By David W. Virtue DENVER (4/30/2004)—A publicly self-professed lesbian priest in the Diocese of Colorado, The Rev. Bonnie Spencer, has been accused of luring the lonely widow of a deceased priest in the Diocese into a sordid lesbian affair, and then making up a liturgy to "marry" her at the church altar to sanctify her misconduct. Spencer told Jean Torkelson of the Rocky Mountain News that she would have no comment until she spoke to Bishop Rob O'Neill, who is out of town until next week. She added, however, that "there was no same-sex blessing." VIRTUOSITY has learned from a number of diocesan sources that the Bishop and Standing Committee are preparing for possible disciplinary hearings and actions. Under the former Bishop Jerry Winterrowd, whose weak and indecisive leadership earned him little respect from either the orthodox or liberals, the new Bishop Rob O'Neill has informed his clergy that such conduct will not be tolerated and a full investigation will be initiated immediately. "I have every confidence that our new bishop, The Rt. Rev. Rob O'Neill, will uphold diocesan standards of married and faithful, single and celibate, not to mention holding homosexual clergy to the same definitions of sexual misconduct as heterosexual clergy, and female clergy to the same standards as male clergy," the Rev. Don Armstrong, a member of the Diocesan Standing Committee, said in a telephone interview. "The whole issue of power differential between priest and parishioner is once again illustrated in this case, making it abundantly clear why it is inappropriate for a parish priest to even date a member of his or her own congregation." After an initial attempt by the Canon to the Ordinary, the Rev. Ed Morgan, to whitewash the whole affair, the issue quickly escalated to the point where Bishop O'Neill came under enormous pressure to act, even as his conservative clergy began placing overseas calls for Primatial intervention and oversight. As such charges have always brought immediate suspension from ministry for heterosexual male clergy and imposition of Title IV of the ECUSA Canons in Colorado, a careful eye is being kept on the situation so that similar vigor is exercised - in this case - involving a female homosexual priest. Under former Bishop Jerry Winterrowd, sexual misconduct allegations brought by three female parishioners against their female rector were handled behind closed doors allowing the only sexual predator ever discovered in the Diocese of Colorado to slip away to another diocese. Given the recent scandals in the Roman Catholic Church, Diocesan officials are reported to be sensitive not to let such a travesty be repeated in this case. The Diocese of Colorado and a guilty parish priest lost a civil suit involving sexual misconduct in the 1980s. In that case, because the Diocese knew about the misconduct, both Diocese and Priest were found liable, and the Church Insurance Company had to pay huge sums on behalf of both the priest and the diocese. Ironically, the Chancellor who lost that case and continues as a Chancellor for the diocese, as well as the Canon to the Ordinary, are both members of Good Shepherd Episcopal Church, where this latest misconduct is alleged to have taken place. The former Rector of this parish, Jon Johannsen, voted for Gene Robinson and CO-51 as a Deputy to General Convention. And now, all are fully supportive of the homosexual agenda, find themselves potentially liable for what has been wrought by their liberal leanings. "Years of the liberal Denver elite running the Diocese of Colorado have lead to this. Many of them have disregarded the values and theology of the vast majority of Episcopalians across the state, and as a result their control may be coming to an end by way of this one event," said Father Armstrong. "A good example of this minority liberal disregard, was the augmenting of the elected membership of the predominately conservative Search Committee by homosexual activists in the diocese's search for a new Bishop. This was done under the guise of seeking balance by the Standing Committee. The Search Committee then proceeded to completely ignore the results of its own survey revealing Episcopalians in Colorado had roundly rejected homosexual innovations being perpetrated on the church." "But now the disregard of both the mind of the Diocese and the mind of the Communion by Bishop Winterrowd, and Bishop O'Neill, Convention deputies, and the Standing Committee has born its fruit among us, and the time of judgment and repentance are upon us." END

To: The Primates and Moderators of the Anglican Communion From: Archbishop Robin Eames, Chairman of the Lambeth Commission 29 April 2004 Dear colleagues, As Chairman of the Lambeth Commission established by the Archbishop of Canterbury following the meeting of Primates and Moderators at Lambeth Palace last October I want to give you an update on our work. I thank you for the many messages of prayerful support and for the submissions we have received from different parts of the Anglican Communion. As we continue our work in your name I do not under-estimate the complexities of our tasks nor the difficulties which face the Commission. However I am greatly encouraged by the sense of common direction and purpose already evident in our work. I pay tribute to the depth of work currently being undertaken by the members of the Commission. Following preparatory work and the first full meeting of the Commission in Windsor we are at present engaged in extensive study of certain key areas which we have identified and already agreed must be addressed in our Report. These issues concern such as the nature of autonomy, the practice of communion and relationships of interdependence as they have developed in the history of the Anglican Communion, the current status of the traditional Instruments of Unity and their relationship to each other and the interpretation of authority as we have witnessed it in the life of the Anglican Communion. The conclusions of these studies will be considered by the Commission when it meets at Kanuga, North Carolina, in June. Prior to the first meeting in Windsor I visited the United States to meet with several groups who had expressed their concerns at the decisions of the General Convention of ECUSA and the Commission will meet representatives of differing constituencies in ECUSA during our June meeting. We have received a large volume of submissions and material from different parts of the Communion and plans are being made to meet others who have expressed opinions on the current crisis from the Anglican Church of Canada and Provinces in Africa. With the constraints of time available it is impossible for us to meet personally with all who have expressed their position on the issues but I can assure you that our analysis of opinions is both thorough and extensive. However there are several aspects of the current situation which I feel I must emphasise. First, the Commission needs and I believe deserves space to do its work. Actions and statements however well intentioned which express definitive positions on relationships within the Anglican Communion run the danger of limiting the opportunities and options available to the Commission. I am grateful to my fellow Primates for remaining within the letter and the spirit of our Statement last October despite the obvious differences of opinion at present throughout Anglicanism. The recent assurance of support following the meeting of the CAPA Primates has been a great encouragement to the Commission. Second, I feel it is important that without prejudice to the Report of the Commission, we maintain the highest possible degrees of communion among those who adopt differing views at this time. In that regard those in North America who feel obliged to object to developments in the General Convention of the Episcopal Church or in the Diocese of New Westminster are still to be regarded as faithful Anglicans or Episcopalians so long as these dissenting groups do not initiate schism in their own Churches. On my visit to the United States I was impressed by those who expressed a desire to remain within ECUSA despite the strength of their feelings. Their initiatives to finding a way of maintaining communion within the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Diocese of New Westminster is further evidence of that desire but I feel such schemes will only be successful if dissenting groups are afforded sufficient support to feel their place within our Anglican family is secure. I would also hope that the wish of the Primates expressed last October that such schemes would be undertaken in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury will be observed. Third, it is obvious to the Commission that if any groups, either dissenting from the decisions of General Convention in ECUSA, or from the forthcoming decisions of the General Synod in Canada, initiate definitive beaks from their parent church, then a different situation will arise for our deliberations. The Commission would have to regard such decisions as a serious development. But until the Commission has come up with proposals for the way in which we may handle such divisions together as a Communion, the support or encouragement of other provinces or dioceses would seem to be itself a further damaging of trust and mutual life and of the very clear guidelines concerning jurisdictional boundaries that we have agreed to adopt as a Communion at successive Lambeth Conferences. While I cannot at this stage predict the form of the Commission's Report I recognise that the Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council together with the Provinces will have to reach decisions which will have defining and widespread consequences. It would be my hope that once the Report is published we can take such decisions as necessary in a manner which is unrushed, in Christian charity and by means of due process. It is my prayer and earnest hope that the Report we are preparing will enable the Anglican Communion to move forward together in ways which will stand the test of time whatever difficulties may arise in future years for our world family. Wishing you God's blessing in your leadership and service. Yours very sincerely, Robert Armagh.

