Archives

BOSTON (AP) Archbishop Sean P. OMalley yesterday urged Catholic lawyers to oppose same-sex marriage, saying the institution of marriage and the family are under assault and lawyers need to help protect them.    The social cost of the breakdown of family life has already been enormous, Archbishop OMalley said at the annual Red Mass, which is dedicated to judges, lawyers and others in the legal system.   It not a question of live and let live, it a question of right and wrong, Archbishop OMalley said.     Later, in an interview, he said: We hope that [Catholic lawyers and judges] will use their profession and their understanding of the law to defend marriage. They’re in a better position than any of us to understand what needs to be done to correct a very complicated situation that the court has put us in.   The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled in November that the state cannot deny marriage rights to same-sex couples, a ruling applauded as a civil rights milestone by homosexual activists. The court gave the Legislature six months to pass a law that complies with the ruling.     At a Catholic Lawyers Guild luncheon following the Mass, former Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork assailed the Massachusetts ruling, calling it untethered from the state and federal constitutions.     If anything justifies the term judicial tyranny, this one does, said Mr. Bork, who converted to Catholicism last year.     Gary Buseck, executive director of Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment on Archbishop OMalley statements.     Archbishop OMalley was installed July 30 as the head of the Boston Archdiocese, which has an estimated 2.1 million parishioners.     His first priority was to settle hundreds of clergy sex-abuse lawsuits filed by people who accused priests of molesting them, and the archdiocese of covering up the scandal. In September, the church agreed to an $85 million settlement.     Http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040112-123616-4956r.htm   END

By David W. Virtue VIRTUOSITY   CHARLESTON, SC--The rectors of one of the largest parish churches in the Diocese of South Carolina has sent a letter of personal regret to AMIA Bishop Chuck Murphy and to the rector of All Saints Church, Waccamaw for its decision to withdraw from the diocese. The Rev. Marc Boutan, associate rector of St. Philip Church, a flagship parish in the heart of Charleston, said some 15 clergy and laity signed a letter saying, We, some of your fellow clergy of the Diocese of South Carolina, gathered coincidentally for the Anglican Communion Institute at St. Philip Church, wish to convey our deep sorrow over this loss.     Although we have been separated to some extent by the legal actions you have taken against the Diocese over the land issue, your friendship, your talent, your vitality and leadership in the cause of Jesus Christ over the years have been wonderful gifts to us -- not something we can relinquish easily. We hate to see our alliance come to this end. We will miss your participation in our common life.     We wish you would reconsider your decision. We need your voice along with ours to stand for the historic Christian faith against the tide of revisionism. We appeal to you give the Anglican Communion an opportunity to discipline ECUSA, and then move together toward the best solution.     Fondly in Christ,   Rev. Haden McCormick, rector Rev. Marc Boutan, Associate rector   (15 Signatures followed after this letter.)   END

An explanation for those outside the church   By Peter Leach Artillery THE CRITIC 11 October, 2025   Sarah Mullally is to be the 106th Archbishop of Canterbury, which has upset a number of Christians, especially in the Anglican community here and abroad, and particularly in Africa. Though if you aren’t a Christian, you may be confused as to why many are unhappy with the appointment. Most of the negative commentary is either written for a church audience, and hence does not explain precisely why this statement or that stance is such a problem, or it attacks her identity politics and lack of charisma — charges that could just as easily be made about a non-Christian selected to run a public body.    But for Christian believers, the Church of England isn’t simply a Quango headed by a state functionary. The theology, integrity and gender of the incumbent are key parts of what it means to lead the Anglican communion, which is why there has been such an issue with her appointment.   Let us take some of the issues in turn, starting with the most obvious point of difference from her predecessors: her gender.   Women’s ordination didn’t just arrive last Friday; the Church of England first ordained women in 1994, and first consecrated female bishops in 2015. The appointment of a female archbishop arguably makes things hotter for those within the church who oppose all such ordinations, but they have found workarounds so far and will probably continue to do so. But since Mullally has put the issue back in the spotlight, let us consider it.   In the life of the church, 1994 is extremely recent. For nearly all of church history, women’s ordination was unknown. Partly this is because of extremely plain statements in the Bible. As Paul the Apostle puts it in 1 Timothy 2:12, “I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man.” This command has been subject to any number of creative re-readings over the last few decades, but it still stubbornly says exactly what it seems to be saying. Consequently this is a straightforward matter of obedience, which Mullally (along with her enablers, male and female) is not obeying. This is a problem for one who claims to be a servant of Christ.   The fiercest fights in church history have not historically been over ethics or power but over the identity of the God we worship   The issue, however, is deeper than a single arbitrary rule. In fact, the rule is not arbitrary. The Bible is a realist about sex, unlike our modern culture: God created it, it is good, and so men and women are different, and both are good. In particular, men are made to govern and women are made to nurture. The interplay of the two sexes is beautiful; the overthrow of the distinction leads to all kinds of chaos. Societies which attempt to treat men and women as interchangeable are setting themselves up for problems they cannot solve and cannot understand.   It goes deeper still; the interplay between men and women is an echo of the love between God and the church, with God in the masculine role. Church leaders are his representatives as he speaks to his bride. Their masculinity is part of their representation. To ordain women is to lose some of our understanding of the love of God — a thing the church cannot very well do without.   Same-sex blessings Mullally has been closely involved with the so-called “Prayers of Love and Faith”, proposed marriage-like prayers for same-sex couples. When PLF was approved she described it as “a moment of hope” for the church, leaving little doubt as to her own opinion. It is this position, rather than anything about the ordination of women, that has caused the most consternation from conservatives. GAFCON and GFSA, two large alliances in the worldwide Anglican Communion, both speak of it as a key driver for continued suspension of ordinary relations with Lambeth.   