Archives

By FRANK MORRISS THE WANDERER   Anglicanism, that is, the religion of an English established church whose head on earth is the British monarch, began based on one of those monarchs   self-serving judgment that he could marry as many times as necessary to produce a male heir. Henry VIII at first veiled that seizure of authority from its legitimate possessor, the Bishop of Rome, in scruples about the validity of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon.   He made a private interpretation of Scripture to argue his vows with the Spanish princess were invalid because she had been once married to his deceased brother, Arthur.  Rome rejected his petition for an annulment from Catherine on the grounds a dispensation had been granted from whatever impediment might be involved, and later, Catherine, defending her marriage to Henry, insisted the marriage to 16-year-old Arthur (even then sickly) had never been consummated. Her confessor, Bishop John Fisher, argued in her favor, and he above all others would have known if in fact the marriage to Henrys brother was complete ( ratum et consummatum).     For his several other marriages, Henry could find no other argument other than that he by his own declaration, approved by a supine Parliament, was head of the Church in England, and could do as he wished.     All of this defied the clear evidence in Scripture that putting ones wife away and taking another is adultery, as well as the fact that Christ made Peter, who became Bishop of Rome, as His Vicar on earth, and that the Church had recognized the Bishop of Rome and no other as having that title and authority to teach, govern, and bind and loose. In breaking with that authority, Henry and all who accepted his schism which rapidly evolved into full-blown heresy, reduced religion to being simply what its constituents, whether citizens, monarchs, or clerics or those pretending to be clerics, want it to be.     All of that must be kept in mind in considering the decision of the Episcopal Church, an offshoot or sprout of Anglicanism, that a man living in a feigned state of spousal relationship with another man, having split from his wife and children to do so, is fit to be a bishop.     Indeed, spokesmen for the majority that voted approval of this promotion  of an Episcopal cleric to hierarchical status have proclaimed him more than fit for the job ? they have praised him as deeply spiritual, exemplary in his ministry, a paragon of priesthood deserving the rank to which they have lifted him by his invisible halo, as it were.     That this is a step toward recognizing marriage of homosexuals is admitted by supporters of this decision, one of whom (the bishop of the Episcopal seminary) said it is just a matter of bringing along reluctant Episcopalians to accepting such a step. Approval for blessing such marriages awaits the community’s arrival at the point the homosexual activists and their supporters have planned ? the debauching of the marriage of man and woman by putting homosexual acts on its level.     The New Hampshire bishop-elect at the center of this parody of religion said Episcopalians are on a learning curve that will lead them to accept gays in every position of authority, which of course minimizes the real intention, that it will be an acceptance not only of their sexual appetites, but of their indulgence in those appetites by sodomy and other unmentionable sexual acts, none of which is in keeping with the decent and natural purpose of the sexual faculties given us by our Creator. The only learning curve Christians should be on is toward obeying, serving, and following Christ as closely and perfectly as possible, which includes being chaste.     Therefore, any genuine learning curve to be followed by Christians leads to Christs teaching, rather than away from it. And one of those teachings is that lust is forbidden to the Masters followers, and that sex is to be used to make man and woman one flesh. The Church has always accepted that Christ made this nuptial union analogous to His own union with His Church. It is therefore blasphemous to even consider equating the lustful acts of homosexual sex with marriage, and it is sacrilegious to attempt to dignify such unions with a blessing or liturgy, which the Episcopal Church is on it way toward doing.     Make no mistake, two major evils are involved here: lust and pride, the claim of autonomy in the matter of sexual use and the claim of righteousness in asserting lust is virtue rather than vice.     There is little chance the Anglican Church, the schismatic root of Episcopalianism, will intervene effectively in what its brash American offspring is doing. For one thing, there is no effective authority at hand to do it. Just as the formal head of that Church,  the British monarch is a figurehead, her primate-designate, the archbishop of Canterbury, is as well. Even if he had effective power, the present holder of that office is an earth, fire, and wind worshiper. It is not likely he would be overly shocked at the desire of some within the church he heads to appear costumed as fauns, frolicking after one another piping the music of the Lupercal.     After all, the Anglican Church has surrendered traditional opposition to contraception, abortion, female clergy, divorce. It would be naive to think it will now take a stand against its shepherds engaging in objectionable activities of all sorts, and even being admired for doing so. The argument that God loves everyone is attractive in an egalitarian age that insists what one does would never be counted against the good Gods desire to have all saved. Further, the revolt against the nature and meaning of human acts in favor of fides sola or even good intentions suggests that Heaven is guaranteed.     Indeed, the truth that God loves everyone is now taken as that very guarantee. That overlooks that the crucial question for God’s creatures is do they love God?     It’s easy to answer that question with of course! But then, what did Jesus mean when He said, Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father in Heaven shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And what is the meaning of the parable that tells of seven foolish virgins denied entry to the wedding feast because they let the oil of their lanterns burn out?     There is not a hint of scriptural teaching, including that of Christ, that sexual satisfaction alone can provide the substance of marriage. But there is direct testimony aplenty that the use of sex to bring new lives into being is such substance. God makes woman to be man’s companion; the command to Adam is to increase and multiply. Jesus reminds His listeners that at the beginning the creation was of man and woman who can become one flesh, and for that reason any putting away of ones wife and remarriage involves adultery. The only nuptial blessing given by Christ was at Cana.     St. Paul condemns the desire of man for man, woman for woman in no uncertain terms. And thus for those who believe in the inerrancy of scriptural teaching, in the protection of the valid episcopal college from error, must surely accept that sodomy is a major departure from that teaching, and therefore a grave sin which, if not sincerely repented and resisted, would disqualify any candidate for that college.     The decline of sexual morality in the West, and even within what citadels of Christianity as remain, is the evil fruit of a totally personalist, subjective moral jurisdiction by each individual. The privacy claimed in matters of sex  even extending to reproduction is simply an assertion of autonomy of the individual in that area of life. It makes no matter if that is the case what any other authority says, even when it is the authority of Christs Church, headed by His Vicar on earth, or the recorded authority of God’s word.     Sexual sins amount to Adams choosing to eat of the fruit that God ordered him to forgo in Eden. Not all sexual sins are of equal malice, and there may be subjective mitigation of guilt in their regard. But if sodomy and other deviant sexual use are not seriously immoral, then surely no other sexual use can be condemned, either in or outside of marriage. Give in regarding homosexual sex, and every city becomes Sodom, every person becomes a potential citizen of Gomorrah.     None of the above is meant to insult or denigrate or even discourage sincere Anglicans or Episcopalians. And undoubtedly some may be ignorant of the issues involved in the origins and directions of their denominations. But most educated persons of those churches must recognize some facts of history. They must recognize how the Church of England drifted into a state of indifference to the meaning of apostolicity, entering a state of quasi-Protestantism and surrendered the full sacramentalism (most disastrously the Mass) that it kept at its very beginning (though for only a matter of months).     If they know anything about the revolt of the Non-Jurors against the acceptance of Protestant royal houses by the Church of England, and of the later Oxford Movement that attempted to revive Anglicanism’s historic link to the Church before Henrys schism and Elizabeths heresy, then they will know the direction of their church has been toward doctrinal and moral dissolution from the beginning.     The last serious chance for Anglicanism to choose either the substance of Catholic faith or the path to irrelevance was the issuance of John Henry Cardinal Newmans Tract 90 of the Oxford Movement. That attempted to establish a compatibility of Anglicanism’s 39 Articles of Faith with the ancient Creeds and interpretations of Catholicism. The Anglican authorities of the early 19th century used Newmans tract as an excuse to silence the Oxford Movement. Many Anglicans, especially Oxfordians, went to Rome with Newman; many, many more remained with an Anglicanism now revealed as determined to resist any challenge to its presumptions to be genuinely linked to the Church Christ founded.     That has led to the present moment, when it is clear the congregational idea of being whatever members of the community want it to be puts the Anglican and Episcopalian Churches on the edge of total religious irrelevance. Gradually, if those churches do not step back from that possibility, they will merge with the prevailing culture no matter how pagan, indecent, perverted, or diabolic that culture might become.     Other Protestant churches have already become pale shadows of Christianity, even the Christianity of their Reformation founders. A few islands of resistance to that fate remain, but it is unlikely these can remain long above the tides of secular morality (more properly, immorality).     In attempting to be relevant to such culture, Christian churches become more and more irrelevant. That is proving itself true even within some areas of the Catholic Church. Modernist theology and thought are becoming more and more unattractive, more and more like a senile nonagenarian who has lost his memory along with his recognizability as something meaningful to the following of Christ. What is prospering is traditional Catholicism faithful to the Church’s beginnings and the ongoing stream of Tradition as a parallel Revelation to Scripture.     That will be a bulwark for the Catholic Church as it rejects such enormities as gay unions, women clergy, trial marriage, legalized adultery, vice converted to virtue, sin mutated into sanctity. And reject it will, for the promise was made to the Church built upon the Rock who was Peter and now is each of his Successors, . . . and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.     It should be clear to all who have the purity of heart that enables them to have a true religious vision that such protection was not given any other church, as those gates prevail more and more over the purely human claim to hold divine credentials. END

