Anglicanism in America

AAC: A personal message from Rev. Phil Ashey, Chief Operating Officer

2008-12-31T12:27:00.000-08:00

Excerpted from the 12/5/2008 AAC Email Newsletter.

"Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to [King Nebuchadnezzar]...'If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand. But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods, or worship the image of gold you have set up.'" (Daniel 3:17-18 NIV)

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ, members and friends of AAC, in TEC,

Grace and Peace to you in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

With the formation of the Anglican Church in North America, a "Province in Formation," many of you are asking, understandably, and with some concern, "What is to become of us who choose to remain in TEC?" What about those of us who are stuck in a heterodox Episcopal church? What about those of us who have had to affiliate for the moment with another sort of church because there is no orthodox Anglican church in the ACNA within driving distance? Is our only option to stay where we are, in the furnace, and make our stand and our witness like Daniel's friends?

First, on behalf of the AAC, let me assure you that we are here, just as we have been since our beginnings, to serve you. We understand the conscientious reasons why you have chosen to remain in TEC. We honor your decision. We pray for you. More than that, we stand with you, with resources to help you make your stand in Christ.

Secondly, we believe God has a strategy that involves more than just standing in the furnace and waiting for the fire to consume you. Look at Daniel and his friends, who faced a system and authority more idolatrous and lawless than TEC. They did not conform to the culture they were in, but instead they resolved to witness to it:

* by drawing a firm line in conformity with God's word and not eating at
the King's table (Daniel 1:8),
* by learning as much as they could about Babylonian culture (Daniel 1:3-4,
17),
* by being more excellent ("ten times better") than anyone else in the
kingdom (Daniel 1:18-20);
* by being consistent throughout many changes of leadership (Daniel 1:21);
* by addressing hostile authorities directly, and with wisdom and tact
(Daniel 2:14-16);
* by avoiding isolation, taking counsel and praying together (Daniel
2:17-18);
* by asking God for discernment (Daniel 2:19);
* by resisting peer pressure, malicious accusations, the temptation to
compromise, an unpredictable king, and even a delaying God (Daniel 3:1-18)

By following this strategy, God blessed them in the furnace, brought them out, and used their faithfulness to move unbelieving authorities to proclaim throughout the whole kingdom the uniqueness and sovereignty of our God, "for no other God can save in this way." (Daniel 3:28-29)

If God has called you to remain in TEC, we believe he has a plan for your time and service, just like Daniel and his friends. And we are here to help you do it.

We intend to continue supporting you in every way we can, with resources for mission and ministry at the congregational level, with counsel in regards to TEC canons and other legal issues, and through our presence and activity in the councils of the Anglican Communion. We will be at TEC General Convention in July 2009, as we have at previous General Conventions, to provide a strategic retreat for Biblically orthodox Episcopalians serving as delegates and alternates to General Convention.

We will continue to personally visit our AAC congregations, chapters and affiliates to provide encouragement, equipping, and counsel. (In fact, if you would like a visit, I would be delighted to come to your chapter or congregation.) If you are experiencing persecution from your bishop and diocese, we will extend our support to you "In Pectore." Also, through our weekly e-newsletter and "Salt and Light" column, we will continue to spotlight TEC congregations and AAC members whose ministries witness to a robust Biblical, confessional and missional Anglicanism in 21st century America.

If God leads you into the furnace, we will stand with you. And we will discover again, in God's wonderful saving grace, how God uses that fire to loose us from our chains, and deliver us unharmed on the other side for even greater ministry!

Yours in Christ,
Fr. Phil Ashey

WISCONSIN: First Episcopal Parish Leaves Diocese of Milwaukee and TEC for CANA

2008-12-31T12:24:00.000-08:00

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/31/2008

St. Edmund's Episcopal Church in Elm Grove, a congregation founded in 1874 in Milwaukee, voted overwhelmingly this week to leave the diocese and The Episcopal Church and move its canonical jurisdiction to the Convocation of North American Anglicans (CANA) based in Herndon, Va.

The Wisconsin parish congregation is following some 100 Episcopal parishes and four dioceses who have left The Episcopal Church during the past two years because they view the National Church as increasingly hostile to orthodox, traditional Christian belief and practice.

St. Edmund's is the first of what is projected to be several Episcopal parishes in Wisconsin to take this step.

"The difficult decision to make this lateral move within valid jurisdictions of the Anglican Communion was finalized after months of prayer and discussion at the Elm Grove parish. The final declaration was signed by 75 of the 84 adult communicant members of the congregation," said a press release from the church.

A spokesman for the parish note that the final decisions were made during bitter winter conditions that brought out more communicants than anticipated who wanted to sign the declaration.

In a formal letter to Bishop Steven Miller, the Episcopal Bishop of Milwaukee they said the issues were theological and "beyond suffragan episcopal bedrooms in New England" and that the congregation was contending for the 'faith once delivered to the saints' and nothing less.

"We are defending the irrevocable stance on biblical authority and order firmly held by the vast majority of the world's Anglicans," they wrote.

"People of Faith are not leaving the Episcopal Church; The Episcopal Church has left them."

The congregation accused the bishop of showing "callow disrespect" for their faithfulness, good will, integrity and the ability of a congregation of thinking adults to make fully informed decisions. We wish the Diocese of Milwaukee no ill will, they wrote.

The Vestry said in their letter that the corporation of St. Edmund's Church would stay in the hands of the parish. "No action on our part may be construed by any person or persons as a dissolution, devolvement, abolition or alienation of St. Edmund's church and all assets, properties, chattel, and resources of St. Edmund's Church remain those of St. Edmund's Church."

Bishop Steven's said last month in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that the new Anglican province of North America would have "no impact on the diocese of Milwaukee."

The parish's complete statement, their doctrinal statement and letter to Bishop Stevens can be read here:

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/content/stedmunds_pressrelease.pdf

REMAIN FAITHFUL: Conference Hopes to Mobilize the Faithful to address New NA Province

2008-09-08T09:54:00.001-07:00

Remain Faithful, a lay led organization comprised of orthodox Episcopalians and Anglicans is planning to take a very active role in support of the establishment of an orthodox Anglican Province in North America. The Anglican communion in North America has been split into two separate churches with polarizing differences in beliefs over the past 30 years. It is apparent that a reconciliation is not going to occur as the orthodox historic faith is being compromised by new age revisionist theology.

According to noted English journalist Andrew Carey, son of retired Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey, "The depressing and urgent situation in The Episcopal Church becomes ever clearer over time, despite all of the efforts of their liberal church leaders to try and persuade the rest of the Anglican Communion that really we're just like you. Close watchers of the US ... will be more aware than most of the state of that Church. Heterodoxy [unorthodoxy ] is never punished, whereas orthodox impatience is the subject of lawsuits all over the country. And the amount of heterodoxy uttered in The Episcopal Church is truly astonishing.

Even leaving aside the virtual atheism of Bishop Spong's 'Twelve Theses', we've had bishops claim that the church can 're-write the Bible', others make sweeping apologies for Christian mission to those of other faiths, while the Presiding Bishop views Jesus as just one way among many."

The laity have realized that The Episcopal Church (TEC) will not change course. Numerous orthodox Anglicans have therefore left or are contemplating leaving the Church. Remain Faithful believes strongly that the answer lies in the formation of an orthodox Anglican Province in North America as has been outlined by the Common Cause Partnership, and endorsed by GAFCON, and is committed to being a strong lay voice beside our faithful Clergy to help make this happen.

As such, Remain Faithful will be hosting its second conference on Saturday September 27, 2008 at St. Vincent 's Cathedral in Bedford, Texas.

All orthodox Anglicans are invited to attend. "Mobilizing the Faithful- Toward a Faithful Future" will begin at 10:00 a.m. on the Saturday morning and will include educational components of how we got where we are and the true differences in our beliefs, factual information for delegates and vestry members, and a call from Remain Faithful to move forward in earnest with the formation of the new orthodox Anglican Province in North America. Please rsvp on our website at http://www.remainfaithful.org/ .The conference will conclude with a lunch around 1:00 p.m.

"All across our planet orthodox Anglicans acknowledge this intolerable situation where the communion has been derailed from its historic faith by revisionists within The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church in Canada. We fully support the position reached by the founders of Common Cause Partnership to form a new orthodox Anglican Province in North America, and as was highlighted at the recent GAFCON meeting of orthodox Anglicans in Jerusalem. We call on the Primates of GAFCON to formally acknowledge a new orthodox Province in North American and we stand ready as faithful laity to insure a rapid and complete formation of this new Province.

It should be stressed, we are not leaving the Church - TEC and the Anglican Church in Canada have left the historic Anglican faith. We can no longer stand by and watch the situation deteriorate further. The time for action is now." Chad Bates, Remain Faithful Chair stated.

"We must be devoted to neither man nor institution, but to Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour, the risen God who lived and died for our sins and is the sole source of our eternal salvation, and His revealed word to us, the Bible, which contains all things necessary for salvation and is authoritative in our behavior and daily lives. We must stand up for our faith, once delivered to the Saints. We must move forward together with our Anglican brothers and sisters in Christ who share our orthodox beliefs to share the Good News of Christ's redemption with the world."

Cora Werley, Spokesperson for Remain Faithful added. Remain Faithful is in the planning stages for how the laity can stand beside and complement faithful Clergy to move forward rapidly with this new Province formation and will b e working in conjunction with Common Cause Partnership to provide lay leadership and support for the new Province.

Remain Faithful was formed in late May of this year, but already has well over 830 members from over 60 Dioceses and over 16 countries.

The membership represents over 33,200 years of membership as Episcopalians and Anglicans. Its membership includes those from The Episcopal Church, Canada, AMiA, CANA, REC, and many other members of the Anglican Communion. For more information on Remain Faithful, go to our website at http://www.remainfaithful.org

Anglican Province of America Diocese of the West Joins Reformed Episcopal Church

2008-09-08T09:51:00.001-07:00

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
9/7/2008

In a move that could have serious implications for the Common Cause Partnership, an entire diocese of the Anglican Province of America with some 22 plus churches has fled that Anglican jurisdiction and allied itself with the Reformed Episcopal Church in America (REC).

"I pray that you will understand that we are not leaving the APA out of any anger but are entering into the REC so we can fulfill what we have been working on for the past ten years. By transferring to the REC we remain in intercommunion with each other and still brothers," wrote the Rt. Rev. Richard Boyce, OCD Bishop of the Diocese of the West (DOW/ APA.)

In a series of letters obtained by VirtueOnline, Bishop Boyce announced this week that he was taking his diocese out of the APA and formally bringing it into the Reformed Episcopal Church, a move that angered the Presiding Bishop of the APA, the Most. Rev. Walter Grundorf, who promptly relieved Boyce of his position as Bishop and appointed the Very Rev. Douglas King as interim administrator of the DOW.

"You are no longer the Diocesan Bishop of the DOW of the APA as of September 5. I have named the Very Rev. Douglas King as interim administrator." Grundorf then said that all DOW priests and parishes wishing to leave the APA must send a letter of their intention to him and request Letters Dismissory. He then said that until he hears from them, they remain in good standing and has his and the APA's full support.

He concluded his letter saying that the letters would provide for an "orderly transition" to the REC. "We have made such orderly transfers in the past between REC/APA and I hope and pray that this will be no exception."

Boyce responded from his parish in Seattle, saying that Grundorf's understanding of the meaning of the word "jurisdiction" was a misconception on his part.

"I have not resigned my jurisdiction nor has coadjutor Bishop Winfield Mott. We have only requested the REC to receive the Diocese of the West (DOW) which has not been acted upon.

"I would remind you that the Reformed Episcopal Church (REC) has similar beliefs, traditions and practices on the Sacraments and Holy Orders particularly as they pertain to women's ordination.

"The DOW is a jurisdiction. I would refer you to Article 2., Sect. 6 of the Constitution of the Anglican Province of America (APA), and Canon 16, Sect. (a) and (e) which refer to the Bishop's jurisdiction. If you recall since the third century tradition has said that "Where the Bishop is, there is the Church, where the Church is there is the Bishop". Boyce went on to say that the Anglican Communion has stated through the Archbishop of Canterbury, that the basic unit of the Church is the Diocese, and you do consider yourself as Anglican."

Boyce said that no one is required by the Constitution or the Canons to send the Presiding Bishop a letter of resignation when leaving the APA. A letter Dismissory is from Diocesan Bishop to Diocesan Bishop.

Boyce blasted Grundorf saying that provincial protocol was a recent invention, "as I do not find it stated anywhere in APA documents. You, as Presiding Bishops have authority only to conduct the meetings of the House of Bishops (HOB) and to take orders for the consecration of Bishops."

"As a result of this restriction you have no authority to declare that I am no longer the Diocesan Bishop of the DOW."

Boyce argued that the APA Constitution states that a bishop shall confine the exercise of his office to his own Diocese. "Therefore as a Presiding Bishop with no authority, and functioning as a Diocesan Bishop of the Diocese of the Eastern US (DEUS), you must not intrude into the affairs of the DOW."

"There is no authority conferred to you by the Constitution of the APA nor by the Canons of the APA to appoint the Rev. Douglas King, nor anyone else as an interim administrator of the DOW. This action would appear to follow The Episcopal Church (TEC) as in the case of the Diocese of San Joaquin.

"DOW Priests and Parishes do not need to send you a latter of intention of staying members of DOW. This is a Diocesan matter for DOW.

"This supposed protocol has no standing in the Constitution of the APA nor in the Canons of the APA.

"No Article of the Constitution of the APA or Canon of the APA prevents the DOW from effecting a merger with the REC, with whom we are in communion, as is the APA. We are following the time-line established by the APA and REC as this is the ten year mark leading to the merger. We just plan to do this before the rest of the APA."

Grundorf wrote to all the parishes of the DOW responding to Boyce's letter saying that while he was not totally surprised, "I am disappointed. I am also disappointed that the REC did not discuss this with me if indeed they are fully aware of all of Bishop Boyce's plans."

The Presiding Bishop said the DOW "still exists" with some having notified him that they had no intention of leaving the APA.

"Bishop Boyce has resigned from the APA, therefore he is no longer the Bishop of the APA/DOW." Grundorf who then said he was appointing King to serve as interim administrator "until such time as we can determine who is leaving and who is staying. I will then call an extraordinary Synod to reorganize and elect the appropriate officers."

Grundorf said there would be no attempt to claim church property or funds. "For all concerned in the APA and the REC, this transition must be done in a proper and orderly manner."

The PB said that one of the subjects to be addressed at their next Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas (FACA) meeting will be "jurisdiction hopping."

"I am well aware that the motivation of this action has been driven by the Common Cause Partnership (CCP). While I support much of what the CCP stands for I, along with many others, have reservations as to what will be the final decision on the ordination of women, which most of the CCP members enthusiastically support. We have stood our ground for the last 30 plus years to the theological innovations of the Episcopal Church and I do not think we should abandon our principles at this point."

One observer told VOL that APA's Diocese of the West's decision to secede was to join Common Cause by way of the REC. It is believed that, in time, CCP will form the basis of a new North American Anglican Province, an orthodox alternative jurisdiction separate from The Episcopal Church and coming under the oversight of the newly formed Global Anglican Fellowship Conference (GAFCON.)

VOL could not obtain comment from leaders of the Reformed Episcopal Church.

END

LONDON: Archbishop of Canterbury's rescue plan for Anglican Communion rejected

2008-08-30T03:32:00.000-07:00

Hopes of a solution for the split in the Anglican Communion over homosexuality have been further diminished after a rescue plan endorsed by the Archbishop of Canterbury was rejected by conservative bishops.

By Martin Beckford, Religious Affairs Correspondent
The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/2646689/Archbishop-of-Canterburys-rescue-plan-for-Anglican-Communion-rejected.html

August 29, 2008

Clergy who have defected from their liberal national churches to join traditionalist provinces overseas said the scheme to put them in a "holding bay" before returning them home was "demeaning and unacceptable".

Meanwhile orthodox Anglican leaders have pledged to press ahead with the creation of their rival movement, claiming that it is an "illusion" to believe that the damage caused by the election of an openly gay bishop can be undone.

It comes just days after Dr Rowan Williams said that the Lambeth Conference gathering of Anglican bishops last month had exceeded expectations and showed that most wanted the 80 million-strong worldwide Communion to stay together despite deep divisions over sexuality.

A letter written by five bishops who have defected from the ultra-liberal Episcopal Church of the USA to conservative churches in Africa and South America was highly critical of the plan announced at Lambeth to create a "pastoral forum", headed by Dr Williams, that would try to resolve new crises in the Communion and act as a "holding bay" for parishes that have left their home countries.

It said: "We note that the pastoral forum proposal has been developed without any consultation with those most directly affected in North America. This had led to a number of serious misunderstandings with regard to the situation at the local level and the relationship between the bishops, clergy and congregations and their sponsoring provinces.

"We would also observe that the various analogies offered, for example, that we are disaffected children being reunited with our parents or that we are being placed in a holding bay before being restored to our proper province are both demeaning and unacceptable."

They said the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada, by electing a gay bishop and sanctioning the blessing of same-sex unions, are now "diametrically opposed" to their beliefs and Anglican teaching, and added: "We can envision no way in which we could be part of pastoral forum in which either Church exercises any leadership role."

Six heads - or Primates - of Anglican provinces who are leading members of the orthodox Gafcon movement met in London last week and have now issued a statement on the outcome of their summit.

They said it was clear that some Anglicans will continue to sanctify "sinful" practices regardless of pleas to stop doing so by Dr Williams.

The Gafcon leaders also said it was right that churches who disagree with the liberal direction of some provinces should "withdraw their fellowship", and that there is "widespread impaired and broken" communion between Anglicans.

They said they were "saddened" that Lambeth did not offer a new way to resolve differences and just repeated calls for liberal innovations, and border-crossing by disaffected clergy, to stop.

The primates pointed out how long the new plans would take to come into effect and added: "Delay itself seems to be a strategy employed by some in order to resolve the issue through weariness."

END

Good News from the N.A. Realignment Movement

2008-08-30T03:27:00.001-07:00

As reported at VirtueOnline:

CHRIST CHURCH in Plano, Texas presented the Diocese of Peru http://www.peru.anglican.org) with a gift of $500,000, enabling the expansion and development of a Leadership Center and Seminary in Lima, Peru. The Rev. Canon David H. Roseberry, rector of Christ Church Plano, said, "We have been sending mission teams to Peru for over eight years and we have been blessed through our relationship with Bishop Bill Godfrey and the people there. Our church family decided it was time to send significant financial resources to make a lasting improvement in the life of that Anglican diocese." The money, a gift from Christ Church Plano parishioners, goes toward the August 28, 2008 purchase of an existing 18,000 square foot building, formerly designed and used as a school. It will be remodeled and reconfigured to house an expanded seminary, diocese administration offices including the Bishop's office, and a worship space for the Mission Ascension. Future plans might include a dormitory for mission teams, or classroom and office space, or both. Christ Church Plano has been a long-time strategic partner of the Diocese of Peru, supplying funds, short and long-term missionaries and prayer partnership steadily throughout the year.

Getting Ready for GAFCON

2008-06-16T13:09:00.000-07:00

The Rev. Cn. Daryl Fenton

On May 21, two Common Cause “prayer-bloggers,” the Rev. Timothy Fountain and Mr. William Schontz, quietly began to post guidance at www.prayer.united-anglicans.org for those participating in 40 days of prayer and fasting for the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). Every Day, our internal statistics show that scores are logging on and praying with them.

Those of us from the Network attending this historic event are grateful for their prayers. Out of a total of more than 1,000 bishops, priests, deacons and laity who have registered for GAFCON, just over 130 will be from North America. Of the more than 280 bishops registered to attend, 19 are affiliated with Common Cause.

We are a small contingent going to what is likely the most important Anglican event in decades. We are not running the show or driving the agenda. This meeting is not about North America or our problems. It is about expanding a faithful, orthodox Anglican witness worldwide. It is also about working together to sail through the storms assailing the western colonial model that has characterized the Anglican Communion for the past century.

The storms are here and, frankly, the traditional structures of the Anglican Communion don’t appear ready to deal with them. Archbishop Williams is clearly steering the Lambeth Conference away from any sort of accounting for The Episcopal Church and Anglican Church of Canada’s increasingly brazen flouting of orthodox faith and the decisions of the last Lambeth Conference. The Anglican Covenant becomes weaker with every revision. We hear reports that the earliest we could expect to see any covenant in place would be sometime around the 2018 Lambeth Conference.

GAFCON, of course, won’t be able to make those storms disappear. It certainly can’t heal the structures of the Anglican Communion. It will, however, chart the course for world wide ministry together across the globe. It will help us get to know our fellow sailors; to prepare for the voyage ahead. And, it will remind us of where we are sailing. The mission God has given us is not simply to survive, but to live the great commandment to love our neighbor and to fulfill the great commission to share the Gospel.

We are honored to be going to GAFCON. We look forward to representing orthodox Anglicans in North America as we spend time in Jerusalem with our worldwide Anglican family. We will, of course, do our best to keep all in the Network informed about what happens at GAFCON. Expect to see regular email and website updates from us between June 22–29, as well as more in-depth reporting in the August addition of Network News, our printed newsletter.

Keep us in your prayers.

Faithfully yours,

Daryl's signature

The Rev. Canon Daryl Fenton
Chief Operating Officer
Anglican Communion Network

1,000 Christial Leaders, 280 Bishops Registered for GAFCON

2008-05-20T14:02:00.000-07:00

May 20, 2008

Over 1,000 senior leaders from seventeen provinces in the Anglican Communion, representing 35 million church-going Anglicans, have registered for the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem at the close of the online registration process. They include 280 bishops, almost all accompanied by their wives. Final attendance figures will depend on smooth processing of requested visas, and other factors.

GAFCON leaders have met in the period leading up to Pentecost with the leaders of Anglican, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Catholic churches and Palestinian Christians and Messianic Jews in Jerusalem to brief them on the nature and purpose of GAFCON. GAFCON is concerned to affirm the continuing presence of the Church in the Holy Land.

Archbishop Peter Jensen of Sydney, the chair of the Programme Committee reports that the programme is almost complete. "Our programme will focus on the transforming love of Christ. We will be drawing from the scriptures of the Old and New Testament in our pilgrimage, and their relevance to the challenges facing the church globally today. These include secularism, other religions, poverty and HIV/AIDS as well as moral and theological issues."

Pilgrims will visit traditional sites in Jerusalem during the pilgrimage June 22 – 29, 2008 including Mount of Olives, the Garden of Gethsemane and the Ophel Gardens and Temple steps where at the first Pentecost Peter preached and people of all nations responded. The 1,000 pilgrims will travel to Bethlehem to the Church of the Nativity and Shepherds' Field, and then to Galilee.

The goals of the GAFCON conference in Jerusalem are to:
1. Provide an opportunity for fellowship as well as to continue to experience and proclaim the transforming love of Christ.
2. Develop a renewed understanding of our identity as Anglican Christians.
3. Prepare for an Anglican future in which the Gospel is uncompromised and Christ-centered mission a top priority.

For further information:» click here to email the Rev'd Dr. Arne H. Fjeldstad, GAFCON Head of Communications
tel. (+47) 97 56 16 96
US phone (SkypeIn): (202) 580 8685

Breakaway congregation recognition is blow to Canadian Church

2008-05-20T10:47:00.000-07:00

From the Church of England Newspaper

Posted by George Conger

The Anglican Church of Canada’s united front against the breakaway congregations and clergy of the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) received a major blow last week after a diocesan synod voted to recognize the secessions.

“All of these churches have by their decisions stayed within the Anglican Communion,” the synod of the Diocese of Athabasca said on April 26, disputing assertions made by Bishop Michael Ingham of New Westminster and other Canadian bishops that by quitting the Canadian Church the secessionists were no longer Anglicans.

The Northern Alberta-based diocese adopted a series of resolutions affirming that it was in “full communion” with ANiC and its sponsor, the Province of the Southern Cone.

The diocese also expressed “its dismay” at the attempts by several bishops to respond to the secessions by turning to the civil courts. “By resorting to the civil courts so readily, the bishops of those dioceses where there are dissident parishes and clergy have displayed so visibly that, to them, the issue is power, not the will of God,” synod said, according to a statement posted on the diocesan website.

Archbishop John Clarke, metropolitan archbishop of Rupert’s Land, and Bishop of Athabasca stated the diocese’s intent was to remain “in communion with as wide a range of our brothers and sisters in Christ as is possible.”

The vote was not a step towards quitting the Canadian Church, he noted, writing “be assured that the Diocese of Athabasca is as deeply committed as ever to the Anglican Church of Canada and to the Anglican Communion.”

However, Archbishop Clarke criticized the push towards permitting same-sex blessings in the Canadian Church, expressing his disappointment with dioceses who abused the language of the church’s canons and prayer book to achieve their political ends.

“We believe that we are bound to adhere to the decisions of General Synod, not only in the letter but also in the spirit,” he said. “We understand the decision of General Synod 2007 not to endorse the right of dioceses to bless same-gender unions as meaning that it was the mind of General Synod that we should not proceed at this time.”

Christian Century: Splitting up

2008-05-19T12:04:00.000-07:00

Anglican angst

by Jason Byassee

Last year the Church of the Resurrection in suburban West Chicago closed its doors and put its building up for sale. The Episcopal congregation had suffered membership losses 14 years earlier when some conservative members left to start their own church, also called the Church of the Resurrection, in nearby Glen Ellyn. The new congregation later aligned itself with the Anglican Mission in the Americas (AMIA), which is connected to the Anglican Church in Rwanda.

The new Church of the Resurrection later experienced its own split, with some members leaving to launch the Church of the Great Shepherd—also affiliated with AMIA—in Wheaton. The Church of the Great Shepherd eventually closed its doors, but not before a 2004 split led to the formation of the Church of the Savior back in West Chicago. During this time the ranks of St. Mark's, an Episcopal congregation in Glen Ellyn, had been swelling—until the Episcopal Church consecrated an openly gay bishop in 2003, whereupon many St. Mark's members left to form All Souls, still another AMIA church, in Wheaton. Meanwhile, another split at the original Church of the Resurrection in West Chicago, which had experienced renewed growth, led to the creation of the Church of the Resurrection Anglican, a church which is overseen by the archbishop of Uganda. So now there are two Resurrection churches in the area, both formed in exodus from the original—now defunct—Church of the Resurrection, and both affiliated with African Anglican bodies, not with the Episcopal Church in the United States, sometimes abbreviated as TEC.

Got all that?

Even for Anglicans in the vicinity it takes a long memory or a flow chart to keep straight all the Episcopal-Anglican divisions and acronyms that have developed in the well-heeled suburbs of DuPage County, just west of Chicago.

Many observers of the Anglican splits assume that the key issue is homosexuality, but a closer look reveals that several other factors are also at work. In fact, the local Anglican story is largely about charismatic leaders coming and going, and congregations growing in their presence or folding in their absence. Among the AMIA folks, the juiciest disagreements have been over the ordination of women rather than the ordination of gays. And the biggest fight to date has been over the relationship between church and state in Rwanda, not in the U.S.

The energy in all these churches comes to a great extent from the many evangelicals who have converted to Anglicanism, a phenomenon outlined some 20 years ago by Robert Webber in Evangelicals on the Canterbury Trail. For the most part, evangelicals joined the Episcopal Church out of an appreciation for its liturgy and tradition, not for its generally liberal approach to sexual ethics and scripture. Many of these people have an association with evangelically oriented Wheaton College, where Webber taught for many years.

The various conservative groups that have broken away from the Episcopal Church in the U.S. have conglomerated into Common Cause, a group that has formed an alliance with churches in the global South in an effort to reverse the long liberal trend of the Anglican Communion in the Northern Hemisphere. Its advocates champion a thesis advanced by historian Philip Jenkins and others: Christianity's axis of power is tilting south and east, with church membership growing rapidly in the developing world while it declines in Europe and America. The late Diane Knippers, a leader among conservative Anglicans, summarized the situation this way: "Today's statistically typical Anglican is not drinking tea in an English vicarage. She is a 26-year-old African mother of four."

