothy 2:2). Our conference speakers reminded us of the urgent need not only to equip current bishops and leaders, but also to continually raise up new leaders who will be faithful to guard and proclaim the gospel. Gafcon has sought to do this through the work of its conferences, its Bishops Training Institute (BTI), and, where necessary, its willingness to consecrate duly elected bishops in new and challenging areas of ministry. We were grateful to hear suggestions from both speakers and participants as to how we can further strengthen theological education around the Communion for the equipping of all God’s people for the work of ministry.   Generating Missional Resources   ‘Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully’ (2 Corinthians 9:6). The mission of the church is hindered by a ‘poverty mindset,’ which proceeds from a fear of scarcity and an ingratitude for God’s gifts. This often results in a lack of available resources for ministry. Our speakers shared their own stories of God’s miraculous provision, as well as practical wisdom for how to partner together across provinces and utilise what God has given us to promote sustainable development and generate resources in our churches. Recognising that we have been gifted in distinct ways by God, we commit to use the resources that we have received in service of one another and of the kingdom of God.   We give thanks to God for the work of Gafcon and for our time together. We have prayed together, worshipped together, studied Scripture together, and been encouraged and edified by the faith that unites us across our differing languages and cultures.   Seventeen years ago, more than 1100 Anglicans from around the world came together in Jerusalem for the first GAFCON Assembly. That meeting could have been a one-time occurrence, but it was not. The Gafcon movement continues to grow, continues to gather, and continues to stand firm for the faith once delivered to the saints. We also continue to grieve over how some leaders in the Anglican Communion have led the flock of Christ astray, diluted the authority of Scripture and distorted the gospel, endangering many souls. We once again call them to repentance.   Our fellowship has not diminished but expanded. Our resolve to proclaim the gospel has not been weakened but strengthened. Our commitment to reform and renew the Anglican Communion has not wavered or faltered.   As we look forward to the future, we were inspired by the vision presented to us by our Gafcon Primates Council Chairman in his final address. He reminded us of who we are—a gospel people, a rooted people, an orthodox people, and a Bible people. He encouraged us to recommit ourselves to prayer, to self-sustainability within our churches, and to some of Gafcon’s key areas of ministry, including BTI, women’s ministry, and our conferences. He also outlined some new initiatives for Gafcon, including the development of a theological writing group and a theological commission, and the intentional deepening of relationships through inter-provincial visits.   G25 inaugurates a series of annual mini-conferences that will be taking place throughout the Gafcon world. Next year, G26 will be meeting in Abuja, Nigeria, and will have a special focus on the more senior leaders of our global movement.   As we conclude our time together, we rejoice in hope because we know that, despite all the threats and obstacles we may face as a global church, the one who has called us is faithful. He has begun a good work in us, and he will carry it to completion (Philippians 1:6).   To God be the glory!   Plano, Texas, USA Friday 14th March, 2025

The Rev Canon Dr Chris Sugden explains how 2025 might pan out and notes developments that could encourage evangelicals.   By Chris Sugden www.virtueonline.org March 14, 2025   With the resignation of Archbishop Welby, the Archbishop of York under a cloud due to a failure in safeguarding and the C of E riven with doctrinal differences, chiefly over the desire of many bishops to bless same-sex unions what might lie ahead? At the time of writing some matters look clear. What has taken place already is that Archbishop Welby introduced a centralized management process into the Church of England. He also sought to preserve what he called unity by making concessions to a small but powerful elite lobby pressing for same sex relationships to be blessed and recognised in church services, and for clergy to enter same-sex marriage.   Because of this step, on the global stage he forfeited the allegiance of many Anglican Primates ( the senior Archbishops in a country), representing between them the majority of Anglicans around the world, who have refused to acknowledge his office as the senior office in the Anglican Communion. It has been formally recommended by an international Anglican body that his successor as leader of the world’s Anglican Archbishops should not be the Archbishop of Canterbury but be chosen from the Primates.   In response here in England, The Alliance, a network of orthodox clergy and lay leaders from the Holy Trinity Brompton (Alpha Course) network, the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), Church Society, ReNew, New Wine, Forward in Faith (an Anglo-Catholic High Church network) and Living Out (people with same-sex attraction who live celibate lives) have come together representing a majority of the churchgoers in the Church of England. The objective of the Alliance is to achieve a parallel province in which orthodox congregations and clergy can be ‘overseen’ by orthodox bishops who stand for the traditional Anglican and biblical teaching on sex and marriage. Despite the managerial moves in recent years the Church of England is not a centralised church. Each parish is ‘independent’ and receives oversight and fellowship from its diocese.   