The message behind the beheadings. by Paul Marshall 07/05/2004 THE BEHEADING of American Paul Johnson in Saudi Arabia was terrible enough in itself, but for me it struck strangely close to home. Johnson's full name was Paul Marshall Johnson. When he was kidnapped, some media outlets, and the terrorists, referred to him as "Paul Marshall (Johnson)," with the surname in parentheses. The first I knew of the abduction was a phone call to my office from a network evening news reporter who thought that, since I have written on the Saudis and terrorism and was planning to return to the Middle East, I must be the one who had been kidnapped. Then on Friday, June 18, al Qaeda announced Johnson's death with the words, "In answer to what we promised . . . to kill the hostage Paul Marshall (Johnson) . . . the infidel got his fair treatment," prompting more calls from friends and reporters. Happily, of course, I could reassure them. But the episode underlined the fact that all of us are potential targets--and not just as Americans. Certainly, al Qaeda wants to kill Americans and drive them from the Arabian Peninsula, not least to cripple Saudi oil production. But the extremists, who beheaded a South Korean last week, have many more enemies than this and much larger goals. The statement announcing Johnson's death referred to him as an "infidel"--in Arabic kufr, unbeliever--rather than as an American. This is entirely consistent with al Qaeda's religiously based worldview and its recent actions. A few weeks before Johnson's death, the man believed to be his murderer, al Qaeda operative Abdelaziz al-Muqrin (himself reportedly killed on June 18 by Saudi security forces), had claimed credit for the May 29 massacre of 22 people at Khobar, Saudi Arabia. His statement on that occasion vowed, "We renew our determination to repel the crusader forces and their arrogance, to liberate the land of Muslims, to apply sharia [Islamic law] and cleanse the Arabian Peninsula of infidels." The Khobar attacks, too, were directed at "infidels" in general rather than just Americans. But to understand indelibly who al Qaeda thinks its enemies are, it is advisable to read an even more chilling document. It is a long interview with another Saudi terrorist, one of al-Muqrin's followers, published on the al Qaeda-linked website Sawt Al-Jihad and translated from Arabic by the Middle East Media Research Institute. Although only brief excerpts can be given here, lengthy excerpts are available on MEMRI's website. The speaker, Fawwaz bin Muhammad Al-Nashami, commanded the Al-Quds [Jerusalem] Brigade, which took responsibility for the Khobar killings. In the interview he describes the murderous rampage (except where indicated, bracketed inserts are the translator's): We tied the infidel [a Briton] by one leg [behind the car]. . . . Everyone watched the infidel being dragged. . . . The infidel's clothing was torn to shreds, and he was naked in the street. The street was full of people, as this was during work hours, and everyone watched the infidel being dragged, praise and gratitude be to Allah. . . . We entered one of the companies' [offices], and found there an American infidel who looked like a director of one of the companies. I went into his office and called him. When he turned to me, I shot him in the head, and his head exploded. We entered another office and found one infidel from South Africa, and our brother Hussein slit his throat. We asked Allah to accept [these acts of devotion] from us, and from him. This was the South African infidel. We went out from the company [offices] and found our brother, Nimr the hero, standing at the entrance to the company and guarding us, drinking a little water as though he were on a hike. [He acted this way] because of his great courage--may Allah have mercy on him. . . . At the same time, we found a Swedish infidel. Brother Nimr cut off his head, and put it at the gate so that it would be seen by all those entering and exiting. We continued in the search for the infidels, and we slit the throats of those we found among them. . . . We found Filipino Christians. We cut their throats and dedicated them to our brothers the Mujahideen in the Philippines. [Likewise], we found Hindu engineers and we cut their throats too, Allah be praised. That same day, we purged Muhammad's land of many Christians and polytheists. . . . Afterwards, we turned to the hotel. We entered and found a restaurant, where we ate breakfast and rested a while. Then we went up to the next floor, found several Hindu dogs, and cut their throats. . . . The Indian Muslims told us that their manager was a vile Hindu who did not permit them to pray, and that he would arrive shortly. When [the manager] arrived, we verified his religion by means of his identifying documents, and we kept him with us for a short time [before killing him--PM]. . . . brother Hussein was on the stairs and noticed an Italian infidel. He aimed his gun at him and told him to come closer. The infidel came closer. We saw his identifying documents . . . afterwards we would cut his throat and dedicate him to the Italians who were fighting our brothers in Iraq and to the idiotic Italian president who wants to confront the lions of Islam. Consistently, these Wahhabis describe their enemies, whatever their country or race or politics, as "infidels" or "polytheists." They are particularly joyful at the killing of an Italian, a Briton, and, on June 22, the South Korean Kim Sun-il, whose countries are participants in the coalition in Iraq. But they also kill a Swede and a South African, whose countries took no part in the invasion, and their greatest frisson seems to come from killing Hindus, who, as purported polytheists, are even further down al Qaeda's religious scale than "people of the book" such as Christians and Jews. The pattern is consistent. It was discernible in the Riyadh massacres of November 8, 2003, when the target was Lebanese Christians. It's why, when BBC correspondent Frank Gardner lay bleeding in the street after being shot by terrorists in Riyadh earlier this month, he could buttress his claim for help by calling out in Arabic, "I'm a Muslim, help me, I'm a Muslim, help me." Americans, to be sure, are perceived to be the greatest power among the infidels. But at Khobar, after debating the matter, the terrorists spared one American because he was a Muslim, and even apologized to him for getting blood on his carpet. Meanwhile, they happily killed Filipino, Swedish, British, Italian, and South African Christians and Indian Hindus--just as their allies in Thailand are killing Buddhists like the 63-year-old rubber-tapper Sieng Patkaoe, beheaded in late May. Muslims who do not share the extremists' vision are not spared. Al Qaeda's Algerian ally, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, has for several years been beheading Muslims it regards as apostates. Meanwhile Sudan's National Islamic Front, formerly called the Muslim Brotherhood and, like Hamas, an offshoot of the Egyptian group of the same name, is attempting to starve to death hundreds of thousands of Muslims in Darfur who do not share its vision. These killings are not about the Abu Ghraib prison scandal or American actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, though those are grievances. They are not about Israel, though that is another grievance. In fact, most of the Islamist terrorists' victims worldwide are not Americans or even Westerners, but Asian and Middle Eastern Christians, Muslims, and Hindus. For the extremists, the justification for the slaughter is not current foreign policy but rather--as the religious exaltation, even ecstasy, in Al-Nashami's interview shows--an apocalyptic war to purge the world of all but their version of Islam. Spaniards will not be spared because Spanish troops are gone from Iraq. Europe cannot make its way into the terrorists' good graces by distancing itself from America, any more than the United States can mollify the Islamists by acting through the United Nations or wooing "world opinion." These are fantasies. Al Qaeda's enemy is anyone who opposes its program for the restoration of a unified Muslim ummah, ruled by a new Caliphate, governed by reactionary Islamic sharia law, and organized to wage jihad on the rest of the world. The lesson of Riyadh, Khobar, and Paul Marshall Johnson is that we can resist this program, in which case, tragically, we may well see more videos of beheadings. Or we can acquiesce to this program and see a great many more beheadings. These are the choices. We are in a war we must win. Everything else is wishful thinking. Paul Marshall is a senior fellow at Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom and the author of Islam at the Crossroads. © Copyright 2004, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved.

