By RICHARD N. OSTLING AP RELIGION WRITER June 30, 2004 Conservatives upset over an openly gay bishop and same-sex blessings in the Episcopal Church have suggested to an emergency commission that global Anglicanism should shun both the bishop and the denomination if things don't change. It's unclear whether such proposals are getting a serious look from the Lambeth Commission, a group of Anglican Communion leaders charged with drafting a plan that will preserve their international association despite a deep rift over homosexuality. Some observers think the conservative ideas are dead on arrival. But analysis of numerous proposals released in the past week still signals just how serious the divisions are. Among them: World Anglicanism should recognize that Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first bishop living openly with a gay partner, cannot uphold church tradition or "act as a focus of unity" and therefore was not a validly consecrated bishop. Since Robinson is no bishop, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and the primates who lead the world's Anglican provinces should ask the Episcopal Church, Anglicanism's U.S. branch, to replace Robinson and censure the bishops who consecrated him. If the Episcopal Church doesn't change its policies, the primates should ask Williams to appoint new bishops to re-establish a truly Anglican church in the United States. The unrepentant Episcopal Church would be outside Anglicanism, but its bishops might be granted observer status without voice or vote at Anglican meetings. Those suggestions came variously from primates and other bishops, prominent theologians, heads of seminaries, 700 U.S. priests and the Anglican Communion Institute, a Colorado-based think tank that filed a 50-page treatise. Robinson had no comment on the proposals, which were released last week by the 17-member Lambeth Commission following a private meeting June 14-18 in North Carolina. The panel holds one more meeting in September, then must report to Williams and the other 37 primates. The commission posted many of the 105 submissions it has received on its Web site, representing hundreds of printed pages. A summary reported that many texts said the Episcopal Church has removed itself from Anglicanism by abandoning sexual morals in the Bible - some regarded schism as inevitable. Fewer submissions advocated other Anglican traditions - tolerance and the autonomy of national churches that trace their roots back to the Church of England. Meanwhile, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold of the Episcopal Church led a delegation that testified before the commission and stressed tolerance within the U.S. church. Griswold said his group sought to "dispel a number of misapprehensions" and "make clear that the overwhelming reality of the Episcopal Church is the diverse center in which different views are held in tension because of our common desire to live together." Church headquarters declined to release further details. Also testifying were rival representatives from the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes, which is carving out an enclave within the Episcopal Church for supporters of traditional beliefs. They said world Anglican leaders should: Provide "immediate protection" for U.S. conservatives; discipline the Episcopal Church in hopes of returning it to "recognizable Anglicanism"; and, define the limits for churches to be considered Anglican. Could world Anglicanism intervene in ways conservatives want? Lionel Diemel, lay president of Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh, thinks it will be difficult for the commission "to do anything more than slap the Episcopal Church on the wrist in an inconsequential way." Historian Robert Bruce Mullin of General Theological Seminary predicts that Williams will try to acknowledge concerns of the majority of Anglican bishops, who believe gay relationships are forbidden by Scripture, but nonetheless avoid taking any "action that excludes anybody." The Rev. Robert Prichard, author of "A History of the Episcopal Church," notes that the Archbishop of Canterbury does have the power to refuse recognition to the U.S. church and its bishops, which previous archbishops of Canterbury did with Scotland's church for 116 years. But, Prichard said, "there is no centralized authority that could remove a bishop or tell any province what to do." So sanctions aimed at Robinson or the Episcopal Church would be unenforceable. END

by Terry Phillips, correspondent Family News in Focus June 28, 2004 A law in Pennsylvania may be used to silence pastors in the pulpit, but Christians have vowed to fight for the right to speak to the truth. We've heard of laws in the Netherlands and Canada that penalize preachers for using the Bible to condemn homosexuality. Now it's happening in America. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has added an amendment to its hate-crimes law that covers something called "harassment by communication." Michael Geer, president of the Pennsylvania Family Institute, said the new provisions could open clergy to the possibility of prosecution for preaching on God's views of homosexuality. "The threat is very real and something that needs to be addressed," Geer said. "The pulpit should be definitely a free-speech zone in the United States of America and in Pennsylvania." Anthony Picarello, chief counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, agreed that the law may be tailored to intimidate pastors, priests and rabbis, but he said his group is ready to defend any pastor who might be charged for speaking out. "The wording is broad enough that it could be applied (to religious speakers)," Picarello said, "and that's something . . . that the people who crafted the language had in mind." The offer of free legal help from the Becket Fund to pastors was backed up with 9,000 letters to all houses of worship in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, some pastors are thinking about insurance to cover their sermons. FOR MORE INFORMATION: The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty Web site contains more information about the Pennsylvania law — and its implications. END

