Via VirtueOnline:
By Mike McManus
April 29, 2009
During Holy Week, Newsweek's cover story was entitled "The Decline and Fall of Christian America," the words of which were in the shape of a cross, written in red.
The magazine quotes R. Albert Mohler, Jr, President of the huge Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, as writing: "A remarkable culture-shift has taken place around us. The most basic contours of American culture have been radically altered. The so-called Judeo-Christian consensus of the last millennium has given way to a post-modern, post-Christian, post-Western cultural crisis which threatens the very heart of our culture."
Statistically, there is a decline of Christianity in America. The percentage of Americans who call themselves Christian has dropped 10 points from 86 to 76 percent. The percentage of people who say they are unaffiliated with any particular faith tradition has doubled to 16 percent. Finally, the number of atheists has jumped from 1 million people to 3.6 million.
More important, two-thirds of Americans believe that religion is "losing influence" while only 19 percent think its influence is growing.
However, it is a gross exaggeration to call America "post-Christian" when 76 percent of the nation consider themselves Christian, and two-fifths of America attend religious services weekly.
On the other hand Europe is post-Christian with church attendance down to one tenth or less.
Pollster George Barna recently reported a more nuanced perspective. He found that half of all adults contend that Christianity is just one of many options that Americans choose from. Two-thirds of evangelicals, who tend to be more fervent in their faith, agreed that Christianity no longer has a lock on U.S. hearts.
However, by 3-1, Americans say their personal religious faith is "becoming even more important to them than it used to be as a source of objective and reliable moral guidance," Barna reports. So while people think others are less committed, their own commitment level has risen.
That's proof that the Christian era has not ended.
Extraordinarily high percentages of born-again Christians, African-Americans and conservatives (84 to 91 percent) say their faith is becoming more important to them.
True, conservatives are chagrined by the undeniable growth of liberalism in Washington. Not only is President Obama pro-abortion and a big spender, but he helped sweep substantial majorities of Democrats into control of the House and Senate. In Obama's first 100 days in office, Congress passed a huge $787 billion stimulus package despite the opposition of virtually all Republicans.
However, what matters to people of faith is how they live their lives. How many are making a difference in the lives of others? America has long been a nation of volunteers. Last year 62 million Americans volunteered time to serve others, 26.4 percent of the population. That is a large and remarkably stable share of the nation, down less than one percent since 2002, reports a survey of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
On average people volunteer about an hour a week. Frankly, however, that is not much. Nor am I impressed by the fact a quarter of Americans are volunteers. If three-fourths are Christians, why aren't at least half of Americans donating time for others?
My conclusion is that most churches don't have a strategy to encourage volunteerism outside of church internal needs for the choir, Sunday School, etc. What is possible can be seen in the Saddleback Church of Dr. Rick Warren, where 13,000 lay ministers have been ordained (out of 30,000 members) to serve in 400 different community ministries.
I was a member of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Darien, CT in 1981, when I heard my pastor, Rev. Terry Fullam, ask this question: "What are you doing to serve the Lord? Don't tell me you are an usher. That is insignificant Christian service." (He got my attention, because I was an usher and proud of it.)
He added, "My question is what are you doing to take the talent and gifts he has given you and using them to serve the Lord?"
It prompted me to launch what became has two new careers. At the time, I was writing a syndicated economic and political column called "The Northern Perspective." Each week I suggested ways to strengthen the region's economy.
I then considered the boring church pages of most newspapers, and thought I could begin a new column to suggest ways America could live the faith it professes. No modern nation has a higher percentage of religiously active people, yet the U.S. has high rates of divorce, crime, etc.
Ultimately, my columns on marriage led me to create a ministry called Marriage Savers whose goal is to revive God's first institution of marriage.
What are you doing to serve others?
---Michael J. McManus is a syndicated columnist writing on "Ethics & Religion". He is President & Co-Chair of Marriage Savers. He lives with his wife Harriet in Potomac, MD
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Unanswered Questions
Via VirtueOnline:
Written by the Rev. Dr. Philip Turner
http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/?p=408
April 28th, 2009
The posting of a stream of private emails that came from an unnamed source, including the correspondence of senior Bishops of this church and their lawyer, has added considerable heat to the debate that has followed publication on the ACI Website of the Bishops' Statement on the Polity of The Episcopal Church.
To date, the discussion that has taken place on the Web has served more to cloud than clarify the significant issues now faced both by The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. If one reads carefully the comments of those who find themselves in disagreement with the Bishops' statement a number of questions come to mind-each of which deserves a clear and unequivocal answer.
1. Why would one publish, without confirmation by the parties involved, a thread of private and privileged emails that came from a source not previously known?
2. Is it not the case that priests' publishing the private emails of bishops is a matter of grave pastoral disorder?
3. How can one confirm that the source is not lying about how the private correspondence was obtained, and that instead the emails were stolen and a convenient alibi provided?
4. Why did the published version of the emails rearrange them in a specific order and omit some; and why was this published on the website of an Episcopal Church in Pasadena, CA, and also watermarked and published by a secular Gay publication in Washington, DC?
5. Why is the version published on this Episcopal Church website now inaccessible?
6. Why would one publish a version of the Bishops' statement without verifying first that the list of signatories is correct? (The list in fact was not correct.)
7. Why would one imply or directly state the signatories thought it permissible for a diocese to withdraw from The Episcopal Church when no such claim was made in the Bishops' statement?
8. Given the frequently repeated objection that a diocese is in fact not free to sign onto the covenant even if The Episcopal Church refuses to do so, and given the fact that The Episcopal Church is defined in its Constitution as being in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, is the claim being made that a diocese that wishes to remain in communion with Canterbury even in circumstances where The Episcopal Church status has been compromised must simply submit to seriously impaired or broken communion?
9. To put the question another way, if The Episcopal Church were to refuse to sign the covenant and its status in relation to Canterbury and the other Provinces of the Communion were compromised, is it being suggested that dioceses that believe their Catholic character to have become questionable should not seek an uncompromised relationship?
10. Some have questioned Dr. Ephraim Radner's claim that use of the term "churches" in the draft covenant is understood to include non-provincial jurisdictions, which might (as at present) mean dioceses or other ecumenical partners, or even other ecclesial entities as Archbishop Williams has indicated in his discussion of this matter on various occasions. Are these persons saying that Dr. Radner is not telling the truth?
11. If the claim is being made that he is not telling the truth, on what basis is such a claim being made?
12. One person commenting on the Bishops' statement wondered if the signatories should not be charged with Abandonment of Communion. On what basis would a responsibly stated objection to actions that appear either unconstitutional or contrary to the canons be grounds for charges of Abandonment?
13. How can a claim about the proper meaning of the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church be considered as grounds for having abandoned them?
It is a sad statement about the nature of our time when the private and privileged email correspondence of Bishops of the church, who are in fact seeking to underscore the place of The Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion, is sent to a secular publication for dissemination and discussion, published by an Episcopal priest, selected and rearranged, and all this justified by the claim that the people in question have been 'outed' and shown to be lovers of darkness.
The entire logic of the Communion Partners fellowship is public and has been, so too the arguments of the Anglican Communion Institute, as well as the work of the Covenant Design members. Answers to the questions above would begin to bring things before the light of God, if indeed that is what is desired by those who chose to act as they have in this matter.
END
Written by the Rev. Dr. Philip Turner
http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/?p=408
April 28th, 2009
The posting of a stream of private emails that came from an unnamed source, including the correspondence of senior Bishops of this church and their lawyer, has added considerable heat to the debate that has followed publication on the ACI Website of the Bishops' Statement on the Polity of The Episcopal Church.
To date, the discussion that has taken place on the Web has served more to cloud than clarify the significant issues now faced both by The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. If one reads carefully the comments of those who find themselves in disagreement with the Bishops' statement a number of questions come to mind-each of which deserves a clear and unequivocal answer.
1. Why would one publish, without confirmation by the parties involved, a thread of private and privileged emails that came from a source not previously known?
2. Is it not the case that priests' publishing the private emails of bishops is a matter of grave pastoral disorder?
3. How can one confirm that the source is not lying about how the private correspondence was obtained, and that instead the emails were stolen and a convenient alibi provided?
4. Why did the published version of the emails rearrange them in a specific order and omit some; and why was this published on the website of an Episcopal Church in Pasadena, CA, and also watermarked and published by a secular Gay publication in Washington, DC?
5. Why is the version published on this Episcopal Church website now inaccessible?
6. Why would one publish a version of the Bishops' statement without verifying first that the list of signatories is correct? (The list in fact was not correct.)
7. Why would one imply or directly state the signatories thought it permissible for a diocese to withdraw from The Episcopal Church when no such claim was made in the Bishops' statement?
8. Given the frequently repeated objection that a diocese is in fact not free to sign onto the covenant even if The Episcopal Church refuses to do so, and given the fact that The Episcopal Church is defined in its Constitution as being in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, is the claim being made that a diocese that wishes to remain in communion with Canterbury even in circumstances where The Episcopal Church status has been compromised must simply submit to seriously impaired or broken communion?
9. To put the question another way, if The Episcopal Church were to refuse to sign the covenant and its status in relation to Canterbury and the other Provinces of the Communion were compromised, is it being suggested that dioceses that believe their Catholic character to have become questionable should not seek an uncompromised relationship?
10. Some have questioned Dr. Ephraim Radner's claim that use of the term "churches" in the draft covenant is understood to include non-provincial jurisdictions, which might (as at present) mean dioceses or other ecumenical partners, or even other ecclesial entities as Archbishop Williams has indicated in his discussion of this matter on various occasions. Are these persons saying that Dr. Radner is not telling the truth?
11. If the claim is being made that he is not telling the truth, on what basis is such a claim being made?
12. One person commenting on the Bishops' statement wondered if the signatories should not be charged with Abandonment of Communion. On what basis would a responsibly stated objection to actions that appear either unconstitutional or contrary to the canons be grounds for charges of Abandonment?
13. How can a claim about the proper meaning of the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church be considered as grounds for having abandoned them?
It is a sad statement about the nature of our time when the private and privileged email correspondence of Bishops of the church, who are in fact seeking to underscore the place of The Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion, is sent to a secular publication for dissemination and discussion, published by an Episcopal priest, selected and rearranged, and all this justified by the claim that the people in question have been 'outed' and shown to be lovers of darkness.
The entire logic of the Communion Partners fellowship is public and has been, so too the arguments of the Anglican Communion Institute, as well as the work of the Covenant Design members. Answers to the questions above would begin to bring things before the light of God, if indeed that is what is desired by those who chose to act as they have in this matter.
END
CNY Episcopal Diocese Helps Nearby Church Grab Money Left in a Will to the Church of the Good Shepherd
From Transfigurations:
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Raymond J. Dague 315-422-2052
http://www.DagueLaw.com
Not content with taking the church buildings and bank accounts from Church of the Good Shepherd by court order, the Central New York Episcopal Diocese got the court to say that Christ Episcopal Church in Binghamton can take money which was left to Good Shepherd in the will of one of its deceased members. A decision issued last Friday denied Good Shepherd a trial on the issue, and awarded the money to the nearby Episcopal Church. The judge said that the deceased parishioner of Good Shepherd was a Episcopalian, and provided for his money to go the other Episcopal Church if Good Shepherd no longer existed. These facts, the judge claimed, could be used to infer the man’s intention to transfer his gift to the other Episcopal Church immediately upon Good Shepherd’s disaffiliation from the Episcopal diocese.
Judge Ferris Lebous of the state supreme court in Binghamton, New York is same judge who issued the first ruling which gave the buildings to the Episcopal Diocese in January of this year.
Syracuse attorney Raymond Dague defending Good Shepherd disagreed with the decision. “The will says that the parish gets the money in the trust unless the parish “ceases to exist,” said Dague. “This court decision morphs the words ‘ceases to exist’ into ‘leaves the Episcopal Church.’ With the greed of the numerous lawsuits she has filed against congregations everywhere in the country including this one, and her dramatic lurch away from classic Christian beliefs over the last few years, it is no wonder that the Episcopal Church is losing attendance faster than any other church in America. The way it is going, the Episcopal Church will be rich with dead people’s money, but with nobody left in the pews.”
The court also noted that there is “an obvious lack of income flowing into Good Shepherd after April 2008” when the Episcopal diocese sued, and the judge finds this “disturbing.” The court will allow the Diocese to conduct depositions to see if there was a diversion of income from the parish. That people would not donate to a church which is being sued by its diocese is not surprising. Apparently the Diocese will now take sworn statements from Good Shepherd officials to determine why individual parishioners decided not to give their money to a church in danger of having all of its assets seized by the Episcopal Church.
The church’s lawyer Raymond Dague flatly denied that the parish diverted any of its money. “Not a dime of parish money was improperly spent,” Dague said. “The way the Episcopal Church is treating this local church, it is a wonder that anyone gives money to anything that has the title ‘Episcopal’ on it in the Central New York Diocese. If the Diocese wants to inquire into why these people did not give to the Episcopal Church, they should get quite an earful.”
The court’s decision also mentions items belonging to Good Shepherd that were taken from the premises after the lawsuit was filed, although the court notes that removed items were later returned. The parishioners did not intentionally take items that belonged to the church. The congregation moved out of the old building quickly, only days after the adverse judgment. In the quick exit from the church building there was confusion on the part of people who were raised at Good Shepherd regarding what belonged to individual members and what belonged to the church. Any items mistakenly removed have been returned.
There was no immediate word from the parish on whether the court decision would be appealed. Bishop Gladstone “Skip” Adams of Syracuse sued the parish last spring after that parish disaffiliated from the Episcopal Church. Fr. Kennedy, the priest at the parish which was sued, is a commentator on the well known Anglican website Stand Firm. Good Shepherd recently moved to a new location in Binghamton just over a mile from its old building, and has been increasing its Sunday attendance since its move to the new location.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Raymond J. Dague 315-422-2052
http://www.DagueLaw.com
Not content with taking the church buildings and bank accounts from Church of the Good Shepherd by court order, the Central New York Episcopal Diocese got the court to say that Christ Episcopal Church in Binghamton can take money which was left to Good Shepherd in the will of one of its deceased members. A decision issued last Friday denied Good Shepherd a trial on the issue, and awarded the money to the nearby Episcopal Church. The judge said that the deceased parishioner of Good Shepherd was a Episcopalian, and provided for his money to go the other Episcopal Church if Good Shepherd no longer existed. These facts, the judge claimed, could be used to infer the man’s intention to transfer his gift to the other Episcopal Church immediately upon Good Shepherd’s disaffiliation from the Episcopal diocese.
Judge Ferris Lebous of the state supreme court in Binghamton, New York is same judge who issued the first ruling which gave the buildings to the Episcopal Diocese in January of this year.
Syracuse attorney Raymond Dague defending Good Shepherd disagreed with the decision. “The will says that the parish gets the money in the trust unless the parish “ceases to exist,” said Dague. “This court decision morphs the words ‘ceases to exist’ into ‘leaves the Episcopal Church.’ With the greed of the numerous lawsuits she has filed against congregations everywhere in the country including this one, and her dramatic lurch away from classic Christian beliefs over the last few years, it is no wonder that the Episcopal Church is losing attendance faster than any other church in America. The way it is going, the Episcopal Church will be rich with dead people’s money, but with nobody left in the pews.”
The court also noted that there is “an obvious lack of income flowing into Good Shepherd after April 2008” when the Episcopal diocese sued, and the judge finds this “disturbing.” The court will allow the Diocese to conduct depositions to see if there was a diversion of income from the parish. That people would not donate to a church which is being sued by its diocese is not surprising. Apparently the Diocese will now take sworn statements from Good Shepherd officials to determine why individual parishioners decided not to give their money to a church in danger of having all of its assets seized by the Episcopal Church.
The church’s lawyer Raymond Dague flatly denied that the parish diverted any of its money. “Not a dime of parish money was improperly spent,” Dague said. “The way the Episcopal Church is treating this local church, it is a wonder that anyone gives money to anything that has the title ‘Episcopal’ on it in the Central New York Diocese. If the Diocese wants to inquire into why these people did not give to the Episcopal Church, they should get quite an earful.”
The court’s decision also mentions items belonging to Good Shepherd that were taken from the premises after the lawsuit was filed, although the court notes that removed items were later returned. The parishioners did not intentionally take items that belonged to the church. The congregation moved out of the old building quickly, only days after the adverse judgment. In the quick exit from the church building there was confusion on the part of people who were raised at Good Shepherd regarding what belonged to individual members and what belonged to the church. Any items mistakenly removed have been returned.
There was no immediate word from the parish on whether the court decision would be appealed. Bishop Gladstone “Skip” Adams of Syracuse sued the parish last spring after that parish disaffiliated from the Episcopal Church. Fr. Kennedy, the priest at the parish which was sued, is a commentator on the well known Anglican website Stand Firm. Good Shepherd recently moved to a new location in Binghamton just over a mile from its old building, and has been increasing its Sunday attendance since its move to the new location.
From the here we go again department
Via VirtueOnline:
Scottish Church Faces Crisis Over Ordination of Gay Priests
April 29, 2009
Dear friends in Christ,
As you will no doubt already have seen in a spate of recent press articles, this year will see a highly charged General Assembly, with some of our brothers and sisters from Aberdeen Presbytery appearing at the Bar in their appeal against the Presbytery's decision to induct a man who has openly declared himself to be living in a homosexual partnership.
Already, some voices in the church are raising the stakes. The editorial of this Month's Life and Work (the C of S magazine) urged strongly for the Church to show leadership in opening the way for acceptance of homosexual practice. Articles have appeared in the national papers similarly.
But this is an issue of enormous magnitude: not just about sexuality, nor even only about the authority of Scripture, but about the nature of humanity, and indeed the nature of the gospel itself, a gospel not of affirmation of sin, but which demands repentance from sin, and brings liberation and transformation from sin.
Mindful of the fact that there are many congregations, and many more church members, who are deeply troubled at the decision of Aberdeen Presbytery, and who do not want to see our General Assembly publicly backing their decision, in consultation and with the support of Forward Together a group of us have published a Statement which can be found here:
http://www.confessingchurch.org.uk/
It seeks to urge commissioners to support the Aberdeen protesters, and also to support an overture being brought from the Presbytery of Lochcarron and Skye, which seeks Assembly support for a clear endorsement of biblical sexual morality: "That this Church shall not accept for training, ordain, admit, re-admit, induct or introduce to any ministry of the Church anyone involved in a sexual relationship outside of faithful marriage between a man and a woman".