Once again the history of the church is instructive; any kind of acceptance of same-sex unions was unknown to Christianity before about the last hundred years, and has only found widespread traction in about the last thirty. (Of course, popes, televangelists and many others have had their moral failings, but these were always recognised as failings and a subject of scandal when revealed.) And once again this is in part because of extremely plain statements in Scripture. Such behaviour is an “abomination”; those who practice these things “will not inherit the kingdom of God”. There is a famous story about Sodom and Gomorrah with which you may be dimly aware. Scripture is at pains to point out that this sin, like all others, will be forgiven for anyone who repents; but it is a sin, and forgiveness does require repentance. (Of course, for all the creative reinterpretations that have flourished here as well, the real reason for the church’s shift is evident to anyone with half a brain: the culture moved, and the church wanted to move with it.)   Here there is an important difference from the issue of women’s ordination. While Scripture is clear on that topic, it is silent on its precise seriousness; most conservatives would not suggest that disobedience around women’s ordination is necessarily the death of faith. But the matter is very different with sexual immorality (of which same-sex unions are of course only one example); here God repeatedly warns us that unrepentant disobedience means judgement. To our culture, obsessed with sex and thereby cheapening it, this seems a strange overreaction. In reality, however, God could hardly do otherwise. Sex is deeply significant, the closest you can get to another human being and therefore an act with enormous power. Any parent can testify to its life-giving strength; any victim of sexual abuse, to its destructive force. God takes it seriously because it is serious.   Mullally, and all those in the Church of England who share her stance, is therefore not only disobedient, but a false teacher. She encourages others to do things that will lead to their destruction. Jesus describes such teachers not as sheep or shepherds but as wolves.   Calling the Holy Spirit “She” Of all the issues with Mullally, however, arguably the most serious is one which has received relatively little attention. In prayers from last year, she speaks of the Holy Spirit as “she”. While Mullally herself does not appear to use this language often (one hopes for her sake that these prayers were an ill-thought-through one-off), the usage reflects a push in the church towards “inclusive language” about God.   The immediate error here has already been highlighted. While God is the creator of sex and therefore beyond sex in himself, God is masculine towards us. Male and female are specifically created to give us this image. To switch these pronouns is to reinvent mankind’s relation to God. But behind this error is a far deeper one that has nothing at all to do with gender.   It is impossible to convey the seriousness of this without speaking for a moment of the most important thing in the world, something I rather tremble to do. But here goes: the point of the Christian faith is God. In Islam, the righteous get to go to a heaven in which they experience many earthly delights, but God himself is notable by his continued distance. The Christian hopes for something far different: God himself. We want to be with him; we are promised that we will see his face. In these human words he promises us something which is beyond human language or understanding, the only thing that satisfies all our desires. Augustine is always quoted on this topic but worth quoting again: you have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in you.   This basic reality, the promise of seeing God, underpins the whole structure of the Christian faith. Unlike other philosophies and religions in which we work our way to our goal, this goal is beyond us and must be given, a gift of forgiveness and adoption and glory. This is the entire purpose of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection. God came down to man that man might be lifted up to God.   This is why the fiercest fights in church history have not historically been over ethics or power but over worship, particularly over the identity of the God we worship. It is the first of the Ten Commandments: no other gods, and no idols. The issue with Mullally’s prayer, to be clear, is not as much the pronoun as the arrogance. If we love God, we will receive him as he reveals himself to us and worship him with humble gratitude. But those who consider themselves free to reinvent God as they please are demonstrating simply that they do not know God at all, they do not want him as he is, and they do not love him. This is a different religion entirely, wearing the corpse of Christianity as a skin suit.   No Roadmap Readers may perhaps want me to conclude with some kind of call to arms, a call to leave the Church of England or directions on how to fight within it. But I refrain. I think both are viable options; though I myself left a decade ago over these issues, I have many friends still within and I wish them only success; it would be beyond my expertise to strategise for them.   My aim in this piece is not to provide a roadmap for the future but an accurate assessment of the present. In particular I am concerned for the observer and the new explorer, especially those drawn to Christianity by the collapse of the culture that has abandoned it. It is vital for these readers to understand that there is a living faith in a living God, and not to be defrauded by the current ascendancy of its dead counterfeit.   Peter Leach is the Minister of Grace Church, Coventry.

PRESS RELEASE Oct. 10, 2025  The Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy ("JAFC") filed a lawsuit on Oct. 6 against the Anglican Church in North America ("ACNA") for injunctive relief and damages, alleging that the ACNA violated federal and state trademark and unfair competition laws in an effort to effectively achieve a hostile takeover of the JAFC.  During an emergency hearing on Oct. 8, a federal judge of the U.S. District Court for South Carolina noted that the ACNA's actions appeared "aggressive" and directed the ACNA to "hold off" on conducting a meeting it had scheduled for 6 p.m. that evening. The JAFC has repeatedly reached out to Archbishop Steve Wood and the ACNA to amicably resolve the parties' differences but has received no response.  The JAFC will continue seeking solutions even as the judicial process proceeds. The JAFC is confident that the truth will prevail, and its chaplains will continue to do the good work that they have done for nearly two decades.  The JAFC is an independent, nonprofit organization that provides for the care, training, ordination, and endorsement of chaplains, with various participating Anglican bodies. The chaplains serve in the U.S. military, other federal and local government agencies, hospitals and hospice programs, law enforcement, and other vocational and voluntary chaplaincies. END

