Archives

COMMENTARY   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org June 9, 2025   Some 15 Episcopalians met recently in the Episcopal Diocese of Long Island to have a respectful conversation on same-sex marriage, with a view, presumably, to bridge the gulf between opposing views.   For the Rev. Scott Gunn, one answer is to bring together a group of people who “disagree about things that are important to each individual” and engage in thoughtful discourse “in a loving and respectful way.”   “Jesus told us to love our neighbors,” Gunn told TLC, “And we don’t always agree with our neighbors. I think the conversations that we’re having are important, not only because they’re about same-sex marriage, but they’re helping us practice the skill of having difficult conversations with people that we are called to love.”  But nowhere does Jesus in his plea to love our enemies meaning "loving our neighbors" does it imply abdicating the basic tenets of the faith which Gunn is advocating.   Episcopal Bishop Larry Provenzano of Long Island emphasized the need to continue the work of reconciliation throughout the church by acknowledging and listening to diverse viewpoints on same-sex marriage. Without compromising core theological principles, the Church must “prioritize understanding” as if there is no absolute across difference to maintain unity.   Well just how much have homosexuals in the Episcopal Church loved those who disagree with them? They haven’t. There has been no compromise. They have been told by people like the late Louie Crew, the late Jack Spong and (the Rev.) Susan Russell, a fierce lesbian, that if you don’t conform then get the hell out of TEC.   Look what happened to Bishop Bill Love of Albany, or the bishop wannabe of Florida, Charlie Holt.  He was told not once but twice he was unacceptable as bishop even though he was prepared to compromise his personal belief on the altar of same-sex marriage for the “higher good” of the diocese. He was toast after lesbian priestess Susan Russell weighed in.   And then there is the case of David Duggan, frequent contributor of devotional essays to these pages, who opposed the ordination of a practicing homosexual (supposedly married to a man, with an adopted daughter to boot). The "ordinand" used Duggan's opposition to secure a "No Stalking Order of Protection" against Duggan while lying under oath, which cost him two-years worth of income to vacate. Duggan's efforts to get recompense for this violation of canons and normal principles of law have so far been unfruitful. But faith persists.   These gatherings do nothing; the die has been cast. TEC will never reverse itself on B012 and they will never tolerate disagreement. There is not a chance in hell that a person with orthodox views on sexuality would ever be elected a bishop in the Episcopal Church again. Never. The small highly vocal gay and lesbian bishops would never give consents.   These gatherings are a veneer of religiosity. It is one ‘white-washed tomb’ talking to another ‘white-washed tomb’ in the hope that the corpse doesn’t have to hear what the other really thinks. “On the outside you appear to people as righteous but, on the inside, you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness,” said Jesus. (Mt. 23:27-28)   These gatherings are designed to relieve the consciences of those who know that TEC will never change its mind or retreat from its new position. And they don’t care if the church goes under in the next decade or so as boomers die off, the check books dry up, and there is no replacement. If columbaria were traded on the Nasdaq, it would be a buy.   SEX IS THEIR IDENTITY NOT CHRIST   Future historians will marvel that western Christianity was divided, not over the two natures of Christ or the atonement or the bodily resurrection of Jesus, but about who should be permitted to have sex with whom.   It bears repeating that God created ‘male and female’ (Gen 1:27 and 5:2) and He closed the sexual matrix never to reopen it. Jesus affirmed that God created humans as male and female, and that marriage is between one man and one woman. (Mark 10:6-9) He had no need to reinvent the sexual wheel to affirm homosexual unions.   ‘COMMUNION ACROSS DIFFERENCE’   Communion across difference ran the headline in The Living Church. What communion? The communion’s fabric has been torn and will never be repaired. GAFCON and GSFA bishops will no longer sit down with TEC or the Anglican Church of Canada, and now the Church of England. The “difference” is deep and wide and will never be bridged. It is wider than the River Thames, and with a winter storm it would wash them all away.   A Thoughtful Dialogue on Same-Sex Marriage. Really!   The church is as divided as Russia is from the Ukraine; as Gaza is from the rest of Israel, and the notion that we can all get along over tea and crumpets, but not bullets, is pure fiction. TEC has split, it is forever divided. The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a witness to that divide and they are not going away. They are vigorously doing evangelism and discipleship to reach the next generation for Christ.   TEC has no message for generations X, Y and Z. None. They have tried twice passing resolutions at General Convention to double the church and it has fallen flat. If they think that woke issues will draw people, they are wrong, dead wrong. You can get all that from the New York Times and left-wing social media. Waving gay flags from atop church steeples or from pulpits changes nothing. It is all virtue-signaling.   The local Methodist church near where I live is down to 10 people. They now wave a gay flag and loudly proclaim their allegiance to homosexuals. None attend. The local Two Queers coffee shop ignore the church. In a year the Methodist church bishop will claim the property, sell it off, and someone will throw the gay flag in the garbage bin. Sic transit gloria mundi.   The Rev. Dr. Matthew S.C. Olver, executive director and publisher of THE LIVING CHURCH, a convener of the group, wryly noted that looking at the context of the U.S. church, it might seem that the progressive side won the debate on marriage for same-sex persons. On that point he is absolutely right. TEC won, and for their sin the church will wither away in a generation; the judgment of God for all to see.   END

Reputation risk ‘at an elevated level’ in wake of John Smyth case and historical safeguarding failures, says report Fiona Parker THE TELEGRAPH 09 June 2025   John Smyth, who ran Christian youth camps, carried out psychological, sexual and physical abuse over five decades Credit: CH4 NEWS/UNPIXS The organisation that manages a large part of the Church of England’s assets is bracing itself for a recruitment crisis in the wake of its latest abuse scandal, a report suggests. The Church Commissioners of England has described its reputational risk as “at an elevated level” after the Anglican Church apologised for more historic safeguarding failures and a review into one prolific abuser prompted the  Archbishop of Canterbury’s resignation . It comes as the body that manages the Church’s endowment fund – its largest source of revenue – announced a 10.3 per cent return last year, taking the value of the fund to £11.1 billion at the end of last year. In November, the extent of abuse carried out by  barrister John Smyth , who abused up to 130 boys and young men over several decades, was revealed in a damning report. Smyth, who died aged 77 in 2018, used his role at Christian summer camps to meet victims, yet his crimes were not reported until 2013, decades after many were carried out. The  2024 Makin review , found that the “abhorrent abuse” by Smyth could have been  exposed four years earlier  if Justin Welby, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, had contacted the authorities and done more to follow up on reports. Mr Welby announced his resignation days after the report, and formally ended his tenure earlier this year. A replacement for the highest position in the Church of England is yet to be decided, with the selection process not set to conclude until later this year.   The Makin review found that Justin Welby had been given a detailed account of John Smyth’s abuse in 2013. A section of the 2024 Church Commissioners for England annual report suggested there were concerns about the effects on its own recruitment. The report said: “Reputation is important for any charity, and the Church Commissioners considers its reputational risk currently to be at an elevated level. “Members of the public, whether they consider themselves part of the Church of England or not, can quickly form opinions about the Church as an institution based on what they see/hear/read in various forms of media, which understandably impacts their perception and view of the Church Commissioners.” Referring to the Smyth case and Mr Welby’s resignation, the authors wrote: “This case and other safeguarding failures undermine public confidence in the assertions made by the Church, including the Church Commissioners, about the importance of, and priority given to, safeguarding. “The potential reputational impacts could be far reaching; for example they may in turn make it more difficult for us to attract and retain staff.” Slavery reparations The same part of the report also referred to controversial slavery reparations, which were set to total £100 million over a nine-year period. It named the Fund for Healing Repair and Justice, an investment fund that will aim to raise £1 billion for members of communities affected by slavery, following criticism that the £100 million sum was not enough. Acknowledging the reparations issue, the report read: “The highly significant and contested nature of the Church Commissioners’ work researching and responding to historical links with African chattel enslavement also attracted significant attention, comment and, in some cases, criticism. “Further reaction (including negative comment) to this programme of work is expected when the intended new Fund for Healing, Repair and Justice is launched, making investments and issuing grants.” Meanwhile, it was revealed that clergy would receive a pay rise of nearly 11 per cent next year as their stipends continue to catch up with salaries. The two key measures for clergy pay, the National Minimum Stipend and the National Stipend Benchmark, will both rise by 10.7 per cent next year, to £33,350 and £34,950 respectively. END