Some members of the Church of England have left the national church to form separate congregations, but remain Anglicans. They are part of the Anglican Network in Europe (ANIE)which has its own bishops. They are recognised by many Anglican Primates around the world. Their departure indicates significant disagreement with the same-sex blessings that have been allowed to take place and their future development. But this cannot be a complete solution. It is far from certain that the General Synod and the House of Bishops would agree to recognise them. Many parish church congregations are central to their local community life, they are in general orthodox, and many would be unhappy to receive any sort of ‘flying bishop’ other than their area or diocesan bishop. While there may be internal disagreements over same-sex blessings, they will not vote to leave the Church of England.   Up to now what the House of Bishops have been doing is to present a series of proposals to allow for same-sex blessings in a separate church service, for same-sex marriages to take place in church and for clergy to be allowed to enter same sex marriages. Up to now all that is allowed is that since December 2023 prayers for same sex couples can take place in a regular service of worship. The bishops’ plan has been to get the General Synod to vote to accept all their proposals by a simple majority.   The objection to this is that such changes represent a change in the Church of England’s doctrine of marriage. A change of doctrine requires a two thirds majority in all three ‘houses’ of the Synod, bishops, clergy and lay people. The bishops know they will not be able to secure this because at least a third or more of laity and probably of the clergy members of Synod are against such a change.   Just this last month a press release from the House of Bishops indicated a delay in their process, noting that any proposals will not be ready for presentation in July. The most likely reason for this is that the orthodox bishops in the ‘house’ have stood firm in their objections at the first meeting which will not have been chaired by Archbishop Welby. Meanwhile speculation has developed about who will be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. The elite gay lobby is understood to be pushing the candidature of Bishop Guli Francis-Deqani, the Iranian-born British Bishop of Chelmsford since 2021, who would be the first woman Archbishop. She is known to be in favour of same-sex marriages.   What matters now is that the members of the Alliance, the orthodox bishops and clergy should remain firm in their stand for the biblical teaching and practice. Some parishes have gone so far as to only send to the dioceses the money they receive back for paying their clergy. This is causing some dioceses significant financial pressure. Some parishes have taken advantage of the overseers commissioned by The Alliance to provide oversight in place of their own ‘heterodox’ diocesan bishops.   But some evangelical clergy have been hesitant to take a stand as they want to be ‘nice’ to everyone and remain united. But as Canon John Dunnett the Executive Officer of the CEEC has written: “The question still remains as to ‘unity in or around what’. The unity that Jesus prayed for was not institutional. The unity that Jesus prayed for was not around the status quo. And unity in Scripture always goes hand-in-hand with truth. CEEC is absolutely committed to unity across cultures, continents and centuries with all those who hold to the apostolic faith as we have received it.”   The Rev. Canon Dr. Chris Sugden is chair of Anglican Mainstream, an orthodox network and website www. anglicanmainstream.org founded in 2003 to uphold biblical teaching,  especially on sex and marriage. He is a Canon in the Anglican churches of both Nigeria and Ghana. He was part of the organising team of the first Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008.

COMMENTARY By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org March 14, 2025   The penny has finally dropped. The new Episcopal Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe has looked in the mirror and admitted the Church has no future if it doesn’t plant new churches.   When the Episcopal Church declared a “Decade of Evangelism” in the 1990s it was hoped the church would jump start, moving away from the slide. In 2003, the development of new congregations was identified as one priority in a series of proposals, known as the “20/20 Vision,” that set even more ambitious goals, including doubling church membership by 2020. It all flopped.   Both presiding bishops Frank Griswold and Michael Curry conceded that they didn’t know what to do and shrugged it off. “But if this church should wither away, the movement that Jesus began will not go away,” conceded Curry in a moment of illumination. Katharine Jefferts Schori said the church needs to face its fears and embrace an unknown future. Rowe expressed skepticism toward those past efforts to grow the church and rightly so.   “The Decade of Evangelism, how’d that work? Not well,” Rowe said Feb. 26 in a keynote conversation at the Episcopal Parish Network conference in Kansas City, Missouri. “We spent 10 years on evangelism. That’s a good thing. But we have no idea why that didn’t work,” reported ENS.   