Via VirtueOnline:
By Stephen Noll
December 30th, 2008
As the anniversaries of the Windsor Report come and go, one is compelled to ask: what has been accomplished? The answer, it seems, is precious little.
Let’s rehearse a brief history of the run-up to the Windsor Report.
August 1998: The Lambeth Conference, by an overwhelming majority, passes Resolution 1.10 on Human Sexuality, stating that homosexual practice is “contrary to Scripture” and “cannot be advised.”
May 2002: The Diocese of New Westminster approves same-sex blessings, and the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada affirms the integrity of same-sex relation ships in June 2004.
August 2003: In spite of numerous warnings, the Episcopal Church USA confirms the election of a practicing homosexual as bishop and permits the use of rites blessing homosexual partnerships.
October 2003: The Primates, meeting in emergency session, call for a Commission to study the matter of Communion discipline and report back a year later.
So in October 2004, there was considerable anticipation that something decisive might come forth. The 93-page Report did present, on first reading, an indictment of the actions of the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada. It called on those churches to “express regret” for their actions and to effect a “moratorium” on any further consecration of homosexuals or blessing of their partnerships.
But Windsor was just a Report, and the next step was the Primates meeting in Ireland in late February 2005. The Primates’ Communiqué, though wrapped in ecclesiastical jargon, did reaffirm Lambeth 1.10, asked the North American churches to withdraw from Communion organs until Lambeth 2008, and set up a Panel of Reference to handle beleaguered orthodox congregations.
The Episcopal House of Bishops then went through the motions of expressing “regret” (for consequences only). The Episcopal delegation, invited but not seated at the Anglican Consultative Council in June, defended the Church’s actions, never once suggesting that it might have been wrong. In response, the ACC upheld the Primates’ position. The Panel of Reference has been AWOL, while conservative congregations and a whole diocese have sought protection under various Global South bishops.
Behind all the momentous meetings and breathless statements of the past year, the spiritual truth remains: the Episcopal Church and Anglican Church of Canada have sinned and will not repent. Anyone who thinks the Windsor Report can wash away this fact is pollyannish. Anyone who lives inside these churches knows the truth: homosexuality is acculturated in these churches beyond return. They will not back down under any circumstances. They would rather die than change.
In this context one wonders at Archbishop Robin Eames’s latest addresses, made at Virginia Theological Seminary – an institution which, by the way, has been admitting homosexual couples for the past eight years. These lectures constitute a masterpiece of liberal apologetics, capped off with the dramatic pronouncement that:
In my opinion the decisions of the House of Bishops in the Episcopal Church (USA) met that request [to “express regret” over the Gene Robinson consecration]. In fact looking at the precise wording of Windsor and the statements of the House of Bishops it is arguable the reaction exceeded what was asked for by the Windsor Report.
While Eames protests that this is just his personal opinion, one cannot ignore the fact that he is the senior Anglican prelate and Chairman of the Lambeth Commission that produced the Windsor Report.
Eames claims to be committed to the “Windsor process,” but in any process there are certain non-negotiables. For the Global South, the non-negotiable is the conviction that homosexuality is contrary to Scripture. Clearly, Eames does not agree with the 1998 Lambeth Resolution. He never mentions it in his lectures and complains obliquely about the “failure to engage in dialogue on an agreed playing field between two apparently opposing views.” Excuse me, Your Grace, but the playing field was tilted by the clear teaching of Scripture, by the consistent practice of the historic churches and by the official action of the Anglican bishops gathered at Lambeth. No matter, apparently. He insinuates that those who hold this view are guilty of suppressing “questions which have perhaps lain submerged for too long in any healthy world debate in a world Church family.”
The Archbishop has his own non-negotiables. He admits that “those members [of the Lambeth Commission] who held the liberal view could not have been expected to sign the Windsor Report if they had felt the Report’s conclusions meant that the debate on the Church’s attitude to human sexuality was closed.” Here the Achilles’ heel of the Windsor process is exposed, for by abjuring judgement on the issue at hand, the Commission had to nibble around the edges of church polity. In the Windsor world, doctrinal and moral essentials are a matter of “he said, she said,” and repentance necessarily morphs into regret.
Eames sees himself as holding the middle ground in the “struggle to discern how to meet conservative concerns for proper biblical interpretation AND liberal consensus for justice and inclusion of minorities…” This formulation is revealing, for surely it should be easier to find a way around “concerns” for biblical interpretation than to deny justice to minorities. To describe rejection of homosexual practice as a justice issue is the first step down the Spongian road toward confessing the “sins of Scripture.” In my opinion, Archbishop Eames is being disingenuous. He knows there is no long-term resolution to the conflict besetting the Communion. He just wants it to go his way.
There is a certain irony to a wealthy white establishment accusing the poorer non-white churches of injustice. And can there be any doubt that discipline would not be so casual if the issue were more politically correct. Suppose the Episcopal Church had legislated that whites and blacks worship in “separate but equal” congregations. Would a Windsor Report which recommended that the Episcopal Church “express regret” while continuing the practice be acceptable? Could it be explained away as a matter of cultural difference? Surely not, for such racial discrimination is a sin with which there can be no compromise (Galatians 2:11).
Now we turn to the reactions of the Global South leaders to the Windsor Report and the maneuverings since then. The key point is this: they never considered the Windsor Report as more than advisory, as a means of discipline and repentance. One must remember that the Global South bishops insisted on the language of the Lambeth Resolution in 1998, on threat of a walk-out. The seriousness of their rejection of homosexuality as “contrary to Scripture” can be found in a series of Lambeth Resolutions asserting the primary authority of the Bible. I do regret that they allowed the wimpy phrase “cannot advise” to go through, because their real view is that sex outside marriage is sin.
The Global South leaders – a substantial majority of them at any rate – consider the actions of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion to be heretical and church-dividing. They are not willing to coexist with churches that teach heresy and practice immorality. They are not interested in clever compromises, like the English bishops’ response on civil partnerships. Archbishop Peter Akinola may be the boldest in speaking his mind, but remember that his whole church assembly voted with him to change that Church’s Constitution.
So where does this leave Windsor? Probably high and dry. Because if the Episcopal Church and Anglican Church of Canada, soothed by the assurances of the sage of Armagh, go right ahead with their agenda – and surely they will – then we shall see a split in the Anglican Communion. The greatest trauma will be felt in the compromised Western churches. The Global South churches will also suffer short-term loss of resources, but the split may be an occasion for them to rise to the full stature of apostolic leadership. In this respect, Archbishop Eames may be correct that this is an historic and providential moment.
In the future, the Bible, the Book of Common Prayer, the Thirty-Nine Articles, the Lambeth Quadrilateral, and Lambeth 1.10 will still be around, informing Anglican identity – the foundations perhaps of a true Anglican Communion Covenant. The Windsor Report will become, I suspect, a relic of a sad but necessary parting of ways.
Addendum (October 2006). This article was written in October 2005 on the second anniversary of the emergency Primates meeting, which led to the promulgation of the Windsor Report one year later. As we now pass the third anniversary of its conception and second of its birth, one may ask: Where are we? At the Episcopal Church General Convention in June, much was made of “Windsor compliance”: did they or did they not? Some take Resolution B033 as constituting minimal compliance and PB Jeff orts Schori now speaks of refraining from consecrating more gay bishops and developing same-sex rites “for a season.” I suppose some will take these words is the magic “moratorium” required by the Windsor Report. That this is the Archbishop of Canterbury’s view seems likely.
Last June, Bishop Tom Wright, one of the conservatives on the Lambeth Commission, suggested that the Communion should fall over itself to welcome the Episcopal Church back if they would just make some gesture of compliance.
“What a great many people are looking for is a signal from the Episcopal Church that Windsor has been heard and not just rejected huffily. If we get a signal that the American Chu rch has taken this seriously…a lot of people will say ‘Whew!’ because we really do like you guys.”
Did B033 keep the Episcopal Church from “blowin’ in the Windsor”? Was it the whispered “sorry”? Will the Primates pull up their robes and run to kiss the returning prodigal? Those who know the real situation on the ground in the Episcopal Church know that its leaders have not repented in the least. Any concessions made to Windsor have been through clenched teeth and fully aware that some members will “conscientiously” move forward.
Update (July 2007). The issuing of the Global South Primates’ Communiqué from Kigali (September 2006), the Primates’ Communiqué from Tanzania (February 2007), and the Archbishop of Canterbury’s invitations to Lambeth (May 2007) may have dealt the death blow to the relevance of the Windsor Report and the “Windsor process.”
An earlier form of this article first appeared in the Church of England Newspaper.
---The Rev. Dr. Stephen Noll is vice president of Uganda Christian University in Mukono, Uganda
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
WISCONSIN: First Episcopal Parish Leaves Diocese of Milwaukee and TEC for CANA
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
Editor's Note: St. Andrew's, Vestal and Westside Anglican Fellowship in Syracuse are the CANA parishes in Central NY.
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
Editor's Note: St. Andrew's, Vestal and Westside Anglican Fellowship in Syracuse are the CANA parishes in Central NY.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
CHATTANOOGA, TN: Faith said to change sexual orientation
Via VirtueOnline:
By Lauren Gregory
Times Free Press
http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2008/dec/28/faith-said-change-sexual-orientation/
December 28, 2008
Chris Delaney, head of Joseph's Coat Ministries, helps council people with same-sex attractions who want to change. Delaney, who was once gay, decided to change after years of being unhappy with his life.
After 12 years of boyfriends and gay bars, Chris Delaney decided he was miserable as a homosexual and ready to change.
"I realized I didn't even like that behavior. I so needed male affirmation," said the 38-year-old resident of Ringgold, Ga. "So I decided I was willing to give faith another chance. I told God, 'I've run my life for 12 years, and it's been a mess. I'm going to hand it back over to you.' "
Fifteen years later, Mr. Delaney now proudly labels himself an "ex-gay," having undergone what he describes as a lengthy spiritual transformation in which he was sexually reoriented. Since 1996, he has ministered to hundreds of others through the nonprofit evangelical organization Joseph's Coat Ministries.
Mr. Delaney, who said he has found true happiness in ministry, six years of marriage and two children, is part of a contested movement in the United States: sexual conversion, or "reparative" therapy.
Conservative Judeo-Christian religious groups applaud the strategy for its adherence to traditional religious beliefs in a "sexually broken world" that has become too accepting of what they say is sin disguised as diversity.
Members of the gay community and the traditional psychotherapy profession criticize such efforts, arguing they target vulnerable individuals and force them to deny natural tendencies in the name of religious dogma.
But the "reparative" movement is catching on locally. Harvest USA, a Pennsylvania-based ministry whose Web site states the group aims "to transform the lives of those affected by sexual sin," opened its Mid-South Regional office in Chattanooga in 2001.
And Exodus International - whose 230 member agencies in the United States and Canada make it the largest Christian organization in the country focused on conversion therapy - held a training session in Chattanooga in November for 28 ministry leaders from Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina and Alabama.
"Because of the current cultural climate and political climate surrounding this issue, I think there's more attention coming around it," said Exodus Church Network Director Jeff Buchanan of Nashville, who conducted the seminar. "It may be more of an awareness, in conjunction with the issues we're facing as a nation."
LONG-STANDING debate
The concept of conversion therapy, couched within decades-old debates about science versus God and nature versus nurture, isn't new; experts say it has been around since at least the 1970s.
The American Psychological Association in 1973 removed homosexuality from its list of treatable disorders. The APA, American Psychiatric Association and the National Association of Social Workers have ethics policies discouraging the use of conversion therapy on the grounds that it is has not been proven effective and might cause more harm than good.
"It doesn't make sense on any level," said Richard L. Pimental-Habib, an openly gay, Chattanooga-based clinical therapist. "The ultimate result is that it doesn't work. It flies in the face of how a person is born and who they are to the core."
Mr. Delaney said he doesn't have specific data to track his clients' outcomes, but acknowledged some people don't respond to the therapy and return to the gay lifestyle.
In 2007, the American Psychological Association put together a task force to evaluate its position on reparative therapy in light of new research. Results are expected to be released within the next few months, said Clinton Anderson, director of the organization's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Concerns Office.
The question of whether someone can choose to be gay is at the heart of all gay-rights issues, Mr. Delaney explained. By saying that a homosexual is genetically born with gay tendencies in the same way a black person is born with dark skin, gay rights advocates are trying to bolster their arguments for equal treatment of gays, he said.
"What I do flies in the face of their agenda," said Mr. Delaney, who noted that he periodically is the target of hate messages on his Web site and threatening voice mails.
But Mr. Delaney and Mr. Buchanan say they aren't going to let resistance interfere with their work. Mr. Buchanan said he believes the ex-gay movement will not only continue but will expand.
"I work with a network of about 115 churches. It's continuing to grow, and I have reason to think it will multiply into the thousands," he said.
"A broken, fallen world"
Professional therapists argue reparative therapy lacks proven benefits and may harm patients by increasing unnecessary self-hatred and guilt.
These therapists point to studies showing that genetics play a significant role in sexual development and say that, based on such evidence, there is no way to sidestep the conclusion that people are born as homosexuals.
"Of course we know there is a genetic component to homosexuality now," said David Kaplan, chief professional officer of the American Counseling Association.
"We do not know of any situation where a homosexual has been converted to heterosexuality," Dr. Kaplan continued. "What you can do is you can change behaviors. You can force somebody to stop eating, but they're not going to stop getting hungry."
Those who support conversion therapy counter that these scientists' evidence is biased and flawed. But even if it weren't, they say, whether someone is born gay is irrelevant to whether that person should act on it.
"Some people are born with a genetic disposition to become alcoholics," Mr. Delaney said. "Does that give them permission to live that way?"
Dan Wilson, director of Chattanooga's Harvest USA, said God states through the Bible that homosexuality and other types of sexual sin are wrong and that people need to struggle against committing that sin.
"We inherited a broken, fallen world, and we inherited a propensity to sin," he said. "We need to be aiming life toward repentance and change."
The issue goes beyond Christian doctrine and into morality in general, said New Jersey-based Arthur Goldberg, executive secretary of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality and co-founder/co-director of Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality.
"We have this whole political-correctness philosophy now, in terms not only of language but just the way we function," Mr. Goldberg said. "Part of it is a breakdown of church and family, and part of it is a breakdown of overall morality in the communities. There's this greater philosophy of whatever feels good is good."
Association therapists use secular science to support their view that anyone who wants to choose to live a moral lifestyle should have the right to seek treatment to change, Mr. Goldberg said.
"HERE TO HELP"
Harvest, Exodus and Joseph's Coat advocate for the rights of those who want to change, yet officials with each group note that the organizations are not out to judge or condemn those who embrace the gay lifestyle.
"We're not in the business of forcing somebody to change, but if they do come to us, we are here to help those who desire change to accomplish their goal," said Mr. Delaney, who does not charge for services and depends on donations to provide therapy, support groups and seminars through Joseph's Coat.
Still, Dr. Anderson of the American Psychological Association contends conversion therapy is rooted in subtle criticism.
People who decide to turn to such therapies "are often people who are involved in social groups that have a high level of negativity toward homosexuality," Dr. Anderson said. "They are seeking such therapies not necessarily because they're going to benefit from them, but because they are trying desperately to fit into communities they seek to fit in."
Randy Thomas, executive vice president of Exodus North America, said he resents that attitude.
"The media and gay activists want to make it all about some sort of fight between us and them, and that's just not true," said Mr. Thomas, who says he has not identified himself as a gay person in 16 years. "Yes, we do have moral disagreements, but we don't exist to oppose the gay community."
To Mr. Delaney, homosexuality is a complicated mix that includes many environmental factors, and he trusts that God offers guidance for true change.
As for himself, he believed "something better" was possible.
"I trust Him that those issues will never control me again," Mr. Delaney said. "Once you mature in the Lord, I've seen that your feelings can change."
END
By Lauren Gregory
Times Free Press
http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2008/dec/28/faith-said-change-sexual-orientation/
December 28, 2008
Chris Delaney, head of Joseph's Coat Ministries, helps council people with same-sex attractions who want to change. Delaney, who was once gay, decided to change after years of being unhappy with his life.
After 12 years of boyfriends and gay bars, Chris Delaney decided he was miserable as a homosexual and ready to change.
"I realized I didn't even like that behavior. I so needed male affirmation," said the 38-year-old resident of Ringgold, Ga. "So I decided I was willing to give faith another chance. I told God, 'I've run my life for 12 years, and it's been a mess. I'm going to hand it back over to you.' "
Fifteen years later, Mr. Delaney now proudly labels himself an "ex-gay," having undergone what he describes as a lengthy spiritual transformation in which he was sexually reoriented. Since 1996, he has ministered to hundreds of others through the nonprofit evangelical organization Joseph's Coat Ministries.
Mr. Delaney, who said he has found true happiness in ministry, six years of marriage and two children, is part of a contested movement in the United States: sexual conversion, or "reparative" therapy.
Conservative Judeo-Christian religious groups applaud the strategy for its adherence to traditional religious beliefs in a "sexually broken world" that has become too accepting of what they say is sin disguised as diversity.
Members of the gay community and the traditional psychotherapy profession criticize such efforts, arguing they target vulnerable individuals and force them to deny natural tendencies in the name of religious dogma.
But the "reparative" movement is catching on locally. Harvest USA, a Pennsylvania-based ministry whose Web site states the group aims "to transform the lives of those affected by sexual sin," opened its Mid-South Regional office in Chattanooga in 2001.
And Exodus International - whose 230 member agencies in the United States and Canada make it the largest Christian organization in the country focused on conversion therapy - held a training session in Chattanooga in November for 28 ministry leaders from Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina and Alabama.
"Because of the current cultural climate and political climate surrounding this issue, I think there's more attention coming around it," said Exodus Church Network Director Jeff Buchanan of Nashville, who conducted the seminar. "It may be more of an awareness, in conjunction with the issues we're facing as a nation."
LONG-STANDING debate
The concept of conversion therapy, couched within decades-old debates about science versus God and nature versus nurture, isn't new; experts say it has been around since at least the 1970s.
The American Psychological Association in 1973 removed homosexuality from its list of treatable disorders. The APA, American Psychiatric Association and the National Association of Social Workers have ethics policies discouraging the use of conversion therapy on the grounds that it is has not been proven effective and might cause more harm than good.
