Archives

Dear members of FIFNA,     The switchboard has been lighting up at our Fort Worth headquarters with many calls over the past several days. The basic question from the callers is, What does FIFNA think about the Network, and are we really part of it or not, let me first say that what follows is my personal commentary as President of FIFNA. It is not a Council statement. The Council is scheduled to meet February 11-13, at which time Bishop Duncan plans to be with us, as well as representatives from other Anglican jurisdictions. I would expect that the Council will make a corporate statement at the end of our meeting about the Network, and upon other areas of concern and development. The week following, Fathers Ilgenfritz, Tanghe, and I will travel to London for a meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury along with FIF leaders from England, Scotland, Wales, and Australia. There will undoubtedly be a statement for you at the conclusion of that meeting at Lambeth Palace as well.     It would be an understatement to say that the crisis of Faith and Order in ECUSA and the Anglican Communion has intensified in recent months. This greater crisis exists because of the rejection of biblical morality by ECUSA as a body in a highly symbolic way with the election, approval, and consecration of Gene Robinson.     You well know that Forward In Faith (and its previous identities as ECM and ESA) has consistently stated that the ordination of women to the priesthood (and the subsequent ordination of women to the episcopate) was a gross violation of and departure from Biblical teaching, Apostolic Order, and Catholic Truth. I think that Bishop Kapinga of Tanzania’s words are worthy of serious reflection. He stated, With the ordination of women, ECUSA left the Catholic fold of the Church. With the consecration of Gene Robinson, ECUSA left the Christian religion.     We now have The Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes before us. You can read its Charter on the America Anglican Councils website. In Article V of the Charter, there is the proposal for a non-geographical Convocation...known as the Forward in Faith North America (FiFNA) Convocation, and may include all congregations which apply to and are accepted as FiFNA members.     The Network understands itself as a church within the Church.     You may remember that this is what the Episcopal Synod of America stated of itself in June of 1989 as its founding Assembly. In July of 1997, our identity was altered in the Good Shepherd Declaration, that ESA/FIFNA would continue in its mission to be the Church....We are not leaving anything or going anywhere. We have said from the beginning that we intend to be the Church.  We will continue to be who we are.     With the passage of time, and with ECUSAs introduction of and legislation for more theological innovations (along with the selective interpretation of Canons, and the legislative decisions of many Dioceses and agenda of their bishops), the concept of being a church within the Church is deserving of serious reflection.     We now see ECUSA as a Province of the Anglican Communion whose actions have been rejected by a large number of Provinces which represent two-thirds of the Communions membership. Only if the Network interprets itself as a church sharing a common mind with majority of World-Wide Anglicans can their focus and identity be grounded in the theological integrity required.     I had hoped to be present at the Networks organizational meeting in Plano, but pastoral responsibilities as the Rector of Good Shepherd, Rosemont, as well as a scheduling conflict, prohibited my attendance. Father Ilgenfritz (one of FIFNAs Vice-Presidents) was there as our official representative.     I believe that the creation of the Network (encouraged by the Archbishop of Canterbury) is a good first step towards the Primates call for Adequate Episcopal Oversight. Let us remember that oversight implies jurisdiction.     I also believe that there will be no fundamental change until diocesan bishops are willing to cross diocesan boundaries, and orthodox priests are willing to refuse the sacramental ministry of revisionist bishops. I would hope that in conscience leaders will increasingly be unable to accede to the misuse of Canon Law, false teaching, and the tyranny of revisionist bishops.     It is wise for us to appropriate the declaration of the Council of Constantinople:     They who separate themselves from communion with their bishop on account of any heresy condemned by the Holy Synods of the Fathers, while he evidently proclaims the heresy publicly, and teaches it with brave front in Church - such persons, in excluding themselves from communion with their so-called bishop before Synodical cognizance, not only shall not be subject to canonical censure, but shall be deemed worthy, by the Orthodox, of becoming honor; for they condemn as teachers, not bishops but pseudo-bishops; and they do not cut up the unity of the Church by schism, but hasten to deliver her from schisms and divisions.     And many centuries later, Richard Hooker wrote, [capitalizations are Hookers]     Laws touching Matter of Order are changeable, but the Power of the Church; Articles concerning Doctrine not so. We read often in the Writings of Catholic and Holy men touching matters of Doctrine. This we believe, this we hold, this the Prophets and Evangelists have declared. This the Apostles have delivered. This the Martyrs have sealed with their blood, and confessed in their Torments, to this We cleave as to the Anchor of our Souls; against this, though an Angel from Heaven should preach unto us, we would not believe. But, did we ever in any of them read touching Matters of mere Comeliness, Order and Decency, neither Commanded nor Prohibited by a Prophet, any Evangelist, and Apostle. Although the church wherein we live do ordain them to be kept, although they be never so general observed, though all the Churches in the World Command them, tough Angels from Heaven should require our Subjection thereunto, I would hold him accursed that doth obey?     Unsettling and spiritually challenging words from a Church Council and from the seminal mind of our tradition.     With the Dennis Canon as it relates to parishes and their property, and with how a Dioceses status could be judged as a binding relationship with the National church, we may be hostages with no seen avenue of freedom. And within this situation, one cannot be reckless or cavalier as stewards of the church. But when we stand before the great judgment seat of Christ, I don’t believe that how diocesan boundaries were honored will be a criterion for our Lords favorable judgment.     I pray that this commentary will be received and understood with a generous spirit. I pray that God will continue to use FIFNA as faithful people who are characterized by humility, repentance, steadfastness, and obedience to the Word of God Incarnate and the Word of God written.     You have my assurances that FIFNA remains committed to its mission which is:     To uphold the historic Faith, Practice and Order of the Church Biblical, Apostolic and Catholic, and to resist all efforts to deviate from it.     David L. Moyer+ 22 January 2004 Feast of St. Vincent, D. & M.