The American Anglican Council (AAC) held its Board of Trustees meeting April 27 – 29, 2004 in Atlanta, Georgia. The Board celebrated the realignment of Anglicanism that is underway, noting a strong grass roots movement of individuals and churches that are forming coalitions and planning program initiatives, networking, assisting with missionary endeavors and planting churches. The AAC renewed its commitment to the Anglican Communion Network (ACN) as well as those faithful individuals and congregations in hostile dioceses in need of encouragement and intervention. The Board also heard reports from various committees and staff members and discussed plans to encourage and minister to beleaguered individuals and parishes. The Rt. Rev. Frank Lyons, Bishop of Bolivia, was present as a special guest, offering an international perspective on the current situation. Explaining that his role as ACN Moderator has developed such that it is impossible to continue in both leadership roles, the Rt. Rev. Robert W. Duncan announced his resignation as Vice President of the AAC Board. In a letter to him the Board said, "We will miss your leadership in the operation and direction of programs of the American Anglican Council. However, we are delighted that your work as the Moderator of the Network has now expanded to the point where this realignment of your energies has become necessary." The Rt. Rev. Peter Beckwith, Bishop of the Diocese of Springfield, was elected to fill that position. The American Anglican Council declared complete and wholehearted commitment to the success of the Network. In a letter drafted to the Moderator, Steering Committee and Council of the Anglican Communion Network, Board members expressed "gratitude to Almighty God for the formation and early life of the Network. The recognition of the Network by Primates representing the majority of Anglicans around the Communion is testimony to the promise that the Network holds for the future of Anglicanism in North America". "Given the current climates and the lightening speed with which events are moving, it is more important than ever that the American Anglican Council remain focused, strong and healthy," said the Rev. Canon David C. Anderson, AAC President and CEO. "We as a Board are committed to persevere and work diligently for the realignment underway." END

Spring blossoms and Grace Church, parish hall, first afternoon of conference Cross and stained glass window, entrance Grace church, first night of conference Acolytes prepare for procession, evensong and Lord Carey's first sermon, first night of conference, Grace Church Lord Carey preaches, Evensong, first night of conference Little Mary, Bishop Alpha's adopted daughter with harpist, Alpha is Bishop in Rift Valley, Tanzania, Evensong first night of conference, Grace Church Bishop Alpha with conference attendees, Antlers Hotel first morning of conference Lord Carey and others sing Gospel praise, first morning of conference, Antlers Hotel Jeremy Begbie talks on Mystery, Antlers Hotel, first morning of conference, Exit sign is purely intentional Ashley Null answers questions after his presentation, first morning of conference Grace Episcopal clergy with Lord Carey and Bishop alpha. Fr. Don Armstrong of Grace stands between Carey and Alpha at right Lord Carey preaches, Grace Church, communion last night of conference Robert Prichard speaks first day of conference, Antlers Hotel Ashley Null speaks second day of conference, Antlers Hotel Ephraim Radner speaks second day of conference, Antlers Hotel Bill Attwood speaks second day of conference, Antlers Hotel Peter Walker speaks second day of conference, Anglers Hotel Alpha Mohamed speaks second day of conference, antlers Hotel John Karanja speaks second day of conference Photos by Grace Episcopal parishioner and Kingdom servant, Steve Starr. In Colorado Springs Steve has a ministry working with a number of ministries as a photographer and a digital photography consultant. See more of his work at http://www.stevestarr.com. Steve was honored to win a Pulitzer in photojournalism while working as a news photographer with The Associated Press in 1970. Christian journalist friends from St. Stephens in Coconut Grove, FL. lead Steve back to Christ in 1988. "I pray daily that our denomination will return to Scripture."

