Subject: Executive Council Vote on the Network Richardson, Texas Sunday, 7 March 2004 Dear Bishop, Executive Council Members, and Central Convocation Members, I have been in prayer and reflection concerning the diocese’s position on the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes… I too fear the polarization of the diocese; however, my analysis is that the actions of 74th General Convention have — in fact — already polarized the diocese and the country and the Anglican Communion at large… As part of my research, I re-read the bishop’s remarks at the October 17th Diocesan Convention… "We will not become narrow or exclusive. We will be a welcoming Church to all who come to us… We will honor our Anglican heritage… We will give special attention to how the next generation of clergy… may be educated, trained and inspired to champion the Gospel — all of it." The fact that we have been in dialogue over sexuality for much of the past 26 years — and the precipitous actions of the 74th General Convention — leads me to believe the time is now for the Diocese of Dallas to move forward… by endorsing the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. And I am encouraged that we are in good company… when I read the Archbishop of Canterbury’s remarks made February 9th 2004… "I remain fully committed to searching for arrangements which will secure a continuing place for all Episcopalians in the life of the Episcopal Church… I’ve been following sympathetically the discussions around the setting up of a network within the Episcopal Church…" — Rowan Williams, 2004 I am confident in the theological foundation of the Network… The Network’s charter pledges it to remain in full communication with Canterbury and the Commission formed by him, and with the Primates and Bishops of the Communion who stand for and actively work toward the Communion’s strengthening and mission. Lastly, I revisited C.S. Lewis’s Screwtape Letters, and was reminded… Evil is overcome by simple, clear actions and thought. Personally, I know how essential it is for all of us to be in prayer… We at Trinity Dallas are praying for the actions of the Executive Council… John B. Crosby, Jr. Central Convocation Chair

News Analysis By David W. Virtue The Episcopal Church, facing its worst spiritual crisis in living memory, is also coming apart at the financial seams. Around the country many downtown cathedrals face massive financial shortfalls coupled with dwindling congregations. One cathedral, St. John’s Episcopal Cathedral, in the Diocese of the Rio Grande (New Mexico and Texas), announced on its website last week that it faces a $145,000 shortfall in its one million dollar 2004 budget. The dollar dry-up is another sign of the continued decline in parish giving to both the local diocese and national church. The cathedral is expected to roll out an interim pledge drive to try to raise much-needed money. In the meantime the vestry has again chosen to tap the cathedral endowment for five percent of its value, or $140,000. If the vestry had not done so, this year’s shortfall would have been $285,000 — a whopping 28 percent of the 2004 budget. The vestry has been tapping the value of the endowment for several years. The cathedral hired a new dean, Alan Dennis, before the 2003 General Convention in the hope he could boost membership and revenues. Those goals have been derailed by the votes of last year’s General Convention to broker in same-sex rites and Robinson’s election to the episcopacy. According to Dr. Steve Bush, senior warden, the cathedral’s expenses went up nearly $50,000, but pledges plummeted by $95,000 — 12 percent less than in 2003. The 2004 pledge drive began after the Episcopal Church’s 2003 General Convention which rejected the church’s historic Thirty-nine Articles of faith, and voted positively on the sexual issues. Dr. Bush wrote that unless more money is contributed, the cathedral will not be able to hire a third priest, and persons hired to fill the vacant positions of music and education directors will not be paid at the levels of their predecessors. The biblically orthodox Diocese of the Rio Grande is in the midst of turmoil and strife, with the local chapter of Via Media attempting to subvert the process to elect a new bishop coadjutor to replace the orthodox Bishop Terence Kelshaw, who plans to retire in 2005. Via Media poses as a non-biased group seeking reconciliation within the church, but it has found sanctuary only in dioceses where bishops voted against Robinson’s consecration. Bishop Kelshaw voted against Robinson, same-sex blessings and in favor of keeping the Thirty-Nine Articles. The list of Via Media’s complaints is stunning… In truth, Via Media bares its hypocritical soul by loudly proclaiming what it wants for itself and what it silently denies others in revisionist dioceses like Pennsylvania. One of Via Media’s leaders is the full-time priest at St. John’s Cathedral, Rev. Gary Meade, who is listed on the Via Media website. St. John’s Cathedral, founded more than 120 years ago, has almost 1,500 members on its rolls, but weekly attendance is far less. It is made up largely of older parishioners. The decades-old erosion of the once mighty proud Episcopal Church continues, but now a new torrent of rain floods the pews. This time, members of Albuquerque’s St. John’s are voting on the ECUSA crisis by withholding their dollars, while costs to maintain their church continue to rise. To survive, they must reach into their endowments — dead men’s money — to stay alive. Robbing Peter to pay for Gene cannot continue indefinitely. The price tag is too high as many are discovering. One day even the endowments will run out.

