Archives

Church of England Newspaper Evangelical leaders will meet with the Bishop of St Albans next week after about 40 clergy and laity protested against the appointment of Canon Jeffrey John as Dean of St Albans. A number of clergy and parish leaders are talking of quota-capping or of not inviting the Bishop to do confirmations. Canon John's appointment has brought divisions to the diocese which are unlikely to be overcome easily. Philip Lovegrove, chairman of the Diocesan Board of Finance for over 30 years, and a lay canon of the Cathedral, is among those heading the protest. He said that a delegation of five or six leaders meeting the Bishop next week were likely to begin by pressing him on how he can now be a focus for unity in the diocese after making such a controversial appointment. He predicted that while there has been much chat about capping parish share an organised campaign was less likely to development. "Big givers will leave the Church of England or put their collection money to other sources," he said. The statement by the Diocesan Evangelical Fellowship called the appointment "a serious error of judgement." They said: "We are aggrieved that the diocesan bishop, who has also called on people not to take precipitate action, should have agreed to the appointment, thus creating division within the Diocese and the wider Anglican Communion." They also repudiated the statements in support of 'gay unions' by Canon John and the Bishop of St Albans as "wholly erroneous and contrary to scripture, tradition and reason." The open evangelical grouping 'Fulcrum' this week supported the appointment of Canon Jeffrey John this week. While questioning the "insensitive timing" and lack of consultation, Fulcrum promised to pray for him as he took up his new ministry. The group said that the appointment of a Dean and Bishop were different matters. "Dr John's position as a Dean means that those disagreeing with his point of view will not be asked to swear an oath of canonical obedience to him; his role will not be a 'focus of unity'." Fulcrum also welcomed Jeffrey John's commitment to uphold rather than campaign against the church's teaching and to live within its guidelines.

Archbishop Gregory Venables Replies to Frank Griswold May 7, 2004 The Most Revd Frank T. Griswold Presiding Bishop ECUSA Dear Bishop Frank, In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. I write in response to your letter of May 5th. Since it has found its way all over the internet, I am constrained to respond more broadly than just in a personal note. With great respect it must be said that considering what you now write in the light of what you have already done brings to mind the old cliche of Nero fiddling while Rome burns. It's like the doctor telling the grieving family that the operation was a success even though the patient has died. You speak with clarity about your grief over the pain your actions have caused and yet you proceed with your relentless agenda. Do you not see that there is an enormous contradiction here? The key path to alleviating that pain is repentance. It is simple to turn around and join the spiritual and doctrinal direction of the Anglican Communion and the overwhelming majority of the Christians of history and the world today. When one considers that you were advised by the Lambeth Bishops Conference, the ACC, the Primates, and the Archbishop of Canterbury that to proceed would bring a harvest of pain, it is hard to see why you find the consequences you now experience surprising. You indicate that the action of the General Convention was constitutional. Of course I am not an expert in the Constitution and Canons of ECUSA, but I do remember the commitment of your General Convention to initiate an "inter-Anglican and ecumenical dialogue on human sexuality issues which should not be resolved by the Episcopal Church on its own (B-020)." Many colleagues have also reminded me that you were clear that the official position of ECUSA was parallel to that of Lambeth I. 10 at a number of Primates meetings. When was that changed, or was it just ignored? Of course there is pain when you moved ahead in violation of your own Convention decisions. In addition, I saw the broadcast of objections to Gene Robinson's consecration which were simply and totally ignored. How can these be constitutional actions? You cling to the statement that "what we hold in common is much greater than that which divides us..." That statement was made before you chose to be the chief consecrator at an event you knew would "tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level." At a time like this, simply celebrating what we hold in common is like a man arguing before a judge that his offence should be overlooked because he hasn't broken other laws. You cannot offer a band aid to a person who needs open heart surgery. The situation must be addressed at the root of the disorder. You don't heal a disease by treating its symptoms. You