No business as usual: Global South will not compromise    Archbishop Gomez Address to Anglican Communion Institute     The following address was given by Archbishop Gomez (Primate of the West Indies) at the Anglican Communion Institute Future of Anglicanism Conference held in Charleston, SC on January 8-9, 2004.     By The Most Rev. Drexel W. Gomez   Recent events in North America have placed the entire Anglican Communion into a state of crisis.  We are, as Anglicans, at a critical crossroad in our pilgrimage as a Communion.  I refer of course to the actions of the Bishop and Synod of the Diocese of  New Westminster in Canada where same sex blessings were officially endorsed and authorized by the Synod and subsequently implemented as a matter of diocesan policy.  These actions in New Westminster must be considered against the background of an existing official policy that forbids such actions and a Provincial authority that refuses to enforce the policy.  Meanwhile many Anglicans in New Westminster are suffering and enduring spiritual persecution simply because they have elected to remain faithful to the historic teaching of the Church which prohibits homosexual practice in conforming to the universal teaching of Holy Scripture. In the United States, four actions have contributed to the growing state of chaos in worldwide Anglicanism.  They are:     1. The action of the Diocesan Convention in New Hampshire in electing a non-celibate homosexual living in an openly gay relationship as the Coadjutor Bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire.   2. The confirmation of the election by the General Convention.   3. The Consecration of Canon Gene Robinson.   These actions must be viewed in the context of:   a. The declared official teaching of the Anglican Communion as stated in Lambeth 1:10.   b. The repeated affirmation of Lambeth 1:10 by subsequent Primates Meetings.   c.    The specific condemnation of same sex blessings from the Primates Meeting in May 2003.     4. The approval of General Convention [2003] in regard to same sex blessings. There are persons who admit that we face a problem but wish to minimize the impact by reminding us that, Anglicanism, since its beginning has been forged on the anvil of ecclesiastical controversy (Philip Thomas in Sykes, Booty and Knight, page 250).  Paul Avis, The problem of [Anglican Identity] is perennial.  It is as old as Anglicanism itself, but it has surfaced particularly strongly at times of greatest stress and conflict (page 11).  [The Anglican Understanding of Church].  In its mid-16th century efforts of Bishops Jewel and Parker to determine Anglican Identity over and against rival claims of Roman Catholicism.  At the end of the century, Hooker - Of the Laws of ecclesiastical polity in which he defended and defined the integrity of Anglican polity over and against the radical puritans.     The work of Cosin and Hammond led to the restoration of monarchy in 1660 - 62.  19th Century Oxford Movement - the conservative theological and politically  conservative defense of Anglican Identity in the face of an emerging secular  state.     While we cannot deny that the identity has been our constant companion of our Anglican ecclesiastical journey, we are presently faced with an acute challenge as the nature and future of Anglican Communion, the worldwide family of legally autonomous but spiritually and pastorally interdependent churches that are in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.    In 1930, the Lambeth Conference defined the Anglican Communion as follows:   The Anglican Communion is a fellowship within the one holy catholic and apostolic church, of those duly constituted dioceses, provinces, or regional churches in communion with the See of Canterbury, which have the following characteristic in common:   They uphold and propagate the catholic and apostolic faith and order as they are generally put forth in the Book of Common Prayer as authorized in their several churches. They are particular or national churches and as such, promote within each of their territories a national expression of Christian faith, life and worship; and they are bound together not by a central legislative and executive authority but by natural loyalty sustained by the common counsel of the bishops in conference.   Alongside is the 1930 Lambeth statement we must place the Lambeth 1948 declaration on the dispersed nature of Anglican authority regarded by some as a classical definition of the nature of Anglicanism.   The positive nature of the authority which binds the Anglican Communion together is moral and spiritual, resting on the truth of the Gospel, and on a charity that is patient and willing to defer its common mind.   Authority, as inherited by the Anglican Communion took the individual church of the early centuries of the Christian era, is single in that it is derived from a single divine source, and reflects within itself the richness and historicity of the divine Revelation, the authority of the eternal Father, the incarnate Son, and the life-giving Spirit.  It is dispersed among Scripture, Tradition, Creeds, the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments, the witness of saints, and the consensus fidelium, which is the continuing experience of the Holy Spirit through the faithful in the church.     It is then a dispersed rather than a centralized authority having many elements which combine, interact with and check each other; these elements together contributing a process of mutual support, mutual checking, and redressing of errors of exaggerations in the many-sided fullness of the authority which Christ has committed to His Church.      Where this authority of Christ is to be found mediated not in one mode but in several we recognize in this multiplicity of God loving provision against temptations to tyranny and the dangers of unchecked power.     In respect of this dispersed authority at the very heart of Anglicanism we should note that ECUSA actions, sighted above, displayed a distinct lack of charity and an unwillingness to defer to the common mind of the Anglican Communion as declared at Lambeth and reaffirmed by subsequent Primates Meetings.    In addition ECUSA has violated the process of mutual support, mutual check up by taking unilateral action without conference with other members of the Communion.      Indeed the contempt towards the other members of Anglican family displayed by ECUSA, clearly demonstrates an inherent weakness in our Anglican system that offers no clear guidelines for holding each other accountable and for admonishing one another.      While many have found solace in the absence of a central authority, there are many voices within the global community insisting that the time has come for us to introduce some mechanism in our common life to prevent each Province from going in separate directions without reference of the fellow members of the Body.     Some of you may recall that Archbishop Sinclair and I raised this issue in To Mend the Net. Despite the urgency of our appeal, the document has not been debated on the level of the Primates, having been relegated to the Standing Commission on Doctrine.  Copies have been supplied for the new Commission appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury to advise on the structural and judicial issues which have arisen out of the actions taken by ECUSA and the Diocese of New Westminster.     One of the factors that has blocked clear focus on the authority issue in Anglicanism is the fear of a Vatican-style central authority coupled with a dread of the Archbishop of Canterbury assuming the role of pope with the implicit dangers of unchecked power and authoritarianism and monolithic conformity.     The existence of these phobias have led some in our midst to refuse to face up to the reality that we have no established mechanism, as Anglicans, for dealing with the resolution of the conflicts for the building up of the Body of Christ. II.     Our present crisis in the leadership many Anglicans to question the merits of the highly acclaimed comprehensiveness and diversity at the heart of Anglicanism. As members of a culturally diverse worldwide communion of churches, Anglicans are habituated to the idea that communion can co-exist with considerable diversity of belief and practice.     