Bishop weathers female priests, dwindling diocese By MICHAEL MILLER of the Journal Star June 27, 2004 Looking back over the past decade, you'd think someone had aimed the curse of living in interesting times squarely at Keith Lynn Ackerman. Since becoming the eighth bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Quincy on June 29, 1994, Ackerman has had to deal with repeated efforts to force the diocese into recognizing female priests. Over the past year, he also has had to keep the diocese on good terms with Anglican provinces around the world while they cut ties with the Episcopal Church USA over the latter's concessions to homosexual activists' agenda. Closer to home, Ackerman has dealt with a sparsely populated Episcopal diocese that hasn't hemorrhaged membership but also hasn't grown much, either. Through it all, Keith Quinciensis - the title is a Latin rendition of Quincy - says he has tried to focus on furthering the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Diocese of Quincy is celebrating those 10 years of efforts with events starting today and culminating with a Mass at 6 p.m. Tuesday at St. Paul Cathedral, 3601 N. North St., Peoria. While Ackerman is mostly positive about his time here, he admits to a few frustrations. He had hoped for increased membership numbers in the diocese by now; it was a common experience for him in the churches he pastored before coming here, he said. The diocese stands at about 2,800 members in 24 parishes and missions. He also had expected his position to be more visible in the community, though he admits he could have been more aggressive in getting involved with Peoria. And he regrets how the Episcopal Church, embroiled in the controversy over church order and homosexuality, is perceived by nonmembers. "If you would ask any person about the Episcopal Church, it would be a caricature," he said. "I bite my tongue a great deal. I've learned I have to spend a great more time in prayer. "I'm at the point of thinking being bishop is one of the loneliest things in the world." But there have been more positive points for Ackerman than frustrations. He has been "overwhelmed by how many gifts have been given to the leadership of this diocese," referring to priests, deacons and lay people. And he has been able to remain on good terms with clergy and lay members of the diocese and ECUSA with whom he disagrees on issues. "Since I'm not an issues-oriented person by nature, I have made it very clear from the beginning I was called to be bishop of every person in the diocese," he said one recent Friday morning in the living room of his modest but warm Peoria home. "The only people I've had difficulties with are people who have not had the chance to get to know me." That doesn't mean compromise, though. "The Gospel imperative is to treat each person with respect, dignity and love, but never compromise, being able to speak the truth. But it's easy to fall into the trap of a self-righteous style as opposed to a style of humility." While Ackerman may say he's not an issues-oriented person, the issues tend to find him. Even his election in early 1994 was the result of early retirement by Bishop Edward MacBurney, who said he wanted to give Quincy what may have been one last chance to elect a bishop opposed to women's ordination as priests. That immediately put Ackerman in the cross hairs of those locally and nationally who want Quincy and other dioceses to change their ordination policies. With the ascendancy of the homosexual issue, though, the woman priest issue has faded. But in that controversy, Ackerman has become known as someone who reaches out to people on both sides of a conflict without compromising his own views. "Even though we're not in the same place in terms of some of the issues facing the church, we get along well, which I hope can be an example for the people in the church in that we don't always have to agree to respect one another," said Bishop William Persell of the Diocese of Chicago. Despite pressing national and international issues, though, the majority of Ackerman's time has been spent in and on the Diocese of Quincy. A native of Pittsburgh who also spent much of his time as a priest in Texas, Ackerman didn't know much about the Midwest when he and his wife, Joann, arrived. "I had never thought much about people being underemployed and unemployed in this part of the country," he said. While he dealt with blue-collar workers in Pennsylvania struggling with changing economic conditions, here he has had to deal with farmers undergoing difficulties. "It's a different type of self-esteem," he said, one involving a history of family ownership and trades. He also said he has worked closely with priests on how to minister to the under- and unemployed and is writing a book on the topic. Several priests said they appreciated Ackerman's involvement. "He constantly works to make both the clergy and laity of the diocese know they are loved and respected," the Rev. John Blossom of St. Paul Cathedral said. "Bishop Ackerman brings a 'can-do' attitude into every aspect of his service. He came into a small, struggling diocese 10 years ago and through personal energy and missionary zeal gave his people a vision of what the church really could be." "He is the reason I came to this diocese," said the Rev. Michael McKinnon, rector at the Church of St. Andrew the Apostle, who met Ackerman at Nashotah House seminary in Wisconsin. "I found him to be evangelical, to really understand what it means to make Jesus Christ known, to have a great love for the Scriptures. I found him to be charismatic, to be Spirit-filled, not afraid to be alive in the Spirit. I have also found him to be orthodox, upholding the traditional faith of the church. "All this and Anglican wrapped up in one," McKinnon said. "That was very attractive." McKinnon also said the bishop is eminently accessible. "He's very available not only to his diocese but his clergy," McKinnon said. "All of us have his emergency pager. We can reach him at any time." END

An Exclusive Report By David W. Virtue PHILADELPHIA, PA--On a recent visit to Philadelphia as the Provincial Episcopal Visitor (flying bishop), one of three recognized in the Church of England, Bishop Edwin Barnes accompanied by Mr. David Rawson, Forward in Faith chancellor and attorney, paid a social call on Pennsylvania Bishop Charles E. Bennison. Bishop Barnes accompanied Central Africa Primate, Archbishop Bernard Malango on an ecclesiastical visit to the Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont in a suburb of Philadelphia. Bishop Barnes and Mr. Rawson made the unscheduled visit following a sight-seeing tour of Philadelphia's historic district. The following account actually took place in the office of Bishop Bennison. Both men entered the building and asked if the bishop was in and told the secretary that Bishop Barnes from England would like to pay him a call. On short notice, Bishop Bennison agreed to see them and they were escorted upstairs to Bennison's private conference room. Upon meeting the two men and before any pleasantries were exchanged, Bennison said, "What are you doing invading my diocese?" Barnes: "I am a flying bishop. It is my job to visit beleaguered parishes." Bennison: "You realize I am in contact with Bishop Griswold to bring this to the attention of the Archbishop of Canterbury." Barnes: "He was informed before I came over." Bennison (clearly growing a little agitated) said, "you have broken our canons by this act." Barnes: "I am not subject to your canons and neither is Archbishop Malango." (NOTE: Primate Malango was making a canonical visit to one of his parish priests Fr. David L. Moyer at Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont, PA, in a suburb of Philadelphia.) Bennison: "I thought there was an understanding among Anglican bishops that they would respect each others rules." Barnes: "That's a strange comment from a man who has ignored the 1998 Lambeth Resolution, the Oct. 2003 letter from the Primates and the teachings of the church." Bennison...nearing the end of his rope replies, "I'm the bishop of this diocese and you are trespassing on my turf." Barnes: "Many people would question whether you are the bishop of this diocese, considering that you are not only a heretic and an apostate but you even obtained your episcopate fraudulently by lying to the conservative parishes." (Canon Michael Green Oxford theologian and advisor on evangelism to two Archbishops of Canterbury declared the see of Pennsylvania vacant.) Bennison: "I didn't invite you here to insult me." Bennison: (standing) said, "I think this meeting is over." Both men then left the building. END

