Archives

By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org April 14, 2026 Dame Sarah Mullally used her first Easter Day sermon as Archbishop of Canterbury to renew calls for peace in the Middle East. "Violence, division and insecurity are affecting the lives of billions of people around the world," she said, adding that "many feel that their heart is in pieces." "The bereft, the wounded, the refugee — this week our gaze and our prayers have been turned towards the land where Jesus was crucified and raised from the dead." Noble sentiments. But calling for peace in the Middle East without naming the parties responsible is a gesture that changes nothing. Vague appeals from progressive church leaders carry little weight when the actors driving the conflict — Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Houthi rebels — have no interest in peace on any terms that would be recognizable to the West. Mullally never identified any of them by name. One suspects her remarks were aimed, implicitly, at Israel and its leadership. After all, we are repeatedly told that Palestinians are the victims of Israeli aggression — that the IDF kills civilians indiscriminately, that Israel practices apartheid, and that Benjamin Netanyahu should face trial for war crimes. She also made no mention of Vladimir Putin, who has waged more than four years of aggressive war against Ukraine at a cost of over a million lives and minimal territorial gain. "Today, as we shout with joy that Christ is risen, let us pray and call with renewed urgency for an end to the violence and destruction in the Middle East and the Gulf," she said. Yet she did not call on Hamas to lay down its arms. She did not ask Hezbollah to stand down and spare the Lebanese people further bloodshed. She said nothing to Iran's leadership about ending its missile strikes against Israel and neighboring Arab states. Her call for peace was stripped of any specific demand — which is to say, it was not really a call for peace at all. Peace, peace, when there is no peace, cried the prophet Jeremiah. From a Christian perspective, lasting peace is the work of the Prince of Peace — a reality that appears beyond the scope of Dame Sarah's Easter address. "May our Christian sisters and brothers know and celebrate the hope of the empty tomb — and may all people of the region receive the peace, justice and freedom they long for." Fine words. The Iranian people would know something about longing for freedom, after five decades under clerical tyranny. Israel's military campaign, whatever one thinks of its methods, is the only force currently attempting to break that grip — and receives no credit for it. Mullally drew more theologically interesting ground when she spoke of resurrection and darkness: "God's most essential work of resurrection happens in the depths of the earth, while the world is silent and still dark." She reflected that "darkness is also a place for the movement of the Spirit, knowing Jesus is with me." There is something worth engaging here. Yet there is an irony she didn't acknowledge: the first act of God in Genesis, when the earth was formless and void and darkness covered the deep, was to create light. An Easter sermon might have dwelt on that rather more. In his Easter Urbi et Orbi, Pope Leo appealed to world leaders to choose "not to dominate others, but to encounter them" — a sentiment that Hamas fighters sheltering in tunnels beneath Gaza are unlikely to find persuasive. END

By Samuel Pascoe ORANGE PARK, FL — When you're 124 years old, giving birth keeps you young. No one knows the exact date, but sometime in 1880 Grace Episcopal Church was planted as a mission church. Today the church has grown to 1,400 members. This year marks our 124th birthday as a church. Far from slip sliding into old age, we are being made young again by a new birth. September 4 was the 20th anniversary of my ordination. There can be no greater way for me to celebrate that anniversary than to give birth to a daughter ... a daughter church. The fellowship that began several years ago as the outreach-oriented "On Ramp" service is going to become a new Anglican Church in Clay County, coming under the ecclesiastical authority of the Province of Rwanda and its Primate Emmanuel Kolini. It will be called Emmaus Road Church (ERC). Its new rector will be the Rev. David Freels. David, the vestry, and the people of On Ramp service had been talking about a new church plant for some time. Over time it became clear that God was leading David Freels to plant an Anglican church under the direct authority of his bishop, Thomas Johnston, a bishop in the Anglican Province of Rwanda. Till now, David had been exercising his priestly ministry under my authority as Rector of Grace Church and as part of a joint venture of cooperation between Bp. Johnston of Rwanda and Bp. Stephen Jecko, who was until January of 2004 the ECUSA bishop of Florida. That joint effort in mutual ministry came to an end when the new bishop of Florida, Johnson Howard, refused to relicense David to perform priestly functions in this diocese. This reversal of Bp. Jecko's policy of reconciliation and mutual ministry has caused great pain for all of us. On August 9, 2004, the vestry of Grace Church unanimously passed a resolution celebrating this new venture and approving David's move from full-time to part-time status here at Grace, thus freeing him up to resume his priestly calling at ERC. Taking the On Ramp to a New Road On Sunday, September 5, ERC moved out of our home and took on her new identity as an Anglican Church on mission to America. Bp. Johnston had planned to join David and the people of Emmaus Road Church but Hurricane Frances prevented his travel to Jacksonville. In fact, even though David cancelled services, 30 people showed up anyway in the midst of the storm and he and new flock celebrated their first communion together as a new church. Symbolically, they were the still point in the midst of the storm that raged around them. Bp. Johnston will join the people of ERC as soon as his schedule permits. It was a time of excitement and opportunity. The goal of this new work is to reach out to the thousands of unchurched and non-Christian people in our area. This new work is not about 'sheep-stealing' (trying to lure others from existing churches). Emmaus Road Church will offer a way for the 30%+ people in Clay County who have no church home to connect with Jesus and the Anglican Communion. Why Now? I believe this is a crucial and timely mission for the following reasons: It will clearly put the "Go" in Gospel as we show we are serious about mission, not only globally (thru the ministry of the McHughs, Starnes, and others) but also locally. It will be good for our own collective soul and our health as a congregation to take a risk and give our very best to the cause of the Kingdom. Because ERC will be under the authority of the Province of Rwanda (through the agency of the Anglican Mission in America), it will allow David to fulfill the calling for which he has worked so long and so faithfully and for which he was ordained into the Anglican Communion. It will open new ministries to our neighbors as those who embark on this adventure offer their special approach to doing church in this area. What David, his team, and those who join him will build together will not be "just like Grace" nor will it be "just like On Ramp." It will be a new thing, a whole new church worshiping and serving the Lord in the strong Anglican tradition and in full fellowship with Anglicans around the world. Why Is ERC an AMiA Church? The word "church" only appears twice on the lips of Jesus. The first is in Matthew 16 when Jesus tells Peter that He will build His Church. The second is in Matthew 18 when Jesus lays out a plan for Church discipline. That plan involves progressively taking concerns to more and more people at higher and higher levels of authority within the church. The context for the Matthew 18 passage is one believer having a problem with another believer. But, what if the problem is with the church (or denomination) itself? That is the issue that continues to face orthodox Episcopalians. I count myself in that group, so I will use the word "we." Over the course of 15 years, we (a group of laity, deacons, priests, and bishops) took our concerns "up the ladder" of authority and accountability. In 2000, we took our concerns to what, in Anglican polity, is the final court of appeals: the 38 primates of the Anglican Communion. Their response was to issue several strong rebukes to the Episcopal Church in the United States (ECUSA) and call for repentance. When ECUSA did not repent, but instead continued to act in defiance of Anglican tradition, the clear teaching of Scripture, and the expressed will of the Anglican communion, members of the world-wide Anglican Communion decided to intervene. The desperate need for their help, wisdom, guidance and courage became crystal clear last summer when almost exactly a year ago the Episcopal Church openly defied the Anglican Community and, indeed, 98% of global Christianity, when it approved the consecration of Vicki