Archives

By Claudia C. Kalis When my daughter was 3 years old she loved popsicles. Not infrequently, the popsicle would break in half and she would burst into tears begging me, "Mom. Fix it. Mom, please fix it." I knew, or quickly learned, that broken popsicles cannot be fixed, no matter the ingenuity of ones efforts. If my daughter was to have a whole, unbroken popsicle there was only one solution, one answer. Give her a new one. The Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes has made magnanimous and ingenious efforts to try to respond to the tear streaked faces of the orthodox who stand pleading, … "Fix it. Please fix it." At some point, and I hope it is soon, the Network will need learn, as did I, that some things that are broken simply cannot be fixed. There are times when what is broken must be set aside and replaced with something new. I applaud the Network's strenuous efforts to champion the voice of orthodox Christianity and Anglicanism within the United States. I am grateful to the leadership of the Network and the American Anglican Council for providing me and the people of God whom I serve a place to stand amidst the turmoil. At the same time, we are all getting tired of standing "amidst the turmoil" waiting for the Network to fix what cannot be fixed. We feel like the tear streaked child whose mother keeps running back and forth between the running faucet and the freezer desperately trying to find a way to attach two pieces of a broken popsicle instead of simply reaching into the freezer and handing the child a new one. As the Network champions orthodox faith and morals, the Network also needs to acknowledge that there is an orthodoxy of association. So Isaiah warns: "Leave Babylon, flee from the Babylonians! Announce this with shouts of joy and proclaim it." St. Paul warns in Ephesians: "Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God's wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them." Even Jesus advises of the sinful brother that if he refuses to listen (as has ECUSA), you are to "treat him as you would a pagan or tax collector." I believe it is past time for the Network to "leave ECUSA, flee from the pagans! [and] announce this with shouts of joy and proclaim it." Until this is done, we will only continue to watch the slow demise and death of the Anglican voice and witness in the United States and weary our brothers and sisters in Christ around the globe who are prepared to stand with us if we'll just act. The Network is well postured to rescue the orthodox in hostile dioceses and solve the problem of Adequate Episcopal Oversight almost immediately. Orthodox clergy become employees of the Network, resign from their diocesan positions, placed under the ecclesiastical authority of an orthodox bishop and commissioned by the Network to plant a new church in location. All monies from these churches that would heretofore have gone to their respective dioceses would now go directly to the Network. Conceivably there could be a continuation of benefits for clergy (i.e., Pension, insurance, etc.) as well as continuation of stipend. Most of our churches are paying these fees anyway. It would not become an undue burden upon the Network. Further, with all monies heretofore now being directed to the Network, the Network would have the financial resources for the administrative infrastructure as well as the resources to escrow for the building of new churches. With the support of our sympathetic brothers and sisters in Christ, it is inconceivable to me that orthodox Anglican churches could not very quickly find spaces in which to continue their worship and ministry. Convocational Deans could work with Roman Catholic Bishops to negotiate for temporary shared space. In our location, the Seventh Day Adventists have been extremely sympathetic and supportive of our stand for orthodoxy and I am quite sure would open their facilities immediately for use. There are all kinds of possibilities and the Network should be working closely with other denominations who I believe would be more than willing to lend aid and assistance vis-à-vis property. To quibble over property when the very witness to our Lord Jesus Christ is at stake seems to me to defy what we proclaim to be of utmost importance. At some point we are going to have to decide whether keeping our buildings is more important than maintaining our orthodox witness. The ECUSA will continue to have influence on the orthodox voice as long as the orthodox voice is unwilling to set forth her witness above and beyond her property. Let the ECUSA have all the property. Send Frank Griswold and the revisionist bishops the keys along with the insurance premiums, the mortgages, the utility and maintenance bills and oversight of the properties. What will a Bishop Lee do when he has 50 empty churches that he has to maintain, heat, cool, mow the grass, shovel the snow and keep pipes from bursting? Orthodox churches with endowments could review the restrictions upon these endowment funds. If the restrictions are minimal and/or reserved for missionary outreach, the endowments conceivably could be "gifted" to the Network. The call for Adequate Episcopal Oversight needs to change its entire direction and focus. Right now it is the orthodox who are futilely attempting to secure adequate Episcopal oversight. It is time for the tide to turn. What is going on is absurd and unnecessary. What would happen, for example, if a Bishop Duncan or a Bishop Stanton, suddenly informed their "revisionist" parishes and missions and they needed to find "adequate Episcopal oversight." How would the House of Bishops then deal with issues of geographical boundaries and the autonomy of dioceses. I'll bet their song would change overnight. The Network has the power to turn the whole tide of what is going on in the United States, IF and WHEN it will take up the cross and completely surrender to the call of Jesus, embrace the "cost of discipleship" and disengage from the political and institutional lariats that keep God's people bound to the powers and principalities of the evil one. I fear that if the Network does not take such radical actions and soon, the Network will find itself with few orthodox left to support its efforts. An increasing number of Episcopal Churches will bail for AMiA, EMS, etc., Orthodox Christians affiliated with orthodox churches will leave because they are weary of the turmoil and the ONLY Anglican voice left in the United States will be that of the ECUSA. I commend the Network for its arduous efforts to work within existing structures. However, when those structures are as corrupt as they have become, it is time to own the need for new structures that lead to abundant life and sever all ties with those structures that promise only to lead to eternal damnation for God's people. Orthodox Anglicans in the United States are tired and weary. We do not want to play corrupt games with corrupt people or institutions any more. We long to get on with carrying the Good News of Jesus Christ into the world and we do not want that Good News entangled with the nuances of sin, evil and death. I applaud the work of the Network. It is also time for the Network to step out in faith, kick the dust of its feet and take up the cross wherever it may lead and irrespective of the cost. Until and unless it does so, the Network will facilitate its own collapse. The Network has the support. Now it needs to take the radical steps that MUST be taken if our commitment to orthodoxy is to retain its credibility. The Rev. Claudia C. Kalis is Vicar of St. Bartholomew's Anglican (Episcopal) Church High Springs, Florida In the Diocese of Florida. She is a graduate of Yale Divinity School.

