Archives

By Alan Hamilton | The Times August 4, 2004 An evangelist who considers homosexuality an "abomination" has been arrested after police and passers-by in Salisbury, Wiltshire, objected to the tone and the volume of his preaching. John Holme, 44, a computer software salesman, was released without charge on police bail pending further inquiries, after his car and trailer were seized as he bellowed his divine message through the streets of the cathedral city at the weekend. Mr Holme, who is married with two children, was asked to tone down the volume of his sermon as he drove through busy streets in his car and trailer berating homosexuality as a wicked perversion. He declined, pleading his human rights, but was arrested when a police officer noticed that his trailer bore the slogan: "God says; if you reject Him you may become homosexual." Wiltshire police confirmed yesterday they had stopped a man after complaints from the public about his method of preaching, and about a sign on his trailer which many found offensive. He had declined to withdraw the sign and was arrested under the Public Order Act. He continued preaching in his cell at Salisbury police station. Yesterday Mr Holme, free but fuming at his arrest, continued to preach his message. "The Bible teaches that any form of sex outside of the marriage bed between a male man and his female wife is an abomination to God." He said he wished people "delivered from the bondage of sexual perversion", but emphasised that he did not intend any violence or evil towards homosexuals. Last month Mr Holme incurred the wrath of shopkeepers and customers in a Salisbury shopping centre who presented him with a formal request to curb the excessive noise of his oratory, which they claimed could be heard half a mile away. Six years ago Salisbury magistrates fined Mr Holme £1,050, plus £250 costs, for attempting to preach to a local housing estate from a motorised hang-glider equipped with a megaphone. The case was brought by the Civil Aviation Authority, who claimed he had been flying too close to a populated area, even though his ill-starred flight was at times barely 6ft off the ground. After his 1998 flight, which narrowly missed bird tables, trees and an electrified fence, Mr Holme said: "I thought that maybe if they heard this voice booming out from the sky, they would think it was God. I wanted to get through to kids on council estates, and I needed some cred." Mr Holme, who is an elder at his parish church in Coombe Bissett, Wiltshire, said yesterday: "The purpose of my preaching is to see people come to believe in God and put their trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. We are not born homosexual; that is logically impossible."

By the Rev. Ian Montgomery August 3, 2004 A pastoral and theological perspective on the dilemma in ECUSA from the point of view of a parish priest. A submission to the Lambeth/Eames Commission. I write as a parish priest, ordained in 1975 in England. I was a curate in London from 1975 - 1978 and moved to the USA in 1978. I have been rector of three congregations in different parts of the USA and a college chaplain. I wish to focus on what has happened and what may happen to the congregation that I currently serve. Following the passing of the General Convention 2003 votes related to human sexuality it was as if a knife had been stabbed in the heart of our congregation. A choice between "yes" and "no" was forced upon us. No longer could pastoral discretion make some sense of our sexual confusions. No longer could we as a more evangelical/catholic congregation ignore the theological innovations and actions of our national leadership. The issues in relation to our own bishop were not in doubt as he has consistently and bravely resisted these innovations. His passion is mission and ministry, to lead people to a transforming relationship with Jesus Christ. I issued a pastoral letter to the congregation stating my grief and opposition to the actions of the convention. This had the effect of stemming some significant departures from our congregation and ECUSA. I begged the congregation to await the October meeting of the primates. Following the meeting of the primates I distributed copies of their statement and gave a personal address, followed by a forum after services. The congregation was divided into four components. First, there were a few who were adamantly in favor of the actions of the convention. Several others favored ignoring the whole matter as not that important. Several more were opposed on grounds of traditional morality. But the majority was opposed because of the violation of Scriptural teaching reinforced by the resolution of Lambeth 1998. It was noted how the majority of the Anglican Communion had begged ECUSA to pull back from its resolutions and intentions. The Primates warned of dire consequences should ECUSA continue with the consecration on November 2. Our Diocese (Fond du Lac), by a narrow vote decided to reject the General Convention decisions concerning sexuality while seeking to affirm unity and mission. The consecration service on November 2 took place the next day. The effect on our congregation was the loss of some parishioners to either more liberal or more non-involved ECUSA congregations. One family left for a more conservative and Biblical denomination. We gained several families from another more liberal congregation. By springtime this year our average Sunday