Conservative Episcopalians Take a "Stand"

I hope these reformers are successful in saving their church. Hopefully they won't be exterminated by those that oppose them.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

I'm praying for a conservative resurgence in the Anglican Church. I too hope these reformers are successful.

 

The Lord graced me with airline tickets and monies to attend this glorious conference! 2,700 bishops, priests, deacons, laity, opened this grand conference with "Stand Up for Jesus!" and indeed they did! This was the most glorious experience of my life! The Wednesday night eucharist saw a procession of 900 priests (and praise God I was able to walk in that procession!) and 40+ bishops, in Trinity Hall of the Anatole Hotel, with a gathering of 4,000+!!!

The following is a letter from a Roman Catholic priest...

Back to the Future: The Rebirth of Optimism.

by Fr Joseph F. Wilson

We live in hope, we Christians; the virtue of Hope is part of our
marching orders. But Hope is distinct from optimism, and it often seems
nowadays that optimism is hard to come by in the Church. My own Roman
Catholic Church as well as the Episcopal Church in America are beset
with problems, scandals and signs of institutional decline all too
familiar to anyone following the news.

But during this past week, something happened that hearkened back to an
earlier day, both hopeful and optimistic, a day thirty-six years ago,
which most people seem to have forgotten. In 1966, in an ancient church
in Rome, Saint Paul's Outside-The-Walls, the Pope of the Catholic
Church met the Archbishop of Canterbury, and they participated in a
prayer service. At its conclusion, just as they were to part, Pope Paul
VI stopped, hesitated, then took off his own Episcopal ring and placed
it on the finger of Michael Ramsey, the primate of All England and head
of the Anglican Communion.

It was a heady day, indeed a day of great optimism and deep hope which
seemed to promise further progress between two great churches towards
the realization of the Lord's prayer "that they may be one."

The dismal aftermath of that joyful encounter is a matter of recent
history. The Anglican-Roman Catholic International Consultation (ARCIC)
began, with great fanfare. Yet over the decades, the two churches,
rather than converging, have diverged sharply as Anglicanism made room
for remarriage in Church after divorce, the ordination of women to the
diaconate, then to the priesthood, then to the episcopate. The list of
controverted moral issues between the two churches has grown, with the
issue of the acceptance of homosexuality and the blessing of same-sex
unions the latest point of contention. The hope of that day in Saint
Paul's Outside-the-Walls has seemed much more distant than just thirty
six years - until this week.

What happened during this past week was that over two thousand faithful
Episcopalians, conservative believers gathering to witness to their
Faith and plan for the future in the face of the continuing apostasy of
their denomination, were brought to their feet in a demonstration of
joyous, thunderous applause in response to a letter of support from
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the chief aide to the Vicar of Christ, the
Holy Father, Pope John Paul.

The letter is a significant gesture, for the Faithful of both churches,
for a number of reasons.

For one, as has been noted already, the headquarters of the Episcopal
Church at 815 Second Avenue in New York City was bypassed, as Cardinal
Ratzinger chose to communicate directly with the Plano assembly. This
is unusual, doubly so as Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold of the
Episcopal Church is the Anglican co-chair of the official dialogue
between Anglicanism and the Roman Church.

For another, the letter is quite clear that Cardinal Ratzinger is
writing "on behalf of Pope John Paul II." This is not merely a private
initiative.

But, perhaps most significantly of all, it is a further sign of
something which has been increasingly evident in the past few years:
ecumenical dialogue is entering a more realistic phase. As the two
churches diverged more and more, the "official dialogue" proceeded and
issued optimistic statements; if the official communiquÈs were to be
believed, it seemed as though the two churches were growing steadily
closer as doctrinal and moral differences between them multiplied.
Successive Archbishops of Canterbury and Presiding Bishops of the USA
were ceremonially received by the Pope in Rome, all the while the
official Anglican establishment in Britain and North America was
getting loonier and loonier.