By David W. Virtue, 2/26/2004 Walter C. Righter, the former Bishop of Iowa and assistant Bishop of the Diocese of Newark, NJ who was tried and subsequently found not guilty for ordaining a non-celibate homosexual to the priesthood, says the five orthodox bishops who won't subscribe to ECUSA's canons and constitution should leave the Episcopal Church. Writing on the House of Bishops/Deputies, listserv, an Online chat room, the revisionist bishop said, "if the continuing dissenters must go I say 'Go with God', and now let us get on with the work of the church." The bishop was the central player of the now infamous "Righter Trial" which declared the Episcopal Church had "no core doctrine" when he ordained a noncelibate gay man to the diaconate in September 1990. "How can the Bishops 'allow' what the canons and constitution do not allow? How can the Bishops 'cede control' that is not theirs to cede? Even if they wanted to, they cannot. If outfits like the AAC and the Network et al must have a plan cast in concrete, they are stuck with it." Righter said the same thing happened at the House of Bishops when the House met right after his presentment. "My presenters acted as if they would negotiate. The PB appointed people to negotiate with them. When they met together it was clear there was only one way - the presenters way. No negotiation. So, Mary Adelia McLeod, acting on behalf of the committee appointed by the Presiding Bishop called everything off, saying there was no way a negotiation could occur. So it is now. If the continuing dissenters must go I say "Go with God", and now let us get on with the work of the church." Righter said too much time has been lost because of people who seem to want the attention of the church focused on them, and who simply ignore mission, including the continuing urging of the church to enter into conversation with homosexual persons. Only in rare instances has that been organized and done thoroughly, even when urged by primates. Who are they kidding?" The bishop, who is retired, lives with his third wife in Maine.

By David C. Anderson If some see even a glimmer of hope in DEPO (Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight), we fail to see how. It is too complicated, too lengthy, designed to frustrate further, to identify the rebels and annihilate the faithful before a real safe harbor can be reached, and leaves the local bishop with veto over the process and no clear definitive decisive and timely way to override the veto. From our standpoint DEPO is a NO-GO. It represents bad faith on the part of the liberal revisionists of the HOB. They are not interested in providing real pastoral care for the faithfully orthodox Christians in ECUSA, but they are interested in smoke and mirrors to try and ward off action by the Primates. As president of the AAC, I see nothing to feel good about from the HOB and a great deal to be concerned about. Until the HOB and the PB are willing to adequately provide AEO, TEMPO (Temporary Emergency Measures – Pastoral Options) will need to arrive at churches one at a time near every revisionist bishop until they understand what inadequate means, both from Webster's definition, and from a practical point of grass roots resistance. The Rev. Canon David C. Anderson is President, American Anglican Council.

By Cynthia P. Brust, AAC, March 26, 2004 The House of Bishops has failed the Church by its new process for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO). The bishops had the opportunity to act sacrificially and lovingly to reach out to orthodox Episcopal congregations and parishioners. Instead, they have offered DEPO, a cumbersome bureaucratic process controlled by the very overseers from whom relief is sought. It inadequately deals with episcopal pastoral care and fails entirely to address such issues as ordination, the calling of clergy, church planting, finances or property. Under DEPO, the power and prerogatives of the bishops are paramount, while genuine concern for parishioners is lost. It shows that the House of Bishops is not serious about reform which would respond to the concerns of the Primates. We know that our Network bishops who were present worked valiantly for a better outcome from the House of Bishops meeting just concluded. Nevertheless, the great majority of the bishops have made clear by the terms of the plan for DEPO that the rejection of biblical authority and the endorsement of sexual intimacy outside of marriage are now the settled teaching of our Church; all that remains is to regulate the speed with which this new teaching is imposed on orthodox Episcopalians. The Anglican Communion Network is committed to living under the authority of Holy Scripture and in true unity with the vast majority of the world-wide Anglicans. We serve in partnership with the Primates, who have written, "we offer our support and the full weight of our ministries and offices to those who are gathering" in the Network. As Deans of the Anglican Communion Network, we say to all faithful Episcopalians in our Convocations: We will do our utmost to provide the support, guidance and encouragement you need to remain faithful to Christ and to carry out the missionary calling we all share. We will work with you in bold and creative ways to provide ministry and mission in healthy, orthodox church structures. In the Anglican Communion Network, we will remain faithful to Christ, no matter what the cost. We take heart from St. Paul's words in this Sunday's epistle: "I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead. "Not that I have already obtained this or have already reached the goal; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Beloved, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but this 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 heavenly call of God in Christ Jesus." (Philippians 3:8-14). Your servants in Christ, The Rev. John A. M. Guernsey, Dean, Mid-Atlantic Convocation The Rev. James McCaslin, Dean, Southeastern Convocation The Rev. Ronald L. McCrary, Dean, Mid-Continental Convocation The Rev. David Moyer, Dean, Forward in Faith North America convocation The Rev. William Murdoch, Dean, New England Convocation The Rev. William A. Thompson, Dean, Western Convocation Cynthia P. Brust is Director of Communications American Anglican Council

Dear Brothers and Sisters, This week the ECUSA House of Bishops meeting in Navasota, Texas trumpeted an uncertain sound in proposing measures to deal with the crisis in The Episcopal Church. Thoughtful Episcopalians said it was a totally inadequate blast in the face of the current crisis in The Episcopal Church. It touched on symptoms not systemic problems. Time will tell if what took place at Camp Allen, Texas is the final turn in the road towards open schism or just another milestone marker leading towards an inevitable Episcopal apocalypse. The House of Bishops offered up a proposal based on the Presiding Bishop's call for "reconciliation" - a cross between the Scylla of Episcopal Pastoral Care and the Charybdis of Alternative Episcopal Oversight. The question is, will the Ulyssian monster called ECUSA find safe harbor in what has been drawn up and dubbed, Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO). Charybdis, you will recall, was turned into a monster by Zeus who made her suck water in and out three times a day, posing a threat to passing ships — and so the question is, is DEPO merely a thin veneer for Episcopal Pastoral Care, and that giant sucking sound you hear, once the word "delegated" is removed, the same old formula that leads to the continuing and ongoing persecution of biblically faithful Episcopalians. Not all the orthodox bishops turned up. Four bishops did not attend. Five (including Duncan) attending meetings but stayed off site. Some who did go stayed