(We believe these issues will be debated on Saturday evening, 23rd May)
We would like to encourage your support in signing up to this statement, which can be found at: http://www.confessingchurch.org.uk/
We want as many to sign up from the C of S as possible, especially ministers, elders and other leaders, to send a strong signal from the 'grass roots' of the church that we do not want our Assembly to lead away from Christian orthodoxy in this way. But also from others of all denominations whose solidarity is so important, and such an encouragement at such times.
I* do hope you will add your name, and be willing to circulate it to others you know in your presbytery* (and elsewhere) whom you believe would also be willing to sign up in support.
Finally, but above all, please do join with us in prayer about this matter, that the Lord our God will hear our plea and have mercy on us in his church, and that this may rebound for the glory of Christ and his gospel in our land.
Thank you for taking time to help us.
Yours in our Lord Jesus Christ,
William J. U. Philip
Printer Friendly Page
Scottish Church Faces Crisis Over Ordination of Gay Priests
April 29, 2009
Dear friends in Christ,
As you will no doubt already have seen in a spate of recent press articles, this year will see a highly charged General Assembly, with some of our brothers and sisters from Aberdeen Presbytery appearing at the Bar in their appeal against the Presbytery's decision to induct a man who has openly declared himself to be living in a homosexual partnership.
Already, some voices in the church are raising the stakes. The editorial of this Month's Life and Work (the C of S magazine) urged strongly for the Church to show leadership in opening the way for acceptance of homosexual practice. Articles have appeared in the national papers similarly.
But this is an issue of enormous magnitude: not just about sexuality, nor even only about the authority of Scripture, but about the nature of humanity, and indeed the nature of the gospel itself, a gospel not of affirmation of sin, but which demands repentance from sin, and brings liberation and transformation from sin.
Mindful of the fact that there are many congregations, and many more church members, who are deeply troubled at the decision of Aberdeen Presbytery, and who do not want to see our General Assembly publicly backing their decision, in consultation and with the support of Forward Together a group of us have published a Statement which can be found here:
http://www.confessingchurch.org.uk/
It seeks to urge commissioners to support the Aberdeen protesters, and also to support an overture being brought from the Presbytery of Lochcarron and Skye, which seeks Assembly support for a clear endorsement of biblical sexual morality: "That this Church shall not accept for training, ordain, admit, re-admit, induct or introduce to any ministry of the Church anyone involved in a sexual relationship outside of faithful marriage between a man and a woman".
(We believe these issues will be debated on Saturday evening, 23rd May)
We would like to encourage your support in signing up to this statement, which can be found at: http://www.confessingchurch.org.uk/
We want as many to sign up from the C of S as possible, especially ministers, elders and other leaders, to send a strong signal from the 'grass roots' of the church that we do not want our Assembly to lead away from Christian orthodoxy in this way. But also from others of all denominations whose solidarity is so important, and such an encouragement at such times.
I* do hope you will add your name, and be willing to circulate it to others you know in your presbytery* (and elsewhere) whom you believe would also be willing to sign up in support.
Finally, but above all, please do join with us in prayer about this matter, that the Lord our God will hear our plea and have mercy on us in his church, and that this may rebound for the glory of Christ and his gospel in our land.
Thank you for taking time to help us.
Yours in our Lord Jesus Christ,
William J. U. Philip
Printer Friendly Page
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
BREITBART: We're here, we're queer and we're hypocrites
From The Washington Times via Stand Firm:
By Andrew Breitbart | Monday, April 27, 2009
ANALYSIS/OPINION
Greetings, from a poolside cabana at a trendy boutique hotel in Santa Monica. Oh, how I love these overpriced overnight stays. The sleek designs. The ambient music. The uniformly attractive and stylishly dressed young staffs. The plush beds with sheets of an absurdly high thread count. Weird faucets and weirder sinks. I bask in the attention to detail. W is my favorite letter. Philippe Starck is a personal hero.
As a realist, I've built into my mindset that the majority heterosexual population is less than exclusively responsible for creating this and countless other high-end consumer and artistic experiences. Plus, I have a ton of wonderful gay friends - even ones "married" and with children. If gay activists created "A Day Without a Gay" (as they promoted Dec. 10 of last year), I'd be the first to cry "uncle" - even before Cher. So, accordingly, I make philosophical and political accommodations. I'm - as the MTV generation says - "gay-friendly."
But lately, color me "gay perturbed." "Gay-friendly," a term once manifestly redundant, now seems a glaring contradiction.
The gay political-activist community - in my view, a small minority of left-wing agitators acting on behalf of the whole - has been on a binge of bad public behavior, and I'm not referring to the bare-buttocked-chaps look and inappropriately placed sparklers during "pride" parades.
The Mormon community was recently targeted for its support of Proposition 8, the pro-traditional-marriage initiative in California. Donors to the cause were isolated and even exposed on online maps. Businesses were targeted. People lost their jobs.
The latest high-profile act on behalf of the "community" came from the Miss USA pageant. Perez Hilton, the wildly popular Internet gossip and celebrity hit man, somehow got himself placed as a judge of female beauty at the Donald Trump-sponsored event. Not to be judgmental, but the apprentice behind that hire should be fired. But I digress.
At the point in the pageant when the young lovelies are asked questions by those who pick the winners, the flamboyantly gay man (who by day pries into the private lives of stars and scrawls human DNA-spewing phalli under the faces of those he doesn't like) asked Miss California, Carrie Prejean, whether she approved of gay marriage.
It was a setup.
Miss Prejean is a student at San Diego Christian College - the kind of place activist gay leftists are at war with, where Christians preach what they practice.
"Out of all the topics I studied up on, I dreaded that one: I prayed I would not be asked about gay marriage. If I had any other question, I know I would have won," she told Fox News.
Perez Hilton, whose real name is Mario Armando Lavandeira Jr., affirmed Miss California's fear: "She lost it because of that question. She was definitely the front-runner before that." Miss Prejean received zero points from Perez Hilton, who put her on the spot defending her faith. She finished in second place.
On display at the Miss USA event was the activist left's pageant of selective bullying, a concerted strategy to go after low-hanging fruit like Mormons. But the left leaves off its hit list members in good standing of its normal coalition - its "rainbow" coalition. In California, one of the gayest places on the map, blacks and Hispanics - who disproportionately disapprove of same-sex marriage - get a stunning pass from outraged proponents of gay marriage.
Since 9/11, the highly organized gay left has also been deafeningly silent on Islam's anti-modern approach to homosexuality - let alone same-sex unions. The mullahs in Iran somehow get a major pass while the director of the California Musical Theatre in Sacramento is targeted for ruin. This contradiction is not subtle. Indeed, it's obvious and pathetic.
In fact, in the beauty contest that was the 2008 presidential race, Barack Obama - the left's hand-tailored candidate and an icon of "hope" in the gay community - like his vice president, Joseph R. Biden Jr., shares Miss California's stance on gay marriage.
"I'm a Christian," Mr. Obama told the Chicago Tribune. "And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
Why the pass, fellas?
I fear the vicious and hypocritical path that the activist gay left is headed on will eventually be met with a backlash. If it already hasn't. Activism goes both ways and somehow the majority has a way of having its say. Unless the gay community polices itself better and registers its displeasure against these pitiful and selective acts of political retribution, many tolerant Americans who hold the same beliefs on marriage as Mr. Obama and the Dalai Lama are going to begin to register their displeasure at the voting booth and through consumer boycotts against those who employ or support the thuggish tactics of Perez Hilton and his ilk.
"A Day Without a Gay" may become a prolonged and mostly unspoken reality. Trust me, I don't want to throw out all my John Waters DVDs. But if push comes to shove, and if the bullying continues, I'm more than willing to stay at a Ramada.
• Andrew Breitbart is the founder of the news Web site www.breitbart.com and is co-author of "Hollywood Interrupted: Insanity Chic in Babylon — the Case Against Celebrity."
By Andrew Breitbart | Monday, April 27, 2009
ANALYSIS/OPINION
Greetings, from a poolside cabana at a trendy boutique hotel in Santa Monica. Oh, how I love these overpriced overnight stays. The sleek designs. The ambient music. The uniformly attractive and stylishly dressed young staffs. The plush beds with sheets of an absurdly high thread count. Weird faucets and weirder sinks. I bask in the attention to detail. W is my favorite letter. Philippe Starck is a personal hero.
As a realist, I've built into my mindset that the majority heterosexual population is less than exclusively responsible for creating this and countless other high-end consumer and artistic experiences. Plus, I have a ton of wonderful gay friends - even ones "married" and with children. If gay activists created "A Day Without a Gay" (as they promoted Dec. 10 of last year), I'd be the first to cry "uncle" - even before Cher. So, accordingly, I make philosophical and political accommodations. I'm - as the MTV generation says - "gay-friendly."
But lately, color me "gay perturbed." "Gay-friendly," a term once manifestly redundant, now seems a glaring contradiction.
The gay political-activist community - in my view, a small minority of left-wing agitators acting on behalf of the whole - has been on a binge of bad public behavior, and I'm not referring to the bare-buttocked-chaps look and inappropriately placed sparklers during "pride" parades.
The Mormon community was recently targeted for its support of Proposition 8, the pro-traditional-marriage initiative in California. Donors to the cause were isolated and even exposed on online maps. Businesses were targeted. People lost their jobs.
The latest high-profile act on behalf of the "community" came from the Miss USA pageant. Perez Hilton, the wildly popular Internet gossip and celebrity hit man, somehow got himself placed as a judge of female beauty at the Donald Trump-sponsored event. Not to be judgmental, but the apprentice behind that hire should be fired. But I digress.
At the point in the pageant when the young lovelies are asked questions by those who pick the winners, the flamboyantly gay man (who by day pries into the private lives of stars and scrawls human DNA-spewing phalli under the faces of those he doesn't like) asked Miss California, Carrie Prejean, whether she approved of gay marriage.
It was a setup.
Miss Prejean is a student at San Diego Christian College - the kind of place activist gay leftists are at war with, where Christians preach what they practice.
"Out of all the topics I studied up on, I dreaded that one: I prayed I would not be asked about gay marriage. If I had any other question, I know I would have won," she told Fox News.
Perez Hilton, whose real name is Mario Armando Lavandeira Jr., affirmed Miss California's fear: "She lost it because of that question. She was definitely the front-runner before that." Miss Prejean received zero points from Perez Hilton, who put her on the spot defending her faith. She finished in second place.
On display at the Miss USA event was the activist left's pageant of selective bullying, a concerted strategy to go after low-hanging fruit like Mormons. But the left leaves off its hit list members in good standing of its normal coalition - its "rainbow" coalition. In California, one of the gayest places on the map, blacks and Hispanics - who disproportionately disapprove of same-sex marriage - get a stunning pass from outraged proponents of gay marriage.
Since 9/11, the highly organized gay left has also been deafeningly silent on Islam's anti-modern approach to homosexuality - let alone same-sex unions. The mullahs in Iran somehow get a major pass while the director of the California Musical Theatre in Sacramento is targeted for ruin. This contradiction is not subtle. Indeed, it's obvious and pathetic.
In fact, in the beauty contest that was the 2008 presidential race, Barack Obama - the left's hand-tailored candidate and an icon of "hope" in the gay community - like his vice president, Joseph R. Biden Jr., shares Miss California's stance on gay marriage.
"I'm a Christian," Mr. Obama told the Chicago Tribune. "And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
Why the pass, fellas?
I fear the vicious and hypocritical path that the activist gay left is headed on will eventually be met with a backlash. If it already hasn't. Activism goes both ways and somehow the majority has a way of having its say. Unless the gay community polices itself better and registers its displeasure against these pitiful and selective acts of political retribution, many tolerant Americans who hold the same beliefs on marriage as Mr. Obama and the Dalai Lama are going to begin to register their displeasure at the voting booth and through consumer boycotts against those who employ or support the thuggish tactics of Perez Hilton and his ilk.
"A Day Without a Gay" may become a prolonged and mostly unspoken reality. Trust me, I don't want to throw out all my John Waters DVDs. But if push comes to shove, and if the bullying continues, I'm more than willing to stay at a Ramada.
• Andrew Breitbart is the founder of the news Web site www.breitbart.com and is co-author of "Hollywood Interrupted: Insanity Chic in Babylon — the Case Against Celebrity."
Who are the Donatists today?
One of the frequent critiques by pecusa liberals of those who have left pecusa and joined the emerging North American Anglican province is that we are Donatists. It comes up nearly as often as the shellfish argument. Let's examine this charge.
The Donatist party believed that priests who were once unfaithful to the church ought not to be restored to the church. One of the issues for the Donatists was the validity of the sacraments by priests who had been restored. Just as they believed that priests who had failed the church should not be restored, they also believed that the sacraments consecrated by those restored priests were invalid.
The views of the Donatists divided the church in North Africa and the Donatists asked Constantine to adjudicate the matter. The group that Constantine called together to address the Donatist schism ruled against the Donatists. In 316 Constantine issued an edict against the Donatists and they would not submit to the emperor's edict.
Now, let's apply this today. pecusa liberals say that those who have left them are in schism like the Donatists. The basis of this is that the Donatists believed that they stood for the purity of the Church, and pecusa believes that they hold in tension beliefs that should be allowed to live together in communion. Yet, we have seen that all four instruments of unity in the Anglican Communion have stood against pecusa. We have seen pecusa repeatedly violate the Windsor standards as well as those of the Dar es Salaam communique of the primates. We see that pecusa today argues for autonomy over interdependence and diversity of doctrine over common beliefs.
I haven't heard those on our side of the divide question the validity of pecusa sacraments. While many of us believe that there is a pattern of unfaithfulness in pecusa today, I don't know anyone on our side of the divide who wouldn't cheerfully and joyfully receive any pecusa liberal who would repent of the unfaithful practices of pecusa.
So, who are the Donatists? Isn't it clear that while pecusa cannot claim any semblance of the purity that the Donatists sought for the Church, they are certainly in the Donatist position on the issues that precipitated the current crisis in Anglicanism.
The Donatist party believed that priests who were once unfaithful to the church ought not to be restored to the church. One of the issues for the Donatists was the validity of the sacraments by priests who had been restored. Just as they believed that priests who had failed the church should not be restored, they also believed that the sacraments consecrated by those restored priests were invalid.
The views of the Donatists divided the church in North Africa and the Donatists asked Constantine to adjudicate the matter. The group that Constantine called together to address the Donatist schism ruled against the Donatists. In 316 Constantine issued an edict against the Donatists and they would not submit to the emperor's edict.
Now, let's apply this today. pecusa liberals say that those who have left them are in schism like the Donatists. The basis of this is that the Donatists believed that they stood for the purity of the Church, and pecusa believes that they hold in tension beliefs that should be allowed to live together in communion. Yet, we have seen that all four instruments of unity in the Anglican Communion have stood against pecusa. We have seen pecusa repeatedly violate the Windsor standards as well as those of the Dar es Salaam communique of the primates. We see that pecusa today argues for autonomy over interdependence and diversity of doctrine over common beliefs.
I haven't heard those on our side of the divide question the validity of pecusa sacraments. While many of us believe that there is a pattern of unfaithfulness in pecusa today, I don't know anyone on our side of the divide who wouldn't cheerfully and joyfully receive any pecusa liberal who would repent of the unfaithful practices of pecusa.
So, who are the Donatists? Isn't it clear that while pecusa cannot claim any semblance of the purity that the Donatists sought for the Church, they are certainly in the Donatist position on the issues that precipitated the current crisis in Anglicanism.
The latest Forrester tally
Updated:
Yes, bishops - 10
Yes, Standing Committees - 4
No, Bishops - 32
No, Standing Committees - 18
Still no announcement from the DCNY. Can we expect a late notice that attempts to slip in with a slew of others? Be assured that it will not go unnoticed. We will see how traditionalist the bishop of the DCNY is, or what rationale he will use to justify a vote for the Buddhist-Christian bishop-elect.
For the record, I am getting these updates mostly from Stand Firm. After his first major report on this David Virtue has not been following this vote by vote. SFIF is doing a good job tracking the votes.
Yes, bishops - 10
Yes, Standing Committees - 4
No, Bishops - 32
No, Standing Committees - 18
Still no announcement from the DCNY. Can we expect a late notice that attempts to slip in with a slew of others? Be assured that it will not go unnoticed. We will see how traditionalist the bishop of the DCNY is, or what rationale he will use to justify a vote for the Buddhist-Christian bishop-elect.
For the record, I am getting these updates mostly from Stand Firm. After his first major report on this David Virtue has not been following this vote by vote. SFIF is doing a good job tracking the votes.
Monday, April 27, 2009
A Comment at TitusOneNine on the ACNA
This was picked up by Stand Firm:
William Witt wrote:
I thought I would save some time on this thread by putting in predictable responses in advance:
1. This is a small group of malcontents who will not amount to anything. Ignore them.
2. This is the spearhead of a giant fundamentalist conspiracy that must be stopped at all counts.
3. This group will never amount to anything because they include women priests.
4. This group will never amount to anything because most of their constituent members forbid women priests.
5. This group will fail unless they embrace the 1662 BCP, and nothing later.
6. This group will fail because they are dinosaurs. Notice that they seem stuck on the 1662 BCP.
7. These people are not real Anglicans because they are not recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
8. These people are nothing but puppets of African bishops, who are striving to increase their own power.
9. This is border crossing. That’s not Anglican, and it violates the Windsor process.
10. This group is not genuinely Anglican. They are really just a bunch of Calvinist Protestants and Pentecostals.
11. This group is not sufficiently Reformed. Apparently they are including people who embrace Romish errors.
12. They are just out to steal property that was given by loyal Episcopalians to be preserved in TEC forever. They should just leave the property behind.
13. These people are not really Anglican. They are meeting in storefronts and gymnasiums rather than stone Gothic churches and cathedrals.
I imagine that covers most of the predictable responses. I’m certain there will be more. Logical consistency is not a requirement.
Editor's note: for the record, we at St. Andrew's in Vestal NY left our properties rather than follow the DCNY into court after they sued us. Jesus and the New Testament is very clear that Christians ought not to be suing Christians, but that has not deterred the DCNY or pecusa. We meet at Memorial Park Baptist Church, 1013 Front St. This doesn't endear us to those with more catholic liturgical sensibilities, but it has been an excellent working relationship.