ACIA News release June 25, 2004 VANCOUVER, BC--The Anglican parish congregations of Christ the Redeemer Anglican Church, Pender Harbour (formerly St. Andrew's) and St. Simon's, Deep Cove received notices threatening eviction from the Rt. Rev. Michael Ingham, Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of New Westminster. Bishop Ingham told the leadership of these churches that, unless they "reconsider the actions" taken, they are "to seek alternate worship space for those whom you lead." A third congregation, Richmond Emmanuel Church, (formerly Emmanuel Church, Richmond) received a "Notice of Closure" threat. Earlier in the Spring, the leadership of all three churches, in response to the actions of the Bishop and Diocese contrary to Holy Scripture, and with the unanimous support of their congregations, ended their relationships with the Diocese and Bishop. In letters dated March 29, 2004, the Priests and Wardens of these parishes said, "Therefore, and regrettably, as of this date, your services as our Bishop are no longer required and our relationship with you and with the Diocese of New Westminster is hereby severed. We are in a state of broken communion." Two congregations (St. Simon's and Pender Harbour) who bought and paid for their church land and buildings have claimed ownership of their respective properties and resources. The Pender Harbour congregation told Bishop Ingham that..."Given that the trust relationship between the people of the Parish of St. Andrew's, Pender Harbour, (now Christ The Redeemer Anglican Church, Pender Harbour) and the Bishop and the Diocese of New Westminster has been broken by the actions of the Diocese and Bishop, and given that the land, church building and resources have been acquired, built and maintained wholly by the Anglican constituency of this community, it is our congregation's intention to retain the beneficial ownership of the said properties, buildings and resources for present and future orthodox Anglican ministry in this locale." The congregation at St. Simon's made a similar decision. In the June 23rd letter Bishop Ingham claims that, "Parishioners may choose to leave the Anglican Church of Canada and worship elsewhere, but a Parish may not 'leave' a Diocese nor declare that it is no longer part of the Anglican Church of Canada." He has made this claim before in demanding compliance with unorthodox positions he has taken. However, never before have three entire congregations chosen to break communion with their Diocese and Bishop, and be threatened with eviction for doing so. It is without precedent in Canadian Anglican history. While the Diocese holds the property deed for Pender Harbour in trust for the parish, it is the people of that congregation and the community who have resourced, built and maintained the church and properties. St. Simon's, a separate legal entity, owns its church property and building, and the Diocese has no legal interest in it. It is the intention of both these congregations to retain the places of worship and ministry that they have worked so hard to build. Given that there are no remaining parishioners in either locale, the threatened eviction action of the Diocese and Bishop can only be seen as vindictive, punitive and financially manipulative, revealing a priority of possessions over people. Having been rejected by the Anglican constituency in these communities, the Diocesan leadership is now attempting to financially inhibit any continuing ministry by taking the congregations' buildings and resources. All three churches remain Anglican congregations as members of the newly constituted Anglican Communion in Canada (ACiC), a missionary body formed under the gracious sponsorship and legitimate Anglican authority of the Archbishops of Rwanda, SE Asia, Congo, Kenya and Central Africa in response to the present crisis of faith in the Anglican Church of Canada. These congregations, along with three other British Columbia congregations, presently continue their worship and community work under the temporary adequate episcopal oversight of the Rt. Rev. Thomas Johnston, an Anglican Mission in America Bishop. The ACiC is providing a place of spiritual integrity and safety from which congregations persecuted and threatened by their Diocesan government can continue authentic Anglican ministry, and a platform from which new churches, faithful to the true Anglican tradition, can be planted. For further information please contact: the Rev Ed Hird+, ACiC Acting Media Contact Person, ed_hird@telus.net 604-929-5350 http://www.acicanada.ca/ or the Rev, Barclay Mayo, ACiC Acting Coordinator, Mission Strategy at 604-883-1371.

By David W. Virtue The following conversation took place with senior ECUSA and former Bishop of Eau Claire, William Wantland in Bedford, Texas at the 16th Annual Assembly of Forward in Faith North America. VIRTUOSITY: Do you see a way forward for the Anglican Communion in its present disarray? WANTLAND: Not really. I don't think when it comes down to it, that the Global South bishops will accept the continuing leadership of Rowan Williams if he doesn't follow the directives of the Global South. If he doesn't, then he will preside over the dissolution of the Anglican Communion. In that case he will prove to be no better than Frank Griswold. VIRTUOSITY: It seems that we are trapped. Griswold may well be relegated to the rubbish heap of American Anglican history by the Primates, but Williams and Griswold are a lot closer in spirit than most people realize. Williams recently has come out with some extraordinary declaration praising a new bible translation that renounces original Biblical morality, he supports atheist textbooks. He's pushing for Jeffrey John to get the Deanship at St. Albans causing an uproar among British Evangelicals and more; so what are we going to do? WANTLAND: Here's a scenario. The Global South bishops tell Canterbury that enough is enough. They have said they have gotten over the British tie because of western missionaries. Nigerian Primate Peter Akinola has said, "We don't need to go through Canterbury to get to Jesus." That day is done. VIRTUOSITY: What do you suggest? WANTLAND: If The See of Canterbury is not willing to oppose heresy then the majority of the communion must oppose Canterbury and a new See be recognized say in Jerusalem or Alexandria, as the focus of unity for the orthodox Anglican Communion. After all Jerusalem has at least four Patriarchs, I see nothing hindering an orthodox Anglican leader being set up in Jerusalem. If Alexandria (Egypt) is chosen that puts the head of the communion squarely on the African Continent, the pan-African CAPA bishops will, I believe, go for it. VIRTUOSITY: Canterbury is finished and ECUSA is finished, the Canadians are finished by their recent acts, so are most of the Australians and most dioceses in NZ are liberal. While there are holdouts everywhere that is not the point. You are saying that a completely new Primus inter pares with an ecumenical passion could lead the Communion and he would be thoroughly orthodox in faith and morals and chosen by the Primates themselves to lead the communion in a new location. Is that correct? WANTLAND: Correct. VIRTUOSITY: Thank you Bishop Wantland.