away for most of the meeting, allowing themselves only that much time to talk about the issue that mattered — alternative pastoral care. Some decided to live offsite and not share the community life of the House. They know what reconciliation a la Griswold means. It means staying together till you agree that pansexuality is good and right in the eyes of God. They have no interest in being sucked into his pagan mystic views any more. A deliberate effort to put Pittsburgh Bishop Bob Duncan into a small group with NH Bishop V. Gene Robinson failed. Duncan would not allow himself to be sequested for a cozy, 'see I'm normal', 'why can't we all get along' huddle with the homoerotic bishop. Quincy Bishop Keith Ackerman did not even attend, pleading other more personal reasons. But the stakes were high, very high, and Griswold knew it. The whole Anglican Communion was watching and just prior to the opening, the Presiding Bishop received a letter from Rowan Williams the Archbishop of Canterbury telling Griswold to tread carefully or the head he might tread on could be his own, thus making his bruised head a repeat of The Fall, with equally fatal consequences. But the Presiding Bishop never told the assembled Purple what exactly was in that letter, leading people to speculate that if there was no compromise it would be Griswold himself who would be accountable to Dr. Williams and his fellow Primates and that any effort to 'hang' the Ohio five bishops who participated in the confirmation would be met with sharp reprisals from the supreme club of Purple. As events played out, the five were not punished, and, except for a minor slap on the wrists, they walked away unscathed for their ecclesiastical insolence. The bishops repudiated the "irregular" confirmations of the Bishops in Ohio, but nevertheless declined to proceed with disciplinary action against them. Interestingly enough, while Griswold steadfastly refused to reveal the contents of Williams' letter to the HOB or media, he had no such scruples in releasing a letter from the PRIMATE OF BRAZIL who castigated one of his own, Recife Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti for attending and participating in the Ohio confirmations. Bishop Orlando Santos de Oliveira, primate of the Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil, said in a letter dated March 16 that Cavalcanti had violated the canons of Brazil and promised the matter would be brought before that church's House of Bishops. The Bishop of Recife will catch hell for his actions, but Griswold catches nothing for officially presiding at the consecration of a homoerotic bishop, after signing a document in London saying he would not. That letter, released by Griswold to the Anglican Communion News Service, sailed around the world, while Williams' letter to Griswold remains hidden in a vault. Politics, pansexual misbehavior, and double standards go hand in hand with great ease in the ECUSA. The lies, deceit, and coercion will continue on uninterrupted. When I asked a source in Brazil why the new Brazilian Primate would do such a thing, I was told that the Brazilian Church has to give "815 (ECUSA) support because the Brazilian church depends on the ECUSA for money." So Brazil is never going to bite the hand that feeds it. "Orlando is not a conservative, but he is also not an active liberal; he is doing his job. Do not expect anything from the Brazilian church more than support of the ECUSA," said the source. BUT REACTION TO THE DELEGATED EPISCOPAL PASTORAL OVERSIGHT proposal was swift and negative. The American Anglican Council condemned it as being "inadequate," as did Canon David Roseberry, a leader in the AAC who led the Plano meetings. An orthodox theologian said it was "dead on arrival," and Forward in Faith North America, the Anglo-Catholic wing of ECUSA, equally condemned the plan, with FIFNA leader Fr. David Moyer declaring, "we will not accept this. We are committed to Adequate Episcopal Oversight as defined by the Archbishop of Canterbury. We will continue to work with the 'Network' to achieve this goal." The closest thing to a favorable reaction came from the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes with a fairly tepid response from Bishop Duncan, its moderator, who said the plan for "Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight" will require "tremendous generosity and charity on the part of the bishops and an extraordinary new level of trust on the part of the people and clergy," if it is to work. We shall see. WHEN THE PRESIDING BISHOP WAS ASKED AT CAMP ALLEN how he was dealing with the issues and pressure of his office, he responded by saying that he coped by working out at a gym, reading a great deal of fiction, and taking frequent trips to his country house in New Hampshire. There was apparently no mention of prayer, Bible study, the Holy Spirit, or anything remotely Christian. Why are we not surprised? The Rt. Rev. Pierre W. Whalon, who is Bishop in Charge of the Convocation of American Churches in Europe, described the closed-door meetings as having an "undertone of dread" as the discussions [around pastoral care] loomed in the schedule. Bishop Charles Jenkins, chairman of the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice, had a rough time of it and was under much pressure, Virtuosity learned. He presented a plan for adequate Episcopal oversight, but said there was much pressure against it and, as he said, "the stakes are high." He had that right. The AAC analysis following the official news release seemed to reinforce the notion that Griswold and the HOB's main focus was to protect the rights (and powers) of the bishops, without giving very much consideration to the rights of orthodox parishes and congregations that need immediate ecclesiastical relief due to their severely damaged or broken relationships with their bishops. No one consulted with spokespersons of faithful congregations or, apparently, the AAC, which only illustrates the continued arrogance of Griswold and his revisionist bishops who are struggling to maintain the "top-down" power structure. As one observer noted, "the battle lines are being better defined, and neither side appears willing to compromise. This is a good example of a major paradigm shift when the individuals with the most to lose are the most opposed to any change." There would appear to be no middle ground, though the statement from the NACDP Network and Bishop Duncan seemed to hold the most hope for moving forward. Time alone will tell. I have posted numerous stories in today's digest dealing with the fallout from the Texas bishops meeting. There will be more in the days to come, including in-depth commentary on that meeting and the DEPO statement. OHIO CONFIRMATIONS. Virtuosity has learned that the confirmations had the highest security the AAC had ever put on. This writer knew nothing about it until after the event. Said Canon David Anderson, AAC General Secretary: "We caught them absolutely flat-footed. We were not even telling our mid-level AAC folks where it was to be, and third-level AAC folks didn't even know when. We kept it SO secret because we didn't want 'ungodly admonitions' to be given to the six rectors, who would then, if they showed up at all, be presentable for violating an 'ungodly admonition.' They will attack us at our most vulnerable points, like clergy who just want to be faithful to Christ and pastor a flock in the historic faith." Then Anderson said this: "There will be more." Now it is very clear that the American Anglican Council is totally geared for a permanent state of war with the ECUSA revisionist powers. First of all, they are never going to back down again. They are prepared to fight for every parish in the country that wants Alternative Episcopal Oversight, and they are under no