I can tell you. The church did not have a message then or now to proclaim that which didn’t echo the culture. Planting and growing churches on themes of diversity, inclusion, pansexuality, anti-racism, LGBTQ acceptance and full-on gay marriage hasn’t planted one church. The Episcopal Church has steadily been eroding for over half a century and now has just over 400,000 weekly Sunday attendance out of a total membership of 1,547,779.   The elevation of homosexual priest Gene Robinson to the episcopacy split the church from which it has never recovered. And by all accounts it never will.   But the new presiding bishop is going to give it the old school try.   As a churchwide realignment begins to take shape, three Episcopal priests and others who spoke to ENS say they are worried about the future of their network and denominational support. “That network has been absolutely crucial in my ongoing formation as a priest, as a disciple, and I can’t imagine myself doing any of the things we’re trying here without the ongoing support of this nationwide cohort,” one of the priests told Episcopal News Service.   ENS reports that recent examples of church-planting starts are plentiful across The Episcopal Church, from a family-friendly dinner church in the Diocese of Georgia to an Episcopal community serving the unhoused in the Diocese of Western Oregon. Innovative Episcopal clergy have launched more than 200 new worshiping communities since 2000 – many of them in the past decade, during which The Episcopal Church has awarded more than $9 million in grants to support that work while developing and expanding its churchwide infrastructure. No figures were immediately available on how many of those new worshiping communities remain active today.   $9 million!!! The total current assets of the ACNA for 2023 which has over 1,000 parishes is a tad over $1 million dollars!   REALIGNMENT EPISCOPAL STYLE   But changes are underway. The priests involved in this work, who already were uncertain about the status of an additional $2.2 million budgeted for church planting and revitalization in 2025-27, told ENS they are eager for clarifying details about Presiding Bishop Sean Rowe’s plan to realign churchwide operations to better serve dioceses.   Last month, Rowe laid off 14 churchwide staff members in the first phase of his restructuring plan, including the two church employees who have developed and overseen the network of Episcopal church planters: the Rev. Tom Brackett, manager for church planting and mission development, and the Rev. Katie Nakamura Rengers, staff officer for church planting.   Though church planting is one of the departments being reorganized or phased out, “our commitment to church planting and redevelopment is undiminished,” Rowe said in a Feb. 20 letter to the church outlining the structural realignment. “In the months to come, we will be reorganizing this ministry and the ways it supports and serves our dioceses.”   The changes also could impact the churchwide grant program that invests in new congregations. It is facilitated each triennium by an advisory board, which has not yet been appointed for this cycle. Rowe says he and House of Deputies President Julia Ayala Harris are now working on those appointments, which were on hold until the staff realignment, ENS reported.   In a March 10 Zoom interview with ENS, Rowe affirmed that he is not abandoning the church’s ongoing investment in church planting. He said the detailed way forward will be worked out through collaborative conversations with dioceses and the priests who have been active in the churchwide network.   So, you have two pivots for church planting. How ironic that the Church of England is facing the same crisis with funding new church plants. An ambitious target of planting 10,000 new, predominantly lay-led churches by 2030 headlines the recommendations of a briefing paper issued by the Church of England’s Vision and Strategy group. The church-planting initiative’s leader, the Rev. Canon John McGinley of New Wine, touched off a firestorm of criticism when he labeled stipendiary clergy, church buildings, and theological college training as “limiting factors” for growth at a recent church planting conference.   When asked whether the former structure had not been meeting the church’s needs, Rowe emphasized a new diocese-centered approach “rather than us running some kind of parallel structure” at the churchwide level.   But the tension between diocesan versus national church support for church plants is there, with ENS reporting a number of complaints about how the process will work out.   “How can we help dioceses realize their local vision for church planting, for redevelopment at the local level?” Rowe said. “I think it will allow for more effective use of resources over the long run. … That’s to be determined, but I think what we want to do is have more integration.”   IT’S THE MESSAGE, STUPID.   But the real issue is whether church planting is simply about institutional survival or something else. It must be about evangelism, discipleship, and community engagement if it is to grow and survive. None of which TEC bishops, clergy and laity are good at. Gay and lesbian bishops do not plant churches.   Telling people God loves them unconditionally without the corollary of God’s hatred of sin, and the need for confession, repentance, and a turning towards God, will only produce a sinner without salvation.   Here is the usual Episcopal cant about the church: “One invitation is a call to cultural humility in mission. How might we shift from expansion to incarnation – showing up, listening and co-creating with local communities? How do we look afresh where God is already at work and join in? I think that this is one way we can approach church planting and redevelopment, one where people don’t have to leave behind their cultures and histories to belong.”   