ROBINSON ABSENT FOR VICTORY SUE BAILEY Canadian Press Thursday, April 29, 2004 OTTAWA -- The Senate passed a bill Wednesday to extend hate-crime protection to homosexuals, but MP Svend Robinson wasn't there to enjoy his hard-won victory. The openly gay New Democrat was in self-imposed exile from the political limelight as his private member's bill jumped the last major hurdle to becoming law. Not that Robinson, disgraced after admitting he stole an expensive ring on April 9, was far away. He was seen exchanging hugs and high-fives with jubilant supporters on a street within sight of Parliament Hill. Robinson has declined interview requests since taking a medical leave from his job. He cited stress and "emotional pain" at a tearful news conference two weeks ago. "He is under orders from his medical professionals that he's not to engage in any activities that are parliamentary," said Ian Capstick, a spokesman for the NDP caucus. Robinson was only in Ottawa for a day to complete related paperwork and retrieve some personal items, Capstick said. The timing coincided with the vote by coincidence, he said. Senators voted 59-11 to pass the bill as applause echoed through the ornate red chamber. It now requires the final formality of royal assent to become law. It was a rare feat for an opposition MP but a tempered victory. Robinson, who publicly apologized for the theft, could still face charges. A special prosecutor in B.C. is reviewing whether he should be charged. "It's a real mixture of sadness and happiness," said New Democrat MP Libby Davies, a close friend of Robinson's. "It's sort of bittersweet that he's put so much into it and he's not able to be there at the Senate to see it go through." Davies, who represents Vancouver East, called Robinson right after the vote but didn't tell reporters he was in town. "He has a lot to go through, including a possible court case," she said in an earlier interview. "But right now his focus is on getting the help he needs." Robinson, a 25-year veteran of federal politics, had worked since 1981 to add gays and lesbians to a list of groups legally protected from incitement of hatred and genocide under the Criminal Code. The bill cleared the House of Commons last September after raucous debate. At the time, the former Canadian Alliance - now part of the new Conservative party - and some Liberals fought the bill over fears that freedom of speech and religion would suffer. Opponents raised concerns that the bill could be used even against religious leaders who condemn homosexuality from the pulpit. They also attacked the logic of singling out certain groups for specific protection, arguing that violence against all people should be prosecuted equally and is already outlawed. The bill's passage in the Liberal-dominated Senate alarmed critics. "Unfortunately, most Liberals in both the Senate and the House of Commons chose to support an NDP-sponsored law that could put fundamental Canadian freedoms in jeopardy," said Conservative MP Vic Toews, a former attorney general of Manitoba. Supporters dismissed such claims, citing the frequency with which gays and lesbians - particularly homosexual men - are targeted. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the Canadian Professional Police Association supported the bill. Police have so far been powerless to prosecute the likes of Rev. Fred Phelps of Topeka, Kan., who runs a website that declares God hates homosexuals. Supporters of Phelps have entered Canada twice in the last five years to hold anti-gay rallies. END

GAY BISHOP PROVES IT'S NEVER TOO LATE TO FALL IN LOVE WITH GRANDSON IN ATTENDANCE, 78-YEAR-OLD CLERIC MARRIES SAME-SEX PARTNER By Rona Marech, Staff Writer San Francisco Chronicle Thursday, April 29, 2004 The ceremony lasted two hours and 45 minutes. When it concluded, Otis Charles, the world's first openly gay Christian bishop, also became the world's first bishop to wed his same-sex partner in church. Charles, an Episcopal bishop, married Felipe Sanchez Paris before several hundred people at St. Gregory's of Nyssa Episcopal Church in San Francisco over the weekend. The bishop says he was guided by his belief that all human beings are called upon to live as fully as they can. That same precept guided him in 1993 when, at age 67, he announced he was gay. "The single most powerful possibility for raising people's awareness and consciousness would be when in the church relationships are being blessed," said Charles, who turned 78 on his wedding day. "When people see that two human beings want to commit their lives together and are able to do that and have the desire to do that with the blessing of God. "My 8-year-old grandson was there, and I think of what the world will be like when young people see two people can make a deep commitment to each other, and it has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with love." A grand total of four different clergy helped officiate the wedding, which began with drumming and ended when Charles and Paris were lifted in chairs and carried outside. The ceremony included singing, dancing and opportunities for the guests and the betrothed to give impromptu speeches. Three of the couple's nine grown children participated in the wedding, welcoming the new spouse into the family by placing a lei around his neck. David Perry, one of the best men, read from the poem "The Truelove" by David Whyte. "If you wanted to drown you could," he read. "But you don't." "I could barely get through it," Perry said. "This man had lived his life in fear of drowning and now he said, 'I'm tired of drowning.'" Charles, who served as bishop of Utah for 15 years and then president of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass., was married for 42 years and has five children. He told his wife he was gay in 1976, but he didn't come out publicly until he retired 11 years ago. For years, Charles said, he told himself it would be too hard on the diocese, on his family, on his wife. But then keeping his secret became unbearably oppressive. "I was ashamed of myself for remaining silent when the church was involved in an acrimonious debate about the whole question of gay people in the life of the church. I couldn't live with that any longer," he said. "I came to realize that I was only going to wither and die and it would be a destructive relationship for my wife and myself." In a letter to fellow bishops, Charles wrote, "I will not remain silent, invisible, unknown." The Episcopal Church continues to be highly divided over the issue of gay priests and same-sex marriage. Last year, in a hotly debated election, Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, became bishop of New Hampshire. The church had long held that it was possible to ordain gay priests, as long as they were celibate, but Robinson's election created a furor because he has a longtime partner. Robinson and Charles are the only two openly gay bishops to this day. The question of whether to bless same-sex unions has also caused some internal strife: Though such unions aren't officially encouraged, the church has acknowledged that in some dioceses, officiating such ceremonies is common practice. Charles and his wife ended their marriage soon after his public announcement. Nearly 70 and unsure "how to be gay," Charles moved to San Francisco. For the first year, he lived among Episcopal Franciscans and began to build a new life. "What was nurturing was just simple things," he said. "Walking down the street seeing a rainbow flag or two men holding hands." He directed a gay ministry. He went dancing. He had openly gay friends. "At whatever age you come out, you have to live through whatever you've missed," he said. "Even though you're 67, you have to go through a process I associate with adolescence. Hopefully, you do it with a little more maturity and grace." Two years ago, after some relationship fits and starts, he met Paris, 62, a retired professor and political organizer with four ex-wives and four children. And the white-haired bishop fell in love. "As people get older, they turn into two kinds. Some become thinner and wispier, and the lifeblood has gone out of them because they have regrets and there are some things you can't do anymore," said the Rev. Leng Lim, a friend who's also an Episcopalian priest. "Or there are people who become really alive to the moment, to the vulnerability that is there, to the love. Because they've worked through their own stuff. And Otis belongs to that second group." Several days after marrying, the couple took turns recounting the details of their wedding. True to form, Charles shed his bishop-like pensiveness and hopped out of his chair to sing and demonstrate a dance. "See what I mean by energy?" said Paris, who has a habit of pausing mid-sentence to smile. Charles is rarely at a loss for words, but reflecting on what had passed he said, "I don't think I can describe it, but I do feel different." He touched his chest and stared at Paris for a long time. "So," he said softly. END

