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

January 16, 2003   Bishop Donald Johnson’s deeply troubling January 15, 2004 Pastoral Letter to the Diocese of West Tennessee raises serious questions of freedom of association and freedom of speech as well as abuse of the office of bishop by dictating the conscience of Episcopalians in his diocese. Bishop Johnson wrote his pastoral letter (which he posted on the Diocese of West Tennessee website) in response to a draft document of an American Anglican Council (AAC) subcommittee outlining plans for adequate episcopal oversight.    Bishop Johnson falsely accuses the AAC of deceitfulness and subversive sabotage and vows to purge his diocese of association with the AAC. We are deeply concerned about the individuals, clergy and congregations in West Tennessee who are affiliated with AAC, and we stand in full solidarity with them.  We urge Bishop Johnson to refrain from punitive action, harassment or intimidation of the people under his care who uphold historic Anglican faith and order and whose affiliation with AAC provides them a place to stand.     Bishop Johnson emphasizes his desire to preserve the church’s as it currently exists.  Here are the facts about the Episcopal Church’s USA (ECUSA) as it currently exists.  It is a Church’s that is no longer in relationship with the majority of Anglicans worldwide.  It is a Church’s that no longer turns to Holy Scripture for its guidance. It is a Church’s that has chosen the ways of man over the ways of God.  It is a church’s that has undermined the institution of marriage. It is a church’s with which many worldwide Christian denominations have broken relations.  It is a church’s that has lost its heart and soul and its commitment to making disciples and proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ.   We must ask: Is this truly the Church’s that Bishop Johnson wishes to preserve?   The AAC has long worked for the reformation and renewal of the Church’s. This is still our desire. We have NEVER said that we are leaving. We have not oved anywhere. We are still in full relationship with the worldwide Anglican Communion and we are resolutely determined that orthodox Episcopalians will remain so. For years we have spoken of the need for adequate episcopal oversight.  It has been one of our goals, and it will continue be one of our top priorities.  In October, the Anglican Primates unanimously called for this oversight to be provided within ECUSA, and we are committed to finding a way for it to be delivered, even if the leadership of ECUSA is unwilling.   In this time of crisis, we must first and foremost pray; we must repent and ask God’s forgiveness. We must also move forward with the mission and ministry of the Church’s -- whatever the cost.   -----   The American Anglican Council is a network of individuals, parishes, specialized ministries and Episcopal Bishops who affirm Biblical authority and mainstream Anglican orthodoxy within the Episcopal Church’s. For more information on the AAC, please visit http://www.americananglican.org .    ###     FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   January 16, 2003   Contact: Bruce Mason Director of Communications 202-250-0996 202-296-5360 Cynthia Brust Assistant Director of Communications 202-412-8721     Bishop Salmon Writes to The Members of All Saints Parish, Waccamaw January 16, 2004   TO: The Members of All Saints Parish, Waccamaw FROM:  Bishop Salmon   Dear Friends in Christ,   The opening chapter of St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians provides the greeting to you for this letter. I never stop thanking God for all the graces you have received through Jesus Christ (I Cor.4). in the same chapter St. Paul appeals to the Corinthians for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ to make up the differences between you (I Cor. 1:10). In that spirit I write you all this letter.              In all the recent events around All Saints Parish and the Diocese of South Carolina, a number of public statements have been made about our relationship. It is my intention in this letter to present the position that I have taken and offer documentation to support that position. Having heard both sides, you may then draw conclusions, as you are so led, which conclusions will I pray move us closer together rather than apart.   When Bishop Murphy was consecrated in Singapore in an irregular consecration in 2000, I was not in favor of the consecration because I believed that it would be divisive to orthodox unity. I believe it has. I could not change the fact that it had taken place.  Since Bishop Murphy was no longer under our Canons, I had no control over the exercise of his ministry. The hope and expectation was that  All Saints Parish would remain a faithful part of the Diocese of South Carolina.   When the Vestry in Moorehead City, N.C. voted to leave the Diocese of East Carolina they first transferred title to the church’s property to another group, and then informed the bishop that they were leaving the Diocese of East Carolina. Because of this the Chancellor advised me to record in the Georgetown County Courthouse, the Canons of the Diocese reflecting the requirement regarding property under which all congregations operate. In the North Carolina suit AMiA claimed that because the Diocese of East Carolina had not done so, the Diocese had no claim on the property. In the suit filed against the Diocese, the claim has been made that because the Diocese of South Carolina recorded the applicable canon, we had placed a cloud on the title. Bishop Murphy has stated that it was similar to building a swimming pool over a property line. It must be removed by legal action.     