The varieties of faith and practice that are a feature of Anglicanism are held together at a fundamental level in the communion that Anglicans have with  one another across divisions of churchmanship that does not mean that all  varieties of belief are equally valid, or that the differences do not matter, or that Anglicans should not be striving for greater coherence and cohesion; onlythat there is something that is greater, deeper and stronger than all these differences- the fact that all the baptized belong to the one Christ and in Him to one another.   This idealistic portrayal of Anglican diversity and comprehensiveness does not address the situation created by contradictory and mutually exclusive teaching and practice within the one body as presented in our present crisis that challenges us to accept the validity of contradictory and mutually exclusive teaching and homosexual practice.      Furthermore, our incorporation into Christ at baptism issues us a common life, a common faith and a discipline of Christ-like lifestyle. Our Anglican devotion to its diversity of comprehensiveness obscures very often the need for boundaries.  There are patterns of behavior which place us outside of the boundaries of the Christ-like life.  There are too many advocates of Anglicanism without boundaries.   III.  The challenge to the Catholic tradition   Anglicanism has always maintained its allegiance to its catholic tradition, its historical continuity in the life, worship and ministry of the Church, and to the authority of the undivided church of the early centuries. The catholicity of Anglicanism has been justified historically - Ecclesia Anglicana represented at the Council of ARLES 314.  In addition, the Celtic Church existed before the arrival of Augustine of Canterbury in 557.      The English Church existed before the Reformation and all Anglican Churches trace their origins to the Church of England and thereby to the historic catholic tradition. The catholicity of Anglicanism is justified theologically because Anglicanism incorporates an upholds the ancient structures of the catholic church, the canon of Scripture, the historic creeds, the dominical sacraments of holy baptism and the Holy Eucharist (put in the context of liturgies that trace this lineage to the liturgies of the early church) and the historic episcopate.  These structures of catholicity are enshrined in the Chicago Lambeth Quadrilateral (Lambeth 1888).     The catholicity of Anglicanism can be supported polemically by its acceptance of the General Councils of the undivided church and its commitment of its council on Catholicism.  Despite the fact that the Roman Catholic Church does not recognize Anglican orders, eucharists and authority, Anglicanism affirms its membership within the one, holy and catholic and apostolic Church along with the Roman Catholic Church and the historic churches of Orthodoxy.     Our present crisis poses a threat to our catholic heritage because the acceptance of homosexual practice as a holy pattern of living represents a departure from the historic tradition.  Representatives from the Roman Catholic Church and some segments of the Orthodox churches have already indicated their opposition.  It is noteworthy that the Presiding Bishop has resigned from ARCIC and the Vatican has suspended the meeting of IARCUM until further notice.  The Oriental Orthodox have cancelled the bilateral meetings with the Anglican Communion and the Russian Orthodox Church has issued a strong condemnation of ECUSA actions. IV   Threat to our reformed heritage.     Although  the English Church predated the Reformation, it was strongly influenced by the Reformation especially in regaining its Biblical center of gravity.  The central place of the Bible in the life of the Church has been jeopardized by the actions of ECUSA and New Westminster.  It has been clearly demonstrated by several scholarly works that the Bible does not support homosexual practice.  I refer you especially to the treatment of this violation of Scripture in our booklet entitled, Claiming our Anglican Identity - The Case Against ECUSA. V. A departure from Anglicanism appeal to reason and sound learning.     Under normal circumstances, one would have expected the authorities in ECUSA, out of respect for this Anglican proclivity for sound learning, to have initiated serious and diligent inquiry into the theological and ethical dimensions of the issues related to homosexual practice before embarking on a deliberate course of action to promote change in the church historic and Biblical teaching and practice.      Instead we observed a refusal to travel the road of serious theological dialogue.  All too often, we were informed by the leadership of ECUSA that there were several views within ECUSA in respect homosexuality without any attempt to examine each approach with a view to arrive at a consensus.      I am convinced that the leadership of ECUSA is not interested in a serious theological approach to the issues since they are driven by a secular cultural agenda. In this regard, we note that our two publications - True Union in the Body and Claiming Our Anglican Heritage have not received any formal response form ECUSA.    In both of these publications, we have set out in an orderly and well-reasoned manner the arguments for the retention of the Church historic teaching on homosexual practice.  In addition, we have detailed ECUSA violations of the teaching and historic order of the Church.  In my opinion, we must place some pressure on ECUSA to mount a reasoned response by circulating our material to all and sundry. VI. Our present crisis requires some major realignment within Anglicanism -     1. Within ECUSA - According to its own self-definition, ECUSA is a constitutional member of the Anglican Communion. is communion with the See of Canterbury.  The emergence of the Network of [Anglican Communion] Dioceses and Parishes should lead to the determination as to which grouping fulfills the terms of ECUSA declared self-definition. In addition, it should agitate for a critical and objective assessment of ECUSA violation of its constitution and self-definition as an integral member of the Anglican Communion and in communion with the See of Canterbury.  We hope that that this aspect will not escape the attention of the new commission.     2. Within the South/South bloc of Anglican Provinces, where the overwhelming majority of Anglicans reside (at least 50 million of 75 million).  A majority of the Primates and Provinces have firmly declared an altered status of relationship with ECUSA ranging from impaired communion to a complete break of communion. Within the grouping there is 100% agreement that the actions of ECUSA are unacceptable.  In addition, there is a strong consensus for some form of discipline to be applied.      It is quite clear that there will be no possibility of business as usual without repentance and disavowal.     In a real sense, the future of the Communion will be determined by the response of the Global South to the proposals from the new commission.      The Global South is not prepared to compromise on the non-acceptance and repudiation of the actions of ECUSA and New Westminster.      While we hope and pray for the continuation of the Anglican Communion, we of the Global South cannot and will not accommodate the numerous violations of ECUSA within our ongoing life.     As a member of the new commission, I request your prayers for all members as we begin our formal work on the 9th of February.  We must present our report by September 30 [2004].  We are all cognizant of the fact that so much rides on our recommendations and their acceptance by the decision-making instruments of the Communion.      Please pray that the Spirit of God will lead us to a positive determination that will enable the worldwide Anglican Communion to prosper in mission and ministry in this century and for the foreseeable future.

