By Ted Schroder | April 25, 2004 A.W. Tozer (1897-1963) pastured the Southside Alliance Church in Chicago from 1928 to 1959, and the Peoples' Church in Toronto, the last four years of his life. His sermons confronted his listeners with these questions: Is God real to you? Is your Christian experience a set of definitions, a list of orthodox doctrines, or a living relationship with God? Do you have a first-hand experience with God, or a second-hand experience through others? Is your heart hungering and thirsting after personal holiness?   He was editor of The Alliance Witness for many years, and his editorials were collected into a number of books. In his classic, The Knowledge of the Holy, he wrote, "What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us... For this reason the gravest question before the Church is always God Himself, and the most portentous fact about any man is not what he at a given time may say or do, but what he in his deep heart conceives God to be like. We tend by a secret law of the soul to move toward our mental image of God... Were we able to extract from any man a complete answer to the question, 'What comes into your mind when you think about God?' we might predict with certainty the spiritual future of that man." (p.9)   That may be why Jesus tells us to pray using the name of God, "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name." He wants us to know to whom we are praying, where God is, and why we should pray.   When we pray: "Hallowed be your name", we are asking that our understanding of God's character would be worthy, and that our lives would honor him in every way, by reflecting that character. Implicit in this prayer is the spelling out of God's purpose for our lives. We may have some idea about what we want to do with our lives, but Jesus is concerned to direct us to finding out God's purpose for our lives. "Many are the plans in a man's heart, but it is the Lord's purpose that prevails." (Proverbs 19:21) By praying this prayer we are aligning our plans with God's purpose, so that our lives will run according to the Spirit's direction.   What comes into your mind when you think about God? What is your mental image of God? What in your deep heart do you conceive God to be like?   We receive our impressions of God from all sorts of sources. Some are good and others are bad. When terrorists torture and murder innocent civilians while chanting, "God is great", I wonder where they received their understanding of the character of God? We are all tempted to project onto God our own prejudices, and desecrate, instead of hallow, the name of God. Do we move toward our mental image of God or is our mental image of God determined by us? What is your conscious impression of the character, the name, of God?   When Moses stood before the burning bush, and was told to remove his shoes, because it was holy ground, God revealed himself as the "God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." (Exodus 3:6) He wasn't yet the God of Moses because God had still to reveal himself to his prophet. Later the people of Israel would know God as the God of Moses. At this point Moses still needed to know more about God. "What shall I tell the people? What is your name?" God's reply was, "I AM WHO I AM." (Exodus 3:14) "I am eternally present, I will be with you in all that you do according to my will."   God's character is revealed in his actions in history as he works out his purposes through his people. God cannot be known and hallowed in the abstract or the universal, but in the particular and the specific. In the fullness of time the name by which God revealed his character was Jesus. It is Jesus who takes this name for himself: "I AM the bread of life, I AM the light of the world, I AM the gate, I AM the good shepherd, I AM the resurrection and the life, I AM the way, the truth, and the life, I AM the true vine." He has been given "the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:9-11)   Therefore when I echo the words of Psalm 103: "Praise the Lord, O my soul; all my inmost being, praise his holy name," I am seeing God through Jesus spectacles. What comes into my mind when I think about God, is not just abstract, theological, philosophical, or New Age thought that God is Spirit, that God is Love, that God is Almighty, but that God has loved me through the birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus. It is Jesus who shows us the truth, love and mercy of God through his feeding the hungry, healing the sick, raising the dead, comforting the bereaved, suffering and dying on the Cross. The character, the name of God, is seen in what Christ did. He hallowed God's name by his actions, by humbling himself and becoming obedient to death.   We can be sure of hallowing God's name when we receive our understanding of God in terms of Jesus. Jesus reveals the name, the character of God to us. "I have revealed your name to those whom you gave me out of the world.....I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them." (John 17:6,26) The more we get to know Jesus, his character and his teaching, the more our understanding of God is hallowed, is worthy of God. Jesus came to reveal God to the world through us.   A general belief in God is no guarantee that we will hallow God's name. The conception some people have of God is hideous. John Wesley once said of one who promoted a depraved view of God: "Your God is my devil." That is why the world needs Jesus.   So much of our thinking about God can be unworthy. So much of the church's teaching about God has been unworthy. So much of institutional Christianity has been unworthy of the name of God.   When we pray "hallowed be your name", we are praying that our lives would glorify God in every way, that everything we do would be honoring to God, and consistent with his character. We need to pray for this because there is a tendency in us to dishonor God by our lives, and to bring his name into disrepute. Paul criticizes the hypocrites of his faith: "if you know God's will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of infants, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth - you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? ... You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? As it is written: 'God's name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.'" (Romans 2:18-24)   For good or ill Christian believers represent Christ to the world. If we are living an immoral, selfish, and unloving life, then others will take note and blame our faith. Jesus said, "Let your light shine before men that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven." (Matthew 5:16)   Gregory of Nyssa wrote that when he prays this petition, what he is really praying is: "May I become through your help blameless, just and spiritual, may I abstain from every evil, speak the truth, and do justice. May I walk in the straight path, shining with moderation, dressed with purity, beautiful through wisdom and prudence. May I meditate upon the things that are eternal and despise what is temporal, showing the heavenly way of life.... For a man can glorify God in no other way save by the virtue of his life which bears witness that the power of God is the cause of his goodness."   The Gospel is spread by the witness of the lives of believers. We are called to witness to Jesus and his revelation of the name of God. That means that we are called to live such lives of beauty, goodness and truth that others will want to share it. The reason the Gospel fails to be persuasive, and the Christian faith and life is brought into disrepute, is because our lives do not bring glory to God's name.   We live in a society in which there is much competition for the allegiance of people. There are many alternative lifestyles, and many different beliefs about God. The church is often seen to be just one option among many. If Christians are just as weak and despairing as their non-Christian neighbors when confronted with suffering and tragedy, illness and pain; if we are just as restless, frustrated and dissatisfied; if we are just as worried and fearful; just as anxious, and guilty, and materialistic, as those who do not believe, then no one is going to want to be a Christian, because it obviously makes no difference when the chips are down.   Nietzsche challenged Christians: "Show me that you are redeemed, and then I will believe in your redeemer."   Jesus tells us to pray that God may show us how to be redeemed, so that in our behavior he may be glorified, and that through us others may come to him. In other words, we pray that we may be able to show others Christ, so that they may want to follow him.   "Let them praise the name of the Lord, for his name alone is exalted; his splendor is above the earth and the heavens." (Psalm 148:13)   A Prayer: THE HOLY NAME   O LORD GOD, whose gifts are beyond count or measure or price, and every gift, high honor; of all, this would be the chief, that you, Lord, would write your Name and grave it on my inmost soul unknown, unseen, unfelt by me, yet readable, for your sole glory, by the eyes of men: so that it testify in quietness to the lowly devotion of my heart, the dedication of my whole being, the pure joy of faith. To your Name, Lord Jesus, help me bow the knee and all its worshipping, bow the head and all its thinking, bow the will and all its choosing, bow the heart and all its loving. But chiefest, O my God, write your Name upon me, in me, your holiness, your lordship, your love, in shining letters, indelible, for ever.   — Eric Milner-White

By Herbert Thompson I have received The Rev. Richard Terry's letter of resignation as Rector of St. Paul's, Chillicothe. I regret both his resignation, the manner in which it was tendered and the course that Mr. Terry has charted for the days ahead, notably the proposed establishing of an "Anglican" congregation in Chillicothe.   This action amounts to a gross exploitation of Mr. Terry's relationship with St. Paul's Church and the congregation with which I entrusted him when I instituted him as Rector in March of 1993.   I am at pains to understand Mr. Terry's problem with the Diocese of Southern Ohio and with me as Bishop. It cannot be the issue of human sexuality. As Bishop for 16 years I have made it clear in the Diocese and the National Church, that I will not bless or countenance the blessing of same sex unions in the Diocese, nor ordain any person living in a sexual relationship with another person. I believe and have taught that, for those who have sworn allegiance to Christ, sexual relations are to take place only in the context of Holy Matrimony between a man and a woman.   I taught and teach the same in the Diocese and beyond. At the 1998 Lambeth Conference in England on the human sexuality resolutions I voted with 570 Bishops from around the world against changing the Church's teaching on this matter. Last year at the General Convention in Minneapolis on the matter of confirming the election of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, I voted "no."   However, from the day of my ordination, I have never wavered from my defense of and work for the Unity of the Church or my affirmation of God's love for all of His people.   I am convinced Mr. Terry needs to examine his conscience and recall his own ordination vows. For it is clear to me that his actions have nothing to do with human sexuality, nor me. Rather they spring from Mr. Terry's tragic misunderstanding of Anglican Christianity and polity.   In my pastoral directive, I stated that I believe the Anglican Communion Network to be a threat to the unity of the Church. The directive clearly stated that while individual members, lay or ordained might affiliate with the Network, congregations under my jurisdiction could not.   Subsequent to my letter to Mr. Terry, Bishop Duncan, Convener of the Anglican Communion Network, called and then wrote to me to say that in response to my position and that of other Bishops of the Episcopal Church he would not accept the congregational affiliation of St. Paul's. I expressed my gratitude for it meant that there was no action for Mr. Terry to take regarding the directive.   I do not presume to know Mr. Terry's motives, only God knows and I am content to leave the judging to God. I do know that his actions have precipitated turmoil and tragedy.   In his letter to you and to the Chillicothe Gazette, Mr. Terry says, "I have decided to leave quietly." How quiet is it to publish to the entire town of Chillicothe a matter that properly belongs between a priest and his Bishop? In so doing Mr. Terry has not only abandoned the trust of the people of St. Paul's, but the Communion which ordained him and instituted him as Rector in that place. He has also abandoned the trust of the people who chose him as pastor, priest and teacher.   On the night before he died, Our Lord Jesus did not pray that his disciples would be right, good or even holy. He prayed that they would be one as He and the Father were one, that the world might believe that He was sent by the Father.   It was out of that clear understanding that I as Bishop issued my pastoral directive to Mr. Terry and now write to call you to work for the unity of the Church and resist Mr. Terry, or anyone else's attempts to divide the body, for such division would grieve Our Lord and distract us from the sacred mission for which the Church exists, to preach the Gospel to all nations and to witness to Jesus as Savior and Lord.   That task calls us to a future. I have asked Archdeacon Hanisian to be with you on Sunday August 8, 2004, to answer any questions you may have and to begin the work which will ultimately end in the calling of a new Rector for St. Paul's. Throughout this period my staff, Bishop Price and I will be working with you committed Episcopal Christians to strengthen the witness of this congregation in Chillicothe.   Yours in Christ, The Rt. Rev. Herbert Thompson, Jr. Bishop of Southern Ohio