over 2000 orthodox Episcopalians to gather this week at AAC  Plano east meeting in Virginia   This Friday and Saturday, January 9-10, 2004, the Virginia and Washington DC Chapters of the American Anglican Council (AAC) will host their Plano-East gathering at the Hylton Memorial Chapel in Woodbridge, Virginia.  The event, theme A Place to Stand, A Call to Mission, is designed as a follow-up to the AAC’s A Place To Stand: Declaring, preparing conference that was held in Dallas, Texas in October 2003 (also known as the Plano Conference). Over 2000 people have already registered for the Virginia event and   registrations continue to come in at a rapid pace. (Over 2700 Episcopalians attended the Dallas conference.)   The Virginia gathering will feature several of the keynote speakers from the Dallas event, including the Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh and acting Moderator/Convener of the newly forming Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. (An organizational meeting for the Network will be held in Plano, Texas on January 19-20, 2004.)   Also speaking in Woodbridge will be the Rev. Canon Dr. Kendall Harman, Canon Theologian of the Diocese of South Carolina, as well as a number of leaders in the local Virginia Episcopal community, including the Rev. John Yates, rector of the Falls Church, the Rev. Canon Martyn Minns, rector of Truro Church, and the Rev. John Guernsey, rector of All Saints Church.  All Saints is serving as the host church for the event.   This conference is about proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ and moving forward with the mission of the Church, said the Rev. John Guernsey. It is also another opportunity for orthodox Episcopalians to take a strong and unified stand against the grievous actions of the Episcopal Church.   Registrations have been received from 49 dioceses and 25 states and they keep pouring in, added Fr. Guernsey. The overwhelming response shows that Episcopalians remain deeply troubled by the actions of ECUSA.   The conference has four goals:   -- To declare our faith and commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the Anglican Communion.   -- To encourage faithful Episcopalians and help us understand and prepare for the emerging realignment of an orthodox and vital Anglicanism in the United States. -- To prepare and strengthen ourselves and those whom we serve to become a missionary church dedicated to the Great Commission.   -- To inspire the next generations to seek the face of God and to equip them to stand on His Word and share the Good News of Jesus   The conference is free and parallel tracks are offered for youth and children, including babysitting for infants.  More information can be obtained on the conference and on registration by visiting the AAC-Virginia website at http://www.aacvirginia.org .   Media are welcome to attend the Plano-East gathering and should contact Bruce Mason or Claire Whitehill at the AAC office to register (202-296-5360).  On Friday afternoon, Fr. Guernsey, Canon Minns and others will be available for interviews. Bishop Duncan may also be available.   -----   EVENT LOCATION:   The Cecil D. Hylton Memorial Chapel 14640 Potomac Mills Road Woodbridge, VA. 22192 Phone: (703) 590-0076 For directions, visit: www.hyltonchapel.org EVENT SCHEDULE:   FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 2004 4:00 pm - Registration begins 7:00 pm - Gathering Call to Worship 7:30 pm - Welcoming Address: The Rev. John A.M. Guernsey Festival Eucharist: The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh, preacher and celebrant   SATURDAY JANUARY 10, 2004 8:00 am - Late Registration 8:30 am - Gathering Worship, Morning Prayer and Bible Teaching: The Rev. Dr. John W. Yates 9:15 am - Anglican Essentials: The Rev Dr. Kendall Harmon 10:00 am - Panel Discussion: Latest Developments &’ the Emerging   Realignment   The Rev. Canon Martyn Minns, Diane Knippers, The Rev. Canon Dr. Kendall Harmon, Hugo Blankingship, Andrew Pearson   11:30 am - 1:00 pm - Lunch, on your own 1:00 pm - It’s All About Mission: International Mission, Local Mission,   Youth and Young Adult Mission 4:00 pm - Closing Address: The Rev. Canon Martyn Minns 4:30 pm - Adjourn   ----   The American Anglican Council is a network of individuals, parishes, specialized ministries and Episcopal Bishops who affirm Biblical authority and mainstream Anglican orthodoxy within the Episcopal Church. For more information on the AAC, please visit http://www.americananglican.org .   END

News Analysis   By UWE SIEMON-NETTO UPI Religion Writer   The following question is of course highly speculative and may sound slightly off the wall, but it still makes some sense: Could 2004 be a Nigerian year? Consider the following: Chances are that pope John Paul II, who is very ill and tired, will not last for another 12 months. Who will take his place?One of the likely prospects is Cardinal Francis Arinze, 71, an Ibo from Nigeria and now prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation on Divine worship. He is tough, energetic knows how to handle youth -- and most importantly perhaps - - is an expert on Islam.   Then consider another branch of Christianity -- the Anglicans. The most powerful traditionalist voice is that of archbishop Peter Akinola, primate of the Anglican province of Nigeria with 17 million-18 million faithful.    His see, Abuja, may well become the Canterbury of the 21st century, just as Constantinople once proclaimed itself the second and Moscow the third Rome. As conjecture in Anglican circles goes, the current archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, will continue to waffle on the crisis in the Episcopal Church USA.   But time is running out. Ten out of the 11 African primates want to cut ties with the tiny American offshoot of Anglicanism, or at least the diocese of t he first openly homosexual bishop, Gene Robinson. Most Asians and Latin Americans feel the same way. And Peter Jensen, archbishop of Sydney in Australia, has already mused aloud about the possibility of shifting his allegiance from Canterbury to Abuja, Nigeria’s capital.   Akinola has already made clear that he will not let Americas’ wealth persuade him to make doctrinal concessions to what he considers the Western heresies.   In other words, there’ll be a split in world Anglicanism.   Now let’s guess on: Nigeria is not only home to two of the most powerful Christian prelates involved in the lesser clash of cultures -- the one pitting Scripture against false doctrine. Nigeria is also the place where the big culture war is being fought -- the conflict between radical Islam and Christianity, both growing rapidly.   Chances are, then, that Nigeria may become the main focus of religion reporters in the New Year -- or perhaps not. To begin with, nobody can predict when the pope will die, and who will take his place. Given the Church’s 2,000-year history it is very likely that after the polish pope’s 25-year reign, it will once again be an Italian’s turn.   It could be that Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn of Vienna will succeed him, or Cardinal Phillippe Barbarin, archbishop of Lyon and a man of great personal holiness, or maybe even the ageing Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, the German prefect of the Pontifical Congregation for the doctrine of Faith, who might bring theological order back into the Roman Church.   Or it could be anybody. Suffice it to say the biggest religion story of 2004 will presumably come from Rome, and that five things can be considered a given about the new man on St. Peter’s throne:   1. He is a disciplinarian, which John Paul II is not, which accounts for a considerable theological chaos in the Church.   2. He has John Paul’s passion for the young.   3. He is, like John Paul, able to garner the respect of representative of other faiths, especially Islam.   4. He shares his commitment to ecumenism, without which it would be hard t o accomplish the next pontiff’s perhaps most important task:   5. He must continue John Paul’s strategy of re-evangelizing Europe and thus strengthen the Christian Church against the potential onslaught of Islamic radicalism.   There are many small signs pointing to Europe’s slow spiritual recovery: There is the fact that 70 percent of the new ordinands in the Church of England are evangelical. There is the reawakening of Christian intellectual life in France -- and the missionary zeal of the Catholic and Protestant churches in that most secularized of all European nations.   There is substantial evidence for a reawakening of religious interests in Germany, where pastors suddenly rank second-highest in the public’s estimation of various professions, and where on regional television religious programs are the most popular. Another sign is that the American feature film Luther is a resounding success in the land of Luther, where only 20 years ago Protestant theologians called the Reformer passe. These developments tend to be subtle -- less obvious than bloody acts of terrorism committed by terrorists in the name of Islam, or conflicts between Sunni and Shiite Muslims dominating the television news from Iraq.   But for the moment, sociologists of religion from both sides of the Atlantic agree, it looks as if in 2004 vibrant Christianity will be the most powerful faith in the world. Meanwhile, Islam may well provide bigger headlines, but has yet to find the ground it has lost 1,000 years ago.   Unless, of course, you consider militant Islamism the true voice of that religion. In that case, most Christian, Muslim and Jewish theologians would beg to disagree.   END