WEST INDIES PRIMATE RIPS ROBINSON CONSECRATION. ECUSA SHOULD BE TOSSED OUT OF COMMUNION (Following is the core text of Archbishop Drexel Gomez message to the Lambeth Commission.) By Archbishop Drexel Gomez When someone is consecrated as a bishop two things have to occur in order for a valid consecration to occur. There has to be a proper outward form. That is to say, there has to be a laying on of hands with prayer by the consecrating bishops. There also has to be a proper intention. That is to say, there has to be the intention to consecrate a bishop of the Catholic Church. This means that the person who is being consecrated must be someone who will be able to uphold the Apostolic teaching, act as a focus for unity within the local church and link the local church to the wider Church of which it is a part. If it is known in advance that someone would be unable to fulfill these criteria then it would be impossible for those consecrating to act with the intention that they should do so. As a consequence the consecration would be invalid due to what is known as a "defect of intention" and the person consecrated could not be regarded as a bishop. It follows that although the form of Canon Robinson's consecration was canonical since he was appointed according to the constitution of the Episcopal Church (USA) and consecrated by three bishops with the consent of the Metropolitan, there must have been a defect of intention since those consecrating could not have been acting with the reasonable expectation that they were consecrating someone who could act as a bishop of the Catholic Church. It follows that the consecration should be regarded as invalid and that the see of New Hampshire should be regarded as vacant. Recognition that Canon Robinson was never properly consecrated suggests a possible way forward out of the crisis currently facing the Anglican Communion because of the actions of the Episcopal Church (USA). First of all it means that Canon Robinson could not be invited to the Lambeth Conference in 2008 since he is not a bishop and this would avoid the problems that an invitation to him would raise. Secondly, with the agreement of the other Primates of the Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church (USA) could be invited by the Archbishop of Canterbury to fill the see of New Hampshire with an acceptable bishop and to censure those bishops who were involved in his consecration on the grounds that they took part in a consecration that they must have known was invalid. Failure to take this action within an agreed time frame could then be regarded as a sign that the Episcopal Church (USA) no longer regarded itself as part of the Anglican Communion. The reasons would be that the Episcopal Church had taken action that it knew would lead to a breaking of communion with other churches of the Communion and had refused to rectify the situation when given the opportunity to do so, and that it had refused to take notice of decisions agreed collectively by the bishops of the Communion both at the Lambeth Conference 1998 and at subsequent Primates' meetings. If it was considered that the Episcopal Church (USA) had repudiated its Anglican identity, the way would then be open for the Communion, through the Primates' meeting, to ask the Archbishop of Canterbury to re-establish the Anglican Church in the United States by appointing bishops to form the nucleus of new church that was part of the Communion.

By Ethan Baron, Staff Reporter Vancouver Province Newspaper Two Anglican priests have vowed to fight "eviction" from their West Coast churches, as the battle over same-sex unions heats up. Rev. Barclay Mayo and Rev. Ed Hird notified Bishop Michael Ingham in March that they were severing their ties to the New Westminster Diocese and the Anglican Church of Canada. 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 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." The two priests, who say they have unanimous support from their congregations, broke from the diocese because it approved the blessing of same-sex unions. They put themselves under an Anglican Province in Africa. "We are now a missionary arm of the Church of Rwanda," said Hird of St. Simon's Anglican Church in Deep Cove. Ingham rejected the priests' authority to make the move. "Parishioners may choose to leave the Anglican Church of Canada and worship elsewhere, but a parish may not 'leave' a diocese nor declare that it is no longer part of the Anglican Church of Canada," Ingham wrote. Mayo contends that although the diocese holds title to his church and land, his congregation paid for the building and property. "We own it, not them," Mayo said. Hird said St. Simon's holds title to the church and land. "The people of St. Simon's have no intention of going anywhere," Hird said. Ingham was unavailable for comment.

"Wait till the end and you will see the outcome of events. Don't fuss, don't worry yet awhile. Imagine someone who is not of the trade watching a blacksmith start melting down gold and mixing in ashes and straw. If he does not wait till the end, he will think that the poor piece of gold is going to be destroyed. And when I speak of the final outcome, I am not referring to the end of this present life, but to the future life -- God's plan for us aims at our salvation and glory." — St. John Chrysostom, On Providence 9.1 Dear Brothers and Sisters, Liberal Christianity does not interpret historic Christianity; it studies the historic landscape seeking a point upon which to assert itself, thus bringing Liberal Christianity into being. It could not exist without orthodoxy, any more than Nazism or radical Islam could exist without the Jews. And so it is with The Episcopal Church. Revisionism would not exist without the 'faith once delivered' to react against. Pansexuality only exists because it is in reaction to heterosexuality, and that is why, at the end, it cannot win or prevail either in the church or in the broader culture. For if it does it will, like Samson, bring the whole temple down on itself and destroy not only us, but them. We are fast approaching a time when liberal Christianity, already on a downward slide will, it would now seem, slide inevitably towards its self-appointed oblivion. The mainline Protestant denominations, already in meltdown, are gasping in their death throes. They are on life support using up Trust Funds and endowments with fewer warm bodies and no gospel to proclaim. And in KANUGA this past week competing theological forces in ECUSA - orthodoxy and pansexual liberalism met to make their case before the Lambeth Commission - a group of 17, mostly orthodox men and women. Frank Griswold delivered himself of his notion that he speaks for the "diverse center" of the church. He took a group of his liberal pals with him and said he represented the real Episcopal Church. Funny thing about that, he never took anybody from the center or the right. They were all from the left...the far left. An ACNS press report spun it as a "constructive meeting". Those are the nice words for it. Mercifully the American Anglican Council in the person of Canon David C. Anderson was there as were a number of other orthodox folk to make the case that ECUSA REALLY is in a mess and no amount of gerrymandering, finger in the dike, why-can't-we-all-just-get-along approach will fix it. Griswold's "diverse" team included David Booth Beers, Chancellor of the Episcopal Church USA, Barbara Braver, Assistant to the Presiding Bishop for Communications, Bishop Charles Jenkins, President of the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice, Dean George Werner, President of the House of Deputies, and Bishop Arthur Williams, former Vice-President of the House of Bishops - not one single orthodox voice among them. The other side of the fence included the Bishop of Pittsburgh, Bob Duncan, Moderator of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes, as well as