William Witt wrote:
I thought I would save some time on this thread by putting in predictable responses in advance:
1. This is a small group of malcontents who will not amount to anything. Ignore them.
2. This is the spearhead of a giant fundamentalist conspiracy that must be stopped at all counts.
3. This group will never amount to anything because they include women priests.
4. This group will never amount to anything because most of their constituent members forbid women priests.
5. This group will fail unless they embrace the 1662 BCP, and nothing later.
6. This group will fail because they are dinosaurs. Notice that they seem stuck on the 1662 BCP.
7. These people are not real Anglicans because they are not recognized by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
8. These people are nothing but puppets of African bishops, who are striving to increase their own power.
9. This is border crossing. That’s not Anglican, and it violates the Windsor process.
10. This group is not genuinely Anglican. They are really just a bunch of Calvinist Protestants and Pentecostals.
11. This group is not sufficiently Reformed. Apparently they are including people who embrace Romish errors.
12. They are just out to steal property that was given by loyal Episcopalians to be preserved in TEC forever. They should just leave the property behind.
13. These people are not really Anglican. They are meeting in storefronts and gymnasiums rather than stone Gothic churches and cathedrals.
I imagine that covers most of the predictable responses. I’m certain there will be more. Logical consistency is not a requirement.
Editor's note: for the record, we at St. Andrew's in Vestal NY left our properties rather than follow the DCNY into court after they sued us. Jesus and the New Testament is very clear that Christians ought not to be suing Christians, but that has not deterred the DCNY or pecusa. We meet at Memorial Park Baptist Church, 1013 Front St. This doesn't endear us to those with more catholic liturgical sensibilities, but it has been an excellent working relationship.
The Oxymoron of Church Politics
From the Anglican Curmudgeon via TitusOneNine:
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Perhaps no event in current memory has so well brought into focus the aims and aspirations of the LGBT wing in ECUSA as the recent publication of the Communion Partner Bishops' Statement, in conjunction with the Anglican Communion Institute. The Statement, and the circumstances surrounding its publication, served as a filter of sorts, eliminating all the usual background noise and hiss, and allowing one to perceive in its raw and unmitigated form both the political ambitions of the Episcopal left, as well as the sheer fury of which they are capable over any attempt to thwart them.
It was indeed extraordinary to be able to read the Statement in its complete form (with footnote references) on the sites of Episcopal LGBTs and their supporters before the ACI officially published it (with slightly different signatories). Not only did they rush to publish it ahead of time, but they also published the private and confidential emails that were exchanged between the drafters and some of the signatories (I shall not compound the offense by providing a link). As BabyBlue documented, they then indulged in an orgy of self-congratulation over their breaches of privilege.
Many other bloggers have excoriated those who have no regard for the privacy of communications between an attorney and his clients, but I find nothing new in how low those on the left can sink in order to (as they believe) advance their cause. After all, they did not treat as confidential the email they purloined from Bishop Duncan, because they believed it would assist in getting him deposed without a trial. Yet they are the first to cry "Foul!" when their own emails published on the House of Bishops/House of Deputies list, which go to thousands of subscribers, turn up published elsewhere without their permission. As I have demonstrated time and again, the left generally abhors the consistency that logic impels; for them the end justifies the means nearly every time.
Their level of ad hominem attack is just as typical. Forget that fifteen ECUSA bishops have endorsed the Statement as an accurate description of Church polity; focus on the person who advised them---and don't forget to slur the only woman bishop among the signers, too. Along the way, add in some sexual innuendo and calls for deposition and "excommunication" (now there's a hierarchical idea), and you have a particularly odiferous gallimaufry of sentiments. (Again, I refuse to perpetuate the calumnies by repeating them, or by linking to them; you can find them on your own.)
The Statement by the Bishops was also nothing new or surprising---it amplified on the ACI paper written by Mark McCall and published one year ago, but proceeded from the perspective of those bishops who signed it. Given this fact, one has to ask the question: why the outrage this time? It exceeded by far anything which the earlier statement provoked.
After slogging through the Episcopal LGBT posts, and mining them for what substantive points in opposition they contain, I believe I have one explanation, at least, for the overreaction on the left. Keep in mind that the bishops are circulating this Statement just three months before the start of General Convention 2009. Now if ever there was a legislative body about to be convened over which the LGBTs in ECUSA think they have complete control, it is GC2009. Louie Crew has been hard at work for years to prepare first for the diocesan conventions which would elect their deputies, and in the time since has researched and published the name and email of each and every deputy, and identified LGBTs and their supporters among them. The catalog of Resolutions proposed for a vote includes no less than eight proposing to overturn or modify the infamous Resolution B033 from General Convention 2006---as though it had been binding in the first place (it was not).
In short, GC 2009 is slated as the Convention where Episcopal LGBTs can and will finally take complete control over ECUSA's agenda---approving rites for same-sex blessings, adopting canons that would prohibit priests from solemnizing civil marriages, encouraging open communion for all without regard to baptism, pushing off consideration of that dreaded Anglican Covenant, and so on and so forth. The years of patience in mastering the complexities of diocesan elections, in seeing LGBTs and their supporters elected as deputies and then appointed to major committees, and in steering both the budget and the agenda in the directions desired, are about to pay off.
But what if the castle that has been the object of such effort does not actually command the territory? What if, like Dorothy, the Episcoleft finds that there is no omnipotent Wizard on the throne, but just a little man pulling levers and throwing switches behind a curtain? What if the LGBTs manage finally to take over the governing levers of ECUSA only to find out that ECUSA is not hierarchical after all? Ay, that would indeed be tragic, if such years of effort proved to be ultimately in vain.
Therein lies, I think, the source of the ferocity summoned to defend the proposition that the Episcopal Church (USA) is hierarchical. And therein lies also the explanation for the Presiding Bishop's campaign to become a metropolitan in deed, if not in word. For those on the left, authority is useless if it cannot be exercised to further the agenda, and to increase one's hold on power. (This is why their ultimate authority is the Holy Spirit---no one can say for certain what He does and does not approve, and so He can be cited as in support of anything. Power without accountability is to those on the left as catnip is to a cat.)
The Statement from the Communion Partners Bishops strikes straight at the heart of the many-headed Episcopal hydra, by insisting that each of the heads is not subject to an overarching authority in all things, but is capable of making autonomous decisions on its own where no power has been ceded---regardless of what resolutions may be passed (or defeated) by General Convention. A resolution from General Convention is nothing more than a momentary consensus, just like a resolution from Lambeth. But there is this difference: there is no Constitution spelling out any authority of the Lambeth Conference, with the result that its powers of suasion are purely moral and collegial. The Constitution of ECUSA, on the other hand, spells out in detail the makeup, the procedures and the authority of General Convention, so that anyone who wants to know whether it has power to legislate on a given subject can look it up. (Hint: if it's not there, then it has no power to legislate.) Lambeth at its roots is moral, while General Convention is pretty much political.
And being political, it is a prize to be taken over, from the left's point of view. The right has all but ceded the contest, and is of necessity retreating to the ultimate reality of ECUSA's polity: ECUSA is a voluntary confederation of dioceses. It always has been, and will continue to be unless and until the requisite language of supremacy is adopted in the Constitution. Even then, however, there would be no mechanism for resolving disputes between the various branches about meaning and interpretation unless there were also created a Supreme Ecclesiastical Court, or unless a metropolitan were created and vested with that authority. (Then we would have the anomaly of an Anglican Church vesting supreme authority in a "pope"!)
Since ECUSA for the time being is a voluntary confederation, the solution for those who cannot agree with the decisions taken and directions announced at the national level is to withdraw from the confederation. The mystical idea that the dioceses are joined in some kind of indissoluble "union" that is greater than any of their individual selves is a leftist fantasy that has no support in either the Church's history or its governing documents. It springs from a desire to control---or more correctly, from an instinct not to cede control when the battlements have been breached, and the mechanism taken over.
What that mechanism today chiefly amounts to is the power to decide how money shall be spent. The Church's triennial budget exceeds $150 million, and that is a lot of money. Even more, there are hundreds of millions---even billions---behind that in long-term investments and trust funds. It is thus no small prize to be taken over, I grant you.
Viewed as a political prize, however, the Church ceases to be a Church. Its mission is being determined by politics rather than under the governance of the Holy Spirit. So long as the battle rages for the prize, the fiction that it is a Church has to be maintained at all costs, because no one who could affect the outcome must realize what is at stake. And with the publicizing of views like those expressed in the Bishops' Statement, the risk is now great that the momentum so carefully accumulated over the years will be seen for what it is: nothing more (or less) than a political attempt to take over a money machine.
And that is why the Bishops, the ACI and its lawyer have received the treatment they did. Only those who are plotting already can regard the publication of such a power-renouncing statement of subsidiarity as "an unprecedented power grab by anti-gay bishops who will assert they are not bound by the Episcopal Church's governing body: General Convention."
The spectacle of taking over a church politically, of even speaking in terms of a church "power-grab", is so antithetical to the essence of a church that in the end it must be self-defeating. Let the Episcopal LGBTs take over General Convention, I say, and let them show the entire church how quickly $9 million can go down the drain in just twelve days. Offer resistance, to be sure, but let it be only as much as may be required to make them show their colors. Once they have declared themselves completely, let them have the floor for as long as they want. Attendance will dwindle, voluntary contributions will evaporate, and eventually the trust funds themselves will be depleted. The true test of what ECUSA can be will come when it has no more money.
Posted by A. S. Haley at 11:34 AM
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Perhaps no event in current memory has so well brought into focus the aims and aspirations of the LGBT wing in ECUSA as the recent publication of the Communion Partner Bishops' Statement, in conjunction with the Anglican Communion Institute. The Statement, and the circumstances surrounding its publication, served as a filter of sorts, eliminating all the usual background noise and hiss, and allowing one to perceive in its raw and unmitigated form both the political ambitions of the Episcopal left, as well as the sheer fury of which they are capable over any attempt to thwart them.
It was indeed extraordinary to be able to read the Statement in its complete form (with footnote references) on the sites of Episcopal LGBTs and their supporters before the ACI officially published it (with slightly different signatories). Not only did they rush to publish it ahead of time, but they also published the private and confidential emails that were exchanged between the drafters and some of the signatories (I shall not compound the offense by providing a link). As BabyBlue documented, they then indulged in an orgy of self-congratulation over their breaches of privilege.
Many other bloggers have excoriated those who have no regard for the privacy of communications between an attorney and his clients, but I find nothing new in how low those on the left can sink in order to (as they believe) advance their cause. After all, they did not treat as confidential the email they purloined from Bishop Duncan, because they believed it would assist in getting him deposed without a trial. Yet they are the first to cry "Foul!" when their own emails published on the House of Bishops/House of Deputies list, which go to thousands of subscribers, turn up published elsewhere without their permission. As I have demonstrated time and again, the left generally abhors the consistency that logic impels; for them the end justifies the means nearly every time.
Their level of ad hominem attack is just as typical. Forget that fifteen ECUSA bishops have endorsed the Statement as an accurate description of Church polity; focus on the person who advised them---and don't forget to slur the only woman bishop among the signers, too. Along the way, add in some sexual innuendo and calls for deposition and "excommunication" (now there's a hierarchical idea), and you have a particularly odiferous gallimaufry of sentiments. (Again, I refuse to perpetuate the calumnies by repeating them, or by linking to them; you can find them on your own.)
The Statement by the Bishops was also nothing new or surprising---it amplified on the ACI paper written by Mark McCall and published one year ago, but proceeded from the perspective of those bishops who signed it. Given this fact, one has to ask the question: why the outrage this time? It exceeded by far anything which the earlier statement provoked.
After slogging through the Episcopal LGBT posts, and mining them for what substantive points in opposition they contain, I believe I have one explanation, at least, for the overreaction on the left. Keep in mind that the bishops are circulating this Statement just three months before the start of General Convention 2009. Now if ever there was a legislative body about to be convened over which the LGBTs in ECUSA think they have complete control, it is GC2009. Louie Crew has been hard at work for years to prepare first for the diocesan conventions which would elect their deputies, and in the time since has researched and published the name and email of each and every deputy, and identified LGBTs and their supporters among them. The catalog of Resolutions proposed for a vote includes no less than eight proposing to overturn or modify the infamous Resolution B033 from General Convention 2006---as though it had been binding in the first place (it was not).
In short, GC 2009 is slated as the Convention where Episcopal LGBTs can and will finally take complete control over ECUSA's agenda---approving rites for same-sex blessings, adopting canons that would prohibit priests from solemnizing civil marriages, encouraging open communion for all without regard to baptism, pushing off consideration of that dreaded Anglican Covenant, and so on and so forth. The years of patience in mastering the complexities of diocesan elections, in seeing LGBTs and their supporters elected as deputies and then appointed to major committees, and in steering both the budget and the agenda in the directions desired, are about to pay off.
But what if the castle that has been the object of such effort does not actually command the territory? What if, like Dorothy, the Episcoleft finds that there is no omnipotent Wizard on the throne, but just a little man pulling levers and throwing switches behind a curtain? What if the LGBTs manage finally to take over the governing levers of ECUSA only to find out that ECUSA is not hierarchical after all? Ay, that would indeed be tragic, if such years of effort proved to be ultimately in vain.
Therein lies, I think, the source of the ferocity summoned to defend the proposition that the Episcopal Church (USA) is hierarchical. And therein lies also the explanation for the Presiding Bishop's campaign to become a metropolitan in deed, if not in word. For those on the left, authority is useless if it cannot be exercised to further the agenda, and to increase one's hold on power. (This is why their ultimate authority is the Holy Spirit---no one can say for certain what He does and does not approve, and so He can be cited as in support of anything. Power without accountability is to those on the left as catnip is to a cat.)
The Statement from the Communion Partners Bishops strikes straight at the heart of the many-headed Episcopal hydra, by insisting that each of the heads is not subject to an overarching authority in all things, but is capable of making autonomous decisions on its own where no power has been ceded---regardless of what resolutions may be passed (or defeated) by General Convention. A resolution from General Convention is nothing more than a momentary consensus, just like a resolution from Lambeth. But there is this difference: there is no Constitution spelling out any authority of the Lambeth Conference, with the result that its powers of suasion are purely moral and collegial. The Constitution of ECUSA, on the other hand, spells out in detail the makeup, the procedures and the authority of General Convention, so that anyone who wants to know whether it has power to legislate on a given subject can look it up. (Hint: if it's not there, then it has no power to legislate.) Lambeth at its roots is moral, while General Convention is pretty much political.
And being political, it is a prize to be taken over, from the left's point of view. The right has all but ceded the contest, and is of necessity retreating to the ultimate reality of ECUSA's polity: ECUSA is a voluntary confederation of dioceses. It always has been, and will continue to be unless and until the requisite language of supremacy is adopted in the Constitution. Even then, however, there would be no mechanism for resolving disputes between the various branches about meaning and interpretation unless there were also created a Supreme Ecclesiastical Court, or unless a metropolitan were created and vested with that authority. (Then we would have the anomaly of an Anglican Church vesting supreme authority in a "pope"!)
Since ECUSA for the time being is a voluntary confederation, the solution for those who cannot agree with the decisions taken and directions announced at the national level is to withdraw from the confederation. The mystical idea that the dioceses are joined in some kind of indissoluble "union" that is greater than any of their individual selves is a leftist fantasy that has no support in either the Church's history or its governing documents. It springs from a desire to control---or more correctly, from an instinct not to cede control when the battlements have been breached, and the mechanism taken over.
What that mechanism today chiefly amounts to is the power to decide how money shall be spent. The Church's triennial budget exceeds $150 million, and that is a lot of money. Even more, there are hundreds of millions---even billions---behind that in long-term investments and trust funds. It is thus no small prize to be taken over, I grant you.
Viewed as a political prize, however, the Church ceases to be a Church. Its mission is being determined by politics rather than under the governance of the Holy Spirit. So long as the battle rages for the prize, the fiction that it is a Church has to be maintained at all costs, because no one who could affect the outcome must realize what is at stake. And with the publicizing of views like those expressed in the Bishops' Statement, the risk is now great that the momentum so carefully accumulated over the years will be seen for what it is: nothing more (or less) than a political attempt to take over a money machine.
And that is why the Bishops, the ACI and its lawyer have received the treatment they did. Only those who are plotting already can regard the publication of such a power-renouncing statement of subsidiarity as "an unprecedented power grab by anti-gay bishops who will assert they are not bound by the Episcopal Church's governing body: General Convention."
The spectacle of taking over a church politically, of even speaking in terms of a church "power-grab", is so antithetical to the essence of a church that in the end it must be self-defeating. Let the Episcopal LGBTs take over General Convention, I say, and let them show the entire church how quickly $9 million can go down the drain in just twelve days. Offer resistance, to be sure, but let it be only as much as may be required to make them show their colors. Once they have declared themselves completely, let them have the floor for as long as they want. Attendance will dwindle, voluntary contributions will evaporate, and eventually the trust funds themselves will be depleted. The true test of what ECUSA can be will come when it has no more money.
Posted by A. S. Haley at 11:34 AM
Episcopal Church resembles 'Peace Corps in ecclesiastical drag'
This was in today's email box:
Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 4/27/2009 6:00:00
A veteran newspaper columnist and longtime member of the Episcopal Church USA says the denomination has cheerfully given up truth to placate a relativistic culture.
William Murchison's new book is called Mortal Follies: Episcopalians and the Crisis of Mainline Christianity. He says the denomination, like other churches of the American mainline, seems to be in a mad dash to catch up with a secular culture that values self-expression and does not want to promote the holy and just God of the Bible.
ECUSA's Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, he says, has set the tone for the denomination.
"When our presiding bishop implies she's more concerned about hunger, primary education, and AIDS and issues like that, then it's clear that she doesn't have her mind on the primary objectives the church ought to be following -- which are the presentation of the gospel," says the author. "And that's what makes the church look like the Peace Corps in ecclesiastical drag."
For that reason, Murchison says many feel the denomination is irrelevant and have left. But he remains optimistic that the church can return to its biblical roots.
"I happen to think this is a wonderful time for evangelism," he shares. "I'm too old, at 67, to be a pessimist; I'm more of an optimist. And I believe that God's in charge -- and he will take us through the trials of today, and he will bring his people where he wants them to be."
Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 4/27/2009 6:00:00
A veteran newspaper columnist and longtime member of the Episcopal Church USA says the denomination has cheerfully given up truth to placate a relativistic culture.
William Murchison's new book is called Mortal Follies: Episcopalians and the Crisis of Mainline Christianity. He says the denomination, like other churches of the American mainline, seems to be in a mad dash to catch up with a secular culture that values self-expression and does not want to promote the holy and just God of the Bible.
ECUSA's Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, he says, has set the tone for the denomination.
"When our presiding bishop implies she's more concerned about hunger, primary education, and AIDS and issues like that, then it's clear that she doesn't have her mind on the primary objectives the church ought to be following -- which are the presentation of the gospel," says the author. "And that's what makes the church look like the Peace Corps in ecclesiastical drag."