Vice Chancellor Uganda Christian University   By Stephen Noll   While there are many high principles of theology and ecclesiology worth discussing at this time of historic crisis, the bread-and-butter political issue facing most conservative leaders in ECUSA is how to keep the property.     Several years ago, I wrote that the key issues were twofold: international recognition and property. In my opinion, the first issue is now settled. Conservatives have already received adequate recognition by the Primates-Who-Count to consider themselves an ongoing part of the Anglican Communion. It strikes me that most conservatives are willing even to forego recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury if they can be partnered with the Province of Nigeria. Is this not so. So the main problem now is property. I begin with an anecdote from one of the first AAC Board meetings in 1996. I posed to an AAC bishop the question: What if your liberal counterpart in the House of Bishops came to you with a proposal to stop the infighting in the Church by means of a property settlement, for example, by allowing each congregation to decide whether it wanted to affiliate with Church A or Church B. I asked: Would you take up the offer?  In a moment! was his reply.       Again, one of the truly great post-mortem remarks from GC 2003 was Canon David Anderson's comment that the AAC was looking for as amicable a separation as Gene Robinson had gotten from his wife.     Acrimonious divorce       The problem is, when it comes to church property, the Episcopal establishment is not interested in amicable settlements. Why? Because they wrote the divorce law in such a way that no-fault divorce and equal division of the property is not an option. And they are either mean-spirited and power-hungry or self-deluded enough to make it stick.       One might think true liberals would say: OK, we admit it. We have made a daring departure from 2,000 years of Christian teaching on sexuality. We believe this decision is prophetic, but we acknowledge that many will see it as a deviation from Scripture and tradition on a matter of conscience. Therefore, in the spirit of Gamaliel, we are willing to let conservatives follow their conscience and take their property with them. When our cause is vindicated, we shall graciously welcome them back into our fold. But they don’t say that, because they are mean-spirited and power-hungry, governed by neo-Marxist convictions that all conflicts of right are veiled conflicts of might, in which case they think: We've got the power, they want it; why should we give it up? Or they are self-deluded, believing their own theo-propaganda that homosexuality is unarguably the work of the Holy Spirit which conservatives are resisting.       The fact is, they do hold the power in the constitutions and canons of the Episcopal Church’s USA, which are the only governing documents recognized by the secular courts in matters of property ownership. Case after legal case has demonstrated this. Again, one may have a theoretical debate about whether the Dennis canon is the mother of all evils. The irony, of course, is that the same people who believe the Bible “ the fundamental constitution of the Christian Church “can be twisted into pluriform knots become wooden literalists when it comes to the Episcopal Church. But that’s the way it is: we can’t change this fact.     Exodus strategy     In my opinion, this reality explains much of the apparent machinations and win-win statements of the American Anglican Council. To be sure, the AAC began with the hope that the Episcopal Church could be reformed from within. I think that in recent years, at least since GC 2000 and GC 2003, most of the AAC leaders and members have come to agree that the Episcopal Church is unreformable. The problem they are facing is: how do we get out of Egypt with the booty?       The problem of property also explains why the most coherent and the best short-term reactions to the present crisis have been happening at a diocesan level “but only in dioceses with a strong bishop that have already been thoroughly infiltrated by conservatives (Pittsburgh, South Carolina, Florida, Central Florida, Fort Worth, Quincy, Albany, any others?). Constitutionally, the national church will find it hard to depose the bishops and recapture whole dioceses, although it may be able to prevent them from freeing their parishes (for example, if the lawsuit against the Diocese of Pittsburgh succeeds, which it may). Parishes and clergy in hostile or lukewarm dioceses, however, seem extremely vulnerable. I assume this is one reason why some have kept a low profile over the last decade as the spectre of Gene Robinson slouched toward Minneapolis to be born. I would assume that this is because some clergy have sworn to live and die with their episcopal boots on and have foolishly kept their congregations in the dark on the pending crisis. Honestly, how many of you clergy out there wouldn’t jump at the chance to join a parallel orthodox jurisdiction within the Anglican Communion if you could take your pension, your buildings, and your budget with you?     Viable options     The problem is, it looks like you can’t have it all, barring an act of God. Look at your options:     1. Take the Anglican Mission in America route and leave now.     2. Wait and see if the Primates and the AAC leaders can carve out an alternative jurisdiction with at least quasi-rights of tenure and property ownership via alternative episcopal oversight.     3. Muddle along congregationally and hope your bishop or the next GC don't force you out.     Have I missed any other options? A long-shot might be a lawsuit claiming that the Episcopal Church’s has violated its Constitution and thus its canons are of no effect.     This option, it seems to me, would only work if the Primates, including the ABC and/or the Lambeth Conference, excommunicated ECUSA and named an alternative jurisdiction as the legitimate USA branch of the Communion. This will not happen immediately, and even if it does, I’m not sure we’d get the property from the secular courts.     Let me conclude with a brief spiritual reflection. By focusing on the property issue I am not necessarily accusing conservatives of bowing the knee to Mammon. As someone recently noted, all property is Gods and we have an obligation to be stewards of it as best we can. We also have responsibilities to provide for our families “though not necessarily in the manner to which we have been accustomed. We also know that Jesus sometimes calls his disciples to sell all that you have and follow me. This is part of our Reformation Anglican heritage “ let goods and kindred go and has been experienced on the mission field and in the Global South churches.     I am sure that there is room for us conservatives to think together about the ecclesiastical crisis we are in “both theologically and politically. But let’s be patient and charitable, aware that we are working within very constricted parameters, and let’s be attentive to Gods call in case at some point we may have to get out now.   END