attendance had grown from 245 to 285. Our budget had increased by over 8%. However about 60% of our income is restricted by its givers from the "National Church." In many ways we are thriving. Our relationship with the Presiding Bishop and those who either voted for the consecration, or participated in it, is functionally and irretrievably lost. We are betrayed in our trust in these bishops. The Presiding Bishop has proven himself duplicitous in signing the Primates statement and then being the chief consecrator on November 2. The presiding Bishop has been the chief advocate of these innovations and offenses. Under the surface and in our ecumenical relations things are still difficult and we are in a temporary "holding pattern." Several churches have come to our aid in prayer support. We are partnered in a feeding ministry with a large Bible Church that considered severing its links with us because of the convention votes. Once our and my stance was made clear they have become even more supportive. On a local level the name "Episcopal" has become an embarrassment and a point of disgusted comment from outsiders. Though our signs include the word "Episcopal," this designation has been quietly dropped in conversation. Within our congregation there are at least 52 families patiently awaiting the decisions of the Lambeth Commission in October and the Primates in February. They are determined to leave ECUSA but would prefer to be Anglican. In fact they and I have already left, in our minds. Communion is effectively broken within the USA, not simply impaired. What are we hoping for? We hope for a complete restructuring of the Anglican Communion in the USA. ECUSA must be declared no longer Anglican (with the hope of repentance and restoration). We seek recognition and support as we seek to continue to be loyal to Christ, the Scriptures, the Creeds and the Anglican formularies as they are adhered to by most of the rest of the Anglican Communion. Ideally our congregation would affiliate with some continuing Anglican community such as the Anglican Communion Network. It would then remain largely intact, stay in its buildings and continue its ministry in the local and larger community. We would hope to continue to be in communion with our bishop whom we support and love. In the absence of such a solution the 52 families above mentioned are likely to leave. They are likely either simply to disperse to other denominations and churches or to leave and form a new church entity. That new church would seek to be in communion with some part of what may be left of the Anglican Communion. I say the latter because it is clear to me that a numerical majority of the Anglican Communion has clearly indicated that they would not tolerate continued communion with ECUSA's leadership. ECUSA's disdain of the rest of the Communion is legendary. The likelihood of the breakup of the Anglican Communion is clear if no action is taken to discipline ECUSA. Certainly this congregation's future would be in doubt. Why not reconciliation? For the last twenty years in which I have been involved in dialog on either a local or national level there has been one goal. That goal has been the conversion from a biblical, orthodox and traditional view into a more liberal and revisionist one. Coupled with this we have seen increasingly intolerant and totalitarian rule by bishops who bring all their canonical authority to intimidate and force out clergy and congregations whose only "sin" is to conform to the doctrine and teachings of Scripture and the Anglican Communion at large. Dialog effectively ended on November 2, 2003. ECUSA has not simply made decisions that separate it from the Anglican Communion, but ECUSA has steadily been moving away from doctrines of apostolic and biblical salvation in favor of a gospel of affirmation that is married to the spirit of the age and enforced by a type of canonical fundamentalism and tyranny. Those clergy who seek with diligence "to banish and drive away from the Church all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's Word" risk discipline deposition if they speak or act contrary to the will of their tyrannical and monarchical bishop. Many have already left ECUSA for alternate Anglican communities - often at great personal cost. Those of us who remain have one hope left. It is to be given a choice, to remove to another church entity, preferably in communion with Canterbury. We desire to keep our churches intact because we are a local manifestation of the body of Christ and we do not wish it "by schisms rent asunder." This has nothing to do simply with property. It is because to leave our church building would be an impossible wrench for many in the flock. The connections are not simply theological or doctrinal they are family connections. In our congregation it is not unusual to see four generations of one family in the pew. Not to both discipline ECUSA (always with the hope of repentance and restoration) and to give our people a choice as to where to go will be to abandon us. So far as ECUSA goes it is as fragmented as Humpty Dumpty. So far as this priest and this congregation is concerned we are first Christian and second Anglican. The leadership of ECUSA has abandoned us. I know that this congregation is but a tiny part of the Anglican Communion. We treasure it and beg you not to abandon our hopes or us. The Rev'd Ian Montgomery, FCA, LLB, DMin is Rector, St. Thomas, Menasha, Wisconsin.