by Pat Ashworth The Church Times THE ARCHBISHOP of Canterbury has floated the idea that the Anglican Communion might need professional help to resolve its crisis over homosexuality. His comments come in a new book, A Church at War, written by The Guardian's religious correspondent, Stephen Bates. Mr Bates interviewed Dr Williams in January. "I asked him why he thought homosexuality had become the issue on which the Church was dividing, and why now," he records in the final chapter. It was a cultural challenge to the whole view of scripture, said Dr Williams. "This is an issue which allows a clear line to be drawn in the sand. It's not something that affects many people, unlike divorce. It's a good rallying point at a time of cultural flux. If you are a [Roman] Catholic there are other issues you can find as a marker — divorce, contraception — but Anglicanism does not have these," he said. Balanced debate and rapid reconciliation in the near future was unlikely, the Archbishop believed, lamenting that "border skirmishing" was taking up the Church's energy rather than attention to "the big central shape of the story". Dr Williams spoke of the pain caused by the campaigning of conservative Evangelicals. Asked how the crisis would be worked out, he suggested the need for an outside expert on conflict resolution. "When the dust has settled, it may be time to think about a facilitated conversation. Somebody coming in to structure discussions, who is an outsider and so does not threaten or bully. . . That might bring the two sides together." The Jeffrey John affair is meticulously charted in the book, for which Mr Bates interviewed more than 50 senior figures in the Anglican Communion. Staff at Lambeth Palace come under scrutiny for the part they played in the process that led to Canon John's withdrawal as Bishop of Reading. The book says that he subsequently attempted to rescind his resignation. Stephen Bates declares his belief that the Church of England is being invaded by a "Taliban Tendency with its own agenda and a strong determination to win". Theirs, he says, is "a sectarian, congregationalist Church that can tolerate only one sort of Christian". END Editorial note. This story is relayed to you, not that you should buy the book, but to make you realize that liberal notions about mediation always work in favor or revisionists, not those who are orthodox

By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent THE LONDON TIMES June 30, 2004 Treatment of Iraqi prisoners 'putting Britain's integrity at risk' The archbishops of Canterbury and York have combined to deliver an extraordinary rebuke to the Government over the behaviour of Western security forces in Iraq. In a joint attack, Dr Rowan Williams and Dr David Hope accuse Tony Blair of "double standards" and give warning that the credibility of his Government is at risk over the treatment of Iraqi detainees. In a strongly worded letter, written on behalf of all Church of England bishops and seen by The Times, they say: "It is clear that the apparent breach of international law in relation to the treatment of Iraqi detainees has been deeply damaging. "The appearance of double standards inevitably diminishes the credibility of Western governments with the people of Iraq and of the Islamic world more generally. "More fundamentally still, there is a wider risk to our own integrity if we no longer experience a sense of moral shock at the enormity of what appears to have been inflicted on those who were in the custody of Western security forces." The letter, written with the unanimous support of all the Church's 120 diocesan, suffragan and assistant bishops, who met in Liverpool this month, was sent to the Prime Minister on Friday. It was timed to coincide with the handover of power in Iraq. Downing Street confirmed last night that it had been received. An official said: "The archbishops are entitled to their views and the Prime Minister will reply in due course." The archbishops also say that the reputation of Britain as "honest brokers" in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must not be jeopardised. They are understood to be concerned by the growing influence of Christian Zionists in the Christian community and the US Administration. Anglican bishops showed a rare unanimity in condemning the Iraq war from the start. In a sermon in Cambridge recently, Dr Williams said that Mr Blair was in danger of eroding public trust in Britain's political system. This latest intervention, designed to influence the conduct of Western security forces, is the strongest to date. It is more usual for the bishops to use their 26 seats in the House of Lords to influence political events. It indicates the strength of feeling that they bypassed this system. One source said: "I cannot remember the two archbishops writing directly to the Prime Minister in this manner before." Dr Williams and Dr Hope insist that the priority must be to do everything possible to help the Iraqi people to rebuild their country. For this, they say, it is essential to maintain the rule of law. They continue: "The credibility of coalition partners in advocating respect for the law and the peaceful resolution of disputes will, we fear, be undermined unless the necessary moral authority is clearly demonstrated at every level." One of their main concerns is the damage caused by the conflict to community relations in Britain between Muslims and non-Muslims. Some of the strongest advocates for the letter were bishops from cities with large Muslim populations, such as Bradford. They are concerned by a rise in Islamophobia and fear that the September 11 attacks have desensitised emotions so that the treatment meted out to detainees no longer causes the moral outrage it should. In their letter, the two archbishops welcome the assurances of the British and US authorities that those responsible for the abuses will be brought to justice. But they say: "Nevertheless, there remain serious questions over how such brutal and indecent behaviour could have come about." Citing the Arab-Israeli conflict as another "litmus test" of the Blair Government's respect for human rights and international agreements, they argue that the legacy of British commitment to respect both sides has enabled the UK to be accepted as "honest brokers". They continue: "It is vitally important that this position is not eroded." In a guarded reference to the growing influence of the Christian Zionist movement in the US — which takes the view that the restoration of the biblical Israel is necessary to facilitate the Second Coming of Christ — the archbishops admit: "Within the wider Christian community we also have theological work to do to counter those interpretations of Scripture from outside the mainstream of the tradition which appear to have become increasingly influential in fostering an uncritical and one-sided approach to the future of the Holy Land." A Church of England spokesman said last night: "The letter was not written for publication, but was intended as a positive contribution to the development of government policy." END

By David W. Virtue The following is the official letter from the Bishop of Long Island, Orris Walker to the Clergy and Lay Leadership of the Diocese of Long Island: On June 10th, the Cathedral Chapter was informed that I requested the resignation of the Dean, The Very Rev. James L. Cardone. This is not a decision that I have taken lightly and it is one taken with considerable self-examination, consultation and prayer. As our working relationship and visions grew more disparate, our mutual ministries and responsibilities grew incompatible and it became obvious that we developed a lack of mutual confidence to the point where I concluded that an attempt at reconciliation was not possible. Dean Cardone will leave his position July 1, 2004. In the interim period, I have asked Bishop Michel to assume oversight of the spiritual and temporal life of the Cathedral. Please be assured that this decision in no way diminishes my support of the ministries of the Cathedral, its congregation and the capital Campaign now underway. I ask for your prayers for the Diocese, its cathedral family, Bishop Michel, Dean Cardone and family and yes, me. Signed The Rt. Reverend Orris G. Walker, Jr. Bishop of Long Island