The facts are the opposite. If permission of the Bishop and Standing Committee are not given the title is clouded. Ross M. Lindsey, Parish Chancellor, admitted in his deposition, that in a transaction in 1986 the bank itself asked that such permission be sought. I am enclosing a letter written by Bishop Murphy, when he was a member of the Standing Committee, asking permission for All Saints to borrow money from the bank in 1988. The canons require such permission and not to seek permission clouds the transaction. I am also enclosing a sample page from the Standing Committee records showing similar permission requested by St. Peters by-the-Sea and the Church’s of the Holy Communion in 1965 as standard operating procedure for the Standing Committee. This has been a part of our common life for well over a hundred years.     When All Saints Waccamaw sued the Diocese ( we are the defendants) over the recording of the applicable property canon, they claimed, in a deposition, that they were not under the canons, and kept them as a matter of courtesy. The Chancellor ruled that a church’s could not be not under the canons and in union with the Diocese at the same time. The convention, hoping for some reconciliation, voted to give All Saints Parish seat, voice, not a vote.     In the meantime, Bishop Murphy has continued to live in the rectory, meet with the Vestry when he is in town, appoint a vicar to represent him, and generally to be in charge. Tim Surratt who, until now, has been the only clergyman canonically resident in the diocese, has been the supposed interim rector. He has, as of January 12, asked to be transferred to Rwanda. I plan to do so.     Because of the legal action, I have not met with the Vestry or made a visitation. Bishop Skilton has been to All Saints, for a visitation once.     I discovered, by happenstance, that the All Saints vestry had voted to amend the 1902 Charter which the then serving Chancellor had assisted the parish in securing. By way of background, the granting of the 1902 Charter by the Secretary of State was followed by the Trustees of the Dioceses conveying the title to the church’s property to All Saints Church’s Parish by quit claim deed dated 1903.   Because of the actions of the vestry, I immediately informed the Chancellor and notified the then Wardens and Vestry that they had in fact voted to leave the Church’s and could no longer be considered the vestry because by leaving they were no longer communicants in good standing, and thereby did not qualify to be vestry members. I did not excommunicate them as has been said. They are free to receive communion whenever and wherever they choose. They cannot vote to leave the church’s and at the same time be the vestry. I am enclosing copies of the letter and documents sent to them.     I called a meeting of the Standing Committee and informed them of my actions. After considerable discussion, the members of the Standing Committee decided to talk directly with the vestry. I gave my full support to such discussions. I am enclosing the report of their meeting written by the president of the Standing Committee. I told the Standing Committee that I was more than willing to consider and implement their suggestions, but that I was not willing to drop the appeal because (1) it had already been heard (September 10) and we were simply waiting for a ruling. I reminded them that (2) because of the original ruling no one now owned the property and this issued needed to be settled.   The basic issues on the table are those of lawlessness and the stability of the Diocese itself. We have no theological issues with All Saints. If any parish in the Diocese can unilaterally decide to not be under the Canons, appoint vicars, do what they want to when they want to, our strength as a Diocese is soon destroyed. There is no authority, only individual choice. That is exactly why the Episcopal Church’s is in the mess it is in. Bishops have individually acted without accountability, believe or not believe as they choose. That is lawlessness. It is my duty to oppose it.     I have met with members of All Saints who are loyal to the Diocese. It was my decision to treat the loyal membership as a parish rather than a mission. We have organized and elected wardens. We plan to meet again as All Saints Parish Waccamaw under the Canons of the Diocese. We have notified the Secretary of State that there is a new vestry representing All Saints Parish, and Articles of Correction will be filed with the Secretary of State giving notice that the original charter of All Saints, Waccamaw remains unchanged.     It is my prayer is that the Holy Spirit will give us all a way to Godly solution to this situation, which is painful for all concerned. You are in my prayers. I cherish yours.     May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all (II Cor. 13:13)   Yours Faithfully in Christ,     Edward L. Salmon, Jr. Bishop of South Carolina, XIII     ...