EDITORIAL   The TELEGRAPH 28/12/2003   It is a regrettable aspect of modern life, as the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, asserted in his Christmas Day sermon, that those who show religious faith should sometimes be treated as figures of fun. The nervous sniggering about the Prime Minister’s religious faith which ripples over the surface of the media from time to time, he asserted, is part of the same fear and unease towards religion that manifests itself in the proposal to ban the wearing of Muslim headscarves in French schools.Dr Williams would be wrong, however, to assume that when people show irreverence towards religious figures it is necessarily a scornful response to their faith. If Dr Williams feels personally the object of mirth, he should reflect on some of the secular aspects of his work. The leaking of his Christmas Day sermon, much of which was trailed in a newspaper last Sunday, is typical of the tawdrier political practices developed by the New Labour spin machine but is unworthy of the office of Archbishop of Canterbury. A sermon is supposed to be a private communion between the priest and his congregation, not a media event, leaked and spun in advance to favoured journalists.   Dr Williams has become adept at using the media to his own ends. Yet he does so not to offer spiritual guidance but to advance a soft-Left political agenda. A full page of the Daily Mail last week was devoted to a piece by Dr Williams proffering family financial advice. The credit explosion has made life a lot easier in all sorts of good ways, he wrote. But it is in danger of slipping out of control unless we have some better regulation and some new attitudes. The Archbishop would more likely find himself being taken seriously were he to render unto the Government the business of financial regulation and concentrate a little more on spiritual leadership.   Since Dr Williams became Archbishop of Canterbury the Anglican Church has been riven by the debate over homosexual clergy. It is not easy to see how politically-correct Episcopalians from Virginia can be reconciled with fundamentalists from central Africa who are driven to preach blood and hellfire whenever the word homosexuality is mentioned, nor to see how schisms can be prevented. Dr Williams’s approach to the problem, however, seems to be not even to try.   In June, during the controversy over the abortive appointment of Dr Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading, Dr Williams’s secretary for public affairs, Jeremy Harris, penned a memo worthy of Alistair Campbell. The issue of homosexuality, suggested the memo, has to be managed in media terms by seeking to take the sting out of it and displacing it in the public mind. The memo went on to suggest a number of attractive alternative stories by which the media might be deflected from the issue of Dr John. ABC, as the memo referred to the Archbishop, was advised to deliver a reading of his own poems, make a high profile Lords’ intervention or announce a theological prize.   Unfortunately for Jeremy Harris, a former BBC journalist, the media turned out to be less gullible and less trivia-obsessed than Lambeth Palace imagined. Most newspapers stuck to the real story, the disquiet over the appointment of Dr John and into the circumstances of Dr John’s late decision to step down.   Dr Williams has been no less morally flabby on the issue of Islamic terrorism. On Christmas Day the Pope appealed to God to rid the world of the scourge of terrorism. The Archbishop of Canterbury, on the other hand, reserved his clearest condemnation for the West’s counter-terrorism campaign. Imprisoning terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay and Belmarsh prison, he complained, sends out the wrong message to Muslim societies. Those of the Christian faith, he said, should show themselves to be on the side of humanity by making sacrifices for the sake of justice.   The sacrifices to which Dr Williams refers presumably involve risking another terrorist attack on the scale of September 11. So far, the counter-terrorist campaign has been remarkably successful in preventing al-Qaeda attacks in Europe and America, in spite of that organisation’s strikes elsewhere in the world. Moreover, this has been achieved without any curtailment of the rights of ordinary Muslims in Britain and America, who are free to practise their faith with a degree of freedom of which Christians in many parts of the Islamic world can only dream. Does Dr Williams really suggest that humanity would better be served by refusing to imprison those who, given the chance, would delight in making a nuclear attack on a Western city?   Dr Williams has yet to deliver a poetry reading in the manner suggested in the Lambeth Palace memo. But if he does treat us to his poetry we hope it will give us greater reason to take him seriously than many of his public pronouncements, which, thus far, have echoed Edward Lear rather than Alfred Lord Tennyson.   END

December 2003   Dear Friend of Ekklesia,   The decision of the Presiding Bishop and others to proceed to consecrate V. Gene Robinson despite the unanimous voice of opposition from other Anglican provinces, the Archbishop of Canterbury, other denominations, and even other faiths has wounded the Christian faith around the globe and isolated the Episcopal Church. Approximately 52 million Anglicans are in church each Sunday around the world. Already, the leaders of 50 million have declared impaired communion. Some have even gone beyond that. Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, West Africa, Rwanda, Central Africa, South East Asia, and Tanzania have formally broken communion. Those provinces represent about 35 million Anglicans.I have been dispatched with a diplomatic pouch of documents to consult with Anglican Primates and Archbishops about finding their way forward. They are deeply committed to Biblical faith. They are also committed to those of us w ho maintain historic teaching and have rejected the actions of the Presiding Bishop and the General Convention. Working with faithful Anglican primates is a two way street. There is no question that we need their leadership and help, but they also live in circumstances of great need. To help address that in recent months your gifts to Ekklesia have helped accomplish many vitally important-even lifesaving-projects. Together this year we have:   Provided more than twenty tons of grain for famine relief in Central Africa:   * Bought and outfitted a small fleet of commercial fishing boats for Lake Malawi. These boats will provide food for starving people, jobs, and income to the diocese for ministry.   * Been building two radio stations in Tanzania that should be going on the air-any day. They will provide Christian teaching, English classes, health education information, and advertising income for ministry from advertising revenue. Helped primates travel to critically important Anglican Communion meetings.                                      * Provided bicycles for all the clergy in Antsiranana Diocese m Madagascar as a memorial gift in thanksgiving for the ministry of Bishop Keith Benzies who died in office last year.   * Helped replace grants, scholarships, and other gifts that have been withdrawn or refused as a result of the crisis.   * Played a critical role in bringing continuing Anglicans together and helping to facilitate an emerging federation of jurisdictions.   Though the situation is grave, there is cause for rejoicing. Not only is Ekklesia working closely with the American Anglican Council, Forward in Faith, and Anglicans United, we are actually bearing fruit. Our labor has helped provide a spiritually secure future. Many questions remain about institutional life an d property, but faithful primates have committed to provide Episcopal oversight for those of us who remain committed to the Anglican Way in America. Ekklesia has been at the center of the conversations and commitments to provide faithful oversight for you. To go on, though, we need your help.   We must raise about $100,000 by Easter in order to operate, travel, and answer the poignant and urgent requests that come to us almost daily from overseas. Obviously, we do not receive any support from the national church. Overseas primates are deeply committed, but do not have financial resources. It is partners like you that that have helped us accomplish miracles over the last  eight years. Now, a Biblically faithful Anglican church in North America is within reach! Will you help?   Yours in Christ,   The Rev. Canon Bill Atwood, D. Min. General Secretary   PS. Please check out our web site ( www.ekk.org ) and order my new book about the crisis. Wild Vine-Fruitful Vine: Crisis in the Anglican Communion. You can order them through Forward in Faith at 1-800-225-3661.20