Gene Robinson — a defiant homosexual activist — as the Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire. The Anglican world recoiled in horror and sadness at this act of American heresy and hubris. They determined to send missionaries to America. There is a fitting symmetry here. Just as in the 18th and 19th centuries America had sent missionaries to Africa and Asia (uninvited but much needed), so now these men and women are sending missionaries back to the U.S. In their arrogance and cultural hubris, some in ECUSA do not understand. They fail to remember that now; as then, in some cases these missionaries are uninvited but much needed. As one African Archbishop said in frustration, "You (Americans) sent us the Bible and now you are mad at us because we believe it." Two archbishops and their provinces stepped up. They consecrated two bishops (Chuck Murphy and John Rodgers) and later four more (among them Tom Johnston) to serve as missionary bishops in America. A new mission agency, the Anglican Mission in America (AMiA) was born. AMiA is a mission agency under the authority of Anglican bishops and primates. One of the sponsoring provinces was Southeast Asia (Singapore, Thailand, etc.) and the other was Rwanda. Why Rwanda? Two reasons: First, the Rwandan genocide of ten years ago taught the people of Rwanda that all it takes for evil to prosper is for good people to do nothing. The world literally stood aside and let tens of thousands of people die. In some cases, the international community literally watched it happen but did not want to get involved. Those who survived the holocaust pledged that they would never stand by while others suffered if they had it in their power to intervene. Second, the Anglicans in Rwanda believe the Gospel. They really believe that spiritual warfare is just as real as earthly warfare. They believe that spiritual death is even more horrific than physical genocide. Earlier this year, my friend Neil Lebhar took a trip to Israel with a Ugandan bishop. Just before going on the trip, 200 people in his diocese had been massacred in religious warfare. Neil felt certain that this Ugandan bishop would see the spiritual problems in America as very minor compared to what he was dealing with in Africa. But, the Ugandan bishop shocked Neil when he said, "No! Your struggle and ours is the same. It is all spiritual warfare, darkness against light. Do not think your struggle (for the soul of the church in America) is any less important to God." The people of Rwanda and Uganda have seen the ugly face of sin, unmitigated by western media and the supposed wisdom of western intelligentsia. They know the fight is real. Why Now? Earlier this year, the new bishop of Florida, Johnson Howard, refused to relicense David Freels for the priestly ministry for which he had trained for so many years, for which he was ordained by the Province of Rwanda, and for which he was previously licensed by Bp. Jecko. Howard's refusal to recognize the legitimacy of David's orders (his ordination) and his continuing refusal to address the issue has left us with few options. The issue is not the legitimacy of David's ordination. David's bishop, Thomas Johnston, was consecrated by two sitting primates of the Anglican Communion — only one is normally present at such an event. Ironically, and instructively, no primates were present at the consecration of the new bishop of Florida, Johnson Howard. On September 5, Emmaus Road Church took its rightful place as a new Anglican Church, part of the Anglican Mission in America, part of the World-Wide Anglican Communion, and not only a daughter, but also a partner with Grace Church in reaching our world for Jesus Christ. The Rev. Sam Pascoe is the rector of Grace Church in Orange Park, Florida. END

September 8, 2004 (Ventura, CA) — The Barna Group Recent legislation, lawsuits and public demonstrations over the legality of gay marriage are just one battlefront regarding the institution of marriage. A new study released by The Barna Group, of Ventura, California, shows that the likelihood of married adults getting divorced is identical among born again Christians and those who are not born again. The study also cited attitudinal data showing that most Americans reject the notion that divorce is a sin. Based on interviews with a nationally representative sample of 3614 adults, the Barna survey focused on the three-quarters of adults 18 years of age or older who have been married at least once. The study identified those who had been divorced; the age at which they were divorced; how many divorces they have experienced; and the age at which the born again Christians had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Comparing the ages when divorced adults had accepted Christ and when they underwent their divorce, the researchers were able to determine both the impact of one's faith commitment on the resilience of the marriage and whether the divorce occurred before or after their born again commitment. The survey also examined whether people believe that divorce is a sin in situations where adultery is not involved. More Than One-Third Call It Quits Among all adults 18 and older, three out of four (73%) have been married and half (51%) are currently married. (That does not include the 3% who are presently separated from their marriage partner.) Among those who have been married, more than one out of every three (35%) have also been divorced. One out of every five adults (18%) who has ever been divorced has been divorced multiple times. That represents 7% of all Americans who have been married. The average age at which people first dissolve their initial marriage tends to be in the early thirties. Among people in their mid-fifties or older, the median age of their first divorce was 34. Among Baby Boomers, millions more of whom are expected to get a divorce within the coming decade, the median age of the first divorce is currently 31. The Barna Group expects the average age of a first divorce among Boomers to be similar to that of the preceding generations by 2015, as the aging members of that generation sustain divorces later in life. The research revealed that Boomers continue to push the limits regarding the prevalence of divorce. Whereas just one-third (33%) of the married adults from the preceding two generations had experienced a divorce, almost half of all married Boomers (46%) have already undergone a marital split. This means Boomers are virtually certain to become the first generation for which a majority experienced a divorce. It appears that the generation following the Boomers will reach similar heights, since more than one-quarter of the married Baby Busters (27%) have already undergone a divorce, despite the fact that the youngest one-fifth of that generation has not even reached the average age of a first marriage. Christians Have Same Incidence of Divorce Although many Christian churches attempt to dissuade congregants from getting a divorce, the research confirmed a finding identified by Barna a decade ago (and further confirmed through tracking studies conducted each year since): born again Christians have the same likelihood of divorce as do non-Christians. Among married born again Christians, 35% have experienced a divorce. That figure is identical to the outcome among married adults who are not born again: 35%. George Barna noted that one reason why the divorce statistic among non-born again adults is not higher is that a larger proportion of that group cohabits, effectively side-stepping marriage — and divorce — altogether. "Among born again adults, 80% have been married, compared to just 69% among the non-born again segment. If the non-born again population were to marry at the same rate as the born again group, it is likely that their divorce statistic would be roughly 38% - marginally higher than that among the born again group, but still surprisingly similar in magnitude." Barna also noted that he analyzed the data according to the ages at which survey respondents were divorced and the age at which those who were Christian accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. "The data suggest that relatively few divorced Christians experienced their divorce before accepting Christ as their savior," he explained. "If we eliminate those who became Christians after their divorce, the divorce figure among born again adults drops to 34% - statistically identical to the figure among non-Christians." The researcher also indicated that a surprising number of Christians experienced divorces both before and after their conversion. Multiple divorces are also unexpectedly common among born again Christians. Barna's figures show that nearly one-quarter of the married born agains (23%) get divorced two or more times. The survey showed that divorce varied somewhat by a person's denominational affiliation. Catholics were substantially less likely than Protestants to get divorced (25% versus 39%, respectively). Among the largest Protestant groups, those most likely to get divorced were Pentecostals (44%) while Presbyterians had the fewest divorces (28%). Is Divorce A Sin? Although Bible