And, Knippers might have added, the typical Anglican is strongly opposed to homosexuality. One of the leaders of Common Cause is Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, who readily uses the word abomination in reference to homosexuality. He likens homosexuality in the church to a "cancerous lump," compares same-sex coupling to animal behavior, and supports severe prison sentences for homosexual practice.

The alliance that conservative Anglicans in the U.S. have made with African Anglicans presents an unusual challenge to the liberal Episcopalian mainstream. It's hard to accuse AMIA members of being bigoted malcontents when they are, in effect, members of African churches. At the 1998 Lambeth Conference of world Anglican leaders, John Shelby Spong, the now retired über-liberal bishop of Newark, dismissed his African colleagues who were adamantly opposed to liberalizing the church's rules on homosexuality as "superstitious, fundamentalist Christians." In remarks that have been frequently cited by his detractors, Spong complained that African Anglicans had "moved out of animism into a very superstitious kind of Christianity" and had yet to face "the intellectual revolution of Copernicus and Einstein that we've had to face in the developing world." For AMIA and its friends, here was evidence that white so-called progressives were the real bigots.

At the local level, the growth of the original Church of the Resurrection in West Chicago was sparked in the early 1990s by its pastor, William Beasley. As a theological and moral conservative, Beasley represented a minority in the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago. One element of his congregation's revitalized ministry was a program called Redeemed Lives, dedicated to helping gays and lesbians reorient their sexuality around "biblical principles" so as to embrace either heterosexuality or celibacy. Meanwhile, the Episcopal bishop of Chicago, Frank Griswold, was ordaining openly gay and lesbian pastors (contrary to canons then in place in TEC).

But when I met with Beasley, who is now a church planter with AMIA's Midwest Anglican Awakening, I could hardly get him to talk about homosexuality. Almost every question I raised he used as an opportunity to talk about reaching the unchurched: "Our goal is to reach just one-one hundredth of the unchurched people in Chicago. Out of 6 million, that's a lot!" Interestingly, it was the Church of the Resurrection that sought divorce from TEC. The Diocese of Chicago was then willing to tolerate a church that touted gay reparative therapy.

Last fall the Church of the Resurrection in Glen Ellyn hosted a regionwide AMIA event in Wheaton, with Archbishop Akinola as the honored guest. Over 1,000 worshipers from Chicagoland's two dozen or so Common Cause churches attended. A small batch of protesters mugged for the cameras outside. Akinola's very presence was a sign of Anglican division, since Anglican bishops do not ordinarily invite themselves into another diocese—and Akinola had not bothered to contact William Persell, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago.

The worship service that day was charismatic in nature—a reflection of Resurrection's normal liturgical practice (by contrast, Wheaton's All Souls AMIA church has a formal Anglo-Catholic liturgy). Hundreds of worshipers waved their hands at the high points in the eucharistic liturgy, giving the worship an almost Pentecostal quality. There were other evangelical touches, including a prayer ministry conducted by lay leaders after communion. The gathering was overwhelmingly young, with many hand-waving young mothers holding babies on their hips. Akinola made no explicit reference to homosexuality, but his challenge to the Episcopal Church was clear: "The gospel is the foundation of unity—there is no other. . . . Until we have obedience and transformation in ourselves, we can't have unity."

At a press conference afterward, Stewart Ruch, the pastor of Church of the Resurrection in Glen Ellyn, described the gathering as the fruit of grassroots-level friendships between African and American Anglicans. He would not respond to questions about protesters or about homosexuality. When I told Beasley that I was pleased not to have heard gay-bashing comments from AMIA people, he seemed puzzled: "Well, of course—that would be sinful." Ruch did say that a "true multiethnic gospel relationship" is like a marriage—each partner has different strengths and points on which correction and forgiveness are needed.

A split occurred at Church of the Resurrection (AMIA) when a group of members started the Church of the Great Shepherd, led by Lyle Dorsett, a professor of evangelism at Wheaton College. (Church of the Resurrection officially recalls this event as a church plant.) By all accounts Dorsett's charismatic personality and dynamic preaching were largely responsible for the church's growth. Great Shepherd put aside for missions half of every dollar it collected—an impressive commitment which allowed it to support mission work far beyond the capacity of most churches with 600 members.

But when Dorsett left Wheaton in 2005 to teach at Beeson Divinity School in Alabama, the future of Great Shepherd was put in question. The church closed its doors in 2007, with members scattering back to Resurrection or going elsewhere. Beasley puts a positive spin on the closure. For a church dedicated to mission, "It's no defeat to spend yourself out of existence." Resurrection's Web site blames the turmoil over Great Shepherd on the lack of episcopal oversight—now provided by AMIA and African bishops.

George Koch, pastor of Church of the Resurrection Anglican, views this history more simply: "Divorce breeds divorce." Bishop Persell, viewing the scene from the perspective of the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago, draws an even stronger conclusion: "If you're formed in opposition and negativity, you're bound to keep on splitting—there's always need for more purity, and you don't live with ambiguity very well, so you end up in a church of one."

When AMIA leaders talked to me about their departure from the Episcopal Church, they focused more on the doctrinal problems represented by Bishop Spong than on the sexual issues raised by the election of gay bishop V. Gene Robinson. Spong has been an outspoken advocate of gays in ministry, but as bishop he was also the author of several books on Christianity that present a sharp critique of Christian tradition and a decidedly unorthodox view of Jesus and Mary. Elizabeth Sausele, who was an associate pastor at All Souls, said that what prompted her to leave the Episcopal Church was that she didn't believe that "the faith once delivered to the apostles was being guarded by the House of Bishops. For a bishop of the church to say that Jesus didn't bodily rise from the dead and that the atonement is child abuse . . ." For her the lack of theological oversight was obvious.

Bishop Persell, however, downplays Spong's importance in this family feud: "He's one bishop among hundreds in the U.S., retired, with no vote in the House of Bishops or the convention." He added, "And most of what he says makes sense."

AMIA is determined to bring about a return to Anglican tradition. That makes Sausele's position all the more extraordinary: she is AMIA's only woman priest. A task force set up in AMIA's early days considered the issue of women's ordination and ruled against it (though women can be ordained as deacons). Sausele, having been ordained a priest in TEC, traveled to Rwanda and offered to resign her orders. Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini, primate of the Church of Rwanda, delined to accept her offer. Kolini has ordained women priests in Rwanda for years, though AMIA, the North American mission he oversees, does not. Common Cause churches speak of women's ordination as an issue on which they can agree to disagree, but AMIA's stance against ordaining women has, if anything, grown stauncher. Not a few dissident Anglicans joined the group specifically because of its stance on this issue.

"I'm grateful to my core that I left TEC before 2003," Sausele says, referring to the fact that her departure happened before the election of Bishop Robinson and therefore was not about homosexuality. "It's far more grievous that the church hasn't censored people like Spong for their contradiction of foundational Christian teaching," she argues. Her critique of the Episcopal Church extends to its current presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori. "The primates pleaded with the U.S. church not to do anything inflammatory" when it elected its presiding bishop, she recalls. She says her problem isn't that the church chose a woman but that its choice was a slap in the face to the churches of the global South. "She's been ordained only two years longer than I have," she said. It might have been different if the U.S. church had chosen someone with, say, a quarter of a century of experience and a Ph.D. in theology, not someone "from a tiny diocese, and she's, what, a biologist?"(Jefferts Schori is actually a geologist.)

On homosexuality, Sausele mostly faults the way that sexuality is talked about in TEC. "I'm a 42-year-old single person," she said. "I understand that I have to be celibate, and that's not always pleasant." So she dismisses the argument, which she says she hears advocates of gay ordination making, that people cannot be expected to resist their hard-wired sexual desires. Sausele also disapproves of the way that the denomination handled women's ordination. It was done, she says, without theological grounding and solely on the basis of "rights" language: "'I can be a CEO, and you can't stop me from being a priest,' they said. The church never did the theological and biblical work that needs doing."

Nevertheless, one detects a certain loneliness in Sausele. She fled TEC liberals to join AMIA traditionalists who oppose women's ordination. The recognition of the validity of her ordination by Archbishop Kolini—and some hints of openness toward women's ordination from Akinola himself—coupled with her being called to All Souls in Wheaton suggests that women's ministry may be an issue in the future for Common Cause. Will its adherents ordain women—and do it on better grounds than TEC did? Or will it be an issue on which people agree to disagree? (If so, why couldn't they have remained Episcopalians?) When I asked Alan Jacobs, a lay catechist at All Souls and an English professor at Wheaton, about women in ministry, he defended Sausele's ordination with another mention of Spong: "I don't have any problem with ordaining women. I have a problem with ordaining heretics."

Last fall, All Souls, a parish with some 150 worshipers, pulled off a coup: it announced that it was bringing Paul Rusesabagina, a hero during the Rwandan genocide, to speak. Rusesabagina is the compassionate Hutu hotel manager who rescued hundreds of his compatriots—Hutus and Tutsis—and whose story was the subject of the movie Hotel Rwanda. Rusesabagina had heard of All Souls' work to build a school in a Rwandan village and wanted to thank the congregation personally.

At the last moment, however, All Souls canceled the event, responding to a directive from Archbishop Kolini. The decision was presented to Martin Johnson, pastor of All Souls, in no uncertain terms: "There was no invitation to dialogue," he said.

The reason for the archbishop's request? Rusesabagina, a critic of Rwanda's president Paul Kagame, has maintained that Kagame's government, which claims to seek ethnic reconciliation, is made up of an elite group of Tutsis. The Anglican Church in Rwanda, which wishes to present itself as a conciliatory force as well—especially since many churches (itself included) failed to protect their people during the genocide—is closely allied to the government. So Rwanda's Anglican Church is not eager to push Rusesabagina's point of view. Rusesabagina has pointed to retaliatory killings engaged in by the Rwandan Patriotic Front. Kagame's government in turn has accused Rusesabagina of extorting money from people who took refuge in his hotel.

Much of this complex history was lost on conservative American Anglicans who had fled TEC for AMIA. Sandra Joireman, a professor of international relations at Wheaton College, says of All Souls: "A little church in Wheaton avoided the Scylla at home but not the Charybdis of African ethnic politics."

The situation is especially ironic because AMIA often uses invocations of the Rwandan genocide to its advantage. Archbishop Kolini even compares TEC with the perpetrators of the genocide, accusing it of engaging in a "spiritual genocide of the truth." He also says, "Ten years ago, when Rwanda cried out to the world for help, no one answered. So when we heard the American church crying out for help, we decided to answer." Western guilt is invoked, African heroism is lauded and AMIA can feel good about itself. But the whole narrative depends on a romanticized vision of church and state in the African country.

I asked Johnson of All Souls if his church can be accused, at best, of being ignorant of church-state relations in Rwanda or, at worst, of having a romanticized view of African Christianity. He said both accusations are fair. "We can only assent to our critics," he said. "But where we are is where we are."

Anglicanism has generally been a faith that is allied with the state. But the obvious ethical messiness of being involved with Rwandan tribal politics brings up again the question of whether AMIA can justify its departure from the Episcopal Church. "We don't exult in all this," Johnson said. "We pray God would forgive us for breaking off again, and we pray that we might reunite." Then, sounding even more like a member of TEC: "I can't stand the loss of diversity. I like a wide tent." But he stands by the decision to ally with the Rwandan church, quoting a story common in AMIA circles about an African bishop who asked his Western colleagues, "You brought us the gospel 150 years ago—why are you not preaching the same one now?"

Speaking with these former Episcopalians, I was struck that each gave me a slightly different rationale for separating from TEC. Sausele and Jacobs of All Souls focused on doctrinal issues raised by a figure like Spong. For Koch of the Anglican Church of the Resurrection the problem was what he sees as TEC's relativism in matters of salvation. For Dorsett of the now defunct Great Shepherd, it was what he calls the denomination's disdain of scripture. For Beasley, who left TEC in the early 1990s, it was liberal views on homosexuality—though he downplays that now and emphasizes issues of scripture and doctrine. Jacobs also points to what he calls TEC's elevation of tolerance as the sine qua non of the church. He told me that if TEC were in the habit of advancing theologically rigorous arguments like those offered by orthodox (and gay) theologian Eugene Rogers in Sexuality and the Christian Body, he'd still be in the denomination— "part of the loyal opposition" but still in communion, he said.

Theologians from Augustine onward have insisted that the effort to leave one church to start a better one results not in a better church but a worse one—and it also fosters the bad habit of defection. The history of Western Christendom attests to the wisdom of this view. The question for the Anglican Mission in the Americas is whether antagonism toward the Episcopal Church is enough to shape a coherent Anglican identity in a complex global setting.

Jason Byassee is a Century assistant editor.

New Church Continues to Grow in Arizona

2008-05-18T12:38:00.000-07:00

Christ Church Anglican in Phoenix, Arizona installed their new rector, the Rev. Christopher M. Schutte, in an elaborate service attended by The Rt. Rev. Daniel Gimadu, Church of Uganda, Diocese of North Mbale along with The Rt. Rev. John Guernsey, Church of Uganda, Bishop for Congregations in America. The Rt. Rev. Alexander "Sandy" Greene, Missionary Bishop from the Episcopal Province of Rwanda for the Anglican Mission in the Americas also attended along with 14 visiting clergy from the Western United States.

Fr. Schutte was ordained a Deacon and Priest at St. Luke's Episcopal Church in Prescott, AZ, where he served until April, 2005. At that time, he and his growing family moved to Phoenix to serve at Christ Church of the Ascension, Paradise Valley, AZ. Fr. Schutte was called to Christ Church Anglican, a new church plant under the jurisdiction oversight of the Anglican Church of Uganda, and was received and licensed by Bishop Guernsey and Bishop Gimadu.

According to a news release, Christ Church Anglican claims 265 faithful,; 209 adults and 56 children. This is a 65% increase over numbers evidenced when the church was planted seven months ago, making Fr. Schutte rector at one of the fastest growing Anglican parishes in North America. For more information, visit their web site: www.christchurchanglicanaz.org

Source: VirtueOnline

FACA Joins Common Cause Partnership

2008-05-18T12:30:00.000-07:00

The FEDERATION OF ANGLICAN CHURCHES IN THE AMERICAS, (FACA) at its semi-annual meeting in Summerville, S.C., voted to accept the Articles of the Common Cause Partnership (CCP) and the Theological Statement of the Common Cause Partners. At its previous meeting in October 2007, FACA voted to become full partners of the Common Cause Partnership. The approval of the CCP documents is latest vote makes full partnership a reality. Also at this meeting, the Rt. Rev. Paul Hewett, Diocese of the Holy Cross, was elected as Moderator of FACA.

The addition of FACA to CCP brings an additional 232* congregations under the CCP umbrella. The FACA members are the Anglican Church in America, the Anglican Mission in the Americas, the Anglican Province of America, the Diocese of the Holy Cross, the Episcopal Missionary Church, and the Reformed Episcopal Church. The Most Rev. Gregory Venables, Archbishop of the Southern Cone, Anglican Communion, is the primatial patron of FACA.

*This number does not include the congregations of AMiA and REC, which are already full partners in CCP.

Source: VirtueOnline

The Realignment Continues to Grow

2008-05-10T05:26:00.000-07:00

May 09, 2008

The ordinations of four North Shore residents by Bishop Bill Murdoch, dean of
the Network's New England Convocation and bishop in the Province of Kenya, as
well as the licensing of new congregations will be livestreamed on AnglicanTV
Saturday, May 10, beginning at 2 pm EST.

Go to http://www.anglicantv.org/ to watch live.

More information is also available at:  http://www.allsaintsamesbury.org/

267 bishops say they will attend Gafcon conference

2008-05-08T13:04:00.000-07:00

May 8, 2008

Posted by geoconger from the Church of England Newspaper:

Organizers of the June Gafcon meeting in Jerusalem report that as of April 25, 267 bishops have registered for the June meeting in Jerusalem.

Denounced as a rival gathering to the July Lambeth conference, a detailed agenda has yet to be released. Like Lambeth much of the conference will be devoted to worship and spiritual reflection. However, Gafcon will play host to bishops, clergy and lay leaders, and will also seek to formulate a common approach to the divisions of doctrine and discipline within the Anglican Communion.

Approximately 150 bishops and conferees from Muslim majority countries unable to travel freely to Israel along with the Gafcon leadership team will meet at a resort on the Dead Sea in Jordan from June 18-22, while a further 600 are expected to join the self-styled “pilgrimage” in Jerusalem from June 22-29.

Organizers note that many of the bishops attending Gafcon will also be among the 625 bishops attending the Lambeth Conference. While the Archbishops of Nigeria, Uganda and Rwanda and their bishops have said that as it is currently organized, they will not attend Lambeth, the Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone Gregory Venables announced last week that he will go to Lambeth.

Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh announced on May 6 that he would attend Lambeth and Gafcon, joining Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker and the other conservative American bishops in attending both meetings.

“After consulting with the people of Pittsburgh and our friends around the globe, we have come to the conclusion that it is necessary for us to be present at both gatherings,” said Bishop Robert Duncan. The American conservative leader said that he would attend the first half of Lambeth, from July 16-25, and that his suffragan, Bishop Henry Scriven will attend from July 26-Aug 3.

At Gafcon, “we will be among friends, focused squarely on the Gospel, and dealing openly with how we build the missionary relationships, covenantal boundaries and responsible structures for the future of Anglicanism,” he said.

At Lambeth, “those who accuse us of abandoning the Anglican Communion will certainly be present and vocal,” he noted. “It is important for us to be able to respond directly to their claims about the situation in the Episcopal Church and our place in the Communion,” he said.

CANA’s Growth Continues: Five New Priests to be Ordained in Ohio

2008-04-30T19:20:00.000-07:00

HERNDON, Va. (April 30, 2008) – The Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) will ordain five deacons into the priesthood this week in Ohio. These include Deacon Sean Templeton, Deacon Kevin Maney, Deacon Greg Heath, Deacon David Smith, and Deacon Jeremy Lile. CANA Suffragan Bishop Roger Ames and Bishop Frank Lyons of Bolivia will be presiding over the ordination liturgy this Thursday, May 1 at St. Luke’s Anglican Church in Akron, Ohio.

“It is a sign of new life in the church as we pass along leadership to a new generation. Our prayers and thoughts are with these five special ordinands this week. We are pleased that they will be continuing in their orthodox Anglican faith and that they will be able to minister to their brothers and sisters in Christ,” said Bishop Ames, who is also rector of St. Luke’s.

Once ordained, all five priests will continue as clergy members in their Anglican churches in Ohio: Deacon Lile will continue at St. Luke’s, Deacon Templeton in Holy Trinity in Milan, Deacon Smith in Church of the Good Samaritan in Cleveland Heights, Deacon Maney in St. Matthews in Westerville, and Deacon Heath in St. Anne-in-the-Fields in Madison.

“We are overjoyed over the growth of CANA in Ohio with the ordinations of these blessed deacons to the priesthood. They will no doubt serve as worthy shepherds to the flock of orthodox Anglicans in Ohio who live for profound transformation through Christ. We know that without Christ we are nothing, but with Christ there are no challenges or obstacles that we cannot overcome,” said CANA Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns.

The ordination liturgy will take place this Thursday, May 1, 2008 at 7:00 pm EDT. St. Luke’s Anglican Church is located at 565 S. Cleveland-Massillon Road, Akron, Ohio 44333. All are welcome to attend.

The Convocation of Anglicans in North America (www.canaconvocation.org) currently consists of approximately 60 congregations and 100 clergy in 20 states. CANA was established in 2005 to provide a means by which Anglicans living in the USA, who were alienated by the actions and decisions of The Episcopal Church, could continue to live out their faith without compromising their core convictions. CANA is part of the Common Cause partnership that includes representatives of more than 250 Anglican congregations that are connected to the rest of the Anglican Communion.

From the ACN website

2008-04-25T14:41:00.000-07:00

Transformational Change

In transactional change, we control the process of change and can clearly see the steps needed to reach our goal.

In transformational change, we are not in control, and we do not see all the steps between where we are now and where we want to be. Instead, we rely on God to give us three things:

A clear understanding of our present reality
The vision
The next step

A—Our present reality is one of tension.

Z—Our vision is a biblical, missionary, and united Anglicanism in North America.

B—Our next step is the Global Anglican Future Conference on June 15th.

Acknowledgements

We got the transactional/transformational model of change from Cynthia Waisner, who got it from Being First, Inc.
The photo is from Taylor Miles via Flickr.

Timeline from the ACN website

2008-04-25T14:37:00.000-07:00

This graphic shows the most significant milestones thus far in our movement. Our understanding of transformational change relates directly to this timeline: while our vision is specific, it is not detailed, and we do not know what all the steps will be between now and the realization of our vision.

References

From the ACN Website

2008-04-25T14:33:00.001-07:00

Bell Curve

Biblical, missionary Anglicanism in North America currently exists both inside and outside of The Episcopal Church. The ACN embraces both positions and holds them in tension. This is our present reality.

Network Bishops Conclude Productive Meeting

2008-04-25T14:30:00.000-07:00

From the Anglican Communion Network:

Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator of the Anglican Communion Network, has released a short statement at the conclusion of the meeting of Network diocesan bishops in Chicago on April 24.

“The diocesan bishop of every Network diocese, as well as a dean representing all the Network convocations, met together in Chicago on April 24. It was an extraordinarily productive meeting. As has happened so many times before in the Network’s five year history, deepened understanding and deeper unity, despite remarkably different contexts and strategies regarding the Episcopal Church, were the fruit of the meeting. The Network’s vision of a biblical, missionary and united Anglicanism was again affirmed and embraced,” stated Bishop Duncan.

Editor's Note: The three network parishes in Central NY are St. Andrew's Anglican Church, Syracuse, St. Andrew's Anglican Church, Vestal, and Good Shepherd Anglican Church, Binghamton.

The Limits of Fellowship

2008-04-05T05:44:00.000-07:00

By Phillip D. Jensen

1. The Misguided Title

Let me commence by saying that the title "the Limits of Fellowship" is misguided. I know I chose it myself, but it is the wrong question. It starts us off looking for the negative when the theme of the Bible is the positive.

In as much as we are able we are to live at peace with all people. We are pray for our enemies, seek their welfare, not answer evil for evil, and never take revenge (Romans 12:14-21). We are to love one another and by quiet honest work not be trouble makers to others but live properly before outsiders (1 Thessalonians 4:9-11).

And when people come to us in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ we are to welcome them. Our welcome is not for the sake of disputes. We are not to be judgemental. Nor are we to exercise our freedom in Christ to harm the weak whose conscience is bound. Rather we are to serve and build one another in love (Romans 14-15).

We are to avoid quarrelling about words or foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions and quarrels about the law for they are unprofitable and worthless (2 Timothy 2:14, Titus 3:9). The youthful passions that we are to flee are contrasted with righteousness, faith, love and peace. For we are to "have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will." (2 Timothy 2:22-26)

This is our concern: the salvation of other people. For the sake of winning people to the Lord we are to set aside our own preferences and become like other people (1 Corinthians 9:19-23, 10:31-11:1). So we do not want to destroy them by our legalism nor by our liberty. When we see somebody fall into sin our concern is their repentance restoration and salvation. We go to them gently looking to ourselves lest we too be tempted (Galatians 6:1-5) and wherever possible we seek to restore the brother or sister. We are to "have mercy on those who doubt; save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh." (Jude 22-23) Even the extreme judgement delivered to the sinner in 1 Corinthians 5 is "so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord."

Within congregational life the love that we have for one another is the hallmark of being a disciple of Jesus (John 13:35). The first letter of John is full of encouragement and assurance of the difference that the gospel makes in our love of one another. We call each other brothers because of our common rebirth. But such a name must be matched in our behaviour towards each other (1 John 4). Our treatment of each other as brothers should mean that we would prefer to be defrauded than to take our disputes with each other into the public domain of the courts.

Maintaining the unity that Christ has won for us by his death and resurrection is commanded of us. "I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit - just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all." (Ephesians 4:1-6)

The desire to exclude people from the Church was championed by Diotrephes. We read of him in 3 John

"I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church. Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good." (3 John 1:9-11)

There is little in the New Testament to encourage Christians to split or divide. In fact we are warned against the divisive person. The works of the flesh include "rivalries, dissensions, divisions," (Galatians 5:20). So in the context of foolish controversies dissensions and quarrels God says: "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned." (Titus 3.10-11).

a) The Paradox

But this treatment of the divisive person raises a paradox for us. For we are to divide from the divisive person.

It is not a paradox that is difficult to resolve for the error is not in division but in being divisive. It is the person who makes for division, loves division and causes division that is in the wrong. Dividing ourselves from them is the right thing to do. Division is not itself wrong but there is a spirit of divisiveness which is wrong. Yet this paradox highlights the problem that we have in dealing with our differences.

The Christian's permanent disposition is, and should always be, to build for harmony with all people especially with the people of God. Yet there comes time when we must stand out as different and in opposition to the world even with those who claim to be the people of God.

b) With Whom Do We Divide?

So with whom do we divide? When? Under what circumstances? For what purpose.?

One of the most important issues to understand is the difference in our relationship with Christians and with non-Christians.

(i) Non Christians

As the Holy People of God of course we are to be different to the world. (Ephesians 4:17-24, Colossians 3:5-17, 1 Peter 4:1-5) Indeed we must expect the world to dislike, hate and even persecute us as our Lord taught his disciples (John 15:18-20, 1 John 3:13).

We are not to expect that the world we live in is going to be so improved that we will easily live in peace and harmony with our neighbours. The parable of the wheat and weeds in Matthew 13:36-43 shows us what the world is like and will be like till the harvest comes. Now is not the time to separate the weeds of the world from the wheat that is also growing there. There is a fundamental and eternal difference between those in the kingdom of God and those who are outside. The days in which we live, are the last days when peoples' opposition to God will be great. They will not put up with sound doctrine but will gather teachers who will satisfy their own passions (2 Timothy 3:1-4 and 4:3- 4).

Sometimes we have to avoid such people. So Paul's advice to Timothy concerning Alexander the coppersmith is he "did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our message." (2 Timothy 4:14-15). We do not know about this man. We do not know if he was professing to be a Christian when he did this harm to the apostle, or what the nature of harm was. But it appears to be a non-Christian that Timothy was to avoid. There is no encouragement for Christians to seek martyrdom in the New Testament so it should not be surprising that we should flee from the persecutors.

But that is not the same as avoiding the immoral. Paul apparently was misunderstood in his advice to the Corinthians. For he writes in 1 Corinthians 5: "I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people - not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler- not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you." (1 Corinthians 5:9 - 13).

Here is the clear distinction between our relationships with non-Christians and Christians. There should be a withdrawal of association with those who profess Christ but are living in sexual immorality as there would not be for those who make no such profession.

Thus with non-Christians except for the danger of some opponents there really is no reason to withdraw from association. We may have nothing in common and we will be divided from them by our lifestyle choices but we have no reason to withdraw from them and every reason to stay in friendship that we may share the saving message of the Cross with them.

(ii) Christians

But with Christians or those who profess themselves to be Christians - things are very different. There can be, and in 1 Corinthians 5 should be, some withdrawal from certain people because of their behaviour.

This involves us inevitably in making judgement decisions about people and behaviours. We are fairly fallible in making such judgements. We need to weigh the evidence very carefully and not jump to conclusions. But none-the-less we have to make the judgements. And as the scriptures say of the Messiah we are not to "judge by what his eyes see, or decide by what his ears hear, but with righteousness he will judge the poor and decide with equity for the meek of the earth;" (Isaiah 11:3-4). So, we must judge without respect of persons but by the revealed will of God.

Our judgements will never be fully accurate or final judgements

1. We do not know enough, especially of the intention of the hearts, to make accurate or final judgements. So Paul would write: "But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged (anakrino) by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God." (1 Corinthians 4:3-5). Yet Paul himself would in the very next chapter make judgements about others and call upon the church to do the same: "For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment (krino) on the one who did such a thing. When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord." (1 Corinthians 5:3-5). And in the next chapter he rebukes the church for having members turn to outsiders for judgement on disputes between them: "When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge (krino) the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers?" (1 Corinthians 6:1-5).