"Though with a scornful wonder men see her sore oppressed, By schisms rent asunder, by heresies distressed, Yet saints their watch are keeping, their cry goes up, 'How long?' And soon the night of weeping shall be the morn of song." —"The Church's One Foundation" (Verse 3) Dear Brothers and Sisters, For too long the Episcopal Church's traditionalist wing has lived in the shadow of the monolithic mother Church. Over the years they have had various names—the Coalition for Apostolic Ministry (CAM), Evangelical Catholic Mission (ECM), Episcopal Synod of America (ESA), and now Forward in Faith North America (FIFNA). FIFNA is part of a worldwide organization—Forward in Faith International with headquarters in the UK. But at the 16th Annual Assembly in Bedford, Texas this week, FIFNA emerged re-energized, re-invigorated and hopeful, no longer sensing that they are alone. They have the ear, not only of the Archbishop of Canterbury but the Global South bishops as well. And because of the INTERNET their voices are heard not in days and months but in minutes and hours. "It is a new day for us," said Fr. David Moyer, FIFNA president. "Our conference theme, 'Orthodoxy, Unity and Mission' says it all. Our voices are being heard in the counsels of the Church, we are no longer in a backwater and we are no longer ridiculed and despised." "We are charged and revived, our mission is strong. We have a new alliance with the Anglican Province of America (APA), we are one of six convocations of the Anglican Communion Network (ACN) and we are in full communion with the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), which daily is being joined by parishes and now dioceses of the Anglican Communion." There was an air of rebellion and excitement in the cathedral. Everyone is waiting on tenterhooks for the Lambeth Commission to complete its work and deliver its findings to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams. How it will all play out is still anybody's guess. But Canon Dr. Bill Atwood delivered the view here that the Global South bishops will never again recognize revisionist Western bishops, as they consider the issues of Robinson's consecration and same-sex unions to be salvation issues. Furthermore the African bishops are ready to pour numerous missionaries into North America to convert Americans, especially North American Episcopalians, he said. Speaker after speaker ripped into The Episcopal Church's heresies and apostasies, with Reformed Episcopal Bishop Ray Sutton blasting homosexual behavior saying that it was "repugnant to the almighty" and arguing that "we are to image in our societal and familial relations the Holy Family in heaven." "God took a bride, the church. The groom did not take unto Himself another groom, which is the image portrayed by homosexual union. It is the inversion of the family of God and therefore Satanic," said the Rt. Rev. Ray Sutton. "I agree with the Primate of Nigeria. It IS Satanic." Fr. David L. Moyer, FIFNA president and a priest in the revisionist diocese of PA Bishop Charles E. Bennison was particularly buoyant, urging his hearers, "We have no faith of our own, but only that which is Biblical, Evangelical, Catholic and Apostolic—the revealed religion of historic Christianity." Moyer said that because of the growing apostasy of the ECUSA, many are now moving (some kicking and screaming) towards the historic faith as it is found in "sacred Scripture and sacred tradition. We have come to the point (I believe), and the Global South leaders have been the clearest about this, to state that the new morality being advanced, celebrated, and codified by the revisionists is a salvation issue. Portions of the Church are leading people to hell." And it didn't lighten up. Church of England Bishop Keith Newton (Richborough) said, "We are called to be faithful not publicly credible. Jesus wasn't publicly credible, He died before a jeering crowd. The Early Church was not publicly credible. The Confessing Church was not publicly credible, and the church today should not be publicly credible. If the Church organizes itself without God why on earth should it be publicly credible?" Women's Ordination is still the important issue for these traditionalist Anglicans. To their minds it precedes the homosexual issue; the capitulation on women's ordination leads to the slippery slope of pansexuality, they argued. They were buoyed by the recent Anglican Mission in America paper on women's ordination which basically repudiated it, thus affirming their ancient theological and historical position. A panel discussion by three ECUSA bishops on the newly formed Anglican Communion Network offered real hope to parishes under siege by revisionist bishops. An interesting note on language. Many now sense that the term Anglo-Catholic might not be useful to describe ECUSA's orthodox faithful. Increasingly the term Evangelical Catholic seems to be catching the imagination. The word 'Evangelical' recognizes the church's gospel mission, the word 'catholic' establishes its historical lineage. With the coming together of Forward in Faith NA and the American Anglican Council, (the latter's leaders were at this FIFNA conference), there is a growing sense that old labels don't easily fit. I will have an exclusive interview with TAC Primate John Hepworth in the next digest. Here is a man shaking the foundations of Anglicanism worldwide. And in what might be the most farsighted observation yet offered, senior ECUSA Bishop William Wantland (Eau Claire, ret.) said that if Rowan Williams fails in his stewardship to discipline The Episcopal Church over faith and morals then he himself should be declared unworthy to run the Anglican Communion and the Global South Bishops ought to give serious thought about abandoning the present communion and forming a new communion with headquarters in Jerusalem or Alexandria (Egypt). If they did they would probably carry 90 percent or more of the Anglican Communion with them. It was Nigerian Primate Peter Akinola who recently observed, that "we don't need to go through Canterbury to get to Jesus." Indeed. DIOCESE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: Episcopalians at Church of the Redeemer are starting a new church rather than accept the leadership of openly homosexual Bishop V. Gene Robinson. Thirty-six out of 39 parishioners walked out of the Church of the Redeemer to launch a new church outside the control of the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire. They are asking the Archbishop of Canterbury to take the unprecedented step of accepting them as Anglicans separate from the Episcopal Church. The parishioners' decision to break away from the revisionist Episcopal diocese came after a meeting with Robinson at the church Wednesday night. Robinson says he will try to rebuild the parish with the remaining three