Archives

Midwest Conservative Journal Webster Groves, Missouri - Copyright 2004,   by Christopher S. Johnson 1/15/2004   Last Sunday at Washingtons National Cathedral, on the occasion of the celebration of the Baptism of Our Lord, Frank Griswold delivered a sermon that demonstrated once again that whatever his religion is, it isn’t Christianity:     North Dakota nominates one bishop candidate by petition   N.D. EPISCOPAL DIOCESE: Candidate for bishop draws opposition   Associated Press   FARGO - Voters in North Dakotas Episcopal Diocese will have six candidates instead of five to choose from when they select a new bishop next month.     Three clergy and three lay persons nominated the Rev. Henry Thompson III of Coraopolis, Pa., through a petition process. He joins five others picked by a selection committee. None of those five candidates has directly expressed his views on the recent confirmation of the openly gay New Hampshire bishop, the Rev. Gene Robinson. Thompson disagrees with the confirmation of homosexual clergy but said it is important to work together.   The search committees lack of direct questions regarding homosexuality angered some members of the diocese, who used the petition process to nominate Thompson. Thompson had been  rejected by the search committee.   I think he’s a very well-rounded candidate, said the Rev. John Floberg, of Thompson. Floberg said he led the petition drive to give the diocese a broader range of candidates.   Donna Pettit, the search committee chairwoman, said she believes the committee came up with a list of qualified candidates.   I’m disappointed, she said. The committee worked very hard.   North Dakota Bishop Andy Fairfield, who strongly opposed the election of Robinson, retired in August.   The other five candidates to succeed him are the Rev. Christopher Chornyak, of Ellsworth, Maine; the Rev. George Martin, of Edina, Minn.; the Rev. Michael Smith, of White Earth, Minn.; the Rev. John Shepard of Spokane, Wash.; and the Rev. Peter Stebinger, of Bethany, Conn.     The election of the next bishop for the North Dakota diocese will be Feb. 7 at Fargos Gethsemane Cathedral. One candidate must receive a majority of votes, or the nomination and election process will start over.     END

Cautious Optimism for Jan. 27   by Louis Victor Priebe Washington Correspondent   WASH., DC,  Jan. 13 An upcoming Public Broadcasting System (PBS)  program featuring a debate on gay marriage with ECUSA gay Bishop Gene  Robinson taking the pro  position was assessed by a panel of concerned  Christians last week at the National Press Club.  Participants concluded  that, with cautious optimism, the program, narrated by Bryant Gumbel,  could be expected to reflect a balanced and fair assessment of the  controversial subject.    The January 27 program is scheduled to air at 9:00 pm EST on local PBS  affiliates and to feature excerpts from a debate taped on January 4 at  historic Christ Church in Philadelphia, founded in 1695 and site of  Benjamin Franklin’s grave.  The debate was between newly elected  homosexual ECUSA Bishop Vickie Eugene Robinson and Dr. Bob Wenz, vice  president for National Ministries of the National Association of  Evangelicals. Dr. Wenz reported that the hour-long program, Flashpoints USA, will  include three segments on the national motto One Nation Under God,  public display of the Ten Commandments and gay marriage. The other  segments were taped in Philadelphia at nearby Independence Hall  featuring Alabama Judge Roy Moore and Constitution Hall.  These  religious issues are certain to be raised during the 2004 Presidential  campaign, in the debate over the Federal Marriage Amendment Act and in  prominent court tests.   During the fast-moving 25-minute taping, Dr. Wenz said he was able to  make three important points: Homosexual sex is a counterfeit of what  God intended for human sexuality Homosexual behavior is outside of God’s  created order for procreation Marriage is a sacred institution between a  man and a woman, ordained by Almighty God and not to be altered   Robinson, Dr. Wenz reported, maintained the deviant liberal position  that the Bible is always open to interpretation by each generation.  Robinson studiously evaded such central topics as the nature homosexual  behavior with regard to actual practices and their consequences.   Dr. Wenz observed that If you are not truly objective, you can come up with  any conclusion you want depending on your revisionist bias at the outset  of an analysis.     Dr. Wenz said that he sought to convey what Biblically faithful  Christians are for, more than what we are against.  He underscored  that God’s word is definitive on the subject on homosexuality and that  homosexual behavior affronts reason and God’s intended role for humankind.   The assessing panel meeting at Washington’ s eminent National Press Club  included Rev. Martin H. Granger, president of Faith in the Family  International, Rev. Ralph Weitz, a pastor at Immanuel Bible Church in  Springfield, Virginia, Rev. Earle Fox, founder and president of Emmaus  Ministries and Allan D. Dobras, a diversely published Christian  researcher and author. They had initially expressed skepticism at the  hands of moderator Gumbel, whose broadcasting career has placed him in  an adversarial relationship with many biblical positions.   There’s no question about it, Dr. Wenz observed, Robinson is being  positioned as the national ˜gay Bishop™ spokesman, not just the  Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire. He said tolerance of anyone’s  behavior   regardless of its morality or its consequences  has  become the supreme value in the religion of revisionist religious  figures who advocate conformity to the secular culture.   Many questions were left unasked in Philadelphia due to limited time.  A transcript of the entire proceedings will be provided.  The assessment  panel’s participants said they hoped ˜set-ups™ for questions wouldn’t  reflect liberal bias and that editing would not juxtapose altered  questions with responses.     The group concluded that the macro issue being debated was Biblical  veracity and authority and that gay ordination and marriage were subsets  to it.   Participants concluded that, despite ECUSA™s dramatically  declining membership, what the denomination does has an important impact  on contemporary culture and all of Christendom.  The PBS program, they  felt, should help enlighten people on the importance of the topic.     Dr. Wenz had entered the debate well-prepared with Ten Principal  Messages as talking points. Although he did not have time to make all of  these points, they follow this article to help expand and amplify  important topics related to the issue of gay marriage , ordination and  other issues relevant to homosexuality.   Dr. Wenz said he plans to author an article entitled If I Were Your  Pastor focusing on Robinson’s behavior and his divisive role in the  Christian community and advising repentance and return to Biblical  standards.     Website for the National Association of Evangelicals is http://www.nae.net