By David W. Virtue THE WORD OF FRANK That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Episcopal Church. The life in ECUSA appeared for a season, we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the brief life, all too brief, which was with Frank and appeared to the House of Bishops with much blinding and diverse light. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us and be inclusive and not excluded, for that would be a crying shame and cause many of us to be sad, for we believe in collegiality above all else. And our fellowship is with one another and it is here that we Dance the Circle Dance of Dispossession when the House of Bishops gather, in order to dispossess ourselves of all bad thoughts and rejuvenate our karmas. I write these "gracious" words to make our common joy complete. This is the message we have heard from Sufi Rumi and declare unto you: Sufi is light; and in him there is no darkness at all for he dwelleth on a plain beyond good and evil where we all hope one day to dwell, for truly there is no darkness in that place. If we claim to have fellowship with the beloved Sufi and yet continue to walk in the darkness of absolutism where there is no pluriform thinking, we lie and do not live by the many pluriform truths of which I am a great advocate. But if we walk in the transcendent light of Sufi, as he is in the light, we have collegiality with one another; and the thoughts of Sufi Rumi purifies us from all bad thoughts and raises us up beyond good and evil so we don't have to worry about those narrow-minded orthodox types who still inhabit my church. For truly there is a GREATER truth which inhabiteth Otis of the Charles and Vickie of the Gene pool who embrace many of their own species, much to their delight and ours. If we proclaim to be without error, and I am rarely wrong, we deceive ourselves only if we do not see things my way, and the truth is not in you. If we confess that it is my way or it will be the highway, we will be liberated from the bondage of believing in sin which only causes us unnecessary guilt which I have banished as being bad for your karma and aura. For there are many truths and I know most of them. If you have not embraced pluriform truths and wish to live in the narrow confines of single truths there will ultimately be no place for you among the House of Purple, for you will feel out of place because of your narrow-minded thinking. Therefore you will cry a lot and feel excluded, and I would not wish that. CHAPTER 2 My dear ECUSANs, I write this to you so that you will not fall into the habit of believing in personal sin, for truly there are only bad thoughts and they can be brushed aside if you perform acts of mercy. Think good thoughts, for I have banished the bad and the attendant guilt. If you do have bad thoughts speak to me and I will absolve you of all psychological guilt feelings, for that is all they are. And I will speak to Sufi in your defense for he is the Righteous One. And there is no need for atonement, for Mel doth have it wrong. Think triumphantly and you will be triumphant. Think good thoughts and goodness will flow from you. For truly if you obey me, you will be right, and things will go smoothly for you. The bishop who says "I know you, Frank" but does not do what I command is a liar and shall receive a private visit from David Booth Beers and he WILL demonstrate that the truth is not in you, and verily he will invoke the Dennis Canon and you shall be very much afraid. I, Frank have spoken and my words will not be gracious unto you. But if everyone obeys my word, my love and that of Sufi Rumi will be made complete with a large and bounteous check from the many and diverse Trust Funds that I have at my disposal, and verily you shall never go without. That is how you know you belong to me. Whoever claims to live in me, must walk as I do, and good things shall flow bounteously from me to you, and you shall want for nothing. Dear friends, none of this is new, for I have been preaching pluriformity for years, it is very old and goes back to Lambeth '98 where I made public my 'pluriform truths' speech at a press conference. This is old news, but let me refresh you just in case you don't get the message and ill befalls you. Yet in a way I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in me and my revisionist pals in the HoB, because the old exclusive, fundamentalist, narrow 'light' of the gospel is slowly being extinguished and the new light of Sufi Rumi shineth, and this light inhabiteth me and it will, if you accept it and come with me to a plain beyond good and evil, find yourself shining as the noonday sun passing over a gay bathhouse in Niagara, New York which was closed down for it was no longer a 'safe place' and many did catch the dreaded disease. Anyone who claims to be in the light, and I hope that is all 100 diocesan bishops, but still loves orthodoxy, is still in the darkness. Whoever loves his brother bishop (and you have your choice of eros, philia, storge or agape, but Frankly I prefer the first), will not cause his fellow bishop to stumble, otherwise he will be forced to stand in a corner at an Oasis meeting in the Diocese of Newark and there have his bottom smacked by Louie of the Earnest. But whoever hates his brother bishop is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness and he will no longer Dance the Circle Dance of Dispossession with us and will find (Sufi forbid), a presentment against him and face the wrath of his fellow bishops, because it is very clear the darkness of narrow-minded orthodoxy has blinded him. I write to you dear children of ECUSA, because I want to banish all bad thoughts on account of the name of my friend Sufi who knoweth all things. I write to you fathers in God, because you have known me from the beginning and I can speak out of many sides of my mouth, and make words mean what I want them to mean and not mean, and when all else fails I can resolve it all in 'mystery' which we can all embrace, even as I am embraced by you. I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the narrowness of exclusive thinking. I write to you, dear children, because you are easily indoctrinated by the new thinking much proclaimed in our modern textbooks from Episcopal Publishing Houses and other publishing places of pluriformity. DO NOT LOVE THE ORTHODOX Do not love the orthodox or anything they believe any more. If anyone loves the orthodox, the love of myself and Sufi Rumi is not in him. For everything in orthodox thinking – the cravings for absolute truth, the lust for true spirituality and the boasting of what he has and does – comes not from me and Suff, but from the Bible and that is subject to many interpretations, and I have used many in the course of my lifetime. For the church, The Episcopal Church may be passing away, but the Episcopalian who does my will and that of Suff will live forever, or until the money runs out and I have to take out a mortgage on 815 2nd avenue, but that will be long after I am dead and gone to live with Suff on his plain of happiness. WARNINGS AGAINST ORTHODOXY Dear children of ECUSA, many think this is the last hour of our beloved church, but it is not so. We may have a cash flow problem but it is temporary, and if the markets continue to rise we can live off the interest of the Trust Funds for years and the Church Pension Fund floweth like the Hudson River forever and ever. I may no longer travel First Class and be reduced to Business Class in my peregrinations around the globe as I promote my inclusive, affirming, pan-everything notion of mission, but I will suffer the hardship for your sake and my gospel. The orthodox went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us and believed the new religion; but their going showed that none of them REALLY belonged to us because they could not accept pluriform truths, of which I am its foremost advocate. Their very narrowness was their undoing, for they could not see the big picture which now includes Vickie of the Gene pool. But you have been anointed by me when you became bishop. I laid my hands on your head and said you belonged to me and the Dennis Canon, and behold you do….until you die…or you will face the Title IV Review Committee. Who is the liar? It is the bishop who denies my authority and that Suff is the Liberator of our narrowness and exclusivity. Such a man is the antiSuff, he denies me and Suff and that is unforgivable. No one who denies my inclusive thinking has Suff in him; whoever acknowledges me, Frank of the Flexible Wrist, gets a night in my New York City Penthouse, dinner at Club 21…and that's a bargain. Therefore, see that what you have heard from the beginning, or 1998, remains in you. If it does, you will remain my friend forever and ever and I will be a 'safe place' for you and you shall never be attacked by narrow uninclusive bishops like Duncan of the Pitts. I write so you won't be lead astray by Iker of the Fortress mentality, for the anointing you have received from me remains with you, and you do not need anyone else to teach you, for my anointing is real, not counterfeit as some wretched cyber journalist says to you. So remain in me, for I am your liberator and friend. Fondly, Frank