NEWS ANALYSIS By David W. Virtue Voters in Missouri have given a resounding thumbs up to an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage. By doing so they served notice that similar proposed bans in other states could be difficult to defeat. The Missouri Constitution will now state that "to be valid and recognized in this state a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman." The vote was over 70% in favor. The Christian voters turned out in record numbers. Vicky Hartzler, a spokeswoman for the Coalition to Protect Marriage in Missouri, said: "This is a message of the heart, and here in the Heartland, we value marriage. I'm very gratified and encouraged and thankful that the people of this state understand our current policy's a wise public policy and they want to see it protected from a legal challenge." The wide margin is especially noteworthy given that the Democrats outnumbered the Republicans at the polls Tuesday, as a result of the hotly contested Democratic gubernatorial primary. In an ironic twist, pro-gay rights forces spent nearly $400,000 in donations, most of it gathered through house parties in St. Louis and Kansas City, while supporters of the gay marriage ban raised less than $10,000 -- relying instead on dozens of church congregations to carry the message via newsletters and announcements from the pulpit. But the Episcopal Bishop of Missouri, George Wayne Smith, urged voters to vote against Amendment 2 in an Op-Ed article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, saying it would continue to marginalize gays and lesbians and make them unwelcome in their neighborhoods. He wrote: "The body politic receives no good fortune in the opportunity to cast a vote on this divisive issue. Human sexuality has become a wedge issue in American society, used deftly at times by those on both sides of the issue. Forcing a 'yes' or 'no' vote divides even further an already polarized electorate. I write as someone whose Church has faced divisions in the aftermath of a vote on human sexuality one year ago." Bishop Smith has it all wrong. The notion that gay safety or "hatred" is an issue is a complete fiction. There are gays in most every neighborhood in America and they live at peace with their neighbors. No. All the citizens of the State of Missouri wanted to do was say something that is as old as Western Civilization itself: that marriage shall be confined to a man and a woman, no exceptions. And it is why the bishop has one parish in his diocese, The Church of the Good Shepherd with its feisty Evangelical rector the Rev. Paul Walter, willing to go all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States to test the Dennis Canon, to keep his people and property from his revisionist clutches. Now that the people of the state have spoken, let's hope the local courts have the good sense to heed the priest's pleas, "to go in peace to love and serve the Lord."

By Matt Franck | St. Louis Post-Dispatch | Tuesday, Aug. 03, 2004 Missouri voters gave resounding approval to an amendment to the state constitution banning gay marriage, putting the nation on notice that similar proposed bans in other states could be difficult to defeat. The Missouri Constitution will now state that "to be valid and recognized in this state a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman." They're words that gay marriage opponents like Vicky Hartzler have wanted for years -- but particularly after judges in Massachusetts ruled to legalize same-sex unions. "I think that Missouri values have spoken," said Hartzler, a spokeswoman for the Coalition to Protect Marriage in Missouri. "This is a message of the heart, and here in the Heartland, we value marriage." Early returns showed the ban winning by a ratio of more than 2-to-1. Missouri's vote on the amendment has attracted nationwide interest from people on both sides of the issue. The state is the first to vote on the matter this election season, with seven set to follow suit by November. State constitutions have become the battleground of the gay marriage debate, after an anti-gay marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution failed in the Senate last month. The wide margin may be especially noteworthy given that the Democrats outnumbered the Republicans at the polls Tuesday, as a result of the hotly contested Democratic gubernatorial primary. Opponents of the gay marriage ban said they were discouraged by the results but proud of their campaign. "We stepped up to the challenge and organized ourselves," said Doug Gray, who headed an anti-amendment campaign for the Constitution Defense League. "We moved this debate forward." The campaign was fueled by nearly $400,000 in donations, most of it gathered through house parties in St. Louis and Kansas City. Supporters of the gay marriage ban raised little for their cause -- less than $10,000 -- relying instead on dozens of church congregations to carry the message via newsletters and announcements from the pulpit. Four other states -- Alaska, Hawaii, Nebraska and Nevada -- have passed constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. "I think we'll definitely have an uphill battle," said Seth Kilbourn, national field coordinator for Human Rights Watch, which spent $60,000 attempting to defeat the Missouri amendment. "But I do think we'll have more time in other states to educate voters and talk about what the amendments are really about." Florence Shinkle and Michelle Munz contributed to this report.