By Juliet Williams Associated Press MILWAUKEE - A Roman Catholic bishop who waded into politics with a decree that lawmakers who support abortion rights can no longer receive Holy Communion has ignited a debate over the separation of church and state.     Bishop Raymond Burke of La Crosse cited Vatican doctrine, canon law and teachings by the U.S. bishops in an announcement telling diocesan priests to withhold communion from such lawmakers until they ``publicly renounce their support of abortion rights. This is about as stark a decree to come down against Catholic politicians as we’ve seen in recent history, said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.     “The problem with it is that elected officials have to represent people of all faiths and none, and not adhere to one religious demand like the bishops, he said.     Pope John Paul II appointed Burke, 55, archbishop of St. Louis in December. Burke signed the decree in November, when he still had the authority to do so, but it was not made public until Thursday.     Burke is to be installed in St. Louis on Jan. 26.   The Vatican and U.S. bishops have for years urged Catholic legislators to consider their faith when they vote, and a task force of bishops is weighing whether to recommend sanctions for Catholic politicians who support policies contrary to church teachings.     In November, Burke wrote letters to at least three Catholic lawmakers, telling them they risked being forbidden from taking the sacrament by continuing to vote for measures he termed anti-life, including abortion and euthanasia.     Democratic U.S. Rep. David Obey, who received a letter from Burke, said Friday that he respects the sacred oath he took to uphold the U.S. Constitution.     Obey said Burke can instruct him on faith and morals in his private life, but should use ``persuasion, not dictation to affect his political votes.     State Senate Minority Leader Jon Erpenbach, a Democrat who was raised Catholic, expressed a similar view.     Dictating public policy for people of all faiths by holding sacraments hostage from those who believe does not sound right, Erpenbach said.     Dan Maguire, a professor of theology at the Jesuit Marquette University in Milwaukee, called Burke a ``fanatic who has embarrassed the Catholic Church by using bullying tactics.     “He is not a theologian and he is making terrible mistakes that have been addressed in theology in the past, Maguire said. “He’s making a fool of himself. And the politicians are absolutely within their Catholic rights to ignore him.     END

By Cara Eastwood Wyoming Tribune-Eagle     CHEYENNE - Episcopalians seeking a more conservative church might find refuge in a new, as of yet unaffiliated group founded by a veteran in the Episcopal denomination. The Church of St. Peter, Apostle and Confessor will begin meeting Jan. 18, and the Rev. H. W. Skip Reeves is eager to plow new ground with his congregation. Initial attendance, estimated between 75 and 150 people, will be comprised mainly of Episcopalians who stopped going to church after last year’s controversial appointment of a gay bishop.     I’m the last person on Earth that many people would think to do this, Reeves said. I’ve always been what you would call a company man.     Reeves served as rector of St. Mark’s Episcopal Church for over 10 years and retired last year. His problems are not with St. Marks or any of the parishioners there, he insists, but instead with the national church.     After the General Convention, when church leaders decided to confirm openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson and recognized that bishops are allowing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, Reeves said he began to feel the church moving away from his beliefs.     I strongly feel that I am not leaving the Episcopal Church, it has left me, he said in a recent letter to the Tribune-Eagle.     Reeves departure from his 34-year connection to the Episcopal Church comes after weathering several major storms like the altering of the prayerbook and the ordination of women.     But the confirmation of Robinson, however, was the last straw for Reeves and many other conservative Anglicans.     The perception of conservatives is that this is a gross violation of interpretation of scripture, Reeves said.     The Episcopal Church’s lack of official doctrine or statement of faith is part of the problem, Reeves said.     The Church of St. Peter, Apostle and Confessor, however, will be what Reeves calls a confessing church meaning that the congregation will be guided by a statement of faith and will not hesitate to state what it believes.     St. Mark’s lost 40 percent of attendance after Bishop Robinson’s confirmation, Reeves said.     Although he made a point to not stir up dissention because of his personal view of the issue, Reeves said many dissatisfied parishioners came to him for help and advice on where to go. He waited until he officially retired before founding a new church.     Episcopalians generally don’t change denominations, he said. They just stop going to church.     Reeves said the new church would welcome homosexual people into the congregation, so long as they are celibate or have the desire to try and convert to heterosexuality.     It’s the behavior that contradicts scripture, Reeves said. Not the individuals.     END

By: RICHARD N. OSTLING Jan/14/2004     The ultimate goal of conservative Episcopalians opposed to an openly gay bishop is a replacement for the Episcopal Church that will be aligned with like-minded Anglican churches in other nations, according to a detailed memo from a key strategist. News of the memo, first reported in Wednesdays Washington Post, comes as conservatives prepare for a crucial closed-door meeting next week in Plano, Texas, to establish a national group called the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes.     In recent weeks, conservative leaders have said this will not be a formal breakaway from the Episcopal Church. But the memo indicates the Plano meeting may face a division between those favoring a conciliatory strategy and militants prepared to defy the church.     Our ultimate goal is a realignment of Anglicanism on North American soil committed to biblical faith and values, says the memo by the Rev. Geoffrey Chapman. We believe in the end this should be a replacement jurisdiction ... closely aligned with the majority of world Anglicanism.     Daniel England, communications director at Episcopal Church headquarters, said many rank-and-file Episcopalians will likely be disappointed by a strategy that seems to contemplate disobeying canons in church law and would circumvent the authority of diocesan bishops. Still, England said, the denomination needs to hear all voices in the debate over homosexuality.   The confidential document was sent to interested congregations Dec. 28 by Chapman, of Sewickley, Pa., on behalf of the Washington-based American Anglican Council, which is helping organize the network.     AAC media director Bruce Mason said Chapman is not a policy spokesman and the AAC does not intend to supplant the current structure of the Episcopal Church. However, he said, the conservative forces remain faithful to the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal Church does not.     The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the international Anglican Communion - bodies which trace their heritage back to the Church of England. Many national Anglican churches have denounced or broken fellowship with the Episcopal Church over the consecration last November of V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay cleric, as bishop of New Hampshire.     Chapman’s memo deals with strategy for individual, conservative parishes in liberal dioceses that oppose the denominations gay policies and want to be ministered to by traditionalist bishops from outside their areas - instead of their regular, local bishops.     A clause in the Episcopal Church’s constitution says a bishop must not exercise his office in another diocese unless the regular bishop requests this.     Chapman is scheduled to brief Plano participants on the situation faced by local congregations. He is rector of the largest congregation in the Pittsburgh Diocese whose bishop, Robert Duncan, is a leader of the new network.     The denominations national leader, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, has proposed a plan for special visiting bishops to minister to conservative parishes. AAC leaders have rejected Griswold’s system, however, because ultimate decisions rest with liberal bishops they distrust.     The issue of so-called adequate episcopal oversight is on the agenda of a closed-door meeting of all Episcopal bishops March 19-24 in Navasota, Texas, and of a special committee dealing with the split on gays in the international Anglican Communion.     Chapmans 2,500-word memo lays out a two-stage process for parishes that have lost faith in Episcopal leadership.     In the first stage, parishes would practice spiritual realignment but remain within the letter of Episcopal Church law in order to hold ownership of their buildings.     In stage two, he said, they would seek negotiated settlements on parish property, hiring of future priests and other contentious matters, with guidance from friendly bishops overseas. If deals aren’t reached, widespread disobedience would occur.     In an interview with The Associated Press, Chapman said he has spoken with scores and scores and scores of churches who say liberal bishops have pressured them not to protest Robinsons consecration, to join dissenting organizations or to withhold contributions.     It's religious persecution, it's very real, and it's happening, and we're trying to figure out how to help these churches, he said.     *****

Warning #1 to the Church’s   The True Church’s   by J. C. Ryle  (1816-1900)   The following Sermon was preached in England, in August, 1858.   On this rock I will build my church  and the gates of hell will not      overcome it (Matthew 16:18) .   We live in a world in which all things are passing away.  Kingdoms,  empires, cities, institutions, families, all are liable to change and corruption.  One universal law seems to prevail everywhere.  In all created things there is a tendency to decay.   There is something sad and depressing in this.  What profit has a man in the labor of his hands?  Is there nothing that shall stand?  Is there  nothing that shall last?  Is there nothing that shall endure?  Is there  nothing of which we can say--This shall continue forever?  You have the answer to these questions in the words of our text.  Our Lord Jesus Christ speaks of something which shall continue, and not pass away.    There is one created thing which is an exception to the universal rule to which I have referred.  There is one thing which shall never perish and pass away.  That thing is the building founded upon the rock--the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ.  He declares, in the words you have heard tonight: On this rock I will build my church’s, and the gates of hell will not overcome it.  There are five things in these words which demand your attention:     1. A Building: My Church’s   2. A Builder: Christ says, I will build My Church’s   3. A Foundation: On this rock I will build My Church’s   4. Perils Implied: The gates of hell   5. Security Asserted: The gates of hell will not overcome it     May God bless the words that shall be spoken.  May we all search our own hearts tonight, and know whether or not we belong to this one Church’s.    