Thus we need to follow the Lord Jesus instructions in Matthew 7 of judging as we wish to be judged - not taking the speck out of our brother's eye while we have a log in our own - but doing to others as we would have them do unto us.

c) Judgements

This will still involve making judgements - even negative ones - for we have to watch out for false prophets and to discern the difference between the narrow and wide gates. And the false prophets come purposely in deceptive appearance in order to lead astray God's people. They are a real danger - described as "ravenous wolves". Their goal is to lead astray the elect. This is not possible because God protects the elect by shortening the days of tribulation and by warning beforehand of the dangers of false prophets (Mark 13:20-22).

Judging then as the Messiah would judge means that we are no respecter of people. Our concern is with the truth. Thus we are not to accept or dismiss people on false basis.

We are not to accept or dismiss people because we "like" them. We are to love one another because we are Christian, not because we are lovable. Rather we are to bear with one another and forgive one another because in Christ we are to love one another (Colossians 3:12-15, Ephesians 2:2). It is this reality of loving one another that is the hallmark of being a one of Jesus' people (John 13:35).

Furthermore our love and acceptance of one another is not based on race, sex, class or religious background. This is the great argument of Ephesians 2-3 but also the climax of the argument in Galatians 3. "For as many of you as were baptised into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise." (Galatians 3:27-29) Which is why we are to welcome all who come in the name of Christ without passing judgements or quarrel over opinions (Romans 14).

Nor should our judgements be based on institutional authorisation. Paul was unimpressed by the status of the Jerusalem leadership. "And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality) - those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me." (Galatians 2:6). Indeed the officialdom of Israel was exactly the group who roused the crowd that called out "Crucify!" (Mark 15:1-15, John 19:6, 15).

Earlier in Mark's gospel an interesting episode records Jesus warning against judging by institutional authorisation. The event is Mark 9 where the disciples tried to stop an unnamed exorcist who was driving out spirits in the name of Jesus. Their objection to the man's ministry was that "he was not following us" (Mark 9:38). Though he was not one of the authorised disciples, he was effectively doing the ministry that they ironically were unable to do earlier in the same chapter. Jesus said: "Do not stop him, for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. For the one who is not against us is for us." (Mark 9:39-40).

While we are to follow the example and teaching of our leaders, submitting to them in love (1 Corinthians 16:16, Hebrews 13:7, 17), Jesus warned against too much authority being given to leaders. "But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted." (Matthew 23:8-12)

We are not to place ourselves under our leaders as mediators between God and us. There is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5). And while there is corporate sin and corporate responsibility yet "each one of us will give an account of himself to God" (Romans 14:12). It is not only Adam or humanity that will be judged or the Church that will be saved, each one of us is personably answerable to God. Being a teacher does not place anyone above judgement but rather brings them into stricter judgement (James 3:1).

2. Whom To Avoid?

So we return to our question of whom we should avoid or withdraw from? Why or when should we do it? How should we do it?

From 1 Corinthians 5 it is clearly those within Christianity not those outside.2 But which ones and why?

There are three aspects of concern to consider: fellowship, teaching, and behaviour.

a) Fellowship

Firstly then the issue of Fellowship. For the people of God were not to fellowship with everybody. Indeed one of the characteristics of the nation Israel was its requirements of holiness that were to keep it separate from other peoples. They were to take no part in the religious expressions of other nations; they were not to intermarry with them or to adopt their practices morality or laws. They were to completely destroy and dispossess those who were already in the promised land - partly as a judgement of God on their sins and partly that the people and land of God were to be completely holy.

Yet within the New Testament there is a universality and inclusion that strikes a quite different note to the exclusiveness of Israel. A different note but not one that dispenses with holiness or any separation. Indeed God's judgement on Israel's flirtations with idolatry and sinfulness is given to Christians as the example of what happens to the people of God when they compromise on holiness (1 Corinthians 10:1-10).

The command to separate oneself from idolatry is fairly clear: "Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?" (1 Corinthians 10:14-22).

Eating and drinking together are expressions of fellowship - of sharing things in common. We cannot eat at the table of demons and of Christ - for we cannot share with both. There is a point at which one must decline to come to the table, for it is a hypocritical nonsense to think that we can be in fellowship with both simultaneously. There has to be renunciation and repentance before one can move from one table to another.

Total inclusiveness of a tolerant relativism is completely at odds with Christianity. In his second letter to the Corinthians Paul asks a series of rhetorical questions that show the impossibility of unequal yoking (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1).

In the Old Testament this is illustrated by the strange life of Daniel. He had to draw the line of separation when in Babylon. He drew it on the issue of eating at the king's table, at the falling down to worship the golden image, at the practice of praying toward the temple for the redemption of Israel. These were non-negotiable. Rather face death than sin.

In the New Testament the disciples would not retreat from preaching Christ even though forbidden it by lawful authority (Acts 4:18-20). If this caused division within the community it may be sad but it was what Jesus did and expected his disciples to do (Matthew 10:16-25, 34-39).

But what about fellowship with Christians? Paul tells us that divisions amongst us are inevitable so "that those who are genuine amongst you may be recognised" (1 Corinthians 11:19).

Sometimes Christian disagreement is not about recognising the genuine but simply choosing to go separate paths, while still being in good standing with each other. So Paul and Barnabas' disagreement over Mark (Acts 16:36-41) or the couple of Christians who cannot live with each other and so choose to live apart (1 Corinthians 7:10). They continue to be married to each other and are not free to marry anybody else, but will live out their obedience to Christ separately.

Sometimes the separation has to do with church discipline for the benefit of the wilful. So Paul calls upon us not to have anything to do with the lazy who will not work - "not to regard him as an enemy but warn him as a brother" (2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14-15).

However when we offer help to strangers who come in the name of Christ to preach his gospel (3 John 5-8) then we are "fellow workers for the truth". So we are not to offer any hospitality to those who go out preaching a false gospel for "whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works" (2 John 11).

So the scriptures urge, warn and command us to avoid certain people and fellowship. We are to have nothing to do with them. We must not help or give succour to them in their work. We are not to fellowship with them in eating and drinking. This is not a matter of personal preference or choice but of obedience to God's word. He commands us not to fellowship with them.

In particular there are two groups that we are to avoid, false teachers and immoral "Christians".

b) False Teachers

On the issue of false teachers there are five aspects to consider

(i) the importance of teaching (ii) the consequence of the teaching (iii) the authority of the teacher (iv) the tolerance of false opinions (v) the separation from false teachers

(i) Firstly we must note the importance of teaching. Christianity comes from the word of God. It is taught to us - in words - the words of the Gospel. That is the form in which the salvation of God is mediated to us. The words are about actions that God has taken in the death and resurrection of Jesus. The words, if they were not about reality, would not be true and would not be saving. But the reality of Jesus death and resurrection is conveyed to us in his word taught in human speech (Luke 24:44-49). Being God's word it is powerful and dynamic, but yet extraordinary as it may seem, it is conveyed in human speech (Romans 1:16-17, 1 Thessalonians 2:13).

This makes Christianity very susceptible to the problem of false prophets and false teaching. When people come claiming to speak the word of God or to give the true meaning of God's word we have to pay very great attention lest we be hard hearted and rejected God's word or lest we be deceived by false teaching.

From the beginning the Devil has been a murderer, a liar and the father of lies (John 8:44). By the means of false teaching he brought death into the world when he denied what God had said and reinterpreted what God meant saying: "You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (Genesis 3:4-5).

Throughout the history of Israel in the Old Testament there has been conflict between the true prophets of God speaking his word, and the false prophets seeking to distort and deny it.

In the New Testament the struggle continued. Establishing the truth and teaching it while rejecting falsehood, exposing and rebuking it was and is a normal part of Christian living.

The Christian gospel is not an infinitely malleable set of ideas, relationships or practices. In the opening chapter of the letter to the Galatians Paul exhibits his understanding of the logical status of the gospel message. "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel - not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-9).

From this passage we can see that: there is only one Gospel; that it can be distorted; it can be contradicted; that it is true independent of its preacher and that those who falsify it deserve to be damned.3

Consequently it is very important that ministers of the gospel rightly handle the word of truth and that false teachers are rebuked and silenced. This is the import of the instruction of Paul to his protégés and colleagues Timothy and Titus (1 Timothy 1:3-4, 6-7; 4:1, 6-7, 13; 2 Timothy 2:2, 14-18; 4:1-5; Titus 1:10-11, 13-14, 2:1, 15). It is also his instruction to elders (Acts 20:26-32) as being 'an apt teacher' is a prerequisite for their appointment (Tit 1:5-9 and 1 Tim 3:1-7). It is critical that an elder "must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it." (Titus 1:9). The character of the ministry of the gospel is handing over the good deposit, the words and the pattern of sound words that have been taught. So faithfulness is a key prerequisite of the job (2 Timothy 1:13, 2:2) as Paul was faithful to the deposit he received (1 Corinthians 15:3).

(ii) Secondly we must note the consequences of the teaching. For the word of God is not only the great creative redemptive power for good but its perversion the very work of Satan for death and destruction.

By God's word the heavens and earth were created (Psalm 33:6, John 1:3). For the Word of God is and always has been with God and is God (John 1:1-2). So when we are dealing with the words of God we are dealing with God himself (Hebrews 4:12-13. The scriptures are breathed out by God so that what the scripture says - God says.4 This means that the word of God is living and active piercing the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart and at work in believers (Hebrews 4:12, 1 Thessalonians 2:13).

Thus the teaching of God's word is not merely a communication of information, but effectively the pastorally transforming work of God - bringing people to faith in God and transforming people as their minds are renewed to know the mind of God (Romans 10:17, 12:1-2). As Peter said to Jesus: "You have the words of eternal life," (John 6:68).

But Peter later wrote of dangerous consequences of false teachers and false prophets. He knew the importance of reminding Christians of the truth that they had embraced. He knew that this was not based in myths but in his eyewitness experience that accorded with the words of the divinely inspired prophets (2 Peter 1:12-21). So he wrote warning of false prophets and false teachers who would bring in secretly destructive heresies and bringing swift destruction on themselves (2 Peter 2:1). But notice that their damaging work is not confined to themselves alone. "And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words" (2 Peter 2:2-3). Peter understood that unstable people twist the scriptures "to their own destruction". He warned us "You therefore beloved, knowing this beforehand take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability" (2 Peter 3:16-17).

The dangerous consequences of false teaching affect both the hearer and the society, in this life and the next. Paul warned Timothy "avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some." (2 Timothy 2:16-18). It is why our Lord warned us against false prophets and false shepherds (Matthew 7:15, 24:11-12, 24:24) and reserves some of his most stringent criticism to the religious leaders and teachers of his day. The seven woes he declaims in Matthew 23 is one of the most powerful rejections and warnings about religious leaders in the scriptures. The dreadful consequences of those who follow their duly appointed but false leaders he describes as becoming a "child of hell". These false scribes and Pharisees 5 "shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in."

The human capacity to be deceived is great for our hearts are sinful and deceptive (Jeremiah 17:9). Unstable people are easy pray for false teachers (2 Timothy 3:6-7) but we all need to be repeatedly warned not to be deceived (1 Corinthians 6:9, 12:1-2, 15:33, Galatians 5:21, 6:7 Ephesians 5:6, Colossians 2:8, James 1:16, 1 John 3:7). Indeed we need even to be warned against ourselves for being deceived one can deceive others - as Paul describes our present age "Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived." (2 Timothy 3:12-13).

(iii) Thirdly we need to understand the authority of the teacher. For though through books and articles, we encounter teaching separated from teachers, in fact teaching does not exist without teachers. And in the church teachers have the authority of leadership. We do not just submit to teaching but to people (1 Corinthians 16:16, Hebrews 13:17) as we obey their instructions and imitate their faith (1 Corinthians 4:16-17, 11:1 Philippians 3:17, 4:9 2 Thessalonians 3:9).

The link between teaching and authority can be seen in 1 Timothy 2:12 but also in the pre-requisite of bishops/elders in 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:9. It was the task of the Apostles (Matthew 28:20). It is the task of both Timothy and Titus (1 Timothy 3:6, 11-16, Titus 2:1, 15). It is the role of the leader in Hebrews 13:7, 17.

This is why the elders who labour in teaching are considered worthy of double honour (1 Timothy 5:17). It is also why the teacher is to be judged with greater strictness (James 3:1). For the tongue is very powerful in its effects and can cause great damage. It is also why the elders who are appointed to teach within the Church, must have stable and godly lives and why Timothy must devote himself to both life and doctrine (1 Timothy 4:15-16). For a teacher's obedience to the teaching is essential if he is to care for the church of God (1 Timothy 3:1-7) as well as to avoid the hypocrisy of the Scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23:1-2).

(iv) Fourthly we need to note the tolerance of false opinions in the New Testament. Though the teacher is to be judged with greater strictness he does not have to be perfect before teaching. There is acceptable latitude of opinion between Christians and there are matters of indifference that teachers should not enter into.

Timothy is to let people see his progress in his life and doctrine. The teacher must hold firmly to what the apostle has taught. But he does not need to know everything. Rather he is to grow in his knowledge and understanding of God. This is the model he needs to set for the congregation (1 Timothy 4:11-16).

Between Christians there will be many different opinions. Even over issues of religious observances. The arguments on Christian liberty in 1 Corinthians 8-11 and Romans 14 are all premised on the possibility of Christians having different opinions on certain matters. Food laws, seasonal observations, or drinking wine are not matters central to the kingdom of God and so different attitudes of people's consciences should be allowed for. Otherwise there will be the reconstruction of justification by good works and the undermining of the centrality of justification by faith in the gracious death of our Lord and Saviour.

It is at this point that many attempts at working out with whom we can fellowship go off the rails. For people naturally want a list of the central matters over which we cannot be tolerant and a list of the peripheral matters over which we can exercise some latitude. But there is no possibility of such a list. For even a matter that is of no consequence in itself - like the food we eat or being circumcised - can in some circumstances be central to gospel fellowship. So in Galatians we are told that "neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation" (Galatians 6:15). Thus Paul refused to submit to the false brothers who would insist on Titus being circumcised. For in the enforced circumcision of Titus he saw that "the truth of the gospel" would be compromised (Galatians 2:3-5). This concern for the truth of the Gospel also lay behind Paul's rebuke of Peter and Barnabas over food laws. For when they refused to fellowship with Gentile Christians for fear of the circumcision party - they were undermining the Gentiles' standing in Christ by faith alone (Galatians 2:11-14). It was a gospel matter even though it was about food and the Kingdom of God is not a matter of eating a drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14:17).

There is no possibility of making the list of matters called adiaphora 6. For anything can be used to express the truth or to teach falsehood. Though there are matters that are less germane to the gospel. Over these Christians can disagree - it is even good that Christians do disagree - for it clarifies our justification is in Christ's death.

Furthermore there are some areas of truth that the Christian teacher should leave alone completely. So Paul tells Timothy, "Remind them of these things (great truths about dying and enduring with Christ) and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers... avoid irreverent babble" (2 Timothy 2:14-16 cf 1 Timothy 6:3-5) and 1 Timothy concludes, "O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called 'knowledge,' for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you." (1 Timothy 6:20-21). He also warns Titus: "avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless" (Titus 3:9).

(v) Fifthly we must note the separation from false teachers that the Scriptures enjoin upon us. This issue is central to our place in history today.

Paul wrote to the Romans: "I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. For your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, but I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil." (Romans 16:17-19).

Again Paul teaches about separation from false teachers when he wrote to Timothy concerning teachers such as Hymenaeus and Philetus "who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened". We must not be afraid that God's plans will be thwarted for God know what he is sovereignly doing. He knows who are his. He uses all kinds of instruments to bring about his purpose. But, though false teachers will in time fail like Jannes and Jambres did, yet we are to "avoid such people" (2 Timothy 3:5).

John also teaches the necessity to remove yourself from support of false teaching. He wrote "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." (2 John 7-11)

This teaching of John is consistent with his instructions in his third epistle. For there he makes it clear that by helping strangers who go out in the name of Jesus we are "fellow workers for the truth".7

We cannot be rewarded as fellow workers in the truth when we support missionaries, without being criticised and judged for being fellow workers in wickedness if we give similar comfort to false teachers in their ministry. This hospitality and greeting of teachers is the flip side of Jesus' promise that whoever gives so much as a glass of cold water to a messenger because he comes in the name of Christ will not miss out on his reward (Matthew 10:42). For in helping the little ones of Jesus when they are naked, hungry and thirsty you are helping Christ himself (Matthew 25:31-46). It is also indicative of the nature of Jesus teaching on how to treat the repeatedly warned and unrepentant sinner "...let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector." (Matthew 18:17).

So when the risen Christ addressed the church of the Ephesians he commended them for their hatred of the work of the Nicolaitans as he held against the church of Pergamum that "you have some who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans." (Revelation 2:6, 15). But he is really condemnatory of the church in Thyatara because of their tolerance of false teaching and the false teacher: "But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead" (Revelation 2:20-23).

c) Immoral "Christians"

The case of Thyatira brings us to another aspect of withdrawal of fellowship. For false teaching is one reason for withdrawal but immorality is another. Of course when the two go together, as they often/usually do, then the reasons for withdrawal are overwhelming.

(i) We All Sin

On the issue of moral behaviour, we know that we all sin - and sin in many different ways. The person who says that they have no sin or have not sinned is a liar and makes God a liar. Rather we are to walk in the light of fellowship with God and his people by confessing our sins, knowing that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:5-10).

Furthermore when we see our brother sin we are to seek to restore him gently (Galatians 6:1-5) and to pray for his forgiveness (1 John 5:16-17). Such prayer is not about "sin that leads to death". There is sin that leads to death and other sin that does not lead to death. That is, while any lawbreaking makes us accountable to the whole law (James 2:10) yet there is a differentiation between sins in the law. There is sinning accidentally8 (ignorance) and, defiantly9. There is gnat law and camel law. There are weightier matters of the law like justice and mercy and faithfulness and righteousness as well as lesser concerns like tithing mint dill and cumin (Matthew 12:7, 23:23-24). There are applications of the law that have become obsolete in the history of salvation (Hebrews 8:13) and others whose application requires us to understand their spiritual intent from the perspective of the gospel (1 Corinthians 9:8-11, 10:6-11).

Thus not every sin committed by a Christian means that we withdraw from fellowship. Otherwise we would be conducting church in the proverbial telephone box and even then we too would have to leave it because of our sin. Rather the issue is how we deal with sin in our lives and the seriousness of the sin.

(ii) If We Repent

For if we repent, God is always merciful and gracious and will forgive us our sins. As John wrote: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. ... My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 1:8-9, 2:1).

It is the refusal to repent that turns any trespass into "sinning defiantly" or "sinning with a high hand". For this, there can be no forgiveness, not because of the sin itself but because of the way in which the work of the Holy Spirit is resisted and despised (Numbers 15:30-31, 2 Chronicles 36:16, Matthew 12:31-32). There comes a point where the opportunity of repentance is no longer available (Hebrews 6:4-6 12:17).

Of course repentance must be real and not just to avoid punishment or to fulfil appearances (Matthew 3:7-10). Saying or even feeling sorry is not the same as repentance (2 Corinthians 7:5-13). While repentance can comfort other Christians it is only when that repentance is real. Paul did not want the Corinthians to apologise to him to make him feel better but to repent of their actions. It was their repentance toward God that made him feel better. Saying sorry for hurting somebody is not repenting - it is not even acknowledging wrongdoing let alone changing the course of life.

Jesus gives a clear process for dealing with a disciple who sins against his brother without repentance. After being warned by the offended party and warned a second time by the offended party plus one or two witnesses, the matter is to be brought before the church. It is only when he refuses to listen to the church that the offended party takes the action of separating himself.

Being unrepentant is one of the critical failures that breaches fellowship.

(iii) The Seriousness of Sin

While repentance is one such issue, the seriousness of some sins is another. As argued above while all sin is serious not all sins are equally serious. The sins that affect fellowship are those that are public denials of key gospel standards. The sins that bring dishonour to the name of Jesus, undermine the holiness of the congregation and should cause offence to the people of God are those that are intolerable.

While the church is not pure or Christians sinless, there are major breaches of public community morality that are intolerable. This is not to minimise the importance of any sin. It is just that not all sins have the same seriousness of consequence. There are those sins that do not lead to death. There are the sins that we bear with one another in forgiveness.

Take for example the economic sins in the New Testament.

The Thessalonians are warned against laziness. They are told to withhold food from the lazy man who will not work, and when he does not obey the command to earn his own keep then the congregation is to "have nothing to do with him". However this is not a final outcome but another strategy to get him to take his responsibilities seriously for Paul continues: "have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother." (2 Thessalonians 3:12-15).

The words of James to the rich are much stronger. Though there is no action enjoined upon the church. But the sins of the rich in their unjust cruelty to the poor should lead the rich to "weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you." (James 5:1).

So not all sins are treated in the same way. But some are considered intolerable and therefore treated with great seriousness and direct action. For example Paul rebukes the Corinthians on many matters but it is a particular issue of sexual immorality that requires immediate and drastic action. "It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you." (1 Corinthians 5:1-2). This breach of standards lowers the congregation beneath the morality of outsiders. It cannot be tolerated in any shape or form.

In the next chapter he warns the Corinthians: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

Here is an important passage because it makes clear the exclusion from the kingdom of God. It illustrates the general reason for exclusion ("the unrighteous") with some specific and concrete examples ("sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers"). It allows for the possibility of salvation for the guilty if there is a significant change (washed, sanctified, and justified). And it warns of the deception that comes with these sins. ("Do not be deceived"10).

Both 2 Peter and Jude discuss people11 who "secretly" bring false teaching and immorality into the church. They both deny the Lord, and encourage sexual immorality amongst Christians. While both epistles warn of these people and encourage the Christians to "contend for the faith" (Jude 4) neither encourage the Christians to exclude these divisive people from the congregation. Rather the Christians are encouraged to remember that God will bring judgement as he did in the flood or in Sodom and Gomorrah and that God can be trusted by the faithful to judge the wicked and save the righteous.

(iv) The Call for Action

The risen Jesus' letter to the seven churches calls for direct action against such false prophets. But the church at Pergamum tolerated the Nicolaitans as well as those who taught as Balaam leading to sexual immorality and idolatry. To them comes the call to repent and the warning of judgement for these failings.

But much harsher is the word to the church of Thyatira: "But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve." (Revelation 2:20-23).

Toleration is sometimes inexcusable. This woman is teaching falsely this common combination of idolatry and sexual immorality. The church should have acted against her, not tolerated her. The Lord of the Church may patiently bear with the sin of the world, but was not going to tolerate her continued sinful teaching and practice.

So there are some people who profess to be Christians we should avoid, because of their behaviour. Such people are mentioned in 2 Timothy 3, where in the climax of the description of evil times we read of people who are "lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power." These are not irreligious people these are people of professed godliness. But their lives and teaching deny the power of what they profess. And Paul's command to Timothy is "avoid such people" (2 Timothy 3:4-5).

3. Come To Lambeth

So with this canvassing of the Biblical material we come to Lambeth. Or at least we come to the invitation that our Bishops have declined. Are they right or wrong? Should others decline as well or is just a private decision that reflects personal wishes?

I am not going to rehearse the problems in the Anglican communion. Mark Thompson has just done that for us. Nor am I going to explain the nature of the Lambeth Conference, as Robert Tong has just done that for us.

However there are some matters that I need to mention to see how this Biblical material should be applied to this particular question.

a) The Incarnation of Ideas Creates Division

The incarnation of ideas creates division amongst people. As long as we are discussing an idea we can stay at the same table. Once you start teaching the idea we may have to withdraw from each other. Once one of us incarnates that idea into an action we are no longer able to continue with each other.

Take a neutral issue like infant baptism. As long as we are just talking there is no reason to separate from those who believe babies should or should not be baptised. But once somebody starts teaching it as a matter of right and wrong then those of us who disagree cannot remain in fellowship. But nothing divides us more certainly than when somebody either baptises a baby or refuses to baptise a baby or rebaptises an adult. Then when the teaching has been incarnated there is no room left for difference of opinion. At that point not only are we distanced from the person but even more from the minister and church who acted in this fashion.

Similarly notice the divisive consequences of ordaining or refusing to ordain women as priests or bishops. As long as we are just talking about it then we can continue in relationship. Once people start preaching on the matter, divisions start to emerge. But if it is your belief that we must ordain women in order to fulfil the command of God then you cannot keep talking about it, you have to do something. And once you act upon your belief then those who are by conscience opposed to this action must either deny their conscience or separate from you. So within the Anglican church there are the created no-go zones of ministry - where some places women are accepted as priests and in other places the same women are considered to be deacons or even lay.

I am not talking about the right or wrong of this illustration just the inevitable outcome that I was taught by a MOW leader in a book called "Actions Speak"12.

b) The Presenting Issue

The issue of homosexuality I do not wish particularly to discuss. It is the presenting issue on this debate so it cannot be avoided but as an issue it is of very little interest to me.

The point is in a passage like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 we are warned that these matters are deceptive. We are warned that these matters exclude people from the Kingdom of God. There has been universal acceptance of the meaning of these words down the centuries and across the spectrum of Biblical scholarship - and while there may be scholars who today want to dispute the meanings of some words they have no agreement amongst themselves or any persuasion of the vast community of scholarship. I have seen nothing to persuade me that the words sustain some unusual meaning.

Furthermore in the context of Lambeth it was only ten years ago that the gathering of world bishops accepted the traditional attitude to sexual expression.

c) The Consecrating Bishops

So on an issue that is not marginal as it involves exclusion from the kingdom of God, a group of bishops, knowingly and intentionally consecrated an unrepentant active homosexual.

Let us be clear here - the problem is not with Gene Robinson. He is not even invited to Lambeth. It has nothing to do with homophobia - if they had consecrated an unrepentant practising heterosexual adulterer the point would be exactly the same. It is not even a matter of sex. If they had consecrated a practising unrepentant thief the point would be the same.

The reason why our bishops are not attending is because of the impossibility of Christian fellowship with the consecrating bishops. They are the false teachers who have acted in a way that makes fellowship with them impossible.

The Lambeth conference is not a debating chamber. It is the formal expression of our world fellowship. The bishops join together around the table of the Lord Jesus Christ. You cannot do that with people who are practising, condoning, commending and consecrating sinfulness.

If it is believed that homosexual behaviour is right and moral, when exercised in a loving relationship, they did nothing wrong. If they believe that innocent people are being persecuted and discriminated against by our church then they did the right thing. If we are teaching that innocent people are guilty and failing to break bread with people who are truly Christ's then we are doing the wrong thing and need to repent.

But unless you are persuaded that this was either right or a matter of indifference you cannot now be associated with these leaders in Christian fellowship. If you believe that the practice of homosexuality is sinful - such as to exclude a person from the kingdom of God - then these Bishops, acting as the leaders of Christ's church, are intolerable false teachers.

It would be important to check the facts and to make sure that they did understand what they were doing and did it intentionally. It would be important to ask them to repent. To do it slowly, carefully, politely, privately and if need be publicly. But once it is clear that this is their studied intentional position then the options are clear. Either accept them for they have done the right thing or reject them for they are in serious error. There really is no middle ground left.

The last five years have demonstrated every conceivable attempt at bringing them to repentance. All has failed.

The meeting at Lambeth is the welcome acceptance of them into the continuing fellowship of God's people.

If you believe that they are wrong there is no way you can join in such a gathering of supposed Christian fellowship. It is not a matter of preference but of obedience.

You cannot accuse others of disobeying the scriptures on homosexuality while you yourselves are disobeying equally clear commands of scripture to avoid such false teachers.

d) I Would Urge

I would urge those bishops who believe that unrepentant active homosexuality is wrong not to compromise their own beliefs, the scriptures, the church of God and the holiness of Christ. If they have already accepted the invitation they should repent and apologise. It is not good to go back on your word. But you should not have given it in the first place. And to reinforce your error of judgement by attending is to make the same mistake as Herod when he executed John the Baptist. Such faithfulness to your word and promise is perverse rationalisation for continued wrongdoing.

To those bishops who go to Lambeth knowing that unrepentant homosexual activity is wrong - your profession of evangelical credentials will always be tarnished. You cannot expect God's people to trust you as you pick and choose which parts of the Bible apply to others and apply to you.