Anglican Mainstreams leadership have given a fulsome welcome to the announcement that Canon Stephen Cottrell is to be the next Bishop of Reading, but is it not odd that they are welcoming the appointment of a man who is reported as holding a completely contrary view to theirs on the very issue which led to the formation of Anglican Mainstream, namely his support for the attempt to appoint Jeffrey John? It is true that the new bishop designate has a high profile commitment to evangelism and accepts the practical boundaries laid down by the House of Bishops Report Issues in Human Sexuality, but he has not committed himself to maintaining orthodox and biblical teaching on homosexuality. Indeed, his reported comments make it clear that he regards this as provisional: We need to listen to what God is saying, what the scriptures are saying. We need to listen to gay and lesbian people in our church - we need to listen to what the world says.   The substantive theological differences between Stephen Cottrell and Jeffrey John? both of whom are members of the liberal Affirming Catholicism group, do not seem to be of any great significance, yet the one is warmly welcomed while the other triggers the formation of an unprecedented international coalition.   Why should this be? Perhaps the reason why evangelicals managed to came together over the Jeffrey John episode was that it was a remarkably unsubtle appointment? the attempt to prefer a man with a track record as proponent of the gay/lesbian cause in a diocese with a strong evangelical presence. Stephen Cottrell represents a much more institutionally savvy way of doing things because he is theologically of a similar mold to Jeffrey John, but sails under an orthodox flag of convenience which has misled some into thinking he is actually an evangelical.   Anglican Mainstream has therefore got itself into an incoherent position. It claims to be upholding biblical truth, but in practice has shown that what really matters is the appearance of orthodoxy rather than the substance. It does not seem to matter what a bishop teaches, or fails to teach, so long as he observes the current institutional rules.   This is a view of Christian leadership which is clearly at variance with the New Testament requirement that those who exercise oversight should have the personal integrity of holding on to faith and a good conscience (1 Tim 1:19). In fact, this failure to follow through the biblical logic of their opposition to Jeffrey Johns appointment has left Anglican Mainstream vulnerable to the revisionist accusation of homophobia. Much has been made of the fact that Stephen Cottrell is a family man so it would seem that what you teach does not matter very much, but who you chose to share your bed with does.     That Anglican Mainstream has come? intentionally or not - to split off biblical teaching from biblical practice should not be a total surprise. There seems never to have been a recognition on their part that the Archbishop of Canterbury is himself a significant part of the problem because this is exactly what he has done sought to separate his ecclesiological practice from his personal (yet well publicised) views.   The bitter consequence for him was that he had to publicly abandon Jeffery John, a longstanding friend, for the sake of institutional unity; the bitter consequence for Anglican Mainstream will be that it loses its way in a marshland of ecclesiastical compromise unless it can quickly put its house in order.   The church I now lead, Christ Church Kidderminster, came into being as the outcome of a principled decision to disassociate from the spiritual authority of the current Bishop of Worcester, albeit a family man, who actively and openly supported the gay lesbian agenda and therefore rejected the authority of God’s Word which is the basis of his office.   Despite pressure to compromise from certain senior evangelicals, I have never regretted taking that stand and I am convinced that it is only when we take action on issues of belief and are willing to put issues of   faith before order that the Church of England will see the deep change it so urgently needs.     The Rev Charles Raven is the former vicar of St John the Baptist, Kidderminster, Worcestershire. He is now the vicar of Christ Church, Kidderminster.   *****

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 Henry’s 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 God’s 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 one’s 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 Adam's 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 Elizabeth’s 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 years 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. Marks lost 40 percent of attendance after Bishop Robinsons 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 number 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.     Its religious persecution, it’s very real, and it’s happening, and were trying to figure out how to help these churches, he said.   *****

