Dear Brothers and Sisters,     As this tumultuous year draws to a close in the life of the Anglican Communion we might well reflect for a moment on why it is necessary to uphold the Faith once delivered.   We are not playing word games here. Words have meaning and they change how we think and view the world. Think what Das Kapital and Mein Kampf did to a generation before us Words matter. They change the way we think, influence our decisions and more. We act upon words every day of our life. We make decisions for good or ill on what we hear and learn, and words influence what directions we will take, what we support with our money and much more. Virtuosity’s whole purpose is to defend the gospel of Jesus Christ as it is practiced within the context of the Anglican Way. There is nothing particularly new or startling about this, no mind-shattering revelations or illuminations, just the solid, defense of something that is true for us today as it was 2,000 years ago. It is a message that has not changed with time, the passage of history, passing cultural fashions, the findings of science, advances in education, the new morality, or more.     Human nature we now know has not changed appreciably over aeons of history. Regardless of how well-educated we might be, however advanced in our understanding of how the mind and body works that intractable thing we call the ego rears its ugly head and we sin.     For the good that I wish, I do not do but I practice the very evil that I do not wish, said the Great Apostle, and he is right. The pull of power, the urge of libidos, and the false security of money pulls us down to equalize us all. None of us is exempt, including this writer.     I love words. I love what they do, how they influence lives, and more. Perhaps one day when I come to die someone will carve on my tombstone, He used words well. I should be so lucky.     For most of you who have endured VIRTUOSITY for another year, will note that many of my writers and contributors, essayists and columnists have used words far better than me, for they are better writers than I am, and know their subjects better than I do.     I am truly grateful for each one of them. I suffer from the sin of envy (among other sins), that God has enabled them to put together sentences more illuminating than my own, more powerful in their ability to persuade, and so I sit in awe of them. Still we must press on.     Virtuosity is a calling and a ministry and it will go on into the New Year vigorously proclaiming, defending, and building up, at the same time pulling down strongholds of satanic influence. We will leave no stone unturned in the search for truth and exposing the lies and half- truths, the pomposity and venality of revisionist hegemony found in The Episcopal Church. We will reveal, expose and bring to the light, those things which we have done and those which we ought not to have done.     That does not mean that this writer comes covered in a mantle of perfection, far from it. I will make my own mistakes and hopefully you the reader will tell me so I can correct them. I expect that. I would be shocked if I did not hear from you.     IN TODAYS LEAD STORY we continue to look at the implications of what a New World Anglican Order could look like if the Episcopal Church becomes, in effect, two churches. A church within a church or para-church, a church that is, that comes alongside the main body, drawing the good from it and leaving a dead carcass behind.     Events are shaping up fast. Two conflicting views over the future of the ECUSA is beginning to emerge and you can read the substance of that in today’s lead story.     TED MOLLEGEN, the point man for The Episcopal Church’s hoped for growth with General Conventions 20/20 has written a propaganda piece at those who opposed Vicki Genes consecration. I have taken this apart for your edification. This man has managed to turn truth so violently on its head that cranial damage has ensued and now seems permanent. His blasphemous attack on orthodoxy and those who defend it is exposed for all to read.     ONCE AGAIN, THE DIOCESE OF PENNSYLVANIA LEADS THE WAY. The Rev. Douglas G. Scott, rector of St. Martins Church, Radnor has issued a stirring call to action on page 28 of Episcopal Life. It is an outrage, he writes, that Christianity seems to have little tolerance for the suffering fat. We should ask the obese to share with their faith community what it means to be at the margins of societal acceptance and learn from them.     I kid you not. The obvious solution, Virtuosity believes is to consecrate an openly fat man who is in a committed relationship with his refrigerator. Do you Douglas take Kelvinator to be your awfully wedded significant other, to have and to hold, till high cholesterol do you part... Dear friends, it is utterly impossible to out-satirize this stuff. With the removal of the twin sins of gluttony and sodomy it just gets easier and easier to become an Episcopalian. Will we abandon the Prayer Book in time? Perhaps we will all live long enough to see a fat bisexual with bestial proclivities who has a hankering for non-neutered Dalmatians publicly consecrated in a NYC bathhouse. Frank Griswold will preside. ECUSA has become a lunatic asylum and the lunatics are in charge.     And our Bible reading today is taken from First Bennison (Pennsylvania Episcopalian Page B) chapter 1 verse 1 Moses smashed the tablets brought down off Mount Sinai to free the Word of God to be heard not seen.  How long will the Standing Committee put up with this lunatic?     IN A RECENT NEWS ARTICLE THE PRESIDING BISHOP Frank Griswold gave some instructions to his Executive Council on the relationship between truth and community. This is what he said: Truth is discovered in communion. Schism is the shattering of communion. In order to discover God’s truth, everyone has to be at the table.     The Rev. Lawrence D. Bausch, rector of Holy Trinity Church, San Diego, begs to disagree. He argues the exact reverse. He offers four examples when leaving the table has occurred because truth had been discerned and not agreed to.     First, the calling out of Abraham and his descendants as followers of Yahweh, separating them from their neighbors. This is a recurrent theme throughout the Old Testament. Secondly, the separation of Christians from Jews over the identity of Jesus. Third, the conciliar definitions including the creeds and canon of Scripture which determined acceptable parameters for communion. And fourth, the English reform under Queen Elizabeth I, which resulted in separation from the Catholic Church.   Its amazing how much rubbish Griswold manages to get away with unchallenged by his fellow bishops.   RECENT REPORTS in newspapers like the Church of England newspaper and on the Internet that Anglo-Catholics and groups like the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) are ready to run to Rome are exaggerated and premature. In discussions with various leaders in Episcopal Anglo-Catholic circles, word is that while talks and visits to Rome have been undertaken no one is going anywhere. The TAC under the leadership of Archbishop Falk and more recently the newly anointed Archbishop John Hepworth admit that while seeking unity to the fullest degree is desirable no one is going to abandon the Anglican tradition. Merger with Rome is not imminent. Furthermore, Rome never acts in a hurry, even to embrace hurting Anglicans under siege from revisionist forces. All in good time.     THE REFORMED EPISCOPAL CHURCH has had a defection. Bishop Gregory Hotchkiss has resigned over the RECs stance against gay marriage. Even the most orthodox of jurisdictions are not immune, it would seem, from all this craziness over homo-erotic behavior.     SPRINGFIELD BISHOP PETER BECKWITH reports that no presentment charges have been made against him despite coming under heavy fire from a group of hard-line revisionist gay and lesbian priests and laity in his diocese who want him gone. (Virtuosity exposed their tricks in a secret chat room where they used anonymous names to blast the bishop).   Beckwith wrote to VIRTUOSITY, I have heard there has been some interest/desire/attempt to present me for 1) Teaching against the doctrine of the Church and 2) Abandoning the Sacrament of the Church.  I’m told 1 is because I will not recognize Gene Robinson’s ministry, allow blessing of same sex relationships or likely to welcome clergy into the Diocese who would.  I’m told 2 is because I did not visit a new mission initiative in our Monroe County before I pulled the plug on it.  After 15 months of preparation, we were aiming at having 200 at the first service.  20 showed up.  In the seven weeks of operation, it was reported between 13 and 20 people participated per service.  We had about 80K left to invest after which the congregation would have to raise the 100K annually to support the operation.  That seeming most unlikely led to my decision. Frankly I consider their efforts to present me laughable! Thank you Bishop.     AND IT WILL COME AS NO SURPRISE, that the Religious Newswriters Association picked the Gene Robinson consecration as the top news story of the year. But it is very revealing that not one of the bishops who supported Robinson has expressed any concern that he accepted a Person of the Year award from a gay soft porn website, PlanetOut, and a gay magazine, The Advocate.     Second top story is Michael Inghams attempted slaughter of 11 godly parishes in the Diocese of New Westminster. They are still open for business and thriving.     And in the DIOCESE OF COLORADO the bishop there one Jerry Winterrowd now expresses regret for supporting the election of the nation’s first openly gay bishop. He says the church was not ready. Winterrowd, who retires on Dec. 31, said he went into Augusts General Convention of the Episcopal Church USA intending to vote against the election of Gene Robinson as New Hampshire bishop. His rationale Robinsons election would fly in the face of the church’s desire to delay setting policy on blessing same-sex unions. But Winterrowd said he became convinced that each diocese had the right to elect its own bishop. Subsequently, I would say that I am on very thin ice there, Winterrowd said. Indeed, you are a bishop. Very thin.     IN CANADA, the Bully of Vancouver, Michael Ingham closed down the fledgling mission parish of Holy Cross in Abbotsford, BC. The timing of the Anglican Bishops pre-Christmas closure of the church is ironic. In attempting to include new ideas, the Anglican Church is making sure there is no room in the inn for traditionalist thinkers. The parishioners must defend their faith. If this was happening in another country, Holy Cross would be listed under the persecution of Christians. That it should be persecuted at the hands of its own infrastructure is alarming, wrote one priest.     The parish priest James Wagner remains committed to his congregation, saying, we will continue to worship, even though were apparently not recognized formally. We hear a lot about tolerance and diversity and how diverse views should be respected. It seems to me a strange way to resolve conflict, said a parish layman.     Holy Cross is a mission church, which is distinct from an incorporated parish. Holy Cross voted by overwhelming majority to accept the offer of Bishop Terry Buckle of Yukon to lead them. The Bishop later withdrew. Ten years ago when the small parish of St. Georges Anglican Church in Hamilton, Ontario, was disestablished, it was re-born immediately as St Georges Reformed Episcopal Church and functions as a traditional Anglican parish. It is flourishing. There is hope.   