by David Virtue   Dear Brothers and Sisters,   It was another stormy week in the life of The Episcopal Church as the ship tossed and turned, the timbers of the Communion boat creaked, the winds showed little sign of calming. The Communion, as one theologian put it, has been hit by a tsunami, and we are salvaging what we can and hoping things have not gone beyond the possibility of repair.     One can but hope. Another rally drew 3,000 orthodox Episcopalians at what was billed as Plano East, following the highly successful Dallas meeting last year, and the troops were once again fired up to hold fast the faith and not abandon the ECUSA ship, as help was on the way. There was no battle plan; no strategy was laid out, just a giant pep rally, and a promise of good things to come. A new strategy will be revealed unto us on January 19-21 when the deep thinkers in the The Network of Anglican Dioceses and Parishes within the Episcopal Church, (and approved by the Archbishop of Canterbury) will meet in Plano, Texas. A public statement of major proportions affecting all the orthodox in the Episcopal Church will be forthcoming. Conclusion - There must be a realignment in Anglicanism.   In the meantime nothing will really change until two events occur: The first is the willingness of a substantial number of priests to stand up to their diocesan bishops and refuse to recognize their sacramental authority, and secondly that biblically orthodox Diocesan bishops are willing to enter the Dioceses of revisionist Bishops and perform sacramental acts without the permission of Bennison et al.   Put another way, nothing will happen unless the orthodox bishops and priests move from speech to action. D-Day approaches.   IN ANOTHER CONFERENCE with the eerie title, Does the Anglican  Communion have a Future, and attended by Virtuosity in Charleston, SC  saw several hundred conferees listen to an array of theologians attack the subject.   Dr. Chris Seitz, president of the Anglican Communion Institute said that any talk of a federation must be rejected. We are a Communion, unlike the Lutheran World Federation, which consists of independent national churches. Anglicanism has found its life and mission in a genuine Communion of accountability and interdependence. Within the US, we have tried to emphasize this with the language for a network now forming: Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes.   While the American Anglican Council focused exclusively on The Episcopal Church’s problems, the ACI sought to set the conflict in the larger context of the Anglican Communion, arguing that splitting up was also not the answer and sticking together through thick and thin, with the help of the Holy Spirit was the way to go.   In the midst of their deliberations and papers, the parish of ALL SAINTS CHURCH, WACCAMAW announced it was pulling out of the DIOCESE OF SOUTH CAROLINA and the Episcopal Church and aligning itself with the Anglican Mission in America (AMIA), provoking anguish from the Bishop Ed Salmon and the parish of St. Philips where the ACI conference was being held.   They issued a statement, which you can read in today’s digest. The bishop had previously fired the vestry and put in his own forcing a confrontation and a vote in the parish as to what they should do. It was a slam dunk for the parish. By an overwhelming vote the All Saints, parish comprising 507 eligible voters, voted 468 voted to leave with 38 voting no and one abstention.   The Standing Committee promptly urged Salmon to drop the appeal to the lawsuit, recommend that seat, voice and vote be given to All Saints at the upcoming Diocesan Convention, that the Vestry be reinstated and the parish restored. At this time of writing no one knows what Salmon will do. He has said if the national church ever voted to legitimize homosexual behavior he would take the diocese out of ECUSA, but he has backed down from that position. Uncertainty reigns.   In the meantime the Anglican Mission in America goes from strength to strength, scooping up plum Episcopal parishes around the country. They meet in Destin, Florida this Thursday for four days. Virtuosity (who will be there) was told that more than 1,000 have so far signed up to attend, significantly more than last year.   BUT THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER UNEXPECTED TURN this week when two orthodox ECUSA parishes in the DIOCESE OF ATLANTA announced they were seeking episcopal oversight from the Province of the Southern Cone and its Primate Greg Venables.   This is a first. To date Episcopal parishes wishing to stay in ECUSA have sought cover from African Primates, but this time they turned to the Bishop of Bolivia, Frank Lyons for help. One reason is that one of the parishes has a large number of Hispanics. One parish split almost down the middle with the rector staying and more than half the parish leaving; the other rector announced he was leaving ECUSA over its bankrupt morality and theology and taking three-quarters of the parish with him. Needless to say the bishop, one Neil Alexander is not amused.   The financial loss to the diocese will run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. You can read those stories in today’s digest.   BUT FINANCIAL LOSSES TO REVISIONIST DIOCESE are increasing at a rapid pace. Following my story on one parish in Americas heartland, I got a note from a parishioner in an ultraliberal parish in Annapolis, MD.  In Tieline, the parish newsletter for St. Annes, pledges for 2004 are only $500,000 against a goal of $800,000 and last year’s numbers of $710,000. So it’s not just affecting orthodox parishes who leave and take their people, it is going on in revisionist parishes where, it was thought, the dyke would hold. Not so. VIRTUOSITY has repeatedly said that Episcopalians are far more conservative than their liberal priests and revisionist bishops. And now these bishops will learn a bitter hard truth - no money, no mission. We will see more and more parishes being reduced to mission status and, over time, many closing their doors. It IS only a matter of time. Oh see what Vickie Gene hath wrought...and the fun has only just begun.   