A gay priest is still a priest a woman priestess has never been a priest   By Mary Ann Mueller Special Correspondent www.virtueonline.org August 28, 2025   The Anglican Communion is going apoplectic over the elevation of Cherry Vann to the Archbishopric of the Church in Wales just as it did in 2003 when Vicky Gene Robinson became the new bishop-elect in New Hampshire.   Article XXVI of the Thirty-Nine Articles clearly states that the unworthiness of the celebrant does not impact the efficaciousness of the Sacrament. The Grace of God still flows through because Christ is the High Priest in Whose Name and Authority the Sacrament is being celebrated on earth.   Article XXVI reads: “Of the Unworthiness of the Ministers, which hinders not the effect of the Sacrament – Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil have chief authority in the Ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ’s, and do minister by His commission and authority, we may use their Ministry, both in hearing the Word of God, and in the receiving of the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ’s ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God’s gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the Sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ’s institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.”   The Article also calls for such priests to be adjudicated for their open sinfulness and deposed – stripped of their orders.   “Nevertheless, it appertaineth to the discipline of the Church, that enquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences; and finally being found guilty, by just judgement be deposed.”   Does the Anglican Communion – albeit The Episcopal Church, the Church of England or the Church in Wales – follow the dictates of the Thirty-Nine Articles? No! Such “evil” men are elevated to the episcopate in the name of the unholy trinity of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI). Starting with Vicky Gene Robinson in the Episcopal Church.   Today there are six living out and proud homosexual bishops in the Episcopal House of Bishops: three sitting gay bishops Thomas Brown (X Maine); Jeffrey Mello (XVI Connecticut); Deon Johnson (XI Missouri); one lesbian bishopette – Bonnie Perry (XI Michigan); and two retired from the active bishopric – Mary Glasspool (New York assistant); and Vicky Gene Robinson (IX New Hampshire).   Homosexuality is a moral failing. That failing becomes a sin when acted upon. The late Bishop Thomas Ely, SSJE (XV Massachusetts) was a member of the religious order Society of St. John the Evangelist. And as such he took his monastic Vows of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience seriously. Even though he was gay, he remained celibate and did not act out his sexual urges but continued to live out his Vow of Chastity until death.   Bishop Robinson on the other hand, not only acts out on his homosexual urges and tendencies, he flaunts them plunging the Episcopal Church into chaos. He lived in what used to be called a “state of sin.” Unmarried couples also fell under that banner.   Today cohabitation – shacking up for either the straight or gay – doesn't even raise an eyebrow. That attitude is "Big deal, so what.”   Women's Ordination , on the other hand, is not a personal moral failing. It is an action which renders the Sacraments not just illicit but invalid.   The Church of Rome and Orthodoxy are striving mightily to hold the line against WO in their ranks.   When a Roman Catholic woman says she has been somehow “ordained” a Catholic priest, the Church of Rome steps in immediately to declare that “ordination” null and void and to excommunicate the new so-called “Catholic priest.”   It's not just the Catholic Church which bars women from the pulpit and the altar several Protestant denominations do too including: the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, the Wisconsin Synod Lutheran Church, the Presbyterian Church in America, the Evangelical Free Church, Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the American Baptist Association. Other non-Christian religious bodies, such as the Mormons, Orthodox Jews and Islam, also bar women from ministerial service.   Basically, Anglicanism started to fall in 1974 when the Philadelphia 11 were irregularly ordained. That became the camel's nose under the tent allowing the smoke of Satan to enter.   Only Baptism and Marriage can be validly celebrated by a priestess since any Anglican can baptize using water in the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; and it is the couple themselves – one man and one woman – who confer marriage upon each other through the recitation of their marriage vows. The minister is merely the official witness for the Church while offering the Church's blessing on the new union.   How a Sacrament is celebrated is important – very important.   The Eucharist using Coke and toast does not produce Holy Communion. Baptism in the name of the Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier while pouring beer over the baby's forehead does not cut it. The giving and receiving of rings between a same-sex couple is not a marriage made in heaven.   Five things are necessary to make the religious ritual a valid Sacrament or Sacramental Rite: the proper elements (bread and wine for Holy Communion); the proper words (the words of Baptism pronounced in the Name of the Triune God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit); the proper intention (desiring to remain married “unto death us do part” rather than participating in a simple marriage of convenience needed to secure a green card); the proper recipient (you can hold a dog under water until it quits kicking, and it is not baptized); and the proper minister (a woman is not the proper minister to celebrate the Service of Holy Communion; nor to ordain).   It is very grating to hear a female's voice pronounce the words of Consecration. To hear a woman say: “This is My Body” … “This is My Blood” … “Do this in remembrance of Me” is a huge disconnect. That voice does not match those Sacred Words.   Cherry Vann may be a deaconess. But she is not a priestess nor bishopette even if the Church in Wales elevated her to the primacy of the Welsh church.   The deaconess is a Scripturally based feminine order of ministry and service.   But, not of preaching and teaching. The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and the Reformed Episcopal Church (REC) have revived the ancient Order of Deaconesses.   The Apostle Paul writes: “I want this letter to introduce to you Phoebe, our sister, a deaconess of the Church at Cenchrea. Please give her a Christian welcome, and any assistance with her work that she may need. She has herself been of great assistance to many, not excluding myself.” Romans 16:1-2   Historically, depending on the English translation, Paul refers to Phoebe as a deaconess. Although, some translations call Phoebe a “deacon” and a “Servant of the Church.”   But Paul is adamant about women preaching and teaching in an ecclesial setting. They are called to a ministry of humble service.   In 1 Corinthians 14:34 he writes: “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.”   Then in 1 Timothy 2:12 Paul fleshes out: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.”   