May we all go home to reflect and to pray!   1. First, you have a Building mentioned in the text.  The Lord Jesus Christ speaks of My Church’s.   Now what is this Church?  Few inquiries can be made of more Importance than this.  For want of due attention to this subject, the errors that have crept into the Church’s, and into the world, are neither few nor  small.     The Church of our text is no material building.  It is no temple made with hands, of wood, or brick, or stone, or marble.  It is a company of men and women.  It is no particular visible Church’s on earth.  It is not the Eastern Church’s or the Western Church’s.  It is not the Church of England, or the Church of Scotland--much less is it the Church of Rome.    The Church of our text is one that makes far less show in the eyes of man, but is of far more Importance in the eyes of God.     The Church of our text is made up of all true believers in the Lord Jesus Christ.  It comprehends all who have repented of sin, and fled to Christ by faith, and been made new creatures in Him.  It comprises all Gods elect, all who have received God’s grace, all who have been washed in Christ's blood, all who have been clothed in Christs righteousness, all Who have been born again and sanctified by Christs Spirit.  All such, of Every nation, and people, and tongue, compose the Church of our text. this is the body of Christ.  This is the flock of Christ.  This is the bride.  This is the Lamb's wife.  This is the Church on the rock.     The members of this Church’s do not all worship God in the same way, or use the same form of government.  Our own 34th Article declares, It is not necessary that ceremonies should be in all places one and alike.  But they all worship with one heart.  They are all led by one Spirit.  They are all really and truly holy.  They can all say Alleluia, and they can all reply Amen.     This is that Church’s, to which all visible Churches on earth are servants. Whether they are Episcopalian, Independent, or Presbyterian, they all serve the interests of the one true Church’s.  They are the scaffolding, behind which the great building is carried on.  They are the husk, under which the living kernel grows.  They have their various degrees of usefulness.  The best and worthiest of them is that which trains up most members for Christs true Church’s.  But no visible Church’s has any right to say, We are the only true Church’s.  We are the men, and wisdom shall die with us.  No visible Church’s should ever dare to say, We shall stand for ever.  The gates of hell will not overcome us.      This is that Church’s to which belong the Lords precious promises of preservation, continuance, protection, and final glory.  Whatsoever, says Hooker, we read in Scripture, concerning the endless love and saving mercy which God shows towards His Churches, the only proper subject is this Church’s, which we properly term the mystical body of Christ.  Small and despised as the true Church’s may be in this world, it is precious and honorable in the sight of God.  The temple of Solomon in all its glory was nothing, in comparison with that Church’s which is built upon a rock.     Men and brethren, see that you hold sound doctrine on the subject of the Church’s.  A mistake here may lead to dangerous and soul-ruining errors.  The Church’s which is made up of true believers, is the Church’s for which we, who are ministers, are specially ordained to preach.  The Church’s which comprises all who repent and believe the Gospel, is the Church’s to which we desire you to belong.  Our work is not done, and our hearts are Not satisfied, until you are made new creatures, and are members of the one true Church.  Outside of this Church there can be no salvation.   2. I pass on to the second point, to which I proposed to call your attention.  Our text contains not merely a building, but a Builder.  The Lord Jesus Christ declares, I will build My Church. The true Church of Christ is tenderly cared for by all the three persons of the blessed Trinity.  In the economy of redemption, beyond all doubt, God the Father chooses, and God the Holy Spirit sanctifies, every member of Christ's mystical body.  God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, three Persons and one God, cooperate for the salvation of every Saved soul.  This is truth, which ought never to be forgotten.    Nevertheless, there is a peculiar sense in which the help of the Church’s is laid on the Lord Jesus Christ.  He is peculiarly and preeminently the Redeemer and the Savior.  Therefore, it is, that we find Him saying in our text, I will build: the work of building is my special work.     It is Christ who calls the members of the Church’s in due time.  They are the called of Jesus Christ (Romans 1:6).  It is Christ who gives them life.  The Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it (John 5:21).      It is Christ who washes away their sins.  He who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood (Revelation 1:5). It is Christ who gives them peace.  Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you (John 14:27).  It is Christ who gives them eternal life.  I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish (John 10:28).  It is Christ who grants them repentance.  God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance (Acts 5:31). It is Christ who enables them to become Gods children.  To all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God (John 1:12).  It is Christ who carries on the work within them when it is begun.  Because I live, you also will live (John 14:19).   In short, God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him [Christ] (Colossians 1:19).  He is the author and finisher of faith.  From Him every joint and member of the mystical body of Christians is supplied.  Through Him they are strengthened for duty.  By Him they are K ept from falling.  He shall preserve them to the end, and present them faultless before the Father’s throne with exceeding great joy.  He is all things, and all in all to believers.   The mighty agent by whom the Lord Jesus Christ carries out this work in the number of His Churches, is, without doubt, the Holy Spirit.  He it is who applies Christ and His benefits to the soul.  He it is who is ever renewing, awakening, convincing, leading to the cross, transforming, taking out of the world, stone after stone, and adding it to the mystical building.   But the great Chief Builder, who has undertaken to execute the work of redemption and bring it to completion, is the Son of God: the Word who was made flesh.  It is Jesus Christ who builds.   In building the true Church’s, the Lord Jesus condescends to use many subordinate instruments.  The ministry of the Gospel, the circulation of the Scriptures, the friendly rebuke, the word spoken in season, the drawing influence of afflictions--all, all are means and methods by which His work is carried on.  But Christ is the great superintending Architect, ordering, guiding, directing all that is done.  What the sun is to the whole solar system, that Christ is to all the members of thetrue Church’s.  Paul may plant, and Apollos water, but God gives the increase.  Ministers may preach, and writers may write, but the Lord Jesus Christ alone can build.  And except He builds, the work stands still.   Great is the wisdom with which the Lord Jesus Christ builds His Church’s.  All is done at the right time, and in the right way.  Each stone in its turn is put in the right place.  Sometimes He chooses great stones, and sometimes He chooses small stones.  Sometimes the work moves fast, and sometimes it moves slowly.  Man is frequently Impatient, and thinks that nothing is happening.  But man’s time is not Gods time.  A thousand years in His sight are but as a single day.  The great Builder makes no mistakes.  He knows what He is doing.  He sees the end from the beginning.  He works by a perfect, unalterable and certain plan.  The mightiest conceptions of architects, like Michael Angelo are mere insignificant child’s play, in comparison with Christ's wise counsels respecting His Church’s.     Great is the condescension and mercy, which Christ exhibits in building His Church’s.  He often chooses the most unlikely and roughest stones, and fits them into a most excellent work.  He despises no one, and rejects none, on account of former sins and past transgressions.  He delights to show mercy.  He often takes the most thoughtless and ungodly, and transforms them into polished corners of His spiritual temple.     Great is the power which Christ displays in building His Church’s.  He carries on his work in spite of opposition from the world, the flesh, and the devil.  In storm, in chaos, through troublesome times, silently, quietly, without noise, without stir, without excitement, the building progresses, like Solomons temple.  I will work, He declares, and none shall stop it.   Brethren, the children of this world take little or no interest in the building of this Church’s, They care little for the conversion of souls.  What are broken spirits and penitent hearts to them?  It is all foolishness in their eyes.  But while the children of this world care nothing, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God.  For the preserving of that Church’s, the laws of nature have oftentimes been suspended.  For the good of that Church’s, all the providential dealings of God in this world are ordered and arranged.      For the elects sake, wars are brought to an end, and peace is given to a nation.  Statesmen, rulers, emperors, kings, presidents, heads of governments, have their schemes and plans, and think them of vast Importance.  But there is another work going on of infinitely greater significance, for which they  are all but as the axes and saws in Gods hands.  That work is the  gathering in of living stones into the one true Church’s.  How little are we told in Gods Word about unconverted men compared with what we are told about believers!  The history of Nimrod, the mighty hunter, is dismissed in a few words.  The history of Abraham, the father of the faithful, occupies several chapters.  Nothing in Scripture is so Important as the concerns of the true Church’s.  The world makes up little of God’s Word.  The Church’s and its story make up much.     For ever let us thank God, my beloved brethren, that the building of the one true Church’s is laid on the shoulders of One that is mighty.  Let us bless God that it does not rest upon man.  Let us bless God that it does not depend on missionaries, ministers, or committees.  Christ is the almighty Builder.  He will carry on His work, though nations and visible Churches do not know their duty.  Christ will never fail.  That which He has undertaken He will certainly accomplish.     3. I pass on to the third point, which I proposed to consider--The Foundation upon which this Church is built.  The Lord Jesus Christ tells us, On this rock I will build my church. What did the Lord Jesus Christ mean, when He spoke of this foundation?  Did He mean the Apostle Peter, to whom He was speaking?  I think assuredly not.  I can see no reason, if he meant Peter, why did He not say, On you will I build My church.  If He had meant Peter, He would  have said, I will build My Church’s on you, as plainly as He said, I will  give you the keys.  No! it was not the person of the Apostle Peter, but the good confession which the Apostle had just made.    It was not Peter, the erring, unstable man; but the mighty truth which the Father had  revealed to Peter.  It was the truth concerning Jesus Christ himself which was the Rock.  It was Christs Mediatorship, and Christs Messiahship.  It was the blessed truth, that Jesus was the promised Savior, the true Guarantee, the real Intercessor between God and man.  