tell us that "Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight" is moving toward solving the problem in your province. It is not so. First of all it leaves the decisions in the hands of the offending bishops and does not give any substantive protection to parishes that maintain Anglican teaching and practice. In addition, we are aware of ECUSA clergy and parishes who have been ordered by their revisionist bishops not to ask for alternative oversight, threatened if they do, or who live in areas where bishops have publicly stated that they will not allow it. The fact that "some" bishops will arrange for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight does not mean at all that it can be put in place where it is really needed. And when did those who hold to the apostolical, biblical faith and practice of Christianity as accepted for 2000 years suddenly become "dissidents"? You now say that you want to be in conversation. In the light of your previous great reticence to discuss the matter in our meetings this is tragically late in the day. ECUSA's actions have caused a great and unnecessary crisis in the Anglican Communion that has spilled over into culture, ecumenical affairs, and even interfaith relations. It is tragic and painful indeed. It is the result of your actions and it is also reversible. You have insisted on autonomy from the Lambeth resolutions, from the Archbishop of Canterbury's plea, from the ACC, and from the Primates to pursue an agenda that is absolutely scandalous to most Christians. That view of autonomy is the opposite of everything Anglicanism has always stood for. Why would you still want to call yourself Anglican? May I urge you either to live as an Anglican conforming to Anglican norms or admit that you have left us and closed the door behind you. May God guide us in love and truth at this crucial and sad time. +Greg The Most Revd Gregory J. Venables Primate of the Southern Cone of the Americas

Archbishop Gregory Venables Replies to Frank Griswold May 7, 2004 The Most Revd Frank T. Griswold Presiding Bishop ECUSA Dear Bishop Frank, In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. I write in response to your letter of May 5th. Since it has found its way all over the internet, I am constrained to respond more broadly than just in a personal note. With great respect it must be said that considering what you now write in the light of what you have already done brings to mind the old cliche of Nero fiddling while Rome burns. It's like the doctor telling the grieving family that the operation was a success even though the patient has died. You speak with clarity about your grief over the pain your actions have caused and yet you proceed with your relentless agenda. Do you not see that there is an enormous contradiction here? The key path to alleviating that pain is repentance. It is simple to turn around and join the spiritual and doctrinal direction of the Anglican Communion and the overwhelming majority of the Christians of history and the world today. When one considers that you were advised by the Lambeth Bishops Conference, the ACC, the Primates, and the Archbishop of Canterbury that to proceed would bring a harvest of pain, it is hard to see why you find the consequences you now experience surprising. You indicate that the action of the General Convention was constitutional. Of course I am not an expert in the Constitution and Canons of ECUSA, but I do remember the commitment of your General Convention to initiate an "inter-Anglican and ecumenical dialogue on human sexuality issues which should not be resolved by the Episcopal Church on its own (B-020)." Many colleagues have also reminded me that you were clear that the official position of ECUSA was parallel to that of Lambeth I. 10 at a number of Primates meetings. When was that changed, or was it just ignored? Of course there is pain when you moved ahead in violation of your own Convention decisions. In addition, I saw the broadcast of objections to Gene Robinson's consecration which were simply and totally ignored. How can these be constitutional actions? You cling to the statement that "what we hold in common is much greater than that which divides us..." That statement was made before you chose to be the chief consecrator at an event you knew would "tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level." At a time like this, simply celebrating what we hold in common is like a man arguing before a judge that his offence should be overlooked because he hasn't broken other laws. You cannot offer a band aid to a person who needs open heart surgery. The situation must be addressed at the root of the disorder. You don't heal a disease by treating its symptoms. You tell us that "Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight" is moving toward solving the problem in your province. It is not so. First of all it leaves the decisions in the hands of the offending bishops and does not give any