By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent and Jonathan Wynne-Jones THE DAILY TELEGRAPH 1/19/2004     The Church of England is being asked to take its biggest step towards accepting the primacy of the Pope and the concept of infallibility since Henry VIII broke from Rome 450 years ago.     A joint Roman Catholic and Anglican report arguing that the Pope should be recognised as the universal primates to be debated by the General Synod next month. Church leaders anxious to promote unity have welcomed the proposals, but they will meet fierce resistance from conservative Protestants.       The Rev David Phillips, the general secretary of the Church Society and a Synod member, said: We would reject universal primacy even if the papacy is reformed. There is no way we would want to be linked to the Roman Catholic Church. On some issues, its teaching is even worse now than it was at the Reformation.       The Gift of Authority report was published several years ago by the Third Anglican/ Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC).       It argued that Anglicans should accept the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome as long as the Pope devolved much of his power to his bishops and local churches.       More controversially, the report also suggests that the Church as a body could, in certain circumstances, make infallible pronouncements on matters of teaching.     Most Anglicans, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, are opposed to the present concept of papal infallibility, which allows the Pope to make such declarations, which cannot be overturned, on his own. In reality, however, there have been only a few such ex cathedra statements, relating mainly to the Virgin Mary. Catholic teaching on controversial issues such as birth control is not covered.     The Pope has recently signalled his willingness to re-examine his role and even evangelical bishops have indicated that they could accept him as a spokesman.     However, many will view the Synod debate as largely academic as unity talks have been derailed by the Anglican decision to ordain women and the row over homosexuality.     Moreover, the Bishop of Peterborough, the Rt Rev Ian Cundy, who is the chairman of the Church of England’ s Council for Christian Unity, is expected to slow progress on the ARCIC report further when the Synod meets from Feb 9.       While the bishop will welcome moves towards greater unity between the Churches, he will criticise aspects of the report and ask for more detail and clarity in key areas.      END

By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent THE TELEGRAPH 13/01/2004     The Church of England lost 100,000 worshippers between 2000 and 2002, according to figures that will make gloomy reading for the clergy.     The decline of nearly eight per cent is greater than some statisticians expected.      Figures show signs of growth in attendance among the young.   In 2002 the average number of people attending a church at least once a week was 1,166,000, down from 1,274,000 two years earlier, the Church’s provisional figures show the average number going to a service on Sunday but not during the rest of the week was 1,002,000, down from 1,058,000 in 2000. Between 2001 and 2002, one diocese lost 5,600 weekly worshippers and another lost 4,700.     But the Church said there were signs of growth among young people, with the average number of under-16s attending church at least once a month increasing by one per cent between 2001 and 2002.     It is evidence for the first time in a long time that the rapid decline in the numbers of young people going to church may have stopped, a Church of England spokesman said.     Peter Brierley, the executive director of Christian Research, an independent organisation, said the overall drop was worrying and needed urgent attention. Dr Brierley, a former Government statistician, predicted that the decline could speed up after about 2020 when ageing churchgoers died.     He said his research suggested that smaller churches tended to do better than larger ones. A few churches, mostly evangelical, were growing.     The Church’s official figures show that a number of dioceses, including London, Exeter and Manchester, added to their numbers between 2001 and 2002.     Others suffered dramatically. Blackburn lost 3,000 worshippers at weekly services, Liverpool lost 3,000, Lichfield 4,700 and Chester 5,600.     END

By RICHARD N. OSTLING The Associated Press     PLANO, Texas (AP) - Episcopalians opposed to a gay bishops consecration and other liberal church trends are threatening to establish a ``church within a church that could pose a significant threat to leaders of the denomination.     A two-day meeting beginning Monday of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes involves conservative bishops, clergy and lay delegates from 12 dioceses with 235,000 members, a tenth of the nation’s Episcopalians. The network's temporary leader, Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, says the meeting will give traditionalists some sense there is a future.      Delegates will adopt an organizational charter, elect leaders and debate how to help conservative parishes in liberal dioceses. Planners insist the network isn’t a breakaway denomination or schism, but a ``church within a church.     Outside observers and reporters have been barred from the meeting and the network has been tightlipped about most details, including who wrote the charter draft and what it proposes.      One reason conservative parishes don’t want to officially leave the church is that under secular law they usually surrender their properties to the denomination. The Rev. Donald Armstrong, a delegate representing Midwestern and Mountain states, says of his Colorado Springs, Colo., parish, ``Weve got a $12 million facility and we can’t just walk away from it.     The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the international Anglican Communion, consisting of denominations that stem from the Church of England. Many foreign Anglican churches have denounced or broken fellowship with the Episcopal Church’s over its November consecration of New Hampshire's V. Gene Robinson, who has lived for years with a gay partner.     A dispute over network intentions last week showed the edginess of the moment. A leaked memo from a network leader said the ``ultimate goal was a ``replacement jurisdiction aligned with the conservative majority in world Anglicanism.       The host bishop, James Stanton of Dallas, says calling the network schismatic “gets things exactly backwards because” the act of schism was the national denomination's approval for Robinson.       