Meanwhile, within the Episcopal Church of the USA and the Church of
England, faithful traditionalist Anglicans were struggling to preserve
their heritage, and continuing Anglicans, having left the official
Anglican Communion to form their own bodies, were persevering against
immense odds. With all of these, the Holy See certainly had more in
common than with the Anglican Communion establishment with which it was
dialoguing.

But things have slowly been changing in the past few years. Bishops of
continuing Anglican churches have been cordially received at Rome, and
conversations quietly begun; and when those conversations encountered
obstacles among some in the Roman Curia, those obstacles were overcome.
Forward in Faith/UK, the traditionalist group in Britain, has been
engaged in serious, cordial conversations with Rome. And Rome itself
has said that it will no longer feel obligated to channel all of its
Anglican conversations through the official channels of the Anglican
Communion.

And now there is reason to hope that we return to the Lord Jesus, Who
is, after all, the Point of it all. We return to the Lord Jesus, Who
prayed that we might be One. We return to the Lord Jesus and to His
Gospel, remembering that the one thing needful is that we be faithful
to Him. We live in a day when it is not hard at all to find bishops who
will pretend that 'Unity" is the Most Important Thing, rather than the
Way, the Truth, the Life who should unify us; that Dialogue is more
important than witnessing to Truth. At Plano, they kicked off the
festivities with "Stand Up, Stand Up for Jesus." It's no accident; that
great old war horse has been out of fashion for years. Standing Up for
Jesus is coming back into style.

Plano was an interesting meeting in many ways; perhaps the most
interesting aspect of it was the quite evident feeling of participants
that the Presiding Bishop and his minions were now quite beside the
point. "Jesus Christ is Lord," was a common exclamation, and also
common in the reports from Plano were expressions of joy and calm.
Bishop Ackerman spoke powerfully when he said that they need have no
fear, that they already knew Who had written the last chapter and where
the victory would lie. Meanwhile, as far as 815 Second Avenue was
concerned, one got the distinct impression that the assembly was
saying, "Oh, rubbish! You have no power here. Now, begone! Before
someone drops a house on YOU!!"

Yes, it seems that, after so long, there's not just a future to hope
in, but to be optimistic about as well. Great things are about to
happen, great things done by the Lord. Stand Up, Stand Up for Jesus!


Father Wilson is a Roman Catholic Priest of the Diocese of Brooklyn,
ordained in 1986. He is presently stationed at St Luke's Church in
Whitestone, Queens, where he is curate, director of education of the
school, and a keen observer of Anglican affairs.

 

FRANK GRISWOLD TKO'D IN FIVE ROUNDS?

News Analysis

By David W. Virtue

DALLAS--Frank Griswold, The Episcopal Church's Presiding Bishop has
taken four blows to the head recently, and a fifth is about to hit him
when he goes to Lambeth next week.

The only question is, will it be a TKO for the Presiding Bishop and for
his notion of pluriform truth?

Griswold's mission of "global reconciliation" will be declared a
fiction, and no one will venture forth to join him with Sufi Rumi in
that plain beyond good and evil. There is also no deeper place for him
to run to or hide. Absolute truth will have finally caught up with the
bishop, while pluriform truth will finally be extinguished in the maze
of his own mystic pagan mind.

Griswold's Affirming Catholicism has finally been exposed as a thin
theological prophylactic, providing no safety against the heavy
doctrinal hand of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger nor the weighty council of
biblically orthodox Anglican bishops and theologians.

The blows he has received to date rank as the most publicly humiliating
an ecclesiastical leader has ever faced in the 200-year history of the
Episcopal Church.

Consider the following:

Last week the Presiding Bishop was told in raw, blunt terms that he was
not welcome at a Roman Catholic parish in St. Augustine, Florida by the
Roman Catholic Bishop of that Diocese, one Victor Galeone.

The Roman Catholic prelate told Griswold he would not be allowed to co-
consecrate at Bishop Samuel Howard's consecration in Florida because of
his views on homosexuality, and his vote to confirm an openly
practicing homosexual to the episcopacy in New Hampshire. The local
Catholic diocese rescinded the invitation after Frank Griswold defended
homosexual behavior, arguing that the Bible does not condemn same-sex
relationships.