substantive protection to parishes that maintain Anglican teaching and practice. In addition, we are aware of ECUSA clergy and parishes who have been ordered by their revisionist bishops not to ask for alternative oversight, threatened if they do, or who live in areas where bishops have publicly stated that they will not allow it. The fact that "some" bishops will arrange for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight does not mean at all that it can be put in place where it is really needed. And when did those who hold to the apostolical, biblical faith and practice of Christianity as accepted for 2000 years suddenly become "dissidents"? You now say that you want to be in conversation. In the light of your previous great reticence to discuss the matter in our meetings this is tragically late in the day. ECUSA's actions have caused a great and unnecessary crisis in the Anglican Communion that has spilled over into culture, ecumenical affairs, and even interfaith relations. It is tragic and painful indeed. It is the result of your actions and it is also reversible. You have insisted on autonomy from the Lambeth resolutions, from the Archbishop of Canterbury's plea, from the ACC, and from the Primates to pursue an agenda that is absolutely scandalous to most Christians. That view of autonomy is the opposite of everything Anglicanism has always stood for. Why would you still want to call yourself Anglican? May I urge you either to live as an Anglican conforming to Anglican norms or admit that you have left us and closed the door behind you. May God guide us in love and truth at this crucial and sad time. +Greg The Most Revd Gregory J. Venables Primate of the Southern Cone of the Americas

We note with great interest that Bishop William Swing of California has revoked Otis Charles' license to officiate and also dismissed him from his position as assisting bishop in the diocese. Details of the story, reported by The Living Church last evening, are sketchy with regard to why the measures were taken, but it appears to be a result of Charles' "marriage" to Felipe Sanchez Paris on April 24, 2004. The Executive Office of the Diocese, the Rev. Michael Hansen told The Living Church that same sex-blessings must be approved by the Bishop of California and should not "resemble a marriage." He also noted that the matter is "under investigation" with regard to possible clergy violations of diocesan guidelines. If the punitive measures reported reflect an attempt to restore some semblance of order and discipline in ECUSA, we welcome such action, particularly if it represents a new trend in the Church. Such a trend might extend to the Diocese of New Hampshire which elected a practicing homosexual as bishop, and to the Diocese of Washington where Bishop John Chane has proposed moving far beyond General Convention's resolution on same sex blessings, proposing such rites be extended to couples for whom marriage is not an appropriate or desirable step. While a new trend toward moral discipline in ECUSA would indeed be encouraging, is it likely? We are left with numerous questions in the California situation. Were the grounds for Charles' dismissal centered in morality or authority? Did he simply irritate Bishop Swing because he didn't get permission and go through the right channels or is it possible that the enormity of the crisis following actions of General Convention 2003 has had an effect? In the current climate in ECUSA with the report of the Lambeth Commission looming, was Charles' ceremony simply too hot to handle? Are the decisions in the Diocese of California based on expediency rather than a moral outcry? We at the American Anglican Council continue to call on ECUSA to repent - laity, priest and bishop, diocese by diocese that this beloved church might experience renewal and restoration.

In England about 40 angry evangelicals will meet with the Bishop of St Albans over the appointment of Jeffrey John. Watch for the sparks to fly. ADDITIONAL READING Among the stories posted today, Dr. Robert Sanders, Virtuosity's resident cyber theologian raises the question of who we are and who we are not in communion with. "What does Nicea teach us? It teaches us that believers need to come under the oversight of bishops, that they cannot receive from heretical bishops, and therefore, orthodox bishops must officiate in dioceses headed by heretical bishops. In short, if Nicea means anything, there must be a network." Dr. Leander Harding raises the issue of Homosexuality, The Church, and Truth and Justice for Children. An excellent read. And there is much more. If you can't read them all at once, take time to read a few stories each day before the next digest comes down. Please feel free to forward them to your friends. With the INTERNET nobody needs to stay in the dark anymore. Tell your friends to join by going to the website: www.virtuosityonline.org and signing up, or you can simply read the stories at the website.