"It doesn't make sense on any level," said Richard L. Pimental-Habib, an openly gay, Chattanooga-based clinical therapist. "The ultimate result is that it doesn't work. It flies in the face of how a person is born and who they are to the core."
Mr. Delaney said he doesn't have specific data to track his clients' outcomes, but acknowledged some people don't respond to the therapy and return to the gay lifestyle.
In 2007, the American Psychological Association put together a task force to evaluate its position on reparative therapy in light of new research. Results are expected to be released within the next few months, said Clinton Anderson, director of the organization's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Concerns Office.
The question of whether someone can choose to be gay is at the heart of all gay-rights issues, Mr. Delaney explained. By saying that a homosexual is genetically born with gay tendencies in the same way a black person is born with dark skin, gay rights advocates are trying to bolster their arguments for equal treatment of gays, he said.
"What I do flies in the face of their agenda," said Mr. Delaney, who noted that he periodically is the target of hate messages on his Web site and threatening voice mails.
But Mr. Delaney and Mr. Buchanan say they aren't going to let resistance interfere with their work. Mr. Buchanan said he believes the ex-gay movement will not only continue but will expand.
"I work with a network of about 115 churches. It's continuing to grow, and I have reason to think it will multiply into the thousands," he said.
"A broken, fallen world"
Professional therapists argue reparative therapy lacks proven benefits and may harm patients by increasing unnecessary self-hatred and guilt.
These therapists point to studies showing that genetics play a significant role in sexual development and say that, based on such evidence, there is no way to sidestep the conclusion that people are born as homosexuals.
"Of course we know there is a genetic component to homosexuality now," said David Kaplan, chief professional officer of the American Counseling Association.
"We do not know of any situation where a homosexual has been converted to heterosexuality," Dr. Kaplan continued. "What you can do is you can change behaviors. You can force somebody to stop eating, but they're not going to stop getting hungry."
Those who support conversion therapy counter that these scientists' evidence is biased and flawed. But even if it weren't, they say, whether someone is born gay is irrelevant to whether that person should act on it.
"Some people are born with a genetic disposition to become alcoholics," Mr. Delaney said. "Does that give them permission to live that way?"
Dan Wilson, director of Chattanooga's Harvest USA, said God states through the Bible that homosexuality and other types of sexual sin are wrong and that people need to struggle against committing that sin.
"We inherited a broken, fallen world, and we inherited a propensity to sin," he said. "We need to be aiming life toward repentance and change."
The issue goes beyond Christian doctrine and into morality in general, said New Jersey-based Arthur Goldberg, executive secretary of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality and co-founder/co-director of Jews Offering New Alternatives to Homosexuality.
"We have this whole political-correctness philosophy now, in terms not only of language but just the way we function," Mr. Goldberg said. "Part of it is a breakdown of church and family, and part of it is a breakdown of overall morality in the communities. There's this greater philosophy of whatever feels good is good."
Association therapists use secular science to support their view that anyone who wants to choose to live a moral lifestyle should have the right to seek treatment to change, Mr. Goldberg said.
"HERE TO HELP"
Harvest, Exodus and Joseph's Coat advocate for the rights of those who want to change, yet officials with each group note that the organizations are not out to judge or condemn those who embrace the gay lifestyle.
"We're not in the business of forcing somebody to change, but if they do come to us, we are here to help those who desire change to accomplish their goal," said Mr. Delaney, who does not charge for services and depends on donations to provide therapy, support groups and seminars through Joseph's Coat.
Still, Dr. Anderson of the American Psychological Association contends conversion therapy is rooted in subtle criticism.
People who decide to turn to such therapies "are often people who are involved in social groups that have a high level of negativity toward homosexuality," Dr. Anderson said. "They are seeking such therapies not necessarily because they're going to benefit from them, but because they are trying desperately to fit into communities they seek to fit in."
Randy Thomas, executive vice president of Exodus North America, said he resents that attitude.
"The media and gay activists want to make it all about some sort of fight between us and them, and that's just not true," said Mr. Thomas, who says he has not identified himself as a gay person in 16 years. "Yes, we do have moral disagreements, but we don't exist to oppose the gay community."
To Mr. Delaney, homosexuality is a complicated mix that includes many environmental factors, and he trusts that God offers guidance for true change.
As for himself, he believed "something better" was possible.
"I trust Him that those issues will never control me again," Mr. Delaney said. "Once you mature in the Lord, I've seen that your feelings can change."
END
ENGLAND: The Anglican Communion will finally split in 2009
Via VirtueOnline:
This will be the year of unavoidable schism in the church
by Paul Handley
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2008/dec/29/religion-anglicanism
December 29, 2008
The question: What will the big religious stories of 2009 be?
A silence has descended on the Anglican Church in the United States - or should that be, Anglican Churches? Since the foundation of the conservative Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) at the start of December, all has gone quiet. Too quiet. Why is this, and how can we then predict what might happen in 2009? Is this, finally, going to be the year of the great schism?
First, a bit of theological background. Jesus made unity an intensely personal thing. St John quotes him praying to God the Father that his disciples "may be one, even as we are one". St Paul took up the theme: "We, being many, are one body in Christ." It is impossible to be a biblical Christian and not make unity a priority.
The reason that unity is such a good thing is that it affirms that Christ's Spirit is in everyone, however uncongenial they may seem. It is a fundamental belief that all are equally sinful and in need of God's grace (which is given freely). A schism occurs when one group believes itself to be better than another. There's a difference between unity and uniformity - everybody who shops around for a church he or she feels comfortable in, rejecting the ones that don't feel right, is indulging in schismatic behaviour to a degree; but because there isn't a group thing going on, this can be a mild, neutral judgement.
As soon as there is a group of people involved, however, all sorts of dynamics are created: the breakaway group almost always defines itself by contrast with the group that has been left behind; there is a need to cohere rapidly, and this means renouncing bonds with the former group; uncertainty and doubt are discouraged, since these suggest a lack of commitment to the new group; and so on. When these forces come into play, you can say farewell to the friendliness and humility which, incidentally, are all you need to keep a church together.
For these anthropological reasons as much the theological ones, it is safe to say that church splits are always a bad thing, in the same way that divorce is always a bad thing. It's just that marriage can be a worse thing. Conservatives and liberals in the United States have been locked in a loveless marriage for some years. The Lambeth Conference has, in the past, functioned as some sort of self-help group, but ten years is a long time between counselling sessions, and in 2008 the conservatives decided not to show up. Besides, the marriage had become abusive, and, as everybody knows, being stuck in such a relationship can be a bleak, bleak experience.
Getting out, then, could be seen as the lesser of two evils. A clean break. The chance to begin life again with a positive outlook, free from all the wrangling of the past. This might be sound advice if the conservatives were happy just to walk away. But there's the family home to fight over, and custody of the children. The members of ACNA are darned if they'll sit back and watch their former partner, now free to indulge in unrestrained intimacy with the liberal spirit of the age - gay sex, abortions, feminist theology, concessions to other faiths, more gay sex - and doing so in the churches built with their money, and thus leading the American public further astray.
So, the ACNA has bigger plans: to become the new, official Anglican province in the US, and watch the old, liberal province shrivel up and die. Silence won't make it vanish
Hence the silence from the old province, which is prompted by a little bit of nervousness, and a little bit of scorn. When we ran a page-three splash in the Church Times on the new Church/province, I received several emails telling me that it wasn't a province and why were we giving it such attention? The Presiding Bishop in the US, Dr Katharine Jefferts Schori, told a gathering of the National Press Club in mid-December that "only a rare few" were "consumed by conflict", suggesting that nice journalists would want to write about all the good works that the Church was doing instead. Well, up to a point, Lord Copper.
The silence might work, but it probably won't. The new province exists, whether anybody mentions it or not, and one day it might actually come to be a province of something. At the moment this doesn't look likely: the Archbishop of Canterbury has told them that they can't be a proper province of the Anglican Communion because they haven't filled in the right form, and, oh, those forms have somehow been lost down the back of a drawer in an office in Paddington.
But the conservatives are now saying, who is this Canterbury fellow, anyway? There are 38 primates around the world, and Canterbury is only one of them. (Actually, this is true: Rowan Williams is denoted as primus inter pares, "first among equals", and so has no weight to throw around when people disagree with him, which they so frequently do.) There is a meeting of all the primates in February, and if the new province (there I go again) is recognised by a reasonable number of the other primates, which is likely (five have done so already), things could get very interesting.
It's a pretty safe bet that Rowan will stick to the rules, i.e. not allow a new province to establish itself. What is less likely, is that the rules imposed on the US Episcopal Church (the official one) will stand. When Gene Robinson was elected Bishop of New Hampshire, despite living with his male partner, the rest of the Anglican Communion persuaded the Episcopal Church to put a hold on any other such appointments. It sounds easy when described in that neat little sentence, but there was an almighty row, and the moratorium was agreed by the US General Convention only after intense pressure. The Convention meets every three years. 2009 is the next one, and now that the hardline conservatives have taken themselves off, albeit not very far, the lifting of the moratorium on gay bishops and gay weddings, another contentious issue, is almost a cert. Rowan's last trump
In the face of all this anarchy, the only trump that Rowan Williams can play is the Anglican Covenant. It's dull and bureaucratic, the equivalent of the two of trumps, and yet can any card have been played to such effect round after round? When all this international disagreement blew up, and the Anglican Communion looked about for a rule book and a referee, it found that it had neither. Let's spend the next six or seven years thinking up some rules and working out who can apply them, said Rowan. Although everybody grumbled, it was a smart move: the conservatives liked the idea of rules, and the liberals liked the idea of discussing things endlessly. And so it has gone on. The conservatives have constantly threatened to give up - and the ACNA move might signal that they mean it this time - and the liberals have constantly argued that the Anglican Communion isn't about rules at all. The Covenant really seems to be too weak to deal with the present hardening of attitudes, but we have kept thinking that over the past three or four years, and every time Rowan uses it, it turns the trick.
The interesting thing about the present row is the international dimensions of it all. In every country, disgruntled congregations have peeled off from the established Church (such as the Church of England itself, for goodness sake). In the United States there are hundreds of them: we know that, because the new ACNA is formed out of a ragbag of them, a few of whom left in the 19th century over a row about the eucharist. In the past, these breakaways had to manage on their own, but increasingly they have been able to forge alliances with other, proper Anglican provinces across the globe, which give them a claim on the Anglican legacy. This has been very handy in property disputes in the US, and encourages them to entertain the possibility of one day taking control of the whole Communion.
They won't, of course, but the game now is going to change from now on. The object has shifted from trying to reform the old Communion (by supplanting the liberals in the US) to forming a new one. Rowan's task in the year ahead will thus change, too, from trying to hold together two disputatious groups in the same Church to trying to hold together two Churches. It can't be done, especially now that he has lost the respect of the conservatives.
So, schism in 2009? It certainly looks like it, and then the numbers belonging to each side start to matter. The conservatives in the US are in a clear minority, but when allied to the millions of Anglicans in, say, Nigeria or Uganda, they become a force to reckon with, however much the liberals would like us to ignore them.
END
---------
This will be the year of unavoidable schism in the church
by Paul Handley
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2008/dec/29/religion-anglicanism
December 29, 2008
The question: What will the big religious stories of 2009 be?
A silence has descended on the Anglican Church in the United States - or should that be, Anglican Churches? Since the foundation of the conservative Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) at the start of December, all has gone quiet. Too quiet. Why is this, and how can we then predict what might happen in 2009? Is this, finally, going to be the year of the great schism?
First, a bit of theological background. Jesus made unity an intensely personal thing. St John quotes him praying to God the Father that his disciples "may be one, even as we are one". St Paul took up the theme: "We, being many, are one body in Christ." It is impossible to be a biblical Christian and not make unity a priority.
The reason that unity is such a good thing is that it affirms that Christ's Spirit is in everyone, however uncongenial they may seem. It is a fundamental belief that all are equally sinful and in need of God's grace (which is given freely). A schism occurs when one group believes itself to be better than another. There's a difference between unity and uniformity - everybody who shops around for a church he or she feels comfortable in, rejecting the ones that don't feel right, is indulging in schismatic behaviour to a degree; but because there isn't a group thing going on, this can be a mild, neutral judgement.
As soon as there is a group of people involved, however, all sorts of dynamics are created: the breakaway group almost always defines itself by contrast with the group that has been left behind; there is a need to cohere rapidly, and this means renouncing bonds with the former group; uncertainty and doubt are discouraged, since these suggest a lack of commitment to the new group; and so on. When these forces come into play, you can say farewell to the friendliness and humility which, incidentally, are all you need to keep a church together.
For these anthropological reasons as much the theological ones, it is safe to say that church splits are always a bad thing, in the same way that divorce is always a bad thing. It's just that marriage can be a worse thing. Conservatives and liberals in the United States have been locked in a loveless marriage for some years. The Lambeth Conference has, in the past, functioned as some sort of self-help group, but ten years is a long time between counselling sessions, and in 2008 the conservatives decided not to show up. Besides, the marriage had become abusive, and, as everybody knows, being stuck in such a relationship can be a bleak, bleak experience.
Getting out, then, could be seen as the lesser of two evils. A clean break. The chance to begin life again with a positive outlook, free from all the wrangling of the past. This might be sound advice if the conservatives were happy just to walk away. But there's the family home to fight over, and custody of the children. The members of ACNA are darned if they'll sit back and watch their former partner, now free to indulge in unrestrained intimacy with the liberal spirit of the age - gay sex, abortions, feminist theology, concessions to other faiths, more gay sex - and doing so in the churches built with their money, and thus leading the American public further astray.
So, the ACNA has bigger plans: to become the new, official Anglican province in the US, and watch the old, liberal province shrivel up and die. Silence won't make it vanish
Hence the silence from the old province, which is prompted by a little bit of nervousness, and a little bit of scorn. When we ran a page-three splash in the Church Times on the new Church/province, I received several emails telling me that it wasn't a province and why were we giving it such attention? The Presiding Bishop in the US, Dr Katharine Jefferts Schori, told a gathering of the National Press Club in mid-December that "only a rare few" were "consumed by conflict", suggesting that nice journalists would want to write about all the good works that the Church was doing instead. Well, up to a point, Lord Copper.
The silence might work, but it probably won't. The new province exists, whether anybody mentions it or not, and one day it might actually come to be a province of something. At the moment this doesn't look likely: the Archbishop of Canterbury has told them that they can't be a proper province of the Anglican Communion because they haven't filled in the right form, and, oh, those forms have somehow been lost down the back of a drawer in an office in Paddington.
But the conservatives are now saying, who is this Canterbury fellow, anyway? There are 38 primates around the world, and Canterbury is only one of them. (Actually, this is true: Rowan Williams is denoted as primus inter pares, "first among equals", and so has no weight to throw around when people disagree with him, which they so frequently do.) There is a meeting of all the primates in February, and if the new province (there I go again) is recognised by a reasonable number of the other primates, which is likely (five have done so already), things could get very interesting.
It's a pretty safe bet that Rowan will stick to the rules, i.e. not allow a new province to establish itself. What is less likely, is that the rules imposed on the US Episcopal Church (the official one) will stand. When Gene Robinson was elected Bishop of New Hampshire, despite living with his male partner, the rest of the Anglican Communion persuaded the Episcopal Church to put a hold on any other such appointments. It sounds easy when described in that neat little sentence, but there was an almighty row, and the moratorium was agreed by the US General Convention only after intense pressure. The Convention meets every three years. 2009 is the next one, and now that the hardline conservatives have taken themselves off, albeit not very far, the lifting of the moratorium on gay bishops and gay weddings, another contentious issue, is almost a cert. Rowan's last trump
In the face of all this anarchy, the only trump that Rowan Williams can play is the Anglican Covenant. It's dull and bureaucratic, the equivalent of the two of trumps, and yet can any card have been played to such effect round after round? When all this international disagreement blew up, and the Anglican Communion looked about for a rule book and a referee, it found that it had neither. Let's spend the next six or seven years thinking up some rules and working out who can apply them, said Rowan. Although everybody grumbled, it was a smart move: the conservatives liked the idea of rules, and the liberals liked the idea of discussing things endlessly. And so it has gone on. The conservatives have constantly threatened to give up - and the ACNA move might signal that they mean it this time - and the liberals have constantly argued that the Anglican Communion isn't about rules at all. The Covenant really seems to be too weak to deal with the present hardening of attitudes, but we have kept thinking that over the past three or four years, and every time Rowan uses it, it turns the trick.
The interesting thing about the present row is the international dimensions of it all. In every country, disgruntled congregations have peeled off from the established Church (such as the Church of England itself, for goodness sake). In the United States there are hundreds of them: we know that, because the new ACNA is formed out of a ragbag of them, a few of whom left in the 19th century over a row about the eucharist. In the past, these breakaways had to manage on their own, but increasingly they have been able to forge alliances with other, proper Anglican provinces across the globe, which give them a claim on the Anglican legacy. This has been very handy in property disputes in the US, and encourages them to entertain the possibility of one day taking control of the whole Communion.
They won't, of course, but the game now is going to change from now on. The object has shifted from trying to reform the old Communion (by supplanting the liberals in the US) to forming a new one. Rowan's task in the year ahead will thus change, too, from trying to hold together two disputatious groups in the same Church to trying to hold together two Churches. It can't be done, especially now that he has lost the respect of the conservatives.
So, schism in 2009? It certainly looks like it, and then the numbers belonging to each side start to matter. The conservatives in the US are in a clear minority, but when allied to the millions of Anglicans in, say, Nigeria or Uganda, they become a force to reckon with, however much the liberals would like us to ignore them.
END
---------
Is heresy better than schism?
By Rod Dreher at Beliefnet via TitusOneNine:
Monday December 29, 2008
On his TNR blog, Damon Linker flags the schism withing the Episcopal Church as the most important and worrying religious development of the past year. Here's an excerpt:
With 100,000 members, the schismatic Anglican denomination is so far quite small, though it may well grow if conservative dioceses around the country decide to take the option now presented to them and bolt from the Episcopal Church. But regardless of the numbers involved, the rupture in the church is historically significant and culturally troubling. The Protestant mainline that once ruled and to some extent united the nation continues its decline, split into squabbling factions facing each other across a cultural chasm. Arrayed on one side are liberals of every theological stripe; on the other are defenders of orthodoxy and tradition. The first views the second as ignorant bigots; the second sees the first as moral degenerates. Barack Obama may have managed to win 53 percent of the popular vote last month, but that doesn't mean the country's division into "red" and "blue" spheres of cultural influence has come to an end. Indeed, the split in the Episcopal Church indicates that it persists and may even be deepening.