On Sunday night Canon David Anderson, president of the American Anglican Council that is helping organize the network, charged that attacks were unleashed to “derail the network meeting.”     Anderson said the Episcopal Church’s actions created the need for a new structure “through which orthodox Episcopalians can remain in full fellowship with Anglicans worldwide, and any” replacement is up to overseas Anglican leaders who suggested the idea.       Within the United States, the crunch point is likely to involve conservative congregations existing under pro-gay bishops. The Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop, Frank Griswold, has proposed a plan for temporary visiting bishops for disgruntled conservatives, but network leaders say its inadequate.   Parishes in 37 dioceses have applied to the network to provide visiting bishops. An ecclesiastical tangle would result if the network sends bishops into dioceses without permission from regular local bishops. Last week’s leaked memo said such disobedience of church law ``may be necessary and conservatives should be prepared to risk trials in church or secular courts.     However, Bishop Stanton opposes such lawbreaking. He wants a positive tone so the network can gain further support among the 43 Episcopal bishops who voted against the elevation of Robinson. Sixty-two bishops backed Robinson.       END

Today, Monday (Jan. 19) and Tuesday (Jan. 20) the Organizing Convocation of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes will meet at Christ Church Episcopal in Plano, Texas. Twelve Episcopal dioceses are sending representatives to this historic gathering.  The Convocation is a significant step forward in the ongoing realignment of Anglicanism in North AmericaAttacks unleashed against the AAC   A letter to AAC members from the Rev. Canon David Anderson   1/18/04     Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,   Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ!   This past week a series of attacks were unleashed against the AAC in a thinly veiled effort to derail the Network Convocation. There is an attempt to divide the participants by painting the American Anglican Council, and those who uphold the biblical faith, as the cause of the current crisis in the Episcopal Church’s.     Here’s how the attacks began: A draft strategy paper drawn up by an AAC subcommittee on Adequate Episcopal Oversight (AEO) was given to at least three media outlets (Washington Post, Religion News Service, and the UKs Guardian) by an unknown source this past week. The draft strategy paper was reported by a Washington Post article as supposed proof of a hidden AAC agenda to supplant the Episcopal Church’s.   While this makes a good storyline, there was almost nothing in the draft strategy paper that the AAC and others haven’t said publicly before.  It is no secret that the AAC has been pursuing Adequate Episcopal Oversight as a way to provide relief and pastoral care for orthodox congregations in hostile dioceses. Since October, we have had an oversight application form and guidelines posted on our website! More importantly, the Anglican Primates said unanimously in October that adequate oversight must be implemented in ECUSA. It is also no secret that ECUSA has abandoned the historic faith and doctrine of the Church and has tragically broken its fellowship with most of the Anglican Communion.  And it is also no secret that, because of ECUSAs actions, there now needs to be a new structure formed through which orthodox Episcopalians can remain in full fellowship with Anglicans worldwide.       As for a desire to replace, it is the mainstream Anglican Primates, themselves, who have suggested it.  Will there ultimately be such a replacement jurisdiction? We can’t know, and even if we desired it, it is not up to the AAC or orthodox Episcopalians to make that decision. It is up to the Anglican Primates.       Expect more of these types of attacks. They will probably get nastier and more personal in the days ahead.  Don’t believe what you hear and be assured that these attacks will not deter the AAC. The plain truth is this: the General Convention of ECUSA brought this pain and division on our Church.     Stand firm and remember that Jesus is the only truth, and His truth will prevail.     Faithfully in Christ Jesus,     The Rev. Canon David C. Anderson AAC President and CEO

With regard to your article entitled Dissident Anglican Parish back in fold, I wish to clarify the situation.  Bishop Michael Ingham, through his appointed wardens, is forcing the parish to rejoin the diocese.  The last parish vestry meeting clearly instructed the elected trustees and wardens, who have since been dismissed by the Bishop, to continue allegiance with the ACiNW.  The bishop will not hold another vestry meeting because he knows that a clear majority of parishioners would vote against him.  He must be held accountable for his actions.     Florence Wilton,  St. Martins Parishioner ---------------       As a member of St. Martins for the past 25 years, none of Bishop Ingham’s appointed wardens speak for my wife and I or the majority of members of St. Martins.   Bishop Ingham has disobeyed the House of Bishops, the worldwide Anglican Communion, and breached the obligations he swore to when Consecrated - specifically, to be an instrument of unity in the church, and uphold the teachings of the church.  He answers to no one.  He has portrayed the dissenting parishioners of St. Martins as homophobic and divisive rebels, even though we are in keeping with what Anglicans believe around the world.                                                                       Gordon & Erica Barrett     -------------- I am rarely moved to write letters to the editor, but I find that I simply must protest Douglas Todd's article today. Regardless of what the Diocese of New Westminster may be claiming, the majority of parishioners at St. Martins have NOT agreed to the things which the bishop's warden may be suggesting.  They have not been allowed to express any opinion in a democratic fashion since the bishop took over, so how these claims can be made as though they were the will of the parish defies any definition of truth it is quite clear, if the facts are investigated, that a handful of diocesan appointees are making unilateral decisions on behalf of the diocese, and claiming that these are the decisions of the parish.  The diocese may make whatever claims it wishes, using whomever may be willing to be used as their spokespersons, but that does not establish those claims as true.          In fact, the leaders chosen by the legitimate vote of the parishioners have been systematically removed and replaced since the diocesan takeover.  Every person in any position of leadership or authority (right down to the Sunday school teachers) who do not agree with the bishop or the diocese have been removed or barred from exercising ministry in the parish.  