From the United Methodist Church national conference held in Pittsburgh comes news that United Methodist delegates had voted 579-376 to hold the line on homosexual behavior. "The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching." They also voted 527-423 to defeat the resolution that "Christians disagree on the compatibility of homosexuality with Christian teaching and affirm that God's grace is available to all." The Methodists have become the first Mainline Church to oppose same-sex marriage. This is an important development with practical relevance to the Lambeth Commission, to the Primates, and to the pending decision regarding the tragic division that has occurred within the Communion. The United Methodist Church, a body that is four times the size of the Episcopal Church, USA, in America, is saying in effect that it agrees with the incompatibility of homosexual practice and Scripture (Lambeth 1998). The U.S. Methodists are also saying to the world, "The Biblical position is so clear that Christians cannot agree to disagree on this subject - and the church need not accommodate American culture on this subject." The necessity of accommodation to American culture, which is the major argument of the Episcopalian leadership ("please make an exception for us because of our culture"), is repudiated by the Methodist's vote. These votes show a consensus among Christians throughout the world on these issues, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox, Baptists, the majority of Anglican bishops at Lambeth, and the orthodox Episcopalians who have dissented from the actions of their General Convention. The United Methodist Church vote aligns the US Methodists on this issue with the American Anglican Council and the Network of Anglican Dioceses and Parishes in the United States. What is going on among mainline Protestants is this: Minister violates Scripture, minister brought to church trial, church jurors decide church law doesn't mean what it says, minister let off the hook, other churches upset, journalists ponder possible "schism" in the denomination. DIOCESE OF UTAH ALLOWS SAME-SEX BLESSINGS From the Diocese of Utah comes word that Bishop Carolyn T. Irish will allow procedures for holding same-sex blessing services in her diocese. "After discussion with clergy, Diocesan Council members, and others, I have now set the following policy for our Diocese to allow same-sex blessings. It is important that bishops formulate such policies, not only for authorization of liturgies not provided in the Book of Common Prayer, but also to share with the clergy the responsibility for such occasions. It is possible that a later bishop may change this policy." One hopes. This was the same bishop who "converted" from Mormonism but was never re-baptized as a Christian. On same sex marriages she had this to say, "In Anglican tradition we can live with such diversity. Each diocese was left to sponsor further conversation, develop policies, and gather liturgical materials for such blessings, as seemed appropriate to their situation." This is the kind of thinking that drives Global South Primates to their knees and then rise up in wrath to say they are no longer in communion with the likes of Ms Irish. CHANGING OF THE GUARD AT TRINITY EPISCOPAL SCHOOL FOR MINISTRY There's a changing of the guard at Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry (TESM) in Ambridge, PA. The Rev. Dr. Paul Zahl has resigned as Dean of the Cathedral Church of the Advent in Birmingham, Alabama to accept the position of Dean/President of TESM, effective August 1. He succeeds Dr. Peter Moore who is retiring. Zahl is an excellent choice. (See full story in today's digest). He writes: "On Tuesday morning May 4th, I accepted the unanimous call of the search committee of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pennsylvania, to be their new Dean/President. This is an awesome decision for Mary and me, a decision to which we came finally with complete clarity, and joy. I shall remain Dean of the Advent through July 31st. We hope to move to Pittsburgh during the first two weeks of August." Henry Parsley, the Bishop of Alabama is no lover of orthodoxy and he has publicly condemned the Network and is threatening those who would join. (See digest for full statement). As deans are appointed by bishops not vestries you can be sure that Parsley will never allow someone with Zahl's orthodoxy or scholarship to replace him. Zahl was under enormous pressure by the bishop and by dissidents in the cathedral. Parsley will no doubt use this as an opportunity to put a liberal in his place. If that happens you can be sure hundreds will leave. Two of Alabama's three churches that allowed redirection of funds are now looking for new leadership. With Parsley preparing to crack down hard on John Michael and the Ascension in Montgomery for joining the network, the bishop appears to be succeeding in driving out the orthodox voices in his diocese.