By Terry Mattingly | Editor's Note: The first of two columns. No Tony Campolo sermon would be complete without his pulpit-shaking gestures of inspiration and exasperation, punctuating litanies of not-so-subtle digs at U.S. foreign policy, Hollywood, Wall Street and the Religious Right. As he ended one recent oration, the sociologist, urban activist and evangelical gadfly fell to his knees, hands raised to heaven. "I believe Americans must heed this call and turn away from our wicked ways," said Campolo, who made headlines counseling President Bill Clinton. "We need to turn away from sexual promiscuity, turn away from the consumeristic materialism, turn away from our failure to pay attention to what we have done collectively to poor and weak peoples around the world... Then, let our prayer be that God will hear from heaven, forgive our sins and heal our land." Many of the faithful said "amen," lifted their hands or made the sign of the cross. Then Campolo froze for a moment, as an hourglass icon hovered in the Romanesque arches of the Church of Fools, the world's first 3D, interactive, virtual church. This kind of thing happens when traffic jams the Internet. The computer-generated "avatar" looked like Campolo and he was delivering a Campolo sermon entitled "Why Many People in the World Hate America." But Campolo was not controlling his own computer image, since the site's webmasters were not sure he could master the technology needed to preach online. Actually, Campolo was at a clergy conference in St. Simons Island, Ga. But he stayed on the telephone with his Philadelphia office staff, which communicated with the Church of Fools in Liverpool, England, through an online instant-messaging program, while one of site's creators controlled the "pixilated preacher." "I wanted Tony to be animated, because that's the way he is -- live," said Stephen Goddard. "I have known him for years and I know his gestures and style. I was sure I could get our Tony to preach like the real Tony." The experimental site -- www.ChurchofFools.com -- opened its doors on May 11, with help from the Methodist Church of Great Britain and others. The pilot project ends this weekend (Aug. 8) and the future is uncertain. It is hard to picture what happens in a "virtual church" without images on a screen. At any one time, 35 worshippers can sign in and create characters that stand, sit or kneel. They can whisper or talk to nearby worshippers, slip into the church crypt for discussions or linger at icons in prayer. Another 1,500 can take part as silent ghosts. Campolo packed the pews. Participants sang along as the organ played through their speakers, typing phrases from the hymns that seemed meaningful. During the July 28th service, one warden led the global flock in prayer, giving thanks for computers, satellites, bloggers, online friendships and their virtual church. "Help us to use our networks to do good things," she said, "to act justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with you, our God, and to be good neighbors online and off." One thing visitors cannot do is jump the virtual altar rail. Early on, an avatar called "Satan" stormed the pulpit and cursed the Anglican bishop of London. Wardens now have the power to smite the rowdy. "It only took a day or two to discover that there are lots of people who could not resist the chance to scream obscenities in a church sanctuary," said Goddard. "Actually, all that cursing was a good sign. It told us that we didn't have the usual holy club in the pews. This wasn't going to be just another safe Christian crowd." NEXT WEEK: Is an online church a "real" church? Terry Mattingly (www.tmatt.net) teaches at Palm Beach Atlantic University and is senior fellow for journalism at the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities.

On Thursday, August 5, lay leaders in the Episcopal Church will launch an initiative geared to and for Anglican laity in North America. SPEAK OUT! is designed to mobilize, encourage and equip laity to communicate their deep concerns regarding the crisis in the Church in the US and Canada. Fueled primarily through a new website -- www.anglicanlaity.net -- the initiative asks laity to commit to pray, write letters to primates of the Anglican communion, register online and recruit at least two other individuals to participate in the endeavor. The website is being launched on the first anniversary of the August 5, 2003 Episcopal General Convention vote confirming the election of an actively homosexual bishop. SPEAK OUT! is being coordinated by Diane L. Knippers, President of the Institute on Religion and Democracy and Cynthia P. Brust, Director of Communications for the American Anglican Council; they are joined by an advisory team of lay leaders from across the country. "We lay people must find our voice and speak out," said Diane Knippers. "We have been excluded from important discussions, such as when the bishops went behind closed doors to craft their Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO) plan. The laity must not abdicate their great responsibility to hold their priests and bishops accountable to church teaching. Now is the time," Knippers said. Despite faithful and bold stances by some orthodox clergy, they have been limited by pressure from their bishops, fear of legal action and intimidation tactics. "Unlike clergy, laity can speak to these issues without fear of reprisals," explained Cynthia Brust. "We are encouraging Anglicans to break the virtual silence that has gripped us. To my knowledge, this is the first effort to organize Anglican laity in North America, and I anticipate a significant response." The website text first and foremost focuses on "speaking out": "At a time when God's people should be speaking forthrightly, creatively, courageously and openly to one another, the discussion has been muted, hidden and fearful.... It is time for laity to insist that the future of our churches not be determined by clergy behind closed doors.... Ultimately, it is the laity who will decide whether or not to assent to or reject novel doctrines and practices." In addition, the website will offer resources such as sample prayers and letters, speeches and a calendar of events as well as recommendations on how laity can take action. SPEAK OUT! is particularly interested in targeting students and young adults. For more information, please visit the website (www.anglicanlaity.net) or contact Mrs. Knippers or Mrs. Brust.