Weekly Digest / Commentary "Much of the sexuality debate revolves around human demands about what God allegedly must do if God is to be considered loving and just, rather than accepting with open hearts the singular way God has provided for acceptable sexual expression." — Presbyterian biblical scholar Robert A. J. Gagnon in Theology Matters Dear Brothers and Sisters, It was another week in which the Episcopal Church's revisionist bishops showed their hand in beating up on orthodox rectors and continuing their in-your-face acts against the predominantly orthodox Anglican Communion pushing pansexuality and much more. If the Global South ever wanted overwhelming evidence that the Episcopal Church does not plan to change course, they need only go to www.virtuosityonline.org and hit the ARCHIVES link and read to their hearts content, or perhaps discontent. "In the whole messy business of legitimizing sodomite relationships comes the question of why not legitimize threesomes and foursomes? What about bisexuals, who are attracted to both genders? And why not abolish marriage altogether?" Thus spake Marvin Ellison, ethics professor at the United Church of Christ's Bangor (Maine) Theological Seminary, in "Same-Sex Marriage? A Christian Ethical Analysis." Professor Ellison is a non-orthodox gay theologian, so his comments come with added irony. "Besides pondering marriage for bisexuals, he protests that the narrowly 'bipolar' definition of marriage excludes 'intersexuality, transgenderism, transsexuality and other sexualities.' Like other gay writers, Ellison wonders whether government should abolish marriage altogether rather than redefine it to include gays. Of course there is no end to this sexual absurdity, and the Episcopal Church is right in the forefront of the sexual revolution with its fawning desire to please lesbitransgays: misplaced compassion knows no abatement. When I asked an Episcopal orthodox psychiatrist how he dealt with people who came into his practice he said simply that you start with whatever behavior they are addicted to and work on them to stop. If you are an alcoholic go to AA, if a homosexual go to HA. Do whatever it takes to stop the bad behavior, then backtrack into the whys and wherefores. Medication can help in cases like depression, but most psychiatrists defer the whys and wherefore about depression to therapists and counselors, but they can prescribe drugs for immediate relief where therapists cannot. The key word is STOP; in these two cases excessive alcohol and bad (read wrong) sex can kill you. Two very good reasons to stop. The Episcopal Church, on the other hand, because of its misguided and misplaced compassion affirms bad behaviors because it doesn't want to appear uninclusive, little realizing that they could be signing a person's death warrant. Take the actions of the Rehab Sisters in the DIOCESE OF OREGON this week who were awarded a Pentecost Offering for their work among prostitutes. The Council awarded $1,750 to these Sisters, an outreach ministry to Portland's prostitutes. This group invites women from the street into the Columba Center (Saints Peter and Paul) where they can eat, talk, and find other forms of support while learning about the welcoming aspects of the church. According to the Rev. Sara Fischer, Grace Memorial, they are offered the kind of hospitality "we hope we would be offered if we were on the street," says Fischer. "We provide a clean, safe place for food, coffee, health items, and respectful, no-strings attached conversation." Translation: Come as you are stay as you are. So what this says is that the Rehab Sisters, in order to appear non-confrontational and non-judgmental, never offer them the greatest news of all - a life changing encounter with Jesus Christ. That apparently is off-limits. So in order not to appear "fundamentalist" this Episcopal parish is acting like a non-profit charity or Kiwanis Club. No gospel, no Good News just Food and Clothing News and that omnipresent all-knowing "listening" much beloved by our Presiding Bishop. The women are affirmed in their womanhood, if not their lifestyle and back on the streets they go. The notion of Jesus saying "neither do I condemn thee go and sin no more", is lost on the Rehab Sisters.

By George Jaksa The Flint Journal, August 8, 2004 It's been a tumultuous year for some area Episcopalians and their churches. Since the ordination of an openly gay Episcopal bishop in New Hampshire a year ago, three local pastors have resigned their posts and tumbling local church attendance has yet to stabilize. Gone are the Rev. Scott Danforth, 51, rector of St. Dunstan's Episcopal Church, Davison Township; the Rev. David Kulchar, rector of Trinity Episcopal Church, Flushing; and the Rev. Gregory Tournoux, 45, rector of Christ Episcopal Church, Owosso. The turmoil centers on New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, installed and affirmed last August at the U.S. church's national convention in Minneapolis. The Rev. Laura Truby, interim rector at Christ Episcopal, said she won't know until after summer vacation how attendance will shake out. "In the past, groups have broken off into little splinter groups, but they come back over the years," said Bishop Edwin Leidel of Saginaw, head of the Diocese of Eastern Michigan, where the resignations have taken place. Leidel and the entire eight-member delegation from the eastern side of Michigan affirmed Robinson's ordination. "This is kind of the hair that broke the camel's back," said the Rev. Steven J. Dewey, 55, conservative rector of Grace Episcopal Church in Lapeer. "At this juncture, the real issue is the authority of Holy Scripture. Does it have any authority in the church?" he added. "Our national church has said 'no,' our diocesan bishop has, by action, said 'no.'" Although other Episcopal dioceses have ordained gay priests, Flushing's Kulchar said ordaining Robinson at a national convention was especially galling. "What made last summer so critical is that ... the general convention is the only real body that can set policy for the church," Kulchar said. Leidel, who doesn't shy away from the issue, last September discussed homosexuality in the church at a closed meeting in St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Flint and later wrote a letter for the diocesan newspaper. "I do have a bias to be open to giving gay men and lesbians a more inclusive role in the church," said Leidel. "It's a frightening thing." said Dewey, who intends to stay as rector of Grace Episcopal. "I guess the part that is really hard for me is that I really believe that our presiding bishop believes that what he is doing is the right thing, the caring and compassionate thing." Opponents say Robinson's ordination and other issues have sent the Episcopal church in the wrong direction. They're hoping a 14-member international committee will give the Archbishop of Canterbury - who presides over the worldwide Anglican church that Episcopalians are part of - reason to order changes in the United States. Kulchar said he hopes the archbishop will at least allow conservatives to have their own Anglican network in the United States. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the international Anglican Communion, consisting of denominations that stem from the Church of England. Many foreign Anglican churches have denounced or broken fellowship with the Episcopal Church over Robinson, who has lived for years with a gay partner. Locally, Danforth resigned Feb. 1 after almost 10 years as St. Dunstan's rector and left the denomination. He now is considering teaching at the secondary level, among other options. A former tennis partner with Leidel, Danforth said he had an ongoing frustration with the direction and theological path of the church and saw no hope of change. He said he had considered leaving the church for two years, but the Robinson issue had a bearing in his final decision. "I really had no more grace to be able to navigate through the waters as a clergyman," he said. "It was time." Kulchar, who continues to live in the Trinity parish rectory with his family, just finished a three-month sabbatical to ponder his future. He said he wants to remain in the Anglican church and was willing to do weddings, funerals, preach at Episcopal churches and be a fill-in rector, but was turned down by Leidel. "I have a great affection and love for him (Kulchar) and have tried to help him find employment and other things," Leidel said, "But he cannot function as a priest without being in communion with the bishop." Kulchar, a member of the Flushing Board of Education, said he hopes to stay in Flushing at least through the 2004-05 school year so his son can graduate from Flushing High School. Tournoux is on sabbatical for six months from Christ Episcopal but is looking for work in the U.S. Anglican churches. He resigned effective June 12 after 12 years as rector and has started work on a second doctorate. He is considering posts in Mississippi and his home state of Ohio and describes himself as committed to Anglicanism. "I absolutely loved my time at Christ's Church," he said. "I will not give up the priesthood," he continued. "I believe strongly in the ordained leadership, and I am looking forward to getting back into the saddle." Leidel said the Episcopal Church has a number of priests able to fill the vacated rectorship, with a number of other seminarians studying for the priesthood. Kulchar said there were 70 people worshiping at Trinity Episcopal when he resigned, but attendance is now down to 30. St. Dunstan and Christ Episcopal also have lost parishioners - but VanKirk Carlson, junior warden at Christ Church, is hopeful. "During the last month and a half, the folks who were unhappy have pretty much left," Carlson said. "Those who are left pretty much have a positive attitude. We are looking to start over with a fresh slate." © 2004 Flint Journal. Used with permission

May 26, 2004 The Rev. Richard B. Terry, Rector St. Paul's Episcopal Church 33 East Main Street Chillicothe, OH 45601 Dear Fr. Terry, Greetings in the awesome name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. As Moderator of the Network of Anglican Communion Diocese and Parishes, it is with great joy that I welcome you to the Network based on the approval by the Steering Committee of your application to associate. I rejoice in counting you among the diocese, congregations and clergy who are standing together for Gospel truth and our faithful expression of Anglicanism in North America. The Network is organized and administered through a series of six convocations (5 geographic and one for members of Forward in Faith North America). Each convocation is overseen by a Dean appointed by the Network and who generously serves on a voluntary basis. It is our pleasure to assign you to the Mid-Continental Convocation and encourage you to be in contact with your Dean, Fr. Ronald McCrary at 913-648-2271, or Ronald.McCrary@aol.com for information on Convocation and Network-wide activities and events. If you may have any needs for which I can be of personal assistance, please do not hesitate to call upon my office. In this regard, you are also welcome to contact my Executive Assistant, Mr. Larry Crowell at 412-325-0095, or lacrowell53@comcast.net . Alternatively, may I ask that you be in contact with Mr. Crowell to register your preference on two matters: 1. our notifying your Bishop of your association with the Network, and 2. having your associate status listed on the Network web site. In closing, please know that you are in my prayers as we enter into this season of reform for our church. Faithfully in Christ, The Right Reverend Robert Wm. Duncan Bishop, Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, AND Moderator, Network of Anglican Communion Diocese and Parishes SOUTHERN OHIO: ORTHODOX PRIEST RESIGNS PARISH. BISHOP OUTLAWS NETWORK By David W. Virtue Chillicothe, OH (8/9/2004) The rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Chillicothe, has resigned from his parish because he found himself at odds with his bishop Herbert Thompson over his parish's affiliation with the Anglican Communion Network. "For