He then continues to instruct Timothy on the basic qualifications of being a bishop: “A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach …” (1 Timothy 3:2)   Paul was not thinking of Vicky Gene Robinson nor Cherry Vann when he fleshed out the qualifications for higher clerical office. He couldn't even foresee such a thing as “gay marriage” would become seemingly acceptable in the church.   Bishop Robinson left his one and only wife and “married” a man who was not his “wife.” They separated a decade ago as the bishop was retiring from his New Hampshire bishopric. The gay bishop's high-profile activity was just too much for the relationship to survive. Remember when Vicky Gene said he was looking forward to becoming a “June bride” as his gay nuptials approached in 2008?   Then, of course, Cherry Vann is not a husband. She can't be, she is a woman. But she is living in a “civil union” meaning the government sanctions her same-sex relationship, giving her the same legal rights as a married person would have, but the church has not put its imprimatur on her living arrangement in a lesbian household.   And Paul had already explained to Timothy in the second chapter of First Timothy that women are not allowed to teach or assume authority over men. So, the new Church in Wales primate is disqualified as a bishop on several aspects outlined in Paul's epistle to Timothy.   Other Episcopal bishops who fail to live up to Paul's teaching on bishops and their marital relationships include: Maine Bishop Thomas Brown, Connecticut Bishop Jeffrey Mello, Missouri Bishop Deon Johnson, Michigan bishopette Bonnie Perry and retired bishopette Mary Glasspool. All are in same-sex “marriages.” Something Paul would challenge.   Even the 1998 Lambeth Conference has declared that same-sex relationships are "incompatible with Scripture.” But that late 20th century Anglican teaching now falls on deaf ears and hardened hearts.   There is another major aspect of the Anglican embrace of WO.   Women’s ordination has thrown a monkey wrench into the Anglo-Catholic ecumenical movement. Before 1974 Anglicans were moving closer to inter-communion with the Church of Rome and the mutual recognition of Holy Orders within the Church Catholic.   ARCIC (1967) predates Pope John Paul II’s Pastoral Provision (1989) and Pope Benedict XVI’s Anglicanorum Coetibus (2009) which birthed the Anglican ordinariates.   Under the leadership of Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey and Pope Paul VI the Anglican – Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) was created and was making great strides in helping to heal the fractured Church Catholic and to bring about the unity that Christ so earnestly prayed for in John 17 on the night He was betrayed.   But, alas, that common unity cannot or will not happen now that women's ordination shattered the long sought for understanding of priestly ordination and episcopal ministry.   As a classically trained Jew Paul bases his understanding of the role of men and women in the church upon creation order in Genesis and the cause of Original Sin.   In 1 Timothy 2:13-14 Paul explains: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor."   Genesis 3:6 explains how sin first entered the world through Eve. “When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.” Then she enticed Adam: “She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.”   This is clearly seen in the postmodern worldly church. Women act emotionally. Men are more concrete in their thinking but can be easily swayed by a woman's wiles.   Priestesses and bishopettes sometimes quickly go off the narrow spiritual path in their attempt to be motherly. Making allowances for questionable activity and theology.   Women clergy are the push – the driving force – behind inclusive language, LGBTQ initiatives, and the DIE (diversity, inclusion and equality) propaganda.   WO is based not upon what Scripture teaches but it is grounded in the social gospel which erases the line of demarcation between men and women.   Basically, WO is a political and societal answer to a Scriptural and spiritual question.   Advocates of WO say that female clergy are necessary to fully promote “ecclesial unity,” to honor “feminine giftedness,” and to dismantle “patriarchal oppression.” In addition, Paul's first century prohibitions are not considered “relevant” in the postmodern 21st century.   As a result, the Church is slowly being feminized with the strength and masculinity of Christ and His Disciples being undermined and stripped away. Men and women are both made by God with set complimentary roles within the Church, in the home and in society.   But the female sex demands to be made equal, not complimentary to their male counterparts. If a man can be a truck driver, so can a woman. If a man can fly fighter jets, so can women. If a man can go to West Point to be trained as a soldier ready to go to war, so can a woman. If a man can be a priest, bishop or Anglican primate, so can women. Just ask Barbara Harris (Massachusetts suffragan) in 1989 and Katherine Jefferts Schori (XXVII PB) in 2006 and, now, Cherry Vann (Church in Wales) in 2025.   The traditional barriers are broken down and the stained-glass ceiling is shattered. And the entire Anglican Communion is suffering because of it. Members are fleeing for more traditional Scripturally-based denominations. Numbers are down. Churches are closing. Souls are being lost.   Today, in 2025, there are 156 bishopettes in 17 Anglican provinces spanning the Anglican Communion starting with Barbara Harris in 1989. WO has spread through the Anglican world like venom spreading from a snakebite.   However, Christian worship is not about elevating oneself. It is about worshipping God in spirit and in truth. It's about being willing to give up self-interest to glorify God and Him alone.   Three times Jesus, Himself, asks His followers to “deny yourself and take up your cross and follow Me.” He makes that request in Matthew 16:24, Mark 8:34, and Luke 9:23.   But with women in the priesthood and bishopric the focus is shifted from God to self. Regardless of the spiritual damage being done to other souls with the WO’s self-righteous attitude and the offering of empty sacraments.   The same self-righteous attitude is taken by the LGBTQ crowd. Just ask Vicky Gene Robinson. For him his homosexuality is paramount. He is gay first then he is an Episcopal bishop second. He preaches about gay-pride instead of the Gospel unless he tries to use the Holy Writ to justify his lifestyle. He, and others like him, champion their cause rather than proclaim the unvarnished truth of the unwavering Gospel message.   Both Vicky Gene Robinson and Cherry Vann fail to adhere to Jesus' demand of self-denial for the Kingdom’s sake.   In Robinson's case it's a personal moral failing which damages his soul. In Vann’s case it becomes a communal sin which drags others down with her to the detriment of their souls making WO a greater threat to the ecclesial Body of Christ than homosexuality.   Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas. She is a regular contributor to VirtueOnline