Report from the President of the Standing Committee Regarding All Saints Parish   January 09, 2004     Following the actions in December 2003 of the Vestry of All Saints Parish, Waccamaw, to change their Corporate Charter, to leave the Diocese of South Carolina, and the Episcopal Church, the Standing Committee met with the members of that vestry.  We met in the hope of reaching a positive resolution, and in an effort to avoid the actions that ultimately took place at the January 8, 2004 meeting of the Parish. As evidenced by the resolutions passed at the Special Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina held in October of 2003, the Diocese, including the members of All Saints, are deeply concerned about the crisis in the Episcopal Church.  We strongly believe that our working together is the best witness in this struggle.     At our meeting on January 5th, the Standing Committee, in an effort to find common ground made the following proposal:     1.) Recommend to the Bishop he consider dropping the appeal to the lawsuit filed by All Saints against the Diocese.   2.) Recommend that seat, voice and vote be given to All Saints at the upcoming Diocesan Convention.   3.)  Recommend the reinstatement of the Vestry   4.)  Recommend the restoration of Parish Status   5.)  Recommend the scheduled meeting with a replacement vestry be cancelled.     We asked the Vestry simply to a) rescind their vote and to b) put on hold the proposed Parish vote on the resolutions altering their Charter and severing their relationship with the Diocese until at least January of 2005.     Following that meeting, we shared our proposal with Bishop Salmon, who immediately acted on our request by canceling the scheduled meeting with the replacement vestry.  In light of the fact that the appeal of the lawsuit has already been heard, and the ruling from the court is still pending, the Bishop discernment was to wait for the courts ruling.  However, the Bishop was more than willing to engage in all manner of discussions regarding the use, and ownership of the Church property.  In addition, Bishop Salmon was willing to reinstate the vestry and restore All Saints to Parish status. He also supported the Standing Committee recommendation that All Saints be given seat, voice and vote ad the upcoming Convention.     Our efforts included the support of the Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh, and Moderator of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes; as well as the overwhelming majority of the clergy of the Diocese, who urged All Saints not to take this action. Sadly, despite the efforts on the part of the Standing Committee and the willingness of the Bishop to find some common ground, the vestry of All Saints was unwilling to rescind their vote, or to delay the Parish meeting so as to avoid the tear in the fabric of our Diocesan Common life. We recognize this is a difficult time for all faithful Orthodox Anglicans. We continue to offer our love and prayers for the members of All Saints Parish, whom we know to be our brothers and sisters in Christ.     Faithfully,     The Rev. Craige N. Borrett, President The Standing Committee   END

Special Report   By David W. Virtue VIRTUOSITY   TO THE BISHOPS AND STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE CHURCH   Dear Brethren:   It is with great heaviness of heart and deep personal distress that I write to provide you with the following information. Under date of November 30, 2003, I have received a letter from Gregory K. Hotchkiss in which he officially vacates his episcopal office and renounces his ministerial orders in the Reformed Episcopal Church. In his correspondence he  cites changes in his moral and theological understanding which have resulted in a growing distance between himself and the Reformed Episcopal Church. In particular he makes reference to the official statements issued by the bishops of the Reformed Episcopal Church in response to the 2003 General Convention of the Episcopal Church and in response to their consecration of a practicing homosexual to the episcopate. He affirms his disagreement with our church stated position, and states that he can no longer continue in good conscience as an ordained clergyman in this denomination.     Accordingly, in conformity with Canon 31, Section 1 (d) of the Canons of the Reformed Episcopal Church, I have accepted his voluntary renunciation of all gifts, authorities, prerogatives and duties which were conferred upon him at the time of his ordination and consecration. As a consequence, he is no longer a minister of the Gospel, or a bishop in the church of God. I commend him and his family to your intercessory prayers.     May God enable us to see beyond the distress and disappointment of these events to the good purpose for which He has called us to Himself in Christ Jesus, and which He is working out among us from day to day. And may we dedicate ourselves anew to the unchanging truth of His eternal Word, to the imperative of uncompromising Gospel witness, and to the privilege of working together to build this portion of His Kingdom as that opportunity has been entrusted to us in this promising day and time.     Faithfully yours, in Christ,     (The Most Rev.) Leonard W. Riches Presiding Bishop     END

By Julia Duin THE WASHINGTON TIMES   More than 3,000 conservative Episcopalians met Friday and yesterday in Woodbridge to pledge solidarity against their denomination decision last summer to consecrate a homosexual priest as bishop.The gathering was larger than the 2,700 Episcopalians who met last fall in Plano, Texas, in what became known as the Plano Conference to oppose the Aug. 5 consecration of Canon V. Gene Robinson at the Episcopal General Convention as the new bishop of New Hampshire. The meeting this weekend at the Hylton Memorial Chapel, termed Plano East, was held for those who couldn’t go to Texas.     Conservative Episcopalians are angry over church decisions last year to approve Bishop Robinson and to allow blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples.     Homosexuals are due their civil rights, and I am in no way challenging that, said Fred Haeberer of Stafford County, Va. However, this is a spiritual realm, and our church is founded on Scriptures that define homosexuality as a sin.     The crowd, mainly church members from the Dioceses of Virginia and Washington, heard nothing negative about their two bishops “the Rt. Revs. Peter Lee and John Chane” who both voted for Bishop Robinson. One of Bishop Lee chaplains, the Rev. Kathleen Christopher, took part in the communion service Friday night.     However, the theme of the speeches was unmistakable: That the Episcopal Church is in deep trouble by allowing the consecration of Bishop Robinson and thereby incurring the wrath of many of the 70 million members of the Anglican Communion. This is our mess, said Hugo Blankingship, a Fairfax lawyer who spoke about how to avoid lawsuits by hostile bishops, and we must deal with it.     Other speakers predicted a similar gloomy scenario. The Rev. John Yates, rector of the Falls Church Episcopal in the city of Falls Church, spent at least 20 minutes explaining how Scripture cannot be reinterpreted to allow homosexual relationships.     If it our claim to submit to Christ, we must submit to scriptural authority as well, he said. We dare not say, as one of our bishops said, Well, we wrote them, we can rewrite them. Or, as another bishop said, We need a new Christianity for a new world.   Since the 1960s, he said, Episcopal leaders and teachers have jettisoned the historic distinctives of the church. Many believers left in August. We have stayed. ... We have to say: Enough is enough.     The Rev. Kendall Harmon, canon theologian for the Diocese of South Carolina, said church liberals often cite the apostles decision in the New Testament to allow Gentiles to become Christians, as a landmark decision similar to the Episcopal Church decision to allow homosexual bishops.     People say were doing a new thing, as in Acts 15, Mr. Harmon said, God doesn’t do new things that are opposed to Scripture. The idea of God doing a new thing is a Mormon idea, not a Christian one.     This story is based in part on wire service reports   END