And this from WASHINGTON BISHOP JOHN CHANES KORANIC CHRISTMAS MESSAGE   And what was God thinking . . . when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the Law to Moses? And what was God thinking . . . when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the sacred Quran to the prophet Muhammad? And what was God thinking . . . when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the birth of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?     Virtuosity thinks that God thinks that Bishop Chane should be tossed out of his bishopric for talking rubbish.   DEMOCRATIC FRONT RUNNER HOWARD DEAN was once an Episcopalian in Vermont. But owing to a squabble about the construction of a pathway on a nine-mile stretch of land along Lake Champlain opposed by a group of Episcopalians, he left the Episcopal Church. Apparently the much vaunted Doctrine of Inclusion hit a snag and the wannabe next president  left the ECUSA.     I WROTE TO CANON PATRICK MAUNEY, the Episcopal Church’s Director of Anglican and Global Relations this week asking if the Episcopal Church was still planning to go ahead and send money for the poor Gulus in Uganda, even though Frank Griswold has been disinvited to attend the consecration of their new archbishop. I got no answer. Unless Virtuosity hears otherwise you can safely assume the gift will not be going out to these poor starving Ugandans, which goes to prove that money and politics are inextricably twined in The Episcopal Church.     THE BISHOP OF OHIO CLARK GREW went on the offensive this week about a group of parishioners who left a parish in Hudson, Ohio. This is what he said on radio WKSU I think the tension I feel is, and I don’t want to devalue the authenticity of scripture claim that people make that this is a matter of scriptural authority, but I think, deep within that posture is a deep-seeded homophobia and an inability for people to see gay and lesbian people as children of God. Other members on the panel took him to task and you can read the he said/she said into todays digest. He has some very revealing thoughts about a parallel jurisdiction in the ECUSA.     RE CHRIST AND CIVILIZATION article. I received a mountain of e-mails expressing anger and disgust at the turn the article took in the latter quarter of the four-part series in its attack on Orthodox and Catholic Christians. Virtuosity regrets such attacks and maintains that the thrust of the article, which is that without Christ we would not have Western Civilization, as we know it, still stands. I am publishing a number of LETTERS reflecting various views on the article, and Virtuosity invites anyone with a knowledge of the origins of Western Civilization to write a contra piece for publication.     I HAVE POSTED A NUMBER OF STORIES today for your interest and edification.     This will be the last digest for the Year 2003. When next I write it will be in the first week in January with a YEAR IN REVIEW story.   With that will come a new website makeover for 2004. It will be easier to navigate with a full explanation coming from Virtuosity’s webmaster, Mr. Robert Turner.     I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU who contributed so generously to Virtuosity this past year. By doing so you made it possible for me to travel and write the stories you needed to read to keep abreast with events as they unfolded in The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. I am indebted to all of you who supported me with checks both large and small. Thank you.     The year 2004 will be even more turbulent Virtuosity predicts than this past year. It will certainly be breakpoint for The Episcopal Church.   What will all the alphabet soup of groups do within and without ECUSA? How will they coalesce? Will they? Who will still be standing at the end of the day? Will it be full-blown schism or a parallel church within a church? We shall know more in due course. Stay tuned. Please keep this writer in your prayers, and if you can support this ministry, please do so either by going to PAYPAL at my website www.virtuosityonline.org , or by sending a donation via snail mail to VIRTUOSITY, 1236 Waterford Rd., West Chester, PA 19380. Thank you for your support     God bless you all and have a very happy New Year.

by Michael J. McManus   Pollster George Barna reported recently that three-fifths of Americans believe cohabitation is an acceptable behavior.  In fact, two-thirds of Catholics see no problem with unmarried couples living together, nor half of all Protestants and even 49 percent of born-again Americans. What’s more, Barna says The moral perspectives of Americans are likely to continue to deteriorate. Compared to surveys we conducted just two years ago, significantly more adults are depicting such behaviors as morally acceptable.   Certainly, the number of couples living together has soared from only 520,000 in 1970 to 5 million today, a ten-fold increase in a generation. That's double the number who marry in a year. Cohabitation, not marriage, is the primary way male-female unions are formed.   However, Scripture is clear.  Flee fornication, St. Paul wrote (I. Cor 718).   I cited that quote in England, and a very dignified dowager interrupted me to exclaim, Jesus never said anything about it.   Yes he did.  Remember the woman at the well, who Jesus said had five husbands and the man you now have is not your husband (John 418).     The problem, as I see it, is two-fold ignorance of cohabitation consequences by the general public, and a willful avoidance of the issue by America's clergy.   Sociology backs up Scripture on the evil of cohabitation. Since men and women living together begin with minimal commitment, there’s greater unhappiness - more infidelity, more conflict and even violence, more illness and depression.   Sociologist Pamela Smock estimates that 45 percent of such couples undergo premarital divorce, which can be painful and complicated.  A woman at a Christian publishing company told me she lived with a man for six years, and desperately wanted to leave, but felt trapped. We bought a house together and he doesn’t want to sell it.   Many live together to test their potential for marriage. Big mistake. Marriages that are preceded by living together have 50 percent higher disruption rates than marriages without premarital cohabitation, according to the National Survey of Families and Households.   St. Paul sagely wrote, Test everything. Hold onto the good. Avoid every kind of evil.   Cohabitation may be perceived as a test, but it is an embracing of evil. A stunning 43 percent of unmarried couples have children, vs 46 percent of married couples.     Yet have you ever heard a sermon on cohabitation?  I bet not. In scores of cities, I’ve asked pastors if they have preached on it. One hand in 50 goes up. This moral abdication is perhaps the major reason why Barna found Christians have a higher divorce rate than atheists.   There is an alternative.  A third of America's churches now provide a more appropriate way for couples to test their relationships - with a test called a premarital inventory.  The man and woman are asked if they agree or disagree separately to 150+ one sentence statements.   At times I am concerned about the silent treatment I get from my future spouse.     I am concerned that my future spouse sometimes spends money foolishly.   I am hoping that after marriage my future souse will change of his/her behaviors.   A computerized report is prepared comparing what the man and woman said on each issue. Result a tenth of couples decide not to marry.   Studies show that their scores are equal to those who marry and later divorce.  So they are avoiding a bad marriage before it has begun!     In 1992, my wife and I added another component, having couples in solid marriages administer the inventory. Clergy will normally provide only an hour of feedback. They do not have time to talk through scores of issues that a couple aged 50 can provide. With both genders present, mentor couples can actually do a better job than clergy or counselors.   From 1992-2000, 302 couples were mentored at our home church.  Of that number, 21 dropped out part way through, mostly to break up.   Another 34 couples met with their mentors six evenings, but decided not to marry.   Thus, more than 50 couples avoided a likely divorce.  But of those who did marry, there have been only seven divorces or separations in a decade.  That is a 3 percent failure rate, or a 97 percent success rate.   That's not just marriage preparation - but marriage insurance.   What’s more, we created an organization called Marriage Savers that has trained 3,000 mentor couples across the country, whose churches often have even lower divorce rates. To learn more, see marriagesavers.org     Why doesn’t your church, synagogue or mosque set a goal in 2004 to radically reduce your congregations divorce rate?   END TXT Copyright   2003 Michael J. McManus   *****

By TREVOR KAVANAGH Political Editor THE SUN     Some years ago the main-line Christian denominations were taken over by leftists the process is even more far gone in Europe than in America.   Hence this utterly bizarre news story Two Top Bishops Last Night Warned Tony Blair Must Answer to God for Toppling Saddam Hussein. Yes, That’s right. God was in Saddam’s corner all the way   The Bishop of Durham and the Archbishop of York blasted the war in newspaper interviews. In an astonishing grab for the moral high ground, they admitted Saddam was wicked but claimed the allies were not the right people to oust him.     Tom Wright, Bishop of Durham, accused the PM and President George Bush - both devout Christians - of a strange distortion of Christianity to justify action. He compared them to white vigilantes going into Brixton to stop drug dealing.     If anyone understands that reference, send us an email I’m completely in the dark. And if England and America weren’t the right people to oust Saddam, who were? All those other nations who have been lining up to do the dirty work all these years, I guess.     Dr David Hope, Archbishop of York, reminded the Prime Minister of the higher authority he will have to face one day and urged churchgoers to pray for his soul. Referring to Saddam, he said Undoubtedly a very wicked leader has been removed but there are other wicked leaders.     Meaning, I guess, that God will fault Tony Blair for not removing the Mullahs, Kim Il Jong, and a few others. Well, Reverend, give him time.   Meanwhile, when it comes to removing very wicked leaders, the score is Tony Blair and George Bush--(remember the Taliban), church of England clerics--. Bishops warning to Blair     TWO top bishops last night warned Tony Blair must answer to God for toppling Saddam Hussein.     The Bishop of Durham and the Archbishop of York blasted the war in newspaper interviews.     In an astonishing grab for the moral high ground, they admitted Saddam was wicked but claimed the allies were not the right people to oust him.   Tom Wright, Bishop of Durham, accused the PM and President George Bush - both devout Christians - of a strange distortion of Christianity to justify action.     He compared them to white vigilantes going into Brixton to stop drug dealing. Dr David Hope, Archbishop of York, reminded the Prime Minister of the higher authority he will have to face one day and urged churchgoers to pray for his soul.     Referring to Saddam, he said Undoubtedly a very wicked leader has been removed but there are other wicked leaders. His words echoed Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams warning that Mr. Blair would be called to account.     END