Frank Griswold got a blast from Southern Cone Primate Greg Venables this week over a letter Griswold wrote trying to put the best light on his recent actions. Venables lashed out at Griswold saying, "you speak with clarity about your grief over the pain your actions have caused and yet you proceed with your relentless agenda. Do you not see that there is an enormous contradiction here?" Of course Frank doesn't. Pluriformity means never having to say you're wrong, and Griswold will fall on his sword rather than "betray" ECUSA's pansexualists. You can read both letters in today's digest. PRESSURE ON LAMBETH COMMISSION CONTINUES Continuing the pressure on the Lambeth Commission to stand firm for orthodoxy, the Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry of Christ Church, Plano reports that some 600 signatures have already been received in response to his letter, "and the list is growing daily." If you want to sign the letter you can do so by going to www@ChristChurchPlano.org. The Eames letter is also posted. OTIS CHARLES MARRIAGE SAGA CONTINUES In the continuing saga of the Otis Charles marriage, the retired Bishop of Utah, has been removed from his position as an assisting bishop of California and his license to officiate has been revoked by the Rt. Rev. William Swing after The San Francisco Chronicle revealed that Bishop Charles had been "married" to a four-times divorced man at St. Gregory of Nyssa Church in San Francisco, April 24. The matter is under investigation, said the Rev. Canon Michael Hansen, the diocese's executive officer. This qualifies as one bad act in Swing's theatre of the absurd. The California bishop who heads the United Religions Initiative, a Gnostic, pan-everything grab bag of religious impulses and "spiritual" weirdos has now sandbagged Charles from functioning as a bishop in his diocese! This is the pot calling the kettle black. Swing is as revisionist and pro-gay as the day is long and now he inhibits Charles! When you have no core doctrine anything goes, and in California it goes on all the time and now Swing fires a former bishop that, deep down, he has no disagreement with…the absurd antics of ECUSA's revisionists bishops never ceases. DIOCESE OF THE CENTRAL GULF COAST From the Diocese of the Central Gulf Coast comes this from a Virtuosity reader. A convention address of Bishop Philip M. Duncan II excoriates the AAC. "To establish an alternative ecclesiastical body either within or without the Episcopal Church has, in my opinion, not been helpful in working together to reconcile our differences and seems to be fostering its own brand of turmoil and schism. I am not in agreement with what I understand their agenda to be. They do not have my support." On same gender relationships and marriage he had this to say. "Our teaching on sacramental Christian marriage has not changed. It is a gift from God, a life long relationship between a man and a woman. Committed same gender relationships are part of our culture and are important to many living within this diocese. In my deliberate study of Scripture, I do not find that these relationships are affirmed nor are they blessed by the tradition as we have received it in this church. Neither do I find, as have some, the condemnation of homosexuality." So what do you believe bishop? "To be clear, as I have stated to the clergy and laity in other settings: the norm for ordination in this diocese continues to be a person living a single celibate lifestyle or in a heterosexual Christian marriage. I will not allow nor authorize the blessing of same gender unions within our diocese." Bishop Duncan bemoaned the downward spiraling finances of the Diocese, noting "giving is down in a number of congregations and financial support for the Diocese is down nearly $200,000. In addition, about $233,000 of pledges to the Diocese have been restricted to Diocesan use only. We are honoring those restrictions."

This week a trial balloon was floated out of England when both the TIMES and the TELEGRAPH newspapers announced, in separate stories, that plans for a formal split in the Anglican Church are being considered in an attempt to resolve differences over attitudes towards homosexuality. A proposal to turn the Anglican Communion into an Anglican confederation is being considered by the Lambeth Commission, the international body of 18 members set up last year by Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote Gledhill of the Times. Jonathan Petre of the TELEGRAPH clarified the issue saying that an all-powerful "star chamber", headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury will be created to avert the collapse of worldwide Anglicanism over homosexuality. A blueprint drawn up by advisers will grant significant new powers to Dr Rowan Williams though not sufficient to transform him into an Anglican "pope". It would be a loose federation with new loyalties and allegiances across geographic lines. Perhaps this is the moment of Acceptance or reality breaking through into the Sufi driven mind of Frank Griswold, that all is now lost and we have the ECUSA and the action of consecrating an avowed sodomite to the episcopacy to thank for the break up of the whole Anglican Communion. Said one priest to Virtuosity, "maybe it should happen. I hope it does. At the end of the day we will know who is on the Lord's side, those driven and beholden to Scripture and the traditions and doctrines of the church. If and when it happens, Griswold and his 62 revisionist bishops will be isolated and we can all watch them whither and die on the pluriform vine." He has a point. How it will all play out is still anyone's guess, but clearly Irish Archbishop Robin Eames is not succeeding in using his immense charm to hold it all together and is perhaps realizing that the days of the Communion are numbered. Clearly the noises out of Africa are less than irenic in tone and orthodox forces in the US Episcopal Church coming from the American Anglican Council and the Network (NACDP) is causing a few headaches, coupled with the steady stream of documents from groups like Plano and from individual dioceses about the state of ECUSA, is less than encouraging. The next seven months will be crucial in the life of the entire Anglican Communion, and orthodox priests and bishops are ratcheting up the pain on ECUSA's liberal and revisionist leadership as never before. Today's lead story addresses this issue. This writer has spoken in four major locations in the last ten days to several thousand Episcopalians concerned about the present state of ECUSA and many parishes are now working up strategies on what they will do and say to their bishops. These are heady days. A lot is at stake.