By Adelle M. Banks RELIGION NEWS SERVICE   Bishop V. Gene Robinson, elected in June as the first openly gay bishop of the Episcopal Church, was named the Religion Newsmaker of the Year by members of  the Religion Newswriters Association. His approval and consecration, and the ensuing threats of schism in the U. S. church and the wider Anglican Communion, were collectively cited as the top religion news story of 2003 -- a ranking shared with criticism of the Anglican bishop of Vancouver, British Columbia, who approved same-sex unions.   About a third of the 240 members of the Religion Newswriters Association took part in the annual survey. More than 80 percent of these selected Robinson as the top newsmaker.   The top 10 religion news stories were ranked as follows: 1. Turmoil mounts within the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion after Robinson’s approval and consecration, and Vancouver Bishop Michael Ingham’s action. 2. The pending war in Iraq split religious communities, with mostly mainline Protestant denominations opposing it and many evangelicals supporting it.   3. The definition of marriage becomes a key area of controversy after Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules gay couples have a right to civil marriage and the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down a ban against homosexual sodomy.   4. A Ten Commandments monument is removed from Alabama’s State Judicial Building and the man who got it installed there, Roy Moore, is removed from his post as the state’s chief justice.   5. Roman Catholic Church efforts to implement plans combating priestly sex abuse draw praise and criticism. Archbishop Sean O’Malley succeeds Cardinal Bernard Law as leader of the Boston Archdiocese.   6. Pope John Paul II marks the 25th anniversary of his election amid growing concerns about his health and debate over his eventual successor. 7. Slumping economy prompts budget cutbacks in many denominations.   8. Presbyterian Church (USA) keeps fidelity and chastity clause, maintaining its ban on noncelibate gay clergy. The denomination elects its first woman pastor as moderator.   9. The U.S. Supreme Court decides to hear a California case challenging the inclusion of the words under God in the Pledge of Allegiance.   10. The suspension of Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod official David Benke of New York, for participating in a post-9/11 interfaith service, is overturned.   Officials of Valparaiso University issued an apology to the denomination’s members after holding an interfaith service marking the first anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.   END

Dear Bishop Lee’   Please read this carefully through until the end.  This is a hard e-mail, tough love, and I know that you have been getting many hard e-mails, sadly even hateful e-mails.  This message is not one of hate but words of one man speaking straight to another.  I have labored long on this message in love believing that you are an adult and old enough to take hard truth.  Please prayerfully consider what I have said.  Time is short.   Much has happened in the life of the church since I shook your hand at Olivet Episcopal Church’s 150-year anniversary earlier in 2003. As part of our family’s ministry to historic re-enactors (see www.historicfaith.net http://www.historicfaith.net/ , Rev. Harper had asked us to help with preparations and we were there in 1850 clothing (I have attached a photo from the event).  I was touched when you stated that you found a power in the old (1845 vice 1928) liturgy, but was not convinced.  There has been twenty years for me to judge your words by.   In 1984 as bishop, you received me into the Episcopal Church. I believe that this confirmation service at Truro was your first confirmation service as bishop of the Diocese of Virginia.  Later, you were the bishop that licensed me as a lay preacher when my family and I were at Christ the Redeemer.  You were the bishop who I looked to when I began the local discernment process for ordination.  While talking with you at a dozen after-church receptions does not make a deep friendship, you have been my bishop since you became bishop in Virginia.   As you have been my bishop, I have carefully read much of what you have written and listened carefully to what you have said. You are an intelligent and articulate man and I believe that you have some love for the Episcopal Church.  From what I have read, heard, and seen, I am deeply concerned for your soul.  It seems clear that you have valued the game of church politics and opinions of fellow bishops over your sworn duty to uphold the faith outlined in scripture and our catholic tradition.   I shook your hand at Olivet but I was a little guarded for I believed that when the clear decision point came to choose between the Apostolic faith and the progressive, world loving, rationalistic apostasy that has come into vogue within ECUSA, you would choose the latter.  I was right.   Years ago, you wrote in the Virginia Episcopalian that you saw your duty as Bishop to avoid clarity (what I call fuzzing up) on issues that would divide, such as the immorality of homosexual acts.   This is not the position of a bishop defending the faith.  Your duty is to make spiritual truth clear not to obscure it.  You have acted like a shepherd that will not divide wolves from sheep.  I could give you many scriptural references including the words of Jesus that show that light should not unite with darkness.  Lovingly, and actively, we are to engage the world so that those who sin are come from darkness to light but that is not to have common cause with them.  Scripture set a different course for those who are believers and even higher standards for those who are leaders among Christians.   Some time after that article on your commitment to be fuzzy in the Virginia Episcopalian, I believe around 1997, you instituted the Call to Holy Life at Virginia Theological Seminary to open the school to active homosexual partnerships in lieu of the previous policy that forbade sexual intercourse outside the bonds of marriage, adulterous relationships, and the practice of homosexuality.  By this action (and actions do speak louder than words) you clearly demonstrated that even within your own diocese, you would be go with the flow even it that meant jettisoning the moral teachings of Jesus.  You used your skill at turning phrases to fuzz up this issue.  At the time you instituted the Call to Holy Life you stated you were seeking a policy more in keeping with Anglican comprehensiveness than the previous statement and more in keeping with the biblical balance of the Christian tradition.   Fine words, as I would expect from a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Duke Law School, but VTS, since your action and under your leadership, has become a hotbed of homosexual activism. VTS is the place in your Diocese where church leaders are  training and you are responsible For the type of leaders you train there.  At the time of A Call to Holy Life, in my deep concern and as part of my discernment process, I exchanged a series of e-mails with you in an attempt to find out where you stood on the authority of scripture and the nature of sin, in particular on the sexual sin, which was being promoted by the apostate.  It was not easy to get a clear answer from you to this fundamental question - did you believe that homosexual practice was sin.  I was at first hopeful when you read my e-mails and took time to reply.   The ongoing exchanges with you, as courteous as they were, eventually convinced me that you did not have a moral compass that would enable me to seek ordination under your leadership.  In my heart, I knew then that when a vote on accepting same-sex immorality would come, you would choose Sodom rather than Zion.  Thus, I left off the ordination process and after subsequent statements and actions by you, left off active life in a local Episcopal Church for a couple of years, moving instead to support our non-denominational ministry.  Recent actions of yours has shown that I made the right decision.  Since you put The Call to Holy Life into place, VTS students who hold the orthodox faith have told me repeatedly how they feel under siege for their beliefs.   Your recent vote and past actions are clearly destroying our diocese.  Unless you publicly and proximately repent for your part in this apostasy, the diocese you claim to love will fall to pieces, to the despair of the many faithful priest and laity who have stood by you through your past moral fuzziness.  Through your actions, the Episcopal Church, USA has become a scandal within the historic, orthodox, catholic faith.  