COLUMBUS EPISCOPAL WOMAN PRIEST RESIGNS OVER GAY BISHOP   Associated Press   COLUMBUS, Miss. - The Rev. Sandra DePriest has become the first Mississippi Episcopal priest to step down to protest the ordination of the church’s first openly gay bishop. DePriest told The Commercial Dispatch newspaper in Columbus that she could no longer actively serve as a priest until the gay bishop issue is resolved.   DePriest finished up with the Church of the Good Shepherd in Columbus and St. John’s Episcopal Church in Aberdeen on Christmas Day.     DePriest told the newspaper she was not resigning her vows for the time being, but could no longer actively serve as a priest until the gay bishop issue was resolved.   Earlier this year, Bishop V. Gene Robinson became the first openly gay man elevated to that rank in any major Christian body.   Robinson was ordained after an August vote at the Episcopal Church USA General Convention in Minneapolis.   Many Episcopalians who believe in a traditional interpretation o f the Bible want Robinson removed as bishop and have won the support of several American bishops.   DePriest said she is one of those opposed to Robinson’s ordination and her stance on the issue meant she could not continue leading worship.   I believe that my vows have been placed in conflict, DePriest said. I took vows to uphold Scripture when I was ordained ... and at the same time I took vows to uphold the doctrine and discipline of the Episcopal Church of the United States. And I cannot teach those doctrines and disciplines.     DePriest joined the priesthood after a 17-year career as a lawyer. She joined the seminary in 1996 and was ordained in 1999.   After spending two years as the priest of Christ Episcopal Church in Tuscaloosa, Ala., DePriest took her position with the two churches in Columbus and Aberdeen.     DePriest said the appointment of Robinson to a senior position within the church was a deal breaker for Episcopalians who believe in a traditional interpretation of the Bible.   DePriest said these Episcopalians consider homosexuality a sin that must be repented a belief completely at odds with Robinson’s openly gay lifestyle.     DePriest said for the moment, she is not willing to leave the church completely while there is hope that the rift can be repaired.   DePriest said the Episcopal Church USA was willing to provide alternative pastoral care for priests and congregations who were opposed to Robinson’s ordination. This arrangement, she said, is supposed to keep disgruntled members of the faith under the Episcopalian banner by allowing them to shift their churches under the authority of another bishop.     DePriest said this is unacceptable to members of the faith who are thinking about splitting from the church because they no longer support its leaders. DePriest said under present arrangements, those Episcopalians would have to abandon their churches and sever financial links with the church.   Bishop Duncan Gray of the Mississippi Diocese said the Anglican faith that Episcopalians practice - founded in England over 400 years ago - was based upon diversity of belief and tolerance.   We were founded in theological conflict, Gray said. Gray said the church had the ability to broker a compromise with in its DNA. He claimed a number of the 13 bishops who had been identified as working against the church’s leadership had since clarified and even retracted earlier statements.   Gray said a great deal of work is going on behind the scenes to broker a compromise.     This is certainly something that will be ongoing, but I’m very pleased with the efforts (of the church) to respect individual conscience, Gray said.     END

A nglican congregation challenges its bishop by refusing to perform gay marriages   Michael Higgins National Post Tuesday, December 23, 2003   An Anglican church defying its bishop by refusing to support same-sex unions has been terminated only days before Christmas.   The decision by Bishop Michael Ingham to close Holy Cross in Abbotsford, B.C., is the latest action in a dispute that is threatening to split the Anglican church worldwide. Despite the closure, the priest at Holy Cross, the Rev. James Wagner, vowed yesterday to celebrate mass on Christmas Day with parishioners.   As far as the diocese is concerned we do not exist. We are a non- entity, Mr. Wagner said yesterday. But I will not abandon these people. I will continue to pastor and pray for them in the midst of this crisis.     He said the decision to close the church was a surprise because its so close to Christmas.     Ronald Harrison, executive archdeacon of the Diocese of New Westminster, said Holy Cross brought the closure upon itself by seeking episcopal oversight from another bishop. He said that a result of the church declaring itself independent was that its funds had been stopped and eventually the bishop was forced to close it.     The decision by Bishop Ingham to sanction same-sex unions and the broader issue of homosexuality are dividing Anglicans. In October, church leaders met at a crisis conference in London called in part because of Bishop Ingham’s approval of same-sex unions. The Canadian House of Bishops has also set up a task force to look at parishes opposed to Bishop Ingham’s decision.     Holy Cross, a mission church that relies on its funding from the diocese, is part of a group of breakaway churches in New Westminster that was seeking episcopal oversight by Bishop Terry Buckle of the Yukon.     In October, the Diocesan Council of New Westminster voted to close Holy Cross but needed Bishop Ingham’s approval. However, funding was withdrawn from the church.   In a letter dated Dec. 18, Bishop Ingham informed Mr. Wagner that he had decided to close the church.   Mr. Wagner said he told parishioners the news on Sunday. They were shocked and surprised that it would come at this time. When they got the news it was four days before Christmas.     None of the other churches in the breakaway group has been closed.   Because they are incorporated individually, and don’t rely on funding from the diocese, they have been able to carry on.   Mr. Wagner said his church was being ostracized within the diocese though it is aligned with Anglican thinking worldwide.     Substantially we are right in step with Anglicans throughout the world and that has great consolation for them [the parishioners] because they very much want to be Anglicans. They are not doing things rebelliously and very much want to be a part of the family of Anglicans throughout the world, Mr. Wagner said.     The termination of the church meant they were like sheep without a shepherd, he said.   He said although they would celebrate Mass on Christmas Day, they would not be recognized as Anglicans. It’s not just that the Diocese of New Westminster will not recognize us as Anglicans, the really sad thing is that, unofficially, there are many Anglicans who want to recognize us, but, officially, there is no one that will recognize us as such.     Mr. Wagner had already had his pay cut off by the diocese and said he now needed to consult with his lawyer to see what his position is.   I don’t regret what I am doing or the circumstances I find myself in. I think that Jesus often talked about his disciples having to count the cost and having to take up their cross, he said.   He called on the Canadian House of Bishops and primates internationally for clear leadership.     Mr. Wagner said the parish had already been in discussion with the House of Bishops task force.   The task force was set up to establish adequate provision for Episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities.   It followed a call from Dr. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, who warned the Anglican Church was in danger of splintering over the issue of homosexuality.     After the task force was set up, Bishop Ingham wrote to Holy Cross offering to restore its funding if it accepted his authority.     Mr. Harrison said the bishop had never had a satisfactory reply except from Mr. Wagner, who said he was consulting his lawyer.   We support and fund all kinds of things, including mission initiatives, but if they have openly declared their hostility to the diocese and the diocesan bishop and will not rescind that even when the bishop has stepped back from the plate, the question is: Why would we fund that?   The decision was made months ago and the bishop withheld his decision while he waited for the parish to respond favourably. They didn’t correspond with him. It has nothing to do with Christmas. We have been waiting for their response for some time.     +++     Church at home with the Lord Holy Cross celebrates Christmas in priest’s living room     Ai Lin Choo, Vancouver Sun Friday, December 26, 2003     ABBOTSFORD Surrounded by Christmas wrappings, presents and excited children, about 20 members of Abbotsford’s newly terminated Church of the Holy Cross gathered in their priest’s living room for Christmas service Thursday.     While the gathering was mostly upbeat and included the usual Christmas songs and nativity stories, the reasons behind the domestic gathering were still on the minds of many.     We as a church community will continue as we always have. It’s unfortunate that the diocese has felt the need to close down the mission, said Dave Chapman, who has been a member of the church since it opened in 2001.   Thursday was the first time parishioners had met for a service since hearing that Bishop Michael Ingham had decided to terminate their mission. The small church has been battling Ingham ever since he decided to sanction same-sex marriages in the Anglican Diocese of New Westminster.   Reverend James Wagner said the service renewed his commitment to his   congregation, adding, we will continue to worship, even though were apparently not recognized formally.     The makeshift church looked like any other Christmas-morning household. Children ran around excitedly displaying and playing with their new toys. But for the parishioners, the atmosphere reiterated a sense of loss -- of not feeling like they belong to a larger community.   We hear a lot about tolerance and diversity and that diverse views should be respected. It seems to me a strange way to resolve conflict, said Chapman.     He said he has been feeling frustrated and disappointed since hearing that the church has been cut off from the New Westminster diocese. He finds it ironic that a church is closing down a mission when, in his view, churches are supposed to be about opening new missions.   There’s just something strangely ironic and surreal about all this. And although the mission church is only three years old, member Rachel Weiland said she is very hurt by the closure.     We follow the minority these days and we stick to the word of God and the diocese doesn’t, so they just cut us off, she said.   While the New Westminster diocese does not place an obligation on priests to perform same-sex marriages, Wagner says the issue is only part of the fight with the diocese. Members of the mission church say they differ from their diocese in their belief that gays and lesbians can be cured of their sexual orientation.     Wagner says the controversy is now being looked at by a task force at the Canadian House of Bishops for dissenting parishes and hopes the decision to terminate the church will be overturned. Beyond that, he says, he has no plans for what he will do next. I haven’t thought that far yet.     Because the New Westminster diocese withdrew funding to the church in October, Wagner doubts the congregation will be able to continue to meet in the location where it has been holding services lately – a seniors room at the Matsqui Recreational Centre.   But Jeremy Smyth, who described the mood Thursday as quiet and reflective, said that doesn’t mean it lacked joy. In a strange way, I am joyful because as a Christian I find it’s a joy to be persecuted for Jesus sake -- especially at Christmas time when were caught up in the stress and activities of preparing for it, he said.     END