Actions have divisive effects. You are now put under incredible pressure to act on an issue that is not your own choosing. But you cannot avoid the consequences of your action. Attending is to fellowship with false teachers in their wicked work. It cannot help but diminish faithful Christians' confidence in you as a leader. To believe otherwise is a further illustration of the naivety, which leads you to attend.

The pragmatic arguments of needing to be there to uphold orthodoxy do not wash. By being there you are denying and undermining orthodoxy. You are demonstrating that the issue does not ultimately matter and that these men are the true bishops of the church.

The American bishops believe they are right and wish to change the rest of the church into accepting homosexuality. There is not the slightest indication that they are coming to Lambeth to listen to what the orthodox have to say. This is not the first round of a debate it has been going on for years. They are not ignorant of alternative viewpoints. They came last time for the final debate and they lost. They come this time with an action that they refuse to repent of. The American bishops did not listen last time they will not listen this time.

That the Archbishop of Canterbury has invited them only shows his colours. He is on record as agreeing with the American action in principle. Orthodox bishops attending, is not going to change the outcome of Lambeth just legitimise fellowshipping with false teachers or more accurately declare that their teaching is not false.

For our own diocese we need to explain the issues clearly so people will rejoice with thankfulness to God that we are led by Godly bishops who put obedience to the word of God ahead of worldly popularity. It would also be very encouraging to them to be flooded with letters and e-mails of appreciation at this difficult time.
________

Endnotes:

1. Though through the gospel ministry the human declaration of the forgiveness of God has eternal consequences. (John 20:23)
2. There are exceptions that have been discussed above such as the non-Christians we are to withdraw from are the dangerous (2 Timothy 4:14) and those who encourage us to join them in their sinful behaviour (1 Peter 4:3-5, 1 Corinthians 15:33-34).
3. anathema ESV, AV "accursed" NIV "eternally condemned". TDNT "Handing over to God's judicial wrath"
4. Nb. e.g. the ascription of authorship of Psalm 95 to God, the Holy Spirit and David in Hebrews 3-4.
5. I am not at this point arguing that anybody today is teaching what the Scribes and Pharisees taught but that false teaching is not something that Christians can ignore as harmless when our Lord was so critical of the false teachers of his day because of, amongst other things, the harm they caused to other people.
6. Things that are indifferent.
7. "Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are, who testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God. For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth." 3 John 5-8
8. Numbers 15:27 ESV, NIV "Unintentionally". AV "through ignorance". The sins of ignorance concept can be seen in Leviticus 5:14ff, 1 Timothy 1:13, Hebrews 5:2, 9:7.
9. Numbers 15:30 ESV, AV. "a high hand". NIV "defiantly".
10. Interestingly a similar warning is given in two parallel passages Galatians 5:21 and Ephesians 5:6.
11. "False prophets" in 2 Peter 2.12 Eileen Baldry and Tony Vinson (eds) Longman Cheshire 1991.
________

This address was given by the Dean of Sydney, Phillip Jensen, at the Sydney Lambeth Decision Briefing held at St. Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney, Friday 14th March 2008. PDF version available here. Audio available at sydneyanglicans.net. http://your.sydneyanglicans.net/images/uploads/mp3/Lambeth/Phillip%20Jensen.mp3 www.acl.asn.au

Network Bishops to Meet April 24

2008-03-24T15:10:00.000-07:00

Bishops of those Episcopal Church dioceses that have formally affiliated with the Anglican Communion Network will meet in Chicago on April 24. The purpose of the meeting is to allow Network bishops to speak frankly with each other about the future.

As the crisis in The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion has deepened, Network bishops and dioceses have been moving in several directions. Some Network dioceses have reaffiliated or are considering reaffiliating with other provinces of the Anglican Communion. Individual Network bishops have left The Episcopal Church to join other communions. Other bishops are attempting to be a voice for orthodoxy within The Episcopal Church.

“I have called this meeting because we need to talk frankly and openly about the future and how we as Network bishops can help the Network best fulfill its mission to build a biblical, missionary and united Anglican witness in the years ahead,” said Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator of the Network. “It is clear that the Network has a continuing mission to unite orthodox Anglicans, especially as increasing numbers of Network parishes and now dioceses are exiting The Episcopal Church. We will be talking about how we can work together to accomplish this goal even as we bless the several paths we have chosen as bishops and dioceses,” he added.

Dioceses that have made formal decisions to affiliate with the Network are Fort Worth, Quincy, Pittsburgh, Albany, South Carolina, San Joaquin, Central Florida, Dallas and Springfield. (The Diocese of the Rio Grande took a number of steps toward affiliation. However, their status was never completely clear.) With these dioceses, the Network also has 231 individual parish affiliates in five geographical convocations and one non-geographical convocation. Of this group, 105 parishes are under the care of The Anglican Provinces of Kenya, Uganda, or the Southern Cone. The entire diocese of San Joaquin is also under the oversight of The Province of the Southern Cone.

Northeast CANA Clergy Meet with Bishop Bena

2008-03-20T19:17:00.000-07:00

Photo by Raymond Dague

Six CANA priests, a postulant for the priesthood and one priest under the oversight of an American bishop attached to the Province of Kenya met with CANA Suffragan Bishop David Bena for the traditional Holy Week renewal of ordination vows. The clergy also received holy oils blessed by the bishop.

The Northeast portion of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America is a healthy microcosm of the growing movement. Nigerian and American priests serving in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut were present for the first gathering of CANA clergy in the Northeast. While not all CANA priests in the Northeast were able to participate, it was a good start for this corner of the Anglican realignment in North America.

CANA Bishops Invited to GAFCON

2008-03-13T06:46:00.000-07:00

The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) will be held in Amman, Jordan and Jerusalem. GAFCON will begin June 18-22 in Jordan. The Jerusalem pilgrimage June 22-29 will focus on worship, prayer, discussions, and Bible Study, shaped by the context of the Holy Land.

"We are very grateful for the feedback that we have received on the many complex issues that confront us," said Archbishop Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney and a member of the leadership team. "The emphasis of our time together will be our future in the Anglican Communion and the reformation and renewal of our common life rooted in the Holy Scriptures and our common faith in Jesus Christ."

Participants will include bishops and their wives, key clergy and laity. All CANA bishops have been invited.

What should the Anglicans do?

2008-03-01T08:54:00.001-08:00

By Steve Addison
http://www.steveaddison.net/2008/02/28/what-should-the-anglicans-do.html
2/28/2008

It is no exaggeration to say that the global Anglican church of is at a crossroads facing its greatest crisis since the Reformation. It's been there at least since the 1998 Lambeth Conference when the vast majority of Anglican bishops worldwide rejected "homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture."

Despite this the Episcopal church in the US and the Anglican Church in Canada have pursued an agenda of acceptance of homosexuality and the ordination of practicing homosexual clergy.

A decade later, at next July's Lambeth Conference, the battle over the nature of the Anglican communion will continue. The church is going through a painful and protracted identity crisis. Whatever happens at Lambeth, this crisis will not go away.

So what is to be done? What is the future for the world's 82 million Anglicans?

Here are some suggestions from a movements perspective. A word of qualification, I am not an Anglican. These are the musings of a concerned outsider who none-the-less loves the Anglican church.

1. Return to who you are.

Movements are renewed by making an innovative return to tradition. Rediscover the essence of the Anglican tradition in it's unity and diversity. Here's a good start from JI Packer: Who We Are and Where We Stand.

2. Don't forget innovation!

Returning to your tradition is only half of the equation. You must make an innovative return. Institutions spend an inordinate amount on energy on non-essential traditions. In contrast, movements are willing to change everything except their core beliefs in pursuit of their mission.

3. Say goodbye to the hegemony of the West.

It's time to catch up to what God is doing around the rest of the world and learn from it. Read the story of Archbishop Peter Akinola and the amazing growth of the Anglican church of Nigeria. Peter Jenkins demonstrates that throughout the "Global South" it is a biblically orthodox version of the Christian faith that is capturing the hearts of ordinary people. There lies the future of the Anglican church.

4. Learn from John Wesley

John Wesley was born and died an Anglican. Unfortunately the Anglican church of the day was not big enough to contain him. He once said, "I love the rites and ceremonies of the Church. But I see, well-pleased, that our great Lord can work without them."

Wesley was a loyal Anglican but when the clergy forbade him to preach in "their" parishes he proclaimed, "The world is my parish!" and preached without their permission to thousands who gladly heard him and joined the Methodists.

5. Make room for more Wesleys

Expect God to raise up a new generation of John Wesleys. Is the Anglican church big enough to give them room? What should happen when a bishop seeks to block the planting of a new church by Anglicans in "his" diocese despite it's decline? Will they be given room?

6. Pour fuel on the fire

Where is the Anglican church prospering? Where are lives being transformed by the Gospel? Where are disciples being made? Where are pioneering leaders to be found? Where are churches being planted? Where is God at work? Go there and learn.

Visit the Anglican church of Nigeria. Visit St Mary's London. Find out why the Sydney diocese has no problem growing leaders. Get excited about what the Church Army is doing down in Berkley NSW. Find out where there is unexpected success, learn from it and multiply it.

Make sure you devour the writings of Roland Allen, CMS missionary and mission strategist. Almost a century ago he wrote Missionary methods : St. Paul's or ours? and we still haven't got the message.

7. Have some grandchildren

Having grandchildren is a wonderful way to become young again, vicariously. The Anglican church has already birthed a dynamic movement called Methodism. Why not do it intentionally? That's what the Southern Baptists are doing in world missions. They are planting indigenous churches that are biblically orthodox but not necessarily "Southern Baptist".

Central Coast Evangelical Church is just one of the churches in a growing movement of Independent Evangelical Churches started and led by graduates of Moore College. Other Anglican churches are planting non-Anglican churches where the parish system frustrates the advance of the Gospel.

8. Remember your heroes

The Anglican church has produced some great leaders throughout it's history: John Wesley, Charles Simeon, William Wilberforce, Henry Martyn, Samuel Ajayi Crowther, Wilson Carlile, CS Lewis, John Stott, David Watson, and many more.

Study their lives. Tell and retell their stories and the lessons from their lives to a new generation.

9. Plant some trees

The best time to plant a tree? Twenty years ago. The second best time? Now.

Charles Simeon was the pastor of the Anglican church at Cambridge for 50 years. When he began in 1782 there were only a dozen evangelical ministers left in the Church of England. When he finished 54 years later, one in three Anglican churches were led by evangelicals. The vast majority of them were men influenced by Simeon in Cambridge. Many of them were converted through him.

10. Thank God for the Episcopalians

We can be thankful that the Episcopalians in the US provide an insight into the future of the Anglican church. . . if the decline continues. The Episcopalians are in free fall. In 2008 they led the way with the fastest rate of denominational decline in the US.

Why would that be?

According to Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, Episcopalians aren't interested in replenishing their ranks by having children. "They tend to be better-educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than some other denominations." You've got to give her credit for creativity. Here's the real reason.

Is that the future you want for the rest of the Anglican church?

END

-------------------

OHIO: Breakaway churches begin to organize amid confusion

2008-03-01T08:47:00.000-08:00

Effort would unify conservative congregations disaffiliated from the Episcopal Church USA

By Colette M. Jenkins
Beacon Journal religion writer
http://www.ohio.com/news/top_stories/15791202.html
February 20, 2008

FAIRLAWN: Bishop Roger Ames is no longer a cleric in the Ohio Diocese of the Episcopal Church USA.

But he is a leader in the global Anglican Communion, which includes the Episcopal Church USA.

Then there's the church that Ames pastors - St. Luke's in Fairlawn. Its incorporation papers list its name as St. Luke's Anglican Church and Ames as pastor. Diocesan records, however, show that it is St. Luke's Episcopal Church and that the pastorate is vacant.

The status of both Ames and the church is an indication of the level of confusion in the denomination and of what might very well be the beginning of a new Anglican province in North America.

Both Ames and Bishop Martyn Minns, the missionary bishop for the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), say an effort is under way to unify the theologically conservative parishes that have broken away from the Episcopal Church.

"We're trying to hold onto the traditional teachings of the church and stop the fragmentation that is going on across the country by bringing people together," Minns said. "We definitely have some real divisions (in the Episcopal Church) and we are trying to develop tight connections with the international church and the churches in this country."

Appointment controversy

Minns, of Herndon, Va., was elected by the Anglican Church of Nigeria, the largest province in the global communion, to lead the CANA parishes that have left the Episcopal Church USA. His August 2006 consecration in Abuja, Nigeria, was controversial because both the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church USA and the Archbishop of Canterbury had requested that it not proceed.

Subsequently, the archbishop did not invite Minns to the 2008 Lambeth Conference, saying Minns' appointment had caused "exceptionally serious division or scandal within the communion."

The Lambeth Conference, in Canterbury, England, is a once-a-decade, by-invitation-only assembly of Anglican bishops. Minns said it is not too late for him to be included on the invitation list for the July conference.

Realigning themselves

Dissension has torn the communion, since the Episcopal Church consecrated its first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, in 2003. A decision in 2004 by the Canadian province of Westminster to bless same-sex unions fueled the tension.

Since then, some of the more theologically conservative churches, such as St. Luke's, have disaffiliated from the Episcopal Church and realigned themselves with Anglican provinces and organizations that share their view on issues like homosexuality.

In fact, St. Luke's is the place where the national movement to defy liberal bishops in the American church was launched. On March 14, 2004, five retired Episcopal Church USA bishops and a diocesan bishop from Brazil confirmed 110 people at a multicongregational service at St. Luke's without the permission of the local bishop.

St. Luke's subsequently voted to leave the Ohio diocese and aligned itself with CANA, which was formed in April 2005. The organization now claims 118 clergy and 161 congregations, compared with 19 clergy and 14 congregations in November 2006.

CANA consecrated Ames and three others to serve as suffragan, or assistant, bishops to Minns on Dec. 9 in Herndon, Va. Their ordinations were in response to the rapid growth in CANA's membership, Minns said.

Ames oversees the 16 parishes in CANA's Great Lakes region. The region includes the five churches that have left the Cleveland-based Ohio Diocese of the Episcopal Church: St. Luke's, Church of the Holy Spirit in Akron, St. Barnabas in Bay Village, Church of the Good Samaritan in Cleveland and St. Anne in the Fields in Madison.

Clusters created by CANA are geographical and relational, but do not follow strict lines like the diocesan structure of the Episcopal Church, Ames said.

Common Cause

"There are now domestic bishops. That's the beginning of a new Anglican province in the U.S.," Ames said. "CANA is just one of the operations that came in to rescue orthodox, evangelical parishes that could no longer stay in the Episcopal Church. All of those streams have come together in something called Common Cause."

Common Cause, chaired by Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, is a partnership of organizations with roots in the Anglican Church that have unified to create an ecclesiastical structure apart from the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada. Its initial meeting in late September in Pittsburgh was to bind its members and discuss their direction for the future.

In addition to CANA, members of Common Cause include the American Anglican Council, the Anglican Communion Network, the Anglican Mission in the Americas (which includes Hudson Anglican Fellowship on Darrow Road), the Anglican Province of America, the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, Forward in Action, the Reformed Episcopal Church, the Anglican Essentials Federation and the Anglican Network in Canada.

"All together, these groups will birth a new American province that could encompass the U.S. and Canada," Ames said. "This will include the diocese of San Joaquin in California, which voted in December to leave the Episcopal Church. We anticipate that three or four more whole dioceses will leave this year and join us."

Some of the parishes across the country that have left the denomination are involved in legal disputes over church property. That is not the case in the Ohio Diocese, which covers the northern 48 counties of the state.

"We are looking for a faithful resolution to the property issues involving the congregations that have elected to leave the diocese," said Martha Wright, diocesan spokeswoman. "The priests in those congregations have asked to be released from their orders and their requests have been granted, but we have not taken any action where the property is concerned."

Ames said the diocese and parishes are in discussions to resolve the property issue and to negotiate a "just" settlement.

Bishop Mark Hollingsworth, who leads the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio, declined to comment.

"We have been able to avoid litigation. We appreciate Bishop Hollingsworth's willingness to continue the dialogue and his gracefulness in releasing the clergy," Ames said. "There is a strong possibility that Ohio could set a precedent for Christian resolution to this property issue that has led to angry, nasty litigation in other places. We're trying very much to let the Lord and the Holy Spirit lead in this process."

END

-----------------------

Venables Interview

2008-03-01T08:42:00.000-08:00

http://acl.asn.au/a-tragedy-for-the-church/
February 28, 2008

Archbishop of the Southern Cone, Gregory Venables was interviewed on CBC Radio in Canada earlier this week.

It's very very sad that it should come to this, it's a tragedy for the church, for the church in Canada and for the church throughout the world - but it shows how serious the division is. We are grateful for this transcript of the interview (the audio is available here in RealAudio format). Questions are from CBC's The Current presenter Anna Maria Tremonti -

Also joining us was The Most Reverend Gregory James Venables, Presiding Bishop of the Province of the Southern Cone. He's also the Bishop of Argentina and the leader of the parishes that have split with the Anglican Church of Canada. Archbishop Gregory James Venables spoke to us from Buenos Aires.

What is your response to the recent votes here in Canada, what do you think of these decisions?

It's very, very, sad that it should come to this, it's a tragedy for the church, for the church in Canada and for the church throughout the world - but it shows how serious the division is. This has never happened before. It has happened significantly with very large groups in the United States in recent years and recently with a whole diocese moving - and now it's happening in Canada. It shows how serious this division is and how strong the convictions are which are pulling the church apart.

In your view is this solely about the Canadian churches stand on homosexuality? Does it go beyond that?

No. This is about two versions of Christianity which are in a strong state of difference. You've got the original biblical Christianity which the church, the Christian church throughout the world has held to over the past two thousand years and then you've got this new liberal post-modern Christianity which has evolved especially in the western world over the last 100 years or so. It's like two ships that have gradually pulled apart and can longer really sail together and the trouble is it's pulling the church apart as it does that.

And how did you personally, in Argentina, get involved with the Canadian congregations?

We've got good links with folk in Canada, we are all a part of the Americas. Also I had been a part of the Primates' debate on this for a long time now and therefore I'd been in contact with Canadians who'd been in touch with us and discussed things with us and asked our advice and that's what has led to this situation - that in the end they came to us and said, "Look we are going to have to break away from something we can no longer walk with - will you please give us somewhere to live while this thing works itself out?" and we talked about it with other Primates - there were a number of provinces that were prepared to make an offer to receive these congregations and in the end the decision was to come down to us.

And in practical terms what does that mean to take on these Canadian parishioners?

It means basically that these people cannot say that they agree with their local Church, with the national Church where they are, but they want to remain within the Anglican church and - since they can't remain within the Anglican Church if they leave the Canadian Church and don't go anywhere else - they are coming to us for shelter until the situation is resolved. We hope it will be a temporary thing and that something more practical and able to be worked out locally will come out of this in the long term. As it stands there are two bishops who will be looking after these congregations, two retired Canadian bishops who will be doing the practical work for us but the overall coverage will be under the Province of the Southern Cone which includes the six countries you mentioned.

And along with the issue of faith when it comes to the running of a church there are legal and financial considerations how do those shake down with these changes?

Well I suppose the most difficult thing will be where the clergy go in terms of stipend, pensions and medical coverage and all that which implies an enormous sacrifice, which shows again how serious this is and how strong the convictions are. But also the tragedy is going to be over buildings - who actually owns the buildings. Because although buildings are secondary in our faith, the church is the temple - we are the temple and God lives in His people - but even so buildings are very very precious to us and they mean a lot, especially locally where families have lived for a long time in one locality so that is going to be probably the hardest thing of all. And what's been happening in the states is tragic because there are multi-million (dollar) court cases going on at this moment in which even members of vestries are being taken to court for 'abandoning the communion' as they say.

I can hear the regret in your voice.

Yeah. Oh yeah. It's heartbreaking. It's heartbreaking. It's tragic because the church is meant to be a demonstration of love - and one of the things that really breaks us up is that there seems to be so little love in this. I said at a Primates' meeting a while back that in a marriage, generally, in spite of difficulties you keep going because you want to, because you love each other and in spite of the fact you face terrible problems sometimes you want to stay together and that's what keeps you going. But there seems to be little love and little desire to remain together and that is the tragic revelation of this situation.

And yet we're talking about a tug of war over a view of Christianity.

Over two versions, one which is the ancient historic version and one which has grown up more recently but unfortunately you would have thought there would be enough in common to hold it together.

And do you think there is, you think there is a chance of doing that?

We thought that for a long time, we met together as Primates over and over again and every time we said, "Please don't go on with this, hold back, let's talk about this, let's find a way" - but even on one situation when we had a meeting in Brazil, with all the Primates and we put out a letter and said, "Please don't do this", within 48 hours a Canadian diocese had gone ahead with moving on same sex blessings which took our breath away, we hadn't even sent the letter out more than 48 hours I think it was. The other tragedy is, having been in this situation for so long and having taken part in it there's been very little real dialogue. There's been long silences but there hasn't been real dialogue and that is a tragedy. If Christianity is what it should be then we should be able to sit down and work it out in spite of differences and that is part of the sadness too.

Okay, well I understand there is a conference for the end of April in BC by the Anglican Network of Canada that is the group of more traditional or so-called essential Anglicans. You're going to that conference, what do you hope that will achieve?

I hope to be there. I hope it will give us a chance to clarify even more how this thing is going to work out and to affirm the position that people are taking so that there's a security within this and simply to be able to pray together and to say okay we've taken a step, how can we know be the sort of church that God wants us to be in a world that really needs to find some hope. And if the world is the creation of God what can we do to help the world find its place within that world vision.

END

----------------

Minns to Anglican District of Virginia

2008-03-01T08:41:00.000-08:00

The following is a letter from Bishop Martyn Minns, Missionary Bishop of CANA, to all the churches of the Anglican District of Virginia, in preparation for the ruling that should come at any time from Judge Randy Bellows.

February 27, 2008

Anglican District of Virginia newsletter.

Dear Friends,

I'm writing to you all to express my gratitude for your faithful witness as we have embarked on this journey together to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ during one of the most challenging periods in the history of the Anglican Communion. We have experienced those challenges not only within the global communion, but particularly right here in Virginia. Your sacrificial giving in supporting the work of ministry through your time, your talents, and your financial resources is a powerful witness to the world of your dedication to Jesus Christ and to the work of His church. Your devotion to the integrity of a biblical witness is a testimony of steadfast faith in Christ in a time of great challenge.

As you know, CANA continues to grow at a remarkable rate. In the past year alone we have quadrupled in size and we continue to receive and plant new congregations. Here in Virginia, the CANA and Ugandan congregations of the Anglican District of Virginia continue to reach out with Christ's love to preach the Gospel, to serve one another, to extend a warm hand of fellowship to our communities, and to celebrate the sovereignty and faithfulness of our God as we go from strength to strength.

You also know that another milestone is soon to be upon us. I ask you all to be in prayer and preparation for the time when we receive the decision from Judge Bellows in Fairfax Circuit Court. We expect him to rule on the applicability and constitutionality of Virginia Statue 57-9 under which we filed reports of votes to sever ties with The Episcopal Church. As you remember, following those filings we entered into negotiations with the Diocese of Virginia based on the protocol unanimously recommend by a committee chartered by Bishop Lee. TEC forced the Diocese to break off those negotiations and to file suits against all 11 churches, their rectors, and vestries. We expect Judge Bellows ruling at any time.

Judge Bellows has signaled he could rule in one of three ways, either that:

1. There has been a division and the 57-9 statute is constitutional. 2. There has been a division and the 57-9 statute is unconstitutional. 3. There has been no division and so that 57-9 statute does not apply.

As you can see, each possible ruling will require responses from us as well as from the Diocese of Virginia and The Episcopal Church. Whichever way he rules, we must bear in mind that this will be only one of a number of issues on which he will likely ultimately rule, and we must stay focused on our ministry and mission. Thanks to the Lord and to your support and prayers, we are ready for all three possibilities.

Last week I asked Jim Oakes, Vice Chair of the Anglican District of Virginia, to gather some leaders together from the CANA churches in the ADV to pray and plan for our next steps. John Yates, the rector of The Falls Church, opened our time together with a reading from Habakkuk 3:

The Sovereign LORD is my strength~ he makes my feet like the feet of a deer, he enables me to go on the heights.

I can assure you that we will continue to seek the Lord in providing for our needs as we earnestly ask Him for His help. He works through you as you continue to pledge and give to this very public witness of standing firm for the Gospel and for the integrity of His Word. We also hear from friends in other denominations in Virginia and around the United States who support and pray for us, knowing that the decisions and actions here will be felt beyond our own denomination. We appreciate the prayers and financial support that comes from inside and outside our denomination. We are not alone.

Please pray as we await this first decision. Pray for Judge Bellows in the great responsibility he's been given to make this first decision. Pray for the legal team and the CANA churches leadership as we respond to this first decision.

And pray for Bishop Lee and the Diocese of Virginia as they also respond to the decisions of the court. Pray for all the churches in the ADV that we may, even through difficult times, continue to trust the Lord with our future, being assured that He will not let us go. Pray that we will continue to seek Him first and His righteousness, eager to stand in the gap and eager to forgive.

As soon as Judge Bellows hands down this first decision, all the ADV churches will be notified. We have been blessed by a remarkable legal team and we are grateful for their diligent preparation for this decision and the work ahead. May the Lord bless you and keep you as we solemnly observe this season of Lent, looking forward to that day when we celebrate His victory through the cross.

Angela and Rachel and I keep you in our prayers. We are confident that He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.

The Sovereign LORD is our strength. May He, indeed, make our feet like the feet of deer, enabling us to go on to the heights together and for His sake. Amen.

Your brother in Christ,

+Martyn
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns
Missionary Bishop of C.A.N.A.

------------------------

One View of Realignment

2008-02-26T15:21:00.000-08:00

Chuck Collins Writes His Parish: Realignment update

Posted by Kendall Harmon at TitusOneNine:

Baroness Caroline Cox, several times this past weekend, quoted Archbishop Ben Kwashi: "We have a message worth living for; we have a message worth dying for; don't you [in the West] compromise the message we are dying for."I heard from a friend in England several weeks ago that an announcement was imminent that would be very good news for the orthodox in the U.S. I learned from others that it would involve a plan for churches to connect to the Anglican Communion apart from the Episcopal Church - this is what we have been waiting for since the vestry letter September 2006. It was reported that this would have the blessing of the Presiding Bishop and the Archbishop of Canterbury. I hoped that this would allow Christ Church and churches like ours to disassociate from the Episcopal Church with the blessing of Canterbury, yet still remain a member of the Anglican Communion.

This is the news I've been waiting for but, I'm sad to say that it is not good news.

It turns out that the four U.S. bishops have only resurrected an old idea that was earlier rejected as inadequate by orthodox Episcopalians, i.e. the Presiding Bishop's plan for alternate episcopal oversight. The plan of the four Windsor bishops is unworkable on every level. It will not help orthodox churches in hostile dioceses because it depends on the good will of revisionist bishops towards their orthodox congregations. For no reason at all bishops can say "no" to episcopal visitors (Communion Partners), and can still require churches to financially support the Episcopal Church (in their lawsuits against conservative congregations!). How is this good news for traditional churches? And for churches like Christ Church, it provides no way to connect to the Anglican Communion apart from the Episcopal Church. No wonder the Presiding Bishop endorsed it; it's her plan and she gives up nothing! The plan of these four bishops is a last gasp from a dying institution.

Not only does this plan fail to address any real issues, it threatens to change the focus of discussion in dangerous ways. Instead of calling the Episcopal Church to repentance for breaking the trust of the Anglican Communion, these four (and other Windsor bishops?) are now figuring out ways to let the Episcopal Church continue with what it is doing now and in the future. The problem for these four bishops is not the Episcopal Church, but orthodox churches and dioceses that threaten the unity because they can no longer associate with the Episcopal Church. The strategy is to blame Peter Akinola and Bob Duncan for the disunity we face, rather than the Episcopal Church who repeatedly refused to respond positively to the pleas of the Anglican Communion.