By Greg Roberts | The Australian | 28 July 2004 The Anglican bishop at the centre of the child sex abuse controversy that forced the resignation of Peter Hollingworth as governor-general is to be formally stripped of his holy orders. A church tribunal headed by Queensland Supreme Court judge Debra Mullins has unanimously resolved that Donald Shearman, 77, be defrocked for seducing a teenage schoolgirl boarding at an Anglican hostel at Forbes in western NSW in the mid-1950s. Church sources said the unprecedented defrocking will be performed by Brisbane Archbishop Phillip Aspinall in the Darnell Room of St Martin's House - part of the St John's Cathedral complex in central Brisbane - on August 25. In a parallel development, NSW police have begun investigating the first formal complaint against Mr Shearman by his victim. Religious historian and head of religious studies at the University of Queensland, Philip Almond, said he had not heard of a bishop being defrocked in comparable circumstances anywhere. "This is indeed exceptional," Professor Almond said yesterday. "This is clearly being done to emphasise how seriously the diocese intends to deal with behaviour of this kind." Archbishop Aspinall confirmed yesterday that he had received the six-member tribunal's findings, but said it would be inappropriate for him to comment until the process had concluded. A suggestion by Dr Hollingworth in 2002 that the underage victim had initiated the sexual relationship with Mr Shearman sparked a national outcry, and a church inquiry into his handling of sex abuse complaints while archbishop of Brisbane. The inquiry's report was highly critical of Dr Hollingworth and led to his resignation last year as governor-general. Mr Shearman, who failed to respond to the so-called Articles of Association served on him by the tribunal and refused to attend its hearings, has previously admitted the relationship with his student but said he was unsure how old she was at the time. In the complaint now being investigated by police, the woman claims Mr Shearman told her at the time she was not too young to have sex because the teenage Juliet, in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, was a partner in "one of the great romances of history". As Brisbane archbishop, Dr Hollingworth was present at a 1995 meeting attended by the woman and Mr Shearman. Mr Shearman later offered to relinquish his holy orders, but Dr Hollingworth rejected the offer. Instead, Dr Hollingworth wrote to the woman suggesting that her allegations had caused great distress to Mr Shearman and his wife, Fay.

DEAN CREDITED FOR GROWTH OF CITY'S LARGEST EPISCOPAL CHURCH By Greg Garrison, News Staff Writer | Sunday, August 01, 2004 The Rev. Paul Zahl will say goodbye to his flock today at Cathedral Church of the Advent after a decade of growth inspired by his sometimes controversial theological flair. "I say things sharply and carry it to the limit to engage a listener," said Zahl, who leaves Monday for Ambridge, Pa., to become the dean and president of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry. "I hope I gave most people room to disagree." Since he took over as dean of the Advent in 1995, Zahl has helped expand membership from about 2,400 to 3,424 at Birmingham's largest Episcopal church. Sunday attendance grew from less than 900 to 1,249. And the annual budget doubled, to more than $3.4 million. "I think it's been Paul's preaching," said the Rev. John Harper, the vice-dean who takes over as interim dean Monday. "It's his message and his style." Zahl will preach at the 7:30, 9 and 11 a.m. services today and teach his dean's class for the last time at 10 a.m., with a reception after the 11 a.m. service. "I don't think he's ever forgotten anything he's read or seen," said Harper, who noted that Zahl draws a youthful crowd. Eighty percent of the downtown congregation is age 55 or younger, more than half is under 40. "I didn't come in worrying about membership or financial giving," Zahl said. "I trusted the message." Zahl, 53, came to Advent after earning his doctorate in theology from the University of Tubingen in Germany and kept a high profile in international theological circles. He especially played a prominent role last year as a voice of opposition when the Episcopal Church approved its first openly gay bishop. "There's no question I came on very strong," Zahl said. "The stakes were so high and continue to be so high. It was of rather decisive significance." BLACK FLAG UP 'TOO LONG' That prompted a dramatic symbolic move. Zahl hung a black flag outside the cathedral for two days after the vote to approve New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson. "I got severe criticism," Zahl said. "I got a tremendous amount of support. It was an important symbolic gesture to make it plain that something very important was at stake." He said if he had it to do over, he would still hang the flag. "I would take it down immediately after it was noticed. I think it stayed up too long. Five hours would have been long enough." Zahl said he's convinced all the hard feelings were smoothed over. He leaves on a high note, he said. "I feel I'm leaving the Advent on a wave of goodwill. We