You stated that in your recent votes: I had a difficult, even wrenching time deciding. I prayed a lot. I consulted widely, with clergy and lay colleagues, with other professionals, more formally with the deans of the regions, and the Standing Committee. I studied scripture anew.  I was particularly struck by the 15th Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles where the apostles and elders of the church in Jerusalem adapted the requirements of Jewish law to the reality of the situation of gentile converts in Antioch.  My reading of scripture convinces me that the Gospel is ever-increasing its power to erase the barriers that we human beings erect among ourselves.   Did you prayerfully read what the Apostles decided in Acts 15:20?  One of the minimum requirements that the Apostles placed on the Gentiles was to avoid sexual sins - no compromise, no fuzziness.  The requirement for the gentiles was a beginning not the end.  The Apostles decision also had the assumption that God’s ministers would teach the Gentiles to live a life of increasing righteousness through faith, not a life of wantonness masquerading as righteousness.  Again, in your reading of scripture as in past actions as bishop, you cling to the politics and ignore the requirements of faith.  You also stated, I was also struck anew by the centrality of a theology based more on grace than on law.  In Philippians 3:8-14, Paul wrote to the Philippians yearning for a righteousness that comes not from the law but for a righteousness that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith.  Paul continues, I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead.   Phillippians 4:9 states, The things which ye both learned and received and heard and saw in me, these things do: and the God of peace shall be with you.  Do you, a bishop, understand the grace that Paul preached?   Do you understand how repentance, the complete turning away from Sin, and Grace are related in Paul’s teaching?  Romans 6:1-7 shows this clearly: What shall we say then?  Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?  God forbid.  We who died to sin, how shall we any longer live therein?  Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  We were buried therefore with him through baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection’ knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin’ for he that hath died is justified from sin.   God Forbid indeed!, and you should have done all in your power to forbid the consecration of Vickie Gene Robinson and the acceptance of same-sex blessings.  What did Paul tell Titus that a Bishop should do? Holding to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able to exhort in the sound doctrine, and to convict the gainsayers (Titus 1:9).  As a bishop you took the vows, and have been supported comfortably by the Church as bishop, but you are NOT holding to the faithful word and 2000 years of church doctrine. You are undermining, not defending the faith.  You seemed to stated with pride:   Since I was consecrated in 1984, I have consented to the consecration of nearly 200 bishops.  I have not voted against a single one, not those who were divorced and remarried, not the poor administrators and preachers, not even those bishops who now threaten to leave the church. I  believe strongly that the people of a local diocese, when the election is properly and fairly held, are the best people to determine who will best lead their diocese.  Just as the apostles respected the local circumstances of the people of Antioch, so the General Convention respected the circumstances of the people of New Hampshire.   The apostles clearly set limits and conditions (faith and  repentance) on God’s grace and even stricter conditions for Church leadership.  Why can’t you?  The Church gave you the vote of consent to defend the faith as a faithful steward.  The pride you have in never having shown leadership, not once since 1984, in the consecration of 200 bishops is shameful.   If, in 1984, you found that you did not have the judgment or moral fortitude to vote down unworthy candidates for bishops, then you should have stepped down then.  If you cannot see the problem with your actions now, you should step down now.  A sea captain whom never steers a ship or a medical board than never denies a medical license to a medical student is acting criminally, even murderously.  Your action or in this case inaction is killing the Episcopal Church and more importantly hindering the work of the Gospel to turn people from death to life.  Do you so disrespect the Church and your calling that you believe that anyone who walks in the door will do as a bishop?  Even he non-spiritual, political wisdom of the business world understands the concept of checks and balances, and of the criticality of selecting competent leaders.   Do you understand what apostasy is?  Do you realize that you are joining with those who are actively seeking to turn the Church away from the authority of scripture and the faith delivered by the Apostles? Second Peter Chapter Two clearly talks about people wedded to apostasy. Verses 18-21 (Message version) is especially clear: They are loudmouths, full of hot air, but still they’re dangerous. Men and women who have recently escaped from a deviant life are most susceptible to their brand of seduction. They promise these newcomers freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption, for if they’re addicted to corruption--and they are--they’re enslaved.  If they’ve escaped from the slum of sin by experiencing our Master and Savior, Jesus Christ, and then slid back into that same old life again, they’re worse than if they had never left.  Better not to have started out on the straight road to God than to start out and then turn back, repudiating the experience and the holy command.   Recent statements by the revisionists, clearly demonstrate that they have no loyalty to the Christian faith.  In his Christmas Day message, your fellow bishop, John Bryson Chane stated the following And what was God thinking... when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the sacred Quran to the prophet Muhammad?  And what was God thinking... when the Angel Gabriel was sent by God to reveal the birth of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?  (see http://www.cathedral.org/cathedral/worship/jbc031225.html ).   Do you really want to through your lot in with the ECUSA proponents of Islam?’ a religion that worldwide continues to martyr more Christians in its name than any other.  This is so much more than promoting slavery to deviate sexual practice, as terrible as that is’ this is collaborating with those who are anti-Christ. Islam does not accept that Jesus is Christ and fights against or enslaves those who do - Muslims are not fuzzy about what they believe. I know of what I speak.  I have read the Qu’ran.  I have talked at length to both moderate and fundamental Muslims.  Having preached to and talked with Sudanese Anglican refugees when I was in Cairo with USAID and here in the United States, I have heard first hand accounts of what our Christian brothers and sisters have endured, and this death, rape, and torture is a worldwide reality, even under advanced Islamic governments.  I worked in Jordan, West Bank/Gaza, Turkey, and Egypt.  I have watched Saudi state television present the master plan of converting the world to Islam and have visited many places where historic churches were converted forcibly to mosques (they don’t switch back).   I have reviewed government assessments on the views and actions of Islamic Jihadist (Christian fundamentalist are NOT like Islamic fundamentalists).  I have read the words of American Mullahs and Imams. Now your fellow bishop has proclaimed the truth of Islam in our national cathedral and his fellow bishops remain silent.  This fact will not be lost on the Islamic world.  It will be used to justify the murder of thousands.   Would you consent to the elevation of a Islamic Mullah as Episcopal Bishop if a diocese put him forward?  Do you believe that Jesus would accept the teachings of Islam?  Jesus cannot be Lord is what Muhammad said in the Qu’ran is true and from the Angel Gabriel. To accept Islam is to deny the Jesus of the Gospels. Peter, will you choose to be light or darkness?, hot or cold?, sheep or wolf?  There is no more time for sitting on the fence, no middle way of inclusion with evil, no more time for fuzz-ing up truth. This is not to say that there is not room in Anglicanism for differences of opinion or understanding but there are limits to how broad the Anglican road is.  It is a wide highway, but you have helped drive the Episcopal Church through the guardrail straight for a cliff--an abyss. You must turn 180 degrees immediately to avoid the crash and the resulting death in flames.   Do you not fear the judgment of God in this matter?  Being a bishop is no defense, if you believe the Gospel accounts and Epistles’ judgment will be stricter for those in Spiritual leadership, whether they are legalistic, fundamentalist Pharisees or rationalistic humanist Sadducees.   The last time I saw you at Olivet you stated that you were moved by the power of the old 1845 version of the liturgy.  I quote that liturgy now in the hope that you will be moved by its power to publicly repent.   