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us." I John 2:19 Dear Brothers and Sisters, In her famous book "On Death and Dying" Elizabeth Kubler-Ross identified five stages in the process of dying. First there was Denial and isolation, followed by Anger, then Bargaining, Depression and finally Acceptance. The Episcopal Church is in varying stages of Kubler-Ross's DABDA acronym. A number of revisionist bishops are still in denial and isolation - "no, not me, it cannot be true," unwilling to admit that the Robinson consecration is tearing the Episcopal Church apart. This writer was in the Diocese of Connecticut this past week speaking on the ECUSA situation to some 20 orthodox priests and learned that the ultra-liberal bishop there, one Andrew D. Smith told several hundred Episcopal ladies at an ECW luncheon that the Episcopal Church was in a terrible mess and he could not see a way out of it. "He looked awful, haggard," an ECW delegate told Virtuosity. Smith might be making his first tentative step out of denial. Many more bishops like J. Michael Garrison of the Diocese of Western New York are angry, "why are you (the orthodox parishes) doing this to me by cutting off funds." That angry statement is being repeated around the Episcopal Church in one diocese after another. Then there are the bargainers. "So you won't pay your fair share, aw come on guys pay up…or else I'll come down on you like a ton of bricks. (Charles E. Bennison, Diocese of Pennsylvania). "You want to leave the ECUSA with your property…in your dreams." (George Wayne Smith, Diocese of Missouri). "If you stay maybe we could work something out. Maybe." Then there is the fourth stage - depression, and God only knows how many bishops are depressed about the whole situation, both orthodox and revisionist. Each side is feeling the heat from angry parish priests withholding money and making threats to join the AAC or NACDP or possibly leaving for the AMIA or coming under a Global South Primate. It's a mess all over and depression is running rampant throughout the whole denomination despite all the talk of "graceful conversation" much ballyhooed by the Presiding Bishop. Revisionist bishops don't want to believe or even acknowledge that their dioceses are in numeric decline, that they are faced with orthodox priests willing to challenge their authority, withhold funds and make waves. Furthermore laity are leaving, and those that stay are not willing to remain silent. They are beginning to speak up forcefully and determinedly against their revisionist bishops; their diocesan policies, theological proclivities and biblical interpretations. But still the bishops continue to live in denial, with many refusing even to answer letters sent to them by both clergy and laity about the state of the ECUSA, the Robinson consecration and much more.

By Paul Marshall May 5, 2004 It is a pretty good rule of thumb that where you find Muslim extremism, Islamist terrorism, and women being sentenced to death by stoning, there you will find Saudi funds and Saudi-trained personnel. One exception to this rule has been Nigeria, but now evidence of Wahabbi mischief is surfacing there as well. Since the governor of Zamfara State, Alhaji Ahmed Sani, introduced a draconian version of sharia in 1999, 11 of Nigeria's 36 states have followed suit. Five women have been sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, though no punishment has yet been carried out. Thieves have had their hands amputated by court order. One man had his eye removed after accidentally blinding a friend (he could have escaped this by paying 60 camels, but the injured party wasn't interested in the camels). Under these sharia dictates, women are harshly subjugated. In northern Nigeria, they have been forbidden to rent houses and barred from riding motorbikes or traveling in the same vehicles as men. Taxi drivers have been caned for carrying female passengers. Zamfara requires all high-school girls to wear a hijab and bars them from wearing skirts and other "Western" forms of dress. State officials have advocated public flogging of those violating an "Islamic" dress code. Prostitution charges have been leveled at women merely for the crime of being unmarried after the age of 13. Judges in Bauchi State have told women to get married immediately or be sent to prison. One judge ordered four of them to pick out husbands from among the men in the court. Women are at a particular disadvantage in these criminal prosecutions since their testimony usually counts for only half that of a man. Non-Muslims, usually Christians, have