None of the above issues plants or builds a church. Do your think if John Stott, (one of Britain’s foremost Anglican preachers) had tried to start churches talking about “cultural humility”, “expansion to incarnation” and “listening and co-creating with local communities” that a single church would have been born?   What about Christ’s atoning death, the reality of our sinfulness, the hope of heaven for those willing to bow the knee to Him who alone saves. Do you think millions of Nigerian Anglicans give a damn about “cultural humility” facing Islam and persecution head on, along with the inroads of homosexuality pushed by the West onto their culture?   If TEC continues along its present lines, no amount of money on new church plants will save it. It will be millions of dollars spent and lost, and then cometh the end.   END

Anglican Watch March 12, 2025   Corrupt Episcopal bishop Todd Ousley, recently released from his previous role as Bishop for Pastoral Development, has been elected bishop provisional of the faltering Diocese of Wyoming. The news comes despite Ousley’s deliberate mishandling of multiple Title IV clergy disciplinary cases involving Episcopal bishops, in which Ousley asserted that he could ignore the provisions of Title IV at his discretion.   Instead, Ousley contends that bishops can disregard Title IV at any time they wish because they can address complaints pastorally.   We and others have parsed those claims extensively so that we won’t revisit the matter at length. Instead, we note three key points:   There is no support in the canons for Ousley’s claim. Under the canons, pastoral response is supposed to be one of the key priorities in any Title IV matter—which is telling, as Ousley has a history of ignoring the pastoral needs of complainants in Title IV cases, as evidenced by his abysmal handling of the Whayne Hougland debacle. That, even as Ousley gasses on about the “lofty goals” of Title IV. Ousley must have been really busy with all those pastoral responses since he left a multi-year backlog of unaddressed Title IV complaints waiting for his almost equally feckless successor, Barb Kempf. In other words, the reality is that most Title IV complaints involving Episcopal bishops went to die in Ousley’s inbox, never to be seen again.   New issues with Ousley: Violations of Title IV confidentiality Meanwhile, in his efforts to bag himself a sweetheart deal and continue his six-figure pay via his Wyoming gig, Ousley made a series of videos that purported to address concerns about his suitability for the job. The reality is that these videos are an alarming illustration of what looks suspiciously like a bad case of clinical narcissism.   Ousley’s videos share some common themes, including:   His use of narcissistic puffery about the “lofty goals” of Title IV. His insistence that he can ignore the Title IV canons. His disturbing efforts to trash or discredit the complainants in several Title IV cases that have rightly damaged his reputation. Additionally, Ousley is now the subject of a Title IV complaint originating from these videos, which involves the unauthorized disclosure of details of a Title IV case against him, which Anglican Watch editor Eric Bonetti filed against him.   Thus, Ousley’s videos are all too typical for him, reflecting a narcissistic disconnect between his babble about lofty goals and his thoroughly not-so-lofty behavior.   What next? All of that begs the question: What next for the Diocese of Wyoming?   As things stand, more than a third of delegates to the Wyoming special convention voted against Ousley. That should, if nothing else, be a warning to Ousley to tread carefully, work hard, and leave the games at home.   That said, Ousley will start his new gig sometime in April.   In the meantime, Anglican Watch and others will continue to fiercely resist Ousley and his corruption. Yes, people can and do change, but past performance is indeed a reliable bellwether of future results, and Ousley has repeatedly shown us who and what he is.   Or, to paraphrase Maya Angelou, “If you’re not prepared to believe someone the first time they show you who they are, maybe by the second or third time you should take them seriously.”   Relatedly, we want to call out another of Ousley’s lies, which is his claim that he has no conflicts due to his role in the Title IV case involving the previous bishop diocesan. That is horsesh*t.   All we can in that regard is that, if he indeed was following Title IV, yes, Ousley had a conflict. Indeed, as intake officer, he was one of three persons responsible for referring the matter, so he was in a decision-making role.   Moreover, as intake officer, Ousley was expressly prohibited under church canons (effective January 1, 2025) from providing any pastoral response in a Title IV case. And prior to that time, as Ousley should well have known, any such role was strongly discouraged.   So, we are left with a situation in which the Diocese of Wyoming now has approved a bishop provisional who has expressly stated that he continues to believe he has the authority to usurp the will of General Convention and the larger church. And we see the church continuing to coddle and protect a bishop with a dismal track record and an arrogant commitment to clericalism of the worst sort.   We hope that our sisters and brothers in Wyoming don’t wind up being hurt spiritually by Ousley’s presence.   