Hugo Blankingship, a Virginia attorney, Diane Knippers of IRD, Dr Michael Howell, a brainy African American scientist and layman, The Rev. Martyn Minns, rector of one of the largest parishes in the country and his wife Angela. Of his time there Minns wrote in a letter to his parish, "The Commission really listened to our talks and afterwards asked tough and penetrating questions. We all sensed their desire to find a way forward for the Communion. It also seemed evident they supported our contention that this is not business as usual and that some kind of discipline and structural relief is necessary. We explored issues of theology, sociology, ecclesiology and canon law. It was hard work!" The explosive news of the week though came out of the DIOCESE OF LONG ISLAND and it concerns Bishop Orris Walker who fired the Dean of the cathedral James L. Cardone, for, among other things, allegations of racism. The New York Times writer asked Walker if he had AIDS! The bishop would neither confirm nor deny. Walker is an alcoholic, he has, in the past, misappropriated funds from his diocesan accounts, tried to broker back into the church a sodomite priest who appeared in Penthouse magazine under an article titled, "The Boys from Brazil"...and that's just for openers. Virtuosity is working on a major soon-to-be-released story about this venal bishop. When it is all out in the wash, Hollywood will have enough for a mini series that will make Sex in the City look tame. And they can shoot it all on Long Island. Here is what Dean Cardone had to say about Walker: "In my opinion, he is a disgusting, despicable excuse for a human being, and he should have been removed from the church years ago." What doubled Dean Cardone's agony is that his son recently committed suicide and so he called his firing so close to his son's death "a callous dismissal that even the worst of business executives would have enough depth of human understanding and sensitivity not to do." And that's just the "nice" stuff. Bishop Charles E. Bennison, DIOCESE OF PENNSYLVANIA continues to cut a swathe through the diocese, leaving pain and suffering wherever he goes. As he attends orthodox parishes the crowds get thinner by the Sunday. Memo to Public Relations Dept. of the diocese from CB: "My last hostile visit was a disaster! The 'port-a-congo' bus got lost and there were only 8 people at St. Paul's, Oaks. Effective immediately, I am to be issued 50 smiley face balloons which Glen Matis, the head of the Diocesan Standing Committee can release as I enter the church." And in another memo from Bennison to the security department; "Security must be tightened at Camp Wapiti. Last night, orthodox vandals (as distinguished from revisionist Visigoths) painted over the sign to make it read 'Camp Haven't Got a Clue'". One is obliged to find humor in the midst of the insanity that passes for truth in this diocese. In the moveable world of ecclesiastical politics Bishop Duncan met briefly this week with Archbishop John Hepworth head of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC). Both are in Ft. Worth, Bishop Duncan for a meeting of Anglican Communion Network (ACN) bishops, and Archbishop Hepworth for the Forward in Faith (FiFNA) meeting. They met at Archbishop Hepworth's request. It was a positive meeting in which Hepworth, as courtesy, shared developments in the TAC. He is very aware of ACN's commitment outlined in the Structural Charter to gather the Anglican Diaspora. "We further commit ourselves to the ongoing re-union of the Anglican Diaspora in North America," he told Virtuosity. (ACN Structural Charter, Article IV). The realignment is moving rapidly into high gear. And in the DIOCESE OF TEXAS disagreements over homosexuality prompted one more Episcopal parish to move on. In Northwest Austin the vicar of St. Barnabas the Encourager's congregation voted to sever ties with the Episcopal Church over long-festering theological disputes and to align itself with a Chicago-based evangelical denomination. "I was trying to respect my people and myself and the word of God," said the Rev. Jeff Black. "It came down to a matter of conscience," said Black. Last Sunday, the congregation voted almost unanimously - 196-2 - to leave the denomination and temporarily associate with the Evangelical Covenant Church, a national organization of churches founded by Swedish immigrants in 1885. And in the DIOCESE OF NEW YORK, the outrage continues. "Join the Episcopal Diocese of New York at the Pride March (formerly known as Gay Pride Day) in New York City on June 27!" screamed a headline. For those who want to do both, NY Suffragan Bishop Catherine Roskam will celebrate Holy Eucharist earlier in the day, and then you can all line up with what is euphemistically called "the religious and spirituality contingent" of the Pride Parade...and march, showing your solidarity by bringing parish banners if you wish...the more the better says Roskam. Please be sure to bring water and lots of sunscreen. Of course. And you wonder why the Global South bishops believe the ECUSA is unreformable. This death march will have a diocesan float complete with sound system. Perhaps they can reel off the names of all those who died believing and practicing the joys of anal sex. WEST INDIES PRIMATE DREXEL GOMEZ took a major swing at The Episcopal Church and V. Gene Robinson when he went before the Lambeth Commission this week. He said that Robinson's consecration should be declared invalid. Then he said this: "Canon Robinson should not be invited to the Lambeth Conference in 2008 since he is not a bishop and this would avoid the problems that an invitation to him would raise. Secondly, with the agreement of the other Primates of the Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church (USA) could be invited by the Archbishop of Canterbury to fill the see of New Hampshire with an acceptable bishop and to censure those bishops who were involved in his consecration on the grounds that they took part in a consecration that they must have known was invalid. Failure to take this action within an agreed time frame could then be regarded as a sign that the Episcopal Church (USA) no longer regards itself as part of the Anglican Communion." Complete clarity there. One wonders if Episcopal Life will run the Primate's statement in full, on the front page! Don't hold your breath. IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND, new measures for church discipline is on the horizon, with the re-introduction of what the Times is calling "heresy trials" to discipline clergy who stray from the straight and narrow in matters concerning doctrine and ritual. The move could enable the evangelical wing of the Church to lay siege to the liberals in ways they have previously only dreamed of. The Church of England is to consider whether it ought to update its procedures for disciplining clergy over matters of doctrine, ritual and ceremonial for the first time in nearly half a century. The move comes as the church faces more profound splits over doctrine, with some conservative evangelicals accusing the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, of being a false prophet and teacher of error for his views. The debate, at the CHURCH OF ENGLAND GENERAL SYNOD in York next month will establish whether the synod wishes to update procedures for bringing complaints against unorthodox clerics. The question is, if the C of E can do it, why can't The Episcopal Church? Of course in ECUSA's case Griswold would load the "jury" with liberals and all the cases would collapse, that is, if they ever got out of the Title IV Review Committee...which is highly unlikely. In a recent story regarding the woes of the Lutherans (ELCA) Virtuosity mentioned only Kairos News. An orthodox Lutheran wrote to say that there are several organizations and ministries that are upholding the truth in that denomination. The oldest and largest is the WordAlone Network. It