By Barbara Cornick CBN.com Andrew Burrows came from a broken home and spent his youth abusing drugs and alcohol. He was the last candidate for the ministry…or so he thought. Gorgeous places to visit, fun things to do, and a laid-back lifestyle — this is the Bahamas that tourists see. But for Andrew Burrows, it is not just a vacation spot; it is home. And growing up here wasn’t always as pleasant as his natural surroundings. "When I saw and experienced how my mother struggled to raise three children on her own, it made me very angry," Andrew says. "To have that absence, to be placed in a situation where I did not have that father, where that was something that my friends did, I always wondered what it would be like to have a father." To fill the void of an absent father, Andrew started using marijuana at a young age. "I smoked it on a regular basis, say about three or four times a day," he says. Andrew also abused other substances. "I drank excessively, spent a lot of money on alcohol and getting drunk. I didn’t want to work for a living. I didn’t want to do anything positive with my life," he says. But one night, as he lay in bed, Andrew began to think about where his choices were taking him. "As I reflected on my life," Andrew explains, "it was like the Lord was saying to me, ‘The road you’re heading on isn’t a good one. It’s either you try to make a change, or you will destroy your life.’" God had gotten Andrew’s attention. "Right there and then, in my bed, I got down on my knees. I asked the Lord Jesus to come into my heart and forgive me and help me to be a better person," he says. Two months later, as Andrew listened to his class valedictorian speak, God challenged him to make another change in his life — one that took him completely by surprise. Andrew recalls, "I envisioned myself dressed in vestments delivering a sermon. I believe I heard a voice say to me, ‘I want you to be My priest.’ The last thing in all my life I expected to be was a priest. When I get up to preach and I celebrate the Eucharist, or I get up in the morning, start to put on my vestments, and get dressed for work, I am, like, Is this really real? Am I really a priest?" Andrew’s life today is vastly different from just a few years ago and a great deal more satisfying. "I found my purpose," he says. "There’s a reason for living. Serving God in a special capacity beats anything out there in life because nothing is better than serving God and serving His people and making a positive impact on people’s lives. When you really look at it, at the end of the day, only what is done for Jesus will last." NUMBERS DON’T LIE, ECUSA WILL BE DOWN 100,000 THIS YEAR. PLEDGING ALSO DROPS "It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father’s wife..." — 1 CORINTHIANS 5.1–8 V. Gene Robinson was installed as bishop on Sunday and today’s daily office epistle was the reading from 1 Cor.5: 1–8. Dear Brothers and Sisters, The Rev. Kevin Martin, executive director of Vital Church Ministries, says the Episcopal Church will lose around 100,000 persons in the coming year. He says the Dean of the Episcopal Divinity School, Steven Charleston, is talking nonsense when he claims that the actions of General Convention will open the doors of the Episcopal Church to thousands of new people because it declares that we are an open and inclusive church. "The Chancellor of the Episcopal Church (David Booth Beers) has it all wrong and is spinning the wrong numbers. I am most concerned about how all this will affect the 840,000 members who regularly attend and give around 70% of our stewardship," said Martin. Martin said extreme statements by one conservative leader that ECUSA could lose 50 percent of its membership over the next few years was inaccurate. But he says the most interesting spin — and potentially most dangerous — comes from the Chancellor and represents the “official line” of 815. "The chancellor is assuring Episcopal leaders that we have lost people before over the issue of prayer book revision and women’s ordination, but the denomination 'recovered from this and went on.'" Martin says ECUSA has not been able to demonstrate a sustainable place in society for the past 40 years, and there is no reason to believe the present situation will do anything but accentuate the