For that reason, Murchison says many feel the denomination is irrelevant and have left. But he remains optimistic that the church can return to its biblical roots.
"I happen to think this is a wonderful time for evangelism," he shares. "I'm too old, at 67, to be a pessimist; I'm more of an optimist. And I believe that God's in charge -- and he will take us through the trials of today, and he will bring his people where he wants them to be."
GAYS CAN CHANGE. REPARATIVE THERAPY WORKS
An Exclusive Interview with Dr. Joseph Nicolosi
By David W. Virtue in London
www.virtueonline.org
4/27/2009
At a two-day Sex and the City Conference near Westminster Abbey, I had an opportunity to hear and see first-hand the work of reparative therapist Dr. Joseph Nicolosi as well as listen to the distinguished psychiatrist and physicist, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover. Both men believe that men and women can overcome unwanted same-sex attractions and that the scientific evidence is on their side. They believe that the whole gay issue has been so heavily politicized from the APA down to street outrage that is almost impossible to get a fair hearing for those who voluntarily choose to abandon the homosexual lifestyle.
I spoke with Dr. Nicolosi, a California therapist who employs seven therapists who deal exclusively in sexual addictions and same sex attractions. He heads an organization called NARTH - the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality. NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality. As an organization, they disseminate educational information, conduct and collect scientific research, promote effective therapeutic treatment, and provide referrals to those who seek their assistance. NARTH upholds the rights of individuals with unwanted homosexual attraction to receive effective psychological care and the right of professionals to offer that care.
I spoke at length with Dr. Nicolosi about the issues and problems he faces.
VOL: What is the central social issue?
Nicolosi: It is quite amazing how to be gay and/or pro gay is to be anti-intellectual. Intellectually, it implies an enquiring mind as to causation and the unspoken taboo is never to ask why a person is homosexual. A true intellectual inquiry always addresses causation. Once you ask why, you open it up to causation. It is amazing to me as a psychologist how my profession will spend thousands of hours and dollars asking the most minute mundane and petty questions and never ask why is this person Homosexual. How dare you ask?
VOL: Well, is there a gay gene?
Nicolosi: After 35 years of investigation, they still have not discovered the Gay gene. After 36 years since the APA dropped its diagnosis of Homosexuality and during that period of time, no credible child developmental model has emerged, to explain the homosexual condition without traumatizing the child. In other words, that fact remains that if you traumatize a child in a particular way you will create a homosexual condition. If you do not traumatize a child, he will be heterosexual. If you do not traumatize a child in a particular way, he will be heterosexual. The nature of that trauma is an early attachment break during the bonding phase with the father.
VOL: What have you seen take shape over the last quarter century?
Nicolosi: I have been doing this work for 25 years and I have seen an interesting shift in the clients who come to our clinic. We used to see the case majority of clients in their late 20s and early 30s. Today about 40% of our clients are teenagers, thanks to the pro-gay indoctrination of our educational and entertainment sources.
Gay porn on the Internet and gay chat lines have pushed at risk adolescence into experimentation and consequent sexual arousal regarding homoerotic images. The bad news is that more teenagers are claiming themselves to be gay or "bi". The good news is that responsible parents are getting their teens into therapy sooner. 50% of these teenagers are motivated to change and another 50% are not.
VOL: Is "once gay always gay" true?
Nicolosi: A central cornerstone of gay propaganda is "once gay always gay". It is amazing how the gay agenda has successfully convinced most people that one is ether gay or straight, determined of course by the mythological gay gene.
What is particularly shocking for me is that many church leaders actually believe that God created two kinds of people - homosexual and heterosexual. We believe that all people are heterosexual, but that some heterosexuals have a homosexual problem.
VOL: Is there a predisposition to homosexuality?
Nicolosi: We have been conceding the possibility of temperamental pre-disposition, usually described as timid, shy, non-aggressive, artistic and introverted. We can debate that assumption. Since as we believe the homosexual condition begins with an intense but insecure attachment to the mother, we attribute that to temperament. It may in fact be a consequence of a fragile attachment to a secure relationship with the mother.
John Bowlby, the great pioneer in childhood attachment, described the child who had an insecure attachment to his mother as being timid shy, introverted and he wasn't even talking about homosexuality. It is from the insecure relationship with the mother that the boy is unprepared to bond with the typically distant detached emotionally aloof and/or hostile father.
VOL: What happened in 1973 when the APA said homosexuality was no longer a disordered behavior?
Nicolosi: It is amazing to think in one day in 1973, 100 years of child studies in psychoanalytic literature was completely thrown out and homosexuality was pronounced "normal".
The three great pioneers of psychoanalysis, Freud, Yung and Adler all saw homosexuality as disordered and the entire development of psychoanalytic research continued until one day in 1973.
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "It is the gene the dare not speak its name". No one is supposed to ask causation. The consequence to our profession is an intimidating research environment in which clinicians and researchers can no longer explore causation of a condition that many find distressful.
VOL: Do men and women come to you voluntarily?
Nicolosi: Absolutely.
VOL: So where does the queer opposition's understanding come from and why do they hate the possibility of change, if someone voluntarily knocks on your door and says, "help me"?
Nicolosi: Supposedly, they are coming in because of their "unresolved internalized homophobia." The only acceptable treatment, therefore, must be not to give the client what he is asking for, but to give the client precisely what he is not asking for.
The justification for denying the client's autonomy and self- determination is the arrogant assumption that "we know better what's good for you than you do". We will tell you what your problem is, which is to learn to enjoy gay sex. So drop your inhibitions drop your archaic religious beliefs, forget your morality or ethic and join the gay parade.
VOL: Who are the "we?"
Nicolosi: The "we" is not science; the "we" are the gay activists who have a monopoly on public policies disseminated through the mental health associations.
VOL: There seems to be a coerciveness about the gay agenda, that it is no longer an issue of free choice.
Nicolosi: True. It is not even respecting human dignity. It is a violation of freedom of choice. The client seeking help to develop his heterosexual potential to diminish what he finds distressful in his life must be abandoned. His dream for a wife, marriage, children, white picket fence, and a traditional lifestyle must be discarded because gay activism knows better. They are happy being gay so you must be too.
VOL: You have said the Great Lie in homosexuality is "once gay always gay". Can you elaborate?
Nicolosi: Central to the gay agenda and its determined goal to have complete homosexual acceptance as normal and natural, is the belief that certain people are just born gay. Gay activists are very familiar with many opinion surveys, which show consistently that if people believe gays are born that way and therefore have no choice, there will be greater tolerance and acceptance. But if you introduce the possibility of choice, then there is less tolerance. So every time a man stands up and says 'I was once homosexual and am no longer' that strikes at the heart of the gay agenda.
I believe that the gay rights movement has gained sufficient success in popular acceptance and the acquisition of rights and civil liberties that they no longer need to feel threatened by ex gay testimonies. I believe that the gay community is now sufficiently accepted by the popular culture that they can now afford to allow individuals to transition out of homosexuality without the need to disparage a former homosexual's life story.
VOL: In your practice over 25 years, what sort of success have you experienced and what about failure?
Nicolosi: I can say that the most important determinant in therapeutic success is motivation. If the client is highly motivated, barring additional psychological problems, he will experience significant diminishment in his same sex attractions. There are individuals who experience no change, so success cannot be guaranteed for everyone, but I can tell you that over the past 25 years as a clinical director supervising seven therapists at a clinic which treats about 135 ongoing cases a week, we have developed our techniques and therapeutic interventions such that we can bring about greater change in a shorter period of time. All things being equal, we now expect the client to experience significant change in two or three months.
VOL: Are they cured?
Nicolosi: This is not to say he or she is completely "cured" of homosexuality and the process may take many years, perhaps a lifetime, but he will acquire skills and self understanding to have his homosexual temptations become less and less until they become insignificant. One man described it as being finally and occasionally like a gnat buzzing around his ear.
VOL: Have you ever experienced clients who completely got over their homosexuality?
Nicolosi: Absolutely. Yes. I am working with a 63 year old man who has been struggling with homosexuality all his life. Six months in therapy with me, he has no homosexual attractions and no homosexual temptations at all and he now is complaining that his life is boring because so much of his life was taken up with gay porn and gay fantasies. By the way, we did it all on SKYPE. He is based in Sydney, Australia.
VOL: What are the ratios of success?
Nicolosi: I used to say one-third no change, one-third significant improvement and one-third treatment success. It is getting to be more are successfully shedding their unwanted same sex attractions. I see the numbers for complete improvement. For many who claim not to be completely "cured", it is less and less till it is little more than a gnat.
VOL: Tell me about the third that fail?
Nicolosi: That third consists of teenagers dragged in by parents who don't want to be there. Husbands dragged in by their wives or individuals sent by their pastors and priests who don't want to be there. This returns us to motivation, which is essential.
Another segment of the homosexual population who may fail but who are motivated have additional psychological issues that impede their treatment success.
VOL: Such as?
Nicolosi: Addictions, low impulse control, narcissistic personality disorder, inability to self reflect and clinical depression, to name some.
VOL: A well known American evangelical leader recently came out of the closet. You have undoubtedly read about him. He later said (within four months that he had been cured). What is your diagnosis of him?
Nicolosi: I would ask has he dealt with the underlying causes of his homosexuality. Uncompromising honesty with oneself is a necessary requirement to treatment success. If he has beaten it in four months, he should write a book about how he did it. It would be an instant bestseller. I would buy a copy.
VOL: You talk about a number of great myths about homosexuality. The first is that 10% of the population is gay. Is that true?
Nicolosi: That was a lie promoted by Alfred Kinsey over 60 years ago and it has become the standard cry of gay activists and the standard claim of homosexual apologists. In fact, it is 1.5 percent to 2 percent. Kinsey himself had a personal interest in inflating the percentage because he himself was homosexual.
VOL: Once "gay always gay"?
Nicolosi: Not true. There is no gay gene. It is a myth. The cry is that the homosexual is normal in every other way except for his sexual preference. Not true, it is the opposite. There are deep-seated personality differences, which create the condition and in fact, homosexuality is only the tip of the iceberg, a mere symptom of a deeper personality conflict.
VOL: Are you seeing more ex-gay people?
Nicolosi: It is wonderful to see men and women in greater numbers standing up publicly and telling their story of overcoming unwanted same sex attractions. Ten years ago, we could not find one person who would go public. Today a young person struggling with such feelings can look to many models of individuals who preceded him. Today there are websites with numerous individuals telling their stories in front of a camera. At a recent concert in Italy, an Italian pop singer named Povia did a great song called "Luca was gay" introducing the ex gay character into the pop culture. It was a touching moment. You can see the video here. http://www.narth.com/videos/povia.html
VOL: What does this portend for the future?
Nicolosi: There is a great momentum building toward the recognition and respect for the man or woman desiring a heterosexual life.
VOL: Thank you Dr. Nicolosi.
END
By David W. Virtue in London
www.virtueonline.org
4/27/2009
At a two-day Sex and the City Conference near Westminster Abbey, I had an opportunity to hear and see first-hand the work of reparative therapist Dr. Joseph Nicolosi as well as listen to the distinguished psychiatrist and physicist, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover. Both men believe that men and women can overcome unwanted same-sex attractions and that the scientific evidence is on their side. They believe that the whole gay issue has been so heavily politicized from the APA down to street outrage that is almost impossible to get a fair hearing for those who voluntarily choose to abandon the homosexual lifestyle.
I spoke with Dr. Nicolosi, a California therapist who employs seven therapists who deal exclusively in sexual addictions and same sex attractions. He heads an organization called NARTH - the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality. NARTH is a professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality. As an organization, they disseminate educational information, conduct and collect scientific research, promote effective therapeutic treatment, and provide referrals to those who seek their assistance. NARTH upholds the rights of individuals with unwanted homosexual attraction to receive effective psychological care and the right of professionals to offer that care.
I spoke at length with Dr. Nicolosi about the issues and problems he faces.
VOL: What is the central social issue?
Nicolosi: It is quite amazing how to be gay and/or pro gay is to be anti-intellectual. Intellectually, it implies an enquiring mind as to causation and the unspoken taboo is never to ask why a person is homosexual. A true intellectual inquiry always addresses causation. Once you ask why, you open it up to causation. It is amazing to me as a psychologist how my profession will spend thousands of hours and dollars asking the most minute mundane and petty questions and never ask why is this person Homosexual. How dare you ask?
VOL: Well, is there a gay gene?
Nicolosi: After 35 years of investigation, they still have not discovered the Gay gene. After 36 years since the APA dropped its diagnosis of Homosexuality and during that period of time, no credible child developmental model has emerged, to explain the homosexual condition without traumatizing the child. In other words, that fact remains that if you traumatize a child in a particular way you will create a homosexual condition. If you do not traumatize a child, he will be heterosexual. If you do not traumatize a child in a particular way, he will be heterosexual. The nature of that trauma is an early attachment break during the bonding phase with the father.
VOL: What have you seen take shape over the last quarter century?
Nicolosi: I have been doing this work for 25 years and I have seen an interesting shift in the clients who come to our clinic. We used to see the case majority of clients in their late 20s and early 30s. Today about 40% of our clients are teenagers, thanks to the pro-gay indoctrination of our educational and entertainment sources.
Gay porn on the Internet and gay chat lines have pushed at risk adolescence into experimentation and consequent sexual arousal regarding homoerotic images. The bad news is that more teenagers are claiming themselves to be gay or "bi". The good news is that responsible parents are getting their teens into therapy sooner. 50% of these teenagers are motivated to change and another 50% are not.
VOL: Is "once gay always gay" true?
Nicolosi: A central cornerstone of gay propaganda is "once gay always gay". It is amazing how the gay agenda has successfully convinced most people that one is ether gay or straight, determined of course by the mythological gay gene.
What is particularly shocking for me is that many church leaders actually believe that God created two kinds of people - homosexual and heterosexual. We believe that all people are heterosexual, but that some heterosexuals have a homosexual problem.
VOL: Is there a predisposition to homosexuality?
Nicolosi: We have been conceding the possibility of temperamental pre-disposition, usually described as timid, shy, non-aggressive, artistic and introverted. We can debate that assumption. Since as we believe the homosexual condition begins with an intense but insecure attachment to the mother, we attribute that to temperament. It may in fact be a consequence of a fragile attachment to a secure relationship with the mother.
John Bowlby, the great pioneer in childhood attachment, described the child who had an insecure attachment to his mother as being timid shy, introverted and he wasn't even talking about homosexuality. It is from the insecure relationship with the mother that the boy is unprepared to bond with the typically distant detached emotionally aloof and/or hostile father.
VOL: What happened in 1973 when the APA said homosexuality was no longer a disordered behavior?
Nicolosi: It is amazing to think in one day in 1973, 100 years of child studies in psychoanalytic literature was completely thrown out and homosexuality was pronounced "normal".
The three great pioneers of psychoanalysis, Freud, Yung and Adler all saw homosexuality as disordered and the entire development of psychoanalytic research continued until one day in 1973.
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, "It is the gene the dare not speak its name". No one is supposed to ask causation. The consequence to our profession is an intimidating research environment in which clinicians and researchers can no longer explore causation of a condition that many find distressful.
VOL: Do men and women come to you voluntarily?
Nicolosi: Absolutely.
VOL: So where does the queer opposition's understanding come from and why do they hate the possibility of change, if someone voluntarily knocks on your door and says, "help me"?
Nicolosi: Supposedly, they are coming in because of their "unresolved internalized homophobia." The only acceptable treatment, therefore, must be not to give the client what he is asking for, but to give the client precisely what he is not asking for.
The justification for denying the client's autonomy and self- determination is the arrogant assumption that "we know better what's good for you than you do". We will tell you what your problem is, which is to learn to enjoy gay sex. So drop your inhibitions drop your archaic religious beliefs, forget your morality or ethic and join the gay parade.
VOL: Who are the "we?"
Nicolosi: The "we" is not science; the "we" are the gay activists who have a monopoly on public policies disseminated through the mental health associations.
VOL: There seems to be a coerciveness about the gay agenda, that it is no longer an issue of free choice.
Nicolosi: True. It is not even respecting human dignity. It is a violation of freedom of choice. The client seeking help to develop his heterosexual potential to diminish what he finds distressful in his life must be abandoned. His dream for a wife, marriage, children, white picket fence, and a traditional lifestyle must be discarded because gay activism knows better. They are happy being gay so you must be too.
VOL: You have said the Great Lie in homosexuality is "once gay always gay". Can you elaborate?
Nicolosi: Central to the gay agenda and its determined goal to have complete homosexual acceptance as normal and natural, is the belief that certain people are just born gay. Gay activists are very familiar with many opinion surveys, which show consistently that if people believe gays are born that way and therefore have no choice, there will be greater tolerance and acceptance. But if you introduce the possibility of choice, then there is less tolerance. So every time a man stands up and says 'I was once homosexual and am no longer' that strikes at the heart of the gay agenda.
I believe that the gay rights movement has gained sufficient success in popular acceptance and the acquisition of rights and civil liberties that they no longer need to feel threatened by ex gay testimonies. I believe that the gay community is now sufficiently accepted by the popular culture that they can now afford to allow individuals to transition out of homosexuality without the need to disparage a former homosexual's life story.
VOL: In your practice over 25 years, what sort of success have you experienced and what about failure?
Nicolosi: I can say that the most important determinant in therapeutic success is motivation. If the client is highly motivated, barring additional psychological problems, he will experience significant diminishment in his same sex attractions. There are individuals who experience no change, so success cannot be guaranteed for everyone, but I can tell you that over the past 25 years as a clinical director supervising seven therapists at a clinic which treats about 135 ongoing cases a week, we have developed our techniques and therapeutic interventions such that we can bring about greater change in a shorter period of time. All things being equal, we now expect the client to experience significant change in two or three months.
VOL: Are they cured?
Nicolosi: This is not to say he or she is completely "cured" of homosexuality and the process may take many years, perhaps a lifetime, but he will acquire skills and self understanding to have his homosexual temptations become less and less until they become insignificant. One man described it as being finally and occasionally like a gnat buzzing around his ear.
VOL: Have you ever experienced clients who completely got over their homosexuality?
Nicolosi: Absolutely. Yes. I am working with a 63 year old man who has been struggling with homosexuality all his life. Six months in therapy with me, he has no homosexual attractions and no homosexual temptations at all and he now is complaining that his life is boring because so much of his life was taken up with gay porn and gay fantasies. By the way, we did it all on SKYPE. He is based in Sydney, Australia.