the sake of the Gospel, I'd rather switch than fight," said Fr. Rick Terry to Virtuosity. In his letter of resignation, that has been widely circulated, he wrote, in part, "Rather than pursue the avenue of an inhibition, an ecclesiastical court trial, a potential deposition, and all the accompanying pain and expenditure of resources that would accompany such a process, I have decided to leave quietly. This is not about me. This is about fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus Christ ..." The Evangelical rector of St. Paul's resigned last week and will plant a new church and conduct the first worship service for Chillicothe Anglican Fellowship an Anglican Mission in America church at 90 N. Paint Street, Chillicothe. A first service on Sunday at a store front Christian cafe in downtown Chillicothe drew 75 worshippers mostly from St. Paul's. Fr. Terry, 54, has become the first rector in the Diocese of Southern Ohio to receive a written Pastoral Directive from Bishop Herbert Thompson, concerning St. Paul's affiliation with the Anglican Communion Network (ACN). "This spring, the Vestry of St. Paul's, voted to affiliate with the Anglican Communion Network (ACN) as part of their witness to the Network's stand for Gospel truth." St. Paul's was warmly received into the Network by its moderator, Bishop Robert Duncan, but Bishop Thompson subsequently refused to allow any Southern Ohio congregations to affiliate with the ACN, and threatened me and St. Paul's with canonical actions if his church did not withdraw from the Network," said Fr. Terry. Bishop Thompson had written a letter to Fr. Terry and St. Paul's telling them to disaffiliate with the ACN. In his letter, Thompson blasted the orthodox rector and the Network saying that he believed the Anglican Communion Network to be a threat to the unity of the Church. "The directive clearly stated that while individual members lay or ordained might affiliate with the Network, congregations under my jurisdiction could not." Drawing on his personal history Thompson said, "As Bishop for 16 years I have made it clear in the Diocese and the National Church, that I will not bless or countenance the blessing of same sex unions in the Diocese, nor ordain any person living in a sexual relationship with another person. I believe and have taught that, for those who have sworn allegiance to Christ, sexual relations are to take place only in the context of Holy Matrimony between a man and a woman," wrote the exasperated bishop. Fr. Terry said he seemed to be on the same page theologically as the bishop. "I personally have needed a very clear unequivocal statement from Bp Thompson as to his desire to lead the diocese in an orthodox biblical direction. Unfortunately that has never came forth. The tragedy is that Thompson is surrounded by liberals thus effectively cutting us off from a gospel mainstream." "In my conversation with Bishop Thompson we talked at length about the concept of unity. I believe very strongly that any lasting unity presupposes a strong adherence to the faith once delivered and when we depart from that into pluriform truths that the unity we seek becomes a mirage." Writing to his congregation Terry said, "I believe Jesus, who is Lord of time and circumstances, clearly led me to become the 25th rector of St. Paul's Parish back in March of 1993. As your pastor, I have sought to remain obedient to the Lord Jesus, endeavoring to be a faithful minister of God's Word and Sacraments. I have sought to be obedient to my ordination vows, in remaining loyal to the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as the Church has received them." "As events have unfolded in recent months, I have searched my heart, and I am unable, in accordance with the canons of the Episcopal Church, to obey my bishop in his recent Pastoral Direction of June 3, 2004. Rather than pursue the avenue of an inhibition, an ecclesiastical court trial, a potential deposition, and all the accompanying pain and expenditure of resources that would accompany such a process, I have decided to leave quietly. This is not about me. This is about fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as I have embraced that Gospel for the past 32 years as a disciple of Christ." "Throughout the challenges of the past year, I have sought to 'conduct myself in a manner worthy of the Gospel of Christ ... contending as one man for the faith of the Gospel.' (Philippians 1:28) I leave the ministry here at St. Paul's with a profound sadness, but also with an overwhelming expectation of the wonderful things the Lord has planned." Prior to his departure, Terry had received a letter from Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan welcoming him into the ACN family. "As Moderator of the Network of Anglican Communion Diocese and Parishes, it is with great joy that I welcome you to the Network based on the approval by the Steering Committee of your application to associate. I rejoice in counting you among the diocese, congregations and clergy who are standing together for Gospel truth and our faithful expression of Anglicanism in North America." Local American Anglican Council representative Andy Figueroa observed that St. Paul's and Fr. Terry courageously determined they could not follow the direction issued by Bishop Thompson and that they would not be intimidated. But the bishop himself came under fire from his orthodox wing. On August 8, 2003, after General Convention, Bishop Thompson issued a pastoral letter saying, in part: "I will not associate myself with those who seek to divide the Church over this matter. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, I look forward to our continued conversation about this issue both within the House of Bishops and across the wider Church, including the Diocese of Southern Ohio. In the meantime, I also look forward to welcoming Bishop-elect Robinson as a colleague and to working with him for the mission that Christ has set before us." Later, in the fall, Bishop Thompson met with a large group of orthodox clergy, whom he promised to support by issuing another pastoral letter which would clearly state his position regarding the actions of General Convention. The letter was never sent. At Diocesan Convention he lent no support to his orthodox clergy, even ruling against the possibility of discussing a proposed amendment to a resolution that would have repudiated the actions of the General Convention (violating Roberts Rules of Order). Furthermore, Bishop Thompson has not only failed to work with and support orthodox bishops in the Episcopal Church in their attempts to prevent the apostasy of General Convention, but he has also criticized their efforts to respond to the convention appropriately. VIRTUOSITY FOOTNOTE: Never at any time has the ACN said it was in the business of separating from the Episcopal Church. The Network is Griswold's and the church's orthodox opposition. If Episcopalians can join Integrity the unofficial ECUSA sodomite organization, then Episcopalians should be free to join the Network. The Network's First Statement in its charter states that they will endeavor to work within the boundaries of the constitution of the Episcopal Church.

By T.R. Fehrenbach San Antonio Express-News, 8/8/2004 For light midsummer reading, I offer an update on the goings-on inside the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society, aka the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States. When the General Convention of the church approved, and New Hampshire consecrated, a practicing homosexual bishop, Gene Robinson, this sent shock waves across the entire 80-million-odd Anglican Communion. Aftershocks continue. World scene: The prelates of the several provinces, i.e., nations, expressed dismay at this action by roughly a 60-40 split vote in the U.S. House of Bishops. The Archbishop of Canterbury was ticked, as was Britain, Australia, all Asia and most of South America, but the sub-Saharan bishops raised real Cain. All except South Africa vehemently denounced the U.S. deed. Now the opinion of Darkest Africa may seem unimportant, but the sub-Saharan area contains most of the world's Anglicans and is the church's most fertile missionary region. Anglicans there are mostly newer converts (and thus true believers) and engaged in deadly Muslim-Christian wars — which American Christians would like to ignore. They take religion seriously. And if they split, what will happen to the vast U.S. missions industry? The rising dissonance led the archbishop of Canterbury to call for a study, due out in October, and a conference of prelates, by invitation only, for August. Canterbury is the ranking see in Anglicanism, but unlike the pope the archbishop has authority but no power over national churches. In similar cases in America and England, he counseled the parties to back off for the good of all; but only England took his advice, while Canada pursued sanctifying same-sex marriage. Members of the Communion, which is technically a communion of bishops, not memberships, are expected to abide by rules and canons, which the American church did not. This means that whatever is adopted by a Communion conference, it has no power to legislate. But the Americans can be "isolated." This means that erring bishops would no longer be invited to Lambeth and other conferences and would no longer be part of the Communion. Meanwhile, some new twists: The next big confab will be in South Africa, not Lambeth, and both clergy and laity will be invited (Robinson will not), so this will be a gathering of thousands, not including media. Oh, yes — when all the African bishops refused to come to South Africa unless its archbishop changed his stance, he flipped, saying this was no longer a civil rights issue but a theological one. Wait and see. National scene: Most American bishops are quiet; anything they say makes somebody mad. Many clergy sit on the fence, glued, as cynics put it, to their pension plan. However, the church is already divided among conservative, "right-wing" groups looking for a new home, liberals who hope they leave and bishops who simply want to hold their dioceses together and damn the politics. The main thing happening is on the money trail. The financial reaction to Robinson has been far worse than liberals feared, the greatest diversion of funds in Episcopal history. Donations to the national church went south. Virginia, the largest diocese, has cut $1 million to date, Connecticut in liberal New England, $500,000. The dioceses of Texas (Houston) and Dallas have sent nothing. West Texas (local) will send less than $200,000 of a once-projected $750,000. The national church bureaucracy has a large endowment and can last about two years, but after that, crisis. Withholding funds does not reflect hostility to church work but no confidence in the leadership. Local scene: The last West Texas diocesan council did its usual thing — protesting and punting. However, it authorized individuals and parishes to withhold funds according to conscience, which most clearly did. The current bishop will never allow the ordination of homosexual clergy, blessing of same-sex marriages or invite errant prelates into his bailiwick. This the middle way, sticking to the old-time religion and having no truck with agitators left or right. Locally, it has kept things calm. Of course, not just bishops but dioceses, parishes and individuals are divided on the issue. Final damage — or restoration — can't be estimated yet. On the surface, things are quiet. However, the money trail shows all is not happy within the church. Mr. T. R. Fehrenbach is San Antonio's resident historian. ANGLICAN COMMUNION'S NEXT SECRETARY GENERAL SAYS CHURCH IS ABOUT COMMUNITY News Analysis by David W. Virtue The new secretary-general of the Anglican Communion Canon Kenneth Kearon, told a BBC interviewer recently that "churches are essentially about community and building community. And community is not only about positive things, but they also sometimes have their tensions." Now the buzzword "community" has become the liberal mantra of failed hopes, when the church has no discernible gospel to preach. It is right up there with words like "conversation", "vulnerability" and "listening", all words designed to lull the orthodox into a state of glassy-eyed insomnia while the revisionists ransack the cathedral looking for non existent silver linings to justify their existence. Frank Griswold talks endlessly about community, even as the House of Bishops is coming apart at the seams. Liberals love community. What they want is for everyone to sit in a giant hot tub called community and share a bottle of wine and loaf of bread...and mellow out. Don't be too dogmatic about what you believe or you will be labeled "fundamentalist"; don't knock homosexual behavior or you will be called "homophobic" and don't push exclusive thinking about the atonement or you will lack "diversity". Revisionists don't want the orthodox to be dogmatic, but they themselves are VERY dogmatic - in stages - of course. First tolerate women's