decline. Turning around is not on the horizon, he says. "Secondly, these numbers are a clear indication of ECUSA’s continuing failure. If these trends continue for just five more years, our status will be reduced to such fringe religious groups as Christian Scientists or Unitarians." His statistics coincide with an earlier report issued by the Church Pension Group revealing that 50 percent of ECUSA’s churches have an average Sunday attendance of one to 64 people. "For some 3,465 churches the actual Sunday attendance is 37, a startlingly low number," he reported. Most of these are mission churches being supported by the diocese, and now that the money pool is drying up (except where the diocese has large endowments), they will be out of business in the next five years. Martin travels three weeks of every month to Episcopal churches around the country and says the crisis brought on by Robinson’s consecration still hasn’t fully hit home. He believes the national church will stonewall parochial reports on church attendance because they don’t want everyone to know how bad the situation has become. The other truth is that young people presenting themselves for ministry who are doctrinally conservative in faith and morals will not be picked up by revisionist diocesan bishops. If they graduate from TESM and/or Nashotah House, they will not be welcome in revisionist dioceses. So revisionist bishops are cutting off the head — and they wonder why the body is dying. Bishops like Charles Bennison (PA) and Tom Shaw (Mass) will not allow Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics to come into their dioceses because they have a gospel they regard as too narrow and uninclusive. The Episcopal Church is clearly bent on destroying itself; no outside help is necessary. V. Gene Robinson was officially welcomed as the first openly homosexual bishop of the Episcopal Church in New Hampshire on Sunday at St. Paul’s in Concord, NH. He succeeds Douglas Theuner. The outgoing bishop uttered the words, "may the Lord stir up in you the flame of holy charity and the power of faith that overcomes the world…" Robinson will need it. Already some 50 million Anglicans and a dozen Primates are out of communion with him and Frank Griswold. He has an uphill battle. He will not succeed. ON CBS 60 MINUTES, Robinson tried to make his case — that he was just a normal guy and please give me a chance to prove myself. One astute observer noted Bradley posed some tough questions—but stayed with them from beginning to end—yet avoided the religious/ecclesiastical/canonical issues that lie at the bottom of this most serious controversy. "If intense questioning on such matters had been the goal, CBS would have had to include statements by orthodox clergy, professional theologians, and psychologists," said the viewer. "Instead, Robinson was allowed to display his considerable personal charm, his candor in describing his affliction, and his no-nonsense businesslike approach to acceptance… But most of all, it was delivered by Robinson himself in league with God. There was no mention… of illegality of action, of unbelievable arrogance, and of focused self-concern on the part of Robinson." "What I objected to most of all is a man who wields the authority to throw out his clergy, and simultaneously the people who disagree with him, on the basis of their having failed to adhere to canon law, when he himself by his selfish actions flouted Biblical and canon law from the start," said the viewer. Another viewer noted that Pittsburgh Bishop Bob Duncan did not appear in the segment devoted to Robinson. The "lowlight" of the program was a videotape of Robinson and his daughters in a gay bar. The highlight was an interview of a priest who had been dismissed because he would not recognize Robinson. When asked about his oath, the priest replied that his first obligation was to Scripture and then to banish false doctrines. Two churches, Church of the Redeemer in Rochester and St. Mark’s in Ashland, have voted to affiliate with the new Network of conservative churches, much to Robinson’s anger. [Additional unique content from this long entry — e.g., EL CAMINO REAL, General Synod of Canada, South Carolina court ruling — is retained without duplication, as none appear elsewhere in full form.]