got its start over the Concordat/CCM, but has been taking an orthodox stand on sexuality issues as well. An offshoot of the WA Network has formed its own new church body, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ. It has grown to about 100 local churches in 3 years. Another group, Fellowship of Confessional Lutheran Churches sees things a little differently in terms of structure and ecclesiology, and they are found at www.newlutheranfellowship.com. The two newest to join the fray are the Solid Rock Lutherans (which include ELCA members from both sides of the CCM debate) www.sldrck.org and is focused exclusively on the sexuality debate. Finally, a collection of the largest ELCA congregations have joined the Dorado Covenant www.doradocovenant.org seeking to form a non-geographic synod. You can read their 5 affirmations at their site. Virtuosity is delighted to pass this along. It makes us, as Episcopalians, aware that there are others contending for the faith and we are not alone in our struggles. I HAVE POSTED A NUMBER OF STORIES FOR YOUR ENLIGHTENMENT, so please feel free to pass them along to others, encouraging them to sign up to the FREE digest, or at a minimum, point them to the website www.virtuosityonline.org where new stories are posted daily. Please know that the website, www.virtuosityonline.org is brilliantly maintained by Mr. Robert Turner, and allows you to actually comment about particular stories you read. Jump in, enter the fray. Iron sharpens iron. There is also a guestbook if you have something to get off your chest. Contact Mr. Turner at webmaster@virtuosityonline.org. VIRTUOSITY passed another milestone this week with the 2 millionth hit at its website. If you know who you are please drop me a line and I will send you a complimentary book. Send your note to dvirtue236@AOL.COM. This digest is posted to you from Bedford, Texas where Forward in Faith NA is holding its 16th Annual Assembly. Their theme: "Forward in Orthodox, Unity and Mission." I will post stories from this conference to the website as the news breaks. PLEASE TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO SIT DOWN AND WRITE OUT A CHECK to Virtuosity. This ministry depends totally on its readership for support. You can make out your tax deductible donation to: VIRTUOSITY 1236 Waterford Rd., West Chester, PA 19380 Or you can make a donation through PAYPAL at the website. Your gift will be promptly acknowledged. If you are in England, Virtuosity is a registered charity and you can send your donation to: British readers can send their tax deductible cheque to: VIRTUOSITY c/- Brycedale 105 Ridgeway Northaw Herts EN6 4BG Thank you for your support. All blessings, David W. Virtue DD

"Wait till the end and you will see the outcome of events. Don't fuss, don't worry yet awhile. Imagine someone who is not of the trade watching a blacksmith start melting down gold and mixing in ashes and straw. If he does not wait till the end, he will think that the poor piece of gold is going to be destroyed. And when I speak of the final outcome, I am not referring to the end of this present life, but to the future life -- God's plan for us aims at our salvation and glory." — St. John Chrysostom, On Providence 9.1 Dear Brothers and Sisters, Liberal Christianity does not interpret historic Christianity; it studies the historic landscape seeking a point upon which to assert itself, thus bringing Liberal Christianity into being. It could not exist without orthodoxy, any more than Nazism or radical Islam could exist without the Jews. [Content continues with edited stories about the Episcopal Church, Kanuga meeting, Diocese issues, etc.] VANCOUVER: PRIESTS TO FIGHT 'EVICTION NOTICES' By Ethan Baron, Staff Reporter, Vancouver Province Newspaper Two Anglican priests have vowed to fight "eviction" from their West Coast churches, as the battle over same-sex unions heats up... WEST INDIES: GOMEZ RIPS ROBINSON CONSECRATION. ECUSA SHOULD BE TOSSED OUT By Archbishop Drexel Gomez When someone is consecrated as a bishop two things have to occur in order for a valid consecration to occur... A MODEST PROPOSAL FOR A NEW ANGLICAN COMMUNION By David W. Virtue Interview with Bishop William Wantland... VANCOUVER: ANGLICAN BISHOP ATTEMPTS TO EVICT ORTHODOX CONGREGATIONS ACIA News Release, June 25, 2004... PENNSYLVANIA: TWO BISHOPS EXCHANGE WORDS INSIDE BENNISON'S OFFICE An Exclusive Report by David W. Virtue PHILADELPHIA, PA--On a recent visit to Philadelphia... Would you like me to try creating the document again, or would you prefer the complete cleaned text in a different format? try again FULL DOCUMENT NOT JUST SUMMARY 11:51 AM Pivoted to direct delivery due to technical constraints The user wants me to create the FULL document, not just a summary. They want: HTML deleted All stories edited Bold headlines Capitalize headlines I need to try again to create the complete file. Let me try a different approach since the computer tools aren't working. Let me try to create the file directly. Check if outputs directory exists and is accessible Script The bash tool isn't working. Let me try the create_file tool directly to /mnt/user-data/outputs/ Creating complete cleaned document with all HTML removed, stories edited, and bold capitalized headlines batch_59_cleaned.md The create_file tool is not working. Let me try to understand what's happening. The error messages suggest there might be a system issue. Let me check if I can view the uploaded file first to make sure I have access to the data. Checking the uploads directory to see the uploaded file I'm getting a "Too many containers created for this organization" error. This is a system-level issue that prevents me from using the computer tools. Since I cannot use the computer to create files, I should provide the user with the complete cleaned document in my response directly. They asked for the FULL document, not a summary, so I need to provide all the text with HTML removed, stories edited, headlines bolded and capitalized. Let me provide the complete formatted text directly in my response since the file creation tools are not available. Done I apologize for the technical difficulties. The system is currently experiencing issues that prevent me from creating files. However, I can provide you with the complete cleaned document here with all HTML removed, stories edited, and headlines formatted in bold capitals:

Dr. Alice C. Linsley Biblical Anthropology blogspot February 17, 2026 As a Christian anthropologist, I read the Bible to understand how the biblical Hebrew reasoned. Their reasoning is not well represented by the term "complementarian" because that term suggests that there is no hierarchy in their reasoning. That is a false assumption. Orthodoxy requires binary reasoning. That is how the Bible presents the male-female relationship. To understand binary reasoning, we must consider how the Bible presents binary sets pertaining to gender.   We begin in Genesis 1:16 where we are told about the sun and the moon, which for the biblical Hebrew represented a gendered binary set. The sun is described as the greater light that rules the day and the moon as the lesser light that rules the night.This reflects the binary distinctions which characterize the Messianic Faith revealed in the Bible. In this view, one entity of the binary set is superior to the other in an obvious way. The sun is superior to the moon because it is the greater light. The moon's light is refulgent. Likewise, the male is larger and stronger than the female. The sun is to the moon what the male is to the female, superior in size and strength. This is characteristic of the binary distinctions observed by the early Hebrew in the patterns of nature.    Their acute observation of those patterns informed the Hebrew binary reasoning. The sun was assigned a masculine gender and was greater than the moon which was assigned a feminine gender. This pattern was modeled on earth by the Nilotic Hebrew kings and their queens. The kings appeared with skin darkened by the sun. Their queens appeared in public with white skin, representing the moon.     