members. DIOCESE OF NEWARK: Revisionist Bishop John Croneberger granted DEPO to St. Anthony of Padua in Hackensack, N.J. this week. The revisionist bishop who followed Spong, said they could have Bishop William J. Skilton, Suffragan Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina. The vestry unanimously accepted this offer. "We strongly reject Bishop Croneberger's opinion that those who support the historic all male priesthood of the Church Catholic violate the canons of the Church, and that Forward in Faith Bishops are some how unsuitable to be Visiting Bishops. Yet we are thankful for the opportunities that Delegated Oversight will afford us", said Jay W. McAnn, church warden. DIOCESE OF WEST TENNESSEE: Bishop Don Johnson deposed three priests earlier this month. Johnson signed a "Sentence of Deposition" for Fathers Noland L. Pipes, Jr., Herbert H. Hand, and Stephen M. Carpenter. The document states that each of these three priests are "deprived of the right to exercise the gifts of spiritual authority conferred in Ordination, for reasons of Abandonment of the Communion of This church by a Priest." Fathers Hand and Pipes, priest and associate priest of Faith Anglican Church, Cordova, respectively, are now part of the Province of Rwanda under the authority of Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini. They were received as presbyters in good standing by Bishop Thomas J. Johnston, Jr. Faith Anglican as part of the Anglican Mission in America (AMiA), a missionary outreach of the Province of Rwanda. Fr. Carpenter and his congregation established St. Peter's Anglican Church, Memphis, which is part of the Anglican Church of Kenya in the Diocese of Thika and is under the oversight of Bishop Gideon Githiga. Though all three priests left ECUSA for different provinces in the Anglican Communion, all of them deny Bishop Johnson's charges of "Abandonment of Communion". DIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA: There was one of those wonderful, Spirit-filled moments in Oklahoma City this week at St. James Anglican Church. In the midst of their Sunday service in their borrowed Baptist Chapel, having walked out on their building and Bishop Robert Moody, the Senior Warden was leading morning prayer when suddenly the doors were opened and a large group of people marched in, totally unannounced and unexpected. They surrounded the little congregation, singing hymns and offering prayers of support. It was a significant portion of the congregation of Holy Spirit in Tulsa. They had chartered a bus and come to Oklahoma City specifically to offer their prayers and support for this new Anglican church. The touching part of this is that Holy Spirit church is apparently on the verge of following St. James lead. They voted overwhelmingly a few weeks ago to join the Network, much to the displeasure of Bishop Moody. He has not yet acted and they have not yet made the final break. But the scene of the two faithful congregations hugging and smiling through their tears was something to behold. "We just came to love you" the Holy Spirit people said. DIOCESE OF KANSAS: The new bishop there, William E. Smalley, has taken to sending out personal letters appealing for money. A family wrote saying they had received a letter from the bishop saying the diocese is $200,000 short and he, the Bishop, needs more money, even relating in his letter to little old ladies passing him $20 bills. Truly pathetic. DIOCESE OF PENNSYLVANIA: Revisionist Bishop Charles E. Bennison gets into a verbal fighting match with visiting PEV Church of England Bishop Edwin Barnes...and loses. VANCOUVER, BC: Two Anglican priests have vowed to fight "eviction" from their West Coast churches, as the battle over same-sex unions heats up. The Rev. Barclay Mayo and Rev. Ed Hird notified Vancouver Bishop Michael Ingham that they were severing their ties to the New Westminster Diocese and the Anglican Church of Canada over same-sex blessings. Now, Ingham has sent the priests letters they call 'eviction notices'. "I would invite you to seek out alternative worship space for those whom you lead," Ingham said in his letters dated June 23. "He's invoking Canon 15 on us," said Mayo of Christ the Redeemer, the Anglican Church in Pender Harbour, on the Sunshine Coast. "It's a diocesan regulation that allows a bishop to take over a parish if, in his own opinion, it's not running properly. This is all vindictiveness. He will probably have to go to court. We're expecting a fairly significant fight." ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: Canadian writer Ian Hunter on the man: "ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY GROWS MORE FOOLISH BY THE DAY. If the Archbishop of Canterbury did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him. Not, I hasten to add, for any spiritual or even ecclesiastical reason; spiritually he is as necessary to the propagation of the Christian faith as tiaras are to whales; ecclesiastically, he presides over an often ribald institution in terminal decline." That might be true of the CofE but not the global south. MID-ATLANTIC CONVOCATION OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION NETWORK will hold its conference for clergy, seminarians, spouses and their families on August 16-19, 2004 at Sandy Cove Conference Center in North East, MD. Featured speakers include Rev. Canon Dr. Michael Green, world-renowned evangelist and lecturer at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University. The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh, ACN Moderator, and his wife, Nara, will be present. REGISTRATION DEADLINE IS JULY 15, 2004. DIOCESE OF RECIFE, BRAZIL: Orthodox Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti has transferred 10 clergy who decided to declare themselves as liberals and he tossed them out. "We are much better off now after GC2003 USA because as you know, we have been able to transfer 10 licensed clergy who decided to reveal themselves," said an orthodox priest in that diocese. Perhaps there is a lesson here for orthodox ECUSA bishops. A NEW BIBLE TRANSLATION which promotes fornication is being praised by the Archbishop of Canterbury who says it is a version for 'extraordinary power'. The new translation of the Bible flatly contradicts traditional core Christian beliefs on sex and morality. Titled "Good as New," the new Bible is translated by former Baptist minister John Henson for the "One" organization, to produce what the group calls a "new, fresh and adventurous" translation of the Christian scriptures. The translation is rubbish. It caves into post-modernity and is precisely the kind of thing that has Global South bishops and the Roman Catholic Church in apoplectic fits. It is also one more reason why the vast majority of Anglican bishops might go their own way. On the subject of that new translation, EKKLESIA, USA, an organization run by Canon Bill Atwood, says he is getting creamed by people who are mad that ekklesia.co.uk has backed the new ONE bible (Rowan's project!). He wants to make it clear that his organization by the same name is not behind this project.