I exhort you, in the Name of God, to remember the profession which you made unto God in your Baptism. And forasmuch as after this life there is an account to be given unto the righteous Judge, by whom all must be judged, without respect of persons, I require you to examine yourself and your estate, both toward God and man’ so that, accusing and condemning yourself for your own faults, you may find mercy at our heavenly Father’s hand for Christ’s sake, and not be accused and condemned in that fearful judgment.   Should you decide that your pride or your convictions will not allow you to make a public confession of sin and repentance in this matter, I will no longer be able to offer you the hand of fellowship.   Until I see that you have repented of your recent heinous actions, I will not accept communion from your hand though this deeply grieves me. Should you decide to humbly and clearly repent, then I with saints and angels will rejoice and weep tears of joy.   I will continue to pray for you, as hundreds of others are, that you will turn back to the faith. If you wish to meet one-on-one to discuss these matters, I will gladly work to meet your schedule, come to Richmond, and meet with you.  The one occasion that I feel that I can still break bread with you is if we came together to privately discuss this issue.  As one who has been saved by grace from my past evils, I am more than willing to go to some length to see your considerable gifts and talents recovered for the kingdom and to see our beloved Diocese of Virginia turned from wreaking at the bottom of the abyss.   Please think twice and pray about what I have said before hitting the delete key...   Your brother in Christ,   Jim Craft Manassas, Virginia

Special Report   By David W. Virtue www.virtuosity.org   RECIFE, BRAZIL--The Evangelical Diocese of Recife has terminated its companion relationship with the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania over the consecration of V. Gene Robinson an activist homosexual to the ECUSA episcopacy. The diocese recently voted three resolutions one of which was to terminate its relationships with the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania and its bishop, the Rt. Rev. Michael W. Creighton, because they voted yes to the consecration of Robinson with the bishop, lay and 2 of the 3 clergy in favor of Gene Robinson’s election.   The Brazilian diocese is lead by the orthodox Rt. Rev. Edward Robinson Cavilcanti. The resolution kept open the possibility of any parish church or individuals in the Central PA diocese staying in relationship with the Diocese of Recife if they did not support the resolutions of GC2003, said The Rev. Miguel Uchoa, a priest in the diocese who sent the news to Virtuosity.   Out actions officially put us in the position of mainstream Anglicans around the globe, he said.   The first resolution decided to break communion with the two dioceses of New Hampshire and New Westminster and clarifies our position with the biblical understanding of sexuality. A second resolution states that we are not going to have communion, companionship or any kind of relationship with any diocese, bishop, clergy or institution that supported GC2003 resolutions on sexuality.   Fr. Uchoa said the climate of the Church in Brazil was still the same. Sometimes even it is even more aggressive against our diocese [Recife] positions and it is very aggressive against our bishops’ decisions, he wrote.   The priest said the passing of these resolutions was not easy, as there was a group in the diocese speaking out and asking the province to come with the primate to pastorally intervene in our diocese. Those clergy and some lay people made a lot of noise, people, who once supported the bishop and called themselves evangelicals, he said.   The priest said that in recent discussions with the Evangelical bishop and he is taking a position with two clergy that were licensed because and were assumed to be homosexuals.   Our canons say that no one can be ordained if they are gay or even support the normalization of the behavior. Bishop Robinson also licensed rectors after the convention in different churches in the diocese.   Uchoa noted that opposition in the diocese did not come from a majority, but it is hard to deal with the province coming against us all the time. We ask for your prayers. The good news is that we are taking back the diocesan structure, the seminary and other commissions.   Furthermore, the other good news is that our plans to make the dioceses  into two dioceses did not result in any prejudice. The churches who are working in the north of Recife (Deanery of north) and they are totally orthodox and the project goes on.   The bishop has already installed a new Dean in the new pro cathedral and there is a new dean of the area, he said.   Uchoa said that by the Year 2006 there will be a new diocese, formed in time for the general synod. We are working hard to plant and to strengthen churches in the area. It requires a lot of hard work and needs much help.   Our hope for Anglicanism in Brazil, comes from the Northeast now more then ever. We need to expand the church here to be a future province, a second province in the country.   Uchoa said the Diocese of Recife was looking for a new companion relationship with an orthodox diocese in the US. We have not cut any links with orthodox churches, dioceses and organizations. We have the passion for evangelism, church growth, new evangelistic methods...a real passion for the lost. We want to share and be in connection with all orthodox believers. Anglicanism will flourish in the spiritually arid wilderness of Brazil as orthodox and biblical churches are born. God is helping us.   The province was, till recently, in the revisionist grip of  Glauco Soares de Lima. The new orthodox Primate is the Most Rev. Orlando Santos de Oliveira.   END

Open Letter to the Crown Nominations Commission   From Archbishop Justin Badi Arama June 6, 2025   To: The Lord Evans of Weardale KCB DL, Chairman of the Crown Nominations Commission for the selection of the next Archbishop of Canterbury Dear Lord Evans, We send you greetings in the precious name of our Lord Jesus Christ and write following a recent meeting of the Primates Steering Committee of the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches. We have been following the process of selection for the next Archbishop of Canterbury with prayerful concern. We treasure a shared history that includes Archbishop Thomas Cranmer and the other Reformation martyrs and those from the Church of England who, often at great cost, selflessly served the cause of the gospel in the lands we represent. Notwithstanding the grievous decision of the General Synod in February 2023 to turn away from the Church’s scriptural and historic teaching on marriage and human sexuality, we write to urge that the next Archbishop of Canterbury should be someone who will uphold the orthodox faith shared by the great majority of global Anglicans. By rejecting the authority of Holy Scripture, the General Synod also chose to reject the hopes and convictions of the Anglican Global South. In our Ash Wednesday statement of 2023 which followed, we therefore stated, with great regret, that we could no longer recognise the Archbishop of Canterbury as the ‘primus inter pares’ spiritual leader of the Communion. So while we recognise that the appointment of an orthodox Archbishop of Canterbury cannot of itself turn back the clock, this could be an opportunity to begin undoing the damage by showing that the Church of England is now willing to take seriously the deep concerns of her ‘daughter’ Churches.   It would also help to restore trust which has been undermined over the past twenty years by failure to exercise meaningful discipline where Provinces have unilaterally departed from the Apostolic faith, and by the neo-colonial manipulation of procedures to marginalise orthodox voices. In this instance we feel it is necessary to say that we are not at all confident in the process for choosing members of the Crown Nominations Commission from the wider Communion. It appears that, yet again, the convictions of Global South Anglicans will not be given the weight they deserve. Nevertheless, we assure you of our prayers for the task with which you and your colleagues have been entrusted in the hope that you will hear and take full account of those millions of faithful Anglicans who still hold the Church of England in great affection even though she has deeply grieved them. ‍Archbishop Justin Badi Arama, is Chairman of the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches and Primate, the Episcopal Church of South Sudan https://www.thegsfa.org/news/open-letter-to-the-crown-nominations-commission