Damon is troubled, and understandably so, by the fact that American churches are breaking apart based on positions congregations and individuals within them hold on culture-war issues. I don't see how any serious believer, whichever side he takes, can be cheered by schism. But I am inclined to think of schism as the second-worst option, if the only other is to accomodate one's church to a serious heresy.
As Damon notes, the stance a believer takes on issues like abortion, homosexuality, order and authority in the family, and a related constellation of concerns, typically places one within one camp or the other. It's no accident that there's a thread connecting stances on both sides; i.e., there's a reason why Christians who oppose abortion rights are more likely to oppose same-sex marriage rights, and vice versa. It all comes down, in the end, to Authority.
If you believe that Scripture, or Scripture and the institutional Church, is the Authority for deciding questions of meaning and morality, then you are far more likely to fall on the traditionalist side of these questions. If you believe that individual conscience is the Authority, then you are likely to be a progressive.
I don't see how the two can be reconciled, unless it is agreed by a majority that the church in question doesn't really stand for anything beyond itself. If you really do believe that Scripture and Tradition are wrong about same-sex relationships, and that it is a matter of basic justice that the teaching be changed, then you aren't going to stop fighting for that change within the church. If you believe that we are not free to throw off the authority of Scripture (and Tradition) in such matters, then to have your church declare these matters open to negotiation would be to hollow out the meaning of what the church is supposed to stand for, all for the sake of a superficial unity.
The question ultimately is this: Are there matters over which there can be no compromise, and in which a compromise would destroy the essence of the institution? If there are, then schism is better than agreeing to disagree for the sake of keeping the family together. Right? If schism is always worse than heresy, then how can it be possible to draw any boundaries beyond which individuals and congregations, progressive or traditional, will not go?
Monday December 29, 2008
On his TNR blog, Damon Linker flags the schism withing the Episcopal Church as the most important and worrying religious development of the past year. Here's an excerpt:
With 100,000 members, the schismatic Anglican denomination is so far quite small, though it may well grow if conservative dioceses around the country decide to take the option now presented to them and bolt from the Episcopal Church. But regardless of the numbers involved, the rupture in the church is historically significant and culturally troubling. The Protestant mainline that once ruled and to some extent united the nation continues its decline, split into squabbling factions facing each other across a cultural chasm. Arrayed on one side are liberals of every theological stripe; on the other are defenders of orthodoxy and tradition. The first views the second as ignorant bigots; the second sees the first as moral degenerates. Barack Obama may have managed to win 53 percent of the popular vote last month, but that doesn't mean the country's division into "red" and "blue" spheres of cultural influence has come to an end. Indeed, the split in the Episcopal Church indicates that it persists and may even be deepening.
Damon is troubled, and understandably so, by the fact that American churches are breaking apart based on positions congregations and individuals within them hold on culture-war issues. I don't see how any serious believer, whichever side he takes, can be cheered by schism. But I am inclined to think of schism as the second-worst option, if the only other is to accomodate one's church to a serious heresy.
As Damon notes, the stance a believer takes on issues like abortion, homosexuality, order and authority in the family, and a related constellation of concerns, typically places one within one camp or the other. It's no accident that there's a thread connecting stances on both sides; i.e., there's a reason why Christians who oppose abortion rights are more likely to oppose same-sex marriage rights, and vice versa. It all comes down, in the end, to Authority.
If you believe that Scripture, or Scripture and the institutional Church, is the Authority for deciding questions of meaning and morality, then you are far more likely to fall on the traditionalist side of these questions. If you believe that individual conscience is the Authority, then you are likely to be a progressive.
I don't see how the two can be reconciled, unless it is agreed by a majority that the church in question doesn't really stand for anything beyond itself. If you really do believe that Scripture and Tradition are wrong about same-sex relationships, and that it is a matter of basic justice that the teaching be changed, then you aren't going to stop fighting for that change within the church. If you believe that we are not free to throw off the authority of Scripture (and Tradition) in such matters, then to have your church declare these matters open to negotiation would be to hollow out the meaning of what the church is supposed to stand for, all for the sake of a superficial unity.
The question ultimately is this: Are there matters over which there can be no compromise, and in which a compromise would destroy the essence of the institution? If there are, then schism is better than agreeing to disagree for the sake of keeping the family together. Right? If schism is always worse than heresy, then how can it be possible to draw any boundaries beyond which individuals and congregations, progressive or traditional, will not go?
BETHLEHEM: Episcopal Bishop Inhibits and Removes Vicar in Partying Scandal
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/29/2009
An Episcopal priest from the Diocese of Bethlehem whose partying behavior in New York bars made headlines in the NY Daily News has been inhibited and his license will be revoked by Episcopal Bishop Paul Marshall.
Saying he was "shocked" by newspaper reports of Fr. Gregory Malia's activities, Bishop Marshall wrote VOL and said, "I am removing him from his appointment as my vicar at St. James in Dundaff, and will be inhibiting him from the exercise of priestly ministry. I can assure the diocese that neither the News reporters nor our internal figures suggest that any church funds were misappropriated –– St. James is a summer chapel open approximately ten Sundays a year."
Malia was formerly a deacon and priest at Trinity Episcopal Church in West Pittston when Fr. John Major was rector of Trinity. Malia left under a cloud. Fr. Major is now rector at Prince of Peace of Dallas, PA. Major did not return calls.
According to another source Malia may not have fulfilled all of the normal requirements of his Clinical Pastoral Education required by the diocese for ordination, using his hemophilia as an excuse. Marshall described Malia as very hard to catch up with.
"Part of the surprise of all this is that he has a very conservative view of the Bible, is opposed to all expressions of homosexuality (let alone ordination), and doesn't believe in the ordination of women. He has been known to speak in tongues. He has pretty much stayed away from diocesan events since (Gene) Robinson's (consecration). While I have always known him to be wealthy, he has always seemed to be the wealthy conservative. He has been generous to the churches he has served. The behavior described in the News takes me completely by surprise."
According to the Daily News, Malia frequented the Pink Elephant and other clubs in New York where he spent thousands on top-shelf liquors, doling out five-figure tips like silver dollars. "I work hard. I make good money. How I spend it - that is my business," the Rev. Gregory Malia, 43, told the Daily News. "I haven't done anything inappropriate."
But VOL has learned that Malia has a checkered past in the Diocese of Bethlehem. He was only ordained a vicar in 2002. According to Bishop Marshall, newspaper reports saying he was a priest at St. James in Carbondale were inaccurate. He was vicar at a summer parish in Dundaff that opens for about 10 Sundays a year, Marshall told VOL. "Malia's health has made it possible for him to attend only about 50 to 60% of services. The parish has a budget of about $16,000 for those weeks and doesn't have running water, heat, or inside plumbing--it's just a summer chapel."
Malia is a pharmacist who owns a specialty pharmacy dedicated to blood disorders. He is a hemophiliac. But according to the PA State Board of Pharmacy there is no Gregory Malia listed as a registered pharmacist in the state of Pennsylvania. He is permitted to own a pharmacy but he cannot manage it or dispense medications, said a board spokesman.
Malia, who has an unlisted phone number could not be reached for comment though he is listed as living in Pittston with the job title of Chief Executive Officer of something called New Life Home Care. Bishop Marshall said Malia did not return his calls. "Fr. Malia has not been an active participant in the life of the diocese.
Earlier today, he did not return a telephone call from my office; nor has he responded to an email note." Malia has a history of litigation.
In October 2007 Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania filed a $3.6 million lawsuit against New Life Home Healthcare of Pittston described as a "specialty pharmacy", alleging officials improperly billed the insurance company for medications provided to three of the pharmacy's employees.
The lawsuit, filed in Luzerne County Court, alleges New Life submitted claims for prescriptions for its president, Gregory Malia, and employees Dawn Litchey and Roger Deaton, despite knowing other insurance programs were responsible for the payments.
P.G. Ferrara, an attorney for New Life, vehemently denied the allegations and accused Blue Cross of filing the suit as part of a campaign to force New Life, which competes with a Blue Cross subsidiary that offers a similar service, out of business. Malia counter-sued.
As well as being sued by Blue Cross he has also been involved in legal disputes with a company called Express Scripts that makes the use of prescription drugs affordable for consumers through thousands of employers, government, union and health plans.
Another pharmacist in the area was approached by Malia to facilitate his business but declined after reading and reviewing his business procedures.
Bishop Marshall said he read the Daily News article "with deep distress" knowing its contents will trouble many parishioners. "The allegations made in the article, if true, constitute a serious violation of ordination vows to be "a wholesome example" to a priest's people.
If true, they may also violate other canonical provisions and certainly portray an unacceptable idea of Christian stewardship. The conservative group he has gathered around himself will be traumatized, and I will ask two priests in the locale to minister to them."
Marshall said Daily News reporters did not contact him or his communications representative prior to publishing this article, "and have not done so since then, although my home and office telephones are not unlisted."
Marshall said The Episcopal Church provides due process when such issues arise, "and no summary judgment can be made by me unilaterally."
The bishop said he had assigned the Diocese's Standing Committee to investigate Fr. Malia's activities.
END
www.virtueonline.org
12/29/2009
An Episcopal priest from the Diocese of Bethlehem whose partying behavior in New York bars made headlines in the NY Daily News has been inhibited and his license will be revoked by Episcopal Bishop Paul Marshall.
Saying he was "shocked" by newspaper reports of Fr. Gregory Malia's activities, Bishop Marshall wrote VOL and said, "I am removing him from his appointment as my vicar at St. James in Dundaff, and will be inhibiting him from the exercise of priestly ministry. I can assure the diocese that neither the News reporters nor our internal figures suggest that any church funds were misappropriated –– St. James is a summer chapel open approximately ten Sundays a year."
Malia was formerly a deacon and priest at Trinity Episcopal Church in West Pittston when Fr. John Major was rector of Trinity. Malia left under a cloud. Fr. Major is now rector at Prince of Peace of Dallas, PA. Major did not return calls.
According to another source Malia may not have fulfilled all of the normal requirements of his Clinical Pastoral Education required by the diocese for ordination, using his hemophilia as an excuse. Marshall described Malia as very hard to catch up with.
"Part of the surprise of all this is that he has a very conservative view of the Bible, is opposed to all expressions of homosexuality (let alone ordination), and doesn't believe in the ordination of women. He has been known to speak in tongues. He has pretty much stayed away from diocesan events since (Gene) Robinson's (consecration). While I have always known him to be wealthy, he has always seemed to be the wealthy conservative. He has been generous to the churches he has served. The behavior described in the News takes me completely by surprise."
According to the Daily News, Malia frequented the Pink Elephant and other clubs in New York where he spent thousands on top-shelf liquors, doling out five-figure tips like silver dollars. "I work hard. I make good money. How I spend it - that is my business," the Rev. Gregory Malia, 43, told the Daily News. "I haven't done anything inappropriate."
But VOL has learned that Malia has a checkered past in the Diocese of Bethlehem. He was only ordained a vicar in 2002. According to Bishop Marshall, newspaper reports saying he was a priest at St. James in Carbondale were inaccurate. He was vicar at a summer parish in Dundaff that opens for about 10 Sundays a year, Marshall told VOL. "Malia's health has made it possible for him to attend only about 50 to 60% of services. The parish has a budget of about $16,000 for those weeks and doesn't have running water, heat, or inside plumbing--it's just a summer chapel."
Malia is a pharmacist who owns a specialty pharmacy dedicated to blood disorders. He is a hemophiliac. But according to the PA State Board of Pharmacy there is no Gregory Malia listed as a registered pharmacist in the state of Pennsylvania. He is permitted to own a pharmacy but he cannot manage it or dispense medications, said a board spokesman.
Malia, who has an unlisted phone number could not be reached for comment though he is listed as living in Pittston with the job title of Chief Executive Officer of something called New Life Home Care. Bishop Marshall said Malia did not return his calls. "Fr. Malia has not been an active participant in the life of the diocese.
Earlier today, he did not return a telephone call from my office; nor has he responded to an email note." Malia has a history of litigation.
In October 2007 Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania filed a $3.6 million lawsuit against New Life Home Healthcare of Pittston described as a "specialty pharmacy", alleging officials improperly billed the insurance company for medications provided to three of the pharmacy's employees.
The lawsuit, filed in Luzerne County Court, alleges New Life submitted claims for prescriptions for its president, Gregory Malia, and employees Dawn Litchey and Roger Deaton, despite knowing other insurance programs were responsible for the payments.
P.G. Ferrara, an attorney for New Life, vehemently denied the allegations and accused Blue Cross of filing the suit as part of a campaign to force New Life, which competes with a Blue Cross subsidiary that offers a similar service, out of business. Malia counter-sued.
As well as being sued by Blue Cross he has also been involved in legal disputes with a company called Express Scripts that makes the use of prescription drugs affordable for consumers through thousands of employers, government, union and health plans.
Another pharmacist in the area was approached by Malia to facilitate his business but declined after reading and reviewing his business procedures.
Bishop Marshall said he read the Daily News article "with deep distress" knowing its contents will trouble many parishioners. "The allegations made in the article, if true, constitute a serious violation of ordination vows to be "a wholesome example" to a priest's people.
If true, they may also violate other canonical provisions and certainly portray an unacceptable idea of Christian stewardship. The conservative group he has gathered around himself will be traumatized, and I will ask two priests in the locale to minister to them."
Marshall said Daily News reporters did not contact him or his communications representative prior to publishing this article, "and have not done so since then, although my home and office telephones are not unlisted."
Marshall said The Episcopal Church provides due process when such issues arise, "and no summary judgment can be made by me unilaterally."
The bishop said he had assigned the Diocese's Standing Committee to investigate Fr. Malia's activities.
END
Monday, December 29, 2008
Atheist Outwits, Out theologizes Episcopal Presiding Bishop
Commentary
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/28/2008
It took an atheist to finally outwit and tell the truth about what development work works best in Africa. It isn't the Millennium Development Goals, (MDGs) that are so much heralded and ballyhooed by Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.
The "gospel" of The Episcopal Church these days is MDGs. It is no longer the Great Commission. MDG's are mentioned in nearly every address given by Mrs. Jefferts Schori, whether it is to lowly and slowly dying Episcopal diocesan conventions, upbeat and hopeful parishes or to press clubs and reporters with twitchy iPods and laptops.
Now she has been exposed, not by an orthodox Episcopal/Anglican blogger (like VOL), but by one of Britain's leading atheists, one Matthew Parris.
After a recent trip through Africa, Parris wrote the unthinkable in an article in the "London Times". He said that missionaries, not aid money, are what Africa needs. "Now a confirmed atheist, I've become convinced of the enormous contribution that Christian evangelism makes in Africa: sharply distinct from the work of secular NGOs, government projects and international aid efforts. These alone will not do. Education and training alone will not do. In Africa, Christianity changes people's hearts. It brings a spiritual transformation. The rebirth is real. The change is good."
Ohmygosh.
"I used to avoid this truth by applauding - as you can - the practical work of mission churches in Africa. It's a pity, I would say, that salvation is part of the package, but Christians black and white, working in Africa, do heal the sick, do teach people to read and write; and only the severest kind of secularist could see a mission hospital or school and say the world would be better without it. I would allow that if faith was needed to motivate missionaries to help, then, fine: but what counted was the help, not the faith. But this doesn't fit the facts. Faith does more than support the missionary; it is also transferred to his flock. This is the effect that matters so immensely, and which I cannot help observing."
As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God, he wrote. Exit MDG's. Enter faithful, hardworking missionaries and nationals who heal the sick, bring clean water, teach people to read and write AND who bring the soul-saving message of Jesus that Mrs. Jefferts Schori wouldn't know if she fell over her own miter on a curb on 5th Avenue.
MDG's are the mandate of The United Nations, good goals to work collectively to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015. Then The Episcopal Church, which had run out of new and original ideas, or even old ones, decided that MDG's would be their pitch. I know this is true because, following his retirement, Canon John Peterson, formerly the secretary general of the Anglican Consultative Council, got a plum job at Washington National Cathedral in exchange for his sins, echoed this by saying how disappointed he was that the UN came up with the idea of MDGs first, instead of the church.
Collective answers, like collective sins (racism et al) look for generic confessions and generic repentance that fail to touch the human heart. Calling TEC to repent of centuries' old racism, while ignoring the present wholesale theological and ecclesiastical slaughter of the church's orthodox faithful, is hypocrisy off the charts.
Episcopal leaders like Washington Bishop John Chane have publicly excoriated African Anglican Archbishops like Peter Akinola and Henry Luke Orombi for failing to speak up on pressing social injustice in their respective countries while focusing on TEC's homogenital bishop and other sexually wayward priests. It's all lies. VOL has documented the social outrage of these Primates as they speak truth to power in their respective countries, but now along comes an atheist and blows away "secular" dogoodism without "spiritual transformation."
In 2000 words, he rips apart the whole Episcopal edifice and façade that social amelioration and MDGs, without real and living faith, is doing God's work, when he, an atheist, journeys across Africa and sees for himself the exact opposite.
Parris' first-hand account, "We had friends who were missionaries, and as a child I stayed often with them; I also stayed, alone with my little brother, in a traditional rural African village. In the city we had working for us Africans who had converted and were strong believers. The Christians were always different. Far from having cowed or confined its converts, their faith appeared to have liberated and relaxed them. There was a liveliness, a curiosity, an engagement with the world - a directness in their dealings with others - that seemed to be missing in traditional African life. They stood tall."
Now these Christians Parris is talking about are evangelical Christians, the sort of Christians the Episcopal Church despises. There are 25 million of them (Anglican) in Nigeria and 9.2 million Evangelical Anglicans in Uganda. They all believe in being washed in the blood of the Lamb, being born again, being regenerate, being made whole, being justified and sanctified, washed clean of their sins, biblical notions that bishops like Jack Spong, Orris Walker, Tom Shaw, John Chane, Charles E. Bennison, Jon Bruno and Jefferts Schori (to name but a few) mock and deride.