Our fear, however, is that the sort of harm caused by clergy like Ousley is narcissistic in origin, meaning that it’s often difficult to detect, and even harder to address. And let’s face it: The denomination lacks the will or moral courage to address the harm already done by Ousley, including the profound damage resulting fromn the Hougland debacle.   If you see something, say something In the meantime, we are mindful of the perils of taking seriously the safe church training, which blithely tells Episcopalians that, if they see something questionable, they should say something. Our experience is that doing so will result in the whistleblower, like John the Baptist, getting her head served up on a silver platter.   And the Title IV protections for whistleblowers aren’t worth the paper they are written on. After all, bishops can, according to Ousley, opt for a “pastoral approach,” which in his case invariably favors the miscreant.   That said, Anglican Watch remains willing to call a spade a spade, and we protect our sources.   So, if there is even an inkling that Ousley is playing games, corruptly mishandling Title IV cases via his purported “pastoral” discretion, or otherwise engaging in misconduct, please let us know. We will do everything in our power to shine a light on Ousley’s corruption, to advocate for integrity, and to oppose spiritual or other abuse.   In the meantime, let’s hope Ousley’s tenure as bishop provisional is a short one. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark, and we fear the stench is about to get worse.   END

By Os Guinness Kildare  190pp  $16.25   Reviewed by David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org March 13, 2025   The world is fast approaching the climax of one of the great turning points in history, writes Os Guinness, a leading American social critic and committed Anglican Christian.   After nearly two millennia of existence and half a millennium of unprecedented dominance, Western civilization is on the wane and the shadows it casts are lengthening, he writes.   In this magisterial book, Guinness notes that the most vehement and radical enemies assaulting the West are from within.   The root of the decline lies not just in the philosophical, ethical, cultural, economic, and technological but the deepest cause of all—the deteriorating condition of the roots of the animating force that once made the West the civilization it has been lies in the faiths that gave vitality and unity have become enervated and rejected entirely.   The West is now largely opposed to the faith that made it, and the intelligentsia in its lead society America are increasingly opposed to both the faith that made the West and the revolution that made America. Ignore it and the decline will be inevitable and irreversible.   Guinness makes four observations.   First, the West owes much to other civilizations and their ideas. The debt to the Greeks is primary. Second, this broad understanding of Christendom is not limited to Christendom proper. It includes the powerful Christian consensus that exerted its influence in many European and Western nations. Third, it is an article of Christian faith itself, and a matter of Christian realism and hope, that perfectibility is impossible in this life, and where there is failure there can and must be correction, forgiveness, reform, and renewal. Fourth, no statement of the centrality of the Christian faith to the West is complete without an equally clear acknowledgment of the centrality of Judaism to the Christian faith. The Christian faith made the West, and the Jewish and Christian faiths have been the central inspiration and dynamic of the West.   Guinness notes that there have been three things we can see clearly. First, secular liberalism has failed. Reason is now tainted. They have replaced God with things such as Marxism. C.S. Lewis foretold this in The Abolition of Man. Second, the renewal of faith is now seen as indispensable. People need three things: meaning, belonging and purpose. Faith provides roots, restraints and renewal for civilization. The West is a “cut flower” civilization—cut off from its roots it looks fine for a while but will not last. We need chains on our appetites. Third, there is a need for renewal. The biblical story is one of exile and return, rather than decline and fall. The alternative to going back to faith is to be focused on power. The will to become powerful is the predominant motivation according to Nietzsche. “We are at a showdown moment in Western Civilization." He referred to historian Arnold Toynbee who observed that a critical element to change is a creative minority.   There are three powerful impulses behind the surge of the philosophy of secularism over the past four centuries. First, there is the revolutionary impulse to secularism: We do not want God.” Second, there is the enlightenment impulse to secularism, which rose up parallel to the revolutionary impulse: We do not need God.”  Third there is a closely related but even more recent scientific, technological and evolutionary impulse to secularism, the Promethean impulse now out in the open: We can replace God (and be gods ourselves).”   The question for the West, and for America in particular, is more pointed. Can countries that pride themselves on being liberal, free, and open maintain that freedom without belief in God?   Guinness writes about the four waves in contemporary America: The Red Wave – Radical Marxism. The Rainbow Wave - The Sexual Revolution. The Black Wave – Radical Islamism and finally the Gold Wave – Corrupt Elitism.   Guinness notes that much of American Establishment still has no idea of the vast difference between the American Revolution and the opposing radical revolution advanced today.   