News Analysis   By David W. Virtue   Ted Mollegen, the 20/20 coordinator who will lead the hoped for expansion of ECUSA in 2004, is upset at dissenting Episcopal and Anglican brothers and sisters who opposed the recent election and confirmation of Canon Gene Robinson as the next Bishop of New Hampshire. In an Open Letter to the Dissenting American Bishops and Priests and to the Anglican Primates, Mollegen asks them to reconsider what they are contemplating and says he has the support of Holy Scripture to support his contention.   This is what he says. My concern is solidly based in the bible. In the Council of Jerusalem, the Church’s leaders concluded that gentile believers did not need to be circumcised. This decision overthrew a central part of the religious practice inherited from Judaism. The reasoning behind the Church’s decision was that uncircumcised gentile believers were seen to be exhibiting signs of the Holy Spirit. The situation with Canon Robinson is quite comparable.   In the New Hampshire Diocesan election, the duly elected leaders of that diocese affirmed that they clearly saw signs of the Spirit in Canon Robinson and his life and work, including his relationship with his partner, Mark Andrew. General Convention looked carefully, saw the same signs, and confirmed New Hampshire’s choice. This is why this autocephalous part of God’s church has selected and confirmed Canon Robinson to be New Hampshire’s next bishop. This action is clearly a break from the practice of the past, but it is also clearly not a break with the faith. The action is fully based on the bible, as explained further below.   Ted Mollegen does not understand Scripture and he does not know how to interpret it.   First of all, the Council of Jerusalem’s concern over circumcision (Acts. 15) was that the Judaizers said that circumcision was necessary for salvation (which it is not), and Peter came down hard on such thinking arguing that He [God] made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. Two verses later he said, but we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.   Mollegen says the situation with canon Robinson is quite comparable. Nonsense. It is not remotely comparable. Circumcision and homosexuality are not even on the same page. Genesis 17 shows circumcision as firstly a spiritual and only secondarily a national sign. It signified membership of the Israelite nation, (homosexual proclivities indicate you need help) visited on the Hebrew people following the exodus from Egypt. It was integrated into the Mosaic system in connection with the Passover. It is a foundation feature of NT Judaism, and occasioned the judaistic controversies of the apostolic period. The Jews in the NT had so associated circumcision with Moses that they had virtually forgotten its more fundamental association with Abraham. Our Lord had to remind them that it antedated Moses, and Paul is emphatic that it was the current understanding of the Mosaic connection which was obnoxious to Christianity and he constantly brings them back to Abraham.   Attempting to enforce circumcision repudiated the unmerited salvation offered freely by, through and in Christ. Homosexuality (all seven Biblical references) is repudiated in both Old and New Testaments, with Paul in 1 Cor. 6:9 making it abundantly clear that its practice alienated one from Christ’s future Kingdom ...neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate nor homosexuals... shall inherit the Kingdom of God.   To put the elimination of circumcision in Acts 15 on a par with or the brokering in of homosexual behavior is patently absurd, poor interpretation and bad theology.   Mollegen writes: The human authors of the bible did not know Christian life-committed unions of same-sex partners. Many of you who are forming divisive plans likewise do not have personal familiarity with Christian life-committed same-sex couples. Those of us who do have such familiarity can clearly see the signs of the Holy Spirit present in many life-committed Christian same-sex couples, in much the same way that those in many Christian heterosexual marriages show signs of the Holy Spirit. You will see these signs too, if you will only stop and look.   Mollegen makes two fundamental errors here. He says that the human authors of the bible did not know Christian life-committed union of same-sex partners.   First of all Scripture has a double authorship’ it is God-breathed words working through man. Both are necessary. Human authors did notwork apart from the Holy Ghost.   Secondly it is true that the authors didn’t talk of or anticipate same-sex unions, and what is more they wouldn’t have approved if they did. The prophets, priests and apostles would have gone back to the creation ordinance of Genesis, and the mandate male and female made He them...with the added proviso that God closed the sexual matrix and never re-opened it. Secondly God’s specific creation was heterosexual marriage between a man and a woman both for purposes of fellowship and procreation, the latter totally missing in homosexual activity.   The second Mollegen argument is pure ad hominum, ...you do not have personal familiarity with Christian life-committed same-sex couples, he writes. Really.   How does Mollegen know that? This writer is personally and deeply acquainted with such committed same-sex relationships and they are morally bankrupt from first to last. My brother-in-law was in such a committed relationship for 11 years and both he and his partner still died of AIDS. Furthermore, there is increasing and overwhelming evidence that faithfulness is virtually non-existent in homosexual relationships. It is presaged upon promiscuity with bath houses still in operation and casual homo-erotic sex is re-emerging with greater force with new statistics showing that bare-backing (non-condom sex) returning full blast, facts duly noted by the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta and ignored by ECUSA’s ardent homosexualists.   Furthermore, most American families know someone, usually a relative or friend, or friend of a friend who is engaging in homoerotic behavior to their detriment.   It is arrogant of Mr. Mollegen to suggest that orthodox bishop’s clergy and laity donâted have familiarity with Christian life-committed same-sex couples’ so what if they did or didn’t, does that suddenly make it right, because Mr. Mollegen thinks that knowledge of such relationships automatically makes it right. This is a totally absurd argument and a fatuous piece of ad holmium reasoning.   Mollegen then goes right over the top. He writes: For Church leaders to take action now in opposition to New Hampshire’s and General Convention’s acts of discernment looks to me very much like blasphemy against the Holy Spirit -- because the competent authorities most familiar with the situation have found the signs of the Holy Spirit to be present in Canon Robinson’s life and work.   My God, if competent authorities suddenly agreed that we should all sprinkle anthrax on our steaks, we should all do it?   Mr. Mollegen has turned truth completely on its head. It is BLASPHEMY of Mollegen to turn Scripture upside down and distort its plain meaning to suit the proclivities of a handful of whinny sodomites who are demanding that the church accept their lethal behavior.  No, theblasphemy is being committed by Mollegen not the biblically orthodox in ECUSA for daring to call a lie the truth and to say something is true when it is a lie.   And what signs of the Holy Spirit are present in Canon Robinson’s life? That he was married, had two kids, then discovered he was gay, divorced his wife, then meets and mates with his boyfriend Mark Andrew! This is a sign of the Holy Spirit! What distorted perverted logic is this. It is distorted and perverted because Scripture will have none of it and neither will any of the world’s religions or leading Christian denominations.   So by Mollegen’s logic, the entire Roman Catholic Church, the Russian Orthodox Church, 20 million Southern Baptists and more are blaspheming the Holy Ghost because Ted Mollegen says so. This is beyond all human logic and totally laughable.   Then Mollegen says that, Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was cited by Jesus in three Gospels as an unforgivable sin. Likewise, in three Gospels, he warns those who cause others to sin: ... It would be better for him to if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea. For the sake of your own souls -- and the souls of those whom you lead -- I ask you the dissenting Episcopal and Anglican brothers and sisters to reconsider what you are contemplating as your response to the election and confirmation of Canon Gene Robinson as the next Bishop of New Hampshire.   So here we see Mollegen, having turned truth on its head, he now proceeds to use the very Scriptures that Jesus used against those who would abuse children to support his sick logic.   He writes: Jesus himself said nothing (that we know of) against homosexual unions. However, he clearly spoke against dividing the faithful. And he spoke severely against causing your followers to sin.   And he spoke quite strongly against judging others. I pray you, do not let your cultural heritages and emotional responses lead you and your followers astray -- please reconsider what you are about to do.   Jesus said nothing about homosexuality (though he may have done so based on John 21:25) because it was not even on the radar screen of contemporary or ancient Judaism. No one even considered homosexual behavior a viable sexual option. Jesus reaffirmed marriage between a man and woman as did the Apostle Paul who reaffirmed marriage as the ONLY acceptable venue for sexual behavior.   Jesus also had nothing to say about bestiality or bisexuality, does Mr. Mollegen think we should practice that?   Finally Mollegen cites Gamaliel ...If this plan or this undertaking is of men, it will fail’ but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!   You are right Mr. Mollegen it will and it is failing. The Episcopal Church is in a state of  total chaos and breakdown with thousands having left to join the AMIA and a new Episcopal structure is emerging to challe.