scholars and teachers point out that Jesus taught that divorce was a sin unless adultery was involved, few Americans buy that notion. Only one out of every seven adults (15%) strongly agreed with the statement "when a couple gets divorced without one of them having committed adultery, they are committing a sin." A similar percentage (16%) moderately agreed with the statement. The vast majority — 66% — disagreed with the statement, most of them strongly dismissing the notion. Faith perspectives made a difference in people's views on this matter — but not as much as might have expected. Born again adults were twice as likely as non-born agains (24% vs. 10%) to strongly affirm this statement. However, a majority of the born again group (52%) disagreed that divorce without adultery is sin. Three-quarters of all non-born again adults (74%) disagreed with the statement. A majority of both Protestants (58%) and Catholics (69%) disagreed that divorce without adultery involved in the commission of sin. There was no difference in point-of-view on this matter across the generational groups. The largest difference among subgroups of the population was between blacks and whites. Just half of the black segment (49%) disagreed with the survey statement compared to seven out of ten white adults (70%). Hispanics were in-between those extremes (64% disagreed.) No End In Sight Barna stated that there is no end in sight regarding divorce. "You can understand why atheists and agnostics might have a high rate of divorce, since they are less likely to believe in concepts such as sin, absolute moral truth and judgment. Yet the survey found that the percentage of atheists and agnostics who have been married and divorced is 37% - very similar to the numbers for the born again population. Given the current growth in the number of atheists and agnostics, and that the younger two generations are predisposed to divorce, we do not anticipate a reversal of the present pattern within the next decade." Research Methods The data described in this report are based on nationwide telephone interviews conducted by The Barna Group with a random sample of 3614 adults, age 18 or older, between January and August 2004. The maximum margin of sampling error associated with the aggregate sample of adults is ±1.9 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. "Born again Christians" were defined in these surveys as people who said they have made "a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today" and who also indicated they believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they had confessed their sins and had accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as "born again." Being classified as "born again" is not dependent upon church or denominational affiliation or involvement. The Barna Group, Ltd., is an independent cultural analysis and strategic consulting firm located in Ventura, California. Since 1984, it has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors. END

COMMENTARY September 9, 2004 By David W. Virtue The actions of Los Angeles Bishop Jon Bruno to inhibit and depose six clergy and then move vigorously to take their parish properties from them, is a scene that we are seeing repeatedly being played out across the country as the revisionist steamroller meets the stone wall of Christian orthodoxy. Of course Bishop Bruno is not the first bishop to thus act and he certainly won't be the last. But he has been the loudest and most vocal to date in his attempt to annihilate the few remaining orthodox priests in his ultra-liberal diocese, using the power of his office to deal swiftly with rebellious orthodox priests. In a blinding flash his wounded ego and his desire for even higher office got destroyed and this quickly translated into ecclesiastical outrage, and the man erupted like Mt. Vesuvius. He fired off letters to the Archbishop of Canterbury, two African bishops (one an Archbishop), solicited the help of Frank Griswold, ECUSA's Presiding Bishop and got unsolicited support from the revisionist "Progressive" Episcopal crowd out of Pittsburgh, home of the Episcopal Church's leader of the Anglican Communion Network - Bishop Robert Duncan. Bruno ordered the priests to cease and desist all ministries, vacate the properties or he would bring an injunction against them prohibiting them from even using the buildings. The threat was real, though empty. That he would move so quickly from inhibition to deposition is probably no surprise to these priests. They expected it and clearly they were prepared and just as equally they don't care. They made their moves with eyes wide open and expected the worst. They got it. On Tuesday the Diocese of Los Angeles filed lawsuits seeking to confiscate the church properties of the three breakaway parishes of St. James Church, Newport Beach; All Saints' Church, Long Beach, and St. David's Church, North Hollywood. The suits, filed in both Los Angeles and Orange County, was aimed, according to Bishop Bruno through his attorney, to "preserve these churches as houses of worship for faithful Episcopalians as they have been since their founding." The parish priests responded saying they were deeply disappointed that the diocese had rejected the possibility of a peaceful resolution, saying the lawsuits were "senseless and intolerant." The local churches hold the deeds to these properties, and hundreds of church families have raised money to acquire and build them, they said. "We are amazed at the callous disregard of the religious rights of hundreds of families who overwhelmingly voted their conscience to disaffiliate from the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Los Angeles." Now all that remains is to see who will win in the courts over property ownership. Bruno is placing his entire reputation on the line that he can win using the Dennis Canon, the power of the Episcopal Church and the appearance in court of David Booth Beers, Griswold's legal hangman. It is clear that either these priests or an orthodox priest somewhere in the U.S. is going to have to challenge the Dennis Canon all the way to the Supreme Court of the US, not merely to a State Supreme Court. A ruling is clearly needed to not only assist fleeing orthodox parish priests from revisionist bishops, but also for orthodox bishops who now find that they have fleeing orthodox parishes, because of the actions of General Convention last summer, the National Church and Frank Griswold. Beers has made it very clear to all diocesan chancellors that he will not tolerate any parish property leaving the ECUSA without a fight by the diocesan bishop and, at a minimum, fair payment for the value of the property, if the bishop decides he is not willing to engage in a long drawn out court battle if he doesn't have the money. Now it truly begins to get messy. Some dioceses are richer than others. Some have major endowments like the Diocese of Pennsylvania which has more than $70 million at its disposal; other dioceses, like the Diocese of Quincy have little or none. Some revisionist parishes in the Diocese of Los Angeles have already started a collection to give Bruno for legal fees in his fight against the three parish priests. In the end it may well boil down to who has the most money to pursue the case to the very end. A ruling can be given by one judge and then appealed, and then it goes up the line to another judge, sometimes taking years for anything to be fully resolved. Nothing moves fast in the legal world. Now the orthodox would like to see the fight stay at a theological and moral level, with the revisionist bishops admitting they have no theology and are not interested in upholding Biblical restraints on sexual behavior, and then for everyone to agree that parting is best and the property should stay with the rector, vestry and parish. But that, as it turns out, is not on the niceness, inclusivity and diversity agenda that revisionist bishops like Bruno have in mind. Their attitude is, "so you don't agree with me, too bad, you can go and leave the keys and check book on the table as you depart." That has happened in the Dioceses of Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Atlanta, to name but a few, but it is by no means the norm. The Rev. Paul Walter, a feisty Evangelical priest in the Diocese of Missouri wants out and he wants his paid up parish property, and he is prepared to fight for it "as far as it takes." Bishop George Wayne Smith is fighting back with the help of the National Church. He has, of course, deposed the priest - another fine example of the triumph of the canons over Scripture. There are also clusters of orthodox priests and their parishes in the Dioceses of Florida, Connecticut and Eastern Michigan that are waiting to see the outcome of the Lambeth/Eames commission before they act. Clearly the problems are not going away, in fact all the evidence points to increasing fragmentation in the coming months and years. With fragmentation comes hope that the new and emerging realignment will bring a fresh start for beleaguered orthodox priests. It is interesting that the three Los Angeles parishes did not