Parris wrote about a time he was in Malawi. "It was the same. I met no missionaries. You do not encounter missionaries in the lobbies of expensive hotels discussing development strategy documents, as you do with the big NGOs. But instead I noticed that a handful of the most impressive African members of the Pump Aid team (largely from Zimbabwe) were, privately, strong Christians. "Privately" because the charity is entirely secular and I never heard any of its team so much as mention religion while working in the villages. But I picked up the Christian references in our conversations. One, I saw, was studying a devotional textbook in the car. One, on Sunday, went off to church at dawn for a two-hour service. It would suit me to believe that their honesty, diligence and optimism in their work was unconnected with personal faith. Their work was secular, but surely affected by what they were. What they were was, in turn, influenced by a conception of man's place in the Universe that Christianity had taught."
In Mrs. Jefferts Schori's universe there is no transcendent faith, it is ALL about MDGs and making the world right for God when God never gave any such command. "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel, making disciples..." will never be found on the lips of the Presiding Bishop. It violates her notion that she (and The Episcopal Church) can save the world for God through MDGs.
The atheist Parris had it right, dead right. He concluded, "Those who want Africa to walk tall amid 21st-century global competition must not kid themselves that providing the material means or even the knowhow that accompanies what we call development will make the change. A whole belief system must first be supplanted. And I'm afraid it has to be supplanted by another. Removing Christian evangelism from the African equation may leave the continent at the mercy of a malign fusion of Nike, the witch doctor, the mobile phone and the machete."
He could have added that the MDG agenda of Mrs. Jefferets Schori and the ruinous pansexual agenda of The Episcopal Church has exposed African Christians to murderous Muslim hordes in the name of TEC's idolatrous behavior.
END
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/28/2008
It took an atheist to finally outwit and tell the truth about what development work works best in Africa. It isn't the Millennium Development Goals, (MDGs) that are so much heralded and ballyhooed by Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.
The "gospel" of The Episcopal Church these days is MDGs. It is no longer the Great Commission. MDG's are mentioned in nearly every address given by Mrs. Jefferts Schori, whether it is to lowly and slowly dying Episcopal diocesan conventions, upbeat and hopeful parishes or to press clubs and reporters with twitchy iPods and laptops.
Now she has been exposed, not by an orthodox Episcopal/Anglican blogger (like VOL), but by one of Britain's leading atheists, one Matthew Parris.
After a recent trip through Africa, Parris wrote the unthinkable in an article in the "London Times". He said that missionaries, not aid money, are what Africa needs. "Now a confirmed atheist, I've become convinced of the enormous contribution that Christian evangelism makes in Africa: sharply distinct from the work of secular NGOs, government projects and international aid efforts. These alone will not do. Education and training alone will not do. In Africa, Christianity changes people's hearts. It brings a spiritual transformation. The rebirth is real. The change is good."
Ohmygosh.
"I used to avoid this truth by applauding - as you can - the practical work of mission churches in Africa. It's a pity, I would say, that salvation is part of the package, but Christians black and white, working in Africa, do heal the sick, do teach people to read and write; and only the severest kind of secularist could see a mission hospital or school and say the world would be better without it. I would allow that if faith was needed to motivate missionaries to help, then, fine: but what counted was the help, not the faith. But this doesn't fit the facts. Faith does more than support the missionary; it is also transferred to his flock. This is the effect that matters so immensely, and which I cannot help observing."
As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God, he wrote. Exit MDG's. Enter faithful, hardworking missionaries and nationals who heal the sick, bring clean water, teach people to read and write AND who bring the soul-saving message of Jesus that Mrs. Jefferts Schori wouldn't know if she fell over her own miter on a curb on 5th Avenue.
MDG's are the mandate of The United Nations, good goals to work collectively to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015. Then The Episcopal Church, which had run out of new and original ideas, or even old ones, decided that MDG's would be their pitch. I know this is true because, following his retirement, Canon John Peterson, formerly the secretary general of the Anglican Consultative Council, got a plum job at Washington National Cathedral in exchange for his sins, echoed this by saying how disappointed he was that the UN came up with the idea of MDGs first, instead of the church.
Collective answers, like collective sins (racism et al) look for generic confessions and generic repentance that fail to touch the human heart. Calling TEC to repent of centuries' old racism, while ignoring the present wholesale theological and ecclesiastical slaughter of the church's orthodox faithful, is hypocrisy off the charts.
Episcopal leaders like Washington Bishop John Chane have publicly excoriated African Anglican Archbishops like Peter Akinola and Henry Luke Orombi for failing to speak up on pressing social injustice in their respective countries while focusing on TEC's homogenital bishop and other sexually wayward priests. It's all lies. VOL has documented the social outrage of these Primates as they speak truth to power in their respective countries, but now along comes an atheist and blows away "secular" dogoodism without "spiritual transformation."
In 2000 words, he rips apart the whole Episcopal edifice and façade that social amelioration and MDGs, without real and living faith, is doing God's work, when he, an atheist, journeys across Africa and sees for himself the exact opposite.
Parris' first-hand account, "We had friends who were missionaries, and as a child I stayed often with them; I also stayed, alone with my little brother, in a traditional rural African village. In the city we had working for us Africans who had converted and were strong believers. The Christians were always different. Far from having cowed or confined its converts, their faith appeared to have liberated and relaxed them. There was a liveliness, a curiosity, an engagement with the world - a directness in their dealings with others - that seemed to be missing in traditional African life. They stood tall."
Now these Christians Parris is talking about are evangelical Christians, the sort of Christians the Episcopal Church despises. There are 25 million of them (Anglican) in Nigeria and 9.2 million Evangelical Anglicans in Uganda. They all believe in being washed in the blood of the Lamb, being born again, being regenerate, being made whole, being justified and sanctified, washed clean of their sins, biblical notions that bishops like Jack Spong, Orris Walker, Tom Shaw, John Chane, Charles E. Bennison, Jon Bruno and Jefferts Schori (to name but a few) mock and deride.
Parris wrote about a time he was in Malawi. "It was the same. I met no missionaries. You do not encounter missionaries in the lobbies of expensive hotels discussing development strategy documents, as you do with the big NGOs. But instead I noticed that a handful of the most impressive African members of the Pump Aid team (largely from Zimbabwe) were, privately, strong Christians. "Privately" because the charity is entirely secular and I never heard any of its team so much as mention religion while working in the villages. But I picked up the Christian references in our conversations. One, I saw, was studying a devotional textbook in the car. One, on Sunday, went off to church at dawn for a two-hour service. It would suit me to believe that their honesty, diligence and optimism in their work was unconnected with personal faith. Their work was secular, but surely affected by what they were. What they were was, in turn, influenced by a conception of man's place in the Universe that Christianity had taught."
In Mrs. Jefferts Schori's universe there is no transcendent faith, it is ALL about MDGs and making the world right for God when God never gave any such command. "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel, making disciples..." will never be found on the lips of the Presiding Bishop. It violates her notion that she (and The Episcopal Church) can save the world for God through MDGs.
The atheist Parris had it right, dead right. He concluded, "Those who want Africa to walk tall amid 21st-century global competition must not kid themselves that providing the material means or even the knowhow that accompanies what we call development will make the change. A whole belief system must first be supplanted. And I'm afraid it has to be supplanted by another. Removing Christian evangelism from the African equation may leave the continent at the mercy of a malign fusion of Nike, the witch doctor, the mobile phone and the machete."
He could have added that the MDG agenda of Mrs. Jefferets Schori and the ruinous pansexual agenda of The Episcopal Church has exposed African Christians to murderous Muslim hordes in the name of TEC's idolatrous behavior.
END
Sunday, December 28, 2008
A New Low in ECUSA's Tactics in San Joaquin
From The Anglican Curmudgeon:
Friday, December 26, 2008
In an earlier post, I asked the rhetorical question: "How Low Can the Sun Sink on the Episcopal Church?" The answer is that after having already sunk, the sun can sink on it apparently lower still---especially if one is talking about the Church's legal tactics.
I have covered the Church's previous, questionable tactics in its San Joaquin lawsuit in a series of posts which you can find grouped under that heading on the Guide to This Site page. Although the case is technically "at issue", meaning that Bishop Schofield and the diocesan property entities which he heads have answered the second amended complaint filed by ECUSA and Bishop Lamb, and by their so-called "Diocese of San Joaquin", the plaintiffs apparently do not plan to let matters rest there. For they---the fifteen percent or so who stayed with ECUSA, that is---are not content with laying claim to all of the current Anglican Diocese's property and funds. (But of course, the law always agrees that 15% of a former group are entitled to 100% of the group's property---don't you realize that it is the Episcopal Church that we are talking about?) Now they want to go after funds which the original and true Diocese of San Joaquin (the one that existed before the vote on December 8, 2007 to leave ECUSA) paid out to its attorneys in anticipation of the lawsuit that ECUSA would bring.
Remember---ECUSA first managed to push Merrill Lynch, who is the brokerage house that manages many of the accounts maintained by Bishop Schofield and the departing diocese (as well as the funds of ECUSA itself), into placing a hold, or "freeze" on all those accounts so that no further money could be withdrawn from them without the Church's and Bishop Lamb's consent. They did this not by obtaining an attachment order and by putting up a bond, as a normal plaintiff would have to do. No, they accomplished the same result by the simple expedient of naming Merrill Lynch itself as a party defendant. Merrill Lynch panicked at being sued, and froze the accounts. It is now trying to pay them into the court to let it decide to whom they belong.
Before it can do so, however, the court has told both Merrill Lynch and ECUSA that since ECUSA requested, and Merrill Lynch cooperated in, the freezing of investment accounts held by churches like St. John's in Tulare, St. John's in Porterville, and St. James's Cathedral in Fresno---whom they did not name as defendants in the case---they would first have to come to some form of agreement with those entities about the use of their funds, or add them to the lawsuit. Thus far, some agreements have been reached, but some of the accounts still remain frozen.
It's pretty neat, don't you think, when you are a big enough bully that you can get a bank to freeze a person's account just by suing the bank as a defendant, while not bothering to sue the person who actually put the money into the account? ECUSA accomplishes this by citing its ubiquitous Dennis Canon. "Since all those parish moneys were actually held in trust for us as a result of the Dennis Canon," they say, "we get to have them frozen when they try to leave the Church."
(Well, St. John's Tulare remained in ECUSA, and did not vote to join the diocese in leaving for the Southern Cone. But that did not help it with its Merrill Lynch account: ECUSA and Bishop Lamb asked to have it frozen, and have demanded that they be allowed to approve expenditures as a condition of unfreezing the account. In just such a way is the Episcopal Church [USA] attempting to establish a legal precedent for stepping in as both a "trustor" and "trust beneficiary" to assert its supposed rights under the Dennis Canon.)
But wait---now comes the latest bullying tactic from ECUSA and its legal team. They demanded, as part of the lawsuit, that Merrill Lynch turn over to them copies of all of the diocesan account statements over the previous year. When it obliged, ECUSA found that Bishop Schofield's diocese had written a retainer check to its law firm, in anticipation of the lawsuit that TEC was expected to file over the impending withdrawal, in the amount of $500,000. (ECUSA has only recently admitted that it spent nearly $2 million on legal fees in the year 2008 alone---$1.5 million over budget. Its budget for 2009, including an unbelievable $600,000 just for legal fees, is in the red by $2.5 million---a feat made possible only because of accumulated prior surpluses.) And guess what: ECUSA---and Bishop Lamb, of course---now want those funds turned over to them, as well!
In other words, ECUSA and Bishop Lamb are trying to see that the money which the diocese budgeted for legal expenses cannot actually be spent for that purpose. And in doing so, the plaintiffs propose to amend their current complaint a third time to name the law firm of the Co-Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese as a new defendant. I have no doubt that this is a prelude to bringing a later motion to disqualify the firm from acting as counsel for the defendants in the lawsuit.
These are vile tactics, that should make any Episcopalian ashamed of their Church. To begin with, the Dennis Canon, which is of dubious validity to begin with, does not apply here. Why is that? Because the Canon applies only to property held "by or for the benefit of any parish," and not to property held by a diocese itself. (The diocese to which the parish belongs is a co-beneficiary of a Dennis Canon trust, and even the Episcopal Church (USA) has to recognize that an unincorporated diocese cannot hold property in trust for itself. Thus it would be nonsensical to try to apply the Dennis Canon to property in the name of a diocese.) So the Church has no grounds on which to claim that the money must be held in trust because of the Dennis Canon. Instead, it is simply waving its wand and contending that its "Constitution and Canons" generally require that all diocesan property be held in trust for, and be used only to benefit, the Episcopal Church (USA). (Could we expect any less of an argument from the Supreme Metropolitan and her Chancellor? No doubt they'll make it much more explicit at GC 2009.)
In the next place, the (Anglican) Diocese of San Joaquin has the right to defend itself when sued, and to use its own funds for that defense. The money belonged to the diocese when it was paid; the national church had no more right to the money then than it does now. Again, it would be a pretty easy route to victory if you could get the court to freeze your opponent's assets at the start of a lawsuit.
So what plausible claim can the plaintiffs make to have the funds frozen? Well, they claim that, as the group representing the one-sixth or so who chose to "Remain [Purely] Episcopal", they are the only lawful "successor" to the original Diocese of San Joaquin, and as such are entitled, as I reported, to one hundred percent of the former diocese's assets! How is that for an equitable (and Christian) division of property? Doesn't such evident charity, and true imitation of Christ's teachings in the Gospels ("But I say unto you . . . if a man takes your coat, let him have your shirt also") just make one proud to call oneself an Episcopalian? Why, the dear folk who choose to remain "Episcopal" are so proud of what they are doing that they have even agreed to give every penny of what they are contributing each Sunday just so those nice, kind (but rather expensive, at $500+ per hour) lawyers they have hired will be able to present their Christ-like position in the court, and so the dear, charitable national Church's money can be spent on "mission"!
(Note that the latter term is defined as "spending money to benefit anyone except for those who used to go to church with you." Those dastardly folk, you sue!)
O.K., end of sarcastic rant. (My apologies to all you well-meaning "Remain Episcopal" folk in San Joaquin, but sometimes, no matter how well-meaning you may be in your own hearts, you arouse this curmudgeon's ire.) Turning serious now, I submit that with their utterly outlandish claim to their opponents' legal funds, the San Joaquin plaintiffs have exposed the soft underbelly of their lawsuit to attack. For the facts on the ground are that:
1. "Remain Episcopal" has never organized properly as a full-fledged "diocese" pursuant to ECUSA's Constitution and Canons. It can only be recognized as such if its claims succeed in court, and under the California law of unincorporated associations, that is anything but a given.
2. The "Convention" at which it was organized was not given the notice required by the very Constitution which the "diocese" insists governs it, nor was the notice given by its Ecclesiastical Authority, as that Constitution again mandates. ("There wasn't any 'Ecclesiastical Authority' around to give it," they say. And just who, do you think, claimed the unprecedented and uncanonical authority to remove (sorry---depose and "derecognize") the Ecclesiastical Authority? Isn't that akin to shooting your mother and father, and then begging for the court's understanding on the ground that you are now an orphan?)
3. The "Convention" did not have a legal quorum of canonically resident clergy present to do business, and probably was lacking a Constitutional quorum of parishes as well.
4. As "approved" by the pseudo-Convention acting without authority and without proper notice or a quorum, Bishop Lamb is "no bishop of no see", and so is not a proper party to come into court; and
5. The earliest date at which it would be possible for the Episcopal Church (USA) to have a duly reconstituted "Diocese of San Joaquin" is July 2009, the date of the next General Convention, which, under ECUSA's claim to be "hierarchical", has to approve the creation of all new dioceses.
Consequently, the party which alleges it has the right to the funds is not a proper party at all to the lawsuit. It's as if, say, you and I used to belong to the Duffers' Golf Club, but after a lot of playing we thought we were better than the others, and wanted to admit some pro golfers who we felt were more like ourselves. The majority said "Nothing doing---we're duffers, and this is our Club," and so we quit (or the Club expelled us---same difference). So in revenge, we meet together and file papers making ourselves look like we are the "Duffers' Golf Club," and then we file suit in court to make the real Duffers' Golf Club turn over all its assets to us! Pretty good trick, if you can make it work. The trouble is that once the court started looking into just how we formed our "Duffers' Golf Club," it would see at once that we have no right to make such a claim. And until ECUSA goes through the procedures spelled out by its Constitution and Canons to create a legitimate new diocese in the region of San Joaquin, a court should not entertain a lawsuit brought by a party who is not what it claims to be.
I can safely predict from my armchair that ECUSA will never get its ducks in a row and cause a proper diocese of San Joaquin to come into being at GC 2009. To do so would be to admit the total error of its approach in San Joaquin thus far. No, GC2009 will come and go, and ECUSA will squander another opportunity to follow its own canons. The result will be that it will be at least 2012 before ECUSA is forced to put its house in order.
Things are about to get mighty interesting in San Joaquin---and not just for those involved in the lawsuit there. Pittsburgh, Ft. Worth and Quincy will all be watching. Will the California judge, as Judge Bellows as able to do in Virginia, see through ECUSA's "hierarchical" smokescreen? With their latest hardball tactic, the San Joaquin plaintiffs have certainly found a way to get his attention.
Posted by A. S. Haley at 10:06 AM
Friday, December 26, 2008
In an earlier post, I asked the rhetorical question: "How Low Can the Sun Sink on the Episcopal Church?" The answer is that after having already sunk, the sun can sink on it apparently lower still---especially if one is talking about the Church's legal tactics.
I have covered the Church's previous, questionable tactics in its San Joaquin lawsuit in a series of posts which you can find grouped under that heading on the Guide to This Site page. Although the case is technically "at issue", meaning that Bishop Schofield and the diocesan property entities which he heads have answered the second amended complaint filed by ECUSA and Bishop Lamb, and by their so-called "Diocese of San Joaquin", the plaintiffs apparently do not plan to let matters rest there. For they---the fifteen percent or so who stayed with ECUSA, that is---are not content with laying claim to all of the current Anglican Diocese's property and funds. (But of course, the law always agrees that 15% of a former group are entitled to 100% of the group's property---don't you realize that it is the Episcopal Church that we are talking about?) Now they want to go after funds which the original and true Diocese of San Joaquin (the one that existed before the vote on December 8, 2007 to leave ECUSA) paid out to its attorneys in anticipation of the lawsuit that ECUSA would bring.