illusions that all the gracious speak that issues forth from the mouth of Frank Griswold is a hot air balloon that someone, one day, will bring down with an ecclesiastical canon. Frank Griswold, in his statement, twice mentioned the "ministry of reconciliation." He loves the phrase and how it rolls off the tip of his tongue. He was talking up reconciliation even as the twin towers were crashing in New York. He likes the sounds of the words; they have a ring of "niceness," as one journalist observed. "It sounds, well, nice. Who could object? And his meaning is clear: 'It is time to stop fighting and to be reconciled to me, my way of doing things, and to your new homo-bishop. C-can't we all just get along?'" One Biblical exegete noted that the scriptural phrase Griswold uses comes from II Cor. 5:18. Read in context, it means to repent of your sins and be reconciled to God. It also means that the ministry of reconciliation, as committed to the Church—in fact to those in apostolic ministry—includes this call from Christ's ambassadors: "Repent from sin." To Griswold it means the very opposite, he wrote. But everything is upside down in the pluriform world of Griswold. Truth is constantly being turned on its head, and what issues forth from his mouth is his own theobabble that baffles Global South bishops, but feeds the itching ears of his fellow revisionist bishops. AS IF TO REINFORCE THE DECLINE IN LIBERAL ECUSA DIOCESES, pledges are down in SOUTHERN VIRGINIA in 2004 by 24%, reports a Virtuosity reader—and this is in a diocese where the Bishop voted against the confirmation of Robinson. Bishop David Bane has appointed a reconciliation commission headed by the rector of Bruton Parish, the largest Episcopal Church in the diocese. Herman Hollerith, the commission head, is already on record saying that the gay bishop does not threaten his theology, but that he will not perform homosexual blessings during his tenure. "I seriously doubt that anything will come of this commission because it is, once again, all talk and no action of significance, if any. I have an email from Bishop Bane that effectively defines the result because he took strong exception to any and all of my suggestions for action—including an apology for the mess that has been created." The traditionalists must march ahead without the Church, he writes. But that is the price that has to be paid if the Church is to survive as a Christian entity. But Bane has come out against President George W. Bush's constitutional ban on same-sex marriages. In these discussions it is important to maintain a clear separation between the roles of church and state. "And it is imperative that we not try through the legislative or legal process to short-circuit or pre-judge ongoing conversations about the moral and religious issues involved." It is this kind of flip-flopping that has people screaming into their coffee cups and pulling their hair out. URGENT PRAYER REQUEST FOR CANADIAN GENERAL SYNOD 2004. The Director and the Council of Anglican Essentials Canada want prayer against the erosion of biblical authority in the church, especially as General Synod approaches in May. "Our monthly email prayer alerts are urging prayer by Anglicans across the nation to get together on the first Friday of the month to pray for the healing and restoration of the Church." At seasons like this, many of us may say, "What can I do? It all seems so hopeless!" The resounding answer is "Pray with us!" There is still time! GOOGLE ADS. Many of you have written that you have seen offensive Google ads at my website. First of all, there is a disclaimer and secondly, if you see such ads, send the URL to webmaster@virtuosityonline.org. He will add the URL to our block list. Google matches keywords from each page in my digest in order to display ads. So a mention of the word condom use at Sewanee will result in an unfortunate ad pop-up. Thank you for your help. Correction: In a recent March issue of Virtuosity, we reported that the Rev. Stephen Waller of St. Thomas the Apostle, Dallas, Texas "left his kids." That statement was incorrect. Rev. Waller has no children born to or adopted by him. Virtuosity regrets the error and apologizes for the statement. A reminder. THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION INSTITUTE will hold its Colorado Spring Conference under the banner, ANGLICANISM: HISTORY AND HOPE: The Future of World Anglicanism in North America, April 20-23, 2004. Among the speakers will be Dr. George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury; Professor Edith Humphrey; The Rev. Dr. John Karanja; The Rev. Dr. Robert Prichard; The Rev. Dr. Jeremy Begbie; and the Rev. Dr. Ashley Null. You are warmly invited to attend this conference. This writer will be in attendance. You can sign up by writing to: The Anglican Communion Institute, 601 North Tejon Street, Colorado Springs, CO 80903, or you can sign up by going to www.anglicancommunioninstitute.org—their website. VIRTUOSITY—UK is now officially a charity (non-profit corporation) in the British Isles. Those living in the UK can make a tax-deductible donation to VIRTUOSITY by sending a cheque to the following address: VIRTUOSITY c/o Brycedale 105 Ridgeway Northaw Herts EN6 4BG Thank you for your support. VIRTUOSITY posts stories daily to its website. If you want the latest news, please go to www.virtuosityonline.org; it's all on the front page. PLEASE SUPPORT VIRTUOSITY with your tax-deductible dollar. Without your support, we cannot exist. Please be generous. You can use PAYPAL at my website: www.virtuosityonline.org, or you can send a snail mail check to VIRTUOSITY, 1236 Waterford Rd., West Chester, PA 19380. Thank you for your support. All blessings, David W. Virtue DD

By David W. Virtue PHILADELPHIA, PA—The revisionist Bishop of Pennsylvania, Charles E. Bennison is facing increasing pressure from orthodox priests in his diocese who disagree with him over the faith, ECUSA's liberal positions on sexual morality and the way he runs the diocese. "Diversity is disappearing, instead we have a liberal narrowness. It's a paradox. Genuine liberalness is slowly vanishing and becoming deliberately narrow," said the Rev. Don Sehulster, the evangelical rector of Good Shepherd, Hilltown, PA. At a recent meeting of the Bucks Deanery Clericus at Grace Church, Hulmeville, several priests raised their voices at the direction the Episcopal Church was going, and specifically at the way Bishop Bennison was running the diocese. Following a Bible study, Sehulster weighed in on the topic of Episcopal pastoral oversight, offering up that the Episcopal Church was sick. "We cannot heal ourselves; we need intervention from the outside. We need a pastoral leader from outside of ECUSA to help us — a Primate." Bennison revealed that he had had discussion with 14 bishops of Province 3 and in their discussions they revealed their strategy as to what they would do if a parish did not want them to make a pastoral visit. "Bennison said that two of the bishops would not make a pastoral visit, two more said they didn't know and 10 said they would go, and if they were not allowed into the church, they would hold a service outside on the parish grounds, (shades of Bishop Jane Dixon at Accokeek in the Diocese of Washington). Bennison said we have learned from the 60s that we must confront evil wherever we find it." The Rev. Larry Snyder rector of St. Luke's Newtown, voiced his opposition to remarks Bennison made saying that everyone who disagreed with him on theological issues was "evil". "I took offense at that remark" said Snyder. Fr. Sehulster also voiced his opposition to the bishop's remark. Bennison scrambled for an explanation saying he didn't mean people but those "who believed in the heresy of schism." Snyder told the Bishop that he was using the canons