BUT NOT TO BE OUTDONE REVISIONISTS ARE CLAWING THEIR way up diocesan ladders looking to take over the reigns of power wherever they can in order to push their sodomite agenda.   In the orthodox DIOCESE OF THE RIO GRANDE where the biblically orthodox bishop Terence Kelshaw has announced plans to retire, the process of replacing him, and the politics have already started.     The rector of an Albuquerque church obtained the confidential mailing list of the Diocesan newspaper, and did a mailing under the Via Media label (the new tactic of revisionists to position themselves in the middle). As a result Kelshaw wrote every member in every parish a letter explaining what had happened, telling them in no uncertain terms that the Via Media mailing was not official and not from the diocese. The revisionists will stop at nothing to get power even as the ship sinks.     And in the DIOCESE OF NORTH DAKOTA, recently vacated by the godly Bishop Andy Fairfield the revisionists are trying to wedge one of their people in their as well. But voters in that diocese will now have six candidates instead of five to choose from when they select a new bishop next month, angering the liberal selection committee who had stacked it with five liberals. 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 the five candidates had directly expressed their views on the recent confirmation of the openly gay New Hampshire bishop.   And in the DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH, Bishop Robert Duncan withdrew a measure that would have left each church in the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh in control of its own property and buildings in a rift over the consecration of a gay bishop in New Hampshire. The resolution introduced by Bishop Robert Duncan, leader of the diocese, prompted a lawsuit by a revisionist Episcopal parish in Pittsburgh against Duncan and the dioceses board of trustees to prevent the transfer of any church property. A headline in a local newspaper screamed: Attorneys withdraw Episcopal land-grab resolution. You can read that story today.   And in the DIOCESE OF WESTERN NEW YORK, the Bishop there, Michael Garrison told an orthodox congregation to go pound sand, declaring, you have your opinion, you will not change mine. These were the words spoken repeatedly by the revisionist Garrison as he visited St. Bartholomew’ s in Tonawanda, NY. on January 8th.  It was a bitter cold snowy evening when members of all ages (from babies in arms to those in their late 80s) filled the sanctuary for a scheduled meeting to tell the Bishop of their concerns regarding his vote in favor of the consecration of V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire. St. Bartholomew’s, a godly parish of over 1100 members, with a godly rector has long been known as a faithful congregation who both know and love Holy Scripture. You can read what that vicious bishop said to these people then he demanded more money from them. You can read that story today as well...and weep.   HARVEST U.S.A. is a ministry to a hurt and sexually broken world. HARVEST has been ministering to men and women afflicted by pornography, same sex attraction, and other forms of sexual brokenness. There are countless, wonderful witnesses to the healing power of Christ for those who have been healed from their sexual problems and are now living in the light of Christ. If you live in or near Philadelphia and would like to attend a luncheon and hear about this ministry then call 610 944-4040 at Church of the Good Samaritan, Paoli, PA. Luncheon is set for Thursday, January 22 at 12 noon.     I AM POSTING A NUMBER OF STORIES including an exclusive interview with the Primate of the West Indies, Drexel Gomez who publicly blasted Frank Griswold, ECUSAs presiding bishop, calling him duplicitous. There are a number of stories coming out of the ACI conference in Charleston. WEBSITE. Most of you are aware of the new VIRTUOSITY website that can be accessed at www.virtuosityonline.org . New stories are posted daily. Register for a user account on the website and you can configure it to be notified when news stories are posted. Up to 30 people are visiting the website at any given time. More than 2,000 people are visiting the website every day. All blessings,   David W. Virtue DD

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 ACTS 29 Ministry - $1,000.00 Woodford Ministerial Association (Food Pantry) - $1,200.00 Woodford Educational Endowment Fund - $1,000.00 Woodford Project Graduation - $500.00 Tuition to Asbury Seminary for Youth Minister Ron Garner - $2,500.00 For a total of $19,500.00     The budgetary surplus for 2003, after meeting our entire diocesan pledge amounts to $39,961.66. This alone should indicate how seriously this vestry has taken its stewardship responsibility. There can be very few churches in this diocese able to make a similar claim.   In August, 2003 after the National Convention, a letter was written to the bishop, stating clearly that the vestry was in disagreement with his vote in favor of the consecration of an openly gay bishop and the blessing of same-sex unions. We subsequently had four meetings in our church regarding differing viewpoints on what had transpired at the Convention, including one at which the bishop shared his opinions. In November, the vestry sent out surveys to see how each parishioner felt on the issues and in what direction they wanted our church to move. Of the 300+ surveys sent out, over 170 were completed and returned. A compilation of results told us that over 75% of St. John’s parishioners were in disagreement, that they would not be pledging as in the past, and that over 60% were in favor of aligning with an orthodox bishop within ECUSA, if it were a possibility.   