_________________________

A Message from Bishop David Anderson

Beloved in Christ Jesus,

Lambeth is going into its last weekend, and soon it will be time for all of the bishops in attendance to hold hands, sing "Kumbaya" and go home. So what is happening in these closing days, and what might the bishops be bringing home with them?

On July 29, the Archbishop of Canterbury and convener of the Lambeth Conference gave a speech, in which he opined that the official Conference statement will speak from the center - but then he had to clarify what that means. It apparently does not mean the midpoint between two extremes, but rather from the heart of our identity as Anglicans. When you see language like that, you know that you are being set up. He has first of all posited that the revisionists are an extreme, and likewise the orthodox conservatives are an equal extreme. Those who stand for 2000 years of orthodox teaching and practice have, by fiat of Dr. Williams, become an extreme, and different from where he stands, which is vaguely described as "from the heart of our identity as Anglicans...and that deepest centre which is our awareness of living in and as the Body of Christ."

Excuse me, but I believe that description of "the centre" is exactly where the orthodox see themselves standing. If he thinks the center of orthodoxy is somewhere else he is once again seriously mistaken.

He then begins to use squishy, TEC-like words when he speaks of an "intelligent generosity" to be born. I would agree with him that it is important to know and understand what each group really means and needs, and a win-win approach such as put forward in the popular book "Getting to Yes" would require such, but all of this pre-supposes that the issues can be resolved. If Dr. Williams understood, really understood, the issues, he would have to come to the sad conclusion that unity is no longer possible or even desirable at this time.

Dr. Williams has stated in the past that there is no theological divide between TEC and the Communion. The truth is that his examination of TEC was done while he had his eyes firmly closed. The American Anglican Council put into his hands (actually in the hands of his Lambeth Palace staff, to be given to him) prior to the New Orleans TEC House of Bishops meeting, a compilation showing TEC's lack of compliance with the Dar es Salaam requirements. It wasn't a text of our writing; we simply printed - unaltered - the words of senior TEC leaders, including Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori, which, in page after page, documented TEC's theological deviation from orthodox Anglican belief and practice.

Did he read it? Going into the HOB meeting Dr. Williams either knew or should have known of TEC's words and actions after Dar es Salaam. The AAC's document gave him the first-hand research he needed to make a decision, and the truth was that TEC's level of compliance was abysmal. Yet, perhaps in this same spirit of "intelligent generosity," he declared what was not compliance in any sense to be good enough. Dr. Williams is now faced with a Solomonic decision and he can't bear the price of that decision, so he writes in circles leaving everyone wondering exactly what he is saying and why.

Is the desired outcome to keep both TEC and the orthodox in the Communion, but to marginalize the orthodox so that they are rendered impotent? In Dar es Salaam, Dr. Williams urged the Primates to accept a plan to push all of the former TEC congregations and clergy back into TEC under so-called Windsor Bishops. After apparently heated negotiations, the Primates agreed to that conditionally, with an exception given to CANA and AMiA, since they already had bishops who are resident in the USA. In exchange for all of this, TEC was supposed to agree to make certain changes. TEC didn't make any changes, TEC rejected the alternative oversight scheme, and the overseas connections continued to grow as more churches and then a diocese left.

Dr. Williams and his coterie have not given up on this idea of forcing the departed congregations and dioceses back into TEC (and the Anglican Church of Canada), only now they are using the term Communion Partners in one instance and Anglican Pastoral Forum in another. This is a serious matter on several levels. Firstly, it is based on a false supposition that those who have left would willingly go back to the increasingly pantheistic provinces from which they fled. Secondly, the idea of forcing congregations back into TEC and the Canadian church clearly shows a lack of understanding as to how far these bodies have deviated from historic Christian belief and how determined they are to maintain their current direction. Does anyone really think TEC or their Canadian brothers will abide by any sort of moratoria? Past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour. 

Buried well within the Windsor Continuation Report is a sentence worth flagging: "We are encouraged by the planned setting up of the Communion Partners initiative in the Episcopal Church as a means of sustaining those who feel at odds with developments taking place in their own province but who wish to be loyal to, and to maintain, their fellowship within TEC and within the Anglican Communion." When Archbishop Clive Handford was further questioned on the Report, Steve Waring of the Living Church noted that Handford advised that the Windsor Continuation Group would not permit any new parish or diocese to "opt out" of its diocese or province. Other reports from the Windsor Continuation Group indicated that the moratoria would be on 1) PUBLIC parish same-sex blessings/weddings and 2) consecrations of homosexual bishops. The inference is that private blessings of same-sex unions would continue along with ordinations of actively homosexual priests and deacons.