The parish has not been consulted regarding their wishes, nor have they been afforded any opportunity to make decisions about the future of the parish.          It is difficult to imagine how this could be construed as a way forward. When the expressed wishes of the people are being ignored, when their right to be consulted about the future of their own parish is being denied, and when they are being dictated to by unelected leaders appointed to do the will of the diocese it is difficult to imagine how any sort of wonderful sense of community can possibly be built.       Sincerely, Linda Seale chairperson of the ACiNW media committee.     ----------------       For Douglas Todd to say that the lay leadership of St. Martins has decided to return to the fold by restoring relations with the Diocese of New Westminster is to imply that Lindsay Buchanan (cited in the article) and the other wardens appointed by Bishop Michael Ingham somehow have the moral and legal authority to make such a decision. However, these wardens do not enjoy the support of the majority of parishioners of St. Martins. If they think they do, they should call a vestry meeting to see if they can persuade others to their point of view. Fat chance.       Gerry & Linda Taunton St. Martin Parishioners North Vancouver, BC     ----------------     For Douglas Todd’s report in the Vancouver Sun, Fri. Jan. 16, to truly be factual & complete, the following items must be included. I presume this to be your mandate to your readers.     On Sept 7, the Bishop FIRED the entire elected Church Committee, as well as the Newsletter Editors, Roster of Collection Counters, Telephone Coordinator & even the Youth Pastor. He then imposed a form of MARTIAL LAW.     How could these actions help St. Martins?   On Sept. 28, an ALL Parishioners Vestry meeting was held. Trustees were confirmed, Wardens, Treasurer and a full slate of committee members democratically elected, but are ignored.     The Lay leadership consists of an Interim priest & the three (3) imposed Wardens. This in spite of the fact they represent 22% of the Parish, while 78% Orthodox/Conservative Parishioners are being told follow me or leave.     Since when does the Minority rule - only in the Diocese of New Westminster you say! John Hopkins North Vancouver B.C.   END

Jan. 17, 2004   by: BOBBY ROSS JR. Associated Press     PLANO, Texas - The Rev. Canon David Roseberry has built the congregation he started in 1985 with 13 members into the Episcopal Church’s that boasts the largest attendance in the nation.     His success with the flourishing Christ Church Episcopal - which draws 2,200 worshippers each weekend to this Dallas suburb - has helped make him a national leader in the conservative revolt against his denominations consecration of an openly gay bishop.     I feel like a very unlikely leader for all of this, said the 48-year-old rector, whose church will welcome a constituting convention of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes next week. Yet the upcoming meeting puts him, once again, in the thick of the debate over homosexuality within his denomination.     The conventions aim will be to produce a church-within-a-church arrangement, so that Episcopal conservatives - estimated by opponents as roughly 15 percent of the denominations 2.3 million members - can work together directly. Its relationship to the Episcopal Church’s national structure is still emerging.     Bishops, clergy and lay delegates from as many as a dozen conservative dioceses plan to develop an organizational charter and a theological platform during the two-day session, which starts Monday.     Roseberry’s high-profile role doesn’t surprise the Rev. Alden Hathaway, a former Pittsburgh bishop who became the priest’s mentor after a chance meeting in Tucson, Ariz., two decades ago.     He’s a natural leader,  said Hathaway, now retired and living in Tallahassee, Fla. I think one reason why is the way he sees himself. He doesn’t have any aspirations or any ego or any need to put himself forward at all.     When Hathaway first met Roseberry in the early 1980s, the recent seminary graduate was divorced and out of sorts, unsure what he believed. After two years of ministry in his native Arizona, Roseberry said, he was out of gas and had no strength.     I was preaching a kind of open-ended, God-loves-you, easy gospel, and I realized that people weren’t changing.     Hathaway challenged him to take a giant leap of faith and trust the Scriptures.     Roseberry said emphasis on the Bible as the error-free word of God was a new concept for him and changed his approach to ministry. When he started Christ Church, he said, he wanted a parish as rooted in the Scriptures as ceremonial tradition.     His vision of a Bible-believing church plays heavily in his opposition to the Episcopal General Conventions approval last August of the Rev. V. Gene Robinson as New Hampshire bishop. Robinson has lived openly with his male partner for 14 years.     There are fewer subjects about which the Bible is more clear than homosexuality, Roseberry said.     For those on the other side, however, the issue is far less clear-cut.     The Rev. Canon Mark Harris, a Delaware priest, said he finds it offensive when conservatives such as Roseberry so easily dismiss progressive interpretations of the Bible.     I’m glad (Roseberry) is struggling with Scriptures, said Harris, past director of the Global Episcopal Mission Network. It just happens when I struggle with them, I come out in a different place as to whether gays and lesbians ought to have a place in the church.     After the General Conventions vote in Minneapolis, Roseberry resigned as a delegate and booked a flight home.     In October, his church hosted a meeting of 2,700 Episcopal traditionalists at a Dallas hotel. Roseberry moderated the meeting and helped take the groups concerns to Anglican Communion primates in London.     As he has spoken out, his own past has drawn scrutiny. A Dallas Morning News columnist noted that Roseberry’s divorce would disqualify him as a minister or even deacon in many churches. I confessed my sin, Roseberry told The Associated Press. God gave me a new chance.     He and his second wife, Fran, married 20 years ago. He adopted her two children and they had two of their own.     Christ Church combines the liturgy and communion of Roseberry’s youth with a biblical emphasis that he suggests most Episcopal Church’s lack. The musical program ranges from the 18th century All Hail The Power of Jesus Name to the 21st century Here I Am To Worship.     The mix of sacred rites and evangelical-style preaching drew John Bock, who grew up Roman Catholic, and his wife, Melody Bock, who was raised Southern Baptist. An estimated 75 percent of parishioners had no Episcopal ties before joining Christ Church.     God didn’t call me to be Baptist, Methodist or anything else, said Melody Bock, 44. He called me to be his child.     But while denominational labels mean nothing to many of Roseberry’s parishioners, the Episcopal rift deeply troubles their priest.      The Episcopal Church’s that I’ve given my life to and that really raised me has a rip in the hull that is going to send it to the bottom of the ocean in just a matter of decades, he said. I don’t want to have wasted my life on a sinking ship.     http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/state/7731919.htm