ordination without doing any theological homework, then accept it, then make it mandatory, then stamp out the opposition. In time the same will happen with the sodomites. Firstly it is sinful behavior, then it is an alternative behavior, then it is a behavior that must be accepted because a few psychologists say so. Then denigrate the biblical accounts or say they don't mean what they clearly say they mean, and then broker it in. Then call people who disagree with you homophobic and then consecrate an openly homoerotic bishop, and finally make the ordination of non celibate homosexuals mandatory. If you don't agree you will never have a prayer of being made a bishop. But the notion of community, now being pressed by Canon John Peterson's successor, is a model that has been sanctioned in the church for years. However it is not biblical. Scripture is clear that the model it understands best when talking about the church is that of the family, not community, and the reason for this is that a family more radically and accurately depicts our relationships with each other and with God. It also points up the inherent flaws in relationships and demands a depth of commitment that cannot be found in a community. A son remains a son whether he conforms or is a prodigal. In community, sonship does not exist and anything goes. It also means that one does not have to be ultimately responsible for another, unless you choose. Or if you do, you can take it or leave it or you can do it for altruistic reasons. You cannot do that with a family. In community you can be absolved of your responsibilities for whatever reason you or they choose. A gated community, for example, is not a family. It is a group of people who can afford to live a certain lifestyle. They may get along because they are genial, sophisticated, play tennis and are nice to one another, even agreeing to shovel each other's driveways over winter. But it is not a family. Families are messy, and that is why God calls us into a family as adopted sons and daughters - because we are messy and sinful and need redemption. A community will never do this; it is far too weak a notion. It can never offer redemption. We are heirs and joint heirs with Christ, and that can only happen in a family, not a community. And that is why the new secretary general is dead wrong, and his concept of community will not work. The well of the Anglican Consultative Council has been poisoned as a Church of England newspaper editorial observed recently, and the notion that Canon Kearon can find a spiritual antidote for the years of poison his predecessor John Peterson poured into the Global South well is totally futile. The truth is Canon Kearon won't change a damn thing. He will continue the failed policies of Canon John Peterson, and the alienation of the Global South will only continue. The Anglican Communion is too far gone for the palliative care of the Anglican Communion Office in Paddington, London. Furthermore the priest comes from the already poisoned well of Irish Anglicanism that has the smooth talking Robin Eames as its Primate, and whose job it is to put on a happy face on things even as the Anglican Communion implodes in his face. The truth is "community" is a liberal palliative pill that offers not one salvific hope for mankind nor will it rescue the Anglican Communion. Eighteen million Nigerian Anglicans did not create "community". The church there was ordered to go out by its former Primate Joseph Adetiloye and preach the gospel and make disciples, and to do it immediately. So Nigerian evangelists went into animist and Islamic villages and told nominal Christians the Good News of God's love and invited them to repent and believe in the gospel...and millions did. They did not attempt to create something called "community" with Islamicists or animists. Had they done so no one would have been converted and the status quo would have been maintained. The Anglican Church in Nigeria would be in as big a mess as the Church of England and the American Episcopal Church is today. Mercifully they did not heed the call to community. They went out with the Good News of the Kingdom on their lips and preached repentance, out of which communities of faith were born. And the family of God was expanded. The idea of "community" is a flop house of failed hopes and expectations. The truth is junkies can create "community", alcoholics have a community, but the church IS a family of faithful people who have made a commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord and savior, and then to one another. They must be prepared to lay down their lives for another. No one in a community will necessarily do that. A community can be artificially drawn up by a committee where annual dues are paid, but one may never talk to another person, and that's it. Kearon says communities have tensions. Really. A brilliant observation like this should get him an honorary DD from EDS. Yes there are tensions and the question has to be asked; Who created them? Certainly not 18 million faithful Nigerian Anglicans or remnant Anglo-Catholics and Evangelicals in the West? The tensions were not created by the Anglican Communion Network or AAC either. The tensions were created by bishops like Pike and Spong and heightened by Griswold and Canon John Peterson. Those are the guilty parties who created tension. The orthodox just went along doing what they were supposed to be doing, carrying on a rich tradition of 2,000 years...preaching the gospel and making disciples. It was the revisionists who came in with "another gospel", causing all the problems. The notion of community is a fallacy In the BBC interview, Kearon was asked about the current Lambeth/Eames Commission (Lambeth Commission on Communion) and he had this to say. The Commission is a "process that's engaged currently in listening and engaging with the people who have very strong opinions on either side of the issue. The more you listen to people and engage with people who have deeply held divisions of opinion on this issue, the more you realize just how complex the issue is," he said. Come October and then February when the Primates meet, that "listening" and "engaging" process will be over, and it could be over for the whole Anglican Communion, and if that happens Canon Kearon's concept of "community" and the ACC will disappear with it.

By Ted Schroder January 4, 2004 Last week I received a letter addressed to the churches of Amelia Island Ministerial Association from Claudia Sovilla, of the Amelia Island Genealogical Society. She was extending an invitation to the members of the churches, who are interested in genealogy and history to attend the Genealogy Course and Mary Fears program in January. She wrote, "The Churches have great resources for information and members with stories of their ancestors. This area is rich in history. Tracing roots has transformed genealogy from a methodical past-time to a raging passion for millions of Americans. Wondering who am I, where I came from, and a missing link to the past and heritage." Joan Hackett and Mary Nelson will be instructors. My parents were not much interested in their antecedents. When I asked them questions about the family they gave vague answers that obscured rather than illuminated. It made me wonder whether I was descended from a long line of undesirables! But I doubt whether they were that interesting. I have cousins on both sides of my family who are the keepers of the family histories. They supply me with information when I need it. I am gathering material to write a fictionalized account of four generations of my family. In discovering what might have happened to them I understand better what formed my parents and grandparents, and influenced me. Some years ago I participated in a continuing education program on Family Systems Theory, which explored how the dynamics of family histories can repeat themselves in the lives of each generation. The exercise of drawing up a genogram of your family history, which identifies the patterns of marriage, children, divorce, births and deaths, can throw considerable light on your own experience. None of us is self-made. None of us is a stand alone. Each of us comes from somewhere. We have continuity to the past. We are the product of generations and our own choices. Erik Erikson describes the stage of Integrity in the Life Cycle as "the acceptance of one's own and only life cycle and of the people who have become significant to it as something that had to be and that, by necessity, permitted of no substitutions. It thus means a new different love of one's parents, free of the wish that they should have been different, and an acceptance of the fact that one's own life is one's own responsibility. It is a sense of comradeship with men and women of distant times and of different pursuits, who have created orders and objects and sayings conveying human dignity and love." (Identity and the life Cycle, p.104) Erikson placed Integrity as the last stage in the life cycle. I am presently reading The Hornet's Nest, a novel of the American revolutionary war in Georgia and the Carolinas, by Jimmy Carter. In writing about those times former President Carter is also trying to understand his continuity with his family members who settled in Georgia. By writing about that period he is getting in touch with what it must have been like for his ancestors. Some of the characters are based on them. He said that he began to study his family history in 1998. It was the 100th birthday of his ancestor who moved to southwest Georgia. As he started study the history he got interested in the period. In Matthew's account of the early childhood of Jesus (Matt.2:13-23) we find that Jesus experienced this continuity with the past. Like his ancestor Joseph he was taken to Egypt. Jesus recapitulated the history of Israel by his sojourn in Egypt. Like Moses he was saved from certain death at the hand of the king of his day. When the time was come to return, the holy family left Egypt and traveled to Nazareth. Israel discovered its identity in Egypt, and the exodus from Egypt was the central point in the history of the nation. Pharoah tried to destroy the people in Egypt, but Moses brought them out into the land of promise. Just as Pharoah failed to kill Moses, Herod, the new Pharoah, failed to kill the Savior. Eventually, Moses brought the children of Israel out of the land of bondage and death, and Moses' successor was to bring the people out of a worse bondage and a worse death, the death of sin. Jesus is seen as the successor of Moses: he came to save his people from their sins. Jesus is going to rescue us. He is going to usher in the new exodus. Matthew sees Jesus as fulfilling the Old Testament's predictions. The history of God's children is recapitulated in the history of God's Son. As Israel of long ago was led down to Egypt, so was Jesus. As Israel came out, so did Jesus. He embodies and fulfils the history of the people of God in his own person. Michael Green, in writing about these stories about Jesus' childhood, concludes: "Matthew makes it plain that God works through both surprise and continuity to bring about his purposes. The story of Jesus is utterly continuous with Abraham, with David and with the whole history of the chosen people. But it also bristles with surprises. Perhaps this is to encourage us to expect God to be working in our lives steadily and continuously, making sense of our past history, but also to be on the lookout for God's surprises in our lives, ready to grasp them and follow through their implications when they come." (The Message of Matthew, p.74) Joseph was surprised by the angel of the Lord appearing to him in a dream and directing him to escape to Egypt. Yet in so doing he fulfilled the prophecies, and repeated the history of his family. When Herod ordered the massacre of the boys under two years old he didn't realize that he was repeating the sin of the Pharoah who opposed Moses. At the right time the angel directed Joseph and Mary back to the land of Israel. There they were warned in a dream not to settle in Judaea but to go to Galilee. How often do we repeat the history of our ancestors? Sometimes we slip into committing the same sins as they did. Joseph was enabled to survive and flourish, to take care of his family, and to move on toward fulfilling divine destiny because he obeyed the guidance that was given him. God is working in our lives steadily and continuously. He encourages us to make sense of our family histories, to discover patterns of behavior that are to be either avoided or embraced. We are also meant to be on the lookout for God's surprises in our lives, and be willing to grasp them and follow through on their implications when they come. What surprises will God have in store for you this coming year? Whatever they are, they are meant to be for your good. When you respond to them positively you will find that you will be fulfilling your divine destiny. The Rev. Schroder is the rector of the chapel on Amelia Island Plantation. He is an Episcopal priest.