May 5, 2004 For the Primates of the Anglican Communion My dear brothers, Grace to you and peace in our risen Savior Jesus Christ. I find myself, in these days of Easter in which we contemplate the mystery of the resurrection and its consequences in our lives, living with a sharp awareness of the reality of our being bound together in the Lord because of our baptism into the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And, that being thus bound we are called to share one another's sufferings as well as joys. Over these months I have been deeply grieved that recent events in the life of the Episcopal Church in the United States have caused suffering for many of you. I am very clear that what occurred is in accord with our Constitution and is widely regarded as a faithful action. However, as your brother I am profoundly sorry for the wound this has caused within our body. As I have said many times to the bishops of the Episcopal Church and to others, what we do in one part of the Communion can have significant consequences elsewhere. I remember vividly when we were together last October at Lambeth hearing from some of you about finding yourselves ridiculed and made a laughing stock because of your association with the Episcopal Church. I completely understand why some of you have spoken so harshly about what has occurred here. At the same time, many of us who love you deeply in the Lord are profoundly saddened that our fellowship is so severely strained, and in some cases appears to be broken. I pray that in spite of our differences, serious as they are, we can discover together in this difficult time the truth of what we said in our statement of last October that "what we hold in common is much greater than that which divides us in proclaiming Good News to the world." The prayer of my heart is that we can discover anew our unity in service to God's mission through these difficulties. Our world, which is so burdened by poverty, disease and civil strife, is much in need of our common witness and action. I regret that this communication is through a letter rather than a conversation. I hope we as primates will encourage ongoing conversations at all levels between people of our various provinces. I do believe that as we explore what we share across our differences we rediscover our common ground in service to God's continuing work of reconciliation. In conversation our differences do not disappear. Instead we find ourselves grounded upon the rock of Christ whose deathless love is able to transform our mistrust and woundedness into mutual care and affection. It is my deepest sense that we have much to learn from one another, particularly as we seek to proclaim the gospel in our often very different contexts. The visits I have been privileged to make to several of your provinces have certainly made that very plain, and I have come away with an enlarged and deeper sense of how God is acting in this world to save us all from the power of sin and death. On another matter, I want to share with you the response of the bishops of the Episcopal Church to the concern expressed in our Lambeth statement of last October that there be "adequate provision for episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities within their own area of pastoral care in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates." The bishops of the Episcopal Church are called to be chief pastors for all people in their dioceses. They have continued to shape a plan for pastoral care which they first put forward in 2002. They have addressed how bishops with different perspectives, overseeing dioceses in which there are varying points of view, can bear one another's burdens and uphold one another's ministries for the sake of the gospel and its proclamation. When we met in March of this year we further refined our plan, which was then agreed to by an overwhelming majority. It is set forth in the enclosed document: Caring for all the churches. I am in conversation with a number of bishops, whose theological perspectives meet the pastoral needs of "dissenting minorities," about making themselves available to provide episcopal oversight at the invitation of the diocesan bishop. As well, I know of several instances where diocesan bishops have arranged or are about to arrange for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight. Key to what we are trying to do at this time is the shared understanding of our bishops that an episcopal ministry of care and oversight is not a personal possession of any one bishop but is shared by all bishops for the well being of the church as a whole. Please pray for us as we pray for you in these days that challenge us all in the various contexts in which the Lord has placed us. This comes, as ever, with my love and prayers, The Most Rev. Frank T. Griswold Presiding Bishop and Primate The Episcopal Church, USA END

Archbishop Gregory Venables Replies to Frank Griswold May 7, 2004 The Most Revd Frank T. Griswold Presiding Bishop ECUSA Dear Bishop Frank, In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. I write in response to your letter of May 5th. Since it has found its way all over the internet, I am constrained to respond more broadly than just in a personal note. With great respect it must be said that considering what you now write in the light of what you have already done brings to mind the old cliche of Nero fiddling while Rome burns. It's like the doctor telling the grieving family that the operation was a success even though the patient has died. You speak with clarity about your grief over the pain your actions have caused and yet you proceed with your relentless agenda. Do you not see that there is an enormous contradiction here? The key path to alleviating that pain is repentance. It is simple to turn around and join the spiritual and doctrinal direction of the Anglican Communion and the overwhelming majority of the Christians of history and the world today. When one considers that you were advised by the Lambeth Bishops Conference, the ACC, the Primates, and the Archbishop of Canterbury that to proceed would bring a harvest of pain, it is hard to see why you find the consequences you now experience surprising. You indicate that the action of the General Convention was constitutional. Of course I am not an expert in the Constitution and Canons of ECUSA, but I do remember the commitment of your General Convention to initiate an "inter-Anglican and ecumenical dialogue on human sexuality issues which should not be resolved by the Episcopal Church on its own (B-020)." (A ten minute search of internet archives shows that!) Many colleagues have also reminded me that you were clear that the official position of ECUSA was parallel to that of Lambeth I. 10 at a number of Primates meetings. When was that changed, or was it just ignored? Of course there is pain when you moved ahead in violation of your own Convention decisions. In addition, I saw the broadcast of objections to Gene Robinson's consecration which were simply and totally ignored. How can these be constitutional actions? You cling to the statement that "what we hold in common is much greater than that which divides us..." That statement was made before you chose to be the chief consecrator at an event you knew would "tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level." At a time like this, simply celebrating what we hold in common is like a man arguing before a judge that his offence should be overlooked because he hasn't broken other laws. You cannot offer a band aid to a person who needs open heart surgery. The situation must be addressed at the root of the disorder. You don't heal a disease by treating its symptoms. You tell us that "Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight" is moving toward solving the problem in your province. It is not so. First of all it leaves the decisions in the hands of the offending bishops and does not give any substantive protection to parishes that maintain Anglican teaching