choose to wait for the outcome of the Lambeth/Eames Commission, but acted instead now! When I asked an insider why they did, I was told that Bruno had asked for a copy of St. James' bylaws, and to prevent a possible strike by him against their parishes, they acted quickly to pre-empt him. Now it is all in the courts. The spin doctors at the church's national headquarters are saying it is a mere handful of churches leaving the ECUSA, but that is patently untrue. Dozens have left the ECUSA for the Anglican Mission in America (AMIA), and increasingly more are coming directly under overseas orthodox primates. Furthermore these are not small urban or country parishes; they are triple-digit parishes with some congregations having well over a 1,000 members. We are not talking chump change. Why else would Bruno scream like a banshee when he got the news? If it were three no name parishes with less than 40 members he'd have turned them into missions and fahgetaboutit. So the question must be asked, how and why are things getting so bad, so fast? And is it irreversible? Wherever I travel, I am constantly being told by orthodox parish priests, often with tears in their eyes, the confusion they feel. They say something like this. "David, I know, or thought I knew my bishop; we were friends, we traveled to Africa together, and with our wives we dined out and saw movies together. He baptized our children. Now I don't know him. Because I won't toe the line and be 'inclusive' on sexuality issues and agree to support him in consecrating V. Gene Robinson, I am a pariah. My phone calls go unreturned. I am not invited into the inner workings of the diocese. I am not asked to sit on any diocesan committees...I am alone...and I am scared. The only truth I know is the handful of brothers who now stand with me, without them I would be truly lost and alone." This story, or some variation of it, is one I hear repeatedly, as I criss cross America, and it is truly heart-breaking. And usually I respond like this. "My dear brothers, you are dealing with unregenerate men and women who dress in purple, wear large crosses and miters, and strut around like lords of the manor, but their hearts are far from God. They are corporate players, minor league CEO's, who see the Episcopal Church as a career opportunity, and you are merely chess players to be moved at will. Their brains were long ago scrambled in seminary, and all they have now is a liturgy to follow which most of them don't believe in any way; but they say the words, churn out a third rate sermon about God's all-inclusive love, and the people nod, not knowing any better. The truth is, you have no power, they have no gospel, no Good News, and if you cross them, you're finished." Los Angeles might be called the City of Angels, but for orthodox Episcopalians, the angels are dark ones, and one of them wears a purple shirt. END

"We must allow the Word of God to confront us, to disturb our security, to undermine our complacency, and to overthrow our patterns of thought and behavior." — John Stott "Do nothing that you would not like God to see. Say nothing you would not like God to hear. Write nothing you would not like God to read." — J. C. Ryle "Wake up. Islam is a danger. If Christians don't start caring about our faith, Islam will take over the West. They'll impose their laws and culture. They'll grow massively in number. And we will decline." — Cardinal Robert Sarah "Go on in a full pursuit of all the mind that was in Christ, of inward and then outward holiness; so shall you be not almost, but altogether, a Christian; so shall you finish your course with joy: you shall awake up after his likeness, and be satisfied." — John Wesley "Prince William claims he 'believes.' But does anyone buy it? With King Charles's health in question and a controversial new Archbishop now in power, the monarchy is scrambling to reassure the public that the next king can defend a faith he has never practiced." — Justin Kurian, Reclaiming Christendom Dear Brothers and Sisters, www.virtueonline.org April 10, 2026 CHURCH MEMBERSHIP IN FREEFALL Religion demographer Ryan Burge paints a stark picture: mainline churches are rapidly shrinking, and there is almost no chance of the trend reversing. United Methodists and Episcopalians are among the biggest losers, having shed more than half their membership over the past few decades. Episcopal Church membership stood near 3.4 million in the mid-1960s. By 2010 it had fallen below 2 million. By 2023 it had dropped to 1.55 million — a decline of more than 50 percent from its peak. Several factors drive this collapse: Young people are increasingly reluctant to join any organization, even among those who still identify as religious. Institutional membership will likely continue falling for decades. Evangelicals and Black Protestants are far more effective at cultivating and retaining members than their mainline and Catholic counterparts. Marriage, age, and gender all show strong positive correlations with church membership. Membership is a powerful predictor of regular attendance. Members are three times more likely to attend weekly worship than non-members, even after controlling for other variables. One additional factor deserves attention: people who are actively religious tend to live longer. The effect is large, consistent, and measurable across many studies — and the strongest predictor is regular attendance at religious services, not merely private belief. THE COLLAPSING PASTORAL PIPELINE The deeper crisis in mainline churches may not be empty pews or shuttered buildings. It may be the vanishing pastoral bench. Consider what is happening on the ground: a pastor is being moved from a thriving 350-person congregation to a struggling sub-100 church. The move feels less like strategy and more like triage — a symptom of a system running out of clergy. Ordinations are collapsing across the board. According to a 2023 report, between 2014 and 2021 the number of active diocesan priests declined by 9 percent, religious priests dropped 14 percent, seminarians fell 22 percent, and total priestly ordinations declined 24 percent. The bench is thinning so dramatically that it is reshaping how churches staff their congregations. In 2023, 44% of congregations had full-time clergy. In 2010, that number was 63%. In 2023, 20% of congregations were served by a priest who was either retired or not active in the Church Pension Fund. A year earlier, that figure was 12%. IS THE NEW ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY IRRELEVANT TO THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION? The new Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, is fast becoming irrelevant to the vast majority of Anglicans worldwide — many of whose primates will simply not receive her. The structural collapse that preceded her appointment has only deepened. The Anglican Communion — once a family of 85 million baptized members across 165 countries, now estimated at 100 million — has been fracturing for decades. The fault lines deepened dramatically after the U.S. Episcopal Church consecrated Gene Robinson, an openly gay man, as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003. That act triggered the Jerusalem Declaration of 2008, the formal launch of GAFCON (the Global Anglican Future Conference), and the eventual birth of the Global Anglican Communion (GAC). Today, GAFCON represents the only genuinely global Anglican body, encompassing the majority of the world's practicing Anglicans — concentrated overwhelmingly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The Anglican Consultative Council, one of the four historic Instruments of Communion, is no longer recognized by this new world order and has been rendered effectively impotent. Most African Anglican provinces have abandoned it. The Global South Fellowship of Anglicans (GSFA), while not yet formally aligned with GAFCON, has similarly distanced itself from Canterbury's authority. Institutional unity has already been shattered. Nothing Mullally has said or apparently believes will move the needle toward greater cohesion or meaningful growth. [Full analysis: virtueonline.org] MULLALLY BLASTS TRUMP OVER IRAN WAR Archbishop Mullally has delivered a sharp rebuke of the Trump administration's posture toward the Iran conflict, declaring that rhetoric around a "war prayer circle" is morally wrong and warning that war can never be considered holy. "War is not holy," she said. "Only peace reflects the will of God." Breaking from the typically measured tone of senior church leadership, Mullally condemned the situation with unusual directness, emphasizing the human cost: soldiers losing their lives, civilians caught in the crossfire, and innocent victims suffering the consequences of decisions made far from the battlefield. It is worth noting, however, that Mullally's sweeping condemnation appears to overlook St. Augustine's Just War Theory — a foundational framework of Christian moral theology that has guided the Church's thinking on armed conflict for sixteen centuries. THE DEATH OF THE EPISCOPAL CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT Another milestone in the Episcopal Church's long decline: St. Paul's, Darien — the flagship charismatic parish in The Episcopal Church — is to be demolished to make way for multimillion-dollar homes. For decades, St. Paul's stood as the leading charismatic congregation in TEC, shaped by the vision of the Rev. Everett L. "Terry" Fullam, who served as rector from 1972 to 1989. Under his leadership, the parish became one of the most active and fastest-growing churches in the United States, centered on renewal through the work of the Holy Spirit. Fullam had come under the influence of Dennis Bennett, an Episcopal clergyman widely regarded as the most prominent pioneer of the modern charismatic movement. Through Bennett, Fullam became a leading voice of the charismatic renewal then sweeping the country — and a counterweight to TEC's accelerating drift toward theological revisionism. [Full story: virtueonline.org] DEPOSED ACNA BISHOP RETURNS TO MINISTRY Less than two years after an Anglican church court deposed him from ordained ministry, Todd Atkinson is back — this time offering "spiritual direction" through Arrupe Spirituality, a Zoom-based ministry offering retreats, book discussions, and instruction in Ignatian prayer. In May 2024, the Anglican Church in North America removed Atkinson following an ecclesiastical trial that found him guilty on four charges, including improper relationships with women and inappropriate interactions with minor females. The ACNA College of Bishops voted to depose him on May 9, 2024. In a 2025 interview, Atkinson described his current work as one-on-one sessions focused on listening, discernment, and guiding people through their spiritual experience. Spiritual directors meet privately with individuals seeking guidance in prayer — often including those recovering from church trauma. Unlike ordained ministry, the role can operate without standardized licensing, formal supervision, or a clear disciplinary pathway, depending on the organization. [Full story: virtueonline.org] IS THE POPE RIGHT ABOUT WAR? Pope Leo XIV has appealed directly to Donald Trump to end the war with Iran, urging world leaders to "look for solutions to problems" and bring the conflict to a close. The pope's position reflects a long tradition within Roman Catholicism that emphasizes peace and restraint in the use of military force. Yet his comments have stirred debate. The Catholic Church has never held that all war is immoral. The concept of just war was first articulated by St. Augustine in the fourth century and later developed by St. Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth. The tradition attempts to set moral boundaries around warfare, identifying conditions under which military action may be justified. Some theologians believe the pope's tone risks obscuring this nuanced heritage. Biblical scholar and ethicist Robert A. J. Gagnon has argued that broad condemnations of warfare overlook the long-standing Christian framework that permits military action under specific moral conditions. Even committed pacifists acknowledge that the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan was necessary — and that without it, the consequences for the world would have been catastrophic. [Full analysis: virtueonline.org] REPARATIONS AND THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND The Church of England has committed £100 million to a reparations fund — Project Spire — aimed at addressing its historical links to the transatlantic slave trade, with ambitions to eventually expand the initiative to £1 billion. Not so fast, say a number of evangelical theologians. Dr. Ian Paul and Professor Richard Dale argue that the Church Commissioners' document underpinning Project Spire is deeply flawed, both historically and theologically. Their combined case is threefold: The historical basis for Project Spire is factually wrong. The theological and moral framing is corrosive and divisive. The governance and legal process behind the project is procedurally improper and potentially unlawful. Project Spire, they argue, rests on a false narrative, is theologically and socially harmful, and is being pursued through means that may not withstand legal scrutiny. [Full analysis: psephizo.com] The Episcopal Church is pursuing its own reparations agenda with considerably less momentum. The Diocese of Virginia pledged $10 million in 2021, establishing a Racial Reparations Task Force and committing to raise a reparations endowment. Nearly four years later, the effort has stalled, with no evidence that any of the pledged funds have been raised. The Diocese of New York has committed $1.2 million to a similar fund as part of a broader effort to address its historical involvement in racist practices. WILL LATHROP GPM SOLVE ACNA'S TRANSPARENCY PROBLEM? Lathrop GPM is a law firm hired by the ACNA Executive Committee and ACNA Chancellor to audit the processes of the Bishop Ruch trial. A glance at their website reveals that they represent their clients — and boast a record of winning exoneration for institutions facing allegations of sexual and spiritual abuse. From the outset, this raises serious questions about the independence of the review. Two questions now hang over the ACNA House of Bishops: First, will the bishops require that the contract with Lathrop GPM be made public? The contract will reveal the parameters of the investigation and whether the firm has a fiduciary duty to protect the institution rather than pursue the truth. If it does, this exercise is little more than an expensive exercise in image management — paid for by the people in the pews. Second, will the bishops mandate release of the full report, not merely its "findings"? The 92-page Ruch report was widely seen as an exercise in obfuscation, concealing nearly all the information that would demonstrate genuine concern for abuse victims. The full report will show what the ACNA values most: truth, or its own reputation. Let us hope and pray that our bishops will demonstrate genuine courage. These two steps — transparency about the contract, and full disclosure of the report — would go a long way toward showing that this is a church willing to hear hard truths and change accordingly. We cannot simply close our eyes and wait for this to pass. (h/t Dean Chuck Collins) ANTI-ISRAEL SENTIMENT GROWS A new Pew Research survey finds that roughly 60 percent of Americans now hold unfavorable views of Israel — a figure that rises to 70 percent among those aged 18–49. The survey, conducted March 23–29 among 3,507 U.S. adults, found that unfavorable views of Israel rose 7 percentage points over the past year and nearly 20 points since 2022. Among those with unfavorable views, 28 percent described theirs as "very unfavorable" — a 9-point increase from last year and nearly three times the figure recorded in 2022. The partisan divide is stark: 80 percent of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents hold unfavorable views, compared to 41 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters — though that latter figure has also risen. Antipathy is most pronounced among the young: 70 percent of those aged 18–49, including 57 percent of young Republicans, view Israel unfavorably. Jewish Americans and white Evangelicals remain the two groups most likely to hold positive views of Israel. In response, Israel has launched several large-scale influence campaigns in the United States. According to U.S. Department of Justice FARA filings, Israel signed a $6 million contract with Clock Tower X — a firm run by former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale — to execute a nationwide campaign combating antisemitism. The effort targets Gen Z across TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and podcasts, aiming for 50 million impressions per month. Whether it moves the needle remains to be seen. IN MEMORIAM: ANDREW CAREY It is with deep sadness that we note the passing of Andrew Carey, 60, son of Lord and Lady Carey, who died recently after a battle with cancer. Andrew served as editor of the Church of England Newspaper until it ceased publication. A gracious friend and colleague, he once arranged for my wife and me to spend a night at Lambeth Palace in the late 1990s. He will be greatly missed. SUPPORT VOL If you value what VOL provides, please consider a tax-deductible donation. This is a labor of love — but bills must be paid. There are no salaries, yet daily writing continues, and a webmaster, researcher, and overseas journalists must be supported. VOL has brought on new writers in 2026 with clear insights into Scripture and culture. We have no mega-donors and no grants — only faithful readers who believe in what we do. Tens of thousands trust us to cover the most pressing issues facing Anglicanism today; only a small percentage contribute financially. We have been at this for more than 35 years. Online: virtueonline.org/donate By check (tax-deductible): VIRTUEONLINE, P.O. Box 111, Shohola, PA 18458 Thank you for your faithful support. David W. Virtue, DD