By Dr. Judith Sture Special to Virtueonline.org www.virtueonline.org June 22, 2025   I am writing this post for a few reasons. Firstly, to express my horror about recent votes in the UK Houses of Parliament; and secondly, to state that the outcomes of these do not, in my experience, represent the opinions of the majority of British people.  Thirdly, I want to say to non-UK readers, that our country is not going to hell in a handbasket, but rather, is currently led by a morally-bankrupt group of people who are abandoning the rights and needs of the very people whom they represent, in favour of international interests and their own preferred ideologies.   Never in my lifetime have I felt ashamed of our House of Commons as much as I do today. Never did I even think that our MPs would vote in the way that they have in the past week. The interests of democracy have been under strain since the General Election in July 2024, with a government in place that has consistently failed to protect the neediest among our population. The wider social issues are for another post, but for today, I am addressing the right-to-life issues that have been potentially obliterated in the UK in recent days.   On Tuesday 17 June 2025, the House of Commons voted on an amendment to the government's crime and policing bill, to allow abortion outside the legal framework without fear of prosecution . It is now possible for a woman to ‘terminate’ her baby (sorry, ‘foetus’ – better still, ‘clump of cells’) up to the day before the due date. Yes, you read that right – a woman in the UK can now choose to ‘abort’ a 9-months gestation baby and not face prosecution. The government won the vote with a majority of 242 votes. You read that right as well.   The Guardian , our major left-leaning newspaper, called this ‘the biggest step forward in reproductive rights in almost 60 years’. The British Medical Association – the biggest union for UK doctors and medical students – ‘welcomes the move…as “long overdue”’ while claiming that abortion is not a matter for the police.   Right to Life UK said it well on X: ‘Jerome Mayhew MP [Conservative] sums up today’s debate: We’ve made major changes to the abortion law, on the basis of no evidence session, no committee stage scrutiny, just 46 minutes of backbench debate [in the chamber] and a government minister wind-up who refused to take any interventions’.   In contrast, in 2004, MPs spent 700 hours debating the hunting of foxes, hares, deer and mink, following a major government inquiry into animal welfare issues around hunting.   We now live in a country where praying silently near an abortion clinic is illegal, but you can legally kill your baby the day before it is ‘due’. If this is not intentional evil, I do not know what is.  Even a lot of feminists are complaining that this is not abortion, but murder.   Just days later, on Friday 20 June, the Commons voted on a private member’s bill (brought forward by an MP, rather than the government) - the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill . This proposes what is euphemistically known as ‘assisted dying’. For which read ‘death on demand’. MPs voted to support the bill by a majority of 23 votes (314 for, 291 against). Like the abortion amendment, the bill now passes to the House of Lords for further scrutiny and debate. Needless to say, the proponents of euthanasia, in spite of any and all evidence or opinion that contradicts their viewpoint, are celebrating wildly.   As usual, those in favour of euthanasia claim that significant safeguards are in place to prevent misuse of the law – but in every country where such law has been enacted, safeguards arguably melt away and we see numbers of mentally-ill people and other vulnerable individuals who ‘choose’ death this way, rising steadily. In Canada for example, euthanasia accounted for 4.7% of all deaths in 2023, with 15, 343 people dying by this route. This is now the fifth most common cause of death in Canada. Belgium saw a 17% increase in euthanasia cases in 2024, including individuals under 40 and even including children. In the Netherlands, 5.4% of deaths (169,363 people) were by euthanasia in 2023.   What makes the UK any different to these countries? What is being put forward as a last resort issue is highly likely, if not unavoidably, going to become a significant cause of death here. Just who is going to ensure that granny or grandpa are not being pressured into ‘doing the right thing’?  Who is going to speak up for the mentally-ill person who says they don’t want to live any longer? Who is going to speak up for the young person under 18 who claims their life is a misery and they want to die?   Neither of these subjects (abortion and end-of-life amendments) featured in the government’s manifesto at the July 2024 election.  Neither have been the subject of public inquiries or consultation. The voice of the man and woman in the street has, in effect, been silenced.   The current Labour government in the UK is, in my opinion, the worst government of my lifetime, and that’s saying something. All I can say to readers outside the UK is, please don’t think that the average Brit agrees with this stuff. I don’t know anyone who is not horrified, and I have a wide circle of friends and acquaintances with many diverse views and beliefs. If you don’t believe me, look online at X – it’s far more representative of opinion here than the mainstream media.   After the October 7 attacks in Israel in 2023, the British commentator Douglas Murray said: ‘Sometimes a flare goes up, and you see exactly where everyone is.’  Few comments could be more apt in relation to where we are in the UK today. A flare has indeed gone up, and we can surely see clearly where everyone is. Evil is among us. There’s no other way to put it. Has anyone even considered the unintended consequences of these votes? Let’s see.   END OF LIFE What about those doctors and nurses who do not wish to engage in assisted dying? What view will medical and nursing unions take on their members who do not wish to toe the line? What about the employers of those medical professionals? Will these professionals be subject to disciplinary processes? How long will they keep their jobs? Will agreement to euthanasia become a requirement for all medical and nursing students? What effect is the law, if finally passed, going to have on the funding of palliative care? If it’s cheaper to just bump you off instead of seeing out your days in a hospice, who is going to pay?  How long before it is you, because the NHS can’t afford it and charitable donations can’t keep up with demand once NHS beds won’t do palliative care? Are we about to see the end of the hospice movement if government funding is stopped or reduced further? How long will it be before hospitals need to save money on pain relieving drugs for terminally ill patients? How long will it be before we see algorithms for identifying value-for-money patients (i.e. likelihood of successful treatment) controlling the uptake of hospital beds? Think I am going over the top? Come back and ask me in five years!   ABORTION   Who is going to get involved to prevent vulnerable women being pressured to end their pregnancy by family or a partner who don’t want the baby? Given that legal abortion pills can be acquired by post, who is going to assess the gestational age of the baby before they are taken? What cast-iron processes are in place to prevent women taking legal abortion pills well past the allowed gestational dates? How are we going to prevent sex-selective abortions? What are the chances that certain cultural groups will now provide their own ‘reproductive healthcare services’ to ensure that fewer girls are born, or that unwanted pregnancies are ‘resolved’? What assurances do we have that some medical professionals will not choose to quietly offer ‘services’ to end late-term pregnancies, with or without the consent of the woman? What whistleblower processes are in place for such activities to be reported?   There are far more questions to ask than these on both abortion and euthanasia, but you get the picture. We are in this position in the UK for a number of reasons, not least of which is the decline in religious and other moral objections to ending life among the elite leadership groups of our nation. The man and woman in the street tend to hold to more conservative, cautious views in my experience. We are also suffering (I use the term advisedly) from the nature of our first-past-the-post electoral system. The current government was elected with only 9.7 million votes out of an eligible 48.2 million voters in the UK. Bear in mind that the turnout at the 2024 General Election was only 50.7%, the lowest since 2001. Yes, we have had governments elected like this in previous years, but none have enacted such massive and unwelcome changes as this current government. We are being subjected to arguably unprecedented social and political changes in the way that the state relates to the individual and to the rights of the man and woman in the street. Not to mention the rights of every unborn child in the country at any given time. What now? We can only pray that the House of Lords will vote these two issues down. The relationship between the individual and the state will be fundamentally changed by these votes should they receive approval in the Lords and go on to be enacted as law in the UK. Put simply, no baby in utero will be legally fully protected until he or she has exited the birth canal on or after the due date (which is often subject to confusion anyway). And no individual who is terminally ill, or who unreasonably (and possibly temporarily) feels that their life is unbearable, can rely on cast-iron legal safeguards to ensure that they won’t be hurried along the end-of-life route. As a clergyman said this week on X: ‘This is shaping up to be the most barbaric, depraved parliament in the history of the UK.’ It is hard to argue with that sentiment. Along with all the other social upheavals we are seeing here, you could almost say that this is the deliberate application of an evil ideology. Did anyone ever think that our great nation would one day elect a parliament that would vote to kill the most vulnerable members of our population? This is utterly beyond the pale. Let’s hope and pray that sufficient pressure is brought to bear on MPs and Lords so that these appalling outcomes can be reversed or amended, to protect the legal protections that we have enjoyed (even if flawed) hitherto. Readers – please pray for the UK – we need it. Dr Judith Sture is a former academic and researcher based in Yorkshire, England. She is a regular contributor to VOL.