Everything in this discussion hinges on the "pendulum." Windsor bishops are 100% invested in the idea that the Episcopal Church, that has swung wildly to the liberal side, will one day swing back to a moderate centrist theology. But there is no indication in recent history or church history in general that there will be such a swing. There is no pendulum. Instead, I believe, the Episcopal Church is set on a trajectory away from mainstream Christianity that will never again intersect with mainstream Christianity. There are simply two churches within the Episcopal Church today with two totally different theologies and agendas. My concern is that we might get 5, 10, 20 years down this road before realizing that the likes of Louie Crew, Presiding Bishop Schori and Bishop Jon Bruno (and the next generation of revisionists that will control the Episcopal Church) will never concede to anything like a more balanced view of theology and morals.

Bishop Lillibridge gave a forceful address at the Diocesan Council last Friday for the essentials of the faith (See the next blog entry--KSH. It was heartening to hear him so strongly upholding the core teachings of the faith as nonnegotiables. As he attends the meetings of the Windsor Continuation Group in the months proceeding Lambeth we need to be praying for him. I will ask him to take to their meetings our concerns (and of many in West Texas from the feedback we've received) that churches who cannot in conscience submit any longer to the Episcopal Church be given a way to continue being "Anglican." Hopefully this Continuation Group will uphold some of the disciplinary portions of the Windsor Report, something that hasn't happened to date.

I am thoroughly energized by what God is doing at Christ Church these days. Our effort at Council last week was a remarkable witness to the vitality and life we are experiencing in the Holy Spirit. Leslie Kingman and Linda Camp, and the over 200 volunteers, deserve a huge thanks for showing our bishops and diocese that we are positive about our future and that we want to help guide and influence our diocese. Caroline Cox was overwhelmed by the spirit of our worship and fellowship on Sunday. I also appreciate the work the vestry and others are doing to collect information on the areas pertaining to the realignment.

The following is offered with the unanimous support of our parish leaders (meeting at the vestry retreat a few weeks ago) to assure our congregation that we continue steadfast in our mission and core values: As the Vestry of Christ Church

»We remain firmly committed to Jesus Christ and the authority of Scripture.
»We are prayerfully seeking God's wisdom and direction in light of the dilemma within the national Episcopal Church.
»We are preparing for our future, valuing our community and our rich heritage.

--The Rev. Chuck Collins is rector, Christ Church, San Antonio, Texas

Realignment News from Canada

2008-02-19T06:05:00.000-08:00

From the Toronto Globe and Mail:

More Anglican parishes to leave the fold
Bishop's prediction follows on the heels of seven new congregations joining breakaway traditionalist movement

JILL MAHONEY

February 19, 2008

More conservative Anglican congregations will join those that have already cut ties with the Anglican Church of Canada, the head of a breakaway group predicts.

In the past week, seven parishes voted to leave the Anglican Church of Canada to seek the authority of a South American archbishop in a long-running dispute over theological issues, including the blessing of same-sex marriages, which they oppose.

So far, six Anglican parishes in Ontario, eight in British Columbia and three in Alberta have decided to operate outside the jurisdiction of the Anglican Church of Canada and joined the recently formed Anglican Network in Canada. Ten of the 17 breakaway parishes have voted to align themselves with the more orthodox, traditional Province of the Southern Cone, which covers most of South America. More are expected to consider the issue in the following week.

"I'm quite confident that this is just a beginning," said Bishop Donald Harvey, moderator of the recently formed Anglican Network in Canada, a "haven" for breakaway congregations that is under the jurisdiction of the South American archbishop, Gregory Venables.
Print Edition - Section Front

Section A Front Enlarge Image
More National Stories

* Aneurysm lands man in health-care nightmare
* 295,000 new arrivals add twist to Tory dynasty
* More Anglican parishes to leave the fold
* Dion hints Liberals willing to let budget stand
* Ontarians mark new winter holiday by making it up as they go
* Veterans go to court over atomic tests
* Go to the National section

The Globe and Mail

Bishop Harvey said parishes across the country are considering the issue - and they are on his organization's mailing list - although he doesn't know of any others that have votes planned.

"It's at a discussion level. I think that what has happened in the last week will give those who were hesitant some courage to know that if they do make this [step], they won't be alone, that there are other parishes right across the country who have made similar moves," he said in an interview from his home in St. John's.

In voting to leave the Anglican Church of Canada, conservative Anglicans will retain ties with other Anglicans who share their traditional views. The congregations plan to seek episcopal oversight under Bishop Harvey, who is under the jurisdiction of Archbishop Venables of the Province of the Southern Cone.

Vianney Carrière, a spokesman for the Anglican Church of Canada, noted that despite the recent departures, there are still almost 2,300 congregations in the Canadian fold.

The congregations' decisions to break ties could lead to battles over church buildings, which at least some want to keep using. Before they voted, parishioners were told that the buildings belong to the Anglican Church of Canada, not to the congregations, and that they may be locked out.

"Our position, and I guess this is where the controversy is likely to come in, is that they cannot take property with them," Mr. Carrière said.

In the United States, the Anglican Episcopal diocese of Virginia fought several congregations in court over ownership of church buildings. The congregations voted to quit the Episcopal Church and affiliate with the Anglican Church in Nigeria.

As well, two priests of St. Mary's of the Incarnation in the Victoria suburb of Metchosin, which voted to leave the Anglican Church of Canada on Sunday, were disciplined. *****

Divisions in the church

Turmoil in the Anglican Church, as presented by the Anglican Network in Canada, an alternative group working outside the Anglican Church of Canada:

1998: An international meeting of leadership in the Anglican Church, held once a decade, endorses a non-binding resolution that states homosexual practice is incompatible with scripture and that it "...could not advise the legitimizing or blessing of same-sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions."

June, 2002: The Diocese of New Westminster ignores the so-called Lambeth Resolution 1.10 and becomes the first Anglican diocese in the world to formally authorize the blessing of same-sex unions.

June, 2007: The Canadian General Synod resolves that same-sex blessings are "not in conflict" with the core doctrine of the Anglican Church of Canada and rejects a motion upholding Lambeth Resolution 1.10 as the current standard of Anglican teaching.

November, 2007: The Province of the Southern Cone synod votes to welcome North American Anglicans into membership.

February, 2008: More than a dozen parishes across Canada vote on whether to request episcopal oversight of Donald Harvey of Newfoundland, a bishop within the Province of the Southern Cone under Archbishop Gregory Venables.

CANA Quadruples Congregational Membership in One Year

2008-02-15T10:05:00.000-08:00

HERNDON, Va. (February 12, 2008) – The Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) has experienced momentous growth in one year, quadrupling its congregational membership.
“CANA is leading the way for the new era of American Anglicanism. CANA is modeling the unifying presence for which many of us have longed,” said CANA Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns.

In November 2006, CANA began with 19 clergy and 14 congregations. By March 2007, the number of clergy grew to 47 and the number of congregations totaled 34. By November 2007, CANA was comprised of 118 clergy and 61 congregations. Overall, CANA clergy have increased by 621% and congregations have increased by 436%.

Bishop Minns attributed several factors to CANA’s growth, including the 10 congregations that Bishop Francis Lyons of Bolivia (Anglican Province of the Southern Cone in South America) recently transferred to CANA.

“Also, among CANA’s clergy we currently count no less than three bishops or archbishops from other continuing Anglican bodies who have humbly laid down their Episcopal positions in order to join CANA as priests. These clergy recognize CANA as a key part of the emerging orthodox Anglican ecclesiastical structure in North America,” Minns continued.

“CANA’s mission is to reach and serve the least, the last, and the lost. Our growth is a testament to committed orthodox Christians who want to be transformed by the Good News of Jesus Christ and to then transform our culture for Christ through evangelism, discipleship and church planting.”

The Convocation of Anglicans in North America currently consists of approximately 60 congregations and 100 clergy in 20 states. About a fifth of the congregations are primarily expatriate Nigerians. CANA was established in 2005 to provide a means by which Anglicans living in the USA, who were alienated by the actions and decisions of The Episcopal Church, could continue to live out their faith without compromising their core convictions. CANA is part of the Common Cause partnership that includes representatives of more than 250 Anglican congregations that are connected to the rest of the Anglican Communion, a worldwide fellowship of some 70 million, through various pastoral and missionary initiatives. For more information, please visit CANA at www.CanaConvocation.org.

To schedule an interview with a CANA representative, please contact Kelly Oliver at 703–683–5004 (ext. 140) or Caitlin Bozell (ext. 119)

DoFW: Second Report on Possible Realignment

2008-02-13T13:07:00.000-08:00

Second Report
on the possibility of re-aligning with the Province of the Southern Cone

In this second report from the Bishop and Standing Committee on the possibility of re-aligning with the Province of the Southern Cone, we would like to offer a brief analysis of some of the basic differences between the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church as compared with those of the Province of the Southern Cone (PSC). An English translation of the Constitution and Canons of the PSC can be found elsewhere on this Web site.

In our Preliminary Report of January 9, 2008, we arrived at the following conclusion:

Based on our review, we have concluded that the structure and polity of the Province of the Southern Cone would afford our diocese greater self-determination than we currently have under the General Convention of The Episcopal Church. This autonomy would be evident most specifically in the areas of property ownership, liturgy, holy orders, and missionary focus.

One fundamental principle underlying the Constitution and Canons of the PSC is that “the Dioceses are at liberty to provide necessary selection and training of clergy, liturgical use, finances and possessions, and other affairs related to the local situation, provided they are not in conflict with other Anglican norms and this Constitution.” (See item 3, Rules, on page 2)

Specifically, we note the following:

Ordination Standards
Each local diocese has the responsibility for the ordination process and makes its own determination as to the eligibility and the qualifications for ordination to Holy Orders. There are no requirements imposed upon dioceses by the Province regarding gender or sexual orientation.

Liturgy
Each diocesan bishop determines matters of worship and Prayer Book usage in his diocese. The section on Liturgy (Canon 9) notes that “it is the responsibility of the Bishops to keep guard that the forms used in Public Worship and the Administration of the Sacraments be in accordance with Anglican Faith and Order and that nothing be established that is contrary to the Word of God as revealed in the Holy Scriptures.” Membership in the Southern Cone would not necessitate a change in our liturgical practices or Prayer Book. It would also protect us from experimental liturgies already authorized or under consideration by the General Convention of TEC which advocate the use of expansive language for God, the elimination of male pronouns for God, or the blessing of same-sex unions.

Property
Canon 10 states that the Province’s possessions “shall consist of the economic contributions of its Member Dioceses.” The PSC does not lay claim to any buildings, real estate or investments of its member dioceses. Thus, title to all our churches, property, and funds would remain in the Diocese of Fort Worth. TEC makes the claim that all local church property is held in trust for TEC.

Provincial Polity
Instead of having a cumbersome General Convention that meets every three years for three weeks at great expense, with four clergy and four lay deputies from each diocese in the House of Deputies and all bishops in the House of Bishops, as in The Episcopal Church, there is a Provincial Synod (Canon 5) of the Southern Cone that meets every three years for three days. It is comprised of the Bishop and one clergy and one lay delegate from each diocese in the Province. This would be a much smaller legislative body on the provincial level, producing considerable cost savings and a council of far more manageable size for conducting business. Also, as a member diocese we would have a seat on the Provincial Executive Council (Canon 6), helping to direct program and budget. Our Bishop would have the right of voice at Council meetings, even if we were already represented on the Council by a priest or lay person.

Presiding Bishop/Primate
The Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone, also referred to as the Primate or Archbishop, is not a separate, full-time, salaried position, as in TEC. Instead, the Bishop elected as Primate continues to serve as a diocesan bishop, like all the other bishops of the Province. There are no “national church offices” staffed with a bureaucracy of paid church employees. This makes for a much smaller structure and budget and keeps the emphasis for mission and ministry on the local diocesan level.

Provincial Budget
The budget of the General Convention of TEC was set at just under $50 million for 2008. Most of this funding comes from an “asking” from each diocese, in the amount of 21% of its annual income. The remainder comes from investment income and other sources. The annual budget of the Province of the Southern Cone totals less than $100,000 and is funded by the member dioceses on a proportionate basis, with contributions ranging between $2,000 and $6,000. Additional support comes from overseas partners. The funds are used mostly for basic costs of administration and communications. This minimal provincial cost keeps the focus and funding for ministry in the local dioceses.

We encourage you to read the PSC Constitution and Canons for yourselves. If you have further questions or matters that require clarification, please feel free to write the Standing Committee at the Diocesan Center for Ministry. Additional concerns will be addressed in our next report.

The Bishop and Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth
Feb. 12, 2008

Washington State: Group splits off St. Paul’s church

2008-02-09T11:11:00.000-08:00

Episcopal pastor says national body has gone astray

MARY LANE GALLAGHER
THE BELLINGHAM HERALD

BELLINGHAM — The top clergy member of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church is stepping down to lead a fledging congregation of former members who feel the nationwide Episcopal Church no longer represents the core of their faith.

The Rev. Kevin Bond Allen announced late last month that he was resigning from one of the city’s largest churches to become rector of St. Brendan’s Anglican Church, a new congregation launched last fall by former St. Paul’s members.

In a letter to the congregation, Allen said he has loved his time at St. Paul’s, but his dissatisfaction with The Episcopal Church made it difficult for him to continue within the organization.

“During the last few years, our (national) Episcopal Church has continued to embrace a wide range of and often conflicting teachings regarding scriptural authority, the divinity of Christ, and affirming other religions at the price of evangelism,” Allen wrote.

“Since I do not agree with their direction,” he wrote, “my leadership as a rector would become a divisive issue rather than a reconciling blessing in future parish discussions about how we should participate with and support our diocese and national church.”

Allen was away this week and unavailable for comment.

The announcement came as a surprise to many in the 1,400- member congregation, said the Rev. Charles W. Whitmore, an associate pastor who is now the church’s priest in charge. The congregation had already been dealing with the loss of members who left to start St. Brendan’s. They were few in number, but many were strong, active members involved with church leadership and hold deep friendships with those who stayed.

“There’s a lot of sadness,” Whitmore said. “‘Can’t we work this out? Don’t we have the main core things in common — our belief in Jesus? Isn’t that enough to hold us together?’ It’s a hard time.”

Episcopal congregations throughout the nation are struggling with the same questions. Some entire congregations, including at least two in Western Washington, have left the church rather than remain part of a national church they worry is straying too far from their core beliefs.

St. Brendan’s, which has about 30 members who attend Sunday services, meets in the chapel of St. Paul’s Academy.

For Moheb Ghali, one of the founders of St. Brendan’s, the dispute boils down to a few key issues, including the nature of Jesus Christ himself.

“Is he the son of God or was he just a good prophet?” Ghali asks. He worries the national church teaches that Jesus represents “a way, not the way” to salvation.

Ghali, a vice provost at Western Washington University, also believes the national church is watering down the authority of the Bible, which he feels was “written by people inspired by God and it does reflect the standards we ought to be held accountable to.”

Peg Swieringa of Custer said she and her husband, Gerry, are still close with many members of the St. Paul’s congregation. But it’s the national church they couldn’t remain a part of.

“I think the national church is leaning away from a lot of those very basic, basic beliefs,” said Peg, who attends both St. Brendan’s and Christ Episcopal Church in Blaine. “They’re becoming more and more liberal and trying to include all kinds of cultures and all kinds of religions, which then sort of detracts from our own religion. St. Brendan’s is trying to go back to that and to the basics of our faith.”

But Episcopal Church leaders say the church’s core beliefs haven’t changed.

“What I’ve heard from some people — that we no longer believe in the divinity of Christ — I don’t even know where that’s coming from,” said the Rt. Rev. Greg Rickel, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia. “It’s certainly not true for me. I don’t see any real movement in that direction as they point to in the Episcopal Church, either.”

And the Bible, Rickel said, “is our authoritative text.”

But Ghali said the consecration in 2003 of an openly gay bishop in New Hampshire stands out as a symptom of the national church’s drift away from the Anglican Communion, the worldwide body of churches rooted in the Church of England.

The event has drawn sharp criticism from other church bodies within the Anglican Communion, who say ordaining a gay bishop goes against biblical scripture.

No one part of the Anglican Communion should take such a drastic departure without the consent of the entire body, Ghali said.

“It’s sort of like, ‘My hand cannot walk away from my body, because it discovered it’s smarter than my feet,’” he said.

Many mainline Christian denominations are struggling with the same issues, Whitmore said: inclusiveness, multiculturalism, the authority of biblical scripture, exploring the divinity of Jesus and “how do we express the truth in the Gospel for the 21st century.”

But Rickel, the bishop, worries that the Episcopal church is losing what he sees as one of its greatest attributes — its ability to hold a diversity of thought in one large religious body.

Diane Parker, a St. Paul’s member since 1984, wishes there had been more discussion among the congregation before the members left to start St. Brendan’s.

“If we’d had those conversations internally, we could have had agreement about what we were disagreeing about,” she said. “What some folks think has happened is, we’ve kind of lost some of that ability to be that forum, where it’s safe to express those ideas.”

But Allen’s departure might bring about the opportunity for the kind of talks Parker wishes took place before he left. As the congregation’s senior warden, she’ll help guide the membership through a self-examination of what they believe, and what they need in their next rector.

And she expects members of the congregation will continue to have close ties to those at St. Brendan’s.

“There’s a lot of friendships on both sides,” she said. “Our philosophy is going to be, ‘Go, God bless, and the porch lights are on.’”

Ghali hopes the new church will grow, but not at the expense of St. Paul’s membership. He hopes the growth comes from the surrounding neighborhood of people who don’t go to church now.

And members haven’t completely cut their ties to their old church. Gerry Swieringa still leads a discussion group at St. Paul’s and plans to continue.

“I still don’t feel like I left St. Paul’s,” he said. “I left the Episcopal Church. There’s definitely a difference.”

Michigan: After split, Anglican church finds its way

2008-02-09T11:03:00.000-08:00

Editor's Note: I've noticed lately in stories like this that writers are using the word "defection" in talking of these splits. I believe that this is a loaded and pejorative term.

By NICHOLAS DESHAIS
Times Herald

LEXINGTON- When the faithful gather on Sunday behind Bush's Restaurant to hear the Rev. Richard Dalton speak, they are acting as a brand-new church as well as a very old one.

The congregants were, until three years ago, all Episcopalians, members of the former Trinity Episcopal Church. But now, after splitting from that church, they consider themselves Anglicans, a faith that can trace its history to the sixth century.

A lot of people felt that we were the splinter group. We feel that the Episcopal church left us," said Finola Hewitt, a member of the new Christ the King Anglican Church.

While watching the congregation at Christ the King, one could hardly suspect the roiling tensions, defections and splintering factions within the Episcopal church.

Like a lightning-struck tree, the international Anglican church, which the Episcopals are part of, is splitting into irreconcilable branches.

"We're not looking much toward the Western church for leadership," Dalton said. "We're looking to the third world."

The small Christ the King church, along with about a dozen others in Michigan, is part of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, which defected from the Episcopal church to join with the church of Nigeria more than three years ago.

These Michiganders now follow the leadership of Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria. Akinola hews to a much more conservative view of Anglicism, and for some Americans, this brand of faith matches their own.

The trouble began in 2003 when the Episcolpalian Diocese of New Hampshire elected Gene Robinson, a gay man, as its ninth bishop. It was the first time an openly gay man was ordained, and some churchgoers felt this went against church teaching.

Robinson's ordination started what has come to be known as the Anglican realignment.

"There are about eight factions that broke away from the Episcopal church," said Dr. Dennis Smallwood, who attends the Lexington church.

Smallwood recently retired from his various jobs a public health director in all the Thumb counties.

Church secretary Janet Pigeon argued people in the movement are not judging others but doing what "God wants, not what we want to do."

"We're trying to hold to the Scripture," said Pigeon, 70, of Lexington. "We need to follow the Word."

New wave of US defections

2008-02-09T06:07:00.000-08:00

CoE Newspaper 2.01.08 p 5:

A new wave of parish defections has washed across the Episcopal Church with congregations in Tennessee, Pittsburgh and Central Florida quitting the national church in protest to its leftward drift.

The response to American church secessions however, has differed from past battles with a premium being placed on an amicable parting of the ways.

The new wave of defections has also come from “Windsor Dioceses”—dioceses whose leaders have been opposed to the innovation in doctrine and discipline made in recent years by the national church’s leadership.

While united in their opposition to the actions of the last two General Conventions, conservatives have been divided on what tactical programme to purse. With the breakaway groups now soliciting defections from conservative dioceses, traditionalist leaders within the Episcopal Church are concerned that turf battles over the remaining conservatives may weaken the remaining Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic witness within the Episcopal Church.

In the Diocese of Tennessee the bulk of Trinity Church in Winchester on Jan 6 quit the diocese for CANA, while the rector and members of Holy Cross in Murfreesboro announced that day they had joined the Church of Uganda.

Bishop John Bauerschmidt lamented the secessions, saying they were unnecessary as “Tennessee has on several occasions committed itself to the recommendations of the Windsor Report.” He noted that he was “committed to the Camp Allen principles of compliance with the recommendations of the Windsor Report” articulated by Archbishop Rowan Williams in his Advent letter.

The Bishop of Central Florida, the Rt. Rev. John W. Howe told his diocesan convention on Jan 25 that eight congregations, including the diocese’s second and fourth largest parishes, were withdrawing from the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Howe told The Church of England Newspaper the last three months had been the most difficult of his life, and the negotiations had left him exhausted. However “we have done something that has not been accomplished anywhere else. We are on the best of terms with all those leaving. And we are committed to rebuilding where there have been losses.”

In his Convention address Bishop Howe stated he understood there were some who for reasons of conscience had to withdraw. “I understand that. I don’t agree, but I don’t believe we should punish them. We shouldn’t sue them. We shouldn’t depose the clergy. Our brokenness is a tragedy. The litigation that is going on in so many places is a travesty,” he said.

“And although some seem to be trying to do so, I don’t think you can hold a Church together by taking everybody you disagree with to court,” he said.

CANA Grows Pulling in Archbishops and Bishops to Priestly Ranks

2008-02-09T06:05:00.000-08:00

Leader Confident in Virginia Lawsuits. "We are moving forward"

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
1/29/2008

The leader of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, a Nigerian church plant of orthodox Anglicanism in the US says his church is growing with some 60 parishes (20 more in the pipeline), 120 plus clergy, and some 8,000 in attendance all in two years, making it one of the fastest growing body of orthodox Anglicans in North America. In an interview with the Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns at the Anglican Mission in the Americas Winter Conference in Dallas, David W. Virtue talked with Bishop Minns about the present state of Anglicanism in North America and CANA.

VIRTUEONLINE: Where is CANA at today?

MINNS: We are going forward and growing, adding churches, adding clergy and planting new congregations. We have 60 churches with several coming out of the Continuing Church movement, led by several archbishops and bishops from the Continuing movement. They have laid down their episcopal office to serve as priests in CANA.

VIRTUEONLINE: Are you simply monochrome or is there some diversity in your ranks?

MINNS: The episcopate and clergy is a blessed reflection of the diversity of the American populace, with significant numbers of immigrants and minorities. We are committed to modeling for American Anglicans the possibility of respecting both integrities regarding the ordionation of women within one ecclesial body.

VIRTUEONLINE: What are the distinctives of CANA?

MINNS: We are an indigenous ecclesiastical structure with representative leadership by member clergy and laity. One distinctive is that we see ourselves establishing the necessary structures for a growing church in North America along with our friends in the Common Cause Partnership.

VIRTUEONLINE: How do you differ from say the Anglican Mission in the Americas?

MINNS: It is a difference of approach, not theology or mission. We are equally committed to planting new congregations, but we are also structuring ourselves as a church fully in communion with the Province of Nigeria and the worldwide Anglican Communion.

VIRTUEONLINE: You are a church then, rather than a mission?

MINNS: We are committed to mission, but I am happy to embrace the word "church". I think the connection through Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola is seen as being positive. Those who come to us see he has taken a strong stand for the gospel. The Nigerian Church, indeed nearly all the African Anglican provinces, will not compromise in their core understanding of the gospel.

VIRTUEONLINE: So you wanted, from the beginning, to connect with an orthodox province in the Global South?

MINNS: Yes. Our desire was and is to connect with a larger structure.

VIRTUEONLINE: How long have you known Archbishop Akinola?

MINNS: We met briefly in '98 and started working closely together in the beginning of 2003.

VIRTUEONLINE: Are you pleased with what is happening in North American Anglicanism now?

MINNS: I am grieved by the brokenness of the Episcopal Church and the intransigence of the leadership in matters of faith and morals, but in the middle of this I see wonderful changes, lives are being transformed, people are offering themselves for ordination.

VIRTUEONLINE: Do you have standards for ministry comparable to the more well established educational channels and vehicles of education in Anglicanism? How well do you look after your clergy?

MINNS: All our clergy are properly educated. We have some flexibility in terms of context, but all clergy must have, at a minimum, a Bachelor's Degree or equivalent in theology. We will insist on more theological training, if necessary. We are also able to offer a comprehensive national healthcare, retirement, and insurance plan for clergy and congregational employees.

VIRTUEONLINE: In the Virginia situation, where some 12 parishes are being sued for their properties by the diocese and The Episcopal Church, the recent intervention by the Virginia Attorney General seemed to tip the scales in your favor. How do you read this?

MINNS: We are very grateful that he did intervene, and that he made it clear that the law is constitutional and that it applies to our situation.

VIRTUEONLINE: What do you hope for an outcome?

MINNS: I am hopeful, but I am still realistic. It is a complex legal case in all kinds of areas. We anticipate many appeals on a very costly, and frankly, an unnecessary journey. We had begun a process of amicable separation that could have been a model for the rest of the church, but those in power at 815 were not willing to let it happen. I am impressed by the thoroughness of the judge and his grasp of the complexities of the situation.

VIRTUEONLINE: What has happened with the lawsuits against vestries?

MINNS: My understanding is that the lawsuits have been put in abeyance and that the Episcopal Church is not proceeding with them.

VIRTUEONLINE: How are your people coping emotionally with what is going on regarding the lawsuits and their ability to minister in the midst of all this? MINNS: It is one of the hardest things going on, but they are handling it remarkably well. Some of the churches have experienced some division over this. We have lost people, but we are also planting new churches in Virginia. Our larger churches are seeing congregational growth. It is a very serious situation, but people are handling it pretty well. VIRTUEONLINE: What about the cost financially?

MINNS: There is an incredible cost financially. Our money is coming from individual parishes, churches and individuals and parishioners versus a line of credit and selling properties, which the Diocese of Virginia is doing. There is a big difference here; our people are fighting this battle. We have a lot of lawyers, some are working pro bono or giving time sacrificially, but our costs are comparable with the diocese. I think the national Church is spending a significant amount but less than the diocese.

VIRTUEONLINE: You are here in Dallas at the Anglican Mission in the Americas Winter Conference. Are you comfortable here?

MINNS: I am very comfortable and delighted to be here to see a healthy and growing Anglican mission. I am seeing lots of old friends. I have the vision of a united orthodox province that is stronger than ever. I was invited to come here and I accepted that invitation. It is important to see and experience encouragement and practical instruction going on. END ------------------------------

Editor's Note: St. Andrew's Anglican Church in Vestal is the CANA parish in Central NY.

The Global Anglican Communion and the Anglican Orthodoxy

2008-02-09T06:03:00.000-08:00

The Rev. Prof. Stephen Noll
Vice Chancellor, Uganda Christian University
Mukono, Uganda

It is a daunting task to be asked to define orthodoxy.[1] Such a task has occupied the minds of great theologians and councils throughout Christian history, and I consider myself hardly up to the task. However, in looking to the future of Global Anglicanism, it is necessary to put one’s hand to the plough and begin a furrow.