LEWISTON, ME—A dozen people, some upset with the national Episcopal Church's decision to consecrate a gay bishop and bless same-sex marriages, are restoring a historic old church in the community for their worship center. Zion Hill Community Church atop Zion Hill Road was built in 1851 and has served as a worship center for several denominations through the years, including Baptists, Congregationalists and Methodists. Begun as the Chesterville Center Union Meeting House, the building is now an Anglican church for those disheartened by the Episcopal Church decisions. The Rev. Lewis Glidden of Industry, a former member of a Wilton church and executive director of Clearwater Ministries, which serves Franklin County, said he and other Episcopalians were not happy about the changes made by the national church. "I was upset because we weren't asked. I was upset that the Episcopal Church would condone such behavior in recognizing same-sex marriages as a civil union and ordaining Gene Robinson, a homosexual, as a bishop in New Hampshire," Glidden said. It was devastating to the elders of the church, said Kenneth Bragg of Monmouth, a disillusioned Baptist who studies with Glidden and is also helping restore the church. So far, there are 12 parishioners. Glidden is not only leading the congregation but also the restoration project to restore the building to its original condition. Cecil Wheeler's family of Chesterville have been trustees of the church building for years. He is helping with the restoration. "What he has done here is what people that have been here the last 70 years would be happy with," Wheeler said. The church still has the original white, wooden pews with dark trim. Dark wood wainscoting runs along the walls. New burgundy drapes with large flowers grace the paned windows. The 14-foot ceiling took 5 gallons of sealer to hide the water marks and 10 gallons of white paint to make it look new. "I'm excited about it," Glidden said as he stood inside the church Monday. "There's a lot of history here." What looked to be a hand-carved cross made of poplar hung on the wall behind the handmade altar. Pots of flowers sat outside waiting to be planted on the church lawn. On Wednesday, scraping and painting was to begin on the outside of the church. Glidden said he is happy to be there. He climbed up to the bell tower and rang the bells 21 times to honor the late President Reagan, he said. The repairs to the church are being made as donations are provided. Glidden hung an original framed motto inside the vestry: The Standard Motto Every member a Christian. Every Christian a worker. Every worker trained. A workman that needeth not be ashamed.

Saturday, June 26, 2004 2004 General Assembly Richmond, Virginia The Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Presbyterian Church (USA) has submitted to the 216th General Assembly (2004) a Preliminary Report of its work that seriously truncates the message of Ephesians as regards "purity." In so doing, it distorts the message of Ephesians regarding "peace" and "unity" as well. The Report is available at http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/resources/prelimreport.pdf Readers will find the theological core of the report in its Part B, "Preliminary Affirmations About the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church" (pp. 2-5). It builds its case almost exclusively on an exegesis of the Epistle to the Ephesians. The report quotes copiously from Ephesians, citing 1:3-4; 2:13-14, 16, 21-22; 3:18, 20; 4:2-3, 5-6, 13; 5:2, 10, 25-27; 6:15. It omits the warning regarding false teaching in 4:14-16 (we should not be "tossed to and fro by every wind of teaching" but should rather "speak the truth in love"). Even more importantly, it omits virtually the entire opening section on moral transformation from 4:17 to 5:20 (36 verses). The only exceptions are the mention of two short phrases. There are brief mentions of Christ's self-giving "for us" in 5:2 and of "finding out what is pleasing to the Lord" in 5:10. The latter is cited to prove that we should view disputes as "gracious invitations to further work together." This is precisely what the text does not say in context. Rather, in context, the text urges believers to be "determining what is pleasing to the Lord" based on the clarity of the church's moral exhortation on sexual ethics and other areas. What the report unfortunately leaves out are the author's stern warnings regarding continuance in "impure" patterns of behavior, particularly sexual behavior. Thus, for example: "[N]o longer walk as the Gentiles walk, … who … have given themselves up to licentiousness (aselgeia) for the greedy doing of every sexual impurity (akatharsia). But you did not so learn Christ, if in fact you listened to him and were taught in him, in accordance with the fact that there is truth in Jesus. [You were taught] to put off yourselves as regards the former conduct of the old human that is being corrupted by desires that deceive, and to renew yourselves by the spirit of your mind and to clothe yourselves with the new human that was created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. … Sexual immorality (porneia) and sexual impurity (akatharsia) of any kind … must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. … Know this indeed, that every sexually immoral person (pornos) or sexually impure person (akathartos) … has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God is coming on the children of disobedience. So do not become associates of theirs. For you were once darkness, but now light in the Lord. Walk as children of light. … determining what is acceptable to the Lord. And do not be partnering with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather even be exposing/refuting them. For it is shameful even to speak of the things that are done in secret by them." (Eph 4:17-24; 5:3-12; my translation) These exhortations make clear that the author – whom we shall hereafter refer to as "Paul," though recognizing a scholarly