You sir are duplicitous: you have repeatedly spun the truth     AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW with the Archbishop of the West Indies, The Most Rev. Drexel Gomez.     By David W. Virtue VIRTUOSITY     The following interview took place at the new Anglican Communion Institute conference (formerly SEAD the Society for Ecumenical Anglican Doctrine which was formerly SEAD the Scholarly Engagement with Anglican Doctrine) in Charleston, SC.   VIRTUOSITY: Archbishop, are you in impaired communion or broken communion with the Episcopal Church?   GOMEZ:  We are in impaired communion with ECUSA, which is the official position of the Province of West Indies.     VIRTUOSITY: At what point would it become broken?   GOMEZ: We will be having our provincial meeting in November. Prior to that we await  the result of the Eames Commission and we will hold the relationship [of impaired communion] till then. We will also see how the communion acts. We have expressed a strong concern for faithful Anglicans in America and a large number of Caribbeans in the US who are preserving the faith in The ECUSA.     VIRTUOSITY: In your speech to attendees at the Anglican Communion Institute conference you called Frank Griswold a duplicitous man who has spun the truth from several Primatial meetings over homosexuality. Can you be specific?     GOMEZ: Within the meeting itself he would always say in the ECUSA there are different approaches it, but he would never discuss what the individual positions were, or  give any resolution. These divisions were the last word so by do nothing you allowed the Practice to continue.     VIRTUOSITY: You mean no authority of Holy Scripture informs him?     GOMEZ: His approach to Scripture is totally alien to our traditional approach to Scripture.     VIRTUOSITY: What should faithful Episcopalians do now? Should they leave? Join the AMIA or what?     GOMEZ: I would not advocate joining the AMIA. I would advise persons to hold on and to bear witness in their particular context as the church works through this question. Let me be clear homosexuality affects the entire Anglican Communion not just ECUSA. There are Caribbean Anglicans questioning whether they should stay in the Anglican Church, it is not just a local one.     VIRTUOSITY: Are you hopeful that the Episcopal Church can be reformed over time?     GOMEZ: Over time, perhaps. It would take a long time because there is a strong revisionist leadership within the ECUSA and most of the seminaries are revisionist and producing a revisionist mindset, and for me that is a very dangerous sign for the future health and wellbeing of the church; it lacks Anglican diversity.     VIRTUOSITY: What do you understand Anglican diversity to mean?     GOMEZ: A variety of opinions on non-essential elements. An example is the approach to  Holy Communion. Some people are receptionists, some broad church, while the Anglican Church teaches the real presence. I see no difficulty tolerating those differences of opinion while emphasizing, doing and participating in the Eucharist. Diversity ceases to be diversity when we teach contradictory and mutually exclusive teaching and doctrines where opposites cannot be true.     There are instances where one set of issues can be both/and but there are other issues that are presumptively secular and are not open to both/and. You cannot say therefore that heterosexual and homosexual lifestyles are equally holy patterns of living, they are not. VIRTUOSITY: What do you understand the Doctrine of Reception to be?     GOMEZ: It is essentially an approach started by the Roman Catholic Church and found in some forms of orthodoxy. A teaching is presented to the church and is allowed to ferment. The doctrine of the church begins at the community level where it becomes comfortable and absorbed into the broader teaching of the church.     VIRTUOSITY: Why could homosexuality not be a part of a new Doctrine of reception?     GOMEZ: Because it contradicts the revealed teaching from Genesis of the creation of humankind, wherein God makes male and female and it is part of the divine order and plan for being human. It is a contradiction of that affirmed by Jesus. It also denies the complementarity that God has placed into the created order and introduces a new anthropology in which human beings are simply persons without differentiation; so any two persons can love any two persons. It is not possible to involve this is a new doctrine of reception.     VIRTUOSITY:  In the present crisis the Episcopal Church finds itself in, what should Episcopal laity do at this time?     GOMEZ: The first approach is to remain in the church. Secondly, I think they should  search out those faithful parishes where they can worship. People have cars they can travel. It wont hurt them. Thirdly they should take time and effort to study the issues more deeply. Stop complaining and get informed.     VIRTUOSITY: How should the Archbishop of Canterbury discipline the Bishop of New Westminster?     GOMEZ: I believe Dr. Williams should make a public comment after the next Canadian General Synod on last day of May after they have elected a new Primate. New Westminster is a diocese within a province. The Archbishop has made a public commitment to uphold the official teaching of the Anglican Church on this issue and  any province that departs from that teaching would present him with a problem.     VIRTUOSITY: Canon John Peterson and the Anglican Consultative Council have very manipulative with the Primates? Has he or can he been stopped?     GOMEZ: Peterson has used the office of General Secretary to promote the cause of the revisionists at the expense of the traditionalists. In terms of the ACC itself, it is due for a structural review. It should represent the more general feeling and rich diversity of the communion.     VIRTUOSITY: Should the next leader of the AAC be from the Global South?     GOMEZ: Yes.     VIRTUOSITY: Should he be orthodox in faith and morals?     GOMEZ: Yes.     VIRTUOSITY: Is there Racism in the ECUSA and at what level?     GOMEZ: My own belief is that racism is still a live issue within the church and wider society, and we have been too quick to cover it up and pretend to be where we are not.   Within the Global South there is a strong feeling that the North does not give to the persons of the South the due recognition that is due to them as persons.     VIRTUOSITY: Pennsylvania Bishop Charles Bennison likened the growth of African Christianity to Hitler Nazi Party? What is your response to that?     GOMEZ: It was and is a racist and uninformed statement and meant to be pejorative. Leaders like Bennison are doing grave harm to the Christian cause not just the Anglican  cause, because he is deficient in Christian orthodoxy and exploits the power of his office to achieve his own ends.     VIRTUOSITY: Do you think there is an implied racism in bishops like Griswold and Spong?     GOMEZ: They are condescending in their attitude towards the Global South and that is racist.     AFTER I WROTE MY LETTER TO FRANK GRISWOLD CONDEMINING HIM FOR CONSECRATING V. GENE ROBINSON I GOT A MESSAGE FROM THE VATICAN SUPPORTING MY LETTER TO GRISWOLD.     I am still praying that we will be able to stay together and be a stronger church out of the present problems, but I am strongly of the view that we must pay greater attention to the teaching of The Faith, and we must reduce the pseudo cultural teaching that is being promoted under the guise of Christianity.     VIRTUOSITY: What are your hopes for the Anglican Communion?     GOMEZ: We are in dialogue with the African and Asian bishops, South East Asia and  Indian archbishops and we are planning a meeting before the end of the year.     