It’s all about love…but is it?   COMMENTARY   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org June 19, 2025   It should not be passed over lightly that the more churches become liberal in doctrine and practice, the more they shout about a loving God – a God that never judges – is open to all, and will, presumably, save all.   I started noticing this in the Episcopal Church back when the activist Episcopal homosexual layman Louie Crew was pushing the homosexual agenda in TEC. His mantra ‘God loves absolutely everybody’ was frequently on his lips as he sought to open the church’s red doors to ‘absolutely everybody.’   We believe that God loves you – no exceptions, runs the official church meme.   “The Episcopal Church embraces a legacy of inclusion, aspiring to tell and exemplify God’s love for every human being; people of all genders and sexual orientations serve as bishops, priests, and deacons in our church. Laypeople and clergy work together in leadership and governance.”   A loving all embracive God became the cornerstone teaching of former Presiding Bishop Michael Curry. It started with a Royal Wedding, ‘Love is the way’ captivating millions with his sparkling personality, later sharing his mantra about love overcoming everything.   He never defined love, assuming people understood what he was talking about. But did they? C. S. Lewis spelled it out in his Four Loves book which was written 65 years ago and is still read to this day.   Christian theology categorizes love into Agape (unconditional love), Phileo (brotherly love), Eros (sensual love), and Storge (familial love), each with different societal and moral implications. Christian love emphasizes selflessness, charity, and societal cohesion, particularly within marriage.   ‘All you need is love,’ sang the Beatles, which became the mantra of the 60s where free love roamed the land.   But is God only loving or is there another side to his character? Can God be wrathful? The answer of course, is that both are true.  But you would never know that listening to the sentimental twaddle pouring out of the mouths of woke clergy dying to tell you that God loves you, and you can come as you are and be yourself without changing.   What progressive leftist clergy opine is that God is totally inclusive and any attempt to make him less than that makes him capricious and unloving. But come as you are is only half the story. The other half of the story is that you will not be permitted to stay as you are, because the gospel demands repentance, confession, and newness of life. But that is not the message you will hear from an Episcopal rector. It’s a variation on ‘I’m okay, you’re okay,’ theme much championed by clergy cultural elites who like to earn a living agreeing with the world rather than being obedient to Christ.   Richard Niebuhr put it well when he said, "A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross." This is probably the best summation of liberal theology.   God’s love and God’s wrath can be found in both the Old and New Testament. In Exodus 34: 6-7 it is written, “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”   It isn’t rocket science to see that both God’s love and God’s judgment are proclaimed here. The truth does not lie in one or the other, nor does the truth lie between them, with each moderating the other. Both are proclaimed absolutely by God.   It should come as no surprise that we find God’s love and God’s wrath in the teachings of Christ.   Here are a few verses where Jesus talks about hell: Matt 5:22, 29,30 Matt 10:28 (= Luke 12:5) Matt 11:23 (= Luke 10:15) Matt 16:18 Matt 18:8,9 (= Mark 9:43-49) Matt 23:15,23 Luke 16:23.   In Luke 12, Jesus tells the disciples to fear God because he can cast them into hell—yet also not to fear him, because he is their heavenly Father:   Jesus is recorded saying in Luke 12:4-7, “I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. Indeed, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.” One could argue that Jesus is playing good cop, bad cop. “Fear him who…Don’t be afraid.”   We should fear God as judge and trust him as Father. God is both just and loving: God judges those who turn from him, and he cares for those who turn to him. We find God’s love together with his God’s wrath in the rest of the New Testament too.   God’s message of grace is tempered with dangers if we don’t respond and repent.   It is profoundly ironic that liberal churches who preach half a message of full acceptance are withering and dying, while evangelical churches that preach ‘the whole counsel of God’ are growing and flourishing.   Grandfathers are kindly and tolerant; fathers don’t have that option. They must discipline their children because the world can be a harsh and vicious place. That is why God is not a grandfather. God has no grandchildren.   In Hebrews, for example, the message is not that God is the judge in the Old Testament, and God is the savior in the New Testament. Rather, it is that, with a better revelation, the New Testament brings greater blessings, and also greater dangers if we don’t respond; “We must pay the most careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. For since the message spoken through angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?” (Hebrews 2:1-3).   Tough words you won’t hear from a liberal Episcopal pulpit.   How does the Bible bring wrath and love together? Our God is ‘holy, holy, holy’ (Isaiah 6:3) and—because he is holy—he wants his people to be ‘a holy nation’ (Ex 19:6, 1 Pet 2:9). ‘You shall be holy, for I, the LORD your God, am holy.’ ‘I am the LORD; I make you holy.’ (Lev 19:2, 20:8).   In today’s culture, holiness has virtually no meaning at all.   Bishop J.C. Ryle defines holiness as practical. It involves obeying God's commandments, pursuing Christian virtues, and resisting temptations. Holiness is the habit of being of one mind with God. Heady stuff.   Yet God’s holiness also means danger for his people. Because God is holy, He: tells us of our sin; tells us not to sin; warns us of his judgment on sin and on sinners; judges us and disciplines us to cure us of our sins; warns us of his wrath and final judgment, and; calls us to repent and trust his faithful love and forgiveness.   Most importantly, because God is holy, he sent his holy Son to die in our place and take the punishment, judgment and wrath as our substitute; to sanctify (make holy) his people. He makes a holy covenant with us, and indwells us by his Holy Spirit.   Because God is holy, he sends his holy Son to die in our place and takes the punishment, judgment and wrath as our substitute; to sanctify (make holy) his people.   Jesus, in other words, is the one through whom God will judge the world (c.f. John 5:22-30). When we read Revelation 6 we get a shocking depiction of the day when that happens:   Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and everyone else, both slave and free, hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can withstand it?” (Revelation 6:15-17).   Liberal Episcopalians beware.   END

December 2003   Dear Friend of Ekklesia,     The decision of the Presiding Bishop and others to proceed to consecrate V. Gene Robinson despite the unanimous voice of opposition from other Anglican provinces, the Archbishop of Canterbury, other denominations, and even other faiths has wounded the Christian faith around the globe and isolated the Episcopal Church. Approximately 52 million Anglicans are in church each Sunday around the world. Already, the leaders of 50 million have declared impaired communion. Some have even gone beyond that. Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, West Africa, Rwanda, Central Africa, South East Asia, and Tanzania have formally broken communion. Those provinces represent about 35 million Anglicans.I have been dispatched with a diplomatic pouch of documents to consult with Anglican Primates and Archbishops about finding their way forward. They are deeply committed to Biblical faith. They are also committed to those of us w ho maintain historic teaching and have rejected the actions of the Presiding Bishop and the General Convention.   Working with faithful Anglican primates is a two way street. There is no question that we need their leadership and help, but they also live in circumstances of great need. To help address that in recent months your gifts to Ekklesia have helped accomplish many vitally important-even lifesaving-projects. Together this year we have:   Provided more than twenty tons of grain for famine relief in Central Africa     * Bought and outfitted a small fleet of commercial fishing boats for Lake Malawi. These boats will provide food for starving people, jobs, and income to the diocese for ministry.     * Been building two radio stations in Tanzania that should be going on the air-any day. They will provide Christian teaching, English classes, health education information, and advertising income for ministry from advertising revenue. Helped primates travel to critically important Anglican Communion meetings.                                    * Provided bicycles ...

By Adelle M. Banks RELIGION NEWS SERVICE   Bishop V. Gene Robinson, elected in June as the first openly gay bishop of the Episcopal Church, was named the Religion Newsmaker of the Year by members of  the Religion Newswriters Association. His approval and consecration, and the ensuing threats of schism in the U. S. church and the wider Anglican Communion, were collectively cited as the top religion news story of 2003 -- a ranking shared with criticism of the Anglican bishop of Vancouver, British Columbia, who approved same-sex unions.     About a third of the 240 members of the Religion Newswriters Association took part in the annual survey. More than 80 percent of these selected Robinson as the top newsmaker.   The top 10 religion news stories were ranked as follows:     1. Turmoil mounts within the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion after Robinson’s approval and consecration, and Vancouver Bishop Michael Ingham’s action.     2. The pending war in Iraq split religious communities, with mostly mainline Protestant denominations opposing it and many evangelicals supporting it.   3. The definition of marriage becomes a key area of controversy after Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules gay couples have a right to civil marriage and the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down a ban against homosexual sodomy. 4. A Ten Commandments monument is removed from Alabama State Judicial Building and the man who got it installed there, Roy Moore, is removed from his post as the state’s chief justice.   5. Roman Catholic Church efforts to implement plans combating priestly sex abuse draw praise and criticism. Archbishop Sean OMalley succeeds Cardinal Bernard Law as leader of the Boston Archdiocese.   6. Pope John Paul II marks the 25th anniversary of his election amid growing concerns about his health and debate over his eventual successor.   7. Slumping economy prompts budget cutbacks in many denominations.   8. Presbyterian Church (USA) keeps fidelity and chastity clause, maintaining its ban on noncelibate gay clergy. The denomination elects its first woman pastor as moderator.   9. The U.S. Supreme Court decides to hear a California case challenging the inclusion of the words under God in the Pledge of Allegiance.   10. The suspension of Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod official David   Benke of New York, for participating in a post-9/11 interfaith service, is overturned.   Officials of Valparaiso University issued an apology to the Denomination’s members after holding an interfaith service marking the first anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.     END