By Ted Schroder What do you do when you are confronted with a life-threatening crisis, when all that you have worked for, labored over, and loved, is jeopardized, when you are at the mercy of something other than yourself over which you have no control? Anxiety grips you. Sleep eludes you. You toss and turn as you replay possible scenarios in your mind, and contemplate the worst that could happen, and how you could have handled things differently and possibly have prevented this happening to you. What can you do? You pray, "Lord, help me." Jacob is returning home after twenty years in Mesopotamia. He left in a hurry after stealing his brother Esau's birthright and his father Isaac's blessing. He fled from his father-in-law Laban, whom he has deceived. He arrives on the borders of his family's land, and sent messengers to Esau to announce his arrival. He hears that Esau is coming to meet him with 400 men. Jacob is in great fear of his brother. He divides his people into two groups, so that if one is attacked the other can escape. He prays: "Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau, for I am afraid he will come and attack me, and also the mothers with their children. But you have said, 'I will surely make you prosper and will make your descendants like the sand of the sea, which cannot be counted.'" (Genesis 32:11,12) He sent ahead of him a generous gift of several hundred goats, camels and donkeys to be presented to Esau. He thought, "I will pacify him with these gifts I am sending on ahead; later, when I see him, perhaps he will receive me." (Genesis 32:) Then he sent his wives, his eleven sons and all his possessions ahead of him, and stayed behind alone all night. He was seriously anxious about what would happen the next day. He gave himself to prayer. All night Jacob wrestled with an angel of the LORD until his hip was displaced. But still Jacob continued to wrestle. He would not let go even when the angel asked him to. Jacob said, "I will not let you go until you bless me." (Genesis 32:26) Then the angel named him Israel, and gave him a new identity: Israel means 'he struggles with God.' The angel blesses him. "So Jacob called the place Peniel (which means 'face of God'), saying, 'It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life is spared.'" (Genesis 32:30) "The conflict brought to a head the battling and groping of a lifetime, and Jacob's desperate embrace vividly expressed his ambivalent attitude to God, of love and enmity, defiance and dependence. It was against God, not Esau and Laban, that he had been pitting his strength, as he now discovered; yet the initiative had been God's, as it was this night, to chasten his pride and challenge his tenacity. The crippling and the naming show that God's ends were still the same: He would have all of Jacob's will to win, to attain and obtain, yet purged of self-sufficiency and re-directed to the proper object of man's love, God Himself. After the maiming, combativeness had turned to dogged dependence, and Jacob emerged broken, named and blessed. His limping would be a lasting proof of the reality of the struggle: it had been no dream, and there was sharp judgment in it. The new name would attest his new standing: it was both a mark of grace, wiping out an old reproach (27:36), and an accolade to live up to." (Derek Kidner, Genesis, p.169) Jacob represents all of us who have struggled for God's blessing all our lives. We have hung on, even when we have been wounded. We have faced anxiety, and having done all we humanly can to escape disaster, we go to prayer. We recognize that there is something greater going on in our lives over which we have no control. All our human ingenuity will not get us out of this one. Walter Brueggemann says that Jacob, or Israel "is not formed by success or shrewdness, but by an assault from God." (Genesis, p.269) The prophet Hosea calls upon all God's people to strive with God as Jacob did. "In the womb he grasped his brother's heel; as a man he struggled with God. He struggled with the angel and overcame him; he wept and begged for his favor." (Hosea 12:3,4) Have you ever been there? We are reduced to weeping and begging for God's favor. This describes a condition of human extremity when we are at the end of our resources. Jesus in his humanity, in the garden of Gethsemane, spent the night wrestling with his Father in prayer, trying to find a way out of having to face the suffering of the day ahead, the brutality of the Passion, his public humiliation and the terrors of the Cross. But that was not the only time in his life that he wrestled with the Father in prayer. Scripture records that, "During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission." (Hebrews 5:7) We find our identity, our strength, not from our human endeavors, but through struggling with God in prayer. James writes, "the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything." (1:3,4) Peterson puts it this way, "You know that under pressure, your faith-life is forced into the open and shows its true colors. So don't try to get out of anything prematurely. Let it do its work so you become mature and well-developed, not deficient in any way." (The Message) Tim Chester (The Message of Prayer p.97) comments, "The story reveals an important dimension to our relationship with God that our sentimental age often fails to see: God is dangerous. He is the aggressor in the narrative. He is not comfortable to have around. Yet in the struggle with God our relationship with him grows and our faith is immeasurably deepened. Calvin says we should think of 'all the servants of God in this world as wrestlers.' He continues: 'God himself, as an antagonist descends into the arena to try our strength. This, though at first sight it seems absurd, experience and reason teaches us to be true. For as all prosperity flows from his goodness, so adversity is either the rod with which he corrects our sins, or the test of our faith and patience. What was once exhibited under a visible form to our father Jacob, is daily fulfilled in the individual members of the Church.' (Genesis, vol.2, pp.195, 196)" God tries our strength as we wrestle together over the issues of our lives. Why does he not just reassure us that he will be with us to take care of the problems we take to him? Why do we have to go through all this pain, and come out limping like Jacob? We are never the same again. Why do we have to go through all this struggle? P.T. Forsyth wrote, "We shall come one day to a heaven where we shall gratefully know that God's great refusals were sometimes the true answers to our truest prayer. Our soul is fulfilled even when our petition is not." (Soul of Prayer, p.14) If God were to grant us answers to our prayers too quickly and easily we would not develop into healthy and strong disciples of Christ. No matter how we might want it to be different real life is struggle and conflict, not superficial peace and premature reassurance. Jim Packer writes, "Biblical Christian experience, whatever else it is, is active battling throughout, inwardly against the flesh, outwardly against the world, and in both against the devil. Awareness and acceptance of the fight is itself gauge of spiritual authenticity and vitality. God may actually resist us when we pray in order that we in turn may resist and overcome his resistance, and so be led into deeper dependence on him and greater enrichment from him at the end of the day." (David Hanes (ed.), My Path of Prayer, p.59) Paul describes Epaphras as "always wrestling in prayer" for the Colossians, that they may "stand firm in the will of God, mature and fully assured." (Col.4:12) "Our relationship with God often involves struggle. Sometimes it is a struggle with temptation. Sometimes it is a struggle with the circumstances of life. Often it is a struggle with ourselves. But sometimes it is a struggle with God himself. God gives us this struggle to refine our faith and to deepen our relationship with him. He wants us to cling to him, like Jacob did - holding out for blessing. As Forsyth says, 'too ready acceptance of a situation as His will often means feebleness or sloth.'" (Chester, p.98) The life Jesus modeled for us, and urged upon us, is not a passive acceptance of life's circumstances, a resignation or fatalism, but the strengthening of the will to "wrestle, and fight, and pray." Sometimes we have to hang on, not let go of God, until we are sure that we have divine blessing. We are not to give up or give in prematurely. Surrender is not always the right thing to do. There is another element to this struggle with God. That is the anxiety of the human struggle with Esau. Jacob carries this anxiety, this threat, into his tossing and turning with the angel of the Lord in prayer. What we struggle with in our daily life is taken into our wrestling with God in the night. When we are faced with a life-threatening crisis in our lives, we find that it controls our prayers for a long time: days, months, even years, before we win through to a blessing. On the way we may be disabled or wounded in our emotions, but eventually the light dawns and we find that we have been given a new identity in Christ, a new maturity, where we can "stand firm in the will of God, mature and fully assured." Isn't this what parenting can do to us, or battling cancer, or other debilitating diseases? Can we not win through to the blessing of becoming a better person, a more mature believer, because of our struggles? "In the National Gallery of Scotland hangs a painting by Paul Gauguin called The Vision of the Sermon. Gauguin believed that art should represent not only what was there but the way it made you feel. In The Vision of the Sermon a group of devout Breton women have heard a sermon on Jacob wrestling with God. It is so real to them that they see it before their eyes. Gauguin distinguishes between the literal reality of the women and the reality of their vision. The grass is red and they are separated from the struggle by the line of a tree. Yet the struggle is real. Indeed one of their cows has strayed into the fray. The reality of wrestling with God is as real as their cow." (Tim Chester, p.101) Wrestling with God is not some myth or some far-fetched idea reserved only for mystics. It is part of everyday life. It can happen to any of us at any time we are face with a crisis. When you are in the midst of it, and are tempted to give up, or think that God wants to destroy you, that life is against you, and that there is no hope, remember that God wants to bless you. "If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all - how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things." (Romans 8:31,32) The Rev. Ted Schroder is the rector of Amelia Island Plantation Church in Florida DEVOTIONAL - BEING ON THE WAY: THE NORMAL CHRISTIAN LIFE By Alan Medinger Regeneration News, December 2003 This article was inspired by the book On Hope by Josef Pieper, published by Ignatius Press, 1986; translated from the German. A number of times in these articles I have addressed the question as to how we can live with relative peace within the context of two truths that seem to crash headlong into each other—the truth that God calls us to live a holy life and the truth that we keep on sinning. Most recently I touched on this in the article "Who Is I? And Who Is Me?" (October 2003). This is a critical issue for most of us because if we find ourselves accepting too easily that we are sinners, we risk falling into complacency or worse yet, we abuse God's grace. On the other side, if we go too far berating ourselves for our sinfulness, we risk not experiencing the joy and freedom that is rightfully ours in Jesus Christ. You probably know people who live at either of the extremes; those who with an attitude of, "Well, we all sin," seem to live in a permanent state of cheap grace, and those who seem to live in a state of perpetual self-condemnation show little of the joy of knowing Jesus. I suspect most of us don't dwell constantly at one extreme or the other, but rather, we bounce back and forth between the two. In this article I am going to approach the problem from a different direction—from the perspective that we are all becoming, we are all a work in process, we are all on the way. Accepting this truth can bring both stability and hope into our lives, and both stability and hope inspire victory in our Christian walk. Being a Person Still on the Way In seeking to overcome sexual sins, we can only be in one of four states: • moving forward • moving backward • standing still • arrived My belief is—and I am going to build a case for it—that if we are leading "the normal Christian life," then we are moving forward. I am going to describe what I mean by the normal Christian life, but first let me eliminate one of the four states—having arrived. I am not ready to state this unequivocally, but I believe quite strongly that as long as we possess the capacity to imagine, we will not be totally free from lust, at least not in this life. Using concepts from the writing of Thomas Aquinas, Josef Pieper refers to living in either status viatoris or status comprehensoris. Status viatoris means "being on the way" while status comprehensoris means "having arrived", no longer being a viator, having achieved perfect union with Christ. While status comprehensoris is our ultimate hope and destination, certainly none of us will be there until the moment of death. Even the Apostle Paul was quite clear that he was a viator, a person still on the way: Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make [knowing Jesus Christ and the power of His resurrection] my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you. Only let us hold true to what we have attained. (Philippians 3:12-16) Part of the good news of Jesus Christ is that being a viator is the natural state for all believers. In the born-again believer the indwelling Holy Spirit is constantly drawing us towards status comprehensoris, the state of perfect union with Jesus, the state of perfect happiness. We do not reach it in this life, but being drawn towards it is at the center of Christian life. Being drawn is certain to occur because it is what the Holy Spirit does. Now it is true that we can resist being drawn, and with our abiding free will, resist it so successfully