Remember---ECUSA first managed to push Merrill Lynch, who is the brokerage house that manages many of the accounts maintained by Bishop Schofield and the departing diocese (as well as the funds of ECUSA itself), into placing a hold, or "freeze" on all those accounts so that no further money could be withdrawn from them without the Church's and Bishop Lamb's consent. They did this not by obtaining an attachment order and by putting up a bond, as a normal plaintiff would have to do. No, they accomplished the same result by the simple expedient of naming Merrill Lynch itself as a party defendant. Merrill Lynch panicked at being sued, and froze the accounts. It is now trying to pay them into the court to let it decide to whom they belong.
Before it can do so, however, the court has told both Merrill Lynch and ECUSA that since ECUSA requested, and Merrill Lynch cooperated in, the freezing of investment accounts held by churches like St. John's in Tulare, St. John's in Porterville, and St. James's Cathedral in Fresno---whom they did not name as defendants in the case---they would first have to come to some form of agreement with those entities about the use of their funds, or add them to the lawsuit. Thus far, some agreements have been reached, but some of the accounts still remain frozen.
It's pretty neat, don't you think, when you are a big enough bully that you can get a bank to freeze a person's account just by suing the bank as a defendant, while not bothering to sue the person who actually put the money into the account? ECUSA accomplishes this by citing its ubiquitous Dennis Canon. "Since all those parish moneys were actually held in trust for us as a result of the Dennis Canon," they say, "we get to have them frozen when they try to leave the Church."
(Well, St. John's Tulare remained in ECUSA, and did not vote to join the diocese in leaving for the Southern Cone. But that did not help it with its Merrill Lynch account: ECUSA and Bishop Lamb asked to have it frozen, and have demanded that they be allowed to approve expenditures as a condition of unfreezing the account. In just such a way is the Episcopal Church [USA] attempting to establish a legal precedent for stepping in as both a "trustor" and "trust beneficiary" to assert its supposed rights under the Dennis Canon.)
But wait---now comes the latest bullying tactic from ECUSA and its legal team. They demanded, as part of the lawsuit, that Merrill Lynch turn over to them copies of all of the diocesan account statements over the previous year. When it obliged, ECUSA found that Bishop Schofield's diocese had written a retainer check to its law firm, in anticipation of the lawsuit that TEC was expected to file over the impending withdrawal, in the amount of $500,000. (ECUSA has only recently admitted that it spent nearly $2 million on legal fees in the year 2008 alone---$1.5 million over budget. Its budget for 2009, including an unbelievable $600,000 just for legal fees, is in the red by $2.5 million---a feat made possible only because of accumulated prior surpluses.) And guess what: ECUSA---and Bishop Lamb, of course---now want those funds turned over to them, as well!
In other words, ECUSA and Bishop Lamb are trying to see that the money which the diocese budgeted for legal expenses cannot actually be spent for that purpose. And in doing so, the plaintiffs propose to amend their current complaint a third time to name the law firm of the Co-Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese as a new defendant. I have no doubt that this is a prelude to bringing a later motion to disqualify the firm from acting as counsel for the defendants in the lawsuit.
These are vile tactics, that should make any Episcopalian ashamed of their Church. To begin with, the Dennis Canon, which is of dubious validity to begin with, does not apply here. Why is that? Because the Canon applies only to property held "by or for the benefit of any parish," and not to property held by a diocese itself. (The diocese to which the parish belongs is a co-beneficiary of a Dennis Canon trust, and even the Episcopal Church (USA) has to recognize that an unincorporated diocese cannot hold property in trust for itself. Thus it would be nonsensical to try to apply the Dennis Canon to property in the name of a diocese.) So the Church has no grounds on which to claim that the money must be held in trust because of the Dennis Canon. Instead, it is simply waving its wand and contending that its "Constitution and Canons" generally require that all diocesan property be held in trust for, and be used only to benefit, the Episcopal Church (USA). (Could we expect any less of an argument from the Supreme Metropolitan and her Chancellor? No doubt they'll make it much more explicit at GC 2009.)
In the next place, the (Anglican) Diocese of San Joaquin has the right to defend itself when sued, and to use its own funds for that defense. The money belonged to the diocese when it was paid; the national church had no more right to the money then than it does now. Again, it would be a pretty easy route to victory if you could get the court to freeze your opponent's assets at the start of a lawsuit.
So what plausible claim can the plaintiffs make to have the funds frozen? Well, they claim that, as the group representing the one-sixth or so who chose to "Remain [Purely] Episcopal", they are the only lawful "successor" to the original Diocese of San Joaquin, and as such are entitled, as I reported, to one hundred percent of the former diocese's assets! How is that for an equitable (and Christian) division of property? Doesn't such evident charity, and true imitation of Christ's teachings in the Gospels ("But I say unto you . . . if a man takes your coat, let him have your shirt also") just make one proud to call oneself an Episcopalian? Why, the dear folk who choose to remain "Episcopal" are so proud of what they are doing that they have even agreed to give every penny of what they are contributing each Sunday just so those nice, kind (but rather expensive, at $500+ per hour) lawyers they have hired will be able to present their Christ-like position in the court, and so the dear, charitable national Church's money can be spent on "mission"!
(Note that the latter term is defined as "spending money to benefit anyone except for those who used to go to church with you." Those dastardly folk, you sue!)
O.K., end of sarcastic rant. (My apologies to all you well-meaning "Remain Episcopal" folk in San Joaquin, but sometimes, no matter how well-meaning you may be in your own hearts, you arouse this curmudgeon's ire.) Turning serious now, I submit that with their utterly outlandish claim to their opponents' legal funds, the San Joaquin plaintiffs have exposed the soft underbelly of their lawsuit to attack. For the facts on the ground are that:
1. "Remain Episcopal" has never organized properly as a full-fledged "diocese" pursuant to ECUSA's Constitution and Canons. It can only be recognized as such if its claims succeed in court, and under the California law of unincorporated associations, that is anything but a given.
2. The "Convention" at which it was organized was not given the notice required by the very Constitution which the "diocese" insists governs it, nor was the notice given by its Ecclesiastical Authority, as that Constitution again mandates. ("There wasn't any 'Ecclesiastical Authority' around to give it," they say. And just who, do you think, claimed the unprecedented and uncanonical authority to remove (sorry---depose and "derecognize") the Ecclesiastical Authority? Isn't that akin to shooting your mother and father, and then begging for the court's understanding on the ground that you are now an orphan?)
3. The "Convention" did not have a legal quorum of canonically resident clergy present to do business, and probably was lacking a Constitutional quorum of parishes as well.
4. As "approved" by the pseudo-Convention acting without authority and without proper notice or a quorum, Bishop Lamb is "no bishop of no see", and so is not a proper party to come into court; and
5. The earliest date at which it would be possible for the Episcopal Church (USA) to have a duly reconstituted "Diocese of San Joaquin" is July 2009, the date of the next General Convention, which, under ECUSA's claim to be "hierarchical", has to approve the creation of all new dioceses.
Consequently, the party which alleges it has the right to the funds is not a proper party at all to the lawsuit. It's as if, say, you and I used to belong to the Duffers' Golf Club, but after a lot of playing we thought we were better than the others, and wanted to admit some pro golfers who we felt were more like ourselves. The majority said "Nothing doing---we're duffers, and this is our Club," and so we quit (or the Club expelled us---same difference). So in revenge, we meet together and file papers making ourselves look like we are the "Duffers' Golf Club," and then we file suit in court to make the real Duffers' Golf Club turn over all its assets to us! Pretty good trick, if you can make it work. The trouble is that once the court started looking into just how we formed our "Duffers' Golf Club," it would see at once that we have no right to make such a claim. And until ECUSA goes through the procedures spelled out by its Constitution and Canons to create a legitimate new diocese in the region of San Joaquin, a court should not entertain a lawsuit brought by a party who is not what it claims to be.
I can safely predict from my armchair that ECUSA will never get its ducks in a row and cause a proper diocese of San Joaquin to come into being at GC 2009. To do so would be to admit the total error of its approach in San Joaquin thus far. No, GC2009 will come and go, and ECUSA will squander another opportunity to follow its own canons. The result will be that it will be at least 2012 before ECUSA is forced to put its house in order.
Things are about to get mighty interesting in San Joaquin---and not just for those involved in the lawsuit there. Pittsburgh, Ft. Worth and Quincy will all be watching. Will the California judge, as Judge Bellows as able to do in Virginia, see through ECUSA's "hierarchical" smokescreen? With their latest hardball tactic, the San Joaquin plaintiffs have certainly found a way to get his attention.
Posted by A. S. Haley at 10:06 AM
Saturday, December 27, 2008
COLORADO SPRINGS: Grace Episcopal leader steps down as trial approaches
The conservative "faction" mentioned in the article is the vast majority of parishioners. ed.
Via VirtueOnline:
by Mark Barna
THE GAZETTE
http://www.gazette.com/articles/grace_45375___article.html/leader_strong.html
December 26, 2008
If ever a church needed a strong leader, it was Grace & St. Stephen's Episcopal Church.
The congregation had been exiled from its home in the majestic stone structure on North Tejon Street, after a conservative faction that broke away from the Episcopal Diocese of Colorado remained in the building.
On Oct. 5, 2007, the diocese tapped the Rev. Michael O'Donnell to be priest in charge of a church that had no permanent home. His Episcopalian flock found a temporary place to hold services, first at Shove Chapel on the Colorado College campus, and then at First Christian Church downtown. Everything seemed to be going fine, and then, without warning, O'Donnell resigned in October.
There's nothing sinister going on. O'Donnell told me he wants to try something else, though he's not sure what that might be.
But he also said he wanted to leave before the start of the Feb. 10 trial over who owns the $7 million North Tejon Street church property: the Episcopal Church, or the breakaway group led by the Rev. Donald Armstrong, which then affiliated with the conservative Convocation of Anglicans in North America.
"It's painful to see the church you love divided," said O'Donnell, 52, who had been an associate rector under Armstrong. "I felt rather than be in the middle of a court case, I would leave because I have done what I needed to bring them to a place of stability and safety."
The diocese gave O'Donnell a generous severance package, so he can afford to take his time figuring out his next move. A New York Episcopal diocese is interested in his taking over a parish, and he's also considering writing his eighth book, said O'Donnell, who still lives in Colorado Springs.
Although he's gone, his impact on the local Episcopal congregation lives on: Clelia deMoraes, spokeswoman for Grace Episcopal, said O'Donnell was the right leader at the right time. "His greatest accomplishment was keeping us together," she said.
The Rev. Martin Pearsall, who led St. Francis Episcopal in Colorado Springs before it closed a few years ago, came out of retirement to fill O'Donnell's vacancy until the area bishop makes an appointment. "Michael had a lot of gifts, and he did a wonderful job holding this congregation together during very difficult circumstances," Pearsall said.
A social conservative, O'Donnell learned a lot leading a predominantly liberal Episcopal parish.
"It's easy to love people who are like you, but not so easy to love those who are against what you hold dear," O'Donnell said. "That would have derailed me before in a relationship. But I learned that different views are actually a good thing."
END
Via VirtueOnline:
by Mark Barna
THE GAZETTE
http://www.gazette.com/articles/grace_45375___article.html/leader_strong.html
December 26, 2008
If ever a church needed a strong leader, it was Grace & St. Stephen's Episcopal Church.
The congregation had been exiled from its home in the majestic stone structure on North Tejon Street, after a conservative faction that broke away from the Episcopal Diocese of Colorado remained in the building.
On Oct. 5, 2007, the diocese tapped the Rev. Michael O'Donnell to be priest in charge of a church that had no permanent home. His Episcopalian flock found a temporary place to hold services, first at Shove Chapel on the Colorado College campus, and then at First Christian Church downtown. Everything seemed to be going fine, and then, without warning, O'Donnell resigned in October.
There's nothing sinister going on. O'Donnell told me he wants to try something else, though he's not sure what that might be.
But he also said he wanted to leave before the start of the Feb. 10 trial over who owns the $7 million North Tejon Street church property: the Episcopal Church, or the breakaway group led by the Rev. Donald Armstrong, which then affiliated with the conservative Convocation of Anglicans in North America.
"It's painful to see the church you love divided," said O'Donnell, 52, who had been an associate rector under Armstrong. "I felt rather than be in the middle of a court case, I would leave because I have done what I needed to bring them to a place of stability and safety."
The diocese gave O'Donnell a generous severance package, so he can afford to take his time figuring out his next move. A New York Episcopal diocese is interested in his taking over a parish, and he's also considering writing his eighth book, said O'Donnell, who still lives in Colorado Springs.
Although he's gone, his impact on the local Episcopal congregation lives on: Clelia deMoraes, spokeswoman for Grace Episcopal, said O'Donnell was the right leader at the right time. "His greatest accomplishment was keeping us together," she said.
The Rev. Martin Pearsall, who led St. Francis Episcopal in Colorado Springs before it closed a few years ago, came out of retirement to fill O'Donnell's vacancy until the area bishop makes an appointment. "Michael had a lot of gifts, and he did a wonderful job holding this congregation together during very difficult circumstances," Pearsall said.
A social conservative, O'Donnell learned a lot leading a predominantly liberal Episcopal parish.
"It's easy to love people who are like you, but not so easy to love those who are against what you hold dear," O'Donnell said. "That would have derailed me before in a relationship. But I learned that different views are actually a good thing."
END
Episcopal Churches across US Feel Pinch of Recession as Pocketbooks Close
Loss of Income and Endowments Loom in Cathedrals, Parishes
Angry Parishioners say they don't want their money going to Diocese and National Church
News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/26/2008
It was Christmas Day and The Very Reverend Samuel G. Candler, Dean of the Cathedral in Atlanta, sent out an urgent news appeal. In bold letters he cried: ST. PHILIPS CATHDERAL IN THE RED.
"I learned today what is required to balance our budget for 2008. The Cathedral of St. Philip needs $949,000 by December 31 in order to meet this year's expenses. There are two ways you can help: If you have not paid your 2008 pledge, please do so by December 31. Secondly, if you can make a special Christmas gift-an additional gift-please do so by the end of the year, as well. We really need it. And the world needs the Cathedral of St. Philip."
Does it? There was a time when the cathedral was in the hands of orthodox believers. The Very Rev. David B. Collins was the dean then and the cathedral throve. No longer. Candler's pro-gay liberal theology has reduced the cathedral in size and prominence. The cathedral is a pale reflection of its former self.
This cathedral is not the only Episcopal institution in trouble. "A deeper and prolonged financial crisis will likely result in a survival-of-the-fittest scenario among local and national faith organizations, which, in turn, will reshape the religious ethos for years to come," said Robert Parhamis, Executive Director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.
A recent study published by The Barna Group found that many Americans have reduced their giving to churches and other non-profit organizations, which could result in donations being billions of dollars less than expected before economic problems erupted.
This is certainly the case with The Episcopal Church.
A Letter from the rector of St. Bartholomew's Episcopal Church in New York City, a landmark social church where the movie "Arthur" was shot, is facing a short fall of $500,000, according to its rector, The Rev. William McD. Tully. In a "state of the church" report on St. Bart's, he issued a "fair warning letter" to the church saying that St. Bart's is being hammered by the national economic crisis.
"We knew it wouldn't be easy in 2008. We downsized the budget and the fundraising goal as we entered the year. We left two clergy positions vacant and squeezed lots of other necessities out of the plan. And as the year has gone on, our concern has deepened. We're facing a deficit that might be as large as $500,000 on a $6.5 million operating budget. Will you do what you can to keep the hope of St. Bart's alive? As the year has gone on, our concern has deepened."
The National Cathedral in Washington came in for terrifying criticism over recent layoffs. One former employee blasted the cathedral's Dean, The Very Rev. Samuel T. Lloyd, saying, "you have done enough (damage), step down.
"Two layoffs in six months, 70 plus employees, their husbands, wives, children, all forced to change their lives amidst angst, shame, worry, and sleeplessness, because of a Dean and Cathedral Chapter that have chosen the wrong course of action over years, not months. Dean Lloyd and Chapter have doubled $enior $taff over the past three years, the result of which is revenues not meeting expenses.
"As I talk to former employees, the great sadness is that such a wonderful place with terrific spirit has been run aground, leaving the poor former employees and current employees to swim on their own to shore while the executive team steps calmly into their lifeboat and is carried away. The Dean, and the Chair of the Cathedral Chapter must resign and new leadership be put into place."
"The centennial celebration ($1.7 million) was almost entirely paid for by "unrestricted contributions". It may not have been in the operating budget, but it was unrestricted, so they could have done anything they wanted with it. They chose to spend it, believing that it would lead to major gift cultivation. They were wrong. As with any organization, they should be held accountable," said a laid-off employee.
The Anglo-Catholic parish, Church of the Ascension in Sierra Madre, California, shows how reliant the whole church budget is on a few pledging units. When they leave, the only option left is to sell part of the property to get them through another few years, until there is nothing left to sell, said a VOL source.
The parish rector, the Rev. Canon Michael A. Bamberger, who has been there since 1985, wrote saying the church faces another budget deficit of massive proportions (approximately 15% to 20% of the budget). VOL's source stated, "Last year we were fortunate to have a year-end outpouring of generosity that offset the anticipated deficit. Now things have changed. The church has approximately 100 pledging units (105 last year, 98 at the beginning of this year, 94 now); the pledged amount is down. Unfortunately, an unbooked tax payment from 2007, a mis-allocated insurance cost, a decrease in pledges and plate offerings, and unexpected other expenses have increased the current deficit to about $22,000, a deficit which the rector projected would grow to about $45,000 by year's end." Difficult times call for difficult solutions, he said.
Here are a few possible solutions for Church of the Ascension: 1. Eliminate the music program and try to make up the remaining deficit through increased or additional pledges; 2. Sell the parking lot to a developer; 3. Sell the parking lot to Gooden School and lease it back for use on Sundays; 4. Sell the Parish House to a developer (or the Parish House and the parking lot); 5. Sell the classrooms to Gooden School and lease them back for use on Sundays; 6. Sell the playground to a developer (or co-develop it, erecting condominiums from which we could derive rental income); or 7. Any combination of the foregoing.
"I don't know that any of the foregoing is desirable, but something must be done as we are not living within our means," the source wrote.