"Illustration by Owen Gent" Whoever the next archbishop of Canterbury will be, they face a legacy of scandal, doctrinal division and dwindling congregations.   By Tim Wyatt THE NEW STATESMAN August 29, 2025 For nine long months the Church of England has been, in the words of Matthew 9:36, “harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd”. In a deliberately quiet ceremony at Lambeth Palace in January, the 105th archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, laid down his crozier, the historic bishop’s staff modelled on a shepherd’s crook. Ever since, the marble throne of St Augustine in Canterbury Cathedral has lain vacant and the national Church, overshadowed by an abuse scandal, left leaderless.   The Church is at one of its lowest ever ebbs, somehow both fractious and listless. Seemingly never-ending abuse scandals, most notably the John Smyth affair that toppled Welby, have sapped morale and undermined the Church’s moral authority. Proposals to outsource its safeguarding to an independent body have only been partly approved by its governing body, the General Synod. Nearly two years after it introduced blessings for same-sex couples, the Church of England (CofE) remains riven by infighting and division over sexuality. The conservative and liberal wings that have long sat side by side, albeit uneasily, in this “broad church” have become more embittered and entrenched. And beneath it all sounds the drumbeat of decline: fewer worshippers, fewer vicars, closing churches, less money.   Linda Woodhead, a leading sociologist of religion, told me the over-riding impression among ordinary Britons towards the Church today is one of utter indifference. The average citizen, particularly those aged under 50, has had almost no contact with the Church. The percentage of the population that attends a Church of England service each week stands at just over 1 per cent. “The new archbishop of Canterbury is facing the most unchurched population ever,” she said. With falling CofE attendance, growth in other Christian denominations such as Pentecostalism and increasing multiculturalism more broadly, many are questioning whether the centuries-old ties between England and its established Church can now justifiably be upheld.   But others in the Church push back on this narrative of decay. Again and again you hear the idea that there are two Churches of England. There is the national Church: the squabbling Synod, the leaderless House of Bishops, the civil service at Church House in Westminster, busy with their strategies. And there is the local church: the village parson, the building where you were baptised and your parents got married, the local CofE primary school.   If the first is ignored or reviled, might the latter still retain some national affection, even offer a sense of community elsewhere lost from public life, despite its crumbling edges? The Bishop of Kirkstall, Arun Arora, who in a previous life was the Church’s director of communications, suggested that for all the “dislocation” at a national level, those who interact with the CofE in their daily life “generally come away from it with a positive appreciation”. Alison Coulter, a Synod member who also chairs the Church’s executive committee, the Archbishops’ Council, told me many feel more warmly towards their local vicar and church than towards the “faceless” national Church.   Can the CofE find popular appeal once more under a new archbishop of Canterbury? Does it even want to? These are questions that, for decades, the Church has tried and failed to answer. Will this time be any different?   However diminished the CofE may be, it retains the trappings of privilege and some vestige of political power. It remains the nation’s established church. Before he was brought low by the Smyth scandal, Welby crowned King Charles III before a global audience of millions, a year after he buried Queen Elizabeth II. Twenty-five of Welby’s colleagues still sit in the House of Lords. And yet the bishops no longer garner the attention they once did. The Bishop of London, Sarah Mullally – once the NHS’s chief nursing officer – has pledged to lead opposition to the assisted dying bill, but otherwise the Church plays less and less part in national politics.   For some, including Marcus Walker, reverend of London’s St Bartholomew the Great, this is a blessing. Walker’s congregation, which has included figures such as Michael Gove and Tom Holland, grit their teeth when bishops wade into politics, most notably attacking the Rwanda scheme as un-Christian. “When the Church is doing the job of a soft-left think tank, nobody’s going to pay attention to it,” Walker told me. Instead of struggling for relevance, he suggested, the CofE should lean in to its 2,000 years of tradition and mystery and focus on spiritual insight.   The question of which way the new archbishop should face divides the Church. Should they turn inwards to resolve its manifold problems, whatever the optics? Or focus on being pastor to the nation once more, rising above the Sturm und Drang of party politics to offer spiritual succour to Britain? There is a sense that neither would truly satisfy the restless members of the Church. The well-connected Old Etonian and former oil executive Welby enjoyed hobnobbing in Westminster, but he was also criticised for his efforts to remould the Church and often attacked for being excessively “managerial”. There is a palpable hunger for someone who could re-energise the languid institution and grab the nation’s attention once more.   Helen King, a Synod member and prominent pro-LGBT activist in the Church, said the weakening ties between England and its national Church could be rebuilt if the next archbishop got the “imagination of the nation”. “If you have someone who’s just very stale and boring, coming out with the platitudes and management-speak of the Church of England, that’s not going to excite anyone.” Arora told me Welby’s successor must find fresh conviction in the Church’s message, regardless of how it lands in 21st-century Britain. “Of course, whatever an archbishop of Canterbury says, there will be dissenters, internal and external. But what that can’t do is damage their confidence in the gospel, their confidence in the Church.”   