AS EYE SEE IT:   Dear Bishop Lee;     Please read this carefully through until the end.  This is a hard e-mail, tough love, and I know that you have been getting many hard e-mails, sadly even hateful e-mails.  This message is not one of hate but words of one man speaking straight to another.  I have labored long on this message in love believing that you are an adult and old enough to take hard truth.  Please prayerfully consider what I have said.  Time is short. Much has happened in the life of the church since I shook your hand at Olivet Episcopal Church 150-year anniversary earlier in 2003. As part of our family’s ministry to historic re-enactors (see www.historicfaith.net http://www.historicfaith.net ), Rev. Harper had asked us to help with preparations and we were there in 1850 clothing (I have attached a photo from the event).  I was touched when you stated that you found a power in the old (1845 vice 1928) liturgy, but was not convinced.  There has been twenty years for me to judge your words by.   In 1984 as bishop, you received me into the Episcopal Church. I believe that this confirmation service at Truro was your first confirmation service as bishop of the Diocese of Virginia.  Later, you were the Bishop that licensed me as a lay preacher when my family and I were at Christ the Redeemer.  You were the bishop who I looked to when I began the local discernment process for ordination.  While talking with you at a dozen after-church receptions does not make a deep friendship, you have been my bishop since you became bishop in Virginia.   As you have been my bishop, I have carefully read much of what you have written and listened carefully to what you have said. You are an intelligent and articulate man and I believe that you have some love for the Episcopal Church.  From what I have read, heard, and seen, I am deeply concerned for your soul.  It seems clear that you have valued the game of church politics and opinions of fellow bishops over your sworn duty to uphold the faith outlined in scripture and our catholic tradition.   I shook your hand at Olivet but I was a little guarded for I believed that when the clear decision point came to choose between the Apostolic faith and the progressive, world loving, rationalistic apostasy that has come into vogue within ECUSA, you would choose the latter.  I was right.   Years ago, you wrote in the Virginia Episcopalian that you saw your duty as Bishop to avoid clarity (what I call fuzzing up) on issues that would divide, such as the immorality of homosexual acts.   This is not the position of a bishop defending the faith.  Your duty is to make spiritual truth clear not to obscure it.  You have acted like a shepherd that will not divide wolves from sheep.  I could give you many scriptural references including the words of Jesus that show that light should not unite with darkness.  Lovingly, and actively, we are to engage the world so that those who sin are come from darkness to light but that is not to have common cause with them.  Scripture set a different course for those who are believers and even higher standards for those who are leaders among Christians.   Some time after that article on your commitment to be fuzzy in the Virginia Episcopalian, I believe around 1997, you instituted the Call to Holy Life at Virginia Theological Seminary to open the school to active homosexual partnerships in lieu of the previous policy that forbade sexual intercourse outside the bonds of marriage, adulterous relationships, and the practice of homosexuality.  By this action (and actions do speak louder than words) you clearly demonstrated that even within your own diocese, you would be go with the flow even it that meant jettisoning the moral teachings of Jesus.  You used your skill at turning phrases to fuzz up this issue.  At the time you instituted the Call to Holy Life you stated you were seeking a policy more in keeping with Anglican comprehensiveness than the previous statement and more in keeping with the biblical balance of the Christian tradition.   Fine words, as I would expect from a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Duke Law School, but VTS, since your action and under your leadership, has become a hotbed of homosexual activism.   VTS is the place in your Diocese where church leaders are  training and you are responsible for the type of leaders you train there.  At the time of A Call to Holy Life, in my deep concern and as part of my discernment process, I exchanged a series of e-mails with you in an attempt to find out where you stood on the authority of scripture and the nature of sin, in particular on the sexual sin, which was being promoted by the apostate.  It was not easy to get a clear answer from you to this fundamental question - did you believe that homosexual practice was sin.  I was at first hopeful when you read my e-mails and took time to reply. The ongoing exchanges with you, as courteous as they were, eventually convinced me that you did not have a moral compass that would enable me to seek ordination under your leadership.  In my heart, I knew then that when a vote on accepting same-sex immorality would come, you would choose Sodom rather than Zion.  Thus, I left off the ordination process and after subsequent statements and actions by you, left off active life in a local Episcopal Church for a couple of years, moving instead to support our non-denominational ministry.  Recent actions of yours has shown that I made the right decision.  Since you put The Call to Holy Life into place, VTS students who hold the orthodox faith have told me repeatedly how they feel under siege for their beliefs.     Your recent vote and past actions are clearly destroying our diocese.  Unless you publicly and proximately repent for your part in this apostasy, the diocese you claim to love will fall to pieces, to the despair of the many faithful priest and laity who have stood by you through your past moral fuzziness.  Through your actions, the Episcopal Church, USA has become a scandal within the historic, orthodox, catholic faith.  You stated that in your recent votes:   I had a difficult, even wrenching time deciding. I prayed a lot. I consulted widely, with clergy and lay colleagues, with other professionals, more formally with the deans of the regions, and the Standing Committee. I studied scripture anew.  I was particularly struck by the 15th Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles where the apostles and elders of the church in Jerusalem adapted the requirements of Jewish law to the reality of the situation of gentile converts in Antioch.  My reading of scripture convinces me that the Gospel is ever-increasing its power to erase the barriers that we human beings erect among ourselves.   Did you prayerfully read what the Apostles decided in Acts 15:20?  One of the minimum requirements that the Apostles placed on the Gentiles was to avoid sexual sins - no compromise, no fuzziness.  The requirement for the gentiles was a beginning not the end.  The Apostles' decision also had the assumption that God’s ministers would teach the Gentiles to live a life of increasing righteousness through faith, not a life of wantonness masquerading as righteousness.  Again, in your reading of scripture as in past actions as bishop, you cling to the politics and ignore the requirements of faith.  You also stated, I was also struck anew by the centrality of a theology based more on grace than on law.  In Philippians 3:8-14, Paul wrote to the Philippians yearning for a righteousness that comes not from the law but for a righteousness that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith.  Paul continues, I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead.   Philippians 4:9 states, The things which ye both learned and received and heard and saw in me, these things do: and the God of peace shall be with you.  Do you, a bishop, understand the grace that Paul preached?   Do you understand how repentance, the complete turning away from Sin, and Grace are related in Paul’s teaching?  Romans 6:1-7 shows this clearly:   What shall we say then?  Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?  God forbid.  We who died to sin, how shall we any longer live therein?  Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  We were buried therefore with him through baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection; knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin; for he that hath died is justified from sin.   God Forbid indeed!, and you should have done all in your power to forbid the consecration of Vickie Gene Robinson and the acceptance of same-sex blessings.  What did Paul tell Titus that a Bishop should do? Holding to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able to exhort in the sound doctrine, and to convict the gainsayers (Titus 1:9).  As a bishop you took the vows, and have been supported comfortably by the Church as bishop, but you are NOT holding to the faithful word and 2000 years of church doctrine.   You are undermining, not defending the faith.  You seemed to stated with pride:   Since I was consecrated in 1984, I have consented to the consecration of nearly 200 bishops.  I have not voted against a single one, not those who were divorced and remarried, not the poor administrators and preachers, not even those bishops who now threaten to leave the church. I believe strongly that the people of a local diocese, when the election is properly and fairly held, are the best people to determine who will best lead their diocese.  Just as the apostles respected the local circumstances of the people of Antioch, so the General Convention respected the circumstances of the people of New Hampshire.   The apostles clearly set limits and conditions (faith and repentance) on God’s grace and even stricter conditions for Church leadership.  Why can’t you?  The Church gave you the vote of consent to defend the faith as a faithful steward.  The pride you have in never having shown leadership, not once since 1984, in the consecration of 200 bishops is shameful.   If, in 1984, you found that you did not have the judgment or moral fortitude to vote down unworthy candidates for bishops, then you should have stepped down then.  If you cannot see the problem with your actions now, you should step down now.  A sea captain whom never steers a ship or a medical board than never denies a medical license to a medical student is acting criminally, even murderously.  Your action or in this case inaction is killing the Episcopal Church and more importantly hindering the work of the Gospel to turn people from death to life.  Do you so disrespect the Church and your calling that you believe that anyone who walks in the door will do as a bishop?  Even the non-spiritual, political wisdom of the business world understands the concept of checks and balances, and of the criticality of selecting competent leaders.   Do you understand what apostasy is?  Do you realize that you are joining with those who are actively seeking to turn the Church away from the authority of scripture and the faith delivered by the Apostles? Second Peter Chapter Two clearly talks about people wedded to apostasy. Verses 18-21 (Message version) is especially clear: They are loudmouths, full of hot air, but still they’re dangerous. Men and women who have recently escaped from a deviant life are most susceptible to their brand of seduction. They promise these newcomers freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption, for if they’re addicted to corruption--and they are—they’re enslaved.  If they’ve escaped from the slum of sin by experiencing our Master and Savior, Jesus Christ, and then slid back into that same old life again, they’re worse than if they had never left.  Better not to have started out on the straight road to God than to start out and then turn back, repudiating the experience and the holy command.     Recent statements by the revisionists, clearly demonstrate that they have no loyalty to the Christian faith.  In his Christmas Day message, your fellow bishop, John Bryson Chane stated the following And what was God thinking... when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the sacred Quran to the prophet Muhammad?  And what was God thinking... when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the birth of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?  (see http://www.cathedral.org/cathedral/worship/jbc031225.html ).   Do you really want to through your lot in with the ECUSA proponents of Islam?; a religion that worldwide continues to martyr more Christians in its name than any other.  This is so much more than promoting slavery to deviate sexual practice, as terrible as that is; this is collaborating with those who are anti-Christ. Islam does not accept that Jesus is Christ and fights against or enslaves those who do - Muslims are not fuzzy about what they believe. I know of what I speak.  I have read the Quran.  I have talked at length to both moderate and fundamental Muslims.  Having preached to and talked with Sudanese Anglican refugees when I was in Cairo with USAID and here in the United States, I have heard first hand accounts of what our Christian brothers and sisters have endured, and this death, rape, and torture is a worldwide reality, even under advanced Islamic governments.  I worked in Jordan, West Bank/Gaza, Turkey, and Egypt.  I have watched Saudi state television present the master plan of converting the world to Islam and have visited many places where historic churches were converted forcibly to mosques (they don’t switch back).   I have reviewed government assessments on the views and actions of Islamic Jihadist (Christian fundamentalist are NOT like Islamic fundamentalists).  I have read the words of American Mullahs and Imams.   Now your fellow bishop has proclaimed the truth of Islam in our national cathedral and his fellow bishops remain silent.  