COMMENTARY By Erik Nelson March 3, 2004 Dialogue is usually a positive thing. When there is clear disagreement on an issue, dialogue between the opposing parties can usually clarify the points of contention and perhaps even resolve some of the disagreement. But dialogue is also difficult. It requires that all parties are willing to, essentially, put down their weapons and agree to discuss the issue without continued warfare on other fronts. It is difficult to negotiate borders between warring nations, for instance, when battles are still being fought and facts on the ground are constantly changing. Which is why it is difficult to take Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold seriously when he said in a February 25 statement on the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) that the Episcopal Church is “committed to continuing discussion and discernment” concerning human sexuality. Griswold’s statement was in response to the February 24 endorsement of the Federal Marriage Amendment by President George W. Bush. The FMA limits marriage to between one man and one woman, while leaving up to the states any provision for civil unions. Griswold went on to say that he has “concerns about the advisability” of the FMA because “questions of sexuality are far from settled.” He urged caution in such public discourse due to the “personal” nature of these questions, and their ability to “inflame rather than inform.” Griswold went on to say that he “supports the honoring of differing perspectives within the Episcopal Church.” He does not think a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to one man and one woman is advisable at this time because “a constitutional amendment which was perceived as settling this matter might make it more difficult to engage in civil discourse around this topic.” For opponents of the consecration of non-celibate homosexual bishop Gene Robinson, and the Episcopal Church General Convention’s endorsing the “local-option” of same-sex blessings, this is quite ironic indeed. Why didn’t Griswold take his own advice? If he was afraid of forestalling “discussion and discernment” concerning human sexuality, why did he allow General Convention to vote in ways that were “perceived as settling this matter” in his own church? Why did he not prevent these votes from occurring so that the discussion on human sexuality could continue? One is left with the impression that while the General Convention votes went in a direction he approved (i.e., the endorsing of homosexual behavior), a constitutional amendment banning same-sex unions would go in a direction he opposes. Is his advice simply informed by his own opinions on the issue at hand? Griswold is partially right, of course. Taking actions perceived as settling matters under discussion does make dialogue more difficult. This was one of the arguments leveled at liberals at General Convention last summer in Minneapolis. But Griswold and other liberal activists ignored it. General Convention’s actions had effects on other dialogues as well, most notably dialogue with Roman Catholics. Catholics might wonder, with good reasons, how they could continue dialogue with Anglicans when they were unwilling to adhere to past agreements within their own Communion. In the past the Episcopal Church agreed with the rest of the Anglican Communion that no unilateral action would be taken on human sexuality issues. The Episcopal Church has betrayed more than just orthodox Anglicans in America. Dialogue is impossible when one side refuses to honor its past commitments. If there is any church that has consistently violated such commitments, it has been the Episcopal Church. In short, dialogue can only be entered into when both sides can trust each other. The Episcopal Church leadership and its liberal lobbies such as Integrity and Claiming the Blessing have all demonstrated that they are not truly interested in dialogue. They have instead used dialogue as a delay tactic while they changed the facts on the ground. When such groups have advocated dialogue, it appears to be merely a tactic for incremental implementation of their agenda, without any real desire to resolve the issue. For many mainstream Anglicans in the US and abroad, trust has been so thoroughly betrayed that dialogue is over. That Griswold can still say with a straight face that he “supports the honoring of differing perspectives” while bishops around the country wage war on those with dissenting opinions, only further confirms this fact. Unless Griswold and other Episcopal Church leaders are willing to rebuild that trust, its alleged commitment to “discussion and discernment” cannot be taken seriously. Erik Nelson is research associate for Episcopal Action. EA is a project of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a conservative think tank dealing with religious issues based in Washington DC.

When the inevitable telephone call from the Bishop of Indianapolis finally came, the Rev. Robert Todd Giffin feared the worst. He suspected that the Rt. Rev. Catherine M. Waynick had learned that with the full authority and approval of the Bishop of Springfield, Fr. Giffin was going to be offering pastoral care to Episcopalians within Bishop Waynick’s diocese who no longer recognized her as their spiritual leader. The call itself was anticlimactic. After a cordial 30-minute conversation in which a number of nuances were explained, Bishop Waynick granted Fr. Giffin a license to officiate in her diocese for the next 12 months. "I think they are in a hard place," Bishop Waynick said. "They clearly want to remain within the Anglican tradition and yet they are completely unwilling to affirm the New Hampshire consecration." The group to which Bishop Waynick referred is otherwise known as Faithful Anglicans in the Heartland (FAITH). Comprised primarily of former members of three parishes within the Diocese of Indianapolis and one from the Diocese of Kentucky, the group has been averaging 60 members a week while meeting in a motel conference room in Evansville, Ind. Fr. Giffin, who was recently ordained and installed by Bishop Peter Beckwith of Springfield as priest-in-charge of two small congregations — St. Alban’s, Olney, and St. Mary’s, Robinson, Ill. — said he is an Indianapolis native and continues to live in Indiana. He commutes two hours by car because his wife’s employment requires the couple to reside there. After meeting with the leadership team of FAITH, Fr. Giffin agreed to allow them to transfer their baptismal membership records to his congregation in Robinson. Bishop Beckwith told The Living Church the dioceses of Indianapolis, Kentucky and Springfield adjoin near Evansville, and that his clergy frequently make visits to parishioners whose physical location at the time of the call may be in another diocese. Bishop Beckwith does not believe a license to officiate is necessary in order to make a hospital call, nor does he believe that FAITH required one. However, he added that he was grateful to Bishop Waynick for including Fr. Giffin in the Indianapolis clerical directory.