and practice. In addition, we are aware of ECUSA clergy and parishes who have been ordered by their revisionist bishops not to ask for alternative oversight, threatened if they do, or who live in areas where bishops have publicly stated that they will not allow it. The fact that "some" bishops will arrange for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight does not mean at all that it can be put in place where it is really needed. And when did those who hold to the apostolical, biblical faith and practice of Christianity as accepted for 2000 years suddenly become "dissidents"? You now say that you want to be in conversation. In the light of your previous great reticence to discuss the matter in our meetings this is tragically late in the day. ECUSA's actions have caused a great and unnecessary crisis in the Anglican Communion that has spilled over into culture, ecumenical affairs, and even interfaith relations. It is tragic and painful indeed. It is the result of your actions and it is also reversible. You have insisted on autonomy from the Lambeth resolutions, from the Archbishop of Canterbury's plea, from the ACC, and from the Primates to pursue an agenda that is absolutely scandalous to most Christians. That view of autonomy is the opposite of everything Anglicanism has always stood for. Why would you still want to call yourself Anglican? May I urge you either to live as an Anglican conforming to Anglican norms or admit that you have left us and closed the door behind you. May God guide us in love and truth at this crucial and sad time. +Greg The Most Revd Gregory J. Venables Primate of the Southern Cone of the Americas

We note with great interest that Bishop William Swing of California has revoked Otis Charles' license to officiate and also dismissed him from his position as assisting bishop in the diocese. Details of the story, reported by The Living Church last evening, are sketchy with regard to why the measures were taken, but it appears to be a result of Charles' "marriage" to Felipe Sanchez Paris on April 24, 2004. The Executive Office of the Diocese, the Rev. Michael Hansen told The Living Church that same sex-blessings must be approved by the Bishop of California and should not "resemble a marriage." He also noted that the matter is "under investigation" with regard to possible clergy violations of diocesan guidelines. If the punitive measures reported reflect an attempt to restore some semblance of order and discipline in ECUSA, we welcome such action, particularly if it represents a new trend in the Church. Such a trend might extend to the Diocese of New Hampshire which elected a practicing homosexual as bishop, and to the Diocese of Washington where Bishop John Chane has proposed moving far beyond General Convention's resolution on same sex blessings, proposing such rites be extended to couples for whom marriage is not an appropriate or desirable step. While a new trend toward moral discipline in ECUSA would indeed be encouraging, is it likely? We are left with numerous questions in the California situation. Were the grounds for Charles' dismissal centered in morality or authority? Did he simply irritate Bishop Swing because he didn't get permission and go through the right channels or is it possible that the enormity of the crisis following actions of General Convention 2003 has had an effect? In the current climate in ECUSA with the report of the Lambeth Commission looming, was Charles' ceremony simply too hot to handle? Are the decisions in the Diocese of California based on expediency rather than a moral outcry? We at the American Anglican Council continue to call on ECUSA to repent - laity, priest and bishop, diocese by diocese that this beloved church might experience renewal and restoration. END

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us." I John 2:19 Dear Brothers and Sisters, In her famous book “On Death and Dying” Elizabeth Kubler-Ross identified five stages in the process of dying. First there was Denial and isolation, followed by Anger, then Bargaining, Depression and finally Acceptance. The Episcopal Church is in varying stages of Kubler-Ross’s DABDA acronym. A number of revisionist bishops are still in denial and isolation - "no, not me, it cannot be true," unwilling to admit that the Robinson consecration is tearing the Episcopal Church apart. This writer was in the Diocese of Connecticut this past week speaking on the ECUSA situation to some 20 orthodox priests and learned that the ultra-liberal bishop there, one Andrew D. Smith told several hundred Episcopal ladies at an ECW luncheon that the Episcopal Church was in a terrible mess and he could not see a way out of it. “He looked awful, haggard,” an ECW delegate told Virtuosity. Smith might be making his first tentative step out of denial. Many more bishops like J. Michael Garrison of the Diocese of Western New York are angry, “why are you (the orthodox parishes) doing this to me by cutting off funds.” That angry statement is being repeated around the Episcopal Church in one diocese after another. Then there are the bargainers. “So you won’t pay your fair share, aw come on guys pay up…or else I’ll come down on you like a ton of bricks. (Charles E. Bennison, Diocese of Pennsylvania). “You want to leave the ECUSA with your property…in your dreams.” (George Wayne Smith, Diocese of Missouri). “If you stay maybe we could work something out. Maybe.” Then there is the fourth stage - depression, and God only knows how many bishops are depressed about the whole situation, both orthodox and revisionist. Each side is feeling the heat from angry parish priests withholding money and making threats to join the AAC or NACDP or possibly leaving for the AMIA or coming under a Global South Primate. It’s a mess all over and depression is running rampant throughout the whole denomination despite all the talk of “graceful conversation” much ballyhooed by the Presiding Bishop. Revisionist bishops don’t want to believe or even acknowledge that their dioceses are in numeric decline, that they are faced with orthodox priests willing to challenge their authority, withhold funds and make waves. Furthermore laity are leaving, and those that stay are not willing to remain silent. They are beginning to speak up forcefully and determinedly against their revisionist bishops; their diocesan policies, theological proclivities and biblical interpretations. But still the bishops continue to live in denial, with many refusing even to answer letters sent to them by both clergy and laity about the state of the ECUSA, the Robinson consecration and much more. AND THIS WEEK a trial balloon was floated out of England when both the TIMES and the TELEGRAPH newspapers announced, in separate stories, that plans for a formal split in the Anglican Church are being considered in an attempt to resolve differences over attitudes towards homosexuality. A proposal to turn the Anglican Communion into an Anglican confederation is being considered by the Lambeth Commission, the international body of 18 members set up last year by Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote Gledhill of the Times. Jonathan Petre of the TELEGRAPH clarified the issue saying that an all-powerful "star chamber", headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury will be created to avert the collapse of worldwide Anglicanism over homosexuality. A blueprint drawn up by advisers will grant significant new powers to Dr Rowan Williams though not sufficient to transform him into an Anglican "pope". It would be a loose federation with new loyalties and allegiances across geographic lines. Perhaps this is the moment of Acceptance or reality breaking through into the Sufi driven mind of Frank Griswold, that all is now lost and we have the ECUSA and the action of consecrating an avowed sodomite to the episcopacy to thank for the break up of the whole Anglican Communion. Said one priest to Virtuosity, “maybe it should happen. I hope it does. At the end of the day we will know who is on the Lord’s side, those driven and beholden to Scripture and the traditions and doctrines of the church. If and when it happens, Griswold and his 62 revisionist bishops will be isolated and we can all watch them whither and die on the pluriform vine.” He has a point. How it will all play out is still anyone’s guess, but clearly Irish Archbishop Robin Eames is not succeeding in using his immense charm to hold it all together and is perhaps realizing that the days of the Communion are numbered. Clearly the noises out of Africa are less than irenic in tone and orthodox forces in the US Episcopal Church coming from the American Anglican Council and the Network (NACDP) is causing a few headaches, coupled with the steady stream of