Statement in Response to Lawsuits Filed on September 7, 2004, by the Diocese of Los Angeles and Bishop J. Jon Bruno Against St. James, All Saints' and St. David's Anglican Churches By Eric C. Sohlgren Devoid of fairness and compassion, the lawsuits filed by the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles and Bishop J. Jon Bruno on September 7, 2004, attempt to punish St. James, All Saints' and St. David's Anglican Churches, their clergy, and their members for exercising their religious freedom of choice to affiliate with another diocese and bishop in the Anglican Communion, and reveal that the true motives behind the lawsuits are financial. Rapidly accelerating from a callous demand letter to three lawsuits in a little over a week, apparently with more to come, the Episcopal Church has shown its true colors, and reinforced the reasons that these three churches felt forced to leave after years of struggle. Not satisfied with suing the California religious corporations that hold the property they seek to confiscate, the Episcopal Diocese and Bishop Bruno also have sued the unpaid and duly elected church members who have graciously donated their time to serve in church leadership, even going so far as to demand punitive damages from them. Among them are an elementary school teacher, graduate student, small business owner, homemaker and retiree. Will the Diocese be coming after their homes and bank accounts as well? The Episcopal Church and the Diocese apparently believe that these local churches are a business, as they have pled claims for interference with an economic relationship and unfair business practices. This is not about politics or revenue loss, but respect for religious freedom and compassion for fellow Christians. The lawsuits contend that the local church families and children are trespassing by attending Sunday services and Sunday school, as they demand an injunction to evict the priests and their congregations, saying that each day these families worship in the churches, the Diocese suffers "grave and irreparable damage." We fail to see the damage caused by people worshiping God, taking Communion, singing hymns, and reading the Bible together. It is beyond logic and belief that Bishop Bruno, a man of the cloth, would ask a judge to shut down these houses of worship, eject the spiritual shepherds of the people, and lock out faithful Christians. The lawsuits also allege that the Episcopal Church, the Diocese and Bishop Bruno "are the rightful owners of all personal property that belonged to the Parish prior to its purported disaffiliation including, but not limited to, church funds, assets, investments, intellectual property, and non-fixtures, such as bibles, chalices, and other articles pertaining to worship," and then seek a court order for them. Does the Bishop of Los Angeles really want to deny Christian people their Bibles and articles of worship? Does the Diocese really want a court order to take away toys, crayons and paper crosses made by the Sunday school children on the theory that they were purchased while the churches were Episcopal? And who are the so-called "faithful" Episcopalians Bishop Bruno claims are in exile, even though there are dozens of Episcopal churches within driving distance of St. James, All Saints' and St. David's? Even though Bishop Bruno took out advertisements in local papers and sent a letter to hundreds of members in these three churches in an attempt to solicit plaintiffs for his lawsuits, he could only muster five people. This pales in comparison to the hundreds of voting members who decided by a margin of 97 percent to amend the articles of incorporation to exclude any mention of the Episcopal Church. Two fundamental American values are at stake in these cases: freedom of religion and property rights. The churches are confident that the California courts will respect these rights and ultimately conclude that they, as separate California religious corporations, can retain their property and get on with their ministries. — Mr. Eric C. Sohlgren is attorney for St. James Church and Legal Spokesperson for St. James, All Saints' and St. David's Churches END

Bishop O'Neill Says He'll Protect Canterbury Ties Amid Division By Jean Torkelson, Rocky Mountain News September 8, 2004 LOVELAND - Bishop Rob O'Neill assured more than 100 Episcopalians in a packed meeting hall Tuesday that while controversies such as same-sex blessings are part of an "ongoing discussion" in Colorado, he will never allow the diocese to be separated from the Archbishop of Canterbury. "That's a no-brainer," said O'Neill about the Canterbury connection, as he spoke to a relaxed and friendly crowd at All Saints Church in Loveland. It was the first of eight meetings scheduled to discuss a just-released bishop's task force report on how to "live together in disagreement" over issues such as whether to develop same-sex blessings. O'Neill's reference to Canterbury was an allusion to the London-based headquarters of the worldwide Anglican Communion. A majority of its 38 provinces reject the Episcopal Church USA's pro-gay policies, which are shared by O'Neill. The question is, how much authority - if any - does Canterbury have to force the American church to change its position? "This is really the key issue - part of the ambiguity of Anglicanism," O'Neill told the crowd. O'Neill and Pat Washburn, one of 11 task-force members of liberals and conservatives, fielded questions from the audience, which represented at least 10 of Colorado's more than 110 parishes. As the crowd shed jackets in the rising heat, Washburn spent the first hour reviewing the 23-page report. It recommended that the beleaguered diocese - beset by squabbling clergy and a $500,000 decline in pledges - put its differences aside during a "season of restraint." Arguably, the major example of that is that the bishop would hold off on developing same-sex blessings for at least two years until the national church revisits the issue at its convention in 2006. Washburn said the goal should be a "transparent, less dysfunctional diocese," one where "we speak the truth and say what we mean. There's been a lack of trust in the diocese and it didn't start now." Ginny Mortenson, a longtime member of All Saints church, said her parish of about 240 families was "pretty evenly balanced on both sides" about same-sex unions, though she was sure those differences would never divide the parish. "We're all friends and will be for a long time," she said. END

By Rowan Williams The Western Mail, Wales September 6, 2004 The slaughter at Beslan was so horrific it was enough to test the faith of the most committed of Christians, Archbishop Rowan Williams said at the weekend. So how should we react to the massacre of the innocents? With a rising death toll, it is now clear that more than 350 people were killed in the Russian town after being held hostage at the school - with scores of children among the dead. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has admitted it led him to momentarily doubt his faith in God. He said it would be inhuman not to question one's beliefs in the light of such evil. Dr Williams branded the terrorists' actions "evil" and called for them to be imprisoned for life. He said, "I think it is probably the suffering of children that most deeply challenges anybody's personal faith. "When you see the depth of energy that people can put into such evil, then of course, yes, there is a flicker, there is a doubt. It would be inhuman, I think, not to react that way." Dr Williams said the terrorists had perpetrated "the most evil kind of action" imaginable. He insisted the murdered children had not been abandoned by God. God had given humans the freedom to make their own decisions, and He did not intervene, even in evil acts like the massacre. Dr Williams quoted the Bible in which Jesus says it would be better for people who committed offences against children to have millstones put around their necks and be cast in the sea. Furthermore the Koran, the sacred book of Islam, said God did not love those who overstepped the limits. He said he did not want to see the terrorists exterminated, and called for them to be given life sentences. "They were performing deeply evil acts," he said. "They were performing perhaps the most evil kind of action that we can imagine." His views have been echoed by clergymen and women around Wales, struggling to find answers to how such evil acts could have been carried out. Canon Enid Morgan of Llangynwyd Church, near Maesteg, said, "Rowan has such a capacity for putting into words what people feel and believe. "Human beings behave abominably, the cycle of violence always works by reaching up to something even worse. "We find it hard to think of anything as bad as September 11, then this happens. There has to be a refusal to take revenge. It was absolutely terrible. I was reminded of the story in the New Testament of Herod slaughtering the infant children. As Jesus wept over Jerusalem, so we can only weep over this." Andrew Morton, rector of St Cybi's Church in Llangybi, near Cwmbran, said, "I've had similar conversations with my congregation. "It is largely to do with where is God in all this, what is He playing at? "The