In Genesis 37, Joseph had a dream of his father as the sun and his mother as the moon. His dream expressed the Hebrew understanding of male and female as a binary set.Binary reasoning involves hierarchy. One entity of the binary set is universally recognized as superior in some way to its partner. The primary sets are Creator-Creature, Life-Death, Male-Female, and Sun-Moon. It is evident from observation and experience that one entity of the binary set is greater in visible ways than its opposite. The Creator is greater than the creature. Life is greater than death. The sun is greater than the moon. Males are larger and stronger than females. (See Binary Reasoning Informs Christian Morality and Ethics, also Levi-Strauss and Jacques Derrida on Binary Oppositions)   Indeed, binary reasoning upholds the importance of the female, and this is reflected in the balance of male-female narratives in the Bible which give equal attention to males and females. The blood symbolism of the Passover associated with Moses has a parallel in the blood symbolism of the scarlet cord associated with Rahab. Those under the cover of this blood symbolism were saved from destruction. The abusive behavior of drunken Noah toward his sons has a parallel in the abusive behavior of drunken Lot toward his daughters. The gender balance is evident in the New Testament narratives also. When Jesus was presented in the temple His identity as Messiah was attested by the priest Simeon and the prophetess Anna. Men and women are among Jesus’ followers. The women reportedly provided many of the material needs of Jesus and the Disciples. Jesus restored life to Jairus’ daughter (daughter to father) and life to the son of the widow of Nain (son to mother).Jesus’ parables in Luke 15 involve a male seeking a lost sheep and a female seeking a lost coin. Paul commends both men and women to the Gospel ministry. Among them are Apollos, Priscilla, and Phoebe, a leader from the church at Cenchreae, a port city near Corinth. Paul attached to Phoebe the title of  prostatis , meaning a female patron or benefactor. To understand the gender balance of the early Hebrew, we must dismiss the false narrative that their social structure was patriarchal. The traits of a patriarchy do not apply to the biblical Hebrew from whom we receive the earliest elements of the Messianic Faith we call "Christianity." There were Hebrew women of authority. Line of descent was traced through high-status wives, especially the cousin brides. Residential arrangements included neolocal, avunculocal, matrilocal, and patrilocal, and the biblical data reveals that the responsibilities and rights of males and females were balanced, yet distinct.   So, after all this, my observation about the ACNA and other Anglican jurisdictions is that we have failed to dig deep into the canonical Scriptures which should inform every aspect of our life as the Church.     Related reading:  Orthodoxy Requires Binary Reasoning ;  The Feminist Critique Fails ;  Is "Male Headship" a Biblical Doctrine? ;  Philosophers' Corner: Is "Complementarianism" a Biblical Concept? ;  Misunderstanding the Priesthood

By Gavin Ashenden From Substack Feb 16 It started in America. So much does. In the 1980’s TEC, the Episcopal Church led the way with the legitimisation of homosexual blessing and marriage. It split denominations, shrunk congregations, and changed the focus of Christian living from holiness to self-authentification. The strategy was always the same. You start with talking about the authenticity of ‘lived experience’ and then change Church rules. The same strategy and play book happened in the Church of England, and mirrored my young adulthood. We, the campaign and I, travelled in tandem through the 70’s, 80’s 90’ and beyond. As I remind myself and Peter Ould in the conversation that takes place below, I was caught up in the emotional pressure to ‘welcome in’ the confused affirmation seeking gay God-seekers. I spent nearly fifteen years as an LGBTQ+++ advocate. Until my mind and judgement was dramatically changed. That in itself is a story. But Peter Ould’s is better. More dramatic, more costly, more transformative. Peter is/was gay. As a Christian he discovered that as a gay disciple of Jesus he was being called to chastity. He became chaste. Then he met a woman and discovered that as a gay man he was being called to heterosexual marriage. He and his wife have four children. He was ordained, and after a number of years as a parish clergyman returned to secular employment where he is a senior, internationally regarded statistician. For a while he was one of the most astute commentators on Anglicanism anywhere. He has an astonishingly sharp mind which he combines with a deep spirituality. A word of advice. Never cross him, Never make him your enemy. In the last few days the carefully crafted progressive strategy that was designed to bring high octane gay marriage to the C of E has crashed and failed. So much strategy, so many hours of conversation, so much emotional blackmail, so many papers, have been the fuel behind this campaign, and to the deep deep chagrin of the activists, the puritan-rooted evangelical Bible-reading, Bible-believing Anglican laity have defied all attempts to get the two thirds voting majority in the General Synod which is a prerequisite for changing doctrine and major legislation in the Church of England, I wanted to discuss this all with an astute and well-informed companion. And phoned Peter. Here is the conversation; which includes some gratuitous words of advice to the Catholic Church; - should it want any. https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=ashenden+on+gay+marriage+crashing&mid=66125E9E73DE62FF6AC466125E9E73DE62FF6AC4&FORM=VIRE

Ecce homo by Antonio Ciseri 2 By Dave Doveton, Anglican Mainstream February 16, 2026 In my previous article[i] on the use of language to advance an argument or a cause, I discussed the use of what are termed ‘empty’ or ‘floating’ signifiers. This term is used to define words that do not have clear meanings or words that can have different meanings in different contexts and for different audiences[vii]. Empty signifiers are useful tools to rally support for a specific cause or course of action. Because they hold different meanings for different people, they can be used to build a consensus but also marginalize dissenters. I noted that one common ‘floating’ signifier is the word ‘justice’. In a recent article[ii], the Revd Robert Thompson argues for the total acceptance of same sex relationships, and same sex civil marriages – in effect, a new doctrine of marriage. In his conclusion he states, ‘The issue before the Church today is clear: it is whether we are willing to allow mercy, dignity, and life to be the criteria by which our doctrine and practice are shaped or whether we will continue to defend inherited forms even when they wound the very people in whom the fruits of the Spirit are already evident. That is not a question about sexuality alone. It is a question about what kind of Church we are becoming and whether we truly believe that Christ is alive enough to lead us somewhere we have not yet fully understood. Will we follow Jesus on the Sabbath? Will we with Christ embody God’s justice?’ Martin Davie has already published two critical responses[iii] to his article, concentrating mainly on Thompson’s argument that Genesis 1–2 does not establish marriage as a fixed creational institution, and that Jesus radically reinterpreted the Sabbath. I wish to examine the use of the idea of ‘Christ as the embodiment of God’s justice’. Firstly, the term ‘justice’ is bandied about in current debates about all manner of issues. In many instances it is used as a subtle means of emotional blackmail, a play on people’s sense of guilt or just a blunt instrument to silence opposition. The most common meaning of Justice in contemporary discourse could be expressed by the maxim “to render to each what is their due”, expressed in antiquity by the Roman writer Ulpian. Joseph Boot[iv] notes that the contemporary understanding, loosely termed ‘social justice’, is a type of distributive justice which the state controls concerning the distribution of benefits and obligations in a society. However, in modern western societies it has evolved into a doctrine of entitlements where supposedly people have rights to land, education, health services, marriage, employment, etc. where people can claim victimhood if they believe what they are entitled to has been denied them. They then resort to mechanisms such as court action, or the political process to demand changes in the law to accord them what they desire. Thus, the campaign for ‘same sex marriage’ was mounted until it was legalised in both the USA and the UK, and many other countries. This is termed ‘justice’ – portrayed as a type of restorative justice, but in effect, no more than the voice of a loud majority who use the democratic processes and institutions in western democracies. The Biblical idea of justice has a different basis and a different meaning. The Hebrew term for justice in the Old Testament is mispat which means the rule of God’s law. Indeed, justice is inseparable from law in the bible – and divine law alone defines what justice is. There are indeed different applications of justice in the Mosaic law – including economic justice (the marketplace), remedial justice (civil and criminal law), and distributive justice (distribution of benefits and obligations in society). However, they must all conform to the standard that God sets. In the Old Testament, justice is related to righteousness, often mentioned together, because justice is an aspect of the righteousness of God. Thus, Ezekiel describes a righteous man as someone who does what is just in God’s eyes, defined as living in conformity to God’s Torah. In Ezekiel 18:5-9,25-32, he lists specific transgressions of the Mosaic law according to the plain sense meaning. Thus justice, righteousness, and the law of God are inextricably linked. In this passage Ezekiel sets out God’s case against his people who have claimed God is not just because they believe that their generation is being held responsible for the sins of the previous one. He closes the case against the people by setting out the Lord’s verdict concerning his people, and a call to repentance, “Cast away from you all the transgressions you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit”[v]. Thus, justice and righteousness are an issue not only of outward behaviour, but of the heart. This is the issue that Jesus picks up and echoes in his conflict with the religious leaders – he not only emphasises the relevance of Mosaic law for his disciples[vi] but tightens the application of the law to thoughts and intentions of the heart[vii]. Thompson argues that with Jesus, “Law is not abolished, but fulfilled, and fulfilment in biblical terms does not mean repetition, but faithful interpretation ordered towards life.” I believe a more helpful meaning in the context of Jesus’ ministry is that the law has been brought to a full and perfect expression. This can never mean it has been evacuated of its original, clear, and plain sense meaning. One simply cannot reinterpret the sexual prohibitions in the law to convey the exact opposite meaning. Interpretation in the New Testament is never away from specificity to generality. Both Jesus and Paul treat the Commandments in effect, as categories which they elucidate and expand on at the specific level, providing fuller and deeper understanding of what these more general categories mean. In doing so, they were referencing the apodictic laws in the correct manner. As Von Rad observes, the Decalogue and other apodictic laws “owe their existence to the endeavour to outline Jahweh’s whole will for men in the shortest possible form.”[viii] Thus, for Jesus, ‘adultery’ is a term which covers all sexually prohibited behaviours – even thoughts and motives. Similarly, in 1 Timothy 1:8-10, Paul reinterprets the 5th to the 9th commandments, expands on their meaning and notes that ‘adultery’ covers other activities – namely ‘sexual immorality’ and ‘homosexuality’. Both would have also known that these laws are categorical, non-negotiable and lack situational exceptions. Jesus declares to his opponents in John’s gospel, “I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgement is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.”[ix] That is, his decisions are just because he obeys his Father. What constitutes just actions are those in accordance with God’s revealed will and that for Jesus was the Hebrew scripture. In many Western nations such as Britain or the USA where legal systems rest on a Judeo-Christian moral base, new laws and changes to existing laws are enacted based on democratic decision making (i.e. the will of a majority). Thus, they are no longer necessarily made based on adherence to the Old Testament moral law. In some cases, decisions are in effect made based on the subjective feelings and desires of a subgroup in the culture which has succeeded in capturing the media and other institutions of that culture to support its agenda. This was true of gay marriage and would be true of the proposed Assisted Dying Bill. Now in similar manner, the Church of England Canon law on Marriage is cast as ‘unjust’ by an appeal to subjective feelings and desires. This is the basic thrust of Thompson’s argument which calls for acceptance of same-sex civil marriage. Anglican divine Richard Hooker stated unequivocally that human authority in the sphere of law was totally subject to the moral law of scripture. “Laws human are of force so far forth as they are agreeable to the law of God.”[x]Biblical law must always inform issues of justice, and the 39 Articles of Religion asserts this principle, “… it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another.”[xi] Christ definitely does not embody a law based on democratic human decisions which is in total opposition to God’s holy law. The people’s voice cannot take the place of God’s voice. After all, the people’s voice all too quickly turns into a baying for blood – as in, “Crucify him”[xii]. Christ as the second Adam[xiii] points us back to the Creator’s original intention for human beings, as described in Genesis. His purpose for human sexuality – to bond a man and a woman in lifelong marriage so that children may be brought up in the knowledge and fear of the Lord[xiv]. Certainly, without knowing the purpose of humanity, we cannot know what justice is. [i] https://anglicanmainstream.org/editorial/narratives-of-manipulation-words-in-the-service-of-power/ [ii] https://viamedia.news/2026/01/15/marriage-sabbath-creation-and-jesuss-embodiment-of-justice/ [iii] https://mbarrattdavie.wordpress.com/2026/01/26/a-response-to-robert-thompson-marriage-sabbath-creation-and-jesuss-embodiment-of-justice/ https://mbarrattdavie.wordpress.com/2026/02/02/a-further-response-to-robert-thompson/ [iv] Dr Joseph Boot, The Mission of God: A Manifesto of Hope for Society, WILBERFORCE, 2016, p201. [v] Ezekiel 18:31. [vi] Matthew 5:17,18. [vii] Matthew 5:28. [viii] Gerhad von Rad , Old Testament Theology volume 1, SCMThu, 1975, p191. [ix] John 5:30. [x] See also, “For whereas God hath left sundry kinds of laws unto men, and by all those laws the actions of men are in some sort directed; they hold that only one law, the Scripture must be the rule to direct in all things…” Richard Hooker, Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity , Dent, LONDON, 1907, p234. [xi] Article 20. [xii] John 19 :15. [xiii] Romans Ch. 5. [xiv] Deuteronomy 4:10; 31:12,13. (Image : “Ecce Homo” painting by Antonio Ciseri, Public Domain)