By Chris Young North Vancouver   Dear Brothers and Sisters,   If the orthodox in ECUSA want to beat the revisionists there is one simple way to achieve that. There is a strategy that will work. They must pick a certain Sunday and 50 orthodox bishops, (active and retired) and acting together, cross diocesan lines and go into claim faithful parishes against the local revisionist diocesan bishop.       If that happens there is no way that all 50 bishops would be presented against, (the HOB couldn’t present either Bennison or Duncan, they are constitutionally impotent), and there isn’t enough money in all those diocesan coffers for bishops to sue to take the parishes back in the likelihood the rectors would be deposed and inhibited. In short it would be a slam dunk for the orthodox. Alternative Episcopal Oversight (AEO) becomes a reality and not the wishy, washy pastoral care notions currently being floated by Frank Griswold to the Anglican Communion, and rejected by the American Anglican Council. Why wont it work? Because there is no way the orthodox bishops could or are able to get their act together or focus on a single strategy and agree on a date and time. (So far only 13 bishops have signed on to the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes.)     But the simple truth is, it could work. Power lies in numbers. We know that. Over the years the revisionists went from a minority to a majority and they are using their power now to ruthlessly extirpate the orthodox while making sure that in the process the orthodox go on paying the bills for their liberal agenda even as they are being pushed out the door. (Please leave your buildings, the key and endowment at the front door as you leave). Have a Nicene day.      It is brilliant, clever, devilish and ultimately from the pit. It is the strategy of Satan in the human form of 62 revisionist bishops, with hundreds of priests fed from seminaries that have a reductionist gospel with no Good News to proclaim, except for something called inclusion and diversity and by extension the failure to preach that gospel declare those in opposition as homophobic.     THE AMERICAN ANGLICAN COUNCIL statement is not without its errors. There are two fundamental mistakes in the AAC statement attached to the Bishops letter. In the Frequently Asked Questions portion, there is a reference to Philadelphia and to not declaring that you have abandoned the communion of the church. This apparent reference to Father Moyer is completely incorrect. Father Moyer never abandoned the communion of the church. Bennison falsely and fraudulently used the abandonment of communion canon to deny Father Moyer a trial. Secondly, the AAC needs to recognize that Father Moyer was right and that AAC priests have the duty to reject the sacramental ministry of revisionist bishops. The present strategy of one bishop crossing lines to rescue one parish only leads to confusion, despair, the danger of presentment against that one bishop and inhibition and deposition of the priest. Power lies in the numbers.       IN CANADA, the 11 parish priests in The Anglican Communion in New Westminster (ACiNW) who have successfully been holding Michael Ingham the revisionist Vancouver bishop from acting against them are growing weary with the six-year old battle. Time is running out. Half of the priests are here in Destin at the AMIA conference trying to figure out their future. They hold no hope for the Task Force set up by the Canadian House of Bishops to save them and they are probably right.     Furthermore, Ingham is ratcheting up the pain by moving against two parishes, Holy Cross in Abbotsford and St. Martins in North Vancouver. He destroyed Holy Cross and has taken back the other. The lay leadership of St. Martins parish in North Vancouver has decided to go through official Anglican channels to hire a replacement priest and to stop its protest of withholding annual dues to the diocese, according to a newspaper report. Ingham had thrown out the original vestry, retired the rector, locked the doors, and cajoled the parishioners so they either left or gave in. As most are fairly old and have nowhere to go they give up the fight. The bully Ingham won.     The big crisis will erupt when the remaining nine decide what they will do. But even they are divided. Big parishes like St. Johns Shaughnessy have multi-million dollar properties, endowments and more to protect and don’t see the AMIA as their savior. A Chinese Anglican congregation, on the other hand, meets in a warehouse. They have little to lose. But some of the other parishes do see the AMIA as their hope. We shall know more soon.     BUT THE BIG NEWS THIS WEEK OCCURRED when a bombshell was dropped over a private memo written by the Rev. Geoffrey Chapman an AAC board member and leaked to the Washington POST and picked up by the Associated Press and blasted around the Internet. (It is on Virtuosity’s front page www.virtuosityonline.org .)       What he said was this. The AACs ultimate goal is a realignment of Anglicanism on North American soil committed to biblical faith and values, and driven by Gospel mission. We believe in the end this should be a replacement jurisdiction with confessional standards, maintaining the historic faith of our Communion, closely aligned with the majority of world Anglicanism, emerging from the disastrous actions of General Convention (2003).     But Chapman does not speak or make policy for the AAC and their media man Bruce Mason stepped up to the plate to say as much. But the damage was done and reactions flowed think and fast. Louie Crew, ECUSAs First Sodomite likened it to Watergate and I have weighed in on Crews false assessment.   Bishop Don Johnson of West Tennessee falsely accused the AAC of deceitfulness and subversive sabotage and vowed to purge his diocese of any association with the AAC. The AAC fired back saying, We are deeply concerned about the individuals, clergy and congregations in West Tennessee who are affiliated with AAC, and we stand in full solidarity with them.  We urge Bishop Johnson to refrain from punitive action, harassment or intimidation of the people under his care who uphold historic Anglican faith and order and whose affiliation with AAC provides them a place to stand. The American Anglican Council wants a church within a church which is not a parallel jurisdiction. This is just one more case where the ugly head of revisionism has reared its head.     