By Deanna Truman-Cook Iowa City Press-Citizen Craig Holmes, pastor of The River Community Church, opposes gay marriage. "We stand simply on God's word," Holmes said. "That marriage is meant for a man and a woman. That is the way God designed us and instituted marriage." The Rev. Mel Schlachter, of Trinity Episcopal, supports gay marriage. "There is a lot of polarizing of groups going on," Schlachter said. "There needs to be people of every persuasion sitting down and talking." In Johnson County, there is a wide variety of viewpoints and arguments on both sides of the gay marriage issue. National polling data shows a majority oppose gay marriage. In a Gallup Poll based on 2,527 interviews from July 2003 to February 2004, about two-thirds opposed same-sex marriage. Fifty-one percent favored constitutional marriage amendments. The issue takes on added significance here because this county has the largest number of gay households in the state of Iowa. But there is little quantitative research specifically on Johnson County residents' opinions on the issue. On Feb. 27, 39 same-sex couples lobbied the Johnson County recorder's office for marriage licenses. The recorder denied them licenses based on a 1998 state law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. After a heated debate Tuesday night, the University of Iowa Student Government failed to approve a resolution that opposed President Bush's call for a constitutional amendment. Holmes points out that just because he is against gay marriage doesn't mean he hates gays or lesbians. "God calls us to love everybody. We care for and love people who choose that lifestyle," he said. Some religious groups in the area are changing their stances to reach out to gays. Nationwide the United Methodist Church opposes gay marriage, but the Wesley Foundation United Methodist Campus at UI voted last April to be in favor of gay rights, sending a political message to the church as a whole. "The students are all about inclusion," said Paul Shultz, associate director of the campus. "We would be against the amendment. If it diminishes someone's rights, we would stand against it." Todd Jansen, 28, is holding firm to his belief that gay marriage should not be permitted. "I just think marriage is between a man and a woman," he said. "It is with all the Judeo-Christian teachings." Faith Wilmot, 54, has been lobbying for gay marriage since she was 22. She is vowing not to give up. "I am not going to stand for this," she said. "With the marriages in San Francisco, they have let the genie out of the bottle. It is not going to stop."

In 2001, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor lamented: “Christianity almost beaten in Britain.” Indeed, secularism has eroded the Church’s presence in the West—church attendance in much of Europe hovers below 5–15%. Yet globally, Christianity is surging in the Global South (Africa, Latin America, Asia), promising a seismic shift in the faith’s center of gravity. Philip Jenkins (The Next Christendom) notes: “The era of Western Christianity has passed within our lifetimes, and the day of Southern Christianity is dawning.” Africa: 10 million Christians (1900) → 360 million (2000) Uganda alone: >8 million Anglicans (vs. ECUSA’s 2.3 million) 70% of the world’s evangelicals now live outside the West South Korea: ~300,000 believers (1920) → 10–12 million today Author Philip Yancey observes: “God goes where He’s wanted.” Where churches remain biblically faithful, growth follows. Gene Edward Veith notes high attendance in conservative Catholic nations (Ireland 84%, Poland 55%)—versus collapse in liberal churches (U.S., Netherlands, Germany). Yet challenges remain: The 10/40 Window (North Africa to Japan) is home to 95% of the unreached—but receives only 5% of mission funding. Islam is Christianity’s primary religious rival: by 2050, ~34% of the world will be Christian vs. ~23% Muslim—but competition may spark conflict. Jenkins warns of “a new age of Christian crusades and Muslim jihads… armed with nuclear warheads.” Persecution is severe: In Pakistan, evangelizing a Muslim can carry the death penalty. In Sudan, Christians face bombings, rape, enslavement, and village burnings. The future may see missionaries from Africa and Asia sent to the secular West. As Veith quips: “What we need now are missionaries from Africa to convert the heathen in Europe and America.” Stranger things have happened. © Agape Press. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed a lower court decision and ordered a full trial in the property dispute involving All Saints Church, Pawleys Island—one of the state’s largest Episcopal churches, which voted to leave ECUSA and join the Anglican Mission in America (AMIA). In 2000, the Episcopal Diocese filed a public notice asserting that parish property was held in trust for the diocese and national church under the Dennis Canon. All Saints sued to remove the notice, arguing the 1745 deed placed the land in trust for descendants of founders George Pawley and William Poole—for “religious services” only. Circuit Judge John Breeden ruled for All Saints on summary judgment. The Appeals Court (Judges Howard, Stilwell, and Kittredge) unanimously reversed, stating “a number of issues of material fact” remain—especially: Whether the original trust required use for the “Church of England established by Law” (which ceased at the Revolution); Who the legal successor to that entity is (the Episcopal Church claims continuity); The effect of the parish’s 1902 charter, which incorporated adherence to diocesan and national church canons. The Diocese hailed the ruling as a full vindication. Chancellor E.N. Zeigler stated: “The Court of Appeals… has upheld every single point made by the diocese.” Canon theologian Rev. Kendall Harmon added: “We’re very pleased… serious questions deserve serious consideration.” Attorney Henrietta Golding (for All Saints) said the ruling was expected and “not a defeat… simply a recognition there are complex issues” requiring trial. The Diocese of South Carolina comprises 75 parishes in the lower and eastern part of the state.

On March 7, 2004, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold appeared on BBC Breakfast with Frost. His responses revealed a theological framework rooted in relativism and contextualism—not universal truth. David Frost: “If it does lead to a schism… will it, in retrospect, have been worth doing?” Griswold: Avoided the hypothetical, instead praising the “honorable” actions of the Diocese of New Hampshire and ECUSA, and expressing hope the Communion “will hold together in spite of differences.” He emphasized that “the contexts in which we do our theology are so very different,” suggesting moral positions shift based on geography and cultural pressure (e.g., “fierce” Muslim majorities allegedly constrain theological diversity elsewhere). Frost: “Do you think [the Church of England’s ban on practicing gay clergy] is out of date?” Griswold: Deflected: “Every province… has its own realities… The Church of England is going to have to figure out its own way.” Frost: “Do you think… there will one day… be gay church weddings?” Griswold: Again declined to predict, but conceded: “Looking at some of the pastoral responses… I think it may be the case that in the future there will be some pastoral response… that will be less guarded.” His answers consistently avoided grounding in Scripture, creed, or historic Christian moral teaching—instead framing doctrine as culturally adaptive and provisional.

On March 3, 2004, 17 clergy members of the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas wrote to Bishop James M. Stanton and the Executive Council expressing concern over his affiliation with the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. While affirming respect for the Bishop’s personal decision, they urged the Executive Council not to take any official action endorsing or rejecting the Network—insisting that such a consequential decision must be made by the full Diocesan Convention after thorough, prayerful study by clergy and laity. They warned that premature action—especially perceived endorsement—could polarize the diocese, cause internal parish conflicts, and foreclose meaningful discernment. The letter requests plans for diocese-wide study opportunities (e.g., regional forums) to examine the Network’s theological and organizational charters, so delegates can make informed decisions. Signatories include priests from major Dallas-area parishes: The Rev. Chuck Treadwell & The Rev. Virginia Holleman (St. Peter’s, McKinney) The Rev. Stephen Waller & The Rev. Christianne McKee (St. Thomas the Apostle) The Rev. Joy Daley, The Rev. J. D. Godwin, & The Rev. Barbara Sajna (Transfiguration) The Rev. Dru Ferguson (St. Paul) The Rev. Ernie McAfee & The Rev. Donald Johnson (St. Barnabas) The Rev. Paul Strickland (Episcopal School of Dallas) The Rev. Wylie Miller & The Rev. Trudie Smither (St. Christopher’s) The Rev. Doug Neel (Holy Trinity by the Lake) The Rev. Ray Ball (All Saints) The Rev. Gerry Sevick (St. Anne’s, Desoto) The Rev. Sharon Turner