The need to define or describe Anglican orthodoxy today has an urgency about it, because of the actions of the Episcopal Church (TEC) and other Provinces of the Communion in blessing homosexuality against the clear teaching of Scripture, the historic Church and the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference 1998. Although this issue has dominated discussions, it is clear that it is symptomatic of a larger abandonment of biblical teaching and authority on fundamental matters of the faith. The fact that Bishop John Spong, a man who has denied virtually every article of the Christian faith, continues a bishop in good standing in TEC, while orthodox bishops are threatened with deposition for their witness speaks for itself.
Global Anglican Orthodoxy: A Blueprint

I have chosen to adapt an essay I wrote in 2006 titled “The Global Anglican Communion: A Blueprint.”[2] This essay sought to outline the essential elements necessary to an orthodox Anglican Communion Covenant which would serve both to correct the errors present in the Communion and to guide the Communion into the future.

The blueprint follows the framework of the Lambeth Quadrilateral. This formulary emerged from the General Convention of the Episcopal Church meeting in Chicago in 1886 and was intended as an ecumenical statement among the many American denominations and was adopted by the young Lambeth Conference in 1888 as an expression of what we now call Anglicanism.[3] In my view, it can continue to inform a worldwide fellowship of Anglicans and at the same time offer an ecumenical platform from which to seek unity with other Christian churches. Although the Quadrilateral is not a sufficient statement of Christian doctrine, it does contain the theological DNA which can guide us in articulating our ecclesial identity, along with the Articles of Religion and the Book of Common Prayer. Together these formularies offer a kind of “branding” for Anglican bodies in their various social contexts.

Finally, let me suggest for strategic and tactical reasons that a statement of Anglican orthodoxy keep in close touch with the idea of a Covenant. Strategically the idea of a Covenant is a good one. The Quadrilateral itself was a kind of preamble to Anglican orthodoxy for the emerging Communion. Going back even further, one might suggest that the Articles of Religion were part of an Anglican Covenant before there was a Communion, as Thomas Cranmer intended the Articles to form the basis for an ecumenical consensus among the churches of the Reformation.[4]

The idea of an Anglican Covenant is also relevant in the present political context of the Communion. Those attending the Global Anglican Future Conference should maintain ties with those orthodox leaders who are working on the Communion Covenant. It seems unlikely that a final Covenant from Canterbury, filtered now through the Anglican Consultative Council, will be sufficiently crisp to deal with the present crisis. However, the opportunity may arise herafter to negotiate an ecumenical Anglican Covenant that will serve as a means of warding off heresy and will chart the future of orthodox Anglicanism.
The Role of Scripture in the Church

The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, as the revealed Word of God (CLQ), containing all things necessary to salvation,” and as being the rule and standard of faith.

It hardly needs repeating that the foremost objection of the Global South churches to the homosexual agenda is the fact that it is “contrary to Scripture” (Lambeth 1.10) and that this spurning of the Bible as “God’s Word written” has infected the entire structure of authority within the most “progressive” churches of the Anglican Communion. Recovering Anglican orthodoxy must therefore include a restoration of Scripture to its rightful place of authority. I propose the following classic traits of Scripture as benchmarks of a restored biblical orthodoxy.

The Primacy of Scripture. Lambeth 1998 passed Resolutions affirming the primacy, or the primary authority, of Scripture in matters relating to Christian faith and life.[5] Primacy is not a call for bare submission to a sacred text, as in Islam, but includes several closely associated principles.

* The Word as medium of the Gospel. The Reformation began with a dynamic sense of the recovery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as a verbal revelation, originating in God Himself as the Word (John 1:1-18). Hence the primary medium of communication is “preaching the Gospel” (Romans 10:14).
* The self-authenticating character of Scripture. Although the Bible is an accommodated form of God’s revelation, God “lisping” to us (as Calvin put it), it is self-authenticating and cannot be “proved” by human science or Church edict.
* Scripture as a means of grace. The Word of God presented in Scripture convicts and evokes faith in hearers. The same Spirit that guided the authors testifies in the heart of readers.[6]

The Unity of Scripture. The Reformation also declared that, despite the differences within and between the Testaments, a fundamental consistency undergirds the various books of the Bible.

* Mystery and unity. As God’s triune nature is a transcendent mystery made known in the fullness of time (1 John 1:1-4), so biblical unity can include paradox and progressive development, without causing confusion in its overall message.
* Hermeneutical center. The center of the Bible is the Gospel of Christ himself. A biblical theology must be evangelical, acknowledging the role of the Old Testament as preparation and of the New Testament as fulfillment, avoiding Old Testament-based legalism or New Testament-based libertinism.
* Harmony of Scripture texts. The principle of “Scripture interpreting Scripture” is found in Cranmer’s Collect which urges ordinary Christians to “mark” i.e., compare, various passages in the Bible. As for the Church, it may not “so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another” (Article XX).

The Clarity of Scripture. The clarity of Scripture was the basis on which the Reformers insisted on a vernacular Bible that could be read and understood by the simplest “ploughboy.”

* Simplicity of Scripture. The Reformers recovered the “plain sense” (sensus literalis) of the Bible.[7] Simplicity is not anti-intellectual. In fact, it is an invitation to study original languages and historical and social context.
* External and internal clarity. Scripture is transparent, not a secret Gnostic document. External clarity is the way Scripture conveys the Word publicly to all who would come with a seeking heart. Because of the hardness of the human heart, internal clarity is required through the grace of the Holy Spirit. One must “have ears to hear.”
* Exposition. “How can I understand unless I have an interpreter?” (Acts 8:31). Bible reading must be accompanied by expository preaching and teaching. Even mature Christians move “from the truth to the whole truth” through regular Bible study.[8]

The Sufficiency of Scripture. The idea of the “sufficiency” of Scripture asserts both its unique efficacy and its limited focus.

* The End of Scripture – salvation. Sufficiency looks to the end or telos of Scripture, which is salvation in Christ alone (John 20:31). Any Church which is ashamed of this salvation cannot be using Scripture rightly.
* Appropriation by faith. Just as the Spirit gives inward clarity, so the means by which salvation is grasped is faith alone. Only then does reason interpret Scripture and works of love apply it.
* Trustworthiness of Scripture. Unlike human councils (Article XIX), Scripture cannot err in the sense that it is an infallible guide to salvation and a holy life. In this it diverges both from liberal caricatures and fundamentalist simplifications of fallibility and inerrancy.

In addition to an exposition of the nature of biblical authority, the Global Anglican Communion will need to grapple with the interpretation of Scripture. Again, we should draw on the resources of the Reformation, in its goal of recovering the “plain and canonical” sense of God’s Word, which is accessible for preaching, teaching and mission. At the same time, the contemporary crisis has raised issues of philosophical hermeneutics which must be addressed. The recent work of Kevin Vanhoozer, for instance, opens an avenue for developing a faithful mode of understanding Scripture as “God’s communicative action.”[9]

Finally, global Anglicanism needs to revisit the so-called Anglican tripod of Scripture, Tradition and Reason. While a tripod of three equal legs is an historical fiction and a theological Trojan horse, there is need for a reaffirmation and redefinition of the consonance of Scripture, tradition and reason, as articulated so pithily by Richard Hooker:

Be it in matter of one kind or of the other, what Scripture doth plainly deliver, to that the first place both of credit and obedience is due; the next whereunto is whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason; after these the voice of the Church succeedeth. (Laws V.8.2)[10]

A renewed study, and in places critique, of Richard Hooker is called for in finding a way forward.
The Church’s Historic Formularies

The Apostles’ Creed, as the Baptismal Symbol (LQ); and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of the Christian faith.

“The voice of the Church,” as Hooker put it, has always been important for an Anglican Christianity that sees itself as part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church upholding “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3).[11] Reformation Anglicans tended to look to particular classic periods as sources of authority, such as the first five centuries and four Councils. At the same time, they adopted confessional statements that addressed the new insights of Scripture study and the pressing needs of the day.

The present crisis in Anglicanism provides the opportunity to recover a modest and ecumenical confessionalism that takes into account the Great Tradition of Christian theology and adapts and applies its truths to the contemporary situation. Our Anglican heritage affords us rich resources in the Thirty-Nine Articles and Book of Common Prayer. At the same time, new challenges to orthodoxy have arisen requiring precise analysis and redefinition, such as the nature of marriage and human sexuality, the rise of modern science and technology and the place of other religions in God’s economy of salvation. I speak of modest confessionalism in the sense of a confession that guides without closing off legitimate dialogue and testing from Scripture, and ecumenical confessionalism as presenting an opportunity for the historic churches of West and East to seek together the mind of God as they face off against militant secularism on one flank and militant Islam on the other.

In his recent book How Africa Shaped the Christian Mind,” Prof. Thomas Oden argues that Africa – and he means ancient Alexandria down to present-day sub-Saharan Africa – provides both the best rationale of “right remembering” of the apostles’ teaching but also the best examples of martyrdom, “where ordinary believers were unwilling to release their Scriptures to governing authorities who might debase them.”[12]
The Church’s Mission and Sacraments

The two Sacraments – Baptism and the Supper of the Lord - ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s words of Institution and of the elements ordained by Him.

A review and reform of Anglican doctrine should not omit the nature and role of sacraments. Sacramental theology has to some extent divided orthodox Anglicans, e.g., Evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics, and one may wonder whether a renewed debate or a papering over of these differences will lead to new life. Undoubtedly renewed discussion of the nature and efficacy of the sacraments is called for among those who agree on biblical essentials.

As a small contribution to such a discussion, I would propose that sacraments should be understood within a theology of mission. The Reformation in general and the Church of England in particular seem to have been deficient in articulating a proper theology of mission. For all their virtues, the Articles of Religion have no single reference to Christ’s Great Commission to evangelize the nations.[13] Likewise, Articles neglected the Person and work of the Holy Spirit, and the Established Church often marginalized or expelled movements of “enthusiasm.” Indeed, much of the work of mission societies has been accomplished in spite of rather than with the full support of the mother Church.

In the context of state churches, the sacraments have often been regarded as rights and rites of national identity. This was not true in the apostolic church, nor does it work today (e.g., what does it mean that the Church of England claims 26 million members?). So I propose we take a dynamic approach to the Gospel sacraments, an approach which I believe is found in the Pentecostal teaching of the apostles (Acts 2:38-47). From this preaching I think we can identify the following marks of the missionary church:[14]

* The Church preaches the Gospel to its own children and to those who are far off - to the churched and unchurched, to the youth of the next generation and to those whom we today call “unreached peoples.”
* It calls people urgently to be saved from the idols of the present age in expectation of the imminent return of Christ.
* Baptism is a response to preaching, and it signs and seals individuals as members of the Body of Christ.
* It expects believers individually and the whole Church corporately to be filled with the Holy Spirit.
* It expects and experiences healing and miracles in its midst.
* It is growing in numbers, often with remarkable leaps forward.
* It is devoted to apostolic doctrine, koinonia, worship and Eucharist.
* It is committed to radical sharing of goods and hospitality.
* It respects authority (the temple) but circumscribes that authority in view of the ascension and reign of Christ.

If the Anglican Communion can orient itself to our Lord’s Great Commission to make disciples of all nations, perhaps it can also reorient its sacramental heritage to convey the eschatological presence of Christ with his Church.[15] Another gap in Anglican theology and practice – not unconnected with its lack of missionary zeal, I suspect – is the conviction that Jesus Christ will return, suddenly and imminently, to judge the living and the dead.[16] As eschatological signs, the sacraments should be seen as incandescent badges of Christian identity: incandescent both in the sense of aglow with the Spirit but also as antagonistic to the world. Global Anglican orthodoxy will need to look not only for faithful administration of Gospel sacraments but for signs of the Spirit and power that accompany it (Mark 16:15-18).[17]
Anglican Ecclesiology

The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the Unity of His Church.

The present crisis in the Anglican Communion has revealed a constitutional weakness in its doctrine of the Church, its ecclesiology. In response to a blatant attack on the apostolic faith, the worldwide Body and its “Instruments of Unity” have proved unable to enforce straightforward discipline of heretical members. This failure has led many to conclude that Anglicanism is fundamentally flawed, and they have departed for other bodies.

We must start by admitting that global Anglican polity has leaned far too heavily on the benevolent patriarchy of the Established Church and the British Empire. The idea that a rapidly expanding body of Global South churches must be governed from a historic See dominated by a secular Government and a compromised mother church is, to be blunt, a dangerous exercise of nostalgia.

Does this mean that the historic episcopate is itself obsolete. I do not think so. Anglicans can rightly uphold episcopal governance and the value of the historic continuity of its ministry, even as they uphold the priesthood of all believers. For all the failures of bishops, we cannot blame the office; indeed we can argue that a rightly ordered episcopacy has provided stability and faithfulness over the centuries and is often emulated by free-church leaders. The second clause of the Quadrilateral – “locally adapted” – qualifies a rigid view of prelacy and specifically relates it to global mission, “the varying needs of nations and peoples called” into the Church. As an example of the latter, one thinks of the Church of Nigeria’s strategy of sending missionary bishops into under-evangelized portions of its own dioceses, or even of another jurisdiction.[18]

The primary role of a bishop is that of a willing and apt pastor-teacher (Ephesians 4:11; 1 Peter 5:2; 2 Timothy 2:24). Bishops are to be stewards (Titus 1:7), which means they bear the final accountability for the state of the Church. To be sure, episcopal authority is not the same as episcopal totalitarianism – an attitude which many Global South churches need to address. The “household of God” which the bishop oversees (1 Timothy 3:4-5) is a “mixed regime” with subsidiary units – congregations, parishes, dioceses and officers, clergy and lay – which must be represented in its governing structures.

We must rethink the role of bishops and polity at the Communion level. Just as national politics and international politics operate on different levels, so also it is right that national churches have autonomy within an overarching framework an international covenant. Much of the work of the church should be “locally adapted,” although we should acknowledge that the electronic communications revolution has brought these local contexts much closer together than heretofore.

This pattern of episcopal governance can function at the level of worldwide Anglicanism. This will involve reform, though not total rejection, of the current Instruments of Unity, including the following elements:

* A synod of bishops should meet regularly (decennially) and have authority to address matters of doctrine, discipline and mission.
* An executive body of Primates should be authorized to carry out the will of the synod in between meetings.
* A presiding Primate should serve as a focus of unity. Canterbury or another historic see could function as a locus of unity as well. However, such a Primate should be elected by the synod of bishops.
* A secretariat should assist these Instruments, with accountability to all. The current Anglican Consultative Council and Anglican Communion Office have failed to function in this way.

In one sense, this polity is not far removed from the “Instruments of Unity” that have evolved of late in the historic Anglican Communion. The likeness may be deceptive: a diseased body may look like a healthy body, at least in the earlier stages of the illness. I am saying that the fault is not with the outward form of the Anglican Communion but with the doctrinal deviation from its apostolic and Reformation origins. Orthodoxy by its very nature must identify and renounce heresy and discipline false teachers, as a last resort, expel them.[19] If the Canterbury-based Anglican Communion continues to tolerate heresy in its midst and welcome false teachers to its councils, then the day will come when an orthodox assembly must break communion with Canterbury and set up alternative structures. Since the trend-lines seem to doom the current Communion to endless compromise or worse, the sooner the shadow structures begin take form the better.

Finally, the global Anglican Communion will need to evaluate the role of the churches in relation to the secular realm. This is classic problem of political theology. Traditional patterns, such as the Established churches are obsolete. At the same time, new models proposed by liberation theology have proved ineffective. I think the political theology of Oliver O’Donovan, while not spelling out specific solutions, offers a framework for developing a theology of church and state under the Lordship of the ascended Christ.[20]
The Spirit and Future of Anglican Orthodoxy

Like any blueprint, the above-mentioned elements of Anglican orthodoxy merely define the principles and structure of a reformed Anglican orthodoxy. Without the structure, it is unlikely that the life of the Communion will long endure. But at the same time, without the Spirit speaking to and working through the churches and their members, such a blueprint will be an empty vessel.

It is not for me to try to capture the wind of the Spirit in a bottle. But I would suggest that Anglican orthodoxy should be:

* Bold in proclamation and clever in apologetics
* Visionary in mission outreach
* Prayerful in all things
* Ecumenical in openness to brothers and sisters in Christ
* Vigilant in guarding the faith and awaiting the return of the Lord

I have attempted to sketch a blueprint of a Global Anglican orthodoxy that will embody the best elements of our tradition and mobilize Anglicans to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth. I believe that if the Global South churches and their allies will take bold action at this time, we shall see a new reformation in the Anglican tradition, one which reflects the movement of the Spirit of God in our day. If these churches, like the Church of Smyrna (Revelation 2:8-11), remain faithful, Christ will give abundant life. Jesus Christ is Lord and His kingdom reigns over all. The gates of hell will not prevail against His Church, which is His Body. Once we lift up our eyes from our own troubles and look at the worldwide scene, we shall realize that the Gospel is not in retreat but is beckoning to the uttermost corners of the globe. As Anglicans we have a stake in the global mission of Christ, and we have something to offer it from the riches of our heritage and our worldwide fellowship of churches.

Brothers and sisters, remember Lot’s wife. The present order is passing away. Behold the Global Anglican Communion is coming.

28 January 2008
NOTES

[1] There is even need to justify the “orthodoxy” as the chief term of reference in this case. Clearly Anglican orthodoxy is to be differentiated from Eastern Orthodoxy. It has been chosen as being broad enough to include various groups of Anglicans – Evangelical, Anglo-Catholic and Charismatic – who agree on the essentials of the faith. At the same time “orthodoxy” recalls the position of those in the patristic period who identified and contended against its opposite, heresy.

[2] The best available version (written and oral) of this address can be found at www.mereanglicanism.com/presentations.htm.

[3] The versions of the “Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral (CLQ) and the text approved by Lambeth (LQ) are slightly different.

[4] Cranmer’s design for the Church of England included reformed Articles, Common Prayer and Canons. See Diarmaid MacCulloch, Thomas Cranmer: A Life (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996) pages 500-513.

[5] In Resolution III.1, the Conference “reaffirms the primary authority of the Scriptures, according to their testimony and supported by our own historic formularies.” In Resolution III.5, “The Authority of the Holy Scriptures,” it likewise “affirms that our creator God, transcendent as well as immanent, communicates with us authoritatively through the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; and in agreement with the Lambeth Quadrilateral, and in solidarity with the Lambeth Conference of 1888, affirms that these Holy Scriptures contain ‘all things necessary to salvation’ and are for us the ‘rule and ultimate standard’ of faith and practice.”

[6] In Uganda, the first Christian converts were called “readers” as the Bible was the first text to become authoritative in an otherwise oral culture.

[7] The meaning of “literal sense” has been revived in contemporary hermeneutics. I defended its use before the House of Bishops in 1992. See “Reading the Bible as the Word of God,” in The Bible’s Authority for Today’s Church, ed. Frederick H. Borsch (Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International: 1993) pages 133-167.

[8] This phrase is borrowed from Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985) pages 50-51. It suggests that the biblical writers were capable of conveying a plain sense which leads the reader into a deeper consideration of its meaning without overturning its surface meaning.

[9] See esp. Is There Meaning in This Text? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), and First Theology: God, Scripture and Hermeneutics (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2002) which lay the groundwork for his dogmatic work, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005). See my review, “Post Conservatives and Post-Liberals: Reflections on Kevin Vanhoozer’s The Drama of Doctrine,” at www.stephenswitness.com.

[10] Note that Hooker’s “credit and obedience” includes both theological dogmas but also what the Articles call the “Commandments called moral.” The idea that one could affirm the Creeds while disobeying the Commandments is foreign to classic Anglicanism.

[11] Note that the oneness of the Church is based on the “once-for-allness” (hapax) of the apostolic tradition entrusted to it.

[12] How Africa Shaped the Christian Mind: Rediscovering the African Seedbed of Western Christianity (Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2007) page 128. In this quotation, Oden is thinking of North Africans like Cyprian, but one cannot help but remember the Uganda martyrs as well.

[13] Granted, Article XVIII states that “Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ whereby men must be saved.” Still, the context of the Article seems to suggest doctrinal contention rather than missionary impulse.

[14] Curiously, the “Covenant for Communion in Mission” also has nine bullets. Only one of these, the sharing of goods, appears in both lists. The missio dei theology of this document emphasizes the “love, justice and joy which Jesus inaugurated” rather than His salvation from sin and death, as appears primary in Peter’s sermon.

[15] O’Donovan, On Thirty-Nine Articles: A Conversation with Tudor Christianity (Leicester: Paternoster Press, 1986), page 126.

[16] Note the omission of Cranmer’s articles on eschatology (#39-42).

[17] Even if the longer ending of Mark is not original, it indicates the linking of sacraments with mission in the early church.

[18] It is ironic that as Lambeth 2008 addresses “bishops in mission,” the one Province that has most successfully equipped bishops for mission will be absent. However, it is likely that Nigeria’s experience of missionary bishops would not be heeded any more than its lessons in the Decade of Evangelism.

[19] Note in this regard that the current crisis does not involve Bishop Gene Robinson so much as those in TEC who elected, confirmed and ordained him, knowing that his life was openly homosexual.

[20] O’Donovan, The Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots of Political Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).

DALLAS: Consecrations of Three Bishops to AMiA Challenge Diocesan

2008-02-09T05:56:00.000-08:00

"We need more missionaries", says AMIA Leader

By David W. Virtue
HYPERLINK "http://www.virtueonline.org/" \nwww.virtueonline.org
1/27/2008

With more than 1,500 orthodox Anglicans watching, three Anglican Mission
in the Americas (AMiA) priests were consecrated by a cross section of
the Anglican Communion's bishops during an emotional three-hour worship
service in a ballroom of the Adam's Mark Hotel in Dallas.

The Rt. Rev. Terrell Glenn Jr. of Pawley's Island, SC; the Rt. Rev. John
Miller III of Melbourne, Fla.; and the Rt. Rev. Philip Jones from Little
Rock, Arkansas were consecrated using a service drawn from the new Book
of Common Prayer (1662 revised) and modern praise and worship music. The
service concluded the three-day winter conference of the Anglican
mission that brought together a bevy of evangelical motivational
speakers.

Present at the consecration were two sitting African Archbishops,
Emmanuel Kolini of Rwanda and the Most Revd Justice Ofei Akrofi of West
Africa. Two retired Southeast Asian Archbishops were on hand including
the Most Rev. Moses Tay and the Most Rev. Yong Ping Chung. A Canadian
bishop, the Rt. Rev. Donald Harvey, under the authority of the Province
of the Southern Cone and 18 other Anglican bishops from the US, England,
Africa and the entire House of Bishops of the Province of Rwanda
participated. A number of Common Cause bishops participated from nine
jurisdictions including Nigeria, Uganda and Kenya as well as two bishops
from the Reformed Episcopal Church. Two retired Episcopal bishops, the
Rt. Rev. C. FitzSimons Allison and the Rt. Rev. Alex Dickson also
participated in the consecration as did the Bishop of Pittsburgh, the
Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan.

The conference itself drew clergy and lay people from across the United
States, Canada, Rwanda, West Africa, Southeast Asia and the UK. The
Rwandan Church's House of Bishops ratified the choice of the three new
bishops last year to accommodate the growing numbers of new converts and
establishing of new churches on this side of the Atlantic by AMiA.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has been critical of such diocesan
incursions and has spoken out directly against them.

Rowan Williams went public with a letter to Canadian Archbishop Fred
Hiltz in condemning the incursion into Canada by the Archbishop of the
Southern Cone, but he also made it clear that he was powerless to stop
conservative Canadian and U.S. congregations upset with their national
churches' positions on homosexuality from leaving and affiliating with
orthodox branches in Latin America and Africa.

It was a frank admission by Archbishop as to the limits of his power,
even though he is opposed to cross-border ecclesiastical moves.

"I have no canonical authority to prevent these things, but I would
simply repeat what was said in my advent letter (in December), to the
effect that I cannot support or sanction such actions," Williams wrote
the Canadian archbishop.

Mrs. Katharine Jefferts Schori, U.S. Presiding Bishop, has inhibited one
retired bishop, 87-year old William Cox, for ordaining and confirming in
Kansas and later confirming in Oklahoma, but he has since fled to the
Province of the Southern Cone for spiritual and ecclesiastical safety.

During his sermon, the Rt. Rev. Chuck Murphy, Bishop and AMiA Chairman,
said there was an urgent need for more missionary bishops as a Second
Reformation has begun and that bodes well for his church's efforts to
reach 130 million unchurched Americans.

"We need more missionary bishops to step into the next level of growth.
The critical factor, the God given vision of this remarkable vision,
comes from the Rwandan House of Bishops and their willingness to stand
up and be a part of us from the beginning. They broke with convention in
the early days and pioneered a way forward in mission unheard of
Anglican circles," said Murphy.

"These past 10 years have been challenging. The criticisms have been
voiced and questions about the legitimacy of our existence, but with
their God given vision they have stood up and stood apart. It could not
have happened without them."

Addressing the conferees, many of whom were formerly members of The
Episcopal Church, Murphy challenged them saying, "The world wants to
know of your witness, your boldness and pioneering vision. All you need
is a God given vision, a way forward in witness to the power of God who
moves with great authority in the world and North America."

Citing a book he had recently read on the changing face of Anglicanism,
Murphy said the AMIA was a profoundly influential movement in the
Anglican Communion, pushing the boundaries in a new vigorous way.

"God promises to give us vision, again, again and again. Where there is
no vision the people perish," he said citing Proverbs 29:18. Picking up
the thread of Joel 2:28 Murphy cried out, "I will pour out my spirit
upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your
old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions"

Murphy said the mission of AMIA was "unique" and offered a compelling
picture of a preferred future that "motivates to work, pray, and
forgive...it is a vision but then it unfolds...godly visions will flow
from the word of God.

"We must ask, is it in conformity with Scripture? Godly visions will
speak to peoples needs. We must get outside of our comfort zones. Godly
visions will ultimately unite as more and more people see and understand
what AMIA is about. Today's consecrations are yet another step in this
unfolding vision."

Murphy said the AMIA had a basis for action. "We see it, we say it and
we seize it. We cannot drift or lie in harbor. This is the challenge of
the church in this age. The trigger for this action is the call, and
that call we sense is from God.

It is also a pneumatic vision - the movement of the Holy Spirit to give
us the desire to send forth laborers into the harvest. You have got to
have an opportunity. The answer was yes. This "yes" required that
action. The good news is that God promises us the power. It fell on the
judges of the Old Testament, again at Pentecost, then St. Paul and
Timothy...it came with the Spirit of power."

Murphy acknowledged both the challenges and temptations. "There is the
challenge to burn out. Do anything you want but not everything you want.
We need margins, time for family. We should expect attacks from The Evil
One and cited the areas of sex, money and power. Satan can trip people
up in the area of relationships and attacks us in the area of self
esteem. We are made in the image of God Satan is not, but we should
never give up."

The Anglican Mission in the Americas encompasses the United States and
Canada with missions in Mexico and Bogota. Since it began in 2000, the
mission has added an average of one church every three weeks. The AMiA
now has seven missionary bishops serving more than 133 parishes with 62
more in the pipeline.

Editor's Note: The AMiA parish in central NY is St. Andrew's Anglican Church in Syracuse.

Church brands draw members

2008-02-09T05:53:00.000-08:00

From the tennessean.com:

Faiths market themselves by taking on names that define their beliefs, message

By BOB SMIETANA • Staff Writer • January 15, 2008

On Sunday morning, just past the signs for Red Roof Inn and Go USA Fun Park on Armory Drive in Murfreesboro, and in the shadow of a billboard for Verizon Wireless, 110 people met to celebrate the first worship service of Faith Anglican Fellowship.

A temporary banner, with the church's name, stood in front of Integrity House, where worshippers gathered after leaving behind their former home, Holy Cross Church.

Inside, the Rev. Frederick Richardson, Faith Anglican's rector, spoke of the mixed blessings of "new beginnings."

Frustrated that the Episcopal Church's battles over doctrine and sex were turning off newcomers, the former members of Holy Cross decided, in essence, to switch brands. No longer Episcopalians, they were now Anglicans, allied with more conservative believers in Uganda.

Once reserved for consumer products like Coca Cola or Doritos, branding has become increasingly important in the God business. Churches, old and new, are using branding to define their theology, attract newcomers and get their message out.

"There is sadness for what we left behind, for who we left behind," Richardson said. But "God will be faithful," he added.

For Faith Anglican, the brand switch went deeper than a name change, Richardson said.