VOL: What are the ratios of success?
Nicolosi: I used to say one-third no change, one-third significant improvement and one-third treatment success. It is getting to be more are successfully shedding their unwanted same sex attractions. I see the numbers for complete improvement. For many who claim not to be completely "cured", it is less and less till it is little more than a gnat.
VOL: Tell me about the third that fail?
Nicolosi: That third consists of teenagers dragged in by parents who don't want to be there. Husbands dragged in by their wives or individuals sent by their pastors and priests who don't want to be there. This returns us to motivation, which is essential.
Another segment of the homosexual population who may fail but who are motivated have additional psychological issues that impede their treatment success.
VOL: Such as?
Nicolosi: Addictions, low impulse control, narcissistic personality disorder, inability to self reflect and clinical depression, to name some.
VOL: A well known American evangelical leader recently came out of the closet. You have undoubtedly read about him. He later said (within four months that he had been cured). What is your diagnosis of him?
Nicolosi: I would ask has he dealt with the underlying causes of his homosexuality. Uncompromising honesty with oneself is a necessary requirement to treatment success. If he has beaten it in four months, he should write a book about how he did it. It would be an instant bestseller. I would buy a copy.
VOL: You talk about a number of great myths about homosexuality. The first is that 10% of the population is gay. Is that true?
Nicolosi: That was a lie promoted by Alfred Kinsey over 60 years ago and it has become the standard cry of gay activists and the standard claim of homosexual apologists. In fact, it is 1.5 percent to 2 percent. Kinsey himself had a personal interest in inflating the percentage because he himself was homosexual.
VOL: Once "gay always gay"?
Nicolosi: Not true. There is no gay gene. It is a myth. The cry is that the homosexual is normal in every other way except for his sexual preference. Not true, it is the opposite. There are deep-seated personality differences, which create the condition and in fact, homosexuality is only the tip of the iceberg, a mere symptom of a deeper personality conflict.
VOL: Are you seeing more ex-gay people?
Nicolosi: It is wonderful to see men and women in greater numbers standing up publicly and telling their story of overcoming unwanted same sex attractions. Ten years ago, we could not find one person who would go public. Today a young person struggling with such feelings can look to many models of individuals who preceded him. Today there are websites with numerous individuals telling their stories in front of a camera. At a recent concert in Italy, an Italian pop singer named Povia did a great song called "Luca was gay" introducing the ex gay character into the pop culture. It was a touching moment. You can see the video here. http://www.narth.com/videos/povia.html
VOL: What does this portend for the future?
Nicolosi: There is a great momentum building toward the recognition and respect for the man or woman desiring a heterosexual life.
VOL: Thank you Dr. Nicolosi.
END
pecusa strategy disclosed by the ENS
It has been pointed out that Matthew Davies from the Episcopal News Service wrote on April 3 that the Anglican Consultive Council is "the communion's main legislative body and the only instrument with the authority to ask the Anglican provinces to sign onto the covenant." This would appear to signal pecusa's strategy for stalling and hopefully (that is, it is hoped by pecusa liberals) killing the Anglican Covenant.
As has also been pointed out, Ephraim Radner said on a TitusOneNine comment thread:
"The ACC does not "own" this or any other covenant proposal. They can commend, not commend, decide to revise or not. But it is not their document. The Primates could commend it, or anyone else could. Provinces could adopt it with or without any Instrument's commendation. Obviously, it would be helpful if representative bodies from the broad range of the Communion's life chose to facilitate rather than deter covenanting at this point."
It should also be pointed out that the ACC is the most liberal of the four instruments of unity with a strong representation from liberal and declining provinces like pecusa. So, when the ACC meets, pecusa, the Anglican Church in Canada and other liberal provinces of the Anglican Communion can be counted on to try to slow if not stop the progress that is being achieved toward having a semblance of common beliefs and practices in the Communion. Stay tuned, this will be interesting.
As has also been pointed out, Ephraim Radner said on a TitusOneNine comment thread:
"The ACC does not "own" this or any other covenant proposal. They can commend, not commend, decide to revise or not. But it is not their document. The Primates could commend it, or anyone else could. Provinces could adopt it with or without any Instrument's commendation. Obviously, it would be helpful if representative bodies from the broad range of the Communion's life chose to facilitate rather than deter covenanting at this point."
It should also be pointed out that the ACC is the most liberal of the four instruments of unity with a strong representation from liberal and declining provinces like pecusa. So, when the ACC meets, pecusa, the Anglican Church in Canada and other liberal provinces of the Anglican Communion can be counted on to try to slow if not stop the progress that is being achieved toward having a semblance of common beliefs and practices in the Communion. Stay tuned, this will be interesting.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
CANA's Malaria Mission
From the Convocation of Anglicans in North America:
April 26, 2009
April 25 was named "World Malaria Day". At the beginning of Lent, Bishop Minns sent out an email asking CANA congregations to consider raising funds for CANA's ongoing mission partnership with CAPA's Malaria office in Africa through whom we can purchase and distribute ITNs (insecticide treated nets) for only $7 (as opposed to some other organizations which have more overhead and therefore must charge more).
To make a contribution to CANA's malaria mission, please mail your checks to the following:
ATTN: ITNs
CANA
3301 Hidden Meadow Drive
Herndon VA 20171
If you have any questions about this mission partnership, please contact the director of CANA's "Inspired Service" task force for social justice and missions, the Rev'd Bill Haley at Inspired.Service@CanaConvocation.org or 888.460.5556 ext. 113.
Editor's note: there are two CANA churches in Central NY, St. Andrew's in Vestal and Westside Anglican in Syracuse. Last year St. Andrew's financially supported this work and I hope that we will do so this year.
April 26, 2009
April 25 was named "World Malaria Day". At the beginning of Lent, Bishop Minns sent out an email asking CANA congregations to consider raising funds for CANA's ongoing mission partnership with CAPA's Malaria office in Africa through whom we can purchase and distribute ITNs (insecticide treated nets) for only $7 (as opposed to some other organizations which have more overhead and therefore must charge more).
To make a contribution to CANA's malaria mission, please mail your checks to the following:
ATTN: ITNs
CANA
3301 Hidden Meadow Drive
Herndon VA 20171
If you have any questions about this mission partnership, please contact the director of CANA's "Inspired Service" task force for social justice and missions, the Rev'd Bill Haley at Inspired.Service@CanaConvocation.org or 888.460.5556 ext. 113.
Editor's note: there are two CANA churches in Central NY, St. Andrew's in Vestal and Westside Anglican in Syracuse. Last year St. Andrew's financially supported this work and I hope that we will do so this year.
As Eye See It : Is GAFCON Fizzling Out? - Chris Sugden
The answer is no, but you can read on. ed.
Posted by David Virtue at VirtueOnline on 2009/4/26 16:10:00
Is GAFCON Fizzling Out?
COMMENTARY
by Chris Sugden
Anglican Mainstream
www.anglican-mainstream.net
May 2008
Was this an April Fool's joke? " an African colleague asked me over African tea in Nairobi when I told him of the resignation of Bishop Michael Nazir Ali as Bishop of Rochester on April 1.
Melanie Phillips in the Daily Mail found it extraordinary that in order to fulfil his calling to support Christians in minority and persecuted situations, Bishop Nazir Ali had to leave his position as a diocesan bishop of the Church of England.
George Pitcher of the Daily Telegraph greeted the news as a sign of frustration with the lack of progress of the GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference movement since the Jerusalem Conference of June 2008.
Is GAFCON fizzling out? It is important to see its global dimensions. I met with the Archbishop of Kenya at the beginning of April. What difference did he see that GAFCON and its Jerusalem Statement had made?
"GAFCON has had an impact in my province in that Christians were given hope that we are going to be grounded even more in the Word of God and the teaching of the bible is going to be taken seriously. It is the interpretation of scripture by which has caused a lot of problems. We are going to carry on the way we have received it and are going to hand it over to others in the same way.
The big debate here has been the union of the same sex to which the church has been saying no. GAFCON has repeated the same thing in its 14 point declaration and this has been giving the Christians here a lot of hope. When the Anglican Communion has its problems there is somewhere we can lean to and that is GAFCON.
To go to GAFCON and meet with people who come from the west and are orthodox like ourselves is a unique fellowship and shows it is not Africa and Asia who are saying we should follow the word of God the way it is, but other countries in the west are with us.
It was said that GAFCON could be meeting every five years. This will help keep the Anglican church alive and on the move. "
A senior theologian from South Africa, wrote to me the same week: "I truly thank God for GAFCON and the spirit of care and fellowship it portrays, and demonstrates how brothers in Christ remain, because of their steadfast faith in the true Christian doctrine and belief, with the compassion of Christ that has so sharply faded in the worlds of liberalism and pluralism. My deep conviction is that it is this spirit of compassion of which GAFCON carries the torch that will cause us to ultimately triumph, as Christ has said that the gates of hell will not prevail over those who love Him."
Meanwhile plenty is happening. The GAFCON primates' council is meeting in London from April 13-18. The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh in the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone and Archbishop-designate of the Anglican Church in North America, has been invited to attend as a guest, according to the Rev. Peter Frank, director of communications for the diocese.
The Anglican Consultative Council meet in Jamaica from May 1-12. The Episcopal Church in the United States and the Anglican Church of Canada will attend again as full members for the first time in six years and can be expected to make their presence and agendas felt. Both are pressing forward with authorizing same-sex blessings.
The Anglican Church in North America holds its inaugural meeting in Texas from June 22.
On July 6 a national gathering will take place at the Westminster Central Hall, London entitled "Be Faithful: Anglicans in Global and Local Mission". Speakers will include Archbishop Peter Jensen, Bishop Wallace Benn, Canon Vinay Samuel and Bishop Michael Nazir Ali. More details at www.anglican-mainstream.net. There will be regional meetings in May and meetings in churches in the London area on July 5.
The Revd Paul Perkin, vicar of St Mark's Battersea Rise, London, and Chairman of the event planning team, has said: "The fellowship is just that, a spiritual movement of brothers and sisters across the nation and the world. It is a renewal of our confessing Anglican roots and convictions, and will be forward-looking in gospel mission locally, and in solidarity globally with Anglicans throughout the world, especially those suffering through poverty or discrimination".
GAFCON fizzling out? I don't think so.
---This article first appeared in the May issue of Evangelicals Now
Posted by David Virtue at VirtueOnline on 2009/4/26 16:10:00
Is GAFCON Fizzling Out?
COMMENTARY
by Chris Sugden
Anglican Mainstream
www.anglican-mainstream.net
May 2008
Was this an April Fool's joke? " an African colleague asked me over African tea in Nairobi when I told him of the resignation of Bishop Michael Nazir Ali as Bishop of Rochester on April 1.
Melanie Phillips in the Daily Mail found it extraordinary that in order to fulfil his calling to support Christians in minority and persecuted situations, Bishop Nazir Ali had to leave his position as a diocesan bishop of the Church of England.
George Pitcher of the Daily Telegraph greeted the news as a sign of frustration with the lack of progress of the GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference movement since the Jerusalem Conference of June 2008.
Is GAFCON fizzling out? It is important to see its global dimensions. I met with the Archbishop of Kenya at the beginning of April. What difference did he see that GAFCON and its Jerusalem Statement had made?
"GAFCON has had an impact in my province in that Christians were given hope that we are going to be grounded even more in the Word of God and the teaching of the bible is going to be taken seriously. It is the interpretation of scripture by which has caused a lot of problems. We are going to carry on the way we have received it and are going to hand it over to others in the same way.
The big debate here has been the union of the same sex to which the church has been saying no. GAFCON has repeated the same thing in its 14 point declaration and this has been giving the Christians here a lot of hope. When the Anglican Communion has its problems there is somewhere we can lean to and that is GAFCON.
To go to GAFCON and meet with people who come from the west and are orthodox like ourselves is a unique fellowship and shows it is not Africa and Asia who are saying we should follow the word of God the way it is, but other countries in the west are with us.
It was said that GAFCON could be meeting every five years. This will help keep the Anglican church alive and on the move. "
A senior theologian from South Africa, wrote to me the same week: "I truly thank God for GAFCON and the spirit of care and fellowship it portrays, and demonstrates how brothers in Christ remain, because of their steadfast faith in the true Christian doctrine and belief, with the compassion of Christ that has so sharply faded in the worlds of liberalism and pluralism. My deep conviction is that it is this spirit of compassion of which GAFCON carries the torch that will cause us to ultimately triumph, as Christ has said that the gates of hell will not prevail over those who love Him."
Meanwhile plenty is happening. The GAFCON primates' council is meeting in London from April 13-18. The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh in the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone and Archbishop-designate of the Anglican Church in North America, has been invited to attend as a guest, according to the Rev. Peter Frank, director of communications for the diocese.
The Anglican Consultative Council meet in Jamaica from May 1-12. The Episcopal Church in the United States and the Anglican Church of Canada will attend again as full members for the first time in six years and can be expected to make their presence and agendas felt. Both are pressing forward with authorizing same-sex blessings.
The Anglican Church in North America holds its inaugural meeting in Texas from June 22.
On July 6 a national gathering will take place at the Westminster Central Hall, London entitled "Be Faithful: Anglicans in Global and Local Mission". Speakers will include Archbishop Peter Jensen, Bishop Wallace Benn, Canon Vinay Samuel and Bishop Michael Nazir Ali. More details at www.anglican-mainstream.net. There will be regional meetings in May and meetings in churches in the London area on July 5.
The Revd Paul Perkin, vicar of St Mark's Battersea Rise, London, and Chairman of the event planning team, has said: "The fellowship is just that, a spiritual movement of brothers and sisters across the nation and the world. It is a renewal of our confessing Anglican roots and convictions, and will be forward-looking in gospel mission locally, and in solidarity globally with Anglicans throughout the world, especially those suffering through poverty or discrimination".
GAFCON fizzling out? I don't think so.
---This article first appeared in the May issue of Evangelicals Now
Counting the consents for Forrester
Over at the children's site seemingly every vote on Forrester is the cause of a new posting. I have decided not to do this at DCNY. I have been updating the count in an earlier post. The future of the world or pecusa does not hinge on whether or not Forrester is consecrated. pecusa is already thoroughly riddled with heresy and is walking a path of apostasy away from the Anglican Communion; Forrester's consecration won't change this. Some at SFIF are still part of pecusa and they are highly concerned about this bishop-elect. So, the children's site counts the votes, commends those who vote against Forrester, and worries, worries, worries about whether he will receive the necessary number of consents. Here, we'll just keep tabs on the count. The reasons for denying consents are not really that different from bishop to bishop. I'll save you the redundancy of the bishop's statements.
Rev Dr Peter Toon - Obituary
From Anglican Mainstream via Stand Firm:
April 26th, 2009 Posted in News |
Peter Toon, 1939 – 2009
Peter, son of Thomas Arthur and Hilda Toon, was born in Yorkshire, England, soon after the start of World War II. After him came Paul, David and Christine. He attended Hemsworth Grammar School, Cliff College, Sheffield; King’s College, London; The University of Liverpool and Christ Church, Oxford University. He held three Masters’ degrees and a Doctor of Philosophy degree from Oxford.
He was married to Vita for forty-seven years and they have one daughter, Deborah, who lives in California, and is married to Michael, a Naval Officer. Vita is a graduate of London and Oxford Universities, while Deborah is a graduate of Vanderbilt University in Nashville and the University of Texas at Austin.
After teaching religious studies in a College, Peter was ordained in the Church of England in 1973 in the Diocese of Liverpool. Since then he has served in parishes in both England and the U.S.A. and also as a theologian in theological houses in the U.S.A. and in England. In the last decade of his working life, he served the Prayer Book Society of the U.S.A. as its President and C E O.
Peter wrote and had published over twenty-five books, together with booklets, essays, articles. He also wrote many opinion pieces for the web. He edited Home Words in England from 1985-2001 and The Mandate in the U.S.A. from 1995 to 2008. He was much committed to The Anglican Way as Reformed Catholicism, and to the importance of the historical Formularies—Articles, BCP and Ordinal. The woes of the Anglican Communion in recent days much distressed him.
As he died on Saturday, April 25th in San Diego, and as virtually all Vita’s and Peter’s relatives and friends are thousands of miles away, there was no public funeral in California, only a service for the family based on the classic BCP. It is hoped that his remains may be interred in the family grave in Yorkshire.
The address for Vita and Deborah in CA is: 2522 Boundary Street, San Diego, CA 92104, and the phone is 619-284-1432.
April 26th, 2009 Posted in News |
Peter Toon, 1939 – 2009
Peter, son of Thomas Arthur and Hilda Toon, was born in Yorkshire, England, soon after the start of World War II. After him came Paul, David and Christine. He attended Hemsworth Grammar School, Cliff College, Sheffield; King’s College, London; The University of Liverpool and Christ Church, Oxford University. He held three Masters’ degrees and a Doctor of Philosophy degree from Oxford.
He was married to Vita for forty-seven years and they have one daughter, Deborah, who lives in California, and is married to Michael, a Naval Officer. Vita is a graduate of London and Oxford Universities, while Deborah is a graduate of Vanderbilt University in Nashville and the University of Texas at Austin.
After teaching religious studies in a College, Peter was ordained in the Church of England in 1973 in the Diocese of Liverpool. Since then he has served in parishes in both England and the U.S.A. and also as a theologian in theological houses in the U.S.A. and in England. In the last decade of his working life, he served the Prayer Book Society of the U.S.A. as its President and C E O.
Peter wrote and had published over twenty-five books, together with booklets, essays, articles. He also wrote many opinion pieces for the web. He edited Home Words in England from 1985-2001 and The Mandate in the U.S.A. from 1995 to 2008. He was much committed to The Anglican Way as Reformed Catholicism, and to the importance of the historical Formularies—Articles, BCP and Ordinal. The woes of the Anglican Communion in recent days much distressed him.
As he died on Saturday, April 25th in San Diego, and as virtually all Vita’s and Peter’s relatives and friends are thousands of miles away, there was no public funeral in California, only a service for the family based on the classic BCP. It is hoped that his remains may be interred in the family grave in Yorkshire.
The address for Vita and Deborah in CA is: 2522 Boundary Street, San Diego, CA 92104, and the phone is 619-284-1432.
Emerging Anglican Province Announces 28 Dioceses
From the Common Cause Partnership via TitusOneNine:
Posted April 25, 2009 at 7:49 PM (20 hours ago)
Leaders representing Canadian and US orthodox Anglican jurisdictions approved applications for membership of 28 dioceses and dioceses-in-formation and finalized plans for launching the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Twelve Anglican organizations are uniting to form the ACNA.