dispute over authorship – believes that no unrepentant sexual impurity is to be tolerated indefinitely within the community of faith. Indeed, it must not even be spoken about, that is, in approving terms. Sexual impurity must rather be exposed and refuted. The text also makes clear that serial unrepentant, sexually impure behavior can risk a believer's disinheritance from the kingdom of God, subjecting the professed believer to the same wrath of God that awaits unbelievers. It also goes so far as to say that believers should disassociate from fellow believers who persist unrepentantly in their sexually immoral behavior. Now, in this context, it should not be overlooked that the term for "sexual impurity," akatharsia, is the same term used in Paul's letter to the Romans to designate all female-female and male-male sexual intercourse (1:24-27). Paul normally uses the term to denote sexually impure acts generally that are, or should be, obvious to all believers, including bestiality, same-sex intercourse, incest, adultery, and sex with prostitutes. The wording of Rom 1:24-27, in its literary and historical context, makes it evident that same-sex intercourse was at or near the top of the list of "sexually impure" acts for Paul – a supreme instance of human suppression of the truth about the way the Creator made us, a truth still evident in nature in the complementary structure and essence of maleness and femaleness. There can be no doubt that the warnings in Ephesians 4:17-24 and 5:3-12 certainly include professed believers who engage in serial, unrepentant acts of same-sex intercourse. The task force's assessment of Ephesians as regards peace, unity, and purity gives little hint of this. Instead, the task force report makes a number of claims that do not accord with Paul's remarks in Ephesians 4-5. For example: The report tells us that it is "difficult to see how this goal of Christian purity can be squared with the equally important call to unity and peace." Not true. It is easily squared inasmuch as unity and peace must always be centered on the lordship of Jesus Christ and the "learning of Christ" in accordance with the apostolic witness. There is no such thing as a unity based on toleration, and even approval, of sexual behavior that Jesus and the united witness of the authors of Scripture would have been appalled by. The report insists that, as regards purity, unity, and peace, "no one [can be] elevated above the other two." And yet, ultimately, the purity of the community does have priority over unity, certainly as regards core values in sexual ethics. More precisely, it defines true unity as a value contingent on adherence to apostolic teaching. The report claims that "purity must not become a pretext for division." Not true. Rather, unity must not become a pretext for impurity. Paul is quite clear in Ephesians 4-5 that serial unrepentant sexual immorality of an egregious sort is just cause for disassociation. The report alleges that "unity cannot be attained if the voices of some members of the body are ignored" and that "all voices [must] be heard and respected." Not true. Ephesians 4-5 says the exact opposite. The church must not allow acts defined as sexually immoral by the united apostolic witness to be spoken about in an approving manner at any time in the body of Christ. The report further alleges: "It is a necessity: union with Christ means union with all the other members of Christ's body, including those with whom one would not ordinarily choose to associate." To their "necessity," Paul would say, "Not necessarily." Paul, rather, calls on believers to disassociate, at least at some point, from fellow professed believers who refuse to desist from acts that the apostolic witness deems to be sexually impure. Paul treats this as a last-ditch measure on the part of the community to bring offenders to their senses and so, hopefully, to reclaim them for the kingdom of God. The report also claims that "Christians cannot even entertain the notion of severing their ties with sisters and brothers in Christ without also placing themselves in severe jeopardy of being severed from Christ himself." Not true. The implication of Ephesians 4-5 is, rather, that the church should consider disassociating themselves not just from believers who persist in sexually immoral behavior but also from believers who condone and support such behavior. Paul is quite clear that believers who persist in sexually immoral behavior are the ones that run that risk of being excluded from God's kingdom, not those who disassociate from such persons. In fact, Paul labels "deceitful" all claims that such persons are not really at risk. Those who support and condone sexually immoral behavior may become accomplices in a fellow brother's or sister's possible exclusion from God's kingdom. The policy put forward in Ephesians 4-5 is exactly the policy implemented by Paul in the case of adult incest between a man and his stepmother discussed in 1 Corinthians 5. Paul wasn't interested in whether the case of incest was a committed relationship of love. He insisted that the community at Corinth disassociate from the incestuous man if the latter refused to repent. Paul did not call here for a unity that trumped issues of sexual purity. He did not insist that "all the voices" be heard. He did not say that to disassociate from the incestuous man would sever them from Christ. He did not puzzle over how to relate questions of unity to questions of purity. To the contrary on all these points. Paul was firm and unequivocal, and eminently pastoral, in insisting on temporary disfellowship, inasmuch as the incestuous believer's eternal destiny was at stake. That the professed believer's destiny was at stake is clear enough from the vice list in 6:9-10 (paralleling those in 5:9-10), which correlates, in context, incest with serial unrepentant adultery, same-sex intercourse, and sex with prostitutes as sexual behaviors that could get professed believers excluded from God's kingdom. There is no doubt