"It gives us a new identity," Richardson said. "The Anglican Church does not have the baggage that the Episcopal Church has at this time. It speaks of a deeper tradition and a more biblically grounded faith."

Church member John Sorrell of Woodbury, said he was worried about "the spiritual drift" of their former denomination.

"Episcopal has come to mean something other than orthodox Christianity," he said. With the new name, added Gary Warden, the church's senior warden, "people will know exactly what to expect when they come here."

For a group of members at Trinity Episcopal in Winchester, a tipping point came in 2006, when Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Shori was asked by Time if "belief in Jesus is the only way to get to heaven?" She replied, "We who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box."

"That's not the faith that I received," said the Rev. Bill Midgett, who had been rector of Trinity Episcopal since 2001. On Jan. 6, Midgett, the church staff and most members voted to leave the Episcopal Church. They formed Christ the King Anglican Church.

"It may sound like a lot of religious-speak," Midgett said, "but for us, it is central to who we are in believing the gospel.''

Branding needn't be slick

Maurilio Amorim, who runs a church-branding firm in Brentwood, says branding is a biblical activity. He points to the parable in Luke 14:16-23, about a man who threw a banquet. When none of the guests showed up, the man sent his servant to invite outsiders in.

So Amorim helps churches creates Web sites, direct mail and other forms of branding to attract newcomers. "Branding and marketing is evangelism," he said. "I don't know what the difference is. You are compelling people, you are giving people a reason to come visit you."

Amorim says that some churches mistakenly believe that branding means a slick marketing campaign. "I hate for people to waste a lot of billboard and direct mail and newspaper advertising that says nothing," he says. Church messages like "Come because we are great" or "We're friendly" don't work, he said. Instead of trying to be slick, he said, a church should find what it does well and promote that.

For Crosspoint Community Church in west Nashville, branding was crucial when the congregation moved to a new building. The church, which started meeting five years ago in a public school, now rents about two thirds of the campus of Park Avenue Baptist Church.

But with its linoleum floors and mauve carpet, the building screamed out "1970s Baptist church."

"And that," said senior pastor Pete Wilson, "is not who we are."

While Park Avenue bills itself as a "traditional church family," Crosspoint services are more rock concert than hymns and prayers.

So, Wilson and Crosspoint leaders set out to brand the building as their own. They replaced carpet, set up video screens and theater lighting in the sanctuary, and transformed the concrete block children's area into something out of Gilligan's Island.

Wilson said he realized the power of branding while watching Supersize Me, Morgan Spurlock's documentary about McDonald's. During the film, Spurlock showed children a series of pictures of famous people like Jesus and George Washington and asked the kids to identify them. "These kids didn't know who any of these people were," Wilson said. "But Ronald McDonald … boom, every one of the kids knew exactly who it was."

And for a new church, he added, brands like McDonald's are the competition.

"We are not competing against other churches," said Jenni Carton, the church's executive director. "We are competing for all the other things that are vying for your attention every day."

CANA Welcomes Ten U.S. Churches

2008-02-09T05:52:00.001-08:00

HERNDON, Va. (January 7, 2008) – The Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) has welcomed ten new congregations into its membership. The Rt. Rev. Francis R. Lyons, the Bishop of Bolivia, commended these U.S. Anglican congregations and their clergy to the oversight of CANA Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns.

“We are thrilled to have the opportunity to work with these churches that have been blessed by the leadership in Bolivia and will continue to be blessed by the Holy Spirit. CANA is eager to welcome them on their Christ-centered and faithful mission to serve God and to honor the worldwide Anglican Communion,” said Bishop Minns.

Originally under the ecclesiastical leadership of the Church of Bolivia, the ten U.S. congregations were given CANA oversight “with a profound desire to promote unity in Jesus Christ which issues from his reconciling work on the Cross and an abiding trust in the power of God’s Word written, and with a genuine commitment to support the emerging ecclesiastical structure of faithful Anglicans in North America,” said the Rt. Rev. Francis R. Lyons of Bolivia in a letter to Bishop Minns.

The newest CANA congregations are St. Luke’s Anglican Church, Fairlawn, OH, Church of the Holy Spirit (Anglican), Akron, OH, Anglican Church of the Good Samaritan (Fairhill), Cleveland, OH, St. Barnabas Anglican Church, Bay Village, OH, St. Anne in the Fields, Madison, OH, Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Milan, OH, Christ the King Anglican Church, Columbiana, OH, Christ Our King Anglican Church, Lexington, MI, St. Michael the Archangel Anglican Church, Indianapolis, IN, and The Shepherd Church, Evansville, IN.

Bishop Allison on Anglicanism

2008-02-09T05:50:00.000-08:00

The Rt. Rev. C. FitzSimons Allison, the former bishop of South Carolina, and former professor at three Episcopal seminaries:

"The apparently willful reluctance to face the issue of faith as the indispensable ground for Anglican unity is finally broken. The fatal flaw of the Windsor Report was substituting the breaking of "bonds of affection" for the reality of broken bonds of faith. 'Instruments of unity' have their integrity only so far as they represent the Anglican faith."

The evangelical bishop. who holds a doctorate in theology from Oxford University, said that "to object to this much needed opportunity on the grounds of its lacking precedents is fatuous. Necessity must always be allowed to trump precedence. There were no precedents for bishops in the United States after the American Revolution. There were no precedents for Seabury's consecration. Both Archbishops of York and Canterbury opposed Seabury's going to Scotland and the latter objected to Seabury's inclusion in Claggett's consecration (an objection that Bishop White ignored). There were no English precedents for missionary bishops in the 19th century. The integrity of the present Archbishop of Canterbury's role as an instrument of unity depends on his faithfulness not to the alleged 'bonds of affection' or to the genealogy of his precedents but to his adherence to the Anglican faith. The integrity of Anglicanism cannot hang merely on the thread of appointments by the prime minister of a state that is itself in an accelerating secular departure from its Anglican roots.

"To put individuals or ad hoc groups in the now inevitable position of making theological judgments on their own regarding submission to or acquiescing in what may seem to be unfaithful or apostate leadership is, in the long run, chaos. To have reputable theologians representing much, if not most, of world wide Anglicanism draw up some simple guidelines around the essentials of the Anglican faith (something the Archbishop of Canterbury has declared Lambeth will not do) and present them as a confessional movement within the Anglican Communion (not a departure from it) would be of utmost reassurance and essential to any effective unity in Anglicanism. It could be a creative contribution to the Lambeth Conference giving them something the Conference could use or amend leading to a wider and more enduring unity."

The scholarly bishop concluded with this, "Our historic unity has been founded on the faith expressed in the Prayer Book and official formularies and faithfulness to the vows to guard them. But gradually that foundation has been replaced by who gets invited to Lambeth and by exhortations not to break bonds of affection. I thank God for those leaders who have committed themselves to this endeavor to under gird our Communion with the faith that gave it birth."

From VirtueOnline

You are not alone

2008-02-09T05:49:00.001-08:00

31 bishop's stand with Bishop Schofield and Diocese of San Joaquin

Dear Bishop John-David,

We, Episcopal colleagues from across the Anglican Communion and across the world, write to salute you on the courageous decision of the Diocesan Convention of San Joaquin to take leave of The Episcopal Church and to align with the Province of the Southern Cone. We know that decision was to a large extent the result of your tenacity and faithful leadership, and for that we give thanks to God. It has been said that you are isolated and alone. We want you and the world to know that in this decision for the faith once delivered to the saints, we stand with you and beside you. May Christ abundantly bless you and your diocese with all the gifts of the Spirit and with joy in believing.

Yours in Christ,

The Rt. Rev. Jack L. Iker, Bishop of Fort Worth

and:

The Most Rev. Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney
The Rt. Rev. Matthias Medadues-Badohu, Bishop of Ho
The Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester
The Rt. Rev. Gerard Mpango, Bishop of Western Tanganyika
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh
The Rt. Rev. Ross Davies, Bishop of The Murray
The Rt. Rev. Keith L Ackerman, Bishop of Quincy
The Rt. Rev. Peter Beckwith, Bishop of Springfield
The Rt. Rev. A. Ewin Ratteray, Bishop of Bermuda
The Rt. Rev. Michael Hough, Bishop of Ballarat
The Rt. Rev. John Broadhurst, Bishop of Fulham
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Jarrett, Bishop of Beverley
The Rt. Rev. John Goddard, Bishop of Burnley
The Rt. Rev. Keith Newton, Bishop of Richborough
The Rt. Rev. Robert Forsyth, Bishop of South Sydney
The Rt. Rev. Andrew Burnham, Bishop of Ebbsfleet
The Rt. Rev. Lindsay Urwin, Bishop of Horsham
The Rt. Rev. Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes
The Rt. Rev. Henry Scriven, Assistant Bishop, Diocese of Pittsburgh
The Rt. Rev. Bill Atwood, Province of Kenya
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns, Convocation of Anglicans in North America
The Rt. Rev. David Anderson, Convocation of Anglicans in North America
The Rt. Rev. John Gaisford, lately Bishop of Beverley
The Rt. Rev. Edward MacBurney, lately Bishop of Quincy
The Rt. Rev. Roger Jupp, lately Bishop of Popondota
The Rt. Rev. David Silk, lately Bishop of Ballarat
The Rt. Rev. Nöel Jones, lately Bishop of Sodor and Man
The Rt. Rev. Edwin Barnes, lately Bishop of Richborough
The Rt. Rev. William Wantland, lately Bishop of Eau Claire
The Rt. Rev. Donald Parsons, lately Bishop of Quincy

[Diocese of San Joaquin website]

Bishop Iker reports:
Bishop Jackson Biggers (Northern Malawi retired) and Bishop John Guernsey (Province of Uganda) have asked that their names be added to the list.

+JLI

January 3, 9:52 am

CT: Leaving A Church Behind

2008-02-09T05:47:00.000-08:00

Leaving A Church Behind
Congregation Prepares For A New Beginning
By KATIE MELONE | Courant Staff Writer
December 31, 2007

WATERTOWN - - It was the last Sunday service at Christ Church. Unable to go
"further in a church that continued in a false gospel," the entire
congregation, including the rector and church leaders, will sever ties with
the national Episcopal Church and reform under a new name: New Hope Anglican
Church.

One of the "Connecticut six," the half-dozen churches in the state diocese
that disagree with national leadership on departure of scripture, including
the appointment of a gay bishop, the congregation will trade its historic
building on the town green for a free community room at the Thomaston
Savings Bank around the corner.

The Sunday service will be held at the bank, starting Jan. 6, until they
find or build another house of worship.
"We need to celebrate today, but we need to recognize there is a dying," the
Rev. Allyn Benedict said in his final homily at the church. Reading off an
overhead projector, church members sang hymns enthusiastically, clapping and
raising hands in acknowledging their faith. They hugged one another, wishing
peace.

The church was founded under the Church of England in 1764. In 2003,
Benedict and several other Connecticut rectors clashed with Connecticut
Bishop Andrew D. Smith, who supported the naming of V. Gene Robinson as New
Hampshire's bishop. Robinson is gay. Benedict and Christ Church leaders also
feel the national church is rejecting scriptural authority and traditions of
the church.

In cutting affiliation with the national leaders, the congregation has
agreed to give up its church buildings and property, estimated to be worth
$7 million, and its name, "Christ Church Parish." The congregation also
ended its participation with the other Connecticut churches in a protracted
legal battle against national leadership over church real estate, deciding
that "it's not worth living under this oppression just for the property,"
said Paul LePine, the senior warden. Four of the "Connecticut six" have also
ended their connection to the national church, LePine said.

"It's a tragedy when relationships fail," LePine said. "There's a relief of
being free of that dysfunctional relationship we've been in for many years."

LePine's daughter, Rachel, 15, commented that while leaving is the right
thing to do, "it is sad."

"That's kind of why we named it New Hope," she said.

"We're just moving on to where we're supposed to be," said Chris Varian, who
was married at the church and has been a member for three years. "It's a
transition. It's a lot of history and a lot of memories. It's bittersweet."

ADV Files Brief in Case to Prevent Church Property

2008-02-09T05:45:00.000-08:00

Source: Anglican District of Virginia Press Release (Via E-Mail)

Date: December 21, 2007

Anglican District of Virginia Churches Remain Confident
ADV Files Brief in Case to Prevent Church Property Seizure

FAIRFAX, Va. (December 21, 2007) – The 11 Anglican District of Virginia (ADV) churches filed a brief in the Fairfax County Circuit Court regarding the Multi-Circuit Property Litigation. The brief explains the validity of the Virginia Division Statute (Va. Code § 57-9) in determining that the Virginia congregations are entitled to keep their church property due to the division within The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia, and the Anglican Communion. (Case No. CL-2007-0248724)

“As our brief today explains, the evidence at the trial strongly demonstrated that our congregations have satisfied each of the core requirements of this law. There has been a ‘division’ in The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia (“Diocese”), and the worldwide Anglican Communion, and our congregations have joined a ‘branch’ of the divided body created as a result of that division,” said Jim Oakes, Vice-Chairman of the Anglican District of Virginia.

“This division occurred as a result of The Episcopal Church and the Diocese separating themselves from the historic Christian faith by deciding to reinterpret Scripture on a number of different issues. Although the reasons for the division involve important issues of biblical truth, the existence and effects of the division are plain and evident for all to see, without regard to religion.

“The evidence also showed that this law was applied no less than 29 times to recognize the legal rights of congregations to keep their property. Over the years, the Virginia General Assembly has made various amendments to the Virginia Code as it relates to religious organizations, but it has not seen fit to narrow or repeal the Division Statute. The General Assembly continues to believe that when congregations separate from a denomination, the neutral and objective principle of majority rule should govern ownership of property. In addition, The Episcopal Church admitted in its complaint that it does not hold title to any of these eleven churches, and that the churches' own trustees hold title for the benefit of the congregations.

“As the Global South Primates said in 2004, The Episcopal Church has ‘willfully torn the fabric of the communion at its deepest level and as a consequence openly cut themselves adrift.’ We are sorry that The Episcopal Church has moved away from the historic teachings of the church, but we should not be forced to go with them,” said Oakes.

The Anglican District of Virginia (www.anglicandistrictofvirginia.org) is an association of Anglican congregations in Virginia. Its members are in full communion with constituent members of the Anglican Communion through its affiliation with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a missionary branch of the Church of Nigeria and other Anglican Archbishops. ADV members are a part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, a community of 77 million people. ADV is dedicated to fulfilling Christ’s Great Commission to make disciples while actively serving in three main capacities: International Ministries, Evangelism, and Strengthening Families and Community. ADV is currently comprised of 21 member congregations.
Date: 12/23/2007

Canada: Bishops Meet with Clergy to Discuss Separate Structure

2008-02-09T05:43:00.000-08:00

Source: Anglican Journal

Date: December 22, 2007

Bishops meet with clergy to discuss network

Since the Anglican Network in Canada held a conference in late November to announce a new church structure for parishes conservative on the subject of homosexuality, several bishops have called clergy in for clarification of their intentions, but no priests have been disciplined.

Three dioceses – Ottawa, Montreal and Hamilton, Ont.-based Niagara – last fall voted to permit church blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, moves that some Anglicans oppose.

At the conference, held Nov. 22-23, leaders of the network announced that the Anglican church in South America, called the Province of the Southern Cone, would accept as members parishes that wish to leave the Anglican Church of Canada. The network moderator, Bishop Don Harvey, announced that Canon Charles Masters had been named archdeacon of the network and Rev. George Sinclair prolocutor.

Bishop Ralph Spence of Niagara, in whose diocese the Burlington, Ont. conference was held, said he met with Mr. Masters to ask “how could he hold that position and be rector of St. George’s, Lowville?”

Mr. Masters explained that, despite the announcement, he had not accepted the position. Although both Bishop Spence and Mr. Masters had legal counsel at the meeting, “in the end, we asked the lawyers to leave the room and had the conversation,” Bishop Spence said.

Subsequently, however, a U.S. group called Common Cause, which is bringing conservative Anglican/Episcopalian groups under one umbrella, at a meeting Dec.17-18 in Orlando, Fla., announced that Mr. Masters had been named general secretary of its leadership council. Bishop Spence said he intended to have another meeting with Mr. Masters in the new year.

Bishop Spence also said he and his successor, Bishop Michael Bird, met separately with a half dozen clergy who had been present at the network conference in Burlington. “We told them their ministry was highly valued. They have a prophetic voice. It may not be the majority, but it is an opinion we respect and we want them to be part of the family.”

One priest who was at the meeting, Canon Mark McDermott, said it was “a very friendly talk.” The bishops are “well aware of our conservative stance. He just wanted to make sure that nothing untoward was going to happen and called us (to the meeting) to assure us that he valued our ministry. It was a very good pastoral response on (Bishop Spence’s) part.” He declined to comment on moves parishes in Niagara might take, saying the group assured the bishops “that within the next 90 days, we were not about to do anything.”

In Ottawa, Bishop John Chapman met with Mr. Sinclair, who also told his bishop that he had not accepted the position with the network. “There was no discipline. At this point, technically, there is nothing to discipline,” said Bishop Chapman.

Mr. Sinclair’s church, St. Alban the Martyr, is listed as a member of the network, but as of late December, no active Canadian Anglican church had voted to secede and join the Province of the Southern Cone. (Two churches with former connections to the Anglican Church of Canada decided to join the South American province.)

The diocese of Ottawa’s position is that its churches cannot leave, said Bishop Chapman. “Individuals can elect to go to another church, but parishes are part of the diocese of Ottawa. Vestries are not allowed to consider (seceding) as a corporate body,” he said. If a vestry were to pass such a motion, “it would be ruled out of order,” he added. “St. Alban’s will always be part of the diocese of Ottawa,” he said.

In Montreal, Bishop Barry Clarke said there has been no discipline of priests, but several parishes have enquired about alternate episcopal oversight should he acquiesce with synod’s decision on same-sex blessings. “I plan in the new year to meet with them,” he said. As far as the blessings decision, “I am not under any pressure to go either way at the moment,” he said.

Date: 12/23/2007

Global Anglicans Face Test of Strength

2008-02-09T05:41:00.001-08:00

From ChristianityToday.com:

December 26, 2007 9:26AM

Top conservatives plan "Anglican Future" event in Jerusalem six weeks before Lambeth.

Tim Morgan

This morning, Dec. 26, conservative Anglicans announced they will gather in Jerusalem (see press statement below) about 6 weeks before the historic Lambeth conference in the UK. Lambeth will start in mid-July and end in early August 2008.

Many conservative bishops will boycott Lambeth due to the fallout over The Episcopal Church's actions supportive of GLBT clergy and couples, TEC's rejection of global accountability, and its re-interpretation of core scriptural teachings.

TEC's ambiguous response to the Windsor Report and its refusals to follow the guidance of Anglican primates meeting in Tanzania in early 2007 to end gay ordinations, same-sex blessings, and property litigation against conservative parishes have undermined Anglican unity worldwide.

The 2003 consecration of a homosexual Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire has been the flashpoint.

In recent weeks, there has been speculation about whether Anglican conservatives will put together a rival Lambeth-like event. Many conservative Anglican bishops expect to opt out of the once-per-decade-event in Canterbury, but had hopes of gathering for a global consultation.

Conservative firebrand David Virtue of Virtue Online observed back in June 07:

The concept of a parallel Lambeth Conference was first raised by the Most Rev. Peter Akinola, Archbishop and Primate of Nigeria, as well as head of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA)....

In mid-December, Virtue noted:

Now the idea has again emerged with a news report out of London, by Jonathan Petre of the Telegraph, that Conservative Anglican leaders are secretly planning a meeting next summer for the hundreds of bishops expected to defy the Archbishop of Canterbury by boycotting the Lambeth Conference.

The unprecedented event will be widely seen as an "alternative Lambeth", further damaging Dr. Rowan Williams's hopes of averting a formal schism over homosexuals, wrote Petre.

Aides of the Archbishop said that any such gathering, which is due to be held just before the official conference, would be perceived as a symbol of division and would send out a "negative" message. Indeed, it would.

These events in June, July, and August pose a three-fold test as I see it:

1. It will test the strength and coherence of an emerging conservative majority within global Anglicanism.

2. It will test the resolve of the Anglican left-wing's agenda to steer the global church toward affirmation of homosexuality as normative human sexual expression.

3. It will test the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury in its ability to provide a viable way forward for a deeply divided church.

Here's the edited version of the press release:

GLOBAL ANGLICAN FUTURE CONFERENCE IN HOLY LAND

ANNOUNCED BY ORTHODOX PRIMATES

Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.

The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church’s faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.

At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network), Bishop

Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.

Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”

The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders "to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON.

The GAFCON website is www.gafcon.org.

Canon Chris Sugden added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land .”

Frequently asked Questions

1. Who is sponsoring the Conference?
The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) is being called by those who took part in the Nairobi Consultation:

Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Archbishop Peter Jensen (Sydney) Archbishop Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria). Bishop Don Harvey (Canada) and Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) who also represented Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone). Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network and Common Cause USA.), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England), Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England)
Bishop Michael Nazir Ali (Rochester, England) and Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted and also form part of the Leadership Team.

These bishops and their colleagues represent over 30 million Anglicans out of the 55 million active Anglicans. ( Nigeria 18m , Uganda 8m Kenya 2.5m Rwanda 1 m Tanzania 1.3 m plus Southern Cone, US, Sydney, England). The notional total of the Communion is 77m. The active membership is nearer 55 m, since of the 26m notional members in CofE 3.7m attend at Christmas Services)

2. Whom do you expect to come?
We will be inviting bishops and their wives, senior clergy, church planters, and lay people including the next generation of young leaders. We aim to make it a Global Anglican Conference with its eye on the future and future leadership.

3. Is this a Global South Initiative?
Not quite. Many of the Primates at the Nairobi Consultation are in the Global South, but it also included Anglican leaders from parts of the world beyond the geographic Global South.

4. Why a pilgrimage?
We are looking to the future of the Global Anglican Communion, which is itself a pilgrimage.

Those who want to hold on to the Biblical and Historical faith need to come together to renew their faith and develop a fresh vision for our common mission. The way we have chosen to do this is to undertake a pilgrimage to a land whose heritage we all share, the land where Jesus Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven and sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out. We believe this will strengthen us for the difficult days ahead.

The conference will outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years for orthodox Anglicans. It is important therefore to reconnect with our roots in the biblical story.

5. Is not Israel/Palestine a controversial venue?
Israel/Palestine has been a place of conflict for decades. That should not keep us from making pilgrimage to a land that is our common heritage. We want to bring fellowship and bear testimony to the Christian communities in Israel/Palestine. Those of us from Africa are no strangers to the pressure that Christian communities are put under from other religious groups and communities.

6. Why call it in June?
The pilgrimage is to strengthen bishops at a crucial time in the life of the Anglican Communion. Many bishops will not be able to accept the invitation to the Lambeth Conference as their consciences will not allow it. Some will attend both gatherings. The purpose of the consultation is to strengthen them all spiritually.

7. Is it not really an alternative to the Lambeth Conference?
No. It is not at the same time or in the same region as the Lambeth Conference. So there will be some who will attend both conferences and thus be able to consult with the Archbishop of Canterbury and others there.

As Archbishop Gregory Venables has said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”

GAFCON is a call to vision and action for mission based firmly on the “faith once delivered to the saints” and revealed in Scripture, to reform the church and transform persons, communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. African Bishops had this focus at their Lagos 2004 conference. The Episcopal church’s agenda has recently overshadowed it. We now need to develop this gospel agenda for all like-minded in the communion.

It is to outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years and how to begin to respond to them.

It is a pilgrimage to the places of the Biblical story to renew our faith and commitment. It is to envision the Global Anglican Future.

The Lambeth Conference has a different agenda.

8. Is this all over a gay bishop?
No. GAFCON is about churches being grouped by what they have in common. We're for growth, we're for being passionate about the truth. We want to look to the future. That's what the conference is about - Global Anglican Future.

9. Aren't you splitting the church?
No. Communion depends on having something in common. Churches in the Global South are growing. They're passionate about the truth and their faith. We are building on this strength.
As the Anglican Communion develops, some of the old bonds are loosening, and some new bonds are being formed. That's a good thing. These bonds involve churches which are growing, and which have something distinctive to say to the world. GAFCON is enthusiastic about mission. Its focus is the future.

Books & Culture: RUMORS OF GLORY

2008-02-09T05:39:00.000-08:00

The Conscience of an Anglican
A man under authority.
by Alan Jacobs | posted 12/24/07

For some time now, people have been asking me why I haven't written anything on the current—or, depending on your point of view, everlasting—crisis in the Anglican world. After all, I have been an Anglican for nearly twenty-five years, virtually all of my adult life; indeed, my experiences in other denominations, before I discovered Anglicanism, were so brief and tentative that I don't even know how to be a Christian except as an Anglican. Nor do I wish to be a Christian in any other way. Surely I have some opinions on the mess the Anglican Communion is now in, on how it got this way, and how it might get out again?

Well, yes, I do have such opinions. But they are worthless. All such opinions amount to little more than the assignation of blame for past events and predictions of the future—the latter usually involving punishments to come for those blamed for the past—and neither of those activities interests me. There was a time when they did, but I have long since learned how futile such pursuits are, and (more important) how powerfully they distract from the core practices of the Christian life. This is the primary reason why, after too long a season scanning the Anglican blogs daily, I now check just one of them, and once a week, at most. This abstinence has calmed my spirit and removed, I think permanently, my taste for such things.

Moreover, I remind myself that the churches of the Anglican world are governed by bishops, and I am not a bishop. One of the chief reasons I have held firm to Anglicanism over the years is that I believe that the threefold order of ministry—bishop, priest, and deacon—is the model taught by the apostles, the governance particularly approved by God. In this model I, as a layman—even though I am also a member of the priesthood of all believers—have a highly circumscribed role. If my pastor asks me to teach, I teach; otherwise I shut up. In the unlikely (and unwelcome) event of a bishop of the Church asking for my thoughts I would share them; otherwise I keep them to myself, at least in public. The decisions that will shape the future of the Anglican Communion will be made by bishops, not by laypeople, nor even by priests; if I care about that Communion—and I do—I had best be praying for those bishops, and not repeating the error of Job in darkening counsel by words without knowledge.

Like the Roman centurion, then, I am a man under authority, and also like him, I have some responsibilities of my own. Chief among them is to raise my son Wesley in the faith of the Gospel. Around four years ago now I left the Episcopal Church because—thanks to various changes in our parish's life that followed the consecration of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire—I knew that if we stayed my son would be taught doctrines which I do not hold, and, just as important, would not be taught doctrines which I hold and believe it important for all Christians to hold. People who encouraged me to stay reminded me that, as (relatively) theologically knowledgeable persons, my wife and I could correct any sins of omission or commission when we got home. But the idea that the family holds the full responsibility for forming children in the faith, with the church being nothing more than a place of worship, is one of the ideas that I don't want to teach my son. Another one is this: that bishops can ignore or repudiate significant portions of the doctrine and discipline of the Church—something the Bishop of Chicago did on a regular basis—and still be thought of as legitimate pastoral overseers for their people.

In leaving the Episcopal Church, then, I believe that I acted according to what Cardinal Newman long ago called "the supreme authority of Conscience … the aboriginal Vicar of Christ." For Newman, conscience is anything but "private judgment": it is, rather, the testing of one's own private judgments, and sometimes those of others, against Scripture and against the long testimony of the whole church of Christ. And if we test those judgments so, and invoke our consciences, we enter perilous territory: as Newman reminds us, the fourth Lateran Council (1215) affirmed that Quidquid fit contra conscientiam, ædificat ad gehennam—Whatever is done in opposition to conscience is conducive to damnation.