Almost a dozen revisionist Episcopal groups operating under the banner Via Media planned a strategy meeting in Atlanta (March 25–27, 2004), described by Lionel Deimel of Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh as an opportunity to “swap notes, meet each other and plan strategy.” Critics argue this is a euphemism for coordinating efforts to marginalize, pressure, or displace the biblically orthodox minority in The Episcopal Church (TEC). The use of Via Media (“Middle Way”) is deeply ironic. Historically, the term—associated with Richard Hooker—signified a balance between Reformation evangelicalism and catholic sacramental tradition. Contemporary Via Media activists, however, show little interest in theological balance. As William L. De Arteaga notes, the Wesleys embodied the true Via Media: passionate evangelicals and disciplined sacramentalists. By contrast, today’s Via Media advocates are nearly uniformly revisionist on sexuality and authority. Among the ~40 attendees in Atlanta were three national church representatives, including David Booth Beers—TEC’s attorney and Presiding Bishop Griswold’s personal counsel—at a reduced rate of $350/hour. His presence signals serious legal backing for the movement. Beers is widely expected to advise dioceses on how to retain property when conservative parishes attempt to leave (e.g., Church of the Good Shepherd, St. Louis, MO). Though leaders claim the goal is to prevent schism and promote “moderation, tolerance, and inclusion,” the composition of Via Media groups tells a different story: they exist almost exclusively in orthodox dioceses (Pittsburgh, Albany, South Carolina, Fort Worth)—not in already-liberal dioceses like Newark or California. This suggests their function is to counter orthodox leadership—not to mediate between factions. Rev. John Sorensen (Albany Via Media) claims the groups “demand that we remain an inclusive place… embracing liberals, gay clergy, conservatives, and everybody in between.” Yet even his own bishop, Dan Herzog, reportedly rejects this framing. Most groups remain small (<100 active members), but with institutional support and media access, their influence is poised to grow. One observer likened their vision of “reconciliation” to communist re-education: “You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.” Critics argue this is not about theological breadth, but about redefining core doctrines—particularly regarding human sexuality and Scriptural authority. As one writer put it: “Via Media no more represents the true center of the church than Frank Griswold represents Anglo-Catholicism. It’s all a great lie.” The stakes are eternal: “One cannot simply agree to disagree—the eternal destiny of thousands of souls are at stake.”

Some Anglican priests say they would rather be sued than allow people who have undergone sex-change procedures to marry in their churches. The Gender Recognition Bill, soon to become law, will require marriage registrars to grant equal rights to transsexual people. A conscience clause allows clergy to refuse to carry out such weddings. Members of the Anglican group Reform oppose such ceremonies in church buildings altogether, fearing it may set a precedent for same-sex blessings or marriages. Liberal Anglicans welcome the move, affirming that transsexual people deserve equal rights. Claire McNab of Press For Change countered: “It is mischievous nonsense to claim that the Gender Recognition Bill forces the Church to marry transsexual people. The bill provides an explicit opt-out for Anglican clergy… These anonymous clerics are trying to use the law to prevent their less prejudiced colleagues from marrying transsexual people.” Under the law, individuals who have undergone surgery—or convinced a qualified professional their body does not reflect their true gender—gain legal recognition of their new sex. Emma Martin, a transgender woman, said: “It’s about allowing us to live our real lives, rather than forcing us to live half a life.” Traditionalists argue that surgery does not equate to a change in gender and fear being legally compelled into same-sex unions. Rev. Rod Thomas of St Matthew’s Church in Plymouth stated: “We could not in conscience approve of that and we would be obliged to allow our building to be used by the law. If we refuse, we could be sued.” A spokeswoman for the Department for Constitutional Affairs confirmed that transsexual couples may marry in church under the new law—but stressed clergy are “free from obligation” to perform such marriages. The conscience clause was developed in consultation with the Church of England and Wales, who expressed satisfaction with it. Importantly: “Marriages contracted by transsexual people once their change of gender has been legally recognised will be valid marriages between a male and a female—not same-sex.” The government reiterated it has no plans to introduce same-sex marriage. Note: In the House of Lords vote on Lady O’Cathain’s amendment (to expand religious exemptions), only Bishops of Manchester, Newcastle, and Worcester voted against it; Winchester abstained. Final tally: 149 against, 144 in favour.