that Paul would have followed the same course of action for a case of adult and consensual male-male intercourse, whether in the context of a committed relationship or not, that he would have followed for a case of adult and consensual incest, committed or not. In our first extant Pauline letter, 1 Thessalonians, Paul makes clear that one of the first things that he did with new Gentile converts to the faith was to sit them down and tell them what the "commands of God" and "will of God" were in the area of sexual morality (4:1-8, the beginning of the moral exhortation in 1 Thessalonians). Gentiles were welcome into the household of faith, but not to engage any longer in the types of sexual behavior that typified Gentile life and at odds with Scripture. Those who did otherwise, those who engaged in "sexual impurity" (akatharsia, 4:7), were not just rejecting Paul. They were rejecting God. And God would be "an avenger concerning all these things," especially since sexual immorality was a holistic offense against the human body indwelt by the Holy Spirit (compare 1 Thess. 4:8 with 1 Cor. 6:18-20). Contrary to what the task force's report suggests, there can be no unity of the church that insists that advocates of homosexual practice be allowed to promote their views indefinitely and officially, much less that committed homosexual relationships should be blessed by any sectors of the church. At least, that is what Paul tells us. Finally, in all its severe injunctions about the essential value of unity, the task force's report ignores the glaring fact that the PCUSA is a denomination. As such, it does not share the same corporate institutional structure with, say, Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopalians, Baptists, Pentecostals, Catholics, and others. If we are not violating Ephesians by remaining in the PCUSA, a denominational entity that is structurally separate from other denominations, how can an "amicable institutional separation" of very different elements within the PCUSA be a violation of Ephesians' message on unity? And shouldn't it be recognized that most people in the PCUSA have for years felt a greater theological kinship with many persons across denominational lines than with many persons within the PCUSA? The PCUSA is already in de facto disunity and has been so for decades or more. In drastically truncating Ephesians' message about purity, the Preliminary Report of the task force deserves to be significantly altered before acceptance by the General Assembly. Failing that, it should be rejected. Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon is associate professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice (Abingdon, 2001), and co-author, with Dan Via, of Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views (Fortress, 2003). Other relevant materials by Gagnon can be viewed at www.robgagnon.net.

June 22, 2004 © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com Page A-3 of the June 19 Washington Post quotes Episcopal Bishop of Vermont Thomas Ely as announcing: "While other dioceses have also developed new liturgical rites for same-sex couples, Vermont's are the only ones that carry legal weight because the state's civil-union law permits couples to be joined by clergy, said Vermont Bishop Thomas C. Ely, who last year commissioned a task force to develop the new ceremonies." "This signals a valuing of the commitment and presence of gays and lesbians in our churches and an ongoing commitment to the fact that when we say the Episcopal Church welcomes you, we mean it." Are there any polygamists in Vermont – as there are, by the hundreds, on both sides of the Utah-Arizona border? If there are, they too are surely welcome in Vermont's Episcopal Churches. For Bishop Ely can hardly withhold welcome to them – who have no record of spreading AIDS – if he not only welcomes, but advocates the pseudo-marriage of sodomists. And since congressman and Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, while in nearby New Hampshire, called for legal marriage for all sexual orientations, surely Bishop Ely's "Vermont churches welcome everybody – and we mean it!" – would not exclude a sadist who wants to be civilly united with a masochist – and have this undeniably compatible relationship blessed by Bishop Ely. The Post reports this new Vermont Episcopal matrimony only "closely approximates a traditional marriage rite." "Same-sex couples are permitted to exchange rings, and only minor word changes are made in the liturgy, such as couples vowing to take their spouses 'to be my partner in life,' rather than 'to be my husband/wife.'" But what if one of these same-sex couples are so determined to see to it that they are really, genuinely and fully married that they either (1) designate one of their partners to be husband and the other to be the wife – or (2) both demand the right vow to "Take thee as my husband/wife"? What if the Vermont-Episcopal-Churches-Welcome-Everybody announcement were to attract the attention of Boston's NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association)? And what if they applied to hold a national convention in the parish house of the Episcopal Church in Montpelier (where Gov. Howard Dean signed the civil-union law)? Or, if the Missouri organization "Man's Beast Friend," for those who believe in interspecies marriage, or California's Rene Guyon Society which believes in "Sex-Before-Eight-or-Else-It's-Too-Late" – preferably sex with your parents? Would Bishop Ely welcome any or all of these organizations into any Vermont Episcopal Church – to show "We really mean it"? Les Kinsolving hosts a daily talk show for WCBM in Baltimore. His radio commentaries are syndicated nationally. He is White House correspondent for Talk Radio Network and WorldNetDaily. His show can be heard on the Internet at www.wcbm.com 8-10 p.m. Eastern each weekday. Before going into broadcasting, Kinsolving was a newspaper reporter and columnist – twice nominated for the Pulitzer Prize for his commentary.