Western civilization is spiritually exhausted and deeply divided. Its intellectual, political, and social territory is fractured along a hundred fault lines. The diverse legions of cultural Marxism and Critical Theory have emerged triumphant from their “long march” through the American institutions.   The nation that prides itself on the way it rose up to defeat two deadly ideologies…appears not to recognize that it faces the deadliest enemy of all: equally hostile ideologies that are threatening to overpower American citizens from within.   But Guinness does not leave us without hope. In the final chapter, Choose Freedom, he argues that the choice could be between the world’s three major families of faith, or philosophies and worldviews. The first family is the eastern (including Hinduism, Buddhism and the New Age movement. The second is the secularist (including atheism, agnosticism, naturalism and materialism). The third is the Abrahamic (including Judaism, the Christian faith and Islam). In light of Western history, the choice is more likely to be between a form of secular materialism that has descended from the Enlightenment and a partnership between the Jewish and Christian faiths that have been the central inspiration of the West.   One thing is certain, there is no sitting on the fence. Only the Jewish and Christian faiths, and their ideas and ideals that made the West at its best, can renew and remake the West at this momentous civilizational moment, and so lead all humanity forward towards a truly human-friendly future.   For those looking for a comprehensive analysis of the West’s current situation, I cannot recommend this book too highly. Buy it. Read it slowly and let the message sink in. Dr. Guinness looks at the West through the lens of his great learning and erudition, above all, his deep Christian faith.   You can buy the book  at Amazon here: https://www.amazon.com/Our-Civilizational-Moment-Waning-Worlds/dp/B0DL3LW558?dplnkId=02a7f48c-aef4-4c0e-b1ff-fee3249b4512&nodl=1

By Anna Rees PREMIER CHRISTIAN NEWS March 11, 2025   A member of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC) has criticised the process of choosing the next Archbishop of Canterbury, branding it “confusing” and “lacking in transparency”. Revd Dr Andrew Goddard raised his concerns, after the General Synod voted against changes to the decision-making process of the Crown Nominations Commission, submitted by the House of Bishops. The CNC are a group of church leaders and lay people who recommend candidates for vacant diocesan roles in the Church of England – such as bishops and archbishops. The CNC leads a discernment process over candidates submitted to it, and puts the chosen candidate forward to the King, via the Prime Minister. Unusually, the current choosing process for the next Archbishop of Canterbury will consider candidates nominated by the general public – provided they are ordained. The consultation runs from February 7 to March 28. The process also involves consulting various bodies within the church. A Vacancy in See Committee (ViSC) in each diocese elects members for the Crown Nominations Commission and provides it with a profile of their individual diocese’s needs. However - Goddard suggests that due process is not being followed the Canterbury diocese. He cites the failure and lack of attention paid to replace members of the existing 2022-2024 Vacancy in See Committee (ViSC) within the timeframe originally agreed, which led to a large number of vacancies. Goddard saw this failing as particularly significant, given that the Archbishop of Canterbury was set to retire. A second ViSC was formed in December, following Justin Welby’s resignation. Yet neither this nor the previous ViSC are being used. Instead, a third committee is being formed - overlapping with the introduction of new regulations around ViSC elections at the General Synod in February. Using the new Regulation would raise yet a further set of questions about the Canterbury process. This process has been criticised as being shrouded in mystery, as it is unclear whether the latest ViSC complies with the new regulations. Goddard states: “There appears to have been, and still remains, some considerable confusion and serious questions which need answering with no less than three different Vacancy in See Committees (ViSC) being in existence in the diocese since the vacancy was announced but with all of them potentially not compliant with the Regulation.” The nominations of three Canterbury representatives on the CNC will take place in the near future. However, new regulations stipulate that no male clergy in Canterbury diocese can be elected, in an attempt to balance the male-dominated CNC. The controversial new rule requires those elected by the ViSC to include the election of one clergywoman and one lay woman. Goddard says: “Uniquely, Canterbury is only electing three members so when this new rule combines with the rule that at least half of CNC members must be lay, this means that no male clergyperson can be elected.” John Dunnett, National Director, Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), said: “Time and again, we see that proper process is simply not being followed on significant issues such as these. Andrew’s analysis spells out why confidence and trust in the appointment of the next Archbishop of Canterbury could be undermined if due process is neglected.” END