The ACNA Leadership Council, in addition to accepting these dioceses as constituent members, finalized a draft constitution and a comprehensive set of canons (Church bylaws) for ratification by the provincial assembly. A list of the new dioceses, the constitution and the canons will soon be available at www.united-anglicans.org.
“It is a great encouragement to see the fruit of many years’ work,” said the Right Reverend Robert Duncan, archbishop-elect of the Anglican Church in North America and Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. “Today 23 dioceses and five dioceses-in-formation joined together to reconstitute an orthodox, Biblical, missionary and united Church in North America.”
The Anglican Church in North America holds its inaugural provincial assembly 22-25 June 2009 in St Vincent’s Cathedral, Bedford, Texas. Delegates to this inaugural provincial assembly will be selected by the 28 constituent dioceses and dioceses-in-formation according to an agreed apportionment (contained in Title I, Canon 5).
In addition to the official delegates, a number of other Anglican and ecumenical Christian leaders are expected to be present at the provincial assembly, demonstrating the breadth of recognition and fellowship accorded ACNA. Already, three prominent Ecumenical leaders are confirmed speakers at the ACNA provincial assembly:
* Pastor Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church,
* His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah, the Archbishop of Washington and New York and the Metropolitan of All America and Canada for the Orthodox Church in America, and
* the Rev Todd Hunter, Director of West Coast Church Planting for the Anglican Mission in the Americas.
Earlier this month, seven Primates (Archbishops leading Churches in the Anglican Communion) issued a statement recognizing the Anglican Church in North America as an Emergent Province. These Primates, who represent 70 per cent of committed Anglicans worldwide, said in their statement, “Though many Provinces are in impaired or broken communion with TEC [the Episcopal Church] and the Anglican Church of Canada, our fellowship with faithful Anglicans in North America remains steadfast. The FCA [Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans] Primates’ Council recognizes the Anglican Church in North America as genuinely Anglican and recommends that Anglican Provinces affirm full communion with the ACNA.”
The Anglican Church in North America unites some 100,000 Anglicans in 700 parishes into a single church. Jurisdictions which have joined together to form the 28 dioceses and dioceses-in-formation of the Anglican Church in North America are: the dioceses of Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, Quincy and San Joaquin; the Anglican Mission in the Americas; the Convocation of Anglicans in North America; the Anglican Network in Canada; the Anglican Coalition in Canada; the Reformed Episcopal Church; and the missionary initiatives of Kenya, Uganda, and South America’s Southern Cone. Additionally, the American Anglican Council and Forward in Faith North America are founding organizations.
Posted April 25, 2009 at 7:49 PM (20 hours ago)
Leaders representing Canadian and US orthodox Anglican jurisdictions approved applications for membership of 28 dioceses and dioceses-in-formation and finalized plans for launching the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Twelve Anglican organizations are uniting to form the ACNA.
The ACNA Leadership Council, in addition to accepting these dioceses as constituent members, finalized a draft constitution and a comprehensive set of canons (Church bylaws) for ratification by the provincial assembly. A list of the new dioceses, the constitution and the canons will soon be available at www.united-anglicans.org.
“It is a great encouragement to see the fruit of many years’ work,” said the Right Reverend Robert Duncan, archbishop-elect of the Anglican Church in North America and Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. “Today 23 dioceses and five dioceses-in-formation joined together to reconstitute an orthodox, Biblical, missionary and united Church in North America.”
The Anglican Church in North America holds its inaugural provincial assembly 22-25 June 2009 in St Vincent’s Cathedral, Bedford, Texas. Delegates to this inaugural provincial assembly will be selected by the 28 constituent dioceses and dioceses-in-formation according to an agreed apportionment (contained in Title I, Canon 5).
In addition to the official delegates, a number of other Anglican and ecumenical Christian leaders are expected to be present at the provincial assembly, demonstrating the breadth of recognition and fellowship accorded ACNA. Already, three prominent Ecumenical leaders are confirmed speakers at the ACNA provincial assembly:
* Pastor Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church,
* His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah, the Archbishop of Washington and New York and the Metropolitan of All America and Canada for the Orthodox Church in America, and
* the Rev Todd Hunter, Director of West Coast Church Planting for the Anglican Mission in the Americas.
Earlier this month, seven Primates (Archbishops leading Churches in the Anglican Communion) issued a statement recognizing the Anglican Church in North America as an Emergent Province. These Primates, who represent 70 per cent of committed Anglicans worldwide, said in their statement, “Though many Provinces are in impaired or broken communion with TEC [the Episcopal Church] and the Anglican Church of Canada, our fellowship with faithful Anglicans in North America remains steadfast. The FCA [Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans] Primates’ Council recognizes the Anglican Church in North America as genuinely Anglican and recommends that Anglican Provinces affirm full communion with the ACNA.”
The Anglican Church in North America unites some 100,000 Anglicans in 700 parishes into a single church. Jurisdictions which have joined together to form the 28 dioceses and dioceses-in-formation of the Anglican Church in North America are: the dioceses of Fort Worth, Pittsburgh, Quincy and San Joaquin; the Anglican Mission in the Americas; the Convocation of Anglicans in North America; the Anglican Network in Canada; the Anglican Coalition in Canada; the Reformed Episcopal Church; and the missionary initiatives of Kenya, Uganda, and South America’s Southern Cone. Additionally, the American Anglican Council and Forward in Faith North America are founding organizations.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
New province is a sad reflection on Canterbury & co
Via VirtueOnline:
by Glenn Davies
http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/news/communion/new_province_shows_canterbury_is_culpable/
April 22nd, 2009
Last week the GAFCON Primates met in London to deliberate on a number of significant issues. However, the most far reaching of their decisions was to recognise the new Province of the Anglican Church in North America.
In the words of the Primates' Statement of 16 April 2009:
"We met with Bishop Bob Duncan and a number of the Episcopal leaders of the proposed new Province. Careful consideration was given to the new 'Province in formation' in North America. This is made up so far of approximately 100,000 Anglican Christians in Canada and the US who wish to be known as Anglicans and to be in fellowship with the Anglican Communion worldwide. We have asked whether we can recognize and authenticate this movement as truly Anglican.
As a result of this process, we celebrate the organization and official formation of ACNA around the same principles that gave rise to the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) and now the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA). Though many Provinces have expressed impaired or broken communion with TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada, our fellowship with faithful Anglicans in North America has remained steadfast.
The FCA Primates' Council recognizes the Anglican Church in North America as genuinely Anglican and recommends that Anglican Provinces affirm full communion with the ACNA".
It has usually been the case that the Archbishop of Canterbury has been involved in the formation of any new Province in the Anglican Communion (if not actually requiring his consent).
In recent years the Primates' Meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council have also been actively involved in creating new provinces, as was the case in the inauguration of the Province of Hong Kong in 1998.
However, none of the so-called Instruments of Communion have been involved in the formation of this new province in North America.
Indeed, one could be forgiven for thinking that each of these Instruments of Communion has been culpable in allowing the Anglican Communion to come to such a crisis point that demanded a new Province in North America. If any of them had acted more decisively than they did since the events of 2003 with the election and consecration of Gene Robinson, we would not be where we are today.
Thank God that the GAFCON Primates have had the courage, conviction and common sense to recognise the ACNA as genuinely Anglican.
We await with interest the reaction of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the ACC who are due to meet in Jamaica in May.
END
by Glenn Davies
http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/news/communion/new_province_shows_canterbury_is_culpable/
April 22nd, 2009
Last week the GAFCON Primates met in London to deliberate on a number of significant issues. However, the most far reaching of their decisions was to recognise the new Province of the Anglican Church in North America.
In the words of the Primates' Statement of 16 April 2009:
"We met with Bishop Bob Duncan and a number of the Episcopal leaders of the proposed new Province. Careful consideration was given to the new 'Province in formation' in North America. This is made up so far of approximately 100,000 Anglican Christians in Canada and the US who wish to be known as Anglicans and to be in fellowship with the Anglican Communion worldwide. We have asked whether we can recognize and authenticate this movement as truly Anglican.
As a result of this process, we celebrate the organization and official formation of ACNA around the same principles that gave rise to the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) and now the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA). Though many Provinces have expressed impaired or broken communion with TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada, our fellowship with faithful Anglicans in North America has remained steadfast.
The FCA Primates' Council recognizes the Anglican Church in North America as genuinely Anglican and recommends that Anglican Provinces affirm full communion with the ACNA".
It has usually been the case that the Archbishop of Canterbury has been involved in the formation of any new Province in the Anglican Communion (if not actually requiring his consent).
In recent years the Primates' Meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council have also been actively involved in creating new provinces, as was the case in the inauguration of the Province of Hong Kong in 1998.
However, none of the so-called Instruments of Communion have been involved in the formation of this new province in North America.
Indeed, one could be forgiven for thinking that each of these Instruments of Communion has been culpable in allowing the Anglican Communion to come to such a crisis point that demanded a new Province in North America. If any of them had acted more decisively than they did since the events of 2003 with the election and consecration of Gene Robinson, we would not be where we are today.
Thank God that the GAFCON Primates have had the courage, conviction and common sense to recognise the ACNA as genuinely Anglican.
We await with interest the reaction of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the ACC who are due to meet in Jamaica in May.
END
Statement in Response to Father Mark Harris
by Mark McCall
http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/
April 23rd, 2009
Fr. Mark Harris has published today a further article on his blog, "Preludium," concerning the "Bishops' Statement on the Polity of The Episcopal Church," published yesterday by the Anglican Communion Institute, Inc. Fr. Harris is a member of the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church.
Fr. Harris had previously disclosed on his blog obviously confidential communications, including material protected by the attorney-client privilege, concerning the Bishops' Statement. Today, in addition to defending his publication of the privileged communications, Fr. Harris also criticizes the Bishops' Statement itself, in part by criticizing my own prior work on this topic.
Since Fr. Harris has discussed my paper, "Is The Episcopal Church Hierarchical?" on several occasions before today, he is aware that my answer to the question posed in the title of this paper is "yes," but that TEC has a dispersed rather than a central hierarchy. The hierarchy is dispersed among the many dioceses that are TEC's constituent members. This is revealed in the first paragraph of the paper and summarized in the introduction for those who do not wish to read the entire 89-page document. Indeed, Fr. Harris's own reaction on reading the paper last September was as follows: "I still have the sense that in the narrow sense from which he is working he may be right, and indeed I agree we are not a very hierarchical church." (Posted by Fr. Harris in a comment on his blog on September 11, 2008 in reply to Prof. Christopher Seitz.)
Fr. Harris has raised again today a point he has made before on his blog by noting the reference in Title IV (the disciplinary canons) to TEC as a "hierarchical Church." I would direct Fr. Harris's attention to three facts. First, this language occurs only in a canon labeled "General Provisions Applicable to This Title." "This Title," Title IV, is of course the disciplinary title that pertains primarily to diocesan, provincial and ad hoc processes, not General Convention. The fact that this characterization occurs only in this place and is expressly applicable to that one title serves to highlight, and indeed emphasize, the fact that this characterization is not used elsewhere. In particular, it is not used in TEC's Constitution and is not used to distinguish General Convention from TEC's constituent dioceses. The fact that this language occurs here and nowhere else is legally significant. Second, no canon could amend the "basic" governance stipulated in the Constitution itself, which makes the Bishop and Standing Committee "the Ecclesiastical Authority" in the diocese and grants no hierarchical priority to General Convention. Third, this canon describes well the dispersed hierarchy among dioceses that I argue for in my paper.
Fr. Harris has also referred once again to Dr. Joan Gundersen's critique of my paper. As he certainly knows, there are a number of serious errors in Dr. Gundersen's piece, including misunderstandings of basic legal terminology. She also had quite obviously not read my paper carefully before commenting on it. ACI pointed out these errors immediately upon the publication of Dr. Gundersen's paper, including in comments on Fr. Harris's own blog by Dr. Ephraim Radner the morning her paper was released.
Surely fairness would require a link to my response to Dr. Gundersen published by ACI on September 19, 2008, the day after her critique was published and immediately publicized by Fr. Harris.
I am sure Fr. Harris is well aware that the articulation of TEC's polity in the Bishops' Statement is hardly novel, but has long been the standard understanding of our governance. See, for example, the widely-used series on "The Church's Teaching" by Dr. Powel Dawley of GTS, the work by Dr. Daniel Stevick of EDS on Canon Law and the article by Dr. Robert Prichard of VTS, one of TEC's leading historians, in the current issue of "Anglican and Episcopal History," who reviews this history and my paper and concludes that my work is "cogent and based on good historical argument."
Finally and most importantly, none of this should deflect attention from the Bishops' Statement itself. It is what it is says it is: a statement by fifteen bishops of this Church, including a candidate for Presiding Bishop in 1985 (Bishop Frey), a candidate for Presiding Bishop in 1997 and one of the three Senior Bishops of the Church who exercise canonical responsibilities under Title IV (Bishop Wimberly) and the immediate past president of the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice (Bishop MacPherson). I urge Fr. Harris and others to focus on this Statement by fifteen distinguished Bishops rather than discuss obviously confidential emails that should never have been made public in the first place.
END
http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/
April 23rd, 2009
Fr. Mark Harris has published today a further article on his blog, "Preludium," concerning the "Bishops' Statement on the Polity of The Episcopal Church," published yesterday by the Anglican Communion Institute, Inc. Fr. Harris is a member of the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church.
Fr. Harris had previously disclosed on his blog obviously confidential communications, including material protected by the attorney-client privilege, concerning the Bishops' Statement. Today, in addition to defending his publication of the privileged communications, Fr. Harris also criticizes the Bishops' Statement itself, in part by criticizing my own prior work on this topic.
Since Fr. Harris has discussed my paper, "Is The Episcopal Church Hierarchical?" on several occasions before today, he is aware that my answer to the question posed in the title of this paper is "yes," but that TEC has a dispersed rather than a central hierarchy. The hierarchy is dispersed among the many dioceses that are TEC's constituent members. This is revealed in the first paragraph of the paper and summarized in the introduction for those who do not wish to read the entire 89-page document. Indeed, Fr. Harris's own reaction on reading the paper last September was as follows: "I still have the sense that in the narrow sense from which he is working he may be right, and indeed I agree we are not a very hierarchical church." (Posted by Fr. Harris in a comment on his blog on September 11, 2008 in reply to Prof. Christopher Seitz.)
Fr. Harris has raised again today a point he has made before on his blog by noting the reference in Title IV (the disciplinary canons) to TEC as a "hierarchical Church." I would direct Fr. Harris's attention to three facts. First, this language occurs only in a canon labeled "General Provisions Applicable to This Title." "This Title," Title IV, is of course the disciplinary title that pertains primarily to diocesan, provincial and ad hoc processes, not General Convention. The fact that this characterization occurs only in this place and is expressly applicable to that one title serves to highlight, and indeed emphasize, the fact that this characterization is not used elsewhere. In particular, it is not used in TEC's Constitution and is not used to distinguish General Convention from TEC's constituent dioceses. The fact that this language occurs here and nowhere else is legally significant. Second, no canon could amend the "basic" governance stipulated in the Constitution itself, which makes the Bishop and Standing Committee "the Ecclesiastical Authority" in the diocese and grants no hierarchical priority to General Convention. Third, this canon describes well the dispersed hierarchy among dioceses that I argue for in my paper.
Fr. Harris has also referred once again to Dr. Joan Gundersen's critique of my paper. As he certainly knows, there are a number of serious errors in Dr. Gundersen's piece, including misunderstandings of basic legal terminology. She also had quite obviously not read my paper carefully before commenting on it. ACI pointed out these errors immediately upon the publication of Dr. Gundersen's paper, including in comments on Fr. Harris's own blog by Dr. Ephraim Radner the morning her paper was released.
Surely fairness would require a link to my response to Dr. Gundersen published by ACI on September 19, 2008, the day after her critique was published and immediately publicized by Fr. Harris.
I am sure Fr. Harris is well aware that the articulation of TEC's polity in the Bishops' Statement is hardly novel, but has long been the standard understanding of our governance. See, for example, the widely-used series on "The Church's Teaching" by Dr. Powel Dawley of GTS, the work by Dr. Daniel Stevick of EDS on Canon Law and the article by Dr. Robert Prichard of VTS, one of TEC's leading historians, in the current issue of "Anglican and Episcopal History," who reviews this history and my paper and concludes that my work is "cogent and based on good historical argument."
Finally and most importantly, none of this should deflect attention from the Bishops' Statement itself. It is what it is says it is: a statement by fifteen bishops of this Church, including a candidate for Presiding Bishop in 1985 (Bishop Frey), a candidate for Presiding Bishop in 1997 and one of the three Senior Bishops of the Church who exercise canonical responsibilities under Title IV (Bishop Wimberly) and the immediate past president of the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice (Bishop MacPherson). I urge Fr. Harris and others to focus on this Statement by fifteen distinguished Bishops rather than discuss obviously confidential emails that should never have been made public in the first place.
END
Central Florida Bishop Demonstrates Separation Need Not Equal Litigation
Diocese of Dallas settles amicably with departing parishes
News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
4/21/2009
In the tangled litigious world of Episcopal Church politics where millions of dollars are being spent on attorneys to retain properties, few bishops have resisted the siren call of ecclesiastical conformity thrust on them by the denizens of 815 2nd Ave., NY to consciously sue parishes and depose priests that choose to flee their imperial clutches.
One bishop who has bucked the trend and successfully allowed parishes to separate from his diocese and "disaffiliate" from the national church without litigation is Central Florida Bishop John W. Howe. Seven rectors, two church planters, and nine senior wardens have departed without a single dollar spent on legal fees. By any definition it has been a major ecclesiastical achievement.
No other bishop in the Episcopal Church has successfully navigated as many departures from The Episcopal Church without litigation. That is not to say, however, that there have not been bumps along the road to separation. But at no time was Howe threatened by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori nor did he have any discussions about the separations with her chancellor David Booth Beers. "I kept Jefferts Schori apprised and asked her prayers which I believe she offered," Howe told VOL. "We got nothing but encouragement, prayer, and support from her," he told VOL. Furthermore, no one saw the inside of a courtroom and the diocese was mercifully spared dipping into its Trust Funds or asking the national church for money to sue for properties.
Howe, an evangelical bishop, a rare life form in the House of Bishops, is both proud and saddened by his achievement. He is proud that with little rancor parishes have been let go to love and serve the Lord in other Anglican jurisdictions. He is saddened that they have left a diocese that shares his theology and understanding of mission and that, as a result, it has weakened the orthodox witness in The Episcopal Church.