It was an unprecedented slap in the face at the Episcopal Church leader
who has also been the ecumenical officer for Anglican-Catholic
dialogue.

Griswold was publicly humiliated.

The second public slap came from Pope John Paul who sent a letter of
support to the gathering of some 2,700 biblically orthodox
Episcopalians in Dallas this week.

The letter came from the Catholic Church's leading exponent of
doctrinal orthodoxy Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger over the signature of
Pope John Paul.

The letter affirmed "unity in truth", a clear slap at Griswold's notion
of "pluriform truths" with the note bypassing denominational protocols
that would have demanded they go through the Presiding Bishop's office
before being delivered to the meeting in Dallas. It never happened.

The Vatican stomped all over ARCIC - the official Roman Catholic
Anglican talks, declaring them, for all intents and purposes dead after
30 years.

The third blow came when Griswold was told that a delegation from the
national church was not welcome at the AAC gathering to observe the
occasion because, as Canon David Anderson put it, "those who are
gathering for the meeting feel a sense of betrayal and abandonment by
the leadership of the Episcopal Church and feel that those who voted to
confirm Gene Robinson's election as the church's first openly gay
bishop have shattered and shipwrecked the church."

He also said there was no category for observers and that all must
register as participants, signing the document, "A Place to Stand",
which of course Griswold could not, in all conscience, sign. Body blow
number three.

But Griswold took yet another blow, his fourth, this time from orthodox
ECUSA bishop, Stephen Jecko of Florida, who read a letter saying that
Griswold was tantamount to a wolf in sheep's clothing. He wrote, "You
have consistently taken sides and consequently relinquished the
reconciling role of the Office of Presiding Bishop. Your public
support, your vote, and your intention to consecrate V. Gene Robinson
is an abuse of the Office of Presiding Bishop and places you clearly at
odds with a majority of the Anglican Communion and the Diocese of
Florida."

Bishop Jecko also made it clear that Griswold was not welcome to come
and consecrate the new bishop of his diocese and the PB should go pound
sand.

And next week Griswold will get his fifth and final blow that will
surely TKO him, leaving him glassy-eyed looking up from the floor,
breathing heavily.

The Archbishop of Canterbury and a majority of his fellow primates will
tell the American leader at Lambeth that his personal vote to elect the
openly non-celibate homosexual Vicki Gene Robinson and his total
support of sodomy as theologically and morally acceptable behavior is
way out of theological bounds and if he doesn't repent (and he won't)
then he and ECUSA are out of the Anglican Communion.

The Primates know, from recent disclosure of his letters to Charles
Bennison, that Frank can't be trusted to keep his word.

IF and when Griswold finally recovers, he could go to his field of
dreams to lick his pluriform wounds, following which he will return to
the US and seek solace in the arms of his fellow revisionist bishops
who will undoubtedly tell him, "to Hell with the Anglican Communion,
you are home now among friends."

Perhaps, but the public humiliation maybe more than Griswold can bear
and he might just do the honorable thing and resign his office.

It would of course, be the ONLY honorable thing he has ever done since
he took office in 1999, but it would, at least, be the right thing to
do. The question is, is his brain unscrambled enough to know to do the
right thing, or has theological Alzheimer's set in so that he no longer
knows right from wrong. We shall soon know.

 

It's much better for the Anglicans to renounce their church and establish a bible believing churches after the New Testament pattern whose Lordship is Christ.

 

That's true. The world could use a lot more Anabaptist congregations.

 

Amen for that! Let's have the spirit of anabaptists in the past when instead of saving the apostate church they rather courageusly proceeded to establish bible believing churches which are pattern after the New Testament.

 

BAPTIST LEADER REFLECTS ON PRIMATES MEETING
An Alarm Sounds in London: Will It Matter?

By Albert Mohler

Friday, October 17, 2003

The emergency meeting of the primates of the Anglican Communion ended
yesterday with the 37 national leaders of the Anglican churches still
trying to prevent a schism in their ranks. They released a unanimous
statement warning that their communion would be torn asunder by action
of the Episcopal Church (USA)to consecrate the first openly homosexual
bishop of the church. The release of the statement came after two days
of meetings in London under the glare of press speculation and public
attention. The stakes could not be higher.