This was the rock, and this was the foundation on which the Church of Christ was to be built.   My brethren, this foundation was laid at a mighty cost.  It was necessary that the Son of God should take our nature upon Him, and in that nature live, suffer, and die, not for His own sins, but for ours.  It was necessary that in that nature Christ should go to the grave, and rise again.  It was necessary that in that nature Christ should go up to heaven, to sit at the right hand of God, having obtained eternal redemption for all His people.  No other foundation but this could have borne the weight of that Church of which our text speaks.  No other foundation could have met the necessities of a world of sinners.     That foundation once obtained, is very strong.  It can bear the weight of the sin of all the world.  It has borne the weight of all the sins of all the believers who have built on it.  Sins of thought, sins of the Imagination, sins of the heart, sins of the head, sins which every one has seen, and sins which no man knows, sins against God, and sins against man, sins of all kinds and descriptions--that mighty rock can bear the weight of all these sins and not give way.  The mediatorial office of Christ is a sufficient remedy for all the sins of all the world.   To this one foundation every member of Christs true Church’s is joined.  In many things believers are disunited and disagreed.  In the matter of   their souls foundation they are all of one mind.  They are all built on the rock.  Ask where they get their peace, and hope, and joyful expectation of good things to come.  You would find that it all flows from that one mighty truth--Christ the Mediator between God and man, and the office that Christ holds, as the High priest and Promise of sinners.     Here is the point which demands our personal attention.  Are we on the rock?  Are we really joined to the one foundation?  What does that good old godly man, Leighton say?  God has laid this precious stone for this very purpose, that weary sinners may rest upon it.  The multitude of Imaginary believers lie all around it, but they are not any better for that, any more than stones that lie loose in heaps, near a foundatioN, but not joined to it.  There is no benefit to us by Christ, without union with Him.     Look to your foundation, my beloved brethren, if you would know whether or not you are members of the one true Church’s.  It is a point that may be known to yourselves.  Your public worship we can see, but we cannot see whether you are personally built upon the rock.  Your attendance at the Lords table we can see, but we cannot see whether you are joined to Christ, and one with Christ, and Christ in you.  But all shall come to light one day.  The secrets of all hearts shall be exposed.  Perhaps you go to church’s regularly and you pray faithfully.  All this is right and good, so far as it goes.  But see that you make no mistake about your own personal salvation.  See that your own soul is on the rock.  Without this, all else is nothing.  Without this, you will never stand in the day of judgment.  Better a thousand times in that day to be found in a cottage on the rock, than in a palace on the sand!   4. I proceed, in the fourth place, to speak of the Implied Trials of the Church’s, to which our text refers.  There is mention made of the gates of hell.  By that expression we are to understand the power of the devil!   The history of Christ's true Church has always been one of conflict and war.  It has been constantly assailed by a deadly enemy, Satan, the prince of this world.  The devil hates the true Church’s of Christ with an undying hatred.  He is ever stirring up opposition against all its embers.  He is ever urging the children of this world to do his will, and injure and harass the people of God.  If he cannot bruise the head, he will bruise the heel.  If he cannot rob believers of heaven, he will aggravate them as they travel the road to heaven.     For six thousand years this hostility has gone on.  Millions of the ungodly have been the devils agents, and done the devils work, though they did not know it.  The Pharaohs, the Herod’s, the Nero’s, the Julians, the Diocletians, the bloody Mary’s--were Satan’s tools, when they persecuted the disciples of Jesus Christ.     Warfare with the powers of hell has been the experience of the whole body of Christ.  It has always been a bush burning, though not consumed--a woman fleeing into the wilderness, but not swallowed up.  The visible Churches have their times of prosperity and seasons of peace, but never has there been a time of peace for the true Church’s.  Its conflict is perpetual.  Its battle never ends.     Warfare with the powers of hell is the experience of every individual member of the true Church’s.  Each has to fight.  What are the lives of all the saints, but records of battles?  What were such men as Paul, and James, and Peter, and John, and Polycarp, and Ignatius, and Augustine, and Luther, and Calvin, and Latimer, and Baxter, but soldiers engaged in a constant warfare?  Sometimes their persons have been assailed, and sometimes their property.  Sometimes they have been harassed by slander, and sometimes by open persecution.  But in one way or another the devil has been continually warring against the Church’s.  The gates of hell have been continually assaulting the people of Christ.     Men and brethren, we who preach the Gospel can hold out to all who come to Christ, exceeding great and precious promises.  We can offer boldly to you in our Masters name, the peace of God which passes all understanding.  Mercy, free grace, and full salvation, are offered to every one who will come to Christ, and believe on Him.  But we promise you no peace with the world, or with the devil.  We warn you, on the contrary, that there must be warfare, so long as you are in the body.  We would not keep you back, or deter you from Christs service.  But we would have you count the cost, and fully understand what Christs service entails.  Hell is behind you.  Heaven is before you.  Home lies on the other side of a troubled sea.  Thousands, tens of thousands have crossed these stormy waters, and in spite of all opposition, have reached the haven where they would be.  Hell has assailed them, but has not prevailed.  Go forward, beloved brethren, and fear not the adversary.  Only abide in Christ, and the victory is sure.     Marvel not at the hatred of the gates of hell.  If you were of the world, the world would love as its own.  So long as the world is the world, and the devil the devil, there must be warfare, and believers in Christ must be soldiers.  The world hated Christ, and the world will hate true Christians, as long as the earth stands.  As the great reformer, Luther, said, Cain will go on murdering Abel so long as the Church’s is on earth.     Be prepared for the hostility of the gates of hell.  Put on the whole armor of God.  The tower of David contains a thousand shields, all ready for the use of Gods people.  The weapons of our warfare have been tried by millions of poor sinners like ourselves, and have never been found to fail.     Be patient under the bitterness of the gates of hell.  It is all working together for your good.  It tends to sanctify.  It keeps you awake.  It makes you humble.  It drives you nearer to the Lord Jesus Christ.  It weans you from the world.  It helps to make you pray more.  Above all, it makes you long for heaven, and say with heart as well as lips, Come, Lord Jesus.     Do not be cast down by the hatred of hell.  The warfare of the true child of God is as much a mark of grace as the inward peace which he enjoys. No cross, no crown!  No conflict, no saving Christianity!  Blessed are you, said our Lord Jesus Christ, when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.      5. There remains one thing more to be considered: the Security of the true Church of Christ.  There is a glorious promise given by the mighty Builder, The gates of Hades will not overcome it.  He who cannot lie has pledged His royal word, that all the powers of hell shall never overthrow His Church’s.  It shall continue, and stand, in spite of every assault.  It shall never be overcome.  All other created things perish and pass away, but not the Church of Christ.  The hand of outward violence, or the moth of inward decay, prevail over everything else, but not over the church that Christ builds.   Empires have risen and fallen in rapid succession.  Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Tyre, Carthage, Rome, Greece, Venice--where are all these now?  They were all the creations of man’s hand, and have passed away.  But the Church of Christ lives on.     The mightiest cities have become heaps of ruins.  The broad walls of Babylon are sunk to the ground.  The palaces of Nineveh are mounds of dust.  The hundred gates of Thebes are only matters of history.  Tyre is a place where fishermen hang their nets.  Carthage is a desolation.  Yet all this time the true Church’s stands.  The gates of hell do not prevail against it.     The earliest visible Churches have in many cases decayed and perished.  Where is the Church of Ephesus and the Church of Antioch?  Where is the Church’s of Alexandria and the Church’s of Constantinople?  Where are the Corinthian, and Philippian, and Thessalonian Churches?  Where, indeed, are they all?  They departed from the Word of God.  They were proud of their bishops, and synods, and ceremonies, and learning, and antiquity.  They did not glory in the true cross of Christ.  They did not hold fast the Gospel.  They did not give Jesus His rightful office, or faith its rightful place.  They are now among the things that have been.  Their candlestick has been taken away.  But all this time the true Church’s has lived on.     Has the true Church’s been oppressed in one country?  It has fled to another.  Has it been tried on and oppressed in one soil?  It has taken root and flourished in some other climate.  Fire, sword, prisons, fines, penalties, have never been able to destroy its vitality.  Its persecutors have died and gone to their own place, but the Word of God has lived, and grown and multiplied.  Weak as this true Church’s may appear to the eye of man, it is an anvil which has broken many a hammer in times past, and perhaps will break many more before the end.  He that lays hands on it, is touching the apple of Gods eye.   The promise of our text is true of the whole body of the true Church’s.  Christ will never be without a witness in the world.  He has had a people in the worst of times.  He had seven thousand in Israel even in the days of Ahab.  There are some now, I believe, in the dark places of the Roman Catholic and Greek Churches, who, in spite of much weakness, are serving Christ.  The devil may rage horribly.  The Church’s may in some countries be brought exceedingly low.  But the gates of hell shall never entirely prevail.     The promise of our text is true of every individual member of the Church’s.  Some of Gods people have been brought very low, so that they despaired of their safety.  Some have fallen sadly, as David and Peter did.  Some have departed from the faith for a time.  Many have been tried by cruel doubts and fears.  But all have gotten safely home at last, the youngest as well as the oldest, the weakest as well as the strongest.  And so it will be to the end.  Can you prevent tomorrows sun from rising?  Can you prevent the tide in the channel from ebbing and flowing?  Can you prevent   the planets moving in their respective orbits?  Then, and then alone, can you prevent the salvation of any believer, however feeble--of any living stone in that Church’s which is built on the rock, however small or insignificant that stone may appear.     