to beat us who don't agree with him into submission. Snyder, an Anglo-Catholic priest has repeatedly asked Bennison for another bishop to do confirmations, and only recently was allowed to have Quincy Bishop Keith Ackerman to come into the parish for a teaching mission. He was allowed to celebrate but not to confirm. But Bennison exacts a heavy price for cooperation. "I ask three or four times a year, but with little success. I am hoping the new ruling from the House of Bishops for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight will give us some freedom," he told Virtuosity. In a letter Snyder wrote to Bennison on March 12, the priest castigated the bishop reminding him of his promise that when elected he would continue the practice established under Bishop Alan Bartlett of permitting traditionalist bishops from outside the diocese to make Episcopal visitations. Bennison said he promised not to change the arrangement with words, "If it ain't broke, why fix it." Snyder accused the bishop of breaking that promise saying, "I lack confidence in your word, your revisionist theology, your insensitive approach and your unperceived pastoral concern for the spiritual needs of traditionalists [which] have caused some congregations to attempt to secede from the Episcopal Church, to withhold voluntary mission giving, and to walk away from their buildings to start a new congregation under the A.M.I.A and with some Rectors to decline to agree to visitations you demanded." Snyder then blasted the bishop saying he had continually demonstrated the power of his office by "upping the ante" adding more demands to be met before an outside bishop would be considered for a supplemental visitation. "When you phoned me on February 23, to remind this parish that they had not made a pledge to the mission program of the diocese, you asked what you could do to convince us to do so. I suggested that you permit an outside traditionalist bishops to make epsicopal visitations." Snyder said that such a visitation would not be in place of Bennison or his assisting bishop, only in addition to his visitations — one for one. "Bennison responded saying that he would only permit such additional Episcopal care after he and other bishops assisting in the diocese had made a visit, plus the parish now had to give a tithe of their income to the diocesan mission program." "That was never part of the deal," said Snyder in a phone call to Virtuosity. "Bennison just keeps upping the ante for one thing — money and power." Snyder said he told Bennison that he was not seeking to leave the Episcopal Church, nor even deny his position as the diocesan bishop, "only to live our faith and to meet the spiritual needs of the congregants." Snyder then blasted the bishop's personal views saying, "Due to your well-publicized positions on faith and morals, your visitations have always caused stress and turmoil within the parish. Parents have told me that they will not have their children confirmed if you are the bishop celebrating the Laying-on-of-Hands, and others have stated they will not be present, or will not receive if you are the celebrant of the Eucharist." Snyder said that no debate regarding the Articles of Religion and Anglican polity will change this. The orthodox priest said that the tithe Bennison was exacting was now 10 percent of the diocesan budget of the previous year. The traditionalist priest said he had handed out a questionnaire to his parish after the consecration of V. Gene Robinson in New Hampshire and his parish voted 90 percent for biblical views on human sexuality. "We have gay couples who are welcome here in the parish, who know they are welcome, but we will still accept the biblical teaching on all aspects of sin." At the clergy meeting, Bennison said he was toying with the idea of dropping retired clergy medical benefits, saying that it was a large chunk of change - $40,000 - and he wanted to drop it. Questions have been raised as to the extent of monthly legal fees unnecessarily being spent to attack traditionalist parishes in the diocese. Sehulster said Frank Griswold had shown poor leadership. "If I had done what he had done I would have been asked to resign. His actions have harmed the church, and knowing the consequences he went ahead and consecrated Robinson. He is a poor leader. I don't want the church to break up; I just want to see it get back on track." Virtuosity was also told that a number of lay people from Emmanuel Holmesburg, who presently have no priest, but only a supply priest, said Bennison recently made the statement, "I am a heretic. I am a universalist...I just don't believe that God would condemn any of his children to the damnation of hell."

By Dave Munday Charleston, S.C., Post and Courier March 26 -- A retired S.C. Episcopal bishop who was censured for invading another bishop's territory calls the rebuke by church leaders the height of hypocrisy. Retired Bishop FitzSimons Allison of Georgetown joined four other retired U.S. bishops and a bishop from Brazil in confirming 110 Episcopalians at a March 14 interchurch service in Akron, Ohio. The parishioners said they could not allow themselves to be confirmed by Ohio Bishop Clark Grew II, who voted in favor of an openly gay bishop at the denomination's General Convention last summer. Performing services in a bishop's territory without his permission is a breach of Episcopal church law. Wednesday, the denomination's House of Bishops released a statement calling the actions "discourteous, disruptive and a willful violation of our Constitution and Canons." They warned that if it happens again, the clergy members will be brought to trial. Allison said Thursday he found the bishops' censure hypocritical. "The House of Bishops is willing to censure and threaten five bishops crossing diocesan lines to support faithful Episcopalians," he said in the statement. "At the same time they are unwilling to censure or even dissociate themselves from denials of the faith among themselves. This is a clear testimony to the bishops' attempt to establish our Episcopal unity on canons (church rules) rather than the Christian faith." Allison didn't use the word hypocrisy in his statement but said that's exactly what he meant when asked on the phone. When asked if he plans to perform confirmations in other dioceses without the permission of the resident bishops, Allison said, "I think we probably will. The main issue is not sexuality. It's a departure from the authority of Scripture." While censuring Allison for crossing geographical boundaries, the bishops have refused to censure retired Newark, N.J., Bishop John Spong, who publicly denied every tenet of the orthodox Christian faith in his "12 Theses," Allison said. The most revealing action at last summer's General Convention was when the bishops voted down a resolution affirming the Episcopal Church's commitment to the Bible, he said. "Their departure from Scripture to pander to the pressures of this present age has been a major factor in the loss of 400,000 Episcopalians in a decade supposedly devoted to evangelism," he said in the statement. The original statement was also signed by retired West Tennessee Bishop Alex Dickson, who is based at All Saints Church of Pawleys Island. Dickson was one of the five retired bishops who performed the confirmations. The online version also had the names of Bishops Maurice Benitez, William Cox and William Wantland. The House of Bishops outlined a plan for alternate oversight this week at their meeting in Texas. Theological conservatives such as the American Anglican Council rejected it, saying it leaves too much control in the hands of the bishops. Allison is working independently of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes, of which S.C. Bishop Edward Salmon Jr. is a charter member.