He acknowledges the congregations who left were behind their leaders in their respective decisions, but he has not fought, threatened or cajoled them into staying.
"I share the evangelical outlook of those who have departed. We are all on the same page. This is what is truly sad. The tragedy is that the morals and theology of The Episcopal Church have caused the schism. Apart from the election of Bishop Gene Robinson, I doubt we would be in the mess we are in today."
Howe concedes that his life has been completely consumed by it all and it has left him with a few sleepless nights. "It has taken hundreds of hours of attention by our Chancellors, Butch Wooten and Bill Grimm. There have been extra meetings of the Diocesan Board and Standing Committee, our staff has been pushed to the limit."
Howe's desire throughout it all is to behave as a Christian bishop should - to be pastoral to both those leaving without recrimination and those who desire to stay.
"Our desire and commitment at all times has been to deal with this in as Christlike a manner as possible, and if possible to avoid litigation and any kind of recrimination. I am very pleased to be able to report that we '"signed off'" on agreements with eight of the nine congregations whose clergy came to see us beginning last October," he told VOL.
Howe offers vignettes of the parishes that have left and what transpired between them.
"At St. Anne's, Crystal River, the Rector, Kevin Holsapple, had a complete change of heart. He told me he could not go through with this, even if it cost him his job. I told him I would do everything I could to ensure it would not. His announcement was greeted with great appreciation by most of the congregation, many of whom had not embraced the plan to "disaffiliate" in the first place.
"At St. Edward's, Mount Dora, the Rector, Woody Volland, and a portion of the congregation left as of December 31, 2007. The former Rector, Bob Maurais, who retired in 1996, is back in place as Interim Rector. Some parishioners, who had left in recent months, have begun coming back. "I am happy to report that St. Edward's is making steady progress since its second split in thirty years. From a sad and discouraged remnant following the departure of half of the congregation in December 2007, we have grown in attendance and income through a welcoming spirit to visitors and newcomers each week. We still have a long way to go, but we are gradually returning to normal."
"In Gloria Dei, Cocoa, the congregation was virtually unanimous in wanting to become an independent community church, and the Diocesan Board agreed to rent the facilities to them for the next three years. We will need to reevaluate that at that point. When I met with the Rector, Paul Young, and the Vestry, they said they had lost a lot of their members, and they hoped that in becoming independent some of them might return.
"At Holy Cross, Winter Haven, the Rector, Andy Doan, and a portion of the congregation left after services on January 6, 2008. Fr. John Wright, a retired clergyman from Maryland who has worshipped at Holy Cross this past year, became Interim Rector. Holy Cross later rebounded from the loss of 60% of its members and 40% of its revenues to become healthy enough to call a new Rector, Fr. Richard Bordin, former Assistant at Church of the Messiah in Winter Garden.
"At Good Shepherd, Maitland, the Rector, John Nyhan, and a portion of the congregation left. They elected a vestry, wardens and other officers. Fr. Robbie Robison, Interim Rector later wrote, "As I reflect on Good Shepherd's progress during the past year...I am amazed at how relatively 'normal' it is. Following the divisions early in the year, we have, with tremendous encouragement from too many people to name, completed 2008 with increased attendance, a small budget surplus, and the confidence that the 125 year history of Good Shepherd is continuing."
"Grace Church, Ocala, hosts and sponsors a school by the same name. The school has been expanding and was recently given a fifty-acre plot of land three miles away. The plan is for the school to become independent but still Christian. The Rector, Don Curran, and a portion of the congregation left and built a new community church on the school property. The Assistant Rector, Jonathan French, became Interim Rector. Curran was President of the Standing Committee. I will personally miss him."
Fr. French later noted that the "difficult divorce" saw average Sunday attendance at Grace Church drop from about 450 to 114, and its budget shrink from one million dollars to just under three hundred thousand. "As serious as those numbers are, they are actually much healthier than we expected as more people stayed than was anticipated and are now giving at a level well above the national average."
Howe said the diocese had two "Church Plants" that began just last year: St. Philips, Lake Nona, and St. Nicholas, Poinciana. Neither of them had grown to the stage of becoming "Organized Missions," so, technically neither of them was actually "affiliated" with the Diocese. The "Church Planters," Paul Jagoe and Geoff Boland, and the members of those two congregations left the diocese. St. Philips gave the Diocese a $10,000 "tithe" of their start-up money, and St. Nicholas plans to return the $25,000 given by the Diocese during 2007.
The most disturbing departure was that of the Rev. Lorne Coyle at Trinity, Vero Beach, one of the dioceses largest congregations, and one that has a magnificent physical plant, with a new state-of-the-art new main church building completed within the past couple of years. Soon after Coyle, all his staff, and a large portion of the congregation chose to "disaffiliate", allegations of sexual infidelity erupted and Coyle, now a member of the Anglican Province of Uganda, resigned. His new bishop the Rt. Rev John Guernsey immediately suspended Coyle.
"He's a friend. He remains a friend and I am very sorry for what happened. We are praying for him and his wife," Howe told VOL.
At Howe's invitation, Dean Rick Lobs, retired from the Cathedral in Orlando, and agreed to serve as Interim Rector at Trinity, Vero. He writes that Trinity was "reborn on July 1, 2008. At the time of that beginning, Trinity consisted of a handful of worshippers and a choir of one imported singer. Over the last five months, Trinity has blossomed into a visible witness to the grace of God. The worshipping congregation now averages 250, and the choir is well stocked with folks singing their hearts out to the glory of God. "We have a children's ministry and significant outreach. The greatest challenge remains the financial requirements and concern for a campus that is far too large for us.... the bottom line? Trinity is alive, growing, and that with contented parishioners who labor under extraordinary financial pressures."
Reflecting on the situation, Howe said there are those who simply have to leave The Episcopal Church for conscience sake. "I understand that. I don't agree, but I don't believe we should punish them. We shouldn't sue them. We shouldn't depose the clergy. Our brokenness is a tragedy. The litigation that is going on in so many places is a travesty."
Howe told VOL that he wanted to be fair-minded and generous than any policy that could possibly be established. "I have proven that."
In the midst of it all, Corpus Christi, (the Body of Christ), the diocese's newest congregation was born. "We are going to continue to grow, evangelize, disciple, and plant churches."
On his own future, Howe is dogmatic that he will stay in TEC, but there is a note of reticence and hesitation as he watches while whole dioceses disappear and tens of thousands of Episcopalians walk away from churches that many of them grew up in. "I am no happier than those who are departing about some of the recent decisions of The Episcopal Church. But I am committed to staying the course for as long as it is possible to remain both an Episcopalian and an Anglican. And the Archbishop of Canterbury has given me, personally, and all the world, those assurances."
"He has said that any Diocese compliant with Windsor Report and the requests made by the Primates of the Anglican Communion remains clearly in communion with Canterbury and the mainstream of the Communion, whatever may be the longer-term result for others in The Episcopal Church."
In his Advent Letter, Howe reiterated his commitment to developing an "Anglican Covenant" that will further spell out what it means for a Province or a Diocese to continue in full constituent membership in the Communion. But there is a note of uncertainty and doubt even as he looks to the future. "I don't honestly know whether that will be enough to hold the Communion together, but I believe that is the only possible hope we have of doing so."
Howe recently attended a meeting put on by the Anglican Communion Institute in Houston where he heard former Archbishop George Carey say that TEC would likely "clean out" conservatives, and that ordaining Gene Robinson, against the strong advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the moral authority of Lambeth '98, the appeals of the primates' meeting, led the Anglican Communion into the worst crisis it has ever faced, and from which it is unlikely to recover.
How does Howe feel about Carey's words? "If there are those who want to throw us out, they may have their way, but until that happens I am committed to being a witness to the power and joy of the Lord who has moved so mightily in Anglican history."
Looking over the last two years, Howe said, "In all of these situations I am very pleased we have been able to avoid litigation or acrimony. We are very conscious of the fact that we remain brothers and sisters in Christ with those who have felt the need to leave The Episcopal Church. This is a sad time, in many ways, as we part company with folks with whom we have worked and worshipped. But we bid them Godspeed, and I would like to ask all of us to think of this as a time of new beginnings rather than endings."
As the present and future unfolds, Howe had this to say, "We are a stronger Diocese than we have ever been in the twenty years of my episcopacy. We mourn the losses of those who have left, but we are committed to taking Central Florida for Christ."
*****
THE Diocese of Dallas, an orthodox diocese under the Rt. Rev. James Stanton, has also experienced a number of departures but has weathered the storms of separation, according to The Rev. Canon Dr. Neal O. Michell, Canon to the Ordinary.
"The Diocese of Dallas has a Canon that governs the process by which churches can leave the diocese with their property (Canon 20). The canon calls for a vote of 2/3's of the congregation before separation is considered," he told VOL.
Michell gave a rundown of the churches that have requested to leave under this canon:
Christ Church, Plano. This was the largest parish in The Episcopal Church and a huge loss for both the diocese and TEC. They paid the diocese $1 million for the property, a pittance by an any standard.
St. Matthias, Dallas left with its property.
Faith, Allen - left without its property. An agreement was drawn up over the division of proceeds if the property is sold within five years.
Holy Trinity, Garland - left without its property. There was a division of funds.
At Resurrection in Dallas, the church left without its property. There was a division of funds.
One other church, St. Francis, Dallas, had been under an agreement that allowed Bishop Jack Iker of Ft. Worth to provide oversight to that congregation. However when that diocese left TEC, they requested an end to that agreement and voted to leave the diocese. They have entered into an agreement that allows them to pay rent in the amount of half their previous diocese assessment. They did not invoke Canon 20, as an agreement was worked out amicably, said Michell.
Two clergy--the rectors of St. Nick's, Flower Mound, and St. Luke's, Dallas-- left the Episcopal Church with a number of parishioners departing at the same time. Neither of these congregations invoked Canon 20. "There was no civil litigation in any of these cases."
Michell acknowledged that of the five churches that have left: Christ Church, Plano; St. Matthias, Dallas; Faith, Allen; Holy Trinity, Garland; and Resurrection, Dallas, all are continuing congregations. Several have different names.
According to independent eye witness reports, none of them has the average Sunday attendance that they had at the point of their departure; that is, all have decreased in attendance.
Michell noted that those who complained that being in The Episcopal Church impeded their evangelism efforts have not realized the growth they were expecting.
"It has been the bishop's policy that these clergy and their congregations departed as friends and with God's blessing. I think it is fair to say that this has been true in all but one instance."
END
FOOTNOTE: Dioceses run by liberal and revisionist bishops including Florida, Colorado, Virginia, Missouri, San Joaquin, Pittsburgh, Quincy, Ft. Worth, Los Angeles, Northern California, San Diego, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Connecticut have spent millions of dollars litigating against orthodox parishes and their priests.
News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
4/21/2009
In the tangled litigious world of Episcopal Church politics where millions of dollars are being spent on attorneys to retain properties, few bishops have resisted the siren call of ecclesiastical conformity thrust on them by the denizens of 815 2nd Ave., NY to consciously sue parishes and depose priests that choose to flee their imperial clutches.
One bishop who has bucked the trend and successfully allowed parishes to separate from his diocese and "disaffiliate" from the national church without litigation is Central Florida Bishop John W. Howe. Seven rectors, two church planters, and nine senior wardens have departed without a single dollar spent on legal fees. By any definition it has been a major ecclesiastical achievement.
No other bishop in the Episcopal Church has successfully navigated as many departures from The Episcopal Church without litigation. That is not to say, however, that there have not been bumps along the road to separation. But at no time was Howe threatened by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori nor did he have any discussions about the separations with her chancellor David Booth Beers. "I kept Jefferts Schori apprised and asked her prayers which I believe she offered," Howe told VOL. "We got nothing but encouragement, prayer, and support from her," he told VOL. Furthermore, no one saw the inside of a courtroom and the diocese was mercifully spared dipping into its Trust Funds or asking the national church for money to sue for properties.
Howe, an evangelical bishop, a rare life form in the House of Bishops, is both proud and saddened by his achievement. He is proud that with little rancor parishes have been let go to love and serve the Lord in other Anglican jurisdictions. He is saddened that they have left a diocese that shares his theology and understanding of mission and that, as a result, it has weakened the orthodox witness in The Episcopal Church.
He acknowledges the congregations who left were behind their leaders in their respective decisions, but he has not fought, threatened or cajoled them into staying.
"I share the evangelical outlook of those who have departed. We are all on the same page. This is what is truly sad. The tragedy is that the morals and theology of The Episcopal Church have caused the schism. Apart from the election of Bishop Gene Robinson, I doubt we would be in the mess we are in today."
Howe concedes that his life has been completely consumed by it all and it has left him with a few sleepless nights. "It has taken hundreds of hours of attention by our Chancellors, Butch Wooten and Bill Grimm. There have been extra meetings of the Diocesan Board and Standing Committee, our staff has been pushed to the limit."
Howe's desire throughout it all is to behave as a Christian bishop should - to be pastoral to both those leaving without recrimination and those who desire to stay.
"Our desire and commitment at all times has been to deal with this in as Christlike a manner as possible, and if possible to avoid litigation and any kind of recrimination. I am very pleased to be able to report that we '"signed off'" on agreements with eight of the nine congregations whose clergy came to see us beginning last October," he told VOL.
Howe offers vignettes of the parishes that have left and what transpired between them.
"At St. Anne's, Crystal River, the Rector, Kevin Holsapple, had a complete change of heart. He told me he could not go through with this, even if it cost him his job. I told him I would do everything I could to ensure it would not. His announcement was greeted with great appreciation by most of the congregation, many of whom had not embraced the plan to "disaffiliate" in the first place.
"At St. Edward's, Mount Dora, the Rector, Woody Volland, and a portion of the congregation left as of December 31, 2007. The former Rector, Bob Maurais, who retired in 1996, is back in place as Interim Rector. Some parishioners, who had left in recent months, have begun coming back. "I am happy to report that St. Edward's is making steady progress since its second split in thirty years. From a sad and discouraged remnant following the departure of half of the congregation in December 2007, we have grown in attendance and income through a welcoming spirit to visitors and newcomers each week. We still have a long way to go, but we are gradually returning to normal."
"In Gloria Dei, Cocoa, the congregation was virtually unanimous in wanting to become an independent community church, and the Diocesan Board agreed to rent the facilities to them for the next three years. We will need to reevaluate that at that point. When I met with the Rector, Paul Young, and the Vestry, they said they had lost a lot of their members, and they hoped that in becoming independent some of them might return.
"At Holy Cross, Winter Haven, the Rector, Andy Doan, and a portion of the congregation left after services on January 6, 2008. Fr. John Wright, a retired clergyman from Maryland who has worshipped at Holy Cross this past year, became Interim Rector. Holy Cross later rebounded from the loss of 60% of its members and 40% of its revenues to become healthy enough to call a new Rector, Fr. Richard Bordin, former Assistant at Church of the Messiah in Winter Garden.
"At Good Shepherd, Maitland, the Rector, John Nyhan, and a portion of the congregation left. They elected a vestry, wardens and other officers. Fr. Robbie Robison, Interim Rector later wrote, "As I reflect on Good Shepherd's progress during the past year...I am amazed at how relatively 'normal' it is. Following the divisions early in the year, we have, with tremendous encouragement from too many people to name, completed 2008 with increased attendance, a small budget surplus, and the confidence that the 125 year history of Good Shepherd is continuing."
"Grace Church, Ocala, hosts and sponsors a school by the same name. The school has been expanding and was recently given a fifty-acre plot of land three miles away. The plan is for the school to become independent but still Christian. The Rector, Don Curran, and a portion of the congregation left and built a new community church on the school property. The Assistant Rector, Jonathan French, became Interim Rector. Curran was President of the Standing Committee. I will personally miss him."
Fr. French later noted that the "difficult divorce" saw average Sunday attendance at Grace Church drop from about 450 to 114, and its budget shrink from one million dollars to just under three hundred thousand. "As serious as those numbers are, they are actually much healthier than we expected as more people stayed than was anticipated and are now giving at a level well above the national average."
Howe said the diocese had two "Church Plants" that began just last year: St. Philips, Lake Nona, and St. Nicholas, Poinciana. Neither of them had grown to the stage of becoming "Organized Missions," so, technically neither of them was actually "affiliated" with the Diocese. The "Church Planters," Paul Jagoe and Geoff Boland, and the members of those two congregations left the diocese. St. Philips gave the Diocese a $10,000 "tithe" of their start-up money, and St. Nicholas plans to return the $25,000 given by the Diocese during 2007.
The most disturbing departure was that of the Rev. Lorne Coyle at Trinity, Vero Beach, one of the dioceses largest congregations, and one that has a magnificent physical plant, with a new state-of-the-art new main church building completed within the past couple of years. Soon after Coyle, all his staff, and a large portion of the congregation chose to "disaffiliate", allegations of sexual infidelity erupted and Coyle, now a member of the Anglican Province of Uganda, resigned. His new bishop the Rt. Rev John Guernsey immediately suspended Coyle.
"He's a friend. He remains a friend and I am very sorry for what happened. We are praying for him and his wife," Howe told VOL.
At Howe's invitation, Dean Rick Lobs, retired from the Cathedral in Orlando, and agreed to serve as Interim Rector at Trinity, Vero. He writes that Trinity was "reborn on July 1, 2008. At the time of that beginning, Trinity consisted of a handful of worshippers and a choir of one imported singer. Over the last five months, Trinity has blossomed into a visible witness to the grace of God. The worshipping congregation now averages 250, and the choir is well stocked with folks singing their hearts out to the glory of God. "We have a children's ministry and significant outreach. The greatest challenge remains the financial requirements and concern for a campus that is far too large for us.... the bottom line? Trinity is alive, growing, and that with contented parishioners who labor under extraordinary financial pressures."
Reflecting on the situation, Howe said there are those who simply have to leave The Episcopal Church for conscience sake. "I understand that. I don't agree, but I don't believe we should punish them. We shouldn't sue them. We shouldn't depose the clergy. Our brokenness is a tragedy. The litigation that is going on in so many places is a travesty."
Howe told VOL that he wanted to be fair-minded and generous than any policy that could possibly be established. "I have proven that."
In the midst of it all, Corpus Christi, (the Body of Christ), the diocese's newest congregation was born. "We are going to continue to grow, evangelize, disciple, and plant churches."