By Anugrah Kumar, Christian Post Contributor THE CHRISTIAN POST March 11, 2025   A Church of England diocese has introduced a new prayer guide stating that Christianity was historically propagated through “racist European ideologies.”    The "anti-racist toolkit," developed by the Diocese of Norwich's Racial Justice Action Group, and which advises clergy to move away from Eurocentric prayers, includes suggestions for addressing racial justice in church services, and is designed to align local parishes with the Church of England’s efforts to combat racism.   The guidance says parishes need to prepare for demographic shifts, particularly in rural East Anglia, where Norfolk remains about 94% white, according to The Telegraph.   Despite the region’s prevailing homogeneity, the toolkit talks about increasing diversity in schools and local communities, advising clergy to be more inclusive in their prayers, incorporating diverse languages and topics to reflect the changing population.   One specific recommendation encourages priests to create a “Collect for Racial Justice Sunday,” which includes prayers asking for repentance for historical wrongdoings and celebrating diversity.   The toolkit also provides an example prayer that refers to congregants as “a holy family, a rainbow people,” and directs clergy to external resources, such as the website PrayerCast, for ideas on prayers related to global issues.   Churches must embrace a metanoia—a complete shift in thinking—to see that strengthening marriages isn’t just ministry, it’s evangelism. Discover how this transformation can grow your church. Read More   Further, the guide suggests displaying images that represent diversity, even in parishes with little or no ethnic diversity.   The Rt. Rev. Jane Steen, Bishop of Lynn, supported the initiative, writing in the foreword that the toolkit’s measures are essential to ensure inclusion in an increasingly diverse society. She wrote that Norfolk’s hospitals, agriculture and other industries are strengthened by individuals whose origins lie outside the U.K.   The initiative follows recommendations from the denomination’s anti-racist task force established after the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. In 2021, the Church’s General Synod endorsed the “From Lament to Action” report, which included steps to combat racism, including revisiting historical ties to the slave trade and removing monuments linked to colonialism and slavery.   The Rev. Ian Paul, associate minister at St. Nic’s, Nottingham, questioned the allocation of resources toward such efforts in an area that is overwhelmingly white. He referred to the shortage of clergy in many parishes, arguing that funds might be better spent addressing these immediate needs, as reported by the Telegraph.   END

by David G. Duggan © www.virtueonline.org March 6, 2025   While the world agonizes over Ukraine, Trump’s speech to Congress, and the unsolved mystery of the death of Gene Hackman and his 30-years younger wife Betsy Arakawa, as we enter Lent matters spiritual should be top-of-mind. In this regard, the death last week of the Rev. Dr. Martin E. Marty 3 weeks after his 97th birthday deserves note.   Dr. Marty was a longtime professor of church history at the University of Chicago’s divinity school (few know that the U of C got its start as Northern Baptist Seminary until John D. Rockefeller came around with mega-donations totaling nearly $35 million during his lifetime), but got his start as a Missouri Synod Lutheran pastor in the Chicago suburbs. One of the few theological academics with practical experience in parish ministry, Dr. Marty traveled and lectured widely, finding time to edit The Christian Century, a monthly journal of “progressive Christianity,” write a bi-weekly newsletter Context, publish 60 books, hundreds of scholarly articles, essays, and columns and then deliver commencement addresses. He also served as a doctoral adviser to budding academics looking to add the gilt-and-maroon-edged diploma to their CVs.   In the ‘60s, Dr. Marty was active in the civil rights and anti-Vietnam movements, founding “Clergy and Laity Concerned,” sort of an antipode to Billy Graham’s public indoctrination by Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. Conceding his march to Selma, invited by Dr. King, and as potential Vietnam-era cannon-fodder, I have found academics’ anti-war protests troubling: protected by tenure, they get the cheap grace of not having to sacrifice for their beliefs.   I heard Dr. Marty speak several times: once at the Newberry Library some 20 years ago just after Martin Luther’s 130-volume opus was boiled down to 30 CDs; and another time at a Northside Chicago parish where he discussed the religious movements which derived from Chicago’s 1893 Columbian exposition (including the introduction of Hinduism to the States). Within those 130 volumes, Luther defended a married clergy as consistent with Scripture (cf. Matthew 8:14–15; Mark 1:29–31; Luke 4: 38-39; Jesus healing Peter’s mother-in-law; which sort of implies that he was married). I asked whether there was anything in those 130 volumes dealing with homosexual clergy which Luther himself had encountered during a pilgrimage to Rome. My recollection of Marty’s answer was that there was nothing.   More recently, with Dr. Marty I have been participating in a zoom Bible-study coordinated by my local Lutheran parish. I am not now, nor can ever become a Lutheran: I worship Jesus, and even if his apostle Luther is as responsible for my Christian faith as anyone in the last 500 years, I cannot bring myself to adhere to a denomination so embedded in a Germanic culture which inter alia gave us World Wars I and II. Not that there is any virtue in the Episcopal denomination of my upbringing, but the shibboleth which distinguishes Lutherans from Anglicans–among Lutherans, the only schism is heresy; among Episcopalians, the only heresy is schism– is at best a glib glossing over of a theological divide which hasn’t been bridged in those 500 years.   Dr Marty had suffered a fall recently and had moved from his John Hancock Bldg apartment to Minnesota, closer to the state of his origin, Nebraska, which punches well above its weight in theology and law, two disciplines which I follow (legal scholars Roscoe Pound and Karl Llewellyn were cornhuskers as was Harold deWolf, Martin Luther King’s dissertation advisor). Martin Emil Marty, Ph.D. and servant of the Risen Christ: RIP. We shall not see your likes again.   END