Additionally the Report called for an Anglican Pastoral Forum (Panel of Reference redux?) which would act quickly (is that Anglican?) to mitigate conflict. How would this be staffed and funded adequately and how would this be actually enforced with any muscle? Handford then used an analogy which was astonishingly patronizing at best and seriously misconstrued at worst. He compared those North Americans who have fled the abuse of TEC or the Anglican Church of Canada to those who in a family aren't getting on: "It's a bit like having a member of the family who is not getting on with the family, having an aunt or uncle who can take them under their wing while they work for the restoration of the family."

Dear Archbishop Handford, the problem is not the child who flees physical and emotional abuse at the hands of a pathologically flawed parent; it is the pathology, spiritual or physical, of the parent(s) who abuse their children. In Atlanta, USA, an abused child was mistakenly sent back to live with the parent who had done the abuse, and when the child was killed by the parent, the authorities began pointing fingers at each other. You will not send us back to suffer under TEC, full stop. TEC is committed to revisionist theology that threatens the souls of those who believe its teachings, and it is committed to the homosexual agenda of full parity (if not more) in the church, and TEC will not step back from this. Listen to what TEC is saying - and in this case they are telling you the truth - there is no going back for them.

It is alarming that Williams, Hanford, et al. apparently believe in a Pollyanna solution that ignores the hard realities. Pushing forward a Windsor Continuation Group, an Anglican Pastoral Forum, and a Communion Partners Group will not take the air out of the decisions reached at GAFCON. What will work is fully disciplining TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada, and taking the Communion down the true middle which is historic Christian Anglican orthodoxy. When TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada fully repent, change their theological viewpoint and behavior and become orthodox again, then talk about reunification of North American churches is appropriate, but not before.

I am afraid that it finally comes down to leadership and whether the leaders have the accurate vision, the full appreciation of the facts on the ground, and the means and resolve to move forward.

Blessings and Peace in Christ Jesus

The Rt. Rev. David C. Anderson, Sr.
President and CEO, American Anglican Council

_________________________

Compromise proposal floated at Lambeth Conference

Source: Catholic Weekly News
July 29, 2008 

London - As the Lambeth Conference continues, Anglican leaders working to ward off an open schism have called for a in which liberal churches would agree to stop ordaining homosexuals (as bishops) and solemnizing same-sex unions, while conservative Anglicans would agree to stop organizing in separate jurisdictions.

The compromise, put forward by a working group chaired by Bishop Clive Handford, would create a new international group, the Pastoral Forum, headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. This new group would monitor the ecclesiastical truce, and could "diminish the standing" of Anglican dioceses that broke the terms of the agreement.

The Pastoral Forum proposal would not require the resignation of Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the openly homosexual bishop whose installation triggered a crisis in the Anglican communion. However, the Episcopal Church in the US would be expected to agree that it would not ordain other homosexuals, and would not approve same-sex marriage ceremonies.

The proposal would require conservative Anglicans to agree that parishes in the US should not be placed under the jurisdiction of bishops from Africa-- an arrangement that some conservative parishes have undertaken to distance themselves from homosexual bishops.

The prospects for approval of the Pastoral Forum proposal are unclear. Episcopalian leaders in the US have already defied an international agreement by allowing the installation of Bishop Robinson, and the conservative African bishops who would be required to drop their ties with American dissenters have, for the most part, refused to participate in the Lambeth Conference.

_________________________

A panel of Anglican bishops share their views on Lambeth

Source: TimesOnline
By Bess Twiston Davies
July 30, 2008

We have asked a selection of Anglican bishops attending the Lambeth Conference, a once-a-decade gathering of the Anglican episcopate, to share their views on the meeting as it progresses.

Bishop Mouneer Anis of Eygpt, Primate of the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East:

"I found the presidential address of Archbishop Rowan very clear. He clearly described what is happening and the thinking of people on both sides. I found his address helpful and very honest in expressing both sides of the conflict. While some very positive things are happening at the conference, some unresolved issues are still dividing the Communion. Those issues are still very much unresolved and untackled. I wonder if during the next few days we will do something about these unresolved issues. I have some doubts. The positives are that we are sitting down together, we are studying the Bible together, we are talking to each other and we are listening to each other.

Yet I see that a big wall still divides us. It is big because it involves the essentials, the foundation of our faith. We are not divided by mere trivialities, or issues on the periphery of faith. We are finding it very hard to come together in the essentials. This diversity of opinion is about the heart of our faith, the faith which we received from the saints. I speak the mind of many of my colleagues in the Global South, especially in the Diocese of Eygpt. I am aware that not all of us in the Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East have the same mind. I respect and love them.