become second-class citizens. Their taxes pay for Islamic preachers, while hundreds of churches have been closed by government order. Last week, Sani announced that all "unauthorized" places of worship in Zamfara State would be demolished. Those who exercise their right under the Nigerian constitution to change their religion from Islam are threatened with death, a punishment for apostasy under sharia law. The Catholic and Anglican churches have had to set up protected centers for converts. This spread of radical Islam has also led to riots, mob attacks, and vigilantes, producing the largest death toll in Nigeria since the civil war over Biafra in the 1960s. Over 10,000 people have died in the last four years in sharia-related violence — perhaps over 1,000 in the central states this year alone. Recent months have seen the emergence of more organized militias. In early January, in Yobe State, there was an uprising by a group calling itself the "Taliban," led by a "Mullah Omar," and demanding an Islamic state. It took several hundred troops two weeks to put it down. Foreign groups have been aiding the institutionalization of Islamic law. Saudi, Sudanese, Syrian, and Palestinian representatives appeared with Governor Sani in the days before he announced his plans for sharia. The Jigawa State government has sent Islamic judges for training in Malaysia and Sudan. The government of Katsina State has sent a delegation to Sudan to study its laws. Other states have been offered assistance from some these same countries as well as from Iran and Libya. In January, the Saudi religious and cultural attaché in Nigeria, Sheik Abdul-Aziz, said that his government had been monitoring the implementation of sharia in Nigeria and noted the results "with delight." There is also evidence of infiltration by foreign Islamic radicals. According to some reports, extremists from neighboring Chad were involved in the July 2001 violence in Bauchi State. In November 2001, Nigerian police arrested six Pakistani preachers, accusing them of inciting religious violence in Ogun state. The police have announced that scores of Pakistanis have been arrested in different parts of the country for allegedly fomenting religious trouble since 9/11. Church spokesmen in Plateau State said last month that local Muslim extremists have brought in thousands of mercenaries from Niger and Chad to invade Christian towns and villages. However, despite repeated rumors, there has until this year been little evidence of organized foreign support for violence and domestic terrorism. Now such evidence is appearing. On February 3, the Nigerian government announced that an unnamed Iranian diplomat was arrested on January 23 in Nigeria's capital, Abuja, after he was found taking photographs of Churches, a presidential villa, the defense headquarters, and the Israeli, British, and American embassies. The usually reliable news service Compass Direct reports that one of January's "Taliban" raiders, Muslim cleric Alhaji Sharu, confessed to police that he was a middleman between Nigerian extremists and the Al-Muntada Al-Islami Trust, a Saudi funded "charity" headquartered in Britain. Sharu said that the Trust's money had been used to propagate a Wahabist version of Islam in Nigeria and fund religious violence. Subsequent investigation by Nigeria's police led to "the discovery of financial transactions running into millions of dollars" between Sharu and the Trust's local head, a Sudanese businessman named Muhiddeen Abdullahi. Authorities arrested Abdullahi on February 20, accusing him and the Trust of financing attacks on Christians, including the January Taliban uprising. When authorities released Abdullahi 10 days after his arrest, more than 5,000 Qadiriyya Sufi Muslims, the largest tradition within Nigerian Islam, mounted a protest march. Chanting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is Great"), demanded that Wahabbis be banned from the country. Their spokesman, Abduljabbar Nasiru Kabara, told journalists, "As a matter of urgency, the state government should close the office of Al-Muntada Al-Islami because of its activities which have resulted in religious unrest in Nigeria." If Nigeria's moderate Muslims can call for the rejection of Saudi interference, there is nothing stopping the Nigerian government from doing the same, and little stopping the U.S. government from encouraging it to do so. — Paul Marshall is senior fellow at Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom. He is author of Islam at the Crossroads and God and the Constitution: Christianity and American Politics.