THE Church of the Advent in Boston found itself with some people refusing to pledge because a portion funded the diocese. Wrote the rector, Fr. Allan B. Warren, "Because of this ambiguity in the larger groupings of which we are a part, some people have said to me or to members of a Stewardship Committee, "I won't make a pledge because I don't want any of my money going to the diocese or the national church."
The Church of the Advent has a sizable endowment. "The major part of our endowment came to us some years ago from a woman who was a doctor and a regular Sunday by Sunday communicant for decades. During my time here, we have received several remarkable legacies nearly a half million dollars from a man who was a janitor; a sizable sum from a woman who ran a dress shop. And quite recently, more than three quarters of a million dollars from a man who can only be described as odd." It is not enough, however.
Warren noted, that there is a clear split between what endowment income pays for in the budget and what is paid for by money received from the pledged stewardship commitment from members. Noting costs for heat, light, regular maintenance, cleaning, office expenses, insurance and expenses over which there is no control, Warren said they must be met and paid for simply to keep the church open and operating. "The endowment, therefore, keeps us here and keeps us open. Nothing more."
Putting his best face on why the church should support the diocese and national church, Warren admitted that each year the diocese does any number of things which he thinks are wonderful, and each year the diocese does any number of things which he thinks are stupid and wrong. "Each year the national Episcopal Church does things which I think are terrific and each year the Episcopal Church does things which I think are stupid and wrong."
Then he admitted, "Because of this ambiguity in the larger groupings of which we are a part, some people have said to me or to members of a Stewardship Committee, 'I won't make a pledge because I don't want any of my money going to the diocese or the national church.'" His appeal clearly failed to move people. They closed their wallets.
From St. Mary the Virgin in Times Square, NYC, comes this word of "retrenchment" from its rector, The Rev. Stephen Gerth. "The Board of Trustees reworked the operating budget for the remainder of 2008 and made decisions shaping the operating budget for 2009. The collapse in the United States equity markets in September and October cost Saint Mary's approximately $1.2 million dollars. This was money the trustees had set aside two years ago to fund deficits in the annual operating budget as we continued our steady growth to a balanced budget. The trustees have made substantial and difficult cuts in personnel and program to keep the parish on a prudent path. None of these cuts would have been made if the financial situation were not what it is."
As a result, the trustees eliminated the full-time position of administrative assistant, the half-time position of bookkeeper and the part-time finance office assistant. The music budget for 2009 was cut in half and the associate organist Robert McDermitt was let go.
The Rev. Ronald C. Crocker of St. George's Episcopal Church in Arlington, Virginia, since 1997, told his congregation recently that they will be facing a large deficit situation in 2009. To "solve" the problem of the deficit, the vestry offered a series of solutions, including, reducing their diocesan pledge to cover the shortfall, eliminating the associate rector position, and reducing the hours of other employees, and compensation as appropriate. They also talked about "trimming out" $35,000 of maintenance from the buildings and grounds and taking the Food Pantry costs out of the budget. Other actions include eliminating the sexton position and hiring a cleaning service instead. None of these possibilities are ideal, or even palatable, he said. The church then said it would eliminate the associate rector of St. George's sometime in 2009, because it could not afford two full-time clergy positions. The priest, however, said he felt a moral obligation to maintain the parish's pledge of $55,000 to the diocese. "We are an Episcopal Church wrestling with our identity and cohesion right now."
It is ironic he would send money to finance lawsuits while laying off his associate rector.
Some "'on the ground'" examples of what the future holds come from Trinity Episcopal Church in Newtown, CT, which held a forum on their parish's financial situation. They have found themselves in a place where deep cuts in the budget will be necessary in 2009. With a $230,000 deficit and endowments dwindling due to the current financial atmosphere, the church has three options: deep cuts in ministry and staffing, additional income for 2009, or a combination of the two. St John's in Saginaw, Michigan, reported at its website that they have been taking over $100,000 from of their $1M endowment every year. They now realize this is unsustainable and have started to cut back. The 2009 budget shows only an $80,000 endowment draw down.
The chart of Christ Episcopal Church in Middle Haddam, CT, under the Rev. Mark E. Given shows something happened in 2003. (Guess). Five years later, it is going on life support. Working with the diocese, the parish and the vestry, after considering many options, concluded the following: "We do not plan to close Christ Church. We do not see merging with another parish as a workable option. We are actively exploring partnering with another parish in some form of shared ministry, and have begun preliminary discussions with the leadership of some other parishes. The church will transition from full-time ministry to a ministry that is sustainable with their current pledge income (and depleted endowment)."
At St Martin's Episcopal Church in Fairmont, Minnesota, The Rev. Dr. Winifred Mitchell asked her people bluntly, "Do you want to keep the parish alive and thriving no matter what the cost? Or do you think it is expendable-a church whose time is winding down?"
"What kind of effort am I willing to put in to keep it here for me and for the next generation of Episcopalians?" These questions are vital to our parish. Often, when congregations stop thriving and growing, they first cut programs, especially outreach and those that serve youth and young families. Next is cutting back on paid staff: first a part-time priest, then only occasional supply clergy and volunteer musicians. Usually the last to go is the building, which is by then in some disrepair-a shell left of the life of a once vibrant congregation."
"At St. Martin's, we need prayer and discernment about our future," she said. "We must come to terms with our tough budget situation. We are about to run out of time. We are spending the endowment principle to subsidize half our annual budget. Pledges and plate cover only half of our $124,000 annual expenses. With only about $100,000 left in the endowment, we have a little over a year to continue at the current rate. Then the parish will have to choose what not to pay: a priest's salary and benefits, an organist, or the cost of operating the building."
She then pled, "Can you donate one percent of your net worth to the church to help restore our endowment? "
At least one Episcopal Bishop recognize's that the church's "fragile security is under threat." Bishop Edward S. Little of Northern Indiana, in an address to his 110th Diocesan Convention, said he is convinced that the Episcopal Church's response to whole dioceses and parishes leaving TEC has been both misguided and costly. He said the legal fees, whose price tag already runs in the multiple millions of dollars, "will sow a harvest of bitterness and may well close the door to the reconciliation for which we all yearn."
Certainly bishops' salaries seem criminally high given the poor performance (massive attendance declines) they are experiencing. The highest paid TEC bishop is the Bishop of Southern Ohio who collects a cool $280,000. The lowest paid bishop draws $80,000. At the same time, only ONE diocese has grown out of 100 dioceses based on recent ASA figures.
Perhaps they should they follow the lead of Episcopal Bishops in 1934 when some took pay cuts themselves to share in the coming pain, rather than just cutting the mission staff, as reported in TIME magazine. Then Presiding Bishop James De Wolf Perry began the move for voluntary retrenchments by pruning his $15,000 salary 10%. He had a rich wife with an independent income. New York's small Bishop William Thomas Manning, who also had a rich wife, a fine Bishop's Palace, a salary of $15,000 and a $5,000 "discretionary fund," followed suit. In response to an emergency call for retrenchment from Bishop Perry, Massachusetts became the first diocese to act as a unit in salary cuts. Bishop Henry Knox Sherrill, who got $15,000 per year, joined with 300 Massachusetts clergymen in contributing $28,000 in the form of reduced salaries. Wealthy, 81-year-old Bishop William Lawrence emerged from retirement to lend sage counsel. The general clergy was spared salary adjustments.
"The layman doesn't realize that most of his money is being held this way. He gives to a budget and supposes that if reductions are necessary they will be made proportionately on all items, not on missions alone. ... In some cases the bishops have failed to send their share. What isn't held back by the priest is kept by the bishop. The deep shame of keeping the money lies in the fact that there is no one to protest, to the hurt of men and women who trust us out in the far corners of the world."
The truth is The Episcopal Church is in a particularly poor position to weather a major financial crisis. At the end of the day, it is people in the pews who will keep a church going and not endowments. The Episcopal denomination is particularly vulnerable, given its recent massive losses in attendance. It is presently losing nearly 1,000 members per week. The average age of an Episcopalian is in the mid sixties. The Episcopal Church, which reported an expected budget deficit of $2.5 million for its 2007-2009 budget, said that 2007 and 2008 surpluses could result in a balanced budget. The Episcopal Church endowment fund is reportedly down 30 percent.
The nation's financial crisis cuts across theological ranks, creating a patchwork of reports, most of which are troubling to terrible. Even those bodies that have increased their 2009 budgets have no guarantees that they will meet their paper pledges. Many depend upon a mix of church gifts and endowments.
Given the lag time between the receipt of gifts in churches and churches sending those gifts to partner organizations, the financial picture for denominational and religious non-profits may actually be much worse than what is currently being reported.
A deeper and prolonged financial crisis will likely result in a survival-of-the-fittest scenario among local and national faith organizations, which, in turn, will reshape the religious ethos for years to come, said Parham.
Chuck Warnock, a pastor and writer in Virginia, provided his assessment in a blog post entitled "Recession, the Domino Effect, and Churches." Using the metaphor of knocking over one domino and then watching other ones fall, Warnock reflected on the various indicators of economic problems and what churches and religious organizations should do in response.
Warnock wrote about 10 implications resulting from this crisis, including his belief that "some faith-based organizations will go broke or be downsized," but that the "organizations that survive will not be the largest or the most well-known." He also argued, that "theologies of ministry may get reimagined as choices are made between feeding people physically or feeding them spiritually" and that "new voices will emerge from the wreckage of old models."
A VOL reader reflecting on why people are leaving TEC and the concomitant loss in income said this, "I think the message here is that many of those leaving the TEC were faced with a simple choice. Stay, and watch their churches slowly die due to lack of funds as pledging units dried up and key church leaders left, or leave now and try to grow again. Leaving was a tough choice, having to start again in many cases with no building and no endowment, but in the end it was necessary for the longer term survival of these churches. The theology of TEC has moved into such opposition to traditional Christian beliefs, it was becoming impossible to keep many of their members while they remained under that umbrella. For those remaining, the TEC dioceses will have to start allowing these churches to disassociate themselves from the main TEC organization by diverting pledges and providing real alternative oversight if they want these congregations to exist in ten years time. But the history of TEC says they will view these parishes with horror, with their male only clergy, and would rather see them closed than let them continue in their traditions."
END
Angry Parishioners say they don't want their money going to Diocese and National Church
News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/26/2008
It was Christmas Day and The Very Reverend Samuel G. Candler, Dean of the Cathedral in Atlanta, sent out an urgent news appeal. In bold letters he cried: ST. PHILIPS CATHDERAL IN THE RED.
"I learned today what is required to balance our budget for 2008. The Cathedral of St. Philip needs $949,000 by December 31 in order to meet this year's expenses. There are two ways you can help: If you have not paid your 2008 pledge, please do so by December 31. Secondly, if you can make a special Christmas gift-an additional gift-please do so by the end of the year, as well. We really need it. And the world needs the Cathedral of St. Philip."
Does it? There was a time when the cathedral was in the hands of orthodox believers. The Very Rev. David B. Collins was the dean then and the cathedral throve. No longer. Candler's pro-gay liberal theology has reduced the cathedral in size and prominence. The cathedral is a pale reflection of its former self.
This cathedral is not the only Episcopal institution in trouble. "A deeper and prolonged financial crisis will likely result in a survival-of-the-fittest scenario among local and national faith organizations, which, in turn, will reshape the religious ethos for years to come," said Robert Parhamis, Executive Director of the Baptist Center for Ethics.
A recent study published by The Barna Group found that many Americans have reduced their giving to churches and other non-profit organizations, which could result in donations being billions of dollars less than expected before economic problems erupted.
This is certainly the case with The Episcopal Church.
A Letter from the rector of St. Bartholomew's Episcopal Church in New York City, a landmark social church where the movie "Arthur" was shot, is facing a short fall of $500,000, according to its rector, The Rev. William McD. Tully. In a "state of the church" report on St. Bart's, he issued a "fair warning letter" to the church saying that St. Bart's is being hammered by the national economic crisis.
"We knew it wouldn't be easy in 2008. We downsized the budget and the fundraising goal as we entered the year. We left two clergy positions vacant and squeezed lots of other necessities out of the plan. And as the year has gone on, our concern has deepened. We're facing a deficit that might be as large as $500,000 on a $6.5 million operating budget. Will you do what you can to keep the hope of St. Bart's alive? As the year has gone on, our concern has deepened."
The National Cathedral in Washington came in for terrifying criticism over recent layoffs. One former employee blasted the cathedral's Dean, The Very Rev. Samuel T. Lloyd, saying, "you have done enough (damage), step down.
"Two layoffs in six months, 70 plus employees, their husbands, wives, children, all forced to change their lives amidst angst, shame, worry, and sleeplessness, because of a Dean and Cathedral Chapter that have chosen the wrong course of action over years, not months. Dean Lloyd and Chapter have doubled $enior $taff over the past three years, the result of which is revenues not meeting expenses.
"As I talk to former employees, the great sadness is that such a wonderful place with terrific spirit has been run aground, leaving the poor former employees and current employees to swim on their own to shore while the executive team steps calmly into their lifeboat and is carried away. The Dean, and the Chair of the Cathedral Chapter must resign and new leadership be put into place."
"The centennial celebration ($1.7 million) was almost entirely paid for by "unrestricted contributions". It may not have been in the operating budget, but it was unrestricted, so they could have done anything they wanted with it. They chose to spend it, believing that it would lead to major gift cultivation. They were wrong. As with any organization, they should be held accountable," said a laid-off employee.
The Anglo-Catholic parish, Church of the Ascension in Sierra Madre, California, shows how reliant the whole church budget is on a few pledging units. When they leave, the only option left is to sell part of the property to get them through another few years, until there is nothing left to sell, said a VOL source.
The parish rector, the Rev. Canon Michael A. Bamberger, who has been there since 1985, wrote saying the church faces another budget deficit of massive proportions (approximately 15% to 20% of the budget). VOL's source stated, "Last year we were fortunate to have a year-end outpouring of generosity that offset the anticipated deficit. Now things have changed. The church has approximately 100 pledging units (105 last year, 98 at the beginning of this year, 94 now); the pledged amount is down. Unfortunately, an unbooked tax payment from 2007, a mis-allocated insurance cost, a decrease in pledges and plate offerings, and unexpected other expenses have increased the current deficit to about $22,000, a deficit which the rector projected would grow to about $45,000 by year's end." Difficult times call for difficult solutions, he said.
Here are a few possible solutions for Church of the Ascension: 1. Eliminate the music program and try to make up the remaining deficit through increased or additional pledges; 2. Sell the parking lot to a developer; 3. Sell the parking lot to Gooden School and lease it back for use on Sundays; 4. Sell the Parish House to a developer (or the Parish House and the parking lot); 5. Sell the classrooms to Gooden School and lease them back for use on Sundays; 6. Sell the playground to a developer (or co-develop it, erecting condominiums from which we could derive rental income); or 7. Any combination of the foregoing.
"I don't know that any of the foregoing is desirable, but something must be done as we are not living within our means," the source wrote.
THE Church of the Advent in Boston found itself with some people refusing to pledge because a portion funded the diocese. Wrote the rector, Fr. Allan B. Warren, "Because of this ambiguity in the larger groupings of which we are a part, some people have said to me or to members of a Stewardship Committee, "I won't make a pledge because I don't want any of my money going to the diocese or the national church."
The Church of the Advent has a sizable endowment. "The major part of our endowment came to us some years ago from a woman who was a doctor and a regular Sunday by Sunday communicant for decades. During my time here, we have received several remarkable legacies nearly a half million dollars from a man who was a janitor; a sizable sum from a woman who ran a dress shop. And quite recently, more than three quarters of a million dollars from a man who can only be described as odd." It is not enough, however.
Warren noted, that there is a clear split between what endowment income pays for in the budget and what is paid for by money received from the pledged stewardship commitment from members. Noting costs for heat, light, regular maintenance, cleaning, office expenses, insurance and expenses over which there is no control, Warren said they must be met and paid for simply to keep the church open and operating. "The endowment, therefore, keeps us here and keeps us open. Nothing more."
Putting his best face on why the church should support the diocese and national church, Warren admitted that each year the diocese does any number of things which he thinks are wonderful, and each year the diocese does any number of things which he thinks are stupid and wrong. "Each year the national Episcopal Church does things which I think are terrific and each year the Episcopal Church does things which I think are stupid and wrong."
Then he admitted, "Because of this ambiguity in the larger groupings of which we are a part, some people have said to me or to members of a Stewardship Committee, 'I won't make a pledge because I don't want any of my money going to the diocese or the national church.'" His appeal clearly failed to move people. They closed their wallets.
From St. Mary the Virgin in Times Square, NYC, comes this word of "retrenchment" from its rector, The Rev. Stephen Gerth. "The Board of Trustees reworked the operating budget for the remainder of 2008 and made decisions shaping the operating budget for 2009. The collapse in the United States equity markets in September and October cost Saint Mary's approximately $1.2 million dollars. This was money the trustees had set aside two years ago to fund deficits in the annual operating budget as we continued our steady growth to a balanced budget. The trustees have made substantial and difficult cuts in personnel and program to keep the parish on a prudent path. None of these cuts would have been made if the financial situation were not what it is."
As a result, the trustees eliminated the full-time position of administrative assistant, the half-time position of bookkeeper and the part-time finance office assistant. The music budget for 2009 was cut in half and the associate organist Robert McDermitt was let go.
The Rev. Ronald C. Crocker of St. George's Episcopal Church in Arlington, Virginia, since 1997, told his congregation recently that they will be facing a large deficit situation in 2009. To "solve" the problem of the deficit, the vestry offered a series of solutions, including, reducing their diocesan pledge to cover the shortfall, eliminating the associate rector position, and reducing the hours of other employees, and compensation as appropriate. They also talked about "trimming out" $35,000 of maintenance from the buildings and grounds and taking the Food Pantry costs out of the budget. Other actions include eliminating the sexton position and hiring a cleaning service instead. None of these possibilities are ideal, or even palatable, he said. The church then said it would eliminate the associate rector of St. George's sometime in 2009, because it could not afford two full-time clergy positions. The priest, however, said he felt a moral obligation to maintain the parish's pledge of $55,000 to the diocese. "We are an Episcopal Church wrestling with our identity and cohesion right now."
It is ironic he would send money to finance lawsuits while laying off his associate rector.