that we find ourselves stuck or falling backward. But this is analogous to my using an umbrella to shade myself from the sun. Even if I do this, the sun is still shining. The Normal Christian Life It is not any extraordinary effort on our part, any sort of heroic Christianity that causes us to be drawn forward towards completeness in Jesus Christ. We simply need to be ordinary Christians leading the normal Christian life. What is this normal Christian life? I believe it is marked by the following conditions: We agree with basic Biblical truths as historically interpreted by the church and as expressed in the ancient creeds of the church. We hold to those beliefs that are universal in time and place. These are the fundamental Christian beliefs about God and man, about sin and redemption. There is a matter of choice here. Christians who take hold of "new truths" (such as those recently put forth at the Episcopal Church's national convention in Minneapolis) are quite likely in rebellion, a rebellion that is, at least in its early stages, freely chosen. They have chosen to adopt beliefs that will justify their behavior, rather than trying to change their behavior to be in accord with the beliefs expressed in Scripture and taught by the church. To a far greater extent than most people imagine, people believe what they want to believe. What have you chosen to believe, especially about sexual sin and sexual purity? We spend significant personal time with the Lord in prayer, meditation and the study of Scripture. This is how we grow in knowing Jesus and the power of His resurrection (Philippians 12:10). If we are growing in Him, we cannot help but be on the way. We are an active part of a community of believers. We are called to be a part of His Body. This is not an option. It is in interacting with other believers that we are challenged, convicted, encouraged, comforted, inspired; we experience all of the elements that provide growth. If you are in a large church where you are not known, join a small home group. If you are in a church where there is no body life, you may need to change churches. If you are in a church where body life is present, and you choose not to be involved, don't look for growth and healing. We are trying to be obedient to God. We try to do those things we should do, and we try not to do those things we should not do. Don't berate yourself with, "If I only tried harder..." I have never found that such self-talk helped anyone. Ultimately, it will be God's power that enables us to become obedient. Our role is to cooperate by never giving up trying. We confess when we sin. As people on the way, those who haven't arrived, we will sin. We have the answer to sin—repentance and confession. This seems so simple, and it is. But over and over again in our ministry we see confusion enter right here. We encounter many Christians who in broad terms want to live a life of obedience to the Lord, but who have consciously decided to go on with their lust, their fantasy, their masturbation. They see overcoming homosexuality or lust as a step by step process, and they imagine—or tell themselves—that they know just what the steps are. Usually they hide behind something like, "Later, I am not at a place to stop yet." The truth is, they are choosing to go on with their sin. When this is the case, I believe that confession of that particular sin is inappropriate. However, there are other things that such people can do. They can confess the sin of rebellion, asking God to change their wills. If this is where you are, right now, go back and re-read the previous four elements of the normal Christian life. What do you really believe about lust and about your sexuality? What are you choosing to believe? Take time to pray about this, to talk to Jesus about it, to study God's word with respect to sexual sins. Share with mature Christians in your fellowship where you are. And try, even if you feel like trying is futile. As a "sacramental believer", I would add a sixth element to the normal Christian life, the regular participation in the Eucharist. I believe that receiving the Lord's Body and Blood has a life changing effect on us, but I realize that this is not where many of our readers are, and I do believe that the five elements described do comprise a life in which change will occur. Part of Your Life Now Here's a key point in all of this. There is not one of these five (or six) elements of the normal Christian life that cannot be a part of your life. And if they are present, you are on the way, and a part of this being on the way will be your growth in sexual purity. There will surely be times when you feel you are stuck, times even when you sense that you are falling back. That too is "normal." The road toward completion is never a straight line. God may have you on hold until he gets your attention in some other area of your life. Most of us have found times when we had to sink deeply into the muck and mire of our own sins before we would find ourselves at a place where we were ready to truly die to something. If you are leading the normal Christian life, you are on the way to true and lasting change because it is not your power that is going to change you. It is His power. Paul wrote to the Thessalonians: To this end we always pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his calling and may fulfill every resolve for good and every work of faith by his power, so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Thessalonians 1:11-12) It is His power. And for this reason, you have every reason for hope.

Anglican Church of Brazil Comments on Homosexuality A Call for a Consequential and Responsible Reflection on the Issue of Homosexuality in the Anglican Communion "Not by might and not by power, but by my spirit" — Zechariah 4:6 Open Letter To: The Primate of the Brazilian Anglican Episcopal Church (BAEC), the Rev. Dom Orlando Santos de Oliveira The Diocesan Bishop of the Recife Anglican Diocese (RAD), the Rev. Dom Robinson Cavalcanti The Suffragan Bishop of RAD, the Rev. Dom Filadelfo Oliveira Neto The BAEC Special Commission The clergy and laity of the RAD and the BAEC All Christians Beloved brethren, The debate on the understanding of homosexuality and its implications has been dividing opinions within the Anglican community for some years now. Though there is a vast majority of people, dioceses, and provinces that consider an erotic relationship between people of the same sex inappropriate from Christian standards, there has always been—even within this majority—a diversity of interpretations on the phenomenon and various ways of understanding its implications for the reality of the Church and society in general. The recent happenings in the Episcopal Church of the United States and of Canada, however, immediately led to such a polarization of opinions and heightening of tensions that it is now almost impossible to conduct a calm reflection and mature discussion on an issue of the utmost importance for the contemporary Church. In this context, the alternatives are reduced to extreme caricatures: an unreasoning, almost homophobic rejection, and a secularist and uncritical, almost festive acceptance. Unfortunately, the international scenario has been transplanted to the reality of our Province and our dioceses without any mediation; reproducing the outside polarization, leading to extreme and precipitated actions and manifestations that have rekindled the historical tensions between the South and Northeast and between the traditional currents in Brazilian Anglicanism. We, the undersigned, as clergy and laity of the Recife Anglican Diocese and of the Brazilian Anglican Episcopal Church, judge it our duty to come forward publicly at this moment to manifest our appeal for moderation, serenity, and wisdom in the discussions regarding this issue. We emphatically affirm that the intransigence often shown in the debates and the extremism clothing the opinions are an obstacle to the cause of the Kingdom of God in our country and an affront to the Brazilian Church. This letter is an attempt to make a contribution to a realistic and productive dialogue, taking up a position in favor of the construction of a Christian, mature, relevant, and renewing alternative to the impasse that our Church and society are experiencing at the moment. A debate of ideas, respect for different positions, peaceful argument, spiritual and intellectual humility, self-criticism, openness to criticism, an honest and profound analysis of opposing arguments, sobriety, generosity, and other attitudes like these are the worthy resources of anyone proposing or even wishing to construct a consistent, responsible, and historically relevant discourse on the issue. In the face of growing speculation and a climate of suspicion and hostility that has been placed in our context, we also judge it necessary to present some positions in relation to the present debate. 1. Regarding Our Faith: a. We believe in one God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—creator and sustainer of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible—who created the human being, man and woman, in His image and likeness, with the capacity to cooperate in creation, to develop language and culture, and to build upon Nature. b. We believe in the universality of human sin and the universal merit of the redeeming sacrifice of Christ on the cross at Calvary, as also the sovereignty of God in relation to the salvation of human beings. c. We believe in the Sacred Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the written Word of God, divinely inspired, the ultimate authority in matters of theology, trustworthy in its integrity and infallible in all things necessary for salvation (Article 6, XXXIX Articles of Religion). d. We acknowledge the Ecumenical Creeds of the Christian Church as an efficient synthesis and a sufficient summary of the basic points of our faith, and we respect the tradition of the Church as a source of inspiration and counsel on the Christian Faith and as a sign of the ongoing action of God as Lord and sustainer of History. e. We consider ourselves to be heirs to the evangelical tradition of a living Protestantism, fulfilled in the day-to-day life of the Church; representatives of an evangelicalism open to the work of the Holy Spirit in history, to the diversity of cultures and forms of contextualization of the Faith, to the contributions from theological reflection and responsible biblical criticism, committed to personal and historical transformation and to the ethical and social implications of the Faith. 2. Regarding the Question of Homosexuality: a. We believe that the discussion on the issue of human sexuality—and especially of homosexuality—for the Church and for theology today must go beyond the question of defining what sin is, since, in accordance with our belief, sin has attained all areas of human life and permeates all our works and relationships (Romans 3:23). b. It is a fact that the erotic relationship between people of the same sex does not represent the divine ideal for the human creature, as expressed in the Scriptures and thus understood by the Church's tradition (Romans 1:18-32). It is also a fact that the questions relative to the discussion on homosexuality comprise a great complexity of human factors that need to be deeply analyzed and taken into account when honestly seeking a practical and historical understanding of tradition and the biblical texts. c. We acknowledge that there exist different forms of interpretation and hermeneutic treatment of the texts that deal with the phenomena of homosexuality, and that it is extremely necessary to deepen and broaden the studies as well as the understanding of this issue. d. We affirm that a large part of the Church has already become aware of its duty to acknowledge and respect the intrinsic dignity of every human being. Many Christian ministers have been pioneers in dealing with the issue of homosexuality in a respectful, humble, and humane manner. Not all the Church, however, has followed this example of evangelical fidelity. It is necessary that work and reflection be stimulated in the sense of producing a Christian mentality and practice, as free as possible from prejudice, hatred, and arrogance, regarding these issues. e. We believe that it is necessary to try to understand in a profound manner the cultures of our time, as a way to identify the renovating work of the Holy Spirit and the aspects of the multiform grace of God in each moment and context, and also, as a way of identifying the presence and mechanisms of the works of sin and death in our generation. It is impossible to understand the issue of homosexuality in a coherent manner today, outside the context of a broader debate on the notion of sexuality for contemporary cultures. f. We believe that a deepened analysis should seek to be faithful to Biblical revelation and to Christian tradition, while taking into account the biological, psychological, anthropological, philosophical, and social aspects that differentiate the understanding of the present phenomenon from the understanding of other similar phenomena contained in the history of Christianity. Such an analysis should help in outlining ethical strategies for institutional organization and works, as also forms of individual and collective pastoral works, and the taking of a stand before society and other emerging disputes. g. We believe that both the discourses of the "conservatives" as well as of the "liberals" presented up to now have failed in the task of presenting a sufficiently deep and comprehensive reading of the phenomenon under discussion. The great majority of the discourses of the "conservatives" have been based on what seems to be prejudice, ignorance, and a superficial reading of the Bible, while the "liberals" seem to have limited themselves to revering and ratifying the secular agenda, bringing up the centuries-old discourse, labeling belief in the Bible and Church tradition as anachronisms. h. We believe that the plurality of theological currents and positionings regarding the issue within Anglicanism do not necessarily represent a weakness in our Church, but rather should be considered as a positive—though annoying—quality, since it endows us all with the privilege of being constantly