The true Church’s is Christs body.  Not one bone in that mystical body shall ever be broken.      The true Church’s is Christs bride.  They whom God has joined in everlasting covenant, shall never be put asunder.      The true Church’s is Christs flock.  When the lion came and took a lamb out of Davids flock, David arose and delivered the lamb from his mouth.  Christ will do the same.  He is Davids greater son.  Not a single sick lamb in Christs flock shall perish.  He will say to His Father in the last day, I have not lost one of those you gave me.      The true Church’s is the wheat of the earth.  It may be sifted, winnowed, buffeted, tossed to and fro.  But not one gain shall be lost.  The tares and chaff shall be burned.  The wheat shall be gathered into the barn.      The true Church’s is Christs army.  The Captain of our salvation loses none of his soldiers.  His plans are never defeated.  His supplies never fail.  His roll call is the same at the end as it was at the beginning.  Of the men that marched gallantly out of England a few years ago in the Crimean war, how many never came back!  Regiments that went forth, strong and cheerful, with bands playing and banners flying, laid their bones in a foreign land, and never returned to their native country.  But it is not so with Christs army.  Not one of His soldiers shall be missing at last.  He Himself declares They shall never perish.     The devil may cast some of the members of the true Church’s into prison.  He may kill, and burn, and torture, and hang.  But after he has killed the body, there is nothing more that he can do.  He cannot hurt the soul.  When the French troops took Rome a few years ago, they found on the walls of a prison cell, under the Inquisition, the words of a prisoner.  Who he was, we do not know.  But his words are worthy of remembrance.  Though dead, he still speaks.  He had written on the walls, very likely after an unjust trial, and a still more unjust excommunication, the following striking words, Blessed Jesus, they cannot cast me out of Your true Church’s.  That record is true.  Not all the power of Satan can cast out of Christs true Church’s one single believer.         The children of this world may wage fierce warfare against the Church’s, but they cannot stop the work of conversion.  What did the sneering Emperor Julian say, in the early ages of the Church’s, What is the carpenters son doing now?  An aged Christian made answer, He is making a coffin for Julian himself.  But a few months passed away, when Julian, with all his pomp and power, died in battle.  Where was Christ when the fires of Smithfield were lighted, and when Latimer and Ridley were burnt at the stake?  What was Christ doing then?  He was still carrying on His work of building.  That work will ever go on, even in troublesome times.     Fear not, beloved brethren, to begin serving Christ.  He to whom you commit your souls has all power in heaven and earth, and He will keep you.  He will never let you be cast away.  Relatives may oppose.  Neighbors may mock.  The world may slander and sneer.  Fear not!  Fear not!  The powers of hell shall never prevail against your soul.  Greater is He that is for you, than all they that are against you.     Fear not for the Churches of Christ, my brethren, when ministers die, and saints are taken away.  Christ can ever maintain His own cause, He will raise up better and brighter stars.  The stars are all in His right hand.      Leave off all anxious thought about the future.  Cease to be cast down by the measures of statesmen, or the plots of wolves in sheep’s clothing.  Christ will ever provide for His Own Church’s.  Christ will take care that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.  All is going on well, though our eyes may not see it.  The kingdoms of this world shall yet become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ.                       Allow me now to say a few words of practical application of this sermon.  I speak to many, whom I speak to for the first time.  I speak, perhaps, to many whom I speak to for the last time.  Let not this service conclude without an effort to press home the sermon on each heart.     1. My first word of application shall be a question.  What shall that question be?  How shall I approach you?  What shall I ask?  I ask you, whether you are a member of the one true Church’s of Christ?  Are you in the highest, the best sense, a Church man in the sight of God?  You know what I mean.  I look far beyond the Church of England.  I speak of the Churches built upon the rock.  I ask you, with all solemnity--Are you a member of that one Church’s of Christ?  Are you joined to the great Foundation?  Have you received the Holy Spirit?  Does the Spirit witness with your spirit, that you are one with Christ, and Christ with you?  I beseech you, in the name of God, to lay to heart this question, and to ponder it well.     Take heed to yourselves, dear brethren, if you cannot give a satisfactory answer to my inquiry.  Take heed, take heed, that you do not make shipwreck of faith.  Take heed, lest at last the gates of hell prevail against you, the devil claim you as his own, and you be cast away for ever.  Take heed, lest you go down to the pit from the land of Bibles, and in the full light of Christs Gospel.     2. My second word of application shall be an invitation.  I address it to all who are not yet true believers.  I say to you, Come and join the one true Church’s without delay.  Come and join yourselves to the Lord Jesus Christ in an everlasting covenant not to be forgotten.  Come to Christ and be saved.  The day of decision must come some time.  Why not this very evening?  Why not today, while it is called today?  Why not this very night, before the sun rises tomorrow morning?  Come to Him, whose I am, and whom I serve.  Come to my Master, Jesus Christ.  Come, I say, for all things are now ready.  Mercy is ready for you, heaven is ready for you, angels are ready to rejoice over you, Christ is ready to receive you.  Christ will receive you gladly, and welcome you among His children.  Come into the ark, the flood of Gods wrath will soon break upon the earth, come into the ark and be safe.     Come into the life-boat.  The old world will soon break into pieces!  Do you not hear the trembling’s of it?  The world is but a wreck stuck on the sandbar.  The night is far spent--the waves are beginning to rise--the winds are rising--the storm will soon shatter the old wreck.  But the life-boat is launched, and we, the ministers of the Gospel, beseech you to come into the life-boat and be saved.             Do you ask, How can I come, my sins are so many?  Do you ask how you shall come?  Hear the words of that beautiful hymn:    Just as I am: without one plea,    But that Thy blood was shed for me,    And that Thou bids me come to Thee,    O Lamb of God I come.     That is the way to come to Christ.  You should come, waiting for nothing, and tarrying for nothing.  You should come, as a hungry sinner, to be filled, as a poor sinner to be enriched, as a bad, undeserving sinner to be clothed with righteousness.  So coming, Christ would receive you.  Him that comes to Christ, He will not cast out.  Oh! come, come to Jesus Christ.     3. Last of all, let me given a word of exhortation to my believing hearers.   Live a holy life, my brethren.  Walk worthy of the Church’s to which you belong.  Live like citizens of heaven.  Let your light shine before men, so that the world may profit by your conduct.  Let them know whose you are, and whom you serve.  Be epistles of Christ, known and read of all men; written in such clear letters, that none can say, we do not know whether he be a member of Christ or not.     Live a courageous life, my brethren.  Confess Christ before men.  Whatever station you occupy, in that station confess Christ.  Why should you be ashamed of Him?  He was not ashamed of you on the cross.  He is ready to confess you now before His Father in heaven.  Why should you be ashamed of Him?  Be bold.  Be very bold.  The good soldier is not ashamed of his uniform.  The true believer ought never to be ashamed of Christ.     Live a joyful life, my brethren.  Live like men who look for that blessed hope--the second coming of Jesus Christ.  This is the prospect to which we should all look forward.  It is not so much the thought of going to heaven, as of heaven coming to us, that should fill our minds.  There is a good time coming for all the people of God--a good time for all the Churches of Christ--a good time for all believers--a bad time for the Impenitent and unbelieving--a bad time for them that will serve their own lusts, and turn their backs on the Lord, but a good time for true Christians.  For that good time, let us wait, and watch, and pray.         The scaffolding will soon be taken down--the last stone will soon be brought out--the top-stone will be placed upon the edifice.  Yet a little time, and the full beauty of the building shall be clearly seen.     The great master Builder will soon come himself.  A building shall be shown to assembled worlds, in which there shall be no Imperfection.  The Savior and the saved shall rejoice together.  The whole universe shall acknowledge, that in the building of Christs Church’s all was well done.   Transcribed by Tony Capoccia Bible Bulletin Board Box 314 Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022 Website: www.biblebb.com Email: tony@biblebb.com Online since 1986   Preface     For more than a century, J. C. Ryle was the leader of the evangelical party in the Church of England.  His policy was to encourage the conservative men to remain in the church’s rather than to abandon ship and leave the liberals to pursue their program unhindered.     J. C. Ryle is best known for his plain and lively writings on practical and spiritual themes.  His great aim in all his ministry, was to encourage strong and serious Christian living.  But Ryle was not naive in his understanding of how this should be done.  He recognized that, as a pastor of the flock of God, he had a responsibility to guard Christs sheep and to warn them whenever he saw approaching dangers.  His penetrating comments are as wise and relevant today as they were when he first wrote them.  His sermons and other writings have been consistently recognized, and their usefulness and Impact have continued to the present day, even in the outdated English of the authors own day.      Why then should expositions already so successful and of such stature and proven usefulness require adaptation, revision, rewrite or even editing? The answer is obvious.  To increase its usefulness to todays reader, the language in which it was originally written needs updating.     Though his sermons have served other generations well, just as they came from the pen of the author in the nineteenth century, they still could be lost to present and future generations, simply because, to them, the language is neither readily nor fully understandable.     My goal, however, has not been to reduce the original writing to the vernacular of our day.  It is designed primarily for you who desire toread and study comfortably and at ease in the language of our time.  Only obviously archaic terminology and passages obscured by expressions not totally familiar in our day have been revised.  However, neither Ryles meaning nor intent have been tired with.   Tony Capoccia   All Scripture references are taken from the HOLY BIBLE: NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (C) 1978 by the New York Bible Society, used by permission of  Zondervan Bible Publishers.    This updated and revised manuscript is copyrighted (C)1998 by Tony Capoccia.   All rights reserved.