I find that many of our North American friends blame us and criticise us for bringing in the issues of sexuality and homosexuality but in fact they are the ones who are bringing these issues in. Here at Lambeth, you come across many advertisements for events organised by gay and Lesbian activists which are sponsored by the North American Church. If you visit the marketplace at the conference, you will notice that almost half the events promoted on the noticeboard promote homosexuality and are sponsored by the North Americans. And in the end, we, the people who remain loyal to the original teaching of the Anglican Communion, which we received from the Apostles, are blamed. They say that we talk a lot about sexuality and that we need to talk more about poverty, about AIDs, and injustice. They are the ones who are bringing sexuality into this conference. It's not us. We want to talk about the heart of the issues which divide us, not only sexuality. That is just a symptom of a deeper problem.

They talk about the slavery and say that 200 years ago Christians were opposed to the freedom of slaves and they compare us to those Christians for our attitude to gay and lesbian practises. To be honest, I think this is inviting us to another kind of slavery, slavery of the flesh, to go and do whatever our lusts dictate. Sometimes, I think that maybe because of the pressure in Western culture to push the practise of homosexuality, our friends in the West are pushing these issues. But, on the other hand, I see many who live in the West and still want to preserve the faith and the tradition of the Church. Should we allow culture to pressure the Church or should the Church be distinctive, light and salt to the world? Cardinal Ivan Dias said that we didn't bring the Gospel to the culture we could end up suffering from spiritual Alzheimers."

Catharine Roskam, Suffragan bishop of New York:

"I was at Lambeth in 1998, and there is a wonderful atmosphere at this one despite the differences. It is much more spiritually grounded than last time. The Archbishop's retreat was the perfect way to start us off and that prayerfulness has continued."

Kirk Smith, bishop of Arizona:

"I've really enjoyed it. I've had a great time in the Bible Studies groups. We now have to get on with the serious stuff. We've had a week now to get to know and trust one another. It is now time to do some hard work. As of today, we've now got to get on with the serious stuff. I'm still optimistic, though less optimistic than yesterday but I'm still optimistic because now we have to really prove we can do this over the next few days. It's like being invited to a dinner party: everyone is happy to be there, and having a good time, drinking and eating the food. Then someone brings up politics, and the atmosphere changes. We have hope that the goodwill built up in the first half of the conference can sustain us through the process." ...

The rest of the article may be found at the link above.

_________________________

Archbishop appeals to divided Anglicans to show generosity

Source: ChristianToday
By Maria Mackay
July 30, 2008

The Archbishop of Canterbury last night appealed to hundreds of bishops to demonstrate mutual generosity as the row over sexual ethics continues to embroil the Anglican Communion. In his second presidential address to the once-in-a-decade Lambeth Conference on Tuesday, Dr Rowan Williams said that warring factions in the worldwide Communion were "threatening death to each other, not life".

He said that some in the Communion regarded the independent actions of some provinces as "confused or reckless innovation" that were a "body-blow to the integrity of mission and a matter of literal physical risk to Christians".

"The reaction to this is in turn felt as an annihilating judgement on a whole local church, undermining its legitimacy and pouring scorn on its witness," the Archbishop said.

He acknowledged that demonstrating generosity would be costly for traditionalists and liberals, who remain at odds over a number of issues including the ordination of homosexual clergy, same-sex blessings and cross-border interventions. "If both were able to hear and to respond generously, perhaps we could have something more like a conversation of equals - even something more like a Church," said Dr Williams. He challenged bishops to take up the recommendations of the 2007 Dar-es-Salaam meeting of primates, which asked different factions within the Communion to take simultaneous steps towards each other.

"To the innovator, can we say, ‘Don't isolate yourself; don't create facts on the ground that make the invitation to debate ring a bit hollow'? Can we say to the traditionalist, ‘Don't invest everything in a church of pure and likeminded souls; try to understand the pastoral and human and theological issues that are urgent for those you are opposing, even if you think them deeply wrong'?" he asked.

Dr Williams went on to reaffirm his support for the Anglican Covenant and the formation of an international body responsible for issuing guidance on what constitutes "a grave and lasting divisive course of action by a local church".

"We need to speak life to each other, and that means change," he said, adding later, "I find it hard at present to see another way forward that would avoid further disintegration." ...

The rest of the article may be found at the link above.

_________________________

Archbishop Orombi: A crisis of betrayal

Source: TimesOnline
By Henry Luke Orombi
August 1, 2008

I love the Lord Jesus Christ, and I love the Anglican Communion. So, why did the bishops of the Church of Uganda and I decide not to attend the present Lambeth Conference? Because we love the Lord Jesus Christ and because we love the Anglican Communion. 