From Cynthia Brust Director of Communications American Anglican Council We are not surprised by the House of Bishops censuring the five of us for providing support to those congregations in revisionist dioceses who cannot in good conscience accept the radical actions taken by General convention and who now find themselves alienated from their diocesan leadership. The House of Bishops continues its long retreat from its sworn responsibilities concerning the Christian faith, from the time of Bishop James Pike to Bishop John Spong's "12 Theses", to its present failure to support faithful Episcopalians in unfaithful dioceses. The action of the 2003 General Convention, in repudiating 4000 years of biblical teaching regarding sexuality and the action of the House of Bishops in repudiating their consecration vows regarding Holy Scripture, were acts of defiance; defiance against the resolutions of the Lambeth Conference, the express position of the 38 Anglican primates, and the explicit wish of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The House of Bishops is willing to censure and threaten five bishops crossing diocesan lines to support faithful Episcopalians. At the same time they are unwilling to censure or even dissociate themselves from denials of the faith among themselves. This is a clear testimony to the bishops' attempt to establish our Episcopal unity on canons rather than on Christian faith. The most generous interpretation of this failure to fulfill Episcopal responsibility regarding the faith, as this church has received it, is to assume a theological incompetence on the part of the House of Bishops who cannot tell the difference between heretical teaching and the Nicene Creed. Departing from Scripture to pander to the present age resulted in the loss of 400,000 Episcopalians in the decade dedicated to Evangelism! We stand in solidarity with the 21 global Anglican provinces who have either, "impaired or broken communion" with the Episcopal Church and who continue to grow as they proclaim the Gospel to a broken world. The Right Rev. FitzSimons Allison The Right Rev. Maurice Benitez The Right. Rev. William Cox The Right Rev. Alex Dickson The Right Rev. William Wantland

By The Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard It appears beyond doubt that this coming year will prove decisive for the future of worldwide Anglicanism. Attention has now — thankfully — shifted from disputes over homosexuality to questions concerning what the Anglican Communion is and how it must change if it is to survive the current crisis. It is therefore important to understand why there is a crisis without reference to same-sex unions and 'gay bishops'; similar issues could arise in relation to a number of different areas, for example in relation to lay presidency at the Eucharist. What has happened is that one diocese (New Westminster in Canada) and a whole province (The Episcopal Church of the United States of America, ECUSA) have taken decisions that violate the mind of the wider Anglican Communion. Furthermore, that Communion and the one holy, catholic and apostolic Church of which it is a part, holds those actions to be contrary to Scripture. The Communion has also repeatedly urged restraint from radical innovations until they can be more widely recognised as legitimate expressions of Christian faith and practice. This has produced a crisis at three levels: within the innovating provinces, between those provinces and other provinces, and in relation to the Communion's four current 'instruments of unity' (the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Primates Meeting, the Lambeth Conference, and the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC)). Is This Really Novel? Of course, some argue we are simply re-visiting the questions raised when parts of the Communion began ordaining women priests and bishops, and that the appointment of an Eames Commission confirms this continuity. Although similarities exist with the impairment of communion from women's ordination, it would be a serious error to treat the current situation as equivalent. Firstly, there are substantive theological differences. The presenting issue is one where, only five years ago, the bishops at Lambeth overwhelmingly agreed they could declare certain conduct 'incompatible with Scripture'. Obviously not everyone shares that assessment. Nevertheless, as the Communion is 'bound together…by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference', disregard for such a strongly worded resolution is qualitatively different from what happened in relation to women's ordination. There, the previous Lambeth Conference had simply declared 'the theological arguments as at present presented for and against the ordination of women to the priesthood are inconclusive'. Secondly, there are significant procedural differences between the two issues. The Anglican Communion lacks a central legal authority. It is, therefore, a recognised communion principle that member churches are advised 'not to take action regarding issues which are of concern to the whole Anglican Communion without consultation with a Lambeth Conference or with the episcopate through the Primates Committee'. This pattern of consultation was followed in relation to women's ordination. Before proceeding, the Bishop of Hong Kong sought the ACC's advice and, at their first meeting in 1971, they narrowly agreed that if any bishop acting with the approval of his Province decided to ordain women to the priesthood then 'his action will be acceptable to this Council'. They therefore committed the Council 'to encourage all Provinces of the Anglican Communion to continue in communion with these dioceses'. In 1973 the Council agreed by 50 votes to 2 that a decision to ordain women to the priesthood 'should not cause any break in communion in our Anglican family' and in 1978 the Lambeth Conference overwhelmingly endorsed this assessment. Here, and in the subsequent restraint over women bishops until after Lambeth 1988, the procedural contrasts with current unilateral actions are stark. Those pressing for changes in relation to sexuality knew their actions would not be viewed as within the acceptable bounds of Anglican diversity. They ignored even the stark warnings of the Primates Lambeth Statement (October 2003) that 'these actions threaten the unity of our own Communion as well as our relationships with other parts of Christ's Church, our mission and witness, and our relations with other faiths, in a world already confused in areas of sexuality, morality and theology, and polarise Christian opinion'. They proceeded with the consecration of Gene Robinson knowing it threatened to 'tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level'. Many discern a sign of a deeper spiritual malaise here. Even Bishop Peter Selby, while 'rejoicing with all those who find themselves affirmed' by Robinson's consecration, comments, 'The problem for me is that much of the language used to doubt the purpose of "waiting" for the Anglican Communion to assent to the election of an openly gay man as a bishop sounds not that different from the language used to justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq without waiting for the UN Security Council'. Thirdly, the political realities are now totally different. Relationships between provinces absorbed the innovation over women's ordination and the diversity it produced in the Anglican family. Already, however, provinces have clearly stated their relationship with New Westminster and ECUSA has been severely impaired. Although most provinces are waiting until the Commission reports this September, many will simply proceed as they believe correct — forming a new Communion if necessary - if the Commission treats this like women's ordination and proposes a modified model of 'reception' and 'unity in diversity'. ECUSA Schism? The Lambeth Primates Meeting at Lambeth said, 'Whilst we reaffirm the teaching of successive Lambeth Conferences that bishops must respect the autonomy and territorial integrity of dioceses and provinces other than their own, we call on the provinces concerned to make adequate provision for episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities within their own area of pastoral care in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates'. However, the Presiding Bishop's decision to proceed as chief consecrator in New Hampshire, combined with a history of 'liberal' bishops acting in a most illiberal and authoritarian manner, makes this solution very difficult to achieve. It appears that adequate episcopal oversight will not be provided and that some of the Primates will no longer respect ECUSA's claimed autonomy and territorial integrity. The actions of ECUSA's General Convention and its bishops who have disregarded the mind of the Anglican Communion has resulted in many parishes and clergy (and some diocesan bishops) being unable to continue in the same relationship with their bishop and the official organs and representatives of ECUSA. Many Global South Primates, meeting in Nairobi before the Lambeth Primates Meeting, shared this assessment and called for ECUSA to be disciplined by the wider Communion. In Archbishop Rowan's memorable word, the situation is now 'messy'. Nevertheless, the recently