By RICHARD N. OSTLING ASSOCIATED PRESS     PLANO, Texas (AP) - Conservative Episcopalians appeared on track to launch a new nationwide protest organization Tuesday as they began the second and final day of a meeting to launch their Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes.     The movement, which hopes for significant support from foreign Anglicans, was prompted by the decision of an Episcopal Church’s convention last August to approve openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. But Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, the group’s leader, told a Monday news briefing that Robinsons name wasn’t even mentioned during the first days deliberations.     Instead, he said, the 100 bishops, representing 12 dioceses and various conservative parishes in other dioceses, focused on building a united, orthodox and missionary Anglicanism in the United States.     The delegates at the meeting plan to complete an organizational charter for the network. They also are trying to produce a new theological statement based upon previous conservative platforms.     Organizers say the network is no schism but a church within a church whose followers will remain Episcopalians. One reason not to quit: most parishes would be forced to surrender their properties to the denomination.     Duncan said the Episcopal Church’s split from its own history when it endorsed Robinson, while the network upholds traditional Episcopal teaching, so who left?     Episcopal Church’s headquarters in New York has issued no formal statement about the meeting.     The Episcopal Church’s is the U.S. branch of the international Anglican Communion, in which many overseas churches  have protested Robinsons consecration. Some have broken fellowship with the Episcopal Church’s or its majority of pro-gay bishops.     The network hopes to become the American entity to which foreign Anglicans can relate. Canon Bill Atwood of the Texas-based Ekklesia Society, which aids churches in developing nations, said in a phone interview from Uganda that bishops who lead a majority of the world's Anglicans are preparing a joint statement to recognize the network.     A leaked memo from one network activist said the ultimate goal is a replacement jurisdiction aligned with world Anglicanism. A key leader said Sunday that the concept originated with the overseas Anglican leaders and decisions on replacement are up to them.   The chief business of the Plano meeting is to agree on an organizational charter to govern the network's early phase. Some delegates worked Monday night in hopes of also fashioning a theological declaration drawn from previous conservative documents.     Perhaps the touchiest issue is whether the network should send bishops to minister to conservative parishes in liberal dioceses, even without denominational permission.     The 12 dioceses at the heart of the network have 235,000 members, or a 10th of the nation's Episcopalians, though some parishioners in these dioceses hold liberal views.     The world Anglican leader, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, named a commission to report by Sept. 30 on solutions to the global division over the U.S. actions and a parallel dispute over Canadian church’s blessings for same-sex couples.     END

By David W. Virtue 1/19/2004     PLANO, TX-An orthodox Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes representing some 100 bishops, clergy and lay delegates from 12 Episcopal Church’s dioceses met for the first in time in an historic meeting here, with moderator Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan telling a press conference briefing that what will emerge is a united, orthodox and missionary Anglicanism. The Episcopal Church is currently being torn apart over recent decisions by the church’s General Convention to pass legislation affirming same-sex rites and for consecrating an openly non-celibate homosexual to the episcopacy. Five major Christian groups: Roman Catholic, Russian Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox have suspended relations with the ECUSA, with two expressing solidarity with orthodox Episcopalians. Nine Anglican provinces have suspended (Impaired and/or broken) communion with ECUSA over its moral actions.     We have a seven fold purpose: To bring the Network into existence, adopt a simple charter with provision for incorporation; to give hope to the orthodox of the Episcopal Church’s, with some sense that there is a future; to adopt a structure appropriate to the Networks early life; to elect the Networks officers; to begin to create and to live as a Network with Missions DNA; to prosper the cause of Adequate Episcopal Oversight and to renew international, ecumenical and North American Anglican relationships, said Duncan.     The Pittsburgh bishop has emerged as the leader of the biblically orthodox in ECUSA and is an Evangelical Anglo-Catholic in theology and ecclesiology. He is the convener of the Network.     Duncan was at pains to avoid language like schism, parallel jurisdiction or a church’s within a church’s at a press conference, telling some 30 media that V. Gene Robinsons name was never mentioned during the first day of the two-day meeting.     We want to renew Anglicanism in this part of the world. We have a vision for a united orthodox and missionary Anglicanism. This is what this meeting is about.     We worked on the articles of a draft charter including why we felt it was necessary to produce this charter. We will also be working on a theological statement, from several groups that have already produced such statements like the American Anglican Council (AAC), Forward in Faith North America (FIFNA) and the Anglican Church’s Dioceses of Parishes Advent statement.     Duncan said the 12 orthodox dioceses sent its bishop and four representatives, representing clusters from different parts of the country where there is hostility to what we stand for. He cited the need in such areas as New England, Southeast US and West Coast where there were small clusters of biblically orthodox believers in largely hostile dioceses.     Responding to a question about how this Network can work inside the Episcopal Church’s when clearly it could not hope to win politically, Duncan responded by saying that The Episcopal Church’s exceeded its own constitution and was functioning outside of its own authority but we are working within that constitutional framework.     Duncan acknowledged that there was disagreement about how we did this. We are faithful Episcopalians. We are staying within the constitution. We want to be in The Episcopal Church’s but not of it.     The other side split from its own history and the communion this summer [at General Convention], not us.     Asked what brought them to this point, Duncan replied that there were theological developments and a decision that 13 of our bishops took in November with a Memorandum of Agreement. We are about historic faith and order. Robinson is not the issue. He [Robinson] would not have been consecrated if there had been an agreed upon understanding of its [the church’s] constitution. The Episcopal Church can't do that it must come back.     Duncan said 11 of the 12 bishops were there; the 12th Bishop Terence Kelshaw from the Diocese of the Rio Grande could not be present but sent a full voting delegation.     The conference is being held at the 2,000-member Christ Church’s, Plano parish under the rectorship of Canon David Roseberry.     END

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’s. 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’s....We are not leaving anything or going anywhere¦ We have said from the beginning that we intend to be the Church’s.  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’s within the Church’s 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 the 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’s - 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’s by schism, but hasten to deliver her from schisms and divisions.     And many centuries later, Richard Hooker wrote, [capitalizations are Hooker’s.   Laws touching Matter of Order are changeable, but the Power of the Church’s; 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’s 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’s 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’s, 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 criteria 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’s 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.   *****

Australian News Service   The Anglican Church of Australia faces a major change of direction in the wake of Archbishop Peter Carnley’s announcement this week 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. The most senior contenders for the position, Archbishop of Adelaide Dr. Ian George, and Archbishop of Melbourne Peter Watson, are set to retire in the next few years.     The church’s other senior bishop, Archbishop of Brisbane Dr Phillip Aspinall, has only been in the job for two years, but could be a compromise candidate.     In a strange twist, Dr Jensen is almost certainly guaranteed support from two wings of the church’s - the low church’s evangelicals and the high church’s Anglo-Catholics.     The two wings have come together on a number of issues in past years, most notably opposition to the ordination of women clergy and the leadership of homosexuals in the church.     In essence, the evangelicals see women clergy as being contrary to the Bible and the Anglo-Catholics see them as not in keeping with the long-standing, God-inspired traditions of the church.   Both have also been critical of liberal elements in the church’s accepting homosexual clergy and gay marriage.   The Primatial Election Board comprises all 23 diocesan bishops, as well as 12 clergy and 12 lay people elected by the General Synod to be held later this year.     At the last election in 2000, Dr Carnley won narrowly from former Archbishop of Sydney Harry Goodhew.   Then Archbishop of Brisbane Peter Hollingworth was eliminated on the third of four ballots, and Dr Carnley defeated Archbishop Goodhew by 24 votes to 17 in the final ballot.   Archbishop Goodhew had received the most votes of all candidates in the first two ballots, but it was believed his imminent retirement influenced voters in the end.   With a number of key changes to the bishop’s frontbench in the past two years, the vote is likely to have shifted away from the moderate rump of the churches.   Handing leadership of the Australian Anglican Church’s to Dr Jensen, who was elected Archbishop of Sydney in June 2001, could have far-reaching consequences.     A profile posted on his website quotes him as saying: Our fundamental aim should be to address the secular challenge by providing flourishing Bible-based, gospel-centred, people-nurturing churches in as many places as possible.   Moves to incorporate women into leadership, including women bishops, embrace changes in secular society and extend a friendlier welcome to homosexuals - all issues championed by Dr Carnley - are likely to flag.   But, given recent national church’s life statistics, which show strong growth in the so-called happy-clappy churches which feature strongly in Sydney, Dr Jensen could in fact lead the churches to renewal.   As national leader, he could also be influential in the world-wide Anglican Communion, which is struggling to remain united in the face of difficult issues.     In the lead-up to the 2005 primatial elections, the churches will need to consider what sort of future it wants and what sort of leadership it needs to thrive in that future.