questioned and confronted, and of contributing to the growth of the Church through the multiform grace of God. The plurality and inclusion can and should lead us to humility, humanness, maturity, and often, to face up to difficult issues that have as yet not been faced up to by the majority of the Church—but only if we are capable of respecting, listening to, and dialoguing with one another, and continually growing together. i. Finally, we affirm that though plurality of opinions and openness to debate are licit, desirable, and extremely necessary, the hegemonic position of the majority of the Anglican Communion and of the tradition of the Church—inasmuch as we claim to be a Protestant and Catholic Church—should be respected and maintained by all the institutions linked to her, until there is a minimum consensus regarding the way to deal with the issues raised by our time. The ministerial ordination and episcopal consecration of people who publicly profess a conscious and voluntary option for living in a homosexual union is unacceptable in this context, as is the holding of rites and ceremonies for blessing unions between couples of the same sex. 3. Regarding the Crisis in the Anglican Communion: a. We believe that the decisions and the consequent actions of the Episcopal Churches in the United States and Canada have publicly and deliberately offended the conscience of the majority of the Church and the international agreements that have been entered into over recent years within the Anglican Communion. b. We believe, however, that these provinces and dioceses, as well as others that may come to adopt the same line of action, should be urged to renounce their works and decisions, so as not to be an obstacle to their participation in the Anglican Communion, as well as suffering the lamentable and inevitable institutional isolation that could be imposed by the other provinces and the risk of provoking an irreversible schism. c. We uphold, as an alternative to a "curialization" or "federalization" of the Anglican Communion, that the instruments of Communion should be strengthened, where there will be a greater participation of the clergy and laity in the Anglican Consultative Council, in such a manner that important decisions can be analyzed and ratified in distinct courts. d. We uphold that, in the case of the dioceses and parishes in the United States and Canada that did not concur with the decisions and actions of their provinces, a norm should be urgently drawn up for alternative episcopal supervision, so as to avoid greater conflicts and misunderstandings. e. We uphold that the financial dependence of the Anglican Communion on the Episcopal Church of the United States be urgently reduced, through, if necessary, a reduction of the administrative machine and the cutting down on and sharing of expenses, to such an extent that the "economic weight" does not upset the relations of authority between the various provinces. f. We call attention to the immense profusion of manifestations of sin that we are witnessing in the contemporary context—such as hunger and consumerism/waste, environmental crimes, sexual exploitation of children and adolescents, child labor and slavery, forms of torture, imperialist wars, international economic exploitation—those that have been and should not be forgotten, neglected, and relegated to a second plan in virtue of an internal struggle in the body of the Church. 4. Regarding the Repercussions of the Crisis within the BAEC: a. Reaffirming our feeling of belonging to the BAEC and our regard for the brethren in the other dioceses, we believe there is no reason for any discussion on, or speculation about, a possible schism here in the Province, since—unlike the United States and Canada—no decision nor action has been taken or even insinuated that could justify such an extreme action. b. We recommend Christian wisdom, patience, moderation, serenity, and humility as necessary attributes for all those involved in the debate. We appeal that there be no untimely and indiscreet actions or manifestations from any party, and we suggest that, at a propitious moment, more profound and specific questions and topics be proposed for discussion. c. We also recommend that there be greater respect and a searching for greater mutual understanding among the various dioceses of the Province, and that plurality be respected not only while they exist as isolated and parallel currents, but that we be ready to interact, listen to, and learn from one another. d. We support the proposal for the creation of internal provinces in the BAEC, an issue that was discussed a few years ago, not as a way to promote isolation among the regions, but as a strategy for driving away the "ghosts" and lessening the tensions, and to stimulate growth in the Church. e. We also support the three-chamber proposal in the synods of the BAEC as a way of promoting greater participation of the laity in the life of the Church. 5. Regarding the Repercussions of the Crisis in the RAD: a. We reaffirm our personal respect and affection for Dom Robinson Cavalcanti and Dom Filadelfo Oliveira Neto, as well as our institutional submission to them as diocesan bishop and suffragan of the RAD. We deny and repudiate any accusation of disloyalty, betrayal, or disregard. We believe, however, that our loyalty, friendship, and submission do not prevent us from disagreeing, duly, with ideas, actions, proposals, or from presenting positions contrary to them at some moments. b. We manifest our concern with the growing canonical restrictions on theological/ideological norms for ordination and participation in our diocese, as well as with the growing climate of ideological and behavioral patrolling that has arisen. The attempt to put Truth within strict boundaries is always risky. c. We reaffirm our willingness and desire to give of our best, in working together with all the clergy and laity of the RAD, for the growth of our Church and for the construction of a diocese that is Anglican, missionary, mature, relevant, inculturated, inclusive, alive, and fraternal. We do not know the how or the when regarding the outcome of the crisis within the Anglican Communion, nor the manner that this will be reflected in the BAEC, but we do know that the problem of human sexuality—and especially homosexuality—is and will continue to be a fundamental question to be understood and worked on by our generation. When "the dust settles" from the battles and the "war drums" have been silenced, there will still be people with their pains and problems, and the Church, with its mission to preach and live the Gospel in an integral manner. Then there will be noticed the lack of an honest, mature, sensitive, and serene reflection on the reality of homosexuality, on the Gospel message, and on the Mission of the Church in our context. It will be imperative that both the "conservatives" as well as the "liberals" be open to review their histories and positions and be ready to listen and learn under the influence of the Holy Spirit. In Christ, Lord of History, Recife, July 6, 2004 Feast of St. Thomas More, Martyr, 1535 Signatories: Rev. Gustavo Gilson S. de Oliveira, OSE, Rector of the Anglican Seminary for Theological Studies–Recife Most Rev. Sérgio F. Lomeu de Andrade, Dean of the Anglican Cathedral of the Most Holy Trinity Rev. Fábio S. Vasconcelos, Rector of the Parish of The Mediator and Chaplain to the Anglican Seminary of Theological Studies Rev. Manoel S. Moraes de Almeida, OSE, Rector of the Parish of The Good Samaritan Rev. João Câncio Peixoto Filho Rev. Elias Leôncio de B. Filho, OSE Friar Quintino Geraldo Diniz Melo, OSF Maurício Amazonas, OSE, Lay Minister Prof. Fernando Antônio Gonçalves, Seminarian Rodrigo Espiúca, Seminarian Senomar Teixeira Junior, Seminarian Sílvio de Freitas Barbosa, Seminarian

From Traditional Values Coalition, Washington, DC In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists, and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture. This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society. What Really Happened? Numerous psychiatrists over the past decades have described what forces were really at work both inside and outside of the American Psychiatric Association—and what led to the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder. Dr. Ronald Bayer, a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, has described what actually occurred in his book, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis (1981). In Chapter 4, "Diagnostic Politics: Homosexuality and the American Psychiatric Association," Dr. Bayer says that the first attack by homosexual activists against the APA began in 1970 when this organization held its convention in San Francisco. Homosexual activists decided to disrupt the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, homosexual activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." Homosexuals forged APA credentials and gained access to exhibit areas in the conference. They threatened anyone who claimed that homosexuals needed to be cured. Kameny had found an ally inside the APA named Kent Robinson, who helped the homosexual activist present his demand that homosexuality be removed from the DSM. At the 1972 convention, homosexual activists were permitted to set up a display booth entitled "Gay, Proud, and Healthy." Kameny was then permitted to be part of a panel of psychiatrists who were to discuss homosexuality. The effort to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM was the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation—not scientific discoveries. Prior to the APA's 1973 convention, several psychiatrists attempted to organize opposition to the efforts of homosexuals to remove homosexual behavior from the DSM. Organizing this effort were Drs. Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides, who formed the Ad Hoc Committee Against the Deletion of Homosexuality from the DSM-II. The DSM-II listed homosexuality as an abnormal behavior under section "302. Sexual Deviations." It was the first deviation listed. After much political pressure, a committee of the APA met behind closed doors in 1973 and voted to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM-II. Opponents were given 15 minutes to protest this change, according to Dr. Jeffrey Satinover in Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Satinover writes that after this vote was taken, the decision was to be voted on by the entire APA membership. The National Gay Task Force purchased the APA's mailing list and sent out a letter to APA members urging them to vote to remove homosexuality as a disorder. No APA member was informed that the mailing had been funded by this homosexual activist group. According to Satinover: "How much the 1973 APA decision was motivated by politics is only becoming clear even now. While attending a conference in England in 1994, I met a man who told me an account that he had told no one else. He had been in the gay life for years but had left the lifestyle. He recounted how, after the 1973 APA decision, he and his lover, along with a certain very highly placed officer of the APA Board of Trustees and his lover, all sat around the officer's apartment celebrating their victory. For among the gay activists placed high in the APA who maneuvered to ensure a victory was this man—suborning from the top what was presented to both the membership and the public as a disinterested search for truth." Dr. Socarides Speaks Out Dr. Charles Socarides has set the record straight on how homosexuals inside and outside of the APA forced this organization to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder. This was done without any valid scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is not a disordered behavior. Dr. Socarides, writing in Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality, writes: "To declare a condition a 'non-condition,' a group of practitioners had removed it from our list of serious psychosexual disorders. The action was all the more remarkable when one considers that it involved an out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but also a number of other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists, and educators over the past seventy years..." Socarides continued: "For the next 18 years, the APA decision served as a Trojan horse, opening the gates to widespread psychological and social change in sexual customs and mores. The decision was to be used on numerous occasions for numerous purposes with the goal of normalizing homosexuality and elevating it to an esteemed status." "To some American psychiatrists, this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for, they can be lost—a disillusioning warning that unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences." Dr. Socarides' report is available from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality: www.narth.com . The Importance of the DSM The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is the most widely used diagnostic reference book utilized by mental health professionals in the United States. It is a manual by which all diagnostic codes are derived for diagnosis and treatment—every single physician (an estimated 850,000*) in the United States refers to this book in order to code for a diagnosis. In plain English, what does this mean? It means that for over 30 years, physicians have been prevented from properly diagnosing homosexuality as an aberrant behavior and thus cannot recommend a treatment for these individuals. Prior to that time, homosexuality had been treated as a mental disorder under section "302. Sexual Deviations" in the DSM-II. Section 302 said, in part: "This category is for individuals whose sexual interests are directed primarily towards objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts...performed under bizarre circumstances...Even though many find their practices distasteful, they remain unable to substitute normal sexual behavior for them." Homosexuality was listed as the first sexual deviation under 302. Once that diagnostic code for homosexuality was removed, physicians, including psychiatrists, have been prevented from diagnosing homosexuality as a mental disorder for more than three decades. *American Medical Association statistic, 2002.