major problem that we have, in terms of beliefs of the Church, is that God has given human beings free will, so they can either choose to do bad things or they can choose to do good things. "If they choose to do bad things, then it is not so much that they can't do anything about it, but He chooses not to do anything about it, because what is the alternative. "The alternative is to take away our free will and our capacity to do evil, at which point we are no longer human. We cannot actually get away from that. It doesn't make God bad, it makes us bad. "One of the things we do on a regular basis, when something really bad happens, is to blame God rather than blame the people. "That is a great get out, it absolves humanity of responsibility, but I am sorry, I don't play that game. He has given us the capacity to do the right thing. "One of my mantras is the fact that we never get it right, we just get it less wrong. Until such time as humanity accepts responsibility for its own actions, then we are in no position to criticise God. "What is the alternative to people making choices? The alternative is that people don't have power to make choices. If that happens then we are no longer humans." Church congregations across Wales were yesterday praying for the people of Beslan. Philip Johnes, vicar of Llanegwad in Carmarthenshire, said, "One's gut reaction to this is to condemn it and that these are barbaric and inhumane actions and we ask where God is. "He is in the middle of all the suffering and He is weeping for all creation and all those involved. All we can do is to pray for the sorrowful and the dead. "Although it is early for the people of Beslan, we must talk about forgiveness and reconciliation, there has to be forgiveness and reconciliation in any situation. "These things have been going on for centuries, time is not always a healer and you have to do something. Unless we do forgive and have reconciliation at some time in the future then we are not fully human either. "The death of anybody, of a single child, is just incomprehensible that somebody could do this in the name of politics and independence. "It is difficult to answer and sometimes the best thing we could do if we were there would be to stay silent, being there with their suffering is all you can do. People do expect answers and expect the Church to come up with answers. "God is there, surely weeping with those who weep." END

September 8, 2004 The Orange County Register The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles filed lawsuits Tuesday seeking to "secure and protect the church properties" at three local breakaway parishes, including St. James Church in Newport Beach. The suits, filed in both Los Angeles and Orange County, aim to "preserve these churches as houses of worship for faithful Episcopalians as they have been since their founding," Bishop J. Jon Bruno said through his attorney. The parishes, also including All Saints in Long Beach and St. David's in North Hollywood, broke from the Episcopal Church USA last month over a variety of differences, particularly the church's ordination of an openly gay bishop. The churches, which realigned with the Anglican Church of Uganda, insist they independently own their parish properties. "We are deeply disappointed that the (diocese) has rejected the possibility of a peaceful resolution," parish leaders said in a written statement. They said they had not yet had an opportunity to review the lawsuits. END Statement in Response to the Lawsuit Filed on Sept. 7, 2004, by the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles We are deeply disappointed that the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles has rejected the possibility of a peaceful resolution. Instead, the Diocese has filed senseless and intolerant lawsuits against three local churches in an attempt to confiscate their property and buildings. The local churches hold the deeds to these properties, and hundreds of church families have raised money to acquire and build them. We are amazed at the callous disregard of the religious rights of hundreds of families who overwhelmingly voted their conscience to disaffiliate from the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Los Angeles. The Diocese notified the media of these lawsuits today, not the three churches or their attorneys. After having an opportunity to review the lawsuits, the three churches will have further comment. St. James Church, Newport Beach, Calif. All Saints' Church, Long Beach, Calif. St. David's Church, North Hollywood, Calif. END

By Peggy Fletcher Stack The Salt Lake Tribune 9/6/2004 Molly Hargadine and Roger Booth may have taken different paths, but they arrived at the same point - breaking with the Episcopal Church they loved. Hargadine is a lifelong Episcopalian and nun who lives in church senior housing and does churchwork full-time. Booth is a recent convert who makes video games for a living but has devoted much of his spare time to lay leadership in the church. Both faced a moment of truth when the Episcopal Church U.S.A. voted to ordain Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire at its first openly gay bishop, an act that outraged many Episcopalians and Anglicans. Just this week, The Times of London reported that the Episcopal Church may be suspended from membership in the worldwide Anglican Communion for its approval of the ordination. For Hargadine and Booth, it came down to a simple belief: The Bible does not endorse homosexual behavior and neither should a Christian church. "It was hard for me. I was born an Episcopalian and I'm 66 years old," says Hargadine, an Episcopal nun who lives in Kaysville. "I just can't stand for something I don't believe in." "To be harsh, the Episcopal Church is apostate," he says. "They've thrown out the Bible." Now Hargadine and Booth have a common mission: to find other "dismayed conservative Episcopalians" to join with them in new journey of faith. Hargadine will be ordained Oct. 1 as a deacon in the Communion of Evangelical Episcopal Churches, a breakaway group headquartered in Memphis that boasts eight archbishops and 24 bishops who represent eight provincial "families" around the world. Booth is the senior warden, or head lay leader, of Wasatch Anglican Fellowship, a small offshoot congregation in Park City. The group hasn't yet decided which denomination to join. Losing any member of the Episcopal Church "is a great sadness to us," Utah Bishop Carolyn Tanner Irish said this week. The Episcopal Church is both "hierarchical" in that it's run by bishops, and "democratic" through the work of state and national convention where delegates are elected by the people, Irish said in a prepared statement. "There are boundaries in our church that are set by our constitution and canons - not just opinions - as to what is acceptable or congruent with the Anglican/episcopal tradition," she said. Irish has no ill will towards those who have left, but said she will certainly "welcome them back should they ever seek to return." Given the circumstances, a return to the Episcopal fold seems unlikely to Hargadine and Booth. Born in Michigan and reared in California, Hargadine became "Sister Molly" in 1985 in Monroe, La. At the time, she had no community of fellow nuns, so the bishop there founded Fellowship Charitos, Inc., to provide legal and financial support for her and other solitary nuns. Now the fellowship has more than 200 members. After 1987, she spent time as a missionary in New Guinea and lived a year in an Australian convent. On Valentine's Day last year, Sister Molly moved to an Episcopal-run senior center in Kaysville to be near her extended family. Now Sister Molly spends her days as a senior companion to clients at an Alzheimer's care center, helping them with simple tasks like eating lunch and making ceramic figures. She also works in the Adopt-a-Native program. On Oct. 9, she plans to go "Franciscan caroling," that is, knocking on doors in her building, singing to the occupants and blessing pets of people who can't make it to church. As part of her role as a future deacon, she takes Communion to elder residents of the senior center where she lives, although she is not yet authorized to consecrate the sacrament. "Right now I am only licensed to assist someone else, so my bishop has to mail the sacrament from Georgia and the Catholic monks at the monastery have agreed to give me holy water," Sister Molly says. Booth is also involved in pastoral matters, albeit as a lay member. He was raised Catholic in New Jersey but by his teens had pretty much given up on God. He got married and wandered along the faith trail until moving to Utah in 1996, where he felt it was important for his family to be involved in a religious community. They joined St. Luke's Episcopal Church in Park City. When Booth and his wife attended a three-day mini-course in Christianity at St. Luke's in 1999, he found himself transfixed by the discussions of grace, piety and godly communion. "I went from someone who prayed to God for things to someone who thanked God for things," he says. "I started feeling thankful all the time." And he