News Analysis   By David W. Virtue   It is now apparent that two very different and conflicting views of what The Episcopal Church will look like are beginning to emerge, as the Year 2003 ends, and the Year 2004 begins. On one side is the vision of Frank T. Griswold, The Episcopal Church’s Presiding Bishop. His vision is contained in what he calls guidelines for providing Supplemental Episcopal Pastoral Care for those bishops who find they have dissident meaning biblically orthodox parishes, who are at odds with theologically revisionist diocesan bishops like Charles E. Bennison, Tom Shaw, and John Chane et al.   On the other side is the Confessing Network of Churches that has been formed with some 13 dioceses now in place (and there will be more) that offer a completely different vision of what The Episcopal Church will look like as the Year 2004 unfolds. One side is post-Biblical, post-modernist, culturally conforming and accommodationist with regard to both ‘the Faith once delivered’ and morals.   The other side is Biblical, faithful to Scripture, liturgically honest, (that is they believe what the Prayer Book says and don’t simply pay lip service to it), gospel-driven with a clear understanding that while the gospel message never changes, it must be spoken relevantly into a pluralistic and pluriform world not much different from the First Century.   These two visions will in time, face off and harden into battle lines, which, if they do not find a way to live at peace with each other, will come to blows. A full-blown war will break out as the year progresses.   Both sides claim that the Archbishop of Canterbury is not intervening in ECUSA’s internal affairs, but Dr. Williams has given the green light for the Network to form, while at the same time affirming Griswold’s need to find a way through the maze of orthodox priests who need protection in revisionist dioceses with the enticement of pastoral care.   The Archbishop of Canterbury is clearly staying above the fray, which is probably a safe place to stay, (but not for long) when the simmering battle breaks out into a full-scale war. And this will be no dogfight’ it will be a war for the very soul of the Episcopal Church.   Another reason why the Network is not buying into Griswold’s vision is that supplemental pastoral care is a crock. What it allows is for a diocesan bishop like Charles Bennison or Bill Swing to let a flying bishop come in on the understanding that the Diocesan can follow later if he or she so chooses.   In other words, it is only supplemental and not alternative pastoral care, which is what Forward in Faith US wants and who will not settle for anything less.   This is precisely the situation in the Diocese of Pennsylvania where Bishop Bennison has demanded the right to visit the Anglo-Catholic parish of Church of the Good Shepherd regardless of who the flying bishop is that he allows to visit. Of course this is totally unacceptable to Fr. David Moyer.   Alternative and supplemental are two very different concepts and one hopes the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is said to be very bright, should be able to figure out for himself without another Eames Commission to help him.   The Network of Confessing Churches is saying that they cannot share the same Narthex space with the ECUSA because it has a different gospel, but they don’t want to split off from the Episcopal Church because the legal ramifications and property issues are enormous and everyone would lose. It’s a sort of legal separation without a full-blown divorce.   David Booth Beers, Griswold’s legal guru might be itching to use the Dennis Canon, but he can’t if no one tries to pull their parish out of the diocese and therefore out of the National Church. To that extent his hands are tied.   Furthermore, taking back parish buildings while losing souls is, in the long run, a no winner for revisionist bishops. Empty pews don’t produce revenue and maintenance costs for empty churches must come out of diocesan coffers.   But stubbornness and power make good bedfellows, and we have seen in the Diocese of Pennsylvania and in the Diocese of New Westminster what stubborn revisionist bishops can and will do.   Both Bennison and Ingham have adopted a scorched earth policy in dealing with parish priests that don’t agree with them, and who insist there is only one gospel and any other gospel is anathema.   In the Diocese of NW this past week, Michael Ingham shut down Holy Cross a small but growing parish in Abbottsford, British Columbia. The argument is’ if you won’t conform I will crush you like a gnat. Forget the souls who will be hurt by his actions, or even what God thinks, this is about the raw, naked, abuse of ecclesiastical power.   It is also why the new Network knows they cannot worship in the same parish pews with these people. It is a lose-lose proposition, repeatedly stated in interview after interview with Canon David Anderson, president of the American Anglican Council.   But what the Network must address are those thriving orthodox parishes in revisionist dioceses. How can they be protected? Bishop Robert Duncan will have to do something for them. When Ft. Moyer was inhibited, he and a group of orthodox bishops and clergy planned to meet with Ft. Moyer at the Radnor Hotel near Philadelphia earlier this year. But Bennison objected and they backed down. At some point orthodox bishops need to be willing to enter revisionist dioceses without the permission of bishops like Bennison and take the risk, or it will just be a shell game.   One of the reasons, but not overtly stated, as to why the Network won’t breakaway from the ECUSA is that they maintain they are the upholders of the one true faith, and in abandoning the ECUSA, they are abandoning what the ECUSA originally stood for, that is before the rot set in with Bishops Pike and Spong. The argument, again not stated, is that in time, as revisionism dies with no discernible gospel and liberal seminaries start closing, as surely they will, and the orthodox ones continue burgeoning, they might just win if they stay and fight. It might take 10 or 20 years, but what is that in the life of the Church.   The history of the Christian Church is strewn with the dead bodies of the faithful drawn over centuries.   Add to the mix what the Anglican Primates will do and how they will act, and the Network (already affirmed by the Province of Uganda) has strong international support that will only increase with time.   Already some twenty of the 38 primates have declared their support for the formation of the confessing network organized by the AAC, according to the Rev. Canon Bill Atwood, secretary general of the EKKLESIA Society, and that figure will only grow. It is also a headache for Williams, because he will never know when they will suddenly act against him.   Canon Atwood himself has emerged as the orthodox answer to Canon John Peterson of the Anglican Consultative Council. He may not have Peterson’s money or infrastructure, but he does have the ear and confidence of the vast majority of primates who listen to him and are guided by him.   Peterson has no respect among the orthodox primates, who no longer want him anywhere near their provinces, and as money can no longer be used by him to manipulate them, his power will drain away, in time, to nothing.   The Archbishop of Canterbury says he is waiting to see what the report he has commissioned by Robin Eames will produce before he decides to act to discipline Griswold. What he wants is mutual accountability, but that is an increasingly growing fiction, as Griswold and ECUSA’s 62 revisionist bishops will be held accountable to no one but themselves.   And then there is the Anglican Communion’s wild card - Nigerian Primate Peter Akinola. He has come out blasting Griswold, Robinson and other Western liberal bishops, refusing their money and ready to have the African, Asian and Southern Cone bishops act on their own.   The argument, though he has not made it is, why should he be expected to wait till Sept/Oct 2004 for the Eames Commission decision on homosexuality when Frank Griswold publicly turned his back on the Pastoral Letter he signed at Lambeth and within a few weeks consecrated a non-celibate homosexual to the episcopacy!   Griswold has lied and flipped the bird to his fellow Primates while schmoozing Rowan Williams just as he did George Carey over the AMIA consecrations.   This morally conflicted, theologically contorted little man with his force field mystic paganism, has proven there is no level he won’t stoop too, to stay in the Supreme Club of Purple as long as he can keep Williams from acting against him. And he has done it with all the gall and venality of a high class hooker who admits she will only do it for $1,000 and not for 50 bucks in the back seat of a streetcar name ECUSA.   Is it the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning for ECUSA and Frank Griswold? We wait and see. Whatever it is, 2004 promises to be the most climactic year in the 200-year-old history of the Episcopal Church with two conflicting world views locked in mortal combat.   END