These words echo those of Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold in his evaluation of the Windsor Report when it first appeared in London on October 18. This is what he said: "Given the emphasis of the Report on difficulties presented by our differing understandings of homosexuality, as Presiding Bishop I am obliged to affirm the presence and positive contribution of gay and lesbian persons to every aspect of the life of our church and in all orders of ministry."

In other words it is apparent the Executive Council doesn't have a mind of its own, in fact it might be thought that it doesn't have much of a mind at all; the last and only orthodox person on Executive Council was Quincy Bishop Keith Ackerman, and his appointment was largely token, bearing in mind that the votes were basically 29 to 1 on all issues.

"It is the job of Executive Council to oversee the ministry and mission of the Church. The Executive Council is comprised of twenty members elected by General Convention (four bishops, four priests or deacons and twelve laypersons) and eighteen members elected by provincial synods," says a blurb on the church's official website. Their primary job, it would seem, is to parrot their leader Frank Griswold.

The Executive Council's statement took note of Griswold's intention to overview the general reflections of the entire church before appointing a group to represent the ECUSA in an Anglican-wide Windsor Report gathering.

This is a fiction. The "entire church" would have to include orthodox views of sexuality which are not now nor will ever again be tolerated because General Convention has already decreed what is true about sexual behavior and it has deep-sexed the historic view that sexual relations shall only be between a man and a woman in holy matrimony. So what sort of representative view respecting 6,000 years of history would now be tolerated in the ECUSA with V. Gene Robinson operating as a licensed homoerotic bishop? The answer of course is none.

And you can be sure that any appointed "group" will include a token white, married, heterosexual male, but most of them will be homosexuals and lesbians, and bloodless white males that now dominate the ECUSA hierarchy. But tokenism is important. Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola discovered that when he went to London and visited with the Anglican Consultative Council and discovered that the place was being run by white homosexuals, white males with liberal views on pansexuality, with the odd clerk being a token African. He hit the roof.

No one hits the roof in ECUSA any more. It is a study in futility. The orthodox in ECUSA are banding together under a new roof called the Network (NACDP) where they will be a majority, but a minority in the church.

Griswold will put on his fey, lispy British accent and talk about a loving inclusive God that will conform to our sexual fantasies and desires. The ECUSA Presiding Bishop who initially suggested the church would not change its position on homosexuality, (and it never will), now says "further reflection and a response is needed." More fiction. Griswold has said publicly that homosexuality is "hard wired". There is no place for reparative therapy in his thinking All he wants to do is to put on a pretense show of inclusivity to impress the Primates. If they buy this nonsense they deserve to lose the whole Anglican Communion to AIDS, Australian crocodiles and African wildebeest.

According to the Episcopal News Service (ENS), Griswold reminded the council at the opening service of the weeklong meeting that the Windsor Report should be taken as a process, not an immediate series of responses" and noted that "some have unfortunately taken as a total response" his first reaction to the report on the day of its release.

Will Griswold shortly announce that his first reaction was wrong and that he has changed his mind perhaps? Not a prayer. He will not because he cannot. His mind is already made up. ECUSA has blessed, ordained and consecrated pansexuality. It is a done deal.

"Responses before February [the Primates' Meeting] are premature," Griswold said. "It is important that urgency not capture us as we reflect on a long process which invites us to consider problematic questions in terms of our Anglican self-understanding, he was quoted as saying on Oct. 31.

This is absolute nonsense. Griswold is deliberately spinning the Windsor Report to make it look as though it was all a "process" when in fact what the report offers is TIMELINES (February for Primates) and June for the ACC, with the sole reason being to offer The Episcopal Church and various dioceses in the Anglican Church in Canada an opportunity to repent!

And that was echoed again and again at the recent meeting of the CAPA bishops in Africa. If they said it once they said it a dozen times, the issue for Griswold and the Episcopal Church is repentance or face the reality that they all must, in the words of the Windsor Report, "walk apart."

Griswold either doesn't get it, or doesn't want to get it. Of course what he is banking on is the response of only one man - Dr. Rowan Williams - and not what the Primates say or do. The truth is he could not care one whit want his fellow archbishops think or do. Griswold knows that if the Archbishop of Canterbury stays in communion with him and the Global South bishops stay in communion with Canterbury then the ECUSA remains firmly in the communion and everything and everyone stays together.

Nothing will change unless the Global South Primates walk out at the Primates meeting in Ireland in February when they refuse to take Eucharist with Griswold.

Williams will insist that they must, and this will be the litmus test. If the Global South primates roll over and share Holy Communion with Griswold then that will be the clearest and loudest signal that it is all over for the orthodox in the Episcopal Church and they must proceed to defiantly leave and fight for their properties as they go (they have nothing to lose at this point) and ratchet up the pain on the ECUSA for the next 10 years soaking whatever Trust Funds and Endowments these revisionist bishops have in lawsuits.

Litigation against revisionist bishops is the only honorable alternative to surrender, but the bottom line is not about money, it is about standing up for truth and not giving in to the revisionists. Force them to use their Trust Funds and Endowments, force their backs to the wall, and take no prisoners. Some of the early Church Fathers went to the lions; we are only asking that orthodox clergy go to court. Trust me you will still come out alive.

The Rev. Paul Walter of the Church of the Good Shepherd in St. Louis, Missouri lost his church properties two weeks ago but he took well over 200 members of the congregation with him and they now meet at a Marriott Hotel, and he has 14, yes 14 men whom he disciples and who now want to go into Holy Orders! Among this group are three Ph. D's, one has an M. Div and is getting a Ph. D in Systematic Theology. One has an MA in Theology and is getting a Ph. D in Philosophy. One is a former Roman Catholic priest who got converted to Jesus Christ. One is a former Episcopal priest who left the priesthood, wandered into his church and found Jesus. One has an M. Div. from Covenant Seminary, one has an M. Div. from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, and a Ph. D and is a tenured Professor of Religion at St. Louis University (RC Jesuit University) and is the author of thirteen books. Four will be ordained within three months, two in December and two at the conference. Walter has already planted one church in a nearby suburb and he has another on the design boards.

Given enough time and they will eat Missouri Bishop George Wayne Smith's lunch.

I am told that the first week after they all left Good Shepherd 50 showed up at the old church, the second week 20 showed up, so how can that be a win for the bishop? He will have to pay someone to keep the church doors open and pay the utilities bills. Sooner or later the Trust Funds run out.

And Bishop Jon Bruno is already putting the hat around to cover his legal bills in his fight with three parishes in the Diocese of Los Angeles.

Meanwhile, Bishop James Tengatenga of Southern Malawi, a member of the Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Reference Group that will monitor the reception of the Windsor Report 2004, tried to put the best spin on the report with the notion that there are two styles of thinking that dominate the debate over the Windsor report: American individualism and African communitarianism.

America's political and cultural hegemony on the international scene, he said, makes it even more difficult for Africans to face the Episcopal Church's actions with equanimity.

But Tengatenga's view that culture is destiny ultimately won't wash. The issues remain profoundly moral and theological and the Nigerian Church has positioned itself on the side of Scripture not culture in this war with the Episcopal Church. They will not give into anything that is not supported by The Book of Books.

The notion of Episcopal "regret" is mockingly offensive; it doesn't begin to touch the core problem. The Episcopal Church has torn the fabric of the communion, perhaps forever, all that remains now is how the communion will look in the next 12 months.

The Episcopal Church is reaping what it has sown. It has sown to the wind, it will now reap the whirlwind.

END