Some "'on the ground'" examples of what the future holds come from Trinity Episcopal Church in Newtown, CT, which held a forum on their parish's financial situation. They have found themselves in a place where deep cuts in the budget will be necessary in 2009. With a $230,000 deficit and endowments dwindling due to the current financial atmosphere, the church has three options: deep cuts in ministry and staffing, additional income for 2009, or a combination of the two. St John's in Saginaw, Michigan, reported at its website that they have been taking over $100,000 from of their $1M endowment every year. They now realize this is unsustainable and have started to cut back. The 2009 budget shows only an $80,000 endowment draw down.
The chart of Christ Episcopal Church in Middle Haddam, CT, under the Rev. Mark E. Given shows something happened in 2003. (Guess). Five years later, it is going on life support. Working with the diocese, the parish and the vestry, after considering many options, concluded the following: "We do not plan to close Christ Church. We do not see merging with another parish as a workable option. We are actively exploring partnering with another parish in some form of shared ministry, and have begun preliminary discussions with the leadership of some other parishes. The church will transition from full-time ministry to a ministry that is sustainable with their current pledge income (and depleted endowment)."
At St Martin's Episcopal Church in Fairmont, Minnesota, The Rev. Dr. Winifred Mitchell asked her people bluntly, "Do you want to keep the parish alive and thriving no matter what the cost? Or do you think it is expendable-a church whose time is winding down?"
"What kind of effort am I willing to put in to keep it here for me and for the next generation of Episcopalians?" These questions are vital to our parish. Often, when congregations stop thriving and growing, they first cut programs, especially outreach and those that serve youth and young families. Next is cutting back on paid staff: first a part-time priest, then only occasional supply clergy and volunteer musicians. Usually the last to go is the building, which is by then in some disrepair-a shell left of the life of a once vibrant congregation."
"At St. Martin's, we need prayer and discernment about our future," she said. "We must come to terms with our tough budget situation. We are about to run out of time. We are spending the endowment principle to subsidize half our annual budget. Pledges and plate cover only half of our $124,000 annual expenses. With only about $100,000 left in the endowment, we have a little over a year to continue at the current rate. Then the parish will have to choose what not to pay: a priest's salary and benefits, an organist, or the cost of operating the building."
She then pled, "Can you donate one percent of your net worth to the church to help restore our endowment? "
At least one Episcopal Bishop recognize's that the church's "fragile security is under threat." Bishop Edward S. Little of Northern Indiana, in an address to his 110th Diocesan Convention, said he is convinced that the Episcopal Church's response to whole dioceses and parishes leaving TEC has been both misguided and costly. He said the legal fees, whose price tag already runs in the multiple millions of dollars, "will sow a harvest of bitterness and may well close the door to the reconciliation for which we all yearn."
Certainly bishops' salaries seem criminally high given the poor performance (massive attendance declines) they are experiencing. The highest paid TEC bishop is the Bishop of Southern Ohio who collects a cool $280,000. The lowest paid bishop draws $80,000. At the same time, only ONE diocese has grown out of 100 dioceses based on recent ASA figures.
Perhaps they should they follow the lead of Episcopal Bishops in 1934 when some took pay cuts themselves to share in the coming pain, rather than just cutting the mission staff, as reported in TIME magazine. Then Presiding Bishop James De Wolf Perry began the move for voluntary retrenchments by pruning his $15,000 salary 10%. He had a rich wife with an independent income. New York's small Bishop William Thomas Manning, who also had a rich wife, a fine Bishop's Palace, a salary of $15,000 and a $5,000 "discretionary fund," followed suit. In response to an emergency call for retrenchment from Bishop Perry, Massachusetts became the first diocese to act as a unit in salary cuts. Bishop Henry Knox Sherrill, who got $15,000 per year, joined with 300 Massachusetts clergymen in contributing $28,000 in the form of reduced salaries. Wealthy, 81-year-old Bishop William Lawrence emerged from retirement to lend sage counsel. The general clergy was spared salary adjustments.
"The layman doesn't realize that most of his money is being held this way. He gives to a budget and supposes that if reductions are necessary they will be made proportionately on all items, not on missions alone. ... In some cases the bishops have failed to send their share. What isn't held back by the priest is kept by the bishop. The deep shame of keeping the money lies in the fact that there is no one to protest, to the hurt of men and women who trust us out in the far corners of the world."
The truth is The Episcopal Church is in a particularly poor position to weather a major financial crisis. At the end of the day, it is people in the pews who will keep a church going and not endowments. The Episcopal denomination is particularly vulnerable, given its recent massive losses in attendance. It is presently losing nearly 1,000 members per week. The average age of an Episcopalian is in the mid sixties. The Episcopal Church, which reported an expected budget deficit of $2.5 million for its 2007-2009 budget, said that 2007 and 2008 surpluses could result in a balanced budget. The Episcopal Church endowment fund is reportedly down 30 percent.
The nation's financial crisis cuts across theological ranks, creating a patchwork of reports, most of which are troubling to terrible. Even those bodies that have increased their 2009 budgets have no guarantees that they will meet their paper pledges. Many depend upon a mix of church gifts and endowments.
Given the lag time between the receipt of gifts in churches and churches sending those gifts to partner organizations, the financial picture for denominational and religious non-profits may actually be much worse than what is currently being reported.
A deeper and prolonged financial crisis will likely result in a survival-of-the-fittest scenario among local and national faith organizations, which, in turn, will reshape the religious ethos for years to come, said Parham.
Chuck Warnock, a pastor and writer in Virginia, provided his assessment in a blog post entitled "Recession, the Domino Effect, and Churches." Using the metaphor of knocking over one domino and then watching other ones fall, Warnock reflected on the various indicators of economic problems and what churches and religious organizations should do in response.
Warnock wrote about 10 implications resulting from this crisis, including his belief that "some faith-based organizations will go broke or be downsized," but that the "organizations that survive will not be the largest or the most well-known." He also argued, that "theologies of ministry may get reimagined as choices are made between feeding people physically or feeding them spiritually" and that "new voices will emerge from the wreckage of old models."
A VOL reader reflecting on why people are leaving TEC and the concomitant loss in income said this, "I think the message here is that many of those leaving the TEC were faced with a simple choice. Stay, and watch their churches slowly die due to lack of funds as pledging units dried up and key church leaders left, or leave now and try to grow again. Leaving was a tough choice, having to start again in many cases with no building and no endowment, but in the end it was necessary for the longer term survival of these churches. The theology of TEC has moved into such opposition to traditional Christian beliefs, it was becoming impossible to keep many of their members while they remained under that umbrella. For those remaining, the TEC dioceses will have to start allowing these churches to disassociate themselves from the main TEC organization by diverting pledges and providing real alternative oversight if they want these congregations to exist in ten years time. But the history of TEC says they will view these parishes with horror, with their male only clergy, and would rather see them closed than let them continue in their traditions."
END
Thursday, December 25, 2008
CANA Missionary Bishop Martyn Minns’ Christmas message
Good News of Great Joy for All People!
We need some good news. A worldwide financial collapse is happening before our eyes and in many of our neighborhoods. Armed conflicts around the globe seem to be never ending. Oppressive governments continue to retain power.
Religious strife is on the increase. Poverty and disease continue to take their unrelenting toll of the most vulnerable. In many ways the world is not much different from that night of nights when the shepherds watched their flocks in the fields around Bethlehem . They needed some good news too!
The word from the angel was clear and simple: I bring you good news of a great joy that will be for all the people! So . . . what on earth was this good news of great joy for all people?
First and foremost, the good news declared that the Creator of the universe had heard their cries and was about to intervene into their world and change the course of human history for good. This intervention had been long anticipated by the prophets but it was not to be a quick fix. The salvation of the world was now assured but it would take time - lots of it. God would bring healing and hope where there had been only brokenness and despair. God could have done all this by sheer force; but instead of following the pathway of power, God chose to work through one of the most vulnerable members of his creation - a newborn baby. It is a unique strategy that God continues to follow.
God also chose to make the good news very personal. Our salvation is not mechanical or automatic. It depends first on God’s grace and second on the response of each person to this amazing gift. And the great joy that the angel spoke about was the promise of this abundant life. We are no longer stuck in patterns of alienation and brokenness, but now we can begin to dream of a new world with new possibilities where freedom reigns and where the ravages of sin no longer hold us in their grip.
The world is still in need of this good news. God is still in the redemption business. During this Christmas season it is good to remember that God chose to bring the promise of healing and hope through one of the most vulnerable of institutions - the church! We have no armies to command or weapons to deploy. We are merely a people whose claim to fame is the one we follow - Jesus of Nazareth. But we know that through this solitary life the world was and is changed for good - one life at a time. And it is by His Spirit that we offer this promise of a new way of living until that day when heaven and nature will sing, “Joy to the world, The Lord is come!”. . . that's good news!
Your brother in Christ,
+Martyn
The Rt. Rev'd Martyn Minns
Missionary Bishop of CANA
There are two CANA congregations in Central NY, St. Andrew's in Vestal and Westside Anglican Fellowship in Syracuse.
We need some good news. A worldwide financial collapse is happening before our eyes and in many of our neighborhoods. Armed conflicts around the globe seem to be never ending. Oppressive governments continue to retain power.
Religious strife is on the increase. Poverty and disease continue to take their unrelenting toll of the most vulnerable. In many ways the world is not much different from that night of nights when the shepherds watched their flocks in the fields around Bethlehem . They needed some good news too!
The word from the angel was clear and simple: I bring you good news of a great joy that will be for all the people! So . . . what on earth was this good news of great joy for all people?
First and foremost, the good news declared that the Creator of the universe had heard their cries and was about to intervene into their world and change the course of human history for good. This intervention had been long anticipated by the prophets but it was not to be a quick fix. The salvation of the world was now assured but it would take time - lots of it. God would bring healing and hope where there had been only brokenness and despair. God could have done all this by sheer force; but instead of following the pathway of power, God chose to work through one of the most vulnerable members of his creation - a newborn baby. It is a unique strategy that God continues to follow.
God also chose to make the good news very personal. Our salvation is not mechanical or automatic. It depends first on God’s grace and second on the response of each person to this amazing gift. And the great joy that the angel spoke about was the promise of this abundant life. We are no longer stuck in patterns of alienation and brokenness, but now we can begin to dream of a new world with new possibilities where freedom reigns and where the ravages of sin no longer hold us in their grip.
The world is still in need of this good news. God is still in the redemption business. During this Christmas season it is good to remember that God chose to bring the promise of healing and hope through one of the most vulnerable of institutions - the church! We have no armies to command or weapons to deploy. We are merely a people whose claim to fame is the one we follow - Jesus of Nazareth. But we know that through this solitary life the world was and is changed for good - one life at a time. And it is by His Spirit that we offer this promise of a new way of living until that day when heaven and nature will sing, “Joy to the world, The Lord is come!”. . . that's good news!
Your brother in Christ,
+Martyn
The Rt. Rev'd Martyn Minns
Missionary Bishop of CANA
There are two CANA congregations in Central NY, St. Andrew's in Vestal and Westside Anglican Fellowship in Syracuse.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Homosexuals showing 'radical intolerance' of Rick Warren
Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - 12/24/2008 7:00:00 AMBookmark and Share
A leading black conservative pastor and political activist says the high level of anger in the homosexual community over president-elect Barack Obama's selection of Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration next month "shows the nature of the culture war we are in."
Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr., of the High Impact Leadership Coalition says although he voted for John McCain in the presidential election and disagrees with Barack Obama's stances on abortion and homosexuality, the president-elect made an "appropriate" decision to pick California pastor Rick Warren to pray on Inauguration Day.
"I think that it says to us that Obama understands the divide among people of faith and that he is going to make a sincere attempt at following through with the kinds of overtures that he made to the faith community as he was running for office," he notes. "So, I think it says a lot about Barack."
Bishop JacksonHe believes the controversy over Pastor Warren also says a lot about the homosexual community. "What's being revealed in this process is that the intolerance of the radical left is coming out. They want to be received and tolerated, but when someone takes one little overture like praying a prayer at a major event, they can't take it," he points out. "And whether we like it or not, this man Rick Warren has become the next generation's Billy Graham."
The Washington-based homosexual activist group Human Rights Campaign is demanding that Obama commit to a "five-step legislative blueprint for change" to make up for his selection of Rick Warren. That "legislative blueprint" includes, among other things, signing "hate crimes" legislation into law within six months, supporting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (often referred to as "ENDA"), repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and issuing an executive order providing special protections for federal workers based on their sexual behavior and gender identity.
A leading black conservative pastor and political activist says the high level of anger in the homosexual community over president-elect Barack Obama's selection of Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration next month "shows the nature of the culture war we are in."
Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr., of the High Impact Leadership Coalition says although he voted for John McCain in the presidential election and disagrees with Barack Obama's stances on abortion and homosexuality, the president-elect made an "appropriate" decision to pick California pastor Rick Warren to pray on Inauguration Day.
"I think that it says to us that Obama understands the divide among people of faith and that he is going to make a sincere attempt at following through with the kinds of overtures that he made to the faith community as he was running for office," he notes. "So, I think it says a lot about Barack."
Bishop JacksonHe believes the controversy over Pastor Warren also says a lot about the homosexual community. "What's being revealed in this process is that the intolerance of the radical left is coming out. They want to be received and tolerated, but when someone takes one little overture like praying a prayer at a major event, they can't take it," he points out. "And whether we like it or not, this man Rick Warren has become the next generation's Billy Graham."
The Washington-based homosexual activist group Human Rights Campaign is demanding that Obama commit to a "five-step legislative blueprint for change" to make up for his selection of Rick Warren. That "legislative blueprint" includes, among other things, signing "hate crimes" legislation into law within six months, supporting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (often referred to as "ENDA"), repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, and issuing an executive order providing special protections for federal workers based on their sexual behavior and gender identity.
Pope's remarks on sexuality 'will widen Anglican rift'
From The Telegraph (UK) via Stand Firm:
The Pope's "clear" statement on the importance of heterosexual lifestyles will widen the rift with the Archbishop of Canterbury on the issue of homosexuality, senior Anglican conservatives predicted.
By Andrew Pierce
Last Updated: 11:28PM GMT 23 Dec 2008
To the fury of homosexual groups the Pontiff said that the defence of heterosexual relationships was as important to humanity as preventing the destruction of rainforests.
In a Christmas address to prelates in the Vatican the Pope, known as God's rottweiler because of his hardline views, said that the Roman Catholic Church had a duty to "protect man from the destruction of himself". He urged respect for the "nature of the human being as man and woman".
As homosexual groups condemned the Pope, his remarks drew applause from conservative Anglican groups in Britain. They welcomed the "clarity" of the Pope's thinking which they contrasted with Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Dr Williams is battling to prevent a schism in the Anglican church as many of his own clergy are in openly gay relationships in defiance of church policy.
The Catholic Church teaches that while homosexuality is not sinful, homosexual acts are. It opposes gay marriage and, in October, a leading Vatican official called homosexuality "a deviation, an irregularity, a wound".
Rev Geoffrey Kirk, a vicar in south London who is general secretary of the traditionalist Forward in Faith organisation, said: "It should not be a surprise that the Pope is a catholic and makes clear statements supporting catholic teaching.
"If there is confusion about what he said it is not because he is not clear it will be because people chose not to listen to what he said. If there is confusion about what Rowan Williams says it is because he is not clear. We are in such a mess in the Anglican church, clarity on sexual morality is now impossible."
Rev Kirk said that even though the remarks of the Pope would increase pressure on the Archbishop to clear up the confusion he expected no movement. "Rowan will not be any clearer on the issue," he said. "He is an Anglican."
In his address to the Curia, the Vatican's administration body at Clementine Hall, the Pope said that behaviour beyond traditional man and woman relations was a "destruction of God's work". The Pope, without referring to homosexuality or same sex relationships, added: "The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less. It's not simply an outdated metaphysics if the Church speaks of the nature of the human person as man and woman, and asks that this order of creation be respected."
It is not the first time that the Pope's Curia speech has created controversy. Two years ago he complained that Islam had yet to learn the lessons of the Enlightenment.
This month the Vatican opposed a proposed UN declaration, backed by all 27 European Union states, calling for an end to the practice of criminalising and punishing people for their sexual orientation.
Mike Egan, chairman of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, said: "It's all part of a fundamental mistake, to say that there's something abnormal about homosexuality. It's like being left-handed. There are much greater threats to marriage and family life.
"There are people among bishops and clergy who think the official line on homosexuality is not true and the more official pronouncements there are, the deeper the hole the church is digging for itself."
Other Christian campaigners warned his remarks would justify homophobic bullying in schools and "gay bashing".
The Pope's "clear" statement on the importance of heterosexual lifestyles will widen the rift with the Archbishop of Canterbury on the issue of homosexuality, senior Anglican conservatives predicted.
By Andrew Pierce
Last Updated: 11:28PM GMT 23 Dec 2008
To the fury of homosexual groups the Pontiff said that the defence of heterosexual relationships was as important to humanity as preventing the destruction of rainforests.
In a Christmas address to prelates in the Vatican the Pope, known as God's rottweiler because of his hardline views, said that the Roman Catholic Church had a duty to "protect man from the destruction of himself". He urged respect for the "nature of the human being as man and woman".
As homosexual groups condemned the Pope, his remarks drew applause from conservative Anglican groups in Britain. They welcomed the "clarity" of the Pope's thinking which they contrasted with Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Dr Williams is battling to prevent a schism in the Anglican church as many of his own clergy are in openly gay relationships in defiance of church policy.
The Catholic Church teaches that while homosexuality is not sinful, homosexual acts are. It opposes gay marriage and, in October, a leading Vatican official called homosexuality "a deviation, an irregularity, a wound".
Rev Geoffrey Kirk, a vicar in south London who is general secretary of the traditionalist Forward in Faith organisation, said: "It should not be a surprise that the Pope is a catholic and makes clear statements supporting catholic teaching.
"If there is confusion about what he said it is not because he is not clear it will be because people chose not to listen to what he said. If there is confusion about what Rowan Williams says it is because he is not clear. We are in such a mess in the Anglican church, clarity on sexual morality is now impossible."
Rev Kirk said that even though the remarks of the Pope would increase pressure on the Archbishop to clear up the confusion he expected no movement. "Rowan will not be any clearer on the issue," he said. "He is an Anglican."