By Uwe Siemon-Netto, UPI Religious Affairs Editor PARIS, Aug. 10 (UPI) — Editor's note: This coming weekend, Pope John Paul II will be in Lourdes, the world's most important site of pilgrimage. His journey to this Marian shrine comes at a time of a new Vatican letter written by Joseph Ratzinger, the Vatican's highest-ranking cardinal, and seen as a condemnation of the excesses of modern feminism. Lourdes, in the French Pyrenees, says perhaps more about the relationship between Roman Catholicism and women than any other Christian site in the world. Its central figure is the Virgin Mary, who is said to have appeared to a peasant girl, Bernadette Soubirous, in 1858, introducing herself with the words, "I am the Immaculate Conception." Women make up a majority of the six million pilgrims who pour into Lourdes from all continents every year to pay homage to Mary: nuns, desperately ill patients hoping for a miracle, housewives, but also young nobles prepared to serve the poor and the sick, cheerful Irish and German singles, all game for a flirt and a tipple in between the prayers. There are plenty of Protestants, too—and why not? Did not Martin Luther praise the Blessed Virgin as the Spiritual Mother of all Christians? Did not Huldreich Zwingli, the Zurich reformer, rate her above all creatures, "including the saints and angels"? Did not John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, affirm her continuing purity (after Christ's birth, that is)? It is hard to conceive of a more feminine, loving atmosphere than that of Lourdes (this writer, by the way, is a Protestant). It is much in keeping with the attributes of the woman "who in her deepest and original being exists 'for the other' (cf., 1 Corinthians 11:9)," as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger phrased it in his recent controversial Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church. This "being there for the other" is of course what Luther, too, saw manifest in Mary; this is why he called her "blessed above all nobility, wisdom and sanctity." This is why his exegesis of the "Magnificat" (Luke 1:46-55)—"My soul magnifies the Lord"—is arguably one of the most spectacular theological commentaries, so much so that it is taught in most Catholic seminaries. And yet, while Cardinal Ratzinger's letter "On the collaboration of men and women in the Church and World," which the pope had approved, made essentially the same point as Luther, Zwingli, or Wesley, it became the object of worldwide controversy. Why? Because even before its publication, the letter was purported to be an attack against worldwide feminism. And so Margot Kässmann, Lutheran bishop of Hanover in Germany, bemoaned the paper's "clichés." Ekin Delgöz, a spokeswoman for Germany's Green Party, accused the church of remaining stuck between the Middle Ages and modernity. Christel Hildebrand, chairwoman of a Conference of European (female) theologians, called Ratzinger's reflection anathema. Emma Bonino, an Italian politician, opined that the paper might just as well have been written by an imam of Cairo's Al-Azhar mosque. Danièle Hervieu-Léger, France's leading sociologist of religion, warned that the church was about to lose women—at least in Western Europe and in North America—just as in the past it had lost the working class. Yet, as Eberhard von Gemmingen of Radio Vatican pointed out, Ratzinger's observations are much more about women's rights and equality than about feminism. True, Ratzinger does chastise the feminist tendency of making "women...adversaries of men." But he emphasizes clearly that women, like men, are equally created in the image of God, and that this constitutes "the immutable basis of all Christian anthropology." Ratzinger reminds his readers of a previous statement by the pope declaring women as "another 'I' in common humanity." He links the warped bond between men and women to the Fall: "When humanity considers God its enemy, the relationship between men and women becomes distorted. When this relationship is damaged, their access to the face of God risks being compromised in turn." This is part of a basic Christian theology most denominations share, based on the apostle Paul's powerful statement to which Ratzinger also referred: "For all of you who have been baptized into Christ...there is neither male nor female" (Galatians 3:27-28). In the face of all the criticism, the Vatican takes comfort from the ancient verity that the "dernier cri [latest fashion] of reason expires more rapidly than sound Christian doctrine." Ratzinger's paper goes out of his way to stress women's right to equal pay and career chances in the secular world and to an even fuller recognition of her role in the family. In the still more earth-bound opinions of his critics, this seems to take second place to Rome's insistence that women cannot be priests because, as one senior prelate put it, "for a woman to take Christ's place at the altar is an ontological absurdity." Rome is not alone in making this point. Eastern Orthodoxy and some major Protestant denominations do the same, but they are spared reproach. It may not be politically correct to say (as did Ratzinger) that "man and woman are different from the time of creation and will remain so for all eternity." But that is what at heart most people realize and are grateful for—be they Catholic or not. And this is what, in a sense, gives women the edge in the biblical narrative: Women, not men, courageously stood by Christ's cross. Women, not men, discovered his resurrection and revealed it to the world. As Luther observed about Mary: "Men have crowded all her glory into a single phrase: the Mother of God. No one can say anything greater of her, though he had as many tongues as leaves on the trees."

News Analysis By Uwe Siemon-Netto, UPI Religious Affairs Editor GENEVA, Switzerland, Aug. 3 (UPI) — The lethal attacks on five churches in Iraq violated the stated will of the Prophet Mohammed, who in the 7th century issued a "Firman"—or letter of protection—for Assyrian Christians. Assyrians make up the majority of the 700,000 Christians in present-day Iraq. Mohammed was so impressed with their ancestors' knowledge of medicine and the sciences that he decreed they be left in peace, according to Albert Yelda, formerly the Christian representative in the leadership of the London-based Iraqi National Congress. "The Firman disappeared without trace in 1847," Yelda told United Press International. Assyrians believe that the then-Turkish rulers destroyed this document before setting out to kill 30,000 Christians. Joseph Yacoub, a political science professor at the Catholic University of Lyon, France, fears that the coordinated car bombings of churches may accomplish what Mohammed had tried to prevent. "There exists a definite risk that the Christian presence will be reduced to a level of insignificance," he told the French newspaper, Le Figaro. "So far there had just been attacks on Christian individuals," this leading expert on Middle Eastern Christianity continued. "But now the bombers have taken on the entire community. Their message is clear: This is Muslim territory; it does not belong to you." Thus, one of the most remarkable communities of Christians is once again threatened with extinction. The Assyrians, of whom there are 1.5 million worldwide, are descendants of one of the oldest civilizations—Mesopotamia. Almost three millennia ago, they excelled in astronomy, jurisprudence, the arts, architecture, medicine, and the natural sciences. Assyrians were the first nation to adopt Christianity as their state religion in 179 A.D., more than a century before Armenia. They claim to have been the first to build churches and to translate the New Testament from Greek into their vernacular—Aramaic, the language of Christ. In the 8th century, not long after Mohammed's death, Assyrians were the first to send missionaries to China, Mongolia, and even Japan. They were Nestorians, considered heretics in the eyes of the rest of the church because they followed the teachings of Nestorius, a 5th-century bishop of Constantinople who taught that the Virgin Mary was not the "theodokos," or mother of God, but simply the mother of Jesus Christ. This fine point of theology has long ceased to stand in the way of Christian unity in Iraq. In the 16th century, a major segment of the Nestorian church united with Rome while retaining its ancient liturgy. They are now called the Chaldean Church, to which most Assyrian Christians belong. The remaining Nestorians are on excellent terms with the Chaldeans, while maintaining different traditions. Their liturgy is extremely "high"; yet their incense-filled sanctuaries appear as stark as synagogues or Reformed churches. There is no iconostasis—a partition or screen decorated with icons separating the sanctuary from the rest of the church. There are no graven images. A simple cross above the altar is the only adornment of a Nestorian church. Nestorians call their priests "rabi"; like orthodox Jews, they eschew mixed marriages. While the Assyrians lived in peace for much of the first 11 centuries since the Muslim conquest of their homeland, martyrdom has been their fate for the past 150 years. The massacre of 30,000 Christians in 1847 was succeeded by another in 1896. In 1915, the Turks slaughtered not only over one million Armenians but also 250,000 Assyrians—a fact seldom mentioned when the first holocaust of the 20th century is discussed. There are still some elderly men alive in Iraq who were forcibly converted to Islam in their childhood but remained Christians in their hearts, fasting during Lent and celebrating Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost. During Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, the Assyrians' persecution was in a sense more cultural than religious. "Tyrants hate minorities," said Yelda. Hence, Saddam had hundreds of Assyrian villages razed, including one 2nd-century church. He also banned the Assyrians' cultural clubs, where they had kept their literary language alive. But in Saddam's days, too, Muslim mobs terrorized Iraqi Christians, beheading on August 15, 2002, a Chaldean nun, Sister Cecilia Hanna, whose monastery they had stormed. Like their cousins, the Jews, Assyrians are now scattered around the world. Almost 300,000 went to America, primarily the Chicago area. Others live in Jordan, Australia, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. It is with a heavy heart that Pope John Paul II reacted to the news of the murderous attacks on Iraq's churches, stressing his closeness to the marvelous and venerable Christian culture, which is at the point of oblivion. The pontiff appealed to those believing in one God to show mercy. Instead, Iraq's Christians are being murdered—in the name of that merciful God.