But there is no coercing the consciences of others, especially in what Rusty Reno has called "the ruins of the church." One acts according to conscience, but it takes a certain rashness to commend one's own precise course to others. My dear friend Charles Marsh published a book this year called Wayward Christian Soldiers, and while I disagree with much that he argues in it, one chapter of the book has has often come back to my mind in an especially powerful way. Its title is "Learning to be Quiet in a Noisy Nation (and in a Nation of Noisy Believers)." The historical moment Charles invokes, and encourages all Christians to consider, is that of the German church in the Nazi era. I am not, let me hasten to say, casting anyone in the role of Nazi or Nazi sympathizer; the point of comparison between Lutheranism in 1930s Germany and Anglicanism in North America today is simply that both churches are broken, ruined; both present their adherents (clergy and laypeople) with potent challenges to faithfulness. And in the midst of such challenges—so said Dietrich Bonhoeffer, consistently, from the time of the Nazi accession in 1933 to his execution in the spring of 1945—almost the first requirement of the Christian is, simply, silence. "The time of words is over," he said; sometimes words have to be forgone in order to save time and energy and focus for what is more essential than words: "prayer and righteous action."

Not because I am taking a general vow of silence, but for other reasons, I am now concluding this online column. Its title, as you can see, is "Rumors of Glory," from a Bruce Cockburn song I particularly admire. Those of us living in the ruins of Anglicanism might be especially inclined to say that we have nothing more to go on than rumors, a handful of slightly hopeful whispers fading into imperceptibility. This could be deeply worrisome for those, like me, who see in Anglicanism a beautiful and compelling vision, a church that draws together the Catholic and the Reformed strands of the Christian life and thereby brings both of them to their fullest realization. I do not enjoy the thought that the Anglican experiment may be over, since, as I have said, I don't know how to be a Christian any other way; but I do not believe that that experiment is over; in fact, I have hope—I hear certain rumors—that it may be only beginning.

But even if that experiment is drawing to a close, I am not worried—a little sad, maybe, but not worried. I could learn to be a Christian some other way, if I had to, because, after all, there is one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all. Plus, I'm thinking about Christmas, which, among other things, teaches us that all those rumors are true: the Lord of All came once, in meekness and humility, in the form of a servant. And he will come again—but next time in glory.

Alan Jacobs teaches English at Wheaton College in Illinois; his history of Original Sin will be published in Spring 2008 by HarperOne. His Tumblelog is here.

Time Magazine Top Ten Religion Stories of 2007

2008-02-09T05:37:00.000-08:00

#5. The Episcopal Church At Odds Over Gays

The U.S. Episcopal Church and its parent, the Anglican Communion, continue disintegrating over the issue of gay Christians. Beyond the human cost of this slow-motion implosion — sparked by the Episcopal Church's decision to consecrate an openly gay bishop in 2003 and to accept same-sex unions — the nasty split has already hatched custody battles over church property: Courts are generally being asked to determine whether the conservative parishes seceding from Episcopalianism over the gay issue can take their buildings with them — or whether they belong to the Episcopal diocese. On a global scale, the battle is among the 79 million members of the Communion, who, in a recent count, appear to be almost equally divided over whether to continue to accept U.S. Episcopalians into the international Communion. Equally divided, that is, if you're talking strictly about proportions of the Communion's 38 provinces. By another measure, a majority of believers are on the conservative side, and a majority of the money is on the liberal side. A mess.

From Archbishop Peter Jensen of Australia

2008-02-09T05:36:00.001-08:00

Anglicanism in America is concerned with the growing realignment of Anglicanism in North America. The conference that Abp. Jensen speaks about below is part of this realignment. ed.

A Global Anglican Future Conference is planned for June 2008. The aim of the Conference is to discuss the future of mission and relationships within the churches of Anglican Communion. Those who wish to retain biblical standards especially in the area of sexual ethics have spent much time and effort in negotiations on these issues in the last five years. They want to move on together with the gospel of Christ’s Lordship, a gospel which challenges us and changes lives. Israel is planned as a venue because it symbolises the biblical roots of our faith as Anglicans. I want those in the fellowship of our Diocese to know what this is about and why I am involved.

In 1998, the Lambeth Conference made it clear that the leaders of the overwhelming majority of Anglicans world-wide maintained the biblical view of sexual ethics – that sexual relationships are reserved for marriage between a man and a woman. Five years later, however, actions were taken in Anglican Churches both in Canada and the United States of America which officially transgressed these boundaries in defiance of the Bible’s authority.

There was an immediate adverse result for those who wanted to maintain orthodoxy within these churches. They courageously protested against these actions, and as far as possible withdrew their fellowship from those who they perceived had broken God’s law. In doing so, they wished the world to know that they remained as genuine Anglicans. They had made no change in their basic beliefs and they understood themselves still to be in fellowship with the mainstream of the Anglican Church elsewhere in the world.

The American actions also impacted churches all around the world. In particular the churches of the Global South had to own the name ‘Anglican’ while living in societies where the actions of the Americans was condemned by all, especially Muslims. The action of some North Americans severely hurt the witness of these churches. It also hindered the good effect that membership of the Anglican Communion has for those who live in a situation where Christians are in a minority.

Since 2003, patient attempts have been made to call the offending North Americans back to biblical standards. Many American Anglicans are now more aware of the distress which their actions have caused others, and regret this impact. At the same time, however, others have condemned attempts by Global South Bishops to provide ministry for the orthodox Christians who still wish to be Anglican, but cannot continue to do so in the fellowship of the American churches. Individuals, parishes and even dioceses have left the original church, becoming associated with other dioceses in other parts of the world, and with new bishops being appointed from overseas to care for the disaffected.

Such has been the fall-out that it is now clear that we will never go back to being the Communion which we once were. There has been a permanent change. We live in a new world. Some American Anglicans are as committed to their new sexual ethics as to the gospel itself, and they intend to act as missionaries for this faith, wishing to persuade the rest of us. The problems posed by the American church are not going to remain in North America. This means that the rest of the Anglican world must be vigilant to guard the teaching and interpretation of scripture. Bound up in this are other issues such as Anglican identity, fellowship, theological education and mission. How are we going to help each other remain true to the authority of God’s word? How are we going to help each other to preach the gospel of God’s transforming power and grace? These matters require urgent attention.

The next Lambeth Conference has been summoned for July-August 2008. The Archbishop of Canterbury is responsible for the guest list, and he has invited all except for the Bishop of New Hampshire on the one hand and some of the new bishops appointed to care for the dissidents on the other. Thus, for example the Bishop of New Westminster has been invited although his actions have caused the Reverend David Short and his congregation (which includes Dr Jim Packer) to withdraw as far as they can from the Diocese. An invitation to share the Conference under these circumstances has posed a real difficulty for many of us.

Several African Provinces have indicated that they will not be attending Lambeth, because to do so would be to acquiesce with the North American actions. They are not ending the Anglican Communion, or even dividing it. They are simply indicating that the nature of the Communion has now been altered by what has occurred. They see that since the American actions were taken in direct defiance of the previous Lambeth Conference, the Americans have irreparably damaged the standing of the Conference itself. They asked without success for the Conference to be postponed. They do not think that this Conference is what is needed now. To attend would be to overlook the importance of the issues at stake.

The Anglican Future Conference is not designed to take the place of Lambeth. Some people may well choose to go to both. Its aim is to draw Biblical Anglican Christians together for urgent consultation. It is not a consultation which can take place at Lambeth, because Lambeth has a different agenda and far wider guest list. Unlike Lambeth, the Future Conference is not for Bishops alone – the invitations will go to clergy and lay people also. But it is a meeting which accepts the current reality of a Communion in disarray over fundamental issues of the gospel and biblical authority. It therefore seeks to plan for a future in which Anglican Christians world-wide will increasingly be pressured to depart from the biblical norms of behaviour and belief. It gives an opportunity for many to draw together to strengthen each other over the issue of biblical authority and interpretation and gospel mission.

I am supporting this Conference and am part of the planning team for it. I am hoping that we will also see Sydney laypersons and clergy in attendance with our bishops. We must look to the future, and network with Anglican Christians from around the globe who share our fundamental trust in the authority of God’s word. We have much to learn from them and they can benefit from our fellowship also. I hope that you will pray for the Conference and support our decision to attend.

GLOBAL ANGLICAN FUTURE CONFERENCE IN HOLY LAND ANNOUNCED BY ORTHODOX PRIMATES

2008-02-09T05:34:00.000-08:00

Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.

The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church’s faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit,and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.

At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network ), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.

Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”

The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders "to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON. The GAFCON website is www.gafcon.org.

Canon Chris Sugden added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land .”

Theological Statement of the Common Cause Partnership

2008-02-09T05:31:00.001-08:00

Theological Statement

We believe and confess Jesus Christ to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no one comes to the Father but by Him. Therefore, the Common Cause Partnership identifies the following seven elements as characteristic of the Anglican Way, and essential for membership:

1. We confess the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments to be the inspired Word of God, containing all things necessary for salvation, and to be the final authority and unchangeable standard for Christian faith and life.
2. We confess Baptism and the Supper of the Lord to be Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself in the Gospel, and thus to be ministered with unfailing use of His words of institution and of the elements ordained by Him.
3. We confess the godly historic Episcopate as an inherent part of the apostolic faith and practice, and therefore as integral to the fullness and unity of the Body of Christ.
4. We confess as proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture the historic faith of the undivided church as declared in the three Catholic Creeds: the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian.
5. Concerning the seven Councils of the undivided Church, we affirm the teaching of the first four Councils and the Christological clarifications of the fifth, sixth and seventh Councils, in so far as they are agreeable to the Holy Scriptures.
6. We receive The Book of Common Prayer as set forth by the Church of England in 1662, together with the Ordinal attached to the same, as a standard for Anglican doctrine and discipline, and, with the Books which preceded it, as the standard for the Anglican tradition of worship.
7. We receive the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of 1562, taken in their literal and grammatical sense, as expressing the Anglican response to certain doctrinal issues controverted at that time, and as expressing the fundamental principles of authentic Anglican belief.

In all these things, the Common Cause Partnership is determined by the help of God to hold and maintain as the Anglican Way has received them the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ.

"The Anglican Communion," Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher wrote, "has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning." It may licitly teach as necessary for salvation nothing but what is read in the Holy Scriptures as God's Word written or may be proved thereby. It therefore embraces and affirms such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the Scriptures, and thus to be counted apostolic. The Church has no authority to innovate: it is obliged continually, and particularly in times of renewal or reformation, to return to "the faith once delivered to the saints."

To be an Anglican, then, is not to embrace a distinct version of Christianity, but a distinct way of being a "Mere Christian," at the same time evangelical, apostolic, catholic, reformed, and Spirit-filled.

The Mission Statement of the Common Cause Partnership

2008-02-02T12:41:00.000-08:00

Our Mission: We intend by God's grace:* to partner together in a renewed missionary effort in North America and beyond, driven by our passion for Jesus and His Gospel.* to ensure an orthodox Anglican Province in North America that remains connected to a faithful global Communion.* to create a unity in the essentials of our Anglican faith that respects our varied styles and expressions.* to build trusting relationships marked by effective coordination, collaboration, and communication.

Timeline and Issues for the Common Cause Partnership

2008-02-01T11:47:00.000-08:00

Timeline

1. College of Bishops organized: September, 2007
2. Theological Statement and Articles ratified by all Partners
3. CCP Leadership Council 1 (Article 4): week of December 3 or January 6
1. Organizing meeting
2. Leadership elected
3. Communications office created (Article 6)
4. Committees named:
1. Executive (Article 4)
2. Admissions (Article 5)
3. Mission (Article 7)
4. Education (Article 8)
5. Additional task forces created:
1. Prayer Book task force
2. Episcopate task force
3. Budget adopted
4. Province by province visitation and appeal for recognition of the "separate ecclesiastical structure in North America"
5. CCP Leadership Council 2: Advent, 2008
1. Reports and adoption of work from committees and task forces
6. Constitutional convention for an Anglican union held at the earliest possible date agreeable to all the Partners

Issues for the Lead Bishops' Roundtable

Within the stated timeline, we intend to address the following items:

* How we can best exercise our episcopate in common.
* A Rule of Life for bishops.
* The ways and means of a mutual review of candidates for bishop before consecration.
* Common worship.
* Stating and maintaining a common Anglican ethos.
* How we will live together with bishops and congregations and dioceses that do ordain women and others that do not ordain women, affirming that we will not violate anyone's conscience on this matter.
* The relation of clergy and congregations to bishops. Will our dioceses be rigidly fixed or flexible, allowing for affinity-based arrangements?
* The shape and nature of our common episcopal oversight. Will it be conciliar as it was in the early church and as it is maintained in some parts of the Orthodox churches and as it is reflected in some aspects of the Anglican Communion? Will it follow a more hierarchical model? Or will it be modeled after the Western institutional structures, such as the federation model, with which we have been familiar in The Episcopal Church?
* Exploring ways to form a leadership "pipeline" from congregational life onward that will lead candidates to offer themselves for ministry, including ordination, in an expanding, mission-minded Church.
* Exploring resources for the bishops' care for clergy and their families, including burned-out clergy and clergy families in trouble.
* Exploring with the seminaries of the Church how they can best serve us and how we can support them in our new mission context.
* Exploring a Common Cause electronic newsletter, with the intention of incorporating the various newsletters of the Partnership members.
* Exploring the standards, spiritual and moral, of ordained and lay leaders.
* Consistent with resolutions of Lambeth Conference, seeking to draw continuing churches, not members of the Common Cause Partnership, into fellowship.
* Opening ecumenical dialogues.

Common Cause Partners build for new Anglican future

2008-02-01T09:49:00.001-08:00

The first meeting of the Common Cause Leadership Council created the structure necessary for building a federation of orthodox Anglicans in North America. Three delegates from each of the ten Common Cause partners gathered in Orlando, Florida December 17-18. The Council unanimously elected Bishop Bob Duncan as Moderator. Delegates also elected Canon Charlie Masters of Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) as General Secretary and Mrs. Patience Oruh of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) as Treasurer. The Leadership Council recognized the ratification of a statement of theology and formed the committees called for by the Common Cause articles of confederation adopted in September 2007. A communiqué from the Common Cause Leadership Council can be found below.

Communiqué

We, the gathered bishops, priests and lay representatives of the Anglican bodies federated in Common Cause held the first annual meeting as the newly formed Common Cause Leadership Council of the Common Cause Partnership on December 18th, 2007, in Orlando, Florida.

We created the structure called for in the Articles of Federation now adopted by nine of our partners. We elected officers of the Federation and formed an executive committee, as well as other committees and task forces. We have also begun work to harmonize and strengthen our common call to Christian education and mission. We expect these committees and task forces to begin work early in the New Year. We are beginning to explore the expanding possibilities for ecumenical contact with fellow Christians in North America and around the world.

Our actions today dramatically reversed the fragmentation and separation of the past. We stand committed to the "faith once delivered to the saints" as expressed in our now ratified theological statement. The Common Cause Partnership is united in faith with the vast majority of members of the worldwide Anglican Communion. We are especially grateful for the support and recognition given to us by the provinces of the Global South that have encouraged us to come together in common cause for the Gospel. We are particularly thankful for the presence with us of Archbishop Yong Ping Chung, the recently retired primate of the Province of Southeast Asia and one of the earliest supporters of the rebirth of orthodox Anglicanism in North America, representing the Anglican Coalition in Canada.

Each Common Cause Partner will continue to live out its unique role, maintaining its distinctive ministry and character, noting the provision of the Articles of Federation that "the autonomy of the individual Jurisdictions and Ministries, and their constituent bodies, is in no way restricted or superseded by membership." In the months and years ahead we anticipate a growing number of joint mission initiatives that will strengthen our witness as united and faithful Anglicans in North America. "So in Christ, we who are many, form one body..." (Rom. 12:5). To God be the Glory.

The Bishop of Central Florida Writes his Clergy

2008-02-01T09:47:00.000-08:00

My Dearly Beloved Brothers and Sisters,

Most of this letter was written two weeks ago, but I did not believe it was timely to send it. I think that the Protocol has now been adopted by the Diocesan Board it may be right to do so.

Not a single one of you has asked the question: "Bishop, why are you allowing these rectors who want to 'disaffiliate' the space to pursue their objectives? They are clearly in the process of abandoning the communion of this Church. Why are you not moving against them by inhibition and deposition?"

Here is my answer to the unspoken question: I am deeply sympathetic to any who believe that the current leadership of The Episcopal Church has greatly compromised the "doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ as this Church has received them." And I am extremely reluctant to discipline those who, for conscience sake, are finding they MUST "disaffiliate."

I believe that many of our clergy and lay leaders have attempted to be completely loyal to our received heritage, and have tried to reform a Church that is in many ways errant. And they have finally concluded that such reformation is not going to be successful. They want to "protect" the members of The Episcopal Church entrusted to them from any further spiritual incursions against them.

I am not convinced we have come to a point of no return. But I understand why they may believe we have done so. I believe it is still possible to be a faithful parish, or a faithful diocese, within The Episcopal Church. And I am still eager to hear what the Archbishop of Canterbury has to say about all of this.

Some of our people have expected and hoped that I would attempt to "lead the Diocese out of The Episcopal Church." (They are, frankly, deeply disappointed in me!)

I do not believe that is possible, though I recognize that some of our Bishops are attempting to do precisely that. I do not think they will be successful. They can leave, and they can take any number of clergy and laity with them. They can affiliate with some foreign jurisdiction such as the Southern Cone.

But there will be a remnant who will NOT want to leave, and that remnant will constitute the continuing Diocese of Pittsburgh, San Joaquin, Fort Worth, etc.

I expect that millions of dollars will be spent in lawsuits that will ultimately fail as far as those who wish to leave are concerned. And I cannot be part of that.

Nor can I be part of litigation against those who, for conscience sake, believe they must leave The Episcopal Church. These are faithful brothers and sisters who only want to remain true to what we have always been: orthodox Anglican Catholic Christians.

We have spent two months (four meetings, approximately twelve hours) attempting to craft a Protocol (a page and a half) which is finally in place - to deal with those who wish to "disaffiliate." This Protocol does not spell out the whole process. It merely brings to the threshold of being able to deal with those congregations. I want to state again my gratitude for the prayers of so many, and my particular gratitude for the members of the Board, the Standing Committee, the Special Task Force, and especially our Chancellors. We could not pay them for the time they have invested on our behalf!

The Protocol does not guarantee success. If the leaders of some congregations offer unreasonable proposals, and we cannot possibly accept them, and if I and the Board offer counter proposals that these leaders cannot accept...there is no guarantee whatsoever that somebody may not do something that the other side will find litigious. I believe that nobody wants to go there. But we may not be able to avoid it.

The Church of the New Covenant attempted to transfer title to a separate non-profit 501 (c)(3) corporation, and forced our hand four years ago. We had to file suit, and we did so. Something like that could occur again. I pray it does not.

On one level, I think the honorable thing those who wish to "disaffiliate" would be to simply walk away.That is what happened at St. John's, Melbourne, and Shepherd of the Hills, Lecanto. And it appears that is what is about to happen at St. Edward's, Mount Dora.

But, on another level, I believe that there is a validity to the argument of some who wish to 'disaffiliate" that it is they who have been faithful, while the national leadership of The Episcopal Church has increasingly abandoned the very heritage we have all sworn to protect.

So, I want to try to work with these brothers and sisters if it is at all possible. (It may not be.) We have received proposals from three of these congregations so far. In all honesty, I do not think any of the three are realistic. But now that the Protocol is in place, we can begin to discuss these proposals.

Each church's situation is unique, and each will have to be dealt with on its own merits. My life, since October 18, has been totally consumed with all of this, and I can tell you there is not a shred of joy in any of it. (Ernie [Bennett]'s, too.)

I will attempt to keep you apprised of where we are as this process unfolds.

My warmest regards in our Lord,

(And yes, you may post off the list so long as you post the whole thing.)--

(The Right Rev.) John W. Howe is Bishop of Central Florida

Common Cause Partnership News

2008-02-01T09:46:00.001-08:00

Dear Network,

The next major milestone in the development of Common Cause is next week, when the Common Cause Leadership Council gathers in Orlando, Florida on December 18 for its inaugural meeting. The Council comprises the head bishop, a clergy representative, and a lay representative from each Partner. This body represents Common Cause in all its fullness, and has the authority to do the work of the Partnership.

This is the organizing meeting of Common Cause, at which the assembly will elect its first officers and establish its initial committees and task forces. As such, December 18, 2007 will mark the formal beginning of a "separate ecclesiastical structure" in North America. Following this meeting, Common Cause will be in a place to seek official recognition from the Primates of our Communion.

We at the Network are pleased to have been given the Kingdom assignment of building unity among the Common Cause Partners. Thank you for sharing with us in this task, and please pray for our work next week.

Yours in Christ,

The Rev. Canon Daryl Fenton
Chief Operating Officer
Anglican Communion Network

Common Cause Partnership

2008-02-01T09:44:00.000-08:00

The Common Cause Partnership, founded in June 2004, represents an unprecedented alliance of several churches and ministries in the Anglican tradition. The groups represent or provide pastoral oversight for more than 200,000 Christians in the Anglican tradition.

These are the ministries and churches that have banded together to form the Common Cause Partnership:

Covenant Declaration of the Common Cause Partners

We intend by God's grace:

to partner together in a renewed missionary effort in North America and beyond, driven by our passion for Jesus and His Gospel.
to ensure an orthodox Anglican Province in North America that remains connected to a faithful global Communion.
to create a unity in the essentials of our Anglican faith that respects our varied styles and expressions.
to build trusting relationships marked by effective coordination, collaboration, and communication.

Theological Statement of the Common Cause Partners

We believe and confess Jesus Christ to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no one comes to the Father but by Him. Therefore, the Common Cause Partnership identifies the following seven elements as characteristic of the Anglican Way, and essential for membership:

We confess the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments to be the inspired Word of God, containing all things necessary for salvation, and to be the final authority and unchangeable standard for Christian faith and life.
We confess Baptism and the Supper of the Lord to be Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself in the Gospel, and thus to be ministered with unfailing use of His words of institution and of the elements ordained by Him.
We confess the godly historic Episcopate as an inherent part of the apostolic faith and practice, and therefore as integral to the fullness and unity of the Body of Christ.
We confess as proved by most certain warrants of Holy Scripture the historic faith of the undivided church as declared in the three Catholic Creeds: the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian.
Concerning the seven Councils of the undivided Church, we affirm the teaching of the first four Councils and the Christological clarifications of the fifth, sixth and seventh Councils, in so far as they are agreeable to the Holy Scriptures.
We receive The Book of Common Prayer as set forth by the Church of England in 1662, together with the Ordinal attached to the same, as a standard for Anglican doctrine and discipline, and, with the Books which preceded it, as the standard for the Anglican tradition of worship.
We receive the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of 1562, taken in their literal and grammatical sense, as expressing the Anglican response to certain doctrinal issues controverted at that time, and as expressing the fundamental principles of authentic Anglican belief.

In all these things, the Common Cause Partnership is determined by the help of God to hold and maintain as the Anglican Way has received them the doctrine, discipline and worship of Christ.

“The Anglican Communion,” Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher wrote, “has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning.” It may licitly teach as necessary for salvation nothing but what is read in the Holy Scriptures as God's Word written or may be proved thereby. It therefore embraces and affirms such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the Scriptures, and thus to be counted apostolic. The Church has no authority to innovate: it is obliged continually, and particularly in times of renewal or reformation, to return to “the faith once delivered to the saints.”

To be an Anglican, then, is not to embrace a distinct version of Christianity, but a distinct way of being a “Mere Christian,” at the same time evangelical, apostolic, catholic, reformed, and Spirit-filled.

Proposed August 18, 2006.

Historic Anglican Communion Consecrations

2008-02-01T09:42:00.000-08:00

On Sunday, 9 December 2007, the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) held the consecration of four new suffragan bishops in the USA: Roger Ames, David Anderson, Amos Fagbamiye, and Nathan Kanu. These four will join Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns and Suffragan Bishop David Bena in leading CANA.

Source: CANA website

It's D-I-V-O-R-C-E for the Anglicans

2008-02-01T09:10:00.000-08:00

The liberals and the conservatives have come to a parting of the ways; all that's left is the division of property

Vancouver Sun

Published: Monday, December 03, 2007

Vancouver's Bishop Michael Ingham has finally admitted that the Anglican Church is in crisis.

Previously, as thriving parishes left one by one -- St. Simon's, Emmanuel, St. Martin's, Christ the Redeemer -- he tried to shrug off each departure as a sort of "extreme decline in attendance."

Now, with many displaced Canadian parishes reassembling under two other Canadian bishops, Ingham is calling it a "schism" -- the religious equivalent of a divorce.*

It is a tacit admission that the two groups -- call them "liberals" and "conservatives" -- are peers, just like opponents in a divorce.

For most of the global Anglican community, they are peers and more. An archbishop from South America has accepted the Canadian bishops and parishes under his authority, and statements from huge "provinces" of bishops suggest that most Anglicans are inclined to treat the conservatives, rather than the old establishment, as the real Canadian Anglican Church.

To put the divorce in context, it is important to realize that the Anglican Church has been an awkward marriage of liberal and conservative streams from its very beginning.

The conservative stream was established when Bishop Thomas Cranmer assembled the Anglican Book of Common Prayer using ancient Latin liturgies and English monastic traditions. He infused Anglicanism with a profound biblical spirituality that remains at the heart of conservative practice. The liberal stream was there at the beginning as well, as Henry VIII used his new English church to sidestep Roman Catholic moral standards that threatened to cramp his lifestyle.

After centuries of rather tense coexistence, serious trouble developed in the last half-century. North American liberal Anglicans proved to be adept at church politics, gained control of the church hierarchy, and promoted a steady stream of theological innovations that assaulted the core beliefs of the conservatives.

Bishop Ingham, for example, has suggested that we should "stop thinking of ourselves as created beings" and stop thinking of Easter as "something understandable." Perhaps not coincidentally, Anglican membership has declined steadily in North America.

In contrast, the dominantly conservative "Global South" Anglican churches have been growing explosively. More than two-thirds of all Anglicans now come from Africa, Asia or South America. And they are now tasked with mediating the divorce of the North American church.

Can we assign blame in this ecclesiastical divorce? Was one of the parties "unfaithful" (pun unavoidable)? Liberal Anglican spokesman Neale Adams summarizes the liberal vision as: "a big-tent church . . . open to a wide variety of theologies, and we think that's good." To my ear, this is a bit like the cheating husband saying, "Ours is an open relationship, embracing a wide variety of extra-marital affairs."

The liberals seem to be genuinely astonished that anyone would have a problem with this -- saying, in effect, "You can teach that Jesus rose from the dead, if you like, but don't hassle us if we teach that he didn't."

(It reminds me of when I checked into a Halifax inn a decade ago and asked for a non-smoking room. The desk clerk stubbed out her cigarette with a puzzled look and said, "Sir, you are not required to smoke in any of our rooms." She couldn't comprehend why I would want a room with less choice.)

In vain the wife hauls out the marriage vows, the Bible and the Prayer Book, which clearly specify that the relationship is to be monogamous. "Oh," the husband replies, "forget that old stuff and be hip and cool like me."

The bane of abusive husbands is the community of faithful neighbours who offer shelter and encouragement to the battered wives. Without them, the wives would have no chance for healthy independence. Similarly, liberal leaders reserve their angriest words for the faithful worldwide Anglican leaders who shelter and encourage the conservative Canadian churches.

Rest assured that the conservatives will never forget how the global community supported us when we needed it most.

There are two stages in a divorce. Last week was the end of the first stage -- the end of attempts at reconciliation and an acceptance of the brokenness. Lots of pain all around. A sort of corporate depression.

Now begins the second stage: The division of the assets. Ingham has made it clear that he prefers the old 1950s-style divorce, where all church property reverts to the liberals.

It doesn't matter that the properties were bought, paid for, and lovingly maintained by the congregations of each church, whether liberal or conservative. Ingham aspires to be the 1950s husband, turning the wife out with nothing but the clothes on her back, holding up the deed to the house and saying, "See, it's in my name. Right here."

Modern society, of course, understands that husband and wife, as peers, both have property rights regardless of the name on the deed.

So let's be civil about this. This divorce (or "schism" as Ingham calls it) is a reality.

Anglican liberals need to be more liberal: They need to accept the conservatives as peers rather than vassals or chattel, and negotiate a reasonable division of assets.

This is the 21st century, for goodness' sake.

Michael Davenport was born, baptized, and raised in the Anglican Church, the son of an Anglican priest. He is a trustee of one of the Anglican churches now under the umbrella of the Province of the Southern Cone.