have never been happier in all our 30 years in ministry. We've never felt better received or better understood." Zahl noted that when he was rector of St. Mary's Episcopal Church in Scarborough, N.Y., from 1982 to 1988, he was among the earliest clergy dealing with the AIDS epidemic. "Part of the irony was that I conducted the funerals for the first two gay priests who died of AIDS in New York and have always been warmly connected to the gay community," he said. "I have a hard time convincing people that it's theology, not politics." Zahl said he wanted to stay at Advent for several more years, but felt called by God to take the seminary post. A RALLY POINT FOR DISSENT Trinity has a reputation for producing priests who are willing to take on tough assignments, revitalizing dying parishes, he said. It also stands for traditional, orthodox Christianity and opposition to the denomination's growing acceptance of same-sex unions. "Trinity has a reputation as a rallying point for dissenters," Zahl said. The problem has been that bishops won't send their priest candidates to Trinity, preferring such schools as University of the South in Sewanee, Tenn., or Virginia Theological Seminary. Zahl wants to build trust with bishops. "Most bishops will accept our graduates as clergy," Zahl said. "Our problem has been that bishops won't send candidates to us to be trained. I hope many bishops will look at us in a new way." Zahl hopes he's remembered at Advent for more than just his theological stances. The important legacy is touching and changing people, he said. The ministry of small groups, with 70 such groups meeting, has been an important force in shaping the congregation's focus and work. "The fruit of transformed lives is the lasting testimony," Zahl said.

NEWS ANALYSIS By David W. Virtue Two American Episcopal bishops and a seminary Dean are in Africa trying to understand why African Anglican Provinces and their bishops will have nothing to do with ECUSA's theological and moral innovations. The three are John Lipscomb, Diocesan Bishop of Southwest Florida, Ted Daniels, Assistant Bishop of the Diocese of Texas and Titus Pressler, Dean of the Episcopal Seminary of the Southwest. Dr. Pressler wrote a letter from Nairobi, Kenya, which Virtuosity has obtained, explaining their 12-day mission. "The purpose of the trip is to have conversations with African bishops in the context of the current tensions in the Anglican Communion. We hope to build relationships that can strengthen our communion in Christ, even as we aware of differences." Pressler says that formal statements publicized by many parties are not as good as "face-to-face conversation." The trip is being pushed by Frank Griswold, ECUSA's Presiding Bishop, who is now persona non grata in most of Africa. "We view the trip as a pilot project in having conversation and building relationships. The keynotes are listening and vulnerability." Pressler positions it theologically on the "incarnation of God." Pressler writes: "We are seeking to communicate that there is a diversity of views within the Episcopal Church and that dialogue is ongoing. We are inviting conversation...we are sharing our confidence that most Episcopalians are committed to unity of our church amid current disagreements." Pressler argued for what he called "companionship in mission." Titus Pressler is either ignorant, a fool, or he thinks he can pull the wool over the eyes of bishops and Primates of the Global South. "Pressler's assumption that the good ship ECUSA can stay afloat because part of the hull is intact is simply wrong. Just because ECUSA shares some things with the Christian Faith, the places where it doesn't, leave gaping holes below the water line," said EKKLESIA leader Canon Bill Atwood who acts as a go between for orthodox bishops in the West with those in the Global South. "The trip is a pernicious strategy to use weak bishops that voted against Robinson but support Frank Griswold. Griswold is clearly behind this whole trip in an effort to find weak links in Africa," said Atwood. And Pressler's own seminary, The Episcopal Theological Seminary of the Southwest recently approved of homosexuals and lesbians who come to his seminary to cohabit in the dorms, something that is totally anathema to Global South Primates and bishops. Why then should the Africans listen to anything Pressler has to say? He goes to Africa as head of a morally flawed seminary and expects graceful conversation. All these "wise men" are doing is running interference for Frank Griswold, because he has been declared anathema on that continent. Pressler says he views the trip as being about "conversation" -- a buzzword for: we'll listen to you, if you listen to us, and then you agree that you are wrong and we are right. The three not so wise men should have stayed at home. They will get nothing but smiles, nods and hospitality from the Africans, because the Africans are unfailingly hospitable and polite even to those who disagree with them, but that is all they will get. Come October and they will learn just how far off base they have been, and by next February they will be crying in their empty cupcakes. But no one can say they were never warned.