VIRTUOSITY: What is the real point of the Eames Commission, can it make any serious contribution to the ongoing debate?     GOMEZ: The Eames Commission is about structural and relational issues. It is NOT about the truth or falsity of homosexual behavior. That issue has been decided. The Lambeth Resolution resolved that. It is now about how we remain in communion and address the question of communion in the face of diversity and the reality of the Archbishop of Canterbury to the various parts of the communion in the situation of diversity. These are issues of provincial autonomy and inter-Anglican relationships, and the Commission is to make recommendations to the Archbishop with special reference as to how he is to function.     VIRTUOSITY:  A Federation rather than Communion perhaps?     GOMEZ: There is a strong possibility by might, but there are efforts devoted to being a Communion. It will be a great tragedy if we are reduced to a federation. It will do immense harm to the image of Anglicanism and it would certainly reduce our influence at the ecumenical level it would reduce it considerably.     I am glad to say that I am able to exercise some influence in the Global South and I am happy to report that we are all, at this time, working off the same page.       END

What is the Network?     The Rev. Canon Martyn Minns Source: AAC News January 11, 2004      Duncan Sermon at the AAC A Place to Stand Gathering in Virginia   The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan source: AAC News January 10, 2004       http://www.americananglican.org/News/News.cfm?ID=933&c=21     God’s Vision, Our Future - Plano East Closing Address     The Rev. Canon Martyn Minns Source: AAC News January 11, 2004     http://www.americananglican.org/News/News.cfm?ID=935&c=21   Marriage is between a Man and a Woman Only   END

http://www.freerepublic.com/    01/09/2004     Ok, just come home from the most glorious Festival Eucharist I’ve been to since The Holy Spirit conference in New Orleans, August, 1997.   Magnificent. The procession was several hundred Priests long, and 2 Bishops in attendance: Bishop Duncan and Bishop MPango of Tanginika, who attended VTS and was married at Truro Church (by Rt. Rev. John Howe, I believe, well, it was during his time at Truro).     The sermon by Bishop Duncan was on the text of Peter and Jesus walking on the water and Jesus reached out and helped him into the boat - that in the same way, the Holy Spirt, Jesus, God - the Trinity are reaching out to us as a group. I heard the doctrine of orthodoxy but not to Griswold or Williams although at the announcement time, Bishop Duncan had 3 announcements one of which was that Griswold and Williams would be informed of this conference, and the last was flyover Bishops that those who want to have Confirmations, or send candidates for Holy Orders, or for Seminarians, these Bishops would be available. Means to us at Church of the Apostles, Truro, Christ the Redeemer, The Falls Church and Church of the Holy Spirit, Dale City, that Confirmation can now proceed without having to invite Bishop Lee!   YES!   After the service ended, there was prayer in front for those wishing to receive prayer, and the lobby/narthex was filled with clergy in informal receiving lines welcoming those from their Churches or just those who wished to have a word with them.     I confess that I went for prayer - during the end of the service I realized that I was furious with Bp. Lee for doing this to us - anger that welled up and spilled out of me. Having had a childhood friend who left the Episcopal Church to become a Jewess, sent me the article on Truro Church, Martyn Minns and the Bishop from the Sunday New York Times Magazine section. There was nothing in the envelope with the article - nothing but it might as well have had one that said, Nah nah nah na!. And it was in this article that I read that Bishop Lee was prodded to take this position by his wife who said, Peter, do you want to be part of the past, or part of the future? And ON THIS SCRIPTURAL BASIS of wifely reminders, he based his decision? Oh joy, this just thrilled me to tears. NOT. BTW, the Bishop has gained a significant amount of weight. He has always been trim and fit, and this picture showed a double chin, a puffed face, and a belly! Must be eating to salve the pains of dissension he feeling, eh?     Interestingly, Martyn nodded in the procession in my direction - I was standing in the narthex, to watch the procession - and saw David Harper who of course never sees anyone except the person back in front to him. Saw Tom Herrick, vicar from Christ the Redeemer, the Mission Church from Truro - in tough times because of disassociating ourselves from Bp. Lee. I have no idea where they got their money to make the Jan. salary budget. Hmm – saw John Guernsey from Dale City, Phil Ashey formerly of Apostles, then Pittsburgh somewhere, is now vicar at South Riding (an entire planned community you’ve never seen off of Rt. 50 hard to pick a mile marker for you to know where it is, when all you remember is forest, followed by more forest, which is now houses, condominiums, and very expensive tony townhomes and single-family homes, and a golf course designed by someone impressive for very costly club fees.     I plan on taking notes during tomorrow panel discussions as this is where the ideas of separation will be presented.     I have had a foretaste of Heaven - the service was glorious, the synchronized responses marvelous, and the rafters just rang with the precise amen of about 3000. I would estimate that the place was 75% full, meaning about 3000 in attendance. Parking confirmed this, as busses were required from 3 distant parking/hotel/motel locations! I arrived in time to get one of the last spaces within the confines of the Hylton Chapel parking lots without being in the extended area!     It was a joy to be among so many devout, joyful, orthodox conservative Episcopalians. The Episcopal Church lives!     Freeper Report on Second Day of Plano East in Northern Virgina   01/10/2004     http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1055546/posts     Today was started with a wonderful historical service in the Episcopal Church, Morning Prayer. This daily office is said daily by Priests in our Church and we don’t’ celebrate it often enough in the Church. There are times I wish every Eucharist started with Morning Prayer as did the Cathedral of my childhood.     Opening comments were again delivered by The Rev. John Guernsey of All Saints, Dale City, who welcomed us to a thoughtful consideration of today speakers.     The day was a composite of panels presenting various topics for our consideration. The call to Orthodoxy was a thread throughout them all, and amazingly so, since they were given different topics with the instruction Come up with 3 questions - which most followed and answered with Biblical text, or song, or with Anglican precendent or history, or a call to remain strong, that those who have embraced the results of GC 2003 have LEFT the Church; that WE are the Church.     The final panel of the day included a young man from Christ the Redeemer who delivered an impassioned plea for us to remember who we are, and to get on with the central tenet of our faith - doing the work Jesus has us on earth to do. This from one so young with almost stinging words, was received with a standing ovation followed by prayer for all those 22 and younger. Hands were laid on those who were in attendance by groups of those around them, and prayer was spontaneous and repentant for having ignored the future of the Church, our youngsters.     The theme throughout today was ever constant - do the work that Jesus sent us here to do, and the business of the Church, how we will align will come out of that but not at the sake of it.     The Rev. Canon Martyn Minns summed this up at the end, giving as the parallel stories of Tex, Ruth and Emily - redemptive inclusivity, radical transformation. Redeeming work done at the risk of reaching out to the unclean, unwashed and outcast, but because they received the love of Christ through one of us, they came to believe in God, accepted His Son as the living Christ, and whose lives were radically transformed as a result.     