But a lay person wrote crying Help! We in West Tennessee are now under attack. Our Bishop has been constantly reminding us that he voted Noin Minneapolis, but his real agenda is now apparent. I wondered how long it would take. We have some scripturally faithful clergy in this town, but they don’t stand a chance. Another layman, a doctor, who knows the bishop said Johnson cried when he said he voted no at GC2003, he felt he had betrayed his gay brothers and sisters. It was the timing he didn’t like.     AND IN VERSAILLES, KENTUCKY, Bishop Stacy Sauls outdid himself in stupidity when he dismissed the leadership of St. John’s Episcopal Church’s in that town because he thought the parish was going to split over the consecration of openly gay bishop Gene Robinson. He downgraded the church from a parish to a mission. But the dismissed members of the parish’s vestry said they never planned to take the assets and weren’t preparing to abandon the denomination. All they wanted was alternative episcopal oversight from a more conservative bishop. And the result: The move split the church and led to the creation of a new, independent congregation. Sauls should see a brain surgeon.       HERE IN DESTIN, FLORIDA WHERE THE AMIA is holding its fourth annual winter conference, Kenyan Archbishop Benjamin M. P. Nzimbi sent his greetings saying, God is in our midst in all we are doing. He knows our struggles. God wants us to walk in the light. Be encouraged brothers and sisters. Put your faith in God and you shall not be moved. Brothers and sisters here in Kenya are praying for you. The AMIA now has seven Primates on board, and while not formally endorsing the AMIA, their presence here and letters of support should give Frank Griswold heartburn.     And Bishop Thad Barnum turned up the heat on Griswold at an evangelistic worship service before 900 folk. He said he was not a wolf in sheep’s clothing, you can see his tail. He has spit upon our Savior. Indeed.     And in the ongoing struggle about who owns the property of All Saints, Pawleys Island, it would appear that Bishop Salmon may have overplayed his hand in dumping the vestry and appointing his own. On Friday morning after the overwhelming vote by the parish to secede from the diocese was passed, someone from the new parish went down to Atlanta and filed the new corporation papers in the State Dept. A State Dept. official stamped it validating the new corporate entity. If the bishop wants the parish he will now have to sue both the state and the new corporation. This comes hard on the heels of two rulings by Judge John Breeden that the diocese had no interest in the property. I am running Bishop Salmons letter to the parish in todays digest, but there will be further commentary on it at a later date. This is a messy complicated business, but it would seem that in the near future the parish is safe in the hands of the AMIA until the next round of court action.     IN AUSTRALIA, The Anglican Church of Australia faces a major change of direction in the wake of Archbishop Peter Carnley’s announcement that he intends to retire as Primate next year. The church’s evangelical wing - based in the biggest diocese, Sydney - has its best chance in years to elevate a member to the top job. At 59, Archbishop of Sydney Dr Peter Jensen is a relatively youthful bishop and could win. If he does it would be the first Western province to have an openly orthodox primate running it. Don’t pop the champagne cork yet, there are more liberal archbishops than orthodox in that country and the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.     AND VIRTUOSITY has learned that there will probably not be a meeting of the Primates in March this year. They are waiting for the outcome of the  Eames Commission report in September. Then they will decide if they are going to meet.   When I asked Primate Yong Ping Chung (South East Asia) if Frank Griswold turned up what he and his fellow orthodox Primates would do he said, We have broken communion with Griswold and we would not break bread with him. Walking out is a real possibility. The wild card is Nigerian Primate Peter Akinola and he IS the biggest player in town. What he decides could swing all the other orthodox provinces.       Word has also been received that if the Communion does break up after the Eames report, the conclusion being unsatisfactory for the orthodox Primates, then it wont be a federation (touted by Rowan Williams) but a new Anglican Communion with Africa, South East Asia, Southern Cone (and Australia if Jensen wins Carnley’s job). Now I wonder who will tell the Queen. Your majesty we have some bad news for you. Dr. Williams is history and Lambeth Palace would make a nice hotel. Oh and by the way the next Lambeth conference will be held in Lagos, you are welcome to come...and yes we do have Lipton’s tea bags, but bring your own water, ours leaves much to be desired.     The Organizing Convocation of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes will be held next week on Monday, January 19 and Tuesday, January 20, 2004, at Christ Church, Plano, Texas. The Network is being formed within the Episcopal Church’s and the Convocation will include representatives from 12 Episcopal dioceses. Virtuosity will be there.     I am posting a number of stories verifying what I have written today. The power plays we now see issuing forth from revisionist bishops only highlights the fears they have that without a gospel to proclaim they have to resort to vicious underhanded political tactics to maintain their power over orthodox parishes and their rectors. Regrettably it will only get worse.     I do hope you will make a donation to VIRTUOSITY. The coming months are going to be crucial in the life of the whole communion. 2004 will be a decisive year. I will be traveling the globe to bring you the stories. PLEASE send your tax deductible donation to VIRTUOSITY, 1236 Waterford Road, West Chester, PA 19380, or you can make a donation through PAYPAL at my website www.virtuosityonline.org . Thank you.     All blessings,   David W. Virtue DD

By Chris Young    Vancouver Sun January 17, 2004   Re: Dissident Anglican parish back in fold, Jan. 16     This latest move at St. Martin’s Anglican Church in North Vancouver has been carried out by Bishop Michael Inghams wardens only, without authority, and has not been backed by a vote of the people of the parish.     The parishioners who voted to stop paying the diocese and to withdraw from Communion with the Diocese of New Westminster have not even been consulted about this recent move. This is yet another repression of the majority that has been pushed upon us by the renegade bishop who is out of communion with the majority of Anglicans in the world.