By Chuck Collins www.virtueonline.org March 8, 2025   ASH WEDNESDAY is very strange for Anglicans. First, the passage from Matthew chapter 6 is read that tells us to keep our religion private, not like the Pharisees who love to be seen by others. Then we smudge ashes on foreheads to announce our piety like neon flashing signs. And what’s with the pronouncement,“Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return”? This was God’s punishment for Adam’s disobedience in Genesis 3 that is hopeless even for those of us who are not already depressed. No, I need to hear, “Remember that Jesus came to seek and save the lost!”  or “Remember that he was crushed for your iniquities.” “Christian holiness finds its ground not in human mortality,” says Liam Beadle, “but in the sure and certain hope of the new creation.” The practice of imposing ashes was first introduced in the church by Pope Urban II in 1091 who stated, “On Ash Wednesday, everyone - clergy and laity, men and women - will receive ashes.” In the span of church history, it is a relatively recent practice. The practice was abruptly ended by the 16th century English reformers and excluded from the Book of Common Prayer, never to be seen officially again until the 1979 Prayer Book revision - 1979! The imposition of ashes was stopped because the reformers wanted to distance the Church of England from the Medieval Catholic understandings of penance and compulsory auricular confession to a priest.  The reformers opposed the blessing of material objects, such as ashes, especially when this suggested that blessing automatically conveys grace apart from faith, and they recognized the contradiction of Matthew chapter 6 with the very visible sign of piety. Imposing ashes was left out of all Church of England Prayer Books (1549, 1552, 1559, and 1662) and replaced with a service called “A Commination” for the first day of Lent. Bishop Nicolas Ridley, in a famous sermon, called the imposition of ashes idolatry because of its potential to separate a meaningless devotional act from the alluring love of God.  It is a historically new Anglican practice that started in small ways and places by the ritualist marching band that followed the 1830s Oxford Movement, and then gradually gained traction to the point where in the 1979 Prayer Book it is wildly prominent. Ask any Episcopalian or Anglican today and you will hear that the imposition of ashes is the central feature of our Ash Wednesday service. And even though the 2019 Anglican (ACNA) Prayer Book claimed to be faithful to the 1662 standard, like many Roman Catholic carryovers into the 1979 Prayer Book, the practice of imposing ashes has a front-and-center place in the American Anglican Prayer Book. Archbishop Thomas Cranmer in 1548, the year after King Henry VIII died, secured an order from the Privy Council to forbid Candlemas candles, the use of ashes on Ash Wednesday, and Palm Sunday palms. Even though it was a directive only for Canterbury diocese, it signaled the end of the Medieval superstitious practices in the Church of England. Ash Wednesday has always been a part of Anglicanism (called in the 1662 Prayer Book “A Commination, or Denouncing of God’s anger and judgments against sinners, With certain prayers to be used on the first day of Lent”), albeit without any mention of imposing ashes.  This beautiful and simple service was written to take the communicant from sin and repentance to grace and gratitude. Just looking at the very short homily supplied in the Commination that follows the ten curses (1662 Book of Common Prayer), those who are crushed by the sinfulness of their wrong-doing are led to the abundance of God’s grace and mercy for repentant sinners. It’s beautiful; it’s the gospel! This is the way to begin Lent! "For such is the force of simplicity that it lifts men's minds towards divine things more than a long series of ceremonies united by however good a meaning" (“Of Ceremonies” from Saepius Officio,1897). This week many will attend Ash Wednesday services which will include the imposition of ashes on foreheads, and many very faithful Christians will participate. We will be reminded that we will all die, and the message will be preached that we need to get our acts together before Easter. May we also be reminded that God’s mercy is everlasting and new every morning. Remember, we are not left in the dust, but we are, by God’s grace, destined to be sons and daughters of the King of Heaven in his New Creation.  This seems to me to be a better way to prepare for Easter, by taking sin very seriously, but always mindful that crushing guilt is meant to lead us to grace and gratitude. “Create and make in us new and contrite hearts, O God, that we, worthily lamenting our sins and acknowledging our wretchedness, may obtain of thee, the God of all mercy, perfect remission and forgiveness, through Jesus Christ our Lord.” “Ashes in a Time of Plague,” Samuel L. Bray https://www.pbs.org.uk/.../09/faith-worship88-website.pdf “No Imposition: The Commination and Lent,” Liam Beadle