A small group of parishioners went to the bishop to complain about what the vestry was doing. They clearly thought that we were planning on bringing in a new rector who would take us out of the diocese and the Episcopal Church. We were, in fact, searching for a rector who fit our parish profile, and we had hoped that eventually there would be adequate alternative oversight available. Never have we considered taking St. John’s out of the Episcopal Church.  In fact, I wrote to one of this small group to explain that in a worst-case scenario, what would likely happen was that the vestry would resign at some point, leave St. John’s, and form a new mission church under an orthodox, biblically centered, Anglican affiliation. I further stated that we were not interested in seizing the property of St. John’ s, and were certain to leave the church in better financial condition than that in which we had found it. I defy anyone to demonstrate where this vestry has been anything other than completely devoted to the care of our congregation, deliberate and honorable in our search, true to the majority opinion of our congregation, and above reproach in the administration of our fiduciary duties to this parish.   On December 9, 2003, the vestry submitted the name of our chosen candidate for rector. The bishop replied December 9 that he was happy to give consideration to our candidate . On December 13, the bishop convened a meeting of the Executive Council to request that St. John’s be reduced to mission status. The vestry was not made aware of this meeting, and in fact, was hopeful that the bishop would initiate his background check and plan meetings with our candidate. On December 18, the bishop contacted our candidate and suggested that they meet January 5th and 6th, 2004.  After cordial, but fruitless meetings, we awaited the bishop’s answer. On the evening of January 6th, records of the Executive Council meeting of December 13 were found, quite by accident, having been posted on the diocesan website. Vestry member, Judge Wilson met immediately the next day with the bishop, and was invited to the Executive Council meeting held that same evening, January 7. At this meeting, Judge pleaded with the bishop and the Executive Council to reconsider their actions. After facing a grueling session of questioning and intimidation, Judge left completely devastated.   The Executive Council ended having granted the bishops request to reduce St. John’ s to mission status. The vestry is to be removed, and the bishop is to take control of this church.   For 156 years, St. John’s has been aligned with the Protestant Episcopal Church. St. John’ s is a corporation registered in the state of Kentucky. All property is titled to the senior warden and vestry of St. John’s Church. We have been asked repeatedly over the years to hand over the deed to this church to the bishop, but we have never done so. We have never borrowed money from the diocese. Clearly, the only way that the bishop can take over the property is by removing us from our elected positions and putting in place those persons who would be willing to turn the property over to him. The only concern the bishop has had throughout the process of the Executive Council meeting was in regard to the property and assets of St. John’s. In explaining the outcome of the meeting to me, Fr. Jay Pierce said those words to me verbatim.   Under the administration of this bishop, within this diocese, you can find 5 churches without rectors. Having bought a huge, old house in Lexington for use as an office, at a cost to the diocese of over a million dollars and restoring it at an additional cost of another half million dollars, this bishop now finds it necessary to extend his credit line from $100,000 in 2003 to $500,000 in 2004. He is taking money from trust funds to pay operating expenses, and is finding that pledges have diminished, making a budget impossible. As a result, he has enacted Canon 28, calling for an assessment of 18% of annual parish revenues. Based on our 2002 revenues, this assessment would total $64,213. An initial, adjusted assessment (to make it more palatable) brings our bill to $33,404 this year.   You now have the facts before you. I urge you to consider them carefully, before you allow this bishop to take control of your church. There is so much at stake here. The actions of this bishop toward St. John’s have been destructive to individual families within our parish, to the unity of the parish family, and the diocese as a whole. Our fate is to serve as an example for all the other parishes in this diocese. As a bishop, this man is expected to lead his flock, not beat it into submission.   We have asked for alternative Episcopal oversight as set forth by the Primates of the Anglican Communion. We are not, nor have we ever sought to be anything other than faithful, orthodox Anglicans. One of many examples is that for a decade, we have been a primary advocate of the Alpha Course throughout the state. Alpha is a uniquely Anglican approach to evangelization enthusiastically endorsed by the past and current Archbishops of Canterbury. The only reason we can imagine why this bishop would act in such an uncanonical and unethical manner towards us is his deep animosity towards evangelical and orthodox Anglicans.   I am saddened by the prospects for my church. Serving this church alongside such dedicated people has been a great honor. However, the effort has become a heavy burden. Our lives have been filled with fear, pain, anger, and ultimately, great sadness. That is not what God intended for his people. We will continue to pray for each of you, and always for our beloved St. John’s Church.   In His service,   Mr. Thomas J. Thornbury Sr. Warden, St. John’s Church, Versailles, Kentucky

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

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

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

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

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