By R. Albert Mohler Jr. | Louisville, Ky. (BP) In this strange postmodern age, heretics find themselves in a very strange predicament. Various skeptics, revisionists, liberal theorists and atheists have been undermining the faith for more than a century. By this time, virtually every heresy has been expounded by numerous proponents. The creative heretic of the contemporary age has to come up with some new angle or bizarre new theory to promote. Nevertheless, never discount the diabolical ingenuity of those who intend to subvert biblical truth and the Christian faith. The latest evidence of the heretical imagination comes from Professor Theodore W. Jennings Jr. of Chicago Theological Seminary. Just when you think you've encountered just about every possible heresy, along comes something so shocking that it demands painful attention. In "The Man Jesus Loved: Homoerotic Narratives From the New Testament," Ted Jennings argues not only that Jesus approved of same-sex relationships -- but that He was involved in one. Jennings explains that his book is "an attempt to carefully and patiently explore texts from the Gospels that suggest something about Jesus' own erotic attachments and the attitude toward same-sex relationships that may be fairly extrapolated from the traditions about Jesus." He admits that his argument "departs from what has been the norm of discussion." That qualifies as a disingenuous understatement. What Jennings proposes is a radical re-reading of the New Testament material in order to claim Jesus not only as a proponent of the homosexual movement but as a man involved in homoerotic relationships. He intends to appropriate the Bible for a "gay-positive perspective." Of course, the Bible contains explicit statements condemning homosexual activity in all forms. Jennings explains that the biblical material dealing with homosexuality can be reduced to five texts -- two verses from Leviticus and three from the New Testament. Liberal theologians determined to find support for theological behavior must deal with these specific texts, and Jennings acknowledges that these texts seem "to require additional work." Additional work, indeed. What Jennings proposes is to ignore those specific texts and to jump over the entire argument by appealing to an absurd reading of the entire New Testament for evidence justifying homoerotic relationships and attraction. Jennings, a United Methodist, argues that his approach is "pro-gay" rather than defensive in dealing with the biblical texts. Reading the Old Testament, he finds parallels in the relationship between Jonathan and David or Ruth and Naomi. The biblical texts should be read "from the perspective of a contemporary gay or clear sensibility." He explains: "Here the aim is to discover how the text appears when it is read from a standpoint affirmative of gay or queer reality -- that is, what the text means now, when viewed from this perspective." Those unfamiliar with the bizarre science of liberal theology and modern biblical studies may be unfamiliar with the way the post-Christian scholars approach the text. Rather than dealing with the text as it is given and clearly intended to be understood, they look for hidden "strategies" by which the text can be read to mean the opposite of what it clearly states. Anyone reading the Bible in an honest and straightforward manner will come face to face with the reality that the Bible communicates an unequivocal and clear message concerning homosexuality. The Bible not only condemns same-sex attraction and acts but also explains that the whole complex of homosexuality is a form of direct rebellion against God's Word and God's design in creation. But Theodore Jennings and others like him will have nothing to do with this unmistakable truth. Jennings teaches at Chicago Theological Seminary in the field of biblical and constructive theology. He is also credited with being a founder of their gay and lesbian studies program. But even in this company Jennings presents a radical argument. The concept of a homosexual Jesus has been promoted by peripheral figures such as playwright Terrence McNally in his infamous 1998 play "Corpus Christi" and Robert Williams, the late Episcopal priest ordained by Bishop John Shelby Spong. Jennings is the first to argue for Jesus' participation in homoerotic relationships from within the mainstream academy. In order to make his case, Jennings turns especially to the Gospel of John and to its author, described as the disciple "whom Jesus loved." Jennings turns this into an assertion of homosexual attachment and relationship. Jesus, explains Jennings, was "fundamentally critical of marriage and family values." This, he says, "may be heard as good news by those who are regularly denigrated because their very existence is regarded as a threat to 'family values.'" In order to justify homosexual relationships, Jennings also must sever sex from procreation. As a matter of fact, Jennings accuses the church of linking sexuality and procreation in a way that distorts true humanity. "The realignment of sexuality and procreation together with the extreme suspicion that tradition has directed against the sexual sphere has produced the monstrosity that is traditional Christian sexual ethics." Clearly, Jennings' obscene theory is the monstrosity. His book is not only an assault upon traditional Christian sexual ethics, but upon the person of Jesus Christ. His work is properly identified as heresy because it is explicit denial of the true humanity and true deity of Christ. We should note that the publication in this book tells us as much about the world of liberal theological education as it does about Professor Jennings and his demented agenda. Chicago Theological Seminary is affiliated with the United Church of Christ, a denomination that grew out of American Congregationalism and has been on a steady march leftward over the last half century or more. Professor Jennings and his horribly offensive new book are prime exhibits of the anti-Christian ideologies accepted by the theological left and its fellow travelers. Determined to undermine Christianity at every turn, liberal theology is losing its mind. R. Albert Mohler Jr. is president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.