The parishioners are responding to support for an openly gay leader   BY ALBERTA LINDSEY TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER January 17, 2004     Some Virginia Episcopalians, angered by actions the denomination has taken in support of homosexuals, are showing their displeasure by cutting back on donations and pledges. Giving to the Diocese of Virginia, the largest in the Episcopal Church’s USA, is about $230,000 short of the dioceses $4 million-plus budget for 2003, said the Rt. Rev. Peter James Lee, the dioceses bishop. In addition, pledges for the 2004 year are running about 18 percent behind last year at this time, he said. The Rt. Rev. David C. Bane Jr., bishop of the Diocese of Southern Virginia, said church’s members pledges are coming in slower than usual.   Church’s pledge to the diocese based on what members pledge to their churches.   A great deal of our budget is being prepared with a pencil instead of a pen, Bane said. We have set priorities as best we can, but there probably will be a couple months before we will know what we have. We are continuing with our mission and ministry.     At the Episcopal Church’s General convention last summer in Minneapolis, the Rev. V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest who had been living with another man for 13 years, was confirmed to be the bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire. Lee voted for Robinson’s confirmation. Lee said at the time that Robinson was selected by the people of New who knew he was gay. Lee said he thought he should respect the Diocese of New Hampshire’s decision. Bane, on the other hand, voted against Robinson’s confirmation. Lee and Bane lead dioceses that are largely traditional.   They do not bless same-sex unions and do not ordain noncelibate gay or lesbian priests. Still, they have received phone calls, e-mails and comments from parishioners angry over the general convention’s confirmation of a gay bishop. William H. Goodwin Jr. denied a rumor circulating in some Episcopal churches that he and his wife, Alice, are withdrawing a matching grant they gave the Virginia diocese in 2000 to start new churches.     The Goodwins are members of St. Stephens Episcopal Church’s in Richmond. Goodwin said yesterday that he and his wife pledged $5 million to the diocese to be paid over five years. We will honor our pledge.     We have always honored our pledges, he said. We indicated at the time that we might pledge another $5 million. We probably will not renew that. We don’t necessarily agree with the bishop on his vote to confirm Robinson.     Some churches are telling parishioners to write on their checks if they do not want their contributions to go to the diocese or to the Episcopal Church’s USA, said the Rev. John A.M. Guernsey, rector of All Saints Episcopal Churches in Woodbridge.   Restricted money will be given to mission work, he said.   We will still give away 43 percent of our budget. We are not withholding  money from the diocese and spending it on ourselves, Guernsey said. This is not aimed at Bishop Lee personally. People just have strong feelings of grief and disappointment with the way he voted, Guernsey said. Lee said he hopes no churches split from the denomination.     The American Anglican Council, a conservative organization within the  Episcopal Church’s, may provide an alternative for unhappy Episcopalians. It's a network of churches that will support one another, Lee said. If people don’t want their donations to go to a diocese, Lee hopes they will look at other ministries where they can continue to participate with conscience.   The council is a part of the Diocese of Virginia and the Episcopal Church’s, said the Rev. Jeffrey Fishwick, rector of Christ Episcopal Churches in Charlottesville and a council member. One thing the council is looking at, Fishwick said, is to have a church pick a different bishop if they don’t like the views of their current bishop. Christ Episcopal 2004 budget will stay the same as its 2003 budget, which is $725,000, Fishwick said. Staff is not getting a raise. We have done well in previous years.   There are good seasons and not-so-good seasons, he said. St. James's Episcopal Churches in Richmond also will keep a flat budget for 2004, said the Rev. Randy Hollerith, rector. Money pledged to last year's $1.4 million budget is still coming in, he said. I’m hoping we will be no lower than that, Hollerith said. Fewer than 10 families have left St. Jamess because of the general convention’s actions, he said. But each has been very, very painful, Hollerith said.   St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in downtown Richmond is discontinuing its women’s prison ministry. The stock market rather than decreased contributions is to blame, said the Rev. Robert Hetherington, the rector. The church runs a halfway house for women who have been released from prison. Four women currently live there, Hetherington said.     The house, which is to close March 31, is being financed though St. Paul’s investment income and grants. The grants also are running out. Efforts to find someone to take over the program have failed, he said. Some churches are trying to put last summer’s general convention behind them and go on with the work of the churches.   At Christ Church’s, we have decided we cant be paralyzed by this one issue, Fishwick said of the Charlottesville church’s. Its time to get on with the greater mission of the church’s. We are all fired up about our mission and the things God is doing here.     END

By MARK I. PINSKY Orlando Sentinel 1/17/2004   Early in this presidential election year, the Republican Party faithful are already rolling up their sleeves - and passing the collection plate. In church social halls, they are raising money for voter registration, issue advertising and Christian scorecards, which rate candidates on their positions on key cultural issues such as abortion and homosexuality. By contrast, there is little activity at the other end of the ideological spectrum. Left- wing religious efforts at political mobilization - where they exist - seem puny, aged and marginalized. After decades of riding popular social movements such as civil rights, the left splintered and now seems unable to regroup. Conversely, the GOP has co- opted the support of religious voters by focusing their attention on cultural and lifestyle issues - such as gay  marriage.   On economic issues, another mainstay of the left, the outlook is no brighter. Unless they are directly affected, people in the pews seem unwilling to grapple with economic disparity and job losses, which defy simple solutions.   Despite the loss of 3 million jobs since 2001 and falling retirement and investment portfolios, they are more likely to object to teaching Darwin in the classroom than to struggling in an economy increasingly based on survival of the fittest.   The poll numbers are ominous for Democratic candidates, who seem to have written off voters with strong religious convictions. A survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that nearly two-thirds of Americans who attend religious services at least once a week vote Republican. For those who say they seldom attend a house of worship, that figure is reversed: Two-thirds vote Democratic. Though preachers don't pick presidents in America, for at least 150 years they have helped set the political agenda.     Thundering from pulpits, mobilizing congregants, religious activists in the 19th and early 20th century helped end slavery; supported women’s suffrage; brought about Prohibition; and supported the rights of workers to organize into trade unions. More modern inheritors of this social gospel were also vigorous agents of change and resistance, propelling the civil-rights and anti- Vietnam War movements. As recently as the 1960s and 1970s, left-wing religion was a  force to be reckoned with. We had the feeling that we were getting somewhere, recalls the Rev. William Sloane Coffin, former chaplain at Yale University and one of the patron saints of mainline religious activism.     We criticized American practice in the name of American ideals. But today liberal religion is seen as a spent force, says Mark Tooley, a researcher for the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a conservative Washington, D.C., think tank. The religious left comprised denominational leaders and tended to be elite, as opposed to grass roots, he says.     Today’s religious right is younger and more vigorous, drawing its support from growing charismatic and nondenominational churches. The religious left was mobilized and excited by the civil-rights movement and by the anti-Vietnam War movement, and has had difficulty finding equally passionate causes to replace those, he says. The religious right has abortion, homosexuality and church’s-state issues that have energized them over the past 25 years.     There’s no sign that any of these issues are going to go away anytime soon.   Evangelicals who previously voted Democratic because of economic issues are trending Republican because of cultural issues, Tooley says. But at the same time, most of those people are still, by and large, not activists by nature.   They are largely middle-class, suburban people who are not drawn to the same kind of economic wedge issues that would excite the religious left or liberal evangelicals. Nor are they willing to follow their spiritual leaders on other issues. For instance, opposition to the death penalty, globalization and the Iraq war by Roman Catholic bishops and mainline Protestant leaders has failed to generate grass-roots support.     There are a variety of explanations for the virtual collapse of the religious left in America. Some believe its members never recovered from the divisive period of the 1970s, when the movement split into identity politics. After working together to break down old barriers, the unified movement headed in diffuse directions: affirmative action, feminism, gay rights and multiculturalism.   Others think the left was simply outmaneuvered and outorganized by the right.   Savvy religious conservatives decided it was a mistake to see political involvement as something unclean for so many years, conceding the field to liberals by default. And the perceived excesses of the 1960s galvanized conservative  Christians into action. Experts say the eclipse of the religious left by the religious right also may reflect the decline of mainline denominations and the rise of evangelicals in the 1980s - both politically and theologically. For many old activists, this is the winter of their discontent.   Skeptics say the cold reality is that you can’t build a mass political movement on nostalgia. Americans today live in a high-stress, fiercely competitive work environment, which tends to reinforce a certain degree of self-centeredness. No Democratic candidate or liberal religious leader has offered a credible plan for reversing globalization or even ameliorating its impact. Much of the social safety net was eliminated during the boom years of the 1990s.   With no simple answers to big problems, there is a pervasive feeling of powerlessness - and frustration. In November, a group of liberal and moderate religious leaders from mainline denominations announced the formation of a new organization that is trying to fill the gap, calling itself the Clergy Leadership Network. The group’s goal is to become what some called a Christian Coalition of the left. Founders include Coffin and the Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, former  general secretary of the National Council of Churches.     They are a Who’s Who of veterans of the civil-rights and anti-Vietnam War movements. The Rev. Albert Pennybacker, a Disciples of Christ minister, heads the  new organization. Backers say they want to offer an alternative to the partisan God embraced by the GOP, and to turn their loose-knit group into a coalition of conscience. The odds against the new group are long. I don’t think its going to go very far, says Tooley. Its leaders are largely retired, mainline Protestant leaders.   It would have better prospects if it had enlisted pastors of large black churches, or a few liberal evangelical pastors or more Catholic clergy and bishops. It just doesn’t seem to have plugged into the more dynamic and growing parts of American religion. Still, there are faint signs of life - and youth - in the religious left, according to Jim Wallis, of the Washington, D.C.-based Sojourners community. Founded in 1971, the group is a Christian ministry whose mission is to proclaim and practice the biblical call to integrate spiritual renewal and social justice. Wallis considers himself a theological conservative, pro-life evangelical - and a radical social activist. Unlike many evangelicals, he believes that religious concern for the poor and the powerless should be motivate by justice, not by charity.   Wallis says he has many requests from young evangelicals to join his community, which focuses on economic and social justice. When he and others like him, including Tony Colo, another radical evangelical, carry their message to heartland churches, the response is positive, he says.     It may be the case that the baton of social justice has passed from liberal, mainline Christianity to evangelicals. I agree that liberal religion is in decline, but I don’t agree that social justice is in decline in the church’s, says Wallis. The problem with most mainline denominations, he says, is more theological than ideological. If you don't have a real Bible- based, Jesus-centered faith, then all you have is upper- middle-class, affluent Americans who are  not going to be your primary constituency for social justice, he says.   In battles around the country for a living wage, mainline ministers make a political mistake when they frame the debate in secular terms, talking about fairness. A more effective strategy, Wallis says, is to rally evangelicals with verse from the Bible, especially prophets such as Isaiah, who spoke out forcefully for fair payment for those who labor. However, there is little evidence so far that even that strategy moves believers.     END