BY DOUGLAS LEBLANC January 23, 2004     The name does not trip off the tongue, but maybe that’s just as well. There is nothing easy about the task that the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes has set for itself.     The fledgling organization held its inaugural meeting this week in the Dallas suburb of Plano, Texas, attracting about 100 people--roughly half laity and half clergy, including 11 bishops. The Rev. Kendall Harmon of Charleston, S.C., a participant, said that the delegates, at first, felt insecure and anxious. But by the second day they managed to agree on a founding charter. What happens next is unclear. The network is the latest expression of resistance to the Episcopal Church’s novel approaches to theology and ethics. When the General Convention, the Episcopal Church’s governing body, last summer approved Gene Robinson as the first openly gay bishop in Episcopal history, it did so despite warnings that this would separate the American church from Anglicans world-wide. There was even the possibility that conservative Episcopalians might break away.       Such a breaking away hasn’t happened, of course. But is the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes a sign it will? In the shorthand of many religion reporters, the networks raison d’etre is--ominously and only--to unite dissidents who reject Mr. Robinsons consecration as a bishop. Some go further, saying its founders want to foment a schism within the worlds 77 million-member Anglican Communion.       These feverish theories found some support last week when the Washington Post discovered a strategy memo by the Rev. Geoffrey Chapman of Sewickley, Pa., a member of the new network. The memo discussed, as a form of protest, the faithful disobedience of canon law.       Father Chapman did not define that phrase precisely, but in the same document he referred to conservative bishops crossing into liberal dioceses to perform services and alienated parishes withholding money from the parent church. (Liberal bishops have engaged in their own civil disobedience for the past few decades by ordaining gay priests and blessing gay unions, but they claim the mantle of social justice, so no one seems to mind.) In response to the Post piece, Bishop Don E. Johnson of Memphis, Tenn.--who had actually voted against confirming Mr. Robinson--wrote a scathing pastoral letter to Episcopalians in his diocese, urging any with ties to the American Anglican Council to sever them. (The new network has arisen from the Washington-based AAC.)       All this served as a backdrop to the gathering in Plano, creating a certain tension among the participants, who had to wonder just what kind of organization they were forming. In fact, the network has divisions within itself. By the end of the inaugural sessions, various factions had agreed to disagree about, for instance, the ordination of women. And various concerns were smoothed down, like those of Bishop John W. Howe of Orlando, Fla., who had worried aloud that the network could become a shadow province within the Episcopal Church’s.       Still, the groups’ conservative purpose is clear. It approved Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh as its first leader. The day after the network adjourned, he boarded a jet for Uganda, where network members will be the only Episcopalians welcome to celebrate the enthronement of that nation’s newest Anglican archbishop.    The inaugural sessions also made clear that the networks dissent has to do with more than sexual ethics. The Rev. Steve Wood, rector of St. Andrews Episcopal Church’s in Mount Pleasant, S.C., is typical of many members. He feels increasingly alienated from the Episcopal Church’ss image as Trinitarian on paper but Unitarian in practice. Like others, his greatest concern is for the authority of Scripture in Christians daily lives. Critics of conservative Episcopalians claim that some are guilty of Donatism, a heresy in which Christians question the validity of sacraments, such as Holy Communion, if a priest or bishop teaches errant doctrine. I'm not questioning whether the sacraments are still valid,Father Wood says. I'm questioning whether we worship the same God.     The network will face various tests in the months ahead. It will contend with Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold about what sort of pastoral care he can provide--i.e., what sort of protection--to conservative congregations that may suffer under punitive liberal bishops. And the network will undoubtedly form liaisons with Global South archbishops--the orthodox clergy in the Third World--who no longer consider themselves in communion with the Episcopal Church’s.     Some critics may have hoped to bury the network as stillborn this week. Instead, it seems to have emerged as a newly baptized baby--with, naturally, an uncertain future.     Mr. LeBlanc is an associate editor of Christianity Today magazine.

AS EYE SEE IT    By John Donnelly     Like many people, I am often quite bewildered by the many, many conflicting messages that conservative/orthodox Episcopalians are receiving from our opponents in ECUSA.     The other day, I received a piece of hate mail from an Episcopalian in my diocese.  I have never met the person. He had heard about us from others in the diocese (Diocese of Newark), and had read our web site. He had heard that I am antigay and was appalled at the Robinson election.  He suggested that bigots like me should leave the Episcopal Church’s.  For many of us, such love letters are a common occurrence However, we receive a mixed message from others in the same camp.  They say, We value you...we love you in God...please stay and dialogue with us Or, You may leave, but not with your property.   Maybe  we conservative Episcopalians should pick up a daisy, and pull off the pedals, one at an item, asking, They love me?...they love me not?     For the time being, I personally do not wish to leave ECUSA.  But I resent the kiss and slap mentality of the liberal Episcopal community.     Coming up at 130th Diocesan Convention, the Diocese of Newark will be voting on a resolution to promote the Unity of the church in the Spirit of the Gospel.[Resolution 2004: http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/convention/resolutions.html ].     This resolution commends the Diocesan Convention of Upper South Carolina for setting a tone of reconciliation by voting to set aside all of these [divisive General Convention] resolutions. They did so not because they believe in the actions of General Convention, but because they did not want polarization around these issues further to interfere with the ministry, mission, and unity of the Diocese. Through their resolution, they are committed to seek deeper unity, more profound love, and more faithful discipleship.     Does anyone else see the irony here?  The Diocese of Newark has led the charge in these battles for years and years, and now they commend a diocese for not polarizing the church? Where is the truth in this resolution?     The Rev. Canon John Donnelly co-Rector, St. Michaels, (Wayne, NJ) An American Anglican Council affiliate in the Diocese of Newark     END