In his address to the Curia, the Vatican's administration body at Clementine Hall, the Pope said that behaviour beyond traditional man and woman relations was a "destruction of God's work". The Pope, without referring to homosexuality or same sex relationships, added: "The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less. It's not simply an outdated metaphysics if the Church speaks of the nature of the human person as man and woman, and asks that this order of creation be respected."
It is not the first time that the Pope's Curia speech has created controversy. Two years ago he complained that Islam had yet to learn the lessons of the Enlightenment.
This month the Vatican opposed a proposed UN declaration, backed by all 27 European Union states, calling for an end to the practice of criminalising and punishing people for their sexual orientation.
Mike Egan, chairman of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, said: "It's all part of a fundamental mistake, to say that there's something abnormal about homosexuality. It's like being left-handed. There are much greater threats to marriage and family life.
"There are people among bishops and clergy who think the official line on homosexuality is not true and the more official pronouncements there are, the deeper the hole the church is digging for itself."
Other Christian campaigners warned his remarks would justify homophobic bullying in schools and "gay bashing".
Relocating a drug and alcohol rehab facility from Owego to Vestal has some people up in arms.
For the video, go to http://www.wbng.com/news/local/36656889.html
By WBNG News:
Story Created: Dec 23, 2008 at 5:57 PM EST
Story Updated: Dec 23, 2008 at 6:32 PM EST
They say the proposed site's proximity to two schools could create problems.
But as Action News Reporter Reed Buterbaugh tells us, the rehab center's current neighbors haven't had any troubles.
Candlehouse Teen Challenge is a faith-based rehab center for women.
Lisa Busby came here for help.
The recovering drug addict, says she owes everything to the facility.
"I'm loyal to this ministry. It means the world to me. I believe in it, it helped me," Lisa Busby, Candlehouse assistant director said. "It was the one thing that did help me."
But these cramped quarters in Owego has Candlehouse looking to relocate to Vestal.
If the rehab center takes over St. Andrew's Church, it would be within blocks of two schools.
"It's well needed and everything but it seems they could put one somewhere where it isn't such a closed district to the schools and children walking around here all the time," Barbara Votopka of Vestal said.
"There's a school, within 2 blocks of each of this installation and I'd prefer they look elsewhere," Carl Cruver of Vestal said.
Candlehouse has heard these type of objections before. People weren't too keen on a drug rehab center moving in next door in Owego. But according to the people we've talked to, they've been good neighbors.
"We've never had any trouble here and nobody else has that I know of," said Byron Worthing of Owego.
"We've had no problems with these women. These women are polite, they're friendly they don't come out, they aren't wandering around at night," said Bonnie Baker-Duff of Owego.
Candlehouse also has some supporters in Vestal.
"I'm familiar with a lot of the girls already in the candlehouse and they bring positive aspect to our church," said Lauree Daviau of Vestal. "They volunteer a lot of time here and I think it would be a good thing for the community."
Candlehouse has yet to purchase the St. Andrew's property.
They will hold another meeting in Vestal in January.
Candlehouse says the property in Vestal does not have to be rezoned, because it's protected under the Fair Housing Act for people emotionally distressed.
A Vestal Town Board member says the town lawyer is looking into whether the Town Board has a say in the matter.
By WBNG News:
Story Created: Dec 23, 2008 at 5:57 PM EST
Story Updated: Dec 23, 2008 at 6:32 PM EST
They say the proposed site's proximity to two schools could create problems.
But as Action News Reporter Reed Buterbaugh tells us, the rehab center's current neighbors haven't had any troubles.
Candlehouse Teen Challenge is a faith-based rehab center for women.
Lisa Busby came here for help.
The recovering drug addict, says she owes everything to the facility.
"I'm loyal to this ministry. It means the world to me. I believe in it, it helped me," Lisa Busby, Candlehouse assistant director said. "It was the one thing that did help me."
But these cramped quarters in Owego has Candlehouse looking to relocate to Vestal.
If the rehab center takes over St. Andrew's Church, it would be within blocks of two schools.
"It's well needed and everything but it seems they could put one somewhere where it isn't such a closed district to the schools and children walking around here all the time," Barbara Votopka of Vestal said.
"There's a school, within 2 blocks of each of this installation and I'd prefer they look elsewhere," Carl Cruver of Vestal said.
Candlehouse has heard these type of objections before. People weren't too keen on a drug rehab center moving in next door in Owego. But according to the people we've talked to, they've been good neighbors.
"We've never had any trouble here and nobody else has that I know of," said Byron Worthing of Owego.
"We've had no problems with these women. These women are polite, they're friendly they don't come out, they aren't wandering around at night," said Bonnie Baker-Duff of Owego.
Candlehouse also has some supporters in Vestal.
"I'm familiar with a lot of the girls already in the candlehouse and they bring positive aspect to our church," said Lauree Daviau of Vestal. "They volunteer a lot of time here and I think it would be a good thing for the community."
Candlehouse has yet to purchase the St. Andrew's property.
They will hold another meeting in Vestal in January.
Candlehouse says the property in Vestal does not have to be rezoned, because it's protected under the Fair Housing Act for people emotionally distressed.
A Vestal Town Board member says the town lawyer is looking into whether the Town Board has a say in the matter.
Rehab Plans Spark St. Andrew's Fire
For the video, go to http://www.newschannel34.com/default.aspx
From NewsChannel 34 in Binghamton:
Last Update: 12:22 am
Fate of Former Vestal Church Remains Uncertain
A private Christian organization wants to buy the former Saint Andrew's Episcopal Church in Vestal near the high school--and, turn it into a rehab center for women.
Based on a meeting last night, the organization, Candlehouse, and people in the area-- who don't want it near them-- may be in for quite a battle.
NewsChannel 34's Peter Quinn has the story.
Candlehouse wants to turn this property into a rehab site for 12 women, who have emotional issues, some because of alcohol and drug abuse.
The lower level of Saint Andrew's community center would be dorms.
The actual church would be where education, counseling, and church activities would be.
Richard Mecklenborg says, "Our success rate is 90 percent. The majority of our students go onto higher education or are working in a Teen Challenge center some place."
Candlehouse still has to buy the property, but Mecklenborg says the rehab center can be here, in part because of a past state court ruling declaring you couldn't deny a center like this from being put in an area unless a suitable alternate location could be found because of discrimination concerns.
It dates back from when some mental institutions were broken up into smaller group settings.
Padavin's law could mean a zoning change would NOT be needed.
But, some neighbors dispute that and say the corner of LaGrange Street and Mirador Road is zoned for single family homes and churches, not for a rehab center.
They're also concerned about a possible increase of crime in the area.
24-year-old police officer Tim Mulvey worked in Delaware County for five years and says he had to constantly round up people from what he calls a similar facility.
Tim Mulvey says, "While I was there for five years we had at least several days a week where they would break into houses nearby to get food, money or to get transportation..."
Things heated up after he was interrupted by Mecklenborg.
Or take Eric Kelley's concerns.
He lives next to Saint Andrew's.
Eric Kelley says, "The folks come in with the state of mind, 'I'm here to get my life back, right?' My question to you is, what do you do in your facility to keep drugs from coming in and to keep weapons from coming in? And, I don't want to hear that hasn't happened so far."
The answer -- the women would be drug tested and searched after they come onto the property, although they rarely leave.
Full body cavity searches are not done however.
Women also would be from several hours away so they don't know where different vice hot spots are.
Candlehouse currently has its facility in Owego, where Mecklenborg says he has never had a problem with crime.
He wants to move for more room.
The town will have to sort out the zoning issue.
Town board member Fran Majewski says he wants the board to vote on putting the center at the proposed location.
From NewsChannel 34 in Binghamton:
Last Update: 12:22 am
Fate of Former Vestal Church Remains Uncertain
A private Christian organization wants to buy the former Saint Andrew's Episcopal Church in Vestal near the high school--and, turn it into a rehab center for women.
Based on a meeting last night, the organization, Candlehouse, and people in the area-- who don't want it near them-- may be in for quite a battle.
NewsChannel 34's Peter Quinn has the story.
Candlehouse wants to turn this property into a rehab site for 12 women, who have emotional issues, some because of alcohol and drug abuse.
The lower level of Saint Andrew's community center would be dorms.
The actual church would be where education, counseling, and church activities would be.
Richard Mecklenborg says, "Our success rate is 90 percent. The majority of our students go onto higher education or are working in a Teen Challenge center some place."
Candlehouse still has to buy the property, but Mecklenborg says the rehab center can be here, in part because of a past state court ruling declaring you couldn't deny a center like this from being put in an area unless a suitable alternate location could be found because of discrimination concerns.
It dates back from when some mental institutions were broken up into smaller group settings.
Padavin's law could mean a zoning change would NOT be needed.
But, some neighbors dispute that and say the corner of LaGrange Street and Mirador Road is zoned for single family homes and churches, not for a rehab center.
They're also concerned about a possible increase of crime in the area.
24-year-old police officer Tim Mulvey worked in Delaware County for five years and says he had to constantly round up people from what he calls a similar facility.
Tim Mulvey says, "While I was there for five years we had at least several days a week where they would break into houses nearby to get food, money or to get transportation..."
Things heated up after he was interrupted by Mecklenborg.
Or take Eric Kelley's concerns.
He lives next to Saint Andrew's.
Eric Kelley says, "The folks come in with the state of mind, 'I'm here to get my life back, right?' My question to you is, what do you do in your facility to keep drugs from coming in and to keep weapons from coming in? And, I don't want to hear that hasn't happened so far."
The answer -- the women would be drug tested and searched after they come onto the property, although they rarely leave.
Full body cavity searches are not done however.
Women also would be from several hours away so they don't know where different vice hot spots are.
Candlehouse currently has its facility in Owego, where Mecklenborg says he has never had a problem with crime.
He wants to move for more room.
The town will have to sort out the zoning issue.
Town board member Fran Majewski says he wants the board to vote on putting the center at the proposed location.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Anglicans and Their Unwelcome House Guests
From the On Faith column at the Newsweek/WaPo site via TitusOneNine:
John Mark Reynolds
Director of the Torrey Honors Institute, Biola University
Dr. John Mark Reynolds can be found blogging regularly at Scriptoriumdaily.com along with other faculty from the Torrey Honors Institute, a great books program at Biola University for which he is founder and director. He is also Associate Professor of Philosophy for Biola.
Imagine a fan so full of admiration that he takes your name and moves into your house. Your family has always tried to reach out to others and so you allow him to stay with you as an act of kindness.
Weirdly, after this fan moves in he becomes quite critical. He decides that many of your costumes and ways are unworthy of the family name and begins to demand that you change them. Your own children stop coming home, because the interloper has become so obnoxious.
At that point, charity finally exhausted, you demand that he leave. He then barricades himself in his room, which he points out you have called "his room," and refuses to leave. He calls you a false and hateful person who has missed the "spirit of the family." Neighbors who have not followed the situation wonder why you are being so mean to a family member. You simply wish that he would go form his own family and leave you in peace.
This story might help a neutral observer to understand what is happening in American Anglicanism.
Over the last half-century, the American Church has become an embarrassment to the global Church. They ceased to be Anglican in any meaningful sense, or in some cases even Christian, and the rest of the Anglican world finally decided to clean house. Certain people hijacked the American Anglican "family name," but had no real ideological connection to the historic faith.
The world is telling them to go find their own house.
Only the most narrow minded person, whose vision of Christianity is parochial enough to see the Church as primarily European and North American, could be confused about the situation. The amazing thing is how patient the global majority has been with the struggling, shrinking American church.
Global Anglicans are a tolerant group, but are finally telling the liberal interlopers to go their own way and stop pretending to be Anglican. They are reaching out to the actual Anglicans that remain in North America and are working to rebuild the American branch of the movement. Worldwide Anglicanism is trying to save the brand!
This is not a family split, since the people being politely asked to leave are not really part of the global Anglican family. All of this is confusing to Americans, since what is left of the Anglican Church here, sadly decayed from its height, but still possessing great wealth inherited from long dead orthodox members, is in the hands of these Anglicans-in-name-only.
While the historic Anglican community has always been theological diverse, these innovative interlopers had nothing to do with either the Evangelical Anglicanism of Wesley, the more Reformed Anglicanism of Cranmer, or the Anglo-Catholicism of Pusey. As a national church Anglicanism was tolerant of diversity amongst Christians who were not Roman Catholic, but believed the Creed.
This polite spirit of theological accommodation, part of the English patrimony, was abused in America. Some people thought Christianity had to change, and quietly brought on this change in America by using old Christian words to describe very different ideas.
This is not to insult American innovators like Bishop John Shelby Spong. They certainly have important and interesting things to say, but as reformers they seem not very courageous. Luther, at least, did not pretend to be a Roman Catholic.
Those who have found Anglican beliefs, or even Christian beliefs, wrong, should form their own religion and argue for it. We shall see how they do. It seems, at best, impolite to take over institutions founded on the blood and money of people who had the old beliefs, but this is what they have done. Still, global Anglicanism seems willing to let American innovators keep the money and the property, allowing them a dignified departure.
This is a sad thing, but it need not be a hateful thing.
Americans who wish a new religion that uses the name of Jesus, but little that the New Testament says, have a right to form it. Americans that don't like Christian morality have the right to form a church based on the morality they do prefer. Those leaving Christendom know that we shall miss them, would welcome them back, and will be fascinated to see what comes of this new faith.
Many of us will look forward to reading their books and engaging in discussions with them. Friendly, open, interfaith dialogue with pioneers of this new faith like John Spong, can only benefit Christians.
Here is hoping that when the left that has controlled the American wing of Anglicanism is finally and politely asked by the rest of the world to leave off calling themselves Anglicans, that they will bravely give up the buildings, endowments, and vocabulary and strike out on their own. That would be admirable and interesting.
Meanwhile, the rest of us look forward to ecumenical dialogue with Anglicans in the United States after clarity is achieved. The global reach of this renewed Anglicanism will go far in helping other Christians forget the sad parochialism that has so gripped the Episcopal Church in the United States for the last fifty years.
The competition of ideas is good for everyone and clarity and coherence in Anglicanism will enable that voice to once again be heard in the ecumenical debate. Those of us in other parts of Christianity in America can only benefit by a renewed, evangelistic zeal from that ancient and important church.
John Mark Reynolds
Director of the Torrey Honors Institute, Biola University
Dr. John Mark Reynolds can be found blogging regularly at Scriptoriumdaily.com along with other faculty from the Torrey Honors Institute, a great books program at Biola University for which he is founder and director. He is also Associate Professor of Philosophy for Biola.
Imagine a fan so full of admiration that he takes your name and moves into your house. Your family has always tried to reach out to others and so you allow him to stay with you as an act of kindness.
Weirdly, after this fan moves in he becomes quite critical. He decides that many of your costumes and ways are unworthy of the family name and begins to demand that you change them. Your own children stop coming home, because the interloper has become so obnoxious.
At that point, charity finally exhausted, you demand that he leave. He then barricades himself in his room, which he points out you have called "his room," and refuses to leave. He calls you a false and hateful person who has missed the "spirit of the family." Neighbors who have not followed the situation wonder why you are being so mean to a family member. You simply wish that he would go form his own family and leave you in peace.
This story might help a neutral observer to understand what is happening in American Anglicanism.
Over the last half-century, the American Church has become an embarrassment to the global Church. They ceased to be Anglican in any meaningful sense, or in some cases even Christian, and the rest of the Anglican world finally decided to clean house. Certain people hijacked the American Anglican "family name," but had no real ideological connection to the historic faith.
The world is telling them to go find their own house.
Only the most narrow minded person, whose vision of Christianity is parochial enough to see the Church as primarily European and North American, could be confused about the situation. The amazing thing is how patient the global majority has been with the struggling, shrinking American church.
Global Anglicans are a tolerant group, but are finally telling the liberal interlopers to go their own way and stop pretending to be Anglican. They are reaching out to the actual Anglicans that remain in North America and are working to rebuild the American branch of the movement. Worldwide Anglicanism is trying to save the brand!
This is not a family split, since the people being politely asked to leave are not really part of the global Anglican family. All of this is confusing to Americans, since what is left of the Anglican Church here, sadly decayed from its height, but still possessing great wealth inherited from long dead orthodox members, is in the hands of these Anglicans-in-name-only.
While the historic Anglican community has always been theological diverse, these innovative interlopers had nothing to do with either the Evangelical Anglicanism of Wesley, the more Reformed Anglicanism of Cranmer, or the Anglo-Catholicism of Pusey. As a national church Anglicanism was tolerant of diversity amongst Christians who were not Roman Catholic, but believed the Creed.
This polite spirit of theological accommodation, part of the English patrimony, was abused in America. Some people thought Christianity had to change, and quietly brought on this change in America by using old Christian words to describe very different ideas.
This is not to insult American innovators like Bishop John Shelby Spong. They certainly have important and interesting things to say, but as reformers they seem not very courageous. Luther, at least, did not pretend to be a Roman Catholic.
Those who have found Anglican beliefs, or even Christian beliefs, wrong, should form their own religion and argue for it. We shall see how they do. It seems, at best, impolite to take over institutions founded on the blood and money of people who had the old beliefs, but this is what they have done. Still, global Anglicanism seems willing to let American innovators keep the money and the property, allowing them a dignified departure.
This is a sad thing, but it need not be a hateful thing.
Americans who wish a new religion that uses the name of Jesus, but little that the New Testament says, have a right to form it. Americans that don't like Christian morality have the right to form a church based on the morality they do prefer. Those leaving Christendom know that we shall miss them, would welcome them back, and will be fascinated to see what comes of this new faith.
Many of us will look forward to reading their books and engaging in discussions with them. Friendly, open, interfaith dialogue with pioneers of this new faith like John Spong, can only benefit Christians.
Here is hoping that when the left that has controlled the American wing of Anglicanism is finally and politely asked by the rest of the world to leave off calling themselves Anglicans, that they will bravely give up the buildings, endowments, and vocabulary and strike out on their own. That would be admirable and interesting.
Meanwhile, the rest of us look forward to ecumenical dialogue with Anglicans in the United States after clarity is achieved. The global reach of this renewed Anglicanism will go far in helping other Christians forget the sad parochialism that has so gripped the Episcopal Church in the United States for the last fifty years.
The competition of ideas is good for everyone and clarity and coherence in Anglicanism will enable that voice to once again be heard in the ecumenical debate. Those of us in other parts of Christianity in America can only benefit by a renewed, evangelistic zeal from that ancient and important church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)