The Presiding Bishop sees the denominations current path as the only way--because its truthful.   Interview by Deborah Caldwell - Beliefnet.com   Since last summer, Frank Griswold, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church’s, has been in the vortex of his denominations controversy over its election of an openly gay bishop. Yet during the church’s August convention and into the fall, Griswold has remained out of the limelight.     In the last few weeks, dissident members of the church’s--those opposed to the church’s liberal stance on homosexuality--are increasingly threatening to circumvent the bishops authority in order to replace the Episcopal Church’s with conservative leadership. This week Griswold sat down to talk with Beliefnet.     During an interview in his New York office, Griswold said he receives frequent private letters of support from bishops around the country and the world--including those who--publicly--strongly oppose the church’s actions. He said secrecy is the devils playground, suggesting that those who want to accommodate homosexuality behind the scenes while publicly condemning it are the ones encouraging sexual aberrance. He disputed the claim by conservatives that Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams supports their actions and suggested that conservatives are fighting Griswold’s proposal--to be discussed by the denominations bishops at a March meeting--to accommodate their needs because, paradoxically, it is workable. He believes conservatives want to keep the fight going. NOTE: The full text of the story can be found at the following link.     The call to accountability:  the parable of the AMiA   by: Ephraim Radner     One of the most egregious failures of the ECUSAs recent General Convention, and of the many of the leaders and bishops engaged in its decisions, has been their demonstrated rejection of Christian accountability as an essential virtue defining the life of the institutional church’s.  The actions of General Convention itself, in consenting to a non-celibate gay mans election as a bishop and in affirming the legitimacy of local same-sex blessings around the church’s, and subsequent actions by the Presiding Bishop and other bishops and dioceses in affirming these decisions, have all deliberately repudiated the constraining power of the common mind, pleas, admonitions, and moral persuasions of both the Episcopal Church’s past commitments, her traditions and historic foundations, and her brothers and sisters in the Anglican Communion around the world.     The world stands and wonders, as do many Episcopalians, what then are you accountable to, if not to the authorities of your common life? The rejection of Christian accountability -- mutual, charitable, ordered, and founded in the demands of Christs own Body -- represents one of the great assaults upon the promises of God in our age.      The press to ecclesial anarchy characterizes a common rebellion, in which we are all complicit. The current unraveling of the Anglican Communion, and the disintegration of the ECUSA itself stands as a judgment upon our shared desire to dispense with being held accountable and calling others to a reciprocal posture of responsibility.     In view of this spreading failure, it is important at least to note that a faithful response to its evangelical ravages cannot be to embrace some alternative autonomy and to add to the overturning of structures that hold us answerable to each other as a communion, however tottering they may now seem.   The case of the AMiA (The Anglican Mission in America) represents an exemplar of succumbing to autonomy’s encouragement and to communal accountabilitys subversion, all in the genuine desire to protest autonomy’s attack upon the Christian faith.   Having rightly identified the spiritual dangers of a disintegrated evangelical witness within ECUSA, and of the weakening of the historic faith and order that ought to be binding American Anglicanisms life with the larger Communion, the AMiA chose to move unilaterally to set up alternative parish and episcopal structures, only tenuously tied to and approved by a tiny minority of leaders of the larger Anglican Communion and positively rejected by most orthodox Primates, and to call this a form of testimony against the failures of the Episcopal Church’s.       The clear problem in this response was that it set out to address ECUSAs rejection of Christian accountability through a process that itself refused to be held accountable to anyone else.  The fruit of this project has, predictably, been to hasten the demise of the historic faith and order of Anglicanism in the United States altogether, a process whose ill effects are seeping into the international community itself.     To take but a local example, let us consider what took place in Colorado. In this moderately conservative diocese, already struggling three years ago to maintain some center of evangelical witness, the AMiA recruited and encouraged the defection of at least 15 clergy from ECUSA, and ended by splitting 9 congregations (closing one altogether).   All of these clergy and congregations were in fact conservative in their commitments and life. Whether deliberately or not, the process involved in these splits proved divisive amongst friends and colleagues, led to mutual accusations and recriminations, and fostered a deep sense of mutual mistrust and even betrayal among former allies in the faith.        In the midst of these discussions and arguments, meetings and counter-meetings, to what authority could one appeal?  Not to the local bishop, of course, whose theological leadership was in dispute;  not to existing bishops within the AMiA, because initially they had none in America, and were acting under the self-appointed direction of concerned priests ;  not to the common mind of the Anglican Communion, whose body of Primates, among the conservative as much as anyone, refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the AMiAs self-ordering.  And when the AMiA next chose to consecrate their own bishops, the question of self-justification was embodied in a process by definition of  ecclesial and episcopal self-invention.     The fall-out in Colorado was predictable and, in many instances, devastating.  The voting ranks of conservative clergy were depleted, conservative congregations were debilitated, and in several cases their clergy replaced with non-orthodox priests.  Further, the image of the conservative witness was, in the eyes of moderates and other conservatives, deeply tarnished by what many regarded, rightly or wrongly, as deceit, manipulation, and the self-promoting tactics of AMiA leaders. In the space of 2 years, Colorado went from being a mildly conservative diocese, to being one with an effective liberal majority in terms of leadership and direction.       There is no question but that the current ability of conservative clergy and laity to stand as a force of orthodox confession in the diocese is not only severely weakened, but considered fruitless by most, in large part because of the wreckage left by the AMiAs pursuit of the autonomous in order to punish autonomy.   It is not clear what the force of the AMiAs own evangelistic witness is within the state, but it is not certainly visible as an alternative example of clarion success.     On a wider scale, the AMiAs effect on the dynamics of Communion decision-making are no more constructive.  The AMiAs episcopal consecrations flew in the face of agreements made between Global South Primates and leaders earlier at Kampala, and there was felt by many around the world who were sympathetic with the doctrinal concerns of the group a deep sense of betrayal and division.  What was viewed therefore as a refusal by the AMiA leadership and supporters to abide by the common mind of the Communions sympathetic leadership - that is, a refusal to be held accountable - ended by rupturing trust among many Global-South Primates, and ruined the image of conservative/orthodox witness within the Communion in the eyes of more moderate leaders, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, whose advisors have explicitly described the AMiA as a retreat into the impossibly autonomous.  This remains the case, and stands as one of the great obstacles to a forceful response to ECUSAs current rebellion.  There is a (mistaken) fear among some Primatial leaders, looking at what has happened with the AMiA, that decisive and courageous action now is equivalent to prideful self-assertion.     And all this for the same reasons as in the local compass of a diocese:  the experience of a rejected call to mutual and responsible accountability -- with all of the interior resentments involved in such an experience --  has made many people around the Communion abandon confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of conservative witness as a persuasive direction for others to follow.  In the name of maintaining Anglican unity in the truth, the AMiA has embodied practices of autonomous self-promotion to the detriment of communion, and thereby rendered suspect the very vision of a common faith and discipline that many have tried so hard to further.     Not all AMiA clergy or leaders, or certainly laity, can rightly be touched by this general evaluation - surely most are people of integrity of faith and vision, who made difficult choices, often sacrificial ones, for the sake of what they saw to be the substance of their vows before God.  But the general evaluation still holds because of the overall direction of leadership that has refused  to place its decisions within an arena of common accountability within the Communion, all of which encouraged and even upheld the many instances of perceived moral failure that mar the internal debates of Anglican conservatives now more than ever.  In all this, the AMiA represents, therefore, one aspect of ECUSAs and the Communions internal malaise.  It is a symptom of spiritual disease, not an instrument of healing.     This is a parable of warning.  Warning even against the paths we have already set down to follow.   Whatever happens to the Anglican Communion, or to Anglicanism within North America, or to individual Episcopalians who desperately seek some renewed clarity of witness to the Gospel that they can be sure is held in common with their church’s, the decisions and choices we make must be in favor of mutual accountability in Christ, and not against it.     This will not be easy, simply because the choices we make in testimony of the historic faith and order of the Christian Church’s will be opposed by some, perhaps by a local majority; and the temptation will be to press our testimony into a realm of individual freedom, cut loose from the constraints of blasphemy and persecution we so acutely feel around us.      The danger, however, is that we will soon find ourselves floating in a sea of competing testimonies and freedoms, and mutually assaulting claims.  And the faith and order we set out to defend will be lost amid in the debris.   The Rev. Dr. Ephraim Radner is rector, Church  of the Ascension, Pueblo, Colorado