The Bishop of Lancaster, Jill Duff, told me that she wanted an archbishop who was committed to the Church’s vocation – its “cure of souls” – but not at the expense of curing its many internal ills. It was no accident that St Paul included among his list of the spiritual gifts in one New Testament epistle that of administration. Gruelling governance meetings behind the scenes and the “hard yards” of sorting out dysfunctional bureaucracy are just as necessary as lofty national ambitions, she argued.   For Walker, the Church should be less focused on drawing in new congregants, and more focused on the congregants that already exist. It would also be nice to have an archbishop who liked the CofE, he said, instead of a “constant sneering at the kind of people who do go to church and a desperate desire to bring in the kind of people who don’t” – a jab at Welby’s enthusiasm for starting new, trendy types of church aimed at apathetic younger generations, such as a Chinese takeaway turned church in Rochdale. Above all, Walker longs for a head of the Church who would have “positive stories to tell about the enormous excitement that is Christ”, rather than spending their reign “delving into constant feuds about sex and sexuality”.   Such feuds have absorbed almost all the CofE’s energy since January 2023, when the bishops proposed services of blessing for gay couples for the first time. Although the doctrine on marriage would remain unchanged (it believes marriage is between a man and a woman), conservatives were outraged and have fought a furious and partly successful rearguard action to block the reforms. A series of bishops tasked with resolving the impasse have resigned in frustration at the refusal of both conservatives and liberals to find a compromise. The project staggers on towards what is supposed to be its denouement at a Synod gathering next February (the bishops are still figuring out what provision will be offered to recalcitrant conservatives and whether gay vicars will be allowed to marry outside the Church), but few expect this to draw a line under the saga. Most liberals are glum, expecting they will have to bank their meagre victories and move on. One pro-blessings bishop said he had reluctantly concluded “the progressives have lost”, and yet the atmosphere among conservatives is also one of defeat.   Nobody expects the next archbishop to make a significant difference to the intractable conflict. Duff, one of the most outspoken conservative bishops, was phlegmatic. Quoting a 19th-century bishop of New Zealand, she said if the Church cracked on with its main job of preaching the gospel, “just as a running water purifies itself of silt, so will error be purified”. Welby sought to settle the question once and for all, but dealing with division was “part of the job” Duff argued, and not something his successor should delude themselves into thinking they can resolve quickly: “Hoping it will go away is just unrealistic.” Without the two-thirds majority either side needs to decisively rewrite church teaching and settle the matter, the Church continues to stumble.   The permacrisis over sexuality is not simply distracting the Church from its other pressing problems, it’s also wearing down clergy and volunteers not signed up as partisans on either side. The image presented to outsiders is one of intractable and baffling division, even homophobic. “We come across as very obsessed with sex in a bad way, and unable to make a decision,” King said. “People don’t really see what the Church of England’s problem is.” If the Church was once considered too moralising by young people, today Gen Z is more likely to view it as actively immoral in its reluctance to unambiguously affirm LGBT relationships. Woodhead and others have argued no national church can survive in the long-term if its moral compass strays too far from that of the people it is supposed to serve.   Another, less publicised conflict lurks at the heart of the CofE. Its historical endowment fund has grown substantially, nurtured by a team of canny investors at its London HQ, to more than £11bn. But while the centre appears flush, regional dioceses are running at ever greater deficits. Most of the money used to pay for grassroots ministry still comes from parishioners’ donations, but as congregations dwindle, collection plates empty. There is growing anger from the “real” Church – the local parishes and bishops – many of whom are demanding the national Church transfer its billions to prop up local budgets. At present, money is handed out in tightly controlled grants, which bishops can only spend on new kinds of ministry (separate from the ancient parish network), not to subsidise declining rural churches. This is the legacy of Welby’s focus on innovation and new styles of church.   An energetic pressure group called Save the Parish, spearheaded by Walker, has been aggressively resisting the retrenchment imposed by the centre. But most bishops reject this dichotomy and insist the CofE can both invest in innovative ministry and support the parish. Those who control national financing have bridled at the calls to hand out millions of pounds with no conditions attached, as some bishops are now demanding. “We can’t just dole out money and everyone just spend it on what they fancy… chocolate biscuits after church,” scoffed the chair of the Archbishops’ Council, Alison Coulter, who sits on the grant-making committee. The Bishop of Lancaster told me her diocese had benefited from national grants, but neither clever strategy nor cash, she said, would save the CofE. That task remained God’s alone.   Behind the to and fro over money lies an unpalatable truth. For all its investing, strategy-building and experiments with new styles of worship, the Church has still not figured out how to reverse declining attendance and engagement. Should it continue to innovate and hope it eventually lands on the right course, or should it fall back on its centuries-old parish network and the familiarity of services and liturgies? Some of the contenders to succeed Welby have hinted they would like to tilt the scales towards traditional ministry, while others appear as continuity candidates.   