By Pat Hurst, PA News. 8/1/2004 A new Archbishop of York must stand firm on the divisive issue of gay clergy, traditionalists in the Church of England said today. The present Archbishop David Hope famously described his own sexuality as a "grey area" when confronted by Peter Tatchell's gay right's group Outrage. Crucially for the church he also said he led a celibate life. At the time he was the Bishop of London and the leading opponent of women priests. He went on to become the Archbishop of York. Today Reverend Rod Thomas, a spokesman for Reform, an evangelical group on the traditional wing of the Church opposed to gay priests, said: "He was someone who played to different parts of the church. He has a slightly mixed history. What is crucial is not looking back but looking forwards. In many ways the out going Archbishop has been a friend to evangelicals and to anybody that believes in orthodox Christian church. The question for the future is, who will succeed him? It is vital the person who succeeds him clearly stands by the authority of the bible." Richard Kirker, a spokesman for Lesbian and Gay Christians, said: "I think his contribution has been ambiguous at best." Mr Kirker, a former curate in the Church of England, said the appointment of the next archbishop may be a liberal in the same way of thinking as the current Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. "It is widely believed that David Hope was largely responsible for Rowan Williams' appointment and got his way. I think that if Rowan Williams were now to find that his number two was antagonistic towards opening up these issues then he would be put in a very difficult position. The Archbishop of Canterbury would not be well served by David Hope's successor being a person with any homophobic views. He would have to be a masochist to wish to have as his closest working colleague someone who fundamentally disagreed with him."

ARCHBISHOP 'TO RETURN TO PARISH' BBC News The Church of England's second most senior bishop has resigned and will return to being a parish priest. Dr. David Hope, who has been Archbishop of York for nine years, will be invested in a more junior role by one of his own bishops in March 2005. The archbishop will swap his palace in York and a £60,000 salary for the rectory at St Margaret's, in Ilkley near Bradford, and just £18,500-a-year. But Dr. Hope insisted he won't miss any of the luxuries of a bishop's life. He told BBC News he felt it was time to move on. He said: "It has been something that has been rumbling around in my mind and heart for a couple of years. "I will have done nearly 20 years as a bishop. It is the sort of time that you ought to be moving on." During his time as archbishop Dr. Hope has aligned himself with traditionalists in the Anglican church. He has opposed the ordination of women and has warned that the internet could limit human interactions. He said St Margaret's in Ilkley, a town of around 5,500 people, was attractive to him because of the "traditional values" of its people. "Clearly I sympathise with their background. I'm looking forward to it. It is clearly a change and a challenge," he said. "I thought it would be good to conclude my ministry where I began - as a parish priest," he added. Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams described Dr. Hope as "unfailingly effective" and "one of God's great gifts to the church". Dr. Williams said: "In every post he has filled he has brought to bear a deep common sense, a complete unpompous attitude, a ready sympathy for all and an irrepressible dead-pan humour. "I shall miss him more than I can easily say, as a colleague whose wise advice and constant support have made a huge difference to my own ministry." He added: "Everyone in the Church of England will want to wish him all good things in the next stage of his ministry." BBC correspondent Jane Little said Dr. Hope has made no secret of his desire to return to what he has called the "real ministry" of parish practice. She said: "Dr. Hope, as an opponent of women priests, has had the support of traditionalists within the church and some have seen him as a counterweight to the more liberal Archbishop of Canterbury. His departure could not come at a more sensitive time for the embattled church." Dr. Hope, 64, can continue as a parish priest until the age of 70.