By David W. Virtue BEDFORD, TX (6/26/2004)--A leading bishop in the Reformed Episcopal Church made a strong plea for orthodox Anglicans to come together stating that they were in spiritual warfare with revisionism. The bishop blasted homosexual behavior saying that it was "repugnant to the almighty" arguing that "we are to image in our societal and familial relations the Holy Family in heaven." "God took a bride, the church. The groom did not take unto Himself another groom, which is the image portrayed by homosexual union. It is the inversion of the family of God and therefore Satanic," said the Rt. Rev. Ray Sutton. "I agree with the Primate of Nigeria. It is Satanic." Addressing deputies to the 16th Annual Assembly of Forward in Faith NA at St. Vincent's cathedral, Sutton said the Incarnation re-orders society and family according to the creation image redeemed by the true image of God, Jesus Christ. The bishop pled for orthodox Anglicans to come together. "It's not other biblically orthodox Anglican Christians, not Anglo Catholics, the Evangelicals, not the Charismatics, nor any fellow Biblical Christian who is the problem. You can't move forward if you're not unified and focused on the real enemy." Citing Paul's letter to the Ephesians, the Rt. Rev. Ray Sutton, told deputies to the 16th Annual Assembly of Forward in Faith NA that we are already united by a common faith but we still have a responsibility to be unified. Sutton, who holds a doctorate in church history and theology said, "We are living icons, refracting as images of the most high God. It is absurd to argue that there are no core Christian doctrines affecting Biblical moral and family life. The teaching of the ascent into the heavenly presence of the Triune family of God requires behavior that reflects God and His Bride of heaven." "How can we fight to win in spiritual warfare if we're divided?" Sutton blasted what he called the trivial pursuit of a shallow, baseless kind of unity so often trumpeted by the liberals. "They do the outrageously heretical and then tell us to concentrate on what we have in common, how it far outweighs what we don't have in common. They have taken the creeds and redefined, revised, and reworked them to the point of removing the uniqueness of the Triune God and Jesus Christ at their center." The orthodox bishop said the revisionists had further corrupted the life of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church also confessed in the creeds by severing them from the morality of the Ten Commandments. "As a result, Christ is not the way. For them the creeds are no longer the unifying symbols of orthodoxy but heterodoxy." Citing early Christian heresies - Arianism, Gnosticism and Nestorianism, Sutton ripped what he called "apostate revisionists" saying they no longer have one Lord the same way we do. "These ancient heresies provided a pluriform theological rationale for polytheism." Sutton said revisionists were committing the same theological and moral fallacies of polytheistic ancient Israel. "Israel's sin wasn't that she rejected Yahweh, it was that she wanted to reintroduce the worship of other local pagan, Canaanite gods."[But] false gods have false sacraments and false sacraments amount to sexual perversion. How dare we think our other theological concerns are more important than our common belief in the One, Triune Lord." In a plea for unity, Sutton argued that we do not have different spiritual parents. "This is particularly true of those of us in the Anglican branch of the family. Go back far enough and you'll find that we have the same Anglican family lineage. We have differences and nuances but that's all they are. We have oneness by any standard in the history of Anglicanism; call it the Anglican formularies or the Lambeth Quadrilateral. To keep the true apostolic unity we already have we must come in a greater way of aligning ourselves." Sutton said that the Network and the larger Anglican Communion offers a context in which this can be worked out. "Perhaps we have to start with a communion of communions. So let us join hands to keep the Biblical and Apostolic unity we already have." END

Church of St Anthony of Padua 72 Lodi St Hackensack, N.J. 07601 Dear Friends in Christ, On June 23, 2004 Bishop Croneberger delegated Episcopal Oversight of the Church of St Anthony of Padua to Bishop Skilton, Suffragan Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina. After some discussion the vestry accepted this offer unanimously. Some disappointment was expressed that oversight by a Forward in Faith Bishop was not offered. But Bishop Skilton is a good friend of St Anthony's and is especially well known to our Hispanic congregation. St Anthony's accepted the offer in solidarity with our brothers and sisters of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes, and mindful of the strong witness of the Bishops and People of the Diocese of South Carolina to the authority of Scripture. Details will be worked out between Bishop Skilton and Bishop Croneberger. We look forward to the Episcopal Oversight of Bishop Skilton and new friendship with the Diocese of South Carolina. We view this development as a small part of the re-emergence of Anglican orthodoxy in this country. Significant disagreements exist between us and Bishop Croneberger on important issues. St Anthony's reaffirms its witness to Catholic faith and practice, and to the fellowship of the world wide Anglican Communion. We strongly reject Bishop Croneberger's opinion that those who support the historic all male priesthood of the Church Catholic violate the canons of the Church, and that Forward in Faith Bishops are some how unsuitable to be Visiting Bishops.Yet we are thankful for the opportunities that Delegated Oversight will afford us. Very Truly Yours, Jay W. McCann Warden

By ANNE SAUNDERS June 27, 2004 ROCHESTER, N.H. (AP) - Hymns were raised to the heavens from two parts of town Sunday after a church split apart over the election of the first openly gay bishop to head an Episcopal diocese. Bishop V. Gene Robinson assumed leadership of the Diocese of New Hampshire last year, shocking many conservative Episcopalians and Anglicans worldwide. Since then, many members of the Church of the Redeemer threatened to leave the congregation unless Robinson relinquished authority over the church in Rochester, about 30 miles east of Concord. Thirty-six members voted this week to leave. Just three voted to stay. In response, nearby Grace Baptist Church invited Episcopalians fleeing from Redeemer to attend a joint service. At the same time, Redeemer held services for a handful of remaining members, who were joined by dozens of supporters from other Episcopal churches and by Robinson and his partner, Mark Andrew. Parishioners on both sides described the day as a new beginning. "Today, your resurrection begins," preached the Rev. Tim Rich at Redeemer. "You begin a new journey in the Holy Spirit." Robinson, who did not speak at the service, said later that he was touched that so many people attended to offer support. "We're all eager to put this unpleasantness behind us," he said. Robinson's opponents say homosexuality is a sin and insist Robinson has no business serving as an Episcopal leader if he will not repent. "Today is a very joyous day for me," said Katie Trafton, 18, who left Redeemer with her family. "It's been a very big battle ... I'm very proud to be part of the family that stood up for Christ." Negotiations had been ongoing since Robinson's consecration in November. The bishop had offered to let parishioners at Redeemer work with a bishop and a priest who shared their views on homosexuality, as long as church members met with him once every three years as church law requires. The majority of members declined the proposal, and plan to launch a new church outside the control of Robinson's diocese. END