The Church is keen to point to four years in a row of modest increases in attendance, although this is compared to the nadir of the pandemic, during which churchgoing fell by almost 60 per cent after places of worship closed their doors for the first time since the reign of King John. Barely one in 100 Englishmen and women went to an Anglican church last Sunday. Decades of stretching fewer and fewer clergy over more and more parishes has left parts of rural England almost vicar-less, alienating occasional worshippers, who no longer see a presence at the village fête or know who to approach about a christening.   Woodhead told me the shrinking Church ties in with a general sense that everything in Britain is rubbish these days. “Everything’s a bit crap, so no surprise really the archbishop’s a bit useless and had to be sacked, and no one wants to go any more, and there’s no local vicar.” The Church’s struggles are wearily familiar to many other British institutions: struggles to recruit talent, a lack of trust among the public it supposedly serves, ever-growing regulatory burdens, and relentless cost-cutting in the face of anaemic (or non-existent) growth.   Woodhead said she will judge the seriousness of the new archbishop by whether they’re honest about “managing decline”, or whether they persist in arguing revival is possible. For the pragmatists, the future of the CofE is not to be found in resolving the impasse over same-sex blessings, or unleashing its endowment, but in accepting a new, diminished role in the nation. As has happened in some Nordic countries, a national church can survive almost total secularisation, Woodhead argued, if it abandons the insistence that its members commit to full-fat, born-again Christianity. Why should the Church care what its adherents believe about the Bible or God, as long as they see the Church as their own and turn up for weddings? Unsurprisingly, this argument finds few friends among clergy and bishops. As nominal and fair-weather Christians have dropped away in recent decades, the CofE has only become more serious about faith, not less. The prospect of watering down Anglicanism on the chance this might appeal to an indifferent public holds little attraction.   Still, in many of my conversations about the future of the beleaguered Church, hope remained. Duff insisted she still finds an openness to her message among non-believers, rattling off anecdotes about sharing the gospel on trains and in shops with curious people. King said she remained optimistic, given the reserves of “passion and commitment” that remained even in a humbled CofE, but that the Church’s survival would depend on the choice of the new archbishop. “I think there’s already a death spiral, and I think this is the one where we can reverse the death spiral, if we get it right.”   The appointment, due to be announced in the coming weeks, falls at a pivotal moment for the Church of England. The next archbishop of Canterbury will set the course for the Church at a singularly precarious moment. Should it modernise to stay in touch with modern social mores, or double down on traditional values? Innovate new kinds of church, or focus on the ancient parish system? Centralise money at the centre, or entrust resources to local leadership? Focus on fixing internal strife, or prioritise reintroducing the national Church to an England that has almost forgotten it? Pulled in these different directions, the Church is in need of a leader with a clear sense of where it’s headed.   Make the right choice, and there may still be a way back for the Church, albeit to a smaller and humbler version of what it once was. But choose the wrong shepherd, and the flock may be lost for good.   Tim Wyatt’s newsletter “The Critical Friend” is on Substack

By Karolos Grohmann, THE INDEPENDENT August 28, 2025   Victims of abuse within the Church of England have revealed that the personal details of nearly 200 survivors were exposed in a significant data breach.   The leak originated from a compensation scheme established to support them.   This incident marks a fresh setback for the Church, which has been striving to rebuild public trust following a series of sexual abuse scandals and the resignation of Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby over his handling of a child abuse case in November 2024.   The Church, which serves 85 million Anglicans globally, approved an independent redress scheme for victims in February, alongside a major overhaul of its safeguarding structures.   According to The House of Survivors, a group founded by church abuse victims, the details of 194 individuals were included in an email sent late on Tuesday.   The email, dispatched by Kennedys Law, the firm managing the redress scheme, was sent to registered claimants, law firms, and Church officials, before being recalled minutes later.   Church of England has been working to restore trust after being hit by a series of sexual abuse cases and the resignation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby (right) over failures in handling a child abuse case (PA Archive) The leak reinforced "the very failures of safeguarding and care that the redress scheme was meant to address," The House of Survivors added.   The Church said it had been made aware of the "deeply regrettable data incident" and that Kennedys Law had taken full responsibility for the breach.   "We recognise the distress this has caused, particularly for survivors who trusted the scheme to handle their information with care and confidentiality," the Church said in a statement.   The law firm did not immediately respond to a request for comment.   A spokesperson for Britain's privacy watchdog, the Information Commissioner's Office, said it was aware of the incident and was assessing the information provided.   David Greenwood, a lawyer representing abuse victims, called on the Church to compensate those affected.   He said one of his clients, who did not wish to be identified, had lodged a complaint, saying: "I have a right to lifelong anonymity under the law. This protection has now been severely compromised through no choice of my own."   Rape Crisis offers support for those affected by rape and sexual abuse. You can call them on 0808 802 9999 in England and Wales, 0808 801 0302 in Scotland, and 0800 0246 991 in Northern Ireland, or visit their website at www.rapecrisis.org.uk . If you are in the US, you can call Rainn on 800-656-HOPE (4673)