documents from groups like Plano and from individual dioceses about the state of ECUSA, is less than encouraging. The next seven months will be crucial in the life of the entire Anglican Communion, and orthodox priests and bishops are ratcheting up the pain on ECUSA’s liberal and revisionist leadership as never before. Today’s lead story addresses this issue. This writer has spoken in four major locations in the last ten days to several thousand Episcopalians concerned about the present state of ECUSA and many parishes are now working up strategies on what they will do and say to their bishops. These are heady days. A lot is at stake. FRANK GRISWOLD got a blast from Southern Cone Primate Greg Venables this week over a letter Griswold wrote trying to put the best light on his recent actions. Venables lashed out at Griswold saying, “you speak with clarity about your grief over the pain your actions have caused and yet you proceed with your relentless agenda. Do you not see that there is an enormous contradiction here?” Of course Frank doesn’t. Pluriformity means never having to say you’re wrong, and Griswold will fall on his sword rather than “betray” ECUSA’s pansexualists. You can read both letters in today’s digest. CONTINUING THE PRESSURE ON THE LAMBETH COMMISSION to stand firm for orthodoxy, the Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry of Christ Church, Plano reports that some 600 signatures have already been received in response to his letter, “and the list is growing daily.” If you want to sign the letter you can do so by going to www@ChristChurchPlano.org. The Eames letter is also posted. IN THE CONTINUING SAGA OF THE OTIS CHARLES MARRIAGE, the retired Bishop of Utah, has been removed from his position as an assisting bishop of California and his license to officiate has been revoked by the Rt. Rev. William Swing after The San Francisco Chronicle revealed that Bishop Charles had been “married” to a four-times divorced man at St. Gregory of Nyssa Church in San Francisco, April 24. The matter is under investigation, said the Rev. Canon Michael Hansen, the diocese’s executive officer. This qualifies as one bad act in Swing’s theatre of the absurd. The California bishop who heads the United Religions Initiative, a Gnostic, pan-everything grab bag of religious impulses and “spiritual” weirdos has now sandbagged Charles from functioning as a bishop in his diocese! This is the pot calling the kettle black. Swing is as revisionist and pro-gay as the day is long and now he inhibits Charles! When you have no core doctrine anything goes, and in California it goes on all the time and now Swing fires a former bishop that, deep down, he has no disagreement with…the absurd antics of ECUSA’s revisionists bishops never ceases. AND FROM THE DICOESE OF THE CENTRAL GULF COAST comes this from a Virtuosity reader. A convention address of Bishop Philip M. Duncan II excoriates the AAC. “To establish an alternative ecclesiastical body either within or without the Episcopal Church has, in my opinion, not been helpful in working together to reconcile our differences and seems to be fostering its own brand of turmoil and schism. I am not in agreement with what I understand their agenda to be. They do not have my support.” On same gender relationships and marriage he had this to say. “Our teaching on sacramental Christian marriage has not changed. It is a gift from God, a life long relationship between a man and a woman. Committed same gender relationships are part of our culture and are important to many living within this diocese. In my deliberate study of Scripture, I do not find that these relationships are affirmed nor are they blessed by the tradition as we have received it in this church. Neither do I find, as have some, the condemnation of homosexuality. So what do you believe bishop? “To be clear, as I have stated to the clergy and laity in other settings: the norm for ordination in this diocese continues to be a person living a single celibate lifestyle or in a heterosexual Christian marriage. I will not allow nor authorize the blessing of same gender unions within our diocese.” Bishop Duncan bemoaned the downward spiraling finances of the Diocese, noting “giving is down in a number of congregations and financial support for the Diocese is down nearly $200,000. In addition, about $233,000 of pledges to the Diocese have been restricted to Diocesan use only. We are honoring those restrictions.” AND FROM THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH national conference held in Pittsburgh comes news that United Methodist delegates had voted 579-376 to hold the line on homosexual behavior. "The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching." They also voted 527-423 to defeat the resolution that "Christians disagree on the compatibility of homosexuality with Christian teaching and affirm that God's grace is available to all." The Methodists have become the first Mainline Church to oppose same-sex marriage. This is an important development with practical relevance to the Lambeth Commission, to the Primates, and to the pending decision regarding the tragic division that has occurred within the Communion. The United Methodist Church, a body that is four times the size of the Episcopal Church, USA, in America, is saying in effect that it agrees with the incompatibility of homosexual practice and Scripture (Lambeth 1998). The U.S. Methodists are also saying to the world, "The Biblical position is so clear that Christians cannot agree to disagree on this subject - and the church need not accommodate American culture on this subject." The necessity of accommodation to American culture, which is the major argument of the Episcopalian leadership ("please make an exception for us because of our culture"), is repudiated by the Methodist's vote. These votes show a consensus among Christians throughout the world on these issues, including the Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox, Baptists, the majority of Anglican bishops at Lambeth, and the orthodox Episcopalians who have dissented from the actions of their General Convention. The United Methodist Church vote aligns the US Methodists on this issue with the American Anglican Council and the Network of Anglican Dioceses and Parishes in the United States. What is going on among mainline Protestants is this: Minister violates Scripture, minister brought to church trial, church jurors decide church law doesn't mean what it says, minister let off the hook, other churches upset, journalists ponder possible "schism" in the denomination. AND FROM THE DIOCESE OF UTAH comes word that Bishop Carolyn T. Irish will allow procedures for holding same-sex blessing services in her diocese. “After discussion with clergy, Diocesan Council members, and others, I have now set the following policy for our Diocese to allow same-sex blessings. It is important that bishops formulate such policies, not only for authorization of liturgies not provided in the Book of Common Prayer, but also to share with the clergy the responsibility for such occasions. It is possible that a later bishop may change this policy.” One hopes. This was the same bishop who “converted” from Mormonism but was never re-baptized as a Christian. On same sex marriages she had this to say, “In Anglican tradition we can live with such diversity. Each diocese was left to sponsor further conversation, develop policies, and gather liturgical materials for such blessings, as seemed appropriate to their situation.” This is the kind of thinking that drives Global South Primates to their knees and then rise up in wrath to say they are no longer in communion with the likes of Ms Irish. THERE’S A CHANGING OF THE GUARD AT TRINITY EPISCOPAL SCHOOL FOR MINISTRY (TESM) in Ambridge, PA. The Rev. Dr. Paul Zahl has resigned as Dean of the Cathedral Church of the Advent in Birmingham, Alabama to accept the position of Dean/President of TESM, effective August 1. He succeeds Dr. Peter Moore who is retiring. Zahl is an excellent choice. (See full story in today’s digest). He writes: “On Tuesday morning May 4th, I accepted the unanimous call of the search committee of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pennsylvania, to be their new Dean/President. This is an awesome decision for Mary and me, a decision to which we came finally with complete clarity, and joy. I shall remain Dean of the Advent through July 31st. We hope to move to Pittsburgh during the first two weeks of August. Henry Parsley, the BISHOP OF ALABAMA is no lover of orthodoxy and he has publicly condemned the Network and is threatening those who would join. (See digest for full statement). As deans are appointed by bishops not vestries you can be sure that Parsley will never