This fact will not be lost on the Islamic world.  It will be used to justify the murder of thousands.     Would you consent to the elevation of a Islamic Mullah as Episcopal Bishop if a diocese put him forward?  Do you believe that Jesus would accept the teachings of Islam?  Jesus cannot be Lord is what Muhammad said in the Quran is true and from the Angel Gabriel. To accept Islam is to deny the Jesus of the Gospels.     Peter, will you choose to be light or darkness?, hot or cold?, sheep or wolf?  There is no more time for sitting on the fence, no middle way of inclusion with evil, no more time for fuzz-ing up truth. This is not to say that there is not room in Anglicanism for differences of opinion or understanding but there are limits to how broad the Anglican road is.  It is a wide highway, but you have helped drive the Episcopal Church through the guardrail straight for a cliff--an abyss. You must turn 180 degrees immediately to avoid the crash and the resulting death in flames.     Do you not fear the judgment of God in this matter?  Being a bishop is no defense, if you believe the Gospel accounts and Epistles; judgment will be stricter for those in Spiritual leadership, whether they are legalistic, fundamentalist Pharisees or rationalistic, humanist Sadducees.   The last time I saw you at Olivet you stated that you were moved by the power of the old 1845 version of the liturgy.  I quote that liturgy now in the hope that you will be moved by its power to publicly repent.   I exhort you, in the Name of God, to remember the profession which you made unto God in your Baptism. And forasmuch as after this life there is an account to be given unto the righteous Judge, by whom all must be judged, without respect of persons, I require you to examine yourself and your estate, both toward God and man; so that, accusing and condemning yourself for your own faults, you may find mercy at our heavenly Fatherh and for Christ’s sake, and not be accused and condemned in that fearful judgment.   Should you decide that your pride or your convictions will not allow you to make a public confession of sin and repentance in this matter, I will no longer be able to offer you the hand of fellowship.   Until I see that you have repented of your recent heinous actions, I will not accept communion from your hand though this deeply grieves me. Should you decide to humbly and clearly repent, then I with saints and angels will rejoice and weep tears of joy.   I will continue to pray for you, as hundreds of others are, that you will turn back to the faith.   If you wish to meet one-on-one to discuss these matters, I will gladly work to meet your schedule, come to Richmond, and meet with you.  The one occasion that I feel that I can still break bread with you is if we came together to privately discuss this issue.  As one who has been saved by grace from my past evils, I am more than willing to go to some length to see your considerable gifts and talents recovered for the kingdom and to see our beloved Diocese of Virginia turned from wreaking at the bottom of the abyss.   Please think twice and pray about what I have said before hitting the delete key...   Your brother in Christ, Jim Craft Manassas, Virginia

A Vision for Future Collaboration By Bryan Hollon Jun 18, 2025 This past week, Trinity Anglican Seminary hosted our first  Symposium on Anglican Theological Formation , bringing together leaders from across the ACNA to discuss the future of our movement. What follows are my opening remarks, adapted for a broader audience interested in the health and future of Anglican Christianity in North America . Introduction While I cannot actually predict the future, I can share the vision that drives our work at Trinity and our hopes for Anglican formation in North America. I speak as someone who cares deeply about the ongoing health and long-term future of the ACNA because -- institutionally -- the future of Trinity depends on a healthy, growing Anglican movement in North America. We have put all our eggs in the ACNA basket, so to speak. We want to see the movement flourish because  we believe that the Anglican Way is an excellent way to be Christian -- especially in our increasingly shallow and fragmented Evangelical landscape . What We Mean by Anglican Formation Let me be clear from the start about what we mean by "Anglican theological formation." We aren't speaking only of theological education in the academic sense. As I'm sure you realize - We're talking about forming the whole person - heart, soul, mind, and strength, as Jesus instructed in the Great Commandment. And we are talking about forming those who will go on to form others -- whether lay or clergy -- our interest is in forming leaders for the church and its ministries. Over the next two days, you'll see some of the breadth of what this means. We'll explore seminary education and how the ACNA standards should shape our work, examine formation on college campuses and in Christian study centers, look at parish education from family catechesis to confirmation to fellowship programs, consider diocesan education through catechist training and canonical testing, and discuss continuing education for clergy and for laypersons. Anglican formation takes many forms across many contexts -- and we care about all of it. Anglican Formation always involves the whole person shaped by the distinctive rhythms and convictions of the  Anglican Way - through Prayer Book spirituality, character formation in Christian community, and appreciation for the Reformed Catholicism of the 39 Articles and other formularies. This kind of formation takes time. It cannot be rushed, and it requires us to work together -- as a Church. But, before I describe some of the hopes we share at Trinity, I'd like to spend some time talking about the past and the present. It's important to consider past efforts at theological formation because it provides some clarity on our current situation. Some of you will know this history, but some of you may not. Our Historical Foundation So let's start with where we've been: The Episcopal Church had a network of 11 theological seminaries -- Trinity, founded in the mid-1970s, was part of TEC's theological ecosystem. Among the TEC seminaries, Trinity was the evangelical voice -- we were the subversives working against the grain of a province drifting from Christian orthodoxy. But the landscape was clear and easy to understand back then: Trinity championed evangelical Anglican formation, Nashotah represented the Anglo-Catholic tradition, and Reformed Episcopal Seminary -- was not part of that ecosystem - they served the REC. There was diversity, but also coherence within a shared Anglican framework. Our Subversive Mission In the early years, we knew exactly who we were: evangelical Anglicans forming leaders to renew The Episcopal Church from within. We emphasized orthodox biblical theology, missions, and evangelism. Our strategy was straightforward - inject Spirit-filled evangelical faith into TEC's increasingly liberal trajectory. We were forming leaders to revitalize the Episcopal Church in the hopes that it could be saved. In many ways, Trinity succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of its founders. Generations of evangelical leaders came through Trinity and now serve as archbishops, bishops, and clergy on every continent besides Antarctica. But the apostasy and decline of TEC continued despite our efforts. So our greatest achievement was never intended -- Trinity was among the key institutions instrumental in creating a faithful Anglican Province for North America. Our success helped birth the ACNA and launch a global Anglican realignment. The ACNA Era: Progress and Challenges When the ACNA was formed in 2009 and we gained ecclesiastical freedom -- we lost something crucial. The ACNA had no established theological ecosystem. Unlike TEC's established network of seminaries, academic journals, magazines, publishing houses, and large endowed churches providing financial support - the ACNA began with no coherent formation strategy and no network of Anglican institutions dedicated to forming leaders for our province. The problem was obvious, so the ACNA created a Seminary Consortium, which included Trinity, Nashotah House, Reformed Episcopal Seminary, and several evangelical institutions including Asbury, Gordon-Conwell, Regent College, and Beeson Divinity School. Subscribed The deans of these schools met monthly for years to discuss the ordination standards outlined in the ACNA's constitution and canons. The ACNA Constitution & Canons requires nine comprehensive formational standards for the ordination of a priest - covering Holy Scripture, Church History, Anglican Church History, Doctrine, Liturgics, Moral Theology and Ethics, Ascetical Theology, Practical Theology, and the Missionary Work of the Church. These standards represent the minimum foundation for clergy formation and should shape the way we form clergy and, to some extent, lay leaders. The nine standards are meant to be the foundation of a comprehensive curriculum, which is what Trinity has done with them, as  you can see here. Each month, leaders from the consortium institutions would meet to go carefully through the standards and discuss how they would be integrated into curriculum and implemented in each institution to ensure thorough formation. In other words, the goal was noble and made good sense in a context with no theological ecosystem. However, the consortium was -- in my assessment -- mostly unhelpful. Here's why: 1.     Non-Anglican institutions could not reshape their curricula  -- Those nine standards cannot be met through a four-course track, and non-Anglican seminaries lacked the structural capacity for genuine Anglican formation integrated into their overall curriculum. They neither had the room in their curriculum nor the structure to require sufficient liturgical immersion and instruction. 2.    Faculty turnover plagued our partners  -- they couldn't maintain qualified Anglican instructors and thus have not been able to keep up a robust Anglican formational track. 3.    Many bishops ignored the consortium , often for their own good reasons -- they sent students wherever it seemed best, rendering the work of the consortium largely irrelevant. 4.    No real accountability existed  for meeting ACNA formation standards. Some dioceses pay close attention to the standards in their ordination processes -- others do not. Some clergy have never heard of the standards -- I know this from experience. 5.    The kind of formation we need requires a complete theological ecosystem  that involves the whole church and many different kinds of formative institutions -- a consortium of seminaries could never have been enough. In other words, we need to think much more holistically. Our formation efforts cannot be achieved by seminary courses alone -- which is why collaborative efforts like our recent symposium are so important. Where We Stand Today I believe the consortium was a noble effort and an important step along the way -- a lesson learned. But we need to be honest about where we are now -- our efforts have not built the formative network that we need. Our Current Challenges: 1.     Neglected Anglican Standards : Too many new clergy receive insufficient Anglican formation - lacking deep grounding in our liturgical, theological, and spiritual traditions. 2.    Creeping Pragmatism : Some dioceses and churches, driven by cultural pressures for success and efficiency, lose sight of proper formational goals. We risk accommodating our culture's impatience rather than forming character through time-tested Anglican formative practices. 3.    Fragmented Formation : Too many clergy are being formed not for the whole Province or even an entire diocese, but for particular congregations. It is too easy to receive theological training online or locally and never be required to engage with Anglicans from around the Province or around the world. This is a problem for the ACNA’s claims to catholicity. We are not congregationalists. 4.    Structural Incapacity : Many consortium seminaries simply cannot be reliable, long-term partners. They lack the institutional commitment to Anglican formation that our province requires. 5.    Increasing Tribalism : As Steve Noll recently observed, without a commitment to unifying institutions, some dioceses have become increasingly extreme versions of themselves. We lack the forces that can pull a healthy province together. 6.    Leadership Pipeline Crisis : Without our own theological ecosystem, we cannot effectively identify, form, and deploy leaders. Too many parishes cannot find qualified clergy. The shortage is evident even in attractive positions that should draw strong candidates. 7.    