By Georgette Forney PRO-CHOICE MARCHER SWITCHED SIGNS, JOINED NOEL COUNTER-RALLY Shirley came to the April 25 pro-choice march in Washington D.C. holding a sign that said "Stand up for Choice." She left with one that said, "I'm Pro-Life." Nobody made her take the new sign. No-one called her names for supporting free access to abortion. Instead, Shirley changed her mind when she saw a small group of Christians affiliated with NOEL (formerly National Organization of Episcopalians for Life) quietly witnessing to the hurt abortion had brought into their own lives. Many carried signs that said, "I regret my abortion," or, "I regret my lost fatherhood." They were there, said Georgette Forney, president of NOEL and a parishoner at St. Stephen's Episcopal Church, Sewickley, PA, to counter the message that abortion is good for women and society. NOEL's campaign, called "Silent No More Awareness," exists to give those with personal experience of abortion's costs a voice, said Forney. That group includes Forney herself, who had an abortion when she was 16. "There is a lot of talk about rights and choice, but very little attention is given to women who have abortions. I regret my abortion and I know others who feel the same way," she said. Forney estimated that some 250 people participated in the Silent No More Awareness counter-rally during the April 25 pro-choice march. Among them were many Episcopalians. Silent No More Awareness is a joint project of NOEL and Priests for Life, a Roman Catholic organization. Abortion has been a contentious issue in the Episcopal Church. In 1994 the church's 71st General Convention reaffirmed that human life should be honored from inception to death. However, it also referred to abortion as a "right," but only one that should be used in "extreme situations." "We emphatically oppose abortion as a means of birth control, family planning, sex selection, or any reason of mere convenience," states the resolution. At the same time both the national Episcopal Church and the Episcopal Women's Caucus have maintained membership in the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), which co-sponsored the April 25 pro-choice march. Among other stands, the RCRC opposes parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion and has fought laws banning partial birth abortions. NOEL, which was founded in 1983, is based in the Anglican Communion Network diocese of Pittsburgh and offers Episcopalians not in agreement with abortion advocacy of the national church a voice in the debate, said Forney. NOEL's is a life-affirming ministry in the Worldwide Anglican Communion. NOEL's mission is to advocate the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death in the Church and society. NOEL's vision is to "stand for the value of every human life as revealed in Scripture and "equip people to develop a biblical response to issues that threaten human life."

By GREG GARRISON Birmingham News staff writer May 7, 2004 The top priest at Birmingham's largest Episcopal Church, who stirred controversy with his strong stance against the denomination's first openly gay bishop, will be leaving this year. The Rev. Paul F.M. Zahl, dean of the 3,800-member Cathedral Church of the Advent, will resign effective July 31 to become president and dean of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pa., said Vice Dean John Harper. Harper will become interim dean of the cathedral on Aug. 1, he said. Zahl plans to take the month of July as vacation, Harper said. Last year, Zahl repeatedly made headlines as one of the leaders of a conservative movement in the Episcopal Church that opposes same-sex unions. Zahl was one of several theologians who signed a position paper saying the Episcopal Church General Convention has no authority to approve blessings for same-sex couples. When the convention approved the Rev. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire as the denomination's first openly gay bishop, Zahl flew a black flag on the front of the cathedral on 20th Street in downtown Birmingham. Zahl also led a delegation of priests from the Advent last year to a meeting of conservative leaders in Dallas to protest the approval of Robinson. Zahl was traveling Thursday when the church executive committee learned of his decision, and was unavailable for comment. In a previous interview, he said he was stung by the harsh reaction from some members of his congregation who criticized his leadership after the fallout from the Robinson decision. But he had loyal supporters as well. "Paul has been an inspiration and a friend for all of us who have worked with him," Harper said. "He lives the Gospel message of grace and we have experienced graciousness from him. We shall miss him." Zahl, who has a doctorate in theology from the University of Tubingen in Germany, has written several books, including "The First Christian: Universal Truth in the Teachings of Jesus," and "Five Women of the English Reformation." Zahl was one of 21 international theologians appointed by his longtime friend, former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey, to serve on the Inter-Anglican Theological and Doctrinal Commission. Zahl graduated from Harvard University in 1972 with a degree in classics and philosophy, received a master's degree from the University of Nottingham and a diploma in pastoral studies from St. John's Theological College in Nottingham. Zahl and his wife, Mary, have three children. He was previously rector of churches in Scarborough, N.Y., and Charleston, S.C., and curate of Grace Church in New York City.