Conservatives will be disappointed that the group did not take direct
action to expel the Episcopal Church (USA) from the Anglican Communion.
Experienced observers of the work and ways of the Anglicans will not be
surprised. Established as a "middle way" between Catholicism and
Protestantism, the Church of England and its daughter churches around
the world have always been known for moderate action and considerable
diversity. The expulsion of the Episcopal Church would have been
unprecedented, but the primates' decision not to expel the church will
likely lead to the very schism the leaders wanted to avoid.

The statement first established that the reason for the unusual
convocation was "recent events in the diocese of New Westminster,
Canada, and the Episcopal Church (USA)." The Canadian and American
churches have acted unilaterally in multiple ways to endorse
homosexuality. The Canadian diocese had adopted a Rite of Blessing for
those in committed same sex relationships. The Episcopal Church (USA)
elected Canon Gene Robinson, a divorced man living in a homosexual
partnership, as Bishop of New Hampshire. These decisions were simply
too much for orthodox Anglicans to take.

As the primates headed for London, conservatives seemed confident that
they had gathered a majority ready to expel the American church and
establish a new Anglican body within North America. Lead by African
leaders such as Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola, the primates knew in
advance that schism was a very real possibility.

According to the statement, the actions of the Canadian and American
churches "threaten the unity of our own Communion as well as our
relationships with other parts of Christ's Church, our mission and
witness, and our relations with other faiths, in world already confused
in areas of sexuality, morality, and theology, and polarized Christian
opinion."

The statement also made reference to the 1998 Lambeth Conference, at
which the primates had affirmed that homosexuality is incompatible with
Scripture. In true Anglican fashion, the primates called upon Dr. Rowan
Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to establish a study commission
charged to bring a report back to the group within twelve months.

The primates stated that the actions in New Westminster and the United
States "do not express the mind of our Communion as a whole, and these
decisions jeopardize our sacramental fellowship with each other." The
statement acknowledged that those who dissent from the pro-homosexual
actions of the Canadian and American bodies may be forced by conscience
to sever all ties with the offending churches. Furthermore, the
statement left wide open the question of whether the Anglican Communion
will take any specific position on the sinfulness of homosexuality for
their worldwide body of churches.

Given the stature of the American church, the decision by the Episcopal
Church (USA) was what actually prompted this unusual gathering. "In
most of our provinces," said the primates, "the election on Canon Gene
Robinson would not have been possible since his chosen lifestyle would
give rise to a canonical impediment to his consecration as a bishop."
Conservatives will be encouraged to see that the thirty seven
participating primates unanimously gave consent to a statement that
described Cannon Robinson's lifestyle as chosen rather than given.

At the same time, evangelical Anglicans will be distressed to read the
evasive language in the statement about biblical authority According to
the statement, all the primates hold to a high view of Scripture.
"Whilst we acknowledge a legitimate diversity of interpretation that
arises in the Church, this diversity does not mean that some of us take
the authority of Scripture more lightly then others." The statement
continued: "Nevertheless, each province needs to be aware of the
possible effects of its interpretation of Scripture on the life of
other provinces in the Communion. We commit ourselves afresh to mutual
respect while seeking from the Lord a correct discernment of how God's
Word speaks to us in our contemporary world."

The problem with this statement should be obvious to any accustomed to
reading the disingenuous evasions of official bureaucratic language. It
is simply not true that the affirmation biblical authority unites these
primates. This argument is patent nonsense and theological evasion.
These words sound almost exactly like the language of the statement
made this past summer by Bishop Frank Griswold, the presiding Bishop of
the Episcopal Church (USA), in his statement defending the election of
the homosexual bishop.

Theological liberals seek to take cover under the claim that what
separates liberal and conservatives is not our commitment to the
authority of Scripture, but rather mere matters of interpretation. This
is intellectually dishonest. Those pushing for acceptance of
homosexuality are pushing against the clear and unambiguous teaching of
Scripture.