Today, whether it was epistemological, historical, analytical, musical or rhetorical, the love of Jesus and the focus on Him was made clear. Over and over, we were urged to place our faith in the Bible, the Trinity, and get on with getting on. These discussions interspersed with prayer and then with song, drove the message deep: There is hope, there is life in this Church (us) after all; there is meaning to all of this when we keep our eyes on the One who came to earth to show us how it done, and that mission - the kind of mission that evolves out of each and every one of us, is central to our existence because living the great commission is more important than living the social life of meaningless Sunday Church services.   With the focus back on Jesus, with the emphasis on mission and service, there was a release of anxiety over where do we go, what do we do now which morphed instead into this is what we do, this is how we proceed, we keep doing the work of Jesus and the mechanics of our Anglican Communion here in America will be worked out. Time will help us work this out. The pressure to see something, almost anything happen NOW was released into peace and patience and commitment to doing the work on earth that God has for us to do.     When I entered the building this Morning, I wondered how I would ever feel peace, ever feel contentment in being an Episcopalian in America. As the day progressed, any anxiety or pressure to have something resolved today or even tomorrow faded away, in to the certainty that our leadership is pursuing with all alacrity that which would make us central to Anglicanism, without worrying about splitting off from or or splitting up ECUSA. Who knew where this would end today? With teenagers performing skits that showed the peer pressure they could face about that homosexual Bishop thing which the central character worked out to be the issue of Biblical authority rather than a homosexual issue.     A fantastic witness was given by a man who is involved in a ministry to those trapped in the homosexual lifestyle, as he told us his story and let us see the pain of what he experienced, followed by the healing and love and wholeness that Jesus has called him into. It was one of the most powerful testimonies of God mercy and grace I think I’ve ever heard. Like all of us, his is a process of healing, but also like us, one that he has recognized the choices he has to make and the fight he has to wage daily.   This is simply and remarkably, the kind of healing and wholeness that God calls us all into.   In the theme of the day, I have 3 questions.   What did I like best? The singing. No, the panels. No, the skits the teenagers did. No, the stories Canon Minns told. No, the congregational prayer we were led in, in small groups. Okay, I liked everything.     Starting with the Festival Eucharist last night, to the Morning Prayer, panel discussions, congregational prayer, group prayer, teenager skits, each had a part to play in the fabric of the day that wove us to the final conclusion - we can retain our rich Anglican heritage by standing firmly on the Word of God and doing His work.     What did I Learn? I learned that we aren’t headed to some major schism, leaving consecrated property, splitting parishes apart, abandoning Priest and Bishop retirement monies, and introducing incredible amounts of doubt. We can continue with who we are, claiming the Biblical authority that we have, and making some requests about our future that will progress slowly, with thought and with care (and with legal help!).     What touched me most? Two things. One, the availability of the Priests and Bishops, to talk with us - at breaks, at lunch, after the last session. With so many white collars around, people could approach them and ask them their most burning concern. If they didn’t feel something had been answered for them (most likely, it just hadn’t been answered yet), they could address it with the nearest Priest. I thought this openness and availability was spectacular. No pedestals, or barriers to questions here.     Second, the pace of the day. I don’t know how they did it, but the time from 8 AM to 4:30 PM just flew by, but instead of feeling like it whizzed past, there was this sense of accomplishment, of peace, of contentment, of renewed passion for ministry. I wanted to thank the heretical Bishops who voted for the consecration of the errant Bishop in NH, to say a loud thank you. Why?   Because bringing this many of us together in No. VA was a treat. The comfort of familiar liturgy, the rhythm of treasured hymns and songs, the cadence of the leaders prayers, the assurance of steadfastness in our faith through humorous stories and Biblical quotes led to a peacefulness that our denomination is not teetering on the precipice of destruction, but instead is focusing on a new emphasis, a call to righteousness. A call of faithfulness.     No matter what you call us, we are Episcopalians.   One final note. I heard two different numbers for attendance today. From the panels, from the introductions by The Rev. Crocker, an Assistant at Truro, I heard 3000 several times. From someone who did the computer print out for name badges, I heard the number 3275.     So, let just call it 3000+. Quite a turnout in this busy No. VA area where there was supposition that not many would bother showing up. 3275 people bothered to show up, and were rewarded for it.   END

AMIA Wave-on-line News Anglican Mission in America     The small African nation of Rwanda has suffered much loss in the last ten years.  The genocide of 1994 cost it an estimated 800,000 lives, and left it to walk a difficult road of rebuilding and restoration.  It has also paid in other ways.  When the Anglican Province of Rwanda came to the aid of orthodox Episcopalians in the United States, it was threatened with the loss of financial support from the powerful Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA).  When the province went ahead, on principle, to establish the Anglican Mission in America (AMiA), it felt the wrath of the ECUSA hierarchy in the forfeiture of much needed  financial support.   In one instance, Trinity Church Wall Street withdrew a promised sum of funds to theological education in Rwanda an amount of over $150,000 that was subsequently raised by the fledgling AMiA. Today, Theological Education by Extension, or TEE, is thriving in Rwanda, having trained nearly 2,000 candidates since 1999.  The Rev. Canon Martin Nzaramba, TEEs Coordinator, is clear about the vital role the program fills: Our immediate vision is to help the Episcopal Church in Rwanda to grow numerically and spiritually.  We also desire to offer theological education to all levels of our church leaders, that our churches would have abundant life. Nzaramba was beaten in the early stages of the genocide, presumed killed and buried alive.  He regained consciousness, got out of the grave and walked to safety in Burundi!     Last year the TEE program trained Diocesan coordinators and facilitators across the country that oversee the local programs and administrate the appropriate examinations each term.  They hope to train 60% of church leaders by the end of 2007.     The House of Bishops in Rwanda has declared that it has a goal to establish a residential theological college that would also be home to the extension program.  Several Anglican Mission congregations have expressed interest in assisting with this goal, and attendees of the AMiAs Winter Conference in Destin will have opportunity to contribute to this project through the conference offerings.     For Canon Nzaramba, it is a partnership that is paying important ministry dividends in Rwanda, We are pleased that the program is progressing so well, and were very thankful for the support we have received.   END