Weakening Anglican Institutions : With only 128,000 members, the ACNA cannot sustain multiple competing Anglican seminaries and certainly cannot support 10+ Anglican tracks. As I've suggested to the bishops repeatedly, if we cannot get behind our own institutions, the ACNA will have no Anglican seminaries at all. Strong institutions are absolutely crucial for provincial health. They require intentional stewarding and will be neglected to the detriment of us all. Our Assessment : The ACNA is fractured and relatively weak in terms of its formative institutions. We have not yet learned to work together and to support institutions that promote the common good of our province.  This is where we are now in terms of Anglican formation for the ACNA. Trinity's Vision Forward Among the consortium seminaries, Trinity is the only institution that can serve the ACNA exclusively -- in order to build the kind of unity we need. We don't need to be the only seminary and certainly won't be. But no other province or tradition has a claim on Trinity’s loyalty. We are devoted to the ACNA -- so our board of trustees -- wisely -- decided that we should take the lead and help the province move beyond some of the weaknesses I mention above. We are working to build the  Anglican Formation Network  to encourage and support a robust theological ecosystem for the good of the whole province -- for Trinity and for competing institutions. For the past three years, Trinity has rebuilt itself to serve the ACNA more effectively. Our Strategic Plan, adopted in October 2023, centers on four goals: 1.     Goal 1 : Trinity will double-down on Anglican Formation grounded in biblical, prayer book spirituality and Reformation teaching, including Daily Office, Wednesday Eucharist, common meals, fellowship, and witness to Ambridge. 2.    Goal 2 : Provide robust Anglican Formation via multiple pathways, including our new Church-Based Pathway launching this fall, combining local mentors and instructors in a parish context, online courses through Trinity, and intensive courses in Ambridge. 3.    Goal 3 : Serve the ACNA as no other seminary can - with complete alignment to the 2019 Book of Common Prayer and thorough integration of all nine ACNA standards for ordination. Our curriculum is entirely tethered to ACNA Standards, and our new Trophimus Center will be a gathering place for an increasing number of meetings focused on topics from great texts, to catechesis to music and liturgy to emotional well-being and resilience and much more. 4.    Goal 4 : Continue our commitment to Anglican formation globally, building on our historic mission legacy and remaining all-in for the global realignment of Anglicanism. The Anglican Formation Network Vision The Lilly Foundation has provided Trinity with a $50,000 planning grant to develop what could become a $10 million initiative -  the Anglican Formation Network . Subscribed The AFN will have three primary areas of focus: 1. Leadership Pipeline Cultivation We can't just wait for potential Christian leaders to find us -- we need to build a culture in our churches where far more young people are encouraged to seriously consider Christian vocations. Too many capable people never consider Anglican ministry because they've never encountered focused encouragement or clear pathways to formation. This initiative will establish regional discernment programs across North America, strategic partnerships with Christian colleges and study centers to identify potential leaders early, pre-seminary preparation programs that begin formation before formal theological education begins, and scholarship support removing financial barriers for promising candidates. 2. Enhanced Clergy Formation Standards As I’ve already described, the ACNA Constitution requires nine formation standards for ordination, but implementation has been inconsistent across dioceses. Many newly ordained clergy have insufficient grounding in Anglican liturgical, theological, and spiritual traditions. Our efforts may include comprehensive curriculum development aligned with all nine ACNA standards, assessment tools ensuring consistent preparation across all formation pathways, faculty training programs for diocesan instructors and mentors, and shared digital resources making quality Anglican education accessible everywhere. 3. Integrated Formation Pathways Knowing how many well-trained clergy and lay leaders are involved in regional parish and diocesan formation, we want to partner with everyone who will work with us to develop a rich and vibrant formational ecosystem. Key components may include recruiting and training a larger network of adjunct professors and church-based formation mentors, providing substantial scholarship support for both residential and church-based students, connecting church-based and residential students with the broader provincial community, and developing new learning communities which extend formation throughout ministry careers. We currently have the enthusiastic support of the Provincial office and the majority of bishops in the ACNA. Trinity currently has at least one student either enrolled or in the application process from every diocese in the ACNA except the REC dioceses. We certainly don't need to be the only seminary forming leaders for the ACNA, but we are the only seminary focused exclusively on forming leaders for the ACNA. Partnership Opportunities Whether or not we receive full Lilly funding, our symposium represents the beginning of an ongoing effort to build a formational ecosystem for the ACNA. The ACNA has the talent, wisdom, and passion needed - we simply need better coordination and shared resources. Moving Forward Together The leaders gathered at our symposium represent Anglican seminaries, diocesan training institutes, study centers, parish formation programs, and fellowship initiatives that are already shaping future leaders. The ACNA is well-gifted for theological formation---it's happening across the province. What we need is better coordination and stronger partnerships. Here is what Trinity plans to do: Cultivate Vocational Discernment  - Help us change the culture of our churches so that Christian vocation becomes a regular part of the conversation in parishes, programs, and mentoring relationships across the ACNA. Share Formational Resources  - Coordinate our efforts rather than duplicate them. Develop and share curriculum, collaborate on faculty development, and build unity by connecting people with provincial efforts. Partner in Theological Formation  - Send promising leaders for intensive courses, help us test church-based formation models, and join us for future symposiums. The Anglican Way offers precisely what North American Christianity needs:  liturgical richness, biblical orthodoxy, theological depth, and evangelical vitality . But we need strong institutions working together rather than competing for limited resources. This symposium marks the beginning of something important. The ACNA's future depends not just on numerical growth, but on the quality of leaders we form together. Paul reminds us in Ephesians that Christ gave gifts "to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God" (Ephesians 4:12-13). This is our calling - not just to train individual clergy, but to build up the body of Christ through excellent formation that serves His church. The vision outlined here represents more than institutional ambition; it reflects our commitment to the flourishing of Anglican Christianity in North America and beyond. For those interested in supporting this vision, whether through prayer, partnership, or financial investment, we are ready to serve as a catalyst for the collaborative excellence our movement needs. The future of Anglican theological formation depends not on any single institution, but on our willingness to work together for the common good of Christ's church. For more information about Trinity Anglican Seminary, visit  www.tas.edu . To inquire about the Anglican Formation Network, send an email to our Associate Dean for Special Projects - Dr. Alex Fogleman. Alex can be reached at alex.fogleman@tas.edu .

By John Mac Ghlionn, Catholic Herald June 2025   (photo: Wikimedia Creative Commons) Rowan Williams wants to make Christianity safe for modern ears. That’s the real story behind his long, meandering interviews, such as the recent extensive interview he did with the New York Times, and poetic turns of phrase.   He tells us that suffering doesn’t need an answer. That faith is elusive, mysterious, like a cloud of incense swirling around a flame we’ll never quite touch. But in trying to make Christianity palatable to doubters, Williams strips it of its essence. In place of the Gospel, we’re left with a mood.   He means well, of course. The former Archbishop of Canterbury is no fool. Williams has read the mystics, the philosophers, the poets. He’s good at riddles and metaphors. But Christianity is not a metaphor. It’s not a feeling or a sensibility or a literary style. It’s a faith rooted in the Incarnation – God made flesh. Not God as fog. Not God as idea. But a man who walked, bled, died and rose again. Jesus Christ not as a metaphor for love, but as love with a pulse and a name.   Williams says the New Atheists attack a God he doesn’t believe in either. But that’s a dodge – a clever one, dressed in academic humility. Because the New Atheists aren’t swinging at vague deities or cartoonish caricatures. They’re aiming directly at the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – the one who split seas, raised the dead, and etched moral law into stone.   The God who commands, convicts, forgives and reigns. Not a therapist in the sky. A sovereign. A judge. And yes, I know, that makes some people uncomfortable. But that’s the point. Christianity doesn’t need to soften that truth. It needs to speak it – clearly, unapologetically and without flinching.   Moreover, while honest, Williams’ picture of suffering is theologically thin. He leans heavily on Dostoyevsky, letting his character Ivan Karamazov set the emotional tone, but shrinks back from the full power of the Cross. He invites us to sit with the sorrow, to feel the weight of existence and the silence of God. And that’s real – but it’s not the whole story. Christianity doesn’t leave you staring into the abyss. It doesn’t end in Ivan’s tortured syllogisms or spiritual stalemates. It ends with an empty tomb, a pierced side and a rolled-away stone.   Christianity doesn’t run from suffering – it confronts it. Yes, we ask why children are born with illnesses no doctor can cure. The question isn’t new, and the ache doesn’t go away. But the Church never pretended to have neat answers. It never tried to talk the agony away. Instead, it pointed to a God who didn’t stay above it all. Who didn’t send down advice or distant comfort, but came in person – right into the mess. Beaten, mocked and nailed to a cross. Not as a symbol, but as a sacrifice. Not to explain the pain – but to carry it. Every last drop.   There is something deeply modern in Williams’ reluctance to assert. He circles truths. He performs reverence without clarity. His God is oceanic, not authoritative. He’s generous but not jealous. He’s present but never personal enough to interfere. That may sound spiritual. It may even feel humane. But it isn’t Christian.   Because the God of Christianity is not a gentle whisper lost in the static of doubt. He is the Lion of Judah. The Alpha and the Omega. He speaks in commandments and covenants. He calls sinners to repent. He casts out demons. He separates light from darkness and truth from lies.   Williams may think that’s all too stark, too literal, too…unsophisticated. But the Gospel wasn’t written for elites. It was preached to fishermen, outcasts, Roman soldiers and tax collectors. It didn’t come wrapped in literary theory. It came with wounds.   Faith is not guesswork. It’s not tiptoeing in the dark hoping to bump into God. It’s confidence in what we firmly believe. Williams prefers to sidestep all that. He warns us not to make God “manageable”. Fair enough. But in doing so, he makes Him unrecognisable. And in trying to rescue God from crude misunderstandings, he risks erasing Him entirely.   Christianity is not about being endlessly “open to something”. It’s about being reshaped, rewritten, remade by Someone. It’s not about keeping your options open. It’s about commitment. Williams offers a gentle Christianity, but not a true Christianity.   The early martyrs didn’t die for a perspective that “enlarges”. They died for Christ the King, for the Logos who became flesh, for the Judge who will come again in glory. That’s the faith that endures. That’s the faith the world still needs.   Photo: Nick Cave and Rowan Williams arrive at Westminster Abbey ahead of the Coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla on May 06, 2023 in London, England. (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)