threw himself into intense participation with the church, serving on the vestry, which is a lay board that helps run the church. His wife joked that he was about ready to put on the clergy collar. That's what made it especially painful for Booth when the church ordained Robinson. He struggled with his feelings until a new, liberal rector arrived at St. Luke's in May 2004. "He's OK with this gay stuff and I am not," Booth says. He wept, knowing he might have to leave the only church home he had ever really known. Booth and about a dozen others had been meeting for Bible studies since December 2003. By the spring, it was time to make a move. A priest from Ohio who had left the Episcopal Church came to Utah to talk about planting a new church for what he called "orthodox Anglicans." "He told us that separating from a church is hard, it's like separating from a family," Booth said. "The grieving process is necessary. Some of us are still going through that." The group left St. Luke's to form Wasatch Anglican Fellowship. They meet for worship at 5 p.m. on Sunday in the library at Park City Academy, a private Christian school at 3120 Pinebrook Road near Jeremy Ranch. They have Bible study on Tuesdays at 6:30 p.m. at The Christian Center of Park City. Wasatch members do not dwell on their differences with the Episcopal Church, Booth says. "We are just looking to bring people to Christ." END

By Robert Gagnon This is to alert you to some new materials of mine on the Bible and homosexual practice. But first I want to mention a very important vote in the House of Representatives for my American readers: "Hate Crime" Bill. Please call your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to oppose the Kennedy-Smith Hate-Crimes Bill that passed the U.S. Senate earlier this year. The House of Representatives will probably vote on this bill any day now (9/7/04). This bill makes "sexual orientation" a specially protected category along with race, gender, and religion. Violent crime is already covered by existing statutes. A "hate crime" bill does not reduce violent crime. It rather establishes homosexual and bisexual behavior as valued practices that society wants to promote. It opens up the possibility of criminal prosecution of persons who speak out publicly against the harmful effects of promoting homosexual practice. By establishing the valued character of "sexual orientation" diversity, it provides a legal stepping stone for other homosex-promoting legislation (including workplace and school promotion of homosexual practice, civil unions, gay marriage), further threatening the civil liberties of any opposed to homosexual propaganda and indoctrination. It also ignores the fact that orientations toward sex with children and with multiple sex partners are "sexual orientations." I know it gets tiring making those calls; but that small annoyance is nothing compared to the long-term damage that will be done to you, your children, and the church if the bill passes. To find out who your U.S. Representative is and/or to get a direct phone number to your Representative's office go here: http://capwiz.com/fof/dbq/officials/. Or contact your Representative by calling the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. New materials on my website: "JOHN KERRY ON 'GAY MARRIAGE': WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR YOU AND THE CHURCH?" at www.robgagnon.net (scroll down a bit) The following articles can be seen with a short description at http://www.robgagnon.net/ArticlesOnline.htm: Ed Schroeder Parodies the Lutheran Faith Robert Gagnon to Stacy Johnson: Two Positions on Homosexual Practice, Not Six (With Postscript) "Why 'Gay Marriage' Is Wrong" "On Boswell and 'Men who lie with a male' in 1 Cor 6:9" "PUP Task Force Report Distorts the Unity/Purity Message of Ephesians" The article on "Why 'Gay Marriage' Is Wrong" aims at a general audience; the pieces on Stacy Johnson and the Peace, Unity, Purity Task Force are directed at a Presbyterian (USA) audience; and the article on Ed Schroeder is directed at a Lutheran audience. All articles, though, contain material of relevance beyond any particular denomination. Mars Hill Audio has come out with the full 45-minute presentation of my interview on the Bible and homosexual practice; and, since my last mailing, I have new information about how to order my 2 DVD set "Truth in Love" by phone. Go to www.robgagnon.net and scroll down a bit. I hope these materials are of help to you. Blessings, Rob Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D. Associate Professor of New Testament Pittsburgh Theological Seminary gagnon@pts.edu 412-362-5610 x 2205 END

By Dennis Prager Townhall.com According to The New York Times, when the terrorists took over the Russian elementary school, they shouted "Allahu akbar" ("Allah is the greatest"). Does this surprise you, dear reader? Does it shock you that the people who deliberately attacked a school and then systematically shot and blew up little children did so in the name of Islam? Unfortunately, the question is rhetorical. Having targeted little children for death, there is no atrocity, no barbarity, no act of evil that the human race cannot imagine fanatical Muslims committing. We have already become almost inured to: The slaughtering of innocent human beings as if they were animals while chanting Muslim prayers. The reintroduction of black slavery and genocide against blacks. The murder of daughters and sisters for imagined or real sexual behavior. The stoning of women accused of adultery. The burning of Hindu temples and Christian churches, and the destruction of among the greatest Buddhist sculptures. The ban on women driving cars or learning to read. The idolization of young men who blow themselves up while murdering and maiming innocent non-Muslims -- and the theology of sexual rewards in heaven for doing so. These are some of the atrocities being committed by Muslims in different parts of the world today. It is, of course, only a minority of Muslims that engages in such horrors, but it is only Muslims who are doing all these things. Christians aren't -- even among Palestinians, there are no Christian terrorists. Jews aren't -- and when one Jew did deliberately kill innocent Palestinians in 1994, the rest of the Jewish world was horrified and demonstrated its revulsion in word and deed. Buddhists aren't -- despite the destruction of Tibet by the Chinese Communists, no Buddhists have murdered innocent Chinese, let alone non-Chinese who deal with China. With the psychopathic cruelty at a Russian elementary school, have we reached the point where people of goodwill can ask serious questions about Muslims and Islam? Or are any challenging questions still to be dismissed as "Muslim bashing" or, even more absurdly, "racist," as if religion were a race? The truth is that everyone with a conscience has questions about Muslims and Islam. But the most powerful religion in America, the religion of tolerance, has rendered it almost impossible to ask any such questions. Most people are so afraid of being branded intolerant that the most natural and goodhearted questions are only posed by the handful who have the courage to do so (usually conservative Christians). But good Muslims should welcome fair questions and not dismiss them as manifestations of bigotry. Most Americans have no a priori view of Islam. As far as they are concerned, it is one more religion that its practitioners ought to be able to practice in peace just as the members of every other faith in America do. I know I have questions, and I know they come from a non-prejudiced place. And I can back up this claim. Between 1982 and 1992, I moderated an extremely popular weekly radio show in Los Angeles on ABC radio. It featured a Roman Catholic priest, a Protestant minister and a rabbi. Beginning about 1987, I regularly invited Muslim representatives, marking the first time that Muslims were given such wide exposure on mainstream American radio or television. I developed such a good rapport with the Muslim community and its leaders that I was repeatedly invited to speak at the Islamic Center of Southern California, one of the largest and most prestigious institutions and mosques in the country. And I in turn invited Muslim leaders to speak before major Jewish institutions. Given this background, it is with the greatest sadness that I feel compelled to ask two questions: First, is there anything in Islam or in the way Islam is now taught and practiced that dulls the conscience and thereby enables many religious Muslims to engage in or support atrocities that other groups, religious and secular, find inconceivable? Second, the laudable condemnations of Islamic terror made by the Islamic Center notwithstanding, why are there virtually no public demonstrations of Muslims against the unspeakable evils committed by its adherents? And while posing questions, here are two for liberals: Why are almost the only people asking these questions aloud conservative and religious? Where are you when it comes to acknowledging evil? Yes, some people do shoot children, and good people have a right to ask why. END