On his own future, Howe is dogmatic that he will stay in TEC, but there is a note of reticence and hesitation as he watches while whole dioceses disappear and tens of thousands of Episcopalians walk away from churches that many of them grew up in. "I am no happier than those who are departing about some of the recent decisions of The Episcopal Church. But I am committed to staying the course for as long as it is possible to remain both an Episcopalian and an Anglican. And the Archbishop of Canterbury has given me, personally, and all the world, those assurances."
"He has said that any Diocese compliant with Windsor Report and the requests made by the Primates of the Anglican Communion remains clearly in communion with Canterbury and the mainstream of the Communion, whatever may be the longer-term result for others in The Episcopal Church."
In his Advent Letter, Howe reiterated his commitment to developing an "Anglican Covenant" that will further spell out what it means for a Province or a Diocese to continue in full constituent membership in the Communion. But there is a note of uncertainty and doubt even as he looks to the future. "I don't honestly know whether that will be enough to hold the Communion together, but I believe that is the only possible hope we have of doing so."
Howe recently attended a meeting put on by the Anglican Communion Institute in Houston where he heard former Archbishop George Carey say that TEC would likely "clean out" conservatives, and that ordaining Gene Robinson, against the strong advice of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the moral authority of Lambeth '98, the appeals of the primates' meeting, led the Anglican Communion into the worst crisis it has ever faced, and from which it is unlikely to recover.
How does Howe feel about Carey's words? "If there are those who want to throw us out, they may have their way, but until that happens I am committed to being a witness to the power and joy of the Lord who has moved so mightily in Anglican history."
Looking over the last two years, Howe said, "In all of these situations I am very pleased we have been able to avoid litigation or acrimony. We are very conscious of the fact that we remain brothers and sisters in Christ with those who have felt the need to leave The Episcopal Church. This is a sad time, in many ways, as we part company with folks with whom we have worked and worshipped. But we bid them Godspeed, and I would like to ask all of us to think of this as a time of new beginnings rather than endings."
As the present and future unfolds, Howe had this to say, "We are a stronger Diocese than we have ever been in the twenty years of my episcopacy. We mourn the losses of those who have left, but we are committed to taking Central Florida for Christ."
*****
THE Diocese of Dallas, an orthodox diocese under the Rt. Rev. James Stanton, has also experienced a number of departures but has weathered the storms of separation, according to The Rev. Canon Dr. Neal O. Michell, Canon to the Ordinary.
"The Diocese of Dallas has a Canon that governs the process by which churches can leave the diocese with their property (Canon 20). The canon calls for a vote of 2/3's of the congregation before separation is considered," he told VOL.
Michell gave a rundown of the churches that have requested to leave under this canon:
Christ Church, Plano. This was the largest parish in The Episcopal Church and a huge loss for both the diocese and TEC. They paid the diocese $1 million for the property, a pittance by an any standard.
St. Matthias, Dallas left with its property.
Faith, Allen - left without its property. An agreement was drawn up over the division of proceeds if the property is sold within five years.
Holy Trinity, Garland - left without its property. There was a division of funds.
At Resurrection in Dallas, the church left without its property. There was a division of funds.
One other church, St. Francis, Dallas, had been under an agreement that allowed Bishop Jack Iker of Ft. Worth to provide oversight to that congregation. However when that diocese left TEC, they requested an end to that agreement and voted to leave the diocese. They have entered into an agreement that allows them to pay rent in the amount of half their previous diocese assessment. They did not invoke Canon 20, as an agreement was worked out amicably, said Michell.
Two clergy--the rectors of St. Nick's, Flower Mound, and St. Luke's, Dallas-- left the Episcopal Church with a number of parishioners departing at the same time. Neither of these congregations invoked Canon 20. "There was no civil litigation in any of these cases."
Michell acknowledged that of the five churches that have left: Christ Church, Plano; St. Matthias, Dallas; Faith, Allen; Holy Trinity, Garland; and Resurrection, Dallas, all are continuing congregations. Several have different names.
According to independent eye witness reports, none of them has the average Sunday attendance that they had at the point of their departure; that is, all have decreased in attendance.
Michell noted that those who complained that being in The Episcopal Church impeded their evangelism efforts have not realized the growth they were expecting.
"It has been the bishop's policy that these clergy and their congregations departed as friends and with God's blessing. I think it is fair to say that this has been true in all but one instance."
END
FOOTNOTE: Dioceses run by liberal and revisionist bishops including Florida, Colorado, Virginia, Missouri, San Joaquin, Pittsburgh, Quincy, Ft. Worth, Los Angeles, Northern California, San Diego, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Connecticut have spent millions of dollars litigating against orthodox parishes and their priests.
LONDON: Hundreds Protest 'Sex and the City Conference'
By David W. Virtue in London
www.virtueonline.org
4/25/2009
I am huddled inside the doorway of Emmanuel Center, a church near Westminster Abbey, as hundreds of gay protesters yell and shout obscenities at a conference where speakers are offering healing for the homosexual through reparative therapy. Anglican Mainstream sponsors the event.
Chanting "2,4,6,8 there is no cure only hate," protesters, including heavily made up Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, angry gay activists wave placards reading "only prejudice needs a cure", "there is no cure for love", "positive alternative to bigotry", "even Jesus loves gays" and "inside lies obfuscation and despair".
Organizers shout and toot horns, but fail to stop speakers from making presentations that say homosexuality is a choice and that reparative therapy, for those who seek it, could change their same sex attractions and, in many cases, lead to heterosexual marriage.
More later...
Psychiatrist, Therapist and Rabbi Say Gays Can Change: "It's all about choice," says Dr. Joseph Nicolosi
By David W. Virtue in London
www.virtueonline.org
4/25/2009
A high police presence and over 100 gay activists failed to prevent participants at a two-day Sex & the City Conference from an opportunity to hear reparative therapist Dr Joseph Nicolosi; psychiatrist, author Dr. Jeffrey Satinover; and JONAH President Arthur Goldberg. The three told their audience that change is not only possible for homosexuals with same-sex attraction, but that thousands of men and women have thrown off homosexual behavior with many marrying and now living normal lives.
"It's all about choice, choice, choice," said Nicolosi. "Individuals have the right to explore their heterosexual potential. It is about freedom of choice. It is about diversity, autonomy, self-determination. The language gays are using, we are using. We say 'who are you to judge, let me decide for my life. I don't want gays telling me I can't change.' All the cliches used by gay activists, we are using for ex-gays."
Nicolosi argues that, at its root, homosexuality is not a sexual problem - it is a gender-identity problem. Normal stages of emotional development have been interrupted, and this can lead to same sex bonding in order to attain affirmation. These relationships tend to implode, leaving the homosexual hurt and confused. Furthermore, Nicolosi claims that there is no such thing as a homosexual, but only heterosexuals that have a homosexual problem. "This may sound like splitting hairs, but it actually opens the door for the dissatisfied homosexual oriented person to change, because such people can begin viewing themselves as fundamentally heterosexual. We have had a great deal of success with this therapeutic approach."
The California therapist ripped gay organizations for their dishonesty in promoting a lifestyle that is ultimately pathological, narcissistic, self-absorbed and offers no hope for people who want to change.
"There is nothing more threatening to the influence of the gay culture and the most threatening influence against the gay culture than the testimony of ex gay persons. The person who says I was once homosexual but I am not one any more threatens to shut down gay activists. Gays believe there are homosexuals and heterosexuals, gays and straights and actually believe God has created two kinds of persons is the great lie. When a person transitions it challenges the line that people are born gay."
"If you believe you are born gay, you are forced to be tolerant. But if you bring in choices, it changes everything."
Nicolosi said it is not about blame or making people feel guilty, but dealing with poor family relationships. "Through therapy people not only change (as a result of therapy) but actually we have seen people change out of homosexuality on their own. Many homosexual people have transitioned out of homosexuality to heterosexuality through psycho therapeutic help. People say 'I don't want to live a gay lifestyle it is not satisfying to me and I believe there is more. I want to develop my heterosexual potential'. These are people who then say can you help me."
Nicolosi said there is no gay gene. It is a myth. "They (the scientists) have never found a gay gene in 35 years. There is much more evidence that it is environmentally caused and our clients are looking at their childhood experiences. That is their right to do. Their dream and desire is to have a conventional marital life, that is there goal and we want to support those people."
Nicolosi said he has been helping people to "increase their heterosexual potential" for 25 years, and puts his success rate among men at about two out of three. "75% of our clients are completely cured, the 25% who are not usually have other factors that are not brought into the counseling situation."
"It is not the absent father, but the non-responsiveness of the father. It is when the father shuts downs and rejects the boy's masculine striving and he shames the boy in his strivings to become a man. That boy will find some male to connect with. It is the negative experience of the father that destroys him and pushes him towards men who offer him homosexual sex as a way out."
Nicolosi said that most hostility comes from gay activists who think change is harmful, but "we have a great deal of evidence showing that these individuals are not harmed and that the therapy does work."
"One third of boys who think they are homosexual were abused by older boys, a relative or family member. It is same sex abuse. It is no surprise that gay activists are lobbying for the lowering of the age of consent." Nicolosi said that in its early stages, it is not about sex but about desire. Homosexuality is compensatory; heterosexuality is about complementarity. If fathers don't hug their sons, some other man will."
"Homosexual behavior is an attempt to repair heterosexuality, so reparative therapy is repairing the breach made in heterosexual relationships. We are not wired to be homosexual. Our homosexuality is my way to get my emotional identification needs meet and to get them in inauthentic ways. A totally secure man won't have sex with you. Nicolosi said the churches are beginning to understand this. The church can help by offering mentoring programs for men."
He made the following observations:
* 50% of teenagers will change without therapy.
* Gay couples don't last. A study of 165 of the best gay relationships, done by objective scientists, has found that maintaining monogamy does not last for more than five years. It will ruin the relationship. They accept going out on each other. Why? It is about the search for maleness. It is a narcissistic fantasy.
Nicolosi outlined four Gay Myths:
* 10% of the population is homosexual. The figure is 1.5%- 2%.
* You're born gay. Not true. No one is born gay.
* Once gay, always gay. A lie. People can change. "My therapy practice with seven male therapists and a woman therapist is living evidence that people can change.
* Homosexuality is normal in every way. Believing 1+2+3+4 = Total acceptance.
* Informed disapproval does not mean "homophobia". Homophobia is an irrational fear of homosexuals. If you have a fear, then you need help. Most people do not fear homosexuals.
* Gay vs. Homosexual. There is no such thing as a homosexual. Homosexuality is a gender identity disorder. Tolerance is not the same thing as approval. We should not approve of a behavior God does not approve.
The therapist said the most common example of persons calling themselves homosexual is what he called the Classic Triadic Relationship. The mother is over emotionally involved, dominant, strong personality. The father is quiet, withdrawn, non-expressive and/or hostile. The son is temperamentally shy, timid, introverted, artistic, imaginative. The result is poor communication between mother and father. The mother has a special relationship with the son while the father's relationship with the son is guarded, ill-at-ease, and antagonistic. "I advise fathers, 'if you don't hug your sons, some other man will."
Nicolosi is convinced that the world's great religious traditions are right: humanity was designed for gender-complementary coupling. The mental-health associations must respect this viewpoint; to do otherwise is a gross violation of worldview diversity as well as the client's right to freedom and self-determination.
Nicolosi said his organization - the National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) is petitioning the American Psychiatric Association to look at the scientific data. The two-day conference being held in central London is organized by Anglican Mainstream. While the Church of England does not promote such therapies, Anglican Mainstream believes such an approach needs to become better known so that the Church can reach out to men and women caught in a variety of sexual addictions.
You can see a BBC-TV interview with Dr. Joe Nicolosi here: http://www.ccfon.org/mediacentre.php?avid=197&avap=1
END
www.virtueonline.org
4/25/2009
I am huddled inside the doorway of Emmanuel Center, a church near Westminster Abbey, as hundreds of gay protesters yell and shout obscenities at a conference where speakers are offering healing for the homosexual through reparative therapy. Anglican Mainstream sponsors the event.
Chanting "2,4,6,8 there is no cure only hate," protesters, including heavily made up Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, angry gay activists wave placards reading "only prejudice needs a cure", "there is no cure for love", "positive alternative to bigotry", "even Jesus loves gays" and "inside lies obfuscation and despair".
Organizers shout and toot horns, but fail to stop speakers from making presentations that say homosexuality is a choice and that reparative therapy, for those who seek it, could change their same sex attractions and, in many cases, lead to heterosexual marriage.
More later...
Psychiatrist, Therapist and Rabbi Say Gays Can Change: "It's all about choice," says Dr. Joseph Nicolosi
By David W. Virtue in London
www.virtueonline.org
4/25/2009
A high police presence and over 100 gay activists failed to prevent participants at a two-day Sex & the City Conference from an opportunity to hear reparative therapist Dr Joseph Nicolosi; psychiatrist, author Dr. Jeffrey Satinover; and JONAH President Arthur Goldberg. The three told their audience that change is not only possible for homosexuals with same-sex attraction, but that thousands of men and women have thrown off homosexual behavior with many marrying and now living normal lives.
"It's all about choice, choice, choice," said Nicolosi. "Individuals have the right to explore their heterosexual potential. It is about freedom of choice. It is about diversity, autonomy, self-determination. The language gays are using, we are using. We say 'who are you to judge, let me decide for my life. I don't want gays telling me I can't change.' All the cliches used by gay activists, we are using for ex-gays."
Nicolosi argues that, at its root, homosexuality is not a sexual problem - it is a gender-identity problem. Normal stages of emotional development have been interrupted, and this can lead to same sex bonding in order to attain affirmation. These relationships tend to implode, leaving the homosexual hurt and confused. Furthermore, Nicolosi claims that there is no such thing as a homosexual, but only heterosexuals that have a homosexual problem. "This may sound like splitting hairs, but it actually opens the door for the dissatisfied homosexual oriented person to change, because such people can begin viewing themselves as fundamentally heterosexual. We have had a great deal of success with this therapeutic approach."
The California therapist ripped gay organizations for their dishonesty in promoting a lifestyle that is ultimately pathological, narcissistic, self-absorbed and offers no hope for people who want to change.
"There is nothing more threatening to the influence of the gay culture and the most threatening influence against the gay culture than the testimony of ex gay persons. The person who says I was once homosexual but I am not one any more threatens to shut down gay activists. Gays believe there are homosexuals and heterosexuals, gays and straights and actually believe God has created two kinds of persons is the great lie. When a person transitions it challenges the line that people are born gay."
"If you believe you are born gay, you are forced to be tolerant. But if you bring in choices, it changes everything."
Nicolosi said it is not about blame or making people feel guilty, but dealing with poor family relationships. "Through therapy people not only change (as a result of therapy) but actually we have seen people change out of homosexuality on their own. Many homosexual people have transitioned out of homosexuality to heterosexuality through psycho therapeutic help. People say 'I don't want to live a gay lifestyle it is not satisfying to me and I believe there is more. I want to develop my heterosexual potential'. These are people who then say can you help me."
Nicolosi said there is no gay gene. It is a myth. "They (the scientists) have never found a gay gene in 35 years. There is much more evidence that it is environmentally caused and our clients are looking at their childhood experiences. That is their right to do. Their dream and desire is to have a conventional marital life, that is there goal and we want to support those people."
Nicolosi said he has been helping people to "increase their heterosexual potential" for 25 years, and puts his success rate among men at about two out of three. "75% of our clients are completely cured, the 25% who are not usually have other factors that are not brought into the counseling situation."
"It is not the absent father, but the non-responsiveness of the father. It is when the father shuts downs and rejects the boy's masculine striving and he shames the boy in his strivings to become a man. That boy will find some male to connect with. It is the negative experience of the father that destroys him and pushes him towards men who offer him homosexual sex as a way out."
Nicolosi said that most hostility comes from gay activists who think change is harmful, but "we have a great deal of evidence showing that these individuals are not harmed and that the therapy does work."
"One third of boys who think they are homosexual were abused by older boys, a relative or family member. It is same sex abuse. It is no surprise that gay activists are lobbying for the lowering of the age of consent." Nicolosi said that in its early stages, it is not about sex but about desire. Homosexuality is compensatory; heterosexuality is about complementarity. If fathers don't hug their sons, some other man will."
"Homosexual behavior is an attempt to repair heterosexuality, so reparative therapy is repairing the breach made in heterosexual relationships. We are not wired to be homosexual. Our homosexuality is my way to get my emotional identification needs meet and to get them in inauthentic ways. A totally secure man won't have sex with you. Nicolosi said the churches are beginning to understand this. The church can help by offering mentoring programs for men."
He made the following observations:
* 50% of teenagers will change without therapy.
* Gay couples don't last. A study of 165 of the best gay relationships, done by objective scientists, has found that maintaining monogamy does not last for more than five years. It will ruin the relationship. They accept going out on each other. Why? It is about the search for maleness. It is a narcissistic fantasy.
Nicolosi outlined four Gay Myths:
* 10% of the population is homosexual. The figure is 1.5%- 2%.
* You're born gay. Not true. No one is born gay.
* Once gay, always gay. A lie. People can change. "My therapy practice with seven male therapists and a woman therapist is living evidence that people can change.
* Homosexuality is normal in every way. Believing 1+2+3+4 = Total acceptance.
* Informed disapproval does not mean "homophobia". Homophobia is an irrational fear of homosexuals. If you have a fear, then you need help. Most people do not fear homosexuals.
* Gay vs. Homosexual. There is no such thing as a homosexual. Homosexuality is a gender identity disorder. Tolerance is not the same thing as approval. We should not approve of a behavior God does not approve.
The therapist said the most common example of persons calling themselves homosexual is what he called the Classic Triadic Relationship. The mother is over emotionally involved, dominant, strong personality. The father is quiet, withdrawn, non-expressive and/or hostile. The son is temperamentally shy, timid, introverted, artistic, imaginative. The result is poor communication between mother and father. The mother has a special relationship with the son while the father's relationship with the son is guarded, ill-at-ease, and antagonistic. "I advise fathers, 'if you don't hug your sons, some other man will."
Nicolosi is convinced that the world's great religious traditions are right: humanity was designed for gender-complementary coupling. The mental-health associations must respect this viewpoint; to do otherwise is a gross violation of worldview diversity as well as the client's right to freedom and self-determination.
Nicolosi said his organization - the National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) is petitioning the American Psychiatric Association to look at the scientific data. The two-day conference being held in central London is organized by Anglican Mainstream. While the Church of England does not promote such therapies, Anglican Mainstream believes such an approach needs to become better known so that the Church can reach out to men and women caught in a variety of sexual addictions.
You can see a BBC-TV interview with Dr. Joe Nicolosi here: http://www.ccfon.org/mediacentre.php?avid=197&avap=1
END
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)