St Francis of Assisi said: "Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary use words." We believe that our absence at this Lambeth Conference is the only way that our voice will be heard. For more than ten years we have been speaking and have not been heard. So maybe our absence will speak louder than our words.

The crisis in the Communion is serious; our commitment to biblical and historic faith and mission are serious; and we want to be taken seriously. In 2003 the Episcopal Church in America consecrated as bishop a man living in an active homosexual relationship. This unilateral and unbiblical action was directly contrary to a resolution of the 1998 Lambeth Conference.

I participated in that conference and we overwhelmingly resolved that "homosexual practice is incompatible with Scripture" and the conference "cannot advise the legitimising of same-sex unions". As a result, the 2003 action of the American Church plunged the Anglican Communion into a crisis that, as the primates of the Anglican Communion said in 2003, "tore the very fabric of our communion at its deepest level". The crisis is about authority - biblical authority and ecclesiastical authority.

The American decision disregarded biblical authority by violating clear biblical teaching against homosexual behaviour. For this reason, the Church of Uganda and other Anglican provinces broke communion with the Episcopal Church in America in 2003, and we continue in that state of broken communion today.

Even though some scholars have tried to explain away specific biblical passages that refer to homosexual practice, the fact remains that nowhere in Scripture is homosexual practice affirmed or presented as a legitimate alternative to heterosexual relationships.

In every case, homosexual practice is considered sinful - something that breaks our relationship with God and harms our wellbeing. It is something for which one should repent and seek forgiveness and healing, which God is ever ready to do. Not only is Scripture to be taken seriously, but it is to be obeyed, because God intends for us things far better than we could ask or imagine.

If a whole province, such as the Episcopal Church, acts contrary to God's word and the consensus of the communion, who in the Anglican Communion has the authority to discipline that erring province?

We in the Global South believed the Primates' Meeting had this authority - the 1988 Lambeth Conference urged the Primates' Meeting to "exercise an enhanced responsibility in offering guidance on doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters" and the 1998 Lambeth Conference reaffirmed this.

So, it was appropriate, after the American decision in 2003, that the Archbishop of Canterbury convened an emergency meeting of the primates to address the biblical and ecclesiastical crisis into which the Americans had plunged the Anglican Communion. The primates, including the American primate, unanimously advised that the consecration should not proceed. Nonetheless, two weeks later, the primate in America presided at the consecration as bishop of a man living in a same-sex relationship. This was a deep betrayal.

Since that meeting there have been numerous other "betrayals" to the extent that it is now hard to believe that the leadership in the American Church means what it says. They say that they are not authorising blessings of same-sex unions, yet we read newspaper reports of them. Two American bishops have even presided at such services of blessings. Bishops have written diocesan policies on the blessings of same-sex unions. It is simply untrue to say they have not been authorised.

That such blessings continue and seem to be increasing hardly demonstrates "regret", let alone repentance, on the part of the American Church. So, when the Archbishop of Canterbury invited these American bishops to participate in the Lambeth Conference, against the recommendations of the Windsor Report and the Primates' Meeting, and in the face of the unrelenting commitment of the American Church to bless sinful behaviour, we were stunned. Further betrayal.

It was clear to me and to our House of Bishops that the Instruments of Communion had utterly failed us. ...

It is important that our decision not to attend this Lambeth Conference is not misunderstood as withdrawing from the Anglican Communion. On the contrary, our decision reflects the depth of our concern and the sober realisation that the present structures are not capable of addressing the crisis.

How can we go to Holy Communion, sit in Bible study groups, and share meals together, pretending that everything is OK?, that we are still in fellowship with the persistent violators of biblical teaching and of Lambeth resolutions?

The Bible says: "Can two walk together unless they are agreed?" The Archbishop of Canterbury has asked us to "wait for each other". But how is it possible when we are not travelling in the same direction?

The Church of Uganda takes its Anglican identity and the future hope of the global Anglican Communion very seriously. We love the Lord Jesus Christ, and we love the Anglican Communion.
 Lord, have mercy upon us.

The entire article may be found at the link above.

_________________________

California: TEC lawsuit put on hold

Source: The Press Democrat
By Paul Payne
July 29, 2008

A lawsuit over ownership of a Petaluma church was postponed Monday to await the outcome of a similar case before the California Supreme Court.

Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Lloyd von der Mehden said in a tentative ruling that motions in the case brought by the Episcopal Diocese of Northern California against the breakaway St. John's Anglican Church would be continued to Dec. 2. ...

The rest of the article may be found at the link above.