The formation of yet another study commission is another bad sign. The
issue of homosexuality in the Scripture requires no extensive study
commission. The Scripture is consistently and explicitly clear in its
denunciation of homosexuality in every form. There is no room for
evasion and there is no problem of confusion in the text. Those who
argue for the normalization of homosexuality do so in direct
contradiction to the Holy Scripture. Under these circumstances, a study
commission is more like a negotiated surrender of biblical authority
and theological integrity.

The Church of England and its daughter churches of the Anglican
Communion are established by constitution. At the center of their
constitutional life is the confessional statement known as the "Thirty-
Nine Articles." Article XX of the confession reads: "It is not lawful
for the church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word
written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be
repugnant to another." This is a classic statement of the evangelical
Scripture principle. It states emphatically that the church is not free
to ordain or approve anything contrary to God's Word. Thus, the
scriptural condemnation of homosexuality is adequate and non-negotiable
to establish that the church cannot normalize or accept, much less
celebrate, homosexuality in any form. In addition, this article of the
confession also requires a method of interpretation that does not place
one scriptural text over against another. This is the usual technique
of those to seek to subvert the Word of God from within the church.

Clear lines of division mark the debate over this issue. An exchange
posted on the website for BBC News featured Dr. Philip Giddings,
convener of Anglican Mainstream insisting that the church cannot be
driven to revise its understanding of homosexuality by the pressure of
modern political correctness. "We respond to the argument that we have
got to 'move with the times' by saying that as Christian disciples we
are called to obey the teaching of Scripture whether we like it or not.
People may wish it said something different, but we are not at liberty
to pick and chose the bits that fit with our current culture of our
personal desires."

Responding to Giddings, Reverend Gareth Williams, Vice Pincipal of St.
Michael's Theological College in Llandaff, argued: "As regards the
Bible, the problem I have is that many people who take the view that
the Bible is against homosexuality are approaching a rich and complex
text rather too simplistically. Two thousand years on we know so much
more about what makes us human. Reading the Bible with the naivety that
pretends to know nothing of what modern human psychology tells us about
the givenness of our sexuality only perpetuates injustices towards
lesbian and gay people. We know that sexuality is hard-wired into our
genes, so what Scripture can then help us with is how we can best
handle our given sexuality in a way that best honors human integrity,
honesty and faithfulness." Williams is taking the classic liberal
revisionist line by arguing that the Scripture has to be corrected by
modern psychology. Furthermore he dishonestly asserts that we "know"
that sexual orientation is genetically based, when we actually know no
such thing at all.

The stage is now set for a division in the church--and the fuse will be
lit if the American church goes ahead with its plans to consecrate Gene
Robinson on November 2nd. This action, which most observers still
expect to go forward, will put orthodox Anglicans around the world on
notice that the unity of their Communion has effectively been destroyed
by this unbiblical action.

As expected, several Anglican leaders from Africa were among the
champions of orthodoxy at the London meeting. In response to the action
of the Episcopal Church, the church of Nigeria had declared: "We
totally rejected and renounced this obnoxious attitude and behaviour.
It is devilish and satanic. It comes directly from the pit of hell. It
is an idea sponsored by Satan himself and being executed by his
followers and adherents who have infiltrated the church. The blood and
power of Jesus Christ of Nazareth will flush them out with disgrace and
great pains." Any doubt where this church stands?

That is the quality of conviction that this crisis demands. The
statement released in London is far too equivocal and temporizing. No
doubt, the Anglican Communion will undergo great pains as it deals with
this crisis. The clock is ticking as this church runs out of time to
recover biblical truth.

Albert Mohler is Author, Speaker, President of the Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary

 

Isn't it nice how gushy feely nice we are about those "Protestant" Anglicans. Hate to tell you this Bob, but they are closer to Catholic than you think.

http://www.allsaintssanfran.org/Virgin%20Mary/anglican_communion_Mary.htm

Of course protestants pay little attention to this aspect of Anglicanism as long as they have a common enemy called Catholicism.

I could bring up the Lord's Supper also. Maybe next time.

Blessings