By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter Tuesday, August 26, 2025   The co-founder of the largest free online encyclopedia in the world is signaling his plans to convert to Christianity after spending most of his adult life as a religious skeptic.   In a thread posted to X on Thursday, Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger announced his intention to “seek to be confirmed in early September into the Anglican Church of North America.” Sanger quipped that he was “fairly sure they’ll let me in.”   Sanger explained why he decided to join the Anglican Church, noting, “I attended a local ACNA church last Sunday, and I absolutely loved the liturgy, which I found deeply spiritual, as well as the fellowship.”   He added, “It helps that the liturgy is all on overhead projectors, and the acoustics are such that I could actually hear the sermon if I turned my hearing aids all the way up.”   Sanger, who spent most of his adult life as a religious skeptic, detailed his newfound embrace of Christianity in a February blog post on his personal website. While Sanger stopped believing in God as a teenager, he had spent the past two decades studying Christianity on his own time as he noticed growing anti-Christian sentiment in the United States.   After reading the Gospel accounts in February 2020, Sanger concluded that he does believe in God and needed to “pray to God properly.” He characterized his initial theological beliefs as “something like an Orthodox Christian faith” while acknowledging that he had “not yet adopted a church home” and was continuing to engage in intense research to determine which denomination of Christianity he wanted to join.   In a blog post published on Aug. 16, five days before he announced his plans to join the Anglican Church of North America, Sanger said he had narrowed his options down to three, including the Anglican Church of North America, the Evangelical Free Church of America and the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches. The Aug. 16 entry marked the third in a series of blog posts written by Sanger examining each of the Christian denominations.   Sanger identified the ACNA as “entirely consistent with my approach” because “they have been set up to be welcoming to a wide variety of Christians, while being firm on the fundamentals.”   He also stressed that he did “not want to be pressured by those who approach theology dogmatically and who have no sympathy with a systematic, careful approach to God’s own truth, one that leaves some questions answered.” He maintained that its “intellectual style” made the ACNA “more simpatico” with his “outlook.”   While Sanger played an instrumental role in founding Wikipedia at the beginning of the 21st century, he has since emerged as a staunch critic of the online encyclopedia. In 2020, Sanger contended that the site’s neutrality policy was “dead.”   According to Sanger, “There is a rewritten policy, but it endorses the utterly bankrupt canard that journalists should avoid what they call ‘false balance.’ The notion that we should avoid ‘false balance’ is directly contrary to the original neutrality policy.”   Sanger pointed to Wikipedia's piece about Jesus as an example of how it no longer has a neutral approach. “It simply asserts, again in its own voice, that ‘the quest for the historical Jesus has yielded major uncertainty on the historical reliability of the Gospels and on how closely the Jesus portrayed in the Bible reflects the historical Jesus,” he said.   “In another place, the article simply asserts, ‘the gospels are not independent nor consistent records of Jesus’ ‘life.’ A great many Christians would take issue with such statements, which means it is not neutral for that reason — in other words, the very fact that most Christians believe in the historical reliability of the Gospels, and that they are wholly consistent, means that the article is biased if it simply asserts, without attribution or qualification, that this is a matter of ‘major uncertainty.’”   Classifying the article as “a ‘liberal’ academic discussion of Jesus” that focused “especially on assorted difficulties and controversies, while failing to explain traditional or orthodox views of those issues,” Sanger suggested that “it might be ‘academic,’ but what it is not is neutral, not in the original sense we defined for Wikipedia.”   Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

In August, 2002 our previous rector Alan Hansen left the parish. The bishop met with the vestry and recommended that the vestry be frozen until a new rector was called. We have remained in place in an effort to keep the wheels onand I think we have been successful in doing so. When Alan left, we were in a critical financial crunch, and the effects of 9/11 added to the crisis. The vestry worked diligently to reduce operating costs, and with the involvement of our dedicated parishioners, we were able to turn things around. Our year-end balance sheet shows assets of:   $246,165.48 in checking, money market, and investment accounts $1,056,972.58 in buildings and property $561,383.59 in restricted funds/trusts Total Assets of $1,864,521.65.   In December, the vestry made the following charitable contributions to various, deserving, outreach ministries:   Salvation Army - $2,000.00 Food For The Poor - $5,000.00 St. Agnes House  3,000.00 Shoes For Kenya - $1,500.00 10 Scholarships for Youth Quake - $1,800.00 ... Sr. Warden writes to the Parishioners of St. John’s Church - Versailles, KY   In August, 2002 our previous rector Alan Hansen left the parish. The bishop met with the vestry and recommended that the vestry be frozen until a new rector was called. We have remained in place in an effort to keep the wheels onand I think we have been successful in doing so. When Alan left, we were in a critical financial crunch, and the effects of 9/11 added to the crisis. The vestry worked diligently to reduce operating costs, and with the involvement of our dedicated parishioners, we were able to turn things around. Our year-end balance sheet shows assets of:   $246,165.48 in checking, money market, and investment accounts $1,056,972.58 in buildings and property $561,383.59 in restricted funds/trusts Total Assets of $1,864,521.65.   In December, the vestry made the following charitable contributions to various, deserving, outreach ministries:   Salvation Army - $2,000.00 Food For The Poor - $5,000.00 St. Agnes House  3,000.00 Shoes For Kenya - $1,500.00 10 Scholarships for Youth Quake - $1,800.00 ... [Message clipped]   View entire message