allow someone with Zahl’s orthodoxy or scholarship to replace him. Zahl was under enormous pressure by the bishop and by dissidents in the cathedral. Parsley will no doubt use this as an opportunity to put a liberal in his place. If that happens you can be sure hundreds will leave. Two of Alabama's three churches that allowed redirection of funds are now looking for new leadership. With Parsley preparing to crack down hard on John Michael and the Ascension in Montgomery for joining the network, the bishop appears to be succeeding in driving out the orthodox voices in his diocese. AND IN ENGLAND about 40 angry evangelicals will meet with the Bishop of St Albans over the appointment of Jeffrey John. Watch for the sparks to fly. AMONG THE STORIES POSTED TODAY, Dr. Robert Sanders, Virtuosity’s resident cyber theologian raises the question of who we are and who we are not in communion with. “What does Nicea teach us? It teaches us that believers need to come under the oversight of bishops, that they cannot receive from heretical bishops, and therefore, orthodox bishops must officiate in dioceses headed by heretical bishops. In short, if Nicea means anything, there must be a network.” Dr. Leander Harding raises the issue of Homosexuality, The Church, and Truth and Justice for Children. An excellent read. And there is much more. If you can’t read them all at once, take time to read a few stories each day before the next digest comes down. Please feel free to forward them to your friends. With the INTERNET nobody needs to stay in the dark anymore. Tell your friends to join by going to the website: www.virtuosityonline.org and signing up, or you can simply read the stories at the website. PLEASE CONSIDER SUPPORTING VIRTUOSITY. New stories are posted daily to the website. If you want to stay completely current then go to www.virtuosityonline.org and scan through the categories that interest you. The dates will show how current the story is. Please know that your financial support and encouragement makes this ministry worthwhile. This is a critical year in the life of the Anglican Communion and VIRTUOSITY is pulling out all the stops to keep you informed on a daily basis. Please be generous and make a donation through PAYPAL at my website or send a check by snail mail to VIRTUOSITY, 1236 Waterford Rd., West Chester, PA 19380. Thank you. 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

By Paul Marshall May 5, 2004 It is a pretty good rule of thumb that where you find Muslim extremism, Islamist terrorism, and women being sentenced to death by stoning, there you will find Saudi funds and Saudi-trained personnel. One exception to this rule has been Nigeria, but now evidence of Wahabbi mischief is surfacing there as well. Since the governor of Zamfara State, Alhaji Ahmed Sani, introduced a draconian version of sharia in 1999, 11 of Nigeria's 36 states have followed suit. Five women have been sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, though no punishment has yet been carried out. Thieves have had their hands amputated by court order. One man had his eye removed after accidentally blinding a friend (he could have escaped this by paying 60 camels, but the injured party wasn't interested in the camels). Under these sharia dictates, women are harshly subjugated. In northern Nigeria, they have been forbidden to rent houses and barred from riding motorbikes or traveling in the same vehicles as men. Taxi drivers have been caned for carrying female passengers. Zamfara requires all high-school girls to wear a hijab and bars them from wearing skirts and other "Western" forms of dress. State officials have advocated public flogging of those violating an "Islamic" dress code. Prostitution charges have been leveled at women merely for the crime of being unmarried after the age of 13. Judges in Bauchi State have told women to get married immediately or be sent to prison. One judge ordered four of them to pick out husbands from among the men in the court. Women are at a particular disadvantage in these criminal prosecutions since their testimony usually counts for only half that of a man. Non-Muslims, usually Christians, have become second-class citizens. Their taxes pay for Islamic preachers, while hundreds of churches have been closed by government order. Last week, Sani announced that all "unauthorized" places of worship in Zamfara State would be demolished. Those who exercise their right under the Nigerian constitution to change their religion from Islam are threatened with death, a punishment for apostasy under sharia law. The Catholic and Anglican churches have had to set up protected centers for converts. This spread of radical Islam has also led to riots, mob attacks, and vigilantes, producing the largest death toll in Nigeria since the civil war over Biafra in the 1960s. Over 10,000 people have died in the last four years in sharia-related violence – perhaps over 1,000 in the central states this year alone. Recent months have seen the emergence of more organized militias. In early January, in Yobe State, there was an uprising by a group calling itself the "Taliban," led by a "Mullah Omar," and demanding an Islamic state. It took several hundred troops two weeks to put it down. Foreign groups have been aiding the institutionalization of Islamic law. Saudi, Sudanese, Syrian, and Palestinian representatives appeared with Governor Sani in the days before he announced his plans for sharia. The Jigawa State government has sent Islamic judges for training in Malaysia and Sudan. The government of Katsina State has sent a delegation to Sudan to study its laws. Other states have been offered assistance from some these same countries as well as from Iran and Libya. In January, the Saudi religious and cultural attaché in Nigeria, Sheik Abdul-Aziz, said that his government had been monitoring the implementation of sharia in Nigeria and noted the results "with delight." There is also evidence of infiltration by foreign Islamic radicals. According to some reports, extremists from neighboring Chad were involved in the July 2001 violence in Bauchi State. In November 2001, Nigerian police arrested six Pakistani preachers, accusing them of inciting religious violence in Ogun state. The police have announced that scores of Pakistanis have been arrested in different parts of the country for allegedly fomenting religious trouble since 9/11. Church spokesmen in Plateau State said last month that local Muslim extremists have brought in thousands of mercenaries from Niger and Chad to invade Christian towns and villages. However, despite repeated rumors, there has until this year been little evidence of organized foreign support for violence and domestic terrorism. Now such evidence is appearing. On February 3, the Nigerian government announced that an unnamed Iranian diplomat was arrested on January 23 in Nigeria's capital, Abuja, after he was found taking photographs of Churches, a presidential villa, the defense headquarters, and the Israeli, British, and American embassies. The usually reliable news service Compass Direct reports that one of January's "Taliban" raiders, Muslim cleric Alhaji Sharu, confessed to police that he was a middleman between Nigerian extremists and the Al-Muntada Al-Islami Trust, a Saudi funded "charity" headquartered in Britain. Sharu said that the Trust's money had been used to propagate a Wahabist version of Islam in Nigeria and fund religious violence. Subsequent investigation by Nigeria's police led to "the discovery of financial transactions running into millions of dollars" between Sharu and the Trust's local head, a Sudanese businessman named Muhiddeen Abdullahi. Authorities arrested Abdullahi on February 20, accusing him and the Trust of financing attacks on Christians, including the January Taliban uprising. When authorities released Abdullahi 10 days after his arrest, more than 5,000 Qadiriyya Sufi Muslims, the largest tradition within Nigerian Islam, mounted a protest march. Chanting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is Great"), demanded that Wahabbis be banned from the country. Their spokesman, Abduljabbar Nasiru Kabara, told journalists, "As a matter of urgency, the state government should close the office of Al-Muntada Al-Islami because of its activities which have resulted in religious unrest in Nigeria." If Nigeria's moderate Muslims can call for the rejection of Saudi interference, there is nothing stopping the Nigerian government from doing the same, and little stopping the U.S. government from encouraging it to do so. — Paul Marshall is senior fellow at Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom. He is author of Islam at the Crossroads and God and the Constitution: Christianity and American Politics.