My question is, "Do you think that the Episcopal Bishops had any fears that when they elected Vicki Gene that it was not purely local and that anyone would care enough to protest? Such a thought never entered their collective diminutive, amoebic, Lilliputian minds. They had one thought and that was the promotion of the homoerotic agenda and to hell with the results.

And here is another quote from the report:

"In most of our provinces the election of Canon Gene Robinson would not have been possible since his chosen lifestyle would give rise to a canonical impediment to his consecration as a bishop. If his consecration proceeds, we recognise that we have reached a crucial and critical point in the life of the Anglican Communion and we have had to conclude that the future of the Communion itself will be put in jeopardy. In this case, the ministry of his one bishop will not be recognised by most of the Anglican world, and many provinces are likely to consider themselves to be out of Communion with the Episcopal Church (USA). This will tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level, and may lead to further division on this and further issues as provinces have to decide in consequence whether they can remain in communion with provinces that choose not to break communion with the Episcopal Church (USA). Similar considerations apply to the situation pertaining in the Diocese of New Westminster. We have noted that the Lambeth Conference 1998 requested the Archbishop of Canterbury to establish a commission to consider his own role in maintaining communion within and between provinces when grave difficulties arise.107 We ask him now to establish such a commission, but that its remit be extended to include urgent and deep theological and legal reflection on the way in which the dangers we have identified at this meeting will have to be addressed. We request that such a commission complete its work, at least in relation to the issues raised at this meeting, within twelve months."

Well, they do state the problem, however the problem is so well known that it didn't take "scholars" reams of paper and months to state something so obvious. What astounds me is their solution to this problem.................let's have another commission and spend another year to study the problem. Are they kidding? Nope, it's for real. But, over the last several years this has been an ongoing ploy of the revisionist agenda. Talk, talk, talk, study, study, study, and even if it is tedious, tiresome, monotonous, and boring, study and talk some more. There is an old Latin saying non carborundum bastardi which means in street language, "Don't let the bastards grind you down". However, the ECUSA does not belong to the Lord Jesus Christ, but I am afraid it does belong to the adversary. If this language offends you, I am sorry, but truth is more important than feelings.

This report is a FRAUD. It solves nothing and answers no questions concerning how to restore unity. Here is one for them to ponder: Unity can only be restored among those who have received Jesus and have come to a deep personal relationship with Him and believe deeply in the Holy Scriptures as the absolute Word of God revealed by he Holy Spirit. There can never be communion between evil and good.

James 3:9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness. 10. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be.

11. Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? 12. My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.

END