formed Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes could create a structure in canonical continuity with ECUSA but also in full acceptance of the Communion's teaching on sexuality and the disciplines of common life within communion. If this can be achieved, it could be recognised by other provinces and perhaps by ecumenical partners. Inevitably, there is a real danger of a quagmire of legal actions over property and other matters and the accusation of 'schism' will be hurled at those in this network. This is, however, different from the actions that led to the Anglican Mission in America (AMiA) in 2000. In a real sense it is ECUSA's understanding of 'autonomy' - and its consequent disregard for mutual accountability within the church of Christ - that represents the real 'schism'. The overwhelming majority of Anglicans worldwide (not to mention other denominations) cannot accept ECUSA's innovations as in accord with Scripture. If they recognise a genuine orthodox Anglican church in the emerging Network then, however regrettable such a development may be, it cannot be condemned as the sin of schism, unless one defines 'schism' solely in terms of non-recognition of existing episcopal jurisdiction and turn a blind eye to those authorities' disregard for the wider church or the truthfulness of their actions. Whither the Communion? The Anglican Communion acts in two main forms. First it exists through the relationships between the various provinces within the Communion. Each province — including at some point our own — will have to clarify how their relationship has changed with ECUSA (and perhaps with other provinces if they have a different relationship with ECUSA). The potential seriousness of this was clear when the Primates warned that if the consecration proceeded, 'we have reached a crucial and critical point in the life of the Anglican Communion and we have had to conclude that the future of the Communion itself will be put in jeopardy…the ministry of this one bishop will not be recognised by most of the Anglican world, and many provinces are likely to consider themselves to be out of Communion with the Episcopal Church (USA). This…may lead to further division…as provinces have to decide in consequence whether they can remain in communion with provinces that choose not to break communion with the Episcopal Church (USA)'. Although a certain restraint is being shown at present, already strong statements are being issued. There is a widespread commitment, especially in the Global South, to a real and deepening worldwide Anglican Communion. There is no great desire for a looser 'federation' where autonomy and pluriformity over-ride mutual accountability and orthodoxy (including in matters of sexual morality). As a result, many provinces will loosen or sever their existing bonds with ECUSA (unless it changes course) and instead establish links — missionary, financial, ministerial etc — with those in ECUSA who reject its innovations. In order to prevent this degenerating into anarchic chaos, the second form of the Communion - the instruments of unity and especially the Archbishop's Commission - has a vital role. The Commission will assist provinces to interpret unfolding events and understand the nature and levels of 'communion' that exist. It will also have to discern how the more focussed, representative and symbolic aspects of the Anglican Communion can survive. For this to happen, reforms must take place; it is unlikely another Primates Meeting, never mind a Lambeth Conference, can take place in the manner of the past. The challenge here is that Anglicans have eschewed any central legal authority within the Communion. Even now there is no great desire for a standing, hierarchical jurisdictional authority at a supra-provincial level. However, the last Lambeth Conference called on the Primates Meeting to include among its responsibilities, 'intervention in cases of exceptional emergency which are incapable of internal resolution within provinces, and giving of guidelines on the limits of Anglican diversity in submission to the sovereign authority of Holy Scripture and in loyalty to our Anglican tradition and formularies'. There is already a proposal — in To Mend the Net — as to how that might be accomplished in response to cases such as the present one. This involves the creation of 'observer status' within international meetings of the Communion for those who have distanced themselves by their actions from the Communion's teaching. Although more work is needed, and it is important that this is not 'excommunication', some such form of discipline is required. The alternatives are for the Communion to disintegrate into a looser and theologically incoherent body and/or to be replaced by a new communion of inter-provincial relationships. Invitations to Primates Meetings and Lambeth Conferences are not a legal right. They are at the discretion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who acts as a focus of unity with primacy of honour in the Anglican Communion. It is therefore perfectly feasible for an institutional 'innovation' such as 'observer status' to develop in response to ECUSA's theological and ecclesiological innovations. Indeed, a signal from the Archbishop or the Commission that something along such lines is being seriously considered (in preference to the 'reception' model used over women's ordination), might lead to calmer responses from individual provinces and greater clarity within ECUSA. The disrespect shown to the Communion requires innovations in its structure if it is simply to continue being what it has always claimed to be: a fellowship, within the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, of dioceses and provinces that are in communion with the See of Canterbury, uphold and propagate the Catholic and Apostolic faith and order as generally set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, and are bound together by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference. What About the Church of England? The Church of England historically lies at the heart of the Anglican Communion. Still recovering from our own 'Reading crisis', little attention has been paid to the implications of all this for the Church of England. These are, however, potentially very significant. From the day of his appointment, Archbishop Rowan Williams has made clear his commitment to the Anglican Communion and the dangers in disregarding its teaching on human sexuality. Recent events make it almost inevitable that, in the very near future, he and the wider Church of England will have to make a choice: either show concrete commitment to the Communion and its teaching or support the freedom of an Anglican province to ignore it and go undisciplined by the wider Communion. Faced with this stark decision, some in an already polarised situation may welcome the showdown with their opponents over sexuality: 'liberal revisionists' able to side with ECUSA and perhaps other liberal provinces, 'conservative traditionalists' able to secure their views in England boosted by an alliance with Anglicans worldwide. Many, however, will feel torn: 'traditionalists' committed to Lambeth I.10 but unsure they wish to see the Communion divide over this and certain they don't want the ongoing English debate on sexuality (helpfully resourced by Some Issues in Human Sexuality) dictated from - or silenced by - Nigeria, 'revisionists' eager to affirm gay Christians but unhappy with American unilateralism or losing international links with the Communion. It is, therefore, important to keep debates over sexuality distinct from debates over the nature and future of the Anglican Communion, even if they are now closely related. The issue is not whether the Communion can continue as before and accept different policies on human sexuality as it has on women's ordination. It is clear that this is a non-starter. The issue is whether a way can be found within the Communion to uphold its teaching and the disciplines of a common life. This will require in some manner rebuking or disciplining provinces that unilaterally break with it and exalt 'autonomy' at the expense of 'mutual accountability'. Sadly, if the Communion fails to do this, there is a real risk it will divide into separate international bodies. Many fear we are entering a period that could witness the Anglican Communion and perhaps the Church of England experience the painful words of Yeats' 'The Second Coming': Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity. The challenge is to continue to pray for the Archbishop of Canterbury and all serving on his Commission, and to discern how the special gift of communion we have been given with our fellow Anglicans - here in England and around the world - can be provided with structures that enable communion to deepen and be extended to others in the body of Christ. In This Issue All four articles have some bearing on the Anglican Communion and its future as well as much wider application and value. At the heart of Anvil is a focus on mission and on learning in and from the worldwide church. I am therefore delighted that the Annual CMS Sermon (delivered in London, Oxford, Birmingham and York in October 2003) by Vinoth Ramachandra from Sri Lanka is appearing in Anvil. It offers insights into our changing world and reminds us of the importance of a global Communion and the priority of local and global mission. The next article by John Nolland opens a series of four articles for Anvil on loving our enemies. I am very grateful to Craig Smith, a member of the Anvil editorial board, for commissioning these articles and he has the final word below as he introduces them and explains the vision behind them. John Corrie again refocuses us on mission and, drawing on the Anglican tradition of Via Media, calls for an integrated approach that he believes may be a particularly Anglican contribution to mission. Finally, Martin Davie's article reminds us that we cannot escape struggles and disagreements within Christian theology. He sets out a helpful framework in which to interpret these and to be faithful in our thinking and speaking about God. The Rev. Dr. Andrew Goddard teaches ethics at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford

By Jan Nunley [ENS] Saying that they "repudiate and deplore the unilateral actions" of five retired U.S. bishops who conducted confirmations in Ohio without the diocesan bishop's permission, the Episcopal Church's House of Bishops, meeting at Camp Allen, Texas on March 24, nevertheless declined to proceed with disciplinary action against them. The vote on the resolution was unanimous, according to Bishop Suffragan Ken Price of Southern Ohio, secretary of the House of Bishops. Retired bishops FitzSimons Allison of South Carolina, Maurice Benitez of Texas, William Cox (assisting) of Oklahoma, Alex Dickson of West Tennessee and William Wantland of Eau Claire confirmed 110 individuals from five congregations and celebrated the Eucharist on March 14 in Akron, without the knowledge and permission of the Bishop of Ohio, J. Clark Grew II. They were joined by Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti of the Diocese of Recife in northern Brazil. The five "in so doing used the sacrament of unity in Christ as an instrument of division and defiance. Secretive in its planning, their action was discourteous, disruptive and a willful violation of our Constitution and Canons," the statement said. The action also met with a stern rebuke from Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, Bishop Grew, and Ohio bishop-elect Mark Hollingsworth Jr., and "strong disapproval" from the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice on March 16. Bishop Orlando Santos de Oliveira, primate of the Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil, said in a letter March 16 that Cavalcanti had violated the canons of Brazil and promised the matter would be brought before that church's House of Bishops. No discipline for now "We have prayerfully considered the use of the disciplinary canons in response to the actions in Ohio. In the spirit of our commitment to reconciliation, we choose a different course. We invite these five bishops to meet with the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice to discuss their actions. Further, we want them to hear about the work we continue to do as bishops who embrace the ministry of reconciliation for the mission of the whole church," the bishops' statement continued. None of the five were present at the Camp Allen meeting. But further infractions, the bishops emphasized, would have consequences. "At the same time, we hold these five bishops, and one another, accountable for the good order of the Church, the Body of Christ," the statement said. "Therefore, in the future any bishop performing Episcopal acts without the permission of the diocesan bishop will be subject to discipline under our canons." The statement urged those in disagreement with their bishops and the decisions of the 74th General Convention to "share their views directly with their bishops" rather than participate in services such as the one in Ohio. "In our continuing efforts to care pastorally for all of our people, at this meeting we have endorsed a plan for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight," the bishops pointed out. "We are committed to responding generously and pastorally to requests made in accordance with this plan." The Rev. Jan Nunley is deputy director of Episcopal News Service.

by David G. Duggan © www.virtueonline.org December 28, 2025 In my 35 plus years of being a landlord I’ve never had to evict someone–until now. After more than a year of non-payment, and eight months of legal proceedings, the sheriff finally escorted this tenant, and her young child from the apartment they had shared for three years. Welcome to C[r]ook County, IL. Undeterred and defiant, this tenant somehow made her way back to the apartment, dismantling a lock and ripping off the “No Trespassing” sign the sheriff had pasted to the door. On Thanksgiving and two days before Christmas I caught her in the apartment and ushered her out. On Christmas Eve the locks were changed. The Bethlehem story of Mary and Jesus and Jesus’ parable about the vineyard owner and the murderous tenants (Matt. 21: 33-43) loom over this saga. But there is no Jesus here and I haven’t been killed (yet) for seeking my due. The courts awarded custody of the child to the absentee–and estranged–father who has been jobless for more than two years, not paying support for his children and their mother. Meanwhile the apartment’s furnishings haven’t been removed. I can’t bring myself to call a scavenger to haul away this fractured family’s memories of happier times. Though now somewhat faded, What Would Jesus Do has become a sort of guidepost to those facing moral dilemmas. Whether I needed the rent more than the tenant needs free housing seems a pointless exercise. Why should I bear the brunt of others’ irresponsibility? Jesus didn’t quite endorse the “wretched end” which the crowd hearing His parable thought the tenants deserved. But He said that the kingdom will be taken away from them and given to those who will produce fruit. On the cross, Jesus offered paradise to the repentant thief. I have no paradise to offer this tenant and the Chicago climate may not be conducive to raising wine grapes. But I can pray that this tenant can come to her salvation by realizing that the grace earlier shown her has limits. Eternity showed no mercy to the other thief who died waiting for a miracle rather than accept Jesus’ reward for taking the just punishment for his sins. David Duggan is an attorney. He lives in Chicago and is a frequent contributor to to VOL.

SPECIAL REPORT   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org December 25, 2025   Anglican chaplains from the Joint Armed Forces Chaplaincy (JAFC) who were ousted from the Anglican Church in North America have formed a new Anglican denomination—the Anglican Reformed Catholic Church (ARCC)—dedicated to "preaching the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."   The JAFC Bishops, in consultation with the Executive Committee and Futures Planning Group (comprised of staff and ministers at large), announced the establishment of the ARCC and incorporated it in Alabama as a new 501(c)(3) church organization. It will be led by JAFC Bishop Derek Jones.   Leaders describe the new alignment as "Classic Anglican."   "We live in the tradition and prayer book expression we have all known and loved in the JAFC for nearly 20 years," JAFC leaders told VirtueOnline. "It is Reformed and Catholic as Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, Bishop John Jewel, Bishop Lancelot Andrewes, and other Anglican reformers envisioned—ancient in faithfulness to the witness of the Apostles and formulated in the ancient Creeds and Councils."   Three-Diocese Structure The Church currently comprises three dioceses: The JAFC remains intact, according to leaders. Bishop Mark Nordstrom and Bishop Marshall MacClellan will serve as eventual coadjutors and lead the JAFC, with Bishop MacClellan serving as the endorsement signatory. The Anglican Diocese of St. Andrew will primarily serve churches in the western geographic regions. The diocese's initial founding church has elected Bishop Michael Williams to serve as their ordinary. The Anglican Diocese of St. Martin will oversee eastern churches, with Archdeacon Basil Maduka serving as Vicar General. Current JAFC churches and missions, along with several new congregations, will be transferred to their new diocesan homes in the coming weeks, while chapels (non-permanent services) will remain with the JAFC.   "This is an exciting time, and we ask for your continued prayers and support. There is still much work to be done," leaders said. "Until the Provisional Canons are complete, the JAFC will continue to operate as everyone's home office. The Bishops and Executive Committee have appointed Bishop Jones to serve as the initial Bishop of the ARCC as we continue our formation work."   Challenges for ACNA This development presents challenges for the small orthodox Anglican denomination. ACNA Archbishop Steve Wood faces presentment charges that could result in his removal from the church. The recent trial of Bishop Stewart Ruch has received mixed reactions. Several ACNA clergy and a group of women believe the trial was biased in favor of Ruch's innocence, with only bishops determining the outcome.   The road ahead for ACNA appears rocky, and further schism cannot be ruled out. Whether this development is an isolated event remains to be seen. END